RailUK Forums
RailUK Forums > Other Rail & Transport > Other Public Transport > Buses & Coaches


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10th January 2017, 23:36   #76
fredk
Member
 
fredk's Avatar
 
Join Date: 2 Sep 2016
Posts: 100
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by WatcherZero View Post
Long standing contracting policy of Tfl, buses over 5 years not to be submitted for use on new tender apart from some heritage services. Leads to the average of London bus fleet being 6 (up on pre NB4L days) compared with around 8 excluding London and operators having to cascade buses too old for London to the regions reducing demand for new.
This is not true at all. I still see some 01 and 02 plate ALX400s around so it's clearly not true.
fredk is offline   Reply With Quote
Registered users do not see these banners - join today!
Old 10th January 2017, 23:43   #77
Arctic Troll
Established Member
 
Arctic Troll's Avatar
 
Join Date: 12 Sep 2013
Location: Newcastle upon Tyne
Posts: 7,588
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deerfold View Post
There is no such limit.

If the average age of a London bus is 6 years that would suggest that they're used for about 12 years.
Indeed. Metroline are still using plenty of 55 plate buses, and Arriva only just shipped their 52 plate buses up this neck of the woods (and refitted them for their premium MAX services!).
__________________
"This train has been delayed by a flow of unusually large passengers."
Arctic Troll is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10th January 2017, 23:55   #78
carlberry
Member
 
Join Date: 19 Dec 2014
Posts: 538
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey C View Post
Going back to the original comment, yes, no more Borismasters will be bought, but then with 1200 of them, that's more then the number of Routemasters in service before the final withdrawals started

They won't be withdrawn, as apart from anything else, they're TfL's bus, a lot of the spec in them is what they insisted on not Boris.
I really dont understand the comparision! Theres more of them than there were Routemasters, after enough of the 2760 Routemasters were withdrawn for the number to be lower than the number of Borisbuses that were built!

They wont be withdrawn because TfL are stuck with them and it's unlikely that they'll be able to get rid of them in the way that London has traditionally dealt with it's stupidity (Bendis (Political), DMS(Arrogant engineers)), SMS(Rushed design)).
carlberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 07:41   #79
Robertj21a
Established Member
 
Join Date: 22 Sep 2013
Posts: 2,993
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredk View Post
This is not true at all. I still see some 01 and 02 plate ALX400s around so it's clearly not true.
Except there weren't any 01-regs.....
Robertj21a is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 10:20   #80
jon0844
Doesn't buy Carnets
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 1 Feb 2009
Location: Hatfield, Hertfordshire
Posts: 20,528
Default

It was 51, which was (Sep) 2001 so I think the mention of 01 and 02 were the years, not the plates.
jon0844 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 12:26   #81
Mikey C
Established Member
 
Mikey C's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 1,182
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by carlberry View Post
I really dont understand the comparision! Theres more of them than there were Routemasters, after enough of the 2760 Routemasters were withdrawn for the number to be lower than the number of Borisbuses that were built!

They wont be withdrawn because TfL are stuck with them and it's unlikely that they'll be able to get rid of them in the way that London has traditionally dealt with it's stupidity (Bendis (Political), DMS(Arrogant engineers)), SMS(Rushed design)).
My point was that it there would always be a finite number of 3 door Borismasters built, around the 1000ish mark for busy central London routes. I expect to see them stay on these routes, maybe fully electric buses will replace them in the future?

Hendy likes having extra doors and open access on busy routes, the Borises combine that aspect of the Bendis with a double decker design.
Mikey C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 12:34   #82
TheGrandWazoo
Established Member
 
TheGrandWazoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: 18 Feb 2013
Location: Somerset with international travel (e.g. across the Severn)
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey C View Post
My point was that it there would always be a finite number of 3 door Borismasters built, around the 1000ish mark for busy central London routes. I expect to see them stay on these routes, maybe fully electric buses will replace them in the future?

Hendy likes having extra doors and open access on busy routes, the Borises combine that aspect of the Bendis with a double decker design.
Peter Hendy left to go to Network Rail about 18 months ago

The most likely outcome.... They'll have to run them in London for the next 10 years. They own them so they're stuck with them. No one else will want them so sale is unlikely. Parking them up on airfields for the next 10 years will be politically toxic.

Let them work for the next 10 years, make do and manage, and then gradually start to withdraw them. The most pragmatic political thing to do
TheGrandWazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 13:33   #83
jon0844
Doesn't buy Carnets
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 1 Feb 2009
Location: Hatfield, Hertfordshire
Posts: 20,528
Default

Fare evaders must love the extra doors, and knowing the driver isn't going to be asking you to come forward to present your ticket.

Has TfL employed more revenue inspectors?
jon0844 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 18:51   #84
Busaholic
Established Member
 
Join Date: 7 Jun 2014
Posts: 5,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmorris0844 View Post
Fare evaders must love the extra doors, and knowing the driver isn't going to be asking you to come forward to present your ticket.

Has TfL employed more revenue inspectors?
BJ dodged the question when he was specifically asked how replacing the bendies (three doors) with NBFLs (three doors) was going to reduce fare evading..
Busaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 18:53   #85
jon0844
Doesn't buy Carnets
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 1 Feb 2009
Location: Hatfield, Hertfordshire
Posts: 20,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Busaholic View Post
BJ dodged the question when he was specifically asked how replacing the bendies (three doors) with NBFLs (three doors) was going to reduce fare evading..
That doesn't seem like something our Boris would do!

[emoji6]
jon0844 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11th January 2017, 18:56   #86
Busaholic
Established Member
 
Join Date: 7 Jun 2014
Posts: 5,329
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jonmorris0844 View Post
That doesn't seem like something our Boris would do!

[emoji6]
Like my grandfather, selectively deaf!
Busaholic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2017, 00:25   #87
fredk
Member
 
fredk's Avatar
 
Join Date: 2 Sep 2016
Posts: 100
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Busaholic View Post
BJ dodged the question when he was specifically asked how replacing the bendies (three doors) with NBFLs (three doors) was going to reduce fare evading..
To be fair the borismaster was meant to have an on board conductor to watch people board so this would have put people off fare dodging. However a conductor on bendy buses would probably have solved the fare dodging issue.

But for me the fare dodging issue is irrelevant - bendy buses were dangerous in London.
  • They are involved in 2.62 collisions with cyclists per million miles, compared with 0.97 for other buses. And they have 153 accidents per million miles, compared with only 87 per million on non-bendy routes.
  • Bendy buses were involved in 1,751 accidents over the year - 75 per cent more than other buses, the figures reveal.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/bendy...s-6588794.html
fredk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2017, 11:07   #88
Mikey C
Established Member
 
Mikey C's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11 Feb 2013
Posts: 1,182
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredk View Post
To be fair the borismaster was meant to have an on board conductor to watch people board so this would have put people off fare dodging. However a conductor on bendy buses would probably have solved the fare dodging issue.

But for me the fare dodging issue is irrelevant - bendy buses were dangerous in London.
  • They are involved in 2.62 collisions with cyclists per million miles, compared with 0.97 for other buses. And they have 153 accidents per million miles, compared with only 87 per million on non-bendy routes.
  • Bendy buses were involved in 1,751 accidents over the year - 75 per cent more than other buses, the figures reveal.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/bendy...s-6588794.html
And unlike the other "London rejected classes" they haven't exactly been snapped up by other UK operators either...
Mikey C is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2017, 11:35   #89
TheGrandWazoo
Established Member
 
TheGrandWazoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: 18 Feb 2013
Location: Somerset with international travel (e.g. across the Severn)
Posts: 7,118
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fredk View Post
To be fair the borismaster was meant to have an on board conductor to watch people board so this would have put people off fare dodging. However a conductor on bendy buses would probably have solved the fare dodging issue.

But for me the fare dodging issue is irrelevant - bendy buses were dangerous in London.
  • They are involved in 2.62 collisions with cyclists per million miles, compared with 0.97 for other buses. And they have 153 accidents per million miles, compared with only 87 per million on non-bendy routes.
  • Bendy buses were involved in 1,751 accidents over the year - 75 per cent more than other buses, the figures reveal.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/bendy...s-6588794.html
Now, now.... let's not treat statistics selectively. Channel 4 fact checked the Boris claims (remember - the Standard was the most vociferous pro-Boris organ) and they reveal it's much more nuanced

The actual number of incidents is small in all cases, but there's still a pretty big difference between the two types of bus: pedestrians and cyclists are both more than twice as likely to get into trouble on a bendy bus route.

But this doesn't necessarily prove that the bendy bus is to blame. What about other factors, such as the roads the buses are using? Is it possible there are just more accidents on certain routes, regardless of the type of bus in operation?

Figures released in January to the London Assembly paint a more moderate picture than the overall totals to which Boris refers. This breakdown compared collisions on all 12 bendy bus routes to collisions on 15 selected non-bendy routes.

These selected routes tended to cover busy inner-city areas rather than the quieter suburbs. The number 41, for example, which goes from London Bridge, through Holborn, to Wood Green, or the number 8, which goes from Bow in the East End, along Oxford Street to Victoria.

It's not necessarily a scientific study, but it would seem to be a more accurate representation of the kind of routes bendy buses serve.

According to this breakdown, bendy bus routes threw up 5.6 collisions with pedestrians in 2006/07; non-bendy bus routes 5.17.

Collisions with cyclists were 2.62 on bendy buses; but 2.78 on non-bendy routes.

Damning evidence that bendy buses are, well, not much different from other buses?

"The incidents that take place are both random, to do with the road networks themselves, and to do with weather conditions," David Brown, TFL's head of surface transport, said when presenting the figures to the Assembly. "They are not related to the type of vehicle that is operated on those roads."

Overall, there were more bendy bus collisions - which could be to do with anything from a pedestrian, cyclist or vehicle to a lamppost, building, street sign or tree.

There were 153 per million miles, compared with 117 for non-bendy buses. But cyclists and people made up a small proportion of these. Luckily, it's far more likely to be an inanimate object that gets over friendly with the bus.

How do bendy buses score in contrast to accidents involving the old Routemaster?

Changes in routes mean that data isn't directly comparable, but according to other figures TFL gave FactCheck, between January 1994 and September 2007 there were 0.05 fatalities per million km operated by bendy buses and 0.08 fatalities per million km operated by Routemasters.


So, taken in isolation, Boris is right but when you put the figures in context, bendis were comparable in terms of accident rates with other vehicles.

As for the redeployment question.... at least some bendis were reused by provincial operators. Who knows the likely redeployment of NB4Ls in the provinces if any withdrawals were made?
TheGrandWazoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12th January 2017, 14:06   #90
carlberry
Member
 
Join Date: 19 Dec 2014
Posts: 538
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikey C View Post
And unlike the other "London rejected classes" they haven't exactly been snapped up by other UK operators either...
As the routes that have the passenger numbers (and flows) where they'd be viable are mostly in London then this is hardly a surprise!
carlberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 13:29.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright © 2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© RailUK Forums 2005 - 2017