So what bus routes should be 24 hours?

thomasj

So if Dublin bus, were to decide that they were going to introduce 24 hours services on a number of routes what routes would work on account of current demand, location etc. I presume frequency would be 30 minutes?

Amongst others I would say 16, 39 and 46A would be up there.

I presume this would do away with some nitelink services which is a good thing given that nitelink were hourly, only run 2 nights per week expensive enough and were only running in 1 direction and stopping at only specific stops.

hfallada

The 11 would be a good one. It would connect dcu and ucd to the city centre at night. Which would be handy for the students and also for the residents of the suburbs on the bus route. Which is a far few hundred thousand.

The green line should really be 24/7 also. Or at least extended at lot later. The last few luas at night are so packed. With "problems" on the red line. I can't imagine a all night service being ideal

thomasj

hfallada wrote: »

The 11 would be a good one. It would connect dcu and ucd to the city centre at night. Which would be handy for the students and also for the residents of the suburbs on the bus route. Which is a far few hundred thousand.

The green line should really be 24/7 also. Or at least extended at lot later. The last few luas at night are so packed. With "problems" on the red line. I can't imagine a all night service being ideal

True , agree With that also the DART line would be a good one given that DART drivers work over 24 hours? But security might be an issue with regards to DART and LUAS?

AlekSmart

thomasj wrote: »

So if Dublin bus, were to decide that they were going to introduce 24 hours services on a number of routes what routes would work on account of current demand, location etc. I presume frequency would be 30 minutes?

Amongst others I would say 16, 39 and 46A would be up there.

I presume this would do away with some nitelink services which is a good thing given that nitelink were hourly, only run 2 nights per week expensive enough and were only running in 1 direction and stopping at only specific stops.

Firstly,the issue of 24 hour general services is most likely an NTA driven proposal,I would be quite surprised if it were otherwise.

Even Nightlink,in it's original form,was the result of a swift response being required to a rather nasty public order issue which had arisen in Dublin City Centre....Lots of people,lots of alcohol,common closing time and a non-existant Night Bus Service,leaving only a small number of Taxis to provide what service there was.

As Nightlink developed and prospered the notion of refining,extending or regularizing the Night service slipped ever further away,until inevitably the market adjusted itself,to cope with,what turned out to be the Nightlink's downfall...restricted service levels,over-expensive, and unable to cope with the new reality of Dublin by night.

Whilst TfL's Night Bus Services in London are oft held up as the way to go,I would instead look to more realistic comparisons such as Edinburgh to provide the lead.

The infrastructure is already in place,staff agreements also,what is left is the sales & marketing element.

I would suggest that the €2.60 13 Stage Leapfare would be a commonsense flat fare for a Night Bus Service,with perhaps someform of combination Evening+Nightlink combo fare also available.

As for routes,I would suggest that Monday - Friday an hourly departure EACH way on a Core group of routes to begin with.......

7,13,16,25,27,83,145 supplemented by the regular Express Nightlink service at weekends/events.

It has to start someplace,but the concept has to also be rapidly responsive to whatever,as yet,unresearched demand is out there.

Currently,the major opposition will definitely come from the Taxi sector,which has had a clear run for over a decade post-deregulation,so resistance will be encountered.

Is it worth a shot...Definitely,as ASAP !!!!

hfallada

The night services work well in Germany due to open end in bars and club. Clubs are still going strong in Germany at 5.30am. This means its not the typical rush for taxis at 3am when all the clubs close in Dublin all together. Allowing open end in Clubs in Dublin would stop sudden rushes for night buses and Luas. I have had a handful of dodgy situations on night trams in Germany. But nothing to serious.

Im surprised no one has mentioned who rough do is in this thread yet. But Dubliners in the last few years have proved that Dubliners arent as bad as the media makes them out to be. The Dublin bikes has had near zero issues with theft. I have yet to see a vandalised real time bus display and even bus stops arent that bad any more. Dubliners generally respect each other and the city property. There is just a far few that cause issues.

LXFlyer

thomasj wrote: »

So if Dublin bus, were to decide that they were going to introduce 24 hours services on a number of routes what routes would work on account of current demand, location etc. I presume frequency would be 30 minutes?

Amongst others I would say 16, 39 and 46A would be up there.

I presume this would do away with some nitelink services which is a good thing given that nitelink were hourly, only run 2 nights per week expensive enough and were only running in 1 direction and stopping at only specific stops.

Well you would be looking at having a bus route along each major corridor.


I would imagine that to start with some of the "super" routes (the principal cross-city services) would be converted - the 9, 13, 15, 16, 27, 39a, 40, and 145.


Add to that probably the 7, 25a, 29a, 31, 41, 42 and 66.


That would leave a reasonable amount of the city covered with a night-time service.

AlekSmart

hfallada wrote: »

0

Im surprised no one has mentioned who rough do is in this thread yet. But Dubliners in the last few years have proved that Dubliners arent as bad as the media makes them out to be. The Dublin bikes has had near zero issues with theft. I have yet to see a vandalised real time bus display and even bus stops arent that bad any more. Dubliners generally respect each other and the city property. There is just a far few that cause issues.

Absolutely !

We all know there are issues with Public Order in Dublin City Centre and equally incidents on mainstream public transport.

However,apart from the Luas Red Line,very few of these could be said to be endemic or unable to be addressed.

The introduction of 24 Hour Services would DEMAND some form of new,highly publicised,Transport Policing arrangements,but these could (and should) be seen as a development of existing Policing strategies,rather than any scary new initiative.

The key is to identify and challenge the small number of savages who repeatedly surface to threaten the well-being and comfort of the majority.

The Red Line Luas illustrates this to perfection,whereby individuals or groups of less than 6 often cause Immense discomfort and disturbance to several hundred occupants of a Luas journey.

Swift and unambiguous response to these people when they choose to strut-their-knuckledragging-stuff has to become THE response.

The vast majority of Public Transport users require NO policing at all...ever !

These civilised and compliant people DESERVE the full respect of the Transport Undertakings and of Society in general...it is the Ordinary People which Society should be concerned for rather than endlessly compromising simple rules and regulations in some vain attempt to facilitate or encourage the savage to come into the fort.

This soft-touch policy,still preferred by many who operate within the operational area,has cost many billions over the past three decades, yet has few quantifiable postive results to show those who fund it that their tax € is being spent to good effect ?

Facilitate & Support the silent MAJORITY of Public Transport users first,then worry about those who find that threatening to their current dominance ?

hfallada

Everyone in Germany on public transport dont put a foot out of place. Maybe its down to the fact they are German, but probably due to the plain clothes ticket inspectors. I was on a tram without a ticket, as my friends took my bag with everything in it eg wallet, phone, ID. I was looking out for inspectors. These three men got on and I didnt take any notice. But 6 stops later they walked up the tram and this was 1.30am. They opened their wallets and flashed ID to prove they were ticket inspectors.

No one steps out of line on the public transport because you never know when you will get an inspector. You get a fine for everything eg drinking on the buses, eating on public transport, no ticket. If you had proper ticket inspectors on Dublin Bus, Luas we wouldnt have so many issues. If you dont have an ID in Germany and cant pay a Fine immediately. Its a trip to the police station until someone pays the fine for you. Even somewhere underground stations in Munich have rooms for the police to put you,while someone comes to pay the fine,

L1011

Some route mergers like the weekday nitelinks of old would probably be required - an hourly all might service on the weekday 67n route would work well enough for instance

cgcsb

Definitely needs to be done. 39a 46a and 16 would be must haves. The current nitelink service has priced many potential users out. The 5 flat fare is unreasonable. If there were two of you, a tenner would get you to most inner suburbs in a taxi.

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

Definitely needs to be done. 39a 46a and 16 would be must haves. The current nitelink service has priced many potential users out. The 5 flat fare is unreasonable. If there were two of you, a tenner would get you to most inner suburbs in a taxi.

I would think the 145 would be preferable to the 46a.

Lifelike

In my opinion, it would be better to have a dedicated set of night bus routes instead. The current routing of the 18 Nitelink routes covers almost all major areas in the city, however it should be run like a normal bus route, with a frequency of either 1 or 2 buses an hour in both directions at the weekend. Most of the routes with an hourly frequency would only require two buses to operate the route, as it shouldn't take longer than an hour for a bus to go from terminus to terminus in the middle of the night.

During the week, I would reduce the service down to about 12 hourly routes by merging some routes (e.g. 25n/66n/67n, 39n/70n, 29n/31n etc.) and maybe cutting out the 33n. Have all buses depart their city centre and outer termini on the hour from midnight to 5am.

A service like this would be better than having 24 hour routes, as all routes could depart from either Westmoreland Street or D'Olier Street, making interchange between the routes simple for those travelling cross-city. Also, it would ensure that buses leave the city centre at a set time that's easy to remember, and that all major areas are served evenly.

markpb

The cynic in me suspects that this plan will never happen, nor was it ever meant to. It has all the bearings of a way to win public support in the battle between NTA and the unions over privatisation.

s8080

Lifelike wrote: »

Most of the routes with an hourly frequency would only require two buses to operate the route, as it shouldn't take longer than an hour for a bus to go from terminus to terminus in the middle of the night.

D

if the nite links could not turn a profit at the height of the boom, what chance of a service now when the economy is struggling?

people bitch about dwell times at stops during the day, imagine how bad they would be at all hours with people drunk/drugged out off their minds, do you really believe it would only take 60 minutes to do all routes?

Lifelike

s8080 wrote: »

if the nite links could not turn a profit at the height of the boom, what chance of a service now when the economy is struggling?

Take a look at all of the night bus systems in operation across Europe and tell me how many of them operate one-way only, don't pick up any passengers en route and charge twice the maximum daytime fare - there's your answer to why the midweek nitelinks failed. If Dublin Bus ran a proper night bus service, not one which half of potential users are either priced out of or unable to use, it would be a much bigger success.

people bitch about dwell times at stops during the day, imagine how bad they would be at all hours with people drunk/drugged out off their minds

The bus is used by more than just drunks after dark you know, many people finish work very late or start early in the morning, people have early-morning flights to catch, other people go to the restaurant or the cinema late at night. Anyway, my own nitelink route is packed almost any night that I get it, the bus has very often left full before the departure time even in the past year or two, despite being an infrequent service. Running a proper bus service would increase the numbers even more.

do you really believe it would only take 60 minutes to do all routes?

I said most routes should only take an hour to do, as there is very little traffic on the roads at night. The only issue would be the routes to places like Balbriggan, Greystones etc. In these cases, you could just either have a 90 minute frequency or have 4 buses operate the route, whichever is more economical.

cgcsb

s8080 wrote: »

if the nite links could not turn a profit at the height of the boom, what chance of a service now when the economy is struggling?

Lets be fair. If you charge tripple the normal price of a fare, the taxi becomes the more economic option for journeys inside the M50. Then you have to take into account that its a service with little no information available on line. Then there's the fact they're all one way and don't pick up at the majority of stops. The Austrian City of Innsbruck offers 24 bus services. It is about the size of zlimerick and fares between midnight and 4am are only 20cent higher than normal

hfallada

cgcsb wrote: »

Lets be fair. If you charge tripple the normal price of a fare, the taxi becomes the more economic option for journeys inside the M50. Then you have to take into account that its a service with little no information available on line. Then there's the fact they're all one way and don't pick up at the majority of stops. The Austrian City of Innsbruck offers 24 bus services. It is about the size of zlimerick and fares between midnight and 4am are only 20cent higher than normal

You are forgetting that the nitelink rarely stops in the inner suburbs. The nitelink tends to stop at only every 5/6 normal stops in the inner suburbs. Meaning you might as well take a taxi if you have to walk 20 mins from the nitelink stop to your house. In Munich there is no extra charge for using the night buses or trams. So people actually use them instead of Taxis.

Nitelink was never going to be successful with its limited services.

ArmaniJeanss

L1011 wrote: »

Some route mergers like the weekday nitelinks of old would probably be required -

Lifelike wrote: »

During the week, I would reduce the service down to about 12 hourly routes by merging some routes (e.g. 25n/66n/67n, 39n/70n, 29n/31n etc.) and maybe cutting out the 33n....
all routes could depart from either Westmoreland Street or D'Olier Street.

Merging was a big mistake imo.

The person who gets say the 29a bus during the day and knows this route shouldn't be faced with having to figure out what their equivalent night bus is.
If they get the bus from Talbot St at 6 every evening why should it depart from D'olier/Westmoreland at night?
Also presumably people in the NTA and DB have spent time and effort perfecting the route of the 29a - so why at night should it be merged with some other route leading to a slower more confusing journey that does bits and bobs of some other route.

It all just leads to the feeling that you are on some subpar service.

AlekSmart

hfallada wrote: »

You are forgetting that the nitelink rarely stops in the inner suburbs. The nitelink tends to stop at only every 5/6 normal stops in the inner suburbs. Meaning you might as well take a taxi if you have to walk 20 mins from the nitelink stop to your house. In Munich there is no extra charge for using the night buses or trams. So people actually use them instead of Taxis.

Nitelink was never going to be successful with its limited services.

Nitelink was successful,very successful.

However,having achieved this success the concept was left to it's own devices whilst the environment in which it operated changed utterly.

Taxi deregulation,boom & bust cycles,and the ever changing entertainment landscape meant that the original and desireable status of Nitelink as a One-Way Express Service OUT of the City became more of a hinderance that a help.

Very few attempts were ever undertaken to keep Nitelink up with the public demand.

I operated them from the beginning,with memories (mainly fond ) of the huge resources which had to be thrown at the service on Friday & Saturday particularly.

The requirement for Ticket Sales Buses should have been a very early warning sign that the brand required attention.

The ill-fated circumnavigation of Stephens Green,with it's pick-up stop for South-East bound routes only served to make matters worse.

Without doubt the conversion of Trunk-Routes to FULL Stage Carriage operation should have been a logical follow-on from Nitelinks success,as the customer base was already in-place and willingly would have embraced the feature.

However,as soon as Bobby Molloy's Taxi deregulation hit the table,all bets were off.

The competition went from c.2,000 Taxicabs in total (far less on any given Night) to c.19,000 as it currently stands (ALL in place on any given night currently ).

The commercial fare level also serves to detract from Nitelink's attractiveness when more than one person is travelling,as the Taxi option,particularly if "negotiated" downwards makes Nitelink a no-brainer.

One issue which Hfallada raises is Nitelink Stops in the suburbs,the service utilises all ordinary bus-stops to set down at,so there are no "Nitelink Specific" set down stops.

There are a small number of Nitelink Speciofic pick-up stops,usually mid-point introduced in a belated attempt to rescue the service,as was a short-lived co-operative venture with dedicated Taxi link up facilities at locations such as Dun Laoire.

IF Nitelink drivers are not stopping to set-down at regular stops you should contact the 8734222 or the Twitter feed to enquire if there is a reason for this (such as proven anti-social behaviour issues at the stop).

It should also be borne in mind that the issue of 24 hour services is not new,as many routes had test schedules drawn up in the late 1990's in anticipation of the go-ahead,with workforce agreements also put in place at that time.

thomasj

AlekSmart wrote: »

Nitelink was successful,very successful.

However,having achieved this success the concept was left to it's own devices whilst the environment in which it operated changed utterly.

Taxi deregulation,boom & bust cycles,and the ever changing entertainment landscape meant that the original and desireable status of Nitelink as a One-Way Express Service OUT of the City became more of a hinderance that a help.

Very few attempts were ever undertaken to keep Nitelink up with the public demand.

I operated them from the beginning,with memories (mainly fond ) of the huge resources which had to be thrown at the service on Friday & Saturday particularly.

The requirement for Ticket Sales Buses should have been a very early warning sign that the brand required attention.

The ill-fated circumnavigation of Stephens Green,with it's pick-up stop for South-East bound routes only served to make matters worse.

Without doubt the conversion of Trunk-Routes to FULL Stage Carriage operation should have been a logical follow-on from Nitelinks success,as the customer base was already in-place and willingly would have embraced the feature.

However,as soon as Bobby Molloy's Taxi deregulation hit the table,all bets were off.

The competition went from c.2,000 Taxicabs in total (far less on any given Night) to c.19,000 as it currently stands (ALL in place on any given night currently ).

The commercial fare level also serves to detract from Nitelink's attractiveness when more than one person is travelling,as the Taxi option,particularly if "negotiated" downwards makes Nitelink a no-brainer.

One issue which Hfallada raises is Nitelink Stops in the suburbs,the service utilises all ordinary bus-stops to set down at,so there are no "Nitelink Specific" set down stops.

There are a small number of Nitelink Speciofic pick-up stops,usually mid-point introduced in a belated attempt to rescue the service,as was a short-lived co-operative venture with dedicated Taxi link up facilities at locations such as Dun Laoire.

IF Nitelink drivers are not stopping to set-down at regular stops you should contact the 8734222 or the Twitter feed to enquire if there is a reason for this (such as proven anti-social behaviour issues at the stop).

It should also be borne in mind that the issue of 24 hour services is not new,as many routes had test schedules drawn up in the late 1990's in anticipation of the go-ahead,with workforce agreements also put in place at that time.

The problem with nitelink was its locations, if I was having a few in Harcourt street, I would have to leave 15-20 minutes to be in Westmoreland street to get a bus. Id be tempted to board 1 of the 100s of taxis that id pass on the way.

Now, if 39/a were running that hour of the night it would be handler for me to walk to Stephens green.

Maybe it nitelinks were to run from Stephens green for north side routes it might be more successful...

ProudDUB

thomasj wrote: »

The problem with nitelink was its locations, if I was having a few in Harcourt street, I would have to leave 15-20 minutes to be in Westmoreland street to get a bus. Id be tempted to board 1 of the 100s of taxis that id pass on the way.

Now, if 39/a were running that hour of the night it would be handler for me to walk to Stephens green.

Maybe it nitelinks were to run from Stephens green for north side routes it might be more successful...

Definitely agree that the starting off point for the Nitelinks should be where the bulk of people using them, are actually congregating ie the Lesson St & Harcourt areas. But is there a space in the neck of the woods for 10 plus buses routes to use as a terminus, and for cars, taxi's and pedestrians (most of them drunk) to move about freely and safely? There is on Dolier St & Westmoreland St, as the streets are so wide. Not sure if there is a similar spot over in D2.

Anyway, why are people so fixated on party animals getting home late at night? Are the people go to work very early in the morning not just as important as the partiers? What are you supposed to do if you work at an industrial estate out in the suburbs & your shift starts at 6 or 7am, but the first bus isn't until 6.30? What if you have an early morning flight from Dublin Airport, and your flight leaves at 6.30am, as most of the El Cheapo Ryanair flights do.

I live beside the 102 Sutton to Dublin Airport terminus, but I have never been able to take the bus to the airport for an early flight. The first bus leaves Sutton at 6.25 & gets to the airport at 7.15. That is eff all use to anyone who has a flight that departs before 9am. The airport definitely needs a better 24 hr bus service imo, that you can access from the suburbs, without needing to go into town.

jaymcg91

This would be awesome, I see jobs advertised regularly in the city that require early starts or very late finishes (to be expected), that I can't apply for because of transportation. Even once an hour at night on the main routes would be a massive step forward. Screw overpriced taxis!

Lifelike

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Merging was a big mistake imo.

The person who gets say the 29a bus during the day and knows this route shouldn't be faced with having to figure out what their equivalent night bus is.
If they get the bus from Talbot St at 6 every evening why should it depart from D'olier/Westmoreland at night?

Having all night bus routes leave from the same area makes changing between the different routes simple. This isn't possible by day due to the number of routes in operation, but it is by night. Something similar is done in London, where a lot of night buses operate to/from Trafalgar Square. As for finding out where to get the bus at night, stating something like 'see route 29n from D'Olier St. for night services' on timetables would solve this problem. The same should be done for Luas and DART timetables IMO.

Also presumably people in the NTA and DB have spent time and effort perfecting the route of the 29a - so why at night should it be merged with some other route leading to a slower more confusing journey that does bits and bobs of some other route.

Merging some routes on quieter nights (Sunday to Thursday) makes economical sense as otherwise you would either be left with major areas (such as Howth) having no bus service, or an oversupply of buses, which could lead to the failure of the service. For example, the merged 66n/67n route was one of the few midweek Nitelink routes that did very well right up to the end because of the large catchment area. A bus route serving Lucan, Leixlip, Celbridge and Maynooth wouldn't work by day as it would be too slow but by night the lack of traffic on the roads makes such a route feasible.

L1011

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Merging was a big mistake imo.

The person who gets say the 29a bus during the day and knows this route shouldn't be faced with having to figure out what their equivalent night bus is.
If they get the bus from Talbot St at 6 every evening why should it depart from D'olier/Westmoreland at night?

Perfectly easy to have the RTPI screens tell people where to go. This happens all around the world.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Also presumably people in the NTA and DB have spent time and effort perfecting the route of the 29a - so why at night should it be merged with some other route leading to a slower more confusing journey that does bits and bobs of some other route.

It all just leads to the feeling that you are on some subpar service.

Because the route is set up for daytime loads - night time traffic patterns are going to be rather different.

Aard

This announcement follows suspiciously in the footsteps of TfL announcing 24-hr tube running on weekends. If anything does come of it (my inner cynic laughed at markpb's comment upthread) it will likely be about 5 corridors and on Friday/Saturday nights only. This is not necessarily a terrible idea, mind.

The routes themselves will be fairly self-selecting, as it were. Navan Road, Stillorgan Road, Swords Road etc. A frequency of a bus every 30 mins after 11:30 would be a suitable compromise imo. Average 15 mins waiting time. Even every hour wouldn't be so bad as long as each bus stuck rigidly to the timetable for every single stop -- easy enough giving the lack of traffic at night.

Pricing - the current max fare should be applied imo or at least not much more. That's €2.60 atm iirc. Reasonable enough. If the price is included in weekly/monthly/annual tickets then a single-fare might be increased up to around €5 so as to encourage weekly ticket purchase.

ArmaniJeanss

Lifelike wrote: »

Having all night bus routes leave from the same area makes changing between the different routes simple. This isn't possible by day due to the number of routes in operation, but it is by night. Something similar is done in London, where a lot of night buses operate to/from Trafalgar Square. As for finding out where to get the bus at night, stating something like 'see route 29n from D'Olier St. for night services' on timetables would solve this problem. The same should be done for Luas and DART timetables IMO.



Merging some routes on quieter nights (Sunday to Thursday) makes economical sense as otherwise you would either be left with major areas (such as Howth) having no bus service, or an oversupply of buses, which could lead to the failure of the service. For example, the merged 66n/67n route was one of the few midweek Nitelink routes that did very well right up to the end because of the large catchment area. A bus route serving Lucan, Leixlip, Celbridge and Maynooth wouldn't work by day as it would be too slow but by night the lack of traffic on the roads makes such a route feasible.

I don't disagree with the logic of what you are saying, but you are looking at it from the point of view of management/accountant etc.

All I'm seeing from a customer pov is that you are offering me a service with route numbers I'm not familiar with, different embarkation points, and journeys that are far more meandering than usual.
None of these are great selling points and likely to get me to want the use it.

You can't force the customer to use the service just because its the best service you feel you can provide. Its an attitude which I think planners have been guilty of re nightlink, and are then dismayed when people decide to use alternatives.

Polar101

Aard wrote: »

This announcement follows suspiciously in the footsteps of TfL announcing 24-hr tube running on weekends. If anything does come of it (my inner cynic laughed at markpb's comment upthread) it will likely be about 5 corridors and on Friday/Saturday nights only. This is not necessarily a terrible idea, mind.

What announcement? I thought this was just about different posters hoping to get a bus service directly from their pub to their home.

I'm actually finding the current nitelink service to be sufficient. The only thing I'd like to see changed is buses stopping at 23:30 - running an hour or two later would be handy.

LXFlyer

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Merging was a big mistake imo.

The person who gets say the 29a bus during the day and knows this route shouldn't be faced with having to figure out what their equivalent night bus is.
If they get the bus from Talbot St at 6 every evening why should it depart from D'olier/Westmoreland at night?
Also presumably people in the NTA and DB have spent time and effort perfecting the route of the 29a - so why at night should it be merged with some other route leading to a slower more confusing journey that does bits and bobs of some other route.

It all just leads to the feeling that you are on some subpar service.

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I don't disagree with the logic of what you are saying, but you are looking at it from the point of view of management/accountant etc.

All I'm seeing from a customer pov is that you are offering me a service with route numbers I'm not familiar with, different embarkation points, and journeys that are far more meandering than usual.
None of these are great selling points and likely to get me to want the use it.

You can't force the customer to use the service just because its the best service you feel you can provide. Its an attitude which I think planners have been guilty of re nightlink, and are then dismayed when people decide to use alternatives.

I'm sorry but these posts are nonsense.


Cities all over the world operate a mixture of daytime and night time routes, with the night time routes generally being mergers of normal routes.


London for example operates a mix of 24 hour and night time routes (which are merged/extended routes) through the night, and bizarrely enough people do manage to figure out what route to catch. Are you suggesting that Irish people are different from those in London for example?


There simply is not sufficient demand to justify serving every area with existing routes. The 39N and 70N routes would be sufficient to service the Blanchardstown area rather than the 37, 38, 39 and 70.


Similarly a 31N (following the current route via Clontarf, Raheny and Howth Summit) and 32N (operating via Donaghmede to Malahide) would be sufficient to serve that area of the city rather than the 29a, 31, 32 and 130.


Northbound and westbound night routes could start from Burlington Road for example, increasing the catchment areas.


There would be some 24 hour services, such as the 13, 15, 16, 25a, 27 and 40, but many areas simply would not warrant having common daytime and night time routes.


There has to be a bit of common sense in planning a night network, which takes into account demand and cost.

thomasj

Polar101 wrote: »

What announcement? I thought this was just about different posters hoping to get a bus service directly from their pub to their home.

I'm actually finding the current nitelink service to be sufficient. The only thing I'd like to see changed is buses stopping at 23:30 - running an hour or two later would be handy.

The nitelink service is anything but decent!

It runs 2 nights per week (doesn't even count for Sundays on bank holiday weekends) it runs from particular locations that is miles away from certain pubs/nightclubs and it doesn't count for out of town niteclubs. It runs only one-way, It only runs hourly and is frankly overpriced.

This city has developed with 24 hour shopping centres shops petrol stations, people who work during the night in the likes of IBM, HP, Intel etc but yet our transport sector has yet to factor this in. Its time to realise late night services are not just for party animals in the city centre at the weekend, not anymore!

cgcsb

You cant have exactly the same routes as exist in the day time. There is a need to serve more residential areas with less reasources. Even much larger cities. London, Paris,Berlin etc. Can't stick to the same routes they have at daytime and their night time economies would be far boomier.

ArmaniJeanss

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm sorry but these posts are nonsense.

I'm a regular customer, telling you purely why as a commuter (and other like thomasj above) don't see these bastardized mishmash routes as a reasonable alternative. You or tptb can dismiss it as nonsense all you want, I guess it'll follow a noble tradition of Irish service providers dismissing feedback and forcing on customers what management has decided in their wisdom that customers really want.

lxflyer wrote: »

London for example operates a mix of 24 hour and night time routes (which are merged/extended routes) through the night, and bizarrely enough people do manage to figure out what route to catch. Are you suggesting that Irish people are different from those in London for example?

Great example is wee London.
The night buses basicaly have a captive market hence they are successful. Stand out in Leicester Sq for a taxi, the 50th might stop, you'll then be faced with 'not going up to Kings Cross lads', 'East Ham, youre having a laff mate', 'Soufhside of the river at this hour, not a chance guvnor'.
You'll then make your way to wherever the nightbus starts at and happily take the merged/extended route home.

But don't mistake this monopoly as being a sign of popularity or customer satisfaction or a system worth copying.

Slightly interesesting obviously that TfL are now going with the underground, buses a more flawed system than previouslly thought I'd guess.

LXFlyer

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I'm a regular customer, telling you purely why as a commuter (and other like thomasj above) don't see these bastardized mishmash routes as a reasonable alternative. You or tptb can dismiss it as nonsense all you want, I guess it'll follow a noble tradition of Irish service providers dismissing feedback and forcing on customers what management has decided in their wisdom that customers really want.


Great example is wee London.
The night buses basicaly have a captive market hence they are successful. Stand out in Leicester Sq for a taxi, the 50th might stop, you'll then be faced with 'not going up to Kings Cross lads', 'East Ham, youre having a laff mate', 'Soufhside of the river at this hour, not a chance guvnor'.
You'll then make your way to wherever the nightbus starts at and happily take the merged/extended route home.

But don't mistake this monopoly as being a sign of popularity or customer satisfaction or a system worth copying.

Slightly interesesting obviously that TfL are now going with the underground, buses a more flawed system than previouslly thought I'd guess.

I'm quoting practice across international cities - pretty much everywhere that has night services has merged routes at night. But you seem to think that is not acceptable here?


Without misrepresenting him, I don't think thomasj said anything about merged routes - his complaint (and I'd agree with him) is that there is not a night time network of routes that pick up and set down in both directions that facilitate people going to/from work, airport and home from a night out.


So are you seriously telling me that there is demand for, for example, the 37, 38, 39 and 70 all night throughout the week?

Aard

Polar101 wrote: »

What announcement?

Whoops, getting my lines crossed :$

LXFlyer

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

I'm a regular customer, telling you purely why as a commuter (and other like thomasj above) don't see these bastardized mishmash routes as a reasonable alternative. You or tptb can dismiss it as nonsense all you want, I guess it'll follow a noble tradition of Irish service providers dismissing feedback and forcing on customers what management has decided in their wisdom that customers really want.

Great example is wee London.
The night buses basicaly have a captive market hence they are successful. Stand out in Leicester Sq for a taxi, the 50th might stop, you'll then be faced with 'not going up to Kings Cross lads', 'East Ham, youre having a laff mate', 'Soufhside of the river at this hour, not a chance guvnor'.
You'll then make your way to wherever the nightbus starts at and happily take the merged/extended route home.

But don't mistake this monopoly as being a sign of popularity or customer satisfaction or a system worth copying.

Slightly interesesting obviously that TfL are now going with the underground, buses a more flawed system than previouslly thought I'd guess.

The London night bus network of merged routes means that you end up with a service out to the far suburbs by merging local/orbital routes with routes that start in the city.


It means most areas have a 24 hour service that local areas together and a connection to/from the city - that's a bit more than what you seem to think it is.

cgcsb

Regarding what the customer wants. If the customer actually got the same service that was available in the daytime. The cost of that service would be unaffordable for the customer. The cost of running empty buses would have to be passed onto the customer. Consequently routes must be merged, otherwise there'd be no service at all for the customer.

AlekSmart

lxflyer wrote: »

The London night bus network of merged routes means that you end up with a service out to the far suburbs by merging local/orbital routes with routes that start in the city.


It means most areas have a 24 hour service that local areas together and a connection to/from the city - that's a bit more than what you seem to think it is.

I wonder does Armani Jeanss think TfL are replacing night buses with The Tube ?

There is no suggestion that Night Bus services,both N route and 24hr routes are to be abolished,but definitely the notion of mainstream Public Transport operating 24/7 is being pursued.

As another poster mentioned,the requirement for 24 hr public transport is no longer driven by recreational needs,but rather by a rapidly changing society.

Take a look at the delivery window in Dublin City Centre 06.00 -11.00.
How many businesses can have stockrooms/premises open to recieve that 06.00 delivery ?
Answer,very few,with the inability to get staff in to work early enough being the major reason

To be up and running for 06.00,a business will have to have Staff in place by 05.30 at the latest,the upside being that these early starters also FINISH earlier,thus reducing the egg-timer effect of morning and evening peaks.

LXFlyer

AlekSmart wrote: »

I wonder does Armani Jeanss think TfL are replacing night buses with The Tube ?

There is no suggestion that Night Bus services,both N route and 24hr routes are to be abolished,but definitely the notion of mainstream Public Transport operating 24/7 is being pursued.

As another poster mentioned,the requirement for 24 hr public transport is no longer driven by recreational needs,but rather by a rapidly changing society.

Take a look at the delivery window in Dublin City Centre 06.00 -11.00.
How many businesses can have stockrooms/premises open to recieve that 06.00 delivery ?
Answer,very few,with the inability to get staff in to work early enough being the major reason

To be up and running for 06.00,a business will have to have Staff in place by 05.30 at the latest,the upside being that these early starters also FINISH earlier,thus reducing the egg-timer effect of morning and evening peaks.

Indeed Alek, there has been no suggestion that the night bus network in London is going to change - rather that the Underground will complement it on Friday and Saturday nights.

thomasj

lxflyer wrote: »

Indeed Alek, there has been no suggestion that the night bus network in London is going to change - rather that the Underground will complement it on Friday and Saturday nights.

Ah you're not suggesting that DARTs should complement night buses are you? :eek:

LXFlyer

thomasj wrote: »

Ah you're not suggesting that DARTs should complement night buses are you? :eek:

I think that's another battle - get some form of public transport operating first!

ArmaniJeanss

AlekSmart wrote: »

I wonder does Armani Jeanss think TfL are replacing night buses with The Tube ?

Nope, but it indicates that there is a nightime demand for the regular normal daytime service which isn't being currently met by the buses.

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm quoting practice across international cities - pretty much everywhere that has night services has merged routes at night. But you seem to think that is not acceptable here?

I'm genuinely not sure what other cities mean by merged routes. It can be a fine concept or it can be a terrible concept. I'm not completely against it but I'd have issues with the 39N example which you mention, to me its an example of merging done wrong.

Also as a general point of interest at what time do these cities of best practice introduce their night buses, i.e., do regular services stop at 23:30?

lxflyer wrote: »

Without misrepresenting him, I don't think thomasj said anything about merged routes - his complaint (and I'd agree with him) is that there is not a night time network of routes that pick up and set down in both directions that facilitate people going to/from work, airport and home from a night out.

I was referring to his saying that he is a regular 39 customer who doesn't use the 39N because he can't get it in an area of the city centre (Leeson St) that the 39 does serve.

lxflyer wrote: »

So are you seriously telling me that there is demand for, for example, the 37, 38, 39 and 70 all night throughout the week?

Not what I'm saying, I'm suggesting that you operate one only (39a I guess, or maybe 70 would be more logical). What you shouldnt have is have a hybrid of them all, the current 39N appears to have elements of the 39a, 37, 38 and even the old 38c.
Some would lose out (inc me in Mulhuddart fwiw) but my personal opinion is that using a direct corridor is preferable to trying to fit in every estate.

*****
Look I'm not being obstreperous for the sake of it and people can dismiss it as nonsense if they want.
But I work and socialise in the Leeson St area myself and two negatives against the Nitelink I hear are that you have to 'walk all the way into town' to get it and 'it goes into every estate on the way'.

thomasj

lxflyer wrote: »

I'm quoting practice across international cities - pretty much everywhere that has night services has merged routes at night. But you seem to think that is not acceptable here?


Without misrepresenting him, I don't think thomasj said anything about merged routes - his complaint (and I'd agree with him) is that there is not a night time network of routes that pick up and set down in both directions that facilitate people going to/from work, airport and home from a night out.


So are you seriously telling me that there is demand for, for example, the 37, 38, 39 and 70 all night throughout the week?

I have no problem with routes being merged during the night providing that they are covering the areas that are required.

The 39N and 70N cover mainly residential areas in blanchardstown. They do not cover damastown or ballycoolin areas that would have staff covering shifts that would require night services, these would need to be factored in.

Also the question is, does Dublin but drop the nitelink brand? It has a reputation as being too dangerous the "fitelink" with riff-raff only using it.

Mainly they will have to move away from the Westmoreland street terminus further south near lesson/baggott street and a better frequency

Furthermore if you are going to introduce 24 hours on some routes surely there would need to be a common face and not normal fare on 24 hour services and premium fares on nitelink services.

Whatever happens, Dublin bus need to make a better attempt on the advertising/information when introducing than network direct otherwise it won't be a success.

LXFlyer

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Nope, but it indicates that there is a nightime demand for the regular normal daytime service which isn't being currently met by the buses.

I'm genuinely not sure what other cities mean by merged routes. It can be a fine concept or it can be a terrible concept. I'm not completely against it but I'd have issues with the 39N example which you mention, to me its an example of merging done wrong.

Also as a general point of interest at what time do these cities of best practice introduce their night buses, i.e., do regular services stop at 23:30?

I was referring to his saying that he is a regular 39 customer who doesn't use the 39N because he can't get it in an area of the city centre (Leeson St) that the 39 does serve.

Not what I'm saying, I'm suggesting that you operate one only (39a I guess, or maybe 70 would be more logical). What you shouldnt have is have a hybrid of them all, the current 39N appears to have elements of the 39a, 37, 38 and even the old 38c.
Some would lose out (inc me in Mulhuddart fwiw) but my personal opinion is that using a direct corridor is preferable to trying to fit in every estate.

*****
Look I'm not being obstreperous for the sake of it and people can dismiss it as nonsense if they want.
But I work and socialise in the Leeson St area myself and two negatives against the Nitelink I hear are that you have to 'walk all the way into town' to get it and 'it goes into every estate on the way'.

Let's just be clear about this. The tube is being extended to 24 hours on Friday and Saturday only - not every day of the week. The bus network will continue as it is.


Most international cities operate a route network at night that is a hybrid of the daytime network, that merges routes and maintains a service to most areas. Most international cities run a night service between say midnight and 05:30 or so.


Go back to my original post - I did suggest starting northbound/westbound routes from Burlington Road (the current 39 terminus) which would expand the catchment area in the city.


While it might not suit you to have the current 39N/70N at night, I suspect quite a few people would disagree. By your reckoning Castleknock would have no service at all - I don't think you can quite equate running a night service with that of a daytime service. They are inevitably going to have to serve more areas to make them affordable to operate.

thomasj wrote: »

I have no problem with routes being merged during the night providing that they are covering the areas that are required.

The 39N and 70N cover mainly residential areas in blanchardstown. They do not cover damastown or ballycoolin areas that would have staff covering shifts that would require night services, these would need to be factored in.

Also the question is, does Dublin but drop the nitelink brand? It has a reputation as being too dangerous the "fitelink" with riff-raff only using it.

Mainly they will have to move away from the Westmoreland street terminus further south near lesson/baggott street and a better frequency

Furthermore if you are going to introduce 24 hours on some routes surely there would need to be a common face and not normal fare on 24 hour services and premium fares on nitelink services.

Whatever happens, Dublin bus need to make a better attempt on the advertising/information when introducing than network direct otherwise it won't be a success.

I doubt very much that there are huge numbers travelling to Ballycoolin or Damastown outside of the current hours of bus operation. I'd imagine night shifts would start before midnight and finish after 06:00. Having said that, the 39N operates to Tyrellstown - nothing to stop it serving Ballycoolin en route.


I wouldn't see an extended 24 hour service as a separate brand at all - it would just be part of the general service. Having said that, in all the years that I've been taking the Nitelink, I have never seen any trouble on it, so I'm not sure where this reputation comes from.


I'm also not sure what you mean by poor levels of info about Network Direct - there were posters on every bus shelter, leaflets on buses and copious details online, in addition to consultation meetings. The only issue was with the first phase when they didn't have the revised timetables up on stops on the first day, something they rectified with subsequent phases.

thomasj

sorry levels of information was good but there were clarifications needed because of inaccuracies etc.

ongarboy

http://www.98fm.com/Dublin-Bus-Could-Launch-24-Hour-Routes-This-Year

Good news! I wonder what the 3 north, south and west routes proposed are?

Edit: this article gives more info. Delighted that Blanchardstown and airport are included!

Dublin Airport, Blanchardstown and the N11: These 3 Dublin bus routes are set to get a 24-hour service http://jrnl.ie/3879221

thomasj

This has been news for a while, hopefully it's coming soon .

A driver I know was telling me the routes in question are the 39, 41 and 145.

He said it could involve 2 routes ballywaltrim-ongar and city-swords.

Time will tell!

thomasj

sugarman wrote:

41 makes perfect sense, 145 not so much.. would have said the 46a ahead of it. Not sure about the 39.

39 carries large numbers of passengers in the evening, even up to 11pm so to me that makes sense. Plus passengers off the 37/38/70 do use it. So no argument there.

The question about the 145 is we know irrespective of 46a or 145 the n11 leg upto foxrock is covered. Next question is which will cover more passengers ? Dun laoghaire or bray? To me it's bray !

41 makes complete sense.

Stephen15

thomasj wrote: »

39 carries large numbers of passengers in the evening, even up to 11pm so to me that makes sense. Plus passengers off the 37/38/70 do use it. So no argument there.

The question about the 145 is we know irrespective of 46a or 145 the n11 leg upto foxrock is covered. Next question is which will cover more passengers ? Dun laoghaire or bray? To me it's bray !

41 makes complete sense.

But it's not just Dun Laoghaire the 46a serves after it also serves large residental areas around Deansgrange, Kill Lane, Bakers Corners, Honeypark and Monkstown. The 145 serves a less dense more spread out area around Cabinteely, Loughlinstown and Shankill.

You could make both the 46a and 145 hourly at night 24h and interwork the timetable giving the N11 a half hourly night time service.

But also you could also make the 7/a a 24h route to serve DL serving Blackrock, Monkstown, Glenageary, Sallynoggin, Ballybrack and Cherrywood/Loughlinstown. It would a good idea especially with the new town going in Cherrywood particularly handy during the night when the DART and Luas is not running in the evening.

thomasj

It's only a pilot dublin bus will be running initially so they will be picking 3 routes with potential initially

North - 41 , west - 39 and south - 145

Bigger range by covering the 145 route rather than the 46a initially

Stephen15

thomasj wrote: »

It's only a pilot dublin bus will be running initially so they will be picking 3 routes with potential initially

North - 41 , west - 39 and south - 145

I know that. I'm just making some more long term suggestions.

thomasj

Stephen15 wrote:

I know that. I'm just making some more long term suggestions.

Oh yeah I know and I don't doubt the 46a will be made 24 hours at some stage if this trial is successful, but it's about this trial being successful and in order to do that you have to aim for the maximum range .

cgcsb

Dead handy. So long as the fare is the same as the day time, or only slightly more. The present 'nitelink' service is a relic that encourages taxi usage. If you live inside the M50 the cost of the nitelink isn't competitive with taxis, especially if there are 2 of you travelling.