Mayor Johnson, or how I learned to stop worrying and love the bendy bus
The 507 (Wikipedia, TfL) and 521 (Wikipedia, TfL) are going to be the first London bus routes to have the bendy bus removed. This is going to make my commute into work longer. Bendy buses have attracted a lot of opprobrium; read on to find out why they’re actually a really good idea.
The 507 and 521 are the last of the Red Arrow routes that were set up in the mid-Sixties to deal with short, high-density, commuter journeys. The idea was twofold; increase bus capacity and, crucially, the speed with which people could board and alight from the bus, thereby increasing route capacity and decreasing journey time. Obviously, it takes more time to use a double-decker; there’s only one exit door and passengers can’t go up and down the stairs at the same time; in any case, people taking short journeys are less likely to go up the stairs, leading to overcrowding downstairs. The solution was to move to a single-decker bus with less seats but more standing room and to allow people to leave by the front door as well.
The 507 and 521 routes haven’t changed in their requirements since the Sixties. Both run between major termini that are close together; in the 507’s case, Waterloo and Victoria and, in the 521’s, Waterloo and London Bridge. More importantly, they go through places where lots of commuters want to go; the 521 goes past Holborn, St Paul’s and Monument (all areas with lots of offices that people who come in by train to Waterloo and London Bridge want to reach) and the 507 goes up Horseferry Road. That’s significant because I board the bus at Horseferry Road but also because the buses, in both directions, practically empty in the morning on the Horseferry Road stops as lots of civil servants go to work in the area; conversely, the buses fill up in the evening peak and empty at the termini.
The bendy buses are ideal for these routes. They can accomodate a lot of people, who can board and alight quickly and in large numbers, travelling over short distances. The ideal would probably be a tram but these are costly to install and there are other priorities, not least the Cross River Tram and, of course, Crossrail. The bendy buses are an ideal solution. The alternative that we are going to have is the double-decker. I like double-deckers, but they’re not appropriate for these routes. I’m sure a lot of people who take traditional double-deckers in the morning rush from major rail stations will be familiar with the long boarding times as everyone clambers on in the one place. You can usually find a seat upstairs (hence the iBus announcement: “Seats are available on the Upper Deck”) as many people are only going a few stops and don’t want to have to fight up and down the stairs. On the 507 and 521 routes, that will be worsened by everyone wanting to leave the bus over two or three stops.
A particular issue for the 521 is the Strand Underpass. It connects the northern end of Waterloo Bridge directly to the top of Kingsway. Originally built for trams, it is not high enough for double-deckers. Presumably, the 521 will have to be diverted round the Aldwych and up Kingsway. These are two busy roads that will become further congested and will delay the 521.
Some of the arguments against the bendy bus are also rubbish. The big one is that there’s lots of fare evasion; I’m sure that’s true on some routes. On the 507 and 521 – the first routes to have bendies removed – just about everyone is using a major rail terminus. They’re probably going to have a Travelcard already – which includes London buses.
Bendy buses aren’t appropriate for every route. The 36, for instance, isn’t ideal for going across Cambridge Circus. That doesn’t mean they’re not appropriate for any route. Unfortunately, bus policy – not necessarily the most fascinating of issues – is being decided by little more than tabloid prejudice.
I’ll see you in the queue.
xD.
Update: Peezedtee weighs in and, in fact, weighed in back in March.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
I too like the bendy buses and think it a mistake to remove them. Many of the criticisms levelled at them are quite wrong – often made by people who don’t actually use them or by motorists who, ideally, shouldn’t be driving in the city anyway.
I think fare dodging is an issue. When I ride on a bendy I always watch incoming passengers to see who produces a ticket and who doesn’t. Many don’t and these can’t all be people with cardboard travel cards or Plus Bus rail tickets. A more positive inspection system might help alleviate this to a certain extent.
The advantages of the bendy bus can be seen in the fact that other cities have taken them up and not only in Britain: we travelled on a bendy last week in Paris.
I shall be sorry to see them go. I think their removal will turn out to be an expensive mistake.
I do wish politicians would learn to do what is right for the people and the community, not what fits some political dogma or other. But that is like wishing for the proverbial flying pigs.
September 16th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
I’m glad you agree; a lot of the complaints are from people who aren’t really affected by bendies. As to fare dodging; Oyster isn’t accepted on all trains in London and so quite a lot of people still have cardboard passes, particularly those who travel on the 507 and 521 routes. I know there is anecdotal evidence that the 38 and 73 have higher rates of fare evasion. The proof of the pudding, though, will be in the eating. When bendies are phased out, we will be able to see if there is a change in ridership or fares collected.
xD.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Trying to estimate fare evasion on bendies from simple observation is even less accurate than has been suggested – its not just people with physical card travelcards or paper tickets purchased from the roadside machines who doesn’t have to touch in, but anyone at all with a period ticket loaded on their Oyster. This includes travelcards and bus passes (except day travelcards/passes) or under-16 free bus travel photocards. The only people who need to touch-in on a bendy bus are those using Oyster pay-as-you-go. The graph on page 26 of this TfL document shows that pay-as-you-go accounts for only around 30,000 of the 135,000 journeys made on TfL services each year, so the proportion touching in should be quite small. Speaking personally – I never touch in on a bendy as I have a monthly travelcard on my Oyster. Better to go with actual figures than anecdotal evidence on this, I think.
Edited by Dave to add in hyperlink.
September 16th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
That’s ‘per four week period’ not ‘per year’. Either way, it would suggest that, if the ridership of bendies is comparable to the aggregate for all London bus routes, slightly less than a quarter of people are required to touch the Oyster reader.
However, the assertion is that lots of people are travelling without paying on these particular routes, which would make the comparison invalid. Once the asserted reason for that has gone, we will be able to see whether it was true or not.
xD.
September 16th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
D’oh! Should have noticed the figures were a bit on the low side for a year!
September 17th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
But they are just horrible, horrible to ride on. The Routemaster was so much better and you could hop off whenever you felt bored. Plus the layout of London’s streets make the bendy bus an inappropriate choice.
September 17th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
Mike,
No, they’re not. They’re really enjoyable to ride on. You see? It’s subjective. In any case, they are best used for short journeys where that horribility is not the issue, but ease of use and speed of boarding.
I accept that you could jump on and off the Routemaster. I happen to know you personally and know that you walk perfectly well and without disability. If, say, you used a wheelchair, you would not be able to hop off a Routemaster, in no small part because you wouldn’t have been able to board it in the first place. I don’t think the extra effort in making you walk an extra couple of hundred yards between bus stops so that a lot of people can use buses at all.
Your final sentence reminds me rather of the scientist, the philosopher and the mathematician going to a conference in Edinburgh. As they cross the border in the train, they look out of a window and see a black sheep.
‘Look’, says the philosopher. ‘All sheep are black’.
‘No’, says the scientist. ‘All Scottish sheep are black.
The mathematician sighed and said ‘No, there is in Scotland at least one field in which there is at least one sheep that is black’.
While many of the roads in London are not suitable for bendies, not all buses are unsuitable. I would say that Horseferry Road (where I catch the 507) is ideal; long, straight and with relatively little traffic and no other buses. As I said above, I don’t think sending bendy buses down Charing Cross Road and right at Cambridge Circus into Shaftesbury Avenue. You could also say that the problem is the passenger density of vehicles on London roads that causes the problem, but that would lead you to further restrictions on cars traveling in London.
xD.
September 24th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
[...] is nostalgia, not common sense. Well known fact. (Dave Cole makes the case for bendy buses well here - I seem to remember predicting during the Mayoral election that the 521 and the Strand underpass [...]
November 12th, 2008 at 1:57 pm
I use the 521 every day from London Bridge to Holborn and I can’t see how any other bus can cope with the demand unless they want to treble the number out on the road.
A bendy bus can arrive at a major station empty and be filled to capacity in under a minute. Often it will be on it’s way seconds later. A couple of minutes after that there is already a crowd building up for the next 521 which will only be a few minutes away.
The only way to get from London Bridge to High Holborn faster is by bike.
November 14th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Paul,
I absolutely agree. I have some FoI requests in with TfL at the moment about passenger loading times; stay tuned for more info!
xD.