Dublin Bus Network Review

cson

One door for almost 100 people if full really puts the stupidity into perspective.

lucernarian

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

the issue is the slowing down, stopping and accelerating of buses unnecessarily due to the number of stops, not necessarily if the are busy or not. if you have a 1km road with 4 stops on it (such as where I used to live) and reduced it to 3 there'd be no appreciable impact to customers (30 second more walking) but the time saved by the bus, the reduction in fuel use and wear and tear on parts would be appreciable in the long run and reduce cost on a fleet wide basis considerably.

My whole point is that many stops in suburban areas don't have people arriving or departing at them in the first place. If there's a stop that attracts nothing except a periodic lick of paint and the odd passenger, I see the significant time saving for the few people who use it to outweigh the rare "inconvenience" of a bus to stop.

My experience with buses mainly revolves around the 128, the 41/c and to a certain degree the 13/a and 4/a and 7. On the 41 and 128 routes in peak time, what happened that busy bus stops became busier while maybe an extra handful of stops along the whole route are used than would be the case at say 3pm. I didn't see any delay at commuting times as a result of paying a visit to every stop except on very rare (1/50) peak trips where 9 stops in a row might take place. I will admit that other routes will likely differ though.

schemingbohemia

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

Isn't the RTPI based on the AVL, according to that Deloitte report?? I couldn't think of the term for the actual system technology being deployed. You're being rather pedantic there.

My point was that staff may not be happy with being monitored continuously, in the same sense that cameras in the workplace (specifically employee-only) areas are controvertial.

sorry wasn't trying to be pedantic just trying to explain which element actually does the tracking - the avls will be in before all the RTPI signs are. and as has been pointed out it's already been agreed to.

but the main point i was making is true in the change it will make to fleet management for DB and the impact it will have on drivers, you won't (hopefully) be standing waiting at a bus stop seething with rage at the driver who's reading the paper when he/she should have left the terminus 10 minutes previously.

paulm17781

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

My whole point is that many stops in suburban areas don't have people arriving or departing at them in the first place. If there's a stop that attracts nothing except a periodic lick of paint and the odd passenger, I see the significant time saving for the few people who use it to outweigh the rare "inconvenience" of a bus to stop.

I would hugely disagree, there is never a stop that far away. There are far too many bus stops on each route, look at RTE, it has 3 stops along it!

Mimikyu

This post has been deleted.

lucernarian

paulm17781 wrote: »

I would hugely disagree, there is never a stop that far away. There are far too many bus stops on each route, look at RTE, it has 3 stops along it!

I mean the occasions where I've found myself walking down the road for a bus stop only for a bus that goes e.g. every 20 minutes to pass me before I get to the relevant stop. If you get rid of more stops, it's more likely that a bus will pass you while getting to one and those delays can be costly. This is naturally more prevalent in places which are not near the terminus of any routes and thereby makes timetabling irrelevant. like Rathmines before the 128, the 83 was and is a small proportion of buses. Or Ballsbridge.

Also I have no knowledge of the area near UCD or anywhere along the stillorgan QBC. I'm not saying that every bus stop is valid or welcome, I'm saying that many of the "surplus" ones make little practical difference to dwell times on a route because they are rarely used. I can think of a couple of stops on the 128 route that had a person or two waiting at every 2nd or 3rd journey I made, even though they're 200 metres apart and a 5 minute walk towards a Luas stop. The likes of that could do with some pruning alright.

patrickbrophy18

schemingbohemia wrote: »

i've highlighted the most important word there, you don't know what changes will definitely be made to your service, you haven't identified your service and you're going on and on about some northside-southside service deficit when nothing definitive has been published.

personally i'm hoping there is some merging of the 4/4a/7/45 service with the 8 being cut and no detouring of those services into blackrock village, and I'm surprised that there has been no mention of those as the 4/4a was specifically mentioned in the deloitte report. but i'll hold my judgement until actual, you know, details emerge.

Where did you here that the 8 is being cut? Does this mean that the 59 and 7D are also going to be removed?

KC61

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Where did you here that the 8 is being cut? Does this mean that the 59 and 7D are also going to be removed?

NOTHING has been announced yet.

"schemingbohemia" was expressing his/her own view! We won't know until Dublin Bus announce each phase.

Hold your horses!!!

Cookie_Monster

KC61 wrote: »

NOTHING has been announced yet.

"To be confirmed" was expressing his/her own view! We won't know until Dublin Bus announce each phase.

Hold your horses!!!

removal of 95 buses and 150 staff has been announced.

thats a pretty big deal in itself

patrickbrophy18

KC61 wrote: »

NOTHING has been announced yet.

"To be confirmed" was expressing his/her own view! We won't know until Dublin Bus announce each phase.

Hold your horses!!!

Thanks KC61, for straightening that out for me. I thought he was giving out leaked information. '''Few''':D

Cookie_Monster

patrickbrophy18 wrote: »

Thanks KC61, for straightening that out for me. I thought he was giving out leaked information. '''Few''':D

Monday will have the first phase details released seemingly

lucernarian

KC61 wrote: »

NOTHING has been announced yet.

"To be confirmed" was expressing his/her own view! We won't know until Dublin Bus announce each phase.

Hold your horses!!!

What?! I never spoke about the 8 bus service? But yes, I am expressing my own view, as always... Perhaps you could clarify what you meant by that, as the only thing I speculated on was that the plan would be a disaster?

I think the bit I said about Dublin Bus enjoying the detriment of staff and users is probably more truth than speculation:p

Cookie_Monster

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

What?! I never spoke about the 8 bus service? But yes, I am expressing my own view, as always...

schemingbohemia did here post 57

personally i'm hoping there is some merging of the 4/4a/7/45 service with the 8 being cut

opinion only though

angel01

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

What?! I never spoke about the 8 bus service? But yes, I am expressing my own view, as always...

Seems some folk here don't like us speculating but this is what a discussion board is for so keep on expressing your views

KC61

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

removal of 95 buses and 150 staff has been announced.

thats a pretty big deal in itself

I meant the specific route changes.

So far we've had wild speculation on this thread and the other about certain routes being cut. None of us know what the full plans are as yet that is what I was saying here.

As for the vehicles, it is quite probable that by, for example, combining the 10, 39 and 46a as I mentioned before that some vehicles may be surplus. That may also carry through with other route mergers. Now whether they *should* be withdrawn is another thing. However, I am prepared to hold fire until I actually see the plans in full detail.

Cookie_Monster

We should run a pot on what'll be cancelled or not :D:D

111 is my bet for the bin

KC61

angel01 wrote: »

Seems some folk here don't like us speculating but this is what a discussion board is for so keep on expressing your views

I'm not against expressing views, but you made it out as if it was a done deal that the 40D was destined for the chop!

I've not seen that said anywhere. In fact I cannot see any logic in that happening.

Expressing a fear that something may happen is one thing, but making comments that imply it will happen are two totally different things!

The problem with that sort of speculation is that people take it up (as patrickbrophy18 just did) as fact!!! That's why it is unhelpful.

KC61

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

What?! I never spoke about the 8 bus service? But yes, I am expressing my own view, as always... Perhaps you could clarify what you meant by that, as the only thing I speculated on was that the plan would be a disaster?

I think the bit I said about Dublin Bus enjoying the detriment of staff and users is probably more truth than speculation:p

Sorry - I picked up the wrong post - it was schemingbohemia that mentioned the 8! I've edited my post!

angel01

KC61 wrote: »

I'm not against expressing views, but you made it out as if it was a done deal that the 40D was destined for the chop!

I've not seen that said anywhere. In fact I cannot see any logic in that happening.

Expressing a fear that something may happen is one thing, but making comments that imply it will happen are two totally different things!

The problem with that sort of speculation is that people take it up (as patrickbrophy18 just did) as fact!!! That's why it is unhelpful.

I never mentioned what route was for the chop

KC61

angel01 wrote: »

I never mentioned what route was for the chop

Sorry again - I am as guilty as eeveryone else - I surmised it was either the 38C or the 40D?

From your posts it seemed to be the 40D you were referring to?

Victor

Threads merged.

devnull

Unfortunately DB bring it on themselves all the speculation, by the stages in which they release information which just asks for trouble they normally go like this for a regular timetable change, which I admit is different to the changes we are having now.

Stage 1: (Day 1 of change process started)
We're notifying you that a revised timetable will take effect shortly, more details will be posted on this website next week.

Stage 2 (A week later)
A revised timetable will take place on route <x> from <date>. you can access the timetable by clicking here.

Stage 3 (2-3 days after timetable posted.)
Timetable change takes place

What it should be is:

Stage 1:
A change to the timetable of route <x> will be taking place from <date> click here to view the timetable.

Stage 2: (At least a week later)
New Timetable takes effect

In this instance Dublin Bus is causing itself complaints and frustrating it's passengers by launching the project and then keeping people waiting 2-3 days before announcing the details - it would be far more sensible to announce the first batch the same day as the project, and far more customer friendly.

But instead we feed crumbs of information at the first announcement, tell people to wait a few days for the details which creates the outrage we have seen on this board. The way they make service changes and give information out is awful. With these change announcements 9/10 there is not co-ordinated to suit the customer, it is pointless to say something will change but not give specifics until a few days later - why not delay the announcement until Monday and release them together? I think that's what causes the most speculation on this board.

Stevek101

Get cleveland browne back, he seemed to know what was going on... Have we got any solid insider info?

Apparently the drivers were informed yesterday of the plans. So somebody has to know something

KC61

All that's happened so far is that the high level plans that Cleveland Browne posted were told to the unions.

The detail will be revealed next Monday.

paulm17781

etchyed wrote: »

murphaph wrote:

Isn't a better network for the majority worth the inconvenience to the minority?

angel01 wrote:

No it isn't

angel01, without reference to yourself could you explain this please?

Then it would be nice if you could tell us exactly how Dublin Bus is biased towards the southside.

I am also curious of this.

Victor

Remember that the Luas extensions will create a shift in bus usage in their catchment areas.

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Also greater frequency with less staff and less buses?

A big problem at the moment is buses congested in traffic and / or making crazy detours. Remove them and if you buses can make 10% more trips per day, then you need 10% fewer buses, although personally I'd prefer service improvements.

For example, Upper Rathmines Road can be congested, especially approaching Rathgar Road (indeed, so can Rathgar Road at this point). **If** route 128 (or some of them) did its inbound leg on Rathgar Road, it could do so in the bus lane. The most important part would be improving the junction though - it gets notoriously congested in the morning. Removing (nuisance) parking, improving boarding speeds and making Rathgar Road 4 lanes in front of the Garda station (bye-bye all day garda parking) would go a long way towards this.

lucernarian

If the 128 were to start beside Trinity Halls as present and then go down Highfield Rd. and then the Rathgar road, I would be happy with that. I'm being a touch parochial however:o

Cookie_Monster

devnull wrote: »

Unfortunately DB bring it on themselves all the speculation, by the stages in which they release information which just asks for trouble they normally go like this for a regular timetable change, which I admit is different to the changes we are having now.

...snip...


In this instance Dublin Bus is causing itself complaints and frustrating it's passengers by launching the project and then keeping people waiting 2-3 days before announcing the details - it would be far more sensible to announce the first batch the same day as the project, and far more customer friendly.

DB are doing exactly the right thing from a company point of view, announce late in the week about cuts and redundancies, I'm actually surprised they didn't wait till tomorrow.

On Monday they'll release the great amendment and it will be greeted as predominantly good news and the between this and the weekend the bad news will be overshadowed and largely overlooked.

(not that I agree with it)

devnull

But that is my whole point, DB is not a private company it is a semi state company so it's priority should be towards it's customers more so than a private companies is, after all us taxpayers are the ones who pay for it's subsidy. It is providing a public service using public money and is backed by the government to run public services, therefore it's focus should first and foremost be on the customer.

That is generally the whole problem with transport in this country - unfortunately the customer for the most part isn't as much of a priority as they should be which is why the transport minster needs to reshape it as the current system unfortunately is not working from a customers point of view.

If they were not getting public money and were a private company I'd be more relaxed as they would be making their own money and earning their own money so should be free to do with it what they want. They don't owe anything to anyone. But I think as customers we have a right for our government funded and taxpayer supported bus company to actually put us first.

The whole thing needs to be better regulated by the government to ensure that the customer is put first, as like others have said on this board in the past, at the moment the current way things works helps nobody, there needs to be guidelines set out on timetable changes, cut of routes, and minimum notice given and how companies go about doing this, that puts the customer, rather than the company first. But I can't blame DB totally for this, but better regulation would help.

Cool Mo D

devnull wrote: »

But that is my whole point, DB is not a private company it is a semi state company so it's priority should be towards it's customers more so than a private companies is, after all us taxpayers are the ones who pay for it's subsidy. It is providing a public service using public money and is backed by the government to run public services, therefore it's focus should first and foremost be on the customer.

That is generally the whole problem with transport in this country - unfortunately the customer for the most part isn't as much of a priority as they should be which is why the transport minster needs to reshape it as the current system unfortunately is not working from a customers point of view.

If they were not getting public money and were a private company I'd be more relaxed as they would be making their own money and earning their own money so should be free to do with it what they want. They don't owe anything to anyone. But I think as customers we have a right for our government funded and taxpayer supported bus company to actually put us first.

This initiative is all about putting the customer first. The main problem with Dublin Bus is frequency, punctuality and journey times, and they are trying to address this. Improving and regularising bus services along the busiest corridors is clearly going to provide a better bus service for most bus users. Every time Dublin Bus tries to change a route for the better, some people are going to be worse off, but that doesn't mean they should have a veto. No built-up part of Dublin is out of walking distance of a bus stop now - why do you think that will change, when Dublin Bus have said it won't?

Belfast did the exact same thing years ago, and it lead to a much better service there - look at their Metro corridors to see the idea.