"Kevin" wrote in message
. uk...

What would be really nice, from the drivers point of view, would be a bell
that once rung would not ring again until after the doors have been opened
and closed.

I believe the bus drivers will only get the tone once, so as not to drive
him crazy, although the bell will continue to ring if pressed.

I remember on the RMs once when somebody kept pulling on the cord. The bus
driver leaned out of his cab into the bus and told everybody off.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:26:34 GMT, wrote:

I remember on the RMs once when somebody kept pulling on the cord. The bus
driver leaned out of his cab into the bus and told everybody off.

I got told off once for using the bell *at all* on a Blackpool tram.
Apparently the expectation was that you tell the conductor when you
want to get off, and that that was his job.

Neil

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

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:26:34 GMT, wrote:

driver leaned out of his cab into the bus and told everybody off.

I got told off once for using the bell *at all* on a Blackpool tram.
Apparently the expectation was that you tell the conductor when you
want to get off, and that that was his job.

Blackpool trams -- wonderful during the Illuminations.

Somebody remind me of the southern terminal, please -- it's called Starr
Gate, right?

In message , Neil Williams
writes
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 21:26:34 GMT, wrote:

I remember on the RMs once when somebody kept pulling on the cord. The bus
driver leaned out of his cab into the bus and told everybody off.

I got told off once for using the bell *at all* on a Blackpool tram.
Apparently the expectation was that you tell the conductor when you
want to get off, and that that was his job.

And I had the same on a WMPTE Leyland National once (in the early
eighties).

I rang the bell and the driver gave me a bit of a tongue-lashing saying
that it wasn't necessary on one man operated buses. I then pointed out
that the said vehicle was built with bell pushes and after the
introduction of OPO.

With hindsight, I must have sounded like a prime anorak! Still right,
though.......
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

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

In article ,
() wrote:

Somebody remind me of the southern terminal, please -- it's called
Starr Gate, right?

Yes.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:49:21 +0100, Ian Jelf
wrote:


And I had the same on a WMPTE Leyland National once (in the early
eighties).

I rang the bell and the driver gave me a bit of a tongue-lashing saying
that it wasn't necessary on one man operated buses.

We used to disable the bell (*) on our Leyland Nationals for the same
reason. We didn't need it. After all, in those days it was our job to
issue tickets, to know where everybody was travelling to and not allow
them to over ride.

If somebody showed a pass (not that common) they told you where they
were going as they got on.

When the Inspector checked the bus, he was checking out you as much as
the passengers.

A different world!

(*) Keep one stuck in with a piece of matchstick and none of them
worked!

--
Bill Hayles

http://billnot.com

wrote:

When the disabled button is pushed RT busses give a small siren sound in
addition to the beep. I don't think that there is any particular sound on
the bendibusses, as the driver's dashboard shows a disabled sign.

If the button is disabled, I'm surprised it gives any sound at all!
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA

On 19 Jul, 01:19, "Richard J." wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 23:55:57 -0700, MIG

wrote:

The reason for this is that, in London at least, drivers don't
stop at bus stops any more. This may not be their fault, in
that instructions not to stop are probablly the only way that
the bus operators can interpret TfL's timing regime.

However, until drivers can be relied on to stop at bus stops,
they are going to hear a lot of bells ringing.

(And in another thread, I reported that I stood up to get off
at a compulsory stop in Trafalgar Square in the rush hour, but
the driver apparently deemed this to be too minor a place to
stop and whisked me off down Whitehall. This is not an
isolated incident, so I have learned by experience and always
ring.)

In the light of your comments you might be interested to read the
proposals here

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/proj...orkandservices...

and perhaps send in some comments to TfL. Closing date 20 July 2007.

Thanks, Paul. I wasn't aware of that proposal and consultation, and
there doesn't seem to be a link to it from the main London Buses page.
I've no problem with the idea of removing the distinction between
compulsory and request stops. Effectively they'll all become compulsory
as far as boarding passengers are concerned (buses will stop at all
stops if anyone is waiting), but will be request stops for alighting
passengers (ring the bell if you want the bus to stop, which is what 80%
of passengers always do anyway).

But if they are going to standardise on one design of bus stop sign, I'd
much prefer the white-on-red of the current request stop, as IMHO it's
much more visible from a distance than the compulsory stop. I've
suggested this in my response to TfL. What do others think?

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)-


One one hand it's a bit cheeky to wait till years after the
distinction has been de facto done away with and then consult on
whether to do away with it or not.

On the other hand, it's better to formalise and standardise what's
going in, rather than leave it to the operator or driver's discretion.

I am fairly sure that the reason for the current situation is the
tendering of routes to private companies. TfL insists on certain
levels of performance, measured only by whether (empty) buses get to
their checkpoints on time, regardless of whether passengers get to
where they are going on time.

The companies have to translate this into instructions to their own
employees, which inevitably boil down to "don't stop if you can
possibly avoid it". This wouldn't be the same if the drivers were
employed by TfL. I will have to mention this in my response somehow.

It's still going to be a case of "damned if you do, damned if you
don't" because compliance with the new proposals will result in non-
compliance with "performance" measures, particularly the completely
new requirement to stop at (former) request stops where no one is
signalling.

Richard J. wrote:


snipped
But if they are going to standardise on one design of bus stop sign, I'd
much prefer the white-on-red of the current request stop, as IMHO it's
much more visible from a distance than the compulsory stop. I've
suggested this in my response to TfL. What do others think?


Apart from the visibility, it has better 'backward compatibility' in the
sense that passengers who haven't upgraded themselves to the new protocol
won't miss their stop when alighting (though they will still redundantly
signal the driver when boarding)!

Paul Corfield wrote:

In the light of your comments you might be interested to read the
proposals here

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/proj...ions/5003.aspx

and perhaps send in some comments to TfL. Closing date 20 July 2007.

No disrepect to Paul, but TfL consultations are just for show. They have
already decided what to do. The high-profile consultation over the western
extension of the Congestion charge showed us Ken's vision of democracy. "If
voting changed anything, they'd make it illegal.", as Ken himself said when
he wasn't in charge. Viva Zapata!