wrote:

In article ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

I can't remember the last time I saw a bus that didn't have a
changeable display. Round here some of the single-deckers still
have the manual scrolls, but all the double deckers and the newer
single deckers have electronic displays.

You are forgetting that in this respect TfL is still in the world of Ned
Ludd.


I don't like electronic displays - I know they've improved over the years,
but I still find that at a bit of a distance the bright LED light output
just results in an undecipherable mush, and the light can be a bit piercing
too. My vote is very much in the 'don't mess with our destination blinds'
column.

"Mizter T" gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

Not so fast Mr Perry! ITYF there are many examples of where route
specific branding has been used on buses around the country - so it's
not really an edge case. No current examples from London readily spring
to mind, but a number of Routemaster operated routes (e.g. 12, 36, 18,
73) used to go in for it (from the 90's onwards I think, i.e. post split
up and privatisation of the LT buses operation) as did some other
routes.

Do I recall the RV1 riverside route using fairly heavily branded buses?

"Roland Perry" wrote:

In message
, at
02:45:34 on Thu, 27 Jan 2011, George
remarked:

I thought that buses running out of service were ordered to avoid their
service route where possible, because people waiting for buses get
annoyed if they see a bus with their chosen route number running out of
service.

A simpler solution is to replace the number with either "Not in Service"
or blank. Buses don't have the route number painted on them permanently!

Of course LED displays would solve this, just a touch of a button and
all routes nembers displays are removed.

I can't remember the last time I saw a bus that didn't have a changeable
display. Round here some of the single-deckers still have the manual
scrolls, but all the double deckers and the newer single deckers have
electronic displays.

The "manual scrolls" aka destination blinds used on London buses at least
are not manual but rather automatic aka motorised, so they can be and indeed
are changed at the touch of a button.

I don't think there's really a problem in London w.r.t. out of service
buses - I shall try and be a bit more observant of such things, but I think
the appropriate "Not in Service" blind is often used when buses are running
out of service, meanwhile when it's dark this isn't necessary because both
the lightbox behind the destination blind and the interior lighting will be
switched off and the bus quite evidently won't be in service.

I've never come across this notion that buses running out of service aren't
supposed to run on their service route before - I can think of numerous
examples of out of service buses running twixt their garage and start/end of
their route using a different route, but that's simply because the route
taken makes sense.

Perhaps worth noting that Paul C, who knows of George from other recesses of
the internet, said a few things on here when George first starting popping
up recently - my understanding of the crux of it was that Geroge's stance is
essentially that TfL's bus operation is a disaster, that they can't do
anything right, and that bus operators elsewhere outside of London are a
paragon of virtue in comparison, or at least something along those lines.
Thus far George's posts appear to subscribe to that general negative
worldview. I travel on London buses, I take a rather different view, but I
don't think I really need to elucidate any further.

Mizter T wrote on 27 January 2011 15:36:38 ...

wrote:

In ,
(Roland Perry) wrote:

I can't remember the last time I saw a bus that didn't have a
changeable display. Round here some of the single-deckers still
have the manual scrolls, but all the double deckers and the newer
single deckers have electronic displays.

You are forgetting that in this respect TfL is still in the world of Ned
Ludd.


I don't like electronic displays - I know they've improved over the years,
but I still find that at a bit of a distance the bright LED light output
just results in an undecipherable mush, and the light can be a bit piercing
too. My vote is very much in the 'don't mess with our destination blinds'
column.

Agreed. TfL is not being luddite; it's continuing to insist on 21st
century standards for legibility, and not assuming everyone has 20/20
vision. (Pity they don't apply the same standards to the fronts of tube
trains.)
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On 2011-01-27, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 11:39:59 on Thu, 27
Jan 2011, Paul Terry remarked:

Buses don't have the route number painted on them permanently!

They do sometimes. See 3rd photo down at:

http://www.showbus.com/gallery/lt/lubdart.htm

Another lesson that usenet is the place to weed out edge cases. Well
done!

But you live in or near Nottingham, where route-branded buses are
definitely _not_ an edge case.

E.

In message , at 19:03:17 on Thu, 27
Jan 2011, Eric remarked:
Buses don't have the route number painted on them permanently!

They do sometimes. See 3rd photo down at:

http://www.showbus.com/gallery/lt/lubdart.htm

Another lesson that usenet is the place to weed out edge cases. Well
done!

But you live in or near Nottingham, where route-branded buses are
definitely _not_ an edge case.

Buses here have routes on the side[1], but not numbers.

They don't always stick to those routes (ie you'll find a bus with a
number/destination that doesn't quite match the branding - although NCT
buses are also colour coded and they usually keep those on the correct
group of routes. So you might see buses swapped between the "Green"
routes to Edwalton (no6) and Ruddington (no10), but not running on a
Purple, Brown etc route.

But I've seen route branded and colour-coded Trent-Barton on entirely
the wrong route - for example a Nottingham-Derby (indigo) branded bus
doing Radcliffe-Nottingham (Red).

And now I return you to our regular programming: uk.transport.LONDON



[1] Which include the nomenclature "Train Station" which I know makes
purists' toes curl.
--
Roland Perry

On Jan 27, 9:23*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 15:27:50 -0000, "Mizter T"
wrote:





[x-posted to uk.transport.buses - coz it's about buses!]

"Roland Perry" wrote:

In message , at 11:39:59 on Thu, 27
Jan 2011, Paul Terry remarked:

Buses don't have the route number painted on them permanently!

They do sometimes. See 3rd photo down at:

http://www.showbus.com/gallery/lt/lubdart.htm

Another lesson that usenet is the place to weed out edge cases. Well done!

Not so fast Mr Perry! ITYF there are many examples of where route specific
branding has been used on buses around the country - so it's not really an
edge case. No current examples from London readily spring to mind, but a
number of Routemaster operated routes (e.g. 12, 36, 18, 73) used to go in
for it (from the 90's onwards I think, i.e. post split up and privatisation
of the LT buses operation) as did some other routes.

We may not have obvious route branding but TfL is quite happy to brand
vehicles as hybrids - seemingly with the white roundel too on some of
the latest ones on the 76 and 139.

The new hydrogen buses on the RV1 have liberal lettering extolling their
virtues as did the former hydrogen Citaros used on the RV1 and 25.

There have been all sorts of experiments in London with route branding
and in a more subtle way with allowing different operator liveries in
the old LRT regime. *In an area with many different operators you could
spot the route by the bus colour - was certainly true in Walthamstow
where my buses were yellow or green and yellow or multiple shades of
grey and green.

Many other examples (both on that Flickr group and elsewhere) there should
one wish to forage around for them - I think broadly speaking they're
commonly flagship routes or else routes that have had some sort of relaunch
(or indeed a new route).

This varies by operator. *Stagecoach seem to brand core routes on local
networks. First seem to brand express routes or certain core routes but
generally only with enormous stickers over the windows rather than
varying the livery. *Go Ahead have all sorts of variants with Go North
East having many routes picked out in individual brands - this tends to
follow Trent Barton's practice. Oxford and Brighton and Hove tend to be
a little more subtle in their approach but it's still there. Also true
for Bluestar and Wilts and Dorset (More). Some elements of the former
Blazefield empire also have very distinct and well presented brands -
again on core routes. * Lothian Buses also have fairly subtle route
branding that seems to work.

I assume the advantage of route branding that doesn't actually show the
route number (of which there are many more examples) is that if that bus
ends up 'off route', passengers are less likely to get in a muddle about
what number the bus actually is (i.e. what route it's operating).

I am not much of a fan of route branding when it is not done properly.
If you do it like Trent Barton, Go North East or Lothian Buses where
there is a coherence in design, the right buses stay on the right
routes, the route timetable leaflets reflect the brand and are available
on the bus etc then it's acceptable and makes sense. *I understand most
of Go North East's routes by their brand names as much as the route
number.

Given the huge allocations in London and the need for fleet flexibility
I just don't see how route branding could be done coherently in London.
There have been odd recent exceptions such as Red Arrow (now killed off)
and Riverside for the RV1 (also killed off but never really properly
maintained after the initial flourish when the RV1 launched). *I doubt
it would make much sense in London because people catch buses regardless
- people need to get places and use the bus to get there. *This is less
discretion for many people - they don't have cars or they are commuters
so they have to use the buses.
--
Paul C- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


Just to put my twopennyworth in, I don't like the policy where the
front of the bus only shows the final destination. I realise that this
may hae something to do with the provision of better information for
people with poor eyesight, but it seems a shame that improvements for
one set of passenger has to be at the expense of another set of
passengers. London gets a lot of tourists who are not familiar with
the bus network and who need to know where the buses go. (eg if you
are on Regent Street and want to go to the Tower of London, and you
see a no. 15 with the destination "Blackwall", you would not
necessarily realise that this bus takes you where you want to go.)

"Paul" wrote in message
...

Just to put my twopennyworth in, I don't like the policy where the
front of the bus only shows the final destination. I realise that this
may hae something to do with the provision of better information for
people with poor eyesight, but it seems a shame that improvements for
ne set of passenger has to be at the expense of another set of
passengers. London gets a lot of tourists who are not familiar with
the bus network and who need to know where the buses go. (eg if you
are on Regent Street and want to go to the Tower of London, and you
see a no. 15 with the destination "Blackwall", you would not
necessarily realise that this bus takes you where you want to go.)

Hear hear. I was in Piccadilly on Wednesday and saw endles 38s going by,
often with different destinations but absolutely no clue as to how they
could get there. Given they appear to be dot matrix type displays, they
could easily scroll as is done by any other bus and train companies. I
suppose the argument might be that the bus stop has all the info you need?

MaxB

On Jan 28, 10:30*am, "MaxB" wrote:
"Paul" *wrote in message
...

Just to put my twopennyworth in, I don't like the policy where the
front of the bus only shows the final destination. I realise that this
may hae something to do with the provision of better information for
people with poor eyesight, but it seems a shame that improvements for
ne set of passenger has to be at the expense of another set of
passengers. *London gets a lot of tourists who are not familiar with
the bus network and who need to know where the buses go. (eg if you
are on Regent Street and want to go to the Tower of London, and you
see a no. 15 with the destination "Blackwall", you would not
necessarily realise that this bus takes you where you want to go.)

Hear hear. I was in Piccadilly on Wednesday and saw endles 38s going by,
often with different destinations but absolutely no clue as to how they
could get there. Given they appear to be dot matrix type displays, they
could easily scroll as is done by any other bus and train companies. I
suppose the argument might be that the bus stop has all the info you need?

MaxB

The same argument applies to provision of space for buggies on buses.
The main bus company in Edinburgh, Lothian Buses, recently introduced
a policy that large buggies and prams could not be carried on their
services. One of the arguments was that provision needed to be made
for wheelchair users. One parenting website said that you could easily
carry wheelchairs as long as you increased the space available to
buggies as well. What they forgot to mention was that you can only
increase the space for buggies at the expense of space for everyone
else.

I know this subject is controversial and you will never please
everyone, and I do not wish to take sides. However Lothian Buses make
an important point on their website, namely that travelling on a bus
means SHARING the space with OTHER PEOPLE. See
http://www.lothianbuses.com/index.ph...=article&id=93.
These other people may have requirements which are different to yours,
and have just as much right to use the bus as you do.

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 10:21:56AM +0000, Roland Perry wrote:

Buses don't have the route number painted on them permanently!

Some do. Back in the good old days the Routemasters often did, and even
now many buses have a list of stops painted* on the outside**.

* for vinyl transfer values of paint
** although now that I think about it I can't think of any routes in
London that do this. It's very common in the provinces though.

--
David Cantrell | Nth greatest programmer in the world

Perl: the only language that makes Welsh look acceptable