1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152 
Why Not Tip-up Seats for Buses ?
Page 105
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
nESP1TE the use of low-loading Ljbodies, incorporating enlarged entrances with doors sliding into the body sides to save space, the modern service bus, particularly the single-deck type, has still bad unloading facilities,
When analysed, the reason soon becomes apparent. The congestion nd restriction are not so much around the door, but along the narrow gangway flanked at each side by closely spaced seats. A passenger occupying a window seat in a crowded bus, with five passengers standing, has, in effect, to undertake the following procedure in order to leave: First, he asks the passenger next to him to step into the gangway so that lie may pass ; secondly, owing to the lack of leg-room between the seats, he has to wriggle along his seat to reach the gangway; and, thirdly, be has to push his way past the standing passengers.
From this it will be seen that, for every one person leaving .a window seat, two persons, the departing one and the adjacent passenger, have to occupy the gangway, which, in a modern bus, is seldom wider than 1 ft. 2 ins. At a popular stopping place this, naturally, causes a general melee. As the maximum width of buses is governed by regulations, the width of the gangway is likely to stay correspondingly narrow, and, therefore, any speeding up in the unloading of passengers must he brought about by limiting pressure on the gangway.
One way in which this could be achieved, it is suggested, is by providing tip-up seats, preferably of the spring-back pattern, for that half of the double seat which is adjacent to the gangway. The occupier of a tip-up seat could then stand up in front of his seat, when necessary, and allow his fellow passenger, in the window seat, to pass..
in the rear-entrance single-deck bus, with seating for 32 passengers, laid out in typical manner, there are usually to double seats with restricted knee-room, the seats facing the front bulkhead, and the wheel-arch and rear seats being more readily accessible. A generous allowance for the spacing of these 10 seats is 2 ft. 5 ins. Of this space the seat cushion accounts for 1 ft. 9 ins., leaving only 8 ins. for knee room. Furthermore, the sweep of the rear of the squab often extends 4 ins, into this S-in. allowance.
When a tip-up scat is raised it should provide at least an additional 10i ins., i.e., half the width of the seat cushion, which, added to the 8 ins, already available, totals 1 ft. ins., or 4iins. greater than the normal dimension of a gangway.
In the same manner, the tip-up seat would also provide much needed space in the upper saloon in certain types of the low-bridge double-deck bus which have a side gangway feeding six. fourpassenger seats.
Apart from improving freedom of movement, other advantages would seem to accrue from the use of tip-up seats. Bus cleaning would be simplified.
During the day, when traffic is slack, heavy hags and other articles could be placed on the floor in front of the tip
up seat next to the owner, and they could thus have his personal attention.
Perhaps the main arguments which could he levelled against the tip-up seat are its additional cost and weight. As regards the first, if any improved comfort be given to passengers by its adoption the additional cost would seem to be justified.
The question of additional weight, however, is a more important problem, especially in the case of a double-deck bus. Nevertheless, no extra material would be required for the upholstery, and the increased weight would be confined to the seat frame.
At the present time, there are rigid seat-frames on the market which weigh less than -9 lb. One frame, of tubular design, is constructed by Accles and Pollock, Ltd., at a weight of only 8 lb. 2 oz. From this it can be assumed that the fitting of a tip-up device on seats of this type, would not mean more than 15 per cent, increase in weight.
On this basis, the additional weight to a 32-seater single-deck bus would amount to 12 lb. 3 oz., and a 9 lb. 12 oz. increase on a high-bridge doubledock bus in which only eight seats in the lower saloon would require converting, as there is usually. a more liberal seat spacing in the upper saloon ; neither of these weights, it is suggested, would he of a prohibitive character. e27