Mayoral press release:
http://www.london.gov.uk/media/press...80%99s-new-bus
or via http://tinyurl.com/395bm2k

New Bus for London page on the GLA/Mayoral website (including a video
presentation):
http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/transport/new-bus-london

TfL project page:
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/projectsandschemes/15493.aspx

BBC News online story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8685486.stm

Evening Standard story:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23834671-.do

Evening Standard comment - Ross Lydall's blog post:
http://lydall.standard.co.uk/2010/05...dows-open.html
or via http://tinyurl.com/2v8uwxy

I'm a bit of a sceptic with regards to this whole endeavour (and very
much a sceptic with regards to the withdrawal of the supposedly evil
bendy buses - but I'll put that aside for now) - but I won't pretend
that I find the proposed (or rather, apparently finalised) design
unattractive - to my eyes at least, it does look good. I suppose the
project does kind of appeal to the 'schoolboy fantasist' element that
lurks within... I dare say that thought might explain a significant
part of the broader allure of this whole venture, one which was after
all instigated by the grown-up schoolboy that is Mayor Bozza. The
talking heads in the TfL video do all seem quite enthused by it,
though I must say they do perhaps betray a little uncertainty over
whether it's all really going to, y'know, actually happen - but maybe
that's just me projecting my thoughts onto their utterances. (And if
it is going to actually happen, then it might as well be done
properly, workably and professionally I suppose.)

All that said, this is the only bus 'thing' that Boris seems to take
any interest in - one can't help but feel his mindset just regards
buses (well, the Routemaster and this new BorisBus) as little more
than moving ornaments to be admired from afar, rather than as a vital
mode of transport that needs to be treated as a cohesive network,
cared for and maintained. If the BorisBus project means other bus
services get cut back and fares go up, then the "stunning red
emblem[s] of 21st century London" (BoJo's words) will take on
something of a different hue.

"Mizter T" wrote in message


All that said, this is the only bus 'thing' that Boris seems to take
any interest in - one can't help but feel his mindset just regards
buses (well, the Routemaster and this new BorisBus) as little more
than moving ornaments to be admired from afar, rather than as a vital
mode of transport that needs to be treated as a cohesive network,
cared for and maintained. If the BorisBus project means other bus
services get cut back and fares go up, then the "stunning red
emblem[s] of 21st century London" (BoJo's words) will take on
something of a different hue.

Boris is a cyclist, so I doubt that he regards buses as little more than
"moving ornaments to be admired from afar". Probably more like "hulking
great lethal monsters to avoid".

Mizter T wrote:
to my eyes at least, it does look good

Not to mine - the front is a hideous, bulbous eyed mess and looks like
it's got a black eye, while the back sacrifices the rear window for a
stylistic swoosh. The sides are OK in a 'just like any modern long
distance coach' way, but who judges a bus by its sides?

What's more important is how big the thing is, looks huge to me. It
would have to be to fit in 87 seats, three doors and two staircases, mind.

It's not a Routemaster.

Tom

On 17 May, 14:12, Tom Barry wrote:
Mizter T wrote:
to my eyes at least, it does look good

Not to mine - the front is a hideous, bulbous eyed mess and looks like
it's got a black eye, while the back sacrifices the rear window for a
stylistic swoosh. *The sides are OK in a 'just like any modern long
distance coach' way, but who judges a bus by its sides?

What's more important is how big the thing is, looks huge to me. *It
would have to be to fit in 87 seats, three doors and two staircases, mind..

It's not a Routemaster.

Tom

Good. A Routemaster was already retro in the 1950s. The bendys have
weaned us off filing through a narrow gap past the driver, at the cost
of a ludicrous amount of wasted road space.

So, does it allow plenty of access points, upper deck rather than
excessive road space and general accessibility?

Chances are it does, in which case I might take back some of my
criticisms of the project. Though I can't see why such a fanfare and
competion and all the other palaver were ever necessary in designing a
suitable bus for London.

"Tom Barry" wrote in message
...
Mizter T wrote:
to my eyes at least, it does look good

Not to mine - the front is a hideous, bulbous eyed mess and looks like
it's got a black eye, while the back sacrifices the rear window for a
stylistic swoosh. The sides are OK in a 'just like any modern long
distance coach' way, but who judges a bus by its sides?

What's more important is how big the thing is, looks huge to me. It would
have to be to fit in 87 seats, three doors and two staircases, mind.

It's not a Routemaster.

Tom

Are we sure it's 87 seats? Or is it 87 capacity (x seats and y standing)?

On May 17, 2:38*pm, MIG wrote:

On 17 May, 14:12, Tom Barry wrote:

Mizter T wrote:
to my eyes at least, it does look good

Not to mine - the front is a hideous, bulbous eyed mess and looks like
it's got a black eye, while the back sacrifices the rear window for a
stylistic swoosh. *The sides are OK in a 'just like any modern long
distance coach' way, but who judges a bus by its sides?

What's more important is how big the thing is, looks huge to me. *It
would have to be to fit in 87 seats, three doors and two staircases, mind.

It's not a Routemaster.

Good. *A Routemaster was already retro in the 1950s. *The bendys have
weaned us off filing through a narrow gap past the driver, at the cost
of a ludicrous amount of wasted road space.

The "wasted road space" of which you speak being space used for
passengers actually on the bus - the long single deck and multiple
doors meaning loading and unloading happens quicker thus dwell times
are reduced, making journeys speedier and resulting in fewer actual
vehicles being required.

(I think it was Tom Barry - well it must have been - who attempted to
work out the total road space that would be used by the double-deckers
that replaced the bendies on route 38 - IIRC his calculation was that
they would actually occupy *more* road space.)


So, does it allow plenty of access points, upper deck rather than
excessive road space and general accessibility?

Chances are it does, in which case I might take back some of my
criticisms of the project. *[...]

(Leaving aside road space issues...)

I don't think you can conclude that at all, certainly not yet at
least. There is absolutely no clarity on how these new Borismaster
buses would/will operate in practice - to what extent will they be be
manned with a conductor (daytime only? peak hours only? not on
Sundays? central London only?), bearing in mind that one of the
fundamental design requirements was for the new bus to be able to
operate with just one person mode (i.e. just the driver).

When they are in OPO (one person operation) mode, the back door seems
as though it'll be locked out of use - i.e. it won't open at all, pax
will have to use other doors. It's entirely unclear as to whether pax
will be able to board and leave by either of the other two doors (i.e.
the front and middle ones) ala a bendy bus (or the 507 and 521 'Red
Arrow' new non-bendy single deckers). It could well be that the bus
then operates akin to a conventional OPO double-decker, with boarding
pax filing past the driver whilst presenting their tickets/ smartcards
and leaving via the middle door - there's nothing in any of the blurb
to say that it would operate in 'board/alight any door' mode (also
bear in mind that one of the common criticisms of the bendies is that
the 'honesty box' fares collection system is open to abuse - I think
Boris & co have voiced this, although perhaps not as prominently as
other criticisms).

Also, it's unclear how the new Borismaster buses would/will operate
when in conductor/"uniformed presence" mode, i.e. two person operation
mode. It's unclear if the front two doors are to open at bus stops as
well as the back platform remaining open - one could perhaps argue
that rear open platform should be the only regular entrance/exit when
operating 'Routemaster mode' (except for those in wheelchairs, and
perhaps prams and buggies... and those with luggage or bags of
shopping? those with more limited mobility?).

If however one or both of the other doors are to be used, then the
whole rear open platform concept starts to look like a right gimmick -
some of the benefits attributed to the Routemasters of old, i.e. that
the open platform provided flexibility at bus stops with people able
to hop-on and off at will without the driver having to deal with
operating the doors (dealing with the pax being the conductors job),
these benefits would be negated if the driver of the new Borismaster
*did* have to deal with the doors too.

So, having mulled it over for a little while, my scepticism levels are
rising again. The raison d'etre of the NB4L / BorisBus / Borismaster
(call it what you will) is the open platform at the rear of the bus -
but if that real platform is only going to see limited use, then it
rather calls the whole thing into question. Furthermore, and
crucially. a two person operated bus - i.e. plus a
conductor/"uniformed presence" - adds dramatically to the running
costs. I've never got very excited over the concept of re-introducing
conductors - sure, they might be a kind of 'nice to have', but most
pax these days already have a ticket of some sort before boarding a
bus, which rather removes the raison d'etre for conductors. Plus, I
think it's far nicer to have a frequent, reliable and comprehensive
bus network than a patchy and infrequent network, albeit one with a
few buses that have conductors on-board. And if you don't have
conductors on-board then you don't have open platforms either, because
a solo driver sure as hell can't be expected to monitor an open
platform.

None of the thoughts above are remotely original - indeed I suspect
the simple equation is much the same as that which was laid down by
TfL bods before ex-Mayor Ken, who decided that a comprehensive bus
network rather than a gimmicky one was the way forwards.

Also, and I think it was Paul C who made this point, *if* the new
buses are a big success with the public, then that might create a real
problem for the future - what with demands coming in from all quarters
of London that people want the new Borismaster buses on their local
bus routes, or indeed want conductors to stay on board for longer
(outside of busy times, or outside the centre of London, or whatever).
The cost of buying these buses will be greater, and crucially the cost
of operating them will be greater, and the big piggy bank is not only
empty, it's full of anti-matter, and that situation isn't about to
change any time soon.

Did I say I was a bit sceptical about it all?!

You're not getting 87 seats:

CAPACITY

Total Capacity: 87
Lower Deck: 22 seats (That total includes 4 priority seats and 6
preferential seats for passengers with restricted mobility) 25
standing.
Wheelchair Bays: 1
Upped Deck: 40 seats

DIMENSIONS

Length: 11.2m
Width: 2.55m
Height: 4.4m

Garius wrote on 17 May 2010 17:58:16 ...
You're not getting 87 seats:

CAPACITY

Total Capacity: 87
Lower Deck: 22 seats (That total includes 4 priority seats and 6
preferential seats for passengers with restricted mobility) 25
standing.
Wheelchair Bays: 1
Upped Deck: 40 seats

DIMENSIONS

Length: 11.2m
Width: 2.55m
Height: 4.4m

From a quick measurement of a still from one of the videos, it looks to
me as if the wheelbase will be around 6.25m. So it will have a longer
body and a longer wheelbase than current London double-deckers, which
won't do much for its manoeuvrability in London's streets. Can someone
remind me in what way this design is particularly suitable for London?

Also, why is this to be *exclusive* to London? From today's publicity
(saying other cities will be "envious" etc.), it sounds as if TfL are
going to licence the design for London only. If it's such a good
design, why not let WrightBus sell it elsewhere, which would help to
bring down the production costs?
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On May 17, 5:58*pm, Garius wrote:

You're not getting 87 seats:

CAPACITY

Total Capacity: 87
Lower Deck: 22 seats (That total includes 4 priority seats and 6
preferential seats for passengers with restricted mobility) 25
standing.
Wheelchair Bays: 1
Upped Deck: 40 seats

DIMENSIONS

Length: 11.2m
Width: 2.55m
Height: 4.4m

So a total of 62 seats.

Remarkably duff question from me - how many seats has a bendy bus got,
is it 49? And what is the notional standing capacity? I should know
the answers to both, but alas I must admit I don't off-hand, and my
Google-fu is rather letting me down at the moment (not least because
the web is full of rather more heat than light when it comes to bendy
buses!).

I like it (it's a lot better than the previous Routemaster pastiche
designs).

Oddly, it looks like the front of an early Leyland Atlantean, (such as
this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:EDW68D.jpg), combined with
the back of a Routemaster...