| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Reports in the Evening Standard and The Times say that the two
"heritage" routes on which Routemasters will run will be based on the central sections of routes 9 and 15, as follows: Piccadilly Circus - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Fleet Street -Ludgate Hill - Cannon Street - Eastcheap - Tower Hill. Royal Albert Hall - Knightsbridge - Piccadilly - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Aldwych. The buses are expected to run every 15 minutes between about 09:30 and 18:30, 7 days a week. TfL say that Travelcards will be valid on the two routes, and that standard fares will be charged. Companies were being invited to tender for the routes. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...672228,00.html -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
|
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article , (Richard J.) wrote: The buses are expected to run every 15 minutes between about 09:30 and 18:30, 7 days a week. They have got to be joking! Hardly a turn up and go service, even for tourists. -- Colin Rosenstiel Does this mean the existing 9 and 15 routes will remain, with a higher frequency but that every 2nd or 3rd bus will be a RM in the central area? Or will the heritage services have new route numbers? |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
"umpston" wrote in message
oups.com... Does this mean the existing 9 and 15 routes will remain, with a higher frequency but that every 2nd or 3rd bus will be a RM in the central area? Or will the heritage services have new route numbers? I'll hazard a guess at H9 and H15. Ian |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
"Richard J." wrote in message . uk... Reports in the Evening Standard and The Times say that the two "heritage" routes on which Routemasters will run will be based on the central sections of routes 9 and 15, as follows: Piccadilly Circus - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Fleet Street -Ludgate Hill - Cannon Street - Eastcheap - Tower Hill. Royal Albert Hall - Knightsbridge - Piccadilly - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Aldwych. The buses are expected to run every 15 minutes between about 09:30 and 18:30, 7 days a week. TfL say that Travelcards will be valid on the two routes, and that standard fares will be charged. Companies were being invited to tender for the routes. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...672228,00.html -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. Where the two tram routes left (from the city centre area) are mainly for tourists who want to ride the SF icon. A half an hour or more wait for a tram is almost guaranteed but worth it for a tourist. and forget starting your journey at any other place appart from the terminating stops. Shame really! ANDY |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
"Ian F." typed
"umpston" wrote in message oups.com... Does this mean the existing 9 and 15 routes will remain, with a higher frequency but that every 2nd or 3rd bus will be a RM in the central area? Or will the heritage services have new route numbers? I'll hazard a guess at H9 and H15. Ian Ummm... H9 already exists; it's the H10 doing the loop 'backwards'. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
londoncityslicker wrote:
Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. Where the two tram routes left (from the city centre area) are mainly for tourists who want to ride the SF icon. I imagine you mean the cable cars (there are still plenty of trams). And there are three cable car routes. -- Michael Hoffman |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
"Michael Hoffman" wrote in message ... londoncityslicker wrote: Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. Where the two tram routes left (from the city centre area) are mainly for tourists who want to ride the SF icon. I imagine you mean the cable cars (there are still plenty of trams). And there are three cable car routes. -- Michael Hoffman No, he means the trams. http://www.streetcar.org/ should explain. The main "Light Rail" routes were put in a subway beneath Market St when the BART (Metro) was built. But the surface tracks were retained andnow a fleet of PCC cars and ex Milan Peter Witts ply the F/Market route up Market and along the Embarcadero to Fishermans Wharf. There a plans for an E route as well. The subway routes are J,K,L,M,N and you can see how they (and the F) cars run at http://www.nextbus.com/predictor/stopSelector.jsp and http://www.sfmunicentral.com/ |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
"Michael Hoffman" wrote in message ... londoncityslicker wrote: Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. Where the two tram routes left (from the city centre area) are mainly for tourists who want to ride the SF icon. I imagine you mean the cable cars (there are still plenty of trams). And there are three cable car routes. -- Michael Hoffman Sorry, yes I meant the cable car. (there are trams elsewhere in SF) And yes you are right there are 3 routes in downtown SF. but the two main routes are the ones predominatly used by tourists and the follow the same route for the majority of the journey. In a similar fashion to what they plan to do with the Routemaster. Hence my comparison. A. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message ,
Colin Rosenstiel writes The buses are expected to run every 15 minutes between about 09:30 and 18:30, 7 days a week. They have got to be joking! Hardly a turn up and go service, even for tourists. -- Colin Rosenstiel Think yourself lucky, in parts of West Cumbria a bus an hour would be considered a good service, no wonder we need cars and lower fuel taxes to make up for you fabulous P.T. And we have tourists. -- Clive |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message ,
londoncityslicker writes A half an hour or more wait for a tram is almost guaranteed but worth it for a tourist. and forget starting your journey at any other place appart from the terminating stops. Wife and self stayed a part of a route half way between the north-south and east-west ones, we never encountered any problems apart from it's limited range, but the tram and BART more than made up for that. S.F. should be congratulated for it's integrated transport, and without cable haulage nothing else would go up some of those hills. -- Clive |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
"Richard J." wrote: Reports in the Evening Standard and The Times say that the two "heritage" routes on which Routemasters will run will be based on the central sections of routes 9 and 15, as follows: Piccadilly Circus - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Fleet Street -Ludgate Hill - Cannon Street - Eastcheap - Tower Hill. Royal Albert Hall - Knightsbridge - Piccadilly - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Aldwych. That seems to cover most of the tourist hotspots, except Oxford Street (which we knew had been ruled out), and Parliament Square, which is a sad ommision. Instead of having both routes traversing Strand, couldn't the 9 be diverted at Traf Sq to run down Whitehall (taking in Downing Street for the tourists), Parliament Square, Victoria Embankment and Northumberland Avenue in a loop, perhaps with a brief layover at Northumberland Avenue if required? The buses are expected to run every 15 minutes between about 09:30 and 18:30, 7 days a week. At that sort of frequency, and with those operating hours, there will be little appeal aside from the tourist market. Chris |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Graham Harrison wrote:
"Michael Hoffman" wrote in message ... londoncityslicker wrote: Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. Where the two tram routes left (from the city centre area) are mainly for tourists who want to ride the SF icon. I imagine you mean the cable cars (there are still plenty of trams). And there are three cable car routes. No, he means the trams. I think you'll find that the OP has already admitted he actually meant the cable cars, not the trams. http://www.streetcar.org/ should explain. The main "Light Rail" routes were put in a subway beneath Market St when the BART (Metro) was built. But the surface tracks were retained andnow a fleet of PCC cars and ex Milan Peter Witts ply the F/Market route up Market and along the Embarcadero to Fishermans Wharf. There a plans for an E route as well. The subway routes are J,K,L,M,N and you can see how they (and the F) cars run at http://www.nextbus.com/predictor/stopSelector.jsp and http://www.sfmunicentral.com/ I am well aware of the Muni Metro lines. They do not fit his description of "trams" in San Francisco--two lines used primarily by tourists. -- Michael Hoffman |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:27:03 +0100, "londoncityslicker"
wrote: Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. That's pretty much the intention. RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. This is just clarifying the position.... Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Robert Woolley ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. LYNCH THE HERETIC! Seriously... Are they? They've all been recently mechanically rebuilt to modern standards. The extremely low weight means that they are the most economical of all the buses in services, AIUI. That economy means that they'll be the least polluting of all in service, even before you take the environmental cost of production into account. Now let's look at how appropriate they are or aren't - physically, they fit FAR better than the bloatibuses - they get round junctions and corners, they don't hang into the traffic at stops. The hop-on-and-off-ability means they spend less time at stops. OK, so they're not perfect. Some people are stupid enough to fall off them, and that's not good in this era of litigation taking the place of personal responsibility. Some disabled users find them difficult/impossible to use - but others prefer them. Some complain they're cramped - but others prefer the higher density of seats. The conductor means they're expensive to run - but how much has been spent on the ticket machines at stops? What about the safety benefit of having a real live staff member in the back of the bus? If the RM is a "museum piece", then why can't we have a "new RM"? |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
On 28 Jun 2005 22:27:42 GMT, Adrian wrote:
Robert Woolley ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying : RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. LYNCH THE HERETIC! Seriously... Are they? They've all been recently mechanically rebuilt to modern standards. Although they can't go for ever. The extremely low weight means that they are the most economical of all the buses in services, AIUI. That economy means that they'll be the least polluting of all in service, even before you take the environmental cost of production into account. Now let's look at how appropriate they are or aren't - physically, they fit FAR better than the bloatibuses - they get round junctions and corners, they don't hang into the traffic at stops. The hop-on-and-off-ability means they spend less time at stops. One boarding point compared with 3 on an artic. OK, so they're not perfect. Some people are stupid enough to fall off them, and that's not good in this era of litigation taking the place of personal responsibility. Yep and some regularly end up dieing. Open boarding is inherently unsafe. Some disabled users find them difficult/impossible to use - but others prefer them. Many disabled people can't physically get on an RM. Neither can mums with pushchairs... Some complain they're cramped - but others prefer the higher density of seats. The conductor means they're expensive to run - but how much has been spent on the ticket machines at stops? What about the safety benefit of having a real live staff member in the back of the bus? Conductors tend to get thumped/stabbed. And if a conductor is off sick you can't take a bus out. With only 10% of passengers paying cash in central London they have little to do. If the RM is a "museum piece", then why can't we have a "new RM"? a) Short production cycle. b) A bus designed for open boarding is inherently unsafe./ Manufacturers would get sued into next week. c) The world has moved on from crew operated buses.... Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In article , Richard J.
writes Reports in the Evening Standard and The Times say that the two "heritage" routes on which Routemasters will run will be based on the central sections of routes 9 and 15, as follows: Piccadilly Circus - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Fleet Street -Ludgate Hill - Cannon Street - Eastcheap - Tower Hill. Royal Albert Hall - Knightsbridge - Piccadilly - Trafalgar Square - Strand - Aldwych. The buses are expected to run every 15 minutes between about 09:30 and 18:30, 7 days a week. TfL say that Travelcards will be valid on the two routes, and that standard fares will be charged. Companies were being invited to tender for the routes. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...672228,00.html How about a heritage route from Marble Arch to Streatham Garage and, shall we call it the H159? At night it could be called the NH159? Grin -- Nicholas David Richards - "Oł sont les neiges d'antan?" |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message , Robert Woolley
writes RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. Sorry, but as a Bristol bus driver in the 70s with crash boxes and manual steering, I'd say they were very advanced for their age. -- Clive |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message , Robert Woolley
writes Many disabled people can't physically get on an RM. Neither can mums with pushchairs... Disabled people might have a point, mums with push chairs should fold them before the bus even comes into sight, or are they just lazy selfish bitches who care nothing for the rest of the travelling public? -- Clive |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 01:03:41 +0100, Clive
wrote: In message , Robert Woolley writes Many disabled people can't physically get on an RM. Neither can mums with pushchairs... Disabled people might have a point, mums with push chairs should fold them before the bus even comes into sight, or are they just lazy selfish bitches who care nothing for the rest of the travelling public? No, you'll find that they're a core part of the bus market. Have you ever tried to juggle a folded pushchair, a baby and shopping? Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:58:24 +0100, Clive
wrote: In message , Robert Woolley writes RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. Sorry, but as a Bristol bus driver in the 70s with crash boxes and manual steering, I'd say they were very advanced for their age. Yep. Advanced for the 1950s. A modern vehicle (e.g. most recent London Buses) tends to be a far easier drive and is more advanced. Technology has come a long way in 50 years. Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Robert Woolley wrote to uk.transport.london on Tue, 28 Jun 2005:
RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. This is just clarifying the position.... I can quite understand why, but it's a pity - they give a far better ride quality (in my opinion) than more modern buses do. And it seems like only yesterday that Ken Livingstone was banging on about bringing them back, and now he is getting rid of them. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 May 2005 |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Clive wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 29 Jun 2005:
In message , Robert Woolley writes Many disabled people can't physically get on an RM. Neither can mums with pushchairs... Disabled people might have a point, mums with push chairs should fold them before the bus even comes into sight, or are they just lazy selfish bitches who care nothing for the rest of the travelling public? In my day you had to fold them or you walked..... or used a baby-sling. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 May 2005 |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
|
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
|
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Robert Woolley wrote: On Tue, 28 Jun 2005 16:27:03 +0100, "londoncityslicker" wrote: Sounds like it's going to end up like the San Francisco trams. That's pretty much the intention. RMs are pretty much museum pieces for modern operation. This is just clarifying the position.... Rob. -- rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk Since they are obviously heritage routes I hope they restore the buses to the old 'London Transport' livery, with the gold fleet names, regardless of who is the operator. 50s or 60s period advertising posters would be nice too - some of the old brands are still around and might be willing to buy the space. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Robert Woolley ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : The hop-on-and-off-ability means they spend less time at stops. One boarding point compared with 3 on an artic. Yes, on Bendis. But compared with one on modern double deckers. One that requires the bus to be stationary while a queue of passengers are "processed" by the driver. OK, so they're not perfect. Some people are stupid enough to fall off them, and that's not good in this era of litigation taking the place of personal responsibility. Yep and some regularly end up dieing. Open boarding is inherently unsafe. For the terminally stupid, yes. Life's a bitch. Like I said... "this era of litigation taking the place of personal responsibility." Some disabled users find them difficult/impossible to use - but others prefer them. Many disabled people can't physically get on an RM. Disability != Wheelchair. Neither can mums with pushchairs... Poor dears. How did their mothers cope? The conductor means they're expensive to run - but how much has been spent on the ticket machines at stops? What about the safety benefit of having a real live staff member in the back of the bus? Conductors tend to get thumped/stabbed. And without them, the passengers get thumped/stabbed. And if a conductor is off sick you can't take a bus out. So stop minimum level manning. With only 10% of passengers paying cash in central London they have little to do. Apart from checking tickets for people with Oysters and travelcards. b) A bus designed for open boarding is inherently unsafe./ Manufacturers would get sued into next week. "this era of litigation taking the place of personal responsibility." c) The world has moved on from crew operated buses.... Why's that, then? Would it be short-term bean-counting over common sense? |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Robert Woolley ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : A modern vehicle (e.g. most recent London Buses) tends to be a far easier drive and is more advanced. Technology has come a long way in 50 years. Yes. And an RM is a big meccano set that can be - and has been - upgraded. They use late 1990s mechanicals currently, and could easily be upgraded to 21st century mechanicals. There's RMs running at Euro 3 emission levels. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Robert Woolley wrote:
c) The world has moved on from crew operated buses.... Others have answered your other points, but this is just untrue. Europe and North America may have few crew-operated buses, but in the rest of the world, where most bus passengers live, crew operation is the norm. And it wouldn't take an enormous change in the relative costs of fuel and labour for RMs to be more economical per passenger mile than heavy modern buses. Colin McKenzie |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:39:04 +0100, Colin McKenzie
wrote: And it wouldn't take an enormous change in the relative costs of fuel and labour for RMs to be more economical per passenger mile than heavy modern buses. Perhaps - but in such circumstances couldn't a modern, lightweight OPO bus be designed? Crew operation isn't really relevant to that question, surely? Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK When replying please use neil at the above domain 'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
"Ian F." typed "umpston" wrote in message groups.com... Does this mean the existing 9 and 15 routes will remain, with a higher frequency but that every 2nd or 3rd bus will be a RM in the central area? Or will the heritage services have new route numbers? I'll hazard a guess at H9 and H15. Ummm... H9 already exists; it's the H10 doing the loop 'backwards'. I'd vote for 9A and 15A - or perhaps 9H and 15H to stop people being disappointed when they encounter the 77A! I believe there was a time when a few route number suffix letters got up to and beyond H. Colin McKenzie |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message . 170,
Adrian writes Yep and some regularly end up dieing. Please explain? -- Clive |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Neil Williams ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying : couldn't a modern, lightweight OPO bus be designed? It would seem not. A modern double decker is about 150% the weight of an RM. A bloatibus is about 250% the weight. Crew operation isn't really relevant to that question, surely? It's one of the excuses being used. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Clive ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying : In message . 170, Adrian writes Yep and some regularly end up dieing. Please explain? I would, but I didn't say it. Robert Woolley ) did. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:49:24 +0100, Colin McKenzie
wrote: I believe there was a time when a few route number suffix letters got up to and beyond H. Not since the Bassom era. Certainly, post-war, the highest was 406F, and that only ran on Derby Day. Plenty of D suffixes, a few "E" and that single "F". -- Bill Hayles http://billnot.com |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message , Bill Hayles
writes Not since the Bassom era. Certainly, post-war, the highest was 406F, and that only ran on Derby Day. Plenty of D suffixes, a few "E" and that single "F". I remember an H1 flat fare bus in Harrow in the early seventies. -- Clive |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Neil Williams wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 29 Jun 2005:
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005 23:39:04 +0100, Colin McKenzie wrote: And it wouldn't take an enormous change in the relative costs of fuel and labour for RMs to be more economical per passenger mile than heavy modern buses. Perhaps - but in such circumstances couldn't a modern, lightweight OPO bus be designed? Crew operation isn't really relevant to that question, surely? In many ways it is, since dwell times at stops are a great deal shorter, and also, a conductor can help someone on to a bus (say, someone with poor sight, or who can walk, but with difficulty) in a way that a driver cannot. -- "Mrs Redboots" http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/ Website updated 23 May 2005 |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
Clive ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying : of bus route suffixes Not since the Bassom era. Certainly, post-war, the highest was 406F, and that only ran on Derby Day. Plenty of D suffixes, a few "E" and that single "F". I remember an H1 flat fare bus in Harrow in the early seventies. Umm, that's a prefix, not a suffix. |
Heritage Routemaster routes announced
In message . 170,
Adrian writes Umm, that's a prefix, not a suffix. My mistake, not reading posts carefully enough. -- Clive |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 09:49 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk