原帖由 細路荃 於 2009-8-20 13:45 發表 http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
小弟想請問…
1. 呢一批E500直梯所佔既面積好似較少…
係咪因為底盤上各樣裝備如油缸、電池組重新配置有關…
2. 小弟見部B7TL係非空調巴士…但係E500卻裝有空調系統…
係咪購買E500必須裝上空調系統呢﹖﹖
1. No, the staircase is just as long, the only difference is it has been fitted further forward than the HK ones. There should be no need to rearrange the fuel tank etc. either.
2. No, as evidence on those with Dublin Bus (ok, they are on B9TL chassis, but wouldn't make a difference). First Glasgow has been buying a fair number of buses fitted with air-cond or air cooling systems lately, so these E500 with air-cond doesn't really look out of place.
sunnykam: The down side of moving the rear door forward is it will discourage people to move further down the bus. In a sense, the layout adapted by KMB is supposed to get the rear door fitted as far back as possible to mitigate the problem, but at the same time they want to speed up unloading time by lining up the stairs with the door, which ended up with a rather wasteful layout.
yes... i would not suggest to locate the rear door next to the front-axle
this would definiately discourage passengers to move forward to the rear cabin.
so i believe CTB's 2262-2301 layout is quite ideal for "City buses" :victory:
原帖由 NV58 於 2009-8-19 04:42 發表 http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
Another view upstairs. A lot of design element nicked from Wright's Gemini bodywork is very evident:
Indeed it is. I wonder what caused the ADL designers to do that kind of thing. Aren't these features supposed to be patented by Wright? Or would these features be the intellectual property of the designer his/herself and that he/she moved to ADL from Wright.
原帖由 Luca 於 2009-8-21 12:34 發表 http://hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
Indeed it is. I wonder what caused the ADL designers to do that kind of thing. Aren't these features supposed to be patented by Wright? Or would these features be the intellectual property of the de ...
most probably, the patent of design is owned by the company, rather than a person, i.e. the designer, which have been stated in the contract between the employer and the employee.
ADL just copied some Wright's design to its product, just like what mainlanders in China do.
原帖由 rudolflau 於 2009-8-21 03:28 發表 http://hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
yes... i would not suggest to locate the rear door next to the front-axle
this would definiately discourage passengers to move forward to the rear cabin.
so i believe CTB's 2262-2301 layout is quite...
I think the other problem is the plug type back door...same cases to 4000
原帖由 NV58 於 2009-8-21 01:39 發表 http://hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
1. No, the staircase is just as long, the only difference is it has been fitted further forward than the HK ones. There should be no need to rearrange the fuel tank etc. either.
2. No, as evidence...
The size of the fuel tank of HK version should be too high for the staircase of UK version to locate.
Furthermore, the fuel tank should not be the same for both versions as the position of the fuel filler
for them are different. The fuel filler for UK version is at a upper position!
Moreover, it is noticed that there should be something placed between the 2nd row seat and the
staircase and it is another significant difference between the two versions.
I agree the idea of moving the rear door as backward as possible, but I don't think it is necessary
for locating the rear door exactly opposite to the staircase. I prefer the position of the staircase of
UK, it is just a slight difference on the position.
[ 本帖最後由 hjhj 於 2009-8-21 22:03 編輯 ]
防護玻璃(?),新野黎喎..
原帖由 hjhj 於 2009-8-21 13:57 發表 http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
The size of the fuel tank of HK version should be too high for the staircase of UK version to locate.
Furthermore, the fuel tank should not be the same for both versions as the position of the fuel filler
for them are different. The fuel filler for UK version is at a upper position!
I take the filler cap is where it is because the panel by the stairs are different - on the HK ones they have glazing which would make it impossible to fit the filler cap there in the first place. I doubt the fuel tank is different between the two versions, although I haven't seen the chassis of both batch to properly compare between them.
does anyone know whether the height/width/length of these E500s is the same as the HK ones?
原帖由 ctb8107 於 2009-8-22 08:16 發表 http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif
does anyone know whether the height/width/length of these E500s is the same as the HK ones?
They are exactly the same.