Dublin Bus Capacity

John R

The switch to single door was made primarily because of the difficulties of providing wheelchair access while keeping a useable layout without sacrificing too much seating capacity.

Practically all UK operations outside London switched to single door accessable buses as well. Cities such as Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Galsgow, etc all use single door buses now.

In London the wheelchair access is provided through the centre doors, that is not possible in Dublin as many bus stops are not available for the whole bus to pull up close enough. It is difficult enough for the nose of the bus to get close enough to many bus stops for safe ramp access.

shltter

kearnsr wrote:

Wouldnt this apply to the front door as well? I dunno but I dont see this as a vaild reason behind not using the middle door.

I dont remember the exact exuse why the unions didnt allow the use of the middle door but this is the first time I've heard your reason.

Any DB drivers out there who could shed some light?

That is exactly the reason and the unions did not prevent anyone from doing it if any driver wants to use the centre doors that is a matter for themselves.

The Labour court ruled that it was a Health and Safety issue and that because of the position in dublin regarding parking the poor state of a large number of stops etc that the company could not force drivers to use the centre doors and hold them responsible for any incidents while not providing a safe enviroment for using the centre doors.

The difference with the front doors is that the driver has some control over the situation it is easier to get the front of the bus in close to the footpath the driver is in close proximity to the passengers so if someone comes up the inside of the bus the driver can warn the passengers. The driver can see the condition of the footpath before the passengers start to alight etc

godtabh

shltter wrote:

That is exactly the reason and the unions did not prevent anyone from doing it if any driver wants to use the centre doors that is a matter for themselves.

The Labour court ruled that it was a Health and Safety issue and that because of the position in dublin regarding parking the poor state of a large number of stops etc that the company could not force drivers to use the centre doors and hold them responsible for any incidents while not providing a safe enviroment for using the centre doors.

The difference with the front doors is that the driver has some control over the situation it is easier to get the front of the bus in close to the footpath the driver is in close proximity to the passengers so if someone comes up the inside of the bus the driver can warn the passengers. The driver can see the condition of the footpath before the passengers start to alight etc

I'm still not convinced. If you have a link the the labour court or any other information I'd love to see it as I'm basing my argument on something a bus driver told me years ago.

shltter

kearnsr wrote:

I'm still not convinced. If you have a link the the labour court or any other information I'd love to see it as I'm basing my argument on something a bus driver told me years ago.

I dont care how convinced you are that is the story
search the labour court yourself if you want to

markpb

The Labour Court decided that:

It is the view of the Court that the operation of these doors as a normal feature should only be considered when the Company are
perfectly satisfied that the safety arrangements agreed have been fully implemented and are effective, operationally.

Subject to the above the Court considers that the centre doors should normally be operated. Recognising the responsibility of
the Driver for his vehicle and passengers, whilst he should normally operate the centre doors, he should carry out this
operation with prudence. Accordingly the Court considers that an instruction to compulsorily operate the centre doors at all times
would be inappropriate.

This quote from the middle of the page sums up Dublin quite nearly:

It would be foolhardy to implement compulsory use of centre doors in a city riddled with illegal parking, narrow streets and a public whose disregard for public transport regulations is well known.

godtabh

shltter wrote:

I dont care how convinced you are that is the story
search the labour court yourself if you want to

I didnt know you could get labour court verdicts online and since you mentioned it I was asking you to share what you knew.

Red Alert

AFAIK on the centre-door fitted AV's (a few ex-airlink ones) have ramps on both doors!

shltter

Red Alert wrote:

AFAIK on the centre-door fitted AV's (a few ex-airlink ones) have ramps on both doors!

They do they were bought specifically for the Airlink which is a completely different kettle of fish from normal city operations. They only make two or three stops and then it is straight out to the airport or straight from the Airport and then 2 or 3 drop off points.

The buses are not loading and unloading at the same stop at the same time like they do in normal city operations and the company has staff on hand at both termini which are fairly well policed.

shltter

kearnsr wrote:

I didnt know you could get labour court verdicts online and since you mentioned it I was asking you to share what you knew.

You asked the question I gave you the answer and you said you were not convinced
I had already shared what I knew and you were not happy with that.

godtabh

shltter wrote:

You asked the question I gave you the answer and you said you were not convinced
I had already shared what I knew and you were not happy with that.

You made a statement for all I knew was made up and I just aksed you to back it up. If I made a statement and I was asked to back it up with fact to prove my argument I would.

Some one else provided the information and now I can see what you said was correct but I'm not going to belive you because you said so

_Kaiser_

shltter wrote:

and the company has staff on hand at both termini which are fairly well policed.

Such a shame they can't share some of these staff amongst other routes to ensure they run just as efficiently. :rolleyes:

shltter

kearnsr wrote:

You made a statement for all I knew was made up and I just aksed you to back it up. If I made a statement and I was asked to back it up with fact to prove my argument I would.

Some one else provided the information and now I can see what you said was correct but I'm not going to belive you because you said so

I did not make a statement

You asked a question

I gave you the answer

If I was just making a statement and someone asked me to back it up that would be fair enough but you asked if any drivers knew what the story was I was helping you out by providing the answer to your query you chose not to believe me thats fine but I am not proving myself when answering your call for information.

shltter

Kaiser2000 wrote:

Such a shame they can't share some of these staff amongst other routes to ensure they run just as efficiently. :rolleyes:

That would require a huge number of staff

Airlink is a commercial operation run by DB it involves having staff at Two termini

But I suppose if everyone was paying 5 euro one way or 9 euro return then they probably could afford to have extra staff and extra services perhaps you might email the DOT with that suggestion

_Kaiser_

shltter wrote:

That would require a huge number of staff

Airlink is a commercial operation run by DB it involves having staff at Two termini

But I suppose if everyone was paying 5 euro one way or 9 euro return then they probably could afford to have extra staff and extra services perhaps you might email the DOT with that suggestion

No it just proves the point that DB management/staff don't give a toss about the average customer - who I'm sure pay the larger share of fares - "commercial" Airlink services regardless (though your terminology makes me wonder what then they see the rest of the routes as? An inconvenience?)

markpb

Kaiser2000 wrote:

No it just proves the point that DB management/staff don't give a toss about the average customer - who I'm sure pay the larger share of fares - "commercial" Airlink services regardless (though your terminology makes me wonder what then they see the rest of the routes as? An inconvenience?)

I think he used the term commericial to show that its a route which doesn't operate under USO and makes money for the company, ie it doesn't receive a subsidy from the DoT.

There's no way DB could have staff at every bus stop in the city, you can't be serious about that? If the gardai enforced proper parking and the drivers in Dublin had the cop on not to park on top of or near to a bus stop, it's go a long way towards fixing this problem.

shltter

Kaiser2000 wrote:

No it just proves the point that DB management/staff don't give a toss about the average customer - who I'm sure pay the larger share of fares - "commercial" Airlink services regardless (though your terminology makes me wonder what then they see the rest of the routes as? An inconvenience?)

Non commercial services are referred to as Social services these are regulated by the DOT for fares and level of service etc for which DB recieves a subvention for providing those services and social welfare pass holders can travel for free

Commercial services are for example the Airlink ,the Nitelinks ,City tours private Hires DB recieves no subvention for these services and social welfare pass holders are not entitled to free travel.

And it proves nothing of the sort it proves that the provision of staff like that provided on commercial services would need
A amassive increase in the level of subvention
or
B a massive increase in the level of Fares
to pay for the increase in costs.

El Stuntman

which route do you drive ****ter?

_Kaiser_

markpb wrote:

There's no way DB could have staff at every bus stop in the city, you can't be serious about that? If the gardai enforced proper parking and the drivers in Dublin had the cop on not to park on top of or near to a bus stop, it's go a long way towards fixing this problem.

No, obviously staff at every terminus is unfeasible, but more random spot-checks on drivers and schedule adherence - in conjuction with actual enforcement of the parking/traffic regulations by our boys and girls in blue - would go a long way to improving the reliability of the service and ultimately present it as a viable alternative to the car, which (let's face it) unless you live on one of the high-frequency flagship routes, it's not at present.