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.

On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 18:32:43 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:
Major student area with lots of cyclists.

But generally wide enough for cycle lanes. And even so, I don't see
the cyclist-bendybus issue, so long as the cyclists are not acting
dangerously e.g. undertaking.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

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...

FWIW, I saw an X26 full and standing at Croydon a couple of hours ago.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Paul Corfield wrote:

These are all entirely admirable policy objectives
provided you don't get upset about vehicle types either being
introduced or abolished. It's not dissimilar to the sorts of nimby
arguments you get about tram systems particularly during the
construction phase. Everyone is happy once the things are built and
running because they've got a swish new transport system on their
doorstep.

Trams are rather more permanent though whereas buses can be replaced. And a
lot of people were not happy with the bendies once introduced and ongoing -
whether passengers or other road users who had to navigate the obstacles.
When campaigning for Boris & the local Assembly candidate in 2007/8 along a
good chunk of the 25's route we found the policy going down very well on the
doorstep or for that matter at bus stops.

I don't think the Conservatives would have needed to have
a view on bendy buses - they were simply the result of the elected
Mayor's policies and enacted via the tendering regime which is not
subject to Assembly votes or sanction.

I agree it's not necessary but if there's the risk that a future elected
Mayor is going to reverse the current policy then it's not terribly stable
for long term planning. Conversely it's not good for democracy if unpopular
& bad decisions can be locked into place for years after the decision maker
has been thrown out. Consensus seeking is usually the best way to marry the
two demands and avoid expensive turnovers, but it requires people to seek
those consensuses.

I think there are far more important issues
for any Mayoral candidate to be pronouncing on

True but this issue especially resonated because it's an issue people can
actually see and have a very clear idea what difference a vote for the
candidate will mean in a way that even pledges on more money for public
services doesn't.

but I think the issue
put Ken on the back foot. He also (IMO) fought a poor and tired
campaign in 2008 and had to deal with unprecedented vitriol from the
Evening Standard.

Livingstone had never really had hard competition before and I got the
impression that both his camp and a lot of the London Labour Party had come
to regard London as theirs to govern by divine right, with elections a
formality to rubber stamp. (The reaction of many Labour activists when
Livingstone lost said it all.) And with such arrogance often comes over
things, which the Standard picked up on and ran with. I don't think they
took the prospect of defeat seriously until it was too late.

"Neil Williams" wrote:

On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 18:32:43 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:
Major student area with lots of cyclists.

But generally wide enough for cycle lanes. And even so, I don't see the
cyclist-bendybus issue, so long as the cyclists are not acting dangerously
e.g. undertaking.


As a cyclist, I don't have an issue with bendy buses. Bus drivers in London
are generally pretty good and aware w.r.t. cyclists (though some cyclists do
seem somewhat oblivious to the dynamics of buses moving around the road
space, but the same applies to other road vehicles, particularly large
ones).

In message , at 23:48:10 on Sun, 26 Jun
2011, Tim Roll-Pickering remarked:

Trams are rather more permanent though whereas buses can be replaced.

And trams show a greater commitment, which may well be reflected in
people's longer term transport decisions.

I'm thinking of exercises like the futuristic "tram-alike" bendy bus
that was put onto the Luton Airport station shuttle (mainly it seemed to
justify the beginning of charging for what was previously a free
service). Within a year it had been replaced by an ordinary bus.

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.

ToCs do it too: the posters for the Luton Airport Parkway P&R facility
depicted a futuristic train, when all they had was a fleet of decrepit
Thameslink trains. Stansted Express tarted up the look of the trains on
their literature too.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

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.

It's still being sold as superior, though, through leather seats and wifi.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

On 25 June, 21:37, "Tim Roll-Pickering" T.C.Roll-
wrote:
The 25 has been debendified as of today and doubledeckers are running its
length.

How many routes still have these monsters on them?

Routes 12,29,73,207,436 and 453.

On Mon, 27 Jun 2011 02:48:43 -0500
wrote:
In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

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.

It's still being sold as superior, though, through leather seats and wifi.

Lets see how well those leather seats survive chavs being sick on them
on a saturday night and schoolkids stabbing them with pencils.

B2003

On Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:49:49 +0100
"Tim Roll-Pickering" wrote:
There were attacks on the buses before Bojo's campaign. Part of it is down
to London exceptionalism, especially as the bendies coincided with the
phasing out of the Routemaster, but also the buses were never terribly well
sold to portions of the public who have to use them.

Why do you need to "sell" a bus? People will know if they like it as soon
as they use it. And frankly anything is better than a routemaster. Once you
wade past all the olde worlde tea and cakes watching a village cricket
match with a spitfire flying overhead nostaligia crap you realise what a
truly and utterly dreadful bus they were. Cramped, slow, noisy, jerky and hot
without a single redeaming feature other than an open platform you could jump
on and off if it was going slow enough. Useful for traffic jams in central
london, a joke for anywhere else.

B2003