Neck-and-Neck

Other 21st Century Routemaster-related posts

Competition for a New Bus
Routemaster RMXL
More on RMXL
Buses on the Agenda
Boris on Board

Transport has rarely been so high up the agenda as in the London mayoralty campaign, focusing on replacements for much-maligned articulated buses. Polls suggest the two main candidates are neck-and-neck. Conservative Boris Johnson wants a 21st century Routemaster. Labour Ken Livingstone wants to carry on expanding the network in proportion to rising demand. Livingstone doesn’t mention artics but instead trumpets an 8,000 fleet of modern, accessible vehicles to date in making real progress in ‘transforming the quality, accessibility and capacity of London’s bus services’.

When the results are announced this evening, no matter who wins, we’ve prepared a post to suit for each of the two main candidates. Pick your winner.

It's Ken Londoners have been spared a vastly expensive and self-indulgent nostalgia-fest that will see hundreds of costly open platform rear entrance buses on the streets. At £250,000 each and carrying only 78 passengers, there will be no other city in the world prepared to order the 21st century Routemaster to keep capital costs down. And that's before anyone talks about double crewing for up to 24 hours a day, seven days a week. And there would be no manufacturer in the world prepared to build a bus that will see them sued for injury or death, as up to ten people a year die from their falls. And how will these manufacturers circumvent onstruction & use regs with an open platform? Livingstone knows how unpopular the articulated Citaro bendies are and he's previously back peddled by stating they aren't necessarily the one solution to London's surface transport problems. Livingstone could do as Transit magazine suggests and purchase 12m tri-axle deckers. At least that would be a typically British solution.

It's Boris The country's gone soft with its over emphasis on health & safety. The number of injuries resulting from a 21st century Routemaster would be considerably lower than those involving articulated bendy bus Citaros. Artics 'wipe out cyclists, there are many cyclists killed every year by them.' It's therefore a question of balancing risks. Soulless artics rely on passengers standing. Just about all injuries to bus passengers occur in the aisle where users are at their most vulnerable. In any case, this is Britain and passengers don't want to stand. 87 per cent of Londoners would welcome the return of an iconic form of street transport, where locals and tourists alike can enjoy the city sights as they travel. This single act will do more for tourism than any other initiative and will easily pay for any additional costs. Yes, there are strict C&U rules surrounding the type and design of bus doors but nothing in the rules that state you actually must *have* doors in the first place!

Lib Dem Brian Paddick's policies have not generated such interest or caught the public mood in quite the same way yet his bus suggestions are imaginative. He's going for ultra light rail trams to replace bendies, conceding that some artics will need to stay. Each remaining artic route would see uniformed staff to reduce fraud. Ultra light rail is designed to minimise capital cost and street works. But it also loses the flexibility of the bus. 10 out of 10 for suggesting a decent alternative.