I like watching the other half of the bus while riding these. It's a cool effect, seeing the whole "room" oscillate through the "doorway", while I feel like I'm standing still.
Edit: The article has a video of this effect near the bottom.
One silver lining to the bus being packed is standing with one foot on either side of the articulation pivot. Feeling your stance change under you while you're standing still is neat.
When I got to where they explained the benefits of having the engine at the very back and the instability of having the back part push the front, I tried to guess how they solved it. I guessed a fancy drive shaft with universal joints so the engine in the back half could drive wheels in the front half.
I guessed wrong. I still like my idea, but their solution is simpler and probably more efficient and more durable too.
> “The articulated bus is a common sight everywhere”
Certainly not in London where they were famously banned in 2009.
Now days they’re uncommon throughout the UK, with UK cities having a preference for double-deckers. You do see them in use as shuttles at some UK airports, though.
In Chicago the drivers and passengers just yell at you to move to the back. I've never seen a bus not get to capacity due to poor utilization. Trains, it does happen and those you can enter anywhere. There's no staff there to call out the inconsiderate.
Why were they banned? They're used in the Netherlands which is rife with small bendy streets so if that was the argument it seems to be somewhat spurious.
There were some fatalities that got a lot of attention in the media. There was also a problem with fare evasion. Some were catching fire as well. A perfect storm of issues.
Also don't forget changing anything is a great opportunity for grift and politicking. Test. Evaluate. Plan. Consult. Pilot. Source. Phase out. Phase in. Maintain. A lot of public money to distribute! A lot of project credit-taking and future-progress-aligning to be image-jacked!
The right-wing media at the time latched onto them as the cause of all of society's problems, and Boris Johnson promised to get rid of them if he was elected mayor.
In addition to the other reply's issues, they replaced the dirty and stinking but British-made old Routemaster buses, they were much more accessible to the disabled and babies (pushchairs), they were used successfully elsewhere in Europe, and they use more road space which could otherwise contain an important person's car.
I think they're still used in cities outside London, but that's OK since Daily Telegraph journalists never go there.
Boarding times though? I agree of course about the cool factor and I was sure to ride one when visiting London, but afaik the slower (dis)embarking times are why double-decked trains are primarily used on intercity trains and not on commuter/local trains or light rail (metro etc.). Typical busses stopping every two minutes are probably similar
Edit: wait, I know one in Germany as well. It's expensive but between Frankfurt airport and another major city, there is a rail line but somehow the bus is significantly faster and they're using double deckers. The front row at the top was, n=3, always free for me (all four seats) so you get a quite unique experience, at least so far as my bus experiences in mainland western Europe go :)
Often true. OTOH, the reduced footprint (vs. either 1 articulated or 2 normal busses) can speeds things up, especially on cramped and congested city streets. And if you're getting near gridlock-level congestion, the length of the articulated busses can be like dumping gravel into your system's gearbox.
The goal of public transportation is to move people fast around the city. Not to have the driver sell the tickets, that’s what the ticket machine is for (both on stations and on board). Anybody using public transportation daily probably has a monthly ticket anyway. And not to provide tourist information.
People want to get to work on time after all. Entering and leaving the tram or bus through all door is a simple way to improve public transports reliability.
Double deckers I’ve seen have just one narrow staircase. You can’t have people go up and down at the same time. Through a door you can move some people in and out at the same time, however it’s rude, but since it’s a door and not a lengthy corridor, you can easily have a group of people go out, let new passengers in, and get in again.
How about articulated double-decker buses? The one does not need to exclude the other after all. It'd need a large harmonica to deal with hills and bumps or it could have separated top floors with sloping roofs.
Just 2 days ago: one of these buses had an accident that left the front part twisted 180 degrees in relation to the rear: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flbaRmGKzPY
The Munich bus-trailer in action: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4IUE-yA8R1A
This article's byline features one of the most magnificent cases of nominative determinism I've ever seen. I wonder if it's a nom de plume.
Name chosen on gender change
https://medium.com/@MissMercedes/the-birth-of-mercedes-cb41d...
I like watching the other half of the bus while riding these. It's a cool effect, seeing the whole "room" oscillate through the "doorway", while I feel like I'm standing still.
Edit: The article has a video of this effect near the bottom.
The trains around Munich, Germany were fantastic for that effect. 15+ cars long with wide, open pivots.
Yep I find the Elizabeth Line in London has this effect too.
I find it a bit freaky to be honest but you do get used to it.
Most metros are like this no? Not much seating, just articulated open tubes(-in-tubes)
Only if the trains are less than about 25 years old. Before that there were only narrow walkways between carriages.
The best part is sitting in the swivel part and having the whole bus bend around you.
My college years did not include all that many hangovers, but I distinctly remember not enjoying this effect one morning.
One silver lining to the bus being packed is standing with one foot on either side of the articulation pivot. Feeling your stance change under you while you're standing still is neat.
When I got to where they explained the benefits of having the engine at the very back and the instability of having the back part push the front, I tried to guess how they solved it. I guessed a fancy drive shaft with universal joints so the engine in the back half could drive wheels in the front half.
I guessed wrong. I still like my idea, but their solution is simpler and probably more efficient and more durable too.
A more modern solution would be to use electric motors on multiple axles, the power coming from a generator or battery.
The bus version of an EMU train
> “The articulated bus is a common sight everywhere”
Certainly not in London where they were famously banned in 2009.
Now days they’re uncommon throughout the UK, with UK cities having a preference for double-deckers. You do see them in use as shuttles at some UK airports, though.
In Chicago the drivers and passengers just yell at you to move to the back. I've never seen a bus not get to capacity due to poor utilization. Trains, it does happen and those you can enter anywhere. There's no staff there to call out the inconsiderate.
Why were they banned? They're used in the Netherlands which is rife with small bendy streets so if that was the argument it seems to be somewhat spurious.
There were some fatalities that got a lot of attention in the media. There was also a problem with fare evasion. Some were catching fire as well. A perfect storm of issues.
Also don't forget changing anything is a great opportunity for grift and politicking. Test. Evaluate. Plan. Consult. Pilot. Source. Phase out. Phase in. Maintain. A lot of public money to distribute! A lot of project credit-taking and future-progress-aligning to be image-jacked!
The right-wing media at the time latched onto them as the cause of all of society's problems, and Boris Johnson promised to get rid of them if he was elected mayor.
In addition to the other reply's issues, they replaced the dirty and stinking but British-made old Routemaster buses, they were much more accessible to the disabled and babies (pushchairs), they were used successfully elsewhere in Europe, and they use more road space which could otherwise contain an important person's car.
I think they're still used in cities outside London, but that's OK since Daily Telegraph journalists never go there.
Call me a fossil, but double-decker busses just seem so much cooler. Without all the added engineering complexity, costs, and footprint.
Boarding times though? I agree of course about the cool factor and I was sure to ride one when visiting London, but afaik the slower (dis)embarking times are why double-decked trains are primarily used on intercity trains and not on commuter/local trains or light rail (metro etc.). Typical busses stopping every two minutes are probably similar
Edit: wait, I know one in Germany as well. It's expensive but between Frankfurt airport and another major city, there is a rail line but somehow the bus is significantly faster and they're using double deckers. The front row at the top was, n=3, always free for me (all four seats) so you get a quite unique experience, at least so far as my bus experiences in mainland western Europe go :)
> Boarding times though?
Often true. OTOH, the reduced footprint (vs. either 1 articulated or 2 normal busses) can speeds things up, especially on cramped and congested city streets. And if you're getting near gridlock-level congestion, the length of the articulated busses can be like dumping gravel into your system's gearbox.
These issues are solved with dedicated bus lanes, which are desirable even for double deckers.
True. While I love our articulated buses in Kraków, if one of these stops mid-turn on an intersection, it blocks 3 out of 4 movement directions.
> Boarding times though?
cant they just put another entry door?
You can, but it's easier to evade fares. The driver can enforce fares better at the door near them.
My local transit agency just stopped allowing rear door boarding, and that was one of the main reasons: https://waypointblog.com/capmetro-is-ending-rear-door-boardi...
The goal of public transportation is to move people fast around the city. Not to have the driver sell the tickets, that’s what the ticket machine is for (both on stations and on board). Anybody using public transportation daily probably has a monthly ticket anyway. And not to provide tourist information.
People want to get to work on time after all. Entering and leaving the tram or bus through all door is a simple way to improve public transports reliability.
maybe i dont understand how articulated bus makes boarding faster. If anything it makes it slower compared to double decker .
Double deckers I’ve seen have just one narrow staircase. You can’t have people go up and down at the same time. Through a door you can move some people in and out at the same time, however it’s rude, but since it’s a door and not a lengthy corridor, you can easily have a group of people go out, let new passengers in, and get in again.
The original designs had boarding at the back. Don't even have to stop people can just leap on.
You have different footprint issues. And a lot of cities seem to have been doing ok with the engineering bit for what, 60 years now?
Double-deckers are cool, I’ll grant you that. And a very nice way to visit a city. But they are far, far less efficient in terms of capacity.
How about articulated double-decker buses? The one does not need to exclude the other after all. It'd need a large harmonica to deal with hills and bumps or it could have separated top floors with sloping roofs.
How about double-articulated double-deckers?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoplan_Jumbocruiser
> need a large harmonica to deal
I'd guess you mean "large accordion". Either way, the size & complexity of that joint section may be why the idea never went anywhere.