||This article may be too long to read and navigate comfortably. (February 2013)|
Front 3/4 view of a typical North American school bus (IC Bus CE-Series)
Interior view of an empty school bus (Thomas Saf-T-Liner C2)
|Manufacturer||List of school bus manufacturers|
|Body and chassis|
|Doors||Front entry/exit door; rear/side emergency exit door(s)|
|Chassis||Various (see article)|
|Engine||Various fuel types (see article)|
|Capacity||10-90 passengers, depending on floor plan|
|Length||Up to 45 feet (13.7 m)|
|Width||Up to 102 inches (2,591 mm)|
|Curb weight||≤10,000–36,000 pounds (4,536–16,329 kg) (GVWR)|
A school bus is a type of bus specifically designed and manufactured for student transport: carrying students to and from school and school events. In the United States, school buses provide an estimated 10 billion student trips every year, over half of the country's student population is transported by school bus. Each school day in 2013, nearly 468,000 school buses transported 28.8 million children to and from school and school-related activities;.12
School buses in North America are distinguished from other bus types by design characteristics necessitated by federal and state regulations. Federal safety standards in the United States and Canada require school buses to be painted school bus yellow and to be equipped with specific warning and safety devices.3
Outside North America, the term can often be applied to an ordinary bus used for a school service or an older bus or coach retrofitted to become a dedicated school bus; the term "school bus" often is applied to bus routes assigned for the purposes of student transport as well.
- 1 Design history
- 1.1 19th century-1930: Early school vehicles
- 1.2 1930-1945: Industry standardization
- 1.3 1945-1960: A new need for school buses
- 1.4 1960-1980: Industry in flux
- 1.5 1980-2000: Industry contraction
- 1.6 2000-present: School buses of the 21st century
- 2 Manufacturing
- 3 Safety regulations
- 4 Environmental compatibility
- 5 Other uses
- 6 Retirement
- 7 School buses around the world
- 8 See also
- 9 References
- 10 External links
Wayne Works, predecessor of Wayne Corporation, was founded in the United States in 1837. By the mid-1880s, it is known that the company manufactured horse-drawn school carriages colloquially referred to as "school hacks", "school cars", "school trucks", or "kid hacks". ("hack" was a term for certain types of horse-drawn carriages.)4
Initial "horseless" school buses retained the rear entry of the kid hacks (a feature designed as to not startle the horses when loading or unloading passengers). Inside, many kid hacks and early school buses had perimeter seating with benches mounted to the outside walls of the vehicle. Early school buses served predominantly rural areas where it was deemed impractical for students to walk the distances necessary to get back and forth from school on their own. Like the kid hacks, they were essentially no more than a truck with a tarpaulin stretched over the truck bed.
In 1927, Ford dealership owner A.L. Luce produced a bus body for a 1927 Ford Model T. Unlike previous wood-bodied motorized buses, Luce used primarily steel panels with a wood frame; this would be the first bus produced by what would later become bus manufacturer Blue Bird. While the bus was constructed with a roof, its only weather protection was through roll-up canvas side curtains.
The 1930s would mark a major transition in the overall layout of vehicles used for school transportation. Instead of adapting other vehicles (such as wagons, carriages, trucks) to accommodate student passengers, school buses were becoming distinct, dedicated vehicles. Part of this was reflected in the body configuration. By the end of the 1920s, for ease of boarding and improved visibility, the entry door of school buses was moved from the rear to the front curbside corner. However, in a nod to their kid hack roots, the rear door would remain (as an emergency exit).
As school bus design paralleled truck design, the advent of forward-control trucks would have their own influence on school bus design. In an effort to gain extra seating capacity and visibility, Crown Coach built its own cabover school bus design from the ground up.567 The highest-capacity school bus of the time,6 the 76-passenger Crown Supercoach was aptly named, as many California school districts operated in terrain requiring heavy-duty vehicles.7 As the 1930s progressed, flat-front school buses began to follow motorcoach design in styling as well as engineering, partially the reason the industry adopted "transit-style" in naming them. In 1940, the first mid-engined transit school bus was produced by Gillig in California.8
The custom-built nature of school buses created an inherent obstacle to their profitable mass production on a large scale. Although the design of school buses had largely moved away from kid hacks, by the end of the 1930s, there was not yet an agreed upon set of industry-wide standards for school buses. A 1939 conference at Teachers College, Columbia University organized by rural education expert Dr. Frank W. Cyr forever changed the design and production of school buses; it was attended by transportation officials, representatives from body and chassis manufacturers, and paint companies.9
The conference resulted in a set of 44 standards adopted by all manufacturers (interior dimensions, seating configuration). Many of those standards allowed for consistency among body manufacturers, reducing the complexity of production as well as the price of their products; large-scale production was now possible. While many of the standards have been modified or updated, one lasting result of the conference remains part of every school bus in North America today: the adoption of a standard paint color for all school buses. While technically named National School Bus Glossy Yellow, school bus yellow was adopted for use since it was considered easiest to see in dawn and dusk, and it contrasted well with black lettering.9 While not universally used worldwide, yellow has become the shade most commonly associated with school buses both in North American and abroad.1011
Following World War II, two factors in the United States would lead to a high demand for student transportation and school buses. In rural areas, one-room schools of the turn of the century were consolidating into fewer, larger schools facilitating graded class structures. Particularly as students progressed into high school, walking to school was becoming impractical. Following World War II, the baby boom resulted in rapid population growth, especially as students moved from urban to suburban areas.
After World War II, transit-style school buses would see increased interest as they offered increased capacity and visibility; some were designed for heavy-duty use.7 A new generation evolved as Blue Bird developed the first version of its All American in 1948. Soon after, redesigned versions of the Crown Supercoach and the Gillig Transit Coach were introduced.8 Transit-style school buses offered a potential solution to the increase in student populations, as their higher capacities (eventually up to 97 passengers) meant that fewer buses needed to be driven and maintained, offsetting their higher initial purchase price.
As before, truck manufacturing would further influence school buses. In 1954, the first diesel-powered school bus was produced; a year later, the first tandem-rear axle school bus was constructed (both were Crown Supercoaches).5 In 1959, Gillig Bros. introduced the rear-engine diesel-powered school bus; soon afterwards, the Gillig Transit Coach School Bus became the most popular example of the type on the West Coast.8 With the availability of heavier-duty chassis, the size of buses began to grow. Towards the end of the 1950s, to accommodate wheelchair-bound passengers, wheelchair lifts were designed as an optional feature along with wheelchair tie-downs.
During the 1960s and 1970s, the school bus in North America would see a period of major evolution. Alongside overall design changes, a number of factors would affect their production; social changes would even affect their use during this time. In terms of production, conventional-type school buses grew much larger, as chassis manufacturers gradually replaced the source of donor chassis from pickup trucks to medium-duty trucks. Another factor affecting production was industry competition. By 1965, Diamond T, REO, Mack, and White had ended school bus chassis production, leaving it to four companies: Chevrolet/GMC, Dodge (Fargo in Canada), Ford (and Mercury in Canada), and International Harvester. In 1977, as part of Chrysler's financial difficulties, Dodge/Fargo school bus production was ended.
Although the need for school bus transportation in rural and suburban areas was still driven by the population of the baby-boom generation, in urban areas, another factor would lead to an increase for the need for busing of students. During the 1970s, several large urban areas had become court-ordered to bus students in an effort to racially integrate schools, building a new demand for student transportation.
As full-size school buses grew larger during the 1950s and early 1960s, they became difficult to navigate the crowded, narrow streets of urban neighborhoods; other rural routes were extremely isolated, with roads that could not accommodate full-size buses. To fill this role, yellow-painted vehicles such as the International Travelall and Chevrolet Suburban came into use. As they entered production in the 1960s, passenger vans were converted to school bus use, largely by the use of warning lights and yellow paint.
A drawback to using passenger vans and utility vehicles is that along with their lower seating capacity, they could not offer the same level of safety as a full-size school bus. The design of the small school bus changed in 1973 when Wayne introduced the Busette. The first school bus to utilize a cutaway van chassis design, the Busette differed from previous vehicles in its ability to utilize a scaled-down version of the passenger compartment design used on its full-size school buses.
In 1973, the Wayne Busette became the first school bus based on a cutaway van chassis design; a scaled-down bus body took the place of the van body; the design of the Busette would quickly be followed by other bus manufacturers. By the end of the decade, other bus manufacturers would develop their own bodies for GM and Ford cutaway vans; some bus manufacturers would get their start specializing solely in small buses. On a heavier-duty scale, bus manufacturers also developed buses utilizing the chassis of a delivery van/step van, which allowed for the body to be the same width of a full-size school bus. For the transportation of special-needs students, small school buses are often equipped with automated lifts for wheelchair-bound passengers unable to climb steps into the bus. In addition to the driver, these buses often have attendants or aides on board to deal with physical or mental issues of student passengers.
During the 1970s, the school bus would begin to see many updates related to safety. To increase safety around school bus stops and decrease confusion over traffic priority, several states began to adopt the use of amber warning lamps inboard of the traditional red ones. Activated 100–300 feet before stopping, the amber lights are intended to show drivers that a school bus is about to drop off or load students. In addition, to keep drivers from passing a stopped school bus in low visibility, the stop arm on the side of the bus was given a set of flashing lights.
In 1977, the United States Federal Government brought into effect a number of safety regulations that changed the design and construction of school buses. Most visibly, these standards —known as Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for School Buses— mandated taller seats and thick padding on the front and back. Under the sheetmetal, the internal structure of school buses was required to be strengthened for improved crashworthiness.
|This section does not cite any references or sources. (November 2009)|
As the school bus evolved as a specialized vehicle in the United States and Canada, concerns arose for the protection of passengers in major traffic collisions. A particular structural weak point in catastrophic school bus crashes was the joints where panels and pieces were fastened together.
Longitudinal steel guard rails had been in use since the 1930s to protect the sides of buses, but behind them on the sides and on the roofs, by the 1960s, all manufacturers were combining many individual steel panels to construct a bus body. These were usually attached by rivets or similar fasteners such as huckbolts.
In the mid-1960s, Ward Body Works of Conway, Arkansas, subjected one of their school bus bodies to multiple rollovers, and noted separation at the panel joints, as well as pointing out that many of their competitors were using relatively few rivets. This resulted in new attention by all the body companies to the number and quality of fasteners. Wayne Corporation's crash tests showed the joints to be points of weakness no matter how many fasteners were used, and in 1973 the company began building "Lifeguard" buses with single longitudinal interior and exterior panels for the sides and roof. Eliminating the joints reduced the number of points for potential body separation in a catastrophic impact.
The unit-panel construction reduced body weight, fastener count, and assembly time. However, it required very large roll-form presses and special equipment to handle the enormous panels. In addition, the panels had to be cut to exact length for each bus body order, which varied with the intended seating capacity and order specifications. This created a marketing disadvantage as the Wayne Lifeguard buses required greater manufacturing lead time than bus bodies made up of riveted smaller panels.
The focus on structural integrity spurred new requirements in the U.S. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for school buses, most of which became applicable for school buses on April 1, 1977. These standards are still in effect today.12
Standard No. 217 - Bus Emergency Exits and Window Retention and Release (Effective September 1, 1973)
- This established requirements for bus window retention and release to reduce the likelihood of passenger ejection in crashes, and for emergency exits to facilitate passenger exit in emergencies. It also requires that each school bus have an interlock system to prevent the engine starting if an emergency door is locked, and an alarm that sounds if an emergency door is not fully closed while the engine is running.
Standard No. 220 - School Bus Rollover Protection (Effective April 1, 1977)
- This established performance requirements for school bus rollover protection, to reduce deaths and injuries from failure of a school bus body structure to withstand forces encountered in rollover crashes.
Standard No. 221 - School Bus Body Joint Strength (Effective April 1, 1977)
- This established requirements for the strength of the body panel joints in school bus bodies, to reduce deaths and injuries resulting from structural collapse of school bus bodies during crashes.
Standard No. 222 - School Bus Passenger Seating and Crash Protection (Effective April 1, 1977)
- This established occupant protection requirements for school bus passenger seating and restraining barriers, to reduce deaths and injuries from the impact of school bus occupants against structures within the vehicle during crashes and sudden driving maneuvers.
Standard No. 301 - Fuel System Integrity - School Buses (Effective April 1, 1977)
- This specified requirements for the integrity of motor vehicle fuel systems, to reduce the likelihood of fuel spillage and resultant fires during and after crashes.
These new federal standards brought significant change to the design, engineering, and construction of school buses and a substantial improvement in safety performance. Further improvement has resulted from continuing efforts by the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and Transport Canada, as well as by the bus industry and various safety advocates.
Towards the end of the 20th century, a variety of economic factors affected the school bus industry. The design of school buses themselves would make evolutionary change, while production of school buses would see significant change. Alongside the fragile economic situation of the early 1980s, there was a key factor driving school bus production and the entire education system in North America: by 1980, the entirety of the baby-boom generation had moved on to college or the workforce.
In 1980, there were six major school bus body manufacturers producing full-size school buses in North America:
- Blue Bird Body Company
- Carpenter Body Works
- Superior Coach Company
- Thomas Built Buses, Inc.
- Wayne Corporation
- Ward Body Works
The "Big Six" manufacturers produced bodies for chassis from three truck manufacturers (Ford, General Motors, and International Harvester) in addition to two coach-type school bus manufacturers who serviced the West Coast (Crown and Gillig).
Through the 1980s and 1990s, several manufacturers filed for bankruptcy or were purchased by other manufacturers. One of the few new firms that gained entry into the industry was Freightliner, who became a chassis supplier in the late 1990s. After 2001, only three of the original "Big Six" had survived (Blue Bird, Thomas, and IC Corporation—a rebranding of Ward successor AmTran).
As a result of the 1970s fuel shortages, steps were also taken to improve the fuel economy of school buses. In the 1980s, manufacturers began to include diesel engines as options in conventional and small school buses; previously, diesel engines were considered a premium option only used on transit-style school buses. In 1986, Navistar International became the first chassis manufacturer to phase out gasoline engines entirely. Other manufacturers followed suit, and diesel engines replaced gasoline engines in virtually all full-size school buses by the mid-1990s.
Other changes involved making school buses easier to drive and operate for a wider variety of drivers. During the 1980s, automatic transmissions became commonly specified on school buses; this was most often the case for urban and suburban routes with stop-and-go driving. The issue of ergonomics led to increased attention towards the layout of controls and switches and how they were positioned. In addition to better ergonomics, many school bus manufacturers began to improve the safety of their school buses by increasing forward visibility for the driver. The demand for better forward visibility and better handling led to a major expansion of market share for transit-style school buses in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Initially, this was led by the Wayne Lifestar; the Blue Bird TC/2000 and Thomas Saf-T-Liner MVP would prove far more successful. In 1996, AmTran introduced the AmTran RE, the first low-cost rear-engine school bus.
After the closure of Carpenter in 2001, General Motors and Ford were gradually shut out of the full-size school bus industry. After building its last bus chassis in 1998, an agreement with Ford to supply Blue Bird with bus chassis fell through in 2002. General Motors, unable to find a body manufacturer to buy its chassis, produced its last full-size school bus chassis in 2003. Today, GM and Ford remain in the industry as the exclusive chassis suppliers for Type A school buses.
The industry consolidation of the 1980s and 1990s necessitated several design changes throughout the industry. In the past, school bus manufacturers had operated as second-stage manufacturers; in nearly all cases, the buyer chose the chassis the body would be assembled on. The mergers and acquisitions of the past two decades had reduced the possible combinations of buses a manufacturer could build. Although the aspect of choice was disappearing, it would lead to several product innovations that were previously impossible.
In the past, conventional-style buses had been built on a chassis built from a separate manufacturer. In 2004, two school buses were introduced that led to buses being built from the ground up in-house. Blue Bird introduced the Vision conventional; in the same fashion of the All American, the chassis was designed by the company specifically for bus use and built in its own factory. The same year, Thomas Built Buses introduced the Saf-T-Liner C2. Although bearing a strong visual resemblance to the Freightliner M2 Business Class, the C2's chassis was designed together with its body as a single vehicle. Both the Vision and Saf-T-Liner C2 were developed in order to improve visibility around the entry doors of the bus.
During the middle of the decade, General Motors ended production of its P-chassis; Type B buses (in decline) all but disappeared. Virtually all small school buses today are of Type A design; General Motors and Ford are the sole chassis producers.
In 2011, another full-size school bus manufacturer was added to the mix for the first time in a decade. In partnership with Spartan Motors,13 Lion Bus of Saint-Jérôme, Quebec marked the return of full-size bus production to Canada. In a move to combat corrosion, Lion Bus used composite panels for the body of the bus in place of the traditionally-used steel.
Collins Bus Corporation, the largest independent manufacturer of Type A buses, purchased Canadian manufacturer Corbeil out of bankruptcy in 2007. Corbeil joined Ohio-based manufacturer Mid Bus as a Collins subsidiary; manufacturing of all three product lines was consolidated at the Kansas factory owned by Collins. In 2009, Starcraft Bus expanded into school bus production. Later in 2009, Blue Bird and Girardin Minibus entered into a joint venture; Girardin now produces the entire small-bus product line for Blue Bird.14
In 2012, IC Bus introduced the IC AE-Series; based on the International TerraStar, it is the first cutaway chassis school bus not based upon a Ford, GM, or Dodge chassis in North America since International's own 3400 school bus chassis, last produced in 2001.
The late 2000s have seen a variety of innovations introduced into school bus design; some changes are aimed at improving their environmental impact while others are intended to improve school bus safety. Several manufacturers have introduced hybrid school buses while alternatives to diesel fuel are also being explored. Seatbelts, always a controversial topic, have become more common in school buses; buses with 3-point seatbelts have been introduced. School bus crossing arms, first introduced in the late 1990s, have been adopted by a number of jurisdictions.
Electronics have started to play an expanded role in school bus operation. To increase child safety and security, alarm systems have been developed to prevent children from being left on unattended school buses overnight.15
In the past decade, onboard GPS tracking devices have taken on a dual role of fleet management and location tracking. Not only does GPS tracking allow for internal management of costs, but it can be used to alert waiting parents and students of the real-time location of their bus.16 This is in use in the United States as well as worldwide markets, such as India.17
|This section needs additional citations for verification. (September 2010)|
In most cases, school bus manufacturers function as second stage manufacturers. However, some school buses (typically those of Type D configuration) have both the body and chassis produced from a single manufacturer. In 2013, 36,073 school buses were sold in North America, a 12.6% increase over 2012.1
In the United States, there are six active manufacturers. Three of them—Collins Industries, Starcraft Bus, and Trans Tech—specialize in small buses, while two—IC Bus and Thomas Built Buses—produce both small and large buses. Blue Bird Corporation produces only full-size buses; its small buses are produced by Canadian manufacturer Girardin.
Along with the United States, Canada has its own history of school bus production. Currently, it is home to Girardin Minibus, which produces small buses for Blue Bird as part of a joint venture. Since 2011, Lion Bus has produced full-size Type C school buses for both Canadian and U.S. operators.
In the past, Canada was home to facilities of several U.S. firms (Blue Bird, Thomas, Wayne); Canadian-produced school buses were exported to the United States, and Canada imported many U.S.-produced buses. Domestically, the Quebec-based firm Corbeil manufactured full-size and small school buses from 1985 to 2007; in 2008, it was purchased by Collins Industries.
The North American school bus industry produces buses in four different body configurations, listed alphabetically (along with trade name). All school buses in North America are of single deck design. In the United States, school buses are restricted to a maximum width of 102 in (2,590.8 mm) and a maximum length of 45 ft (13.72 m).18
|School Bus Configurations1920
(Images of Contemporary School Bus Models)
|Configuration||Type A (cutaway van)||Type B (integrated or conventional)||Type C (conventional)||Type D (transit-style)|
||This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (April 2010)|
Since the first development of consistent school bus standards in 1939, many of the ensuing changes to school buses over the past 75 years have been safety related, particularly in response to more stringent regulations adopted by state and federal governments. Ever since the adoption of yellow as a standard color, school buses deliberately integrate the concept of conspicuity into their design. When making student dropoffs or pickups, traffic law give school buses priority over other vehicles; in order to stop traffic, they are equipped with flashing lights and a stop sign.
Due to their size, school buses have a number of blind spots which endanger passengers disembarking the bus and pedestrians standing or walking nearby. This safety challenge is addressed by improving the design and configuration of the bus windows, windshield, body panels, and mirrors in order to maximize visibility. In the case of an accident, the body structure of a school bus is designed with an integral roll cage along with a number of emergency exits to facilitate fast egress. Controversy exists over the use of seat belts as a restraint system for school bus passengers; officials of the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board state school buses are safer than private automobiles even if they are not fitted with seat belts.21
Yellow was adopted as a standard color for North American school buses beginning in 1939. In April of that year, Dr. Frank W. Cyr, a professor at Teachers College at Columbia University in New York organized a meeting to establish national school bus construction standards, including the adoption of a standard shade of paint. The color which became known as "school bus yellow" was selected because black lettering on that specific hue was easiest to see in the semi-darkness of early morning and late afternoon. Officially, it is designated "National School Bus Chrome" (later renamed "National School Bus Glossy Yellow" as the lead was removed from the pigment).
Although it is not a government specification outside of the United States and Canada, school buses outside North America sometimes feature some shade of yellow in part or in whole, And while some areas without school services have conducted evaluations of American yellow style school buses,22 other governments require their own distinctive paint schemes, often favouring other high visibility colours such as white or orange1123 that may better suit their own climate or conditions.
School buses often operate in low-visibility conditions such as early morning or in poor weather as well as in rural areas. While their yellow paint color does give them a conspicuity advantage over other vehicles, darkness can make them hard to see. To improve their visiblity, many state and provincial governments (for example, Colorado)24 require the use of retroflective tape on school buses. Marking the length, width, height, and in some cases, identifying the bus as a school bus, reflective tape makes the vehicle easier to see for other drivers by the light of their headlamps and correctly perceive its size and position.
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 217 also requires that yellow, white, or red retroreflective tape be applied so as to mark all emergency exits, so rescue personnel can quickly find them in darkness.25 The equivalent in Canada is almost identical; the only difference is that red cannot be used as a retroreflective color.
In the United States, approximately ⅔ of students killed outside a school bus are not struck by other vehicles, but by their own bus.26
To reduce the driver's blind zones, more sophisticated and comprehensive mirror systems have been developed. As Type C and D buses have been redesigned and updated, windshields have been significantly enlarged in size to remove obstacles from the driver's lines of sight.
To inhibit pedestrians from walking close enough to the front of the bus that the hood obscures them from the driver's view, North Carolina and Connecticut are examples of states that requiring school buses to be equipped with crossing arms which extend from the front bumper while the bus is stopped for loading or unloading.27 By design, these force passengers to walk forward several feet forward of the bus (into the view of the driver) before they can walk across the road.
Another hazardous area is the loading door; a drawstring or other loose clothing items may be caught as a student gets off the bus. If the driver is unaware, the student may still be attached to the outside of the bus as it begins to pull away. To reduce this risk, school bus manufacturers have redesigned handrails and equipment in the stepwell area. In its School Bus Handrail Handbook, the NHTSA described a simple test procedure for identifying unsafe stepwell handrails.28
By the mid-1940s, most states had traffic laws requiring motorists to stop for school buses while children were loading or unloading.citation needed The justifications for this protocol are:
- Children, especially the younger ones, have normally not yet developed the mental capacity to fully comprehend the hazards and consequences of street-crossing, and under U.S. tort laws, a child cannot legally be held accountable for negligence. For the same reason, adult crossing guards often are deployed in walking zones between homes and schools.
- It is impractical in many cases to avoid children crossing the traveled portions of roadways after leaving a school bus or to have an adult accompany them.
- The size of a school bus generally limits visibility for both the children and motorists during loading and unloading.
Since at least the mid-1970s, all U.S. states and Canadian provinces and territories have some sort of school bus traffic stop law; although each jurisdiction requires traffic to stop for a school bus loading and unloading passengers, different jurisdictions have different requirements of when to stop. Outside of North America, the school bus stopping traffic to unload and load children is not provided for. Instead of being given traffic priority, fellow drivers are encouraged to drive with extra caution around school buses.
Around 1946, the first system of traffic warning signal lights on school buses was used in Virginia. This system comprised a pair of sealed beam lights similar to those employed in American headlamps of the time. Instead of colorless glass lenses, the warning lights utilized red lenses. A motorized rotary switch applied power alternately to the red lights mounted at the left and right of the front and rear of the bus, creating a wig-wag effect. Activation was typically through a mechanical switch attached to the door control. However, on some buses (such as Gillig's Transit Coach models and the Kenworth-Pacific School Coach) activation of the roof warning lamp system was through the use of a pressure-sensitive switch on a manually controlled stop paddle lever located to the left of the driver's seat below the window. Whenever the pressure was relieved by extending the stop paddle, the electrical current was activated to the relay.
In later years, electromechanical wig-wag flasher controls were replaced by electronic ones, and the warning lights were increased from four — two front and two rear, all red — to eight — two amber to warn of an impending stop, and two red to indicate a stop in progress, front and rear. Some jurisdictions, such as Wisconsin and Ontario, Canada still do not permit the amber-and-red system; all-red warning systems are still used in such locales. Newer buses with provisions for the amber-and-red eight-lamp system generally use eight red lenses where amber is not permitted. Plastic lenses were developed in the 1950s, though sealed beams — now with colorless glass lenses — were still most commonly used behind them until the mid-2000s, when light-emitting diodes (LEDs) began supplanting the sealed beams.
During the early 1950s, states began to specify a mechanical stop signal arm which the driver would swing out from the left side of the bus to warn traffic of a stop in progress. The portion of the stop arm protruding in front of traffic was initially a rectangle with stop painted on it. The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 131 regulates the specifications of the stop arm as a double-faced regulation octagonal red stop sign at least 45 cm (17.7 in) across, with white border and uppercase legend. It must be retroreflective and/or equipped with alternately flashing red lights. As an alternative, the stop legend itself may also flash; this is commonly achieved with red LEDs.29 FMVSS 131 stipulates that the stop signal arm be installed on the left side of the bus, and placed such that when it is extended, the arm is perpendicular to the side of the bus, with the top edge of the sign parallel to and within 6 inches (15 cm) of a horizontal plane tangent to the bottom edge of the first passenger window frame behind the driver's window, and that the vertical center of the stop signal arm must be no more than 9 inches (23 cm) from the side of the bus. One stop signal arm is required; a second may also be installed.29 The second stop arm, when it is present, is usually mounted near the rear of the bus, and is not permitted to bear a stop or any other legend on the side facing forward when deployed.29
The Canadian standard defined in Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard No. 131, is substantially identical to the U.S. standard.30
In addition to the entry door, all school buses have at least one emergency exit door (in rear-engine buses, a window exit supplemented by a side emergency exit door) in the rear of the bus. The rear door was a design feature retained from when school buses were horse-drawn wagons and the entrance door was rear-mounted to avoid frightening the horses.
Additional exits may be located in the roof (roof hatches), window exits, and/or side emergency exit doors. All are opened by the use of quick-release latches which activate an alarm. The number of emergency exits in a school bus depends on the size of the bus (its seating capacity) along with individual state regulations.
During the past decade, video cameras have become common equipment installed inside school buses, primarily to monitor and record passengers' behavior. Video cameras have also been useful in determining the causes of accidents: on March 28, 2000, a Murray County, Georgia, school bus was hit by a CSX freight train at an unsignalled railroad crossing. Three children were killed. The bus driver claimed to have stopped and looked for approaching trains before proceeding across the tracks, as is required by law, but the onboard camera recorded that the bus had in fact not stopped.32
In contrast to cars and other light duty passenger vehicles, school buses are typically not equipped with seat belts. In 1977, as provided in Federal Motor Vehicle Standard 222, the U.S. federal government required passive restraint and more stringent structural integrity standards for school buses instead of requiring lap seat belts. The passive restraint standards exempted school buses with a gross vehicle weight (GVWR) of over 10,000 pounds from requiring seat belts. A revised FMVSS 222 was set to take effect in October 2011 to require three-point, lap/shoulder belts in all newly manufactured Type A small school buses to improve occupant protection. The revised standard also introduces standards for testing lap/shoulder belt-equipped bus seats and the anchor points for the optional installation of these seat-belt systems in large school buses. Where in the past FMVSS 222 seat belt equipped seats could reduce passenger capacity by up to one third, NHTSA is recognizing new technology that allows belting either three smaller children or two larger children per seat.3334
Whether seat belts should be a requirement has been controversial.35 However, in October 2013, NASDPTS most recently stated at their annual transportation conference (NAPT) that they now fully support three-point lap-shoulder seat belts on school buses.36 Currently, they are a requirement in at least five states:37
Of the states that equip buses with two-point lap seat belts (Florida, Louisiana, New Jersey and New York), only New Jersey requires seat belt usage by riders.38 In other states, it is up to the district whether to require riders to use them or not.
In July 2004, California became the first state to require three-point lap/shoulder seat belts on all new Type A small school buses. A year later, this requirement was extended to large Type C and Type D school buses. Texas followed with its own three-point seat belt law for school buses in 2007 with a 2010 implementation date, if funding was available. So far, the Texas Education Agency has only received $2.6 million for optional grants.39
As a concept, compartmentalization was introduced in 1967 by safety researchers at UCLA. The premise behind compartmentalization is that improved seat design with high-back padded seats spaced close together (a maximum of 24 inches (61 cm) apart front to back) would better contain passengers in the event of a crash. Although not an element of compartmentalization, the UCLA researchers who conducted the 1967 tests on school buses concluded that after high back seats, next in importance to school bus passenger collision safety is the use of a three-point belt, a lap belt or other form of effective restraint. In April 1977, Federal Motor Vehicle Standard 222 changed the design of school bus seats from low metal-backed seats to the thickly padded seats still in use today.34
While compartmentalization is designed to help protect passengers in frontal and rear impact situations,40 it does little to protect passengers in a side impact or rollover scenario.4142 Even in the situations where compartmentalization is designed to help protect passengers (front and rear impacts), injuries can still occur.43
In theory, school buses reduce pollution in the same manner that carpooling does but on a much larger scale; in total, it is estimated that the approximately 480,000 school buses in the United States do the job of 17.3 million cars when it comes to transporting students.44 However, as they are powered by internal-combustion engines, school buses are not a completely pollution-free method of transportation like biking or walking.
Some of the environmental drawbacks of school busing stem from the idling of engines while waiting for students to be unloaded and loaded at bus stops and at school. Since most school buses use diesel fuel, people standing or walking near the bus are exposed to exhaust fumes, which are believed to lead to health problems. Some older buses have been retrofitted with upgraded emission controls and diesel particulate filters,45 and new buses meet more rigorous emissions standards with more advanced engines and emission control strategies such as Selective catalytic reduction; a bus meeting 2007-model year emissions standards is 60 times cleaner than a bus from 1990.45
Although diesel fuel is most commonly used in large school buses (and even in many smaller ones), alternatives such as propane, CNG, and hydrogen have been developed to counter the drawbacks that diesel and gasoline-fueled school buses pose to the environment.
- In the 1970s and 1980s, as a response to the gas crisis, propane conversions of gasoline engines were made available (most commonly those used in the General Motors B-Series). These conversions fell out of favor due to declining fuel prices and the increasing usage of diesel engines. Currently, Blue Bird Corporation offers a propane-powered option in its conventional Vision model bus.46
- Compressed natural gas (CNG)
- Compressed natural gas school buses were introduced by Blue Bird in 1991, using the Cummins ISL-G engine in its Type D All American rear engine body and chassis.46 CNG is also available as an option from Thomas Built Buses on the Saf-T-Liner HDX.47
- Another conversion of existing engine architecture involved the use of methanol as a fuel source. In 1989, Crown Coach introduced the Supercoach Series II, a bus with a Detroit Diesel 6V92 converted to run on methanol instead of diesel. The same powertrain was offered into the 1990s by Carpenter on their Coach RE transit-style bus, but few were sold, and many methanol-fueled engines were later converted to diesel by their operators.
IC Bus, in collaboration with Enova Systems, unveiled the nation's first hybrid electric school bus in 2006 at the New York Association of Pupil Transportation (NYAPT) Show. This plug-in hybrid-electric vehicle (PHEV) school bus is claimed to reduce fuel consumption by as much as 40 percent compared to ordinary diesel buses.
Eleven states joined together for an exploratory purchase of 19 of these school buses from IC Bus. New York, California, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Arkansas, Iowa and Washington were the first states in the nation to test the diesel-electric hybrid school buses.48 Since then, hybrids have slowly gained acceptance in the marketplace nationwide as the price premium has come down. Hybrids generally cost about $200,000 as of spring 2011, compared to more than $100,000 for a regular-sized diesel school bus.49
During the 1990s, battery-powered school buses were developed as conversions of existing vehicles; only a few were made, primarily for research purposes. In 2012, Trans Tech Bus introduced the eTrans, the first series-produced school bus that was battery-powered. Based upon the Newton truck from Smith Electric Vehicles, the eTrans was designed with an approximate range of 130 miles between charges.50 In 2013, Trans Tech developed the SST-e, a conversion of a Type A school bus using the Ford E-Series rolling chassis.
As a result of their large size and sturdy construction, vehicles built from school bus bodies are desirable for many other uses outside of student transport.
An "activity bus" is a school bus used for providing transportation for students. Instead of being used in route service (home to school), the intended usage of an activity bus is for transporting students for extracurricular activities. Depending on individual state and provincial regulations, the bus used for this purpose can either be a regular yellow school bus or a dedicated unit for this purpose. Dedicated activity buses, while not painted yellow, are fitted with the similar interiors as well as the same traffic control devices for dropping off students (at other schools).
In the past, groups that transport children and adults that did not need (or afford) a large bus commonly used 15-passenger vans to handle their transportation. However, such vehicles were at a disadvantage by comparison in terms of meeting safety regulations. To provide an alternative to 15-passenger vans (called "non-conforming vans" because they do not meet any safety standards for school buses),51 manufacturers have designed buses that can replace 15-passenger vans. These are called Multi-Function SchoolActivity Buses (MFSABs).
The basic design of MFSABs differs from yellow school buses because of their intended use. These differ from yellow school buses in that they are not intended for route service; therefore, they are not fitted with traffic control devices (red warning lights, stop arm).52 Also, they are not painted school bus yellow. MFSAB buses are typically based on Type A school buses, although manufacturers offer MFSAB configurations for all four body styles of school buses.
If used by schools, MFSABs are primarily used for extracurricular activities requiring transportation; in the private sector, the MFSAB bus is commonly being purchased by child-care centers.
Larger police agencies may own their own buses for transporting large numbers of officers for a number of reasons. As these often offer higher capacity seating than other buses, the vehicles employed are based on school buses. Other police buses are custom-built as mobile command centers, using school bus bodyshells. Other uses by law enforcement often involve prisoner transport vehicles.
Throughout the United States and Canada, school buses that are retired from front-line service have seen a second life as church buses; some churches purchase their buses new. While these buses are used to transport both adults and children, their usage as church buses varies from state to state. Buses converted to non-school use are prohibited by federal safety standards from displaying the "School Bus" lettering. Stop arms and signal lamps must be disabled or removed.3 In some states, the bus is required to change its color from School Bus Yellow.
Since school buses sold upon their retirement are typically older models, they do not offer occupants the same level of safety performance as newly produced buses. This relative lack of safety performance was scrutinized after the 1988 Carrollton, Kentucky bus collision. The collision involved a church bus which had been originally built and served as a school bus; it resulted in one of the deadliest bus accidents in United States history. In addition to extensive media coverage and considerable litigation, an investigation was launched by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB). Subsequently, many federal, state, and local agencies and bus manufacturers changed regulations, vehicle features, and operating practices.
While pre-1977 school buses have largely been phased out of use (in most states), buses from before 1977 can sometimes be found carrying passengers as church buses. In most cases, these are bound by fewer regulations than school buses. Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia53 are the only American states where school bus stop laws are similarly applied to church buses, if equipped with the flashing red lights used on school buses and operated in compliance with the same regulations as school buses. Other states may have vehicles marked as "church" buses, but they do not have church bus stop laws similar to school bus stop laws.citation needed
||This section may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. (December 2009)|
||This section possibly contains original research. (May 2009)|
After a school bus has been withdrawn from regular day-to-day service, it may be used as a substitute for newer buses for any one of a number of reasons, usually while a newer bus is being serviced or needs maintenance, or a regular bus is unavailable (in use for another duty, such as transporting athletes to an event). The older buses are still maintained to comply with all applicable safety standards, but sometimes lack features of newer buses, such as air conditioning, radios and tinted windows.
A bus is often completely retired from school service when it becomes no longer cost-effective to keep it in reliable and safe condition. Some transportation services may have a vehicle replacement schedule calling for a bus to be replaced after at a specific age, even if the vehicle is in good or excellent condition. Many of these retired school buses are sold to such entities as churches, resorts or camps.
Buses converted to non-school use are prohibited by federal safety standards from displaying the "School Bus" lettering. Stop arms and signal lamps must be disabled or removed.3
School buses, as do other types of buses, are sometimes preserved and restored to their original condition by collectors and bus enthusiasts. While school districts do not operate heritage fleets, museums and collectors have an interest in older and rarer models.
Additionally, restored school buses often make appearances in television or film when a vintage bus is needed on the set as part of traffic.
Former school buses may also be converted into farm utility vehicles for cattle feeding, fruit orchard maintenance and harvest, and other tasks. Most of the roof and body sides are removed, leaving only a cab for the driver enclosed with a rear wall. This creates a truck with an extremely long, flat bed. Many farms also use unconverted school buses (with usually just the name of the school district it once served and the "School Bus" lettering on the front and back blacked out) to transport their migrant workforce.
Some retired school buses are exported to Latin America, Africa, or elsewhere. They are used as public transportation, school buses, municipal transport, or for the transport of migrant farmworkers. Once they are exported, their new owners often update the color scheme from school bus yellow to a variety of different colors.
|This section requires expansion with: examples and additional citations. (March 2014)|
Outside of North America, the yellow school bus is not as common; buses used for the purpose of student transport are typically closer in design to mass-transit buses. These buses may be painted yellow or other similar shades, but school bus yellow is not a government specification like it is on school buses from the United States or Canada and so is generally seen only on buses imported from North America. School buses outside of North America typically do not have traffic priority while loading or unloading students; school bus traffic stop laws differ from North American counterparts (if they exist at all).
In mainland China, purpose-built vehicles for transporting schoolchildren are not commonly used. Due to lack of buses and absence of regulation, overloading of buses with children in China for school routes is commonplace.54 Consequently, accidents happen frequently.
Some Chinese bus manufacturers, such as Zhengzhou Yutong Group Co., Ltd., developed a school bus model, the ZK6100DA, to be purchased by schools in China. It was described as a "big-nose school bus" with a "classic western-style appearance" by one online newspaper.55 FAW developed the similar CA6750. Both school buses hold approximately 35 student passengers.56 In addition to large school buses, minibuses are sold by Chengdu and Maxus;56 these school buses hold from 16 to 24 passengers.
In February 2012, the potential of American-imported school buses was explored as American manufacturers Blue Bird and IC Bus (Navistar) displayed buses at a bus industry trade show in Beijing.57
In Hong Kong, younger students are transported between their homes and schools by "nanny vans". These vehicles are typically van-based and are smaller than a minibus. When nanny vans originated, they were regulated primarily by the schools and the van drivers. Today, in the interest of safety, nanny vans are government-regulated vehicles that run on fixed routes.
|This section does not cite any references or sources. (November 2013)|
In Germany, students travel to school on scheduled public train and bus routes. Buses used on these routes are not specially constructed. In most cases, these services operate at times to suit school hours and are not run during weekends and holiday periods, though the services are open to use by non-school-related travellers. Local authorities subsidise the routes but parents or guardians are required to pay a contribution to the cost of a season ticket for use of the services. Many scholars use their own bicycles to travel to school and may take these with them when a part of the journey is by train.
In the United Kingdom, student transport by bus is typically handled with the use of local scheduled public transport bus services. Bus services for school students are usually contracted out to local bus companies, using ordinary buses which are used for other purposes when not in use for school journeys.
To encourage students to travel to school by bus, North American-style yellow school buses were introduced in the late 1990s. West Sussex acquired American Blue Bird school buses produced in right-hand drive in 1997; these replaced outdated Leyland double-decker buses.58 A number of other localities followed suit, including Cheshire in 1999.59
In the private sector, FirstGroup launched First Student UK in 2000. While initially using right-hand drive Blue Bird TC/2000s imported from the United States, the company switched to Turkish-produced BMC 1100 buses later in the decade. First Student UK school buses are distinguished by the use of a monochromatic school bus yellow livery, the same shade required in North America.
MyBus is a group of bus contractors that ensure school buses are used solely for school transport, equipped with seatbelts, and drivers are assigned to each route full-time.
The body manufacturer Wrightbus of Northern Ireland produces a bus body configured for school bus use, the Wright Eclipse SchoolRun. Based on a Volvo chassis, the 66-passenger SchoolRun has been in production since 2006.
Children with more complex needs/disabilities are often transported to special schools in purpose-built minibuses. Much like in the United States, these buses are bus bodies fitted to full-size van chassis. In Europe, the Ford Transit and the Mercedes-Benz Vario are popular donor chassis for such vehicles.
Canadian school buses are similar to their U.S. counterparts both in terms of overall design and their usage by school systems. The primary functional difference is the adaptation to the bilingual population of Canada. In francophone Quebec, the signage on the outside of the bus is in French; the front and rear legends read écoliers"—French for "Schoolchildren" ("School Bus" translated into French is the much longer "autobus scolaire"). The stop signal arm legend may read arrêt, French for "Stop", though Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 131 requires the legend to read stop.30 In addition, all emergency exit designations and instructions are required to be bilingual.
Buses are sometimes marketed to customers in Canada differently in comparison to the United States. In one example, the Blue Bird All American is rebadged as the Blue Bird TX3 in Canada (and other export markets). Additionally, of the three regionally-focused brands sold by Collins Industries, only Corbeil is sold in Canada, due to its previous manufacturing base in Quebec.
|This section does not cite any references or sources. (November 2013)|
In Mexico, in addition to yellow school buses seen from the United States, various other types of buses are used in the role of student transport. As in the United States, many schools own their own fleets of school buses; school bus yellow is not a government regulation, so most buses are painted in individual school colors. Depending on capacity needs, vans, minibuses, and midibuses are also used. Among retired American school buses, some newer ones are imported into Mexico and put back into school service.
Unlike the United States and Canada, school-owned buses are not primarily used for route service (due to high cost); instead, they are often used for field trips and other related excursions. In addition to students using regular transit systems, several Mexican companies specialize in scheduled student transportation.
In Australia, school buses vary in colour with yellow buses being rare.60 As school route buses are almost universally run by direct government contract,61 the livery of the bus is generally that of the contractor, with the bus commonly also being used for normal scheduled routes as required. In NSW, however, the State Government has begun a program to bring all public transport in the state under one livery62 including strict livery regulations for new vehicles purchased for government contract use.23 The style is typically the same as public buses in other countries, as demonstrated in the picture from Wagga Wagga, NSW (which is in the livery of the local operator). Buses used on school routes are required to bear 40 km/h (25 mph) speed limit signs on their rear and to flashing yellow lights on the front and rear, similar to those in the US and other places. When stopping or stopped, the lights flash indicating other drivers must not travel past the bus in either direction faster than 40 km/h (the same speed limit is used in 'school zones' on roads adjacent to schools at times when most students are expected to be arriving or leaving). Drivers must also cede right of way to all buses (school or otherwise) attempting to pull out from a stop. Dedicated bus lanes are common in larger cities, where buses are also allowed to move off first from traffic lights before other traffic is shown a green light. Some areas also have dedicated busways. Increasingly, jurisdictions are requiring new buses purchased for use on school routes to be fitted with seat belts and 'compartmentalisation' features, or even requiring students to use seatbelts at all times.
Private and public schools often have 'activity' style buses, sometimes in a colour matching the 'school colours' although more commonly with just the name and logo of the school on the side and/or front of the bus to save the cost of custom painting. They are used by many schools for smaller excursions, i.e. to transport a single sport team or class, in order save on external hire costs and are consequently generally also driven by school staff. In order to allow staff to drive them with a standard car or light truck licence these vehicles are generally quite small, 22 seat buses are very common in this role.
The vast majority of schools in Australia (both government and private) do not have their own buses for transporting children between the school and their home and thus most school children in Australia that do travel by bus travel on public transport buses, either on standard scheduled public transport routes, or on specific 'school travel' routes. Most school routes do not allow the general adult public to ride along with the children, although this does vary by location according to practicality (i.e. remote areas) and local regulation.
Many Australian school children travel 'free' on non fare paying bus services63 to their local school or using a bus pass that they get issued at the beginning of the school year that covers transport with the relevant bus (and often other public transport such as train or ferry) network/s for travel to and from school only, for which the contractor in turn receives a government subsidy amount for each trip,64 although specifics of the schemes vary from state to state, some only providing subsidy to remote or low income families.65 Many thousands of children in Australia thus have to travel daily to school using a number of different public transport routes with different bus, train, tram and ferry networks. In most places, as of 2013, this is even achieved with a single pass.
In New Zealand, student transport is sometimes provided by the New Zealand Ministry of Education through school bus contractors or general bus companies. Bus companies generally have a fleet of older transit buses or coaches, different from the newer public service fleet vehicles to cater for school services.
While carrying students, buses are marked by either "SCHOOL", "SCHOOL BUS", "KURA" (Maori for "school"), or pictograms of children in black on a fluorescent chartreuse background, and a limited on the open road to 80 km/h (50 mph) . These signs all indicate that a motorist should slow to 20 km/h (12 mph) when passing a stationary bus in either direction6667
- School Bus Fleet Fact Book 2014 59 (11). p. 34.
- "FAQs". American School Bus Council. Retrieved 2010-11-27.
- Highway Safety Program Guidelines: Pupil Transportation Safety. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration website. Retrieved 2010-06-23.
- Mark Theobald (2004). Wayne Works. Coachbuilt.com. Retrieved 2010-04-26
- Mark Theobald (2004). "Crown Coach". Coachbuild.com. Retrieved 2010-04-29
- J. H. Valentine. "Crown Coach: California's Specialty Builder". Tripod. Retrieved 2010-04-27.
- Sandi Brockway (January 11, 2007). "Crown Coach Corporation (1932-1991)". Crown Coach Historical Society. Retrieved 2010-04-28
- "The Gillig Transit Coach And Pacific Schoolcoach Online Museum (archived)". Retrieved 28 March 2014.
- "Frank W. Cyr, 'Father of the Yellow School Bus,' Dies at the Age of 95". Columbia University press release (August 3, 1995). Retrieved 2010-04-07
- "School Bus Safety Community Advisory Committee". Retrieved 2013-10-21.
- "WA School Bus Specifications 20 September 2013". Retrieved 2013-10-21.
- "Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards". School Transportation News. August 8, 2009. Retrieved 2011-06-02.
- "Spartan Chassis Executes Agreement With Lion Bus Inc. for Type C School Bus Chassis". MarketWatch. 16 June 2011. Retrieved 17 June 2011.
- "Blue Bird, Girardin Join Forces". School Bus Fleet Magazine. February 19, 2010. Retrieved 2010-04-14.
- "FAQs/Q: The school bus looks like it’s hardly changed in decades. Where’s the modernization". American School Bus Council. Retrieved 2010-12-03.
- Spiral Design Studio. "School Bus GPS Tracking - Busfinder from". Transfinder. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
- "School Bus Tracking". Vainatheya.com. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
- THE FOURTEENTH NATIONAL CONGRESS ON SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION. "NATIONAL SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION SPECIFICATIONS and PROCEDURES (2005 Revised Edition)". p. 40. Retrieved 2011-01-10.
- "School Bus types". School Transportation News. Retrieved January 3, 2010.
- THE FOURTEENTH NATIONAL CONGRESS ON SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION. "NATIONAL SCHOOL TRANSPORTATION SPECIFICATIONS and PROCEDURES (2005 Revised Edition)". p. 7. Retrieved 5 January 2014.
- Dr Kristin Poland of NTSB, quoted at a hearing into a fatal 2012 bus crash at Chesterfield, Missouri, in "Buses safer than cars", Circular, Bus and Coach Association of New Zealand, August 2013.
- Rob Watson (June 13, 2000). "UK may get yellow school buses". BBC News. Retrieved 2010-04-07.
- "Sydney Metropolitan Bus Service Contract-Schedule 8". Retrieved 2013-10-20.
- Colorado Minimum Standards Governing School Bus Transportation Vehicles Colorado Code of Regulations 301-25, Section 2251-R-54.02. Retrieved 2010-04-16
- Bus emergency exits and window retention and release Code of Federal Regulations Title 49, Section 571.217. Retrieved 2010-04-15
- "Protecting Children from Their Own Buses by Mark D. Fisher". Retrieved January 29, 2006.
- Safety in the Danger Zone School Bus Fleet (September 1, 2007). Retrieved 2010-04-19
- Handrail MechanicsSchool Bus Handrail Handbook. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Retrieved 2010-04-19.
- School bus pedestrian safety standards Code of Federal Regulations Title 49, Section 571.131. Retrieved 2010-4-15.
- "Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard - Technical Standards Document 131". Tc.gc.ca. 2011-04-04. Retrieved 2011-11-29.
- Illinois school bus safety standards: Lamps, Reflectors, Signals Illinois Administrative Code Title 92 (Transportation), Sec. 442.615g. Retrieved 2010-04-16
- Highway Accident Report - NTSB/HAR-01/03 National Transportation Safety Board (December 11, 2001). Retrieved 2012-07-28
- Ryan Gray (August 7, 2009). "School Bus Seat Belts FAQ". School Transportation News.
- "School Bus Seat Belts". School Transportation News. Retrieved 2010-04-16.
- Janna Morrison (August 8, 2008). "NAPT Advocates Scientific Approach to Seat Belt Issue". School Transportation News. Retrieved 2010-04-16.
- Arroyo, Silvia (24 October 2013). "NASDPTS Alters Its Support of Three-Point Lap/Shoulder Seat Belts on School Buses". School Transportation News. Retrieved 2 December 2013.
- Susan Haigh (February 17, 2010). "Connecticut considers installing seat belts on school buses". The Hour Online. Retrieved 2010-04-16.
- Seat Belts in School Buses Transport Canada. Retrieved 2010-04-19
- Ryan Gray (July 8, 2009). "The History of Seat Belt Development". School Transportation News. Retrieved 2011-06-02.
- "Compartmentalization". School Transportation News. Retrieved 2 December 2013.
- "REVIEW OF MAJOR SCHOOL BUS CRASHWORTHINESS STUDIES BY THE NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD". National Coalition for School Bus Safety. National Coalition for School Bus Safety. Retrieved 2 December 2013.
- "SafeGuard school bus rollover crash test". YouTube. IMMI. Retrieved 2 December 2013.
- "It's time for seat belts on school buses.". SafeGuard Seating. Retrieved 2 December 2013.
- "Individual, Local and Global Community Impact - American School Bus Council". Retrieved 9 April 2014.
- "FAQs/Q: Is it healthy for my child to ride the school bus?". American School Bus Council. Retrieved 2010-12-03.
- Blue Bird's Alternative Fuel Product Offerings Blue Bird Corporation. Retrieved 2010-4-16
- Saf-T-Liner HDX Thomas Built Buses (pdf brochure). Retrieved 2010-04-16
- "IC Corporation Works with Enova Systems to Supply First Hybrid School Buses That Can Attain Up To 40 Percent Increase in Fuel Efficiency - See more at: http://www.electricdrive.org/index.php?ht=display/ContentDetails/i/4688/pid/11284#sthash.QA84sQiT.dpuf". Retrieved 9 April 2014.
- "Hybrids Might be the Way of the Future but Remain Slow in Coming to School Transportation Industry". Stnonline.com. 2011-03-04. Retrieved 2011-11-29.
- "Trans Tech goes green with electric school bus". Retrieved 22 January 2014.
- "Are there other vehicles that can be used for school transportation? Vans?". Retrieved 2010-05-23.
- "Why do some school buses look different than others, for example in color?". Retrieved 2010-05-23.
- "LIS § 46.2-917.1. School buses hired to transport children.". Code of Virginia. Retrieved December 4, 2005.
- 校车安全事故频发折射监管缺位 超载现象严重 Retrieved 2012-3-10
- "Bigger nose means bigger safety for Qingdao school buses". chinadaily.com.cn. 6 June 2011. Retrieved 18 June 2011.
- "China goes Schoolbus Crazy". Retrieved 31 December 2013.
- "American-Style Schoolbuses Make Inroads In China". Retrieved 31 December 2013.
- Di johan m b Nessun nome reale + Aggiungi contatto. "bluebird | Flickr –Condivisione di foto!". Flickr.com. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
- Di Wildmoreway Lena+ Aggiungi contatto. "Cheshire School Bus Bluebird V219EAL at Crewe | Flickr –Condivisione di foto!". Flickr.com. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
- "Bus Australia Photo Gallery". bus australia. Retrieved 2013-10-20.
- "School bus contracts discourage fleet upgrades: MP". Abc.net.au. 2010-07-22. Retrieved 2013-04-22.
- "Out of the blue, more buses, all dressed alike". smh.com.au. 2010-12-22. Retrieved 2013-10-20.
- "Bus subsidy cuts hit students". smh.com.au. 2012-06-14. Retrieved 2013-10-20.
- "NSW School Student Transport Scheme". Retrieved 2013-10-20.
- "Queensland School Transport Assistance Scheme". Retrieved 2013-10-20.
- Speed limits on NZTA official New Zealand Road Code website, retrieved 2010-11-14
- See this article on an instance of Maori bus sign usage in Rotorua:Principal remains adamant over 'kura' bus signson Rotorua Daily Post website, retrieved 2010-11-14
|Wikimedia Commons has media related to School buses.|
- School Bus Fleet Magazine - news magazine for student transportation professionals
- School Transportation News - news magazine for student transportation professionals
- U.S. DOT, NHTSA, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for School Buses (FMVSS)