|
Where have all the RMs gone?
In article , Mait001
writes Introducing a massive subsidy scheme that is bound to fail Purely out of interest, in law, how is a "massive" subsidy different from a smaller one? -- Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for London & the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Where have all the RMs gone?
|
Where have all the RMs gone?
On Mon, 27 Oct 2003 20:19:31 +0000 (UTC), "Nes"
wrote: Sorry if this has been taclked before! Just wondering why are all the RM-type crew buses being withdrawn? First the 94, then 15 and now the 11? I know there are others, but those routes are what first comes to mind. Nes. -- To reply directly to me, please remove all the spam-deflecting X's! Either that, or simply reply to the group! I was on one the other night going up York Way. It was the first bus for twenty minutes, and it was so packed that I could just about hang onto the post at the back with most of my encumberance flapping about in the wind. Great fun, but probably in contravention of every safety standard ever invented - I'm sure that if a passing plod had seen us, there'd have been trouble. I imagine that this sort of thing is a big part of the thinking to remove them from service. I wonder if the last three in service will process in state to Willesden Bus Garage past roads thronged with wellwishers and camera crews. It worked for Concorde... R |
Where have all the RMs gone?
|
Where have all the RMs gone?
|
Where have all the RMs gone?
On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:20:40 +0000, Ian Jelf
wrote: unreliable, I've not seen any figures to prove or disprove this one. Well, as they've lasted so long, they can't have been that unreliable. cramped, I have more trouble fitting on newer buses than RMs/RMLs. I find them some of the most comfortable buses I've ever been on. Indeed cold, Not in my experience. nor mine in a supposedly world class capital city. It *is* a world class capital city. except for public transport :-( |
Where have all the RMs gone?
"Nes" wrote in message ...
Sorry if this has been taclked before! Just wondering why are all the RM-type crew buses being withdrawn? First the 94, then 15 and now the 11? I know there are others, but those routes are what first comes to mind. I asked London Buses a similar question last month. Here's their reply: ===== .... we are currently reviewing the benefits of replacing Routemasters with fully accessible buses. Fully accessible buses will enable all members of the community to use them. The intention is therefore to remove the vast majority of Routemasters by 2008. Unfortunately, at the current time we do not know whether some may be retained on "tourist routes." However, we do recognise that these buses are popular with many customers and are also an important part of London's transport heritage. We will bear this in mind before taking any decisions. In respect of specific routes, the vehicles used are constantly monitored and decisions are taken to renew vehicles in light of ongoing assessments on the state of the fleet. I am therefore unable to tell you which routes will lose their routemasters and when. In respect of route 94, there is no immediate plan to change the vehicles serving this route. I am sorry I can not give you a clearer response at this time. Thank you once again for your continued interest. ===== Robin |
Where have all the RMs gone?
In article , K
writes On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 09:20:40 +0000, Ian Jelf wrote: unreliable, I've not seen any figures to prove or disprove this one. Well, as they've lasted so long, they can't have been that unreliable. Well, they have been re-engined. But then a "modular" approach to overhaul was inbuilt to the design, really, wasn't it?! ;-) cramped, I have more trouble fitting on newer buses than RMs/RMLs. I find them some of the most comfortable buses I've ever been on. Indeed cold, Not in my experience. nor mine in a supposedly world class capital city. It *is* a world class capital city. except for public transport :-( Despite the constant digs at it, I still find London's public transport pretty good. This is especially so when compared to other British cities! Even Paris, often cited as being streets ahead of London in public transport provision, has nothing like as comprehensive a bus network. During the evenings and on Sundays it reduces to a very skeletal network. (Though the Metro, thanks to ongoing investment, *is* far better than the London Underground, it serves a smaller area. Now if we could have had Crossrail at the same time that Paris managed to get its RER.......) -- Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for London & the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Where have all the RMs gone?
Purely out of interest, in law, how is a "massive" subsidy different
from a smaller one? -- Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK Ian, it is a matter of proportionality. If the ratepayers of Bromley ae paying disproportionately for a service from which they do not benefit, no doubt they would regard it (as did the Courts) a massive and illegal subsidy. If it were a small amount, but even if it could have been proved that the Bromley ratepayers received no direct benefit (for example, suppose there were NO L.T. services whatsoever in that Borough), I think the G.L.C. might still have won the case since it may have been provable that Bromleians when travelling beyond their borough boundaries derive some benefit. However, the scheme that Ken introduced required hugely disproportionate contributions from some boroughs (maybe the richer ones, but also those South of the Thames without Underground services) and this led to the challenge. Marc. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 12:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk