|
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 |
RIP Boris Bus
On 2017-01-03 16:11:43 +0000, Someone Somewhere said:
That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" I'm not clear why the Bozza bus, which has exactly the same operating model, isn't also seen that way. FWIW, the bendy could have been operated as "on at the front, off at the back" the same as most London deckers. The method of revenue protection has nothing to do with the type of bus. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
RIP Boris Bus
On 2017-01-03 17:01:14 +0000, Recliner said:
Not happily. They had more fires and were soon taken off the road. They've new been sent to somewhere hotter still: Sudan. Luton Airport also seem to have a number of them, with Arriva interiors, and modified to have doors on both sides. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 17:01:14 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote: wrote: 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.timesofmalta.com/articles...ses-to-be-ship ed-to-sudan.507334http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140218/local/bend -buses-to-be-shipped-to-sudan.507334 "Experts concluded that the fires were caused by the conditions the buses were subjected to on Malta’s roads, as well as an element of poor maintenance." I'm guessing the cooling wasn't designed for a hot country and coupled with cheapskate maintenance and presumably no fix being applied before they were shipped from London... Running them in Africa, what could possibly go wrong? Still, the local islamist nutters may see an opportunity there with self immolating buses. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
On 04/01/2017 10:34, d wrote:
On Tue, 3 Jan 2017 17:01:14 -0000 (UTC) Recliner wrote: wrote: 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.timesofmalta.com/articles...ses-to-be-ship ed-to-sudan.507334http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20140218/local/bend -buses-to-be-shipped-to-sudan.507334 "Experts concluded that the fires were caused by the conditions the buses were subjected to on Malta’s roads, as well as an element of poor maintenance." I'm guessing the cooling wasn't designed for a hot country and coupled with cheapskate maintenance and presumably no fix being applied before they were shipped from London... Running them in Africa, what could possibly go wrong? Still, the local islamist nutters may see an opportunity there with self immolating buses. I also note the following concluding line: In offering the buses for sale, Transport Malta had laid down that they cannot be returned to Maltas roads, because of the congestion they caused. So it's not just London where bendy buses are unwelcome due to congestion... |
RIP Boris Bus
On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:10:33 +0000
Someone Somewhere wrote: In offering the buses for sale, Transport Malta had laid down that they cannot be returned to Maltas roads, because of the congestion they caused. So it's not just London where bendy buses are unwelcome due to congestion... What causes more congestion, 2 double deckers or one bendy? I'm guessing you don't visit Oxford street very often. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:40:22 +0000
Neil Williams wrote: On 2017-01-04 12:36:37 +0000, d said: What causes more congestion, 2 double deckers or one bendy? I'm guessing you don't visit Oxford street very often. Oxford Street's transport arrangement is a joke. In a civilised country it'd have a single tram route and no taxis. Can't disagree with that. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 15:06:20 +0000
Someone Somewhere wrote: On 04/01/2017 12:36, d wrote: On Wed, 4 Jan 2017 12:10:33 +0000 Someone Somewhere wrote: In offering the buses for sale, Transport Malta had laid down that they cannot be returned to Maltas roads, because of the congestion they caused. So it's not just London where bendy buses are unwelcome due to congestion... What causes more congestion, 2 double deckers or one bendy? I'm guessing you don't visit Oxford street very often. Why would I? I'm a Londoner and we famously rarely visit the West End... Speak for yourself. I often go there since its about the only place that has any decent book and record shops left! Oxford street was a sea of mostly empty buses doing 5mph as usual. The sort of issue I was thinking of was around Brixton where there are several pairings of lights that are about 1.5 bendies or 2 double deckers apart - a single bendy is fine, but once two try to get through either the arse end of one ends up blocking the lights/junction or leaves a large gap in front which is rapidly filled by overtaking marauding white vans and taxis preventing it making the progress it could do and leading to congestion behind. From memory there were similar issues in the Aldgate area. Yes, HGVs can cause the same issue, but there are a lot more buses around on certain roads than there are HGVs. Well, its horses for course. You don't use double deckers on routes with low bridges and bendies shouldn't have been used in areas they blocked junctions. Anyway, its all academic now, I doubt they'll be back anytime soon sadly. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
On Wed, 04 Jan 2017 20:40:57 +0000
Richard wrote: Another nail in the coffin was the Brexit-style campaign of misinformation from serial liar Boris himself and the Mini Mail -- or Boris just jumps on any bandwagon that it thinks will take him somewhere convenient. With the buses he could stick it to ken and get the lycra lout vote all in one. was the Standard in the oligarch's hands by then? Sadly the standard these days is nothing more than Guardian Lite. An unremitting diet of liberal left bull**** and propaganda. vehicles better. The first routes these buses went from were the ones to which they were most suited, therefore IMO the policy was nothing but ********. Weren't they removed from Uxbridge road PDQ, the route that was absolutely perfect for them? -- Spud |
[quote=Neil Williams;159791]On 2017-01-04 12:36:37 +0000, d said:
What causes more congestion, 2 double deckers or one bendy? I'm guessing you don't visit Oxford street very often. Oxford Street's transport arrangement is a joke. In a civilised country it'd have a single tram route and no taxis. Neil https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/bus...d-bus-changes/ |
RIP Boris Bus
Bendies here in Caen and many other French cities operate “on at the front,
off at the centre and rear” rule. Enforced by onboard CCTV in many locales. Mind you, Twisto here (aka Kaolis) over-eggs the pudding somewhat with the message “Je Monte, Je Valide” alternating with the destination on the front display panel every few seconds. A big irritation in the city centre when you can’t tell whether your bus is next or one following, since they are all showing the same front message. As one friend put it: “Kaolis obviously think we Caennais are stupid. Half the population is too young to know any other kind of bus – and the rest of us have had years to learn how it works. We know we have to pay or valider when we board – what we REALLY want to know is this if it is the bus we want to board.” Of course the real anti-social behaviour on our buses is failing to say “Bonjour” to the conducteur as you compostez, [For the avoidance of doubt, that’s the person sitting at the steering wheel]. On 4 Jan 2017, Neil Williams wrote (in article ): On 2017-01-03 16:11:43 +0000, Someone Somewhere said: That, allied to their reputation as a "free bus" I'm not clear why the Bozza bus, which has exactly the same operating model, isn't also seen that way. FWIW, the bendy could have been operated as "on at the front, off at the back" the same as most London deckers. The method of revenue protection has nothing to do with the type of bus. Neil |
RIP Boris Bus
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 09:07:05 +0100
Water musician wrote: Bendies here in Caen and many other French cities operate “on at the front, off at the centre and rear” rule. Enforced by onboard CCTV in many locales. Mind you, Twisto here (aka Kaolis) over-eggs the pudding somewhat with the message “Je Monte, Je Valide” alternating with the destination on the front display panel every few seconds. A big irritation in the city centre when you can’t tell whether your bus is next or one following, since they are all showing the same front message. As one friend put it: “Kaolis obviously think we Caennais are stupid. Half the population is too young to know any other kind of bus – and the rest of us have had years to learn how it works. We know we have to pay or valider when we board – what we REALLY want to know is this if it is the bus we want to board.” The london bus dot matrix boards at bus stops are useful , but they do have an annoying habit of slowly going through a list of up to 9 buses r a t h e r s l o o o o w ly , which is annoying when its telling you the 7th, 8th and 9th buses (which are usually 15-20 mins away) when all want to know if your bus is coming in the next 2 mins or whether you have enough time to do a bit more shopping. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 00:49:07 +0100
Robin9 wrote: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/bus...d-bus-changes/ "London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs - well good luck with that given the lack of housing. Hopefully some politician will find a pair of balls after Brexit and actually do something about mass immigration tho given a large proportion of immigration is from non EU countries which we do have control over yet do nothing about I won't hold my breath. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
In message , at 10:54:30 on Fri, 6 Jan
2017, d remarked: "London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs Isn't "commuting distance" usually reckoned to be an hour from a London Rail Terminus? Although 10m is far too small for that. -- Roland Perry |
RIP Boris Bus
On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:03:59 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:54:30 on Fri, 6 Jan 2017, d remarked: "London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs Isn't "commuting distance" usually reckoned to be an hour from a London Rail Terminus? Although 10m is far too small for that. Don't know, but isn't there something like 20-25 million in london and the home counties? -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote: In message , at 11:13:58 on Fri, 6 Jan 2017, d remarked: "London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs Isn't "commuting distance" usually reckoned to be an hour from a London Rail Terminus? Although 10m is far too small for that. Don't know, The 1hr is true. Ely within 1 hour? but isn't there something like 20-25 million in london and the home counties? 8.5m in Great London today, so the extra 1.5m will be easily mopped up by the boroughs which encircle it. I assume the discussion is about the Greater London population. Hopefully Spud won't get his wish if he wants enough people to be working to pay for his pension. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
RIP Boris Bus
wrote in message ... On Fri, 6 Jan 2017 11:03:59 +0000 Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 10:54:30 on Fri, 6 Jan 2017, d remarked: "London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs Isn't "commuting distance" usually reckoned to be an hour from a London Rail Terminus? Although 10m is far too small for that. Don't know, but isn't there something like 20-25 million in london and the home counties? 2011 census London 8 Million SE region 8.5 million Eastern Region 6 million tim |
RIP Boris Bus
"London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs Isn't "commuting distance" usually reckoned to be an hour from a London Rail Terminus? Although 10m is far too small for that. Don't know, The 1hr is true. Ely within 1 hour? Of Cambridge, yes. And while there are London commuters from Ely and further north, it's not a huge number. Ely generates 450k trips a year to London[1] (a tenth of that from Cambridge). That's all passengers, and my finger in the wind for Ely is that less than half will be commuters. but isn't there something like 20-25 million in london and the home counties? 8.5m in Great London today, so the extra 1.5m will be easily mopped up by the boroughs which encircle it. I assume the discussion is about the Greater London population. Hopefully Spud won't get his wish if he wants enough people to be working to pay for his pension. [1] That's Kings Cross plus Liverpool St plus Thameslink core destinations. -- Roland Perry |
RIP Boris Bus
On 2017-01-06 12:23:13 +0000, Roland Perry said:
The 1hr is true. It's typical on conventional mainlines, but on very fast ones much less so because price also comes into it. Rugby is not, for example, primarily a commuter town (there are commuters, but that proves nothing - there are commuters from far further away too). I wouldn't expect HS2 to turn the Birmingham suburbs into London commuterland, either. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the @ to reply. |
RIP Boris Bus
In message , at 10:59:17 on Mon, 9 Jan
2017, Neil Williams remarked: The 1hr is true. It's typical on conventional mainlines, but on very fast ones much less so because price also comes into it. Rugby is not, for example, primarily a commuter town (there are commuters, but that proves nothing - there are commuters from far further away too). Peterborough and Market Harborough[1] definitely, Grantham increasingly so. [1] Which are both further north than Rugby -- Roland Perry |
RIP Boris Bus
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 13:45:07 -0600
wrote: In article , (Roland Perry) wrote: In message , at 11:13:58 on Fri, 6 Jan 2017, d remarked: "London is growing, with an estimated 10 million people expected to live here by the early 2030s" 10 million already live in commuting distance. Presumably they mean within the london boroughs Isn't "commuting distance" usually reckoned to be an hour from a London Rail Terminus? Although 10m is far too small for that. Don't know, The 1hr is true. Ely within 1 hour? but isn't there something like 20-25 million in london and the home counties? 8.5m in Great London today, so the extra 1.5m will be easily mopped up by the boroughs which encircle it. I assume the discussion is about the Greater London population. Hopefully Spud won't get his wish if he wants enough people to be working to pay for his pension. I pay for a private pension, I don't require the next generation to do it for me thanks. Also that whole paying pensions argument falls apart since it appears to require a constantly increasing working age population which is completely unsustainable, so better to bite the bullet now and halt population growth rather than wreck the country then STILL have to deal with the problem of pensions at a later date anyway. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
In article , d () wrote:
On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 13:45:07 -0600 wrote: I assume the discussion is about the Greater London population. Hopefully Spud won't get his wish if he wants enough people to be working to pay for his pension. I pay for a private pension, I don't require the next generation to do it for me thanks. Also that whole paying pensions argument falls apart since it appears to require a constantly increasing working age population which is completely unsustainable, so better to bite the bullet now and halt population growth rather than wreck the country then STILL have to deal with the problem of pensions at a later date anyway. You've spotted a weakness which applies a lot more widely than to pensions but it's still the only way your state pension will be paid. -- Colin Rosenstiel |
RIP Boris Bus
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 05:44:44 -0600
wrote: In article , d () wrote: On Fri, 06 Jan 2017 13:45:07 -0600 wrote: I assume the discussion is about the Greater London population. Hopefully Spud won't get his wish if he wants enough people to be working to pay for his pension. I pay for a private pension, I don't require the next generation to do it for me thanks. Also that whole paying pensions argument falls apart since it appears to require a constantly increasing working age population which is completely unsustainable, so better to bite the bullet now and halt population growth rather than wreck the country then STILL have to deal with the problem of pensions at a later date anyway. You've spotted a weakness which applies a lot more widely than to pensions but it's still the only way your state pension will be paid. The age of retirement is slowly being raised so that should solve the problem at least partially. More workers in the job market without requiring immigrants and less demand for pensions. Win win. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
|
RIP Boris Bus
On Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:12:46 +0000
Roland Perry wrote: In message , at 11:51:35 on Tue, 10 Jan 2017, d remarked: I assume the discussion is about the Greater London population. Hopefully Spud won't get his wish if he wants enough people to be working to pay for his pension. I pay for a private pension, I don't require the next generation to do it for me thanks. Also that whole paying pensions argument falls apart since it appears to require a constantly increasing working age population which is completely unsustainable, so better to bite the bullet now and halt population growth rather than wreck the country then STILL have to deal with the problem of pensions at a later date anyway. You've spotted a weakness which applies a lot more widely than to pensions but it's still the only way your state pension will be paid. The age of retirement is slowly being raised so that should solve the problem at least partially. More workers in the job market without requiring immigrants How many redundant Southern Guards, aged 70+ want to work in all weathers picking crops in the Fens? If that was the only place immigrants were taking jobs then that would be a valid question, but as you know - it isn't. I'm currently sitting in an office 60% immigrants, none of them doing a job that couldn't have been done by a native. And in fact 1 position was illegally filled since it wasn't advertised in the UK before a foreign director found someone in his own country to fill it for a pittance salary. -- Spud |
RIP Boris Bus
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 06:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk