Matt Ashby wrote:

With Three fully refurbished Routemasters (Marshall Standard) being
available for the cost of a single modern vehicle it appears sensible to
maximise the Passenger carrying ability of ANY route by retaining them and
distributing them throughout the network as the situation demands.
...
Save the Routemaster Indeed......But only if it remains capable of
performing its task !!

Unfortunately the Routemaster isn't capable of performing the task
required of it - safe and accessible road transport. Routemasters are
not accessible to wheelchairs, buggies

Isn't that why so many Routemaster routes have very long shared sections
with other routes?

or the elderly,

Not always - my grandmother has found she can use some Routemasters but
not others. Apparently the platform heights vary.

and are extraordinarily unsafe (as demonstrated by the people you
occasionally see trying to push other people off the platform).

I've never seen those!

Their engines also contribute far more than modern buses to our city's
pollution levels.

Are there any AEC engined routemasters left in service? I thought it was
only the ones with the clean engines that were left!

A few months ago on ITV's "Ask Ken" there was a cabbie rather annoyed
with the fact that the Routemasters were still on the road while he'd
been required to switch to a new vehicle. The fact that Ken's response
gave no indication that they had new engines made me wonder if he even
knows they have. Next time they do such a programme, maybe someone from
this ng should ask him why they're getting rid of the Routemasters when
they've recently had new engines installed!

They might be cheap, and they might be the subject of some nostalgia,
but they have nevertheless outlived their usefulness.

'Tis really a case of how you use them. I think the best way of using
them would be as a peak only supplement to the regular service: on very
busy routes (the ones where buses are sometimes too full to get on), in
addition to modern buses, there should be a good supply of Routemasters
to accomodate the commuters. They should make no attempt to stick to a
timetable - the new buses that they share the route with could do that.
Instead the drivers should start at regular intervals (say every three
minutes) with the instruction to go as fast as they comfortably and
safely can. This way:

A lot of capacity could quite cheaply be provided when and where it's
needed.
Routemasters would regain their reputation for being fast.
Those who have trouble using Routemasters would be able to use the route
more easily (as crowded new buses can be just as bad)

Interpeak some of them could be used on routes that are popular with
tourists.

On Mon, 02 Feb 2004 01:00:58 +0000, Ken Wheatley wrote:

I prefer what seems to be more normal on the continent. For most
people it is cashless. But you can, if you like, buy a ticket from the
driver and then validate it in the machine. This is the situation on,
e.g. the Brussels buses and trams.

Ditto Hamburg. The difference, though, is that single fares[1] are priced
rather highly, and day and period passes more cheaply, so you are strongly
discouraged from using single fares. This means few people actually want
to buy from the driver, as they already have a ticket.

[1] These are all-modes with changes of bus/train permitted.

Neil

They each agreed upon the preference for the "Long Seats" at the back of
the
Routemaster and most interestingly they each remarked upon how difficult
it
was FOR THEM to get to a seat on a new SLF bus because "They`re always
crowded full with Push-Chairs and Prams"

Yes that is indeed something I hear of a lot. Also the rear section of many
low floor buses is near enough inaccessible to many because it is raised up
so high and it can be quite precarious getting down again if you do make it.
Also where there are side facing seats towards the front of buses they are
dangerous because they are not deep enough and there are insufficient
handholds resulting in a tendency to be thrown off the seat when cornering.
Finally in the wheelchair areas there are often seats on a spring up
mechanism. Unfortunately in order to reach the bell push it is necessary
for many people to raise themselves off the chair slightly, only to find
that is has sprung up and is no longer there when they sit back, leaving
them deposited on the floor. So these low floor buses might be more
accessible in terms of boarded and alighting but the same considerations can
greatly reduce the number of usable seats for many and add several new
dangers. Indeed on some of the double decker low floor buses there are only
about four seats that are really suitable for many people.

(Aidan Stanger) wrote in message ...

[talking about Routemasters]

'Tis really a case of how you use them. I think the best way of using
them would be as a peak only supplement to the regular service: on very
busy routes (the ones where buses are sometimes too full to get on), in
addition to modern buses, there should be a good supply of Routemasters
to accomodate the commuters. They should make no attempt to stick to a
timetable - the new buses that they share the route with could do that.
Instead the drivers should start at regular intervals (say every three
minutes) with the instruction to go as fast as they comfortably and
safely can. This way:

A lot of capacity could quite cheaply be provided when and where it's
needed.
Routemasters would regain their reputation for being fast.
Those who have trouble using Routemasters would be able to use the route
more easily (as crowded new buses can be just as bad)

Interpeak some of them could be used on routes that are popular with
tourists.

Absolutely superb idea, just what's needed.

Personally I hate the new bendy buses - they take up massive amounts
of roadspace (space which London doesn't have); they are a danger to
other road users, particularly cyclists (try overtaking a bendy bus -
not fun); there are far less seats on board than on other buses; and
(now I'm getting picky) they have a horrible tacky plasticky smell.

However I can see that they have some merit and combining them with
peak-time Routemasters seems like an excellent idea to me.

In message , David
Boothroyd writes
3) Routemasters are fundamentally inaccessible for anyone with mobility
problems.

A few (contradictory) observations.

As someone with a slightly unsteady Mum I have to take issue with this.
RMs are inaccessible to anyone in a "wheelchair* but are preferred by
those who are a bit unsteady. In particular, Mum has great difficulty
with modern low floor buses because of the lack of grab rails,
necessitated by the circulating space for wheelchairs and push chairs.
A case of helping one section of the community while buggering things up
for another.

That said, a few months ago, I travelled with a friend in a wheelchair
in London, who was able to take his first ride on a bus in over 30 years
as a result of the presence of a low floor bendy. It worked and it was
delightful to see.

As for cashless operation, it's now much harder for me to encourage
clients to hop on a bus for short journeys in Central London than it
used to be. "Get on a 13 there, the journey to Oxford Street will cost
you £1" is now replaced by "Get on a 13 there but first you have to buy
a ticket for £1 from the machine at the stop". That is relatively
straightforward but puts off casual tourist use which is a pity.

To be honest, I've never thought that paying at stops slows the service
down (relatively few people did so anyway and the flat fare made it
pretty painless). The main cause of delays tends to be "do you go to
X? No? Well where can I get a bus there? But how far along this
road *are* you going?" etc.

I still await (with baited breath) the "tourist routes" on which the RMs
will (apparently) be retained indefinitely. As I said in previous
posting, I thought when I first heard this that it would be the 9, 11
and 15 but events have proved me wrong. So where will they be?

--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

Aidan Stangers response is exactly the type of commonsense thinking that TfL
and its Senior Executives (Including Hizzonor) are paid to come up with.
The Routemaster has many years of good solid service left in it and this
type of Peak-Time enhancement is right up its alley.
There is also the question of occasions such as the great Power Cut when
Tube and Rail services may be Nixed and extra Routemaster Capacity could
very well make a huge contribution to the response.
Surely SOMEBODY from TfL (Surface Transport) reads this ng....????

"Alek" typed


Listening to the two I wondered if anybody from TfL had ever asked them for
their opinion but sadly I didnt interrupt their conversation.
To me it still appears that the Issue of disability remains one where much
lip-service is paid yet little real understanding of what the term really
means exists.

Quite. The 'ambulant disabled' far outnumber the wheelchair users. They
need downstairs seats with good grab rails. Buggy & wheelchair spaces
reduce the number of seats available for their use.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

"Graham J" typed


They each agreed upon the preference for the "Long Seats" at the back of
the
Routemaster and most interestingly they each remarked upon how difficult
it
was FOR THEM to get to a seat on a new SLF bus because "They`re always
crowded full with Push-Chairs and Prams"

Yes that is indeed something I hear of a lot. Also the rear section of many
low floor buses is near enough inaccessible to many because it is raised up
so high and it can be quite precarious getting down again if you do make it.
Also where there are side facing seats towards the front of buses they are
dangerous because they are not deep enough and there are insufficient
handholds resulting in a tendency to be thrown off the seat when cornering.
Finally in the wheelchair areas there are often seats on a spring up
mechanism. Unfortunately in order to reach the bell push it is necessary
for many people to raise themselves off the chair slightly, only to find
that is has sprung up and is no longer there when they sit back, leaving
them deposited on the floor. So these low floor buses might be more
accessible in terms of boarded and alighting but the same considerations can
greatly reduce the number of usable seats for many and add several new
dangers. Indeed on some of the double decker low floor buses there are only
about four seats that are really suitable for many people.

And one person frequently occupies two seats...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

"Aidan Stanger" wrote in message ...
What I want to know is what's happening after they're withdrawn. Are TfL
selling them to people who could sell them back to TfL next time there's
a policy backflip?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspap...982982,00.html

=====

But for some bus fans, reports of its death are greatly exaggerated. As quickly as Transport for
London decommissions them, enthusiasts are buying them back.

Peter Newman runs a second-hand bus dealership in Essex, and for him the demise of the
Routemaster has meant an unexpected boom in business. "I have got literally 200 inquiries
sitting on my desk from interested buyers," he says.

"All of them have come in the last two months since the Routemaster began being sold off.
One guy from London has bought five and just parked them in a barn, as an investment."

Depending on the condition, you can pick up a Routemaster for as little as £2,000, although
in good repair the price rises to £15,000. Newman says America is a lucrative market and
that while private buyers want the buses purely for nostalgia, some businesses are
becoming increasingly interested too.

"We’ve had estate agents buying them to advertise their services like a mobile billboard, a
school wants one to house their computer class, I’ve even got an order from a church that
wants a Bible bus," he says.

=====


Robin

"Helen Deborah Vecht" wrote in message
...

Quite. The 'ambulant disabled' far outnumber the wheelchair users. They
need downstairs seats with good grab rails. Buggy & wheelchair spaces
reduce the number of seats available for their use.

And how often are elderly people forced to get up from these seats to
accommodate minging, Croydon-facelifted, mobile 'phone-touting,
Regals-smoking slapper chavs, with their whingeing pikey brats and a buggy
the size of Peckham?

;-)

Ian