Michael O Leary on The Last Word

veryangryman

Brilliant interview i heard last week between Michael and Matt

For anyone who's missed it, he basically dismissed the Luas and the Metro as "vanity projects" which were a complete waste given the fact that 90% of Dublin commuter traffic is car-based. He felt that the money would have been better spent on Motorways (DOOR anyone??) and car parking facilities in the middle of Dublin.

Have to say i think he speaks much sense. Public transport has its part to play in the greater scheme of things, but i feel that the Luas done very little for commuters, especially the way its turned out with no interconnecting lines etc. Compare with the Port Tunnel extension of the M50, new bypasses etc and look at the improved quality of life this brings for people in comparison. I for one, have heard feck all praise of the Luas.

The only thing i doubt is the feasibility of creating parking space in the city..Its fairly maxxed out as it is, so would be difficult.

Anyways, its a slow day at the office, so any debate/opinion would be cool to speed up things :pac:

markpb

That's a bit of a circular argument. You're saying there's no point building more lines because people don't use them but a lot of motorists say they'd use PT if there were more lines. Likewise, without more lines there can't be more integration and the start of a proper PT network (although I agree that building the green line that integrates with nothing was spectacularly poor).

Secondly, there's no point saying we shouldn't build by-passes instead of train lines because they're not for the same area. A new by-pass anywhere in the country (even around Dublin), won't help reduce congestion in the city centre. The only thing that can reduce congestion there is public transport - there just isn't space for more cars.

Finally when it comes to building public transport for cities, MOL (who I do respect), is the last person you'd talk to. Not only does he not live in a city (sorry Mullingar people but it's just not ), all he cares about is getting people from their homes to the airport.

brianthebard

MOL is a bit of a pain, just because he's been able to run an airline successfully people look to him for all sorts of transport answers, when really he doesn't have much to say. Besides encouraging more people to drive to work, making the roads more clogged and continuing all the associated problems with mass car commuting, what would be the benefits of such a plan?

veryangryman

Im going to get hammered for this, but this is the truth...

I think that what people say and what they mean are very different things. People in decent jobs and decent incomes are always going to choose to get behind the wheel rather than walk to stop, wait 15-20 minutes and then face into every gob in the city, with their only hopes being to get a seat and/or that it wont be windy/raining. This is regardless of public transport. Improved road facilities giving more room for traffic to move faster around the city would aid these people.

More improved roads/motorways would divert more traffic away from the city altogether eg the DOOR. Thus would free up space on the M50 and by extension, allow easier movement around the city

The Luas is a disgrace with its complete lack of choice of routes it allows. I want to hear somebody give it some genuine praise before i back down from this argument. Dublin Bus does a decent job (open to correction as im not a Dub but just from visiting city..) but overall in the current climate with little money to go around, i think car facilities should be prioritised

markpb

I don't think that's true. People in Ireland currently choose to drive, even where decent public transport is available because that's the culture. It's not sustainable (not for environmental reasons) because there just isn't enough space. Show me any city that has managed to build enough roads to cope?

On the other hand, relatively rich people in London, Paris and New York will happy take the train to work. They have to walk for a few minutes to the train station, wait a few minutes and sit on a train for 30+ minutes to get to the central zones of those cities. What's the difference? A better public transport system and a realisation that, in a city, not everyone can drive. You're saying we shouldn't build that better system.

veryangryman

markpb wrote: »

Show me any city that has managed to build enough roads to cope?

On the other hand, relatively rich people in London, Paris and New York will happy take the train to work. They have to walk for a few minutes to the train station, wait a few minutes and sit on a train for 30+ minutes to get to the central zones of those cities. What's the difference? A better public transport system and a realisation that, in a city, not everyone can drive. You're saying we shouldn't build that better system.

Michael O Leary is a maverick who has done more for getting this country going than any current planner/councillor. He has innovated the airline industry to such an extent that it directly affects my own lifestyle. And i salute him for that.

His methods are hard and extreme, but even Hitler built a dinger of a Motorway network in Germany for all his sins.

I dont have an answer to your Q of what could be done re: parking/driving in cities, but I'll bet he does.

Right, i think ive sucked him off quite enough today. Moving on... I think that while public transport is desirable, the reality is that its been done extremely badly in the city with very few success stories. I have little faith that the Metro/Luas extensions will deliver much bang for the buck we are spending on them. Time will tell

peter1892

There will always be people who choose to drive. Whether those people are the company CEO's with big cars & a parking space at their office or those who need to drive because there's no alternative for them.

The Luas is good. It delivers people from the suburbs it serves to the city centre & vice-versa. It's reliable and in the case of the current green line, fast. Because it doesn't share the line with other trains it can be run without a timetable, with trams arriving at regular intervals.

Where it fails is the lack of integration, not just between the two lines but with existing public transport modes (bus & rail). Where it does link into existing transport links there is then the problem of no integrated ticketing system & no integrated timetables (admittedly these issues are often beyond the control of Luas/Veolia/RPA).

I'd also argue that a low-capacity tram isn't really a good solution for the numbers it's trying to cater for, a higher capacity metro or even a Dart-style train might have been a better option. That said, passenger numbers dropped by 1 million last year.

Yes we need the roads & motorways but would something like DOOR really take traffic away from Dublin city centre? Much of the traffic that would use such a road is probably already using the M50, or even avoiding that road altogether & using whatever routes are already available (back-roads & the like). Although getting unnecessary traffic off the M50 would help things a lot.

I don't see these as 'vanity projects', they're necessary. What's needed is a reliable, integrated service that the public will want to use.

A better public transport system and a realisation that, in a city, not everyone can drive.

Exactly.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

veryangryman wrote: »

For anyone who's missed it, he basically dismissed the Luas and the Metro as "vanity projects" which were a complete waste given the fact that 90% of Dublin commuter traffic is car-based.

THIS IS THE BLOODY PROBLEM! Why the fvck is it being encouraged...? Are we trying for the magic number of 100% or something?

He felt that the money would have been better spent on Motorways (DOOR anyone??) and car parking facilities in the middle of Dublin.

How, exactly, is a motorway going to help people commuting into Dublin City Centre?

Have to say i think he speaks much sense. Public transport has its part to play in the greater scheme of things, but i feel that the Luas done very little for commuters, especially the way its turned out with no interconnecting lines etc. Compare with the Port Tunnel extension of the M50, new bypasses etc and look at the improved quality of life this brings for people in comparison. I for one, have heard feck all praise of the Luas.
Jesus, Ireland gets even more backward by the minute...

The only thing i doubt is the feasibility of creating parking space in the city..Its fairly maxxed out as it is, so would be difficult.

Anyways, its a slow day at the office, so any debate/opinion would be cool to speed up things :pac:

Luas is ok, if you live near it and want to go into town. Problem is, as has been pointed out, it's not expanisve enough. But then surely funds should be divirted into expansion programs...?

Dublin is, as you say, too maxxed out at the moment. You're going to pay through the nose for parking. Also, how in the hell are you going to get more cars on the roads in the city centre?

O'Leary's points are only really valid if you're travelling from one city/town to another, not for commuting.

veryangryman

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

THIS IS THE BLOODY PROBLEM! Why the fvck is it being encouraged...? Are we trying for the magic number of 100% or something?

Alot of people like to drive, as stated before. Check New York/Paris as an example. Loads of public transport options yet streets still clogged with traffic. Why? Because people like the comfort of a car rather than dealing with the general public on a day to day basis

Ikky Poo2 wrote: »

How, exactly, is a motorway going to help people commuting into Dublin City Centre?

I mentioned the reason before. But to break it down.


1. Mr X going from Drogheda - Bray for instance takes M50
2. M50 has less capacity
3. M50 eventually gets too packed for commuters to use it to get around city
4. Traffic on streets suffers because people see that its just as slow to use the M50

With the DOOR and other Motorway projects, Mr X can avoid the M50. This has ripple effects of reducing traffic on streets

murphaph

I'm not going to get bogged down in a debate with you VAM but please look at any city which tried to build roads to combat congestion-they all failed or are urban wastelands you wouldn't want to live in. Cities are about MUCH more than commuting to and from monday-friday. People LIVE and BREATHE in them. They should be pleasant places to be. Motorised traffic everywhere is NOT conducive to good living.

High quality public transport is the only option for mass transit within city limits. Motorways outside cities are appropriate. When high quality public transit has been provided in this city, it has been met with enthusiasm-see the 46A QBC (the only true QBC in the city) to show that even a bus (if it's reliable) will encourage people out of cars.

Dublin can still redeem itself. All is not lost. The will needs to be there but I despair when I hear people like O'Leary talking of public transport in the way in which he does. Margaret Thatcher stuff.

Polar101

veryangryman wrote: »

Loads of public transport options yet streets still clogged with traffic. Why? Because people like the comfort of a car rather than dealing with the general public on a day to day basis

People who don't like to see other people should probably migrate to a less populated area, then. A lot of people prefer good public transport to sitting in a car alone in a traffic jam.

markf909

veryangryman wrote:

More improved roads/motorways would divert more traffic away from the city altogether eg the DOOR. Thus would free up space on the M50 and by extension, allow easier movement around the city

The DOOR will make a lot of speculative land owners and developers very rich while doing the square root of nothing for Dublin's chronic commuter traffic.

You've mentioned the DOOR 3 times in 3 differents posts, any interests to declare?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

veryangryman wrote: »

Alot of people like to drive, as stated before. Check New York/Paris as an example. Loads of public transport options yet streets still clogged with traffic. Why? Because people like the comfort of a car rather than dealing with the general public on a day to day basis

"Liking" something and "doing" somethign are different things. You mentioned two cities with massive polution/congestion problems. Is that what you want for Dublin?

I mentioned the reason before. But to break it down.


1. Mr X going from Drogheda - Bray for instance takes M50
2. M50 has less capacity
3. M50 eventually gets too packed for commuters to use it to get around city
4. Traffic on streets suffers because people see that its just as slow to use the M50

With the DOOR and other Motorway projects, Mr X can avoid the M50. This has ripple effects of reducing traffic on streets

And how long before the DOOR is also packed to capacity and MR X is demanding a third motorway? And it won't reduce traffic because, as you said yourself, people like to drive.

SeanW

veryangryman wrote: »

With the DOOR and other Motorway projects, Mr X can avoid the M50. This has ripple effects of reducing traffic on streets

Remember that the M50 was originally built as the "Dublin Bypass."

If we continue with road and car driven urban planning, how long will it be before your DOOR (the "Dublin Bypass Mark 2") likewise becomes a suburban mainstreet like the M50? Besides IMO the actions taken on the M50, widening and freeflowing interchanges, have been entirely correct.

The 2 Luas lines are running an "operating surplus" i.e. a profit before depreciation, and both opened at capacity, much like existing heavy rail DART and Commuter services into Dublin, all or most of which are now likewise running at or over capacity.
This suggests that there is very much a need for more and higher quality public transport.
People living in remote areas and working in the City Centre can be facilitated with Park+Ride and connecting buses, all of which are far more efficient than trying to expend roads and parking in the City Centre, that would involve tearing down about 1/4 of the city. Besides, what happens next time oil prices go crazy? They might not go down again, like they did late-2008!

It sounds like Michael O Leary is just beig snobbish and wants more Bus Lanes for his "Taxi."

veryangryman

markf909 wrote: »

You've mentioned the DOOR 3 times in 3 differents posts, any interests to declare?

Nope. Not from Dublin or any of the surrounding DOOR-related places and would rarely if ever, have to use it. Its just an example of something that can be used to divert some of the traffic, thus freeing up space for city users

There is no silver bullet answer to all this. I just feel that not enough is going to be done for car users in comparison to the plans for PT in Transport21

This isn't 100% on topic, but just to throw it out there, what do you think would be more beneficial... The Western Rail Corridoor Development or a fully built M17/M18/M20.

Commuters prefer to drive, and while that isnt 100% possible in places like Dublin, they should be facilitated as much as is reasonably possible considering the amount drivers contribute to the exchequer.

Again, like i said there is no silver bullet..thats just my opinion. Everyones got one

themont85

Boo Michael O'Leary. Anyone who has been to LA knows what an absolute tip it looks like with its serious lack of PT. Roads are part of the solution but shouldn't be relied on.

bk

veryangryman wrote: »

There is no silver bullet answer to all this. I just feel that not enough is going to be done for car users in comparison to the plans for PT in Transport21

You got to be kidding!!!

The government is currently completing one of the largest motorway building projects in the world, connecting every city in Ireland to Dublin by Motorway and the M50 upgrade and you think not enough is being done
for car users!!! That is just nuts.

I've the opposite opinion, I think for the most part PT and road projects have been fairly well balanced, but that the PT projects should have been started much earlier, at the same time as the road project.

BrianD

veryangryman wrote: »

Brilliant interview i heard last week between Michael and Matt

For anyone who's missed it, he basically dismissed the Luas and the Metro as "vanity projects" which were a complete waste given the fact that 90% of Dublin commuter traffic is car-based. He felt that the money would have been better spent on Motorways (DOOR anyone??) and car parking facilities in the middle of Dublin.

Have to say i think he speaks much sense. Public transport has its part to play in the greater scheme of things, but i feel that the Luas done very little for commuters, especially the way its turned out with no interconnecting lines etc. Compare with the Port Tunnel extension of the M50, new bypasses etc and look at the improved quality of life this brings for people in comparison. I for one, have heard feck all praise of the Luas.

The only thing i doubt is the feasibility of creating parking space in the city..Its fairly maxxed out as it is, so would be difficult.

Anyways, its a slow day at the office, so any debate/opinion would be cool to speed up things :pac:

Well Michael does have a point but it is misguided. The real problem is bad planning which has allowed a suburban sprawl that will never be efficeiently served by public transport (especially in a cost effective basis). Therefore there is a reliance on cars and given that we have allowed villages on R or L roads to become suburban housing estates it's little wonder that new roads are met with public approval.

Despite what you might think there is universal praise for the LUAS but the LUAS is not the solution for Dublins public transportation. It is a merely one spoke in the wheel. The LUAS is irrelevant to public outside of the 'corridors' taht it serves. The fact that the lines do not join up is not a major issue. It would be nice but there's absolutely no evidence to indicate that Green line users would be automatic users of the Red line and vice versa. It would be great if they were linked but I think a lot of people miss the point. The LUAS does interconnect with other modes of transport - rail and bus.

I would agree that the Metro Airport as originally proposed would have been a monument to ineffective and useless planning that the FF government has brought to Dublin. However, now that Swords is the primary destination it makes sense but it would have been better if built as a DARt line (underground) and integrated into the heavy rail network. CIE don't have to build it or operate it so long as it plugs into the rest of the DART network. At the moment. all we are getting is another LUAS line with the word Metro painted on the sides of the tram.

The notion of creating more parking spaces in Dublin is ridiculous in this day and age. Only an idiot would call for it. Even with cheap available land, you would simply never be able to meet the demand for space and then manage traffic flows. BTW I don't know why you point to the port tunnel as being welcomed by the public as by and large the public don't use it. The key benefit has been the REMOVAL of traffic from the city.

Hopefully the current economic conditions will bring a correction to the urban sprawl and indeed the Greens in government should assist it. What need is a decent tranportation authority in Dublin who will plan routes in conjunction with sustainable planning and development. We need to see population densities within Dublin 'proper' increase which will in turn make further investments in public transportation viable and efficient. The net result should be that living in a suburban house in, say, a village in Cavan and commuting to Dublin by car will become unsustainable and something that nobody in the right mind would do.

BrianD

veryangryman wrote: »

The Luas is a disgrace with its complete lack of choice of routes it allows. I want to hear somebody give it some genuine praise before i back down from this argument. Dublin Bus does a decent job (open to correction as im not a Dub but just from visiting city..) but overall in the current climate with little money to go around, i think car facilities should be prioritised

Possibily the most ridiculous comment I have read in a long time and really diminishs your arguement. How can the LUAS offer choice when it is a fixed line that goes from A to B? It's like saying that the Ryanair doesn't offer choice because it doesn't fly to Navan or the 46A doesn't offer choice because it won't serve Tallaght on the way to Dun Laoghaire. The LUAS is part of a system and an expanding system at that. If you want praise for the luas ask the twenty odd million people who use it each year.

there is a huge amount of parking available in Dublin both on street and in car parks (remember there were huge tax breaks given to car parks in the 1980's) so Dublin possible has more inner city car parks then most cities its size.

the bottom line is that car borne transport may seem like a quick and easy fix at the moment but is entirely unsustainable in the long run.

veryangryman

The LUAS is TWO lines last i checked. And has been a well publicised overpriced project. How you compare that with Ryanair who have ~100 different routes is beyond me. Regarding choice, they could have done well to service the Northside better.

Yes its being upgraded etc, but at what cost-benefit ratio? You only have to look at how much quicker a simple upgrade of roads get the traffic moving quicker (M50/N7 extra lanes anyone?) I just dont see the LUAS as being a decent long-term investment. Im sure its lovely for those who live by it

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

veryangryman wrote: »

The LUAS is TWO lines last i checked. And has been a well publicised overpriced project. How you compare that with Ryanair who have ~100 different routes is beyond me. Regarding choice, they could have done well to service the Northside better.

Yes its being upgraded etc, but at what cost-benefit ratio? You only have to look at how much quicker a simple upgrade of roads get the traffic moving quicker (M50/N7 extra lanes anyone?) I just dont see the LUAS as being a decent long-term investment. Im sure its lovely for those who live by it

What?! And building more roads IS a "decent long-term investiment"?!

veryangryman

In short, yes if you future proof them well enough (ie give them enough lanes, quality junctions etc)

BrianD

veryangryman wrote: »

The LUAS is TWO lines last i checked. And has been a well publicised overpriced project. How you compare that with Ryanair who have ~100 different routes is beyond me. Regarding choice, they could have done well to service the Northside better.

Yes its being upgraded etc, but at what cost-benefit ratio? You only have to look at how much quicker a simple upgrade of roads get the traffic moving quicker (M50/N7 extra lanes anyone?) I just dont see the LUAS as being a decent long-term investment. Im sure its lovely for those who live by it

Yes but how can you argue that LUAS offers a lack of choice when everybody knows exactly where it serves??? The two existing lines are only a part of a tram network that will be built in time. A tram line won't appear overnight and yes the northside does need tram lines. And yes, it is only meant to serve those who live by it!! Were you under the impression that it would do anything else????? Given the amount of patronage that it gets it would seem to be very much a long term success. It is now down to the powers that be to ensure that new lines are built and not to stop like the government did with the DART in 1984.

Why do you ask for a cost-benefit analysis for a tram line and not for a new road project or perhaps a Ryanair flight. We all know what happens when the costs get too much on a Ryanair flight. It gets pulled and thats that. I's imagine that the cost benefit analysis for some motorways and new road projects are horrific. The M1 is practically empty most of the day. What's the benefit of the port tunnel? A hugely expensive project who's real benefit is remove trucks from the city centre thus improving the quality of life. That's exactly how it was sold to the public.

Public transport is operated for the benefit of the public at large and in most places is subsidised in some shape or form. Ideally it should pay for itself but if it has to be subsidised so be it.

The M50/N7 extra lanes are being built and in time they will be full. Why are they full? Because people like you think it's great to live in a suburban house or worse a one off house in the country (subsidised by me) and travel by car. The bottom line is that we will never be able to take these people off the roads as there is no practical option other than getting employment in your own county. BTW I have no idea where you live so take the above remark as a generalisation.

BTW it's ironic that Michael O'Leary should talk about vanity projects. Two words for him - Aer and Lingus.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

veryangryman wrote: »

In short, yes if you future proof them well enough (ie give them enough lanes, quality junctions etc)

You're insane...

What happens when, in a few years time, it's overcrowded as well...? Just build another one?
There is NO furture for mass private transport. The resources of Dublin are NOT finite and the sooner Dublin drivers realise this the better.

corktina

the only thing that improving roads acheives is to create MORE traffic..if you make it easier to drive into Dublin City centre, more people will do it and you will be back to square one PDQ

To improve Public Transport, you have to reduce the amount of cars on the road and the way to do this is to hit the private motorist in the pocket...congestion charges, car park charges etc.

the hard word is we will all have to end our love affair with the car some time soon.

peter1892

veryangryman wrote: »

1. Mr X going from Drogheda - Bray for instance takes M50
2. M50 has less capacity
3. M50 eventually gets too packed for commuters to use it to get around city
4. Traffic on streets suffers because people see that its just as slow to use the M50

With the DOOR and other Motorway projects, Mr X can avoid the M50. This has ripple effects of reducing traffic on streets

Except that DOOR leaves Mr X in Naas. Wrong side of the Wicklow mountains.

But if Mr X were to hop onto the train on Monday morning in Drogheda he'd be in Bray within 1 hour 40 minutes. And that's next monday, one train, no changes.

On the other hand, Miss Y has just graduated from college & is living in Lucan. But her job is Sandyford & she doesn't have a car. So she's stuck on the bus morning & evening trying to get into town to get to or from the Luas green line, only the bus still takes forever because even with the bus lanes the traffic on the quays is very heavy so it takes an hour to get into town in the morning, then she walks for 15 minutes to get on the Luas which takes 25 minutes to reach her workplace.

So, after 6 months she thinks 'sod it', buys a car, and becomes yet another single occupant of a car taking up space on roads that are already congested.

Rawr

peter1892 wrote: »

On the other hand, Miss Y has just graduated from college & is living in Lucan. But her job is Sandyford & she doesn't have a car. So she's stuck on the bus morning & evening trying to get into town to get to or from the Luas green line, only the bus still takes forever because even with the bus lanes the traffic on the quays is very heavy so it takes an hour to get into town in the morning, then she walks for 15 minutes to get on the Luas which takes 25 minutes to reach her workplace.

So, after 6 months she thinks 'sod it', buys a car, and becomes yet another single occupant of a car taking up space on roads that are already congested.

Well said there Peter, nail hitten with hammer!

RuggieBear

is this the same o'leary who bought himself a taxi plate to avail of the (public transport) bus lanes?

cyclopath2001

veryangryman wrote: »

90% of Dublin commuter traffic is car-based.

Did O'Leary say that?

Last stat I can find, shows it between 50 and 60%.

Wishbone Ash

veryangryman wrote: »

Im sure its lovely for those who live by it

BrianD wrote: »

it is only meant to serve those who live by it!!

I don't live anywhere near either LUAS lines but I use them regularly.

veryangryman - don't idolise MOL too much. Just think, if he ran the Luas, Dublin Bus, Bus Eireann, Irish Rail etc. you'd get to the outskirts of the city only and he would recomend a particular car rental or taxi service to get you the rest of the way.

themont85

RuggieBear wrote: »

is this the same o'leary who bought himself a taxi plate to avail of the (public transport) bus lanes?

I completely forgot about that, the hypocracy is unreal.

LiamD

veryangryman wrote: »

I think that what people say and what they mean are very different things. People in decent jobs and decent incomes are always going to choose to get behind the wheel rather than walk to stop, wait 15-20 minutes and then face into every gob in the city, with their only hopes being to get a seat and/or that it wont be windy/raining.

I think this is a very good point. People like comfort and convenience, which most bus routes in Dublin don't offer unless you can get the 46A. The only reason I use buses is necessity. As soon as I graduate and get a job the first thing I'm buying is a car.

KC61

LiamD wrote: »

I think this is a very good point. People like comfort and convenience, which most bus routes in Dublin don't offer unless you can get the 46A. The only reason I use buses is necessity. As soon as I graduate and get a job the first thing I'm buying is a car.

That's not strictly true - virtually all of the new bus routes introduced in Dublin in recent years - 4/4A, 128, 140, 145, 151 have all been frequent and operate directly along the relevant QBC without deviation.

Judgement Day

veryangryman wrote: »

Im going to get hammered for this, but this is the truth...



The Luas is a disgrace with its complete lack of choice of routes it allows. I want to hear somebody give it some genuine praise before i back down from this argument. Dublin Bus does a decent job (open to correction as im not a Dub but just from visiting city..) but overall in the current climate with little money to go around, i think car facilities should be prioritised

What a strange comment! The Luas system is widely accepted as being excellent thus far. How this will pan out with the extensions now being constructed is far from clear as overcrowding is already a serious problem. Luas, if anything, is a victim of its own success.

If you want to attract car drivers to public transport quality is all important - you will not persuade people to leave their car at home in favour of getting the bus. Dublin Bus for all its fleet improvements remains the preserve of students, OAPs and foreigners. Nothing against the aforementioned but in the main they are not car drivers. :)

LiamD

KC61 wrote: »

That's not strictly true - virtually all of the new bus routes introduced in Dublin in recent years - 4/4A, 128, 140, 145, 151 have all been frequent and operate directly along the relevant QBC without deviation.

Frequency is just one element though. Proximity of bus stops, journey time, quality of the bus (I know others don't like this attitude but I prefer travelling on 'new' buses i.e. not the RVs, especially in the rain). I've found that on some routes after the 3rd or 4th stop from town the buses will be full, increasing waiting time for those people.

KC61

LiamD wrote: »

Frequency is just one element though. Proximity of bus stops, journey time, quality of the bus (I know others don't like this attitude but I prefer travelling on 'new' buses i.e. not the RVs, especially in the rain). I've found that on some routes after the 3rd or 4th stop from town the buses will be full, increasing waiting time for those people.

Most of your arguments are dealt with with my point. If there is a high frequency then waiting times should be lower. Journey times improve if the routes do not deviate from the QBC. I am aware that other routes need updating, but faced with the licensing obstacles that DoT put up that is easier said than done.

As for the quality of bus - the oldest buses in the fleet are 11 years old - and 100 more replacement buses are currently hitting the roads, replacing 100 RV Class buses. I cannot imagine that you are seriously suggesting that most people look at the type of bus DB use serving an area before deciding whether or not to use the bus.

Other routes' schedules, such as the 15/15A/15B and 74/74A were recast in 2008, with a huge improvement in the bus service for Knocklyon in particular, but which still suffer from serious pinchpoints - such as Terenure and Rathmines. Short of demolishing half the villages in question, these will remain a problem.

The 75 was also recast, and has become a much more reliable service, but most people remember the old schedule which was well overdue a change and its inherent reliability problems and DB now have a struggle to get people to try the bus again.

There is an awful lot to be done, but it is not fair to suggest that the 46A is the only decent route in the city.

LiamD

KC61 wrote: »

As for the quality of bus - the oldest buses in the fleet are 11 years old - and 100 more replacement buses are currently hitting the roads, replacing 100 RV Class buses. I cannot imagine that you are seriously suggesting that most people look at the type of bus DB use serving an area before deciding whether or not to use the bus.

Other routes' schedules, such as the 15/15A/15B and 74/74A were recast in 2008, with a huge improvement in the bus service for Knocklyon in particular, but which still suffer from serious pinchpoints - such as Terenure and Rathmines. Short of demolishing half the villages in question, these will remain a problem.

The 75 was also recast, and has become a much more reliable service, but most people remember the old schedule which was well overdue a change and its inherent reliability problems and DB now have a struggle to get people to try the bus again.

There is an awful lot to be done, but it is not fair to suggest that the 46A is the only decent route in the city.

I appreciate that the bus routes in question have been improved and the frequency is now much more adequate for the amount of people using the service. My point was that I'd rather take the car, the only reason I don't is I'm a student and it's slightly beyond budget.

I personally find it rather uncomfortable to use these services as the peak time buses seem to be mostly older style. The recent press said that none of the 100 buses you mentioned will be going to Ringsend, the garage that operates these routes.

I'm not suggesting the 46A is the only decent route, I'm sorry if it came across that way, it was just an example of a route that I could see myself being happy using instead of a car.

Lennoxschips

veryangryman wrote: »

1. Mr X going from Drogheda - Bray for instance takes M50
2. M50 has less capacity
3. M50 eventually gets too packed for commuters to use it to get around city
4. Traffic on streets suffers because people see that its just as slow to use the M50

With the DOOR and other Motorway projects, Mr X can avoid the M50. This has ripple effects of reducing traffic on streets

There's not that many Mr. Xs.

Terrontress

Lennoxschips wrote: »

There's not that many Mr. Xs.

Mr. Me. Living in Donabate, working in Sandyford Ind Est. When I need to bring the car to work, which happens maybe twice a month, I drive down the M1, Grace Park Ave, Ballybough, Gardner St., Rogerson's Quay, along the canal and out the M11. This is in spite of there being motorway all the way from Donabate to Sandyford Industrial Estate. It's a ridiculous situation.

Alot of the problem is that the motorways are Dublin-centric. Someone driving from Dundalk to Cork or points in between have to use the M50. There needs to be an alternative.

As for Brian D posting here, he mentions the 20 million people who used the Luas last year and says it is for people who live near it. 20 million living near the Luas? Is he sure he is not talking about Tokyo and the Yamanote line?

cyclopath2001

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

veryangryman - don't idolise MOL too much. Just think, if he ran the Luas, Dublin Bus, Bus Eireann, Irish Rail etc. you'd get to the outskirts of the city only and he would recomend a particular car rental or taxi service to get you the rest of the way.

If you look at how he runs his airline, it's all about transferring risk, effort and cost onto the customer. You fly when it suits RyanAir best and if you have to walk a kilometre through the airport to get to the gate because the rent's cheaper there, then that's what you do. If he could get away without assisting people with special needs, he would. It's not profitable.

He needs to fill his planes as close as he can to full capacity. So, he doesn't put on extra planes to suit people's personal schedules, he doesn't serve routes where there's not enough business to fill the planes.

Now, if we look at the amount of valuable road space wasted by mostly-empty private cars what would he do about that?

amacachi

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

If you look at how he runs his airline, it's all about transferring risk, effort and cost onto the customer.

Yup, that'll get people to use public transport.

markpb

veryangryman wrote: »

In short, yes if you future proof them well enough (ie give them enough lanes, quality junctions etc)

You've probably stopped reading this thread by now having dismissed us all as PT loving loonies. We're not really.

On the outset, what you're proposing makes sense. Cars are much more convenient than buses or trains. Who wouldn't prefer to take the car if they could? No walking, no waiting, no getting stuck in the rain.

However, history teaches us otherwise. Los Angeles is the typical (and over-used) example. For decades they built for car and ignored public transport. They upgraded avenues to roads, roads to freeways, bulldozed houses and businesses to make space for more lanes, build overhead when no more houses could be bulldozed, upgraded the junctions and, after a huge effort, have achieved a magnificent road network. A staggering 100 million miles a day are driven on LA roads.

But you know what.... LACMTA have realised that no more roads can be built - there's no space, there's no money and the CBA for upgrading existing roads just isn't positive. So they're pushing all their resources into public transport. They already have one underground rail line, five or six heavy rail lines, one light rail line, one bus rapid transit line, a growing network of express/priority bus routes and a huge and well-integrated network of normal bus routes. They run buses 24/7. They somewhat controversially won the APTA best public transport network award last year.

If Los Angeles have decided that the future doesn't lie in the roads, who are we to argue differently?

BrianD

Terrontress wrote: »

As for Brian D posting here, he mentions the 20 million people who used the Luas last year and says it is for people who live near it. 20 million living near the Luas? Is he sure he is not talking about Tokyo and the Yamanote line?

No, I am talking about the Red and Green tram lines in Dublin which carried 27.4 million passengers between them last year. A million down on the year before apparently. The measurement is 'passenger journeys' and is pretty much the standard metric used accross all forms of transportation.

cyclopath2001

amacachi wrote: »

Yup, that'll get people to use public transport.

So, for car drivers, RyanRoads (tm) would introduce a pay-per-use charge, higher for popular times and places. In addition, all parking (including outside your own house) would be charged for, again varying by popularity of the time of day according to competing demand for the same space.

Those living in remote locations would be charged extra to make up for lower revenue due to less traffic. Non-viable roads would be closed down.

Naturally, the only fuel stations on the RyanRoads would be owned by the operator offering an attractive range of carefully-selected fuels at special prices and the opportunity the buy a RyanRoad lottery ticket to win a free credit on RyanRoads (non-popular times/routes only, not including taxes and handling charges).

And, you'd be allowed to drive in the outside lane if you paid an extra charge....

Amtmann

Terrontress wrote: »

As for Brian D posting here, he mentions the 20 million people who used the Luas last year and says it is for people who live near it. 20 million living near the Luas? Is he sure he is not talking about Tokyo and the Yamanote line?

To be pedantic, that's obviously not 20 million individuals. It might be only 133,000 people each making 150 journeys a year.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

cyclopath2001 wrote: »

Now, if we look at the amount of valuable road space wasted by mostly-empty private cars what would he do about that?

Charge people to car-pool probably

Terrontress

BrianD wrote: »

No, I am talking about the Red and Green tram lines in Dublin which carried 27.4 million passengers between them last year. A million down on the year before apparently. The measurement is 'passenger journeys' and is pretty much the standard metric used accross all forms of transportation.

You stated:

Ask the twenty odd million people who use it each year.

There obviously wasn't 20 million people using it last year. There may have been 20 million journeys but I would doubt if there were even 20 million different people in Ireland throughout last year.

Furet wrote: »

To be pedantic, that's obviously not 20 million individuals. It might be only 133,000 people each making 150 journeys a year.

I know it's being pedantic but it is the kind of hyperbole trotted out all the time to make something sound more impressive. And I'm sure those 133,000 people nearly all made return trips in their 150 journeys. So that's 133,000 people making on average 75 trips.

I may have driven my car 8 times in the last week but you can't instruct someone to get an opinion off the 8 people driving my car in the past 8 days. If he is going to try to massage figures, he should really come up with a believable figure.

skywalker_208

markpb wrote: »

relatively rich people in London, Paris and New York will happy take the train to work. They have to walk for a few minutes to the train station, wait a few minutes and sit on a train for 30+ minutes to get to the central zones of those cities. What's the difference? A better public transport system and a realisation that, in a city, not everyone can drive. You're saying we shouldn't build that better system.

I think if we had a system like London, Paris or New York where you can hop on and off at any location and arrive at any other location in the space of a few minutes - of course more people would use it! But we don't. We have 2 crappy separate Luas lines, a few dart lines and a bus network. This cannot be compared to the underground systems mentioned above...

Therefore people drive

mikemac

I walk/cycle or use the moped into work.
When walking and past the national schools on my route, I'd say easily over 60% of cars have one person in them.

What a waste. If only half used a bus you'd take 30 cars off a route. It might take 2 traffic light cycles to get 30 cars through some junctions. Imagine the time saved!

However I don't use the bus and if you used Dublin Bus and knew the vermin on the 78A, you'd understand too.
I live on an excellent bus route, reliablilty is fine and fares are resonable. The reason I don't use it is to use the generic term "anti-social behaviour". It goes on the Luas too, experienced it tonight from Kingswood to Black Horse. It's a pity but I've a low tolerance of this kind of messing
So I'll stick to the moped mainly for now and this doesn't realy cause congestion to anyone

Judgement Day

skywalker_208 wrote: »

We have 2 crappy separate Luas lines, a few dart lines and a bus network. This cannot be compared to the underground systems mentioned above...

Therefore people drive

The two 'crappy' Luas lines managed to carry almost 28 million passengers in 2008! While much remains to be done on the Dublin public transport front it has been utterly transformed in the last few years - ask anybody who remembers the 1970's when people had to use army lorries on a number of occasions.

As for scumbags on the Luas - zero tolerance is the only answer - and at least on Luas there is a highly visible security presence. When did you last see security or, indeed, any staff other than the unfortunate driver on a Dublin Bus?

skywalker_208

Judgement Day wrote: »

managed to carry almost 28 million passengers in 2008!

So?
It is still an inadequate system which services a very small portion of the city...