Dublin bus route 116

foggy_lad

Why has this one bus a day route been kept when it could easily be scrapped and the few passengers accommodated on other routes?

Banjoxed

foggy_lad wrote: »

Why has this one bus a day route been kept when it could easily be scrapped and the few passengers accommodated on other routes?

What did the NTA say when you asked them?

LXFlyer

Have you ever used it?

If you had, you would know exactly why it operates, and not made such a daft post.

Aard

It effectively caters for the schools between Ballinteer and Stillorgan. BCS, Wesley, St Tiernan's, Raphaela's, Colaiste Eoin, Colaiste Iosagain, UCD.

It's always packed.

miller50841

It has the biggest bus in the company on it the VT type as posted above it is busy catering for all the schools that's why they added the bigger bus it was leaving people behind beforehand.

I did see though during the summer it was quiet but that's just the way things go we aren't in London where nothing sleeps.

LXFlyer

Aard wrote: »

It effectively caters for the schools between Ballinteer and Stillorgan. BCS, Wesley, St Tiernan's, Raphaela's, Colaiste Eoin, Colaiste Iosagain, UCD.

It's always packed.

miller50841 wrote: »

It has the biggest bus in the company on it the VT type as posted above it is busy catering for all the schools that's why they added the bigger bus it was leaving people behind beforehand.

I did see though during the summer it was quiet but that's just the way things go we aren't in London where nothing sleeps.

You're both correct.

The 116 serves a dual purpose.

It primarily provides a link to those schools, particularly the Gaelscoilenna on the Stillorgan Road, which no other bus provides, but also then acts as a much needed backup on the N11 QBC and helps clear the road.

But sure some people would appear to know better than everyone else and decide that a bus that is jammed full every day (and has no suitable alternative) shouldn't operate.

miller50841

It's the same as a lot are going on about we must privatise everything and sell all our the peoples assets.

Sure Leo V's(minister) wife is on the board of a private coach operator Matthews if I'm not mistaken.

KD345

foggy_lad wrote: »

Why has this one bus a day route been kept when it could easily be scrapped and the few passengers accommodated on other routes?

What are you basing that on? You're obviously not familiar with this service. As mentioned, it's not uncommon to have full VTs operating this route.

dfx-

It's a bit like the 118. When I got that from Kilternan, it was crammed, turning people away on the N11.

Full upstairs with children going to school.

Didn't think VTs were to be found on those routes though, 116/118/161 etc. Mid-age AVs and the odd AX anytime I've seen them or been on them.

LXFlyer

dfx- wrote: »

It's a bit like the 118. When I got that from Kilternan, it was crammed, turning people away on the N11.

Full upstairs with children going to school.

Didn't think VTs were to be found on those routes though, 116/118/161 etc. Mid-age AVs and the odd AX anytime I've seen them or been on them.

They replaced 2 AV/AX on the 116 with one VT - saved a driver duty.

Cookie_Monster

The same arguement could be had about the 145 that runs the old 46 route in the mornings. On paper it looks stupid but it's always full of school kids going various places all the way to UCD and then it covers the rest of the N11 corridor as relief.
Though I'm not sure if it still runs these days, last aware of it two years ago.

MGWR

miller50841 wrote: »

It's the same as a lot are going on about we must privatise everything and sell all our the people's assets.

Sure Leo V's (minister) wife is on the board of a private coach operator Matthews if I'm not mistaken

Socialistic language and innuendo are not much of an argument against privatisation.

And a bus that is "packed" can indeed be privatised...plus a private company can probably market it better in order to increase the number of trips and therefore the utility. Using the "people's" resources to serve a small amount of passengers is an insult to the "people".

Grolschevik

MGWR wrote: »

Using the "people's" resources to serve a small amount of passengers people is an insult to the "people".

Extend that to health or any other public service and see how far it gets you.

Banjoxed

MGWR wrote: »

Socialistic language and innuendo are not much of an argument against privatisation.

And a bus that is "packed" can indeed be privatised...plus a private company can probably market it better in order to increase the number of trips and therefore the utility. Using the "people's" resources to serve a small amount of passengers is an insult to the "people".

Well I suppose if your definition of "people" are libertarians who went to Donnybrook Poly or Trinners and fawned at the feet of Moore McDowell and Sean Barrett then yes, "people" could be offended all right.

LXFlyer

Lads, I wouldn't waste your time - all you're going to get is a Tea Party rant.

Victor

Can people be a bit more constructive in their posting?

Moderator

stehyl15

Get rid of the 46e first

dublinman1990

stehyl15 wrote: »

Get rid of the 46e first

Why would you get rid of that bus?

I've never used that service myself but it meets it's purpose of picking up the passengers as it's a morning service.

It usually gets nearly full at that hour of the day.

dfx-

Feedback for the OP, I was on the afternoon 116 service today operated by AV326.

Crammed by the time it reached Colaiste Eoin, three to a seat all the way to Broadford. This was with VT17 and VT32 in close attention on the 46A and 145 respectively. Could do with an extra service and certainly a VT.

116 then does the final 161 too. Bus could do with a bit of a clean, there was an apple fight through Stillorgan