Most contributors on here use his social class as a weapon to beat him with - because its easier than actually following in detail what he has actually achieved, but to call him a pleb just makes you look utterly foolish.
FYI - not that you have any desire for it - the new bus will in fact reduce the massive losses incurred by Kens off the German shelf lets shoe-horn them into London's Victorian junctions and hope for the best, bendy buses - do you remember how much they cost? - and the new ones are iconic, if production increases as planned they will become as significant to London as Taxi's (providing they dont all become Mercedes slide door MPV's) or the old Routemasters, they will also reduce the chances of massive environmental fines from Brussels, are built by a UK company, in the UK, German made bendy buses (and I admit to using wikipedia's expertise here), have been involved in FIVE times as many accidents as other London buses, its the first bus designed for London since the Titan workhorse, The bus uses the latest green diesel-electric hybrid technology. In test condidtions the new bus produces less than half the CO2 and half the NOx emissions of conventional diesel buses and is twice as fuel efficient.
What is your problem with it?
Oh and it will be far better value than the £79million Edinburgh's SNP council spunked on a tram system that doesnt even exist!
ses will cost. And it works out at a massive £1.6m each – eight times more than a conventional double decker.
The Wrightbus contract is to design, build and test a prototype plus five buses for use on the roads before 2012, at a cost of £7.8m. The cost of any additio
Gents the bendy buses were are useless on most routes but not all up and down the Old Kent Road they worked OK. A buses total life cost is important we still have a 60 year old routemaster running on route 15. If a bus costs 300k and lasts 20 years it costs 15k per year and is much greener than a bus that costs 200k but only lasts 10 years at 20k/year.
A wright bus if it really is 1.5 m each just needs to last longe be popular and practical.
Floyd: Fact: the bendy buses were never bought- they were leased.
Where do you get the fact that Ken made massive losses on the bendy buses from?
What has that got to do with cost? Great, so they were so much cheaper over the 5 year ''lease'' werent they? No. Just like the ruinously expensive PFI obsession of the past decade, they cost more than buying outright (as I suspect you knew all along) And thats not even including the various fires and withdrawal from service of these
Source for costs - BBC, see below - hope thats OK? But if you like, dogpile it yourself and estimates range from £7m to £9m in lost revenue from what Which? magazine called 'the trust bus' 10 December 2011 Last updated at 01:31 Transport for London (TfL) predicted it would increase its takings by £7.4m because fare-evasion would now become harder.
Oh and its no suprise that the German leviathans were introduced by Arriva. Who are owned by Deutche Bahn.
And there are 13 less SEATS on a bendy than a new RM.
I've heard Boris Johnson called a few things in his time. But pleb? Olster I'm not sure you understand the meaning of that word.
You and Floyd are right; silly word to use.
But back onto the buses; it just annoys me that appears to be another 'flagship' scheme of boris's, whereas I think the bendy buses could've been more of a success. Granted, they were not completely suitable for all of london - but they did work well on lots of their routes.
Floyd, your point about there being less seats on the bendy's than the new routemasters is a little disingenuous as there was lots and lots of standing spaces on the bendy's, where as on other double deckers there tends to be less (especially if you'll still not be able to stand upstairs) and as such I imagine total number of passengers will be less on the RM than on the bendy's (I stand to be corrected with actual figures; but that's what i imagine).
Secondly, Yea plenty of fare evasion on the bendy's; but it always seemed to be an easy problem to solve by putting on a conductor. And if the new RM's are only going to have their back doors open with a conductor on board, then surely it's a comparable position of wages etc...
I guess it remains to be seen what the impact of the new RM's will be; but I liked the bendy buses and while they weren't perfect in london; they could've been made to work. Instead, we've resorted to an expensive PR stunt just in time for the mayor elections. Such is politics...
When I get on public transport I generally want a seat - so not disingenious at all. More seats = more chance of sitting down. How many times have you seen half empty bendys? Many times - again, the new RM's win.
But I do acknowledge people with a negative attitude will always find a reason to decry change for good. Its just so much easier than accepting a positive initiative.
I remember the jumping off the bus game and going much too early - was trying to impress. The bus was going faster than I could run and I ended up bouncing along the road wrecking my school uniform and giving me bloody knees and hands -happy days! I remeber being in agony and pretending I was ok so I didn't look an idiot although with hindsight I think I probably looked even more of an idiot!
Made up a sob story and got sympathy from parents rather than punishment and learned never to play that game again!
Has an open entrance at the back but doesn't make me feel nostalgic looking at the new bus. On certain routes (no tight roads) the bendy buses were fine and held more passengers - a bit of a folly really and waste of tax payers money.
Had many mornings as a kid jumping off the platform of a old 51 travelling past Hurst Road in Sidcup, where there was no stop, but I don't suppose these vanity buses will ever operate in outer London.
I've almost never encountered a bendy bus as I haven't worked in central London for 22 years but one thing Ken Livingstone did do was massively increase bus services, including in outer London.
Since the primary use of a bus is as a means of transport that seems to be more important than what they look like to me.
Had to get a 25 bus from Whitechapel to Mile End this morning because the District Line was screwed. For years the 25 has been a bendy bus but a double-decker turned up this morning. Half as much capacity, twice the crush on the bus. What fun.
On the plus side, they take up half as much road and don't fuck up every single junction they ever cross. Nor do they piss of pedestrians who have to walk around the damn things when they block the crossings (usually in spite of the fact that the bus had zero chance ot getting anywhere once through the crossing but decided to go anyway).
With reference to John Boy's posting if you want to take as many passengers, surely you need two RMs for every bendy bus and thereby take up just as much space, just with a gap between them? Two drivers needed so more staffing costs, double again if conductors/security guards are employed (which they could have done on the bendy bus, if fare dodging is such a big reason for dumping them). And on a point made by someone else, Ken leasing the bussses means they can now go back to whence they came, and are not just scrapped, as will happen with the new RMs when they reach the end of their serviceable life? I do like the look of them though, and if conductors are used, and people can jump on and off they might work.
But I do acknowledge people with a negative attitude will always find a reason to decry change for good. Its just so much easier than accepting a positive initiative.
The bendy's were more of a change. The new RM takes its inspiration from the past, not the future.
but one thing Ken Livingstone did do was massively increase bus services, including in outer London.
Since the primary use of a bus is as a means of transport that seems to be more important than what they look like to me.
Ken was also responsible for the bikes too. A few weeks ago he was on the radio moaning that everybody was praising Boris for them, but he had started it all off and was voted out before they hit the streets!
Floyd: Fact: the bendy buses were never bought- they were leased.
Where do you get the fact that Ken made massive losses on the bendy buses from?
What has that got to do with cost? Great, so they were so much cheaper over the 5 year ''lease'' werent they? No. Just like the ruinously expensive PFI obsession of the past decade, they cost more than buying outright (as I suspect you knew all along) And thats not even including the various fires and withdrawal from service of these
Source for costs - BBC, see below - hope thats OK? But if you like, dogpile it yourself and estimates range from £7m to £9m in lost revenue from what Which? magazine called 'the trust bus' 10 December 2011 Last updated at 01:31 Transport for London (TfL) predicted it would increase its takings by £7.4m because fare-evasion would now become harder.
Oh and its no suprise that the German leviathans were introduced by Arriva. Who are owned by Deutche Bahn.
And there are 13 less SEATS on a bendy than a new RM.
So, could we be clear - is your argument that the cost of the bendy buses is the problem or is it the fair evasion? make your mind up! Oh no, I forgot - it's already closed.
Great design and a total white (red) elephant unless other cities buy into the concept and order in which case the 8 million R&D will be recouped and the cost of the current new Routemasters will fall to an exceptable level. Don't ever expect a return to the open backed hop on and off I remember with affection.
FYI - not that you have any desire for it - the new bus will in fact reduce the massive losses incurred by Kens off the German shelf lets shoe-horn them into London's Victorian junctions ......................
There are some benefits to the new buses and the now old bendy buses were unsuited to some of London's tight streets.
But if you are going to castigate KL for wasting money then understand that the new buses are more expensive - ca £30k more per bus and Boris's other great idea - the bike - is currently running at an £11m a year loss - the original plan was to raise ca £18m a year, instead it will make £7m a year.
I repeat Boris is a pleb. It's just that a right-wing media are always going to cut him more slack than they ever did for Ken Livingstone. The problem with Boris is that again we have an elected politician who thinks he's playing in a game of popularity and he's another who's lack of experience in the real world before getting elected is showing him up.
You may notice that there is a door either side of the front wheel and the open platform (which has a door for when there is no attendant) and 2 staircases.
This reduces the number of seats on the lower deck.
There is also a wheelchair position.
This isn't an new RM.
It is an attempt to reduce weight and fuel consumption and introduce hybrid technology on a new chassis.
Comments
complete and utter waste of money. boris is a pleb.
What DO you mean?
We could start you with a definition of the word you employed
Concise Oxford English Dictionary © 2008 Oxford University Press:
pleb/pleb/
▶noun informal, derogatory a member of the lower social classes.
Most contributors on here use his social class as a weapon to beat him with - because its easier than actually following in detail what he has actually achieved, but to call him a pleb just makes you look utterly foolish.
FYI - not that you have any desire for it - the new bus will in fact reduce the massive losses incurred by Kens off the German shelf lets shoe-horn them into London's Victorian junctions and hope for the best, bendy buses - do you remember how much they cost? - and the new ones are iconic, if production increases as planned they will become as significant to London as Taxi's (providing they dont all become Mercedes slide door MPV's) or the old Routemasters, they will also reduce the chances of massive environmental fines from Brussels, are built by a UK company, in the UK, German made bendy buses (and I admit to using wikipedia's expertise here), have been involved in FIVE times as many accidents as other London buses, its the first bus designed for London since the Titan workhorse, The bus uses the latest green diesel-electric hybrid technology. In test condidtions the new bus produces less than half the CO2 and half the NOx emissions of conventional diesel buses and is twice as fuel efficient.
What is your problem with it?
Oh and it will be far better value than the £79million Edinburgh's SNP council spunked on a tram system that doesnt even exist!
A wright bus if it really is 1.5 m each just needs to last longe be popular and practical.
Source for costs - BBC, see below - hope thats OK? But if you like, dogpile it yourself and estimates range from £7m to £9m in lost revenue from what Which? magazine called 'the trust bus'
10 December 2011
Last updated at 01:31
Transport for London (TfL) predicted it would increase its takings by £7.4m because fare-evasion would now become harder.
Oh and its no suprise that the German leviathans were introduced by Arriva.
Who are owned by Deutche Bahn.
And there are 13 less SEATS on a bendy than a new RM.
But back onto the buses; it just annoys me that appears to be another 'flagship' scheme of boris's, whereas I think the bendy buses could've been more of a success. Granted, they were not completely suitable for all of london - but they did work well on lots of their routes.
Floyd, your point about there being less seats on the bendy's than the new routemasters is a little disingenuous as there was lots and lots of standing spaces on the bendy's, where as on other double deckers there tends to be less (especially if you'll still not be able to stand upstairs) and as such I imagine total number of passengers will be less on the RM than on the bendy's (I stand to be corrected with actual figures; but that's what i imagine).
Secondly, Yea plenty of fare evasion on the bendy's; but it always seemed to be an easy problem to solve by putting on a conductor. And if the new RM's are only going to have their back doors open with a conductor on board, then surely it's a comparable position of wages etc...
I guess it remains to be seen what the impact of the new RM's will be; but I liked the bendy buses and while they weren't perfect in london; they could've been made to work. Instead, we've resorted to an expensive PR stunt just in time for the mayor elections. Such is politics...
More seats = more chance of sitting down.
How many times have you seen half empty bendys? Many times - again, the new RM's win.
But I do acknowledge people with a negative attitude will always find a reason to decry change for good. Its just so much easier than accepting a positive initiative.
Made up a sob story and got sympathy from parents rather than punishment and learned never to play that game again!
Has an open entrance at the back but doesn't make me feel nostalgic looking at the new bus. On certain routes (no tight roads) the bendy buses were fine and held more passengers - a bit of a folly really and waste of tax payers money.
I've almost never encountered a bendy bus as I haven't worked in central London for 22 years but one thing Ken Livingstone did do was massively increase bus services, including in outer London.
Since the primary use of a bus is as a means of transport that seems to be more important than what they look like to me.
They used to cause absolute havoc around St Pauls.
With reference to John Boy's posting if you want to take as many passengers, surely you need two RMs for every bendy bus and thereby take up just as much space, just with a gap between them? Two drivers needed so more staffing costs, double again if conductors/security guards are employed (which they could have done on the bendy bus, if fare dodging is such a big reason for dumping them). And on a point made by someone else, Ken leasing the bussses means they can now go back to whence they came, and are not just scrapped, as will happen with the new RMs when they reach the end of their serviceable life? I do like the look of them though, and if conductors are used, and people can jump on and off they might work.
......................
There are some benefits to the new buses and the now old bendy buses were unsuited to some of London's tight streets.
But if you are going to castigate KL for wasting money then understand that the new buses are more expensive - ca £30k more per bus and Boris's other great idea - the bike - is currently running at an £11m a year loss - the original plan was to raise ca £18m a year, instead it will make £7m a year.
I repeat Boris is a pleb. It's just that a right-wing media are always going to cut him more slack than they ever did for Ken Livingstone. The problem with Boris is that again we have an elected politician who thinks he's playing in a game of popularity and he's another who's lack of experience in the real world before getting elected is showing him up.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16244634