On Mon, 7 Feb 2005 11:53:10 +0000, Ian Jelf
wrote:

In message , Garry Smith
writes
Many years ago, I caught an overnight coach from London to
Edinburgh. The drivers changed over without stopping -
the outgoing driver standing up, the incoming one slipping
in behind him, with a co-ordinated hand- (and foot-) over of
wheel and accelerator.
I've seen that done, too. Only once and - obviously - it *terrified*
me. The coach company concerned (from County Durham) is no longer
trading.


Me too - though in my case not in the UK and I'm fairly certain the
operator is still in business. I seem to remember that one of the
drivers needed to leave his seat to brew up some coffee...

Martin

David B wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 7 Feb 2005:

in the example I spoke about we are talking about waiting 5 - 10 minutes
longer than they would have otherwise been, time which could be lost in a
traffic jam anyway. In fact if I recall, because there were buses behind me,
which thankfully overtook to help me out, I made up all of the lost time
anyway - didn't get any thanks of course. I could understand people being
angry at a 20 minute+ delay, but 5 - 10 minutes is IMHO pathetic.

The thing is, if you're sitting on a bus, you do feel like you're going
somewhere, even if in practice you aren't! You can usually get a seat
(if only upstairs), and perhaps read, if you aren't troubled by
car-sickness, and it's warm, and you're relatively comfortable. Whereas
standing at a bus stop, often in an icy wind, or in the rain, and
waiting and waiting for a bus (and you can't relax and read, even if
it's a lovely day, or you might not see the bus coming in time to hail
it, and how many buses are going to stop these days if you don't? And
very often even if you do!), is very stressful.

Whilst a lot of my coach passengers use it because of its low cost compared
with the train and are only going as far as London, a lot are going to
airports or have connections for coaches going further west and north from
London and so in a sense their journeys are time sensitive. It is true the
train is faster but there is no guarantee of a seat and no real sense of
security particularly late at night although it is true most coach
passengers probably don't have a car.

I don't, but I think you'd have to pay me to do a journey by coach! I
get incredibly claustrophobic on them - far worse than the Tube, because
I know that on the Tube, if it gets too bad, I can get out at the next
station. And I almost invariably have something to read on the Tube -
something I can't do on a moving coach! I wish I did enjoy coach travel
- it is cheaper, although not always more convenient than the train.
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 23 January 2005 with new photos

IMHO if you need to be somewhere at a certain time, moreso if you
have an
appointment or interview, you simply have to add extra slack to
guarantee
arriving on time. I think this applies whether you use public
transport or

This is why I leave an hour before work ever day rather than the 37
minutes that TFL predicts.

This is also why when going to an interview last week I allowed an hour
and a half for a twenty minute journey and wasted money in starbucks
during the spare hour at the other end.

The irritating thing is when you alow plenty of extra time but get
delayed 3 hours on a twenty minute journey

Guy Perry wrote:
Passengers on citytraffic are somewhat spoiled. They seem to tke it
as
granted that there's a bus coming up every 5 to 10 minuteswhile
regional
passengers do still cherish the few buses the get per day as long as
they show up at all.

Not really.

When at home in the countryside I know the bus leaves at quater to the
odd hour between 8.45am and 5pm so I arrive at the bus stop a few
minutes before and get on (and get a seat or two).

In london, if there's a bus 'every 10 to 12 minutes' on one route and
'every 10-15 minutes' on the other this normally adds up to a
significant wait.

David B wrote:

So the buses were scheduled to run every five minutes, but you didn't
leave until ten minutes after the previous one??? Even though it would
delay you and at least one bus after you, causing huge inconvenience for
the passengers, and possibly preventing you from reaching the end of the
route in time to start the return journey on time? No wonder the
passengers were angry! I sincerely hope you made an official complaint
against the controller who had disallowed your early departure.

Buses on frequent routes should ALWAYS depart at as near to even
intervals as possible.

Well the thing is, the bus after me left on time, caught up and took my
passengers. The bus behind him wasn't that far away either (we became a
convoy of 3 at one point) ... and here's the best part. That missing bus
started in service from Camden (I started at Hampstead) and overtook me
somewhere near Warren Street. If I had left early I would definitely be
running early as there wasnt anyone to pick up!

No, that would only be the case if you'd left eariler than the missing
bus was scheduled to. If you'd left three minutes early, you'd be
picking up the missing bus's passengers as well as some of your own, so
you'd take slightly longer than normal. By the time you got to Camden
you'd be on time (in which case the missing bus should've been told to
join start picking up passengers once it gets back on schedule) or
slightly late (in which case the missing bus should'be been told to
start picking up passengers as soon as it overtakes you).

If you'd done that, the bus after you should've been instructed to leave
one minute early, to compensate for having to pick up the passengers
you'd've picked up had you not been running early at the start of the
route.

Thats a situation I'd rather
not try to explain to a revenue inspector who would see 3 buses in convoy
with me being last and slightly early. Whats my excuse?!

Firstly, they only caught up with you because you were late.
Secondly, unlike late running, early running is easily remedied.
Thirdly, ask the driver of the third bus in the convoy that you caused
what his/her excuse was. Or better still, tell the inspector the truth!
Fourthly, would the inspector even determine that you were the one
running early?

On Tue, 8 Feb 2005 13:06:21 +0000, Mrs Redboots
wrote:


I don't, but I think you'd have to pay me to do a journey by coach! I
get incredibly claustrophobic on them - far worse than the Tube, because
I know that on the Tube, if it gets too bad, I can get out at the next
station. And I almost invariably have something to read on the Tube -
something I can't do on a moving coach! I wish I did enjoy coach travel
- it is cheaper, although not always more convenient than the train.

That's odd, because I found it easier to read and to write on a
motorway coach, when I was travelling to Sheffield and Barnsley some
years ago. The ride on the HSTs on the MML made writing on a table
almost impossible, if I wanted to read it afterwards. This was when
Yorkshire Traction were using double-deck Neoplan coaches on their
London service.
--
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

Terry Harper wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 9 Feb 2005:

That's odd, because I found it easier to read and to write on a
motorway coach, when I was travelling to Sheffield and Barnsley some
years ago. The ride on the HSTs on the MML made writing on a table
almost impossible, if I wanted to read it afterwards. This was when
Yorkshire Traction were using double-deck Neoplan coaches on their
London service.

I find even motorways in this country (with the possible exception of
the M6 toll) too uncomfortable to read on. I can, and do, read on
French motorways - we seem to get a better ride quality. Although the
worst motorway ever was the one between Linz & Vienna, both daughter & I
disliked that one!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 23 January 2005 with new photos

On 8 Feb 2005 wrote:

Guy Perry wrote:

Passengers on citytraffic are somewhat spoiled. They seem to tke it as
granted that there's a bus coming up every 5 to 10 minuteswhile
regional passengers do still cherish the few buses the get per day as
long as they show up at all.

Not really.

When at home in the countryside I know the bus leaves at quater to the
odd hour between 8.45am and 5pm so I arrive at the bus stop a few
minutes before and get on (and get a seat or two).

That may be the exception. The times for buses in my old neck of the woods
were accurate to within about an hour.

tom

--
eviscerated by obfuscation

In message , Mrs Redboots
writes
I find even motorways in this country (with the possible exception of
the M6 toll) too uncomfortable to read on.
I suppose it's a matter of personal taste. I've never had a problem
with reading on any form of transport (bicycle excepted!).

I can, and do, read on
French motorways - we seem to get a better ride quality. Although the
worst motorway ever was the one between Linz & Vienna, both daughter & I
disliked that one!
I take it you've never been on a Polish motorway, then? They have to
be felt to be believed!
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

In message , Neil Williams
writes
Not wishing to state the obvious, but if the timetable says every 5 to
10 minutes, they have a right to expect it. They are not "spoiled", it
is part of the "product" on offer.

ITYF that if all London bus routes operated hourly, there'd be a lot
more cars on the road, congestion charge or no. IOW, the two are not
comparable in that way.
Very reasonable, and we should get cheap fuel because of our lack of
public transport.
--
Clive.