![]() |
RIP Boris Bus
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor-
boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters- a7505391.html -- Roland Perry |
RIP Boris Bus
Roland Perry wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor- boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters- a7505391.html The headline is a bit of an exaggeration, and it's really a non-story on a quiet news day: we already knew no more of them were to be ordered, and Sadiq isn't actually getting rid of the delivered fleet. |
RIP Boris Bus
On 02/01/2017 20:44, Roland Perry wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor- boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters- a7505391.html That was in TfL's business plan published on 8 December. http://content.tfl.gov.uk/board-20161215-item09-tfl-business-plan.pdf And nice of the Independent to go along with TfL's spin. While I'm no fan of the NRMs, there's not even a hint of the other narrative: "Sadiq Khan's fares freeze means TfL can no longer afford to buy other kinds of new buses in place of the Routemasters". -- Robin reply-to address is (intended to be) valid |
RIP Boris Bus
"Recliner" wrote in message
... Roland Perry wrote: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor- boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters- a7505391.html The headline is a bit of an exaggeration, and it's really a non-story on a quiet news day: we already knew no more of them were to be ordered, and Sadiq isn't actually getting rid of the delivered fleet. I am assuming London is stuck with the NRMs until they are scrapped. At least the bendies were a standard design that could be sold to other UK bus operators; we have some of them in Brighton & Hove. -- DAS |
RIP Boris Bus
On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 00:37:35 -0000
"D A Stocks" wrote: "Recliner" wrote in message -septem er.org... Roland Perry wrote: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...-london-mayor- boris-bus-scrap-boris-johnson-legacy-double-decker-routemasters- a7505391.html The headline is a bit of an exaggeration, and it's really a non-story on a quiet news day: we already knew no more of them were to be ordered, and Sadiq isn't actually getting rid of the delivered fleet. I am assuming London is stuck with the NRMs until they are scrapped. At least the bendies were a standard design that could be sold to other UK bus operators; we have some of them in Brighton & Hove. It does seem to be history repeating itself. Boris didn't like the bendies giving some spurious nonsense about them being a danger to cyclists (or more likely because they were Kens idea) and now Kahn has decided the roastmasters are a poor choice. Which to be fair, they are. I suppose if you're mayor of western europes largest city but you really don't have much power, buses seem to be the bit where you can leave your legacy. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
On 03/01/2017 15:31, d wrote:
On Tue, 03 Jan 2017 07:18:22 -0600 wrote: In article , d () wrote: It does seem to be history repeating itself. Boris didn't like the bendies giving some spurious nonsense about them being a danger to cyclists (or more likely because they were Kens idea) and now Kahn has decided the roastmasters are a poor choice. Which to be fair, they are. Speaking as a cyclist I hated the bendies. They were so long they were very hard to navigate round and they kept cutting in on one. So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think of the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in this country is anyones guess. Wasn't the problem more (from my experience) that the road design in London is unsuited to large numbers of such long vehicles - ie the distance between traffic lights and other obstacles to road progress was not a reasonable multiple of bendies long so if (when!) the service bunched up or many routes served a road then they caused more congestion than would reasonably be expected or presented an impediment to progress - whether that be themselves, other motorists or pedestrians. That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" and the consequential crush loading on certain services (25 anyone?), was what made them undesirable than the supposed risk to cyclists (which was unproven) and their flammability (which was fixed and never caused an injury anyway). |
RIP Boris Bus
On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:11:43 +0000
Someone Somewhere wrote: On 03/01/2017 15:31, d wrote: So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think of the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in this country is anyones guess. Wasn't the problem more (from my experience) that the road design in London is unsuited to large numbers of such long vehicles - ie the distance between traffic lights and other obstacles to road progress was not a reasonable multiple of bendies long so if (when!) the service bunched up or many routes served a road then they caused more congestion than would reasonably be expected or presented an impediment to progress - whether that be themselves, other motorists or pedestrians. Possibly. OTOH they carried ~150 passengers compared to about 80 on a DD and they weren't close to being twice as long, so they carried more passengers per metre of road space used. That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" and the consequential crush loading on certain services (25 anyone?), was what made them More random ticket inspections would have sorted that problem. You don't get mass fare evasion on the gateless DLR because they do frequent checks. But of course that means hiring people and TfL don't like doing that. Unless its for management positions of course. undesirable than the supposed risk to cyclists (which was unproven) and Quite so. Just lots of lycra louts whining when they found out that riding up the inside of an articulated vehicle turning left turned out to be a bad idea. Who knew? (Well, everyone with some basic common sense which excludes a lot of cyclists it seems). their flammability (which was fixed and never caused an injury anyway). And a lot of them ended up happily working in the heat in Malta. Ironic. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 16:11:43 +0000 Someone Somewhere wrote: On 03/01/2017 15:31, d wrote: So treat them like an HGV. Problem solved. They have them all over europe without thousands of dead cyclists littering the roads. As someone who has taken a pushchair on a double decker on number of occasions its a fecking nightmare - half the bus is out of bounds. God knows what the disabled think of the bloody things. Quite why we're so wedded to having 2 storey vehicles in this country is anyones guess. Wasn't the problem more (from my experience) that the road design in London is unsuited to large numbers of such long vehicles - ie the distance between traffic lights and other obstacles to road progress was not a reasonable multiple of bendies long so if (when!) the service bunched up or many routes served a road then they caused more congestion than would reasonably be expected or presented an impediment to progress - whether that be themselves, other motorists or pedestrians. Possibly. OTOH they carried ~150 passengers compared to about 80 on a DD and they weren't close to being twice as long, so they carried more passengers per metre of road space used. That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" and the consequential crush loading on certain services (25 anyone?), was what made them More random ticket inspections would have sorted that problem. You don't get mass fare evasion on the gateless DLR because they do frequent checks. But of course that means hiring people and TfL don't like doing that. Unless its for management positions of course. undesirable than the supposed risk to cyclists (which was unproven) and Quite so. Just lots of lycra louts whining when they found out that riding up the inside of an articulated vehicle turning left turned out to be a bad idea. Who knew? (Well, everyone with some basic common sense which excludes a lot of cyclists it seems). their flammability (which was fixed and never caused an injury anyway). And a lot of them ended up happily working in the heat in Malta. Ironic. Not happily. They had more fires and were soon taken off the road. They've new been sent to somewhere hotter still: Sudan. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/trans...s-8788929.html http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles...o-sudan.507334 |
All times are GMT. The time now is 11:33 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk