Bus Lanes - obstacle to meeting kyoto?

djpbarry

Tea drinker wrote: »

What's with the burning oil smell from buses? That's down to poor maintenance or worn engines.

I'm not sure what smell you're referring to, but, last I knew, buses in the Dublin Bus fleet have to be serviced every 4 weeks by law.

Tea drinker

djpbarry wrote: »

I'm not sure what smell you're referring to, but, last I knew, buses in the Dublin Bus fleet have to be serviced every 4 weeks by law.

The smell of burning oil is very distinct, it smells kinda like burning plastic, it's quite noxious. I often smell it travelling behind buses. The smell can come from either oil leaking on to a hot exhaust, or from the exhaust itself, if oil is being consumed by the engine.
I wonder are all their stats as well maintained as the buses?

djpbarry

Tea drinker wrote: »

The smell of burning oil is very distinct, it smells kinda like burning plastic, it's quite noxious. I often smell it travelling behind buses.

I cycle around Dublin quite a bit and I can honestly say that the fumes from the average bus don't bother me any more than fumes from any other vehicle.

BoatMad

When you can't afford fuel for your car (or to heat your home for that matter), or all the carbon tax charges which are inevitable, you might be glad of the bus lanes.

This nonsense is typicall of the tree-huggers, end of teh world so lets justify lots of stupid action now

Heres my predictions

(a) Oil will continue to be available much longer then most people predict, rumors of its death are very premature, further exploration will bring more reserves, Antartica is a good example

(b) Pricing will rise, but the most significant impacts of this will actually be on poorer developing economies, India and China will bear teh brunt of rising oil, the "west" is simply weathly enough and can bring enough technology to bear to handle it, the west industrial base is not as dependant on oil in teh way it was in the 70's , but Indias and Chinas is.

(c)Car transport will continue to grow and manufactures will eventually solve the emmisions problems, one way or another technology will deliver a solution becuase some many people want it ( cars) and will pay for it. In my opinion it will be some form of electric drive solution ( just waiting for a electric Range Rover that does 0-60mph in 4 secs, electric drive is brilliant, should ultimately give us way more performance then petrol engines, oh and allow us build bigger cars), once we solve teh energy storage that is.

(d) Public transport will remain a minority sport, consuming vast quantities of taxpayers money and transporting a small minority of commuters. public transport is a 19th century concept, a concept that suited the available mass movement technology of the time,

(e) The world will not end, you will be able to heat your home,etc ( and youll need less energy to do so) and in general thank yourself that you live in a weathly ecomony that can implement the technology as it become available.

(f) The major failing of the tree-huggers, is that they simply project into the future the thinking of today, technology brings paradigm shift. I was looking at a plat recently that purported to show air transport in the year 2000, form a perspective of 1849, the intersting thing is that the clothes of the peolpe hadnt changed!. What this illustrates is that the solutions of teh future will inthem selves bring change that we cannot forsee.

So rather then bringing in carbon taxes say for cars which merely penalises peolpe for buying the technology of teh day , we should be carroting and aticking teh car companies to more the technology ahead as fast as possible.

Demands for alternatively energy is growing undoutably and such grow is pushing new developments, Ultimately the "West" will leave oil behind, but only as new technology offers a costs effective solution. Science does not go backwards

markpb

The reason cities promote public transport is because cars are inefficient when it comes to space. Nothing else, not green issues, not socialist issues, just space. Even in the biggest cities with the widest roads, there isn't enough space in core areas. If everyone drives, cars go nowhere. If some people share space by using a bus or train, more people are carried by the same space.

You can believe all you want about the future of oil, the cleanliness of cars but none of those help more people in more cars into the city centre in Dublin. Underground train/bus tunnels are the obvious solution but they're incredibly expensive so they're not going to be widespread any more. Not many cities, especially in the West, are even contemplating building more.

BoatMad

The reason cities promote public transport is because cars are inefficient when it comes to space. Nothing else, not green issues, not socialist issues, just space. Even in the biggest cities with the widest roads, there isn't enough space in core areas. If everyone drives, cars go nowhere. If some people share space by using a bus or train, more people are carried by the same space.

Agree cities are crowded,/conjested , its not about cars its about conjestion. one of the major actions should be to get peolpe to move away from Dublin, we have the least dense country in europe, loads of space elsewhere. Secondly in Dublin we need yto ensure cars journeys that cross teh city have a easy way to do so without going through town. thirdly where we develop new industrial estates etec we need to build suitable road networks to support them. ( for example why is SAndyford estate so conjested, 30,000 people work in the general area with effectively 3 roads into and out of it, Think what would happen to say Waterford if it had only three entrance/exit routes, and people wonder why there is conjestion)

Think about it, we are building massively expensive mass transist systems to move people , primarily to and from work, yet at the same time everyone seems teleworking as the futue, decentralisation. mass transist is a 19th century concept, bring the workers from the little cramped homes to "mill" and back. its not the way a modern technology driven future will function. In the meantime reduce conjestion by incentifising peolpe to leave Dublin. ( along with their places of work). ( say no corporation tax for 10 years west of teh shannon and 30% top personal tax rate. that will get people moving)


IN the meantime a complete failure to realise "real life " is going on. There are huge estates, commercial and domestic with appaling road access, ( ie low capacity,) leading to massive frustrationand conjestion and then we are promised "public transport" which say might come along in 10 years time... for gods sake.

Take for example ehat happen in teh last 5 years in Firhouse/knocklyn, the road coming down out of teh mouhtain through kncoklyon had virtually no traffic on it 5 years ago ( I know I used come from Bray via it), then maybe 5000 homes/apartments get built, was the road improved, did it go say to two lanes or something, no, with the exception of a few mickey mouse roundabouts it remained the same mountain road.

The fact is that politically the ideaology has overtaken the reality, the planners allow development and yet do not allow proper car access ( limit car parking, no to dual lane roads) and yet the public transport takes years to arrive if at all.

its a joke.

markpb

You're right on some points, plannning certainly hasn't been our fortè recently and our estates, both housing and industrial, have born the brunt of it but I disagree that public transport is a 19th century solution. People travel outside of work - they travel to visit friends, they have hobbys, they eat out, they go to the cinema. All of those things require travel and once again, space is an issue. If you look at any busy city, you'll still see thousands of people travelling around well after office hours have finished. Paris and Madrid can be just as busy at 10pm as they are at 9am!

Planning comes back to the front again when you talk about incentivising people to move out of Dublin. Companies don't want to locate there because the infrastructure is so poor. Broadband is difficult to get, roads aren't as good, airports don't have as many connections because we gave every county in the west an airport of it's own, public transport is almost non-existant, the list is endless.

djpbarry

BoatMad wrote: »

Oil will continue to be available much longer then most people predict

That prediction seems to be based on little more than faith.

BoatMad wrote: »

the west industrial base is not as dependant on oil in teh way it was in the 70's , but Indias and Chinas is

First of all, China has massive coal reserves. Secondly, if you're including Ireland in "the west industrial base" that "is not as dependent on oil as it was in the 70's" then you're having a laugh; all of our largest power stations are fired by either oil, coal or gas. If OPEC close the taps - we're ****ed.

BoatMad wrote: »

Car transport will continue to grow and manufactures will eventually solve the emmisions problems, one way or another technology will deliver a solution becuase some many people want it ( cars) and will pay for it.

Again, this is purely faith-based. To dismiss the problem of pollution by simply saying "oh, someone will sort it out eventually - I don't need to worry about it" is irresponsible in my opinion.

BoatMad wrote: »

Public transport will remain a minority sport, consuming vast quantities of taxpayers money and transporting a small minority of commuters. public transport is a 19th century concept, a concept that suited the available mass movement technology of the time

As markpb has already said, you're being very dismissive of all the people, in Dublin in particular, who depend on public transport every day. Public transport will have a hugely important role to play in our future infrastructure, as it will in every other city in the world. Can you imagine everyone in London deciding that they were no longer going to use public transport and were going to drive instead? The cities of the world are simply not big enough to support such a mentality.

BoatMad wrote: »

we should be carroting and aticking teh car companies to more the technology ahead as fast as possible.

What makes you think that car manufacturers are not designing cars to the best of their ability already? Surely it is in their interest to stay at the top of their game, to keep ahead of the competition and hence build (or maintain) market share? What further incentive do they need other than profit?

And by the way, I've never hugged a tree. :cool:

BoatMad

Originally Posted by BoatMad
Oil will continue to be available much longer then most people predict
That prediction seems to be based on little more than faith.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil#Optimistic_predictions_of_future_oil_production
and thats only for starters

First of all, China has massive coal reserves. Secondly, if you're including Ireland in "the west industrial base" that "is not as dependent on oil as it was in the 70's" then you're having a laugh; all of our largest power stations are fired by either oil, coal or gas. If OPEC close the taps - we're

Youre missing the point, India and China are huge importers of oil, it will affect their ecomony much more then ours, ireland is a more a knowledge based ecomony, its not a manufactuering base like china

Originally Posted by BoatMad
Car transport will continue to grow and manufactures will eventually solve the emmisions problems, one way or another technology will deliver a solution becuase some many people want it ( cars) and will pay for it.
Again, this is purely faith-based. To dismiss the problem of pollution by simply saying "oh, someone will sort it out eventually - I don't need to worry about it" is irresponsible in my opinion.

Stop rabbetting on with the simple "faith based" dismisal, argue the point, several studies show car growth will continue, ie our own Dept of transport. If you also take the time to read technical journals , you will see that the pollution output from cars ( in particular) will diminish over time and utilmately other forms of motive power will begin to appear. Look at transport technology, it has progressed over the last 150 years, it will continue to progress, to suggest other wise is to dismiss science.

As markpb has already said, you're being very dismissive of all the peoplein Dublin in particular, who depend on public transport every day

he didnt say that, nor did I say that. I pointed out a FACT. Public transport in Dublin transports approx 20% of total travel ( its a minority activity) , ie one in 5 . What I am saying is that dealing with teh majority method must have at least equal standing with dealing with the public one. The agenda in Dublin has been hijacked by idealogy rather then pragmatism.

My overall point about this is we have to get away from calling certain types of transport "bad" or "good", We have to deal with what people want to use and how to use it. We have to deal with where and how people live today and how they will live in teh next 20 years , not how we would like to see a city in some utopian future. Furthermore we have to "stop" telling peole whats good for them and develop solutions that appeal to them not coerce them

We have to get the polictics, ( mostly left wing) out of transport

PS, before you continue to tell me its all "faith based", actually make some points of your own and maybe read up a bit on teh subject and not just accept what you read in trendy mags

Victor

BoatMad wrote: »

he didnt say that, nor did I say that. I pointed out a FACT. Public transport in Dublin transports approx 20% of total travel ( its a minority activity) , ie one in 5 .

Dublin Bus handles 500,000 passengers per day, Luas and DART 80,000-100,000 each. Add Irish Rail commuter services, Bus Éireann, commuter services and you are talking 750,000+ journeys per day. Thats a lot more than 20%.

And of course, not everyone else uses a car.

djpbarry

BoatMad wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil#Optimistic_predictions_of_future_oil_production

Fantastic. My turn:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil#Pessimistic_predictions_of_future_oil_production

BoatMad wrote: »

Youre missing the point, India and China are huge importers of oil, it will affect their ecomony much more then ours

What are you basing that on? About 98% of Ireland's energy is produced by burning some form of fossil fuel, the vast majority of which is imported. China has 1.5 trillion cubic metres of proven gas reserves; Ireland has about 1% of that. China has 16.3 billion barrels of oil reserves; Ireland has none. At present, China consumes about 5 barrels of oil per thousand head of population per day. This is expected to grow to about 7 per thousand per day by 2030. Ireland currently consumes about 40 barrels per thousand people per day. We are hugely dependent on imported energy.

BoatMad wrote: »

ireland is a more a knowledge based ecomony, its not a manufactuering base like china

The primary and secondary sectors constitute about 51% of GDP in Ireland. This compares with about 60.6% in China, 39.3% in India and just 30% in Germany.

BoatMad wrote: »

several studies show car growth will continue

I never said otherwise.

BoatMad wrote: »

you will see that the pollution output from cars ( in particular) will diminish over time

Again, I never said otherwise. But people don't go out and buy new cars every year and, even if they do, they don't always buy the most efficient model (in fact I would say they rarely do). So, car ownership is increasing, as are sales of, for example, SUV's. So, the fleet of cars on Ireland's roads is getting larger every year and is becoming less fuel-efficient every year (I stand to be corrected on that). Technology can change all it wants - it won't make much difference unless peoples' attitudes change.

BoatMad wrote: »

We have to deal with what people want to use and how to use it.

As has already been established, a lot of people in this country want good quality public transport.

BoatMad wrote: »

actually make some points of your own and maybe read up a bit on teh subject and not just accept what you read in trendy mags

:rolleyes:

OTK

BoatMad wrote: »

he didnt say that, nor did I say that. I pointed out a FACT. Public transport in Dublin transports approx 20% of total travel ( its a minority activity) , ie one in 5 . What I am saying is that dealing with teh majority method must have at least equal standing with dealing with the public one. The agenda in Dublin has been hijacked by idealogy rather then pragmatism.

I think in this forum you need to give a source when you state that something is a fact.

The proportion of journeys carried out by car in Dublin in 2006 was
46% for shopping trips
25% for education trips
54-56% for work trips
http://www.dto.ie/web2006/rum2006.pdf

This is a far cry from the 80% you state above.

The pragmatism of encouraging people in cities to use public rather than private transport is simple efficiency. In a given period of time, more people can get to work or school when they travel together than when they travel alone because a buslane or a trainline can carry more people in an hour than a lane of traffic.

gurramok

Funny thing is when the schools are shut during the summer, its actually alot quicker to travel around the city in a car.
In my day, we walked that 1 mile to school and didn't get trucked around in SUV's.

MCMLXXXIII

OTK wrote: »

I think in this forum you need to give a source when you state that something is a fact.

The proportion of journeys carried out by car in Dublin in 2006 was
46% for shopping trips
25% for education trips
54-56% for work trips
http://www.dto.ie/web2006/rum2006.pdf

This is a far cry from the 80% you state above.

The pragmatism of encouraging people in cities to use public rather than private transport is simple efficiency. In a given period of time, more people can get to work or school when they travel together than when they travel alone because a buslane or a trainline can carry more people in an hour than a lane of traffic.

^^ I agree with you that cars and personal transportation is way better, but the way that survey reads is it just considers those traveling in cars, not the total population. Also, 46+25+54=125% :rolleyes:

gurramok wrote: »

Funny thing is when the schools are shut during the summer, its actually alot quicker to travel around the city in a car.
In my day, we walked that 1 mile to school and didn't get trucked around in SUV's.

This has already been argued - SUVs take up the same amount of space on the roads as cars. But yes, each ADDITIONAL vehicle is more congestion...

oscarBravo

MCMLXXXIII wrote: »

Also, 46+25+54=125% :rolleyes:

You're misreading the numbers. I read it as 46% of shopping trips were made by car, etc.

BoatMad

OK let battle commence lets play the statistics game:cool:

Dublin Bus/ Dublin City Council’s November 2005 Canal cordon counts recorded: 59,810 inbound bus passengers crossing the Canal between 07:00 and 0:00hrs representing a fall of 2,535 bus passengers, or 4.2% on the ovember 2004 values.

"DTO 2006"

Shock horror LESS peolpe are travelling by bus

PS Victor, your off your head with 500,000 per day

I think in this forum you need to give a source when you state that something is a fact.

The proportion of journeys carried out by car in Dublin in 2006 was
46% for shopping trips
25% for education trips
54-56% for work trips
http://www.dto.ie/web2006/rum2006.pdf

This is a far cry from the 80% you state above.

"
In
comparison, the Dublin area has a bus modal share of less than 20 percent" (CSO 2004b).;)

Shock Horror Cars makeup the majority , a big majority

The statistics you give are merely a breakdown of that 80%

"While bus usage in Luas catchment areas almost halved, car usage only fell by 2 per cent"
(paper NBRU)

Shock Horror Luas nicks bus passangers, not cars users

A recent UCD study of the N11 QBC ( probably the best QBC) shows that even here only at peak times is the bus lane faster, ( and this is just taking journey times not door to door). In fact worst QBC peak time journey was worse then the best car times, showing that even in peak times the car could under certain circumstances be faster.

"The Quality Bus Corridor (QBC) monitoring exercise organised by the DTO recorded: �� A decrease in A.M. peak inbound speeds of 2% in 2005."

Shock Horror, QBC;s might not be all there cracked up to be

"

between November 2003 and November 2004. During the AM peak survey period
(07:00 - 10:00hrs), cycle flows decreased by 17.0%. A 21.9% decrease was recorded
in the inter peak period (10:00 – 16:00hrs). A decrease in outbound cycle flows of
25.1% was recorded in the PM peak (16:00 – 19:00hrs). Over the 12-hour survey

period (9 hours inbound and 3 hours outbound), cycle flows decreased by 21.1%.
"

Shock Horror lefties arnt cycling to work, oh my god ( ps Why make more stuopid cycle lanes

Before you start playing the stastics game with me sonny boyo, do your research

Again to bring this back to my original point

Bus lanes, where they add to the total available transport infratructure, ( like say the N11 QBC, in general) are a good thing as they add additional capacity without removing existing capacity, LUAS has in the main done the same thing.

Bus lanes, like the rock road one, are a poor politcally motivated way to solve conjestion , they seek to acticely peanalise one section of commuters just to introduce a buslane. This is not the way forward, its a quick fix, thats not even a fix. The leftist political interference with pragmatic road engineering has to be removed.

BoatMad

secondly have a look at the environmental data from teh DTO survey

NO2 and Co poullants are very low and in the case of NO2 falling. Particulants have also fallen. and even in teh case of CO ( listen up climate changers) are at very very low levels compared to the EU limits , in fact Dublin already meets 2010 limits on road CO already.

Shock Horror SUV argument goes up in polluition free smoke

The yanks call all this a slam drunk

oscarBravo

BoatMad wrote: »

Before you start playing the stastics game with me sonny boyo, do your research

Before you post here again, I suggest you tone down the attitude.

OTK

BoatMad wrote: »

I pointed out a FACT. Public transport in Dublin transports approx 20% of total travel ( its a minority activity) , ie one in 5 .

You still haven't managed to back up this claim.

BoatMad wrote: »

OK let battle commence lets play the statistics game:cool:

All of your statistics either contradict your original claim or are irrelevant to the discussion.

BoatMad wrote:

Dublin Bus/ Dublin City Council’s November 2005 Canal cordon counts recorded: 59,810 inbound bus passengers crossing the Canal between 07:00 and 0:00hrs representing a fall of 2,535 bus passengers, or 4.2% on the ovember 2004 values.

"DTO 2006"

Shock horror LESS peolpe are travelling by bus

This is true but irrelevant. Where is that 80% of people travelling by car?

BoatMad wrote:

PS Victor, your off your head with 500,000 per day
[/SIZE][/FONT]

This is also irrelevant. Dublin Bus had 146m passengers in 2006 or around 500,000 per day. This is very easy to source:
eg http://www.cso.ie/newsevents/pr_transport06.htm

BoatMad wrote:

"
In
comparison, the Dublin area has a bus modal share of less than 20 percent" (CSO 2004b).;)

This is true. However it doesn't help you because another 30% of people found other ways to get to work other than driving or taking the bus. Here is a link to the CSO data you quote above (a 2002 census) showing a slight minority of people driving to work vs other options.
http://beyond2020.cso.ie/Census/TableViewer/tableView.aspx?ReportId=1625

Shock Horror Cars makeup the majority , a big majority

The statistics you give are merely a breakdown of that 80%

This is not true. Both the source I quoted (the DTO) and your source (the CSO) both show around 50-55% modal share for drivers.

"While bus usage in Luas catchment areas almost halved, car usage only fell by 2 per cent"
(paper NBRU)

Shock Horror Luas nicks bus passangers, not cars users

This is again true but irrelevant. We still don't have that 80% of journeys by car.

A recent UCD study of the N11 QBC ( probably the best QBC) shows that even here only at peak times is the bus lane faster, ( and this is just taking journey times not door to door). In fact worst QBC peak time journey was worse then the best car times, showing that even in peak times the car could under certain circumstances be faster.

Yes, QBCs could be better but you're no closer to your 80% of journeys by car.

The point you were trying to argue with your 80% car figure is that we should spend money and attention on facilitating cars in cities as they make up a majority of road users.

BoatMad wrote:

dealing with teh majority method must have at least equal standing with dealing with the public one

This point is often made and it doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

First public spending on roads already massively outweights public transport spending. (source: http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=10030&lang=ENG&loc=2127)

Secondly it does not follow that we should preserve the modal split between cars and other methods of transport as if people who own and drive cars are a separate species whose distinct culture and traditions must be respected. The goal of public transport policy is to maximise the number of people who can get to work or school or the shops as efficiently and cleanly as possible. The method of getting them there is of secondary importance.

Victor

BoatMad wrote: »

Dublin Bus/ Dublin City Council’s November 2005 Canal cordon counts recorded: ��
59,810 inbound bus passengers crossing the Canal between 07:00 and
0:00hrs representing a fall of 2,535 bus passengers, or 4.2% on the
ovember 2004 values.

http://www.dto.ie/web2006/rum2006.pdf

Dublin Bus/ Dublin City Council’s November 2005 Canal cordon counts recorded:
59,810 inbound bus passengers crossing the Canal between 07:00 and
10:00hrs representing a fall of 2,535 bus passengers, or 4.2% on the
November 2004 values. (B5_QBC_Bus_Users)

You fail at copy and paste, what can I say?

djpbarry

Tea drinker wrote: »

Yes please!... there is SFA competition to Dublin Bus!

From today's Indo:

Dublin Bus accounted for 80pc of the bus traffic in and out of the city between 2002 and 2007. But the number of private buses operating in the city centre is steadily increasing, with a 30pc jump in the same five-year period.

RATM

OP is far from correct in saying bus lanes are clogging the city. Every decision has knock on effects and opening up the lanes to cars will only encourage people out of buses ( as they're slowed down ) and into cars, thus clogging even further.

Points about bus lanes not being linked are valid. When I used to take the bus part of my journey was waiting 10-15 mins just to clear a distance of 200m. That was before they linked up Conyham Rd and Parkgate Street bus lanes( nearly ) fully.

Either way after 4 years of Dublin Bus I got sick of:-
1) Drivers leaving you stranded at a stop cos you didnt put your hand out ( I used to get the bus in Islandbridge, there are no route variations, all 6 on my route go to O'Connell Bridge but they would still leave you stranded - they must think ppl stand at bus stops for the craic )

2) Drivers closing the doors on you when they are jammed in traffic ( and often still at the actual stop )

3) A dreadful service on a Sunday, I could get 6 different buses home yet I often waited over 30 minutes on a Sunday for one. Shops have been open on Sundays in town for a good 6/7 years now yet Dublin Bus still operates off half a time table on Sundays

So last year I got myself a moped and haven't looked back since, my quality of life has improved considerably. I now use the bus lanes, zip in and out of town in less than 12 minutes, pay 7 euro to do 110 miles and the whole set up costs me more or less the same as taking the bus 5 days a week throughout the year.

Eventually Dublin will get a congestion charge and I suspect motorbikes will be exempt, I guarantee there'll be an explosion of people finally realising two wheels is the way to go.

Stark

RATM wrote:

1) Drivers leaving you stranded at a stop cos you didnt put your hand out ( I used to get the bus in Islandbridge, there are no route variations, all 6 on my route go to O'Connell Bridge but they would still leave you stranded - they must think ppl stand at bus stops for the craic )

Now that's just you being dumb. Some of the buses go to Aston Quay and some go to Pearse Street. Someone may not want a particular bus because it doesn't go to Pearse Street. If the driver had to stop at every stop and every person if they wanted to get on even if they didn't, then the bus would take twice as long. Hence why you need to stick your hand out.

djpbarry

RATM wrote: »

1) Drivers leaving you stranded at a stop cos you didnt put your hand out ( I used to get the bus in Islandbridge, there are no route variations, all 6 on my route go to O'Connell Bridge but they would still leave you stranded - they must think ppl stand at bus stops for the craic )

2) Drivers closing the doors on you when they are jammed in traffic ( and often still at the actual stop )

You got sick of the bus drivers following procedure?

RATM wrote: »

3) A dreadful service on a Sunday, I could get 6 different buses home yet I often waited over 30 minutes on a Sunday for one. Shops have been open on Sundays in town for a good 6/7 years now yet Dublin Bus still operates off half a time table on Sundays

Ever consider that even bus drivers need the occasional day off?

markpb

RATM wrote: »

3) A dreadful service on a Sunday, I could get 6 different buses home yet I often waited over 30 minutes on a Sunday for one. Shops have been open on Sundays in town for a good 6/7 years now yet Dublin Bus still operates off half a time table on Sundays

djpbarry wrote: »

Ever consider that even bus drivers need the occasional day off?

Come off it.... you must be joking! Drivers work shifts on a roster. It's not like the more pious among them volunteer to work seven days a week so we can have the piss poor Sunday service we do. If we want a city where people feel they can get by without a car, that means having a decent service all week. If I have to buy a car to get around late at night or at weekends, why wouldn't I use it the rest of the week too? After all, I've already paid tax, vat, vrt, petrol, etc.*

This was brought up at the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Transport recently - if DB expect the city to ban cars, they have to provide a decent service all the time - not just when it's profitable. If there are no buses when people want to shop, socialise, etc, we can't ban cars.

* For the record, I don't own a car and don't even drive so I do depend on buses and the twice an hour service I have on Sunday and after 7pm on weekdays is a complete joke. I even live in the DCC area so I'm not a complete suburbanite where the joke could be explained.

lostexpectation

with a 14% drop in traffic in the city centre seems that these slightly outer bottlenecks are the biggst prob now.

djpbarry

markpb wrote: »

Come off it.... you must be joking! Drivers work shifts on a roster. It's not like the more pious among them volunteer to work seven days a week so we can have the piss poor Sunday service we do.

No, but Dublin Bus only have so many drivers. Their shifts are obviously concentrated on weekday rush-hours. Sundays are not a high priority.

markpb

djpbarry wrote: »

No, but Dublin Bus only have so many drivers. Their shifts are obviously concentrated on weekday rush-hours. Sundays are not a high priority.

If they persist in that attitude, they'll fail to promote public transport because people will be forced to buy cars for the times the bus service is rubbish and then use them when the bus service is good. Look at the Luas - it manages a reasonable off-peak service so the trains, especially on the red line, are still busy.

RATM

Stark wrote: »

Now that's just you being dumb. Some of the buses go to Aston Quay and some go to Pearse Street. Someone may not want a particular bus because it doesn't go to Pearse Street. If the driver had to stop at every stop and every person if they wanted to get on even if they didn't, then the bus would take twice as long. Hence why you need to stick your hand out.

You're kinda right, the 66,67,67A,25,25A,26 terminate in D'olier St. The 68 and 69 terminate in College Green, a 2 minute walk away. My point would not be valid if the route ended up in 2 completely different parts of the city but thats just not the case. And anyway if we make the assumption that most people have to walk at least 5 minutes from their house to the stop then why wouldnt they be willing to walk 5 minutes when they get off the bus? Its never going to be a door to door service.

Im just making the point that they pass you by if you dont put your hand out ( often cos Im txting, reading a paper and dont see them till their past- is it fair to ask customers to stand to attention scanning the road for buses in the hope one comes along?) and they know well at my stop all routes end up less than 150m apart. Its just drivers being lazy, errrm no hand, grand, put the foot down. I could understand this if the route splits up massively and different buses go to completley different places but thats not the case where I am.

Finally I'll say I used to work in a pub where alot of drivers drink and if you heard some of the stories they laugh about leaving passangers high and dry ( the worst I ever heard was leaving an OAPs who forgot their bus pass at the stop but there were loads of them) then you'd probably get my opint of view.

Im just glad to be shut of Dublin Bus, they always seem to have the ability to make me stressed before Id even done a minutes work. Since Ive got my moped I havent looked back and now I use their lovely bus lanes to get into work twice as quick with none of the hassle, I'll never go back.

bonkey

djpbarry wrote: »

No, but Dublin Bus only have so many drivers. Their shifts are obviously concentrated on weekday rush-hours. Sundays are not a high priority.

I would argue you have it the wrong way round.

I would imagine that Dublin Bus do not run a frequent service on Sundays because there is less demand, not because there is less availability of drivers.