Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Dublin Bus Network Review

1142143145147148178

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 750 ✭✭✭Pretty Polly


    This is the link to the revised cash fares.
    http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/News-Centre/Travel-News/Revised-Cash-Fares-2012/

    Do people expect the Travel 90 to go up in price? I'm sure its going to go up at some stage!


  • Registered Users Posts: 116 ✭✭Rabbitt


    howiya wrote: »
    lxflyer wrote: »
    Of course drivers should inform passengers of the fact that the bus will be waiting if they arrive early as a matter of course and out of basic courtesy. That is something that DB drivers (in general) just seem incapable of doing. I specifically exclude Alek Smart from this criticism as were he driving your bus you would be in no doubt as to what was happening.

    There are intermediate times on the bus stops from Hawkins Street on routes 27 and 151, which are online on the individual timetables as pdf files at the top. These are the times these routes should depart that point at. With the best will in the world in the traffic conditions prevalent last week buses were arriving up to 20 minutes earlier than normal in the early mornings.

    One driver out of however many providing a decent level of service leaves a lot to be desired.

    You fail to see that the attraction of getting the bus this week was the fact that buses were arriving up to 20 minutes earlier than normal. For the passenger this is not neccessarily a bad thing. It was the only reason I opted for the bus to get me to work this week.

    The intermediate times you have pointed me towards should in theory solve the problem. The 27 should leave Eden Quay every 10 minutes during peak time. If this was true then arriving exactly 20 minutes early would not cause a problem. You would merely disembark the bus you are on to board the one scheduled to leave.

    If you arrived 18 minutes early the most you would wait would be 8 minutes and so on. Yet the only driver who had the courtesy to advise passengers on my bus this week of the wait stated that we would be waiting up to 15 minutes. Indeed when I disembarked the RTPI stated the next 27 was due in 13 minutes.

    And can a bus driver not turn up early for his shift? All week my working day has varied in length whether it be at the start or end of the day
    In my opinion i think it's a stupid system to expect people to use a Bus that can waste 10/15 mins waiting to change drivers. Personally i think a bus an driver should complete the whole route. No doubt Union officials wouldn't allow this but for me the customer comes first.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    howiya wrote: »
    One driver out of however many providing a decent level of service leaves a lot to be desired.

    You fail to see that the attraction of getting the bus this week was the fact that buses were arriving up to 20 minutes earlier than normal. For the passenger this is not neccessarily a bad thing. It was the only reason I opted for the bus to get me to work this week.

    The intermediate times you have pointed me towards should in theory solve the problem. The 27 should leave Eden Quay every 10 minutes during peak time. If this was true then arriving exactly 20 minutes early would not cause a problem. You would merely disembark the bus you are on to board the one scheduled to leave.

    If you arrived 18 minutes early the most you would wait would be 8 minutes and so on. Yet the only driver who had the courtesy to advise passengers on my bus this week of the wait stated that we would be waiting up to 15 minutes. Indeed when I disembarked the RTPI stated the next 27 was due in 13 minutes.

    And can a bus driver not turn up early for his shift? All week my working day has varied in length whether it be at the start or end of the day

    I am not disagreeing in any way with you about the lack of communication - it is not good enough.

    However, the situation regarding driver breaks/rosters is far more complicated than you may think. The major pitfall in your plan about drivers turning up early is that unfortunately driver's working hours are very strictly governed by the EU working time directive. It leaves very little room for manoeuvre.

    And I'm not missing the point at all. I'm trying to look at it from both sides of the argument, because like it or not that is what would be needed. You have to look at it from both the passenger viewpoint and the driver rostering perspective as well.

    I clearly put forward the options available in an earlier post. Apart from maintaining the existing situation where the full timetable is maintained, with only departure times from termini and driver changeover times being officially timetabled, with the result that buses are arriving very early at the next timetabled point.

    1) Special timetables - this would be an absolutely mammoth task and given that the recently introduced timetables introduced are still undergoing review, would be impossible in my view.
    2) Amended saturday timetables with additional early morning services on routes where the service starts later on Saturdays - probably the most appealing option
    3) Fully timetabled routes - whereby bus routes would have publicly published timetabled points all along the route and whereby buses would wait at each point until the official time. This is grand for the normal course of events, but would lead to buses waiting varying lengths of time all along the route during school holidays (including Church holidays), Christmas/New Year and Good Friday. What it would deliver is predictable arrival times.

    To my mind the easiest solution is the second one - to implement an amended Saturday timetable that would result in buses operating to a schedule that reflects the low level of traffic in the early morning and builds bus/driver rosters accordingly, but with extra early morning services where the Saturday service starts later than the usual Monday/Friday service.

    However, I suspect that this is something that will have to be thrashed out between management and the unions after the Network Direct project has been completed. From my observations over the years, these things tend to be fought one battle at a time.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Rabbitt wrote: »
    In my opinion i think it's a stupid system to expect people to use a Bus that can waste 10/15 mins waiting to change drivers. Personally i think a bus an driver should complete the whole route. No doubt Union officials wouldn't allow this but for me the customer comes first.

    As posted above - under normal circumstances they wouldn't be waiting but with the lack of traffic buses are arriving far earlier than usual.

    There are a number of flaws in your suggestion:
    1) If drivers have to operate the whole route where do they take their breaks? Route 27 for example starts in housing estates at both ends of the route.

    2) Do you end up with lots of "dead running" between termini and garages for drivers to go on their breaks? This would mean needing additional bus and driver resources to manage the gaps in service. Given the 27 operates from both Ringsend and Clontarf this would be a lot of dead running.

    3) You could then run into problems with driver hours under the EU working time directive.

    The reason there are driver changeovers mid-route on cross-city routes is because it is the most efficient way of operating the service. It allows lower driver/vehicle resources to operate the service than would otherwise be needed.

    This problem raises its head primarily during the week between Christmas and New Year, on Good Friday, and on the Monday following St Patrick's Day if St Patrick's Day is on a Saturday.

    These are the days that there needs to be a change in the operating practices - and I firmly believe that an amended Saturday schedule is the best option.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    This is the link to the revised cash fares.
    http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/News-Centre/Travel-News/Revised-Cash-Fares-2012/

    Do people expect the Travel 90 to go up in price? I'm sure its going to go up at some stage!

    They probably will go up later in 2012 - prepaid ticket prices did not go up until May 2011, while cash fares had increased in February 2011.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,189 ✭✭✭howiya


    lxflyer wrote: »
    And I'm not missing the point at all. I'm trying to look at it from both sides of the argument, because like it or not that is what would be needed. You have to look at it from both the passenger viewpoint and the driver rostering perspective as well.

    Like it or not the only viewpoint that matters when it comes to putting bums on seats of buses is the passengers. Less patronage will result in less farebox revenue and as a result more cuts.

    I only care about getting an advertised service all the way to work, not some of the way. I don't care about the rosters behind it and what it takes to put that bus on the road


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,463 ✭✭✭CIE


    howiya wrote: »
    Like it or not the only viewpoint that matters when it comes to putting bums on seats of buses is the passengers. Less patronage will result in less farebox revenue and as a result more cuts.

    I only care about getting an advertised service all the way to work, not some of the way. I don't care about the rosters behind it and what it takes to put that bus on the road
    Seems like at this point the bureaucrats in government have once again mistaken "rationalisation" with fixing what isn't broken. Always go to the passengers first before even thinking of going to consultants that are out of touch with the needs of passengers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    howiya wrote: »
    Like it or not the only viewpoint that matters when it comes to putting bums on seats of buses is the passengers. Less patronage will result in less farebox revenue and as a result more cuts.

    I only care about getting an advertised service all the way to work, not some of the way. I don't care about the rosters behind it and what it takes to put that bus on the road

    With respect you may not care about rosters, but you can't have a bus service without them.

    The particular bus you travelled on has a scheduled driver change en route at a particular time (not necessarily publicly advertised but scheduled nevertheless) - due to the lack of traffic the bus arrived in advance of that by approximately 15 minutes.

    Blythly saying I don't care is not going to solve the problem.

    A completely different schedule is the only solution to that problem - which to my mind is an amended Saturday service.


  • Registered Users Posts: 16 KC8


    Despite some of the undeniably big operational issues in some of the newly introduced ND services, I still believe the ND programme is a good idea and with some tweaks could really see an improvement for most bus users. I set out below the changes that I think would be worthwhile and have tried not to increase the overall number of buses in the fleet given the financial pressures facing DB. So here goes.

    Blanch and Lucan Services
    Probably the biggest success stories of ND. Lucan services much more direct and Chapilizod has a better service with fewer buses thanks to properly designed timetables.

    39A has also seen huge improvements for most people living in Blanch. Route 39 could be improved while also saving at least two buses. Send it direct from Closnsilla down the Closnsilla Road to Blach Village (road is now two-way). The only link that is lost is between Blach Village and Hartstown / Blanch Centre. While this might discommode some people it will benefit most and offer big efficiencies. Urbus maintains a link between the village and centre.

    There is no easy solution for the Mulhuddurt / Corduff / Ballycoolin area (Route 38/A). I’m not that familiar with the area to know if Route 40D could be uses more to help. In the absence of this being a viable solution, I suggest Routes 38/A terminate at the Screen Cinema and keep existing timetables. This should at least make the services 95% reliable. Route 38B should be extended to cover 38A pm peak departures.


    Stillorgan Services
    46A seems to be running well.

    145 reliability has improved and I suspect just a small further adjustment is all that is needed to make it reliable 95% of the time. Cancel the Herbert Road diversion just south of Bray.


    Finglas & Ballyfermot Services
    Running time on Route 40 is clearly a big problem. Four additional buses are required here to hopefully improve reliability.

    A more radical solution here is to remove Route 40 from Kilmainham and James’s Street. Arguably, it is already well serviced with routes 13 / 123 and Luas. Route 40 could then adopt the old 78 routing from Ballyfermot to town making journeys considerably shorter. This could offer the triple win of increased frequencies, increased reliability and a reduction in resources allocated to the route.

    Ballymun & Clondalkin Services
    Running time on Route 13 is clearly a big problem. Four additional buses are required here to hopefully improve reliability

    Tallaght Services
    I believe there is some room for improvement here.

    Route 27: Reliability is the issue here. I believe this can be solved by changing the Edenmore terminus to Clare Hall Shopping Centre (plenty of space to turn buses in the car park. The reduced journey time should make the existing timetable reliable while also reconnecting the Centre to Darndale. Route 27B is 100% more frequent that originally planned so Route 27 is not needed in Edenmore.

    Route 65: Rather than every 2 hours, why not run it between Blessington and the Square every 45 minutes with the same resources?

    Route 65B: Cancel the existing service and introduce a new route that runs from The Square in Tallaght along the following Route: Square > Aylesbury > Kilinarden > Citywest > N7 > M50 > N4 > Heuston > Quays > Hawkins Street. Operate every 15mins peak and 30 mins off peak. This will offer a much faster journey time. Many Bus Eireann services operate from the N7 to the N4 given the bus priority along the N4 and freeflow interchanges on the M50. Route 77a: Go back to old route. Operate every 15mins peak and 30 mins off peak. I reckon thjese changes would save 4 buses.

    Route 150 should operate along Donore St and then Cork Street rather than the cumbersome and slow diversion through the liberties. Merging it with Route 130 should also be considered.

    Rathmines Services
    Routes 14, 15 and 83 seem to be running well. Route 15B now offers much faster journey times for most users

    I strikes me that even though Route 140 will run less frequently than the old 128 in Rathmines, demand does not justify the 140 frequency on the unique routing in Rathmines. Suggest Route 61 is rerouted along the old 13B from city to Palmerstown and the along old route 14A until is re-joins its existing alignment in Nutgrove. Route 140 terminus reverts to Lesson St Bridge. This should save at least 4 buses.

    Ballsbridge
    Capacity along the Ballsbridge section is a problem. It’s a shame that Route 4 was butchered.

    The Route 120 extension doesn’t make sense as residents from Ashtown and Cabra can just get the train if they want to go to that area during peak times. Cancelling the 120 extension will save a peak time bus.

    I suggest frequency is increased on route 4 or Routes 25A/B are extended to the RDS using the old circleline routing. I reckon this can be done with 4 additional buses.


    Others:
    Route 68A: The sooner its cancelled the better. The bus could be far better used on other routes. DB should never have given in to such illogical local political pressures

    Route 16: The proposed merger of Routes 16 and 16A should mean that the instances of bus bunching should reduce offering a much better services – Hurry Up DB!

    The proposed coordination of timetables along the Howth Road is long overdue – Hurry Up DB!

    Summary:
    Route 39: – 2 buses
    Route 40: + 4 buses
    Route 13: + 4 buses
    Route 140: - 4 buses
    Route 68A: -1 bus (peak only)
    Route 120: -1 bus (peak only)
    Tallaght: - 4 buses
    Ballsbridge: + 4 buses
    Overall cost: No change in the number of buses but huge improvement in service. Simplistic analysis I know, but worth exploring imo


  • Registered Users Posts: 14,005 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    Excellent post KC8 and one whose thrust I generally agree with.

    I also believe the the essence of Network Direct is positive and good for Passenger and Company.

    I would also recommend sending your observations to the NTA section responsible for Dublin Bus matters,as many people still remain unaware that the NTA now call the shots in deciding much of what's attempted in PT terms.

    I would differ from your views only in minor ways,eg: I'd be inclined to leave the 140 but instead focus my quest for extra vehicles on routes such as the 61/161 with,as you point out,a rather simple reversion to the old 14A routing serving to attract some more patronage than is currently travelling on the this sector.

    Sticking Southside I would also do a hatchet job on the 63,which in no way merits the resources currently performing wild (and empty) circumnavigations of Ballyogan/The Park Centre.

    The buses and drivers thus released could be performing far more desirable functions as added resources to the provenly successful changes where scheduling issues remain.

    I'm hoping that the much delayed 166 is introduced asap as well as some focus on that Blessington/Terenure 65 alignment which cries out for attention....

    There's Public Transport gold in them thar hills,but it's not going to dig itself out !!!


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,282 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    KC8, the problems with the 4 could be described as workable if DB changed the timetable properly.

    On Sunday evenings, the 4 is at it's worst possible frequency mainly at 1 bus an hour. In my opinion, this arrangement could be changed to have one 4 every 25 to 30 minutes in each direction. The last time I was on a 4 on a Sunday during the October Bank Holiday weekend. The bus was heading out of town through Merrion Square through Baggot Street due to the Dublin City Marathon being held the following day.

    The amount of people on the bus on that Sunday was just too much to take in. Luckily it didn't stay too long, because a 7 bus was there just before the number 4. The 7 to Cherrywood was taking the rest of the passengers away.

    On Mondays to Fridays, the 4 in my opinion should be ''adjusted'' to one bus every 12 minutes. DB should put that current Monday to Friday frequency to every Saturday.

    What about your views on the upcoming 18 extension to Docklands, and on the 7, 8 and the 45.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    AlekSmart wrote: »
    I would differ from your views only in minor ways,eg: I'd be inclined to leave the 140 but instead focus my quest for extra vehicles on routes such as the 61/161 with,as you point out,a rather simple reversion to the old 14A routing serving to attract some more patronage than is currently travelling on the this sector.

    Sticking Southside I would also do a hatchet job on the 63,which in no way merits the resources currently performing wild (and empty) circumnavigations of Ballyogan/The Park Centre.

    The buses and drivers thus released could be performing far more desirable functions as added resources to the provenly successful changes where scheduling issues remain.

    Alek, this is good commercial thinking, for sure, but Dublin Bus is not operating commercial routes here.

    It is paid to provide a service to the community and for the development of new routes.

    Moving resources away from marginal communities with relatively poor numbers to commercially strong, viable routes from weaker routes is not really the answer to the problem.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    KC8 wrote: »
    Despite some of the undeniably big operational issues in some of the newly introduced ND services, I still believe the ND programme is a good idea and with some tweaks could really see an improvement for most bus users. I set out below the changes that I think would be worthwhile and have tried not to increase the overall number of buses in the fleet given the financial pressures facing DB. So here goes.

    Blanch and Lucan Services
    Probably the biggest success stories of ND. Lucan services much more direct and Chapilizod has a better service with fewer buses thanks to properly designed timetables.

    39A has also seen huge improvements for most people living in Blanch. Route 39 could be improved while also saving at least two buses. Send it direct from Closnsilla down the Closnsilla Road to Blach Village (road is now two-way). The only link that is lost is between Blach Village and Hartstown / Blanch Centre. While this might discommode some people it will benefit most and offer big efficiencies. Urbus maintains a link between the village and centre.

    There is no easy solution for the Mulhuddurt / Corduff / Ballycoolin area (Route 38/A). I’m not that familiar with the area to know if Route 40D could be uses more to help. In the absence of this being a viable solution, I suggest Routes 38/A terminate at the Screen Cinema and keep existing timetables. This should at least make the services 95% reliable. Route 38B should be extended to cover 38A pm peak departures.


    Agree on the Lucan QBC - much better service all round.

    Re Blanch, I don't see the need to curtail the 38/a to Hawkins Street rather than Baggot Street. Firstly it (from replies to my query here) is no longer suffering from running time issues, and secondly it replaced the 10 by offering a connection from Baggot Street to Phibsboro.

    Agreed re the 38b in both directions in evening peak.

    I'm not sure about your suggestion re the 39 - it would leave a very limited connection between Hartstown/Huntstown and Blanchardstown Village in the form of the 76a and 220. I also cannot agree that Urbus is a viable alternative to the 39 - its timetable has been butchered to a very limited service.

    KC8 wrote: »
    Stillorgan Services
    46A seems to be running well.

    145 reliability has improved and I suspect just a small further adjustment is all that is needed to make it reliable 95% of the time. Cancel the Herbert Road diversion just south of Bray.


    Agree with both - leave Herbert Road to the 45a.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Finglas & Ballyfermot Services
    Running time on Route 40 is clearly a big problem. Four additional buses are required here to hopefully improve reliability.

    A more radical solution here is to remove Route 40 from Kilmainham and James’s Street. Arguably, it is already well serviced with routes 13 / 123 and Luas. Route 40 could then adopt the old 78 routing from Ballyfermot to town making journeys considerably shorter. This could offer the triple win of increased frequencies, increased reliability and a reduction in resources allocated to the route.


    Removing the 40 from Kilmainham and James' Street while desireable from a journey time perspective for Neilstown and Upper Ballyfermot to City Centre users, would not in my view be acceptable to the majority of users of the route.

    For one thing it would mean both the 40 and 79 using the same route to the city, secondly there are large volumes of people using the 40 between Ballyfermot and Inchicore/James Street/Thomas Street (many of them elderly who could not be expected to walk up/down the hill to/from the quays), and thirdly there would not be enough capacity through Inchicore and Kilmainham were it removed.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Ballymun & Clondalkin Services
    Running time on Route 13 is clearly a big problem. Four additional buses are required here to hopefully improve reliability


    I would imagine a new roster is in the offing for this route - it needs it badly.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Tallaght Services
    I believe there is some room for improvement here.

    Route 27: Reliability is the issue here. I believe this can be solved by changing the Edenmore terminus to Clare Hall Shopping Centre (plenty of space to turn buses in the car park. The reduced journey time should make the existing timetable reliable while also reconnecting the Centre to Darndale. Route 27B is 100% more frequent that originally planned so Route 27 is not needed in Edenmore.

    Route 65: Rather than every 2 hours, why not run it between Blessington and the Square every 45 minutes with the same resources?

    Route 65B: Cancel the existing service and introduce a new route that runs from The Square in Tallaght along the following Route: Square > Aylesbury > Kilinarden > Citywest > N7 > M50 > N4 > Heuston > Quays > Hawkins Street. Operate every 15mins peak and 30 mins off peak. This will offer a much faster journey time. Many Bus Eireann services operate from the N7 to the N4 given the bus priority along the N4 and freeflow interchanges on the M50. Route 77a: Go back to old route. Operate every 15mins peak and 30 mins off peak. I reckon thjese changes would save 4 buses.

    Route 150 should operate along Donore St and then Cork Street rather than the cumbersome and slow diversion through the liberties. Merging it with Route 130 should also be considered.


    Route 27b does not serve Edenmore - I fail to see what relevance that has to your suggestion of taking the 27 out of there? Also the 27 now replaced the 42a between Edenmore and Northside Shopping Centre. There is a need for a new roster on the 27 to address the running time issues at certain times.

    Routes 65/65b - Your suggestions would mean no link between Citywest/Tallaght and Terenure, Rathgar or Rathmines. Given there are reasonable user numbers making those journeys I cannot see the merit in your suggestions. The proposed 65 running times were far too generous - there could be far more productive use of the buses.

    I'd agree that the 77a is far too unwieldy a route. However, I'm not really sure what the alternative is.

    The local reaction to the proposed removal of the bus service from the Tenters was very hostile - I cannot see your proposal regarding the 150 being acceptable.

    KC8 wrote: »
    Rathmines Services
    Routes 14, 15 and 83 seem to be running well. Route 15B now offers much faster journey times for most users

    I strikes me that even though Route 140 will run less frequently than the old 128 in Rathmines, demand does not justify the 140 frequency on the unique routing in Rathmines. Suggest Route 61 is rerouted along the old 13B from city to Palmerstown and the along old route 14A until is re-joins its existing alignment in Nutgrove. Route 140 terminus reverts to Lesson St Bridge. This should save at least 4 buses.


    Route 14 needs revised peak time running times. They are too tight at certain times.

    Cannot agree with your suggestion re the 140 and 61. The 140 is exactly the right frequency for Upper Rathmines. You are obviously unfamiliar with the large numbers of Trinity students using it to/from the student residences just beside the terminus. It also acts as a relief to the 14, 15/a/b, 65/b and 83 through Rathmines that is justified particularly at peak times.

    The numbers using the 14a from stops between Churchtown and Rathmines were negligible - given the 44 is to be revised in the new year and integrated with the 61 between the city and Dundrum I cannot really see the logic in your suggestion.

    KC8 wrote: »
    Ballsbridge
    Capacity along the Ballsbridge section is a problem. It’s a shame that Route 4 was butchered.

    The Route 120 extension doesn’t make sense as residents from Ashtown and Cabra can just get the train if they want to go to that area during peak times. Cancelling the 120 extension will save a peak time bus.

    I suggest frequency is increased on route 4 or Routes 25A/B are extended to the RDS using the old circleline routing. I reckon this can be done with 4 additional buses.


    From what I understand there were repeated requests from residents of the apartments along the canal for the 120 to be extended and that is why it was implemented.

    Personally I would like to see the 45 reinstated to Pearse Street and the timetable integrated with the 47 to offer a consistent service to Ballsbridge backing up the 4 and 7.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Others:
    Route 68A: The sooner its cancelled the better. The bus could be far better used on other routes. DB should never have given in to such illogical local political pressures

    Route 16: The proposed merger of Routes 16 and 16A should mean that the instances of bus bunching should reduce offering a much better services – Hurry Up DB!

    The proposed coordination of timetables along the Howth Road is long overdue – Hurry Up DB!


    I'd hope that we'll see the remaining changes relatively quickly in the New Year - devising rosters and timetables is a very complicated task - it should have happened faster than it has but right now I'd prefer that they fix the problems with the recently implemented changes first.

    As for the 68a - I can't really see that going in the near future. It would be too much of a political hot potato.
    AlekSmart wrote: »
    Excellent post KC8 and one whose thrust I generally agree with.

    I also believe the the essence of Network Direct is positive and good for Passenger and Company.

    I would also recommend sending your observations to the NTA section responsible for Dublin Bus matters,as many people still remain unaware that the NTA now call the shots in deciding much of what's attempted in PT terms.

    I would differ from your views only in minor ways,eg: I'd be inclined to leave the 140 but instead focus my quest for extra vehicles on routes such as the 61/161 with,as you point out,a rather simple reversion to the old 14A routing serving to attract some more patronage than is currently travelling on the this sector.

    Sticking Southside I would also do a hatchet job on the 63,which in no way merits the resources currently performing wild (and empty) circumnavigations of Ballyogan/The Park Centre.

    The buses and drivers thus released could be performing far more desirable functions as added resources to the provenly successful changes where scheduling issues remain.

    I'm hoping that the much delayed 166 is introduced asap as well as some focus on that Blessington/Terenure 65 alignment which cries out for attention....

    There's Public Transport gold in them thar hills,but it's not going to dig itself out !!!


    I can't really see the 63 being changed any time soon - like the 68/a it would provoke a very negative reaction in the Monkstown Farm area which is something DB can do without. As Antoin says it is not a commercial service - I think you would have to leave it at the current service level. Personally I would take the 44 out of Ballyogan altogether - the LUAS offers a suitable service to/from Dundrum and I'm fairly sure there is a School Link service to cover the schools. The 63 provides a link to the DLR CoCo offices in Dun Laoghaire which is needed by Ballyogan residents.

    I imagine route 61/161 will probably change somewhat when the 16/16a changes take place - we need to remember that this is a phased (if rather drawn out) process. The numbers using the 61 will increase once the 16a is removed.

    Incidentally I would suggest that the 61 is actually faster than the 16a between the city and Nutgrove but I imagine most people have not cottoned on to that yet.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,177 ✭✭✭KD345


    KC8 wrote: »
    A more radical solution here is to remove Route 40 from Kilmainham and James’s Street. Arguably, it is already well serviced with routes 13 / 123 and Luas. Route 40 could then adopt the old 78 routing from Ballyfermot to town making journeys considerably shorter. This could offer the triple win of increased frequencies, increased reliability and a reduction in resources allocated to the route.

    Unfortunately there is a too large a demand for a connection between Thomas Street, James' Street, Kilmainham, Inchicore and Balyfermot to withdraw the 40 and sever this link. The 13 and 123 do not serve Ballyfermot.

    I think there is a upcoming opportunity for Dublin Bus to address this issue. My proposal would be to alter the current 40 routing when the new 79 is being launched in the next few months.

    I believe if the 40 and 79 swapped routes in the Balyfermot/Liffey Valley area then it would be possible to get a more reliable service. It would mean route 40 operating its current route as far as Lower Ballyfermot where it would then take over the 79 routing to Cherry Orchard and Parkwest. Route 79 would operate it's normal route as far as Lower Ballyfermot where it would then remain on the main Ballyfermot Road to replace Route 40 to Neilstown and Liffey Valley.

    These changes would mean Ballyfermot has the same level of service with connections to the Thomas Street area but with a more reliable 40 as it wouldn't have to travel the journey to Liffey Valley, saving 5/10 minutes on the route. Meanwhile, passengers in Neilstown and North Clondalkin would benefit from a more direct routing to the city centre with the new 79, the frequency might be slightly less, but there service would be more reliable and routes 76 would still offer additional services to Ballyfermot.

    It's just a suggestion, but it would help address the issues while requiring very little additional resources.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,463 ✭✭✭CIE


    KC8 wrote: »
    Despite some of the undeniably big operational issues in some of the newly introduced ND services, I still believe the ND programme is a good idea and with some tweaks could really see an improvement for most bus users. I set out below the changes that I think would be worthwhile and have tried not to increase the overall number of buses in the fleet given the financial pressures facing DB. So here goes.

    Blanch and Lucan Services
    Probably the biggest success stories of ND. Lucan services much more direct and Chap(e)lizod has a better service with fewer buses thanks to properly designed timetables
    Better service? This has to be the only instance in the world where less service equals "better"; certainly it's the case that increased service is being touted by the proponents of ND to be what is "better", but this is not the case in Chapelizod. It also puts an inordinate burden on bus routes that are travelling beyond Lucan to provide the local service through Chapelizod, as well as the sole bus route operating through Lucan Village. There is also no way to travel by bus between the areas that the 25A/B serves and Chapelizod, now.

    You really think that the new/old 26 is an improvement? DB can't even figure out the right way to configure the route. The idea to run through Ballyfermot was a good one, but running westward via Kennelsfort Road onto the N4 towards (at least) Liffey Valley Centre should have been a part of it. Either that or have it run via Ballyfermot to/from Dodsborough, thus freeing the number "25" to become the Adamstown bus instead of the 25B.
    KC8 wrote: »
    39A has also seen huge improvements for most people living in Blanch. Route 39 could be improved while also saving at least two buses. Send it direct from Clonsilla down the Clonsilla Road to Bla(n)ch Village (road is now two-way). The only link that is lost is between Bla(n)ch Village and Hartstown / Blanch Centre. While this might discommode some people it will benefit most and offer big efficiencies. Urbus maintains a link between the village and centre
    Running the 39 via the old route 39A, while cutting off Blanchardstown Village from the Square? You need to define how it will "benefit most" when there apparently has been no demand for such a bus for a very long time, and those that have not taken to the car most likely have been using the train as the most direct link to the city centre. The 39 has always operated via Sheepmoor from the time it was extended there from Coolmine Cross, and not via the 39A's old Clonsilla Road route. Also, I don't see Urbus running via Clonsilla or Hartstown/Huntstown.

    (In the past, I had envisioned a route 71 in place of the old 39A running to/from Dunboyne via Clonsilla, Ongar, and Summerseat/Clonee. But that's the past, and with the train going that way now, that wouldn't work out too well, perhaps.)
    KC8 wrote: »
    There is no easy solution for the Mulhuddurt / Corduff / Ballycoolin area (Route 38/A). I’m not that familiar with the area to know if Route 40D could be uses more to help. In the absence of this being a viable solution, I suggest Routes 38/A terminate at the Screen Cinema and keep existing timetables. This should at least make the services 95% reliable. Route 38B should be extended to cover 38A pm peak departures.
    If nothing's broken, no need to attempt to fix it.

    Route 40D needs to have its own route number. It's quite distinct from Route 40. With all the disused non-suffixed route numbers currently available, I'm not sure why it doesn't.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Stillorgan Services
    46A seems to be running well.

    145 reliability has improved and I suspect just a small further adjustment is all that is needed to make it reliable 95% of the time. Cancel the Herbert Road diversion just south of Bray
    You can't just cancel something willy-nilly that there is demand for. (Well I suppose you can if you're DB, but then it'll lead to disaster and confusion.)
    KC8 wrote: »
    Finglas & Ballyfermot Services
    Running time on Route 40 is clearly a big problem. Four additional buses are required here to hopefully improve reliability.

    A more radical solution here is to remove Route 40 from Kilmainham and James’s Street. Arguably, it is already well serviced with routes 13 / 123 and Luas. Route 40 could then adopt the old 78 routing from Ballyfermot to town making journeys considerably shorter. This could offer the triple win of increased frequencies, increased reliability and a reduction in resources allocated to the route.

    Ballymun & Clondalkin Services
    Running time on Route 13 is clearly a big problem. Four additional buses are required here to hopefully improve reliability

    Tallaght Services
    I believe there is some room for improvement here.

    Route 27: Reliability is the issue here. I believe this can be solved by changing the Edenmore terminus to Clare Hall Shopping Centre (plenty of space to turn buses in the car park). The reduced journey time should make the existing timetable reliable while also reconnecting the Centre to Darndale. Route 27B is 100% more frequent that originally planned so Route 27 is not needed in Edenmore
    Hmm. What do all these services have in common...? Oh yes: being made into excessively-long cross-city routes. The 13, 40 and 27 are now longer than 20 kilometres one-way, with the added burden of having to operate through the city centre. Adding buses won't solve anything, you see, since these moves were done with an eye to reducing the number of operating buses; and adding buses would be a confession of being wrong, as well as conceding that the conventional wisdom of longer routes being increasingly unreliable compared to shorter routes still stands.

    And did you forget that the 27B was supposed to be replaced by the extended route 79? As for Edenmore, perhaps the old route 28 needs to make a comeback to replace the current 27/A in that area. And isn't the 15 supposed to be the catch-all replacement for all Clare Hall service?

    You can't remove the 40 from the Thomas Street/James Street corridor if there is strong demand for buses to run between there and Ballyfermot.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Route 65: Rather than every 2 hours, why not run it between Blessington and the Square every 45 minutes with the same resources?
    How about "no"? DB tried this trick with routes 68 and 69 and were quickly rebuffed by the public, who were not going for a forced transfer onto the Luas at Red Cow. The further out the suburb, the more the passenger is going to want a direct ride into the city.

    And of course, there is the historical matter of route 65 doing in the competing Dublin & Blessington tram. While it'd be a matter of irony to do a forced transfer onto the new tram, it is as non-viable as being forced onto the tram from Newcastle or Rathcoole (and I don't want to give DB any ideas of turning the 69 into a Rathcoole-Saggart shuttle now that the Luas goes to Saggart).

    Furthermore, demand to/from Poulaphouca and the other towns served by the 65 has not diminished, especially Ballymore Eustace, which is not served by Bus Eireann (nor are Ballyknockan and former destination Donard).
    KC8 wrote: »
    Route 65B: Cancel the existing service and introduce a new route that runs from The Square in Tallaght along the following Route: Square > Aylesbury > Kilinarden > Citywest > N7 > M50 > N4 > Heuston > Quays > Hawkins Street. Operate every 15 mins peak and 30 mins off peak. This will offer a much faster journey time. Many Bus Eireann services operate from the N7 to the N4 given the bus priority along the N4 and freeflow interchanges on the M50
    Provincial routes need to operate as fast as they can into and out of the city, that's why; and nothing was done about the N7 bottleneck in Inchicore. If that bottleneck was fixed, then it'd be faster to run to/from town via the N7.

    Problem here is running in the wrong direction out of Tallaght via Citywest to the N7 will make for a longer rather than shorter journey. Your proposed route is 27 kilometres in length. And that's in one direction.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Route 77A: Go back to old route. Operate every 15 mins peak and 30 mins off peak. I reckon these changes would save 4 buses
    What's the "old route"? City Centre to Bawnville Road via Tallaght Village?

    Sure why don't we resurrect the old route 54 then, and do away with the 77A? After all, it's "duplicating" the new route 27 between the city centre and Walkinstown Cross...and maybe the new route 9 could use some supplement to its service...
    KC8 wrote: »
    Route 150 should operate along Donore St and then Cork Street rather than the cumbersome and slow diversion through the liberties. Merging it with Route 130 should also be considered
    What's "cumbersome and slow" about it? I've often found that taking side streets is faster than trying to negotiate the main thoroughfare. Not only does frequency sell with bus routes, so does convenience. (There's also that matter of route "duplication" again...isn't it "ideal" to have each route run a unique corridor?)

    As for merging with another route from the north side, they already cut off the Clogher Road/Kildare Road route from that by cancelling the 121.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Rathmines Services
    Routes 14, 15 and 83 seem to be running well. Route 15B now offers much faster journey times for most users

    I(t) strikes me that even though Route 140 will run less frequently than the old 128 in Rathmines, demand does not justify the 140 frequency on the unique routing in Rathmines. Suggest Route 61 is rerouted along the old 13B from city to Palmerstown and the along old route 14A until is re-joins its existing alignment in Nutgrove. Route 140 terminus reverts to Lesson St Bridge. This should save at least 4 buses
    The old 13B (former route 13) operated via Cowper Road, did it not? I thought that the 140 was going to replace the 14A and 128 on Upper Rathmines Road? because the 14 is on Rathgar Road still. Combining the loss of the 14A with that of the 128, this is a huge loss of bus service along Upper Rathmines Road, even with the retention of route 142.

    As for the 15B, there are quite fewer buses there now. And I'd say the jury is still out as to whether replacing the 74/A with this bus was a good idea.
    KC8 wrote: »

    Ballsbridge
    Capacity along the Ballsbridge section is a problem. It’s a shame that Route 4 was butchered
    ...but not such a shame what happened to route 45? That also used to be an important bus route through Ballsbridge. Never mind the former route 8, when it ran frequently from the city to Dalkey via Dun Laoghaire and Sandycove instead of its current infrequent route.
    KC8 wrote: »
    The Route 120 extension doesn’t make sense as residents from Ashtown and Cabra can just get the train if they want to go to that area during peak times. Cancelling the 120 extension will save a peak time bus
    Eh? You know that there are no railway stops between Ashtown and Broombridge along the 120's extension, right? The extension of this route is more for residents of Royal Canal Park rather than Ashtown and Cabra people.
    KC8 wrote: »
    I suggest frequency is increased on route 4 or Routes 25A/B are extended to the RDS using the old circleline routing. I reckon this can be done with 4 additional buses
    Ah, so we want to decrease the reliability of the new fantabulous 25A/B by making the route longer.

    And the 120 now runs to/from Ballsbridge. Maybe this extension is making the route problematic rather than the Royal Canal Park one?
    KC8 wrote: »
    Others:
    Route 68A: The sooner its cancelled the better. The bus could be far better used on other routes. DB should never have given in to such illogical local political pressures
    Political pressure or passenger demand? It may seem well and good to tell passengers of the former 19 to bugger off and walk a kilometre or so to catch another bus, but ultimately you aren't in their shoes.
    KC8 wrote: »
    Route 16: The proposed merger of Routes 16 and 16A should mean that the instances of bus bunching should reduce offering a much better services – Hurry Up DB!
    It's not really a merger, is it? It's a cancellation of the 16A and re-routing of the 16.

    As far as this goes, the creation of "Route 3A" is an inefficiency that should have instead been addressed by extending route 2 to the north side and becoming the bus route for Shanard Road. On the south side, the 2 should serve Belfield exclusively while the 3 serves St. John's Church exclusively. What would have been wrong about something like that? (This is an example of your shorter traditional cross-city service that doesn't reduce reliability.)
    KC8 wrote: »
    The proposed coordination of timetables along the Howth Road is long overdue – Hurry Up DB!
    I think you'll be waiting forever. The attitude at No. 59 may be "Let Them Ride DART"...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,525 ✭✭✭miller50841


    We have set hours and with driving rules brought in we are restricted to hours we can start or amount we can drive. Its a very difficult job and yes most of us do be in early as to do checks on the bus before it leaves rhe depot.


  • Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 27,501 Mod ✭✭✭✭Posy


    parsi wrote: »
    If the RTPI cant be relied upon then what's the point? It is supposed to provide the most up to date info.
    Early on New Year's eve, the RTPI on dublinbus.ie was showing buses all coming via Suffolk Street- when I got to Suffolk Street, the road was closed to traffic!
    howiya wrote: »
    Route 27 is starting to annoy me again. This morning heading to work from Tallaght, we get to Eden Quay and the driver announces that we have to wait here for the next driver who should be here in about 15 minutes because we are ahead of schedule due to the light traffic...
    Same thing happened to me two mornings last week! What is the point of making good time in light traffic, only to be left waiting in town 10-15 minutes for the next driver?
    And why do the timetables in town say 'DUE' and then you get on the bus and are left sitting around for 10 minutes before it departs? I'd at least like to know where I stand..


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Posy wrote: »
    Early on New Year's eve, the RTPI on dublinbus.ie was showing buses all coming via Suffolk Street- when I got to Suffolk Street, the road was closed to traffic!

    Ludicrous - I saw it too. The NTA really do need to get their act together on this.
    Posy wrote: »
    Same thing happened to me two mornings last week! What is the point of making good time in light traffic, only to be left waiting in town 10-15 minutes for the next driver?

    And why do the timetables in town say 'DUE' and then you get on the bus and are left sitting around for 10 minutes before it departs? I'd at least like to know where I stand..

    As I explained above - you would have to have a completely different schedule in place last week to avoid that - the full service was in operation which is based on normal traffic conditions.

    As I understand it the RTPI works off the position of the bus once it has left the terminus and does not reflect the fact that there may be a scheduled stop en route. That might be a complication too far?


  • Registered Users Posts: 16 KC8


    Its clear my views arent accepted by all! One thing that I will continue to argue agaisnt is the view that the introduction of cross city services automaticaly means less reliability. With the bus gate in oepration at peak times this just shouldnt be the case. The AVL data should allow DB to establish the average and mean running times for all services and then build in industry standard turnaround times to ensure 95% of services run on time. Unfortunately, this doesnt appear to have been done in this case as running times are clearly too short in many instances.

    My justification in curtailing the northside 27 route is due to the frequency of the 27A (27b was a typo - sorry).

    Re Route 65. Other than a direct peak time service to the city, I suggest that increasing frequency by a factor of 3 but terminating it at Tallaght would be attratctive to many. Tallaght is likley to be the main destination for many custoemrs in any event.

    Finally re route 45, I suggest extending Route 4 to Cornelcourt and cancelling route 45.


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    KC8 wrote: »
    Its clear my views arent accepted by all! One thing that I will continue to argue agaisnt is the view that the introduction of cross city services automaticaly means less reliability. With the bus gate in oepration at peak times this just shouldnt be the case. The AVL data should allow DB to establish the average and mean running times for all services and then build in industry standard turnaround times to ensure 95% of services run on time. Unfortunately, this doesnt appear to have been done in this case as running times are clearly too short in many instances.

    My justification in curtailing the northside 27 route is due to the frequency of the 27A (27b was a typo - sorry).

    Re Route 65. Other than a direct peak time service to the city, I suggest that increasing frequency by a factor of 3 but terminating it at Tallaght would be attratctive to many. Tallaght is likley to be the main destination for many custoemrs in any event.

    Finally re route 45, I suggest extending Route 4 to Cornelcourt and cancelling route 45.

    I would entirely agree with your comments on the AVLC - it unfortunately takes time to analyse and see the trends.

    You still haven't addressed the issue of Tallaght-Terenure-Rathgar-Rathmines - there are a reasonable number of users making that trip and under your proposals they would have no service other than at peak hours which to my mind is not acceptable.

    I don't think that extending route 4 to Cornelscourt will solve the problem I'm afraid. There are full bus loads of schoolchildren using the 45 in the mornings/afternoons from south of there to Blackrock and Booterstown.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    On route 45 on boghall rd in bray there are two stops which are only used for the morning 45x busses afaik, the problem with this is that there is nothing on these stops or on the website stating that they are only part time bus stops and not used for regular services.

    I had a case a while ago where a disabled person was waiting one evening at one of these stops number 4145 and after waiting over an hour was approached thankfully by a local who explained that no busses used this stop and offered her a lift into Bray to a stop she could get a bus from!

    Can anything be done about these phantom stops some of which only have one bus a day?


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,606 ✭✭✭schemingbohemia


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    On route 45 on boghall rd in bray there are two stops which are only used for the morning 45x busses afaik, the problem with this is that there is nothing on these stops or on the website stating that they are only part time bus stops and not used for regular services.

    I had a case a while ago where a disabled person was waiting one evening at one of these stops number 4145 and after waiting over an hour was approached thankfully by a local who explained that no busses used this stop and offered her a lift into Bray to a stop she could get a bus from!

    Can anything be done about these phantom stops some of which only have one bus a day?

    Interesting, when you say "case" do you represent disabled persons and their interactions with transport companies?


  • Registered Users Posts: 17,483 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    There was an issue with the 45 being impeded around Wolfe Tone Square by parked cars and if my memory serves me right they diverted via Boghall Road in the early mornings.

    Whether this is still the case I don't know.

    I'm sure Alek Smart can update us.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,639 ✭✭✭Miss Lockhart


    I just wish the 25a would stop going missing!

    On 9 different occasions now I have been waiting for a 25a on Aston Quay that has never appeared.

    Strangely, extra 25bs seem to be coming in their place.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    Interesting, when you say "case" do you represent disabled persons and their interactions with transport companies?
    No but I came across someone who had been left stranded at this stop which had no information at all and the website was no better. AFAIK they have raised the matter with Dublin Bus themselves, I suggested they do contact the company but did not offer to do so on their behalf.


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,462 ✭✭✭✭Cookie_Monster


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    I had a case a while ago where a disabled person was waiting one evening at one of these stops number 4145 and after waiting over an hour was approached thankfully by a local who explained that no busses used this stop and offered her a lift into Bray to a stop she could get a bus from!

    Can't really blame DB for people who won't check timetable and routes before hand given the ease with which it can be done these days. It's not viable to put timetables on every single stop.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,764 ✭✭✭antoinolachtnai


    Sure it is. 4000 stops. Three staff, 1440 hours per year. Allowing one hour per stop, you will be able to update all the timetables once per year.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    For now, the lack of timetables could probably be to do with Network Direct. Timetables have gone up on two stops in Fairview for the 15 in the last few weeks; they would have previously been done when the 14 was extended, and they'll need to be done again when the 79 is extended.

    On the other hand, stops with the Braille identification posts will probably never get timetables on them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    Can't really blame DB for people who won't check timetable and routes before hand given the ease with which it can be done these days. It's not viable to put timetables on every single stop.
    The website did not have any information to say that stop was/is not in use or is only used by a few morning busses!

    Imagine you were waiting in Bray at superquin for a 145 at 6pm for an hour and someone walking past noticed and told you that they only use that stop between 8am and 10am but there is nothing on the website or bus stop about this as it is local knowledge only!


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,177 ✭✭✭KD345


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    The website did not have any information to say that stop was/is not in use or is only used by a few morning busses!

    You can key any stop number into the website (on the home page) to check if a bus is expected at that particular stop.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement