| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
....and it's Wrightbus. Three doors, two staircases, wtf?
http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx Announcing it two days before Christmas while everyone's looking the other way does suggest it's not to be looked at too closely. There isn't even a sketch yet, let alone any costings. Tom |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
"Tom Barry" wrote in message
...and it's Wrightbus. Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx Announcing it two days before Christmas while everyone's looking the other way does suggest it's not to be looked at too closely. There isn't even a sketch yet, let alone any costings. I note that it says, "The preferred manufacturer was chosen on Wednesday 23 December 2009, there will then be a 10 day standstill period. (This is a mandatory period required by the public procurement regulations between announcing the winner of a contract and the signing of the contract.)". Does this mean 10 working days, or 10 elapsed days? If the latter, one assumes that the xmas/new year holiday period was deliberately chosen to wrongfoot anyone who might be thinking of objecting. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote:
...and it's Wrightbus. Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? Seems a bit low. Bendy buses have a capacity of 49 sitting, 149 total. -- Paul |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:46:25 +0000
Paul wrote: Bendy buses have a capacity of 49 sitting, 149 total. Thats irrelevant. Cyclists don't like them so they have to go. Quite how Boris is going to persuade the bed wetters in the HSE that an open platform is a good idea is anyones guess. Routemasters have grandfather rights. These won't. B2003 |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
Paul wrote:
On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote: ...and it's Wrightbus. Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? Seems a bit low. Bendy buses have a capacity of 49 sitting, 149 total. TfL work on a DD capacity of 85, against 120 for bendies - 87 is therefore unsurprising as a target unless they want difficulties operating the contraption alongside normal buses. I can't see them fitting 87 people, two staircases, two doors and a platform with a bloke on or a cover over it in the 10-11m normal double deckers take up, let alone the old RMs which were much smaller. Tom |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
|
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 23 Dec, 13:46, Paul wrote:
On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote: ...and it's Wrightbus. *Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? *Seems a bit low. Bendy buses have a capacity of 49 sitting, 149 total. Capacities for well-designed vehicles are based on things like the number of seats. Capacities for badly-designed vehicles are based on dividing the total volume by the average volume of a person, assuming that all the bodies can be slotted in upside down or chopped into bits or impaled on obstructions as necessary. That's why so many bad designs get approved on the grounds of "capacity". It's bollox. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
MIG wrote:
On 23 Dec, 13:46, Paul wrote: On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote: ...and it's Wrightbus. Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? Seems a bit low. Bendy buses have a capacity of 49 sitting, 149 total. Capacities for well-designed vehicles are based on things like the number of seats. Capacities for badly-designed vehicles are based on dividing the total volume by the average volume of a person, assuming that all the bodies can be slotted in upside down or chopped into bits or impaled on obstructions as necessary. That's why so many bad designs get approved on the grounds of "capacity". It's bollox. You want a seat for everyone. I want people to be able to afford to get to work. Since these are mutually exclusive in a London context, shall we agree to differ? There is no such things as 'well-designed' - either it's well designed for the job it's expected to do, or it isn't. The problem with Boris's bus is that it's well designed for the twin roles of getting him elected and burnishing his CV as a Man Who Gets Things Done. The concept of 'moving people about' appears to have fallen by the wayside at some point, as has any mention of who pays for this thing. Tom |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:46:25 +0000, Paul wrote: On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote: ...and it's Wrightbus. Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? Seems a bit low. Not really - it's a tad higher than the normal capacity spec for low floor double deckers which IIRC is 80 people. Therefore this is notionally 10% greater. Given the proposed configuration of three doors and two staircases this suggests most seats will be upstairs with relative poor lower deck seating capacity but perhaps more room for buggies / wheelchairs / standees. I also suspect the chassis length will be longer than we are used to - possibly 11.3m. I doubt we will get 12m unless we end up with route specific variants as we did to some extent with the Routemaster (RM and RML versions). Whether Wrightbus are brave / daft enough to built a maxi Boris Bus of 13.7m configuration remains to be seen. The composition of the 5 vehicle "evaluation" batch will be most interesting as will the routes used to test the vehicle. The bus is probably going to be a mutant hybrid of a Red Arrow style lower deck mated with a Berlin Lion City three door / dual staircase double decker but with the engine and drive line in the most bizarre location possible (given the need for the rear platform plus door). Ah, so it's possible the AEC "Q" could be reborn? :) DW downunder I think we should also wildly speculate about which mobile phone or music player Wrightbus will use to base the "face" and "back" of the bus on ;-) Sorry but most modern deckers look like mobile phones! I still think this is barking mad but I am genuinely surprised it has got this far! -- Paul C |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Dec 24, 4:20*am, "DW downunder" noname wrote:
Ah, so it's possible the AEC "Q" could be reborn? *:) Well I suppose it is also possible that the moon is made of cheese, the earth is flat and that black is white. The problem, as mentioned on another group I read, is that side engined vehicles have a very poor reliability record. Hybrid technology may offer some new options but that has hardly been a breeze in terms of building reliability. Ironically it seems the Enviro 400 hybrid (from purely an anecdotal viewpoint) runs more consistently and reliably that other models - it also got in to service far faster and with fewer glitches than all other versions. While I am not criticising Wrights (they did, after all, provide the first hybrids for London years ago) their models have taken a lot longer to get in to fleet service and Volvo even longer still. Both of the single deck routes using Wright Electrocities (129 and 360) have an equivalent number of diesel buses available to cover for buses conking out or not being available. Not exactly a viable way forward if you're looking at a potential fleet of 400-600 buses. Still they may actually exhume the remains of the Volvo Ailsa and have the engine [1] at the front :-) If Boris had been really brave he'd have gone for trolleybuses - that would have provided a genuine legacy and even I might have indulged him in having a specific "London" design for that. [1] most engines are either car or van derived so therefore perfectly suited to front installation. Where you stick the batteries and driveline are other issues altogether. -- Paul C via Google |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Dec 23, 8:17*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 13:46:25 +0000, Paul wrote: On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote: ...and it's Wrightbus. *Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? *Seems a bit low. Not really - it's a tad higher than the normal capacity spec for low floor double deckers which IIRC is 80 people. *Therefore this is notionally 10% greater. *Given the proposed configuration of three doors and two staircases this suggests most seats will be upstairs with relative poor lower deck seating capacity but perhaps more room for buggies / wheelchairs / standees. *I also suspect the chassis length will be longer than we are used to - possibly 11.3m. I doubt we will get 12m unless we end up with route specific variants as we did to some extent with the Routemaster (RM and RML versions). *Whether Wrightbus are brave / daft enough to built a maxi Boris Bus of 13.7m configuration remains to be seen. The composition of the 5 vehicle "evaluation" batch will be most interesting as will the routes used to test the vehicle. The bus is probably going to be a mutant hybrid of a Red Arrow style lower deck mated with a Berlin Lion City three door / dual staircase double decker but with the engine and drive line in the most bizarre location possible (given the need for the rear platform plus door). I think we should also wildly speculate about which mobile phone or music player Wrightbus will use to base the "face" and "back" of the bus on ;-) * *Sorry but most modern deckers look like mobile phones! I still think this is barking mad but I am genuinely surprised it has got this far! -- Paul C So it should end up much less manouverable than a bendy bus! Robert |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 23 Dec, 23:36, Tom Barry wrote:
MIG wrote: On 23 Dec, 13:46, Paul wrote: On 23/12/2009 12:30, Tom Barry wrote: ...and it's Wrightbus. *Three doors, two staircases, wtf? http://www.wrightbus.com/site/default.asp?CATID=9 http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/medi...tre/13903.aspx "Capacity for at least 87 passengers" Including standing? *Seems a bit low. Bendy buses have a capacity of 49 sitting, 149 total. Capacities for well-designed vehicles are based on things like the number of seats. Capacities for badly-designed vehicles are based on dividing the total volume by the average volume of a person, assuming that all the bodies can be slotted in upside down or chopped into bits or impaled on obstructions as necessary. That's why so many bad designs get approved on the grounds of "capacity". It's bollox. You want a seat for everyone. *I want people to be able to afford to get to work. Since these are mutually exclusive in a London context, shall we agree to differ? Not necessarily, I just object to false claims of standing capacity, particularly in vehicles that are spectacularly badly designed for it, whatever their internal volume. There is no such things as 'well-designed' - either it's well designed for the job it's expected to do, or it isn't. *The problem with Boris's bus is that it's well designed for the twin roles of getting him elected and burnishing his CV as a Man Who Gets Things Done. *The concept of 'moving people about' appears to have fallen by the wayside at some point, as has any mention of who pays for this thing. Something is badly-designed if it isn't fit for the purpose for which it's designed (many modern trains, eg 376 emus, are designed for standing, but actually don't allow for much standing because of the layout, lack of holds etc). I think that both Routemasters and Bendys are not suitable buses for current-day London. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Wed, 23 Dec 2009, Paul Corfield wrote:
While I am not criticising Wrights (they did, after all, provide the first hybrids for London years ago) their models have taken a lot longer to get in to fleet service and Volvo even longer still. Both of the single deck routes using Wright Electrocities Are they called that because they're Electrical Atrocities? tom -- Big Bang. No god. Fadeout. End. -- Stephen Baxter |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
"Paul Corfield" wrote: Still they may actually exhume the remains of the Volvo Ailsa and have the engine [1] at the front :-) Which buses operated the 24 in the Grey Green era? I seem to recall those had an unconventionally positioned engine, as the lower deck did not have enough headroom for my 6'3" frame. The upper deck was great, however - deep windows and good legroom - and they had a fair turn of speed. Chris |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
"Paul Corfield" wrote: "Chris Read" wrote: Which buses operated the 24 in the Grey Green era? I seem to recall those had an unconventionally positioned engine, as the lower deck did not have enough headroom for my 6'3" frame. The upper deck was great, however - deep windows and good legroom - and they had a fair turn of speed. Volvo Citybus with an under floor engine hence it felt like climbing a mountain when boarding. The seat pitch was extremely odd with some seats with a mile between them and others pinched tight. They had a decent turn of speed though. Yes, I remember the odd seat spacing on the lower deck. The pay-off for the mountain-climb boarding was, of course, seats right to the back of the bus, all on one level. My other memory of these buses was the distinctive smell. Not unpleasant, but a definite odour. I always assumed it was a particular cleaning substance used by Grey Green/Cowie/Arriva, or perhaps related to the interior plastics used, but I suppose it was an engine-related odour permeating through the floor. There's an example in the Depot at Acton, IIRC. I hope an early LFDD is also preserved - are the R-plate DAFs still around with Arriva London? Chris |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 24 Dec, 17:40, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 05:35:35 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote: I think that both Routemasters and Bendys are not suitable buses for current-day London. So is there any bus currently in service in London that is suitable? If not, is there a bus anywhere that would meet your requirements? Dunno, but we need to be clearer on the requirements than the Boris project seems to have been. (It seems to have been on the lines of "anything you like as long as it has a front end that was already retro in the 1950s".) Off the top of me head I'd say it would be nice to include * Don't require excessive road space and block crossings and junctions. * Don't require everyone to squeeze through a narrow space to get in. * Build in some kind of circulation if possible, so that entry and exit don't block each other. * Bring back conductors to help people in all sorts of ways and allow tickets to be sold on the bus all day and night. (The extra revenue would surely pay for them.) The bendys have at least got as away from the main curse of OPO buses, which was filing through a narrow space by the driver while the bus stood at the stop. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
MIG wrote:
* Bring back conductors to help people in all sorts of ways and allow tickets to be sold on the bus all day and night. (The extra revenue would surely pay for them.) a) No it wouldn't, have you seriously done any maths on this? £24k a year + employers NI and other overheads * 8000 buses (or replace with how many buses you think should be conductor-equipped, but it'll be four figures). You're talking a lot of extra revenue attracted to pay for that lot, which then drives further bus purchases* and thus more crew etc. Basically the biggest single item of the bus operator's bill is the crew *even with just the driver*. b) Oyster The periodic call of 'bring back the conductor' is one of those nostalgic platitudes that curse us to second rate public transport in the UK. Seriously, if you find yourself on the same side of the argument as Quentin Letts it's a sign you've gone off the path of sanity big time. And now back to the oven. Tom * Note that Boris is reducing the bus network fairly substantially up to 2018, when you take into account the extra mileage worked by bendy replacements and the former projected rise in mileage turning into a reduction. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 25 Dec, 15:04, Tom Barry wrote:
MIG wrote: * Bring back conductors to help people in all sorts of ways and allow tickets to be sold on the bus all day and night. *(The extra revenue would surely pay for them.) a) No it wouldn't, have you seriously done any maths on this? *£24k a year + employers NI and other overheads * 8000 buses (or replace with how many buses you think should be conductor-equipped, but it'll be four figures). *You're talking a lot of extra revenue attracted to pay for that lot, which then drives further bus purchases* and thus more crew etc. *Basically the biggest single item of the bus operator's bill is the crew *even with just the driver*. b) Oyster The periodic call of 'bring back the conductor' is one of those nostalgic platitudes that curse us to second rate public transport in the UK. *Seriously, if you find yourself on the same side of the argument as Quentin Letts it's a sign you've gone off the path of sanity big time. I said it would be a nice thing to include, as would many things if transport was run as a public service. I don't claim to have done calculations on anything (such as the value to the city and country of transport being run as a public service) but that doesn't mean that they have no value. It's not nostalgia. They don't have to do exactly the same job as in the past, but I see that there is a value to having public transport better staffed, and I would be arguing the same for railway stations etc. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Dec 24, 11:44*pm, MIG wrote:
The bendys have at least got as away from the main curse of OPO buses, which was filing through a narrow space by the driver while the bus stood at the stop. The main curse was the time taken for a queue of people to pay and wait for change, which Oyster and round-money flat-fares have done away with in London - even on OPO double-deckers... -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 15:44:56 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote: * Bring back conductors to help people in all sorts of ways and allow tickets to be sold on the bus all day and night. (The extra revenue would surely pay for them.) What extra revenue? Practically everyone is using Oyster. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 26 Dec, 00:09, (Neil Williams)
wrote: On Thu, 24 Dec 2009 15:44:56 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote: * Bring back conductors to help people in all sorts of ways and allow tickets to be sold on the bus all day and night. *(The extra revenue would surely pay for them.) What extra revenue? *Practically everyone is using Oyster. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. Then why are people always complaining that bendys are free? (Not that that wasn't necessarily the ultimate intention.) Anyway, they don't have to be the in the same job as the old conductors or on all routes or at all times of day. It would be good to have someone extra on night buses, say, who could, among other things, sell reasonably-priced cash tickets to new arrivals and people who can't top up. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 25 Dec, 23:54, John B wrote:
On Dec 24, 11:44*pm, MIG wrote: The bendys have at least got as away from the main curse of OPO buses, which was filing through a narrow space by the driver while the bus stood at the stop. The main curse was the time taken for a queue of people to pay and wait for change, which Oyster and round-money flat-fares have done away with in London - even on OPO double-deckers... But there is still the narrow gap and having to wave or bleep something at the driver, which is surely unnecessary. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:16:54 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote: Then why are people always complaining that bendys are free? That's a side issue. You don't need a conductor to check that people have touched in. A driver can do that if people board at the front. On at the front, off at the rear is the fastest option in a two-door bus where touching in takes half a second. Anyway, they don't have to be the in the same job as the old conductors or on all routes or at all times of day. It would be good to have someone extra on night buses, say, who could, among other things, sell reasonably-priced cash tickets to new arrivals and people who can't top up. This may well be worthwhile as a security measure if nothing else, though would people be willing to see night bus fares increased above daytime ones as they used to be, so this could be affordable? Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:17:49 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote: But there is still the narrow gap and having to wave or bleep something at the driver, which is surely unnecessary. The gap is wide enough for people to get through if nobody stands there. This can be avoided by going for a bigger bus with more dedicated standing room downstairs. Revenue protection is clearly proving to be necessary, given the reputation of "uncle Ken's free buses". But then the UK never did, and probably never will, do penalty fares correctly[1]. [1] Forget prosecuting people, heavy-handedness or messing around. Just set the PF and enforcement to be at the level where the PF income from ticketless travellers, having deducted the cost of enforcement, equals (or to be safe slightly exceeds) the income that was lost by the fact that they didn't pay the proper fare. Then stop worrying about them, because they don't lose you money. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Dec 26, 11:13*pm, (Neil Williams)
wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:17:49 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote: But there is still the narrow gap and having to wave or bleep something at the driver, which is surely unnecessary. The gap is wide enough for people to get through if nobody stands there. *This can be avoided by going for a bigger bus with more dedicated standing room downstairs. Revenue protection is clearly proving to be necessary, given the reputation of "uncle Ken's free buses". *But then the UK never did, and probably never will, do penalty fares correctly[1]. I'm not sure this is true, except for highly depressing, party- political values of "necessary". The actual TfL studies show that evasion isn't significantly higher on bendies than regular buses - unfortunately, the urban myth of 'uncle Ken's free buses' has obscured the reality. (CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 26 Dec, 23:09, (Neil Williams)
wrote: On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 14:16:54 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote: Then why are people always complaining that bendys are free? That's a side issue. *You don't need a conductor to check that people have touched in. *A driver can do that if people board at the front. On at the front, off at the rear is the fastest option in a two-door bus where touching in takes half a second. Anyway, they don't have to be the in the same job as the old conductors or on all routes or at all times of day. *It would be good to have someone extra on night buses, say, who could, among other things, sell reasonably-priced cash tickets to new arrivals and people who can't top up. This may well be worthwhile as a security measure if nothing else, though would people be willing to see night bus fares increased above daytime ones as they used to be, so this could be affordable? All I am saying, as Paul Corfield kind of repeated in a different branch, is that there should be a sensible consideration of what is needed in a bus that is suitable for the central London. I don't think it's a bendy or a Routemaster and I have no time for any party political associations with bus designs. I also see a need for better staffing in approporiate roles. I foolishly mentioned the word "conductors" as an aside, and that's all anyone wants to talk about. It's very strange how, in the meantime, various people seem to be claiming that no time is lost by filing past the driver on double deckers, despite dwell time being one of the main claimed advantages of bendys. Even less justification for them then. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
John B wrote:
(CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! New Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/899.aspx and the relevant conditions are 6.6.1 for LU, Overground and National Rail, and 6.6.7 for Buses. Cheers, Barry |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Dec 28, 4:28*pm, Barry Salter wrote:
John B wrote: (CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! New Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/899.aspx and the relevant conditions are 6.6.1 for LU, Overground and National Rail, and 6.6.7 for Buses. ....although interestingly, that strongly implies (to the extent that any court would support) that Travelcard holders will only be liable to a penalty fare if they fail to touch in on buses. While 6.6.1 says that Travelcard holders are supposed to touch in on LU/LO/NR, it doesn't specify any sanctions for people who don't - whereas 6.6.4 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't use OEPs on NR, 6.6.7 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't touch in on buses, and 6.7.3 mentions explicit sanctions for PAYG users who don't touch in on LU/LO/DLR. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
In message of Mon, 28 Dec 2009
16:28:37 in uk.transport.london, Barry Salter writes John B wrote: (CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! New Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/terms andconditions/899.aspx and the relevant conditions are 6.6.1 for LU, Overground and National Rail, and 6.6.7 for Buses. How do people find out how CoC versions differs? I read my first version carefully. I don't feel like doing it again. I might suggest pdftotext, but found it shuffles http://www.tfl.gov.uk/ assets/livetravelnews/realtime/tube/track-closures.pdf [Later: pdftotext -layout does a reasonable job. I hope to post a comparison of the 2010/01/02 and November 2009 versions.] I note it continues to say "4.5. ... in our bus and Underground stations you must not: ... take flash photographs and/or use a tripod or other camera support equipment" I take that as permission to take non-flash photographs without camera support equipment. My showing the CoC on my phone/camera/computer is usually enough to deal with staff who challenge: "You need permission to take photos on the Underground." I suppose I should complain. -- Walter Briscoe |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On Dec 28, 5:17*pm, John B wrote:
On Dec 28, 4:28*pm, Barry Salter wrote: John B wrote: (CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! New Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/899.aspx and the relevant conditions are 6.6.1 for LU, Overground and National Rail, and 6.6.7 for Buses. ...although interestingly, that strongly implies (to the extent that any court would support) that Travelcard holders will only be liable to a penalty fare if they fail to touch in on buses. While 6.6.1 says that Travelcard holders are supposed to touch in on LU/LO/NR, it doesn't specify any sanctions for people who don't - whereas 6.6.4 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't use OEPs on NR, 6.6.7 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't touch in on buses, and 6.7.3 mentions explicit sanctions for PAYG users who don't touch in on LU/LO/DLR. I notice that the wording is suitably obscure about the use of OEP on the existing NR routes which accept PAYG. First section 6.6.4 says that you MUST have an OEP if travelling outside your travelcard validity on NR, but then says that you SHOULD have an OEP if using one of the existing PAYG routes (those mentioned in section A1). I had understood that if, for example, I wished to travel to Watford Junction on a London Midland service, I wouldn't need an OEP, as the PAYG rules to Watford Junction would not be changing from the current situation. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
Barry Salter wrote:
(CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! That is going to be a ****ing disaster at some stations (DLR, Waterloo & City, Stratford) - and what are people supposed to do if they start their journey on a paper ticket to their season validity? |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 28 Dec, 17:17, John B wrote:
On Dec 28, 4:28*pm, Barry Salter wrote: John B wrote: (CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! New Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/899.aspx and the relevant conditions are 6.6.1 for LU, Overground and National Rail, and 6.6.7 for Buses. ...although interestingly, that strongly implies (to the extent that any court would support) that Travelcard holders will only be liable to a penalty fare if they fail to touch in on buses. While 6.6.1 says that Travelcard holders are supposed to touch in on LU/LO/NR, it doesn't specify any sanctions for people who don't - whereas 6.6.4 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't use OEPs on NR, 6.6.7 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't touch in on buses, and 6.7.3 mentions explicit sanctions for PAYG users who don't touch in on LU/LO/DLR. Which is particularly bonkers, since a bus journey can't exactly be extended beyond zones. Again, despite my deep suspicion of everything Oyster, I don't believe this is going to be used for PF purposes. I am sure that it's just an attempt to get people into the habit of touching all the time, given all the potential problems (which can't all be solved anyway). It's one of those "terms and conditions" things that they can fall back on if someone does try something on but there's no other technical offence they can get them on. I don't believe they are going to reprogram all the bus inspector machines not to give a green light to valid travelcards. What kind of entry/exit gets registered with a bus touch anyway? PS Or is this just to prepare for debendification? It's normal to touch a travelcard in front of a straight bus driver who has the responsibility of checking that you've got a valid ticket. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 29 Dec, 08:47, MIG wrote:
On 28 Dec, 17:17, John B wrote: On Dec 28, 4:28*pm, Barry Salter wrote: John B wrote: (CUE: pointless anecdotes of "I got on the 29 and only saw 4 people touching in". Well, yes - the others have Travelcards or bus passes). Talking of people not touching in, TfL are changing the Conditions of Carriage from 2nd January such that *ALL* Oyster holders *MUST* touch in (and out where appropriate) or be liable to a Penalty Fare, even if they have a valid Season Ticket loaded onto their Oyster! New Conditions of Carriage can be found at http://www.tfl.gov.uk/termsandconditions/899.aspx and the relevant conditions are 6.6.1 for LU, Overground and National Rail, and 6.6.7 for Buses. ...although interestingly, that strongly implies (to the extent that any court would support) that Travelcard holders will only be liable to a penalty fare if they fail to touch in on buses. While 6.6.1 says that Travelcard holders are supposed to touch in on LU/LO/NR, it doesn't specify any sanctions for people who don't - whereas 6.6.4 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't use OEPs on NR, 6.6.7 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't touch in on buses, and 6.7.3 mentions explicit sanctions for PAYG users who don't touch in on LU/LO/DLR. Which is particularly bonkers, since a bus journey can't exactly be extended beyond zones. It is possible to do so on routes 84 & 614. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 2009-12-29, Matthew Dickinson wrote:
On 29 Dec, 08:47, MIG wrote: While 6.6.1 says that Travelcard holders are supposed to touch in on LU/LO/NR, it doesn't specify any sanctions for people who don't - whereas 6.6.4 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't use OEPs on NR, 6.6.7 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't touch in on buses, and 6.7.3 mentions explicit sanctions for PAYG users who don't touch in on LU/LO/DLR. Which is particularly bonkers, since a bus journey can't exactly be extended beyond zones. It is possible to do so on routes 84 & 614. But they do not accept Oyster for journeys beyond the specified points, so this is totally irrelevant. E. |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
On 29 Dec, 13:19, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:47:24 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote: Which is particularly bonkers, since a bus journey can't exactly be extended beyond zones. On a few routes it is possible but these are not TfL routes just LLSA [1] services. Again, despite my deep suspicion of everything Oyster, I don't believe this is going to be used for PF purposes. *I am sure that it's just an attempt to get people into the habit of touching all the time, given all the potential problems (which can't all be solved anyway). *It's one of those "terms and conditions" things that they can fall back on if someone does try something on but there's no other technical offence they can get them on. I understand that the level of expected compliance is going to be ramped up over a number of months. This gives people time to get used to touching in even if they have Travelcards. *Notices appeared a few months ago giving advance warning that everyone on staff passes had to touch in on routes with remote readers. *I touch in anyway on bendies even though it's not strictly necessary. *Not sure what is proposed for holders of Freedom Passes. The use of PFs goes well beyond what Parliament agreed to in the first place, in my opinion, but if they are going to PF people who have paid their fare and can prove that they have and who have no means, while on the bus, of travelling beyond their validity, they will definitely end up in court, and I will be among lynch mob outside. But I can't believe that they really intend to do anything so ridiculous. I don't believe they are going to reprogram all the bus inspector machines not to give a green light to valid travelcards. *What kind of entry/exit gets registered with a bus touch anyway? Clearly only an entry is registered but if people change to another mode or another bus as part of an overall journey then patterns of usage can be derived if the timings for validation look OK relative to journey / interchange time. PS Or is this just to prepare for debendification? *It's normal to touch a travelcard in front of a straight bus driver who has the responsibility of checking that you've got a valid ticket. I don't see how. Once a route goes to double deck then that's it - everyone on at the front and everyone touches in. * That's what I said. Is this change simply in recognition of the fact that with debendification, there will not be a situation in which anyone gets on a bus with no need to either touch or show something to the driver? That would make sense. Planning to PF everyone with a travelcard who hasn't carried out a separate arbitrary action would, I think, be illegal. It would be purely a trap to earn them extra cash, and would protect no revenue whatsoever since it would only apply to people who could prove that they had paid the correct fare. They can't justify inventing rules purely for the purpose of fining people for breaking the rules. Not sure what's going to happy on the NBFL which will apparently allow boarding and alighting through all doors (like a rigid bendy)!? [1] London Local Service Agreement (former section 3/2 routes). -- Paul C |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
|
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
MIG wrote
...although interestingly, that strongly implies (to the extent that any court would support) that Travelcard holders will only be liable to a penalty fare if they fail to touch in on buses. While 6.6.1 says that Travelcard holders are supposed to touch in on LU/LO/NR, it doesn't specify any sanctions for people who don't - whereas 6.6.4 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't use OEPs on NR, 6.6.7 mentions explicit sanctions for Travelcard holders who don't touch in on buses, and 6.7.3 mentions explicit sanctions for PAYG users who don't touch in on LU/LO/DLR. .. Which is particularly bonkers, since a bus journey can't exactly be .. extended beyond zones. .. Again, despite my deep suspicion of everything Oyster, I don't believe this is going to be used for PF purposes. I am sure that it's just an attempt to get people into the habit of touching all the time, given all the potential problems (which can't all be solved anyway). It's one of those "terms and conditions" things that they can fall back on if someone does try something on but there's no other technical offence they can get them on. .. I don't believe they are going to reprogram all the bus inspector machines not to give a green light to valid travelcards. What kind of entry/exit gets registered with a bus touch anyway? Wearing my "think of a reason" hat, requiring touch-in on buses will ensure the /forgetful/ won't travel free with an expired season ticket. Other parts of the conditions of carriage remind me of Sir Alan Herbert (who, in _Uncommon Law_ invented the negotiable cow). 12.1.3. You must not bring with you anything that: • is more than 2 metres long 14.1. You can bring an assistance dog with you without charge. You can also take with you without charge any other dog or inoffensive animal, unless there is a good reason [...] So parrots and other birds are OK if not too large. -- Mike D |
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
|
Boris Magic Wonder Bus builder announced
wrote:
In article 01ca88cb$cc175420$LocalHost@default, (Michael R N Dolbear) wrote: Other parts of the conditions of carriage remind me of Sir Alan Herbert (who, in _Uncommon Law_ invented the negotiable cow). 12.1.3. You must not bring with you anything that: • is more than 2 metres long 14.1. You can bring an assistance dog with you without charge. You can also take with you without charge any other dog or inoffensive animal, unless there is a good reason [...] So parrots and other birds are OK if not too large. Is a giraffe more than 2 metres _long?_ Dunno. But if you do take one you shouldn't leave it on the train. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk