|
|
| Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' (232998) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||
|
| (233134) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon May 16 15:13:13 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by BMTLines on Mon May 16 11:55:30 2011. I highly agree with that. Thanks for posting the section about seating.Unfortunately, I'm not sure they will be able to get this amount of seating the way MTA spec's their buses to maximize standing capacity. Wasn't there a huge issue with the original Orion VII set up where people were complaining about the narrow aisle in the back of the bus? Too bad they can't use those NABI 45ft buses... :( |
|
|
| (233137) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Gold_12th on Mon May 16 15:40:23 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon May 16 11:13:35 2011. It is the high floor section. The LFS artic has more legroom then the LFS-40 footer. MTA should have configured the U shape seating just like the LFS 40 footer demo that has.I think it is clearly MTA made the wrong decision to buy these buses. They really did not plan that well. |
|
|
| (233138) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Osmosis Jones on Mon May 16 15:44:40 2011, in response to Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by Gold_12th on Sun May 15 13:03:43 2011. I knew that the LFS was a bad purchase decision the first time I rode them on the Bx12, why in the world would the MTA order buses with "party seats"? |
|
|
| (233154) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by orionviidieselbus on Mon May 16 19:44:40 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by Gold_12th on Mon May 16 15:40:23 2011. Maybe the high floor section should have came with sideway seating like the NGs even if I hate it but would make a little more room on the back. |
|
|
| (233190) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Gold_12th on Mon May 16 23:51:55 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by orionviidieselbus on Mon May 16 19:44:40 2011. thats why I wrote..."MTA should have configured the U shape seating just like the LFS 40 footer demo that has." |
|
|
| (233201) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue May 17 06:23:42 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by The Flxible Neofan on Mon May 16 15:13:13 2011. Unfortunately, I'm not sure they will be able to get this amount of seating the way MTA spec's their buses to maximize standing capacity. Wasn't there a huge issue with the original Orion VII set up where people were complaining about the narrow aisle in the back of the bus? Don't confuse BMTLines with facts and reason and logic. |
|
|
| (233203) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Tue May 17 06:40:13 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by Terrapin Station on Tue May 17 06:23:42 2011. Then choose your argument. If you are going to argue that the MTA prefers to maximize STANDING capacity THAT ONLY PROVES my point that YOUR PRECIOUS MTA DOES NOT PRIORITIZE COMFORT! |
|
|
| (233204) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Tue May 17 07:17:52 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by BMTLines on Tue May 17 06:40:13 2011. Incorrect. We don't want to confuse you with facts and reason and logic. |
|
|
| (233205) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Tue May 17 07:21:17 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by Terrapin Station on Tue May 17 07:17:52 2011. You can't argue my point so you resort to insults and innuendo. Enjoy the show: |
|
|
| (233211) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Railman718 on Tue May 17 09:07:27 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by BMTLines on Tue May 17 07:21:17 2011. Please hurry with part five six seven and so on.. |
|
|
| (233226) | |
Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room' |
|
|
Posted by Gold_12th on Tue May 17 13:07:42 2011, in response to Re: Problems with MTA's Nova Bus LFS (40 ft): 'lack in head & leg room', posted by Terrapin Station on Tue May 17 07:17:52 2011. You really need to go back to school. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
Page 2 of 2 |
||