Jump to content

Talk:Bus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 201.98.17.25 (talk) at 05:07, 24 August 2006 (Leave the gallery!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

"Busses" is sometimes used

Incorrectly, I think. Must check Fowler. What do US guides say? Then again, We're Not A Dictionary. We could just delete that bit entirely -- Tarquin 11:00, 24 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I can see no excuse for "busses" but it scores 430,000 google hits (i.e. mostly this type of bus) so obviously a lot of people use it. Shantavira 18:19, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I found an American Merriam-Webster dictionary that recommends it as an alternative spelling, mostly to prevent people from pronouncing it as SAMPA bjuz".Ez.-FZ 13:44, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

--- Illustration: there are several lithographs by Honore Daumier that are in the public domain that would help make points now in "History" subsection. Wetman 21:31, 23 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

buses are the safest

I read an interesting newspaper article about buses recently:

"the [US] National Transportation Safety Board decided ... not to recommend seat belts in school buses. ...
The board also recommended that buses be equipped with data recorders starting Jan. 1, 2003. ...
School bus design is closely regulated ... Motor coaches -- the type of bus used by Greyhound -- have no occupant protection standards.
Regardless, school buses and motor coaches are considered the safest forms of transportation on the road. On average, nine people are killed each year in school buses, and four die in motor coaches. Roughly 42 000 are killed annually in car and truck accidents."
-- Glen Johnson, Associated Press, 1999 Sept. 22

EditHint: Mention some of these facts in the article.

--DavidCary 17:41, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)


I have no clue how to fix this, but all the "edit" buttons in the article are in one line, like {edit} {edit} {edit} and looks kinda bad. -- Josh

satellite bus?

If something were written about Satellite Bus(s)es, should it have its own entry, or go in Electrical bus (or even Computer bus )? -FZ 13:51, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

reversion of changes by 213.51.209.230

I've reverted the changes by 213.51.209.230, which describe an articulated bus thus:

Articulated buses consist of a standard length bus fitted with a tow hitch and a trailer. The trailer part is connected to the front part with a rubber accordion section.

With the exception of the accordian bit, this sounds more like a description of a bus+trailer combination, as widely used in Germany in the 1950s and, I believe, still used in some eastern european countries. It may be that some apparantly articulated buses are configured this way, but it certainly isn't the normal form. The most common form of modern articulated bus (eg. the MercedesBenz Citaros used in London) actually has the engine in the rear section, which can hardly therefore be described as a trailer. And obviously such a configuration requires something other than a tow-hitch. -- Chris j wood 23:41, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)


This sounds like speculation. Sources? (The assumptions that homelessness is caused by urban housing shortages, that such shortages exist, and that many homeless people ride buses all need substantiation.)

Homelessness and buses in the U.S.

Because of a variety of factors, housing shortages have become a chronic problem in most large American cities since the 1970s. The result has been an epidemic of homelessness. With no place to go, the homeless often end up riding around aimlessly on public buses, which offer advantages like temperature control, security, and comfort.

Unfortunately, the presence of homeless people strongly reduces the attractiveness of bus transit to other riders, due to factors like odor, hygiene, panhandling, crowding, etc.


I don't see why that passage should have been taken out. Have you ever actually commuted regularly on a typical big city bus? I use buses four days of the week and I've seen everything, including homeless people urinating in the bus.

--Coolcaesar 08:26, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It looks like the passage has some relevance, but its needs quite a bit of POV cleanup. First off, I can see no reason to limit discussion to the U.S. or to homeless passengers. The real issue is that people don't like sharing space with strangers - in particular strangers who are different from themselves. Then it can be seen as a more general issue contrasting public transport vs private transport such as the car. In fact, come to think of it, the whole issue is probably much better addressed on the public transport page where there is already some comment. -- Solipsist 11:18, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Sure; I've seen plenty of bizarre things on public transport, but I'm hesitent to extrapolate a trend from any of them. I agree with Solipsist (oh, the irony) that the treatment in public transport is better. jdb ❋ 21:14, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Fine. I concede that public transport is probably the best point to address the issue in detail (and it should addressed in detail). I'll have to think about it and do a little research before I go and elaborate on it in that article, though. As written, public transport only addresses the issue of homeless people sleeping on public transport rather than the odor, hygiene, public health, or security issues, which I would argue are major disincentives for people to ride public transit---have you had the pleasure of sitting next to a fragrant homeless person lately? I also concede that Solipsist is probably right to generalize the issue to the broader problem of how many people don't like sharing personal space with strangers.

--Coolcaesar 09:11, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

DD in US?

However, several experimental uses of double decker buses have not proved them to be practical in U.S. operations other than for sightseeing groups.

I'm curious as to why DD buses haven't caught on in the U.S. except as sightseeing buses -- esp. on heavily-trafficked routes. Can anyone expand upon this? 140.247.60.206 05:35, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, but my best guess is that most American cities tend to have much longer and wider streets than in Europe, so if a bus line becomes really popular, then the local transit agency will simply add more buses or switch to extra-long articulated buses.

Also, Americans simply don't ride buses as much as in other countries because we have cheap gas (we don't tax it as much) and most of our cities are not laid out well for efficient bus use.

As for inner-city neighborhoods where buses are more popular, a major problem is that many such cities, like Los Angeles, are nearly bankrupt and cannot afford to put their electrical and phone wires underground. The result is that their skies are cluttered with old lines which are just barely high enough for trucks and ordinary buses to pass underneath. A double-decker bus plowing through those lines would create an enormous mess and cause massive service outages.

Finally, I think another reason is that our courts are very plaintiff-friendly. Our public transit agencies get sued every day by people who are run over by bus drivers, people who trip and fall on the bus, people who trip and fall getting on or off the bus, people who are robbed on the bus, people who are arrested by the police because they refuse to pay the bus driver, etc. Adding double-decker buses would result in having to defend against lawsuits from people who fell down the stairs because the driver braked suddenly. However, sightseeing companies are probably able to use such buses because they are not public agencies, have more control over who can board, and can simply jack up prices to cover the cost of their liability insurance. --Coolcaesar 17:52, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting -- thanks. jdb ❋ (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]


As a bus operator, I would say: the height of the signs and such is the main cause. A regular single-decker coach is about 11 ft and 6 inches tall. Most bridges and overpasses are right about 13 feet and some inches. That leaves practically NO ROOM for a second deck.

````

Davis, California makes extensive use of double-deckers. Twinxor t 02:36, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The bus types aren't quite right

There should be categorization by size, by use, and by propulsion/energy type

Buses are generally diesel, but there are CNG and electric buses available. Hybrid diesel/electric buses may be avialable soon.


Bus sizes can vary from minibus (about 14 to 20 people) to mid-sized bus (26-35) to maxi-bus (up to 42-seats) baby coach (32-40) to coach (42-49) to XL coach (55 to 61) passengers. Double-deckers and/or articulated buses are counted in a different category.

microbus -- basically a converted van with extra high-ceilings, there offer walk-in high-back chair seating.

minibus -- generally converted from heavy-duty van or truck platforms, they offer greater carrying capacity than full-size vans at the cost of wider width. They can be ordered in a variety of seating configurations, but usually seat about 18-24 plus some luggage space. Available with perimeter seating (all seats with back against the walls) or forward-facing seating (normal).

mid-sized bus -- built on mid-sized truck platforms, these buses offer greater carrying capacity (often up to 35-seats and some luggage space). They could be front or rear-engined.

maxi-bus -- built on large truck platforms, these buses offer up to 42 seats without the investment of a full-sized coach. Sometimes these are known as mid-sized buses. Usually front-engined.

baby-coach -- built on shortened version of a standard coach, these have only 2 axles instead of the three on a standard coach, with reduced seating capacity, but retains the underneath luggage space. Usually rear-engined to reduce cabin noise.

coach -- standard coach in the US is 40 foot long and seats 42-50 people, with underneath luggage space, and has three axles: front, drive, and tag. Usually rear-engined to reduce cabin noise.

XL coach -- 45 foot version of standard coach, these represent the longest length coach allowed on highways without special permits. The extra length allows installation of extra seats, resulting in up to 62 seats. Not permitted on all roads. Check your state highway restrictions. Usually rear-engined to reduce cabin noise.


Buses are generally divided into three use types: tour/intercity bus, transit bus, and school bus.

Tour/intercity buses have luggage space placed under the main cabin. They can achieve high speeds and are more comfortable on the highways with air-suspensions over long distances.

Transit buses are designed for intracity use with lots of starts and stops. Their top speed is lower, and latest models have lower floors and multiple entry-ways, and NO luggage space. They often have a combination of perimeter and forward-facing seating to maximize the amount of standing space available.

School bus, in the US, can sit up to 70+ people with narrow bench seating, and has required set of rear escape doors and such.

the los angeles bus image is not showing up. 169.244.143.115 16:15, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

US bias

This article is extremely biased towards the US - in fact, less than a passing mention is made of buses in other countries through the whole article. --Stevefarrell 13:38, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then by all means, be bold and make it less so! SchuminWeb (Talk) 22:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't agree more. In the U.S., the mentality is "I need my personal car, you should ride a bus". Why not tell us more about buses elsewhere? Vaoverland 22:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article improvements

I added some info about various types of bus service such as local, intercity/interstate, shuttle, school, tour and charter. The wording of my additions could possibly use some improvements but i feel it's a decent start at least. I do think their should be a separate section on the specific types bus vehicles such as transit, coach, shuttle, mini-busses, double-decker, etc.. Also we should provide more info on the types of fuels/power sources currently used in busses including diesel /bio-diesel, electric, bio-fuels (ethanol, etc), hydrogen, etc. Also the types of amenities available fancier coach style busses (such as those used by touring musicians). These include lavatories, satellite TV, sleeping facilities, and other RV-like amenities. --Cab88 11:52, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buses

Why is it "buses" rather than "busses"? "buses" should rhyme with "abuses". 64.192.106.146 16:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In which language? 68.122.41.103 23:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Motor coach

Seems to me that the entry at Coach should be merged into this article, or at the very least the two articles should clearly reference one another.--Lordkinbote 19:56, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lead photo

The 1895 bus is cool historically, but maybe the article would be better served by a more contemporary photo, which is more representative of bus service today. Twinxor t 18:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I've implemented it. I left the historic bus photo on the page, but moved it down a little. SchuminWeb (Talk) 01:49, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Leave the gallery!

Someone deleted the gallery so i put it back. It's nice and could help to diminish that non-international point of view feeling of the article.