Mark Brader:
What I haven't heard about is the status of the
*other* double-deckers, the ones operated only by a driver.

Martin Rich:
As others have already said, one-person double-deckers remain the
commonest type in London.

Thanks to Martin and others who have explained this.

One effect of the insistence on low-floor buses, whcih have really
only been the norm for double-deckers for the last ten years or so...

The "low-floor" buses we're now getting in Toronto are only low-floor
for about 2/3 of the bus, including both doors. To ride in the back
of the bus you have to climb two steps. Compare the window heights
in different parts of the bus in either of these photos (taken a few
minutes' walk from my house, incidentally):

http://transit.toronto.on.ca/images/TTC7860.JPG
http://transit.toronto.on.ca/images/TTC7865%20CS.JPG

This means that the rear wheels don't cut into the seating capacity
and there's more space for underfloor equipment.

But it also means that if the bus is full then it's quite likely that
people will be on the steps or near the top of the steps when the
driver brakes for a bus stop, and if they fall they'll fall forward
down the steps. I think that's dangerous and I'm dismayed that it's
being widely used here, but I remember encountering a similar design
in London.

Are most of the present London buses entirely low-floor, or split in
a similar way, or of some other pattern?
--
Mark Brader | "[Jupiter's] satellites are invisible to the naked eye
Toronto | and therefore can have no influence on the Earth
| and therefore would be useless
| and therefore do not exist." -- Francesco Sizi

My text in this article is in the public domain.