Ken & Bendy Buses

elyob said:

In the new Time Out :

1. Bendy buses block up the streets, they're slow and they are a

hazard to

Quoted message said:

cyclists. They just don't work! (Christina Simmons, Stoke Newington).
KEN SAYS - Bendy buses are faster and more reliable than double

deckers.

Quoted message said:

They spend less time at bus stops because passenegers buy their

tickets

Quoted message said:

before boarding. They are also more accessible for people with yound
children, older and disabled people. The vehicles are highly

manoeuvrable

Quoted message said:

and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them. I know

of no

Quoted message said:

incidents including cyclists.

Any comments for Ken?

Well from my admittedly limited experience with these buses (they only
run on about km1 of my journey), I haven't had any problems. I can see
that there may be problems if they overtake too close to a left bend
but this hasn't happened to me (yet). Do the drivers have extra
training? I've had more problems with drivers of normal buses.

In central London, you must buy your ticket before boarding all buses,
this is not unique to the bendy ones.

Also the accessibility on modern kneeling buses is no longer a problem.

The bendy buses are more manoeuverable than double deckers because
making quick accelerating, braking or changes of direction on a double
decker affects the passengers upstairs too much. But I think this is
probably a good thing to encourage the drivers to drive more smoothly.

The one area where the bendy buses win over normal double decker ones
is that they are less likely to get stuck under bridges :-D

Cheers

LN

"elyob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In the new Time Out :

Any comments for Ken?

I have a relative who works in the city - one of the girls in her office no
longer cycles in London. Being hit by a bendy bus was not something she
enjoyed apparently :-/

Cheers, helen s

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:59:12 -0000 someone who may be "Helen C
Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

I have a relative who works in the city - one of the girls in her office no
longer cycles in London. Being hit by a bendy bus was not something she
enjoyed apparently :-/

Hopefully you can obtain some more details and then ask Mr
Livingstone about it. He can then no longer claim, "I know of no
incidents including cyclists." However, given that he has now taken
up with the Labour Party again anything he says is likely to be a
lie.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

elyob said:

In the new Time Out :

1. Bendy buses block up the streets, they're slow and they are a hazard to
cyclists. They just don't work! (Christina Simmons, Stoke Newington).
KEN SAYS - Bendy buses are faster and more reliable than double deckers.

That might be true for some specific bendy buses compared to some
specific double deckers, but it is not inherent to the types of bus, so
it is not a relevant observation on their comparative merits.

Quoted message said:

They spend less time at bus stops because passenegers buy their tickets
before boarding.

This also is not inherent to the bendyness of the bus. Such a system can
operate for any type.

They are also more accessible for people with yound

Quoted message said:

children, older and disabled people.

This also is not inherent to the bendyness of the bus. It might be
arranged for any type.

The vehicles are highly manoeuvrable

More so than a double decker? Really?

Quoted message said:

and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them.

Ah, so they are less manoeuvrable then, otherwise they would not have
this limitation.

I know of no

Quoted message said:

incidents including cyclists.

Looks like a 3-wise-monkeys answer.

Quoted message said:

Any comments for Ken?

See above.

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:22:54 GMT someone who may be "elyob"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

KEN SAYS - Bendy buses are faster

They may be a bit faster, but is this a good idea if pedestrians and
cyclists are killed as a result.

Quoted message said:

and more reliable than double deckers.

What is he on? Bendy buses have more moving parts to go wrong.
Assuming one is comparing buses of the same age and manufacturer a
bendy bus must be more unreliable.

Quoted message said:

They spend less time at bus stops because passenegers buy their tickets
before boarding.

This is nothing to do with the type of bus.

Anyway, passengers used to buy their tickets after boarding the bus,
from the conductor. That is faster than everyone showing a ticket to
the driver as they board.

Quoted message said:

They are also more accessible for people with yound
children, older and disabled people.

Again, one must be comparing buses of the same age and manufacturer.

In Edinburgh we have many double decker buses that are perfectly
accessible for these groups.

Quoted message said:

The vehicles are highly manoeuvrable
and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them.

The two halves of this statement are incompatible. Just what I'd
expect from a party politician.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

elyob said:

In the new Time Out :

1. Bendy buses block up the streets, they're slow and they are a
hazard to cyclists. They just don't work! (Christina Simmons, Stoke
Newington).
KEN SAYS - Bendy buses are faster and more reliable than double
deckers. They spend less time at bus stops because passenegers buy
their tickets before boarding. They are also more accessible for
people with yound children, older and disabled people. The vehicles
are highly manoeuvrable and are only used on roads which can easily
accomodate them. I know of no incidents including cyclists.

Any comments for Ken?

Ken is this: Wrong. Wrong and mad. They accelerate like dead crabs, catch
fire[1] and three of them nose to tail at a bus stop bring half the parish
to a standstill. I've seen at least one having to do a three-point turn to
get around one junction, though admittedly this could have been down to the
incompetence of the driver. And I've personally been on the receiving end
of Bendylengthmyopia, and been obliged to brake to avoid kerb/Larrington/bus
sandwich, at least three times.

And if His Kenness would care to explain why little triangular stickers are
appearing on the back of 149s between London Bridge and The Death Of The
Soul, with a black bicycle on a yellow background, with a black cross
through the bicycle, it would demystify me no end. The only thing I can
think it might mean is "this bus does not wait until it has finished
overtaking cyclists before pulling tinto the bus stop", presumably for the
benefit of following motorists (to allow them to avoid getting blood on
their motorcars, obv.)

I hate them. They are indubitably Works of Stan.

Bah!

1 - I know they /claim/ to have fixed this. But if Mr. Sunshine and I have
anything to do with it...

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

A couple of interesting articles to further the reading ...

http://73bus.typepad.com/73bus/2004/09/getting_to_know.html

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3746
(note point 2 in the feedback).

Personally I have had no experience with the buses, but I guess no one
has been killed or seriously injured enough for Ken to be told (or read
in the papers). I'm pretty sure that CTC etc have raised their fears,
so am sure Ken has chosen those words carefully.

On the other hand, he is banning motorcycle taxis as 'they are
dangerous', yet there have been no serious injuries in almost ten
years.
http://195.224.59.217/news/archives_2000/news_details.asp?id=3652
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-1453972,00.html

David Hansen <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

They are also more accessible for people with yound
children, older and disabled people.

Quoted message said:

Again, one must be comparing buses of the same age and manufacturer.

Actually, they lack enough easily-accessible seats, which are needed by
people with moderate disabilities.

Non-wheelchair users outnumber wheelchair-users by a HUGE factor.

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:39:20 GMT someone who may be Helen Deborah
Vecht <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Actually, they lack enough easily-accessible seats, which are needed by
people with moderate disabilities.

Bendy buses or double deckers?

In the former case it is a long way to walk to the back, in the
latter case there are the stairs to negotiate.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

JLB said:

The vehicles are highly manoeuvrable

More so than a double decker? Really?

Quoted message said:

and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them.

Ah, so they are less manoeuvrable then, otherwise they would not have
this limitation.

Much less manoeuvrable than a shorter non-articulated bus (we've got
them here in southampton, and regular mounting of pavements isn't
unknown). Add in the optare's (a short but VERY wide bus) and you can
see why they're demanding exclusive rights on some roads now....

Niel.

"elyob" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In the new Time Out :

1. Bendy buses block up the streets, they're slow and they are a hazard to
cyclists. They just don't work! (Christina Simmons, Stoke Newington).
KEN SAYS - Bendy buses are faster and more reliable than double deckers.

Largely because they are new while some of London Transport'sdouble deckers
are a squillion years old.

Quoted message said:

They spend less time at bus stops because passenegers buy their tickets
before boarding.

How does the bendy nature of the bus contibute to this? Surely presale of
tickets would work on any type of bus -- so this is irrelevant.

Quoted message said:

They are also more accessible for people with yound
children, older and disabled people.

This may well be true.

Quoted message said:

The vehicles are highly manoeuvrable
and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them.

If they are so highly manoeverable surely they can opperate almost
anywhere -- either they are manoueverable or they are limited to roads that
can accomodate them -- which is it Ken?

Quoted message said:

I know of no
incidents including cyclists.

Probably because the driver didn't notice the crump half a mile behind him!!

T

David Hansen <[email hidden]>typed

Quoted message said:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:39:20 GMT someone who may be Helen Deborah
Vecht <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Actually, they lack enough easily-accessible seats, which are needed by
people with moderate disabilities.

Quoted message said:

Bendy buses or double deckers?

Quoted message said:

In the former case it is a long way to walk to the back,

Few seats there too, nothing to hold as you try to walk on a moving bus...

Quoted message said:

in the latter case there are the stairs to negotiate.

Good handrails and loads of seats up there...
....cos many lazy passengers CBA to go up.

Double deckers, please!

--
Helen D. Vecht: [email hidden]
Edgware.

David Hansen said:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:39:20 GMT someone who may be Helen Deborah
Vecht <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Actually, they lack enough easily-accessible seats, which are needed by
people with moderate disabilities.

Bendy buses or double deckers?

In the former case it is a long way to walk to the back,

Stop showing your ignorance. The London bendy bus has three doors and
you don't need to walk to the back to get a seat in any case. There
are sideways facing seats at floor level in the back part just by the
doors so they are handy for those with difficulty getting into a
normal bus seat.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Dave Larrington said:

elyob said:

In the new Time Out :

1. Bendy buses block up the streets, they're slow and they are a
hazard to cyclists. They just don't work! (Christina Simmons, Stoke
Newington).
KEN SAYS - Bendy buses are faster and more reliable than double
deckers. They spend less time at bus stops because passenegers buy
their tickets before boarding. They are also more accessible for
people with yound children, older and disabled people. The vehicles
are highly manoeuvrable and are only used on roads which can easily
accomodate them. I know of no incidents including cyclists.

Any comments for Ken?

Ken is this: Wrong. Wrong and mad. They accelerate like dead crabs

Like lightning more like. The brakes can be a bit firece too. Many's
the time I've had to hang on for grim death as a standing passenger in
one.

Quoted message said:

three of them nose to tail at a bus stop bring half the parish
to a standstill.

Even worse when they are all on the same route. They haven't found a
solution to the banana syndrome yet.

Quoted message said:

I've personally been on the receiving end of Bendylengthmyopia, and
been obliged to brake to avoid kerb/Larrington/bus sandwich, at least
three times.

I find the worst thing about them as a cyclist is that the engine is
so far from the front that you can't hear them coming as easily as a
normal bus. A routemaster you can hear coming from about half a mile
away :-) and a modern double decker from about 20 yards so you get
plenty of warning when one is about to pass you. With a bendy it is
alongside you before you know it.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

David Hansen said:

Anyway, passengers used to buy their tickets after boarding the bus,
from the conductor. That is faster than everyone showing a ticket to
the driver as they board.

You don't show your ticket to anyone unless an inspector boards.

David Hansen said:

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:59:12 -0000 someone who may be "Helen C
Simmons" <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

I have a relative who works in the city - one of the girls in her office no
longer cycles in London. Being hit by a bendy bus was not something she
enjoyed apparently :-/

Hopefully you can obtain some more details and then ask Mr
Livingstone about it. He can then no longer claim, "I know of no
incidents including cyclists." However, given that he has now taken
up with the Labour Party again anything he says is likely to be a
lie.

Put in a Freedom of Information request asking his office for the number
of recorded incidents between bendy buses and cyclists.

Tony

njfbadger said:

JLB said:

The vehicles are highly manoeuvrable

More so than a double decker? Really?

Quoted message said:

and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them.

Ah, so they are less manoeuvrable then, otherwise they would not have
this limitation.

Much less manoeuvrable than a shorter non-articulated bus (we've got
them here in southampton, and regular mounting of pavements isn't
unknown). Add in the optare's (a short but VERY wide bus) and you can
see why they're demanding exclusive rights on some roads now....

Niel.

Interestingly, First in Soton are no fans of the buses[1] themselves and
the ops dir can't wait to be shot of them.

[1] Except that I had that conversation so long ago now he might have
been talking about their gas powered buses rather than bendy ones. It
was something newfangled, anyway. Then again, maybe the gas ones are
also the bendy ones?

elyob said:

A couple of interesting articles to further the reading ...

http://73bus.typepad.com/73bus/2004/09/getting_to_know.html

http://www.ctc.org.uk/DesktopDefault.aspx?TabID=3746
(note point 2 in the feedback).

Personally I have had no experience with the buses, but I guess no one
has been killed or seriously injured enough for Ken to be told (or read
in the papers). I'm pretty sure that CTC etc have raised their fears,
so am sure Ken has chosen those words carefully.

On the other hand, he is banning motorcycle taxis as 'they are
dangerous', yet there have been no serious injuries in almost ten
years.
http://195.224.59.217/news/archives_2000/news_details.asp?id=3652
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-1453972,00.html

Er, no he isn't. One of his cttees is recomending that he ban them and
it is from them that your quote is taken. KL wrote a letter to one of
the papers saying that he had no intention of implementing this
proposal. But I'm damned if I can find the URL.

njfbadger said:

JLB said:

The vehicles are highly manoeuvrable

More so than a double decker? Really?

Quoted message said:

and are only used on roads which can easily accomodate them.

Ah, so they are less manoeuvrable then, otherwise they would not have
this limitation.

Much less manoeuvrable than a shorter non-articulated bus (we've got
them here in southampton, and regular mounting of pavements isn't
unknown).

ISTR they are pretty effective at flattening prospective buspassengers,
taking a shortcut in the busstation
--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl