The New Routemaster

[Marmora Man]

I like the new bus and intend to use it when I can.

[Huguenot]

I like Chippy implying that the 'lack of competition' in building the bus was a bad thing ;-) If he's up for compeition I'm hanging on to his coat tails!

[Chippy Minton]

I like the look MM, very cool, it's just they're the latest dim, waste of money, decision from a London Mayor.

Ken should never have introduced bendys; once they were introduced Boris should never have been so gung ho about getting rid of them; introducing this new Routemaster is the latest and stupidest decision from Boris; and no doubt if Ken gets in in May he'll have a good look at getting rid of these new Routemasters! We're going round in circles!

[Brendan]

Is it going to get more people off the road and out of my parking spaces?

[malumbu]

I saw this one day

Not sure that it will catch on though

[Lowlander]

Actually the old routemasters were fairly future-proof and modular, this was proven when they fitted new engines to them sometime last decade (2000-2010 IIRC).

Ironically this made them fully compliant with the latest emissions standards and more fuel efficient - around 5mpg - than their successors.

They easily had another decade in them when they were withdrawn.

[tfwsoll]

I loved the old Routemasters as a design icon but they were uncomfortable, freezing cold in winter and virtually impossible to get off when they were sardine-full during the rush hour. More importantly, they weren't designed for wheelchair users or anyone with mobility problems. I've heard that the new Boris Buses have been criticised by lobbyists representing the less mobile in London so I am would be worried if they are being seen as the future of public transport.

[Michael Palaeologus]

The antis do seem to WANT the tung to fail as it allows them to express their anti-Boris angst.

No reason why this bus shouldnt succeed anymore or less than any other.

To say that not many countries use double deckers is bizzare.

[Huguenot]

The disagreement here seems to be between single-issue stakeholders refusing to see the the project from the point of view of its many other objectives.

Yes getting Londoners around town efficiently and effectively is one, so is disabled access and so are the environmental considerations.

Howener, the Routemasters were always much more than this - they were an icon of London and the UK that positioned us on the world stage as a quirky nation with a sense of tradition and independence.

You rarely see iconic photos of London or Britain overseas that don't have a Routemaster in shot.

Retaining that positioning benefits us in terms of tourist dollars and international business.

I thought the bendys were a tragedy at so many levels - difficult to drive around London's streets, a threat to other road users, a characterless tilt at modernism, an inefficient use of limited roadspace...

The new Routemaster takes all this into account - and to attribute the R&D costs to the first 10 buses as 'proof of their poor value for money' is patently stupid.

It's base electioneering, and is a demonstration of the cynical intent of politicians willing to deceive the electorate to try and deliver substandard planning and solutions that London doesn't need.

[Jeremy]

Totally agree that the claims of "?1.4m per bus" are nothing short of stupid. (Tottenham MP David Lammy came out with a bizarre quote saying that it's equivalent of a new BMW per seat!). But even once production is scaled up, surely a custom-designed bus will still work out a lot more expensive than a Mercedes or Volvo bus produced in vast quantities? And I would still argue that this is not the right time to be spending money on "Cool Britannia" icons.

It does look good though...

[Michael Palaeologus]

Its a custom designed bus for London; and could be a custom designed bus for anyone of a score or more cities.

The Volvo buses on the streets of a core of cities all have the same basic chassis and body form. However, they all differ in detail, that is the nature of modern manufacturing.

Whether its Volvo or Mercedes or whoever, they all invest many millions of pounds in developing a new bus, then sell it in various forms and adaptations.

The same will be true of the Routemaster. There is nothing about this bus that will stop it selling elsewhere.

[Huguenot]

Just as an aside, I disagree that recessions are the wrong time to invest in cultural, landmark or innovative public projects.

I think it's the perfect time - get everybody up and at 'em...

[Jeremy]

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The same will be true of the Routemaster. There is

> nothing about this bus that will stop it selling

> elsewhere.

I did try googling, and could find nothing about plans to flog it abroad. Neither could I find anything about the original routemaster being sold overseas. But it is early days, time will tell.

[Huguenot]

According to this independent Autocar review, despite its unique design, the new Routemaster is only 10% more than the average hybrid bus.

I think that's a tiny price to pay for the iconic value, and the potential it has to make more cash for TfL on resale. Places like HK and Sg also have RHD buses with card only usage - so there's no reason why it shouldn'y be equally popular there (it would only really work for card based public transport and hence no use in the shires):

"At around ?330,000, the NBfL won?t be cheap when it makes full-scale production for 2013, but neither are its competitors: other hybrid double-deck buses cost ?300,000, and when you consider the 12 to 15-year lifespan in London (after which each bus might still get sold on), the NBfL doesn?t seem like such bad value.

"Especially when you consider its economy and emissions. A return of 11.6mpg and 640g/km of CO2 don?t sound that great until you consider that a typical hybrid double-decker returns just 8.6mpg and 864g/km, and a conventional diesel bus 5.8mpg and 1295g/km. London has to make big improvements to its air quality, and the reduction in emissions that comes from replacing several hundred of TfL?s 8000 buses with NBfLs will contribute to the clean-up. If all goes well, TfL might even clean up financially, too; if Wrightbus can sell this design to other cities and countries, TfL gets a cut of each sale.

"Price: ?330,000; Economy: 11.6mpg; CO2: 640g/km; Kerb weight: 17,900kg; Generator: 4 cyls in line, 4460cc, rear-mounted, turbodiesel; Transmission: RWD Siemens full-series hybrid system with DC inverter, Siemens AC electric moto and 75kWh lithium ion battery pack; Power: 174bhp; Torque: 1844lb ft"

[Undisputedtruth]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=QNtg7fwsPiA#t=102s

According to this link the new London Bus design cannot be exported due to lack of international standard regulations for a rear open platform vehicle.

With regards to the costs, Boris has previously stated the new buses will cost just a bit more than the standard buses after mass production. The ?12m figure quoted by Silverfox included the r&d costs.

[Huguenot]

That story merely relates that the new London Routemaster doesn't fall within current EU legislation.

Since there are no other back platform double deckers this isn't exactly surprising is it?

As all in the industry have observed, it is still likely to be passed as fit for use after the designs have been submitted.

The story is simply tabloid scaremongering from that rather populist bunch at BBC London.

[Voyageur]

I like it!

[pk]

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> That story merely relates that the new London

> Routemaster doesn't fall within current EU

> legislation.

>

> Since there are no other back platform double

> deckers this isn't exactly surprising is it?

>

what i don't get is that if the routemaster's strength is that the old one was a london icon (which didn't successfully export elsewhere (as far as i am aware) not even elsewhere in this country). why this one would be a successful export overseas when no else in the world seems to think that there's a market for back platform double deckers?

[Undisputedtruth]

That story merely relates that the new London Routemaster doesn't fall within current EU legislation.

The whole point of the video was that the new buses may not be exported. They said international regulations not EU legislation, you prat. With a small risk of a challenge by the EC.

Anyway, buses are heavily subsidised and I rather see the money spent on developing trams for London. They have cross party support, better green credentials, faster and more cost effective than buses. The current coalition government are in favour of trams.

[El Pibe]

Trams are evil. I lived in Amsterdam for a while and still bear the pyschological scars!!!!!

[Undisputedtruth]

Trams are popular, EP, and there are a number of new Tram projects in the UK.

[El Pibe]

Like the Edinburgh tram? That went well!!!!

Trams are great when you're on them, it's when you're a road user of some ilk that they become silent angels of DEATH!!!!

[maxxi]

I travelled on the Croydon tram network for the first time a couple of weeks ago and it was weirdly wonderful. Like being on a bus that was driving along the railway line. As it starts (at Wimbledon station) on the adjacent platform to the train you arrive on it's as convenient as heck too.

[Undisputedtruth]

Trams have gone down well in Nottingham and Manchester, EP.

[Huguenot]

Haha! Being called a prat by UDT, it's like watching him soil his panties and limp slowly away with his knees held far apart.

One of the particular problems with the old Routemaster was that it required a staff of two. The new one can either operate as a one man bus, with only the front entrance open, or as a card system with all doors open. It's particularly suited to HK and SG for that reason. The majority of fleets in both those cities are double deck.

As it happens, old Routemasters continue to be employed around the world as tourist buses despite UDT claiming bus regulation as yet another area of expertise.