Close Menu
    Vereinigtes Königreich

    „Busse im Londoner Stil“ werden landesweit mit einer Steigerung von 1 Milliarde Pfund versprochen


    „Busse im Londoner Stil“ werden landesweit mit einer Steigerung von 1 Milliarde Pfund versprochen

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c86qy500545o

    Von dc456

    View 18 Comments

    18 Comments

    2. AlpsSad1364 on

      For context London subsidises its buses by about £760m a year (excluding capex).

    3. Thetonn on

      This is inevitably doomed to fail.

      London has a far better population density, but still needs to subsidise its buses. The way you make buses work is by identifying those areas where it makes sense to run them viably, and focus on delivering a high quality, reliable service there in order to get a modal shift.

      Universality just means the entire model becomes entirely reliant on subsidy, which will inevitably get cut when it is proven to fail.

    4. O-bot54 on

      Everyone is very negative in the comments but investment is needed .

      I think we should focus on rail and roads first when it comes to transport under government ownership and scrap the planning bill that doubles the cost of any development but i will take any investment as a positive , the country has become a rotting corpse of what it was in the 70’s .

    5. Questjon on

      Bullshit. Buses in London work because they’re frequent enough that you don’t need a passenger timetable. That’s undoable outside big cities because the passenger density isn’t there. What non-london buses need is a unified API so we can have a national travel app that ties in buses and trains and provides reliable realtime information. I also think we need to look at standardising taxi services and bringing them into the public transport fold a) because the data is valuable for planning bus routes and b) in some communities it makes more sense to subsidise taxis (or some flexible taxi/minibus service) than to run a bus timetable.

    6. FewEstablishment2696 on

      You used to be able to buy crack upstairs on the number 38 bus to Clapton Pond. Is this what they mean when they say “London-style” buses?

    7. Purple_Feature1861 on

      I like the sound of this, though I think if this does come about they need to put it in the right areas 

    8. newnortherner21 on

      Building more buses fairly easy with the money. The point about being frequent enough to remember and not have to look at a timetable also important to get a step change in use.

      Need to get the DVLA to function so bus drivers can be recruited quickly (if you have to wait they will accept another job). You need to have the police and CPS support them so anyone who commits crime on a bus is prosecuted, and proper planning of roadworks so buses don’t end up being delayed in March because of ‘essential roadworks’ (‘essential’ spending of council budgets).

      This seems to need some joined up thinking, otherwise it will be limited in what it achieves.

    9. AsianOnee on

      This is a joke. I would avoid taking bus in London because they take forever. Frequent detours and you never know where the fuck you are going to end up. Tube is actually doable in medium size city. But the strike is going to fuck it all up. Nothing works in this country.

    10. Marble-Boy on

      I suppose that’s as good an excuse as any for having to raise the prices..

      *”who cares that it’s a tenner one way? We’ve got a whole fleet of new buses, baby!”*

    11. ChickenPijja on

      While this is a welcome boost, I fear that this money will be wasted on a few tweaks that won’t actually improve services. Last few times we got improvements round here we had: Raised kerbs at bus stops, 12 months later the bus companies introduced kneeling busses. New busses where the main feature was that it announced the stop name, which customers found loud and annoying and so was switched off. Finally “dynamic” bus timetable displays at stops, but the busses didn’t have any way to communicate with the signs to say when the next one was due, then the grant ran out so they were switched off.

      Seriously just improve the timings, cost and frequency of the services and people will use them, fuck around with a novelty that requires more money in the long term, and you’ve just wasted a billion. 

    13. aegroti on

      as someone who went to London recently and hadn’t tried their buses in a decade I don’t see how they could work unless they rapidly increase bus frequency. The three door buses make it easier getting on and off but it also means they lose about a third of their carrying capacity.

      I’d rather not be getting onto a bus which has almost no seats downstairs when it’s busy.

      I quite like the modern West Midlands buses, good amount of seats, charging ports (although I don’t really use them and they charge extremely slowly) and sometimes even limited public wifi.

      If there was investment I’d prefer better bus stops with accurate timetables. I’m sure we’ve all had the issue where you’re waiting for a bus that says 5 minutes and it passes by saying not in service. There’s no excuse, IMO, why they aren’t able to update the timetable so you’re not waiting for a not in service bus. Delays are understandable though in traffic/bad weather/unforeseen issues.

    14. Palaponel on

      There’s some absolutely deranged comments in here.

      At the end of the day, most people in the UK live in major towns or cities. Towns and cities cannot function without public transport – private car drivers are simply not efficient and never will be at that population density. Congestion is one of the biggest economic inefficiencies we have, never-mind the pollution aspect.

      Cities need to ban the use of private cars. Restrict driving to emergency services, buses, taxis, businesses, and deliveries (during certain hours).

      The benefits would be huge:

      – Bus services would improve massively due to lower congestion

      – Every other road user would benefit from lower congestion

      – The economy & innovation would benefit from increased ease of movement

      – Number of traffic accidents would drop precipitously

      – Much more space for expanding pavements, bike lanes, green space

      – Much fewer emissions = cleaner air, healthier population

      – More walking or cycling = healthier population

      – More time back for the public

      – Public ownership of public transport would allow for greater integration – imagine being able to use a single point of contact to plan and pay for your transport.

      The Government should take responsibility for public transport, which means a near-full subsidy to the point that there is only a nominal fee (and I include national rail in this).

      This also means taking responsibility for increasing the capacity (which is currently insufficient for current public transport users, let alone when faced with a significant increase). Actually building Underground networks in other cities outside of London. Actually building high speed rail.

      It also means building more mid-rise housing, because public transport is only going to be value for money with a decent population density. The Government should focus on raising population density in a positive way by building such housing after the manner of European cities like Barcelona.

      I can already see that these proposals are going to irritate some people, but at the end of the day this is the only way you can effectively run cities. You cannot have next level, futuristic cities while they are chock full of cars. It is not possible.

    15. Environmental_Move38 on

      They’ve mentioned Leicester (my home town) in article with the urban area including the suburbs likely around about 650,000 people and fast growing. Can’t have trams so it’s only form of useable public transport is buses unlike other cities like Nottingham (etc) who have a good tram network. Having lived on the outskirts of the defined city area it was a nightmare getting a bus into the city as they were generally packed by the time it got to you and at times the bus would go passed as they couldn’t take anyone else. So the inner city passengers got the rough end of the journey. Partner that with reliability I stopped using them and drove instead. If there was an example of where a city with need for more buses to meet demand / get people out of their cars it’s here. And with huge housing developments going up in the suburbs guess what they’ll need…

    16. Cynical_Classicist on

      If they could do that, then this would actually be a help. But how long does it take to get people used to it?

    17. Astriania on

      This is obviously a good thing. Will it fix buses overnight? No. But it will fix two major issues with it:

      – Councils have long been unable to run the local buses, so private companies compete over the profitable routes and abandon the unprofitable ones, resulting in an incomplete network

      – Some services (especially late night ones) are unprofitable but socially useful and therefore have a benefit to being subsidised, this money will allow councils to support those services.

    18. Kcufasu on

      We don’t need London style buses whatever the fuck that means, we need London priced bus services. But no they are making the £2 cap £3 already

    Leave A Reply