Originally Posted by dfx-
Originally Posted by lxflyer
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.