Solar Penguin ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

Seriously, name one good thing about routemasters. Go on, just one.
They're not even nice to look at
Compare that to the sleek, stylish lines of modern buses

Lynch mob! Please, let's have some decorum. Thank you.

Form an orderly riot behind me, please.

designed by proper designers, not a committee of bean-counting
bureaucrats.

Ah, no, wait. It was a joke.

The amazing immolating bendibuses were, apparently, designed by "real
designers", and Routemasters were designed by accountants.
Bwahaahahahahhaahhaha...

Paul Corfield ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

You missed route 13 from Golders Green to Aldwych which is rumoured to
be losing its recently modernised Routemasters very soon to former
route 9 RMLs. Note this is a rumour that has just emerged and it may
have no foundation at all.

This seems odd. I'd have thought they'd keep the "best" till the end, and
flog the more tired off first.

FWIW, there was one RML on Upper St on Friday with "Goodbye - See you on
the 273s" in the driver's window. I didn't notice which route it was on,
though.

Helen Deborah Vecht wrote in
:

(Neil Williams)typed


2) Modern deckers are designed for lower-deck crush loading. This
meant a substantial reduction in capacity, people being forced to go
upstairs for short journeys when they'd rather stand in the wheelchair
space, and annoyed passengers being left behind at stops when they'd
otherwise have fitted on.

Really?
I've been left behind at bus stops when I've seen loads of empty seats
upstairs but downstairs is crush overloaded. People don't go upstairs
enough.


I think this varies a lot by route, with far more (longer distance?)
passengers going upstairs than ever used to be the case. I have boarded
Westbound 8's around St. Pauls where the lower deck has been pretty lightly
loaded (maybe half a dozen people) but the upper deck was more than half
full!

Tony Bryer ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

IMO the upright radiator grille and headlamp on stalk of the RT made
it look old fashioned long before 1979. The last car to have these
was the Ford Popular which ceased production in 1959 and was a
hangover even then.

The last ordinary saloon car with "headlights on stalks" left production in
1990 - the 2cv. Caterham Sevens still have 'em, though.

"Mait001" wrote in message
...
Seriously, name one good thing about routemasters. Go on, just one.

I'll give you ten:

If I might add my opinions...

1. Windows that open at the front of the upper deck.

Agreed - this should have been catered for on recent designs. Easy to
fix if en wants to, surely?

2. Fuel efficiency (ever tried standing near the rear of a more modern
bus: the
engine emissions change the climate for several feet in area).

Hmmm, ITYF that the vast majority of Routemasters have been re-engined
in the last decade, so surely the emissions will be similar? The
Sovereign ones on the 13 are very similar to Dennis Darts mechanically.

3. Ease of maintenance.

Agreed, but surely a worry for the operators not the passenger.

4. Conductors.

True. But low-floors partially counter this by pushchairs not needing to
be folded and the elderly not needing to be helped up high steps. And
fare-dodging is only a real problem on the artics.

5. Upper deck on which to get away from the melee downstairs

Surely *all* double-deckers have this?! :-) The 73 is the only RM route
so far (in this period) to be converted away from double-deckers.

6. Excellent suspension.

Personally, I don't notice much difference, but probably a matter of
personal preference.

7. Superbly ergonomically designed and aesthetic from all angles.

Matter of opinion - see below.

8. Excellent drver visibility.

Though the RM is obviously unencumbered by passengers around the cab
area, ISTM that visibility from Presidents, Geminis etc. is better -
bigger windscreens, bigger mirrors.

9. Aluminium construction ensuring less weight, i.e. less wear & tear
on roads.

Is this really much of a problem? I have no idea?

10. The rear upper storey seats are the nearest thing I will ever
experience to
being in a (double-decker) limousine!

Again a matter of preference. I think the more recent Metroline
Presidents, e.g. on the 205, are some of the most comfortable buses in
London - excellent legroom.

Utter rubbish. Do you realy think at TPL or whatever they are now
called are
more aesthetically pleasing?

I reckon this is an age thing (no offence Marc, I of course don't know
how old you are!). Older people like the buses they saw when they were
younger, whereas today's younger people like more modern designs,
fitting with design trends in cars, mobile phones, etc.. From what I've
read, the Wright Eclipse Gemini seems to be considered one of the best
looking buses around.

AFAICS, the presence of conductors on RMs seems to be the only universal
(i.e. non-subjective) reason as to why they should be kept. I'm not
convinced. Nevertheless, I am worrying about the 73...

James

David Jackman typed


I think this varies a lot by route, with far more (longer distance?)
passengers going upstairs than ever used to be the case. I have boarded
Westbound 8's around St. Pauls where the lower deck has been pretty lightly
loaded (maybe half a dozen people) but the upper deck was more than half
full!

Maybe it's an Inner London thing.

Round here, on the 114 and 142 there are very few upstairs.

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Neil Williams:
If it wasn't for the sue-everyone culture, there could quite
easily be an open-platform version of such a bus developed.

Adrian Chapman:
And yet California - the home of that sue-everything culture -
manages to retain the San Francisco cablecar, with passengers
hanging off the outside like lemmings...

The trick is, first you get them declared a National Historic Landmark.

(Having said that, I don't know if this has actually been a factor in
any court cases; but it seems likely enough.)
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "I seem to have become a signature quote."
-- David Keldsen

"Mait001" wrote in message
...
Today, for those of you that don't know it, sees the largest withdrawal of
Routemaster buses from London since the current withdrawals began last
year:
from tomorrow, Routemasters will be no more on routes 9, 73 and 390.


Saw a 390 RM, claiming a destination of York Way, heading down the A23
towards Redhill on Saturday afternoon, presumably on its way to some new
home.

James Penton ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

1. Windows that open at the front of the upper deck.

Agreed - this should have been catered for on recent designs. Easy to
fix if en wants to, surely?

I'd imagine that the windows are all hermetically sealed on modern buses to
stop people opening them and letting the aircon out. However, they've been
ordered without aircon for London, of course...

9. Aluminium construction ensuring less weight, i.e. less wear & tear
on roads.

Is this really much of a problem? I have no idea?

Less weight also equals less fuel used. It's a very big difference between
the 7.5ton of an unloaded RM and the 17ton of a Bendibus Citaro... That's
ten ton of metal that's got to be moved around. Which takes fuel.

As has already been stated - all the RMs were re-engined to fit modern
emission regs a few years ago.

I reckon this is an age thing (no offence Marc, I of course don't know
how old you are!). Older people like the buses they saw when they were
younger, whereas today's younger people like more modern designs,

Hmm. I'm 33, and miss the RM already.

From what I've read, the Wright Eclipse Gemini seems to be considered
one of the best looking buses around.

By the salesmen? Never mind what you've *read* - what do you think? I've
googled, found an image, and - ewww. One of those.

"Adrian" wrote in message
.4...

As has already been stated - all the RMs were re-engined to fit modern
emission regs a few years ago.

I understand that there is at least one still operating with an AEC engine.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/