Metropol

martindtanderson wrote:About getting rid of the "bendy buses"... All that was needed, was conductors in between the 2 sets of back doors. Double Decked buses are dangerous, and are not as wheelchair or pushchair accessible! Not to mention the waste of money replacing them with a nostalgia induced vanity project.

OK, so how much research have you done into the project? By that long, rambling, spittle-flecked post, I'd say fuck all. I'm no fan of Boris, but I must point out that the New Bus For London is:

1) No more dangerous than any other bus. If you are referring to their height meaning they are more likely to tip over, then you've been watching too much Top Gear. If you are referring to their height meaning they could be driven under low bridges, then rest assured that is extremely unusual and statistically irrelevant, with all sorts of safeguards put in against it happening.

2) Accessible. The NBFL has been designed to be both wheelchair and pushchair accessible, in line with disability legislation imposed by both our national government and the European Parliament.

3) a Nostalgia Induced Vanity Project? Well, while the shape may resemble the RT and the Routemaster, it is different in the same way a Kinder Egg and a Creme Egg are different. It has a modern hybrid engine, additional doors, the rear platform can be closed at quieter times, Oyster card readers, the option of conductorless operation and more importantly, was designed and built by a British company. When trains are being tendered out to foreign companies, this is a vital Northern Irish engineering contract.

I've ridden on a bendy bus. They're counter intuitive, induce motion sickness, have been proven to be dangerous and while introducing capacity, by introducing an extra conductor to each service as you suggest would totally negate the whole reasoning for their introduction.

However as I said, other than being marginally more economical and looking nostalgic, they (NBfL) do a very similar job to the current bunch of Enviro400H hybrids and Wright/Volvo B5L hybrid vehicles which are cheaper and are of perfectly good quality. They are also built within the UK, in fact the only buses in London that aren't are the Scania Omnicitys and Mercedes Citaros.

Yes, they are nicer to look at and ease boarding/departing at peak times, but the development money and production cost in comparison with a standard hybrid bus is huge, and it's money that could have been spent better elsewhere in my opinion.

Another point is that many London buses are cast off to other parts of a company (Stagecoach, First and Arriva) with the dual doors removed, and normal LED displays fitted. These NBfL things aren't suitable for that job, so they'll have to spend longer in London and have a shorter life span overall.

woah wrote:However as I said, other than being marginally more economical and looking nostalgic, they (NBfL) do a very similar job to the current bunch of Enviro400H hybrids and Wright/Volvo B5L hybrid vehicles which are cheaper and are of perfectly good quality. They are also built within the UK, in fact the only buses in London that aren't are the Scania Omnicitys and Mercedes Citaros.

Yes, they are nicer to look at and ease boarding/departing at peak times, but the development money and production cost in comparison with a standard hybrid bus is huge, and it's money that could have been spent better elsewhere in my opinion.

Another point is that many London buses are cast off to other parts of a company (Stagecoach, First and Arriva) with the dual doors removed, and normal LED displays fitted. These NBfL things aren't suitable for that job, so they'll have to spend longer in London and have a shorter life span overall.

I don't know about other companies but when Stagecoach re-acquired their London Operations they stated that vehicles for London would continue to be leased rather than purchased. As a result they aren't available for Stagecoach to cascade.

That's very true, I'd forgotten about that bit - however the point still stands for all other companies cascading/selling on their vehicles.

woah wrote:Another point is that many London buses are cast off to other parts of a company (Stagecoach, First and Arriva) with the dual doors removed, and normal LED displays fitted. .

Do TFL have a rule on no matrix displays on buses????

It is among their many daft rules, yep!

The only exception was the 'Spirit of London' bus that was given to replace the bus destroyed in the 7/7 bombings in 2005. Don't think it was intended to go to London so it had LED blinds till about 2007 when it got the standard London green rollers.

Given how often I've seen matrix displays mess up (dead pixels, unintelligible words from a distance), I'm not a big fan of them.

I prefer rollers, but I like LEDs as long as they're programmed properly - without all the endless scrolling and terrible fonts. LEDs I've seen usually behave but companies seem to neglect the side/rear ones which tend to die, where are the front ones are usually fine.

Alexia wrote:

martindtanderson wrote:About getting rid of the "bendy buses"... All that was needed, was conductors in between the 2 sets of back doors. Double Decked buses are dangerous, and are not as wheelchair or pushchair accessible! Not to mention the waste of money replacing them with a nostalgia induced vanity project.

OK, so how much research have you done into the project? By that long, rambling, spittle-flecked post, I'd say fuck all. I'm no fan of Boris, but I must point out that the New Bus For London is:

1) No more dangerous than any other bus. If you are referring to their height meaning they are more likely to tip over, then you've been watching too much Top Gear. If you are referring to their height meaning they could be driven under low bridges, then rest assured that is extremely unusual and statistically irrelevant, with all sorts of safeguards put in against it happening.

2) Accessible. The NBFL has been designed to be both wheelchair and pushchair accessible, in line with disability legislation imposed by both our national government and the European Parliament.

3) a Nostalgia Induced Vanity Project? Well, while the shape may resemble the RT and the Routemaster, it is different in the same way a Kinder Egg and a Creme Egg are different. It has a modern hybrid engine, additional doors, the rear platform can be closed at quieter times, Oyster card readers, the option of conductorless operation and more importantly, was designed and built by a British company. When trains are being tendered out to foreign companies, this is a vital Northern Irish engineering contract.

I've ridden on a bendy bus. They're counter intuitive, induce motion sickness, have been proven to be dangerous and while introducing capacity, by introducing an extra conductor to each service as you suggest would totally negate the whole reasoning for their introduction.

Firstly, I don't think you should belittle his opinion by calling it "spittle-flecked" unless you've swabbed his monitor. Secondly, I think I missed the points where you address his argument:
1. Accessibility: You're just saying "they're designed to be accessible" but that just shows they meet a minimum standard, and it's a valid assumption that if half of your seats are upstairs then half of your seats aren't accessible.
2. Motion-sickness: I can't think how bendy buses would do more to induce motion sickness than sitting atop a bus with more swaying. Care to explain? I assume that's what you're calling counter-intuitive, unless the destination board shows where it came from rather than where it's going, and they travel only in reverse.
3. The engine/oyster card bit would presumably be standard on *any* new bus regardless of its shape. Meanwhile, the design *is* nostalgic and it's being described as "brought back" almost everywhere.
4. Safety: What about stairwell accidents?

Alexia wrote:When trains are being tendered out to foreign companies, this is a vital Northern Irish engineering contract.

Just out of interest, which British train manufacturers do you think should be getting the contracts for new trains?

woah wrote:However as I said, other than being marginally more economical and looking nostalgic, they (NBfL) do a very similar job to the current bunch of Enviro400H hybrids and Wright/Volvo B5L hybrid vehicles which are cheaper and are of perfectly good quality. They are also built within the UK, in fact the only buses in London that aren't are the Scania Omnicitys and Mercedes Citaros.

Yes, they are nicer to look at and ease boarding/departing at peak times, but the development money and production cost in comparison with a standard hybrid bus is huge, and it's money that could have been spent better elsewhere in my opinion.

Another point is that many London buses are cast off to other parts of a company (Stagecoach, First and Arriva) with the dual doors removed, and normal LED displays fitted. These NBfL things aren't suitable for that job, so they'll have to spend longer in London and have a shorter life span overall.

I expect some clever lot will come up a way to remove TfL's bespoke features on a rolling-basis and make it a bus which cost-sensitive provincial operators can purchase and use to the end of their lives.