|
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
In article ,
Peter wrote: On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 19:21:29 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: On 2011\06\26 10:30, Peter wrote: I suspect that they will be recycled. Swansea has had a number of second-hand bendy buses imposed upon it - no idea where they came from. thjey all have personalised number plates to hide the fact from the morons in the council that they are rejects. They were initially planned torun as far as Mumbles, but then it was discovered that it was impossible for them to turn around to make the return journey! Then I'd call that a proposal rather than a plan. No, it was a plan - the council wanted something to replace the Mumbles Railway and came up with a bendybus route to the village. Surely the solution is clear: fit the bendybuses with a driving position at each end, guided by flanged wheels on a steel bar (or two) of some sort ? Nick -- Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010) "The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life" -- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996 |
Remaining bendy buses
In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote: In message , at 12:23:25 on Mon, 27 Jun 2011, remarked: The Cambridge Guided Bus was also "sold" on the basis of having a similar trendy looking bendy bus in the fliers - but once it was approved the promoters backpedalled and said that they never intended to imply it would have anything other than normal buses. Yeah, right. To be fair, that was a change of promoters. Cambridgeshire County Council have never sold the scheme on the basis of bendy buses. So who was it produced the documents in question. Weren't they circulated around the time of the infamous "would you like high quality transport" questionnaire? I have to admit I've forgotten who they were. I know it wasn't the County Council because those other people upset my constituents big time by proposing various road alterations close to Drummer Street that the County knew nothing about. The incursion into Christ's Pieces to give more room for turning. That was a bunch called "SuperCAM" - see September 2002 thread "Fears over 6ft city buses". The story seems to start in July 2002 - or is that typo for 2003?: http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Camb...-bid-for-Super CAM-cash.htm "CAMBRIDGESHIRE'S bid for a mammoth cash hand-out to build a new rapid transit system was being sent off to the Government today. The county has carried out a study into re-opening the former Cambridge-St Ives railway line as a route for guided buses." And in July 2003, Council minutes report that SuperCam have abandoned the scheme leaving the County as sole candidate. Then in August 2003 (another typo? see Sept 2002 above): http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home...-from-guided-b us-plan.htm "The plan is for a transport system that will run along the old Cambridge St-Ives railway line using tram-like guided buses. The £70 million SuperCam scheme, proposed by a consortium led by Stagecoach and developers Gallagher, is expected to be up and running by 2006." A picture of the bendy-tram (with OHL!): http://www.camcycle.org.uk/newsletters/38/article8.html They've been anti-guided bus ever since, even though it will barely affect them if at all. The County denied all knowledge of the original promoters with bendies and started their own proposals some time later. We need to get the dates sorted out before making a firm comment on that. Who cares the exact dates. They faltered, just as Gallaghers have at Northstowe. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
Remaining bendy buses
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:55:59 +0000 (UTC), Nick Leverton
wrote: In article , Peter wrote: On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 19:21:29 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: On 2011\06\26 10:30, Peter wrote: I suspect that they will be recycled. Swansea has had a number of second-hand bendy buses imposed upon it - no idea where they came from. thjey all have personalised number plates to hide the fact from the morons in the council that they are rejects. They were initially planned torun as far as Mumbles, but then it was discovered that it was impossible for them to turn around to make the return journey! Then I'd call that a proposal rather than a plan. No, it was a plan - the council wanted something to replace the Mumbles Railway and came up with a bendybus route to the village. Surely the solution is clear: fit the bendybuses with a driving position at each end, guided by flanged wheels on a steel bar (or two) of some sort ? FFS, don't suggest that to Swansea council... -- Cheers Peter (Reply to address is a spam trap - please reply to the group) |
Remaining bendy buses
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 19:55:59 +0000 (UTC), Nick Leverton
wrote: Surely the solution is clear: fit the bendybuses with a driving position at each end, guided by flanged wheels on a steel bar (or two) of some sort ? There is a publicity shot re the Luton busway that consists of a bus parked on the railway, looking rather like a new generation low floor Pacer... Neil -- Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK |
Remaining bendy buses
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:00:30 +0100, Peter
wrote: FFS, don't suggest that to Swansea council... You wouldn't rather have what is being described, i.e. a train service? Neil -- Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK |
Remaining bendy buses
In message , at 16:34:21
on Mon, 27 Jun 2011, remarked: We need to get the dates sorted out before making a firm comment on that. Who cares the exact dates. It matters quite a lot because the County filed their plans for a bus either a year after, or just before, the Christs Pieces incident, the planning ramifications of which were in any event apparently known to the council. So it's all about who knew what, and when. They faltered, It's late (5 years late if you believe early estimates of 2006) but the County has doggedly ploughed on since applying for the money. just as Gallaghers have at Northstowe. Latest plan seems to be 150 homes by 2012, 800 by 2016, 9,500 eventually. Must be fairly scattered to start with, or they wouldn't need three different Primary Schools by 2016 (and surely not thirty of them eventually). http://www.cambridgeshirehorizons.co...ojects/project _timeline.aspx?ID=3 -- Roland Perry |
Remaining bendy buses
On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 20:00:26 +0100
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: I'm not so sure. I think there was a small very vocal minority who couldn't stand them and made damn sure everyone knew it , but the vast majority of users were more than happy with them. I used them intermittently for a while and I found them a pleasure to use. Far nicer than having to crawl up the staircase in a double decker and hang on for dear life while the driver floors it and then when I get to the top deck its more like a greenhouse than a method of transport. And thats without the obligatory yoofs hanging around on the back seat. There were yoofs on the bendies as well. And I used the new doubledecker 25 Yes, but because they're not hidden away they don't cause to much grief. both ways today - much more pleasant, a much better chance of getting a seat, a much more realistic official capacity and far less of the crush crowding so hated on the bendies. How can a bus with less seats offer more chance of getting a seat? As for crush crowding I've yet to see 4 people fall down a staircase on a bendy as I have on a double decker. I realise double deckers are seen to be British and worthy and all that nonsense but IMO they are the worst bus design on the planet without a single redeeming feature. There's a good reason that very few countries use them - they're crap. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
In message , at 08:29:14 on Tue, 28 Jun
2011, d remarked: And I used the new doubledecker 25 both ways today - much more pleasant, a much better chance of getting a seat, a much more realistic official capacity and far less of the crush crowding so hated on the bendies. How can a bus with less seats offer more chance of getting a seat? Because you can almost always find one upstairs if you can be bothered to look. -- Roland Perry |
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:50:07 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 08:29:14 on Tue, 28 Jun 2011, d remarked: And I used the new doubledecker 25 both ways today - much more pleasant, a much better chance of getting a seat, a much more realistic official capacity and far less of the crush crowding so hated on the bendies. How can a bus with less seats offer more chance of getting a seat? Because you can almost always find one upstairs if you can be bothered to look. Eh? Are you suggesting most people hang around downstairs even if its packed but there are free seats upstairs? Thats not my experience. I'll tell you who does hang around downstairs however - people with prams, the elderly and others who can't make it up those narrow stairs. And thats assuming there's enough room for anyone with a pram or in a wheelchair to get on in the first place. But hey, double deckers are a british tradition and thats whats most important. Screw practicality or giving a **** about the less able bodied. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:30:33 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 09:09:31 on Tue, 28 Jun 2011, d remarked: How can a bus with less seats offer more chance of getting a seat? Because you can almost always find one upstairs if you can be bothered to look. Eh? Are you suggesting most people hang around downstairs even if its packed but there are free seats upstairs? Yes, all the time. Especially if they aren't travelling very far. Well that can occasionally happen I suppose and it probably prevents more people getting on unless the drivers shouts at them to go upstairs. Yet another reason to get rid of these daft vehicles. On the double deckers around here there's a special place reserved for them. Great, thats one taken care of. Now what happens if theres half a dozen mums with prams? But hey, double deckers are a british tradition and thats whats most important. Screw practicality or giving a **** about the less able bodied. And of course priority seats for the less able bodied. If they can reach them and if there are enough. No problem on a bendy with lots of room and 3 doors to board from. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 10:49:35 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: Well that can occasionally happen I suppose and it probably prevents more people getting on unless the drivers shouts at them to go upstairs. I've never been on a completely full double decker here in Nottingham, but plenty of full single deckers. And the drivers don't shout. With all due respect , nottingham isn't london. Completely full double deckers are common in the rush hour here especially in the centre or places where theres a large school nearby. And yes, single deckers will fill up quicker because theres less room - hence you make them longer and articulated. Great, thats one taken care of. Now what happens if theres half a dozen mums with prams? Why is that easier on a single decker? I'm not talking about standard single deckers, I'm talking about bendy buses. But even on normal ones there isn't the narrow restriction caused by having a staircase. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
In message , at 10:15:09 on Tue, 28 Jun
2011, d remarked: Great, thats one taken care of. Now what happens if theres half a dozen mums with prams? Why is that easier on a single decker? I'm not talking about standard single deckers, I'm talking about bendy buses. But even on normal ones there isn't the narrow restriction caused by having a staircase. But you have the entire space opposite the stairs open, for the wheelchairs, prams etc. -- Roland Perry |
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 11:41:07 +0100
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:15:09 on Tue, 28 Jun 2011, d remarked: Great, thats one taken care of. Now what happens if theres half a dozen mums with prams? Why is that easier on a single decker? I'm not talking about standard single deckers, I'm talking about bendy buses. But even on normal ones there isn't the narrow restriction caused by having a staircase. But you have the entire space opposite the stairs open, for the wheelchairs, prams etc. Depends on the bus. But however they package it the stairs take up a fair bit of floor space. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
wrote in message
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:50:07 +0100 Roland Perry wrote: Eh? Are you suggesting most people hang around downstairs even if its packed but there are free seats upstairs? Thats not my experience. I'll tell you who does hang around downstairs however - people with prams, the elderly and others who can't make it up those narrow stairs. And thats assuming there's enough room for anyone with a pram or in a wheelchair to get on in the first place. But hey, double deckers are a british tradition and thats whats most important. Screw practicality or giving a **** about the less able bodied. 'scuse me for interrupting this conversation, but I had to remark on something I'd never expected to see: Boltar standing up (so to speak) for the lesser-abled (or whatever the current pc term is) travellers. |
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 14:06:59 +0100
"Recliner" wrote: 'scuse me for interrupting this conversation, but I had to remark on something I'd never expected to see: Boltar standing up (so to speak) for the lesser-abled (or whatever the current pc term is) travellers. Spending hundreds of millions to allow wheelchairs on the tube is one thing. Chucking away perfectly good buses that are already more accessable for everyone than the replacements Doris is spending millions on is another thing entirely. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:50:07 +0100, Roland Perry
wrote: Because you can almost always find one upstairs if you can be bothered to look. Not dissimilar, then, to the way to ensure a seat on any 12 car peak departure from Euston... Neil -- Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK |
Remaining bendy buses
In article ,
Neil Williams wrote: On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 23:00:30 +0100, Peter wrote: FFS, don't suggest that to Swansea council... You wouldn't rather have what is being described, i.e. a train service? I had in mind more of a tram, effectively reinstating the Swansea and Mumbles, but otherwise correct :) Nick -- Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010) "The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life" -- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996 |
Remaining bendy buses
On 28/06/2011 10:09, d wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 09:50:07 +0100 Roland wrote: In , at 08:29:14 on Tue, 28 Jun 2011, d remarked: And I used the new doubledecker 25 both ways today - much more pleasant, a much better chance of getting a seat, a much more realistic official capacity and far less of the crush crowding so hated on the bendies. How can a bus with less seats offer more chance of getting a seat? Because you can almost always find one upstairs if you can be bothered to look. Eh? Are you suggesting most people hang around downstairs even if its packed but there are free seats upstairs? Thats not my experience. It's my experience. The only time I find I can't get a seat upstairs seems to be on post-pub late night buses from Trafalgar Square. I'll tell you who does hang around downstairs however - people with prams, the elderly and others who can't make it up those narrow stairs. And thats assuming there's enough room for anyone with a pram or in a wheelchair to get on in the first place. But hey, double deckers are a british tradition and thats whats most important. Screw practicality or giving a **** about the less able bodied. They could be a German or Danish tradition. I saw some in Poland too. As for the worst buses, I didn't fancy the pick-up truck based ones in Thailand. Abu Dhabi had some ropey looking things, although I suspect they might have been for building site traffic rather than public use. -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Remaining bendy buses
In message , at 21:00:58 on
Tue, 28 Jun 2011, Paul Corfield remarked: How can a bus with less seats offer more chance of getting a seat? Because you can almost always find one upstairs if you can be bothered to look. You can? Not always, but more often. How often do you use buses in London in the rush hour? Some of the time you can get a seat - as I managed to this evening on the way home. However we soon ended up with people standing upstairs, on the stairs and I have to assume (as I don't have x ray vision) all along the lower deck. This is not an unusual experience and it can happen in the morning - at 0640 or so! Or try a full bus at 0605 (first one) on a Sunday? This is on a suburban orbital route that serves a few tube / rail stations along its route. Central London radial services are far busier so you will see people squashed inside buses with all seats taken on a regular basis. Nottingham has a decent bus system and is well used but I am afraid it is not in the London league at all. Agreed. I wonder how Nottingham can manage to provide enough capacity (on the Trent Bridge from the south, at least one bus per minute), and London can't, despite the cash pouring in from all those passengers? -- Roland Perry |
Remaining bendy buses
On 28/06/2011 21:11, Roland Perry wrote:
London can't, despite the cash pouring in from all those passengers? Except on bendy buses... :) -- Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK |
Remaining bendy buses
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 18:55:45 +0200
Neil Williams wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 08:29:14 +0000 (UTC), d wrote: reason that very few countries use them - they're crap. The fact that bridges are typically lower in cities in other EU countries may be a bigger reason. No they're not. They have to be high enough for HGVs which means they'll be high enough for a double decker. B2003 |
Remaining bendy buses
|
Quote:
The delays to London's traffic is caused primarily by the traffic not being allowed to make normal progress. Bendy buses were and are still a minor but nevertheless irritating aggravating factor. The main reasons for traffic being held up are, of course, the forest of unnecessary traffic lights, the phasing of the traffic lights, bus lanes, the closure of useful "cut-throughs", the narrowing of roads, the narrowing of T-junctions, the consistent elimination of gyratory systems, the expanding of pavements at bus-stops and the establishing of bus stations at crucial crossroads, e.g Hammersmith, Vauxhall and Clapton. Your idea that "London's traffic is slow because everyone is on tenterhooks waiting to avoid the next hazard" is original but eccentric. If I'm held up at unnecessary traffic lights, I'm anxious to avoid the next set of lights not the next hazard. |
Remaining bendy buses
On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 23:41:29 +0100, Arthur Figgis
wrote: On 26/06/2011 11:01, Paul Corfield wrote: the X26 from Kingston to Heathrow. ?? I hope you don't know something I don't, IYSWIM. Still, it wouldn't surprise me after... Shhh! FWIW, I saw an X26 full and standing at Croydon a couple of hours ago. The general rule seems to be that I don't get a seat on the way to Heathrow but do on the way back. A perfect route for bendy conversion, with a bit of extra luggage rack. I think there are a number of Heathrow - W/SW suburbs that would benefit. Richard. |
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
Paul Corfield wrote:
I am not aware that there has much of an expansion of bus lanes under the current regime. In fact aren't several Tory run councils like Ealing and Barnet scrapping bus lanes so the roads can be full of cars and bus passengers can be delayed? No idea about what the councils are doing, but Ealing has been Labour run since last May. |
Remaining bendy buses
On 2011\07\02 11:48, Paul Corfield wrote:
There is only one gyratory currently being abolished which is Tottenham High Road / Hale and that will take until 2014. Sorry Paul, but Pall Mall / Saint James Street / Piccadilly are reverting to two way operation tomorrow (Sunday) morning at 8am, and Russell Square east side is becoming two way very soon (if not already), which will remove most of the traffic from the other three sides of the square. |
Remaining bendy buses
On 2011\07\02 11:48, Paul Corfield wrote:
I am not aware that there has much of an expansion of bus lanes under the current regime. In fact aren't several Tory run councils like Ealing and Barnet scrapping bus lanes so the roads can be full of cars and bus passengers can be delayed? Barnet got rid of one in East Finchley about 6 years ago, but I'm not aware of any others. I don't know Ealing well enough to comment. |
Remaining bendy buses
On 2011\07\02 16:37, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Sat, 02 Jul 2011 16:15:46 +0100, Basil Jet wrote: On 2011\07\02 11:48, Paul Corfield wrote: There is only one gyratory currently being abolished which is Tottenham High Road / Hale and that will take until 2014. Sorry Paul, but Pall Mall / Saint James Street / Piccadilly are reverting to two way operation tomorrow (Sunday) morning at 8am, and Russell Square east side is becoming two way very soon (if not already), which will remove most of the traffic from the other three sides of the square. Thanks for the update. Sorry to be picky - and I guess we could argue for ever - but are these really gyratories? I also believe they are both local authority schemes as I can't see them listed as TfL schemes. I think the original theme of this long thread related to things TfL is doing at Mayoral instruction but it may have morphed along the way. I would have thought both schemes would actually speed traffic flow up rather than slow it because the main routes are having a reduced number of vehicles directed into them from side roads. Also the distance being travelled is surely less too so what's not to like from a motoring perspective? I wasn't complaining about the removals. I'm not skilled enough to predict the effects of either scheme on motor vehicles, except to say that in the short term some of the two way roads will be very quiet in one direction, which will be very good for drivers in the know, and will probably exceed capacity in the other direction, which will be very bad for drivers who aren't. As Satnavs get gradually replaced or updated this effect will dissipate. |
Remaining bendy buses
|
Remaining bendy buses
On 2011\07\02 18:11, wrote:
In , (Basil Jet) wrote: On 2011\07\02 11:48, Paul Corfield wrote: There is only one gyratory currently being abolished which is Tottenham High Road / Hale and that will take until 2014. Sorry Paul, but Pall Mall / Saint James Street / Piccadilly are reverting to two way operation tomorrow (Sunday) morning at 8am, and Russell Square east side is becoming two way very soon (if not already), which will remove most of the traffic from the other three sides of the square. Huh? Close your mouth, lad, you'll catch flies. They seem to be removing the bus contraflow on the East side of Russell Square so it becomes a normal gyratory. At least that's what it looked like the interminable roadworks were aimed at last time I was there last month. I was there about 12 hours ago. The east side is now two lanes southbound (open) and two lanes northbound (coned off, but painted and very nearly ready). They seem to be doing option 1 from... http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/cms-ser...sset_id=918885 .... but I can't rule out that it might be option 2. |
Quote:
Take the example of traffic lights supposedly being reduced. TfL is currently sabotaging the A12 in Poplar at the junction with Zetland Street by creating an unnecessary new crossroads with - of course, this is TfL - new traffic lights! (For those unfamiliar with London's trunk road network, the A12 in this area is a continuation of the A2, A102 and Blackwall Tunnel. The effect of this new and unnecessary crossroads will be to stop traffic in one of London most important and busiest trunk roads a few hundred yards north of the Blackwall Tunnel. The result will of course be mega-chaos with a large increase in air pollution) I notice you make the common mistake so popular among regular users of public transport that there is an inevitable conflict of interest between motorists and bus passengers. I also notice that you seem to dislike motorists and seem to assume, quite incorrectly, that motorists dislike bus passengers. In fact bus passengers suffer from the ruination of London's road system as much as anyone else and sometimes more. Car drivers can take an alternative route. Buses have to stick to the prescribed route. An example: Whipps Cross Road which used to be a good road with free-flowing traffic. Then TfL intervened. They gave Waltham Forest Council £500,000 to carry out work that probably cost about £30,000. The pretext? To enhance bus services! The result: traffic on Whipps Cross Road is either stationary or at walking speed for much of the day and the service for bus passengers is now far worse. Don't take my word for it. Take a 257 bus from Stratford Station to Whipps Cross Hospital and see how you like it. And then try the return journey. Boris Johnson most certainly is not pro motorist and he has not reversed his predecessor's policies. The only people he's working for is cyclists and it is here that he differs from Ken Livingstone. Livingstone was obsessed with buses, and in effect ran London for the benefit of buses as opposed to running buses for the benefit of London. Johnson is obsessed with bikes and does not seem interested in helping anyone who is not a cyclist. Boris Johnson can be very grateful to the London Labour Party for re-selecting Livingstone as their candidate. If Labour had chosen someone sensible, Boris Johnson would be vulnerable because most motorists in London are very disappointed in him and would like to give him a good kicking, but not at the cost of Livingstone getting back in. |
Remaining bendy buses
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
... On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 23:30:51 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 21:37:57 +0100, "Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote: The 25 has been debendified as of today and doubledeckers are running its length. How many routes still have these monsters on them? 12 - converts November 29 / N29 - converts by year end but no firm date 73 - converts September 207 - converts by year end but no firm date 453 - converts November 436 - converts November All dates refer to 2011 as I believe Boris has decreed they must be gone by the end of the year. This clears the deck in terms of one Mayoral commitment before the Borismaster (another commitment) emerges to much undoubted fanfare early in 2012. I still think it's a monstrous waste of resources to be binning the bendy buses when they still have another 10-15 years life in them. I'm sure I'm in a minority though. I have just found this article about what New York MTA have ordered. http://www.busandcoach.com/newspage....8&categoryid=1 How ironic - they order 328 artics with 3 doors to speed boarding as London comes close to completing a process which removed broadly the same number of vehicles. -- Paul C It looks (from the article) like they tried out an initial order of 90 vehicles and found they worked well. Manhattan (I lived there for 19 months) is about as different a street environment from central London (I worked there for about 20 years) that I can think of. -- DAS |
Remaining bendy buses
In article ,
(Basil Jet) wrote: On 2011\07\02 18:11, wrote: In , (Basil Jet) wrote: On 2011\07\02 11:48, Paul Corfield wrote: There is only one gyratory currently being abolished which is Tottenham High Road / Hale and that will take until 2014. Sorry Paul, but Pall Mall / Saint James Street / Piccadilly are reverting to two way operation tomorrow (Sunday) morning at 8am, and Russell Square east side is becoming two way very soon (if not already), which will remove most of the traffic from the other three sides of the square. Huh? Close your mouth, lad, you'll catch flies. They seem to be removing the bus contraflow on the East side of Russell Square so it becomes a normal gyratory. At least that's what it looked like the interminable roadworks were aimed at last time I was there last month. I was there about 12 hours ago. The east side is now two lanes southbound (open) and two lanes northbound (coned off, but painted and very nearly ready). They seem to be doing option 1 from... http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/cms-ser...sset_id=918885 ... but I can't rule out that it might be option 2. If you say so. I expect I'll get to look this coming week. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 07:15 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk