On 16/09/10 20:37, Neil Williams wrote:

What *is* bad is the provincial single-doored bus. As ever with the
bus industry, paranoia about a small amount of lost revenue overtakes
the benefits to the timetable, PVR and passenger comfort/convenience.
At times the industry really is far too conservative for its own good.

I'd always understood this was more a health and safety concern than a
revenue protection concern -- the driver doesn't have a good view of the
rear doors so I think the concern is that of the bus departing with
someone trapped by the closing doors.

Clearly it's not insurmountable though. e.g. they run double deckers
with two doors on the Park and Ride in Cambridge -- the rear doors have
hustle alarms somewhat like on a train to warn passengers they are
closing...

I'm wondering now - do London buses have hustle alarms? I don't recall
hearing them, but since pretty much all London buses are driver only
operated, the same issues must arise in London as elsewhere...

-roy

"Mizter T" wrote in message
...

On Sep 16, 8:44 pm, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Thu, 16 Sep 2010 07:56:49 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:
I've seen it somewhat more than that, though I also see it happening
with conventional buses as well as lorries and other traffic.

Builders' lorries are in my experience the real scourge of London
traffic. Badly-driven, noisy, smelly and just plain large. Even
though it might contribute to congestion, a larger number of smaller
vehicles would be preferable in that context.

Hard to fit 6.3 metre scaffolding pole on a smaller vehicle though. Re
the driving - well, scaffolders have something of a general
rapscallion reputation.

(Yes, I know there's all multitude of other builder's lorries on the
road hauling all sorts of supplies, but I'm being completely partial
and picking on the poor scaffys - they can take it though!)

True story, one of the first really major incidents I had to deal with as a
DMT involved some bunch of cowboys demolishing a house hard up against the
wall protecting our railway. I turned up to find an unprotected gable end
wall swaying gently in the breeze about a metre away from the eastbound
Picc. where it exits Southgate tunnel, a representative of the local council
surveyors department who had stopped further work and called us and a
somewhat sheepish looking builder who was having the riot act read to him by
said council chappie. We suspended the service and told builder to get some
protective scaffolding up pronto. A scaffolding lorry turns up about 45
mins. later only to discover that Mr. Scaffolder has left his ladder back at
base. More agitated telephoning ensues and we are assured that the "boy" is
hotfooting it from base with the errant ladder. Another 45 mins. passes, by
which time my RDO has finished having kittens over the delay and gone on to
giving birth to tiger cubs, before the "boy" arrives with the ladder in a
van and with truly awesome accuracy drives the van straight into the back of
the scaffolding lorry! Oh how we laughed.
--
Cheers, Steve
To reply change the exclamatory smelly stuff to a well known mobile telecoms
company.

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:20:09 +0100, Roy Badami
wrote:

I'd always understood this was more a health and safety concern than a
revenue protection concern -- the driver doesn't have a good view of the
rear doors so I think the concern is that of the bus departing with
someone trapped by the closing doors.

Supposedly so. But London buses have door-brake interlock on the rear
doors, and you can see them well enough through the mirrors, both
interior and exterior. That could be improved by having some form of
CCTV on a modern bus.

Clearly it's not insurmountable though. e.g. they run double deckers
with two doors on the Park and Ride in Cambridge -- the rear doors have
hustle alarms somewhat like on a train to warn passengers they are
closing...

I'm wondering now - do London buses have hustle alarms?

Most of them do, I think, certainly recent ones.

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

On Sep 18, 11:39*pm, Neil Williams
wrote:

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 13:20:09 +0100, Roy Badami
wrote:

I'd always understood this was more a health and safety concern than a
revenue protection concern -- the driver doesn't have a good view of the
rear doors so I think the concern is that of the bus departing with
someone trapped by the closing doors.

Supposedly so. *But London buses have door-brake interlock on the rear
doors, and you can see them well enough through the mirrors, both
interior and exterior.

I'm not entirely sure there is a direct door-brake interlock - or is
there?

*That could be improved by having some form of
CCTV on a modern bus.

There is CCTV on most of not all buses in London - this can be used to
monitor the rear door I think (on bendy buses it is used to monitor
both the rear doors).


Clearly it's not insurmountable though. *e.g. they run double deckers
with two doors on the Park and Ride in Cambridge -- the rear doors have
hustle alarms somewhat like on a train to warn passengers they are
closing...

I'm wondering now - do London buses have hustle alarms?

Most of them do, I think, certainly recent ones.

All of them now I think - it's not something I even notice any more,
so I can't be more certain. Thankfully the stupid and ultra-annoying
"doors closing - please stand well clear of the doors" announcement
that featured on some new buses that were introduced a few years back
in place of a hustle alarm doesn't appear to have found favour on more
recent introductions (and bloody rightly so!).

On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 17:14:42 -0700 (PDT), Mizter T
wrote:

I'm not entirely sure there is a direct door-brake interlock - or is
there?

I'm not sure how it works, but there is. On some designs the
handbrake being released causes the door to close, while on others it
seems that if the doors don't close properly, the handbrake won't
release.

It only seems to be possible to depart with the front door open, and
on some designs even that isn't possible.

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

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 12:27:31 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:

There usually is. I have certainly experienced nearly being thrown on
the floor because a yoof decided that exiting via the rear door would be
a great idea while the bus was moving slowly in a traffic jam. The
brakes certainly came on!

Surprising - that sort of interlock is very dangerous on a road
vehicle, as it could maroon it in the middle of a junction. I always
thought it was a simpler form than you get on rail, in that the
handbrake wouldn't release if the door was open, but if the door
became open when the handbrake was released it wouldn't do anything.

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

On 19/09/10 17:49, Neil Williams wrote:

I'm not sure how it works, but there is. On some designs the
handbrake being released causes the door to close, while on others it
seems that if the doors don't close properly, the handbrake won't
release.

Hmmm, I'm not convinced that the former design doesn't *increase* the
risk of a passenger being dragged along by the bus... (It may mitigate
other risks, of course, such as people falling out of the bus.)

-roy

On 19 Sep, 17:50, Neil Williams
wrote:
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 12:27:31 +0100, Paul Corfield

wrote:
There usually is. I have certainly experienced nearly being thrown on
the floor because a yoof decided that exiting via the rear door would be
a great idea while the bus was moving slowly in a traffic jam. *The
brakes certainly came on!

Surprising - that sort of interlock is very dangerous on a road
vehicle, as it could maroon it in the middle of a junction. *I always
thought it was a simpler form than you get on rail, in that the
handbrake wouldn't release if the door was open, but if the door
became open when the handbrake was released it wouldn't do anything.

Yes; I thought that the general trend was not to allow passenger
alarms and other features to remove control from the driver, certainly
on trains. Maybe London buses don't often have to turn right into
dual carriageways, but I wouldn't fancy being in one that might get
halted in front of oncoming lorries etc.

On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 01:44:28PM +0100, Bruce wrote:
David Cantrell wrote:
Yes, Germany has the great advantage of having been bombed back to the
stone age
I feel sure that any Germans who personally suffered from the
relentless (and apparently rather pointless) destruction of civilian
life during WW2 by RAF and USAF bombs, or whose families were
devastated by it, will be touched by your sympathetic approach to
their plight.

Those that I know and have discussed this with agree with me. And we're
still friends.

--
David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig

Languages for which ISO-Latin-$n is not necessary, #1 in a series:

Latin