|
Post by shroudoffrost on Sept 7, 2019 17:30:17 GMT
What does everyone think of tri-axles being rolled out in London for TfL routes?
I'm quite suprised it took so long for TfL to bring in TA1 to have a few stints on the 12...I think the extra seating and standing room will be hugely beneficial on many routes in London. The impending 427 chop got me wondering as the 207 is already I believe the 5th or 6th busiest route in London and will probably soar up into the top 3 once the 427 cut happens.
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Sept 8, 2019 21:47:17 GMT
Having been to Hong Kong and fought my way through aisles full of people from the back to get off triaxles, I can safely say I'm glad we don't have them here!
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 8, 2019 22:01:02 GMT
Having been to Hong Kong and fought my way through aisles full of people from the back to get off triaxles, I can safely say I'm glad we don't have them here! OK ... quick question, would you rather have done that than not been able to get on the bus because it was full?
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Sept 8, 2019 23:04:26 GMT
OK ... quick question, would you rather have done that than not been able to get on the bus because it was full? I got on at the first stop when it was empty! In all seriousness, in London frequencies change in line with significant changes in vehicle capacity if the past is anything to go by. PVRs dropped significantly on the routes that became artic operated so it's a bit of a moot point unless an overall capacity increase is promised. A crowded bus is not a nice envionment to be in but I'd rather be on a crowded 10.5m decker than a crowded 12m decker. By default the more people on the bus, the more you get jostled about as people get on and off. Triaxles with 2 sets of doors, forward centre doors have to dwell at stops for longer and there's an increased risk of people missing their stop if they can't get off in time and the driver doesn't see them. If they had 3 sets of doors that would be different, but that's out of the question.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 11, 2019 9:02:08 GMT
OK ... quick question, would you rather have done that than not been able to get on the bus because it was full? I got on at the first stop when it was empty! In all seriousness, in London frequencies change in line with significant changes in vehicle capacity if the past is anything to go by. PVRs dropped significantly on the routes that became artic operated so it's a bit of a moot point unless an overall capacity increase is promised. A crowded bus is not a nice envionment to be in but I'd rather be on a crowded 10.5m decker than a crowded 12m decker. By default the more people on the bus, the more you get jostled about as people get on and off. Triaxles with 2 sets of doors, forward centre doors have to dwell at stops for longer and there's an increased risk of people missing their stop if they can't get off in time and the driver doesn't see them. If they had 3 sets of doors that would be different, but that's out of the question. Me, I would rather have the 12m, as the same crowded capacity on a 10.5m decker will not be so bad on a 12m ... if there is more than a 10.5m capacity, the have served there purpose otherwise passengers would have been left behind ... I am sure the lion share of passengers would rather get on a crowded bus, than be left behind.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 14, 2019 16:44:49 GMT
OK ... quick question, would you rather have done that than not been able to get on the bus because it was full? I got on at the first stop when it was empty! In all seriousness, in London frequencies change in line with significant changes in vehicle capacity if the past is anything to go by. PVRs dropped significantly on the routes that became artic operated so it's a bit of a moot point unless an overall capacity increase is promised. A crowded bus is not a nice envionment to be in but I'd rather be on a crowded 10.5m decker than a crowded 12m decker. By default the more people on the bus, the more you get jostled about as people get on and off. Triaxles with 2 sets of doors, forward centre doors have to dwell at stops for longer and there's an increased risk of people missing their stop if they can't get off in time and the driver doesn't see them. If they had 3 sets of doors that would be different, but that's out of the question. Your experience of tri-axles is coloured by your experience of HK. Things like dwell times are important as they are key to the economics of operation / attractiveness of the service. Hong Kong is a near unique environment given the enormous population density and lack of car ownership which results in extraordinary demand for public transport. Despite very high service levels and a tiered service approach (expresses, peak extras etc) the bus network is overwhelmed in HK in many places. You clearly experienced that. I was glad of old style side seats when I used Citybus 10 regularly - allowed me to be near the centre door with less squeezing given I was the size of probably 2 average HK-ers at the time. Large people and Hong Kong public transport are not a good mix! I think dwell time increases and likely frequency cuts on any tri-axle route in London (to keep costs under control) are reasons why we won't see their introduction in London. They don't make economic sense at first cut in the current (and likely ongoing) funding environment. If you are forecasting ongoing patronage decline why invest in large capacity buses which are not readily available in proven hybrid / electric form?? Doesn't exactly fit with the Mayor's strategies.
|
|