In article ,
() wrote:

On Fri, 28 Jan 2011 09:35:48 -0600, ote:

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.

TfL and its predecessors have often been behind the curve on these
things. Remember how late they fitted the trams with windscreens?

Was that down to the operators? or did the Met police have a say in
such things. It is the sort of thing they might have objected to
claiming poor visibility in rain/fog etc.
Back in those smog laden days and with non existent or primitive
wipers they may have had a point. ISTR that a cut potato rubbed on the
glass helped in those places that did use screens.

The police did indeed set the rules but the rest of the country seemed to
manage with screens and with the same technology.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In uk.transport.london message , Thu, 27
Jan 2011 10:21:56, Roland Perry posted:

In message , at 22:29:56 on
Tue, 25 Jan 2011, Basil Jet 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!

Or to have a whole new set of route "numbers", starting with (say) X,
with the routes running between the garages and the corresponding points
of joining/leaving a normal-service route. There would, perhaps, be no
public timetable for these routes, but the routes themselves would be
published for use on the basis of "if you happen to see an X-bus heading
your way at a stop, use it".

--
(c) John Stockton, nr London, UK. Turnpike v6.05.
Website http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/ - w. FAQish topics, links, acronyms
PAS EXE etc. : http://www.merlyn.demon.co.uk/programs/ - see in 00index.htm
Dates - miscdate.htm estrdate.htm js-dates.htm pas-time.htm critdate.htm etc.

On Thu, 27 Jan 2011, Mizter T wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote:

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,

I don't know if it still does, but it was not so long ago that the 38 had
a logo painted on it - it had a little heart in the middle. Like so:

http://www.showbus.com/gallery/lt/arriva7.htm

The 38 was my night bus home when i first moved to London (2003?). I never
had any romantic experiences on it, but i did end up feeling quite fond of
it.

tom

--
KEEP CALM and CARRY ON

Paul Corfield wrote in article
[...]
where, along with a key and often a table to work out which route
goes where
and from what stop. (Though Paul C will be along in a moment to say
that he
disapproves of the simplified timetables!)

All correct including my dislike of the stop specific panels. I have
yet to see people look at a stop specific panel and come away
enlightened as to when a bus might be expected.

So let me report on such an incident at 1128 today in Long Ditton at
the Vicarage Rd stop on the K3 route. Both the chap ahead of me and I
were enlightened - the next Kingston bus was said to be at 1133 and it
duly arrived.

Of course if I hadn't a watch that might have been less useful so
perhaps a radio controlled clock should be added @ £5 per stop.

And as to "stop specific " information, I see the iBus display at
Richmond Bus Sation has been removed so there is none available there,
ie you can't say "no 65 is shown so I will take the 371, due in 4
minutes"

--
Mike D

Michael R N Dolbear wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote in article
[...]
where, along with a key and often a table to work out which route
goes where
and from what stop. (Though Paul C will be along in a moment to say
that he
disapproves of the simplified timetables!)
All correct including my dislike of the stop specific panels. I have
yet to see people look at a stop specific panel and come away
enlightened as to when a bus might be expected.

They work very well in Stoke-on-Trent.

So let me report on such an incident at 1128 today in Long Ditton at
the Vicarage Rd stop on the K3 route. Both the chap ahead of me and I
were enlightened - the next Kingston bus was said to be at 1133 and it
duly arrived.

Of course if I hadn't a watch that might have been less useful so
perhaps a radio controlled clock should be added @ £5 per stop.

Plus, round here, the installation and repair costs every time the local
yobs trash it. The glass in my local stops lasts about a month on
average. Then again, if there's already a realtime route display on the
stop, it's trivial to tell it to alternate between the next bus time and
the current time.

--
Tciao for Now!

John.

In message , at 21:29:57 on
Sat, 29 Jan 2011, Paul Corfield remarked:

In addition you get the ludicrous "every 8-12 mins" type statement -
there is no official explanation as to what that phrase means.

Somewhere with a lot of traffic I'd assume this meant "the timetable is
every 10 minutes, but we often run up to 2 minutes early or late".

Where traffic isn't the problem it's more likely to mean "every 8
minutes at busy times of day, and every 12 minutes the rest of the
time".

What I find grammatically challenging is "up to every 10 minutes". Which
from observation means "sometimes as often as every 10 minutes" rather
than "never less frequent than every 10 minutes".
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:02:31 +0000, Mizter T wrote:


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,

Well, he's right about that anyway. For example, the toilets in Crystal
Palace bus station were recently made staff only. Those were the last
surviving public toilets in the Crystal Palace triangle area, and now we
don't even have them. Coded locks and "Staff only" notices appeared on
the doors one day. No explanation, no warning, nothing. What are
customers supposed to do if they get caught short while changing buses
there?

and that bus operators
elsewhere outside of London are a paragon of virtue in comparison, or at
least something along those lines.

And there, George is totally wrong. Other bus operators are even worse.

On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 06:11:17AM -0800, George wrote:

Ever noticed how many blind boxes have bulbs that don't work and so
you cannot possibly see what is on the blind in the dark until the bus
is virtually on top of you?

No, I can't say that I have. Perhaps you're unfortunate enough to live
in an area served only by a bus company whose contract is almost up so
they don't care about maintenance.

--
David Cantrell | even more awesome than a panda-fur coat

When one has bathed in Christ there is no need to bathe a second time
-- St. Jerome, on why washing is a vile pagan practice
in a letter to Heliodorus, 373 or 374 AD

On 30 Jan, 13:23, solar penguin wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:02:31 +0000, Mizter T wrote:

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,

Well, he's right about that anyway. *For example, the toilets in Crystal
Palace bus station were recently made staff only. *Those were the last
surviving public toilets in the Crystal Palace triangle area, and now we
don't even have them. *Coded locks and "Staff only" notices appeared on
the doors one day. *No explanation, no warning, nothing. *What are
customers supposed to do if they get caught short while changing buses
there?

and that bus operators
elsewhere outside of London are a paragon of virtue in comparison, or at
least something along those lines.

And there, George is totally wrong. *Other bus operators are even worse..



Oh really? And on what scientific basis have you come to that
conclusion? Or is it just your opinion and nothing more? I really do
despair that some people cannot see beyond the TfL spin.

On 31 Jan, 14:04, David Cantrell wrote:
On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 06:11:17AM -0800, George wrote:
Ever noticed how many blind boxes have bulbs that don't work and so
you cannot possibly see what is on the blind in the dark until the bus
is virtually on top of you?

No, I can't say that I have. *Perhaps you're unfortunate enough to live
in an area served only by a bus company whose contract is almost up so
they don't care about maintenance.

--
David Cantrell | even more awesome than a panda-fur coat

* When one has bathed in Christ there is no need to bathe a second time
* * * -- St. Jerome, on why washing is a vile pagan practice
* * * * *in a letter to Heliodorus, 373 or 374 AD

No I live in Beckenham actually.

Just stand at a busy point (such as Marble Arch) and look for
yourself, you'll also notice how clear the LED displays on the Oxford
Tube/Espress and National Express and Megabus coaches are by
comparison as well.