| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
In message , at 14:31:56 on
Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Trolleybus remarked: So, we have a bus that's 84% more expensive, with less capacity, longer and heavier than a normal double-decker, less comfortable, worse fuel consumption and whose entire reason for existence, the open rear platform, is not used. No wonder the hoped-for sale of the design to other cities never happened. Yes, all granted. But apart from that, they're fine. Nothing to do with the Romans. Actually I really dislike them. I can't really say why, but they seem cramped. And, as I normally have a paper ticket (an ODTC from outside London) I can't take advantage of the mid/rear dors. Isn't the rear door locked out of use (it's hard to keep up). If you asked BoJo in his current mood he'd say "We are absolutely committed to keeping the rear door". [But you just can't use it]. -- Roland Perry |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 14:31:56 on Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Trolleybus remarked: So, we have a bus that's 84% more expensive, with less capacity, longer and heavier than a normal double-decker, less comfortable, worse fuel consumption and whose entire reason for existence, the open rear platform, is not used. No wonder the hoped-for sale of the design to other cities never happened. Yes, all granted. But apart from that, they're fine. Nothing to do with the Romans. Actually I really dislike them. I can't really say why, but they seem cramped. And, as I normally have a paper ticket (an ODTC from outside London) I can't take advantage of the mid/rear dors. Isn't the rear door locked out of use (it's hard to keep up). No, it behaves the same as the other two doors: open at stops, closed when moving. It's long been that way out of the central area, but it's been like that everywhere since Khan cut the excessive costs of the buses by getting rid of all the platform attendants. Strangely, the unions didn't go on strike, unlike on the railways where the guards' role was changed, but none lost their jobs or any income. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On 01/10/2019 10:50, David Cantrell wrote:
I don't get this antipathy to the Boris buses. I'm a passenger, frequently. They do their job well, combining the benefits of a normal double decker with the one benefit of the bendy monstrosities - quick boarding - without the humungous downsides of the bendies taking up too much road space and blocking junctions. They just look "wrong" to me. And furthermore, they are an insult to the genuine, real Routemaster, which served London for many years and still would to this day if not for the PC brigade. -- Ria in Aberdeen [Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct] |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
In message , at 19:11:01 on Tue, 1 Oct 2019,
Recliner remarked: So, we have a bus that's 84% more expensive, with less capacity, longer and heavier than a normal double-decker, less comfortable, worse fuel consumption and whose entire reason for existence, the open rear platform, is not used. No wonder the hoped-for sale of the design to other cities never happened. Yes, all granted. But apart from that, they're fine. Nothing to do with the Romans. Actually I really dislike them. I can't really say why, but they seem cramped. And, as I normally have a paper ticket (an ODTC from outside London) I can't take advantage of the mid/rear dors. Isn't the rear door locked out of use (it's hard to keep up). No, it behaves the same as the other two doors: open at stops, closed when moving. It's long been that way out of the central area, but it's been like that everywhere since Khan cut the excessive costs of the buses by getting rid of all the platform attendants. Thanks. I was conflating "locked out of use always", with "locked out of use when under way". The essential difference [user friendliness] of the old London buses was you could hop and off whenever they were paused, eg at traffic lights, quite irrespective of where the bus stops were. Strangely, the unions didn't go on strike, unlike on the railways where the guards' role was changed, but none lost their jobs or any income. Hmm. -- Roland Perry |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 19:11:01 on Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: So, we have a bus that's 84% more expensive, with less capacity, longer and heavier than a normal double-decker, less comfortable, worse fuel consumption and whose entire reason for existence, the open rear platform, is not used. No wonder the hoped-for sale of the design to other cities never happened. Yes, all granted. But apart from that, they're fine. Nothing to do with the Romans. Actually I really dislike them. I can't really say why, but they seem cramped. And, as I normally have a paper ticket (an ODTC from outside London) I can't take advantage of the mid/rear dors. Isn't the rear door locked out of use (it's hard to keep up). No, it behaves the same as the other two doors: open at stops, closed when moving. It's long been that way out of the central area, but it's been like that everywhere since Khan cut the excessive costs of the buses by getting rid of all the platform attendants. Thanks. I was conflating "locked out of use always", with "locked out of use when under way". The essential difference [user friendliness] of the old London buses was you could hop and off whenever they were paused, eg at traffic lights, quite irrespective of where the bus stops were. Yup, and that was the original idea with the new buses, but Boris ignored the warnings that this would no longer be permitted with an unsupervised open platform, because of modern elfin safety rules. With his perennial, verbose optimism, you could say he was confident that "the doomsters and the gloomsters" would be proved wrong. But it turned out that they did know what they were talking about, and TfL was left to keep paying the hefty bill for his failed experiment, while he moved onwards and upwards. He also cost TfL money for dumping the bendies prematurely. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 01/10/2019 10:50, David Cantrell wrote: I don't get this antipathy to the Boris buses. I'm a passenger, frequently. They do their job well, combining the benefits of a normal double decker with the one benefit of the bendy monstrosities - quick boarding - without the humungous downsides of the bendies taking up too much road space and blocking junctions. They just look "wrong" to me. And furthermore, they are an insult to the genuine, real Routemaster, which served London for many years and still would to this day if not for the PC brigade. Form followed function with the compact, light-weight, attractive, original RM, whereas style dictated structure with the huge, heavy, expensive new one. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
In message , at 20:34:18 on Tue, 1 Oct 2019,
Recliner remarked: Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 19:11:01 on Tue, 1 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: So, we have a bus that's 84% more expensive, with less capacity, longer and heavier than a normal double-decker, less comfortable, worse fuel consumption and whose entire reason for existence, the open rear platform, is not used. No wonder the hoped-for sale of the design to other cities never happened. Yes, all granted. But apart from that, they're fine. Nothing to do with the Romans. Actually I really dislike them. I can't really say why, but they seem cramped. And, as I normally have a paper ticket (an ODTC from outside London) I can't take advantage of the mid/rear dors. Isn't the rear door locked out of use (it's hard to keep up). No, it behaves the same as the other two doors: open at stops, closed when moving. It's long been that way out of the central area, but it's been like that everywhere since Khan cut the excessive costs of the buses by getting rid of all the platform attendants. Thanks. I was conflating "locked out of use always", with "locked out of use when under way". The essential difference [user friendliness] of the old London buses was you could hop and off whenever they were paused, eg at traffic lights, quite irrespective of where the bus stops were. Yup, and that was the original idea with the new buses, but Boris ignored the warnings that this would no longer be permitted with an unsupervised open platform, because of modern elfin safety rules. http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/...oris_routemast er_feature.shtml Shows "hop-on hop-off" buses with only a rear platform. With his perennial, verbose optimism, you could say he was confident that "the doomsters and the gloomsters" would be proved wrong. But it turned out that they did know what they were talking about, and TfL was left to keep paying the hefty bill for his failed experiment, while he moved onwards and upwards. He also cost TfL money for dumping the bendies prematurely. I was amused by his interview n BBC Breakfast yesterday where he quoted what he claimed was a well know saying "there's no problem you can't fix with a single decker bus". I doubt he was indulging in self-parody regarding the double decker Routemaster (replacing the single decker bendy bus); was it perhaps a referenceto his battle bus? Anyway Boris is unabashed, and his new London bus is "wonderful", apparently. -- Roland Perry |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 20:18:06 +0100, MissRiaElaine
wrote: On 01/10/2019 10:50, David Cantrell wrote: I don't get this antipathy to the Boris buses. I'm a passenger, frequently. They do their job well, combining the benefits of a normal double decker with the one benefit of the bendy monstrosities - quick boarding - without the humungous downsides of the bendies taking up too much road space and blocking junctions. They just look "wrong" to me. And furthermore, they are an insult to the genuine, real Routemaster, which served London for many years and still would to this day if not for the PC brigade. It's a shame you added "PC brigade". It is not a terrible thing that almost everyone can use a bus now, or that 50 year old buses are not on our streets. Routemasters were wonderful in their day, and I agree that BJ's buses don't deserve the name. The only benefit they have is the one that is on the way out. I don't think the articulated buses were monstrosities either, in my opinion they were the most user-friendly buses we've ever had. That the mayor would have started a campaign of lies about them won't be a surprise to anyone now. Richard. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On 02/10/2019 15:19, Richard wrote:
I don't think the articulated buses were monstrosities either, in my opinion they were the most user-friendly buses we've ever had. That the mayor would have started a campaign of lies about them won't be a surprise to anyone now. We still have bendy buses up here, and long may they remain, they do the job. My comment on the PC brigade was valid. I never said Routemasters had to be the only buses in service. My brother is disabled and uses a wheelchair, I know all about the requirement for disabled access. -- Ria in Aberdeen [Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct] |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 02/10/2019 15:19, Richard wrote: I don't think the articulated buses were monstrosities either, in my opinion they were the most user-friendly buses we've ever had. That the mayor would have started a campaign of lies about them won't be a surprise to anyone now. We still have bendy buses up here, and long may they remain, they do the job. My comment on the PC brigade was valid. I never said Routemasters had to be the only buses in service. My brother is disabled and uses a wheelchair, I know all about the requirement for disabled access. Apart from that, the old buses needed conductors, while modern buses are OPO. That was the main factor in the initial switch from the popular RMs. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On 02/10/2019 21:10, Recliner wrote:
MissRiaElaine wrote: On 02/10/2019 15:19, Richard wrote: I don't think the articulated buses were monstrosities either, in my opinion they were the most user-friendly buses we've ever had. That the mayor would have started a campaign of lies about them won't be a surprise to anyone now. We still have bendy buses up here, and long may they remain, they do the job. My comment on the PC brigade was valid. I never said Routemasters had to be the only buses in service. My brother is disabled and uses a wheelchair, I know all about the requirement for disabled access. Apart from that, the old buses needed conductors, while modern buses are OPO. That was the main factor in the initial switch from the popular RMs. Thereby making even more people redundant. And reducing safety. Buses with conductors never suffered the same level of antisocial behaviour as they do now, with only one person (the driver) on board. Not long after I started work driving, probably around 1999 or thereabouts, one of my colleagues on a late night service reached the point where he was due to come out of service for the night. This was some way short of the normal terminus, and was so that the bus didn't have too long a journey back to the garage. It was well after midnight and was rarely busy. When he got to this point, there were still three males on board. He told them they would have to get off, as he was now out of service. The destination was, of course, clearly shown on the front and side blinds when they boarded, but they were very loud and abusive and were having none of it. "We want to go to Chelmsley Wood" they kept saying. This, for those who don't know the Birmingham area, is an area to the east of the city, not far from the airport and about another three miles or so further on from where this particular bus terminated for the night. The driver politely explained that he was now out of service and could not take them any further. After several more abusive (on their part) exchanges, they forced their way into the cab, dragged the driver out, and gave him such a severe beating that he suffered three broken ribs and was unable to return to work for several months. In fact I believe he never did return to bus driving. This is what happens when you get rid of conductors. Two people on the bus may or may not have been a deterrent to these particular yobs, but they would deter many others. -- Ria in Aberdeen [Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct] |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 02/10/2019 21:10, Recliner wrote: MissRiaElaine wrote: On 02/10/2019 15:19, Richard wrote: I don't think the articulated buses were monstrosities either, in my opinion they were the most user-friendly buses we've ever had. That the mayor would have started a campaign of lies about them won't be a surprise to anyone now. We still have bendy buses up here, and long may they remain, they do the job. My comment on the PC brigade was valid. I never said Routemasters had to be the only buses in service. My brother is disabled and uses a wheelchair, I know all about the requirement for disabled access. Apart from that, the old buses needed conductors, while modern buses are OPO. That was the main factor in the initial switch from the popular RMs. Thereby making even more people redundant. Britain isn't short of minimum wage jobs. It's short of the people to do them. There would be even fewer buses still running if they all had to carry conductors. And reducing safety. Buses with conductors never suffered the same level of antisocial behaviour as they do now, with only one person (the driver) on board. Modern buses have extensive, high res CCTV coverage covering the whole bus interior. The yobs will certainly be caught on camera, and the drivers can summon urgent assistance. My local buses show the CCTV images in a constant cycle, so you're reminded of how your image is being recorded. Not long after I started work driving, probably around 1999 or thereabouts, one of my colleagues on a late night service reached the point where he was due to come out of service for the night. This was some way short of the normal terminus, and was so that the bus didn't have too long a journey back to the garage. It was well after midnight and was rarely busy. When he got to this point, there were still three males on board. He told them they would have to get off, as he was now out of service. The destination was, of course, clearly shown on the front and side blinds when they boarded, but they were very loud and abusive and were having none of it. "We want to go to Chelmsley Wood" they kept saying. This, for those who don't know the Birmingham area, is an area to the east of the city, not far from the airport and about another three miles or so further on from where this particular bus terminated for the night. The driver politely explained that he was now out of service and could not take them any further. After several more abusive (on their part) exchanges, they forced their way into the cab, dragged the driver out, and gave him such a severe beating that he suffered three broken ribs and was unable to return to work for several months. In fact I believe he never did return to bus driving. This is what happens when you get rid of conductors. Two people on the bus may or may not have been a deterrent to these particular yobs, but they would deter many others. The drivers now have a secure cab door for protection against aggressive passengers, which is more than conductors ever had. I suspect that there are far fewer staff injuries now than when there were vulnerable conductors trying to collect cash fares. And, of course, few cash fares are now collected (none in London), so there's little or nothing to rob. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 10:05:41AM -0000, Recliner wrote:
David Cantrell wrote: I don't get this antipathy to the Boris buses. I'm a passenger, frequently. They do their job well, combining the benefits of a normal double decker with the one benefit of the bendy monstrosities - quick boarding - without the humungous downsides of the bendies taking up too much road space and blocking junctions. They're very heavy, which limits their capacity as does the rear platform and second staircase The second staircase helps make boarding quicker. It's a reasonable trade-off IMO. like the bendies they have double the fare evasion of normal buses Again, a trade-off against quicker boarding. They acquired their 'Roastmaster' nickname because their air-cooling didn't work and they lacked ventilation, which had to be retro-fitted. Not a problem that I ever noticed. -- David Cantrell | Cake Smuggler Extraordinaire Are you feeling bored? depressed? slowed down? Evil Scientists may be manipulating the speed of light in your vicinity. Buy our patented instructional video to find out how, and maybe YOU can stop THEM |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 05:35:29PM +0100, MissRiaElaine wrote:
On 02/10/2019 15:19, Richard wrote: I don't think the articulated buses were monstrosities either, in my opinion they were the most user-friendly buses we've ever had. That the mayor would have started a campaign of lies about them won't be a surprise to anyone now. We still have bendy buses up here, and long may they remain, they do the job. I'm sure that they're fine in places that don't have much traffic or so many buses. My complaints about them in London were that they were so long that they couldn't cross junctions in one go and so blocked the flow of traffic, including most importantly the flow of other buses; that they replaced Routemasters on a passenger-per-passenger basis and so because the new buses individually held more people the buses ran less frequently; and that a smaller proportion of passengers had seats. Their replacements solve every one of those problems. -- David Cantrell | semi-evolved ape-thing |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
David Cantrell wrote:
On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 10:05:41AM -0000, Recliner wrote: David Cantrell wrote: I don't get this antipathy to the Boris buses. I'm a passenger, frequently. They do their job well, combining the benefits of a normal double decker with the one benefit of the bendy monstrosities - quick boarding - without the humungous downsides of the bendies taking up too much road space and blocking junctions. They're very heavy, which limits their capacity as does the rear platform and second staircase The second staircase helps make boarding quicker. It's a reasonable trade-off IMO. Not for long. The proposal is to only allow boarding by the front door. So the rear staircase will be for exit-only, which makes it an expensive waste of space. like the bendies they have double the fare evasion of normal buses Again, a trade-off against quicker boarding. An unacceptable one for TfL. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On 03/10/2019 00:45, Recliner wrote:
Modern buses have extensive, high res CCTV coverage covering the whole bus interior. The yobs will certainly be caught on camera, and the drivers can summon urgent assistance. My local buses show the CCTV images in a constant cycle, so you're reminded of how your image is being recorded. Ah, CCTV. My last job before I retired was to deal with requests for CCTV; processing footage for issue to police, insurance investigators and the like. There were not enough cameras to cover the full interior of the vehicle, so there were many, many blind spots. And those cameras that we had were frequently vandalised so that they were useless in the event of an incident. Even if the miscreants *are* caught on camera, identifying them and ensuring they are dealt with is a whole different ball game. Getting the dead cameras repaired was also a nightmare; there was ONE engineer to cover several garages and he was worked to a frazzle, sometimes it would take him weeks to get around to us. In the meantime, anything could have happened, and frequently did. Summon urgent assistance. Ah, yes. There is an emergency button on the radio system, true. But pressing it doesn't always result in assistance arriving quickly, or even at all. In my driving days, I was once punched in the mouth by a drunken yob for no reason other than I had politely asked him to pay some bus fare. (This was in the days before full cab door screens, but I've seen people punch their way through those as well). So I sat there, blood streaming down my face, and pressed the emergency button. The controller did come on the line quickly, true. But the first words out of his mouth were not "are you ok..?" or "do you need police/ambulance..?" No, he simply said "can you carry on in service..?" I don't think I need to mention what my reply was. -- Ria in Aberdeen [Send address is invalid, use sipsoup at gmail dot com to reply direct] |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:00:57 +0100
MissRiaElaine wrote: So I sat there, blood streaming down my face, and pressed the emergency button. The controller did come on the line quickly, true. But the first words out of his mouth were not "are you ok..?" or "do you need police/ambulance..?" No, he simply said "can you carry on in service..?" I don't think I need to mention what my reply was. If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
|
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:16:08 +0100
Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 13:03, wrote: If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. Oh really, some yob is beating the living daylights out of you and you are going to reach into your pocket, remove the knife and open it as you're being punched. Good luck with that. So what would you do , just sit there and whimper? Its better than nothing. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On 03/10/2019 16:14, wrote:
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:16:08 +0100 Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 13:03, wrote: If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. Oh really, some yob is beating the living daylights out of you and you are going to reach into your pocket, remove the knife and open it as you're being punched. Good luck with that. So what would you do , just sit there and whimper? Its better than nothing. It takes time to get the knife out of your pocket, then find the right blade and finally open it. In that time the yob has managed to split your lip and leg it. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Sammi Gray-Jones wrote:
On 03/10/2019 16:14, wrote: On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:16:08 +0100 Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 13:03, wrote: If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. Oh really, some yob is beating the living daylights out of you and you are going to reach into your pocket, remove the knife and open it as you're being punched. Good luck with that. So what would you do , just sit there and whimper? Its better than nothing. It takes time to get the knife out of your pocket, then find the right blade and finally open it. In that time the yob has managed to split your lip and leg it. Or grab the knife and use it on you. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 11:43:40AM -0000, Recliner wrote:
David Cantrell wrote: The second staircase helps make boarding quicker. It's a reasonable trade-off IMO. Not for long. The proposal is to only allow boarding by the front door. So the rear staircase will be for exit-only, which makes it an expensive waste of space. If anything having a one way system will make it even better as you won't have people waiting to go up the stairs while others come down. -- David Cantrell | Nth greatest programmer in the world You can't spell "slaughter" without "laughter" |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
David Cantrell wrote:
On Thu, Oct 03, 2019 at 11:43:40AM -0000, Recliner wrote: David Cantrell wrote: The second staircase helps make boarding quicker. It's a reasonable trade-off IMO. Not for long. The proposal is to only allow boarding by the front door. So the rear staircase will be for exit-only, which makes it an expensive waste of space. If anything having a one way system will make it even better as you won't have people waiting to go up the stairs while others come down. It's not a problem with normal 'deckers: people come down before a stop, and go up after it. So have a bus costing almost twice as much, with lower capacity, worse fuel consumption, less comfortable, and needing more maintenance than an off-the-shelf hybrid double-decker make even less sense than before. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 20:04:28 +0100
MissRiaElaine wrote: On 03/10/2019 16:14, wrote: On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:16:08 +0100 Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 13:03, wrote: If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. Oh really, some yob is beating the living daylights out of you and you are going to reach into your pocket, remove the knife and open it as you're being punched. Good luck with that. So what would you do , just sit there and whimper? Its better than nothing. Only if you can actually get to it. You have obviously never been on the receiving end of someone trying to thump the living daylights out of you. Ha, if only you knew :) |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 20:11:28 +0100
Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 16:14, wrote: On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:16:08 +0100 Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 13:03, wrote: If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. Oh really, some yob is beating the living daylights out of you and you are going to reach into your pocket, remove the knife and open it as you're being punched. Good luck with that. So what would you do , just sit there and whimper? Its better than nothing. It takes time to get the knife out of your pocket, then find the right blade and finally open it. In that time the yob has managed to split your lip and leg it. I wasn't talking about a swiss army knife - most penknifes have a single blade. And sure, I'm not going to pretend its the most practical solution but its better than nothing if someone is determined to do you over. One stab in the arm or leg might give you enough time to get away and give them pause for thought. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
wrote:
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 20:11:28 +0100 Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 16:14, wrote: On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 13:16:08 +0100 Sammi Gray-Jones wrote: On 03/10/2019 13:03, wrote: If I had to do that job I'd carry a perfectly legal but nicely sharpened penknife for occasions like that. I'd sooner lose my job than my life. Oh really, some yob is beating the living daylights out of you and you are going to reach into your pocket, remove the knife and open it as you're being punched. Good luck with that. So what would you do , just sit there and whimper? Its better than nothing. It takes time to get the knife out of your pocket, then find the right blade and finally open it. In that time the yob has managed to split your lip and leg it. I wasn't talking about a swiss army knife - most penknifes have a single blade. And sure, I'm not going to pretend its the most practical solution but its better than nothing if someone is determined to do you over. One stab in the arm or leg might give you enough time to get away and give them pause for thought. TBH if you do have the right frame of mind to fight back and many don’t, then a small spray bottle filled with vinegar etc and aimed in the eyes may be more effective, commercial pepper sprays can be had but having one on ones person is probably illegal. Grinding up some Dorset Nagas and making some hot condiment for use on your lunch is just an indicator of strange taste. GH |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On 5 Oct 2019 15:00:25 GMT
Marland wrote: wrote: I wasn't talking about a swiss army knife - most penknifes have a single blade. And sure, I'm not going to pretend its the most practical solution but its better than nothing if someone is determined to do you over. One stab in the arm or leg might give you enough time to get away and give them pause for thought. TBH if you do have the right frame of mind to fight back and many don’t, then a small spray bottle filled with vinegar etc and aimed in the eyes may be more effective, commercial pepper sprays can be had but having one on ones person is probably illegal. Grinding up some Dorset Nagas and making I believe they are illegal. Which is odd given that it does no long term damage but could save someone from being raped or killed. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Fri, Oct 04, 2019 at 09:53:23AM -0000, Recliner wrote:
David Cantrell wrote: If anything having a one way system will make it even better as you won't have people waiting to go up the stairs while others come down. It's not a problem with normal 'deckers: people come down before a stop, and go up after it. .... said someone who has never used a busy double decker. You often *can't* go down the stairs before the stop because there are people standing at the bottom, and of course there are people less steady on their feet who are not comfortable walking about the upper deck or down the stairs when the bus is moving. And of course because of all the people coming down the stairs most people can't board until they're all gone, because they're blocking not just the route to the upper floor, but also the route to the back of the bus. -- David Cantrell | Bourgeois reactionary pig Irregular English: you have anecdotes; they have data; I have proof |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/wrightbus-war-of-words-as-rescue-talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
In message , at 10:28:24 on Fri, 11 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked: Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...rds-as-rescue- talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ -- Roland Perry |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:40:30 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: In message , at 10:28:24 on Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...rds-as-rescue- talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Recliner wrote:
On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:40:30 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:28:24 on Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...rds-as-rescue- talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: https://www.irishnews.com/news/2019/10/12/news/as-jcb-heir-s-son-takes-wrightbus-reins-how-many-jobs-can-be-saved--1736870/ |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
In message , at 15:48:21 on Sun, 13 Oct
2019, Recliner remarked: Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: https://www.irishnews.com/news/2019/10/12/news/as-jcb-heir-s-son-takes-wrightbus-reins-how-many-jobs-can-be-saved--1736870/ And no necessarily employing even most of the former employees. But they do seem to have grabbed some adjacent farmland, whatever that means to them. -- Roland Perry |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 15:48:21 -0000 (UTC)
Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail. com wrote: Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail com wrote: On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:40:30 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:28:24 on Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.use remarked: Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...rds-as-rescue- talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: If they become the BBC half or more of the staff will have to go as they won't meet gender and ethnic quotas! And they'll have to start reading The Guardian during lunchtime. No more football or rugby chat, it'll be 30 mins of handwringing about the plight of the roma goatherders in Godknowswhereistan. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
wrote:
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 15:48:21 -0000 (UTC) Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail. wrote: Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail wrote: On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:40:30 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:28:24 on Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.use remarked: Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...rds-as-rescue- talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: If they become the BBC half or more of the staff will have to go as they won't meet gender and ethnic quotas! And they'll have to start reading The Guardian during lunchtime. No more football or rugby chat, it'll be 30 mins of handwringing about the plight of the roma goatherders in Godknowswhereistan. Wrong BBC. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:48:21 on Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: https://www.irishnews.com/news/2019/10/12/news/as-jcb-heir-s-son-takes-wrightbus-reins-how-many-jobs-can-be-saved--1736870/ And no necessarily employing even most of the former employees. Almost certainly not, as the factory was apparently over-manned. The former owner was a religious Protestant, while the new one is Catholic, so that might alter the employee profile. But they do seem to have grabbed some adjacent farmland, whatever that means to them. It's not clear what the farmland is to be used for, as it's been donated by Wright to Mid and East Antrim council, not to Bamford. As it's not part of the factory, I wonder why the ownership needed to change? Perhaps it's needed for access, or as a bus park? |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 19:47:34 -0000 (UTC)
Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail. com wrote: wrote: On Sun, 13 Oct 2019 15:48:21 -0000 (UTC) Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail. wrote: Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.usenet@gmail wrote: On Fri, 11 Oct 2019 11:40:30 +0100, Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:28:24 on Fri, 11 Oct 2019, Billy No Mates Always On His Own Billy No Mates Always On His Own.use remarked: Looks like the rescue deal might have been bulldozed into the ditch: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/w...rds-as-rescue- talks-collapse-cxrzxw2zk?shareToken=6a2b5480bfd679d5c08b9168bcad8 f38 Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: If they become the BBC half or more of the staff will have to go as they won't meet gender and ethnic quotas! And they'll have to start reading The Guardian during lunchtime. No more football or rugby chat, it'll be 30 mins of handwringing about the plight of the roma goatherders in Godknowswhereistan. Wrong BBC. No, definately the Wright BBC. |
Boris's bus related jinxes continue
Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 15:48:21 on Sun, 13 Oct 2019, Recliner remarked: Alternatively: https://www.itv.com/news/utv/2019-10...principle-for- wrightbus/ Yes, that seems to be more up to date, and better news. I wonder if the plan is to keep building buses, or to make JCB's usual diggers, bulldozers, etc? Or, perhaps both. as there doesn't seem to be enough demand for buses to keep the factory open. It looks like this is actually nothing to do with JCB. It seems that Wightbus will become the BBC, with a focus on hydrogen buses: https://www.irishnews.com/news/2019/10/12/news/as-jcb-heir-s-son-takes-wrightbus-reins-how-many-jobs-can-be-saved--1736870/ And no necessarily employing even most of the former employees. Almost certainly not, as the factory was apparently over-manned. The former owner was a religious Protestant, while the new one is Catholic, so that might alter the employee profile. But they do seem to have grabbed some adjacent farmland, whatever that means to them. It's not clear what the farmland is to be used for, as it's been donated by Wright to Mid and East Antrim council, not to Bamford. As it's not part of the factory, I wonder why the ownership needed to change? Perhaps it's needed for access, or as a bus park? An update: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jo-bamford-the-billionaire-s-son-who-took-the-bus-and-is-turning-it-green-ntv2mbc7k?shareToken=e3d8fd1e41bcdfb6642d68beab86a a54 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:44 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk