|
Constant anouncements on London Buses
"MIG" wrote:
Their allover red buses are mostly confined to SE London. They seem to be better at keeping the right colours in the right places now. Till fairly recently, it was common to see garish yellow and blue buses on routes like the 261 (London), but it doesn't seem to happen any more. That was partly a tender thing - the 261 was the very last contract before the "red rule" came in, so it seemed to linger longer. -- Andrew |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Sat, 15 Nov 2008 13:51:23 -0000, wrote:
Yeah, but people still don't go to the far ends of the platforms, particularly on the westbound track. Which means the announcements are superfluous. If people didn't realise yesterday, the same people (as indeed they are) won't realise today or tomorrow, announcements or no. In any case, I'm quite happy that the sheep will continue not to walk to the end of trains, as it gives me more space. Do you mean the Met? Yes, I've heard many a time that they have a holier-than-thou attitude. But still, there are many destinations and several variants on how to run trains, so it is not surprising that there are so many announcements. So announce those - but shut up about the bloody doors! Announcements like "This train is ready to depart, stand clear of the doors, mind the doors, mind the doors" are pointless and irritating, as "beepbeepbeepbeepbeep" conveys that information perfectly well on its own. If really necessary, give platform staff a whistle, a good, traditional-railway, non-annoying way of conveying that information further in advance. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
|
Constant anouncements on London Buses
|
Constant anouncements on London Buses
|
Constant anouncements on London Buses
In message , at 11:56:23 on Sun,
16 Nov 2008, Edward Cowling London UK remarked: Plus of course so many councils seem to have put speed bumps on bus routes. Now that really does help my back !! Tell me about it! At the stop I get off most often, the council has put one of those "pedestrian platforms" across the road just before the stop. If I'm downstairs at the back of the bus and I'm standing (well, slouching even though I'm quite short) it always seems to make me hit my head on the ceiling. -- Roland Perry |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote in message
... I have a bad back and I prefer Tube & Train every time. A Bus is only ever as good as it's driver, and sadly many seem poorly trained these days and seem to get their ideas on driving from Top Gear :-) I have noticed on several occasions that drivers seem to slam the brakes way too hard, particularly on double deckers as people are coming down the stairs. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 15:38:09 -0000, Andrew Heenan wrote:
I was at Euston bus station when a bus came round (people inside and outside looking bemused) making an external announcement that "this bus is under attack". I think this was before ibus though. That was a pre-ibus thing. I've heard it a couple of times. This example is from outside London: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=iDGHuNfQZjA I think the London version sounds less panicky. Why doesn't it just send an automatic radio message to control telling them to call 999, rather than relying on passers-by? |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:38:49 -0000, wrote:
I have noticed on several occasions that drivers seem to slam the brakes way too hard, particularly on double deckers as people are coming down the stairs. The classic London binary throttle - only two settings, those being full acceleration and emergency braking. It is understandable, though, given the atrocious state of bus infrastructure in Central London. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 13:52:31 +0000, asdf
wrote: Why doesn't it just send an automatic radio message to control telling them to call 999, rather than relying on passers-by? Because it might be too late, and also because it may act (like a burglar alarm bell) as a deterrent. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:45:26 GMT, Neil Williams wrote:
Announcements like "This train is ready to depart, stand clear of the doors, mind the doors, mind the doors" are pointless and irritating, Yes, very pointless. Particulary since the spiel is so long that anyone with more than a couple of days' rush hour experience knows that "This train is now ready to depart, stand clear of the doors..." really means "There is plenty of time until the doors close, continue boarding." |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Nov 16, 2:02*pm, asdf wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 10:45:26 GMT, Neil Williams wrote: Announcements like "This train is ready to depart, stand clear of the doors, mind the doors, mind the doors" are pointless and irritating, Yes, very pointless. Particulary since the spiel is so long that anyone with more than a couple of days' rush hour experience knows that "This train is now ready to depart, stand clear of the doors..." really means "There is plenty of time until the doors close, continue boarding." Particularly when it starts happening while people are still queuing to get off and the people on the platform are politely standing back. I've noticed that on the Central Line, the doors generally don't close at this point, while on the Northern Line they do, leaving people on the platform (both based on experience at Bank), so the interpretation may depend on the circumstances. I wonder if there is a different regime for penalising drivers on the Northern from on the Central with its ATO? |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
Edward Cowling London UK wrote:
Plus of course so many councils seem to have put speed bumps on bus routes. Now that really does help my back !! The emergency-vehicles-only slip from Westbourne Terrace Rd to Westbourne Terrace has a speed bump on it... I presume it's only used by ambulances without patients, but still... |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 06:19:01 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote:
Announcements like "This train is ready to depart, stand clear of the doors, mind the doors, mind the doors" are pointless and irritating, Yes, very pointless. Particulary since the spiel is so long that anyone with more than a couple of days' rush hour experience knows that "This train is now ready to depart, stand clear of the doors..." really means "There is plenty of time until the doors close, continue boarding." Particularly when it starts happening while people are still queuing to get off and the people on the platform are politely standing back. I've noticed that on the Central Line, the doors generally don't close at this point, while on the Northern Line they do, leaving people on the platform (both based on experience at Bank), so the interpretation may depend on the circumstances. I've had similar experiences at Waterloo on the eastbound Jubilee in the a.m. peak. The doors close as soon as everyone has finished getting off, meaning you only get a chance to board if few enough people get off from the door you're waiting at. However, people don't tend to stand back to allow people off the train (possibly because they can't due to the density of the crowd around each platform edge door) - the first person off has to practically push and shove their way through the crowd, opening up a narrow route for the rest to squeeze through. The result is that each train departs with a fair share of fresh air on board. Meanwhile, upstairs in the Jubilee ticket hall, the ticket gates are closed and the entrance from the NR concourse is shut, because the platform is overcrowded... |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
wrote ...
I have noticed on several occasions that drivers seem to slam the brakes way too hard, particularly on double deckers as people are coming down the stairs. I doubt the two are connected. There are (of course), some bad drivers, but most of the excessive breaking is due to other road users not seeing a large moving object. Cyclists and pedestrians do their share, but I never fail to be amazed at the sheer bad manners of car drivers coming out of side roads - or changing lanes - knowing that the bus driver has good brakes - and has to use them. I either read a book on a bus - or sit at the front upstairs and pretend to be a tourist; I see idiots in front of the bus on a daily basis. -- Andrew "She plays the tuba. It is the only instrument capable of imitating a distress call." |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Nov 16, 3:41*pm, asdf wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 06:19:01 -0800 (PST), MIG wrote: Announcements like "This train is ready to depart, stand clear of the doors, mind the doors, mind the doors" are pointless and irritating, Yes, very pointless. Particulary since the spiel is so long that anyone with more than a couple of days' rush hour experience knows that "This train is now ready to depart, stand clear of the doors..." really means "There is plenty of time until the doors close, continue boarding." Particularly when it starts happening while people are still queuing to get off and the people on the platform are politely standing back. I've noticed that on the Central Line, the doors generally don't close at this point, while on the Northern Line they do, leaving people on the platform (both based on experience at Bank), so the interpretation may depend on the circumstances. I've had similar experiences at Waterloo on the eastbound Jubilee in the a.m. peak. The doors close as soon as everyone has finished getting off, meaning you only get a chance to board if few enough people get off from the door you're waiting at. However, people don't tend to stand back to allow people off the train (possibly because they can't due to the density of the crowd around each platform edge door) - the first person off has to practically push and shove their way through the crowd, opening up a narrow route for the rest to squeeze through. The result is that each train departs with a fair share of fresh air on board. Meanwhile, upstairs in the Jubilee ticket hall, the ticket gates are closed and the entrance from the NR concourse is shut, because the platform is overcrowded...- But the empty trains probably run on time, so that's good performance and reliability. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 01:58:03PM +0000, Richard wrote:
German announcements are more verbose, yes. But I still say stick with just the stop name, for me extra words don't add anything. They add "hey, listen up, there's some important words coming along in a sec". That why I prefer "the next train to Brighton will leave from platform 94 at 12:34 ..." to "platform 94 for the 12:34 to Brighton ...." - because by the time I've heard the magic word "Brighton" and realised that maybe I should be listening, the important information has been and gone with the latter. -- David Cantrell | Reality Engineer, Ministry of Information You don't need to spam good porn |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 03:42:07PM +0000, James Farrar wrote:
On Fri, 14 Nov 2008 12:19:17 +0000, David Cantrell wrote: The number of residents it would **** off would far outnumber the number of blind people in the entire country, never mind the fraction of them who would use the bus. In this case, I'm inclined to say "**** the blind". Sadly, the DDA gets in the way of that attitude. I'm rather deaf (a disability), and deafness is exacerbated by background noise - it makes it much harder to pick useful noises (like the person sitting next to you trying to have a conversation) out of the background noise. Given all the Yoof who seem to delight in blowing their ears apart with doof-doof "music", I'm sure we could make a case that more poor victimised disabled people would be disadvantaged than advantaged. -- David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist Fashion label: n: a liferaft for personalities which lack intrinsic buoyancy |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 16 Nov, 15:42, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
I either read a book on a bus Can't do that for more than 5 minutes - or sit at the front upstairs and pretend to be a tourist; I see idiots in front of the bus on a daily basis. I see idiot bus drivers every day -- the ones that go to full throttle to edge past a cyclist before slamming the brakes on to the stop, often cutting the cyclist up in the process. Their lack of driving skills, coupled with the dangerous size of their vehicles, by far outweighs the next-worst class of road users (taxis) |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 16 Nov, 13:56, (Neil Williams) wrote: On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 12:38:49 -0000, wrote: I have noticed on several occasions that drivers seem to slam the brakes way too hard, particularly on double deckers as people are coming down the stairs. The classic London binary throttle - only two settings, those being full acceleration and emergency braking. It is understandable, though, given the atrocious state of bus infrastructure in Central London. Would you care to expand on that point Neil? |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:45:53 -0800 (PST), Mizter T
wrote: It is understandable, though, given the atrocious state of bus infrastructure in Central London. Would you care to expand on that point Neil? Bus infrastructure in Central London needs to be improved to the standard of other western European countries. Examples might be:- 1. Allowing the bus the option to overtake and turn at traffic lights (this is one of the best features of Dutch and German bus lanes - basically the bus gets its own signal so it can pass in the bus lane then turn right (left) across traffic). 2. Giving the bus the right to change traffic lights in its favour. 3. Increasing the roadway quality of bus lanes. 4. Moving bus lanes out of the gutter into the middle of the road, where they're not going to be flying half an inch past trees and bumping down potholes, and they aren't going to have other traffic turning left across them. 5. Taking out situations where other traffic can either unwittingly or intentionally end up blocking the bus lane. 6. Removing known-problem zebra crossings and replacing with signalised crossings. In the height of the peak, you'd cut 5 minutes at least off a journey on the 15 if that crossing at St Pauls was to be removed and replaced with a proper crossing. 7. Removing cyclists from bus lanes. This would be easiest done using the "bus lanes up the middle of the road with stops at traffic lights" approach, as you could have a cycle lane at the left, then a general-traffic lane, then a bus lane. Cycles and buses are *very* incompatible; one is very small, one very large, and one wants to move quickly in between stops, whereas the other wants to continue at a slower speed without stopping. 8. Making bus lanes wide enough. There are many places in London where you can't get a bus in the width of the bus lane. 9. Better enforcement - having a wheel in the bus lane should be considered an offence, as that's normally enough to delay the bus. 10. Barring turnings by other vehicles that cause serious delays to buses. The general principle would be that infrastructure should be such that the bus should always be kept moving at or near the speed limit except when it wishes to stop, and when it wishes to stop that it should do so without obstructing other traffic. This is how good it is in the Netherlands and much of Germany, and with all of it in place the bus driver's lot would be improved no end, and that would no doubt improve their standard of driving. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:45:53 -0800 (PST), Mizter T wrote: It is understandable, though, given the atrocious state of bus infrastructure in Central London. Would you care to expand on that point Neil? Bus infrastructure in Central London needs to be improved to the standard of other western European countries. Examples might be:- 1. Allowing the bus the option to overtake and turn at traffic lights (this is one of the best features of Dutch and German bus lanes - basically the bus gets its own signal so it can pass in the bus lane then turn right (left) across traffic). Their left, our right, i take it? This sounds like a rather good idea. 4. Moving bus lanes out of the gutter into the middle of the road, where they're not going to be flying half an inch past trees and bumping down potholes, and they aren't going to have other traffic turning left across them. Where do you put the bus stops? How does the bus get from the middle-of-the-road lane to the stop? 6. Removing known-problem zebra crossings and replacing with signalised crossings. In the height of the peak, you'd cut 5 minutes at least off a journey on the 15 if that crossing at St Pauls was to be removed and replaced with a proper crossing. You have to weigh this against the negative impact on pedestrians, of course. 7. Removing cyclists from bus lanes. This would be easiest done using the "bus lanes up the middle of the road with stops at traffic lights" approach, as you could have a cycle lane at the left, then a general-traffic lane, then a bus lane. Cycles and buses are *very* incompatible; one is very small, one very large, and one wants to move quickly in between stops, whereas the other wants to continue at a slower speed without stopping. This one, predictably, i really disagree with. As a cyclist, i'm held up by buses in bus lanes far more often than i hold up a bus. The difference in speeds is actually sufficiently small - 5-10 mph - that the bus's frequent stopping makes it effectively much slower. 8. Making bus lanes wide enough. There are many places in London where you can't get a bus in the width of the bus lane. Particularly if there's an overly wide, or badly driven, vehicle in an adjacent lane. I see this quite a lot on my commute in various places around Old Street. 9. Better enforcement - having a wheel in the bus lane should be considered an offence, as that's normally enough to delay the bus. Yup. The general principle would be that infrastructure should be such that the bus should always be kept moving at or near the speed limit except when it wishes to stop, and when it wishes to stop that it should do so without obstructing other traffic. This is how good it is in the Netherlands and much of Germany, I'm dubious about this. Is there enough distance between stops to get up to full speed? Are the continental stops further apart than ours? tom -- Also, a 'dark future where there is only war!' ... have you seen the news lately? -- applez |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:18:56 +0000, Tom Anderson
wrote: 1. Allowing the bus the option to overtake and turn at traffic lights (this is one of the best features of Dutch and German bus lanes - basically the bus gets its own signal so it can pass in the bus lane then turn right (left) across traffic). Their left, our right, i take it? This sounds like a rather good idea. Yep. It's incredibly common in both Germany and the Netherlands, and saves no end of time. It's made easier there by the fact that they can use tram signals for the bus (you can't here, so you need a bit more infrastructure) but a small island and second set of lights would do the job in most locations. I've seen bus overtaking lanes installed in a few places, including in Milton Keynes, bizarrely with one of them being installed where there is no actual bus route! (Presumably for future expansion as the road works were being done anyway). However I've not seen an overtake-and-turn-right, despite there being *loads* of places in London where this would be easy to implement and very useful. Where do you put the bus stops? How does the bus get from the middle-of-the-road lane to the stop? You put the stops in the middle of the road as well. By having them at (before) a signalised junction, you get several benefits in one:- - The bus is using the time it might spend waiting at the lights to load and unload passengers. When it's ready, it signals this and the lights can then change in its favour. - The bus doesn't have to leave the stop (can be difficult to get out) then get caught in a queue at the lights. - The passengers can also use the lights to cross to the bus stop. - Plus all the other benefits of bus lanes in the middle of the road. Again I've never seen this stop arrangement in London, even though there are a number of locations (most of Oxford St, for instance) where it would fit very well even without the middle-of-the-road bus lanes. 6. Removing known-problem zebra crossings and replacing with signalised crossings. In the height of the peak, you'd cut 5 minutes at least off a journey on the 15 if that crossing at St Pauls was to be removed and replaced with a proper crossing. You have to weigh this against the negative impact on pedestrians, of course. True, though I think they'd accept it given that most pedestrians in central London are also public transport users, and also given that the norm for pedestrian crossings in busy central London is lights, and not zebras. This one, predictably, i really disagree with. As a cyclist, i'm held up by buses in bus lanes far more often than i hold up a bus. The difference in speeds is actually sufficiently small - 5-10 mph - that the bus's frequent stopping makes it effectively much slower. And makes overtakes by the bus more dangerous for both you and them, and causes delay at stops. I cycle myself (not, admittedly, often in London), though I am a regular bus passenger in Central London, and my observation is that the speed and safety of both cyclists and buses would be increased by going for that kind of layout. Particularly if there's an overly wide, or badly driven, vehicle in an adjacent lane. I see this quite a lot on my commute in various places around Old Street. Common on the 59/68/168 around Holborn as well. Part of this is poor signage, though; from one side of the junction you can't see the extent of the bus lane on the other. The outcome of this is a delay of 1-2 mins for the bus because there's a car in the bus lane, which then has to move and can't. I'm dubious about this. Is there enough distance between stops to get up to full speed? Perhaps not *full* speed, but a constant speed rather than the binary acceleration-braking that London traffic otherwise causes. Are the continental stops further apart than ours? Generally, yes. This would also be worthy of consideration - the most stupid example I've seen in London is Westferry station, where there are two stops for the 135, one either side of the viaduct, no more than about 20 metres apart if that. Ridiculous and wasteful. I missed one, incidentally , in the form of taxis. Taxis should not be allowed to stop in bus lanes, IMO, as they cause both danger and delay by doing so. This is again a benefit of centre-of-the-road bus lanes - the taxis can delay the other traffic instead - but you could also go for the option of providing lay-bys for taxis that move them out of the way of the bus. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 09:18:56PM +0000, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote: The general principle would be that infrastructure should be such that the bus should always be kept moving at or near the speed limit except when it wishes to stop, and when it wishes to stop that it should do so without obstructing other traffic. This is how good it is in the Netherlands and much of Germany, I'm dubious about this. Is there enough distance between stops to get up to full speed? There are in a few places. Not many though. The ones I can think of are all on the roads that meet at Hyde Park Corner. Mind you, there are some places where stops are *ridiculously* close together. Fetter Lane and Chancery Lane Station are maybe 150 yards apart at the most, and there's no reason at all for a bus to stop at both. -- David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic " In My Egotistical Opinion, most people's ... programs should be indented six feet downward and covered with dirt. " --Blair P. Houghton |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 09:41:12PM +0000, Neil Williams wrote:
I missed one, incidentally , in the form of taxis. Taxis should not be allowed to stop in bus lanes, IMO, as they cause both danger and delay by doing so. We've covered this before in this froup, and I disagree. I certainly see no danger there, and the delay is vanishingly small compared to that caused by delivery trucks parking in bus lanes or traffic turning across bus lanes - and the latter won't go away with middle of the road bus lanes, as people still need to turn right. Get rid of the delivery trucks - or banish them to the dead of night - and the taxi "problem" would be so small as to be not worth bothering about. Remember, taxi drivers want to spend as little time as possible stopped. Actually, it's not even delivery trucks that are the biggest problem. It's security vans. AFAIK, while there is a sensible exemption from the "no stopping in bus lanes" rule for people like the post office, there isn't one for Securicor - and they can laugh off the occasional derisory fine. As, obviously, can the operators of the same truck that I've seen illegally parked in the same place every morning for several days in a row, with a good dozen or so tickets on the windscreen every time. This is again a benefit of centre-of-the-road bus lanes - the taxis can delay the other traffic instead - but you could also go for the option of providing lay-bys for taxis that move them out of the way of the bus. I see your point with middle of the road bus lanes, but making taxis only stop in designated laybys (at least on some routes) would **** taxi drivers and passengers off *a lot*, and also eat into the space available for pavements that are already crowded. When I use a taxi, I don't want to have to find the nearest taxi layby and wait there until an available taxi just happens to go past, I want to walk to the nearest place that I know lots of taxis drive past, hail one, and jump in with the taxi stopping for maybe all of 20 seconds. Unless you have literally thousands of those laybys all over central London your plan will do an awful lot of damage to our very good and useful taxi infrastructure. You'd need at least as many of them as there are now bus stops, but spread more evenly. -- David Cantrell | Minister for Arbitrary Justice You know you're getting old when you fancy the teenager's parent and ignore the teenager -- Paul M in uknot |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
"David Cantrell" wrote :
I missed one, incidentally , in the form of taxis. Taxis should not be allowed to stop in bus lanes, IMO, as they cause both danger and delay by doing so. But not a lot. Once the taxi moves, the bus then moves forward twenty yards, in most cases. But I do think that taxis should not be allowed to stop at bus stops, which can prevent access or departure. Not that there's a law in the world that will stop a taxi driver stopping for a fare, even a fare stupid enough to flag down a taxi at a bus stop, and make no move away from it. And it would be totally unenforceable. -- Andrew "She plays the tuba. It is the only instrument capable of imitating a distress call." |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 21 Nov, 14:41, "Andrew Heenan" wrote:
"David Cantrell" wrote : I missed one, incidentally , in the form of taxis. *Taxis should not be allowed to stop in bus lanes, IMO, as they cause both danger and delay by doing so. But not a lot. Once the taxi moves, the bus then moves forward twenty yards, in most cases. But I do think that taxis should not be allowed to stop at bus stops, which can prevent access or departure. Not that there's a law in the world that will stop a taxi driver stopping for a fare, even a fare stupid enough to flag down a taxi at a bus stop, and make no move away from it. And it would be totally unenforceable. -- Whatever I might have thought, experience makes me prefer the taxi to stop in the bus lane. It's less hazardous than people running across the bus lane in front of my bike to reach a taxi. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:25:44 +0000, David Cantrell
wrote: When I use a taxi, I don't want to have to find the nearest taxi layby and wait there until an available taxi just happens to go past, I want to walk to the nearest place that I know lots of taxis drive past, hail one, and jump in with the taxi stopping for maybe all of 20 seconds. Unless you have literally thousands of those laybys all over central London your plan will do an awful lot of damage to our very good and useful taxi infrastructure. This part does, admittedly, show a bit of personal bias in that I more or less never use taxis unless there is no other option, which in central London is basically never. It's worth noting that Singapore does have "taxi stops" of this nature, though. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 22 Nov, 11:56, (Neil Williams)
wrote: It's worth noting that Singapore does have "taxi stops" of this nature, though. I'm sure I've seen somewhere in London like this, possibly near Blackfriars, where taxis are banned from stopping and passengers are directed to a nearby rank. U |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 22 Nov, 13:03, Mr Thant wrote: On 22 Nov, 11:56, (Neil Williams) wrote: It's worth noting that Singapore does have "taxi stops" of this nature, though. I'm sure I've seen somewhere in London like this, possibly near Blackfriars, where taxis are banned from stopping and passengers are directed to a nearby rank. There are three stretches of road in London where taxis cannot pick-up or set-down passengers - these are shown on the road with a thick red line. See this PCO notice... http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ners/44_06.pdf ....and in particular this bit on the second page... quote London taxis can stop to pick up or set down passengers on most stretches of Red Route. The exceptions are three stretches of road with particularly busy bus stops or other problems: • Wilton Road alongside Victoria Station; • Euston Road eastbound in front of Kings Cross Station; • Bishopsgate northbound between the junctions with Liverpool Street and Middlesex Street. There are plans to mark these stretches with a broad red line by the kerb, in place of the normal single or double red lines. /quote There are taxi ranks nearby these locations and they might be signposted with TfL's Bus Stop-esque Taxi rank totem pole sign... http://www.tfl.gov.uk/resources/corp...-rank-sign.jpg |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
h.li... On Thu, 20 Nov 2008, Neil Williams wrote: 1. Allowing the bus the option to overtake and turn at traffic lights (this is one of the best features of Dutch and German bus lanes - basically the bus gets its own signal so it can pass in the bus lane then turn right (left) across traffic). Their left, our right, i take it? This sounds like a rather good idea. I haven't heard of own signals for busses, but I have heard over the years that they are working on a system that would give priority to busses at traffic signals. It seems only to be talk, however, as I have never heard or seen anything like that in actual practice. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
Neil Williams wrote:
I've seen bus overtaking lanes installed in a few places, including in Milton Keynes, bizarrely with one of them being installed where there is no actual bus route! (Presumably for future expansion as the road works were being done anyway). However I've not seen an overtake-and-turn-right, despite there being *loads* of places in London where this would be easy to implement and very useful. There is one in Bloomsbury Street approximately opposite Bedford Avenue. From here on the bus lane is on the right side, ready for the turn into New Oxford Street. I think it used to work okay before the bendies, but bendies usually end up stretching across all three lanes here. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 23 Nov, 12:23, wrote:
I haven't heard of own signals for busses, but I have heard over the years that they are working on a system that would give priority to busses at traffic signals. It seems only to be talk, however, as I have never heard or seen anything like that in actual practice. The system is called "extended green" and keeps the lights from changing in the face of an approaching bus. There's no visible indication a set of lights has it. U |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
John Rowland wrote:
There are numerous places in Greater London where traffic lights give buses (usually taxis too) priority over other traffic. They generally take the form of a traffic light on a short island between the bus lane and the traffic lanes(s), with no stop line in the bus lane, and they occur just before a traffic light controlled junction and are synchronised with it. For most of the time that the main traffic lights are red, only bus lane traffic can get to the main junction, then when the main junction is about to turn green, all traffic is allowed to reach the main lights. So conceptually it's the same as advanced stop lines for cycles. Actually, I've just realised what a clever device these are. They give the bus the equivalent of a bus lane right up to the lights, but with the added ability to potentially turn right, while they don't reduce the capacity of the junction for other traffic one iota in the way a bus lane right up to the lights would. Here's one in Seven Sisters Road on the northbound approach to Fonthill Rd... http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1 Here's one in South Lambeth Road just before you hit the Vauxhall one way system. http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1 Here's one in Harrow.... http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1 Here's one near the Ironbridge in Hanwell/Southall http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1 This looks like another version even closer to the Ironbridge, although I've never noticed this one on the ground, I found it now when I was looking for a map of the other. http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=...cl=1&encType=1 I think there are some in Walworth Rd and Camberwell Road, but they might be too new to be on the photos. This is nowhere near an exhaustive list. |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
"Neil Williams" wrote in message ... On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 06:45:53 -0800 (PST), Mizter T 2. Giving the bus the right to change traffic lights in its favour. TfL did a lot of experimenting with this, and I'm not sure what happened. Where I work did some tests too and while they worked it was never rolled out for some reason. The Microwave sources on the tops of the lights, and now little boxes with aerials are linked back into the local control unit, when a vaild coded signal is recieved it triggers a cycle in favour of the lamp recieving the signal. 6. Removing known-problem zebra crossings and replacing with signalised crossings. In the height of the peak, you'd cut 5 minutes at least off a journey on the 15 if that crossing at St Pauls was to be removed and replaced with a proper crossing. Yes! in the days of having to use the 26 when there was no WL&C line it was the single biggest delay on the route most mornings... 9. Better enforcement - having a wheel in the bus lane should be considered an offence, as that's normally enough to delay the bus. Enforcement is quite good, but only where you have CCTV enforcement - and there is always going to be someone who has been 'pushed' over the line by a truck or something. I'll let others debate enforcement :) |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
I haven't heard of own signals for busses, but I have heard over the years that they are working on a system that would give priority to busses at traffic signals. It seems only to be talk, however, as I have never heard or seen anything like that in actual practice. London buses were for donkeys' years fitted with transponders that the signal loops pick up and could give priority to an approaching bus by extending the green phase or cutting short the red period. Didn't help much when there was another similarly equipped bus approaching on the other arm of the junction though, nor was it capable of distinguishing between a bus running late and one running early, so a bit crude. The system was getting long in the tooth and other cleverer systems were in development by the early 2000's. Peter |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On 23 Nov, 14:33, Peter Heather wrote:
London buses were for donkeys' years fitted with transponders that the signal loops pick up and could give priority to an approaching bus by extending the green phase or cutting short the red period. Didn't help much when there was another similarly equipped bus approaching on the other arm of the junction though, nor was it capable of distinguishing between a bus running late and one running early, so a bit crude. The system was getting long in the tooth and other cleverer systems were in development by the early 2000's. No, it still seems to be the current preffered method, although I'm guessing the technology's changed: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...s-priority.pdf U |
Constant anouncements on London Buses
|
Constant anouncements on London Buses
On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 05:09:43 -0800 (PST), Mr Thant
wrote: The system is called "extended green" and keeps the lights from changing in the face of an approaching bus. There's no visible indication a set of lights has it. Does anyone tell the bus drivers? It'd save them feeling compelled to accelerate towards the green to make sure they get through. How prevalent is it? Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:55 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk