Borismaster's on Route 267

[MatthewRead]

Why are there Borismaster's on this route when it does not go near Central London?
Also certain routes use more than 1 type of bus where as other use a standardized fleet is that to save costs?

 

[transmanche]

Why are there Borismaster's on this route when it does not go near Central London?

The 267 received the final batch of 17 Boris Buses (from a total of 1,000 built). I suspect it could have been simply because the 267 has a PVR of 17 buses.

However, there are other Boris Bus routes which don't go near Central London; the EL1, EL2 and EL3.

 

[Busaholic]

TfL are spreading the misery wider!

 

[hassaanhc]

The 267 goes to Hammersmith, which I would most certainly consider to be "near Central London", given that Kensington High Street starts only a mile down the road! Yes the other end of the 267 at Fulwell is not, but LTs make it just as far (if not further) every night on routes like the N3 to Bromley, N15 to Romford, N21 to Bexleyheath and the N55 to Woodford Wells (and maybe soon the N9 to Heathrow, which has the same route as the 267 between Hammersmith and Brentford). Indeed they've made it to Old Coulsdon on the N68 a few times, which I think is the furthest south a London night bus goes.

 

[Hophead]

With forthcoming frequency reductions and route truncations, there will be more reallocations. The 27 is inline for NRMs (though presumably not till it's cut back itself, losing the Hammersmith to Chiswick Park section).

 

[Bletchleyite]

TfL are spreading the misery wider!

There are many engineering (and financial) things wrong with them, but I don't think from a passenger's perspective they are any worse than any other bus, and have some key advantages like the dual staircase and three doors as well as quite a nice ambiance compared with the Spartan interior of most buses. So I don't think they cause any misery.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

There are many engineering (and financial) things wrong with them, but I don't think from a passenger's perspective they are any worse than any other bus, and have some key advantages like the dual staircase and three doors as well as quite a nice ambiance compared with the Spartan interior of most buses. So I don't think they cause any misery.

All fair and well if you are fit enough to climb them which, with the low seating capacity of the lower deck, you will need to if you want a seat.

 

[transmanche]

All fair and well if you are fit enough to climb them which, with the low seating capacity of the lower deck, you will need to if you want a seat.

They have 22 seats on the lower deck, which doesn't seem excessively low.

 

[MatthewRead]

With forthcoming frequency reductions and route truncations, there will be more reallocations. The 27 is inline for NRMs (though presumably not till it's cut back itself, losing the Hammersmith to Chiswick Park section).

When will that be???

 

[Robertj21a]

There are many engineering (and financial) things wrong with them, but I don't think from a passenger's perspective they are any worse than any other bus, and have some key advantages like the dual staircase and three doors as well as quite a nice ambiance compared with the Spartan interior of most buses. So I don't think they cause any misery.

Some of those seats are terribly uncomfortable and I would describe the ambiance as 'Dull and depressing'.
The opening windows have, at last, reduced the greenhouse effect.

 

[MatthewRead]

With forthcoming frequency reductions and route truncations, there will be more reallocations. The 27 is inline for NRMs (though presumably not till it's cut back itself, losing the Hammersmith to Chiswick Park section).

They shouldn't cut it back what about all the people who travel from Kensington to Chiswick?

 

[Busaholic]

Some of those seats are terribly uncomfortable and I would describe the ambiance as 'Dull and depressing'.
The opening windows have, at last, reduced the greenhouse effect.

I've not come across a more uncomfortable seat on a London bus, and I first travelled on one seventy years ago. Maybe those upstairs may be slightly better, I wouldn't know. All in all, as you correctly say 'depressing', and they certainly make me miserable. The most depressing aspect is the amount of time, money and energy expended on this vanity project, with nobody being robust enough to tell Boris Johnson that his fantasy of recreating a 'hop on, hop off' bus, a re-enactment of the Routemaster, was both impossible and fatuous. Now TfL have to find a role for 1,000 buses of which they have ownership with a resale value of approximately zero pounds above scrap value, so they'll have to be run into the ground. And, no, unlike the real Routemaster they won't be around in fifty years time anymore than I'll be!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some of those seats are terribly uncomfortable and I would describe the ambiance as 'Dull and depressing'.
The opening windows have, at last, reduced the greenhouse effect.

I suppose this heads into the same debate as to the Pendolino interior. Personally, I find it cosy, classy and welcoming, and I find other buses with bright blueish LED lighting to be stark and unwelcoming. Others find it dull and depressing and prefer brighter lighting.

I'm neutral about the seat comfort, it's good enough for me though not special.

 

[transmanche]

They shouldn't cut it back what about all the people who travel from Kensington to Chiswick?

TfL had a consultation on the changes to route 27 back in the summer.

The rationale for the changes is that the 27 is very lightly-used between Hammersmith and Chiswick and that more than sufficient capacity is already available on the existing 267, 391, H91 and 237. And with the bus hopper fare, passengers are not financially penalised for having to change buses en-route.

 

[Deerfold]

They have 22 seats on the lower deck, which doesn't seem excessively low.

And terrible for those with accessibility issues. How many can be accessed without climbing a high step?

 

[Deerfold]

And with the bus hopper fare, passengers are not financially penalised for having to change buses en-route.

That's being used as an excuse for a lot of cuts. How many people are going to be happy with more and more changes to do their journeys, even if they're no more expensive?

 

[Bletchleyite]

And terrible for those with accessibility issues. How many can be accessed without climbing a high step?

No fewer than any other London bus (a dual door layout can't avoid reducing this).

This is rather offset, though, by the entire downstairs being low floor, which is not true of very many other buses.

 

[Bletchleyite]

That's being used as an excuse for a lot of cuts. How many people are going to be happy with more and more changes to do their journeys, even if they're no more expensive?

You can't have a through bus from everywhere to everywhere, and people are well used to changing on the Tube. A simpler connectional network will overall be of much more value.

 

[Deerfold]

No fewer than any other London bus (a dual door layout can't avoid reducing this).

This is rather offset, though, by the entire downstairs being low floor, which is not true of very many other buses.

I find them a lot less accessible. The central aisle is very narrow, the seats uncomfortable and most of the seats difficult to access.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find them a lot less accessible. The central aisle is very narrow, the seats uncomfortable and most of the seats difficult to access.

Seating comfort is subjective and has basically nothing to do with accessibility.

 

[MatthewRead]

TfL had a consultation on the changes to route 27 back in the summer.

The rationale for the changes is that the 27 is very lightly-used between Hammersmith and Chiswick and that more than sufficient capacity is already available on the existing 267, 391, H91 and 237. And with the bus hopper fare, passengers are not financially penalised for having to change buses en-route.

But those travelling between Kensington and Chiswick would rather take one straight bus surely.

 

[Busaholic]

Seating comfort is subjective and has basically nothing to do with accessibility.

I don't think he was saying it was: he was listing the other inconveniences of the type. I find it incomprehensible that a so-called top designer could allow his name to be associated with this dog's breakfast, but I suppose the interior layout wasn't part of his brief, and his own experience of bus travel is probably on a par with his mentor Boris Johnson's i.e. only to be savoured as a photo opportunity, and never in real life (shudder!)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't think he was saying it was: he was listing the other inconveniences of the type. I find it incomprehensible that a so-called top designer could allow his name to be associated with this dog's breakfast, but I suppose the interior layout wasn't part of his brief, and his own experience of bus travel is probably on a par with his mentor Boris Johnson's i.e. only to be savoured as a photo opportunity, and never in real life (shudder!)

Personally, I like the interior, it's the engineering package that's flawed - after all you could have put that body on near enough any low floor chassis you felt like, give or take some modifications to the engine mounting to allow a low floor throughout (or using one of the European chassis that already allow that). And it'd be loads cheaper.

Indeed, Alexander Dennis have produced something that is rather a clone of it looks-wise, though it doesn't have the dual staircase nor rear door which are two benefits to me.

 

[alex397]

I actually like Borismasters (I wish they didn't have that awful nickname), and I find the interior far more welcoming than the rather clinical hospital-waiting-room interiors of some other types. Its clear that its a matter of opinion. I prefer the more subdued colours in comparison to all the bright garish colours of most bus interiors (*cough* Stagecoach *cough*). Its clear that some new bus types have taken some of the good things away from the Borismaster.

 

[Busaholic]

Personally, I like the interior, it's the engineering package that's flawed - after all you could have put that body on near enough any low floor chassis you felt like, give or take some modifications to the engine mounting to allow a low floor throughout (or using one of the European chassis that already allow that). And it'd be loads cheaper.

Indeed, Alexander Dennis have produced something that is rather a clone of it looks-wise, though it doesn't have the dual staircase nor rear door which are two benefits to me.

I've said enough on the subject. The clones look better than the original, I think. Lookswise, I've always felt the rear was better than the front and, I'd even be prepared to admit, looked quite stylish. For me, as soon as that rear entrance/exit was closed off between stops the bus became absolutely pointless, and it was clear that scenario was going to be played out sooner rather than later, as I believe everyone in charge knew.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've said enough on the subject. The clones look better than the original, I think. Lookswise, I've always felt the rear was better than the front and, I'd even be prepared to admit, looked quite stylish. For me, as soon as that rear entrance/exit was closed off between stops the bus became absolutely pointless, and it was clear that scenario was going to be played out sooner rather than later, as I believe everyone in charge knew.

I'm not sure I agree - I think the second set of stairs and rear door have a number of benefits. For one, "moving down the bus" doesn't make you feel like you are going to have trouble getting off past people, and for another it means you can't be "cornered" upstairs by an undesirable.

Indeed, if you were going to go two-door rather than three, I'd suggest dispensing with the middle one and having front and rear only. Wheelchair users could use the front door like they do elsewhere in the country - I used to think this was sub-optimal, but it seems from discussion a while ago either here or on uk.railway (I forget) that many prefer boarding at the front as the driver is closer to them to assist them if needed.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Seating comfort is subjective and has basically nothing to do with accessibility.

try accessing the rear lower deck seats if you're over 5ft 6 - think they are an accessibility issue as half the population would have difficulty accessing them.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

I actually like Borismasters (.

What a totally obnoxious name - why not call them LTs instead of calling them after some putrid vane individual

 

[Bletchleyite]

try accessing the rear lower deck seats if you're over 5ft 6 - think they are an accessibility issue as half the population would have difficulty accessing them.

That is seat positioning and has nothing to do with the shape of the seat itself. Any style of seat would have the same issue.

 

[Deerfold]

No fewer than any other London bus (a dual door layout can't avoid reducing this).

This is rather offset, though, by the entire downstairs being low floor, which is not true of very many other buses.

I'm on a 205 at the moment. Of the 25 seats downstairs, 10 require no steps. If you're standing the only step is just before the back seats.
On a Borismaster, I make it 8 seats with no step of 24 in total.
For a revolutionary design that doesn't seem great.