NationStates Jolt Archive

Why? They are more efficient as they reduce traffic jams and don't use up as much fuel as two busses.

*poll coming*

All busses are evil.

And after being dragged to school for over six years, at 7:40am, by a double-decker I know they're especially evil.

I like the fact that your spelling of buses is double decker too. :p

Buses cause traffic jams, not reduce them. The person who thought that taking out use a lane of traffic on a busy road and giving it over to dirty, slow, infrequent vehicles with one person on board was a fool.

Because we are the only nation with common sense! *sings "God save the Queen"* *votes UKIP* *Reads Daily Mail* *Urinates on immigrants*:p

Busses (especially New York ones) are evil and should be destroyed as soon as subways can be instituted to cover their routes. And anyone else who has sat in the back of one, wedged between a fat woman and drunken hipster, staring at the slowly expanding crack in the floor and wondering whether the bus will be able to avoid disintegrating long enough for you to make it to the airport will agree with me.

Down with buses. (http://www.chaser.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3289&Itemid=31)

Berlin has them too, silly.

Why? They are more efficient as they reduce traffic jams and don't use up as much fuel as two busses.

*poll coming*
Dublin Bus mostly employs double deckers. (http://www.aidan.co.uk/md/IrlDubA27EdenQ65Bus3X09.jpg)

Why? They are more efficient as they reduce traffic jams and don't use up as much fuel as two busses.

*poll coming*

New York used to have them back in the fifties. Don't know if they have them now or not.

Berlin has them too, silly.

Really, I wasn't aware.

Why? They are more efficient as they reduce traffic jams and don't use up as much fuel as two busses.

*poll coming*

Dublin has them, Berlin has them... the question is, who doesn't have them?

I like the fact that your spelling of buses is double decker too. :p


Yes, ehm, that was intentional. Yes, clever me!

We're just super awesome. Although seeing as others do also - so is the rest of the EU. Hurrah.

Because we're stupid. Come on Canada get with the program.

Because we're stupid. Come on Canada get with the program.

Actually I was just checking wikipedia about it (how sad am I). I think they are being introduced in some areas of canada now.

We're just super awesome. Although seeing as others do also - so is the rest of the EU. Hurrah.
New Yorkers use them (http://www.nytix.com/GuidedTours/BusTours/bustours.html) as a way to keep the tourists off the "real" busses, in a desperate play to avoid crowding. It also gives the fat guy who wants to know "Where do I get on?" some excercise as he chases the bus down 42nd Street.

All busses are evil.

And after being dragged to school for over six years, at 7:40am, by a double-decker I know they're especially evil.

Pfft, the school bus picked me up at 6:35 every morning with a possible deviation of 15 minutes either way, so we'd have to sit outside in the subzero (that's subzero in farenheit) temperatures waiting for the damned thing because if you weren't right out there the driver would just keep on going and we were 15 miles away from the town we went to school in.

Anyway, I wish my town had buses in the regular bus route fashion. We have a couple now but they are more like glorified taxis than anything else. They plan their routes every day by who calls and sets up an appointment to get picked up and dropped off.

Buses cause traffic jams, not reduce them. The person who thought that taking out use a lane of traffic on a busy road and giving it over to dirty, slow, infrequent vehicles with one person on board was a fool.
You're not talking about buses here are you, sounds more like cars. I can count the number of times I've seen a bus with fewer passengers than most of the cars around it, on my hand.

Dublin has them, Berlin has them... the question is, who doesn't have them?

Warsaw does not have any.

Dublin has them, Berlin has them... the question is, who doesn't have them?

Bagdad

Bagdad

What does Baghdad have? Well, besides civil war, criminality, a very high mortality rate and the highest number of guns/resident?

We don't use them in Australia because they won't fit under many of our overpasses.
That said, they are occasionally used as party buses by private firms.

What does Baghdad have? Well, besides civil war, criminality, a very high mortality rate and [b]the highest number of guns/resident?[b]
Actually, that's Nottingham for the guns.

But I digress - it also has lots of craters. And they're digging a trench all around it to keep baddies out. I shit you not.

Actually, that's Nottingham for the guns.

But I digress - it also has lots of craters. And they're digging a trench all around it to keep baddies out. I shit you not.

I know. Next thing you know they'll fill it with water and build a high wall with towers behind it.

I know. Next thing you know they'll fill it with water and build a high wall with towers behind it.
Nottingham already has a castle :p

Oh and well played everywhere that has a bus.

And here's an example of a German Doppeldeckerbus.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Doppeldeckerbus.jpg

But I really like the new generation Ziehharmonikabus!

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/GermanNightmare/Ziehharmonikabus.jpg

Why? They are more efficient as they reduce traffic jams and don't use up as much fuel as two busses.

*poll coming*

I believe they are being phased out anyway.:(

What does Baghdad have? Well, besides civil war, criminality, a very high mortality rate and the highest number of guns/resident?

no. he was talking about Bagdad, not baghdad.

Ooh, I think Kennedy Space Centre has double decker busses. I remember going on them in Florida.

Y'see, they've warped me so badly that all I remember* from a holiday to Florida is double decker busses. With tinted windows.

*Ish, maybe.

Dublin Bus mostly employs double deckers. (http://www.aidan.co.uk/md/IrlDubA27EdenQ65Bus3X09.jpg)

Curses, beaten too it.

no. he was talking about Bagdad, not baghdad.
I wouldn't trust you with proper spelling if my life depended on it.

I believe they are being phased out anyway.:(

Phased out where? They have phased out the old style Routemaster bus with the open rear deck on all but 2 "heritage" routes, but there are loads of brand new double deckers on other routes. They have introduced the bendy bus, but they are just too unmanoeuvrable in London's old streets. They also have 3 hydrogen fuel cell buses, but those are also being taken out of service, although London Transport have tendered for 73 more.

I like the fact that your spelling of buses is double decker too. :p

Buses cause traffic jams, not reduce them. The person who thought that taking out use a lane of traffic on a busy road and giving it over to dirty, slow, infrequent vehicles with one person on board was a fool.

But if more peole used them then that one slow vehicle would take about 30 cars off the road. The more people that use them, the faster traffic will go.

The same is even more true of Metro Rails.

But if more peole used them then that one slow vehicle would take about 30 cars off the road. The more people that use them, the faster traffic will go.

Ah, so I have to get up earlier, to wait in the cold, to catch a bus that's late, to sit next to someone with a hygiene problem, to listen to the moron behind me playing his music too loudly, to be dropped off 20 minutes from where I want to be, so that the guy who stayed in his car gets to move more quickly?

Keep going here; you're really convincing me.

Because we're stupid. Come on Canada get with the program.
Because they are so tall, so heavy, and typically so slow, they must be carefully considered before purchasing to ensure a good fit for ones needs.

http://busforsaleguide.com/double-decker-bus.htm

Because we're stupid. Come on Canada get with the program.

Actually I was just checking wikipedia about it (how sad am I). I think they are being introduced in some areas of canada now.

Victoria has had double decker buses for years now. What are you talking about?

Because the rest of the world sucks.... duh!:D

I love those 40 year old, semi-wooden contraptions we have in Colchester.....

Actually I was just checking wikipedia about it (how sad am I). I think they are being introduced in some areas of canada now.
Yes indeed. We have had "tourist" double deckers for as long as I've lived in Victoria BC (so at least 2 decades), and the city has been using double deckers as public transportation on the busy routes for several years now.

When I was 15 (again, 2 decades ago) I rode a double decker in Ottawa. But it was a tourist-mobile, not public transport.

What does Baghdad have? Well, besides civil war, criminality, a very high mortality rate and the highest number of guns/resident?

You've got to be kidding. A higher number than Texas? That's it. They're all going to die. :eek:

Dublin has them, Berlin has them... the question is, who doesn't have them?

Seems like alot of cities use them for tours. Boston doesn't. We have duck (http://www.gbpflag.org/advocacy/pridemarches/Boston-Pride-2003/_photos/GBBC%20Duck%20Tours.jpg) tour (http://graphicslib.viator.com/graphicslib/3037/SITours/duck2.jpg)s for that

It would be inefficient in Columbus. We rarely fill up a single level bus, so why would we go for doubles?

We have a few open top double deckers, but you have to duck when you go under some of the bridges here. (Whether they were originaly open top buses is open to question.)

We have a few open top double deckers, but you have to duck when you go under some of the bridges here. (Whether they were originaly open top buses is open to question.)

:p

Ah, so I have to get up earlier, to wait in the cold, to catch a bus that's late, to sit next to someone with a hygiene problem, to listen to the moron behind me playing his music too loudly, to be dropped off 20 minutes from where I want to be, so that the guy who stayed in his car gets to move more quickly?
I feel sorry for you, please understand that not everywhere has a bus service as shit as the hole you live in.

I feel sorry for you, please understand that not everywhere has a bus service as shit as the hole you live in.

Agreed, almost every place I have lived at has a very reliable bus service.

I feel sorry for you, please understand that not everywhere has a bus service as shit as the hole you live in.

'Bus service' and 'not shit' are mutally exclusive concepts.

You still need the same number of buses. Unless you are going to reduce the number running on the route it really won't make any difference. In really busy areas though it will give more seats so you don't have to stand. That is certainly a plus.

Double-decker buses have both their drawbacks and advantages.

The advantages:
* Capacity.

Disadvantages:
* Slower and less maneuverable.
* Not applicable for all routes.
* More dangerous due to much lesser stability.
* Take more time per passenger to load and unload, and even more considering the number.
* While cheaper per passenger, still more expensive and consuming per vehicle.
* Lower granularity decreases average usage:capacity ratio.

So double-deckers may decrease load on a high-traffic line, but, unless buses are overloaded, even with the same number of buses the quality of service decreases due to lower speed. If the number is decreased, the quality decreases more severely.
Double-deckers are appropriate where the number of passengers demands buses to come each five minutes or less, distances between stations are short, and the road traffic is slow anyway. They, however, offer little advantage on more loaded lines. A solution of smaller number of double-deckers is less flexible than of more smaller vehicles. On lines with highly varying passenger traffic, long routes, and any complications, conventional smaller buses are more effective.

The first situation is cities like London, and double-deckers fit there well. The United States is a much larger country with lower population density, so smaller vehicles are a better solution in most cases.

THe simple reason America doesn't have double decker buses is because we have wide roads, so our powerlines are lower and the double decker buses would rip down the lines. And also, we have sharper corners to turn, so a double decker bus would be unsafe on such roads.

That just came out of my ass, so I dunno if it's true.

Double-decker buses have both their drawbacks and advantages.

The advantages:
* Capacity.

Disadvantages:
* Slower and less maneuverable.
* Not applicable for all routes.
* More dangerous due to much lesser stability.
* Take more time per passenger to load and unload, and even more considering the number.
* While cheaper per passenger, still more expensive and consuming per vehicle.
* Lower granularity decreases average usage:capacity ratio.

So double-deckers may decrease load on a high-traffic line, but, unless buses are overloaded, even with the same number of buses the quality of service decreases due to lower speed. If the number is decreased, the quality decreases more severely.
Double-deckers are appropriate where the number of passengers demands buses to come each five minutes or less, distances between stations are short, and the road traffic is slow anyway. They, however, offer little advantage on more loaded lines. A solution of smaller number of double-deckers is less flexible than of more smaller vehicles. On lines with highly varying passenger traffic, long routes, and any complications, conventional smaller buses are more effective.

The first situation is cities like London, and double-deckers fit there well. The United States is a much larger country with lower population density, so smaller vehicles are a better solution in most cases.

What an excellent answer, you should hang out on NS more often. :)

THe simple reason America doesn't have double decker buses is because we have wide roads, so our powerlines are lower and the double decker buses would rip down the lines. And also, we have sharper corners to turn, so a double decker bus would be unsafe on such roads.

That just came out of my ass, so I dunno if it's true.

If you think the USA has sharper corners, then you've never been to England. Logically, wide roads & sharp corners don't go together.


We don't have double decker buses in Melbourne, but we do have trams. Trams pwn all, trams FTW! :p

Probably 'cause you guys are too cool for us to be able to use one...actually they are in NYC as tour buses...we usually use double buses attached...

New Yorkers use them (http://www.nytix.com/GuidedTours/BusTours/bustours.html) as a way to keep the tourists off the "real" busses, in a desperate play to avoid crowding. It also gives the fat guy who wants to know "Where do I get on?" some excercise as he chases the bus down 42nd Street.

Heh, I used to throw water balloons and other um... stuff onto those buses from my roof when I was little. They stopped going down my street though.:(

Probably 'cause you guys are too cool for us to be able to use one...actually they are in NYC as tour buses...we usually use double buses attached...


The attached double buses are way cooler.

Heh, I used to throw water balloons and other um... stuff onto those buses from my roof when I was little. They stopped going down my street though.:(

Dude. Shit in your hands is never a good thing.

*slaps you with a Lynyrd Skynyrd album*

Oh, the irony!

Dude. Shit in your hands is never a good thing.


Not on my hands, on their heads.

(the rest of that post went so far over my head)

'Bus service' and 'not shit' are mutally exclusive concepts.
Who could have known that the internet not only crosses between many different lands, but different universes?!

I wouldn't trust you with proper spelling if my life depended on it.

would you trust wikipedia? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baghdad)

Not on my hands, on their heads.

(the rest of that post went so far over my head)

Wait, so did you take a dump in a baseball cap and sling it on the buses?

And note that after I said "Shit in your hands is never a good thing", I followed through by slapping you with a Lynyrd Skynyrd album, which, of course, would have to be in my hands.

Buses are cool, but I much like the subway.

Why? They are more efficient as they reduce traffic jams and don't use up as much fuel as two busses.

*poll coming*

We do have them. We also have the sort that are twice as long with a flexible joint in the middle.

http://www.lovetoeatandtravel.com/Graphics/Photos/NewYork/0690-red_tour_bus_openair_240x156.jpg

Wait, so did you take a dump in a baseball cap and sling it on the buses?

And note that after I said "Shit in your hands is never a good thing", I followed through by slapping you with a Lynyrd Skynyrd album, which, of course, would have to be in my hands.

I thought that there might be another reason for having a specific album other than to say its shit? It makes sense though.

For the first part, there was never actual shit involved, we were to young to think that gross. However, a local kid did had access to stink bombs, which were quite effective.

NZ has double decker buses, not many, but yeah.
Edit: As for sharp corners, I was under the impression that double deckers can lean further without falling. I'll look it up, but it may not be the case, so no flaming of teh me plox :p

Feh. Buses are okay, but I like trams.