This bus is being held here to regularise the service

[Boycey]

Feel pissed off about something that is worth being pissed off about. When the driver is doing his job, there is nothing to get pissed off about. If the seervice doesn't meet your expectations, here that would seem to be that they run solely for your convenience, don't use the service.

this is the crux of why i cannot stand using public transport- there is simply nothing you can do, you are either lucky or unlucky, fast or slow. you get on, pay up and switch off. there is no point getting wound up about a service based upon blind acceptance.

 

[Dr. Furface]

You've no right to get pissed off about them working for everybody else's benefit and not just yours.

Ok. I accept that they're always doing the right thing, for everybody else's benefit. At all times. I'm much happier now, thanks Donna.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Tbh this does fuckme off too. It is well annoying especially when you are trying to get somewhere quickly.

I got on the 207 this morning (nad yesterday). Timeabled at "every 6 -8 minutes" so no one really pays attention to the timetable.

TBF when busses are timetabled like that I think it's fair enough that passengers expect the bus to move. It's not like you can complain if the bus turns up early or late cos effefcitvley there is no time for it to come.. it just comes. If it were tametabled 4.12, 4.22, 4.30, etc etc it would be fair enough.

What bugs me more is when bus drivers don't tell you how long you can expect to be waiting. It's been the case where I've been 3 or 4 stops away from my destiination, so roughly a 5 minute walk, and I've stayed on the bus for 10 minutes.

In these cases wouln't it be better fot the bus driver to say "look guys we'll be here for x minutes" so do what you have to.

Generally tho they couldn't care less and don't let anyone know what the hell is going on. And it is rage enducing. Especially if you are trying to get somewhere on time.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Ok. I accept that they're always doing the right thing, for everybody else's benefit.

I think the useful thing would be for your to accept the existence of "everybody else".

 

[Donna Ferentes]

In these cases wouln't it be better fot the bus driver to say "look guys we'll be here for x minutes" so do what you have to.

Generally tho they couldn't care less and don't let anyone know what the hell is going on.

So presumably they know, but just aren't telling you?

 

[dodgepot]

Tbh this does fuckme off too. It is well annoying especially when you are trying to get somewhere quickly.

I got on the 207 this morning (nad yesterday). Timeabled at "every 6 -8 minutes" so no one really pays attention to the timetable.

TBF when busses are timetabled like that I think it's fair enough that passengers expect the bus to move. It's not like you can complain if the bus turns up early or late cos effefcitvley there is no time for it to come.. it just comes. If it were tametabled 4.12, 4.22, 4.30, etc etc it would be fair enough.

the buses are timetabled to take a particular time to complete a particular route, therefore they need to stick to the advertised time, therefore sometimes regulating the service is necessary annoyance.

 

[Roadkill]

I am sick to death of hearing this new message that they've got on the buses these days in order to give the impression of legitimising the all-too-common practice (and getting commoner) of the bus driver deciding to sit on his/her arse for 5 mins at a stop while the paying customers sit in the back and seeth that they're being made to wait for absolutely no reason at all. I caught 2 buses this morning and it happened to me on both of them - including the first one where I'd only just got on. As I do my Oyster on pay-as-u-go that meant I'd just spent a quid to go nowhere, so I was effectively forced to sit there and wait - although I did get up and tell him to get going, after which some others told him the same, and then he gave up and decided to do his job and DRIVE THE FUCKING BUS!

Don't be bloody stupid. As various people have already pointed out (and which should frankly be straingly obvious) it's not the driver's decision and he's not killing time for the fun of it. I imagine most drivers would rather kill time at the depot with a cup of tea and the newspaper than sitting in their cab with impatient passengers fuming at them. It's done to even out the service and make it run closer to the timetable, and a good thing too since it's just as irritating to wait twenty minutes for a bus and then have two turn up together.

It is mildly irritating when you're in a hurry, but so what? There are bigger things in life to get irate about.

 

[paulhackett]

I think the useful thing would be for your to accept the existence of "everybody else".

The OP did say he was not the only person on the bus nor the only person to speak to the driver, so he's hardly in a minority of 1?

It's not too much to ask for a similar level of communication to the one they've tried to introduce on the tube in the past few years.

Everyone knows there will be delays/cancellations and no-one in their right mind will go off on one if the bus is behind the published schedule, so why not just communicate to people clearly, so if possible, they can make an informed decision?

If someone pays a fare as they get on the bus and are not told by the driver, there's a delay, it isn't unreasonable to expect them to have said something.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

The OP did say he was not the only person on the bus nor the only person to speak to the driver, so he's hardly in a minority of 1?

It's not too much to ask for a similar level of communication to the one they've tried to introduce on the tube in the past few years.

Everyone knows there will be delays/cancellations and no-one in their right mind will go off on one if the bus is behind the published schedule, so why not just communicate to people clearly, so if possible, they can make an informed decision?

If someone pays a fare as they get on the bus and are not told by the driver, there's a delay, it isn't unreasonable to expect them to have said something.

The OP also referred to being told something by the driver, did it not?

 

[Roadkill]

Sorry, didn't realise I had to actually LIKE the services that I use and had no right to feel pissed off about them - whether you think I'm justified or not. NOW THERE'S A CONCEPT!

You don't have to like the service, but IMO you should show a bit of respect to those who provide it for you. Bus driving is a pretty thankless job, and IME most drivers do it very competently and with admirable good humour.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

the buses are timetabled to take a particular time to complete a particular route, therefore they need to stick to the advertised time, therefore sometimes regulating the service is necessary annoyance.

Yeah, I get all that.

But it does beg the question necessary to whom? I doublt very much it's the passenger. If the busses come frequently and arn't timetabled then that's the big deal?

I mean who doens't wat to get to their destination quickly when they are on a bus?

Sitting on a bus is no fun and if they are that frequent (remeber I'm NOT talking about the infrequent properly timetabled busses) then it shouldn't really matter should it?

As long as they regulate the frequent busses at the beggining of the service then it shouldn't make that much difference.

And if they do decide to regulate the service, it would be nice to know how long you are expected to stay stationary so you can make the appropriate calls/desicions. Wouldn't it?

 

[dodgepot]

if the bus was running to the advertised timetable anyway, you would still be standing waiting for it rather than sat on it waiting 1 or 2 minutes for it to get going again. as someone has already mentioned, i believe

 

[dodgepot]

Yeah, I get all that.

But it does beg the question necessary to whom? I doublt very much it's the passenger. If the busses come frequently and arn't timetabled then that's the big deal?

necessary to the bus company and the passenger.

two buses leave the depot at ten minutes apart. for some reason there is less traffic than usual. the first bus sticks pretty much to the timetable as there are a lot of passengers for some reason. the second bus, having no traffic and very few passengers to deal with, sails through the first 10 stops and is catching up with the first bus. with no regulation, you'd end up with two buses running in tamden, and a twenty minute wait for the next one rather than three buses each ten minutes apart.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

if the bus was running to the advertised timetable anyway, you would still be standing waiting for it rather than sat on it waiting 1 or 2 minutes for it to get going again. as someone has already mentioned, i believe

Yeah but I'm not talking about the advertised time table. I'm talking about the busses (like the 207) that come so frequently there is NO advertised timetable, other than how frequently the busses are meant to arrive.

in this case it's every 6-7 minutes (just checked the timetable).

http://www.londonbusroutes.net/times/207.pdf

 

[dodgepot]

you've just *shown* me an advertised timetable

each bus takes 41 minutes from start to finish, and *that* is where regulation comes into play at times.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

if the bus was running to the advertised timetable anyway, you would still be standing waiting for it rather than sat on it waiting 1 or 2 minutes for it to get going again. as someone has already mentioned, i believe

Yeah but I'm not talking about the advertised time table. I'm talking about the busses (like the 207) that come so frequently there is NO advertised timetable, other than how frequently the busses are meant to arrive.

in this case it's every 6-7 minutes (just checked the timetable).

http://www.londonbusroutes.net/times/207.pdf


Infact in the case of this bus there are 2 busses that run in tandem. one (the 607) does the same route but with less stops (although the stops are really only 10 minutes walk apart.

I thoguht that advertised timetable was like a riid this bus comes at 5,13, 5.16, 6.17 etc etc. Point still stands tho.

The 207 is a shit bus anyway. it always stinks. But that is another thread.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

As far as I can see, for part of the day there is indeed a regular timetable.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

Can I just reitterate that i'm not talk about when busses are infrequent and/or scheduled to specific times?

 

[dodgepot]

the buses might not be scheduled to be at a specific stop at a specific time but they *are* scheduled to take a specific time to complete a specific route, as you can see on the timetable you've linked to.

 

[Boycey]

you can say what you like about mussolini but he knew how to sort out the buses.

 

[berniedicters]

I don't give a shit about what's going on in the driver's head - I just want to be on the move, like everyone else. And that's what I pay for.

Look on the bright side. You're getting to sit on the bus that arrived at the stop 5 minutes early, rather than wait in the freezing cold/rain/blazing sunshine for it to arrive at the correct time.

Where's the problem?

Contrary to what you might believe, bus drivers don't get to decide when and where to run their buses, either. It's quite likely that if a bus is being held, it's being done on instructions - from what I gathered from quite a few years ago, running your bus early was a heinous crime compared to running late, and rightly so if there are people who might be relying on its arriving at the timetabled time. And with more and more GPS and other technologies to locate buses, the control rooms know where they are - no driver's going to get away with messing around or swinging the lead for very long.

 

[plasticene]

I think the useful thing would be for your to accept the existence of "everybody else".

I think the useful thing for you would be to quit using the word existence so wrongly!

 

[PacificOcean]

They have started doing this on the tubes too now.

There really is no excuse on the tube - there is no timetable apart from "Every 2-6 minutes"

The Central Line is hot enough without being held willy-nilly.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

So why do you reckon they do it then?

 

[PacificOcean]

So why do you reckon they do it then?

Just to annoy people more?

 

[dodgepot]

fun. must be. not cos of any incidents, doors not closing cos of people getting in the way, scuffles on platforms, nothing like that. just fun.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Just to annoy people more?

I was thinking more along personal lines, like the other check-out queue always moving faster. It's deliberate, see. And it's targetted at you.

 

[berniedicters]

We still don't.

We do. In winter, every 24 hours, two buses come along. One in the morning, one in the afternoon. But the bus stops operate all day.

 

[skyscraper101]

I'd like to see the introduction of route maps on every bus stop with little graphics of busses running along the roads which are controlled by a GPS tracker linked to each bus so we can see roughly how far the bus is away from your stop and if its worth waiting or walking. That would be much cooler than those countdown displays which are wrong half the time anyway and can't display enough information at the same time (and they're only used on a limited number of stops).

Plus I'd like to see the introduction of routemaster style busses that you can hop on and off, which are also accesable to disabled folk.

And, it would be good to have more video stuff on the inside - like live rolling news on TV screens instead of just pictures of what the video cameras are showing.

 

[FabricLiveBaby!]

And, it would be good to have more video stuff on the inside - like live rolling news on TV screens instead of just pictures of what the video cameras are showing.

They do this on the 83.

But it's adverts.