Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
Not been to Leicester presumably ?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
New shorter NB4L unveiled
- Thread starter plcd1
- Start date
- Status
Not been to Leicester presumably ?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Are you talking about the 135 route in Bury? It was operated by Scania artics with two doors the last time I was there
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Yes, many times
Lots of buses outside the UK have three doors. Even non-articulated buses can have three doors. Why bother when you can get two or one door versions?
Last edited:
Well clearly UK operators see no need for three door buses, in fact most are one door, and obviously more doors means less seating
But your argument was that there's no point having more than two doors as it doesn't speed up boarding. Obviously in most of the UK, they don't care about speedy boarding, given that they are all too happy to accept a lot of cash payment and even allow smartcards to be topped up on the bus. In London, they do care, so they have two or three doors and have banned cash payment altogether.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
An awful lot of UK operators have single door buses, which is quite visibly madness - it must elevate PVRs significantly that provincial buses tend to spend several minutes at stops.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Not really. Journey duration tends to be longer so less inclination for standees and the loss of seats means that PVRs are broadly similar.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Would it not solve both problems to use a 12m rather than 10m bus and have a second door (same number of seats)?
Though it's the cash transaction rather than the lack of a second door that *really* slows things down. It massively surprises me that there have been so few mobile and smartcard ticketing projects in the commercial world (Arriva aside, which is one I do use, though I think it needs single tickets adding to it). Taking the cash off the bus entirely has so many benefits - faster running and better driver safety being the main ones.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Mind you, nothing was quite as mad as the old (Julian Peddle days) MK Metro contact-type smartcard season ticket system. Because of the faff of inserting (and repeatedly re-inserting) the card in the machine, it took longer to process a season ticket than a cash transaction. Dumping it in favour of regular paper season tickets in a laminated folder was one of the first things Arriva did when they took over, and boarding speeded up substantially.
The one benefit of the scheme was preventing passback, which I saw it do a few times to the entertainment of everyone who had properly paid for their journey.
This has been an issue for decades, including before deregulation, and solutions have been available throughout all that time, so given that the operators have been content with longer journey times and tedious boarding for so long, why would they care now? Modern technology isn't necessary, but given that it now exists, they are still dragging their feet.
The intention was no such thing. The NB4L was a Mayoral initiative which TfL then had to turn into some sort of workable solution. It has been deployed on defined corridors with the predominant aim of improving air quality in Zone 1. You can see quite clearly that Oxford St, Victoria St, Whitehall, parts of Holborn and the City are the areas TfL have focussed on. The fact that the routes then stagger into the inner suburbs is almost accidental.
There is no public plan to deploy any more buses beyond the 800 on order. TfL senior officers denied they were ordering any more. They are more Mayor's Questions going up next week on this topic so we shall see whether TfL have changed their mind or not. At this point in time there are no commitments from Mayoral candidates to buy any more. It is also the case that more NB4Ls were NOT on the TfL or Chancellor's "wish lists" for the Autumn Statement.
Therefore I rather suspect your "dream" or nightmare may well remain unfulfilled.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
While you're all debating fare evasion risks on NB4Ls here is what TfL said in a Mayor's Answer in Feb 2015. Make what you will of their response when set against "logic" and past opinions about bendy buses, old crew buses etc.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Given how so many drivers on front-boarding routes pay no attention to what is being shown to them[1] (I really should try something silly like a Georgemas-Wick single, while having a valid Travelcard in my pocket as well), and given that they are trained to avoid conflict, it wouldn't at all surprise me if evasion rates on front-boarding buses are not all that much lower than on open-boarding buses.
If anything, you might expect "obvious trouble" to be challenged more on a Borismaster with a "conductor" (even though that is not their role, strictly speaking) simply because there are two staff rather than one.
[1] I did once get a group of Scouts all the way across London on the wrong tickets even though we had to go to the manual gate instead of through the barriers which obviously correctly rejected them. We did hold valid ones, but I had the outwards in my hand rather than the returns and didn't notice.
Last edited:
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Not really. Using 12m deckers or singles often means they struggle in urban environments. Ask a driver when using a B7RLE in Bristol!! Any savings in dwell time are soon wiped out in trying to manoeuvre. Fine for the boulevards of MK but not so clever elsewhere
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
I wonder how LTs would have coped with fare evasion on the 25. Presumably we'll never know.
90sWereBetter
Member
I had a journey on the new LT-esque E400s that Arriva are running on the 78 this afternoon and I couldn't help but feel it was a superior design.
By the way, these E400s have an LT-style interior and moquette, which was surprising as I was expecting the usual Arriva cream and blue inside.
By the way, these E400s have an LT-style interior and moquette, which was surprising as I was expecting the usual Arriva cream and blue inside.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
(Googles)
I do like that. Easily as classy as the Lothian custom interiors. More please.
Only thing it needs that the LT has (assuming OPO) is spot lighting, it gives a much nicer interior atmosphere than strip lighting.
http://www.arrivalondon.com/news/ar...stylish-new-enviro-friendly-buses-on-route-78 if anyone wants to see it.
Last edited:
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
That is, of course, part of the point of them. They can be closed at busy times to prevent overcrowding within stations reaching dangerous levels.
As for fare evasion on buses, the written answer plcd1 quoted ties up with my experience. Most people in London have some form of Travelcard, and it is the Travelcard cost that's the big money spinner for TfL. It may be marginally easier to avoid paying on a multi-door bus but a) most people have already paid and b) it's not that hard to get past a bus driver without paying at the busiest times.
Fare evasion was always massively overstated on the bendies.
Seems you were indeed hallucinating then?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Most people have oysters, they're not going to use their credit if they don't have to are they?
How do you know fare evasion on bendys was massively overstated?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Yes very stylish
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Obviously every operator will try and speed up boarding wherever possible but they not going to do it forgo revenue in the process are they? Doesn't sound like a good business plan to me.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
So why don't you get in touch with some of these operators and tell them about this madness that is apparently so visible? Tell them where they're going wrong and what they should be doing about it.
Oh and do let us know what response you get
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
So why don't you get in touch with some of these operators and tell them about this madness that is apparently so visible? Tell them where they're going wrong and what they should be doing about it.
Oh and do let us know what response you get
I would imagine they are of the opinion that they are doing it right. However, as another poster in here will confirm, just about every other country in the world happens to disagree.
Certainly, I would be interested to see examples of major cities where single door operation is the norm. Here is the list of the 86 urban areas in the EU with a population of over half a million:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_European_Union
Do any of them (other than in Britain and Ireland) primarily use single door buses?
This is the best effort I have seen on the square bus vehicles
Give me though a rt.RM ..Rml or an Lt please for a proper looking bus
PermitToTravel
Established Member
Seems you were indeed hallucinating then?
Evidently
My general point stands though. They are used outside London
Evidently
My general point stands though. They are used outside London
If you say so
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Every other country in the world? A slight exaggeration perhaps?
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
If you say so
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Every other country in the world? A slight exaggeration perhaps?
Perhaps a slight exaggeration as I know they have single door Pointer Darts in Squamish in Canada and one of the regional operators in Italy uses single doors.
A slavish dedication to multi door vehicles means you do get the rather farcical situation that I've experienced in Budapest, Pisa and Florence where you have some cut down full size bus (like some Ikarus) that is used in the historic areas with 16 or 20 seats and two doors.
BTW, I didn't hallucinate and there are definitely 3 door article in Bristol!
Lastly, I don't buy the "whole world is better than the UK" spiel. It is mixed and whilst I've enjoyed some good public transport (Berlin), there's also some less good (Lisbon) which is no better and often worse than the UK.
So why even think about places that are not so good? There's so much good practice in northern and central Europe, there's no need to even worry about other places. Take the best practice and try to emulate it.
TheGrandWazoo
Veteran Member
Fair enough but I'm just a bit tired of the "Animal Farm" binary view of UK = bad and everywhere else = better. It's a lot more nuanced than that.
The UK does some things well, not least what we get for the money that is spent. Yes, there's some very good practice elsewhere and some areas where we let ourselves down. However, the idea that we're rubbish and that everything over the water is somehow better is not true.
Indeed and I've heard many overseas visitors common favourably on London double deckers, especially the routemaster.
Going back to this 3 door open boarding idea, if we take Brighton & Hove as a random example, they have cross city routes that can be every bit as busy as buses in London but copes perfectly well with single door buses. I suppose that there could be an argument for two door buses but I cannot for the life of me see how open boarding three door buses could be viable, a reduced seating capacity on the lower deck, an inevitable loss of revenue through fare evasion and higher operating costs with three doors that could fail rather than one.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I'm sure they cope, just like Milton Keynes' almost 100% cross city service does - but would the service be faster, and thus both more attractive and cheaper to operate - were dual door and off bus ticketing used? I think it would. Seconds count - remember that I've posted before the fact that Merseyrail had to add two minutes to the Ormskirk to Liverpool running time just because of the addition of hustle alarms to the 50x units.
UK bus operations certainly have things going for them - I'm not doggedly pro European, I just get frustrated when I ride a slow bus service and think how several minutes could be taken off by some simple, well tested changes.
FWIW, I agree 3 door is not strictly necessary - but now modern buses make it more viable I would be interested to see buses with doors at the front and rear only. Those make very good use of capacity because people are less dissuaded from moving down the bus, as they need not be concerned about having to push past a crowd. Wheelchairs could board and alight at the front as they already do with single door operation.
With regard to two doors, I think in some cases it is an emergency exit requirement, which leads to two door minibuses, which even I think to be a bit silly. The UK offside exit makes more sense.
UK bus operations certainly have things going for them - I'm not doggedly pro European, I just get frustrated when I ride a slow bus service and think how several minutes could be taken off by some simple, well tested changes.
FWIW, I agree 3 door is not strictly necessary - but now modern buses make it more viable I would be interested to see buses with doors at the front and rear only. Those make very good use of capacity because people are less dissuaded from moving down the bus, as they need not be concerned about having to push past a crowd. Wheelchairs could board and alight at the front as they already do with single door operation.
With regard to two doors, I think in some cases it is an emergency exit requirement, which leads to two door minibuses, which even I think to be a bit silly. The UK offside exit makes more sense.
Thames Transit in Oxford had 2 door minibuses in the early 90s which looked quite smart IMO.
When comparing places, the most important metric is the modal share for public transport. In particular, are car users using the services? In general, the UK cities outside London have lower public transport patronage compared to cities in northern and central Europe.
Regarding fare dodging in London, I could refer you to the Christmas Day thread, where we see that only about a fifth of London public transport commuters use only one bus each way, and only about a third of London public transport commuters who use at least one bus use only one bus each way. So unless all your trips are on open boarding buses, you will need to pay on every other bus/Tube/train anyway, meaning you would save very little or nothing at all by fare dodging on open boarding buses.
When comparing places, the most important metric is the modal share for public transport. In particular, are car users using the services? In general, the UK cities outside London have lower public transport patronage compared to cities in northern and central Europe.
Regarding fare dodging in London, I could refer you to the Christmas Day thread, where we see that only about a fifth of London public transport commuters use only one bus each way, and only about a third of London public transport commuters who use at least one bus use only one bus each way. So unless all your trips are on open boarding buses, you will need to pay on every other bus/Tube/train anyway, meaning you would save very little or nothing at all by fare dodging on open boarding buses.
Robertj21a
On Moderation
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2013
- Messages
- 7,691
Interesting that Brighton & Hove have now decided to order dual-door double deckers for the busy route 1.
- Status