Real time displays on Dublin Bus

lucernarian

KD345 wrote: »

Places that might seem silly now may actually turn out to be busy stops in the next few months. With the level of cross city routes about to increase many city centre stops will be changing.

I've used Parnell Square inbound many times to board a bus, as have other passengers. Perhaps putting up signs here might encourage passengers to use the stop more.

I agree with lxflyer. I don't see the point in moaning about which stops have received them first, the displays are being rolled out. Give it time.

I can see how Parnell Square deserves displays, even for outbound stops that are lightly used as it ties in with the idea of consistency across all the central bus stops and besides, I have seen people using the parnell square stops to go outbound for the likes of the 2/3 bus stop and the outbound stops for the 3, 4 and the 16/a routes among others. More people than what use the baggot st upper (southbound) stop which has only the 18 stopping at it if you ignore the routes that terminate practically around the corner anyway!

In the entirety of Pearse St and Ringsend Rd., there is one RTPI display in each direction. Not even the somewhat busy outbound stop across the Trinity Capital Hotel will get one, according to the RTPI plans for Dublin City Council's area. If this document is accurate then there are still grounds to query their placement.

I'm not sure that 20% completion figure for the RTPI displays is a fair reflection of the project currently. Remember, many bus stops will have signs of the RTPI installation before it's operational. Quite a number of stops I've seen in the last two months have the metal pole in place but with no electronic display for example.

I would be concerned about an RTPI display being provided for the airport if it's not even showing up on the online. I doubt this will be lost on the designers and planners of this system that's still in development so I'm keeping my powder dry on that one. I really hope the DAA are facilitating the provision of these displays...

And I accept the point about O'Connell St, it's likely those stops will see RTPI displays even if the rollout seems sporadic. There's a long way to go before we know the full extent of the rollout and the veracity of the mentioned plans.

schemingbohemia

remember that there will be smartphone access to RTPI also, so if your stop doesn't have a sign/pole then most people will still be able to access the information.

lucernarian

And do most people have smartphones? With the internet access subscription to check the RTPI info for the stop?

mgmt

To_be_confirmed wrote: »

And do most people have smartphones? With the internet access subscription to check the RTPI info for the stop?

They could have a non-smartphone service. Text the bus stop number and it will tell you the real time arrivals, not the listed times as they currently do.

lucernarian

mgmt wrote: »

They could have a non-smartphone service. Text the bus stop number and it will tell you the real time arrivals, not the listed times as they currently do.

That would be nice to see implemented. Maybe there'll be some movement on that this year. Hopefully any new SMS service won't cost more than the existing Bustxt.

LXFlyer

That's exactly what is planned.

http://www.transportforireland.ie/future-plans

SMS text service
Web and text messaging services are scheduled to be available in 2011. These services will cover all 5,000 bus stops served by Dublin Bus. You will then be able to access real time bus arrival information from your phone and the internet for every Dublin Bus stop.

Internet Service
Following the roll-out of the information signs, passengers will be able to access the latest service information using mobile web or their internet connection at home or at work. Passengers will also be able to search by bus stop name, street name or area. It is scheduled for 2011 that those planning a journey on the web will also be able to search on a map.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

That is why the bus should be of in a separate holding area, and the RTPI updated as they leave the holding area.

THE RTPI's called also display the scheduled departure time as they do in many other places like the 123 terminus.

Again from the point of view of a tourist, the current set up is rubbish. Most people don't even know that there is an accurate timetable at the bus stop and anyway it is hard to get too and read due to the crowds of people at the bus stop.

A display of even the scheduled departure times would be a vast improvement.

OK so we should spend more money building a "holding area" and spend more money on fuel as buses drive to and from it every time they go to the airport just because you think seeing a bus parked at a terminus does not look good?

For goodness sake they are trying to reduce costs not increase them!!

I think most people in the world are used to seeing buses parked at a terminus.

Also, if the entire 16/16a service is merged into one 16 route as planned, then the amount of time there is no bus picking up passengers at the stop will be a lot less than it is now given the higher frequencies involved.

bk

lxflyer wrote: »

OK so we should spend more money building a "holding area" and spend more money on fuel as buses drive to and from it every time they go to the airport just because you think seeing a bus parked at a terminus does not look good?

FFS Ixflyer you know I'm not talking about spending a load of money doing this. Just have the buses stop around the corner, out of sight, until they are ready to pull up to the stop and start boarding.

At worst it entails a few extra markings on the road.

Trust me it matters when you are standing in the rain, because there are too few shelters and you are staring at the 16a just 10 meters away with the driver siting in it with the door closed all nice and dry. I was looking around and I could see many very confused tourists. It just doesn't happen in most other countries.

markpb

lxflyer wrote: »

I think most people in the world are used to seeing buses parked at a terminus.

From my experience at the airport, no. People run to every bus that pulls up whether it's coming in, going out or going in the wrong direction. On several occasions I've seen a 16A come in, unload passengers and, just as tourists are trying to board, the driver closes the door and refuses to explain to them why they can't board. Then a 41 will pull up behind and leave people wondering which one to board. To the other extreme are the 16A drivers who let people board long before they're due to depart, only for a 41 to come through, leave empty and with the passengers still sitting on the 16A.

Things are better now with the newly arranged coach area (at least all the non-express city-bound services leave from one bus stop) but it's still not a great experience for people unused to Dublin Bus.

LXFlyer

bk wrote: »

FFS Ixflyer you know I'm not talking about spending a load of money doing this. Just have the buses stop around the corner, out of sight, until they are ready to pull up to the stop and start boarding.

At worst it entails a few extra markings on the road.

Trust me it matters when you are standing in the rain, because there are too few shelters and you are staring at the 16a just 10 meters away with the driver siting in it with the door closed all nice and dry. I was looking around and I could see many very confused tourists. It just doesn't happen in most other countries.

markpb wrote: »

From my experience at the airport, no. People run to every bus that pulls up whether it's coming in, going out or going in the wrong direction. On several occasions I've seen a 16A come in, unload passengers and, just as tourists are trying to board, the driver closes the door and refuses to explain to them why they can't board. Then a 41 will pull up behind and leave people wondering which one to board. To the other extreme are the 16A drivers who let people board long before they're due to depart, only for a 41 to come through, leave empty and with the passengers still sitting on the 16A.

Things are better now with the newly arranged coach area (at least all the non-express city-bound services leave from one bus stop) but it's still not a great experience for people unused to Dublin Bus.

Most of what you are complaining about should be significantly less of a problem if as planned the 41 is removed from the airport and the 16 becomes the bus to/from the city at a higher frequency.

To be fair it is a bus station, and in most bus stations that I've been in (and that is an awful lot), be they at airports or elsewhere, I've seen buses arrive short of the stop on the bus stand, allow passengers get off and then doors close for a few minutes before the bus pulls back up to the stop.

That's what happens over at the coach station too.

bk - there is nowhere "around the corner" from the bus station to park other than outside terminal 2, and that is a longer hike for the passengers getting off the bus for terminal 1 to walk than they have currently.

lil5

After returning from holidays I see the system is no longer "in test".

There's a good few more displays activated (at least on through web) along the 7 bus route, although the distribution is a bit of a mystery.

The running times of the 7 bus in the system are still pure fiction. Standing in Ballsbridge 10 minutes could be anything from 15 to 25 minutes. The 4 bus is closer to reality.

foggy_lad

lil5 wrote: »

After returning from holidays I see the system is no longer "in test".

There's a good few more displays activated (at least on through web) along the 7 bus route, although the distribution is a bit of a mystery.

The running times of the 7 bus in the system are still pure fiction. Standing in Ballsbridge 10 minutes could be anything from 15 to 25 minutes. The 4 bus is closer to reality.

It is no longer in test but they have still not complied by having bilingual displays!

AlekSmart

foggy_lad wrote: »

It is no longer in test but they have still not complied by having bilingual displays!

I understand a mechanism has been found which means the OLA requirements to not extend to this system.....unless the screen is erected in the middle of An Daingean or Corca Dhuibhne.....?

The Maverick

foggy_lad wrote: »

It is no longer in test but they have still not complied by having bilingual displays!

I cannot imagine why anyone would care about a bilingual version, the display is mainly numbers anyway.

How do they decide which displays get switched on? They're quite patchy along the southside part of the 4 and 7 routes. Most of the stops southbound are on but only a few towards the city centre are.

Red Alert

Thank God the Irish doesn't have to be on them... it would get quite confusing with the displays flipping from one language to the other.

lil5

I'd rather have the correct times and no phantom buses.

starviewadams

Who the feck would want an Irish translation?!surely all you need is the bus route number and the time it's arriving.

Guarantee some miserable gaeilgeoir will come along and kick up a fuss at some stage because of it.

noelfirl

I wouldn't go getting too excited, this FAQ was updated with these details not that long ago...

Bilingual Signs?

When the National Transport Authority assumed the management of the Real Time Bus Passenger Information programme from the Department of Transport, it was considered whether the signs should be bilingual.
The main objective was that the signs should be legible for all users, including motorists, in order to encourage modal shift from car to bus. The Authority was concerned that the legibility could be compromised if the variable message on the sign alternated between Irish and English in addition to information changing as buses approached the stops.
However bilingual functionality was included as part of the RTPI software contract in order to serve the website. This allowed the Authority and Dublin City Council to trial a bilingual sign. The trial demonstrated that legibility and effectiveness are not overly compromised by including standard information in 2 languages. The National Transport Authority is, therefore, comfortable that these bilingual traffic signs can accord with the Traffic Signs Manual.
The Authority is working with Dublin City Council and the bus operators to prepare al bus stop database in Irish which can be displayed within the 19 characters available on the signs. When this work is complete it will allow us to implement the change to bilingual on street signs in the coming weeks.

starviewadams wrote: »

Guarantee some miserable gaeilgeoir will come along and kick up a fuss at some stage because of it.

Some gaeilgeoir did already, hence the addition above. Maybe now that info is out of date and there won't be bilinguality but I wouldn't count chickens yet.

coylemj

noelfirl wrote: »

Some gaeilgeoir did already, hence the addition above. Maybe now that info is out of date and there won't be bilinguality but I wouldn't count chickens yet.

The main reason for including the destination on the display is to tell would-be travellers which direction the bus is going e.g. in the case of the 46A whether it's 'Phoenix Park' or 'Dun Laoghaire'. Most of the people who need this information are tourists so it beggars belief that DB are caving in to the Irish language terrorists lobbyists to have the information bilingual.

etchyed

coylemj wrote: »

...so it beggars belief that DB are caving in to the Irish language terrorists lobbyists to have the information bilingual.

This one line is so full of factual inaccuracies I don't know where to begin. Actually, that's a lie. I do, and I'm going to number them

1. Dublin Bus are not responsible for the rollout of RTPI displays.
2. If Irish was put on the signs, it wouldn't be because of the NTA and Dublin City Council (who are responsible for RTPI) "caving in" to the Irish language lobby, it would be because it is required by law under the Official Languages Act 2003.
3. If what AlekSmart says above is true, they are not, as you claim, "caving in" but rather actively resisting the lobbyists by trying to find loopholes in the law that exempt them from putting Irish on the signs.

irishguy

etchyed wrote: »

This one line is so full of factual inaccuracies I don't know where to begin. Actually, that's a lie. I do, and I'm going to number them

1. Dublin Bus are not responsible for the rollout of RTPI displays.
2. If Irish was put on the signs, it wouldn't be because of the NTA and Dublin City Council (who are responsible for RTPI) "caving in" to the Irish language lobby, it would be because it is required by law under the Official Languages Act 2003.
3. If what AlekSmart says above is true, they are not, as you claim, "caving in" but rather actively resisting the lobbyists by trying to find loopholes in the law that exempt them from putting Irish on the signs.

The dual language rule makes no sense in this case. It should only be in English and only because the vast majority of users will speak english.
Its a bit of a joke that Irish is our first language and most people couldnt string a sentence together, but thats another story.

CIE

irishguy wrote: »

The dual language rule makes no sense in this case. It should only be in English and only because the vast majority of users will speak english

How come that it's impossible to do dual language with the (easier to so configure) digital signs, yet it wasn't a problem to do scroll signs with dual languages for several decades?

Should we also take the Irish off road and street signs, just because the predominant language is English and it's difficult to find a native speaker of Irish? Maybe that'd have us look just like Northern Ireland...? We can change the name of Dun Laoghaire back to Kingstown as well, since that was its name in English and everyone who lives there speaks English (huzzah, "46A Kingstown")...and who understands "Cobh" either (no letter V? no English speaker recognises the "bh" digraph as being pronounced like a V, right? Queenstown it is, then.)

AlekSmart

etchyed: If what AlekSmart says above is true, they are not, as you claim, "caving in" but rather actively resisting the lobbyists by trying to find loopholes in the law that exempt them from putting Irish on the signs.

I'm afraid I can't vouch for the veracity of my sources.

The prime thing to remember is that on-street element of the RTPA project is an NTA/Dublin City Council gig with Dublin Bus merely a peripheral observer supplying data.

I have little doubt but that bilinguality will make an appearance in some shape or form,but I equally doubt that it will enhance,in any way,the functionality of the system for the vast majority of users.

As the display units (Installed and maintained by a third-party contractor BTW) are quite small and in some cases the route destinations already pre-shrunk ás Bearla I can only shrug my shoulders at the camel which will result from this particular committee meeting.

However,if it will assist in pulling Ireland out of the depression and establishing us as a forward thinking knowledge based economy,then I'm all in favour of it.

irishguy

CIE wrote: »

How come that it's impossible to do dual language with the (easier to so configure) digital signs, yet it wasn't a problem to do scroll signs with dual languages for several decades?

Should we also take the Irish off road and street signs, just because the predominant language is English and it's difficult to find a native speaker of Irish? Maybe that'd have us look just like Northern Ireland...? We can change the name of Dun Laoghaire back to Kingstown as well, since that was its name in English and everyone who lives there speaks English (huzzah, "46A Kingstown")...and who understands "Cobh" either (no letter V? no English speaker recognises the "bh" digraph as being pronounced like a V, right? Queenstown it is, then.)

I would take it off anything that wasnt practical to display it on. Like the realtime bus signs. I would also reduce Ireland to the second language of Ireland as a huge percentage of Irish people (way less than is on the census) can and use Irish.

Its a simple fact. If its so important to people they should use it and not lie to themselves that its our first language when <10% speak Irish at home every week.

CIE

irishguy wrote: »

I would take it off anything that wasnt practical to display it on. Like the realtime bus signs. I would also reduce Ireland (Irish?) to the second language of Ireland as a huge percentage of Irish people (way less than is on the census) can and use Irish.

Its a simple fact. If its so important to people they should use it and not lie to themselves that its our first language when <10% speak Irish at home every week.

You're using the word "practical" without giving it context. It's far less "practical" from a pure cost-driven standpoint to have scrolls that feature the Irish language than to have them programmed into a digital display.

You also seem to have a political agenda that has nothing to do with bus displays, WADR. Perhaps your handle should be "englishguy"?

irishguy

CIE wrote: »

You're using the word "practical" without giving it context. It's far less "practical" from a pure cost-driven standpoint to have scrolls that feature the Irish language than to have them programmed into a digital display.

You also seem to have a political agenda that has nothing to do with bus displays, WADR. Perhaps your handle should be "englishguy"?

I mean practical as in 1 language as it becomes more difficult to read if its switching between 2 languages. If people understood the Irish language version I would just go with that (and leave english off), but people don't understand it so you should go with english its just common sense.

fh041205

irishguy wrote: »

I mean practical as in 1 language as it becomes more difficult to read if its switching between 2 languages. If people understood the Irish language version I would just go with that (and leave english off), but people don't understand it so you should go with english its just common sense.

It was posted above that in a trial it was determined not to undermine the legibility of the signage so theres no problem there. Would there be an extra cost though?

And how many people wouldn't understand the Irish versions of most stops? They're on the bus routes and timetables already sure. Sure the tourists wouldn't but most Irish people would/should be fine with it. There's no point reinventing the whole country to that extent just to cater for tourists in my opinion.

cast_iron

irishguy wrote: »

I mean practical as in 1 language as it becomes more difficult to read if its switching between 2 languages.

Is it really though?

Are you telling me that if the display alternates from English to Irish destinations, with the same route number and due time, you would be completely confused?

I think most reasonable people could work out that it's merely the Irish version alternating. And when I'm a tourist in a foreign country, I'm not shocked when they use some of their own language on signs.
It's quite clearly the local language by virtue of the fact that: 1)it's not English, and 2)local dialect may be used in a foreign country to mine.

As long as the English version is there, most people will figure out how to read the bi-lingual signs fairly easily.

Victor

starviewadams wrote: »

some miserable gaeilgeoir

Play nice.

teol

cast_iron wrote: »

Is it really though?

Are you telling me that if the display alternates from English to Irish destinations, with the same route number and due time, you would be completely confused?

I think most reasonable people could work out that it's merely the Irish version alternating. And when I'm a tourist in a foreign country, I'm not shocked when they use some of their own language on signs.
It's quite clearly the local language by virtue of the fact that: 1)it's not English, and 2)local dialect may be used in a foreign country to mine.

As long as the English version is there, most people will figure out how to read the bi-lingual signs fairly easily.

There is a difference between signs and LED displays. The Irish names on signs are in italics and there is a distinct difference between the languages. This does not work on LED.

Also there is a precedent for not having bilingual signs in this country:



and also at Dublin Airport.