Comments on: Van Hooligans

By: News Media « AC Transit WATCH

News Media « AC Transit WATCH — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 02:52:51 +0000

[...] http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2008/01/24/van-hooligans/ [...]

By: Kit Vaq

Kit Vaq — Thu, 01 May 2008 15:57:27 +0000

I am a regular AC Transit bus rider since 1984. I just had a falling accident on April 29th on the 72R Van Hool bus. It sent me to the emergency room on advice from Kaiser the next day because more soreness and bruising showed up. I had been thrown across the bus aisle, hitting empty seats and a passenger. All because I had attempted to get off one of those high seats (approximately a foot from the bus floor) as it came to a stop. The bus driver refused to file a report even though I asked. I’m on pain meds and ice with no health insurance or sick leave, plus I’m on job probation and have to take time out to deal with this.

The incident, of course, made me miss my transfer bus home and I had to wait again for my bus, but this time in pain.

I’ve yet to hear back from AC Transit who I phoned and e-mailed my accident to. By the way, I did get the bus driver’s badge and the bus number.

The same week, during the morning rush hour on the #18, a man had a hard time finding something to hold onto as this crowded bus moved. He fell on top of an elderly woman’s wire basket cart, ripped his pants and damaged her cart.

I have seen countless other passengers fall, slip and hold on for dear life onto their seats as these Van Fools or Van Hooligans dangerously travel down the streets of the East Bay. These buses should carry the sign “Ride at Your Own Risk” instead of “Bus of the Year”. Or maybe the sign should say “Bus of Fear”.

By: Robert Manson

Robert Manson — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:59:26 +0000

oh ya… and why is it the priority for AC Transit to buy local? If they can get better busses abroad isn’t that better for the people that actually ride the bus?

By: Robert Manson

Robert Manson — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 21:57:49 +0000

As someone who rides AC Transit occasionally, I opine that the busses are actually nicer than anything that SF Muni runs, including the New Flyers.

Numerous parts of his story appear to be intentionally misleading (ie the insinuation that all the seats are on elevated platforms).

I am shocked that this writer has been awarded for anything. Is he being paid by Gillig? Did Gillig even make low floor busses in 1996?

By: Doug Faunt

Doug Faunt — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:02:09 +0000

Interesting. I see many people standing on the Van Hools rather than sitting backwards. I think the quality of ride makes a big difference between backwards on these buses vs doing the same on rail stock.
And given the lack of enough handholds, and the necessity for them on the Van Hools, I’m a little surprised. My balance is good enough so I can ride BART and MUNI standing without a handhold- on the Van Hools I must have one if not seated, and even then it’s pretty brutal.

So what advantages do the Van Hools have that make their driver and rider unpleasantness worthwhile?

Certainly the driver on the 72 yesterday didn’t like them, and his statement was that most drivers didn’t.

By: V Smoothe

V Smoothe — Wed, 30 Jan 2008 23:12:23 +0000

I agree that it is insulting for those who dislike the Van Hools to accuse everyone who does like them of not riding the bus. Personally, I frequently find myself riding standing room only buses, and prefer the Van Hools to both the old high-floor buses and the low floor NABI buses because I find them more spacious and pleasant to ride when you’re standing up.

By: Michael Krueger

Michael Krueger — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:15:41 +0000

“Anyone who is defending the VanHells obviously does not ride them everyday.”

Another possibility is that we do ride them—perhaps not every day, but often—and we like them. Perhaps we don’t find a backward-facing seat to be that big of a problem, compared to the other advantages the buses offer. Perhaps we’ve noticed that half of the seats on many streetcars and trains face backward, and it’s not the end of the world. Could that be it?

I find it amazing that dissenting views on the Van Hool issue are waved away with the casual dismissal, “Well, then you must not ride these buses, or else you would agree how terrible they are!” Apparently the only opinions that count are the ones that slot nicely into the “Van Hools are evil” world view.

By: kris

kris — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:40:24 +0000

Anyone who is defending the VanHells obviously does not ride them everyday. Sitting up high, backwards, unable to see your stop, with nothing to grab on to while the bus jerks back and forth is scary. The smaller buses are the worst. American roads are in worse shape than European roads so you feel the ups and downs and worse, side to side. When the buses stop suddenly hold on or you’ll be on the floor!

By: Doug Faunt

Doug Faunt — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:34:46 +0000

The NABI low-floor buses are much better. The low floor extends from the front door to the rear door, with forward-facing seats at that level (no step up to the seats), and then there’s one step up to a higher platform of seats at the rear for the more-abled. I had the luck to ride a Van Hool 51 to Alameda where I got on a NABI low-floor on the 50 run to OAK, with much heavy baggage. The difference was most enlightening, and turned me against the Van Hools.

I note that Muni has TransLink readers at the rear doors of many of their vehicles, for POP service, whereas AC doesn’t seem to think this is necessary, even if they’ve got buses that are optimized for this service. This was done to the detriment of the AC ridership, as I see it.

I’m not against AC, but I am against the Van Hool buses. When I’ve talked to riders and drivers, they’ve largely agreed with me. My perception is that people who like them are comparing them to the old high-floor buses, and they are an improvement there. But they’re not good enough.

By: david vartanoff

david vartanoff — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 23:55:34 +0000

Well designed Low Floor buses already are part of AC’s fleet. They had NO NEED for the VH products which are more expensive to buy, to get delivery, and mean a whole new batch of spare parts to stock–few of them common to the previous fleet. The professed desire for POP enabling features is so far just talk and extra cost for unused equipment. Note, I make no claim for Gillig, I just want functional buses for cheap. The VH design has very slow doors which delay the buses as we wait to get off. They may look snazzy but they ride like s#^% because the needless third door moved the rear axle too far forward. And to put icing on the cake there are insufficient hand holds in the open center section making it difficult to get from the narrow entry aisle to the non ADA seating.