"Recliner" wrote in message
...
Roland Perry wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor-
boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters-
a7505391.html

The headline is a bit of an exaggeration, and it's really a non-story on a
quiet news day: we already knew no more of them were to be ordered, and
Sadiq isn't actually getting rid of the delivered fleet.


I am assuming London is stuck with the NRMs until they are scrapped. At
least the bendies were a standard design that could be sold to other UK bus
operators; we have some of them in Brighton & Hove.

--
DAS

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 00:37:35 -0000
"D A Stocks" wrote:
"Recliner" wrote in message
-septem
er.org...
Roland Perry wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor-
boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters-
a7505391.html

The headline is a bit of an exaggeration, and it's really a non-story on a
quiet news day: we already knew no more of them were to be ordered, and
Sadiq isn't actually getting rid of the delivered fleet.


I am assuming London is stuck with the NRMs until they are scrapped. At
least the bendies were a standard design that could be sold to other UK bus
operators; we have some of them in Brighton & Hove.

It does seem to be history repeating itself. Boris didn't like the bendies
giving some spurious nonsense about them being a danger to cyclists (or more
likely because they were Kens idea) and now Kahn has decided the roastmasters
are a poor choice. Which to be fair, they are.

I suppose if you're mayor of western europes largest city but you really don't
have much power, buses seem to be the bit where you can leave your legacy.

--
Spud

In article , d () wrote:

It does seem to be history repeating itself. Boris didn't like the
bendies
giving some spurious nonsense about them being a danger to cyclists
(or more likely because they were Kens idea) and now Kahn has decided
the roastmasters are a poor choice. Which to be fair, they are.

Speaking as a cyclist I hated the bendies. They were so long they were very
hard to navigate round and they kept cutting in on one.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Tue, 03 Jan 2017 07:18:22 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:

It does seem to be history repeating itself. Boris didn't like the
bendies
giving some spurious nonsense about them being a danger to cyclists
(or more likely because they were Kens idea) and now Kahn has decided
the roastmasters are a poor choice. Which to be fair, they are.

Speaking as a cyclist I hated the bendies. They were so long they were very
hard to navigate round and they kept cutting in on one.

So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe
without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has
taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking
nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think of
the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in
this country is anyones guess.

--
Spud

On 03/01/2017 15:31, d wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2017 07:18:22 -0600
wrote:
In article , d () wrote:

It does seem to be history repeating itself. Boris didn't like the
bendies
giving some spurious nonsense about them being a danger to cyclists
(or more likely because they were Kens idea) and now Kahn has decided
the roastmasters are a poor choice. Which to be fair, they are.

Speaking as a cyclist I hated the bendies. They were so long they were very
hard to navigate round and they kept cutting in on one.

So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe
without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has
taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking
nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think of
the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in
this country is anyones guess.

Wasn't the problem more (from my experience) that the road design in
London is unsuited to large numbers of such long vehicles - ie the
distance between traffic lights and other obstacles to road progress was
not a reasonable multiple of bendies long so if (when!) the service
bunched up or many routes served a road then they caused more congestion
than would reasonably be expected or presented an impediment to progress
- whether that be themselves, other motorists or pedestrians.

That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" and the consequential
crush loading on certain services (25 anyone?), was what made them
undesirable than the supposed risk to cyclists (which was unproven) and
their flammability (which was fixed and never caused an injury anyway).

On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:11:43 +0000
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 03/01/2017 15:31, d wrote:
So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe
without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has
taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking
nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think
of
the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in
this country is anyones guess.

Wasn't the problem more (from my experience) that the road design in
London is unsuited to large numbers of such long vehicles - ie the
distance between traffic lights and other obstacles to road progress was
not a reasonable multiple of bendies long so if (when!) the service
bunched up or many routes served a road then they caused more congestion
than would reasonably be expected or presented an impediment to progress
- whether that be themselves, other motorists or pedestrians.

Possibly. OTOH they carried ~150 passengers compared to about 80 on a DD and
they weren't close to being twice as long, so they carried more passengers per
metre of road space used.

That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" and the consequential
crush loading on certain services (25 anyone?), was what made them

More random ticket inspections would have sorted that problem. You don't get
mass fare evasion on the gateless DLR because they do frequent checks. But of
course that means hiring people and TfL don't like doing that. Unless its for
management positions of course.

undesirable than the supposed risk to cyclists (which was unproven) and

Quite so. Just lots of lycra louts whining when they found out that riding up
the inside of an articulated vehicle turning left turned out to be a bad idea.
Who knew? (Well, everyone with some basic common sense which excludes a lot
of cyclists it seems).

their flammability (which was fixed and never caused an injury anyway).

And a lot of them ended up happily working in the heat in Malta. Ironic.

--
Spud

wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:11:43 +0000
Someone Somewhere wrote:
On 03/01/2017 15:31, d wrote:
So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe
without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has
taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking
nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think
of
the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in
this country is anyones guess.

Wasn't the problem more (from my experience) that the road design in
London is unsuited to large numbers of such long vehicles - ie the
distance between traffic lights and other obstacles to road progress was
not a reasonable multiple of bendies long so if (when!) the service
bunched up or many routes served a road then they caused more congestion
than would reasonably be expected or presented an impediment to progress
- whether that be themselves, other motorists or pedestrians.

Possibly. OTOH they carried ~150 passengers compared to about 80 on a DD and
they weren't close to being twice as long, so they carried more passengers per
metre of road space used.

That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" and the consequential
crush loading on certain services (25 anyone?), was what made them

More random ticket inspections would have sorted that problem. You don't get
mass fare evasion on the gateless DLR because they do frequent checks. But of
course that means hiring people and TfL don't like doing that. Unless its for
management positions of course.

undesirable than the supposed risk to cyclists (which was unproven) and

Quite so. Just lots of lycra louts whining when they found out that riding up
the inside of an articulated vehicle turning left turned out to be a bad idea.
Who knew? (Well, everyone with some basic common sense which excludes a lot
of cyclists it seems).

their flammability (which was fixed and never caused an injury anyway).

And a lot of them ended up happily working in the heat in Malta. Ironic.

Not happily. They had more fires and were soon taken off the road. They've
new been sent to somewhere hotter still: Sudan.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...s-8788929.html

http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles...o-sudan.507334

On 2017-01-03 16:11:43 +0000, Someone Somewhere said:

That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus"

I'm not clear why the Bozza bus, which has exactly the same operating
model, isn't also seen that way.

FWIW, the bendy could have been operated as "on at the front, off at
the back" the same as most London deckers. The method of revenue
protection has nothing to do with the type of bus.

Neil
--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the @ to reply.

In article ,
(Neil Williams) wrote:

On 2017-01-03 16:11:43 +0000, Someone Somewhere said:

That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus"

I'm not clear why the Bozza bus, which has exactly the same operating
model, isn't also seen that way.

FWIW, the bendy could have been operated as "on at the front, off at
the back" the same as most London deckers. The method of revenue
protection has nothing to do with the type of bus.

Presumably the main difference is the larger number of passengers per bus.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Bendies here in Caen and many other French cities operate “on at the front,
off at the centre and rear� rule. Enforced by onboard CCTV in many locales.

Mind you, Twisto here (aka Kaolis) over-eggs the pudding somewhat with the
message “Je Monte, Je Valide� alternating with the destination on the
front display panel every few seconds. A big irritation in the city centre
when you can’t tell whether your bus is next or one following, since they
are all showing the same front message.

As one friend put it: “Kaolis obviously think we Caennais are stupid. Half
the population is too young to know any other kind of bus – and the rest of
us have had years to learn how it works. We know we have to pay or valider
when we board – what we REALLY want to know is this if it is the bus we
want to board.�

Of course the real anti-social behaviour on our buses is failing to say
“Bonjour� to the conducteur as you compostez, [For the avoidance of
doubt, that’s the person sitting at the steering wheel].


On 4 Jan 2017, Neil Williams wrote
(in article ):

On 2017-01-03 16:11:43 +0000, Someone Somewhere said:

That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus"

I'm not clear why the Bozza bus, which has exactly the same operating
model, isn't also seen that way.

FWIW, the bendy could have been operated as "on at the front, off at
the back" the same as most London deckers. The method of revenue
protection has nothing to do with the type of bus.

Neil