"George" wrote in message
...

On 30 Jan, 13:23, solar penguin wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:02:31 +0000, Mizter T wrote:

Perhaps worth noting that Paul C, who knows of George from
other recesses of the internet, said a few things on here when
George first starting popping up recently - my understanding
of the crux of it was that Geroge's stance is essentially that
TfL's bus operation is a disaster, that they can't do anything
right,

Well, he's right about that anyway.


and that bus operators
elsewhere outside of London are a paragon of virtue in comparison,
or at least something along those lines.

And there, George is totally wrong. Other bus operators are even
worse.



Oh really? And on what scientific basis have you come to that
conclusion?

The basis of my own experience and the evidence of my own eyes.

Or is it just your opinion and nothing more? I really do
despair that some people cannot see beyond the TfL spin.

I don't think TfL ever released spin saying "We're ****, and other
operators are even worse."

On 31 Jan, 16:21, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 08:00:22 -0800 (PST), George

wrote:
On 30 Jan, 13:23, solar penguin wrote:
And there, George is totally wrong. *Other bus operators are even worse.

Oh really? And on what scientific basis have you come to that
conclusion? Or is it just your opinion and nothing more? I really do
despair that some people cannot see beyond the TfL spin.

You've been here for about 5 minutes George. I think you will find Mr
Penguin is not the most pro TfL person on this newsgroup. *You surely
cannot be contending that TfL is the worst operator in the whole of the
UK? * That would be palpable nonsense given some of the shoddy operators
that run in other parts of the UK. *Take a trip to Glasgow or Paisley
and see some of the minibus operators there. Or look at the ancient
Dennis Dart operators that plague Birmingham or there is the delight
that is Banga Buses in Wolverhampton. There are other examples of less
than exemplary performance and turnout. *Equally there are some very
good operators running elsewhere in the country but many are mediocre
including divisions of some of the big groups.

Mr Penguin simply said "other operators are worse" - he did not say
*all* operators are worse.

I also couldn't see your scientific basis or evidence for concluding
that TfL are useless. *Care to set it out for us here? *All you've
offered is your opinion.
--
Paul C

As I haven't sampled every other bus operator in the UK I wouldn't be
qualified to make such a statement, I'm sure there are worse operators
and equally I'm sure there are better ones so it's rather a mute point
really.

As I've said before TfL's overall performance should be measured by
the funding they receive compared to other operators.

On Tue, 01 Feb 2011 20:54:32 +0000
Paul Corfield wrote:
The bit you fail to ever recognise is that London is the Capital City
and it has unique transport demands that require substantially higher
levels of service than seen elsewhere in the country. Other regional
cities complain about overcrowded trains and buses but it is extremely
rare that the service levels are comparable.

Actually if the regional cities in this country had a half decent public
transport system they might be more attractive to large multinationals to
use for HQs and other offices. In europe most reasonable sized cities have
a metro and almost all have an extensive tram system. In this country even
a city the size of birmingham or manchester only gets tossed some derisory 1
or 2 line tram system which is quibbled over for years beforehand by nimbies
and cost cutters. Only Newcastle somehow got lucky with its Metro but even
thats only a shadow of what it should be.

And before anyone mentions buses - I don't count them as a serious public
transport system for commuting.

B2003

On 1 Feb, 20:54, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 1 Feb 2011 07:17:17 -0800 (PST), George

wrote:
On 31 Jan, 16:21, Paul Corfield wrote:
I also couldn't see your scientific basis or evidence for concluding
that TfL are useless. *Care to set it out for us here? *All you've
offered is your opinion.

As I haven't sampled every other bus operator in the UK I wouldn't be
qualified to make such a statement, I'm sure there are worse operators
and equally I'm sure there are better ones so it's rather a mute point
really.

It is hardly a moot point when your consistent commentary (in another
place) about TfL is that they are no good and that full blown bus
deregulation should be introduced in London in order to fix what you
consider to be their poor performance. Anyway thanks for confirming that
you don't have comparative evidence to support your position.

As I've said before TfL's overall performance should be measured by
the funding they receive compared to other operators.

Money, by itself, is not a measure of performance. *It is what you get
for that money and how well or badly the service quality is delivered
against specification that is the issue.

The bit you fail to ever recognise is that London is the Capital City
and it has unique transport demands that require substantially higher
levels of service than seen elsewhere in the country. *Other regional
cities complain about overcrowded trains and buses but it is extremely
rare that the service levels are comparable.

If trains from Bolton to Manchester were 12 cars long and ran at 5
minute headways and were grossly overcrowded then it would be comparable
to people moaning about trains from Surbiton or East Croydon being
grossly overcrowded. Ditto for trains into Birmingham or Leeds or
Newcastle or Bristol. However services in and around those cities are
not comparable to London in their intensity of frequency and associated
usage levels. *Therefore London and the South East will always have a
disproportionate call on funds.

While some bus services in those conurbations will be busy I doubt any
get close to the highest frequencies in London nor see the same scale of
demand. And that is not decrying the efforts of the bus companies in
those areas although I dare say the locals probably would complain about
what they get. *It is worth noting that the Mayor and TfL seem to have
convinced the DfT and Treasury that broadly maintaining London's bus
network is a "good thing" for the country. *While the budget may well be
trimmed somewhat and fares will rise the essential nature of the network
will be preserved. If the London approach was fatally flawed and
unaffordable surely the government would have demanded an alternative
approach? * It seems to be demanding that in every other sector like
health, education, the BBC, social services etc etc.

Still we could always do what Northamptonshire County Council are
suggesting - abolishing all bus service subsidies (already very low) and
expecting the private sector to cover some of the lost journeys. There
is some residual funding for combined social service / demand responsive
travel for some parts of the county. *I feel genuinely sorry for those
people in Northants who will lose their bus services permanently as a
result of government cuts to council funding.

--
Paul C


Yes it does seem appalling that people in Northants face losing their
bus services whilst TfL continue to throw good money after bad on
Hybrid buses not too mention the Oystercard system which seems to be
attracting more and more complaints from rail users about being
overcharged, although I'll admit it does generally work well on buses
where a flat fare is deducted on entry.

On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:06:31 +0000
Ian Jelf wrote:
In europe most reasonable sized cities have
a metro and almost all have an extensive tram system.

They also pretty much all have higher population densities, which makes
heavier transport systems more viable.

Do they? I'll take your word for it. But even if more people in britain
live in sprawling suburbs than in the centre thats probably an even greater
argument for a metro system.

And before anyone mentions buses - I don't count them as a serious public
transport system for commuting.

Ah. I thought we were doing too well on the agreeing front. Buses

Can't have everything eh?

*can* be a very effective, even stylish means of travelling. Go to
Oxford. Or Nottingham. Or Edinburgh, I'm told (although I have no
experience of bus travel there).

I lived near nottingham for a few years and while the buses are fine on the
outskirts, once they get near the city centre things tended to slow down.
And thats the problem with any street based transport - buses or trams. They
get stuck. Luckily the NET tram system in nottingham uses its own right of
way for a lot of the route but I imagine it still suffers traffic jams at
peak times.

B2003

In message , at 12:26:16 on Wed, 2 Feb
2011, d remarked:

I lived near nottingham for a few years and while the buses are fine on the
outskirts, once they get near the city centre things tended to slow down.
And thats the problem with any street based transport - buses or trams. They
get stuck.

The Derby Road can be bad, but there are extensive bus priority measures
to most of the main bus routes into the City, including many roads that
are in effect bus only (ie not just bus lanes).

Luckily the NET tram system in nottingham uses its own right of
way for a lot of the route but I imagine it still suffers traffic jams at
peak times.

Traffic (especially through traffic) is excluded from much of the
on-road running sections, and I've never seen a tram caught in a jam.
--
Roland Perry

On 2011\02\02 12:06, Ian Jelf wrote:

Ah. I thought we were doing too well on the agreeing front. Buses *can*
be a very effective, even stylish means of travelling. Go to Oxford. Or
Nottingham. Or Edinburgh, I'm told (although I have no experience of bus
travel there).

Or even Bromley, where the peak hour buses are full of chaps in suits.

On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 12:55:38 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 12:26:16 on Wed, 2 Feb
2011, d remarked:

I lived near nottingham for a few years and while the buses are fine on the
outskirts, once they get near the city centre things tended to slow down.
And thats the problem with any street based transport - buses or trams. They
get stuck.

The Derby Road can be bad, but there are extensive bus priority measures
to most of the main bus routes into the City, including many roads that
are in effect bus only (ie not just bus lanes).

My experience dates from the 90s so its probably well out of date. I've been
there many times since but I've not used the buses.

Of course traffic isn't the only problem with buses - having a stop every
200m or so would lead to a slow service even if there was no other traffic
on the road. Where there is usually free flowing traffic bus stops should be
a lot further apart and those routes which don't have stops but people just
stick their hand out to stop the bus (I'm thinking london now) and ring the
bell to stop the bus are a bloody pain.

Traffic (especially through traffic) is excluded from much of the
on-road running sections, and I've never seen a tram caught in a jam.

Perhaps nottingham was bad example then. But certainly trams do get caught
in traffic in other cities.

B2003

On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 21:41:04 +0000, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 04:15:47 -0800 (PST), George
wrote:


Yes it does seem appalling that people in Northants face losing their
bus services whilst TfL continue to throw good money after bad on Hybrid
buses not too mention the Oystercard system which seems to be attracting
more and more complaints from rail users about being overcharged,
although I'll admit it does generally work well on buses where a flat
fare is deducted on entry.


I assume you will also throw in the Borismaster to the "waste of money"
category as it is planned to be a hybrid vehicle?

Everyone - except Boris himself and his cronies - thinks the Borismaster
is a "waste of money". But that's nothing to do with whether it's a
hybrid.


Strange that you decry Oyster and yet every large city and many counties
want something similar. Are Go North East, Metrobus, Brighton and Hove
and Trent Barton also wasting their time in investing in smart card
systems for their services?

From the customer's POV, that probably all depends on whether those smart
cards are as awkward and unreliable as Oyster. I suspect that, like
Oyster, they'll be just about adequate for simple, flat-fare bus
journeys, but an utter nightmare for anything more complicated.

OTOH from the authorities' POV, these smart cards are really just
something that helps them spy on our movements for their own secret
purposes. As long as that happens, they've not been "wasting their
time", no matter how much it costs us.

In uk.transport.buses Paul Corfield wrote:
Although there are some excellent companies and counties who do a
sterling job in keeping bus stop info up to date. You also have a number
of places with real "real time" info systems at stops and accessible via
text. You also have the back up of being able to text for the
theoretical times for next buses in many counties. I once found out how
to do it for TfL's stops and did manage to get the real timetable info
rather than "intervals". In some respects it is London that is behind
many other places.

You can find all the timetabled info from a stop he
http://www.travelineeastanglia.org.uk/
(works for London and SE too)
More - next departures

There's various phone apps for this. When it has live info (such as for
Cambridgeshire), that will be displayed too.

What's the situation with TfL's live bus info feed? It's on the bus screens,
and TfL are usually good about publishing free data. I'm surprised that the
wilds of Cambs have been ahead of the metropolis in this respect.

Theo