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
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Some Dublin Bus News

  • 31-05-2015 9:57am
    #1
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭


    Route 46A to loose its VT type tri Axles, will be replaced with new SG class. NTA want 46A Dual doored. (Possible increase in P.V.R)

    Route 7 to gain the VT type tri axles.

    Improved running times and extra buses will be added to Rock Road, (routes 4, 7)

    Increased running time to route 4.

    New route with 4 buses from Phoenix Park to city.

    Route 27B changes to be announced.

    This is the start of some tidying up, some more improvements due over the next few months.

    Some buses that are due to be withdrawn from service over the next few months will be kept until 2016 to help with these improvements.


«1345678

Comments

  • #2
    Slippin Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,031 ✭✭✭Slippin Jimmy


    What is the capacity of the vt vs sg?


  • #3
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    VT 1-20 92 seated / 27 standees Total 119
    VT 21-70 92 seated / 32 standees Total 124

    Not sure about The SG,s.


  • #4
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,959 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    joegriffinjnr wrote: »
    VT 1-20 92 seated / 27 standees Total 119
    VT 21-70 92 seated / 32 standees Total 124

    Not sure about The SG,s.

    SG and GT classes seat 69 with 14 standing. There is room for one wheelchair with a space provided for one buggy as well.


  • #5
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    The 46a frequency will need to be ramped up if the VTs are replaced with SGs - that's a big capacity drop.


  • #6
    Slippin Jimmy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,031 ✭✭✭Slippin Jimmy


    lxflyer wrote: »
    The 46a frequency will need to be ramped up if the VTs are replaced with SGs - that's a big capacity drop.

    My thoughts exactly. They are fairly full at the best of times let alone peak times.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    lxflyer wrote: »
    The 46a frequency will need to be ramped up if the VTs are replaced with SGs - that's a big capacity drop.

    If dual doors are used properly on the SG,s dwell times at stops should be a hell of a lot better. Bus stops need to be fixed first though, to allow for dual door operation.


  • #8
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    joegriffinjnr wrote: »
    If dual doors are used properly on the SG,s dwell times at stops should be a hell of a lot better. Bus stops need to be fixed first though, to allow for dual door operation.

    Absolutely - but maintaining capacity (when passenger numbers are growing) on the principal QBC in the city is essential and would be my primary concern.

    The VTs could not be removed from the 46a without an increase in frequency that delivers the same capacity overall.

    Dwell times and dual door operation need to be addressed, but that's a different issue.


  • #9
    dfx-
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,662 Mod ✭✭✭✭dfx-


    Disastrous move for 46A customers. I wonder what might happen if they start getting left on the side of the road in massive numbers. Not great news for the 145 too which will have to take on more of the slack. Dual doors are a waste of time as long as it takes so long to board. The NTA putting policy before the needs of its customers again and will bear no responsibility for it.

    Great news for the 7 passengers after years of dual door operation. Will the VT turning be tight in terms of the Loughlinstown terminus?


  • #10
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,240 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    lxflyer wrote: »
    The VTs could not be removed from the 46a without an increase in frequency that delivers the same capacity overall.
    An increase in frequency doesn't necessarily need an increase in vehicles if each vehicle can do the trip quicker due to reduced dwell times or making some services semi-express.


  • #11
    dublinman1990
    Registered Users Posts: 8,300 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    The 145 is VT operated too isn't it. Will that route be affected by capacity issues with their bus type going on the 7 route?

    There is another thing about the no.7 drivers in that they sometimes drive the no.8 route to Dalkey as well. I could not forsee a scenario where a tri-axle bus would be on the 8 as it would be too big for that route unless the no.8 drivers have seperate rosters.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    RayM
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,973 ✭✭✭RayM


    Would this be a good opportunity to re-route the 84 back to the city centre again, thus adding some extra capacity onto the N11? For the sake of a few extra miles each way, it would make a lot more sense than running almost-empty to Blackrock.


  • #13
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Victor wrote: »
    An increase in frequency doesn't necessarily need an increase in vehicles if each vehicle can do the trip quicker due to reduced dwell times or making some services semi-express.

    I know that Victor but that's on an overall basis.

    Gains from reduced dwell times won't compensate for the reduction in capacity during the morning peak - it will flow through during the day.

    There would have to be an increase in the PVR (Peak Vehicle Requirement) to cover the morning peak differential.

    Fundamentally though, there is going to have to be a root and branch review of the bus stops across their network, and proper, uniform and safe design standards applied. This review should also look at possible rationalisation of stops where appropriate, but not without a proper consultation with users.


  • #14
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    RayM wrote: »
    Would this be a good opportunity to re-route the 84 back to the city centre again, thus adding some extra capacity onto the N11? For the sake of a few extra miles each way, it would make a lot more sense than running almost-empty to Blackrock.



    That won't happen - the 84X and 145 cover Northeast Wicklow and Bray to city - you still need to retain a connection along Clonkeen Road to Blackrock, particularly for the substantial numbers of schoolchildren.


  • #15
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,959 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    dfx- wrote: »
    Great news for the 7 passengers after years of dual door operation. Will the VT turning be tight in terms of the Loughlinstown terminus?

    The 7 has already seen VT's on it so either the class can cope with the terminus or else they work through into Cherrywood.


  • #16
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    The Loughinstown terminus is no problem for a VT.


  • #17
    dublinman1990
    Registered Users Posts: 8,300 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    lxflyer wrote: »
    That won't happen - the 84X and 145 cover Northeast Wicklow and Bray to city - you still need to retain a connection along Clonkeen Road to Blackrock, particularly for the substantial numbers of schoolchildren.

    The 84 can be still be retained to take home schoolchildren though if it was extended to the city if it turned off at Cornelscourt to go through Clonkeen Road, Blackrock and then return to the very top part of Mount Merrion Avenue to continue onto the City Centre. If the 84 went through Mount Merrion Avenue a lot of schoolchildren are going to various private secendary schools in that area and it would make a lot of sense for them to have the option of a bus heading to or from Bray to only a few yards to their school instead of walking up from Blackrock Village or either to or from it's DART station in the morning and afternoon.

    It also negates the need for most of them to travel on the DART during the school term because it will prevent overcrowding on the DART particularly during the afternoon periods as the trains I board sometimes are overcrowded sometimes on shorter trains unlike when rush hour kicks during the morning.


  • #18
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Extending the 84 to the city would mean having to increase the PVR on that route, i.e. add extra buses onto the route to maintain freqency.

    I think that any such vehicles could be put to better use elsewhere.


  • #19
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    If the P.V.R was to increase on the 46A when the SG,s enter service, could we not allocate them buses to an hourly 24 hour 746?


  • #20
    the groutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,096 ✭✭✭✭the groutch


    Stupid putting the VTs on such a buggy-heavy route like the 7, gonna be a major increase in dwell times.


  • #21
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    joegriffinjnr wrote: »
    If the P.V.R was to increase on the 46A when the SG,s enter service, could we not allocate them buses to an hourly 24 hour 746?

    I doubt that the 746 would be making a comeback.


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    Would be a great 24 hour route all the same.


  • #23
    thomasj
    Registered Users Posts: 4,785 ✭✭✭thomasj


    Interesting.

    No doubt there were customers that complained that a flagship route like the 46a should have newer buses. They will be chuffed!

    The new buses are awful. The most uncomfortable journey I was on was crammed at the centre doors on a peak hour 39a. Not for the clostraphobic folks!


  • #24
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    thomasj wrote: »
    Interesting.

    No doubt there were customers that complained that a flagship route like the 46a should have newer buses. They will be chuffed!

    The new buses are awful. The most uncomfortable journey I was on was crammed at the centre doors on a peak hour 39a. Not for the clostraphobic folks!

    I bet there was still seats available upstairs


  • #25
    thomasj
    Registered Users Posts: 4,785 ✭✭✭thomasj


    joegriffinjnr wrote: »
    I bet there was still seats available upstairs

    I know and that is a pet hate of mine, and it happens a bit but on this occasion all seats were taken upstairs.


  • #26
    dfx-
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,662 Mod ✭✭✭✭dfx-


    Six VTs (frequency of ten minutes) can carry 240 more people than six SGs. Where are all these people going to go?

    That is on top of the current capacity issues with the VTs in place on the N11 corridor.

    They don't know what they're doing do they?


  • #27
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    dfx- wrote: »
    Six VTs (frequency of ten minutes) can carry 240 more people than six SGs. Where are all these people going to go?

    That is on top of the current capacity issues with the VTs in place on the N11 corridor.

    They don't know what they're doing do they?

    Well given that we don't know what the precise plan is, I'm not sure that you can say that.

    It's a bit early to jump to conclusions.


  • #28
    Stevek101
    Registered Users Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭Stevek101


    Is the 27b due to be merge with the 79 still or just the extension to Heuston? Also will they finally get around to the 33s and 41's?


  • #29
    joegriffinjnr
    Registered Users Posts: 686 ✭✭✭joegriffinjnr


    I think the 27B is having a terminus change, I cant confirm though.


  • #30
    LXFlyer
    Registered Users Posts: 17,542 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    joegriffinjnr wrote: »
    I think the 27B is having a terminus change, I cant confirm though.



    Can I ask what the source of all of this is?


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    thomasj
    Registered Users Posts: 4,785 ✭✭✭thomasj


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Well given that we don't know what the precise plan is, I'm not sure that you can say that.

    It's a bit early to jump to conclusions.

    That's a fair point, but do people really want to wait until this happens before they start taking action, because once it happens it will be difficult to reinstate the old position.

    I think that people when complaining to Dublin bus by email need to start including NTA on the emails it makes logical sense plus it seems (although not certain) that Dublin bus are the ones who are making the point in favour of the VTs.

    Petiole should be emailing nta and Dublin bus, highlighting their concerns and providing real-life examples as to why the VTs should be kept on the route and why SGs are unsuitable to be running solely on the route. That should be done sooner rather than later. No point in bolting the gate after the horse has long done a letter.

    If local TDs need to be pushed on this, don't forget the transport ministers constituency would cover phoenix park-phibsboro area of the route. You could also Maybe test ms Creighton and her new party. She should be representing parts of the southside leg of the route.


Advertisement