![]() |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Just come back from Amsterdam where they operate a decent tram service
and also bendy buses. On BOTH the rule is: boarding ONLY at the front and you must show your ticket to the driver there, and only then may you pass down through the aisle to the rear; to alight you use the middle and rear doors (sometime through the front doors if no-one is trying to board). On trams they also have a ticket inspector/seller opposite the central doors for those boarding there. Whatever you MUST show your ticket to boatd. Seems to me T4L doesn't know how to operate their bendy buses. All they have to do is to restrict boarding to the front doors only. CJB. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
CJB wrote:
All they have to do is to restrict boarding to the front doors only. Which would slow down boarding and alighting. That isn't the point. I think it works poorly on Amsterdam trams, and a better investment would be additional inspectors. Increase the penalty fare if it is necessary to pay for them. Neil |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On 13 Jun 2006 08:30:45 -0700, "CJB"
wrote: Just come back from Amsterdam where they operate a decent tram service and also bendy buses. On BOTH the rule is: boarding ONLY at the front and you must show your ticket to the driver there, and only then may you pass down through the aisle to the rear; to alight you use the middle and rear doors (sometime through the front doors if no-one is trying to board). On trams they also have a ticket inspector/seller opposite the central doors for those boarding there. Whatever you MUST show your ticket to boatd. Seems to me T4L doesn't know how to operate their bendy buses. All they have to do is to restrict boarding to the front doors only. CJB. This argument has been aired many times in many places. Amsterdam is a poor example to use - not so many years ago you could board and alight through any door on trams and buses. Needless to say fraud was rampant and coupled with the generally tolerant Dutch society no one was greatly concerned. However the levels of subsidy needed to keep the system running were such that the GVB Amsterdam became extremely sloppy and inefficient and IIRC was on the edge of financial collapse. It is certainly the case that investment in the tram fleet suffered and only in recent years has significant modernisation taken place. In the light of local political pressure there was the obvious move to tighten up fare collection and revenue control on the system. This has been part of a general trend on the continent that has typically not touched the UK because we have always had small scale subsidies and the move to deregulation rather changes the operator's view of how he looks after the pennies. The London Bendy Bus conversions are justified on the basis that they replace RM operation (and in some cases conventional OPO) with fewer vehicles and fewer staff. The boarding speeds are very quick which generate passenger time benefits when compared with the other options. In the context of the time savings and the basic economic argument (including the vehicles and associated infrastructure and some increase in evasion) then bendy buses are justified. It is worth pointing out that the latest figures on cashless transactions show that 95% of all ticket transactions are now off bus and therefore vast numbers of people on bendy buses will have a pass, permit or Oyster Pre-Pay or a Saver ticket or a ticket from a RTM. A recent trip on the 29 left me with ringing ears because the validators were used so much by people using their Oyster cards. There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"Paul Corfield" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. I reckon that, were the Routemaster to be re-introduced to oust the bendies, there would be a torrent of complaints - not least from those who fought the scrapping of the RM so vociferously over the last couple of years. In terms of fare evasion, I am a semi-regular on the Heritage 15, and there have been several occasions where the Conductor has not ventured upstairs for the entire journey, despite only having to 'look after' about 20 passengers in total. Of course, this was widespread when the Routemaster was in normal service. However, to my mind, the Bendies should be heavily targetted by Inspectors. I rather suspect that, as is human nature, the Inspectors go for 'easy targets' - ie nice quiet suburban routes - wherever possible. I'm willing to be proven wrong here, however. I use bendies maybe twice a week, and have never been asked to produce my ticket since the Red Arrow 507 went over in 2002(?). Chris |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
In message , Chris Read
writes "Paul Corfield" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. I reckon that, were the Routemaster to be re-introduced to oust the bendies, there would be a torrent of complaints - not least from those who fought the scrapping of the RM so vociferously over the last couple of years. In terms of fare evasion, I am a semi-regular on the Heritage 15, and there have been several occasions where the Conductor has not ventured upstairs for the entire journey, despite only having to 'look after' about 20 passengers in total. Conductors' attention to fare collecting on the Heritage routes was exemplary when they first started, in marked contrast to their latter-day work on the conventional RM services. However, as another semi-regular user of the services, I, too, have noticed them becoming more slack in this respect. However, to my mind, the Bendies should be heavily targetted by Inspectors. Indeed. The message that you are *very* likely to be checked needs to come across. I rather suspect that, as is human nature, the Inspectors go for 'easy targets' - ie nice quiet suburban routes - wherever possible. I'm willing to be proven wrong here, however. I use bendies maybe twice a week, and have never been asked to produce my ticket since the Red Arrow 507 went over in 2002(?). I've been asked a couple of times on the 521. I don't use suburban buses much in London but I've never encountered *any* inspections on those I have used. -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:13:50 +0100, "Chris Read"
wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. I reckon that, were the Routemaster to be re-introduced to oust the bendies, there would be a torrent of complaints - not least from those who fought the scrapping of the RM so vociferously over the last couple of years. Out of curiosity why? In terms of fare evasion, I am a semi-regular on the Heritage 15, and there have been several occasions where the Conductor has not ventured upstairs for the entire journey, despite only having to 'look after' about 20 passengers in total. Of course, this was widespread when the Routemaster was in normal service. I haven't used the heritage routes at all but I rarely use those corridors and if I do use the 9 it's usually to High St Ken and of course the RMs don't go that far - more's the pity. The current MD of Stagecoach London would be interested in any specific feedback on poor service. He has certainly asked for it to be provided when posters on other London Bus groups have made negative comments about customer service by the conductors. I would also think First London would wish to know about instances on the 9 as well. However, to my mind, the Bendies should be heavily targetted by Inspectors. I rather suspect that, as is human nature, the Inspectors go for 'easy targets' - ie nice quiet suburban routes - wherever possible. I'm willing to be proven wrong here, however. I use bendies maybe twice a week, and have never been asked to produce my ticket since the Red Arrow 507 went over in 2002(?). I think I have been inspected on a bendy and I have certainly witnessed "mass" ticket checks on them as well. In terms of other inspections I have been checked on central area routes and also at 06.35 on my local route in North East London. The proportion is not huge given that I use buses almost every day of the week but checks do occur. I would agree that there would be no harm at all if checks were more intensive as a general rule across the whole network. The counter argument, of course, is that pre-payment is now so high in London and that so many forms of fraud have been removed by structural changes you can argue just how effective a big effort would be. We have flat fares so no over-riding, we have one bus zone so no "out of zone" season ticket fraud, Travelcards are valid on all buses so rail zones are irrelevant, all Oyster personalised and registered cards can be barred from use, smartcard technology facilitates sophisticated fraud analysis, Oyster checking helps the driver detect out of date or out of value cards more readily and children travel free. This really only leaves out of date passes / permits, forgeries and stolen cards, non validated cards on cashless routes and blatant non payment - again probably only on cashless / heritage routes to any level as drivers check on all other routes. Many people complain about the London fare structure but it many ways the policy is ingenious in that it has designed out the opportunity for many frauds to be committed. It will be interesting to see what the revenue protection philosophy will be for an entirely cashless network as drivers will be unable to assist passengers "on vehicle". I remain to be convinced that on a practical level a fully cashless London network can work. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"Paul Corfield" wrote: On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:13:50 +0100, "Chris Read" wrote: I reckon that, were the Routemaster to be re-introduced to oust the bendies, there would be a torrent of complaints - not least from those who fought the scrapping of the RM so vociferously over the last couple of years. Out of curiosity why? A number of reasons: 1. The bendies load/unload more quickly than the RM. 2. They make faster progress than the RM when on the move. This has surprised me, but would anyone deny it is true? In simple terms, the power of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the RM. 3. Although there are fewer seats, IMO the bendies are pleasant vehicles in which to stand - light and airy, and lots of rails to hang on to. By contrast, standing on an RM was always a pretty miserable experience. Obviously, you still wouldn't want to stand from Clapton to Victoria (for example), but in reality, few make end-to-end journies, and for those that do, a seat normally becomes available at some point. 4. They are undeniably well built (blinds aside!). They feel like a quality product. And in more general terms: 1. Now they are (almost) entirely gone, the RM just looks so *old*. It's funny - I never felt that way until the 159 disappeared, but somehow, seeing an RM now just doesn't look right. It reminds you that the RM had to finish sometime - it was life expired. 2. We Brits always try to cling to our history and bemoan the passing of supposed national institutions. We are almost equally good at adapting when change finally happens, however. I sense the initial uprising against the bendies has turned to acquiesence, and I suspect if, in five years time, the bendies are threatened with withdrawal, the 'Evening Standard' will mount a 'Save our bendies' campaign of outrage, as it did (very belatedly) with the RM. 3. Enthusiasts like almost everything which is old and rare. It appears even Titans and Metrobuses are now coveted. Bendies remain relatively rare, and in a few years, they will also be old. Enthusiasts will then claim that bendies single-handedly saved the London bus. So I think the RM is now viewed like steam railway engines - we're glad that there are still some around for posterity, but we wouldn't want one as daily transport. In terms of fare evasion, I am a semi-regular on the Heritage 15, and there have been several occasions where the Conductor has not ventured upstairs for the entire journey, despite only having to 'look after' about 20 passengers in total. Of course, this was widespread when the Routemaster was in normal service. The current MD of Stagecoach London would be interested in any specific feedback on poor service. He has certainly asked for it to be provided when posters on other London Bus groups have made negative comments about customer service by the conductors. I would also think First London would wish to know about instances on the 9 as well. I should say, there are also some very good conductors on the 15, who remain consistently chirpy after what must be long and often tedious shifts. The counter argument, of course, is that pre-payment is now so high in London and that so many forms of fraud have been removed by structural changes you can argue just how effective a big effort would be. We have flat fares so no over-riding, we have one bus zone so no "out of zone" season ticket fraud, Travelcards are valid on all buses so rail zones are irrelevant, all Oyster personalised and registered cards can be barred from use, smartcard technology facilitates sophisticated fraud analysis, Oyster checking helps the driver detect out of date or out of value cards more readily and children travel free. This really only leaves out of date passes / permits, forgeries and stolen cards, non validated cards on cashless routes and blatant non payment - again probably only on cashless / heritage routes to any level as drivers check on all other routes. I think the 'blatant non payment' category is a large(ish) one on the bendies, with people hopping on opportunistically for a couple of stops, wagering that the probability of getting caught is very slim. I would say the typical offender would be: i) The usual 'yoofs' in gangs, especially in the evenings. ii) Commuters on 'London Terminals' (ie no Travelcard) seasons, running a bit late for work/the train home, and wishing to avoid a short walk. However, I have no evidence for this other than anecdote and instinct. Part of the problem here is that TfL were so defensive about fare evasion on bendies, it looked as though they had something to hide. It may be there isn't a problem at all, but only if you take a very generous view about the honesty of the average Londoner. I doubt whether the vagrant(s) who frequent the 38 have Oyster cards. Many people complain about the London fare structure but it many ways the policy is ingenious in that it has designed out the opportunity for many frauds to be committed. Albeit at some cost in terms of overall subsidy requirement, surely? Chris |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On 13 Jun 2006 08:30:45 -0700, "CJB" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. Not at all, Paul. I think you always have something interesting and informative to say about transport in London. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! Why 'admits'? You're not ashamed of LU, are you? EZ |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Conductor 119466 on the 15H made no use of his ticket machine on Monday from Tower Hill c1830 to Charing Cross. Oyster Cards were merely looked at, so no idea if these were valid and no stored value debited. On the plus side at least 8 people boarded between stops showing what are/were truly the most accessible buses in London. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
wrote: Conductor 119466 on the 15H made no use of his ticket machine on Monday from Tower Hill c1830 to Charing Cross. Oyster Cards were merely looked at, so no idea if these were valid and no stored value debited. On the plus side at least 8 people boarded between stops showing what are/were truly the most accessible buses in London. Possible flat battery on the machine? I've seen that before. Inexcusable if it was not charged properly before use, but sometimes electrical faults cause the batteries to drain rapidly with little warning. Chris |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"Neil Williams" wrote in news:1150213202.886907.103880
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com: CJB wrote: All they have to do is to restrict boarding to the front doors only. Which would slow down boarding and alighting. That isn't the point. I think it works poorly on Amsterdam trams, and a better investment would be additional inspectors. Increase the penalty fare if it is necessary to pay for them. Not sure. My experience of Amsterdam trams, and Amsterdam transport in general, is quite positive. Relatively well enforced as people have to board through the front, apart from days when Ajax are playing at home when there's a kind of amnesty and it's free for everyone. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:10:26 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:
The counter argument, of course, is that pre-payment is now so high in London and that so many forms of fraud have been removed by structural changes you can argue just how effective a big effort would be. We have flat fares so no over-riding, we have one bus zone so no "out of zone" season ticket fraud, Travelcards are valid on all buses so rail zones are irrelevant, all Oyster personalised and registered cards can be barred from use, smartcard technology facilitates sophisticated fraud analysis, Oyster checking helps the driver detect out of date or out of value cards more readily and children travel free. This really only leaves out of date passes / permits, forgeries and stolen cards, non validated cards on cashless routes and blatant non payment - again probably only on cashless / heritage routes to any level as drivers check on all other routes. Many people complain about the London fare structure but it many ways the policy is ingenious in that it has designed out the opportunity for many frauds to be committed. Is it not possible to board a bendy with only a PAYG Oyster, but not touch in unless/until you see revenue inspectors boarding, thus getting lots of free rides with almost no chance of getting caught? |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"CJB" wrote in message
their bendy buses. All they have to do is to restrict boarding to the front doors only. CJB. I hope that TfL don't do this. I'd rather have a bus that's quick to board and suffer a certain percentage of fare evaders. Having to show your ticket to the driver is going to slow things down. At the moment, I can present my Oyster Card to a reader after the bus has been moving a few seconds. I wouldn't want to have to do this serially with other people. Anyway, if you did have to board at the front, how are you going to enforce it ? If a driver sees someone entering through the exit doors, what's he going to do ? Call the BTP ? Walk down the bus and remove them ? I'd rather bus DRIVERS do just that: battle through London's traffic and have bus conductors (maybe one per three buses) who check tickets at random, so that people have say a 40% chance of getting checked some where along the jny. Richard [in SG19] -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Tristán White wrote:
Not sure. My experience of Amsterdam trams, and Amsterdam transport in general, is quite positive. As is mine - but the location of the rear "kiosk" and the driver mean that it, like most UK buses, is too slow at the stops because people have to queue to board. Given that trams are designed to carry high volumes, this can slow them down a lot at busy times. It'd make a lot more sense to have the conductor roaming around the tram selling tickets like they do on many of the UK systems, if you're going to have one. OK, it makes it difficult if the tram is wedged, but so do the kiosks. Neil |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Richard M Willis wrote:
Anyway, if you did have to board at the front, how are you going to enforce it ? If a driver sees someone entering through the exit doors, what's he going to do ? Call the BTP ? Walk down the bus and remove them ? The usual approach on the deckers (where this does apply) is to stop the engine and announce (if PA is fitted) / shout inaudibly (if not) that the bus isn't moving until the offender pays. It tends to work; either the offending individual moves themselves, or the other passengers assist them in doing so. I'd rather bus DRIVERS do just that: battle through London's traffic and have bus conductors (maybe one per three buses) who check tickets at random, so that people have say a 40% chance of getting checked some where along the jny. Agreed. Neil |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
asdf wrote:
Is it not possible to board a bendy with only a PAYG Oyster, but not touch in unless/until you see revenue inspectors boarding, thus getting lots of free rides with almost no chance of getting caught? They might see you do that. It'd be tremendously suspicious if, on boarding, there was a queue at the machine. Neil |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:13:50 +0100, "Chris Read"
wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. I reckon that, were the Routemaster to be re-introduced to oust the bendies, there would be a torrent of complaints - not least from those who fought the scrapping of the RM so vociferously over the last couple of years. In terms of fare evasion, I am a semi-regular on the Heritage 15, and there have been several occasions where the Conductor has not ventured upstairs for the entire journey, despite only having to 'look after' about 20 passengers in total. Of course, this was widespread when the Routemaster was in normal service. However, to my mind, the Bendies should be heavily targetted by Inspectors. I rather suspect that, as is human nature, the Inspectors go for 'easy targets' - ie nice quiet suburban routes - wherever possible. I'm willing to be proven wrong here, however. I use bendies maybe twice a week, and have never been asked to produce my ticket since the Red Arrow 507 went over in 2002(?). At the 453 stop just before the E&C roundabout, I see a squad of inspectors and police around once a week or more, targeting the bendies coming from Peckham. They almost always have a miscreant or two in tow after a bus stops. I've also noted that the inspectors have a new Oyster reader that's about the same size (if a bit thicker) as a 4-banger calculator. Very nifty and much better than the huge readers they started out with. -- Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com |http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk or |http://www.livejournal.com/users/chrishansenhome/ |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 02:44:10 +0100, asdf wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 22:10:26 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: The counter argument, of course, is that pre-payment is now so high in London and that so many forms of fraud have been removed by structural changes you can argue just how effective a big effort would be. We have flat fares so no over-riding, we have one bus zone so no "out of zone" season ticket fraud, Travelcards are valid on all buses so rail zones are irrelevant, all Oyster personalised and registered cards can be barred from use, smartcard technology facilitates sophisticated fraud analysis, Oyster checking helps the driver detect out of date or out of value cards more readily and children travel free. This really only leaves out of date passes / permits, forgeries and stolen cards, non validated cards on cashless routes and blatant non payment - again probably only on cashless / heritage routes to any level as drivers check on all other routes. Many people complain about the London fare structure but it many ways the policy is ingenious in that it has designed out the opportunity for many frauds to be committed. Is it not possible to board a bendy with only a PAYG Oyster, but not touch in unless/until you see revenue inspectors boarding, thus getting lots of free rides with almost no chance of getting caught? I presume that the touch pads are deactivated before the bus stops for inspectors. If not, they should be. -- Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com |http://www.hansenhome.demon.co.uk or |http://www.livejournal.com/users/chrishansenhome/ |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"Neil Williams" wrote in message ups.com... asdf wrote: Is it not possible to board a bendy with only a PAYG Oyster, but not touch in unless/until you see revenue inspectors boarding, thus getting lots of free rides with almost no chance of getting caught? They might see you do that. It'd be tremendously suspicious if, on boarding, there was a queue at the machine. More to the point, when the inspector reads the card, they'll see that the date-stamp for the last xaction was "only a few seconds ago" Richard [in SG19] -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 Ian Jelf wrote:
I've been asked a couple of times on the 521. I don't use suburban buses much in London but I've never encountered *any* inspections on those I have used. I once had my ticket checked on the tube to Ealing Broadway, then I got on a bus and was inspected again. -- Thoss |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
E. Zackatackali wrote:
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On 13 Jun 2006 08:30:45 -0700, "CJB" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. Not at all, Paul. I think you always have something interesting and informative to say about transport in London. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! Why 'admits'? You're not ashamed of LU, are you? Because there's usually some fool who wants to have a rant at someone who works for LU about their crappy journey, and just as Paul provides useful information to this group, he sometimes gets a battering too! -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 11:53:46 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:
E. Zackatackali wrote: "Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... On 13 Jun 2006 08:30:45 -0700, "CJB" wrote: There will now follow a torrent of posts telling me I'm talking out of the top of my head and that TfL is the evil empire and should be nuked by George Dubya. Not at all, Paul. I think you always have something interesting and informative to say about transport in London. Thanks. Admits to working for London Underground! Why 'admits'? You're not ashamed of LU, are you? No I'm not. We are not perfect but we do get a lot of people moved around London with assets that are not necessarily the best. If in a few years time when lots of assets have been improved and processes changed to make things run more efficiently the public are still having delays inflicted on them then I think public outrage about how had LU is will be justified. Whether we like it or not we are not the same railway and do not have the same culture as say the Hong Kong MTR, Tokyo Subway or Singapore MRT. Therefore we cannot (yet) produce the same service quality or reliability. Hopefully one day we will run to those levels of service quality and reliability. Because there's usually some fool who wants to have a rant at someone who works for LU about their crappy journey, and just as Paul provides useful information to this group, he sometimes gets a battering too! While the above is a true statement it is not an explanation of the comment. The explanation is that I decided I would say I worked for LU and not hide behind a pseudonym. I'm not criticising those who do use such things but I think it's better to be open about who you work for when posting to a group like this when "expert" or "inside" knowledge will quickly be detected. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Chris Read wrote: In simple terms, the power of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the RM. Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement? Marc. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
|
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Dave Newt wrote: wrote: Chris Read wrote: In simple terms, the power of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the RM. Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement? I'm guessing becuase of reasons stated in the previous 2 sentences that you chose to snip: "2. They make faster progress than the RM when on the move. This has surprised me, but would anyone deny it is true? " The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting, the lesser braking / acceleration offered the better. Marc. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
|
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
"Jonathan Morris" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting, Ah, so you've used the 63 then! A service with drivers that seem so sick of their job, that throwing people around is the only thing that gives them job satisfaction! I'd rather have a lunatic driver than one who waits until every last persun has sat down before starting off. Why *is* it that when I get up to let an OAP on one of the priority seats, they insist on walking all the way to the back of the (almost empty) bus, taking about 3min to do so ? Similarly with people who run along the platform to get on the train at a door distant from the one that they're near. Richard [in SG19] -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Richard M Willis wrote: "Jonathan Morris" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting, Ah, so you've used the 63 then! A service with drivers that seem so sick of their job, that throwing people around is the only thing that gives them job satisfaction! I'd rather have a lunatic driver than one who waits until every last persun has sat down before starting off. I hope and pray that you're not a bus driver! Why should the public (some of whom are old and infirm) be subjected to violent acceleration and braking? It is precisely BECAUSE of such inconsiderate driving that I will not get up to move to the door of the bus UNTIL the bus is stationary, and I don't care how much bell-ringing I have to do to enure the door is still open by the time I get there. Why *is* it that when I get up to let an OAP on one of the priority seats, they insist on walking all the way to the back of the (almost empty) bus, taking about 3min to do so ? A slight exaggeration methinks. And, I have yet to meet the bus driver who dies not zoom off the very moment the doors are closed, whatever the state of passengers' movements. You must have some remarkably civilised drivers where you are if they even notice whether everyone is seated before they move off! If it's an almost empty bus, why do you use the priority seat in the first place? I always go upstairs and leave as much place as possible for those unable to use the stairs. Similarly with people who run along the platform to get on the train at a door distant from the one that they're near. Possibly they are doing so to get away from you (sorry, couldn't resist that one: no offence intended!) Richard [in SG19] Marc. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
|
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
wrote in message
oups.com... Conductor 119466 on the 15H made no use of his ticket machine on Monday from Tower Hill c1830 to Charing Cross. Oyster Cards were merely looked at, so no idea if these were valid and no stored value debited. On the plus side at least 8 people boarded between stops showing what are/were truly the most accessible buses in London. Try using one in a wheelchair, and then let us know just how accessible it is. Or if you're old, or have limited mobility. Or even if you're over 6'4 tall - sitting doesn't work, and standing certainly isn't. I saw an older guy thrown off the back of one as it went round a corner, so it seems their accessibility can be a little bit too good for some people, in some occasions ;) RMs are great for able-bodied people - the leaping-on/off really is great, and will be the reason I miss RMs the most. The only problem is that they are complete non-starters for a large sections of the community. Its luggage capacity is ridiculous, too, not to mention you can't fit a stroller on it (let alone 3, complete with occupants, as I witnessed on a 38 the other day). dave |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
wrote in message
ups.com... Chris Read wrote: In simple terms, the power of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the RM. Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement? F=MA. Marc. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
wrote in message
oups.com... Dave Newt wrote: wrote: Chris Read wrote: In simple terms, the power of the engine and efficiency of the brakes seem light years removed from the RM. Why, Chris, do you regard this as an improvement? I'm guessing becuase of reasons stated in the previous 2 sentences that you chose to snip: "2. They make faster progress than the RM when on the move. This has surprised me, but would anyone deny it is true? " The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting, the lesser braking / acceleration offered the better. If you've ever been on a full RM trying to get up a hill from a standing start, you'd know why having a more powerful engine is a good idea. Also, when traffic starts to move off on a quickly-timed traffic signal, RMs would have a nasty habit of crawling just enough to get to the light just after it turned. Bendy busses seem to be able to accelerate a great deal better, and still not throw people off their feet. And if you're a pedestrian crossing the street, the improved brakes certainly takes the edge off the red menace. Marc. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
wrote in message
ups.com... Richard M Willis wrote: "Jonathan Morris" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: The reason I asked the question was, with the appalling standard of driving of so many London bus drivers, who regard emergency braking and Grand Prix-style accelerating as mandatory when stopping or starting, Ah, so you've used the 63 then! A service with drivers that seem so sick of their job, that throwing people around is the only thing that gives them job satisfaction! I'd rather have a lunatic driver than one who waits until every last persun has sat down before starting off. I hope and pray that you're not a bus driver! Why should the public (some of whom are old and infirm) be subjected to violent acceleration and braking? It is precisely BECAUSE of such inconsiderate driving that I will not get up to move to the door of the bus UNTIL the bus is stationary, and I don't care how much bell-ringing I have to do to enure the door is still open by the time I get there. Why *is* it that when I get up to let an OAP on one of the priority seats, they insist on walking all the way to the back of the (almost empty) bus, taking about 3min to do so ? A slight exaggeration methinks. And, I have yet to meet the bus driver who dies not zoom off the very moment the doors are closed, whatever the state of passengers' movements. You must have some remarkably civilised drivers where you are if they even notice whether everyone is seated before they move off! If it's an almost empty bus, why do you use the priority seat in the first place? I always go upstairs and leave as much place as possible for those unable to use the stairs. Similarly with people who run along the platform to get on the train at a door distant from the one that they're near. Possibly they are doing so to get away from you (sorry, couldn't resist that one: no offence intended!) So you'd go to the top of an almost-empty bus, and remain seated until the bus comes to your stop, THEN get up and walk all the way off? Genius. Richard [in SG19] Marc. |
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
|
Bendy Buses & Fare Evasion
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
[RMs] Try using one in a wheelchair, and then let us know just how accessible it is. Are you aware that only 5% of people with disabilities are wheelchair users? True, but I suspect they're also not easy to use if you have trouble standing, climbing, gripping onto things or seeing. -- John Band john at johnband dot org www.johnband.org |
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:15 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk