Bendybus goes on fire...again.

Knowing the way First S Yorkshire drivers behave, they would deliberately not open the centre doors to be awkward. IMO the present layout of London 'deckers like the WVLs is the best, with the exit door further back.

I note that Ken said that he would dispose of the bendy's if there were more fires... I noted from last nights post 10 o'clock London local news that TfL had commented that the fire was not related to the cause of the previous fires....

IMO the bendy's were purchased as a means to take up more road space and therefore cause more traffic problems.... therefore encouraging drivers to ditch their cars... I may be completely off the mark here but that was/is the impression that I get

Perhaps then the solution is to design a double-decker with the internal layout of a bendy and, if possible, allow standing passengers upstairs. I don't know what the reason is why this is normally not permitted - I have been a standing passenger upstairs on an old (old R reg iirc) double-decker in Swansea, where overloading of the student busses wasn't uncommon in the peaks (I've also been stood forward of the driver (instructed where to stand so I didn't block the view), and stood on the step right by the doors). Even if they had bendybusses in Swansea they couldn't put them on the 82/82A/83 student services as there wasn't enough space for them to make the three-point turn at the student village end of the route, and I'm not certain the reversing manoeuvre at the bus station end would be safe either.

Certainly not .


Can't help wonder which ones. We have many "Ikarus-280" and "Ikarus-435" buses, and neither one has anything close to what you describe.

I think the reason why you can't stand upstairs on a decker is a mechanics one - the centre of gravity may be increased.

I've been on buses where I've had to stand at the front next to the cab as there has been nowhere else to stand. One driver got shirty when he turned up in the peak time in a little 26 seat Dart instead of a 51 seat B10M, and the only place I could stand was at the front. Er, what do you expect if you use a minibus on a board which should be worked by a full sized one?

I'd have thought that low-floor buses would help in this regard, lowering the centre of gravity. If you also maximise the design of the chassis and internal fittings for maximum lower deck passenger capacity so you get the largest weight downstairs this will help as well.
Possible design changes include moving the stairs to the outside rear of the bus so they don't take up room inside that could otherwise be used by passengers (like, say, a Routemaster), longitudinal seating downstairs to maximise passenger capacity (it works on a C stock) and bench seating rather than individual seats (three children or small adults can use the same space occupied by two large adults).
You could increase the width of the bus, but with the narrow streets this country has this leads to more traffic jams - I have a friend in Bristol who will go on at length about the stupidty of the modern wider buses as they cannot pass each other on his street and sometimes have to mount the kerb to get around parked cars.

Come to think of it, one bus company I drove for had a local council contract to take kids from junior school to the swimming pool for lessons - this was always a single deck job as it was never more than 30 kids (plus a few adults, of course).

On one particular occasion, the only available bus in the yard was a 'decker - much to the kids delight - and they all wanted to go upstairs. I had no objection and neither did their teachers/adults. It wasn't long before I noticed that having all your passengers upstairs (even kids) really ain't a good move ;D ;D Their faces really got me on the return journey when I said they couldn't go upstairs ..........

I hadn't thought about ground clearance - that's a good point for rural areas, but do you need the super-capacity buses on rural routes? I'd have thought that it would only be needed on routes that encounter nothing more severe than speed bumps?

I haven't seen pictures of those sorts of buses so I can't comment. Please can you point me in the direction of some so that I may be educated in this regard.

My point, although not well made, regarding the seating was not so much the number of seats but their layout being such as to maximise standing capacity.

In the streets around where he lives there are only a handful of properties with off-street parking, so with the dire public transport provision in Bristol (and expense of what there is) most households require at least one car. I do suspect that the modern buses are being compared with ones that are at least 40 years old if not more; I'm not familiar whether these are thinner or not, and whether or not they were built to the maximum permitted width. Certainly the width of private cars has generally increased over the years.
One of his points is that the bus routes should be altered so that where possible they run in different directions on parallel streets. Although with the pinch points that I am familiar with on the services between Wells/Winscombe and Weston-super-Mare (Banwell (Castle Hill/East Street/West Street), Cheddar (Church Street/Draycott Road and Axbridge Road) and Westbury-sub-Mendip (Wells Road)) - there are no alternatives.

Thought Olympians/Dominators/Metrobusses were *slightly* narrower than the new Tridents. I'm asking because Hong Kong took a couple of years to update the width regulations to the EU standard. When it was done, the Tridents etc. that came in new were wide enough to accomodate 2-2 wide seats on the lower deck without compromising aisle width.

Aspect, the 25 really is one very unique route in London! Even when its full, I'm pretty sure it hasn't exceeded the Licenced capacity by people count! I really cannot imagine more than 60 people standing in that thing.

The Routemaster is a great design but it is lighter because it's shorter and narrower than modern busses. A RM has width to support 2-2 "narrow" seating.

Modern wide busses initially came with "narrow" 3-2 seating but with people getting fed better these days, the standard has become "wide" 2-2 seating. The increased width also increased standing capacity. If you fit "wide" seats into a routemaster it would be a 2-1 config, resulting in approx 15 less seats. Therefore, modern busses aren't not as weight inefficient as they may seem.

A low floor bus results in the loss of approx 10 seats versus an Olympian. The low floor is responsible for the loss of 6 seats as people cannot sit sideways above the wheels anymore. Another 4 seats is lost because of the modern "straight" staircase instead of the old spiral resulting in one less row of seats.

I rather like the route. I have driven it in MCW Metrobus's, Dennis Arrows, Dennis Trident/Alexander, Dennis Trident/Plaxton President (Long and short) and Routemasters. Though, I am pleased to say, never a Mercedes Benz Citaro! You'd be amazed at the antic's of (the very different) passengers on this route !