thomasj Registered User
#16

noelfirl
Considering the function of that route is to "mop up" for the other busier outer suburban services using the N4, it seems a bit ridiculous to remove that departure from Palmerstown - at one of the key times when that end of the route merits the extra support.


That has to be a timetable error.

The general trend of the 26 route during morning peak is 30 minute frequency . If you look at the other earlier new departures they run at the same time (or give or take a few minutes before or after the existing departures)

They couldn't have an hour gap between buses in the morning peak even if it is outside term time could they?

1 person has thanked this post
thomasj Registered User
#17

LeinsterDub
Unbelievable the 4 didn't get an improvement. It's a core north-south route.


I was on a 39a at 8.30 last night. With a 20 minute gap for the next one it was skipping stops or only letting the first few on. And this was a triaxle bus being used.

2 people have thanked this post
devnull Moderator
#18

noelfirl said:
If I'm reading that one correctly, they're removing the 0825 departure from Palmerstown (cut short to start from the West County Hotel further down the line).

Considering the function of that route is to "mop up" for the other busier outer suburban services using the N4, it seems a bit ridiculous to remove that departure from Palmerstown - at one of the key times when that end of the route merits the extra support.


Well spotted. I reported the changes as they had been announced by Dublin Bus but as past experience has shown they tend to use a more "PR Speak" approach to such notices over the last few years to mention the good and ignore the bad rather than using a factual approach to them

What the NTA needs to do in the next Dublin Bus contract is enforce them to report route changes on a factual basis using a set template of wording rather than allowing such announcements to be made from a marketing point of view.

The announcements should include:
- Details of services dropped when they are withdrawn and the times of them
- Details of new services provided when they are introduced and the times.
- When services run certain parts of the year only - list those dates
- The date the timetable takes effect from
- Alternative arrangements (if any) for areas omitted.
- When routes are changed, a clear map of the new route.

If Dublin Bus or any other state contractor do not comply with this then it should be fined. Using spin the way they have on a number of occasions is not fair on the public, the same public the company is supposedly set up to serve paid for by public money.

5 people have thanked this post
AlekSmart Registered User
#19

devnull said:
Well spotted. I reported the changes as they had been announced by Dublin Bus but as past experience has shown they tend to use a more "PR Speak" approach to such notices over the last few years to mention the good and ignore the bad rather than using a factual approach to them

What the NTA needs to do in the next Dublin Bus contract is enforce them to report route changes on a factual basis using a set template of wording rather than allowing such announcements to be made from a marketing point of view.

The announcements should include:
- Details of services dropped when they are withdrawn and the times of them
- Details of new services provided when they are introduced and the times.
- When services run certain parts of the year only - list those dates
- The date the timetable takes effect from
- Alternative arrangements (if any) for areas omitted.
- When routes are changed, a clear map of the new route.

If Dublin Bus do not comply with this then it should be fined. Using spin the way they have on a number of occasions is not fair on the public, the same public the company is supposedly set up to serve paid for by public money.


Given that BAC schedule alterations come with the words
All changes have been approved by the National Trasport Authority.
,one must assume that the NTA are indeed satisfied with the methodology used ?

The various Irish sectors which have become "regulated" over the past two decades,have become well used to adhering closely to the wordings of reguatory agencies,which is not always to the benefit of the end user.

Perhaps a pithly worded enquiry to the NTA's public affairs department might spur them clarify their position ?

One element is becoming clearer in the light of the Go-Ahead transfer,and it is the absence of an operational transition plan.

Since 2014, there is a comprehensive agreement in place between the NTA,Bus Atha Cliath and the Dept of Transport,outlining quite specific (and substantial) PSO Bus Service enhancements to existing BAC routes to cater for BAC's now altered situation.

The Agreement was arrived at after protracted negotiations,but one significant issue is that it is based upon 2013 usership data.

Neither the NTA or BAC,appear to recognise the front-line reality of the increased demand for Public Transport Services since 2013,which as many posters here confirm,regularly results in Full buses across the entire day.

What we are now seeing,is a response to a demand situation which existed in 2013,and which has become far more acute since then.

With our core schedules still adhereing to the 1950's definition of Peak/Off Peak,and the inability of anybody to define the extent of "Term Time",we have returned to the time honoured practice of "tinkering" with individual departures and hoping that it will address the greater capacity issues.......this aproach has not worked in the past,and it will not work now.

I'm assuming the NTA's standard PR reply will refer to the Jarrett Walker Busconnects programme,which apears now to be slipping into overdue status,when it is now urgently required in terms of comprehensively addressing the situation.

There is now a worrying element of lack-of-leadership on display,both from the NTA as the oversight body and Bus Atha Cliath,as the major service provider.

It can be argued that the country,as a whole is headed down the exact same road as led us into the last collapse,which makes it even more important that those involved in Public Transport do not head in that direction yet again,with the inevitable end result of more "Network Direct" style survival plans for the entire Public Transport area.

4 people have thanked this post
devnull Moderator
#20

AlekSmart said:
Given that BAC schedule alterations come with the words ,one must assume that the NTA are indeed satisfied with the methodology used ?


My comment was not in relation to changes to the schedule or the methodology but it was in relation to the text of the announcements which was written by Dublin Bus which was less than transparent about the full nature of the changes that were being made on the route and this is not the first time that this has happened as it happened in the middle of last year with the 75.

Dublin Bus are required to get approval and agree changes with the NTA, but there is no requirement for Dublin Bus to get approval for the text that is issued to announce such changes to the public contained within the PSO contract that is in place between the NTA and Dublin Bus and I'm saying that should change in the future so a standard format is used detailing everything I outlined above as right now there is not full transparency.

1 person has thanked this post
Wagon360 Registered User
#21

I suggest it would be better for the NTA to make the announcements.

AngryLips Registered User
#22

AlekSmart said:
the inability of anybody to define the extent of "Term Time"Transport area.


It's fairly clear to me that term time is the difference between the summer timetable and the timetable in force for all other times of the year, no?

thomasj Registered User
#23

AngryLips
It's fairly clear to me that term time is the difference between the summer timetable and the timetable in force for all other times of the year, no?


I would have thought it would have been during the term at college and school.

For example look at the 145 timetable, the departures that go from ucd mention term time.

AngryLips Registered User
#24

thomasj said:
I would have thought it would have been during the term at college and school.

For example look at the 145 timetable, the departures that go from ucd mention term time.


The summer timetable is always talked about in the context of lower demand from schools and colleges being off - I don't think it could mean anything else TBH. Of course, I stand to be corrected

thomasj Registered User
#25

But are those 145 services run on midterm etc ? I wouldn't know myself

Stephen15 Registered User
#26

Del2005 said:
The schools don't even have a standard term, so how can something be term time only when there's no defined term time for schools or colleges?


Exactly the timetable should say September to May Only or not exist on the summer timetable.

1 person has thanked this post
Arlessienne Registered User
#27

I sincerely hope they have the resources, in terms of both buses and drivers, to actually deliver new timetables. Because timetabling yet more buses that won't show up due to operational issues is just making the situation worse. For me reliable delivery of the advertised timetable is the most important thing. I feel extra resources should go to ensuring there is adequate capacity to deal with issues arising daily and causing buses not to run daily on these routes, such as drivers not coming in and traffic delays, before adding departures to the timetable.

1 person has thanked this post
Stephen15 Registered User
#28

Arlessienne said:
I sincerely hope they have the resources, in terms of both buses and drivers, to actually deliver new timetables. Because timetabling yet more buses that won't show up due to operational issues is just making the situation worse. For me reliable delivery of the advertised timetable is the most important thing. I feel extra resources should go to ensuring there is adequate capacity to deal with issues arising daily and causing buses not to run daily on these routes, such as drivers not coming in and traffic delays, before adding departures to the timetable.


You have to remember that DB is not allowed operate any additional services without NTA approval so they can't send extra buses that aren't timetabled.

Arlessienne Registered User
#29

Stephen15 said:
You have to remember that DB is not allowed operate any additional services without NTA approval so they can't send extra buses that aren't timetabled.


I don't want extra buses that aren't timetabled - just that the ones that are timetabled depart as advertised. Right now it's a common occurence for some of these routes to not operate due to no driver or due to the incoming bus being too delayed to start the outbound journey on time so it's just dropped. It seems 100% of buses are already deployed so there is no capacity to deal with everyday problems. Additional drivers and buses are required just to operate the current timetable from I can see, let alone add new departures.

2 people have thanked this post
devnull Moderator
#30

Arlessienne said:
I don't want extra buses that aren't timetabled - just that the ones that are timetabled depart as advertised. Right now it's a common occurence for some of these routes to not operate due to no driver or due to the incoming bus being too delayed to start the outbound journey on time so it's just dropped. It seems 100% of buses are already deployed so there is no capacity to deal with everyday problems. Additional drivers and buses are required just to operate the current timetable from I can see, let alone add new departures.


As stated earlier the buses are believed to come from the fact in December there were more new buses entering service than were withdrawn and in any case there are also a small number that have been stored in case they are needed for expanded service.

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!