|
These have been introduced on some bus routes in London now. I don't know how many passengers they can carry, but it surely can't be that many more than a normal double decker - but of course they occupy that much more roadspace. Meanwhile, I read somewhere (Evening Standard I think) that average bus occupancy rates are only 25%. So, surely what we need is smaller buses, not larger ones? What exactly is the point of these vehicles?
|
Bus occuapancy is low overall, but during te rush hour many buses will have standing room only. It would be pointless owning different size buses to drive at different times of the day.
--
I read often, only post occasionally
|
I'm fairly sure that due to safety concerns all double decker buses will have to be phased out over the next few years.
|
There aren't any plans to phase out double deckers on safety grounds - it wouldn't be justified anyway.
However, with a double-decker it is far more difficult to achieve a reasonable percentage of accessible seating/wheelchair space - and attempts to achieve that force other passengers upstairs when they would rather not go there - e.g. carrying shopping, only going a short distance, personal safety concerns.
The double-decker is far from dead, but it is becoming a far more specialised beast.
But - artics are unnecessary, usually introduced experimentally to get a bit of publicity, over-complicated, use more road and depot space, and don't fit in existing bus stops. given that our roads generally have clearance for double deckers, I think they will remain the favourite where high capacity is needed (I think some companies now close off the top deck off peak to reduce vandalism/cleaning).
|
|
|
|
These have been introduced on some bus routes in London now. I don't know how many passengers they can carry, but it surely can't be that many more than a normal double decker -
Sitting alongside one in the usual London evening traffic,I read 132 passengers on the little plate above the driver. If that is the figure then it has a much greater capacity than the double deckers.
|
|
The 132 is a standing load - standing isn't allowed upstairs on a double decker and there isn't much standing room downstairs. Seating capacity is probably much lower - so they won't be popular on anything but short high-density routes.
|
There aren't specific safety issues with double deckers. The problem lies with the EC which is working on new regulations for public transport and have simply ignored buses with more than one storey because only ONE country in the EC uses them, us!
As we get close to Guy Fawkes night, I think we should burn any/every politician who took us into the Common Market or who wants to keep us in there.
It started as a market arrangement but anyone who argues that we're not already federalised just can't see their nose in front of their face!
|
|
|
|
These have been introduced on some bus routes in London now. I don't know how many passengers they can carry, but it surely can't be that many more than a normal double decker - but of course they occupy that much more roadspace. Meanwhile, I read somewhere (Evening Standard I think) that average bus occupancy rates are only 25%. So, surely what we need is smaller buses, not larger ones? What exactly is the point of these vehicles?
Hi Arthur
What's the point of bendy buses?
I have just taken few rides on these buses, and they are brilliant. Airy and bright inside, and much easier to move around than a double-decker -- ever tried climbing the stairs on a crowded double-decker while it is moving, with a wet floor on a rainy day, trying to hold your bags?
The ease of moving inside them means that people can board and exit faster -- less time blocking the trafic at bus stops.
I've also never seen a kneeling double-decker bus, but the bendy buses do seem to kneel at the front -- makes a big difference if you got a kid's buggy.
They don't take that much more roadspace. Any moving vehicle needs to keep at least its safe stopping difference clear ahead of it, so its effective roadspace is much more than its length. That extra space depends on stopping ability, not on the size of the vehicle, and would be roughly the same for the bendy bus as for the double-decker. So the overall increase in roadspace is quite small.
Even with bus occupancy at 10%, the people use much less roadspace than if they each had cars.
Anyway, the raods are full of four-seat cars with one or two people on board. Anyone for smaller cars?
Claire
|
They don't take that much more roadspace. Any moving vehicle needs to keep at least its safe stopping difference clear ahead of it, so its effective roadspace is much more than its length. That extra space depends on stopping ability, not on the size of the vehicle, and would be roughly the same for the bendy bus as for the double-decker. So the overall increase in roadspace is quite small.
You don't drive much in Central London, do you? :)
|
You don't drive much in Central London, do you? :)
Not if I can avoid it! I've driven there often enough to know that London drivers can be nearly as keen as Dubliners to minimise the gap between them and the car in front.
But except when the traffic is stopped, the gap is always there, even if it is too small for safety. Buses tend to keep a bigger gap in front of them than other vehicles, because a stand-on-the-brakes stop is much more dangerous for the bus passengers than the seat-belted occupants of a car.
|
My local bus company started using bendy buses a couple of years ago. They are now trying to sell them off. The company claim that road humps causes damage to the coupling between the 'compartments' and that the high cost of repairs make the buses uneconomical to run.
|
Here in Nottingham, they introduced bendy buses, as part of the Neo-Stalinist Transport Plan, the council love them, because they pull up to a bus stop (not into a bus layby as they used to, these were just so un-PC) and leave the back half of the bus blocking the carriageway, they then set off and get to the traffic lights and turn left or right, of course, it's the only vehicle that gets through the lights and it's still pivotting round the bend as the lights are red, and then the side view reveals there at 5 people on board.
This is the same radical council who has told the leaseholders of a newish multi-story car park that it must be demolished as it can be seen (and thus will be found deeply offensive) by users of the new beleagured tram system (which isn't running yet due to a catalogue of safety defects and a £10m deficit)
|
|
|
|
Another point not yet mentioned is the fact bendy busses allow you to achieve a high number of passengers in low vehicle, this allowing the electrification of the bus. It?s just our bewildering obsessivness with fossil fuel transport that kind of negates one of the great advantages of a long and low bus.
Having spent a lot of time in the Czech Republic (family over there) I can confirm that bendy buses of the electrified type are pretty widespread. And the things crawling around most large towns are ancient Skoda relics ? not million pound state-of-the-art complex wonder busses!
These busses need to be low to allow electrification for practical reasons; drivers occasionally have to reconnect the bus's electrical contactors to the overhead cables if they mistakenly drive away from the cables, or are forced to, in order to avoid an accident. This is achieved by a simple winch type mechanism, which appears very quick, easy and safe.
The busses are pretty old and creaky, but have plenty of room for luggage & are bright and airy. And it so great not to be engulfed in a cloud of diesel smoke as a bus pulls out of a stop! And of course they?re quieter at night.
I find it very hard to believe that the majority of our councils exclude electrified busses of the overhead cable type on the grounds of cost. If a relatively poor country like the Czech republic can operate such a service, why can?t we seem to achieve the same level of aaplication?
|
Jazzmag, are these trolley buses?
I was recently told by a tram/trolleybus buff at work how it is large corporation lobbying of the Eu etc... which means that we have no trolleybuses, as there is no trolleybus manufacturer within the EU, but there are tram and light rail manufacturers. I don't remember any more than that as I probably fell asleep!
|
There must be a trolleybus manufacturer somewhere in the EU - they are in service near me at Limoges, France, and I can't believe they are imported from the Far East! Next time I'm in the city I will see if I can spot a maker's name on one.
Back along, I was driving down a country lane in the middle of nowhere about 30 miles from Limoges when I came across a little scrapyard. As well as a couple of Renault Dauphines (remember them?) and some other bits and pieces he had an old Limoges trolleybus. Ever since then I've been wondering why on earth anybody would tow an electric bus 30 miles into the countryside just to scrap it.
If there are any trolleybus buffs reading this I think I have an emailable pic...
|
|
|
|
Trolleybuses don't have to be single-deck - most British trolleybuses had two decks - so there isn't really a link.
The big problem with trolleybuses is they can't overtake one another - but at least they're not fixed to a track (try driving down the main street in Fleetwood behind a tram - when they stop, the traffic stops, full stop).
|
RogerL said: "There aren't specific safety issues with double deckers. The problem lies with the EC which is working on new regulations for public transport and have simply ignored buses with more than one storey because only ONE country in the EC uses them, us!"
Actually there are modern ones in Berlin too. Gradually though they are being reduced just as in the UK. Replacing them: new long single deckers with dual rear turning wheels (like a 1960s Foden with its dual front wheels on either side).
What gets me about bendy buses is the technology - the engine seems to be right at the back driving the wheels in the middle [shock] THE OTHER SIDE of the bend! [/shock]
pat
|
The reason for bendy buses in London is that people can get on and off much faster than any double decker (except a Routemaster) thus speeding the bus and the general traffic flow.
(BTW A "new" Routemaster would be a no-no on safety grounds.)
|
|
Can you elaborate on that, as I've never actually travelled on one - what is it about them that makes it faster for people to get on and off as compared to say, a bus with separate doors for entry and exit?
|
|
There was a remark earlier about not having seen any "kneeling" double decker buses. Yellow Buses in Bournemouth operate a number of Double Deckers with this facility and they are much easier to access and egress.
|
Many of the green park and ride buses in Oxford also have this facility.
|
king arthur,
These bendy buses have three doors, and passengers must buy tickets before they board (in Central London, anyway). This means that the buses spend a lot less time at bus stops and more time on their journey. Of course, we all know that very few people will actually buy a ticket as a LT inspector is like gold dust these days.
With regard to kneeling double deckers, all the Dennis and Scania double deckers where I work have this facility and it is greatly appreciated by the old and parents with pushchairs.
Cheers
Rob
|
|
|
|
|
