Dublin Bus Network Review

qerty wrote: »

Karsini wrote: »

As in the 79A route?

Yes but both the 79 and 79a operate via Kylemore and Decies and Lally road. IMO it should operate the same route as the 40 from where it comes onto Ballyfermot road as far as Inchicore bridge and then operate via the current 79a routing! Passengers could be in town in less than 15 minutes as opposed to the 25-30 in currently takes! For an area that is quite close to town it takes an awfull long time to get there!

At the very least peak services could operate this route and all other services could maintain the current routing.

I don't think you'd be very popular with the residents of Kylemore Road, Decies Road or Lally Road with that idea.

As a Neilstown/Rowlagh resident, I can say firmly that the 40 is a complete disaster.

My bus stop is only 3 stops (a fifteen minute walk or so) from the Liffey Valley terminus, but local residents are often waiting up to 45 minutes for a bus because the drivers are skipping the Neilstown loop and going straight onto the Coldcut road. This also means that any bus that does do the proper route fills up by the time it gets to the Neilstown road, causing passengers to wait longer. Boarding times are longer too, so a journey that took 40 minutes on the 78a now takes almost an hour.

I've been watching the bus stop from my window the past couple of days so I can see exactly how bad it is.

I also got the 40 home from the City Centre the other day and it had already filled up (and stayed full until Inchicore) when we hit Dame Street, I assume because the buses are bunching in Finglas and skipping stops.

The 78a, and now the 40, are vital to Neilstown. It's our only bus route to the City Centre so people really do rely on it. I've been writing complaint emails, and advising other unhappy passengers to do the same. Hopefully somebody will listen but I'm not counting on it.

phasers wrote: »

As a Neilstown/Rowlagh resident, I can say firmly that the 40 is a complete disaster.

I also got the 40 home from the City Centre the other day and it had already filled up (and stayed full until Inchicore) when we hit Dame Street, I assume because the buses are bunching in Finglas and skipping stops.

The 78a, and now the 40, are vital to Neilstown. It's our only bus route to the City Centre so people really do rely on it. I've been writing complaint emails, and advising other unhappy passengers to do the same. Hopefully somebody will listen but I'm not counting on it.

So bloody sad.....RUNNING TIME-RUNNING TIME-RUNNING TIME......Yet again the company have been caught out by a reluctance to admit that Network Direct is all about service CUTS.......Remove 200 Buses and 350 Drivers from a system and it is IMPOSSIBLE to maintain previous service levels.....a little honesty rather than PR puffery would be more appropriate at this stage.

AlekSmart wrote: »

So bloody sad.....RUNNING TIME-RUNNING TIME-RUNNING TIME......Yet again the company have been caught out by a reluctance to admit that Network Direct is all about service CUTS.......Remove 200 Buses and 350 Drivers from a system and it is IMPOSSIBLE to maintain previous service levels.....a little honesty rather than PR puffery would be more appropriate at this stage.

It's about eliminating inefficiencies and overcapacity which there certainly was.

The problem as you say Alek is that the running times (at certain times - by no means all) have been far too tight.

phasers wrote: »

Are the management completely oblivious to the short running times or do they just not care? It's chaos, and I bet the drivers are getting it in the neck from passengers as well.

I'd like to think they are not, given they have detailed reports from the AVLC of how long every bus takes to travel from A to B, but it has to be said that drawing up new schedules and rosters is not exactly straightforward, and tends to take weeks to do as they often have to do up several versions before everyone is happy.

dfx- wrote: »

lxflyer wrote: »

It's about eliminating inefficiencies and overcapacity which there certainly was.

Routes like the 39/51B/C/77/78A/27/145/46A/15s/128/140 had no trouble with overcapacity. Arterial, core revenue routes have been messed with for no reason. Everyone of them has been changed to some degree.

An EV on the 145 is a sentence to a crammed, uncomfortable journey, running time increase or no running time increase. Unsuitable for the Heuston section too.

I'm slightly scared at the thought of the Rathmines/Rathgar corridor next week with this 15 nonsense. I'll be lucky to get any 14.

In fact there was overcapacity on virtually every corridor - why else in certain cases were DB able to in some of those cases able to cut both peak and off-peak frequency on virtually every route? The 19, 19a and 83 for example merged into the 9 and 83 and still seem to be coping very effectively with the loads post-implementation.

The 145 is still operating at the same frequency (more or less) as before the change but without the long gaps throughout the day that used to occur due to some buses operating via Bray Station and others not. As for being crammed, buses are designed to operate at full capacity last time I checked - or do you want half -empty buses instead? That simply cannot continue.

There was gross inefficiency with virtually no route having regular fixed interval clockface schedules. At one stage on a Saturday afternoon a 15, 15a and 15b all left Eden Quay together at the same time and then there was a 15 minute gap to the next departure of any variant. Most routes had totally irregular departure patterns. Some routes had excessive running time with buses sitting at termini for over 25 minutes or in one extreme example an hour between departures! That frankly had to change.

People do want more cross-city services and one can already see more passengers on the 14 for example availing of the cross city penetration. I certainly believe that the increased cross-city penetration is a positive thing offering greater choice to customers.

The fundamental problem with the implementation has been that in certain cases (by no means all) running times were far too tight, meaning buses did not have sufficient time to get from one terminus to the other meaning knock on effects with later journeys late, curtailed or cancelled. Result? There could be long gaps in service, the advertised timetable has not been delivered, and you have a disaffected customer base. Not good.

This is something DB have to fix and far more quickly than they have been. Devising new rosters/timetables is a very complex task, but my own view is that if it ain't working they need to move heaven and earth to fix it.

lxflyer wrote: »

Carawaystick wrote: »

Can anyone explain why the 33n now goes via Dublin Airport, Druncondra and Santry, are these not served by other night links?
I thought network direct was supposed to eliminate parallel services

The 33N has always served Dublin Airport.

Last time I got it, it went out the m1 to Holywell and then to swords and then Lusk
The 41n also serves the airport

lxflyer wrote: »

In fact there was overcapacity on virtually every corridor - why else in certain cases were DB able to in some of those cases able to cut both peak and off-peak frequency on virtually every route? The 19, 19a and 83 for example merged into the 9 and 83 and still seem to be coping very effectively with the loads post-implementation.

The 145 is still operating at the same frequency (more or less) as before the change but without the long gaps throughout the day that used to occur due to some buses operating via Bray Station and others not. As for being crammed, buses are designed to operate at full capacity last time I checked - or do you want half -empty buses instead? That simply cannot continue.

There was gross inefficiency with virtually no route having regular fixed interval clockface schedules. At one stage on a Saturday afternoon a 15, 15a and 15b all left Eden Quay together at the same time and then there was a 15 minute gap to the next departure of any variant. Most routes had totally irregular departure patterns. Some routes had excessive running time with buses sitting at termini for over 25 minutes or in one extreme example an hour between departures! That frankly had to change.

People do want more cross-city services and one can already see more passengers on the 14 for example availing of the cross city penetration. I certainly believe that the increased cross-city penetration is a positive thing offering greater choice to customers.

The fundamental problem with the implementation has been that in certain cases (by no means all) running times were far too tight, meaning buses did not have sufficient time to get from one terminus to the other meaning knock on effects with later journeys late, curtailed or cancelled. Result? There could be long gaps in service, the advertised timetable has not been delivered, and you have a disaffected customer base. Not good.

This is something DB have to fix and far more quickly than they have been. Devising new rosters/timetables is a very complex task, but my own view is that if it ain't working they need to move heaven and earth to fix it.

Great to see the 15 and 15b at their new terminus up in Stocking Av - given the increase in frequency I presume there are new drivers- the old 74/74a need to show the lads where to park up like at the roundabout where there is space which does not block the road. Both buses were nearly parked opposite each other this morning which meant it was pretty hard for cars to get past.

AlekSmart wrote: »

Jaysoose,you are close to the bullseye here.

The Network Direct process was the first large scale attempt by Dublin Bus to introduce major alterations based largely on electronically gathered data.

A huge amount of highly detailed statistics were presented to Drivers representatives in the early stages of phase one and were of such complexity as to be virtually unchallengable.

This raft of raw data led to the shambles which was Phase 1 of Network Direct the 46A-10 Merger and the 145 extension,both of which led to a virtual collapse of service in the immediate aftermath of ND's first outing.

It was only after large scale public outcry that the company were forced to reconsider the situation and take some heed of actuality rather than Laptop based figures.

This continues to be a problematic area,which one hopes will be resolved by a sensible use of the companys actual resources rather than make-believe ones....;)

So, what you are saying now that a compromise is made with the public, the staff and management at the bus company that is based on the census figures?

Let's say if that compromise was done on the 15 group. Do you think that it is working well?

dublinman1990 wrote: »

So, what you are saying now that a compromise is made with the public, the staff and management at the bus company that is based on the census figures?

Let's say if that compromise was done on the 15 group. Do you think that it is working well?

Not quite as general as that Dublinman1990,the initial 46A and 145 Network Direct introduction was so spectacularly out-of-kilter that it simply could'nt be operated ...at all...not a hope of it ever succeeding.

Initially,in the wake of what at times threatened to descend into a Public Order situation,the company attempted to utilise all manner of shore-up's and additions,but none of these could address the serious issues of the basic schedule and running time being wrong...quite simply the hard data did not accurately reflect the actuality on-the-road.

It was only after a prolonged and fraught period of negotiation that reality insisted on being recognised and new schedules were drawn up to reflect the same reality...and it seems to be working,at least with far less problems than later attempts.

I have no idea as to what metrics were used re the 15/128 merger but hopefully some form of sense prevailed.

littlejp wrote: »

I recently moved to Rialto and found out this morning that if I get the 122, it costs me €1.20 to get to Camden St. but if I get the 68, €1.20 only gets me to Leonard's Corner.
This fare system using stages suits no one but Dublin Bus. Why they don't have a flat fare by now is beyond me.

I'm afraid you're wrong.

Fare stages on the 68:

68 Bulfin Rd.
69 Dolphin's Barn
70 South Circular Rd. (Donore Ave.)
71 South Circular Rd. (Leonard's Corner)
72 Kelly's Corner (Camden St.)

Fare Stages on the 122:

68 Herberton Rd.
69 Dolphin's Barn
70 South Circular Rd. (Donore Ave.)
71 South Circular Rd. (Leonard's Corner)
72 Kelly's Corner (Camden St.)

Therefore if you board either route on the South Circular Road in Rialto you are deemed to board at stage 68 (the nearest previous stage). 3 stages from that is Leonard's Corner.

Camden Street is 4 stages on either route unless you board after Dolphin's Barn Crossroads.

I'd prefer zones to flat fares

The stages thing is ridiculous

lxflyer wrote: »

A flat fare really is impractical for Dublin given the length of some journeys - it would result in some people paying far more and others far less. It would be far better to have a zonal structure.

Why is it impractical for Dublin but okay for other, larger cities?

LA Metro charge a flat fare of $1.50 per trip, with a longest bus route being 43km.
New York MTA charges a flat fare of $2.25 per trip.
Paris RATP buses charge a flat fare of €1.70.

Personally I'd be in favour of a two zone system (inside and outside the M50) but flat fares have a lot going for them.

It sounds like the driver on the 122 pressed the stage point too early. littlejp's post does highlight the discrepancies in the fare system in that area. For example, why is there a stage point called "Kellys Corner (Camden Street)"? Surely it should read either Harrington Street or Camden Street, there is no stop at Kellys Corner.

Also, while littlejp's post might be incorrect, there are some fare differences in the Dolphins Barn, Inchicore and Drimnagh area.

On route 68, it is 7 stages between SCR and College Green, on the 123 it is just 5, even though passengers board at the same bus stops. This continues on the 123 into parts of Drimnagh, where the 122 is more expensive to travel to the city centre than the 123.

It's cheaper to travel from Hawkins Street to Tyrconnell Road in Inchicore on Route 69 than it is on Route 68. Even though you board and alight at the exact same stops.

The journey between Dolphin's Barn and Kevin Street (4 stages) is more expensive if you use the 27 or 151. It's only classed as 3 stages on Route 77A, again even boarding at the same stops.

There are many more examples across the network. The stage system does not work, it's confusing for passengers, confusing for drivers and does not encourage anybody to take a bus in Dublin.

markpb wrote: »

So basically, it's perfect right now and we shouldn't every try to change it? We've reached the pinnacle in customer fairness and maximum farebox revenue.

Just like using middle doors (works elsewhere but it wouldn't work in Dublin apparently), selling bus-bus transfers on board, selling rail-bus or bus-rail transfers (only one or two routes in the entire city do this), showing timetables with intermediate stop times (works almost everywhere else but not possible in Dublin because we have congestion unlike NYC, Paris or LA), putting route maps online (only happened in 2010), putting audio and visual displays onboard buses, selling tickets at bus stops (other than the airport), etc, etc. The list is endless and everyone is full of reasons why we couldn't even consider them.

Some day I'll find out why it is that all these things are possible all round the world but are impossible for Dublin Bus.

Now you are misrepresenting what I said.

I didn't say it was perfect by any means nor did I suggest retaining the status quo - in fact I suggested a zonal fare structure would be better. Anything that is simpler than the staged fare system.

The risk of implementing a flat fare is a drop in farebox revenue and right now the company cannot afford that as that will only mean reductions in services (however desireable it is).

Jaysoose wrote: »

So a bus service that was functioning perfectly well was altered to suit the few people that knew who and where to complain at the expense of the majority. This is pretty much the opposite of improving something, the service has actually declined in this case yet the network direct lads are all sitting around in meetings with deskbound managers talking about how innovative the whole process has been and how great they all are when the customer has less options less frequently.

Dublin bus is a disgrace.

How reliable is the 38/a/b now?

Given you (rightly) complained about it before the timetable has changed you have never posted about it since. Can we take it buses are showing up when they should?

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Reliability is important but its not the only factor. At an extreme level if there was only five 46As a day and they took 3 scheduled hours for the journey they could have 100% timetable reliability but it would be a completely crap service.

Telling us on the 38A that we now have reliability when it's clearly a hugely inferior service vis a vis what we had up until September 2010 is disengenuous speak at its best.

I was simply asking the question?

Don't bite my head off - I'm not "telling" you anything.

I just wanted to know if the service was reliable or not since the last timetable change?