|
|
Post by railtechnician on Jan 2, 2008 7:30:01 GMT
I used to live in Edmonton and work in Acton so I both saw and used bendies on the 73,149 and 207 routes. Quite honestly I just don't think bendies are suited to most of London and without the congestion charge, bus lanes and other anti-motorist devices in place the bendies would be the cause of even greater congestion. I have to say that being able to get from A to B in the peaks certainly improved with the introduction of bendies but only because they have a greater capacity but I'm not certain that they are cost effective at all and probably do carry record numbers of fare dodgers.
As for the 207 the quicker it is replaced with trams to Shepherd's Bush the better, the corridor from Hayes is an absolute nightmare at times especially with the North Circular intersection.
Why bendies, well quite simply because politicians are now running London's transport with not even a suggestion that it's actually transport professionals making decisions. Ken Livingstone has turned London into his personal province and London's transport is his very own bus and train set subsidised at vast expense by council tax payers.
What amazes me is just how transport policy has changed so much in a couple of decades. Notwithstanding population increases and immigration to London transport in the capital must've been a dismal failure for so many residents to be car users. It is only 30 years ago that many routes were running Transit minibuses and making transport more available to residents off the main transport corridors and even though they have been converted to full size buses the avalanche of car users has continued apace. The answer of course is either to ban private cars in central London altogether in favour of public transport or to start rethinking the policy of listed buildings and build a modern capital on the ashes of the past including decent thoroughfares fit for people carriage.
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 2, 2008 9:42:36 GMT
It's a well & good to pick up on the fact that a bendie was involved - but did that make any difference to what happened? Whose fault was the accident? Given the age of the car driver, I know what I think may have occurred - but I wasn't there and neither were any of us......... Anyway, it's a sad and tragic end of life on a day that the families/those involved will all remember for the rest of their lives - for that they have my deepest sympathy. Good point. and of course any loss of life is tragic. However,, it doesn't alter the fact that these buses are totally unsuitable for most parts of London (as mentioned by Railtechnician), and should be consigned to the scrapheap with the utmost expedience. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2008 17:21:18 GMT
they shouldn't of entered sevice in the first place they are a public menace I don't ride my bike in central london ever after the back bit of the bus swayed towards a friend and nearly knocked him off
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jan 2, 2008 17:53:54 GMT
That's probably more bad driving than anything else.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,348
|
Post by Colin on Jan 4, 2008 3:41:34 GMT
Don't get me wrong folks - I hate bendie buses as much as you lot and can only nod in agreement that if there's a bus that isn't suitable for our capital, this is it.
|
|
jazza
Guess my Favourite Number?
Posts: 196 
|
Post by jazza on Jan 5, 2008 22:04:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Jan 5, 2008 22:44:33 GMT
That's a Volvo, not a Merc Ciatro though.
In safety terms I think there are a lot more serious issues than bendies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 5, 2008 23:14:03 GMT
the initial 'chariots of fire' problem was to do with a long pipe in the engine that carried hot liquid that shouldn't have been that long as it is liable to cause fires.
Colin Curtis heavily criticised Mercedes for that in the book 'The Bus we Loved.' A book not about bendies thankfully! it was about RMs!
The Citaro isn't a bad bus nor are most buses in London - but they aren't up to the standards that London needs or desires after being used to RMs for so many years.
After the war, LT had to hire out some provincial Bristols with ECW bodywork because of the acute vehicle shortage. The management asked if the buses of standard, provincial design were suitable for London. The engineers at Chiswick (not a bloody focus group!) sent a report saying that the hired buses were reliable enough for London. However, they didn't have the comfort, speed or convenient features that the RT bus had. This kept LT designing their own buses until the bus grant and thousands of discarded Merlins and Fleetlines of the 70s.
London Buses and perhaps the Underground consulted engineers first and customer surveys second back then. Now it is customer surveys and not an engineer or expert to be seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Jan 5, 2008 23:57:36 GMT
Stagecoach Glasgow pull their bendy's off the road! Waste of time and effort... Look at this movie between 0:50 and 1:00. Bus in question is 'Ikarus-435', cause of event - both hydraulic cylinders which control trailer movement failed. rubbish happens, get over it... |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 6, 2008 0:21:47 GMT
The RT's were all supposed to be gone by 1970 - 1971. As things turned out, the RT was still most common class of bus in London in 1970, soldiering on whilst the chaos of OPO / single deckers / DMS diasters unfolded. Who'd have believed back then that RM's would last into the new millenium?
Bendy Buses have no right to run on great historic routes like the 12, 38 and 73. Call me out of date if you like, but unlike TFL, I respect London and its heritage, and I'm proud to come from the great city.
|
|
jazza
Guess my Favourite Number?
Posts: 196
|
Post by jazza on Jan 6, 2008 1:40:17 GMT
Stagecoach Glasgow pull their bendy's off the road! Waste of time and effort... Look at this movie between 0:50 and 1:00. Bus in question is 'Ikarus-435', cause of event - both hydraulic cylinders which control trailer movement failed. rubbish happens, get over it... No need to "get over" anything. I was merely posting a relevant incident to the topic. And incidentally I found that video quite disturbing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2008 18:28:37 GMT
OPO / single deckers / DMS diasters unfolded. Who'd have believed back then that RM's would last into the new millenium? Somehow, we got the ex-LT DMS to work pretty well in a city more crowded, dense and slopier than London alongside more than 400 other fleetlines. The old RM's have had it's day. The ride quality is extremely poor over bumps and the transmission extremely harsh. The seats on the RM are now too narrow because our population has become obese. It would however be interesting to see a bus in the similar lines of a RM using modern technology. The current standard Volvo and Dennis low floor busses do their job pretty well in my opinion though. As for Bendies...they need to be replaced one by one by Dennis Enviro 500s. Even the Irish can get these 12 metre deckers to work. |
|
|
|
Post by happybunny on Jan 9, 2008 18:39:51 GMT
I could not sit on a seat on a Routemaster (except that sideways one towards the back of lower deck) and fit my legs in as well. I had to put them sideways taking up both seats! They were the most uncomfortable bus I have riden on. Also I could not go upstairs without cracking my head! They are nice as they are on the heritage routes, If someone wants to go on one, for "old" times sake... for newer routes I find most other double decker buses or bendies more comfortable and spacious!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 9, 2008 18:51:42 GMT
You are quite a lot taller than average though, happybunny!
|
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jan 9, 2008 19:23:03 GMT
True, the RM's were designed in an era when, on average, people were smaller and shorter! The RT's were even smaller!
|
|
|
|
Post by happybunny on Jan 10, 2008 19:44:27 GMT
You are quite a lot taller than average though, happybunny! True... but there are taller people out there than me  |
|
|
|
Post by signalfailure on Jan 27, 2008 16:59:48 GMT
Bus will have only travelled 2 stops when he got off then ! Given the number of substantial turns and bends the bus will have negotiated between these stops it's a surprise that he was dragged that far ! I'm a touch surprised if the bus driver was arrested, difficult to see how he would know what had occured ! One assumes no one else on this busy route inside the bus knew either ! True my good man, True. I still cant fathom the fact that driver didnt know he hit someone. Going over pot-holes or plastic bottles makes a loud enough bang and its not as if the driver has limited view out the screen. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,773
|
Post by Chris M on Feb 3, 2008 3:51:25 GMT
If you thought bendy-busses in London were bad, take a look at this one in a tunnel in Russia:
|
|
|
|
Post by Dmitri on Feb 3, 2008 12:22:56 GMT
take a look at this one in a tunnel in Russia It was an 'Ikarus-435' bus on the dead run (there are no bus routes through the Lefortovo tunnel). That time, both hydraulic cylinders controlling trailer movement failed. The bus got insignificant damage. |
|
|
|
Post by dla365 on Feb 4, 2008 8:53:59 GMT
I used to live in Edmonton and work in Acton so I both saw and used bendies on the 73,149 and 207 routes. Quite honestly I just don't think bendies are suited to most of London and without the congestion charge, bus lanes and other anti-motorist devices in place the bendies would be the cause of even greater congestion. Living in exactly the same area and using those very same routes, I can say the 149 is significantly worse than the 73 as far as reliability and security are concerned. In the early mornings and morning peaks when I sometimes use the 149, it is fine however during shopping hours, the service is atrocious with about one in five buses going all the way to Edmonton Green, and the others terminating short at Snells Park or Tottenham Swan. This doesn't seem to be as much of a problem with the other routes along this corridor (259, 279 and 349 which are all double deckers), so why this route? The section between Acton Central and Acton Tram Depot, as well as Southall Broadway are horrendous too. However, at least this road has other buses like the 427 and 607 as alternatives to the bendies. Now that the 607 has an all-day service, I don't understand why it doesn't have a Sunday service. Before, buses on the 207 used to go from Uxbridge to Shepherds Bush on Sundays and evenings, but once those journeys were cut, there was nothing to replace them! |
|
|
|
Post by happybunny on Feb 4, 2008 18:06:25 GMT
I think it is because very few people travel all the way from Shepherds Bush to Uxbridge. I agree the Southall area and Acton High St area are quite bad traffic-wise.. however I haven't noticed it get any worse since the 207 route was changed. In fact I think it is better as the buses are more frequent.
|
|
|
|
Post by dla365 on Feb 4, 2008 19:22:58 GMT
I think it is because very few people travel all the way from Shepherds Bush to Uxbridge. I agree the Southall area and Acton High St area are quite bad traffic-wise.. however I haven't noticed it get any worse since the 207 route was changed. In fact I think it is better as the buses are more frequent. The frequency was actually reduced when the 207 was converted from double decker to bendy. It was every 4-6 minutes when double-decker but it now is every 7-8 minutes. Route 427 was unchanged, while the 607 has recently had its operating hours extended by 60 minutes. |
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Feb 6, 2008 18:03:41 GMT
|
|
