Some bus shelters in Italy have supplies for this purpose.
This is not just a quick laugh; there's an important insight here about how customers perceive time. But no, I don't think it's a reason to tolerate lower frequencies …
Some bus shelters in Italy have supplies for this purpose.
This is not just a quick laugh; there's an important insight here about how customers perceive time. But no, I don't think it's a reason to tolerate lower frequencies …
So if it’s cheaper to buy tons of bubble-wrap, we can deploy that instead of more service? Bubble-wrap doesn’t need any benefits, retirement, or insurance, ya know 😉
On an aside, the article actually shows a stop on one of Milan’s tram lines, where it operates in reserved track. So if anyone’s waiting there for a bus, they’ll be there a long time! (Unless, like Jarrett, they’ll be happy to take the first convenient vehicle that comes).
So I guess people can tolerate slower in-transit speeds as well if they’re not bored. I think we’re back to the Disneyland transit idea.
The linked article refers to a NY Times article on the psychology of queues, with the following quote relevant to the transit experience:
“Uncertainty magnifies the stress of waiting, while feedback in the form of expected wait times and explanations for delays improves the tenor of the experience.”
@Brent – for me, this summarises the situation perfectly: uncertainty. Nextbus is the best ever: you can time your sprint to the bus stop to the minute, or if waiting for a connection, go shopping for a bit, if you live somewhere nice like San Francisco. If your stuck nowhere, then you should pray for a lot of bubblewrap.
See http://www.thepoke.co.uk/2012/03/05/guerillas-on-the-london-underground/stress-twig/
for a London Underground alternative.