packed buses...

Stephen15

bebeman wrote: »

Only trolling going on here is the constant bashing of DB and unions from posters who do not know what they are talking about.
The SIPTU documents he refers to have NOTHING to do with a 24 hour service, they are to do with new timetables on routes, where DB tried to get a departure after 2330.
The only one i currently know of is the midnight 84, in the past there was a 44 and 184 that departed after 2330, these are what the letter refers to as local agreements.
The Unions and DB have already agreed to 24 hour bus service and did so years ago, the hold up now is The NTA, some posters here have a set of blinkers on which prevents them from seeing any wrongdoing by the NTA, it appeared that the LUAS cross city mess has lifted the veil for some on this issue but now they have falling back into old bad habits of blaming the wrong people for problems that have nothing to do with them.
These same posters are in denial that DB has had serious trouble recruiting drivers the last few years, the fact is these new drivers are contracted to work 24 hour service, but DB knows if they force them to do it many will walk, so they have offered increased pay and conditions to try get drivers to volunteer to work these shifts.
Now DB wait for the NTA to give permission to run theses 24 hour services.
DB and unions as the bad guys is a figment of your imagination, i repeatedly posted that DB cant put on extra Buses without the permission of the NTA, the pro NTA posters claimed this was false, then the NTA said exactly the same thing the other day and still some refuse to believe.

""Asked whether Dublin Bus has the freedom to add more buses to a route if demand is there, the NTA said a process is in place where such an application can be made.

“Basically, the situation is that they’re (Dublin Bus) under contract with the NTA, they’re the providers, they’re contracted to us. If they want to vary the conditions of the contract, they put a formal process to us and we would consider it and make a detention as to whether it goes ahead or not,” O’Gara explains."

The 65 has an 00:15 departure from Ballymore Eustace and the 33 has a 23:50 departure from Balbriggan.

I don't see why there would be any union issues when the same unions agreed to a 24h timetables on the 109a for BE.

Stevek101

Don't mind the above about ancient services agremeents and post 2330 departures. Unions have met with the company on the 23rd Jan to discuss 24h services. This is due to the fact the NTA are seeking them to be introduced on 39 and 41 amongst others.

devnull

Stevek101 wrote: »

Don't mind the above about ancient services agremeents and post 2330 departures. Unions have met with the company on the 23rd Jan to discuss 24h services. This is due to the fact the NTA are seeking them to be introduced on 39 and 41 amongst others.

That is what I was speaking about here (second part) from an official union source.

Is there any indication in the public domain as to how these talks went and what the potential stumbling blocks are, if any?

Stevek101

devnull wrote: »

That is what I was speaking about here from an official union source.

Is there any indication in the public domain as to how these talks went?

Yeah, that's exactly it. Haven't heard a thing but I am sure we will know soon enough.

I honestly don't know why they don't just tender out late night services.

AlekSmart

devnull wrote: »

That is what I was speaking about here (second part) from an official union source.

Is there any indication in the public domain as to how these talks went and what the potential stumbling blocks are, if any?

Perhaps the most significant issue currently within the BMO discussions,is the lack of information,both internally,via Staff memo's or Management Interaction etc and externally,via NTA,BAC or DTTaS Press Releases.

Another element of note,is the Agreement between the Company,NTA,Unions and DTTaS,which ended the 2104 dispute and allowed the BMO process to be completed is based upon 2013 usership statistics,which have significantly altered in the interim.

To date,no indication has been given that the current statistics have been factored into the responses we are implementing.

This issue,I believe,requires URGENT clarification from the parties to the 2014 Agreement.

The lack of effective communication processes,has inevitably led to a swamp full of bubbling gasses,in which the loudest,brashest (and craziest) individuals hold sway.

Managing the entire BMO process is not a smple process for any of the agencies involved,BUT,it would be a whole lot easier if some attention was paid to simple communication issues,to allow both Staff AND Customer to plan for their futures.

This also factors into the sorry mess which the entire Luas BXD/Cross City Bus situation entails.
Noteworthy & long established agencies such as DCC,NTA,DTTaS all flailing about with,it would seem,not a well formulated,considered and agreed plan between the lot of them,and this entire process still being presented to the Public Customer as a planned & fully expected outcome to the spending of c.€600,000,000 on the project....indeed :rolleyes:

Placed alongside this,the 24 hour service issue should be small-beer.

The Situation,since the 23rd Jan meeting is that Bus Atha Cliath have stated their intent to imminently introduce 24 hour running on the 39 & 41 routes initially,with the potential for services on the Rathmines corridor.

The services will be Hourly or Half Hourly in each direction,depending on demand,operating 7 days a week and replacing current Nitelink services on those corridors. (Nitelink will remain on other corridors for the present)

The Company have detailed the hours,payment and conditions under which the service will be operated.

Given that these new services will be stand-alone services from an operational perspective,the sourcing of Staff interested in operating the duties is the next phase.
There is already considerable interest from Driving Grade Staff in the Night Work service,which will be available to ALL Driving grade Staff to apply for.

The notion that Night Services will be operated by Junior Staff on a "forced" basis is somewhat wide of the mark.
There will be NO problem sourcing a body of Staff,willing & able to work Night Rotas.

The pace of change is rapid,particularly when put alongside Public Perceptions of the "Semi-State" sector,which in many cases do not reflect the on the ground reality.

Whilst some posters may have information from Local Meetings,Local Union Meetings or from personal dealings with individuals within the Management or Union Official grades,these neeed to be treated with utmost caution,as often there may be other issues at play concerning the dissemenation of such information.

Local Depot issues for example,which can often assume great importance within a specific location,or single route,can often be rapidly addressed from an unexpected source,when Centrally dealt with.

The expected commencement date for 24 hr services is...ASAP and if the associated internal non-driving issues,such as Control,Supervision and Engineering Support,along with external elements such as Garda and Local Authority interaction are dealt with then it could be a matter of weeks

Onwards & Upwards !

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

If Dublin Bus is going to run 24 hour services in the future, then they would need to have departures after 23:30 in order to run such services, so it's very much relevant to this discussion imo.

Agreement in place years, don't know whats so hard to understand

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

There isn't a midnight 84 - the last departures are 23:30 ex Blackrock and 23:30 ex Newcastle, Monday to Friday, Saturday and Sunday.

Local agreement in place for midnight 84 from bray station.
When you don't know something don't post as a authority on the issue.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

So you are saying that there was a 44 and 184 that departed after 23:30 which the union used their central powers to rescind and stop operating despite there being a previous local agreement to operate them?
.

There you go again with the negativity, bashing the unions when you know nothing about what happened.
where did i say the unions refused to operate these services?

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

So if the hold-up is the NTA, who have stated several times about the desire for 24 hour services, why is the union saying the NTA is seeking the introduction of these routes and these things have to be discussed at an industrial relations forum? Surely if everything is already agreed to in relation to 24 hour routes there is nothing in relation to industrial relations issues about 24 hour routes to discuss at said forum?

Take the pro NTA blinkers off, DB and Unions have agreement to run 24 hour service, If the NTA want it they will have to pay for it, thats what is being hammered out at the moment.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

Would this be the same Dublin Bus who have not been recruiting for drivers since January 2017. I have no doubts that recruiting bus drivers is not as easy as some people make out, however the fact the company has not needed to recruit for over a year suggests there isn't a massive staff shortage in DB either.

The denial is strong in this one!
Recruiting was paused at the time as the results of the 10% tender where due, DB needed to know the result before hiring decision was made.
DB lost the 10% and now in donnybrook alone will be a staggering 150 spare drivers per day.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

Dublin Bus have no right to increase timetables without the NTA's permission - this has been the case for many years now. However there is a passage that is in the PSO contract that allows for auxiliary (not extra timetabled) departures to be provided, which then have to be promptly reported to the NTA afterwards.

Put the keyboard down and just read the post from DB drivers and see the reality is somewhat different.
This forum is a constant stream of complaints of full buses going pass day after day, do you honestly think DB would not put on a extra bus that will be certain money maker?

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

Local agreement in place for midnight 84 from bray station.

At the moment there is no such service and neither are there services for the other routes that you have discussed in relation to post 23:30 services, the only proven information we have at the moment is that last year there were issues in relation to central committees of unions who claimed that they had the right at any time to veto local agreements and would happily do so if they wanted to.

bebeman wrote: »

where did i say the unions refused to operate these services?

You are the one that said that the union documents I referred to involve local agreements in relation to DB services after 23:30 and SIPTU themselves last year said that they have the right to veto local agreements so services do not run - or are you suggesting me that SIPTU are making out there is a problem when there is none?

There you go again with the negativity, bashing the unions when you know nothing about what happened.

You are free to post documents or union or other communications from a reputable source to back up your points at any time - I'm simply basing my views on confirmed info on the public domain from reputable sources.

bebeman

Stephen15 wrote: »

The 65 has an 00:15 departure from Ballymore Eustace and the 33 has a 23:50 departure from Balbriggan.

I don't see why there would be any union issues when the same unions agreed to a 24h timetables on the 109a for BE.

I would not be up to speed with routes outside of Donnybrook.
24 hour service on BE is all the proof you need that the unions dont object to 24 hour service, its the same unions in DB and BE.

bebeman

Stevek101 wrote: »

Don't mind the above about ancient services agremeents and post 2330 departures. Unions have met with the company on the 23rd Jan to discuss 24h services. This is due to the fact the NTA are seeking them to be introduced on 39 and 41 amongst others.

Zero objection from unions, so what is your point?

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

That is what I was speaking about here (second part) from an official union source.

Is there any indication in the public domain as to how these talks went and what the potential stumbling blocks are, if any?

Who is paying for the operation?
That all, no problem from the unions

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

Take the pro NTA blinkers off, DB and Unions have agreement to run 24 hour service, If the NTA want it they will have to pay for it, thats what is being hammered out at the moment.

So if it's so simple tell me - why do such things have to be discussed at an industrial relations forum when there is no industrial issue? Seems a bit silly to me to discuss an issue if it's not really an issue?

bebeman wrote: »

Recruiting was paused at the time as the results of the 10% tender where due, DB needed to know the result before hiring decision was made. DB lost the 10% and now in donnybrook alone will be a staggering 150 spare drivers per day.

So do they have a shortage of drivers or not? I'm confused, on one hand there is a shortage of drivers and now you are saying that they have so many drivers that they have no idea of what to do with them?

By the way, even though Dublin Bus have lost 10% their fleet size is not going to get any smaller and nor is there amount of work because the amount of lost work is going to be replaced by extra work on other routes and by redeploying vehicles elsewhere - this has already been agreed.

bebeman wrote: »

This forum is a constant stream of complaints of full buses going pass day after day, do you honestly think DB would not put on a extra bus that will be certain money maker?

There are a number of new timetables in the works at the moment and a few which have already gone live over the past few weeks that will allow for capacity increases on a number of routes but as you know, bills/schedules have to be approved by drivers and the unions and this doesn't happen overnight.

Over the course of this year there is going to be over 100 extra buses deployed on Dublin City bus services in addition to the 30 that were added to the streets as fleet expansion at the end of last year - that should certainly help with the issues that are ongoing at the moment.

And in addition the LUAS Cross City issues have effected capacity as well because of long delays which has not helped the present situation at all as drivers are exceeding their hours and are having to miss laps out or turn around short.

thomasj

Is it still planned for the 39 to merge with the 145 overnight?

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

At the moment there is no such service and neither are there services for the other routes that you have discussed in relation to post 23:30 services, the only proven information we have at the moment is that last year there were issues in relation to central committees of unions who claimed that they had the right at any time to veto local agreements and would happily do so if they wanted to.
.

You are SO WRONG!
Someone from Greystones or Kilcoole will come along and confirm a midnight 84 from Bray station.
When you don't know, dont post as if you have knowledge of the matter.
You are spreading false info here and creating problems

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

Someone from Greystones or Kilcoole will come along and confirm a midnight 84 from Bray station.

The 84 that calls at Bray at 00:00 is the 23:30 departure from Blackrock.

thomasj wrote: »

Is it still planned for the 39 to merge with the 145 overnight?

Haven't heard anything about that - all I've heard from reliable sources is the 39/41 is the first routes to go-ahead.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

You are the one that said that the union documents I referred to involve local agreements in relation to DB services after 23:30 and SIPTU themselves last year said that they have the right to veto local agreements so services do not run - or are you suggesting me that SIPTU are making out there is a problem when there is none?

Yes they have the right to pull out of local agreements, but where did i state that the unions stoped a 44 or 184 departing after 2330?
You are so anti Unions that you jump the gun on everything without knowing the facts.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

You are free to post documents or union or other communications from a reputable source to back up your points at any time - I'm simply basing my views on confirmed info on the public domain from reputable sources.

The documents you referenced to are 6 months old, web site is not official it looks to be a amateur site run by a bus nerd and is missing load of info.
There are loads of union and DB documents posted that are not for public consumption, you will just have to accept that you dont have a inside track on what is going on and rely on bits and pieces leaking out.

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

Yes they have the right to pull out of local agreements, but where did i state that the unions stoped a 44 or 184 departing after 2330?

You said that in the past there was a 44 and a 184 that departed after 23:30 due to a local agreement, and I showed you a statement that said the union said that local agreements can be removed by the central committee and since that notice was published, the locally agreed 44 and 184 does not run anymore.

You are so anti Unions that you jump the gun on everything without knowing the facts.

So if they are facts post the materials from the unions that are backing up your claims, since it appears you've seen them, and I can have no argument can I?

The documents you referenced to are 6 months old, web site is not official it looks to be a amateur site run by a bus nerd and is missing load of info.

The document in relation to bus market opening and 24 hour services was posted a few weeks ago and an industrial relations meeting about them in January has been confirmed by at least one known bus driver on this forum.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

The 84X that calls at Bray at 00:00 is the 23:30 departure from Blackrock.
.

What are you on about, 84x at midnight???

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

What are you on about, 84x at midnight???

I mean to say 84

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

You said that in the past there was a 44 and a 184 that departed after 23:30 due to a local agreement, and I showed you a statement that said the union said that local agreements can be removed by the central committee and since that notice was published, the locally agreed 44 and 184 does not run anymore.

Who said the unions pulled the local agreements?

Take the blinkers off and think, who else could cancel these buses?

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

Who said the unions pulled the local agreements?

The unions themselves stated that they will pull the local agreements centrally if they felt the need to, the fact that they've come out and said this would indicate there is a strong likelihood that they had something in mind when they said this.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

So if they are facts post the materials from the unions that are backing up your claims, since it appears you've seen them, and I can have no argument can I?


.

You and other here have to accept that you are well out of the loop, you get a titbit of information when a driver posts it here, other than that you must wait for public releases from DB/Unions/NTA.
You seem to have a problem accepting this, speculate away but quit pretending that you have info on what is happening.

dashcamdanny

Deleted User wrote: »

One of my pet peeves is that a lot of the drivers pull up at the real time info display, instead of at the actual stop. If you are at the head of the queue, you can often be 8th or 9th onto the bus, which isn't always enough for a spot. Drives me mad. I always make a point of saying "fair play for pulling in at the stop" when they do.

Shify you are wasting your time lining up. The driver wont go near an area where some person might spill out in front of a bus or get clipped by a mirror.

We are told to stop where its safest. Which is usally not at the end of a line.

As said, the one with the sense to get their hand out will also usually get first dibbs . Also it is a good idea to get behind and elderly or disabled person as they also get priority (in my book anyway).

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

The unions themselves stated that they will pull the local agreements centrally if they felt the need to, the fact that they've come out and said this would indicate there is a strong likelihood that they had something in mind when they said this.

So you accept that the Unions can pull out, but where did i or anyone else state that they did?
You just assume the worst regarding the unions, stick to facts not your personal feelings

Cookie_Monster

bebeman wrote: »

You just assume the worst regarding the unions, stick to facts not your personal feelings

some good self advice there, I've yet to see any fact posted by you, just opinion masquerading...

AlekSmart

bebeman wrote: »

So you accept that the Unions can pull out, but where did i or anyone else state that they did?
You just assume the worst regarding the unions, stick to facts not your personal feelings

Rather than assuming a degree of malice on the part of another poster,it may be somewhat more accurate to accept that the degree of information available is,at best patchy,and often just plain wrong.

Sadly,this is the reality which both Staff and Public experience generally.

There is no trade union "ban" on the operation of night bus services,just as there is no Trade Union "ban" on the use of centre-doors.
24 Hour services will be beginning imminently,as soon as the infrastructural elements are in place.
These elements include,rearranging vehicle servicing programmes,both in terms of mileage and engineering staff availability.

The provision of such services is not a matter of snapping fingers and magicking up buses and staff at a whim,as the lack of planning and backup can swiftly assume major importance should something go wrong on the road.

With several significant meetings coming up at the beginning of March,as an integral part of the WRC brokered 2014 agreement,perhaps it may be more sensible to await the results,particularly in the light of the Busconnects plan's planned phased introduction from June.

Checking back on this thread in 12 Months time,will reveal a different Public Bus Service landscape indeed.

Stephen15

AlekSmart wrote: »

Checking back on this thread in 12 Months time,will reveal a different Public Bus Service landscape indeed.

All going to plan that is and we all that's not always the way. We have to welcome these things with cautious optimism. Let's not get too far ahead of ourselves.

bebeman

AlekSmart wrote: »

Rather than assuming a degree of malice on the part of another poster,it may be somewhat more accurate to accept that the degree of information available is,at best patchy,and often just plain wrong.

.

Nail on head!
So why do anti DB/Unions posters post as if what they are saying is a matter of fact?
Why do these same posters have such a hard time believing that DB/Unions are not the bad guys, even after evidence is provided?
Why do these same posters believe the NTA are knights shining armour who can do no wrong, even after evidence to the contrary is provided?
So many lies about DB/Unions are pushed as fact by posters, when you are told the truth you dont what to know, you have blinkers on and cant face the fact that you are not all knowing, its sad.
The boards user who only looks here once in a blue moon is bombarded with anti DB/Unions lies, so they dont get any wiser from their visit, regulars who post here are anti DB/Unions, pro NTA zealots in their views and not for changing no matter what.

monument

bebeman wrote: »

Nail on head!
So why do anti DB/Unions posters post as if what they are saying is a matter of fact?
Why do these same posters have such a hard time believing that DB/Unions are not the bad guys, even after evidence is provided?
Why do these same posters believe the NTA are knights shining armour who can do no wrong, even after evidence to the contrary is provided?
So many lies about DB/Unions are pushed as fact by posters, when you are told the truth you dont what to know, you have blinkers on and cant face the fact that you are not all knowing, its sad.
The boards user who only looks here once in a blue moon is bombarded with anti DB/Unions lies, so they dont get any wiser from their visit, regulars who post here are anti DB/Unions, pro NTA zealots in their views and not for changing no matter what.

It would help if you posted less ranty with less talk of zealots and anti- etc.

For example, if you stopped talking in black and white terms — nobody or at least very few people are saying the unions are all bad or that the NTA are knights shining armour who can do no wrong.

It would also help if you stopped vaguely calling people liars and actually responded with examples of such anc sources to back up what you’re saying.

— moderator

suicide_circus

Waited 20 mins for a 747 from Lord Edward St this morning at about 11am. The bus was full after oconnell st and sailed past all the distraught tourists after that. For some reason we still did the loop the loop round bus aras despite the fact that we weren't going to pick up anyone. Guess he wanted to rub it in their faces or something.

StreetLight

suicide_circus wrote: »

Waited 20 mins for a 747 from Lord Edward St this morning at about 11am. The bus was full after oconnell st and sailed past all the distraught tourists after that. For some reason we still did the loop the loop round bus aras despite the fact that we weren't going to pick up anyone. Guess he wanted to rub it in their faces or something.

No he didn't. Any deviation from the route without authorisation is a disciplinary offence. Stop blaming the driver for the apparently inadequate service level.

suicide_circus

StreetLight wrote: »

No he didn't. Any deviation from the route without authorisation is a disciplinary offence. Stop blaming the driver for the apparently inadequate service level.

I don't think I actually blamed the driver for the service level, comrade. And i only mentioned the bus aras loop because plenty of times drivers bypass it when the 747 is full.

sunrainmooncl

StreetLight wrote: »

No he didn't. Any deviation from the route without authorisation is a disciplinary offence. Stop blaming the driver for the apparently inadequate service level.

The drivers regularly skip this stop :rolleyes:

trellheim

Is Busconnect actually going to happen , if so whats first ?

devnull

trellheim wrote: »

Is Busconnect actually going to happen , if so whats first ?

This is the last update on the project from a conference held last week.

AlekSmart

trellheim wrote: »

Is Busconnect actually going to happen , if so whats first ?

The first element was implimented on 1st Feb...The elimination of the City-Centre Fare.

Technocentral

Schools off this week, heaven. Got a half empty 140 at 8.30 on Finglas Road, pity there aren't dedicated School buses.

AlekSmart

Technocentral wrote: »

Schools off this week, heaven. Got a half empty 140 at 8.30 on Finglas Road, pity there aren't dedicated School buses.

There are quite a few dedicated School Services,both Dublin Bus contracted and privately contracted by the Schools themselves.

https://www.dublinbus.ie/Your-Journey1/Timetables/Contracted-Services/

however,in the current environment,it's not the chizzlers themselves who represent the problem,but rather the Teaching and Administrative staff,most of whom Drive their cars into School.

The lack of flexibility around School Start/Finish times added to the now traditional parental "Schoolrun" also add substantially to what is now a VERY serious traffic management and public transport issue.....as well as being an "untouchable" in Local Political terms.

Technocentral

AlekSmart wrote:

There are quite a few dedicated School Services,both Dublin Bus contracted and privately contracted by the Schools themselves.

3 or 4 busses go by full I got on half empty bus at 8.30am, that only happens when school breaks are on

Stephen15

Technocentral wrote: »

Schools off this week, heaven. Got a half empty 140 at 8.30 on Finglas Road, pity there aren't dedicated School buses.

Maybe it would be better if parents sent their children to the nearest school instead of one that requires a bus journey.

Also a large amount of school children are still paying they should make schoolchild fare leap only and then they'd switch fairly quick.

StreetLight

sunrainmooncl wrote: »

The drivers regularly skip this stop :rolleyes:

They shouldn't.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Cookie_Monster

AlekSmart wrote: »

The first element was implimented on 1st Feb...The elimination of the City-Centre Fare.

Hardly a positive first step from a customer point of view?

Stephen15

cuckmeister wrote: »

It's quite a predicament. Do you:
A) have a bus jam-packed with people to a dangerous degree?
or
drive past commuters but win nothing but their spite and vitriol in the process?

I am aware that the passenger limit for Dublin Bus is at 91 but let's face it: this is just too high and should never be reached. Anyone who's ever been on an overcrowded Dublin Bus knows how uncomfortable and claustrophobic it can be.

Either way, both circumstances are absolutely unacceptable and a proactive approach by the CIÉ needs to be taken in order to improve the currently dismal quality of Irish public transport. Whether that means reducing the number of people on board or increasing funding to allow for larger buses, all that I know is that the government is sitting on its hand, and at this stage, that just doesn't cut it.

On the continent or at least in Italy where I was there does not seem to be any legal limit on how many standing passengers a bus can take. I travelled on a number of buses there and they were all absolutely packed with very little breathing space but the driver kept picking passengers up despite this. Although the buses were all better designed for standing than DB buses.

n!ghtmancometh

cuckmeister wrote: »

It's quite a predicament. Do you:
A) have a bus jam-packed with people to a dangerous degree?
or
drive past commuters but win nothing but their spite and vitriol in the process?

I am aware that the passenger limit for Dublin Bus is at 91 but let's face it: this is just too high and should never be reached. Anyone who's ever been on an overcrowded Dublin Bus knows how uncomfortable and claustrophobic it can be.

Either way, both circumstances are absolutely unacceptable and a proactive approach by the CIÉ needs to be taken in order to improve the currently dismal quality of Irish public transport. Whether that means reducing the number of people on board or increasing funding to allow for larger buses, all that I know is that the government is sitting on its hand, and at this stage, that just doesn't cut it.

The newer model busses even make it uncomfortable for two people to sit beside each other upstairs because of the awkward height of the window ledge. If you are sitting inside its difficult to move your arm, and if you're sitting outside you can barely fit on the seat. I'm tall but not wide, so can only imagine how uncomfortable it must be for bulky people. This wasn't an issue on the older busses (AV?) as the lower window ledge enabled you to sit into the seat fully and rest your shoulder/arm a bit on the ledge. Pain in the hoop. I generally stand now because of this.

Stephen15

n!ghtmancometh wrote: »

The newer model busses even make it uncomfortable for two people to sit beside each other upstairs because of the awkward height of the window ledge. If you are sitting inside its difficult to move your arm, and if you're sitting outside you can barely fit on the seat. I'm tall but not wide, so can only imagine how uncomfortable it must be for bulky people. This wasn't an issue on the older busses (AV?) as the lower window ledge enabled you to sit into the seat fully and rest your shoulder/arm a bit on the ledge. Pain in the hoop. I generally stand now because of this.

That's the SGs I agree their windows are rather poor but they are better than the older buses. The best buses in my opinion are the GTs which have nice large windows.

The seats on the AVs which you talk about aren't great as the backs of them are at a right angle meaning they'd hit off a a tall persons knees and they've got a metal bar on them meaning if you sit back it sticks into you also people are less likely to manspread on individual seats.