|
|
Post by TB141 on Feb 13, 2018 18:42:46 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Feb 13, 2018 21:03:07 GMT
Have to give the mayor credit over this even though I think he is a numpty. This should have been sorted out years ago. It is ridiculous on some routes that at both ends there are no toilets. I have no idea why the AA has to comment on this, they have never been keen on bus drivers welfare so why are they so concerned about passengers. As usual Edmond King is dipstick. Never stands up properly for motorists.
|
|
|
|
Post by TB141 on Feb 13, 2018 21:05:44 GMT
Have to give the mayor credit over this even though I think he is a numpty. This should have been sorted out years ago. It is ridiculous on some routes that at both ends there are no toilets. I have no idea why the AA has to comment on this, they have never been keen on bus drivers welfare so why are they so concerned about passengers. As usual Edmond King is dipstick. Never stands up properly for motorists.
Yes I did think it was on odd comment to make. Most passengers will be on a bus for half an hour or so. Driving spells of 5.5 hours is slightly different. |
|
|
|
Post by lonmark on Feb 13, 2018 22:10:06 GMT
it could be temporary toilets place somewhere at end of the routes. but the problem is, none of house-owners want any toilet place near them at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Feb 14, 2018 9:40:14 GMT
it could be temporary toilets place somewhere at end of the routes. but the problem is, none of house-owners want any toilet place near them at all. Yes I wonder how toilets could be installed at somewhere like the Abbey Wood Lane terminus of the 165 and 287 without objections from locals? I get the impression that the lack toilets for bus drivers is more a problem in the evening when public toilets are closed? As has been mentioned it's bizarre that Edmund King of the AA has commented, what's it got to do with them? |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Feb 14, 2018 10:16:36 GMT
it could be temporary toilets place somewhere at end of the routes. but the problem is, none of house-owners want any toilet place near them at all. Yes I wonder how toilets could be installed at somewhere like the Abbey Wood Lane terminus of the 165 and 287 without objections from locals? I get the impression that the lack toilets for bus drivers is more a problem in the evening when public toilets are closed? As has been mentioned it's bizarre that Edmund King of the AA has commented, what's it got to do with them? They pointed out that if TfL consider toilets necessary, and are building them anyway, why not also provide them for passengers. .... ah forgot, that might have side effect of increasing passenger numbers, what a silly idea. |
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Feb 14, 2018 10:22:58 GMT
it could be temporary toilets place somewhere at end of the routes. but the problem is, none of house-owners want any toilet place near them at all. The only one I've ever noticed is in Brook Street where the 65 stands. It's been there for a few years now. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Feb 14, 2018 10:25:47 GMT
Yes I wonder how toilets could be installed at somewhere like the Abbey Wood Lane terminus of the 165 and 287 without objections from locals? I get the impression that the lack toilets for bus drivers is more a problem in the evening when public toilets are closed? As has been mentioned it's bizarre that Edmund King of the AA has commented, what's it got to do with them? They pointed out that if TfL consider toilets necessary, and are building them anyway, why not also provide them for passengers. .... ah forgot, that might have side effect of increasing passenger numbers, what a silly idea. Surely the provision of public toilets is not a matter for TfL? You could argue that any toilets for bus drivers should be available to everyone but inevitably it would result in vandalism and anti social behavior, the very reason most public toilets are locked in the evening. |
|
|
|
Post by rugbyref on Feb 14, 2018 20:36:25 GMT
When I first saw the headline, I imagined a bucket and chuck-it under the stairs!
|
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Feb 14, 2018 20:58:40 GMT
Some things from your childhood remain in you memory for ages, even decades. I have few memories of the last of the first generation electric trams that passed my grandmother's flat in Well Hall Road, Eltham, when I was 3 and 4, but I made a few journeys on them and the most abiding memory I have is that once, as the tram passed Sutcliffe Park between Lee Green and the Yorkshire Grey, the tram came to a halt and both of the crew decamped to the toilets located thirty yards or so within the park. I also remember this happening when the 182 bus replaced one of the tram routes, also out of New Cross, and the crews regularly did the same. Interestingly (or not!) I never knew this to happen on the parallel 21 bus route at the time, but it wasn't operated by New Cross at this stage. Over the 60 odd years since then, I can't remember ever seeing another obvious occurrence mid-route, but then there are plenty of bits of route these days I'm not personally familiar with.
|
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Feb 14, 2018 22:45:02 GMT
Over the 60 odd years since then, I can't remember ever seeing another obvious occurrence mid-route, but then there are plenty of bits of route these days I'm not personally familiar with. One route where you might see a mid-route toilet break is the 353, which has a timetabled 5-minute pause on westbound journeys at Addington Village specifically for that purpose. I've occasionally seen drivers take unofficial toilet breaks at bus stations mid-route, but never seen anything like running to a public toilet in a park! Well not in London at any rate. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2018 17:00:59 GMT
it could be temporary toilets place somewhere at end of the routes. but the problem is, none of house-owners want any toilet place near them at all. Yes I wonder how toilets could be installed at somewhere like the Abbey Wood Lane terminus of the 165 and 287 without objections from locals? I get the impression that the lack toilets for bus drivers is more a problem in the evening when public toilets are closed? As has been mentioned it's bizarre that Edmund King of the AA has commented, what's it got to do with them? TfL failed to consult when they installed the toilet on Marshall’s Road in Sutton next to the 407 stands, it’s such an eyesore. I would have said no if TfL had consulted local residents. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Feb 20, 2018 11:50:45 GMT
Yes I wonder how toilets could be installed at somewhere like the Abbey Wood Lane terminus of the 165 and 287 without objections from locals? I get the impression that the lack toilets for bus drivers is more a problem in the evening when public toilets are closed? As has been mentioned it's bizarre that Edmund King of the AA has commented, what's it got to do with them? They pointed out that if TfL consider toilets necessary, and are building them anyway, why not also provide them for passengers. .... ah forgot, that might have side effect of increasing passenger numbers, what a silly idea. So why has Edmond King not campaigned for more public toilets for cars drivers and not protest at the hundreds of local council toilets that have shut down across the country. He is a total bellend imo. Even down to many petrol stations do not have public toilets but he is going on to take a swipe at buses, moron. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 22, 2018 10:39:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Mar 11, 2018 0:22:25 GMT
Have they put these proposals on paper yet?
|
|
