Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 05:25:17AM -0700, MIG wrote:

The claimed superior capacity of a bendy over a double decker has
always been hard to believe though.

Now I'm as anti-bendy as they come, but *I* believe that they have a
greater capacity. If a bendy and a normal bus are "crush loaded" (a
term that gives away that passenger comfort is of no consequence)
then the bendy can carry more victims.

The important bit, to me, is the number of seats - ie, the number of
people that can be carried in a civilised manner, with a semblance of
comfort. There, normal buses win every time due to having more seats on
each vehicle *and* operating at a higher frequency so you don't have to
wait so long at the bus stop. But like I said, it's obvious that
passenger comfort doesn't matter.

--
David Cantrell | A machine for turning tea into grumpiness

engineer: n. one who, regardless of how much effort he puts in
to a job, will never satisfy either the suits or the scientists

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 01:58:21PM +0100, Jim Brittin wrote:

First experience ever yesterday of the concept of 'free' bendybuses.
Because the Central Line was non-up had to use an 86 destined for
Romford.
The number of people who waited for the 25 amazed me, the 86 would have
taken them to wherever they were going.

Perhaps because they didn't want the hassle of having to claim back
money that Oyster would otherwise take from them for the privelege of
having made both a bus and a tube journey.

--
David Cantrell | Godless Liberal Elitist

What is the difference between hearing aliens through the
fillings in your teeth and hearing Jesus in your heart?

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

It's not possible for us to know the driver's motives. I have had half
empty double deck buses drive past stops with people waiting at them
and I have seen drivers fail to appreciate that while the lower deck
may be rammed the upper deck has seats. It's no fun when you're the
poor soul trying to get on the bus and you can see there is space.
Your driver might just have been having a bad day - who knows?

He seemed in a reasonably good mood when one passenger was asking which bus
to change to for Bethnal Green (it sounded like once again insufficient
information about alternate bus routes was provided for the Central Line).
But even if it's just the driver having a bad day, it's a awfully common
experience on the 25 and from what I've seen, both from on the bus and from
the pavement when it's stuck at lights, the bus usually looks pretty crowded
on such low numbers. And passengers are definitely moving down the aisles
and using what space they can.

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:13:43 +0100, Tom Barry
wrote:
Usable capacities used by TfL for modelling the debendifications are 85
(double decker), 70 (single decker) and 120 (bendy). The placarded
capacities are similarly excessive for the new 521/507 non-bendies,
which from me counting people onto them leave Waterloo with about 60 on
board, despite having a placarded capacity somewhat higher. It's
assumed the maximum feasible load is somewhat lower, not least because
with a bus along every couple of minutes the choice of the person at the
front of the queue is a minute or two waiting followed by a seat, or
getting on now and standing.

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a stronger case
for eliminating Routemasters. Their official maximum capacity gave all but
5 people a seat - and you could fit well over 5 standing downstairs if the
conductor failed to prevent it.

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

On Tue, 20 Oct 2009 21:23:33 +0100, "Colin McKenzie"
wrote:

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a stronger case
for eliminating Routemasters. Their official maximum capacity gave all but
5 people a seat - and you could fit well over 5 standing downstairs if the
conductor failed to prevent it.

But much of the time they *did* prevent it, and even if they didn't it
was uncomfortable to stand anywhere other than right in the way on the
platform because the ceiling was too low.

While the bendies might be crush-loaded, at least you don't see them
sailing past you due to being "full" as often as the RMs did.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

"Colin McKenzie" gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying:

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a stronger case
for eliminating Routemasters. Their official maximum capacity gave all
but 5 people a seat - and you could fit well over 5 standing downstairs
if the conductor failed to prevent it.

'course, a Bendy doesn't have a conductor who needs to move amongst the
standing passengers...

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
news:op.u1379jnrby8eno@sheepdog...

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a stronger case
for eliminating Routemasters. Their official maximum capacity gave all but
5 people a seat - and you could fit well over 5 standing downstairs if the
conductor failed to prevent it.


My recollection is that the official limit of 5 standing passengers applies
to any bus using a conductor, and that in periods in the past where doored
buses were regularly used with conductors there were signs to this effet

Martin

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

In article ,
(Martin Rich) wrote:

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
news:op.u1379jnrby8eno@sheepdog...

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a
stronger case for eliminating Routemasters. Their official
maximum capacity gave all but 5 people a seat - and you could fit
well over 5 standing downstairs if the conductor failed to
prevent it.

My recollection is that the official limit of 5 standing passengers
applies to any bus using a conductor, and that in periods in the
past where doored buses were regularly used with conductors there
were signs to this effet

It was typical London luddism though. The limit of 5 passengers was set
when buses had 56 seats. Why it wasn't increased when buses went up to 64
and then 72 seats is unfathomable to me at least.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

Colin McKenzie wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:13:43 +0100, Tom Barry
wrote:
Usable capacities used by TfL for modelling the debendifications are
85 (double decker), 70 (single decker) and 120 (bendy). The placarded
capacities are similarly excessive for the new 521/507 non-bendies,
which from me counting people onto them leave Waterloo with about 60
on board, despite having a placarded capacity somewhat higher. It's
assumed the maximum feasible load is somewhat lower, not least because
with a bus along every couple of minutes the choice of the person at
the front of the queue is a minute or two waiting followed by a seat,
or getting on now and standing.

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a stronger case
for eliminating Routemasters. Their official maximum capacity gave all
but 5 people a seat - and you could fit well over 5 standing downstairs
if the conductor failed to prevent it.


Um, those are the figures used in 2008, under Boris. Are you suggesting
he loaded the figures to make a case for eliminating Routemasters?

IIRC I've read some figures (on the DMS, possibly) saying that the
standing capacity was 21 when driver-only and 5 when crewed.

No comments on how the £20m annual cost of bendy replacement looks
absolutely scandalous when Boris is trying to slash the bus subsidy by
£150m annually?

Tom

Actual bendy bus capacity?
 

On Thu, 22 Oct 2009 09:59:31 +0100, Tom Barry
wrote:

Colin McKenzie wrote:
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 19:13:43 +0100, Tom Barry
wrote:
Usable capacities used by TfL for modelling the debendifications are
85 (double decker), 70 (single decker) and 120 (bendy). The placarded
capacities are similarly excessive for the new 521/507 non-bendies,
which from me counting people onto them leave Waterloo with about 60
on board, despite having a placarded capacity somewhat higher. It's
assumed the maximum feasible load is somewhat lower...

This suggests that the figures have been loaded to make a stronger
case for eliminating Routemasters. Their official maximum capacity gave
all but 5 people a seat - and you could fit well over 5 standing
downstairs if the conductor failed to prevent it.

Um, those are the figures used in 2008, under Boris. Are you suggesting
he loaded the figures to make a case for eliminating Routemasters?

More like LT and then TfL from the 70s on.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.