On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:54:19 -0000, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:

And for me that's the issue. I like Routemasters but their time is
gone. I cannot see for a moment how hundreds of millions could be spent
on reviving an old bus design.

Well there's the cost issue that's true, but the basic problem is the
Routemaster has several features that a) are not duplicated on the
replacement buses, particularly the ability to jump off between stops, open
platform that prevents it from getting too hot inside and onboard staff who
gave reassurance; and b) have been incorporated into road and bus stop
planning - e.g. the Liverpool Street to Tottenham bendy that takes forever
because of the over frequent bus stops that were placed for Routemasters or
the narrows built into roads that bendies have problems navigating.

I think it would be extremely doubtful that any replacement Routemaster
would be allowed to have an open platform no matter what is shown on
Autocar's sketches. I doubt it would pass health and safety checks and
there may well be insurance problems with such a design given the
relatively poor accident record of the Routemaster. Any before anyone
screams about bendy buses being unsafe I said relatively poor not
"horrendously unsafe" as others are wont to claim.

You're obviously referring to the 149. I confess I have not seen it in
the absolute height of the peak in the City but I do remember when the
149 was double deck OPO. Buses would literally sit for 5-8 minutes at
somewhere like Liverpool St as the driver could never get the doors shut
as the queue was never ending. With the bendy buses they do manage a
quick get away on other parts of the route and I've honestly not seen
any problems up at the Tottenham - Stoke Newington section. I've also
travelled on the 73 from Tottenham into town in the peaks and that's
much twistier than the 149 and the buses seem to do OK to me. I confess
I like bendy buses so perhaps I'm a bit biased but as crowd shifters I
think they do a decent job.

I imagine there will be some thinning out of buses on the Kingsland Road
when the ELLX opens anyway but I don't see bus stops being removed -
there'd be too much of an outcry. The legacy of short gaps between stops
may actually be from trolleybus days rather than the Routemaster era.

What could address some of these problems would be more flexibility on the
part of drivers and/or the training - e.g. allowing passengers to be able to
escape the buses when on a scorching day they're stuck in traffic only 200
metres from the bus stop. It's these kind of things that make people want
the Routemaster back. Yes there's nostalgia for the bus but if the modern
buses were doing as good a job at meeting passenger requirements then demand
for the return would be less.

To be fair to bus drivers they are in a bind when it comes to traffic
jams. They have legal duties placed on them with respect to passenger
safety and they are clearly told not to open doors between stops. Now
clearly if the roads are jammed solid and nothing is moving and a safe
step to the pavement is possible many will do the sensible thing and
allow people off. The occasional jobsworth may not but they are working
within what are generally sensible rules and it would only take one
accident for them to be stuck. Passengers can help by ensuring that if
they do step off that they actually look to see if there are
obstructions or possibly a cyclist sneaking up the inside. That would
reassure drivers that the passenger is taking some responsibility too.

Another one that springs to mind are pushchairs. On modern buses owners of
toddler tractors seem to assume they have a God Given Right to the limited
open space and that anyone in that space for whatever reason can be simply
shoved aside (more than once I've had my shopping almost rammed) and battles
ensue when there isn't enough space to go round. I can't recall the battles
occurring on the Routemaster because it was clear they had to be folded.

I could rant on about buggies for a long time but let's just say I agree
with your comments. The problem with the new Routemaster design is that
it is low floor, wider (the aisle would be accessible by buggies) and
would have lots of lovely space at the front of the lower deck complete
with its own door. I would envisage you'd have exactly the same
expectations of access from buggy wielding parents as on "normal" low
floor buses but with the added excitement of them being able to argue
with a conductor as well as with other buggy toting parents and the
other passengers. In such circumstances I don't see the buses actually
moving off the stop while the rowing continues.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:46:59 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Tim Roll-Pickering wrote:

That's a good point but I think too many people overlook the level of
faredodging on the bendy buses - how much would ticket insepctions claw
back? I don't doubt that it probably wouldn't reach the cost, but
passengers also find the bendies in particular to be scarey to travel on
(again this may be a 25 specific problem) and having a member of staff
on board who isn't locked away in a booth at the front would reassure
many.

I've often heard it suggested that these problems are linked: the
dodgeability of fares means they attract people we might charitably
describe as 'low-life scum', who then make travel a bit frightening for
everyone else.

I think it is far more to do with the general areas that bendy buses
serve. By their nature they run on very busy, high use corridors and
these are typically in poorer, run down areas of London where bus use is
proportionately higher. There may be the odd exception with the Red
Arrow routes but Harlesden, Peckham, New Cross, Camberwell, Dalston,
Hackney, Islington, Stoke Newington, Tottenham, Camden, Holloway,
Finsbury Park, Shepherds Bush etc etc all have their problems. I'm
afraid the social problems of crime and deprivation have their roots in
issues other the fact there are a few bendy buses in these areas.

I can recall Evening Standard headlines saying how Routemaster routes
like the 36, 38 and 73 were mobile drug dealing dens and they took great
delight in painting a lurid picture of how unsafe routes like the 12 and
36 were in South London. This, of course, was before they spotted the
newspaper selling potential of pretending to be the Routemaster's
Saviour (just weeks before they were finally withdrawn). Hypocrites? -
never!

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message


I could rant on about buggies for a long time but let's just say I
agree with your comments. The problem with the new Routemaster design
is that it is low floor, wider (the aisle would be accessible by
buggies) and would have lots of lovely space at the front of the
lower deck complete with its own door. I would envisage you'd have
exactly the same expectations of access from buggy wielding parents
as on "normal" low floor buses but with the added excitement of them
being able to argue with a conductor as well as with other buggy
toting parents and the other passengers. In such circumstances I
don't see the buses actually moving off the stop while the rowing
continues.

But at least the buggues wouldn't get in the way of other pax getting
on, as happens with current buses.

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 22:06:26 -0000, "Recliner"
wrote:

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message


I could rant on about buggies for a long time but let's just say I
agree with your comments. The problem with the new Routemaster design
is that it is low floor, wider (the aisle would be accessible by
buggies) and would have lots of lovely space at the front of the
lower deck complete with its own door. I would envisage you'd have
exactly the same expectations of access from buggy wielding parents
as on "normal" low floor buses but with the added excitement of them
being able to argue with a conductor as well as with other buggy
toting parents and the other passengers. In such circumstances I
don't see the buses actually moving off the stop while the rowing
continues.

But at least the buggues wouldn't get in the way of other pax getting
on, as happens with current buses.

You don't know that. It's quite possible that they would attempt to get
in at the back - remember no steps and a wider aisle as the bus would be
as wide as a modern bus at 2.55m - and wheel it to the front. Yes it
would be possible to open the front door and let them on but is that
really going to happen for buggies? Would the ramp have to be deployed
if the bus had pulled in awkwardly at a stop?

It that was the proposal then stop dwell times would become extended
compared to an old Routemaster which would worsen the case for the bus
overall as they'd be standing still for longer. This would make the
economics of such routes far worse than even conventional crew operation
never mind compared to a normal OPO bus or a bendy bus.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 15:41:34 -0000, "Tim Roll-Pickering"
wrote:

That's a good point but I think too many people overlook the level of
faredodging on the bendy buses - how much would ticket insepctions claw
back?

I was talking to a bus gripper a couple of weeks ago, and he told me
that whenever he focusses on bendies, he claws back so much extra
revenue it's silly... they're not known as "the free bus" for nothing!

At 21:52:33 on Thu, 20 Dec 2007 Paul Corfield opined:-

I imagine there will be some thinning out of buses on the Kingsland Road
when the ELLX opens anyway but I don't see bus stops being removed -
there'd be too much of an outcry.

When the 207 went over to bendy buses they did remove a stop near Ealing
Broadway. No outcry that I can recall.
--
Thoss

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:33:01 -0000, thoss wrote:

At 21:52:33 on Thu, 20 Dec 2007 Paul Corfield opined:-

I imagine there will be some thinning out of buses on the Kingsland Road
when the ELLX opens anyway but I don't see bus stops being removed -
there'd be too much of an outcry.

When the 207 went over to bendy buses they did remove a stop near Ealing
Broadway. No outcry that I can recall.

You forgot to mention the removal of every stop West of Hayes Bypass!

--
Fig

At 12:16:31 on Fri, 21 Dec 2007 Fig opined:-

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 11:33:01 -0000, thoss wrote:

At 21:52:33 on Thu, 20 Dec 2007 Paul Corfield opined:-

I imagine there will be some thinning out of buses on the Kingsland Road
when the ELLX opens anyway but I don't see bus stops being removed -
there'd be too much of an outcry.

When the 207 went over to bendy buses they did remove a stop near Ealing
Broadway. No outcry that I can recall.

You forgot to mention the removal of every stop West of Hayes Bypass!

They weren't removed, just transmogrified from 207 stops to 427 stops.
--
Thoss

"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote in message
...
Mizter T wrote:

is guilty of subscribing to the
orthodox media opinion when she claims that London's "bendy-
busses" (sic) are "loathed and problematic" - the opinion of Londoners
on these buses is by no-means universally hostile as is often
portrayed in the press (though I certainly know a few non-transport
enthusiast normal people who detest them, but many more who find them
quite acceptable).

It's quite possible that opinions vary given the actual bendy bus people
are likely to use. The number 25 serves QMUL (and also my home) and I'm
hard pressed to think of *anyone* with a good word to say about bendy
buses in general.

And of course there is the fact that these would be two-man buses,
requiring a conductor. As great as conductors may be, that is a very
significant expense - London's bus network is already subsidised, so
unless the subsidy is increased there would have to be cut backs
elsewhere. If the network was less frequent, less comprehensive or
more expensive to the passenger in terms of fares, then ridership
would be likely fall.

That's a good point but I think too many people overlook the level of
faredodging on the bendy buses - how much would ticket insepctions claw
back? I don't doubt that it probably wouldn't reach the cost, but
passengers also find the bendies in particular to be scarey to travel on
(again this may be a 25 specific problem) and having a member of staff on
board who isn't locked away in a booth at the front would reassure many.




My version of a new RM would be an oyster-only bus, with an entrance barrier
and an exit barrier with oyster readers, on the wide, low open platform.
There would be automatic fail-to-move to stop hangers-on, and yes, a
conductor who, freed from the need to collect fares, would be able to
concentrate on making pax feel safe, assissting the disabled and preventing
vandalism.

Jim Hawkins

In article
,
(Mizter T) wrote:

Of course whether any such bus is really a viable proposition is
questionable - the Autocar article claims it "might be viable with a
500 per year production run over nine years", but I suspect that's a
very optimistic estimate.

They cannot be serious! The original Routemaster production run was under
3000. Where on earth do they think they might get demand for over half as
many buses again?

--
Colin Rosenstiel