DDs VS Artics

[LF60]

I've looked up some info on this, but I'm encouraging everyone to add thier own 2 cents to this topic. I'm curious to get some real information, not just "I hate ____ because they all suck"

first, from

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:8j9Fj...;cd=1&gl=ca

I get

The double decker gets slightly better gas mileage than the articulated buses. Our articulated buses get about 4-5 miles per gallon, while the double decker, according to the manufacturer, get about 4-6 mpg, on the higher end while on the highway, which is largely where our bus will be driving.

Of course, this is not an apples-to-apples comparison since we have

history with the artics (cool bus-people talk for articulated buses - ed.) on our routes and no such history with the double decker yet. Over the course of our yearlong lease fuel efficiency is one element we'll be watching.

If you're talking about a capacity crowd boarding or deboarding at the same time, say at a commuter park & ride in the morning, the answer is yes [they would be longer]. Rather than getting on the bus and heading straight to the back to sit down, as on an arctic, people will get on the double decker at the front and decide to go up the stairs or stay downstairs, as well as whether to sit in the front or rear.

When boarding or deboarding in traffic, there will not be as many people getting on at the same time, but it still could take longer as some people will go upstairs to sit, or come from upstairs to deboard. There is a camera at the front of the top deck so the driver can see if someone is coming is standing and won't start moving until that person is either seated or makes her way off the bus. This is the primary reason this bus will not be used for local service.

In the commuter situation, boarding in the morning and deboarding in the afternoon will not add significant time, maybe a couple minutes.

Pros of double-decker vs articulated buses.

80 people on double-decker vs 60 for articulated.

Won't jack-knife in bad weather.

Easier to turn

Cons of double-decker

More expensive, $650,000 vs $580,000.

Slower boarding.

At 14 feet tall, can't fit through all tunnels, and under all bridges.

I am for double-deckers on these long-distance routes. Articulated buses are annoying on city streets, but they are necessary to fit under bridges and powerlines.

from another website

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:UZRkE...;cd=2&gl=ca

I got this

They may (double-deckers)

They may (double-deckers) serve a purpose on some routes, but they do have some major negatives. They're several times heavier than articulated buses, have narrow stairwells to get to the top level, making it difficult for some to use. We'd need to build new garages to accommodate them and that makes it an expensive business case try to justify.

Negatives aside, they might be used for express routes with few stops.

accordign to some comments on this website

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:frRzH...;cd=3&gl=ca

A lot of time will be wasted waiting for people to get to their doors when the buses are full

Longer-distance passengers would go upstairs

You're going to need to find that many should these buses be pulled out of service. And don't say that the winds never get that high in L.A. Even on mild, breezy days, parts of Wilshire Center and Westwood get powerfully gusty.

*Clearance issues. There could be things like the traffic light arms that might not allow double decks to operate.

*Boarding and alighting. This will slow, even with prepayment, because of the no-standees-on-the-stairwell issue. The drivers have to make sure that everyone gets off at the stop in time and that everyone gets on top before they can take off.

*For maintenance, you'd need to make garage entrances larger. Forget about lifting a double deck bus on a hoist.

*Crime and vandalism. I'm sorry, but this is the kicker. The top level, while adding to capacity, is also a haven for graffiti and other, more serious, crimes.

and went up to the front seats (had it been a rail car, we'd call it a railfan seat) The first thing I noted was the absence of all the transactions that are part of riding the front of a regular bus. Much quieter. The second thing was that some streets had not had their trees trimmed lately, and we got smacked by a few branches on the way. Buses like this are probably best for long-distance suburban and commuter type service, where it's less likely that obnoxious kids will turn the upped deck into a monkey cage.

so there's alot of info there about artics and double deckers, any opinions from members of this forum?

[LF60]

my opinions:

most of the other opinions above come to one conclusion, that double deckers are not a suitable replacement for 40 foot transit busses that do short and frequent stop routes, but they have many advantages in situations where stops are far apart and spaced out.

I agree. Double Deckers sound like a great idea of used right. The TTC has some 'express' routes, but in terms of real express, wherein the bus only stops at major streets intersectnig, such a bus might work, and then only if the hight issues allow it. Remember, our north-south streets all have to cross the 401 at some point.

The best use for DDs is between cities, as a motorcoach replacement. For this reason I support GO and hope they buy more then just 12 DDs. The only downside is that due to maintence issues, having a few DDs does not work out well. A city could buy a dozen artics and get away with it, but a dozen DDs in a city with 500 busses would be odd. If a transit agency is going to go for DDs they need to commit to it and have at least 5%-10% of thier fleet be double deckers.

Good examples of places that could use this would be VIVA blue, where huge loads get off and on at places like RHC and Finch, or Hurontario where it could be run as an express that stops at Square One; passengers destined for that locale would be smart to take a seat up top.

[Centralsmt]

my opinions:

most of the other opinions above come to one conclusion, that double deckers are not a suitable replacement for 40 foot transit busses that do short and frequent stop routes, but they have many advantages in situations where stops are far apart and spaced out.

I agree. Double Deckers sound like a great idea of used right. The TTC has some 'express' routes, but in terms of real express, wherein the bus only stops at major streets intersectnig, such a bus might work, and then only if the hight issues allow it. Remember, our north-south streets all have to cross the 401 at some point.

The best use for DDs is between cities, as a motorcoach replacement. For this reason I support GO and hope they buy more then just 12 DDs. The only downside is that due to maintence issues, having a few DDs does not work out well. A city could buy a dozen artics and get away with it, but a dozen DDs in a city with 500 busses would be odd. If a transit agency is going to go for DDs they need to commit to it and have at least 5%-10% of thier fleet be double deckers.

Good examples of places that could use this would be VIVA blue, where huge loads get off and on at places like RHC and Finch, or Hurontario where it could be run as an express that stops at Square One; passengers destined for that locale would be smart to take a seat up top.

So why then are double deckers more popular in places like London and Hong Kong which have far more intensive network of services than anywhere in Canada?

[LF60]

So why then are double deckers more popular in places like London and Hong Kong which have far more intensive network of services than anywhere in Canada?

I cant speak for HK, but London had DD's long before articulations were invented, and change is never an easy thing. despite that, even london is getting artics.

[Centralsmt]

I cant speak for HK, but London had DD's long before articulations were invented, and change is never an easy thing. despite that, even london is getting artics.

That doesn't answer my question. Far more contracts in London still specify double deckers rather than artics, there are around 6,000 deckers and 300 artics. The artics tend to be used on longer distance services, apart from the red arrows, so where does that fall into your argument that deckers are more suitable for long distance services?

[Orion V]

I love cities where they have both artics and dd. Just imagine at Finch station during rush hour, a dd pulls up follow by an artic. Man, that's amazing!

However, very few cities have both dd and artics as system usually resort to one or the other and not both.

[Centralsmt]

I love cities where they have both artics and dd. Just imagine at Finch station during rush hour, a dd pulls up follow by an artic. Man, that's amazing!

However, very few cities have both dd and artics as system usually resort to one or the other and not both.

Off the top of my head, London, Birmingham, Bath, Cardiff, Manchester, Newcastle, Glasgow, Aberdeen, Belfast, Dublin, Berlin, Copenhagan, Johannesburg and I'm sure there are plenty more.

[TheAverageJoe]

comparing Double Deckers and Artics is comparing Apples and Oranges

[TheAverageJoe]

I love cities where they have both artics and dd. Just imagine at Finch station during rush hour, a dd pulls up follow by an artic. Man, that's amazing!

However, very few cities have both dd and artics as system usually resort to one or the other and not both.

that would be sweet how about a Double decker artic??????????????//

[A. Wong]

I think Neoplan made one.

[Orion VIII]

that would be sweet how about a Double decker artic??????????????//

Been there, done that.

[LF60]

That doesn't answer my question. Far more contracts in London still specify double deckers rather than artics, there are around 6,000 deckers and 300 artics. The artics tend to be used on longer distance services, apart from the red arrows, so where does that fall into your argument that deckers are more suitable for long distance services?

Londoners are used to DDs and use them where they are not suitable because they are so used to it, they dont want change.

[LF60]

I think Neoplan made one.

yes and it was a huge failure, the engine was so big that the only way to get from the front to the back was though the upper deck.

[Ailsa-Volvo B55]

Introducing the Neoplan Jumbocruiser series:

As for the part about longer boarding and alighting times on a DD... it's a different story in Hong Kong. Very rarely will drivers wait until everyone is seated on the upper deck then proceed to start the bus; almost all of the people in Hong Kong will start heading downstairs a few stops prior to their desired stop so that they can alight because in Hong Kong, every second counts, and most drivers will not wait for a single person to slowly make his/her way downstairs to alight at the very last minute, the only exceptions are (1)A DD bus at crush-load (where people are standing on the upper deck, which is illegal in Hong Kong) during rush-hour or (2)When the elderly or physically handicapped are boarding/alighting.

[TheAverageJoe]

Been there, done that.

I was talking single artic not a double artic

[2044]

Londoners are used to DDs and use them where they are not suitable because they are so used to it, they dont want change.

I don't think it's that they don't want to change. It's more, people understand how to use them and they work great, so why stop buying them? The same thing will happen here. People will get used to riding a double decker. people will learn how to move efficiently through the double decker so they do not miss their stops.

I was talking single artic not a double artic

The Jumbo Cruiser also comes in a single artic version.

[TheAverageJoe]

I don't think it's that they don't want to change. It's more, people understand how to use them and they work great, so why stop buying them? The same thing will happen here. People will get used to riding a double decker. people will learn how to move efficiently through the double decker so they do not miss their stops.

The Jumbo Cruiser also comes in a single artic version.

the back part dont look like a full double decker

[2044]

the back part dont look like a full double decker

Aye, since these were mostly made as tour buses, the lower deck on part of the coach was used to store baggage.

[TheAverageJoe]

Aye, since these were mostly made as tour buses, the lower deck on part of the coach was used to store baggage.

I see , where there any transit models made?

[kevlo86]

Double deckers carry a pretty sharp learning curve in order for them to function the way they were intended to. The reason why they work in London, Hong Kong and other places where a huge portion of the fleet is made of these buses is because passengers and drivers have got this learning curve glued to their minds.

The situation in Hong Kong (as described above) is exactly what I mean by learning curve. "No standing" does not mean no standing up to move from upstairs to downstairs and vice versa. In Hong Kong, all those "No Standing" labels on the buses simply mean you can't be standing on the upper deck if you are not going downstairs or to a seat upstairs. And yes this rule is usually followed.

As for double decker buses in North America as transit buses there are only three places, Las Vegas, Victoria and Kelowna.

Firstly, Las Vagas is an example of an extremely poor use of double decker buses. Drivers take no standing as literally nobody can be standing upstairs while the bus is in motion. I encountered one driver that came on the PA to tell people to sit down, these people were getting up to go downstairs, something that is common and correct procedure when riding a double decker bus. But no this driver insisted it was not safe to do so. So yes dwell times were painfully long at the stops. Plus the route that they are run on is full of tourists along the strip, often they want only a few stops. But hey it would be cool to ride upstairs even for a few stops! So again increasing dwell time. And even for the drivers who kindly don't yell at passengers to sit down over the PA (which was most of them ) They will dwell at stops till people are seated upstairs, even if they are late (which they usually are on the strip).

Victoria uses them on some longer routes with fewer stops where people are going long distance. When I rode them on the long route 70 earlier this year, it was flawless. Though some more urban routes also use the double deckers, I don't know how well that works, I would imagine a whole lot better then Las Vegas.

I think the main problem with double deckers in North America is height. A lot of cities have a lot of places where the buses would not be able to go. I really don't agree that dwell time is a valid issue, that is an issue caused by people not knowing how to properly ride/operate double decker buses with regard to passenger flow. Over time people learn this, just like in other places around the world like Hong Kong and London. So if you want to see double decker buses being used properly and a crapload of them, I'd suggest going to Hong Kong and/or London. They seem like a great idea there.

[LF60]

I really don't agree that dwell time is a valid issue, that is an issue caused by people not knowing how to properly ride/operate double decker buses with regard to passenger flow.

people cant even ride single deckers properly in this city.

[CN7066]

Victoria uses them on some longer routes with fewer stops where people are going long distance. When I rode them on the long route 70 earlier this year, it was flawless. Though some more urban routes also use the double deckers, I don't know how well that works, I would imagine a whole lot better then Las Vegas.

I think the main problem with double deckers in North America is height. A lot of cities have a lot of places where the buses would not be able to go. I really don't agree that dwell time is a valid issue, that is an issue caused by people not knowing how to properly ride/operate double decker buses with regard to passenger flow. Over time people learn this, just like in other places around the world like Hong Kong and London. So if you want to see double decker buses being used properly and a crapload of them, I'd suggest going to Hong Kong and/or London. They seem like a great idea there.

As I recall, the main reason Victoria went with double deckers instead of 60-footers was because Victoria has short city blocks and the 60-footers would take up too much road space.

[BCT-3122-D800-10240]

One thing I find much better on a double decker is that the ride quality is a whole lot better than the ride on a Low Floor Articulated bus. I have ridden Low Foor articulated Flyer's and Van Hools and found the ride quality was not very good on either model.