What's your top speed?

But I still know you're making it up. The flaw in your post above is claiming to have passed a bendy bus. Everyone knows this to be physically impossible no matter what speed you acheive, especially the speed of light. You see due to the cretinous numptys that drive these laughable leviathans, the indescribable chaos they cause daily by blocking the road causes carnage

It's all a ploy by the Germans. Where was Einstein from eh? And where do bendy buses come from eh? I rest my case. Just ask Oliver about urban planning and watch him foam at the mouth

(I've stripped all the fun bits out from your post so that we can focus on the serious and important bits.) :)

Actually, while of course I understand the emotional case against articulated buses in London (I used to like the Routemaster design like most other people), from the point of view of bus operations and transportational utility, articulated buses are hard to beat. Be careful with whom you align yourself in your dislike of them, as the main case against them is actually brought by motorists, who believe them to cause congestion. It's a little complex to explain why that effect is negligible.

Essentially, articulated buses are the most efficient overground urban people-movers after trams. The roadspace they take up contains far more people (and more often than not, on the main bus routes they ply, they tend to be full) than cars would, and indeed double-deckers (which actually have a far smaller capacity, even if they have more seating). It helps the flow of traffic to have a few larger units rather than many small units, as each unit has to accelerate separately, creating a ripple delay at every junction. If in a queue, position yourself behind the articulated bus in the inside lane and marvel at how quickly the queue clears compared to the outside lane where the little cars sit.

There are a few myths about that articulated buses cause a safety problem for cyclists, but that has simply not been shown. TfL shot themselves in the foot a while ago when they produced silly incomplete stats in an answer at Mayor's Question Time, and those stats have become an urban myth. No proper before-and-after comparison has ever been undertaken on those routes where articulated buses replaced double-decker buses, and a number of other omissions, too, so we basically don't know.

Articulated buses cause other problems for cyclists than double-deckers. The latter often cut in quickly ahead of a cyclist, which articulated buses can't do owing to their length. The things that frighten people about them is that they are quite silent when coming up from behind (engine at the back), and can gradually pinch cyclists in when overtaking and moving back towards the kerb. They are also slightly wider than double deckers and it takes longer for a cyclist to squeeze past them in a queue--where the best advice is usually to wait further back in the queue--, which often leads to situations in which inexperienced riders find themselves in a tight space when the queues start moving.

Another important thing to realise is that many cyclists have never liked buses. We used to have just as many complaints about double deckers before the introduction of articulated buses as about the latter. Bus driver behaviour sometimes leaves a lot to be desired, although I find that the standard of driving has certainly improved over the years, and many drivers of articulated buses in particular are very good (it's a special status for them to be driving those). I've only once had an unpleasant encounter with the driver of an articulated bus.

Anyway, as ever, it's a complex subject that silly politics distorts and misrepresents. The bus people at TfL are probably tearing their hair out over the policy by the current Mayor of London to phase out articulated bus operation. I have to say I find that all of the designs from that competition look pretty shit.