Articles on 11th December, 1998.

Today's Articles: 61.

Articles' Numbers: (19981211_01-61)

Article 1:


8287 (hkay@netvigator.com) from imsp037.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 12:30, 1998 said:






Article 2:

Declaration on 998 & 692

291+291A+690+691+692 (eg_slk@stu.ust.hk) from ustsu18-nc2.ust.hk at Thu Dec 10 12:57, 1998 said:

There are some boardmates said my suggestion of 692 is totally crazy, worse than BusBus' 998 (HKUST - Kennedy Town Inceniator).

But this is NOT TRUE because they are totally different!

Citybus+NWFB 692 is develpoed as an express route from most of Tseung Kwan O to Central via Island East Corridor, Gloucester Road, etc. So it has short ftravelling time as follows:

Tiu King Ling (minutes)

5 Hang Hau

10 5 Metro City

23 18 13 Lam Tin

35 30 25 12 Tin Hau

45 40 35 22 10 Central

60 55 50 37 25 15 Kennedy Town (these theoretical times may be longer than actual!)

It has the low fares shown in the suggestion, and of course full AC.

This route not only serve fast service from Tseung Kwan O to Central because the congestion zones of King's Road & Hennseey Road are avioded, but also serves a fast link from Tin Hau to Kennedy Town, so it can replace Citybus 5 & NWFB 18.

So this route is an excellent route.

BusBus' 'Citybus' 998, however, is a very slow route between HKUST & Kennedy Town via the following route:

HKUST - ClearwaterBay Road - Choi Hung Road - Kwun Tong Road - To Kwa Wan Road - Chatham Road - Jordan Road - route of 904 after WHC.

Worse, the route has no stops between HKUST & Sai Ying Poon. So it is totally unreasonable for it to go via such long & circuitous road, making the trip at least 2 hours long! >_<

The route is full hotdog service (the buses are not from Citybus, but are just retired ex-NWFB Fleetlines with fake Citybus logo), thus the trip is even slower (they may have speed of less than 1km/h on going uphill!)

The fare, however, is totally man-eating $15 ($20 for Citybus fans!). This makes the route no passegners at all!

So the 998 is totally a crazy route!

Thus please do not rate the route suggestions just depending on his identity (such as Citybus or NWFB fans or others), but should see the individual cases objectively.

If anybody rates the route just depending on the people himself, then this is the same as rating all films by a company you dislike Cateogory III, no matter how healthy the film they are, and Cateogory I to all films by another company you like, no matter how unhealthy they are. This is totally unreasonable.


Article 2: (Request 1)

There is a new purpose of NWFB/Citybus Rt 692: A link between HKUST & HK Island!

There are some deaprtures in the morning from Kennedy Town to HKUST via:

Des Voeux Road West, Connaught Road Central, Admiralty, Gloucester Road, Causeway Bay, Victoria Park, Island East Corridor, EHC, Lam Tin (no stop until Hang Hau), Tseung Kwan O Tunnel, Hang Hau, HKUST.

The departures are:

0730 (to HKUST at 0830), 0740 (0840), 0750 (0850), 0810 (0910), 0830 (0930), 0840 (0940), 0850 (0950) (Mon-Fri only, not in PH)

And there are some departures in the afternoon from HKUST to Kennedy Town via:

Hang Hau, (no stop until Lam Tin) Tseung Kwan O Tunnel, Lam Tin, EHC, Island East Corridor, Tin Hau, Causeway Bay North, Gloucester Road, Connaught Road Central, Des Voeux Road West, Kennedy Town.

The departures are:

1700 (to Kennedy Town at 1800), 1710 (1810), 1730 (1830), 1750 (1850), 1800 (1900), 1810 (1910), 1830 (1930) (Mon - Fri only, not in PH)

The fare is $14.0 between HK Island & Hang Hau, $15 to HKUST, other fares same as existing 692.

This route is much faster & cheaper than BusBus' 998 ($20 for Citybus fans, $15 for others) that uses only hotdogs & via a lot of roads & at least 2 hours long, so it would be popular.

Also, this would not cause the wastage of buses as the buses running on the service are just those used on 692 in peak times (so Volvo Super Olympian 12m or Trident).


Article 2: (Request 2)

I have to delcare that the special departure of 692 between HKUST & Kennedy Town is NOT selfish.

This is because the route goes from Kennedy Town, stops Sai Ying Poon, Sheung Wan, Central, Admiralty, Wahchai North, Causeway Bay, Tin Hau, Lam Tin, Hang Hau, making the route has many passegners not only from the area mentioned, but also from Mid-Levels, Happy Valley, Jardine Lookouts, Aberdeen.

This configuration, however, would not cause long travelling time (about 1 hour) because it has a logical route:

Kennedy Town - Sai Ying Poon - (Connaught Road Central) - Central - (Queensway in Eastbound direction, but Harcourt Road in Westbound) - WanChai - (Gloucester Road) - Causeway Bay - Tin Hau - Island East Corridor - EHC - Lam Tin - express to Hang Hau - HKUST.

Not only HKUST studetns (there are about 20% of all HKUST students living in HK Island & 10% in Lam Tin & Tseung Kwan O, thus making there are about 600 potential passegners, I guess), but also TVB staffs & visitors to & from HKUST would take the route. So the route is profitable & practical.

BusBus' 998, however, is not practical & very selfish because the route only have stops in Sai Ying Poon & Kennedy Town, but goes via WHC, Jordan Road, Chatham Road, Choi Hung Road, making the route extremely long, and hence no passgeners.


Article 3:

Re: My letter to all HKBDB boardmates

屯兵 (chungtm@netteens.net) from imsp013.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 22:18, 1998 said:

> 291+291A+690+691+692 (eg_slk@stu.ust.hk) said:

> Here is my letter to all HKBDB boardmates.


> (1) Please see each route suggestions objectively, don't rate the suggetions just depending on the people himself. It not so, then it is the same as rating all films by a company you dislike Cateogory III, no matter how healthy they are, while Cateogory I to all films by a company you like, no matter how unhealthy you are.


> (2) All hotdog fans please do not suggest the bus companies to have hotdog service in the future as most people in HK dislike hotdog service because of tunnel exhausts, wet cabin during rainy days, etc. It they like hotdog so much, then they should form a bus company with only hotdogs.


> (3) All hogh floor fans should operate their own bus compnay uses only high floor buses, and not suggest bus companies to buy high floor buses bacause HK population is ageing, so there is an ever increasing need for low floor buses.


> 291+291A+690+691+692



Thank You!

Article 3: (Request 1)


Article 3: (Request 2)

> Here is my letter to all HKBDB boardmates.


> (1) Please see each route suggestions objectively, don't rate the suggetions just depending on the people himself. It not so, then it is the same as rating all films by a company you dislike Cateogory III, no matter how healthy they are, while Cateogory I to all films by a company you like, no matter how unhealthy you are.

Did I ever do so???


> (2) All hotdog fans please do not suggest the bus companies to have hotdog service in the future as most people in HK dislike hotdog service because of tunnel exhausts, wet cabin during rainy days, etc. It they like hotdog so much, then they should form a bus company with only hotdogs.

They don't seem to accept the fact bus companies in Hong Kong, including those 'mung mo' residential bus operators, will not purchase anymore hotdog.


> (3) All high floor fans should operate their own bus compnay uses only high floor buses, and not suggest bus companies to buy high floor buses bacause HK population is ageing, so there is an ever increasing need for low floor buses.


Agree. Though those new 'medium' MAN of AEL and B7R of Tai Fung

are super high floor as well, and I don't see any problem with

them. (nice place to sleep!)

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 3: (Request 3)

> (1) Please see each route suggestions objectively, don't rate the suggetions just depending on the people himself. It not so, then it is the same as rating all films by a company you dislike Cateogory III, no matter how healthy they are, while Cateogory I to all films by a company you like, no matter how unhealthy you are.


I think you should not discuss which company the routes are belonging to, and then no one will score you


> (2) All hotdog fans please do not suggest the bus companies to have hotdog service in the future as most people in HK dislike hotdog service because of tunnel exhausts, wet cabin during rainy days, etc. It they like hotdog so much, then they should form a bus company with only hotdogs.


How about Rural routes? I think most people like hotdog bus to travel on 99,51,76K,77K because people can breathe fresh air


> (3) All hogh floor fans should operate their own bus compnay uses only high floor buses, and not suggest bus companies to buy high floor buses bacause HK population is ageing, so there is an ever increasing need for low floor buses.


Each one operates its own company? CRAZY YOU ARE !


Article 3: (Request 4)

> 100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) said:


> Then why 78K and 79K have full A/C service?


Don't want to purchase Non-A/C buses loh!


> Have you count how many 'mung mo' residential bus companies

> are out there?


> 100/911R/M1 Wong


I think Siu means that each boardmate has his/her own bus company

Article 3: (Request 5)

> 100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) said:


> Have you count how many 'mung mo' residential bus companies

> are out there?

since they are 'underground' service, i think noone, even

hong kong police force can't answer u also.



> 100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 3: (Request 6)

> 291+291A+690+691+692 (eg_slk@stu.ust.hk) said:


> But...... what happens when there is downpour? All seats become wet. And what happens when there is a smoky vehicle, especially a rubbish collection truck in front of a hotdog? Certainly harmful to health! Also, there would be far too mucu fallen leaves & litter on the seats & in cabin, making seating unpleasant.


I think if not the day with heavy rainstorm (few days per year), passengers can close the windows.


> But how can the high floor fans & hotdog fans do else? The bus compnaies (except for KMB) are withdrawing the high floor & non-AC buses, and KMB's franchise would be ended by 2007, so there would not be any hotdogs nor high floor buses. So they should operate such bus compnay for them!


There is no 'high floor fans' in the world! They are only orindary bus fans

Don't u know KMB has withdrawn all its Guy Victory? KMB is a progressive company at all!

Because KMB has too many 'hotdog', you should give more time to KMB to do so.

That's because CTB has only 100 'hotdog', they can be withdrawn quickly.

But for KMB, withdrawal needs more time! So please be patient.


Article 3: (Request 7)

> DC10 (s986380@mailserv.cuhk.edu.hk) said:

> I think if not the day with heavy rainstorm (few days per year), passengers can close the windows.

I guess you weren't in Hong Kong during the summer of 96/97, when the total number of days without rain didn't total more than a month!

> Don't u know KMB has withdrawn all its Guy Victory? KMB is a progressive company at all!

Although it seems to me NWFB might withdraw its front-engined buses before KMB.

True, KMB is a progressive company, though is it progressing fast enough to keep up the pace?

However, it pretty much cared only on (new) routes in newly developed areas like Tin Shui Wai and Sheung Tak and allocate many 3AD's to serve them, instead of ordered them as ADS to replace those front-engined buses.

> Because KMB has too many 'hotdog', you should give more time to KMB to do so.

It sure has more resources to purchase more buses, or even order bus chassis manufacturers to 'customize' vehicles for KMB.

> But for KMB, withdrawal needs more time! So please be patient.

Hopefully I'll still be alive...

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 3: (Request 8)

1. i had said to you before:

'mung mo' bus is not equal to 'non-franchise bus service'

'mung mo' bus is a illegal bus service which hadn't authorise

from Transport Department. such as: there are some bus operate

from Kam Tin to Tuen Mun Pier which no TD permission authorised.

2. for KMB, they can buy bus everywhere, but, do you think

the market of bus service is expanding? i don't think so.

Dong Chieh Hua just know how to make more money with commercial

Company, especially, Property holdings, they want there new

developing estates has direct transport aids to urban area.

so, they want dong permit to have more railway. so, the %

taken for bus in all transport aids should be decrease, if

u r the manager of KMB, would you willing to invest a giant

amount of capital which may or may not have acceptable returns?

also, the decrease on speed on purchasing vehicle leads decline

on retiring old vehicle, i don't think some N will retain

until 2007, but i think it may retain until 2000.

for other three company, NLB have most of them high-floor bus,

some of this are non-ac; NWFB has agreement with the government

that they will withdrawn all bus of 18 years, i.e. all fleetline,

metrobus(except some ML), lv2 and jubliant, for others, they

can retain. i don't think they should withdraw some newly

non a/c bus such as 'tiger-head(LM)'; 'open dragon(DM)'.

do you think so?

for the devilery stragery of a/c bus of kmb, it is a problem

that kmb put a/c bus only in money earned route or long route.

i think it is the only point i agree with u.

Jess, a hotdog fans during winter; a a/c bus fans during summer;

like most people in hong kong.

Article 3: (Request 9)

> DC10 (s986380@mailserv.cuhk.edu.hk) said:

> I think if not the day with heavy rainstorm (few days per year), passengers can close the windows.

But what happens if there are not many passegners in the bus? And if most of the day is sunny, so the windows are opened, but there is a sudden downpour? The seats become wet because none closes the windows. That's what I experienced on a trip of Citybus 48 in 2 years ago, when there were still hotdogs on 48.

Such case could also be found on CMB 537, with hotdogs running on it in a rainy day. The seats became wet & dark! Everyone complained to the TD & CMB aout this!

> There is no 'high floor fans' in the world! They are only orindary bus fans

No high floor fans? See my article under the thread! My mother is a high floor fan!

> Don't u know KMB has withdrawn all its Guy Victory? KMB is a progressive company at all!

But I think the Ducks cannot be withdrawn by 2007!

Also, KMB buys a lot of high floor AC buses, like AM, Dart, Dragon, even there are lower floor buses, like Olympian, B6.


Article 3: (Request 10)

> Kwan (sfac3a09@netvigator.com) said:

> 嘩!你咁都知香港人唔鍾意坐熱狗?

They don't like hotdogs clearly, because hotdog means poor air in tunnel, wet cabin in rainy days, poor smell then the hotdogs are going through farms (you should know this when taking hotdog 91, 91M or 92) ans when running after a truck (especially rubbish collection truck). So most people do not like hotdogs.

> 當年未有冷馬時他們怎樣坐?

They have to stop breathing each time when going through tunnel and when there is a truck before a hotdog. This is very unpleasant.

> 另外,你這些叫別人不要保留熱狗的態度足以使人知道你對別人不尊重.


Not respecting others? I am respecting others as the bus compnaies (except KMB) are withdrawing hotdogs by 2000, while KMB would die by 2007, making there arte no hotdogs in HK. The setting up of bus companies by them are creating special choice for them!


> 你的理論真神奇!!這世上有高地台迷?

In fact, there are high floor fans. My mother is one of them. She says it is more comfortable to take high floor buses. But in fact this is untrue. The high floor buses have leaf spring suspension, so uncomfortable, but the low floor buses have air suspension (even front independent suspension, like Volvo B6BLE, Super Olympian, B7L, B10L!), so much mre comfortable.



Article 3: (Request 11)

> DC10 (s986380@mailserv.cuhk.edu.hk) said:


> Do you know why the floor of the 50-seat bus is so high?

> Just because people want to see the scene from the bus!

> If they take SLF bus, how can they see beautiful view?

If most non-bus fans passengers think like you do, MTR may

go out of business as everybody wants to enjoy the view outside!

I do think the view outside is pretty good in Hong Kong, as

of course I'm a bus fan and things are different everyday on

the streets! (especially buses on 110 by NWFB) However, I

probably prefer to sit on the upper deck, as I sure can see

more than a single deck super high floor bus!

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 3: (Request 12)

> Do you know why the floor of the 50-seat bus is so high? Just because people want to see the scene from the bus! If they take SLF bus, how can they see beautiful view?

But how can the elderly & the small children board on the buses? The floor is too high. So low floor buses is needed. And for the view problem this can be easily solved by using buses with low floor till the 2nd axle, but high floor after the 2nd axle, like Volvo B6BLE, B10BLE, so elderly can take lower seats for easier access, while others can tahe the higher seats for better view.


Article 4:

Re: A41可能延長至出馬鞍shan+可能開M78

B-2051 (dickson2@macau.ctm.net) from at Thu Dec 10 19:19, 1998 said:

> chung (chengtt@ctimail.com) said:

> 今日見到張通告關於A41 & M78

> A41 如題

> M78 from Northern part to Tsing yi MTR.(Fare $10.9)

其實早就應該開 M78啦! 好過開條北區線往機場. 而且用途不單止

讓北區的乘客來往機場, 而且可讓他們在三號幹線轉車往市區(如行



Article 4: (Request 1)

> GZ5818 (kytse1@netvigator.com) said:


> 什麼通告? M78 , 278X 可否共存?


> GZ5818






Article 4: (Request 2)


若果可以接駁其他大欖隧道線, 北區可以唔使開太多市區線

用M78去大欖轉車站可轉 269B 去尖沙咀, 69X 去油麻地旺角, 或

968 去港島


Article 4: (Request 3)

> 278X! (ericnet@hkstar.com) said:

> M78最大分別係行三號幹線

> M78 is go to Tsing yi and 連接 all airport bus line!

Then A41 to tsing yi is $17

Article 5:

Re: 民建聯成功爭取A12...

林文放 (manhing@hkstar.com) from jupiter.csc.cuhk.edu.hk at Fri Dec 11 02:59, 1998 said:

> Ambrose (ambrosey@netvigator.com) said:

> 今天回家看見告示指出民建聯已經成功向運輸局爭取機場

> 線A12在聖誕節前延長到小西灣,這樣不知A12是不

> 是將成境內最遠車程路線?車費又不知會否改變?








Article 5: (Request 1)



Article 5: (Request 2)


Article 5: (Request 3)

> Bruce Li (bruceli@vcn.bc.ca) said:

> 老實講,政府俾城巴延長A12都係想好好運用現有資源和保護新巴

> 利益呢,試想,若政府俾新巴開條只服務柴灣及筲箕灣的機場線,

> 很大可能會蝕錢呢,客量仲分分鐘少過現在的A12呀!


> Bruce





Article 5: (Request 4)



Article 5: (Request 5)

不如將 A12 過俾新巴玩囉



780/788/8X 又係咁


5 糸又係咁

巴士 VS 機鐵又係咁



Article 6:

Re: 石硤尾及旺角地鐵巴士總站的位置,32M

Stanley Yung (n281@hkstar.com) from mp27119.hknet.com at Fri Dec 11 10:40, 1998 said:

> S3N370,GD605 (s3n370@netvigator.com) said:

> 地鐵觀塘線啟用時,九巴曾開辦以下地鐵接駁線:

> 6M 美孚 - 石硤尾地鐵站

> 33M 荃灣碼頭 - 旺角地鐵站

> 36M 梨木樹 - 石硤尾地鐵站

> 37M 葵盛(中) - 旺角地鐵站

> 40M 荃灣碼頭 - 石硤尾地鐵站

> 45M 祖堯 - 旺角地鐵站

> 66M 大興 - 旺角地鐵站


> 問石硤尾地鐵站及旺角地鐵站的巴士總站的位置.








Article 6: (Request 1)

至少仲有 72M





Article 6: (Request 2)

The bus stop for 45M was at Argyle Street (I remember it's

near Shanghai Street.

Article 6: (Request 3)

> Jess (c5013830@hkbu.edu.hk) said:

> 當時石硤尾和旺角總站都是擺街.

> 石硤尾站在偉智街; 旺角站在西洋菜街.



> Jess

Article 6: (Request 4)

Is it just next to the Holy Trinity College/Ming Yin College? If so, not many buses can be parked. As the buses will block the enterence of Holy Trinity College and Ming Yin College. How did they park the buses?



Article 6: (Request 5)

yes! 但那處當時泊車又無問題, 仲有條無關係的104有站添.



Article 7:

Re: (urgent)78K到唔到鷂藪?

Tony(S3M61) (op615221@netvigator.com) from hhtam005179.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 18:42, 1998 said:

> S3V30(GK9112) (matt4127@netteens.net) said:

> 如題.唔該





Article 7: (Request 1)

> S3V30(GK9112) (matt4127@netteens.net) said:


> 鶴藪郊野公園係咪可以行番落沙頭角公路搭78k?

行好遠 , 條路又斜 ,

但小巴 30 mins 一班.


Article 7: (Request 2)

> F-stephen (c462a198@netvigator.com) said:


> 若果假日去,小巴只需12-15分一班,最好在粉嶺火車站上車,

> 指明往鶴藪(流水口向)才上,若果多人搭,會即時加班的!


> F-stephen





Article 7: (Request 3)




Article 8:


1010,1357 (schneide@netvigator.com) from hhtun024073.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 18:12, 1998 said:



放學:94A的LF46,LF256 有時LF18.






Article 8: (Request 1)






















Article 8: (Request 2)

返學 :2A 的AS, 間中S3BL309, S3M234.

放學 :2A 的AS (不定).


Article 8: (Request 3)

> 返學:52M(S3BL300,AD178)

> 放學:行路線11號 (要送女仔回家)

> 星期六:S3M225.AD283(很久前,已過K廠

> 去街:AA59(60M)

Article 8: (Request 4)

返學: DL 9903 S3BL84 (80K) ,每月都不同 (上個月就日日坐DL 2085)

放學: HV 9690 AV530 (282)

星期六: GJ 5216 AD174 (296A), HE 4236 3AV249 (80)

HB 916

Article 8: (Request 5)

> DA90 (refchan@netteens.net) said:


> 返學:93A的LA11(即第二班車)

係0米 E.T呀?

> 放學:970或90B(話唔定)

> 星期六(出大會堂):70居多,回頭有時坐43X(寶)



Article 9:

Re: New!新巴VA54模型!

William (william2@ihug.co.nz) from p42-max25.akl.ihug.co.nz at Thu Dec 10 16:27, 1998 said:

> LF272 加德士 (victory2@netvigator.com) said:

> 今次出0左架VA54上0左

> (一切從新開始)Banner 即翻油0既樣子!

> 行駛116往魚則魚涌,聽講出好少大約3,000部,

> 價錢$288,有興趣可以去巴X世界望0下(門口有相辦)

> 大約12月20日前會到.

Where I can buy this model except Bus World?

Article 9: (Request 1)

> WingKit (tslmis@hkstar.com) said:


> 唉! 再出落去真係破產都唔掂囉! 可唔可以買平D架? 小弟巳花了超

> 過$2500落Olympian同Trident模型上. 我想我都係要放棄, 省D錢去

> 多幾次牛河好過.


> 好窮呀..



今個星期出KCR 201同捷達,

下星期又出新巴VAs...仲要數款Banner tim...




窮人 1010,1357


Article 9: (Request 2)


產品, 價錢相對於收藏價值而言, 實在是太貴了. 而且越出越多,


p.s. 以上只屬個人意見, 絕不是要打擾大家收藏的興致 :)

Article 9: (Request 3)

> David Lai (lps288@netvigator.com) said:

> KCRC#201出0左未呀?

At 14-12-1998 will sell KCRC#201

Article 9: (Request 4)

太子聯合廣場的 80N 都有。

仲有,除0左 '一切從新開始' 之外,

仲會有另外兩款新巴 Banner VA 模型出售。

傑仔 RLX1

Article 10:

怪巴士3BL162 + 其他所見/問題

Jacky,S3M80 (jackyyng@hkschool.net) from aquila.hkschool.net at Thu Dec 10 19:33, 1998 said:









Jacky,S3M80 DR5312

Article 10: (Request 1)

> R Lai (raymansc@asiaonline.net) said:

> 呢部車十多年前己經係o甘(但不知是一出車就o甘)

> 以前行42掛牌, 上過粒粒橙汁廣告.

以前行 42 部掛牌係 3BL111, 不是3BL162,

不過兩者都係咁樣的, 仲有架 3BL109.

3BL162有好多年都係行 6 號.

Ricky Chan

Article 10: (Request 2)

唔止, 仲有幾部BL係咁BL120, BL121 同 BL123. 全部都o係 K 廠.


Article 10: (Request 3)

> Joe~305 (dartchm@netvigator.com) said:


> o甘樣......係o米D通風機全部打直(正常斜的)果部.


> 如是......我好掛住[人巨]!!


> 小時常常坐的


> Joe~305字


Jacky,S3M80 DR5312

Article 11:

Re: 今日遊河 -- 276P 金躉 , 70 老虎頭

GC2875 (loks@netteens.net) from imsp013.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 16:18, 1998 said:

> GZ5818 (kytse1@netvigator.com) said:

> 日期 : 12 月 10 日

> (我住上水)

> 今朝 , 我特登去坐 276P Trident , 前幾日(由 7/12 起)

> 開始 , 部 Duple trident 都開 7:13 am , 今朝也不例外.

> 在 7:05 am , 部 duple trident (ATR61 HX9308) 已駛入

> 上水 276P 總站站坑,當時無插路線牌(空車),而排隊人數約有八十人,

> 而排在前頭的幾個人見金車駛至 , 均捨 AM , 等 ATR ,

> ( 276/276P 班次好密 , 3 分鐘一班 , 可以一等 )

> 之後那班是 3AV39 GC2875 , 有多十數位乘客企埋一邊

> 等下一班 Trident .


> 那部 Duple Trident 十分吸引 , 候車乘客均望多幾眼 ,

> 甚至等上 Trident , 我也覺得興奮 , 因為終於見到 Duple

> Trident , 終於有 Trident 載客行經上水 , 絕對不是齋等 !


> 那部 Trident 插好路線牌 ' 元朗(西) 276P ' ,

> 不過'元朗(西)' 是紅牌,

> 而車頭塊 '276P' 牌太細 , 剩了許多虛位 .


> ATR61 上了 60 餘人便開車 , 不過部車內籠手工麻麻 .

> Trident 起步果然快好多 , 有力 , 但不夠 Volvo 靜 ,

> 部車亦鎖左速 , 極速約 70 km/h .

> 部車去到元朗(西) 就行返 968 .


> 之後 , 我搭 68X 去佐碼乘 70 返屋企 ,

> 因為今朝見到 70 有老虎頭 S3BL431 FU5381 (7:05 am 上水開).


> 在 7: 50 am 上了 68X L 廠 AV HN???? ,

> 勁多人 , 只可企在司機位旁 , 不過可望下司機渣車 ,

> 部車極速為 75 km/h .


> 8:45 am 到佐碼 , 70 號部老虎頭竟然仲未到 ,

> 70 果然犀利 , 我遊完花園佢都未到 !


> 8:55 am S3BL431 到站 , 9:00 am 開車 ,

> 部車好好力 , 好爽 , 同 黑金剛 CT5138 無得 fight!

> 司機又肯踩 , 簡直一流.

> (車內有 58X 資料)


> 10:15 到達上水總站. ( 部車不久就開 , 是行全日)


> 70 U 廠今日派車:


> ME DF8120

> ME DF6700

> ME DF9520

> ME DG5010

> S3M EF8576

> S3BL431 FU5381

> ADS GU563

> ADS GT9319


> GZ5818

架車行返968,之後仲連開三班(8:15-8:30),ALX 同DUPLE 梅花間竹,我上0左架ALX





Article 11: (Request 1)










Article 11: (Request 2)

> AV102 GL3694 (agnescsf@asiaonline.net) said:


> 我都想試0下276P 既Trident 同70 既老虎頭.

> 原來70 號早上這麼快, 75 分鐘到達.

> 但係個司機好似冇得休息, 到達總站不久便要開車.


> 另外,想問一問70 號有幾多架字軌車?

> 我見到都有好多架, 不只以上那8 架.


> 都想有Trident行上水線0既

> AV102

頭先打的只是 U 廠車 ,

70 : U 廠 6 部 ME , ADS 2 部 , 加早上攝一 AD.

70 : L 廠 1 部 N , 3 部 M , 1 部 BL , 1 部 ADS

U 廠 :

ME DF8120 , DF6700 , DG5010 , DF9520 , DG6407 , ????

ADS GU563, GT7040

AD GL9740

L 廠 :

M DG9377 DE8745 DE6718

BL DE4314

N CT5138

ADS GU7753


Article 11: (Request 3)





Article 12:

Re: 挽救東涌線的解決方法

Walter Kwong (h9816113@hkusua.hku.hk) from hkusud.hku.hk at Fri Dec 11 08:24, 1998 said:

> 我住青衣,我返放學不搭東涌線。原因如下:

> 1.不直接(由偉景要行10-15分鐘先到MTR St.)

> 2.經常送車尾(成5-10分鐘,巴士就冇問題。但集体鐵路疏就有問

> 題)

> 3.害怕故障(大家明白)


> 所以政府cut机場線班次實在有點見戲,不如叫地鐵全力支持

> 東涌線,例如:

> 1.3-4分鐘一班列車




> 2.車站內的Plaza快開幕(尤其青衣城,一定搶長發、愉城生意)

> 3.要求政府開多些接駁線去青衣站。(e.g.傳聞的M78、971)

看不見 M1 , M2 , 248M , 249M 的下場嗎?

> 希望解決到東涌線的客少情況!

> 不過,青衣站的配套有問題,我建議41M來回程經青衣站(平過

> 49X嘛!)及加開來往屯門龍門居及青衣站經Gold Coast的接駁線

> 。


> 事實上,部分A、E、S線確實有點功過於求:

> 1.E22----最好減至12-20分鐘一班

> 2.A12----最好減至20分鐘一班

> 3.S51----最好減至10-15分鐘一班

> 4.S54----最好減至20分鐘一班

> 5.E41----最好減至15-20分鐘一班

> 6.E34----最好減至10-20分鐘一班

> 7.E33----最好減至15-20分鐘一班

> 8.A21----最好減至12分鐘一班

> 9.由於S61-S64及E32已減班次,故本人不再建議

其實好似 A11 vs E11 , E22 VS E23 VS A22 路線都太似喇

Cut 一 cut 部份線好D

仲有D S 線


罷回無聊文章, 回復昔日安寧, 全賴大家支持

Article 12: (Request 1)

> 不過,青衣站的配套有問題,我建議41M來回程經青衣站(平過

> 49X嘛!)及加開來往屯門龍門居及青衣站經Gold Coast的接駁線

> 。







Article 12: (Request 2)

> Walter Kwong (h9816113@hkusua.hku.hk) said:

> 其實好似 A11 vs E11 , E22 VS E23 VS A22 路線都太似喇

> Cut 一 cut 部份線好D

> 仲有D S 線







Article 12: (Request 3)

S62 和 S63 已改用長矛行走.

另外會唔會有情況龍運多車得滯, o的龍躉要賣返比九巴做金躉? :p



罷回無聊文章 回復昔日安寧 全賴大家支持

Article 13:

ATR 路線號碼牌

Walter Kwong (h9816113@hkusua.hku.hk) from hkusud.hku.hk at Thu Dec 10 21:47, 1998 said:

今日見到 112 , 968 等 ATR 既路線


完全 fit 晒條邊


Article 13: (Request 1)

> FP 8167 (z0127629@netvigator.com) said:

> 為什麼 ATR 路線號碼牌個洞禁大 ?




Jacky,S3M80 DR5312

Article 13: (Request 2)

> 680 at 3 day ago alraedy change it!

Article 14:

Re: 大相廣告●九巴新十米巨龍

PTC (bc_cly@stu.ust.hk) from ustsu54-nc2.ust.hk at Thu Dec 10 22:34, 1998 said:

> Hanvas 漢 華 (hanvas@netvigator.com) said:

> 大 相 廣 告 ● 九 巴 新 十 米 巨 龍

>   網 頁     : 香 港 汽 車 網 絡 快 線

>   更 新 項 目 : 每 週 大 相

>             九 巴 新 十 米 巨 龍 (ADS)

>   更 新 日 期 : 98/12/10

>   網 址    : http://home.netvigator.com/~hanvas/hkvne/weekly34.html




Article 14: (Request 1)

M11 偈都已經夠嘈, 再加埋個額外風扇, 想唔嘈都幾難啦.

Article 14: (Request 2)

上層車頭條柱好似比其他ADS 較低.

HB 916

Article 14: (Request 3)

> 除o左車尾個風扇位之外仲有冇其他唔同呢?

車 內 部 份 座 椅 有 安 全 帶 囉 .....

引 擎 唔 同 左 囉 .....


> 架車仲有冇3AD咁嘈?

佢 都 冇 開 過 引 擎 .

Article 15:

New Toyota Coaster

100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) from olkc1b108.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 20:51, 1998 said:

Today I saw a new Toyota Coaster with HX license.

(I think due to the economic downturn, there haven't been

too many new minibuses, either red or green ones.)

What are the differences of this one than the 'older' ones?

1)The headlamps are different. The new one incorporate those

already found on those 'deluxe' versions with 20 or 24 seats.

2)The row over the rear wheel arches are being placed higher

than those of the older ones. This arrangement/configuration

finally solves the problem of the window seat passengers over

the wheel arches, as these seats are some of the most uncomfortable

around. Though the seats are no longer totally 'flat' from

the driver's point of view. (and the view of the passengers

who sit in the last row might be blocked)

Has anyone seen similar Coaster as Red Van or GMB? Where?

(or which route?)

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 15: (Request 1)

> Kwan (sfac3a09@netvigator.com) said:

> 死喇!我都未聽過改了設計.....

> 基本上16,20同24座設計不同.

> 16座較20及24座短.

> 設備當然冇得比,另外20座車送冰箱一個.


> 座位方面可以很多款,任那間小巴公司改.

> 不過三菱方面自從出了29座小巴後豐田小巴的占有率

> 有下降的現象.


> 等我有時間再問下我爸爸同世叔伯有關這些資料.

> 一個做豐田,一個做意蘇蘇,仲有些好似做三菱(不是大熟).


> P.S.自從看完無記某節目後,我幾乎肯定我以前個老闆同我老豆

> 識捷聯個老細,(因為佢要做巴士車身),我有時間實捉佢

> 入去各大車身廠參觀.不過佢講了幾個月都冇入過去^_^

Sorry! Since I can't read Chinese characters through this

computer, I've no idea what you said. Anyway, thanks for

your reply!

Actually, the 'cute' MAN used by MTR/Kwoon Chung for AEL

free shuttle is pretty good replacement of Toyota's domination

in the marketplace.

Surely the 'Q' MAN doesn't have the same problem for seats

over the wheels. Meanwhile, if they're adopted by minibus

companies, even disables may get on board! (and elderly

people would have a much better time!)

Of course, TD also needs to 'deregulate' the restrictions

placed on current minibuses.

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 15: (Request 2)






Article 15: (Request 3)

Very unfortunately, the opposite happen in the reality.

Coasters are replacing SWB MANs now on AES to Shun Tak Centre.

Article 16:

Re: 有行過ATR(金色)的九巴/龍運路線

AV12 GL3694 (agnescsf@asiaonline.net) from at Fri Dec 11 01:20, 1998 said:

> 969 (kbt@inet.hkg.com) said:

> 有行過ATR(金色)的九巴/龍運路線包括:

> 1A,6,60M,72X,269B,276P,105A,112,171,300,301,680,690,

> 968,E34

> (請接力)


Article 16: (Request 1)

樓下的60M仲未見有. 且E34那架係龍運車HN2195(?), 唔係ATR.

如果連那架都計, 相信除左N30,N31,E41和A41我未見過外其他非S線都行過.


Article 16: (Request 2)


Article 16: (Request 3)

仲有 44.


Article 17:


AV340--進 (eeckc98@alumni.ust.hk) from ustsu68-nc2.ust.hk at Thu Dec 10 17:50, 1998 said:









Article 17: (Request 1)

> 1.新巴亞記躉出到1087/1088。

> 3.其中一個卡佬話佢未見過1089,1090和1092。


> 4.新記遲下(無講幾時)會買十二米富豪。

會,Super Olympian。

> 另外,新巴躉比九記金(廢)躉行快好多。



Article 17: (Request 2)

> 龍神丸 (clement@hkplanet.com) said:

> 但上斜就新巴躉(1081)比九巴躉差...上東廊, 觀塘墝道得一波兼冇力,

> 反而九巴躉就有二波. 不過極速大家都太慢...應該去到80才理想

我都覺得上斜較新新巴躉(1047 之後) 比 106 批 102? 差.

至於極速方面, 我搭過 #1080 都一如其他新巴躉一樣,

70km/h 多少少就鎖死左.



Article 17: (Request 3)

> 2.1091(乜車黎架?)


> 4.新記遲下(無講幾時)會買十二米富豪。


Article 18:


VA36 (kchojbl@school.net.hk) from ntproxy2.polyu.edu.hk at Thu Dec 10 18:54, 1998 said:

> 病鬼左的風間火月 (hsbt@netvigator.com) said:

> 繼之前的Jingal All The Way後,今日在LV2上又有新發現:


> What to have fun on a bus? In one of our new bus.....


> 由於在車上,睇唔清,有錯請指正。


Oh what fun it is to ride. ......


Joseph Ho

Article 18: (Request 1)

> CMB DA82 (da82@netvigator.com) said:

> 仲有LV14呀~~唔知Wishing乜乜架,睇唔清楚啊~~


Article 18: (Request 2)



Article 19:

Re: 城巴606出車漸雛惡化

cky (kyfchiu@netvigator.com) from olkc4189.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 22:43, 1998 said:

> Dick (dvchan@netvigator.com) said:

> 今日又見到2架1??的單門利蘭係606,其中一架重

> 係Sh?ll油廣告!點解會有咁既情況?是好是壞?

今日晌屋企附近見到, 都嚇O左一跳!

今天放假中的 cky

Article 19: (Request 1)

> Volvo (S3BL1) (volvo@school.net.hk) said:

> 由星期一開始, 187? & 194 (白色 shell) 暫時掛牌 606,

> 其他的係 933, 93, 94 系.

> 原有掛牌車全數失蹤, 95, 97 系.

城巴邊有字軌/掛牌, 就算從以前 9??,10?? 到 1?? 都日日唔多同車,

184, 186, 194 算較穩定, 不過次序日日不同

而現時多數係前車用 9?? , 後車用 1??

> 城巴搞乜? 單門車都出.



Article 19: (Request 2)

 Yesterday I saw a 194&187 working on Rt.606 

Article 20:

Re: Can I talk about London Buses here?

Bruce Li (bruceli@vcn.bc.ca) from at Fri Dec 11 09:05, 1998 said:

> London Central NV58 (tin.wong@kcl.ac.uk) said:

> I want to ask Ken Fung : Can I talk anything about London Buses here?


Sure! Why not?

> If it is possible, I will launch a series on my experience on riding London Buses

> after my arrival in late September.


Interesting topic! Please launch your series as soon as possible!


Article 20: (Request 1)

當然可以, 只要是十六座位以上的車輛就可以當作是巴士討論,



Article 20: (Request 2)

Just help our braodmaster to answer. According to the

rules of this board, you can talk any buses with capacity

more than 16. So, I think you can talk about London bus

here, and I am glad to hear from you. Just like me, talk

about Canadian buses, and Dennis Law, SuperBuzz Melbourne,

C Ma talk buses in Australia.

Article 21:

Re: 三號幹線郊野公園段已有正式路名!

Ricky Chan (95098987d@polyu.edu.hk) from at Thu Dec 10 23:10, 1998 said:

> 278X! (ericnet@hkstar.com) said:

> 由大欖隧道錦田出口至坳頭一段命名為青朗公路

> 由博愛交匯處至三號幹線交匯處/新田公路交界一段命名為

> 元朗公路

你的資料又有錯了, 邊個話你聽的?

跟據憲報, 由青衣西北交匯處至新田公路的一段命為


Ricky Chan

Article 21: (Request 1)

睇最新出版的 99 通用街道指南.


Article 21: (Request 2)


Article 22:

Re: 無線新聞

死老鬼SLK (97017130j@polyu.edu.hk) from pc118.hkc.net at Fri Dec 11 00:26, 1998 said:

> 1010,1357 (schneide@netvigator.com) said:

> 今日無線新聞講巴士埋站搞到塞車...大快人心

> 未睇今晚記往睇啦.

> 1010,1357


Article 22: (Request 1)


Article 22: (Request 2)



Article 23:

Re: Finding for......

100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) from olkc1a115.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 19:53, 1998 said:

> Wan Chi Wai (3AV120) (akw@hkschool.net) said:

> I am finding for the following buses:

> 1.NWFB 3001 (691?What about the time?)

Probably not on 691 anymore! (fortunately I got a photo of

it when it served on 691) The last time I saw it was on 112

as well.

> 2.KCRC 222 (K11?)

I saw it on K16 either last night or the night before.

> 3.NWFB DL's (apart from 2A/8/112/601,any other else?)

Some may serve on 111 as 'rush (hour) fighters' during peak


Good luck!

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 23: (Request 1)

> 1.NWFB 3001 (691?What about the time?)

近來所行路線十分不穩定, 較大機會在 112.

> 3.NWFB DL's (apart from 2A/8/112/601,any other else?)

112 都無 DL 囉, ML 反而間唔中有; 601 每日多數都只有一千零一架(八車),

除 2A, 8 較常見 DL 外, 小西灣車場都有好多.



Article 23: (Request 2)

> 1.NWFB 3001 (691?What about the time?)

It use in 112 Now! in 7:40am & 12:00noon

> 2.KCRC 222 (K11?)

I think it use in 95R

Article 24:

Re: 我對運豬局關於機場巴士線的見解

Truman (ifabel@netvigator.com) from hhttnt01117.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 01:26, 1998 said:

> 布甸狗九巴冷蘭AL118 (rainbowg@hkstar.com) said:

> 今日睇生果報, 話九線機場巴士將會削減班次!


> 我見解如下:


> 1. 據資料顯示, 各E線及A線巴士的乘客量均比預算多, 只係S線比預算低約三分一! 而機場快線就比預算低36%! 為何E及A線就要陪S線削班次, 但機場快線的班次卻唔改! 難道有'鐵路保護法', 逼人坐貴車!


> 2. 第二跑道就開, 到時機場可應付多一倍航機! 換言之, 即入境旅客又多了! 為何運豬局不等這條跑道啟用再作打算!


> 故本人有以下意見:

> 1. 保留所有E/A巴士線, 暫不削減班次!

我認為部份路線可予以調整, 如E33,E11(週一至週五)

> 2. 合併/縮減S線班次! 改用全單層巴士!

沒錯, S線平日的客量不足以支持採用雙層巴士(早晚繁忙時間例外!)

> 4. 設指示牌, 指示的士司機大約候客時間, 以免的士司機白花燃油開支!

> 5. 減少E線赤立角路程, 只選擇性途經!


> 歡迎討論, 若有離題不要介意!


Article 24: (Request 1)

> 1. 據資料顯示, 各E線及A線巴士的乘客量均比預算多, 只係S線比預算低約三分一! 而機場快線就比預算低36%! 為何E及A線就要陪S線削班次, 但機場快線的班次卻唔改! 難道有'鐵路保護法', 逼人坐貴車!

但政府係大股東, 幫地鐵也不足為奇(而家東涌線比原定低67%又真係勁左d)

聽聞主要減的係e線(四條), 主要目的相信都係救東涌線.

> 2. 第二跑道就開, 到時機場可應付多一倍航機! 換言之, 即入境旅客又多了! 為何運豬局不等這條跑道啟用再作打算!

但問題係香港的旅遊業一厥不振, 就算開多十條跑道, 遊客唔見得會

多好多, 況且第一條跑道都未飽和, 開第二條都加唔到幾多機.

> 3. S線重複路線太嚴重, 例如城巴的S51同龍運S61, S51貨運區路程大可由S62/63/64取代, 去客運大樓可坐S61, S53則可由S64取代! (S51主要客源是外來人士居多)

呢點絕對同意, 如S51繞入航膳區已可代S62,63;S64亦可代S51機場部份,61(除碼頭);



> 故本人有以下意見:

> 1. 保留所有E/A巴士線, 暫不削減班次!

事實運輸署曾提過數條A/E線太重覆, 令其中一線唔夠客, 故要Cut都

勢所難免, 至少A22的路線同E23近乎全同; A11和E11也有七分相似.

> 3. 機鐵長期保持現有優惠收費, 延長成人帶小童免費上車優惠!

但此舉隨時令東涌線客量更惡化, 其實要東涌發展得快些, 才可令此


> 4. 設指示牌, 指示的士司機大約候客時間, 以免的士司機白花燃油開支!

但聽的士司機講, 好多的士乘客都係入機場, 出機場通常搭機場巴,

唔搭的士, 設指示牌也無補於事.

> 5. 減少E線赤立角路程, 只選擇性途經!

一定顧此失彼, 所以最好一係全部都經, 一係全部都唔經, 要搭就行



> 歡迎討論, 若有離題不要介意!


不過仲要想想將來東涌北及東涌東落成後, E線巴士會變得更繞道.


Article 25:

Re: 中電奧黏小問一堆

DC10 (s986380@mailserv.cuhk.edu.hk) from saturn.csc.cuhk.edu.hk at Fri Dec 11 09:32, 1998 said:

> 病鬼左的風間火月 (hsbt@netvigator.com) said:

> 有中電奧黏小問一堆:


> 1)中電重有無豪?


No la, 315 and 316 have been transfered to Citybus


> 2)中電而家重有幾多奧黏?


> 3)除左發電廠,通常幾時同邊度會出沒?


I saw many times in Austin Road and Gascoigne Road


> 4)平時擺係邊?


> 5)可以入去影相嗎?


> 病鬼左,在家休息的

> 炎之熱血漢-----修羅‧風間火月

Article 25: (Request 1)

> 3)除左發電廠,通常幾時同邊度會出沒?





希望幫到你. 並祝你早日康復~

> 病鬼左,在家休息的

> 炎之熱血漢-----修羅‧風間火月


Article 26:

Re: Cut AEL to 30 minutes

CITYFLYER A23 (cpitech@netvigator.com) from olkc4a082.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 13:46, 1998 said:

> 100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) said:

> Today I was informed by my non bus fan friend regarding TD's

> plan to cut service of existing airport bus routes in order

> to protect MTR's AEL. Then I read the article from a

> newspaper at my work place.


> For a while I had 'fire in front of my eyes' and carelessly

> interpreted TD wanted to cut 2 airport bus routes.


> I wondered which two routes might be cut?


> If the purpose for TD to cut routes in order to protect MTR's

> AEL, then the most popular route...A21, might be a victim.


> Of course, for me, even if A21 is cut, I'd still have A22.

> (quite unlikely both routes would be cut! Probably another

> one of LW)


> After some cooling down period, I re-read the article and

> found TD plans to reduce service of bus routes to the airport

> simply because the demand has exceeded expectation!


> According to the article, TD plans to reduce service on 2 airport

> bus routes, 4 'E'xternal ('E'conomy) routes and 2 'S'huttle

> routes.


> Also, according to the article, District Board members in the

> northern territory (probably Fanling/Sheung Shui) 'cried'

> for bus service to the airport. In this case, even Long Win

> (good job!) agrees to do so. However, it was rejected by TD.

> (in order to protect railway companies)


How long can the TD reject this plan???

> Therefore, it seems TD is quite angry about bus companies who

> provide 'good' service! From my observation, 'A' route buses,

> particularly that of CTB, may not depart as per schedule, but

> rather than on 'fill up then go' basis like minibuses and

> depart within the 10-minute scheduled time. (I don't have

> any problem with this arrangement, as if buses depart earlier,

> they shall return early, perhaps even empty or private, in

> order to make another trip!)


Very diffecult arrangement. For A11, suddenly we have too many busses

in Moreton Terrace or if you waited tooo long, no busses.

> Actually, I think all 'E' routes can terminate anywhere EXCEPT

> at the airport, as they were orginally designed for workers

> at the airport. Now I think many passengers abuse to take

> 'E' routes instead of 'A' routes and complain not being able

> to carry luggage on board.


It is not abuse, but it is the price. If you have to travel to the

airport ten times in the week like I do, so you save at least

HK$ 760.- of transpertation per month. Where should all the E routes

end??? There were no other extra space designed for them.

> If no 'E' route goes to the airport directly, such arrangement

> should make those 'S' routes profitable.


Why support the MTR??? HKBDB members never take the MTR!!!!

> However, as per district board members in Shum Shui Po, I do

> agree E21 should be extended to the airport, considering my

> plan above won't (and will likely remained) not realize, since

> passengers would need to transfer once on E21 (considering

> the driver allows luggage on board!) and S51/S61 to the

> airport. Otherwise, passengers may take MTR to Lai King,

> then transfer to Tung Chung Train to Tsing Yi for AEL, or

> Tung Chung for S51/S61.


Extension should be done immediately, s there are two spaces

left, behind E22 on the airport.

> I think passengers on Hong Kong island are more likely to

> use AEL, since Hong Kong station is centrally located near

> Central.


> However, how about those living in Kowloon?


> For me, I can easily walk to busstops for A21 or A22. However,

> especially with the death of M1, how else can I go to Kowloon

> Station for AEL? Carry my luggage on board on route 11?


> Otherwise, the FREE 'big' MAN shuttle bus passes by right

> under my house at Austin Road, though there is no stop

> whatsoever.


> My mom did suggested, if we insist to take AEL to the airport,

> we should take a taxi to Hung Hom KCR for free shuttle to

> Kowloon Station, as the fare might be lower than going to

> Kowloon Station directly.


Take Cityflyer. Cheap & Convenient. Don't support AEL, especially

the TD likes to weaken the bus service. Instead they should cut

down the AEL & MTR service. Save a lot operation costs.

> Hence, even though I think, with the return discount, AEL is

> quite competitive with airport buses. However, its geographic

> location, especially in Kowloon, really limits the number of

> passengers, unless there are more buses, which allow luggage

> on board, connect to Kowloon Station.


So, take A21. The better choice.

> 100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 26: (Request 1)

Here is more update information:

機 鐵 的 士 客 量 少 六 至 七 成

九 條 機 場 巴 士 線 擬 減 班 次

more information

LF2 (BE 8749)

Article 27:

我對 香港巴士討論區 (及其板友) 的感想...

水晶天使 (cj5581@netteens.net) from imsp039.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 21:30, 1998 said:

我覺得這個 香港巴士討論區 是一個很好的地方去讓巴士迷談談巴士

,可是這個 討論區 卻變成一個戰場,原本應該對其他人很友善的板






一位不喜歡看到那麼多罵戰的 香港巴士討論區 板友

水晶天使 (Suishou Tenshi)

Article 27: (Request 1)




Jacky,S3M80 DR5312

Article 27: (Request 2)











正如直至現時為止都俾 Xxxxxxx xxx 發言一樣麻


Article 28:

Re: no. of bus

LF2 (BE 8749) (huil@genrad.com) from detdhcp153.genrad.com at Fri Dec 11 01:09, 1998 said:

> eric (bching@hk.super.net) said:

> how many bus all in KMB?

Around 3000? Please point out if I am wrong.

LF2 (BE 8749)

Article 28: (Request 1)


Article 29:

Re: 金躉

GZ5818 (kytse1@netvigator.com) from hhtak009137.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 18:02, 1998 said:

> 269B (cmlai@hknet.com) said:

> 剛才4:45在天福路見部ALX金躉經過,有冇人知道是什麼車?行什麼線?

可能是 E34 , 今朝 ALX ATR HX1??? 行 E34.


Article 29: (Request 1)




Article 30:

罷回無聊文章 回復昔日安寧 全賴大家支持

Sunba (akyl@rubens.its.unimelb.edu.au) from ustsu68-nc2.ust.hk at Thu Dec 10 14:03, 1998 said:

罷回無聊文章 回復昔日安寧 全賴大家支持

Article 30: (Request 1)


Please don't waste board space la!

Article 31:

Re: (圖畫)車,不是一定有轆

PTC (bc_cly@stu.ust.hk) from ustsu54-nc2.ust.hk at Fri Dec 11 11:42, 1998 said:

> V3123 (chankt@lynx.bc.ca) said:

> 車,是不是一定有四個轆,扁扁平平,光可照人的呢?



> 關詠妍 6歲


> 來源:<黃巴士>98年11月(56期)43頁


> V3123




Article 32:


LA24 經翰 (kinghon@netteens.net) from imsp039.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 09:24, 1998 said:






Article 32: (Request 1)


Article 33:

Re: 九巴八達通消息

金魚 (n960@hkabc.net) from ppp253108.hkabc.net at Fri Dec 11 10:43, 1998 said:

> Ricky Chan (95098987d@polyu.edu.hk) said:

> 唔知有冇人講過...

> 63M 由 12 月 10 日起可以接受八達通付款.



Article 34:

Re: 203 & B1

London Central NV58 (tin.wong@kcl.ac.uk) from poplar.cc.kcl.ac.uk at Fri Dec 11 01:23, 1998 said:

> 100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) said:

> Today I was fortunate to meet AA12 (still with luggage rack

> and 'yellow arrow' CX ad) on training, and I was able to

> speak with the bus instructor.


> Hence, I had the opportunity to ask him as whether or not a

> Dart can make the turn from Begonia Road to Tat Chee Avenue,

> and he said 'yes!'


> Then I told him as I wondered why Darts aren't being used on

> 203, he couldn't explain so and he only suggested me to call

> KMB's hotline.

> (too bad I forgot to ask him whether or not a 11m bus, or

> even ADS, can make the turn from Hung Hom to Hung Hom KCR!)


> If 203 can use Dart, then Nathan Shoppers sure would have a

> much more pleasant time shopping along Nathan Road without

> hopping on and off those super high floor buses.


I have also asked a driver of 203 about using Darts on 203 when I was in HK, but

she said that it is pretty difficult to turn from Begonia Road to Tat Chee Avenue,

although it is possible. (I saw AA1? in July heading for Tsim Sha Tsui).

> I also heard on radio about KMB advertiesed and encourage

> passengers to take B1 to shop along Nathan Road. I'd bet

> they'd have a 'pleasant' experience on those AM's.


> 100/911R/M1 Wong

It is a good idea, but will KMB do so? It is exactly better to have Darts on 203/B1.

(Maybe KMB can think of purchasing 9m Darts or deploy AA2 to the route).

London Central NV58

p.s. I saw a MCW (289) of First Capital (ex-Capital Citybus) in yellow livery working on Rt 1

today in London.

Article 35:

Re: 新金躉正番好多呀

koala (koala@cuhk.edu.hk) from jupiter.csc.cuhk.edu.hk at Thu Dec 10 23:51, 1998 said:

> Hanvas 漢 華 (hanvas@netvigator.com) said:

> 今 日 放 學 之 後 坐 左 個 幾 兩 個 鐘 車 入 屯 門 裝 嵌 廠 ,

> 一 入 到 去 見 到 好 多 金 躉 , 包 括 前 白 躉 .....


> 一 望 落 去 D 山 寨 躉 度 突 然 覺 得 靚 左 好 多 !

> 不 過 都 未 知 係 咩 事 .....


> 再 影 多 陣 相 ,

> 嚮 山 寨 躉 車 頭 行 過 ,

> 望 一 望 , 原 來 車 頭 兩 塊 大 銀 幕 下 面 既 咀 唇 油 番 黑 色 ,

> 望 落 去 真 係 正 番 好 多 呀 !

不過我都係覺得白躉最正, 金色真係好核突... 或者好似新記油法都

唔錯. 金躉給我的感覺就像一些由沒塗裝的銅片組成的車, 十分簡陋,



罷回無聊文章 回覆昔日安寧 全靠大家支持

(唔回文唔貼文唔代表我唔active, 我想一眾老板友較大家遲來的

行動來得早得多, 也是實行得最徹底的人吧?)

Article 36:

Re: 'domestic' vs. 'international' fares.

291+291A+690+691+692 (eg_slk@stu.ust.hk) from ustsu18-nc2.ust.hk at Fri Dec 11 10:53, 1998 said:

> 100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) said:

> I could of take 35A/41A to Nathan Road, charging at $6.4/$6.5.

> (cheaper than 203!)


> Then my colleagues at work, being a non-bus fan, actually

> reminded me I should of take XHT buses, which should be

> faster!


> Then I realized, not only if I take 300 would be faster!

> (with possible Trident buses!) The fare is also MUCH

> cheaper at $5.4!


> I heard many passengers would rather take 111 along Chatham

> Road North/Kowloon City to Ping Shek, rather than 26.


> Also, many passengers also prefer 101 over those of 'domestic'

> (non-cross harbour) routes to Kwun Tong within Kowloon.


> However, the story on the opposite side of the harbour is

> a different story.


> Not only if I take 5 series/10 from Central to West Point

> would be cheaper than taking 'international' tunnel buses

> like 101/104/113, which has been historically true since

> 1976. Even if I take M21 at $5.5, it's only $0.1 more expensive

> than 110 to Taikooshing.


> So, should 'domestic' bus routes be cheaper than 'international'

> bus routes? (after crossing the harbour!)


I think that all routes going in same direction should have same fare, so people can enjoy equality. That's why NWFB 970 has its fare to the South same as its 'domestic' rotues, while Citybus 973 has its fare same as 73 after QMH.

291+291A+690+691+692, who is very dissatisfied to see KMB not introducing sectional fare from HKUST to Diamond Hill for 91, and wants the TD to cut KMB 91 to Citybus 291 for fairer fare.

Article 37:

Re: Still different fares!

Cityflyer A23 (cpitech@netvigator.com) from olkc4a082.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 14:01, 1998 said:

> 100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) said:

> Recently, I was appointed to work in Tsim Sha Tsui East, and

> I just can't resist to take a bus to work!


> Before, I worked in Central, and before the airport was moved,

> the fares from Hung Hom KCR to Central were as follows:


> Economy: hotdogs on 101/104/105A/etc.. at $7.3

> Deluxe Economy: A/C on 301 at $8.1

> Business Class: A/C 105A/etc... at $8.9

> First Class: A/C A2/A20 at $13(? As I was never wealthy

> enough to take one, as I would pay premium fares to STAND!)


> Now I go to work in Tsim Sha Tsui East, and I've the following

> choices:


> Economy: Hotdogs 35A/41A/98D...don't know nor care about

> the fares!


> Deluxe Economy: 35A/41A/203/208 at $4.2

> (although economy fares should be slower, such as 203/208

> which goes around Tsim Sha Tsui Star Ferry and easily spends

> another 10 minutes of traveling time, 35A/41A offers 'express'

> service at no extra charge!)


> Business Class: 26 at $4.7

> (I'd pay an extra $0.5 so I can enjoy 'around' Tsim Sha Tsui

> Star Ferry. Although 203/208 offers the same service, the

> double decker buses on 26 may justify the extra $0.5?)


> First Class: 98D at $5.2


> Although in this case, versus that of 105a/301, I don't see

> much different, even from a bus fan point of view, about the

> buses being used for the routes above.


> Now I usually take 'hotdog 11' to go home, which means

> 'on foot', since the weather is cool enough outside.


> Actually, I don't think the fares for me to go home is

> reasonable.


> Economy: 26 at $5.5.

> Deluxe Economy: 35A at $6.4 and 41A at $6.5

> Business Class: 203/208 at $7

> First Class: 98D at $8.2


You name AM on 203/208 business class??? 98D with AV First class???

And Cityflyers are only reserved for the oil-billionaires from Arabia!!!

Is there a choice of the bus company??? Regretfully not.

If you go from Hunghom to Cental, you can choose between KMB,CTB &

NWFB also vice versa. But in Kowloon....

> 100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 38:

An OL who can't read!

100/911R/M1 Wong (wongjsy@sfsu.edu) from olkc1b108.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 21:03, 1998 said:

Recently, I was appointed to work in Tsim Sha Tsui East, and

I just can't resist to take a bus to work!

Anyway, this morning when I was waiting for 26/35A/41A/98D/203/208

(and even unsuccesfully for ATR66, even though I saw it at

the same time at the same place for the past two days) at

Prudential Centre, an OL came by and was looking at the bus

information board. (or BBQ pork plate)

As a responsible bus fan, I immediately offered my assistant.

Though she said something which meant 'none of your business'.


A relatively 'new' AV on 259B came by, which read 'Tsim Sha

Tsui Star Ferry', she didn't board on the bus.

However, an 'AL' on 9 followed that bus and she boarded on it!

(hence, don't try to tell me she wanted to take a hotdog!)

I wonder if there is any place which is served by 9 and not

by 259B south of Prudential Centre? Correct me if I'm wrong,

I think they share the exact same busstops.

The 259B was pretty much empty by the time it arrived, while

the AL on 9 was relatively crowded.

Was she an AL bus fan? I doubt so!

100/911R/M1 Wong

Article 38: (Request 1)

先生: 人家喜歡, 干卿底事? 人家給你''食檸檬'', 你便老羞成怒,

大造文章, 說別人是文盲云云, 你未免太過份了吧?

我來了這板一年, 愈來愈覺得閣下心胸狹隘、蠻不講理. 書你倒念得

夠多了, 可是...



Article 39:

Re: 車長數目

巴士文 (daraman@netvigator.com) from hhtck015180.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 02:15, 1998 said:

> 靚巴士迷 (bching@hk.super.net) said:

> KMB現在有幾多 個車長?(可以不括LUNG win 車長)







Article 40:

Re: 最多巴士迷改自己的英文名

Kwan (sfac3a09@netvigator.com) from imscache01a.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 20:09, 1998 said:

> 金魚 (n960@hkabc.net) said:

> 唔知最多巴士迷改自己的英文名


> 係唔係Dennis


> 我識的朋友叫Dennis的起碼5個


> 好彩我叫Jimmy

> 不過又可以叫Goldfish

我以前有想過改Guy, Leyland甚至Dart



P.S. 你收到我份e-mail呢?

Article 41:

Re: 神奇電子牌

299 Vigor (wkli98@netvigator.com) from uranus.csc.cuhk.edu.hk at Fri Dec 11 02:11, 1998 said:

> VA36 (kchojbl@school.net.hk) said:

> Trident電子牌已經有新M21資料,今日見到1061往中環方向循環跳:


>   中環  →  機鐵車站

>  Central → AEL Station


> 另外,503今日行99,往筲箕灣方向順序循環跳(中文):


> 筲箕灣 → 筲箕灣(經北角) → 筲箕灣(經銅鑼灣)


> 咁無聊都有...




> Joseph Ho

> VA36 - GV6348

> 重返112七車字軌

That's not so good wor. It's confusing to passengers.

Also, the LED goes off when the flip-dots operate, making it

difficult to read at night.

Can the LED keep lit when the dots flips?

I think that the LED for both destinations can light up when

the display changes, 'cos the dot will cover the LED when it

turns black.

Article 42:

Re: About those newly planned airport route

9807 (newflyer@sympatico.ca) from d82-hn101h2-htmn-pdi.attcanada.net at Thu Dec 10 22:32, 1998 said:

> Trident (pttsang@hkschool.net) said:

> Many days ago, some 1 suggest that there'll be new airport bus routes open in later time (such as E 43, E44 and A13).

> Can anyone tell me what are those planned routes and the destinaition about these planned routes?

Do you mean those inside the route suggestion centre?

Yeh, I can help you, for sure.

A13 Siu Sai Wan Stadium -- Airport, via Chai Wan, Wan Tsui,

Shau Kei Wan, Yiu Tung, Hing Tung, Tai Koo Shing, then

direct to airport not via Tung Chung and Chak Lap Kok

E24 Tseung Kwan O(Hang Hao) -- Airport, via Hong Sing Garden,

Tsui Lam, Po Lam, Hau Tak, On Ling Garden, Clear Water

Bay Road, HKUST, Tseng Lan Shue, Lung Cheung Road,

Tung Chung, Chak Lap Kok, Airport

E43 Fanling(Ka Fuk Estate) -- Airport, via Ka Fuk, Wah Ming,

Fanling South, Choi Yuen, Route 2, Route 3, Tung Chung,

Chak Lap Kok, Airport.

Do you cannot read Chinese on this board?

I suggest you can download some Chinese supporter to your


You can get them from

NJ Star, with view only

Unionway, can view and

type Chinese, Japanese and Korean

Richwin, supports the

mainland type Chinese.

Article 43:

Re: [超奇想]混種概念!

299 Vigor (wkli98@netvigator.com) from jupiter.csc.cuhk.edu.hk at Thu Dec 10 17:53, 1998 said:

> 豐田英二 (tcli1998@ctimail.com) said:


> 當我看完CAR王有關豐田Prius的文章之後,

> 我想將來會不會類似設計的巴士呢?


> 慨然電動巴士未能成功之前,各廠家會否生產以汽油和電力

> 混合推動的低公害巴士,作為電動巴士的過渡產品呢?


Such Hybrid buses are already running in Japan for a few years la.

Mitsubishi made it, i forgot whether Nissan have it too.

Their high floor maybe unsuitable for Hong Kong.

The principle is that when the bus is idle or breaking, the battery is

charged by the engine, or the inertia of the bus by a dynamo.

And the battery powers the bus for most of the time. The engine drives the

bus directly when accelerating only.

Therefore, the inertia is converted to electrical energy, not heat,

therefore saving fuel and reduce the workload on the brakes.

Of course the bus is very quiet and have low emission la.

You may try to find out more about it at the Mitsubishi official homepage.

Article 44:


Joe~305 (dartchm@netvigator.com) from hhtam040199.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 10:54, 1998 said:





另問香港有幾多部能開動DMS?Thank you very much!!

Article 45:

屯門 N80 消息

金魚 (n960@hkabc.net) from ppp253108.hkabc.net at Fri Dec 11 10:48, 1998 said:








Article 46:

[ 網頁廣告 ] 32巴士總站又一再更新

Jacky,S3M80 (jackyyng@hkschool.net) from aquila.hkschool.net at Fri Dec 11 10:31, 1998 said:







Jacky,S3M80 DR5312

Article 47:


前中巴8號線太守VA51 (parnell@cyberec.com) from ppp2-173.ibuffet.com at Fri Dec 11 02:11, 1998 said:




Article 48:

《網頁廣告》「巴士狂熱專題3」 推出

Eddie Lam (bustop@glink.net.hk) from ntproxy1.polyu.edu.hk at Fri Dec 11 00:07, 1998 said:


第三個專題──「龍運巴士首條北大嶼山路線 E31」, 簡介 E31 線及

提供該線相片兩張. 歡迎參觀.

按以下連線到「巴士狂熱專題 3」:




Article 49:


agedaMAN (romeo.no.piccolo%f192.n1000.z128@iconet.hongkong.net) from dialup-17-59.glink.net.hk at Thu Dec 10 22:25, 1998 said:


冷狗投資及運作成本和熱狗相約, 然而所收車費卻高於狗熱兩成以

上, B 公司為了保障股東的利益, 只買冷狗不買熱狗, 妄顧市民對

廉價/ 環保/ 自然的汽車服務的需要 -- 這就是理所當然, 市民不

應反對, 甚至不應作聲。

新車落地立即節舊兩成, 回本須時, 然而所缺的正是其可搵錢的時

間, A 公司為了保障股東的利益, 減少投資, 以免高價買新車回來

卻被迫旋即以低價蝕讓予別公司 -- 這就是不合理, 必須以高調反


可以為對方犧牲公平處事的原則, 愛真偉大...

soshite ... 難怪巴士迷在一般人心中的印象是 (偷水牌的) 無知

少年/ 幼童。

P.S. 還有不足百二分鐘, 城記同獨立第三者的優先收購協議便到



Article 50:

問 : 點解 58X 掛牌 (S3BL431)會行 70

GZ5818 (kytse1@netvigator.com) from hhtak012149.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 19:25, 1998 said:

點解 58X 掛牌 (S3BL431)會行 70 ?

聽聞 S3BL431 FU5381 昨天行 73X .

若維修 , 今日會派落兩味車.



Article 51:


DA90 (refchan@netteens.net) from imsp013.netvigator.com at Thu Dec 10 18:57, 1998 said:




Article 52:


金魚 (n960@hkabc.net) from ppp253166.hkabc.net at Thu Dec 10 18:24, 1998 said:











Article 53:

About buses allocation

291/291A Siu (eg_slk@stu.ust.hk) from max14-8.hk.super.net at Fri Dec 11 14:53, 1998 said:

It is the best time to discuss the allocation of buses as there are far too may inappopriate bus allocation cases, like 1xx on Citybus 606, 11m buses on KMB 12 & 87 with very few passegners, ADS on KMB 917, wasting the ADS, forcing 5C & 8 uses Ducks, etc.

I would discuss the bus allocation of Citybus first, then followed by KMB, NWFB & CMB.

Citybus' bus allocation is the better one, like:

3B uses single decker in non-peak time but 10.4m buses in peak time, well suit the demand.

5B uses 3xx that has highset seating capacity among all AC buses, even they are older.

6 series uses 10.4m AC buses that have high capacity & high quality cabin.

7 uses 9xx during peak times but 10.4m at other times, thus can carry most passengers at peak time & no waste.

8x, 780 uses Dragon & 6xx Olympian with better hill climbing ability than 4xx & 5xx Olympians.

10 uses 5xx & 6xx that are newer, so greatly improving the image of Citybus Route 10.

11 & 511 uses MAN single deckers in peak time, but 13xx Volvo B6LE during other times.

12 series uses midibuses with high frequency, thus providing high level of service.

25A & 25C uses powerful MAN single decker with higher capacity than midibuses.

529 uses single decker buses at most of the time, but uses 10xx 11m double decker to carry people to Breamer Hill fastly.

37 series use 11m buses taht can carry many passengers while turns fastly on tight Pokfulam Road.

40 series use 11m buses so can carry many passengers fastly.

47A uses the most comfortable Jit Luen B6, making the level of service very high, and people are willing to pay more for such good trip.

260 uses the luxurious & comfortable Volvo buses, making it worth the money.

72 uses 12m buses with high frequency to attract passegners from maxicabs & it has high amount of passengers.

98 uses 10.4m buses, providing large capacity needed for such route, and safety in Aberdeen.

619 & 690 uses latest 6xx with faster speed & high fuel economy.

But there are of course some routes with bad buses allocation:

10X is a route with extrememly few passegners but still uses 12m buses, at frequency of 1 hour.

29R uses large buses (including MAN ingle decker & double deckers) & carries almost none passegners.

48 & 85 uses MAN single deckers & makes many passengers packed in it.

90C uses 12m buses but with very few passegners.

95C uses midibuses but it has a lot of passegners.

There are more articles on bus allocation of other bus companies.

291/291A Siu

Article 53: (Request 1)

KMB has one of the worst bus allocation in HK now, just slightly better than CMB. These are examples:

KMB 917 with very few passegners & still uses ADS which is in short, making not enough ADS running on 91 & 91M (badly needed) & forces 5C & 8 to use Ducks.

11m buses are used in 12 & 87, with almost no passengers, but not on 91M (the route can accept 11m bus) which mas much larger demand, and forces the tall HKUST students to bend down their body in Ducks along the trip.

91M uses BL, with extremely slow speed of 2km/h running from HKUST to Pik Uk, but not 11m buses which is faster & of higher capacity.

296 uses 11m or even 12m bus with very few passegners.

296A, however, never uses 12m buses, with a lot of passegner waiting for it at all times.

276P uses Dennis Dragon 12m that is fuel comsuming & slow, even the route does not go through any hills.

B1 uses high floor, narrow corridor AM, making seating very inconvenient.

Please continue to read my articles on bus allocation (NWFB & CMB).

291/291A Siu

Article 53: (Request 2)

The bus allocation of NWFB is not good on some routes, but quite good at others. The worse ones are:

2 uses Fleetlines that are small & slow, making it cannot compete with Citybus.

8P uses 12m buses even in non-peak time and few passegners take the route during that time.

18 uses 12m buses to run, even the route has very few passengers.

19 & 27 use Darts, but not 11m buses to run, even there are many passegners and the road permits.

262 uses 11m buses, even the route has very few passegners.

91 & 94 use Fleetline which is very slow on running uphill, but not 11m buses with larger capacity & faster.

94X, however, uses the best 11m buses (LM) even the route has extremely low patronage & NWFB is planning to close it.

113, 914 use large buses, sometimes 12m long, even they have very few passegners.

Even so, there are some routes with good buses allocation:

2A & 8 are routes with high passenger amount, so 12m buses are used, including Trident.

13 uses Darts to run, thus suits the high income passgners there.

590 uses a lot of Trident that have higher seating capacity.

And there is my last epsiode: CMB!

291/291A Siu

Article 53: (Request 3)

CMB bus allocation is the worst in HK, as seen from follows:

2 uses very large Metrobus 11m, even the route has very few passegners, also for 18, while CMB 10 uses the oldest Fleetline, small & slow, making 10 the worst route in HK.

262 uses 11m buses and the route has very few passengers.

780 uses Fleetline in peak times, making the bus can only go up Chai Wan Road at 1-2km/h!

641, 619 uses full Fleetline, with very low seating capacity.

606 uses Fleetline, with very low speed going up Chai Wan Road (never over 5km/h even the bus is empty!)

91 & 43 uses Fleetline, very slow.

And please continue to say the worst bus allocation of CMB.

291/291A Siu

Article 54:

Re: 小寶寶,食蛋糕......

小寶寶 (ifabel@netvigator.com) from hhtam027198.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 16:59, 1998 said:

> 巴士大師 (w3d080r@school.net.hk) said:


> 我尋日放學又坐那些小寶寶來.我又發覺佢成日無端端

> 會死火,有無人知點解呢?

> 另外,現在小寶寶是否已經死得七七八八呢?(大概仲有無

> 30部呢?)




> 勇敢的就去打猛男,唔係去拍城蠅!

> 因為唔支援ip address而要係學校打文的

> 巴士大師(罪過罪過......)

Article 55:

Some Questions

VA48 (mirage13@netvigator.com) from olkc5253.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 17:01, 1998 said:

Do any one know which bus is still not locked the speed

I only know the 99x and 3xx is still not knocked.

Do there have any more?

Do any one know how to write 'Merry Christmas'in Janpanese?


Here is my wish: I wish there is some single door

ALX500 trident for CTB

Article 56:


不良牛九巴AL118 (rainbowg@hkstar.com) from at Fri Dec 11 16:55, 1998 said:


由於運豬局只承認城巴的962線為該處唯一的往港島巴士服務, 並拒絕發牌予上述巴士服務, 故此

由1998年12月14日起, 上述服務正式取消!

城巴保護主義又一'貢獻', 想坐B7又少一個途徑! (這條路線比962早開辦, 由渡輪服務演變出來!)



Article 57:


巴士大師 (w3d080r@school.net.hk) from olkc1213.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 16:59, 1998 said:



Article 58:


1010.1357 (schneide@netvigator.com) from hhtun022149.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 16:34, 1998 said:

黃廠頂樓放了數部(我見少於五部)ALX500 Tridents.











Article 59:


問題 (hangk@netvigator.com) from imsp039.netvigator.com at Fri Dec 11 16:38, 1998 said:




Article 60:


Citybus 5B (samuel18@netfront.net) from at Fri Dec 11 16:38, 1998 said:

My computer is out of order now. (ICQ 16878722 RECONIZE ME?)

Send me a email please! ronald8@hotmail.com

How many dm KMB Tridents now?

Citybus 5B



Article 61:

Re: 巴士路線係屬於巴士公司還是政府?

Jess (c5013830@hkbu.edu.hk) from venus.hkbu.edu.hk at Fri Dec 11 17:59, 1998 said:

> Eddie Lam (bustop@glink.net.hk) said:

> 尋日睇過無記新聞講中環灣仔塞車, 新聞提到政府會嚮稍後時間

> 將某些路線改道, 搬總站. 我就諗, 究竟每一條巴士路線係屬於

> 巴士公司本身抑或政府? 點解政府話改路, 話搬站, 話減班,

> 巴士公司就要乖乖就範? 條線冇客我偏要五分鐘一班都係我死我事,

> 政府有乜野權過問? 如果政府乜都要理, 點解唔將巴士服務公營化?


> 又, 經常聽到區議會, 運輸署迫巴士公司提早開線. 乜開線與否唔係

> 操縱在巴士公司之手? 點解唔開線就要俾人炮轟, 俾人收番專營權?


> 唔明唔明....

> ---

> 本月金句:「巴士狂熱」量力而為

巴士公司只係負責營運巴士服務, 但路線/班次等都是由政府操縱(

非決定, 因擬定權是落在巴士公司上, 不過路面上的其他限制, 配合

政府發展步伐等都是政府決定. 原則上政府有操控任何車輛在街上行

走的權利, 巴十亦不例外.

結論:巴士路線是巴士公司擁有, 但終決權在運輸局手上.

正如外匯基金及寵大儲備是屬於香港每一位市民, 但決定使用與否,


又正如教師可隨意用任何方式上課施教, 但進度要跟足政府決定.

像活在香港的人一樣, 被董叔叔欺壓至將盡的傻Jess