Talk:Ftr
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The criticisms have all been made (and having travelled on the things, I can bear them out), but without sources they are unverifiable, and qualify as original research. We don't want to give Yorkshire First the opportunity to portray Wikipedia as a soapbox for dissatisfied passengers, so can someone please find references? --RobertG ♬ talk 15:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I have added some content from a trade publication and tried to wikify the rest of it. I have also amended the Leeds section which I believe was factually incorrect. I don't believe that Metro have made any decision on this yet (Metro published a tender invitation in August 24th edition of LTT saying "no costs or timescales are available").Jezzerk 19:58, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
http://www.firstgroup.com/ftr/faq/index.php states "The vehicle can carry 53 seated passengers and 47 standing." If someone could find data on the old buses we might be able to verify one point at least, but I am having difficulty finding any data on the exact length of the buses. --Karina_Tv 09:34, 21 June 2006
According to the First York fleet list, http://www.firstgroup.com/ukbus/yorkhumber/york/history/historyindex.php, the Wright Eclipse Fusion (bendy buses) seats 56, the standard Eclipse (single) seats 41 and the Alexander ALX400 (double decker) seats 76. There is no information on the standing capacity.
It is also worth remembering that the bendy buses didn't operate on the ex number 4 (now ftr) route, so the claim that the ftr seats less than its predecessor isn't strictly true.
I am also doubtful whether this article should remain an anti ftr forum. Mdcollins1984 12:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Swansea
The service is expected to start in late 2008, nott 2007 according to http://www.swansea.gov.uk/index.cfm?articleid=10765
[edit] Criticisms removed for discussion and/or verification
- Despite being 100% longer than their predecessors, the ftr buses can seat only one more person. [citation needed]
...See above - this is not true.
- The length of the buses frequently leads to problems navigating York's often narrow and twisting streets, despite the jointed nature of the buses.
...But the original bendy buses still work and have done so. The ftr is based on the same chassis, the Volvo B7LA
- The 'Emergency door open' buttons are frequently mistaken by passengers as the correct way to open the back doors.
... they are clearly marked 'EMERGENCY USE ONLY' and are clearly visible. Is this therefore the fault of the bus or passengers? Mdcollins1984 13:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
- They are clearly marked but that has not stopped many passengers pressing them thinking that's the correct way to open the doors. It's clearly mostly the passengers' fault but IMHO the point is that it's a mistake they might not have made had the doors been designed better. --Jmptdc 11:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
- Most of the critisms don't have sources and are entirely original research. Probably done by the members of the facebook group (which is hardly relavent to the topic)
-What is the source of this comment then? 'Probably' is not a valid critism (dc505)
Yet they have a right to their opinions and views. As do you. So not irrelevant, but a useful perception.
- First Group advertised ticketing with the ftr as being easy, with 'm-tickets' being available to buy and download using a mobile phone, and pre-paid barcode tickets also being available from paypoints. Despite the trial period having been in operation for several months, these systems have still not yet been put into operation. First have given no indication of when, or even if, these pre-paid tickets will become available.
Removed, both these payment methods are fully operational, as far as I'm aware. I've certainly had no trouble obtaining tickets from paypoints. DezSP 17:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
i agree, i also deleted the following criticism and added it here for discussion, as it has no citation or source and seems to be either rumour or a slander :- Now cited
- Many users have experienced problems when dealing with First staff, particularly the 'pilot', who is often accused of being rude to members of the public, and even throwing them off the bus. This has been considered a particular problem because many students or tourists visiting York for the first time will be put off the city by such behaviour. (see Evening post, Nouse, Vision, YSTV).
I think it should also be perhaps mentioned that alot of the critism maybe a result of technophobia and negative reporting by the media. --Neon white 15:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] 'ftr' seating capacity
On the contrary of the capacity of the 'ftr' seating 53. I can tell you they seat 42 (although since some of the corner seats are not 'legal' seats under the regulations they 'officially seat 37). The staple single decker with First York is the B7L which is 12m long and seats 41. They have 5 or 6 B7RLEs which seat 43 and are the same length. The reason for the difference in seating between the two single deckers is the engine layout at the rear. The statement in the length of the 'ftr' being 100% longer than a single decker is incorrect. The 'ftr' is 18.75m and a typical single decker is 12m, so it is around 50% longer.
[edit] Meaningless paragraph
"The vehicles have been designed to make refubishment straightforward to freshen their appeal every few years. FirstGroup's record has not been impressive when it comes to maintaining the appearance of its existing fleet of conventional buses." This paragraph has no logic within this topic, it matters not on the type of bus. But when they are refurbished/repainted. -- Matthew Forth 88.109.123.206 18:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] This article requires extensive work
Whilst some aspects of this article are well done, the criticism section is very poor. I am aware this article was either started (or at least extensively edited) by a Facebook group claiming to hate the ftr but it is still important to retain balance. I propose these changes for a start:
"A Facebook group "I Hate The New Bus Society" has been formed, which now has over 840 members, with the aim of increasing awareness of problems with the buses and taking action against some of the problems. This contrasts to the 'ftr's might not be perfect but i don't hate them' group, which has only 16 members."
This is ridiculous. There are many valid criticisms that can be levelled at the service but the membership of Facebook groups is surely not one of them. This should be deleted.
The rest of the criticism section contains unverified claims and weasel words. For example, "Some have commented that ..." should go unless it can be cited. Similarly "The bus often fails to stop at the correct bus stop ..." is unverified and therefore out of place here. The ftr has been plagued with technical problems, can nobody find a reference?
In the 'support' section, *every* point is rebutted. They all follow the formula of <Grudging acceptance of a point> followed by <BUT some reason why this is still a criticism in disguise>. The nature of a bus service is that few people are going to come out with verifiable praise. If it is not there, don't make it up. Delete it and if the criticism section were written more fairly then the reader can make their own mind up about the service without need for a 'support' section.
I will leave it a while to see how people respond before making these changes. Thanks. 12:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
