In message , Walter Briscoe
writes

sent a response on 31 March 2009 to
me saying "It is true that there used to be separate designations for
'compulsory' and 'request' stops. This is no longer the case. Following
a review of the matter last year, drivers have been advised to treat all
designated bus stops in the same manner. If there are customers waiting
at the stop they must stop, and if a passenger presses the stop request
button on board the bus they must stop at the next bus stop. There is no
documentation of this change."

It's difficult to see the logic behind this change, unless it is just a
general dumbing-down for the benefit of those poor souls who can't
remember the difference between a compulsory stop and a request stop
when waiting for a bus.

Almost all of the stops on the route that I use most frequently are
served by a variety of different routes (with totally different
destinations), and it is a great irritation for passengers and other
road traffic when the bus keeps stopping at places where nobody wishes
to alight and where none of the waiting people want to board the bus
concerned.

Worse than that, drivers are often confused by this notion of people
"wanting to board" - some stop, even if nobody boards; some slow down
and look quizzically for some unspecified intention to board; some sail
past, oblivious to the shaking fists visible in their rear-view mirrors.

Worse still: when TfL (or their agents) refurbish bus stops - as they do
several times a year in these parts (*) - or when they supply temporary
bus signs for road works - they still use a mix of request and
compulsory stop signs. Why? To confuse the public?

(*) This is really a subject for a different thread, but I'm appalled at
the money wasted by TfL on street furniture. It was good to see most bus
stops in the area supplied with seats, shelters and information a few
years ago. However, most of those shelters have been moved several times
since their installation - some further back from the kerb, some nearer,
two have been moved sideways because their supports blocked the bus exit
doors, one was moved further because the bus exit was blocked by a BT
street cabinet, and then moved back again because the new position was
too close to a road junction, another had to be removed because it was
built on a pavement so narrow that it blocked push chairs and wheel
chairs. And most of them are dug up at frequent intervals because the
supply cable to the Countdown system or the electric adverts failed.

I've no idea who is responsible for all of this chaos, but I'm sure TfL
could save a significant sum if they appointed a team with the ability
to analyse what is required and then get things right from the outset,
instead of wasting funds on correcting earlier, and often multiple,
mistakes.

--
Paul Terry

"martin" wrote in message
...
Someone's put in a Freedom of Information request to TfL for the
manual issued to bus drivers, the Big Red Book, which I suspect will
be of interest to some people here.

It can be found at
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques...%20version.pdf
(or, http://tinyurl.com/24l4hr5 if the link's broken)

(Useful though it is) I wonder what it is that makes the site-owner think
that the FOI legalisation allows him to ignore the laws of copyright.

tim

tim.... wrote

"martin" wrote

Someone's put in a Freedom of Information request to TfL for the
manual issued to bus drivers, the Big Red Book, which I suspect
will
be of interest to some people here.

It can be found at

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/reques.../attach/3/BRB%
20Final%20version.pdf
(or, http://tinyurl.com/24l4hr5 if the link's broken)

(Useful though it is) I wonder what it is that makes the site-owner
think
that the FOI legalisation allows him to ignore the laws of copyright.

IIRC Paul Corfield and others have mentioned FOI documents that have
been placed on the TfL website.

And though your point is possibly valid in abstract law, if the
whatdotheyknow.com site had instead mentioned the success of the FOI
request and triggered dozens or hundreds of identical requests to TfL
it would not, however legal, been the sort of thing that ought to be
done. Indeed since the document is available to anyone the damages for
breach of copyright might be zero rather than nominal.

--
Mike D

Paul Terry wrote

Worse than that, drivers are often confused by this notion of people
"wanting to board" - some stop, even if nobody boards; some slow down

and look quizzically for some unspecified intention to board; some
sail
past, oblivious to the shaking fists visible in their rear-view
mirrors.

Obviously it will take some time before the customers work out a
suitable protocol.

There remain several problems, ie

(a) at some stops the driver can't see whether there is anyone waiting
when they are in the shelter, sitting on the bench.

(b) a stop that is just one stop before their terminus may well cause
drivers to get creative. I have in mind the Hampton Court Palace Gates
stop where it is conceivable that someone would take the R68 across
Hampton Court bridge to its terminus at Hampton Court rail station but
a clear signal might be expected.

(c) Both TfL and non-TfL buses call at the same stop.

(d) people who are at the stop to use their mobile phones in shelter.

--
Mike D

On 16 May 2010 19:13:48 GMT, "Michael R N Dolbear"
wrote:

Obviously it will take some time before the customers work out a
suitable protocol.

The German one is to stop unless absolutely sure there is nobody
wanting that bus. That generally means nobody at all at the stop,
unless there is one person only at the stop who visibly either waves
them past or shakes their head and steps back.

(a) at some stops the driver can't see whether there is anyone waiting
when they are in the shelter, sitting on the bench.

The German assumption would in that case be to stop to find out.

That said, there is one big difference between German and UK bus
operations in that the stops in Germany are far further apart (often
as much as 1km rather than the usual few hundred metres over here).
Stopping everywhere and opening the doors would make routes very slow
indeed in the UK.

That being the case, unless we close some (that would cause outrage),
a more sensible approach is the "UK standard" one that all stops are
treated as request stops, possibly modified slightly to say that if
the driver can't see the stop clearly e.g. because of another bus,
even if of the same route[1], they should proceed slowly and look
carefully if someone wants the bus. (Stopping anyway at the rear of a
long queue of buses may still cause people to miss it!)

[1] The front bus might, for instance, be full and dropping off only.
Or it might be terminating short (TfL, of course, only display the
number on the rear blind, not the destination).

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply put my first name before the at.