|
Post by manontheinside on Feb 22, 2008 21:21:49 GMT
Since very few companies still buy them these days its hard to say, although small runs of them will always cost more. I would guess somewhere in the order of £200-£400 per set, but this depends on size (number of destinations etc) and spec.
The level of investment depends. If you are simply replacing a couple of broken ones, not really. Just adding a couple of inserts to the fleet, not really. A full change across the fleet (say old UPPER CASE to DDA friendly lower case) would be very costly and time consuming. Thats the beauty of the electronic ones used now.
The trouble for companies however was that you could never guess too far ahead (would anyone have had Waverley on a blind?) and it doesn't even have to be a major change - say Lane Top instead of Ecclesfield. You can have every variant possible but that makes them longer, more expensive and therefore ironically, by virtue more prone to breaking and tearing and therefore a financial liability.
They are however more fun than the new types and arguably clearer.
|
|
|
|
Post by busman3 on Feb 22, 2008 22:10:21 GMT
Remember a PROPPER sheffield blind would have other gems which are lost today although used then:
Sothall, Crookes - about 2 versions, Woodseats, Meadowhead, Greenhill etc etc etc etc
|
|
|
|
Post by manontheinside on Feb 22, 2008 22:34:32 GMT
Maybe maybe. The world changes, and as a result i still have a wry smile when i see a 'First Sheffield' blind rather than the OG or HA versions which are less comprehensive - and particularly with the HA versions near illegible.
|
|
|
|
Post by dougie on Feb 22, 2008 22:35:06 GMT
Remember a PROPPER sheffield blind would have other gems which are lost today although used then: Sothall, Crookes - about 2 versions, Woodseats, Meadowhead, Greenhill etc etc etc etc Do buses still have Woodhouse via Standon Road (from the old 93 blinds)? Am sure I saw it on a 52 not that long ago, but my memory may be playing tricks... As for Buxton, good question. Did SYT have any journeys on the old Trent 208 (which I think was the previous version of the X23, before it became the X18, before it became the 218)? Otherwise, I'm stuck. Been trying to think of some short lived summer Sunday services (like the 401/402 to Glossop), but can't think of any
|
|
|
|
Post by manontheinside on Feb 22, 2008 22:46:43 GMT
Several do yes, its a regular error!
|
|
|
|
Post by dougie on Feb 22, 2008 23:05:49 GMT
Several do yes, its a regular error! Always makes me chuckle seeing a bus in Crookes heading to Woodhouse via a street in Wincobank (though I doubt anyone else notices this) ;D Wonder what the most commonly used "wrong" blind is...
|
|
|
|
Post by 22438 on Feb 22, 2008 23:26:47 GMT
Several do yes, its a regular error! Always makes me chuckle seeing a bus in Crookes heading to Woodhouse via a street in Wincobank (though I doubt anyone else notices this) ;D Wonder what the most commonly used "wrong" blind is... Standon Road seems to turn up quite regularly on the 85s too, which kind of defeats the point of having it there!
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom B on Feb 22, 2008 23:47:30 GMT
Undoubtably it's on the 72/75, which invariably display "Lakeside" whether they are heading for The Dome, Lakeside, Catesby Park or Town!
There are some variations of "Doncaster" on B10Ms, which show "via Thorne and Hatfield" or "via Balby" underneath, which sometimes show up on routes coming from places like Skellow or Rosso.
|
|
|
|
Post by manclad on Feb 23, 2008 1:44:33 GMT
X23/X18 were purely PMT right?
|
|
|
|
Post by dougie on Feb 23, 2008 8:49:41 GMT
X23/X18 were purely PMT right? As far as I can remember, yes. It was a curiosity to me that there were no buses from the Sheffield end.
|
|
|
|
Post by manontheinside on Feb 23, 2008 10:00:15 GMT
I guess part of the problem with 'via Standon Road' from the 93 days, is that there's no comparable 'via Sandstone Road' blind. You can forgive the use of some of them because i doubt most drivers even appreciate where it is.
The most common error i've seen (and bear in mind as we move towards ever more electronic blinds the ability to make errors reduces for the drivers) is at Rotherham where just about every bus from Sheffield ends up there via a myriad of routes. Rotherham via Arena and Stadium always was a favourite for routes such as 132 when a B10M was used.
|
|
|
|
Post by 22438 on Feb 23, 2008 13:02:07 GMT
I guess part of the problem with 'via Standon Road' from the 93 days, is that there's no comparable 'via Sandstone Road' blind. You can forgive the use of some of them because i doubt most drivers even appreciate where it is. Problem is when the via points are so small, it would be hard to tell the difference between the two roads!
|
|
|
|
Post by dougie on Feb 23, 2008 15:26:11 GMT
The most common error i've seen (and bear in mind as we move towards ever more electronic blinds the ability to make errors reduces for the drivers) is at Rotherham where just about every bus from Sheffield ends up there via a myriad of routes. Rotherham via Arena and Stadium always was a favourite for routes such as 132 when a B10M was used. Good point. Much as I liked the two blinds on older double deckers that allowed a "via" point to be used, I appreciate that this may not be realistic on modern buses (with electronic blinds). However, would the rotating board in the windscreen that Mainline introduced (with "Via Meadowhall", "Via City Centre" and an advert about return fares IIRC) be allowed these days (with DDA legislation about visibility and font sizes etc)?
|
|
|
|
Post by Tom B on Feb 23, 2008 16:16:07 GMT
A sensible thing for that would be to use a rotating board - although I do remember a few B10Ms in Doncaster has them. I do remember passengers asking if the bus went through Meadowhall... or even use a 'tramboard' (imagine a MASS destination board, but professionally produced and mounted on a bracket inside the windscreen).
|
|
|
|
Post by manontheinside on Feb 23, 2008 17:32:50 GMT
Not to say that that isn't a decent idea, but it does rather require buses to be stable on routes doesn't it. Interworking would seriously stretch the idea and number required, and could easily fall over on that most common problem - namely human error.
Think the problem with the rotating boards was more one of 'scruffy looking' and - as ever - a lack of willing to change them. Given the font size it also was of little value until it was upon you anyway.
Always enjoyed classics such as "41 City Centre & Moorfoot" with "via City Centre" added in - no s**t sherlock me thinks.
|
|
|