In article t,
Dave Newt firebird.remove.net.this.remove.me.20.den@spamgou rmet.com wrote:
True, though IME this might be because a lot of 19 drivers drive like
maniacs, and the 4 drivers don't.

(I've noticed this, that certain routes do get driven differently - why
is this? Drivers of the 10 also seem(ed) to get a lot of criticism.)

Timetable issues, perhaps. If route 19 has 29 minutes to do a 30
minute journey, and 4 drives have 35 minutes, then you'd expect to
see some speedier driving.

--
You dont have to be illiterate to use the Internet, but it help's.

Dr John Stockton wrote:

JRS: In article , dated
Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:12:29, seen in news:uk.transport.london, Acrosticus
posted :
From: Stuart
Date: 11/08/2004 09:58 GMT Daylight Time

No such thing.

Not only is there no such thing, Acrosticus's claim that Stuart had
posted that was a lie! The real header clearly states:

| Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 09:58:02 +0100

No mention of daylight at all!

Neil Williams wrote:

On Wed, 11 Aug 2004 11:24:07 +0100, Colin McKenzie
wrote:

Just sit down.

I would if there was any legroom. The only place I can sit is either
right at the front or on the side-facing seats, and in the latter case
my knees block the aisle.

How wide are the people using the aisle? There was plenty of spare
aisleroom last time I checked!

BTW the back seat upstairs (next to the stairs) also has a decent amount
of legroom.

AIUI, bendy buses have fewer seats than Routemasters.

I'd rather stand in comfort than sit with my knees up my nose.

Yes, the Routemasters would be a lot better if they had more legroom.

The Routemasters are fun, but regardless of the accessibility issue
they are not suited to the modern day. The bendies are better, as are
those newer deckers with lots of legroom on the upper deck.

But how long will it be before those make up even the majority of
London's double deckers?

Generalizations are almost always wrong. There are some situations
where bendies are better, and other where Routemasters are better.

Also, a good two-doored double-decker loads and unloads far quicker
than the single-entrance Routemaster.

Only where the bus stops are the only places where people get on and
off.

Ian Jelf wrote:

writes
I mourn the demise of the conductor - and that is one of the main
reasons for the demise of the Routemaster. Cost, I mean - cheaper to
pay one person than two.
Sadly yes. But I believe it's a false economy. Having extra people
on hand helps with all sorts of things, mot least security, limiting
damage and making people feel safer (and therefore happier to use public
transport).

Does anyone know what the running cost difference between Routemasters
and their replacements is? Even if the Routemaster's no faster, its
extra cost of a conductor is offset by fuel savings (and with oil prices
going the way they are, I'm sure that must be significant). And some of
these new buses are so poorly ventilated - if you want to do better than
a Routemaster, you really need air conditioning, so unless you're happy
for then to be replaced by junk, you should include the costs of running
that in your calculation...

I've not seen the figures, but if you also take vehicle costs into
consideration, I'd be surprised if there weren't some situations where
Routemasters would be better value.

Aidan Stanger wrote:
Ian Jelf wrote:

writes
I mourn the demise of the conductor - and that is one of the main
reasons for the demise of the Routemaster. Cost, I mean -
cheaper to pay one person than two.
Sadly yes. But I believe it's a false economy. Having extra
people on hand helps with all sorts of things, mot least security,
limiting damage and making people feel safer (and therefore
happier to use public transport).

Does anyone know what the running cost difference between
Routemasters and their replacements is? Even if the Routemaster's
no faster, its extra cost of a conductor is offset by fuel savings
(and with oil prices going the way they are, I'm sure that must be
significant). And some of these new buses are so poorly ventilated
- if you want to do better than a Routemaster, you really need air
conditioning,

Well actually, all you need is some decent ventilation. Why on earth
don't people design buses with air vents at the front? Also, in hot
weather, why can't buses be driven with front doors open? Is there an
interlock that prevents this? I was on a single decker in Brentford on
a very hot day recently, and the driver kept the front door open all the
time; it was wonderful to feel a flow of air for once.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Aidan Stanger writes:
Dr John Stockton wrote:

JRS: In article , dated
Thu, 12 Aug 2004 16:12:29, seen in news:uk.transport.london, Acrosticus
posted :
From: Stuart
Date: 11/08/2004 09:58 GMT Daylight Time

No such thing.

Not only is there no such thing, Acrosticus's claim that Stuart had
posted that was a lie! ...

We don't have to throw around words like "lie"; his software is probably
rendering all Date: lines converted to his local time zone (which it
obviously doesn't know the name of), and he copied what he saw.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto "Don't be evil."
-- corporate policy, Google Inc.

My text in this article is in the public domain.

"Richard J." wrote in message
...

Well actually, all you need is some decent ventilation. Why on earth
don't people design buses with air vents at the front? Also, in hot
weather, why can't buses be driven with front doors open? Is there an
interlock that prevents this? I was on a single decker in Brentford on
a very hot day recently, and the driver kept the front door open all the
time; it was wonderful to feel a flow of air for once.

For a long time all of the Eastern Coachworks bodies had vents at the front
of both upper and lower decks. With a front entrance this is not possible
downstairs. Back in the 1950s, the East Kent had Dennis Lancets with
half-drop windows all along the side, except for the very front window. In
summer we used to open the first two on each side fully, and the rest about
one quarter open, but not the ones by the side facing seats over the wheel
arches. That seemed to provide adequate ventilation and comfort.

Some buses have doors which can't be opened unless the hand brake is on, and
close automatically when the brake is released. Others use the gear lever to
open the doors, and you cannot put the bus into gear unless the door is
closed as a result. On ours it's the kneeling that works with the hand
brake, but not the doors.
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/

Terry Harper wrote:
"Richard J." wrote in message
...

Well actually, all you need is some decent ventilation. Why on
earth don't people design buses with air vents at the front?
Also, in hot weather, why can't buses be driven with front doors
open? Is there an interlock that prevents this? I was on a
single decker in Brentford on
a very hot day recently, and the driver kept the front door open
all the time; it was wonderful to feel a flow of air for once.

For a long time all of the Eastern Coachworks bodies had vents at
the front of both upper and lower decks. With a front entrance this
is not possible downstairs.

Perhaps they should talk to car manufacturers, who have found it
possible to fit front air vents on vehicles with front entrances for the
last 50 years or so.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Aidan Stanger wrote:

Does anyone know what the running cost difference between Routemasters
and their replacements is? Even if the Routemaster's no faster, its
extra cost of a conductor is offset by fuel savings (and with oil prices
going the way they are, I'm sure that must be significant). And some of
these new buses are so poorly ventilated - if you want to do better than
a Routemaster, you really need air conditioning, so unless you're happy
for then to be replaced by junk, you should include the costs of running
that in your calculation...

Yesterday I checked the weights of some buses. RMs are 7t 5cwt, RMLs
7t 15cwt, as any fule kno, but I think a tonne is a few % less than a
ton, so say 8 tonnes for a RML.

High floor rear-engined double-deckers are around 10 tonnes; low-floor
11.5 to over 12. Bendis are 16 and a half - over twice the weight of a
RML.

Fuel consumption in London is roughly proportional to weight - but
bear in mind that 72 passengers weigh about 4 tonnes.

My best guess is that about a third to a half of the cost of the
conductor is covered by fuel savings. The real question is how much of
the rest is covered by reduced vandalism.

The only valid reason for withdrawing RMs now is if they are falling
apart. Actually some may be, but all of them?

Colin McKenzie

--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that
it leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!

"Richard J." wrote in message
...
Terry Harper wrote:

For a long time all of the Eastern Coachworks bodies had vents at
the front of both upper and lower decks. With a front entrance this
is not possible downstairs.

Perhaps they should talk to car manufacturers, who have found it
possible to fit front air vents on vehicles with front entrances for the
last 50 years or so.

Not the sort we are talking about here. Have a look at the front of a
Routemaster or an RT, or even a Lodekka, to see what is meant. Or did you
mean opening windscreens?
--
Terry Harper, Web Co-ordinator, The Omnibus Society
75th Anniversary 2004, see http://www.omnibussoc.org/75th.htm
E-mail:
URL: http://www.terry.harper.btinternet.co.uk/