原帖由 petcity 於 2010-10-30 21:14 發表 
如果樣樣咁計，有排計
點計先係最抵，要架新車，冇架舊車
係唔係下下有新車先算抵，又係唔係我最著數先叫識計
巴士迷，無謂咁計，有車你坐先叫實際
九記，show me the bus ...
咁講,
你沙田廠咁耐點對上水大埔果邊,
老實講,
佢做得到好似以前屯門廠咁做法既,
我仲嘈咁係我唔岩,
以前屯門廠唔係下下放新車落去既,'
上水大埔食落以前幾多屯門元朗甩出黎既車大家心照,
如果你以為我係講緊冇新車而嘈,
我會覺得你睇得太表面 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 cktse 於 2010-10-31 00:19 發表
我就真係唔明勒
膠豬同電豬既座位有分別架咩?
認真一問, 闊身金巴既上層座椅同普通金巴既有無唔同?
膠豬,
除3ASV3外,
全部使用窄位 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 3ASV174 於 2010-10-31 14:38 發表
膠豬上層窄凳係 410mm。
380mm 係 3+2 車用既無頭枕凳，
除左前機場 AA 之外，九巴所有有頭枕既巴士窄位都係 410mm，
你可以比較下個頭枕闊度就會知道。
不過有板友堅持「大多數人」同佢一樣分辨唔到闊凳窄凳咪由得人地 ...
佢係話分黎冇咩意思姐
講真,
車唔上都上左~
唔通走番落去大吵大鬧?
我又唔信一般乘客咁叻可以晌用一分鐘出面睇到架車係咪窄位之後再決定上唔上(尤其係視線範圍大極都係下層既時候) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 3ASV174 於 2010-10-31 14:38 發表
膠豬上層窄凳係 410mm。
380mm 係 3+2 車用既無頭枕凳，
除左前機場 AA 之外，九巴所有有頭枕既巴士窄位都係 410mm，
你可以比較下個頭枕闊度就會知道。
不過有板友堅持「大多數人」同佢一樣分辨唔到闊凳窄凳咪由得人地 ...
As I know those narrow seats installed in the 3ASVs are from the lower deck of 2+2 3AVs. If what you said is true, does it mean the seats in the lower deck and upper deck of the 2+2 3AVs are different? If so, why didnt the majority of the society figure it out? By the way, Won't you think this is a bit insulting to say "堅持「大多數人」同佢一樣分辨唔到闊凳窄凳咪由得人地"?  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 teddybus 於 2010-10-31 16:00 發表
As I know those narrow seats installed in the 3ASVs are from the lower deck of 2+2 3AVs. If what you said is true, does it mean the seats in the lower deck and upper deck of the 2+2 3AVs are differe ...
上層同下層座椅角度都唔同而且不能再作調較,
你從何肯定呢D窄位係由2+2 AV/3AV移植? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 teddybus 於 2010-10-31 16:00 發表
As I know those narrow seats installed in the 3ASVs are from the lower deck of 2+2 3AVs. If what you said is true, does it mean the seats in the lower deck and upper deck of the 2+2 3AVs are different? If so, why didnt the majority of the society figure it out? By the way, Won't you think this is a bit insulting to say "堅持「大多數人」同佢一樣分辨唔到闊凳窄凳咪由得人地"?
我唔知道窄凳車上層座位係唔係水塘豪移植過去，
但 2+2 AV/3AV 上下層座位唔同的確係事實，
因為上層係 440mm 位，下層除橫位同車尾外都係 410mm，
我唔知你要點先為之「Majority」，或者你覺得要將你都包括o係入面先算，
但大部份經常坐上層o既乘客其實都係知道上層座位比下層闊，唔係我隨口講出黎，
佢地發現上層好坐過下層，其中一個原因就係張凳闊左，
即使講唔出闊窄分別，但已經代表佢地感受得到。
至於下面一句，
唔好意思，真係睇唔到有咩問題。
前半句係講事實，後半句都係講事實，你點諗我真係改變唔到，
不過唔係重覆左幾次就係金科玉律囉。
[ 本帖最後由 3ASV174 於 2010-10-31 16:55 編輯 ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 dubai 於 2010-10-31 16:52 發表
想問一下
以前既屯廠係咩做法對待水廠呢 ?
令到你咁不滿而家既沙廠多過屯廠 ?
平時已經見閣下係某討論區成日圍插沙廠,
估唔到係呢度又見到閣下 
真係唔知幾時先能夠令你對沙廠既怨氣驅走  ...
講真,
以前屯廠做水廠果陣,
一來唔係冇舊車,
唔駛我講大家都知道,
雞雞鴨鴨,去到BENZ晚年,
唔少車都係晌上水安享晚年,
但近呢10年起,
屯廠做水廠,
的確係有新車唔會唔俾水廠,
冇錯數目上唔多,
某程度上水廠真係旺區線唔多,
要太多新車亦都冇咩需要,
二手金亦都食唔少,
當年73X加金既果堆,
基本上全部都係968甩出黎既車,
同埋至起碼出車上,
會做到咁大堆線,
得幾架十一米車做後啤黎講既情況,
以前的確係比較少有
但,
點解水廠一俾沙廠接管左之後,
係不停有問題浮現?
而家唔係話怨唔怨氣既問題,
講真,
我又唔係住水廠範圍,
水廠惦唔惦亦都唔關我事,
不過講真,
只係話對呢間廠個做法覺得,
好多野,可以用第二種方法去做,
但佢係要用呢一個方法去做先覺得佢有問題姐,
佢做得好既地方,
我唔會唔讚佢,
實際D既,
K牌豬掛74X,
車唔係新,
但勝在實用,
呢D我唔會走去話佢架,
唔好話人地圍插沙廠,
佢點對呢間廠,
佢做得好既,
我插佢我認我唔岩,
但實際上呢?
唔知你有冇留意一個現象,
早幾年有人插水廠冇新車既時候,
果個人一定係俾人圍插,
而家?
點解D人反而會希望水廠有新車?
我都係果句,
資源唔夠,
係其中一個令巴士迷希望沙廠增派資源既重點,
新車,
有時只係一個引子,
有時你十個茶煲七隻蓋,
多幾隻蓋新起既,
咁唔打佢主意打邊個丫~
但最實際既,
其實係想資源善用
有時自己樓下咁多新車,
我都會高興,
但係高興既背後,
唔代表我地要無視他人既需求囉~
甚至衰D講,
我樓下條87D上番水廠堆曲梯金,
680換番堆歐三豬我都唔介意,
又清到客,
人地又得到想要既野,
一舉兩得
[ 本帖最後由 da93 於 2010-10-31 17:30 編輯 ] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 3ASV174 於 2010-10-31 16:54 發表
我唔知道窄凳車上層座位係唔係水塘豪移植過去，
但 2+2 AV/3AV 上下層座位唔同的確係事實，
因為上層係 440mm 位，下層除橫位同車尾外都係 410mm，
我唔知你要點先為之「Majority」，或者你覺得要將你都包括o係入面先算，
但大 ...
Ok fine, if you said that most passengers can experience the difference between the width of seats in upper deck and lower deck, it might be possible that they can also feel that the upper deck in those 3ASVs are narrower than the normal ones in other models. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
原帖由 da93 於 2010-10-31 17:05 發表
講真,
以前屯廠做水廠果陣,
一來唔係冇舊車,
唔駛我講大家都知道,
雞雞鴨鴨,去到BENZ晚年,
唔少車都係晌上水安享晚年,
但近呢10年起,
屯廠做水廠,
的確係有新車唔會唔俾水廠,
冇錯數目上唔多,
某程度上水廠真係旺 ...
Other than using 3+2 buses on several long-distance routes, I cant see there is any real problem in the bus schedule of the routes in those involved districts. Whether there should be new buses scheduled in these routes is really subjective. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
|
