Door hoggers - Dublin Bus

D3V!L

I have the unfortunate privilege of having to commute into Dublin City center along one of the main transport routes. My trip to and from work and just before rush hours.

I've noticed that door hogging is getting more and more prevalent. People are simply getting on the bus and standing there, even though there is free seats down stairs and a half empty upper deck.

The drivers dont seem at all bothered by this and getting on and off the bus is getting harder as time goes on.

Why is there no enforcement for this and why is it tolerated ?

Emme

D3V!L wrote: »

I have the unfortunate privilege of having to commute into Dublin City center along one of the main transport routes. My trip to and from work and just before rush hours.

I've noticed that door hogging is getting more and more prevalent. People are simply getting on the bus and standing there, even though there is free seats down stairs and a half empty upper deck.

The drivers dont seem at all bothered by this and getting on and off the bus is getting harder as time goes on.

Why is there no enforcement for this and why is it tolerated ?

How long is your journey? If it's 5K or less get a bike. Problem sorted.

schemingbohemia

Easier for drivers not to enforce. I find a slightly sharpened elbow whilst walking past does wonders......

In fairness some drivers do announce seats upstairs, with the next stop announcement and apps listing stops on routes I would have thought it would have diminished. But people are strange.

magicbastarder

i have been on buses where the driver has been quite vocal about this, but often you see free seats and people standing when the standing passengers may be near their destination, and a seat becomes free. there's little point in them moving upstairs to sit down.
that phenomenon is obviously more prevalent the closer the bus gets to the city centre.

_Kaiser_

Maybe if the centre/exit doors were standard on all of the current fleet (how they got away with single doors on the AV/AXs and the bigger tri-axles is beyond me!) AND used at EVERY stop then people might move down the bus.

But when you have to squeeze your way through a packed bus before the bus driver sails past your stop then it's no wonder some people stay as close to the exit as possible.

(Cue various excuses about Health and Safety, bus stop design etc - why is it that other cities and countries seem to manage just fine without it at many locations)

prinzeugen

Its is bad but its been going on for years.

What has made it worse (and walking anywhere even worse) is people with headphones stuck in the ears and face glued to the screen of the phone.

Nobody seems to be aware of what is going on 2ft from them.

As another poster said, a quick dig to the ribs is the only way to drag them away from the phone and look up.

Vic_08

_Kaiser_ wrote: »

Maybe if the centre/exit doors were standard on all of the current fleet (how they got away with single doors on the AV/AXs and the bigger tri-axles is beyond me!) AND used at EVERY stop then people might move down the bus.

But when you have to squeeze your way through a packed bus before the bus driver sails past your stop then it's no wonder some people stay as close to the exit as possible.

(Cue various excuses about Health and Safety, bus stop design etc - why is it that other cities and countries seem to manage just fine without it at many locations)

In other countries you can't get a massive payout from a company if you give yourself a boo-boo stepping from a bus to the pavement.

As long as our courts keep up the compo culture then companies and employees dealing with the public have to be overly cautious with anything that can leave them open to a claim.

FFS here is a case of a woman getting €40k for tripping on a forest path. Patently ridiculous and completely impossible for hiking trails to be made trip-hazard free but still €40k no bother at all to the Judge. In this climate opening a rear door on a bus that is not adjacent to a pavement is just asking for a claim.

Just as with the car insurance premiums shooting through the roof as long as our joke of a legal system rewards handout merchants this sort of crap is the result.

Bus drivers really don't care which door people use. As far as I'm concerned people can get on and off wherever, whenever and through whichever door they please as long as I am not held responsible if they manage to injure themselves in the process. Until that happens as I am forced into being a de facto nanny for every passenger then sorry, door will only open where I can be sure I can state everything is 100% safe (or at least in a location and manner as laid out) for even the most clumsy idiot out there.

dfx-

centre doors are largely pointless (and take up space that could be better used for priority seats). You still can't get out using the centre doors when the bus is stuffed and people are standing in the doorwell.

What would be a better solution is where buses frequencies are improved or bus capacities are increased so there is plenty of space and not full buses that you have squeeze through to get any door, no matter how many doors you have.

It is no easier to get out of a stuffed SG or GT from upstairs than an AV.

devnull

dfx- wrote: »

centre doors are largely pointless (and take up space that could be better used for priority seats).

Used with the appropriate operating environment, fare and boarding system middle doors will make the bus service cheaper to run and substantially reduce journey times attracting more customers and reducing the costs to operate the service, reducing congestion and the number of buses needed to operate a route. I do not expect this to happen in my lifetime however.

dfx-

but all that is a long way off as you say, so it's a moot point whether they might be useful in the right circumstances.

Right now and for the foreseeable future, every doorwell if a 13, 15, 27 and 40 are going to be stuffed and as hard to get through as a single door bus. People can't afford to just wait for the next one or stop people from standing there, because they will all be the same. The next one will be full too.

devnull

dfx- wrote: »

but all that is a long way off as you say, so it's a moot point whether they might be useful in the right circumstances.

They will be useful in the right circumstances. On a lot of routes for every half an hour of journey time up to a third of that can be dwell time which is crazy and is a gross inefficiency in the bus service.

If you had both doors being used you could cut dwell times even at the busiest stops down from minutes to seconds. In most other cities I have been in they have less dwell time in a 15km route full of passengers than Dublin Bus has at 2 or 3 city center stops.

Anyone who has traveled extensively outside these shores will know that.

dfx-

if you could board using both sets of doors with a flat fare, they could be useful (if people are not standing in the doorwell). Until then though, it's academic what other cities can do.

bobbyss

DB could make regular looped announcements just like they announce next stop.I also think if you are carrying a shoulder bag it might drag against the person blocking the way as you exit. That may inconvenience the stander upper!

AlekSmart

dfx- wrote: »

Centre doors are largely pointless (and take up space that could be better used for priority seats). You still can't get out using the centre doors when the bus is stuffed and people are standing in the doorwell.

What would be a better solution is where buses frequencies are improved or bus capacities are increased so there is plenty of space and not full buses that you have squeeze through to get any door, no matter how many doors you have.

It is no easier to get out of a stuffed SG or GT from upstairs than an AV.

About as good an analysis as you'll get.

Prior to the 1999 order for the AV class,some of the more interesting research apparently revealed that in London,the 2nd most common complaint in the Bus sector was the shortage of seating in the lower saloon.

Some of the London Double Decks of that era had as few as 11 seats in the lower saloon,which on a service with 5 to 10 minute headways is'nt a major issue.

The single-door AV,AX,EV,VG and VT types are all very competent designs,which can cope well with Dublin's bus environment.

It is not the number of doors that causes Dublin's woefully long Dwell-Time,it is the reluctance of the NTA and DoT to sanction the abandonment of a 150 year old Fare-Stage system with a Flat Fare,or totally cashless system not requiring Driver interaction.

Fast forward to Dublin 2016 and the arrival of the NTA influenced double door SG class which have a total of 64 fixed seats (+ 3 tip-up seats.)

It is now quite obvious that directly replacing 76 seat AV class vehicles with 64 (or 67) seat versions will leave an operator with a substantial capacity shortfall on busy peak-time journeys.

The NTA have recently stated that they have a TEN YEAR deadline for the introduction of Cash Free transactions on Buses....which is some 9 years and 2 months longer than I would suggest.

With TfL having officially announced their future Fare Collection policy will be totally cashless,and based upon direct payment via wireless Bank Card,which is already now in widespread use across ALL modes in London,the NTA's 10 YEAR target would appear to be wildly out of step with the real-world.

( TfLondon also have adopted a policy of removing ALL tip-up seating from their surface transport fleet,rail & road alike,but since this coincides with the NTA suddenly discovering the merits of them,it'll take an equally long time before the penny drops there as well)

forestgirl

D3V!L wrote: »

I have the unfortunate privilege of having to commute into Dublin City center along one of the main transport routes. My trip to and from work and just before rush hours.

I've noticed that door hogging is getting more and more prevalent. People are simply getting on the bus and standing there, even though there is free seats down stairs and a half empty upper deck.

The drivers dont seem at all bothered by this and getting on and off the bus is getting harder as time goes on.

Why is there no enforcement for this and why is it tolerated ?

I know it seems very rude for people to block a passage way on the bus but sometimes it may be a person who feels unwell and may need to stay at the front of the bus.

hmmm

AlekSmart wrote: »

the NTA's 10 YEAR target would appear to be wildly out of step with the real-world.

Unfortunately they're dealing with an Irish public that will be fed stories of some edge case "Mary from Rathgar who is allergic to using contactless payment systems unable to visit her elderly mother because of wicked NTA decision to remove cash payments on bus", along with a photo of some concerned local politician calling for "something to be done about it".

In any other country the politicians would tell them to get on with it and make the changes, but over here there'll be so many exceptions that need to be catered for it will take 10 years (and another 10 on top of that).

devnull

AlekSmart wrote: »

It is not the number of doors that causes Dublin's woefully long Dwell-Time,it is the reluctance of the NTA and DoT to sanction the abandonment of a 150 year old Fare-Stage system with a Flat Fare,or totally cashless system not requiring Driver interaction.

Dublin Bus are reluctant to abandon the 150 year old fare stage system because they are worried about the impact that it would have on their farebox revenue and have resisted all kinds of fare simplifications that the NTA have made over recent years. The NTA over recent years have greatly reduced the number of fare bands with a lot of opposition from Dublin Bus who did not want to combine fare bands in the fear that it would impact farebox revenue of an organisation who was performing financially inadequately for a number of years and is only starting to recoup their financial performance recently.

To say that the NTA and the DOT are not sanctioning is spin to the extreme, the simple fact is that the operator is not willing to proceed with such a rapid change because they are worried about the effect it would have on them and their farebox revenue unless they get promised a massive increase in PSO to cover the worst case scenario, which is not really feasible at this moment in time.

Mortpourvelo

Emme wrote: »

How long is your journey? If it's 5K or less get a bike. Problem sorted.

How is the problem sorted ??? You don't know the poster is fit enough to cycle, for one.

D3V!L

Mortpourvelo wrote: »

How is the problem sorted ??? You don't know the poster is fit enough to cycle, for one.

I am but have absolutely no interest in cycling to work and of course it doesn't solve the current problem at all.

Mortpourvelo

D3V!L wrote: »

I am but have absolutely no interest in cycling to work and of course it doesn't solve the current problem at all.

True story.

"Antisocial people are behaving badly!"
"Well buy a bike"


Nope, don't get it.

AlekSmart

devnull wrote: »

Dublin Bus are reluctant to abandon the 150 year old fare stage system because they are worried about the impact that it would have on their farebox revenue and have resisted all kinds of fare simplifications that the NTA have made over recent years. The NTA over recent years have greatly reduced the number of fare bands with a lot of opposition from Dublin Bus who did not want to combine fare bands in the fear that it would impact farebox revenue of an organisation who was performing financially inadequately for a number of years and is only starting to recoup their financial performance recently.

To say that the NTA and the DOT are not sanctioning is spin to the extreme, the simple fact is that the operator is not willing to proceed with such a rapid change because they are worried about the effect it would have on them and their farebox revenue unless they get promised a massive increase in PSO to cover the worst case scenario, which is not really feasible at this moment in time.

In the current situation,the DoT via the NTA is in FULL control of the current and future development of Fare Payment methods on it's PSO services.

For sure,Dublin Bus was "performing inadequately" for a few years,but then it can be shown that the Irish State itself,was similarly engaged across the entireity of our country's economy.

Whilst the requirements of individual operators represents an element which informs NTA thinking,I feel you may be overstating the issue somewhat by focusing on Dublin Bus's alleged reluctance to engage with NTA initiatives.

The reality,since the introduction of Leapcard,tends to indicate the opposite,but I suppose it's all a matter of interpretation.

NO operator,private or public,is going to voluntarily worsen it's Income generation,in the absence of some compensatory element,but the Leapcard initiatives so far,have proven beneficial to ALL parties.

Rebalancing of Stage validity vs cash.
20% discount vs cash.
Daily/Weekly Capping.
Multi passenger Leapcard usage.
Multiple Journey Discount.
16-19 Year old Child Leapcard usage.
All Children Free for two weeks in in July.

All NTA initiatives,but all introduced across the Dublin Bus network without much ado

With the current Wayfarer TGX ticketing system having long ago reached the limits of it's technical ability,it is now of pressing importance to source and deploy a suitably comprehensive and future-proof system across a 1000 vehicle fleet...without doubt,the funding of that system represents a major element of the impasse,but there are several stakeholders involved...not just the one,big,bad,Dublin Bus.

The issue is one which requires significant action,sooner rather than later,and it is the NTA which is in the overreaching position of responsibility,and authority to drive it forward.

XPS_Zero

AlekSmart wrote: »

About as good an analysis as you'll get.

Prior to the 1999 order for the AV class,some of the more interesting research apparently revealed that in London,the 2nd most common complaint in the Bus sector was the shortage of seating in the lower saloon.

Some of the London Double Decks of that era had as few as 11 seats in the lower saloon,which on a service with 5 to 10 minute headways is'nt a major issue.

The single-door AV,AX,EV,VG and VT types are all very competent designs,which can cope well with Dublin's bus environment.

It is not the number of doors that causes Dublin's woefully long Dwell-Time,it is the reluctance of the NTA and DoT to sanction the abandonment of a 150 year old Fare-Stage system with a Flat Fare,or totally cashless system not requiring Driver interaction.

Fast forward to Dublin 2016 and the arrival of the NTA influenced double door SG class which have a total of 64 fixed seats (+ 3 tip-up seats.)

It is now quite obvious that directly replacing 76 seat AV class vehicles with 64 (or 67) seat versions will leave an operator with a substantial capacity shortfall on busy peak-time journeys.

The NTA have recently stated that they have a TEN YEAR deadline for the introduction of Cash Free transactions on Buses....which is some 9 years and 2 months longer than I would suggest.

With TfL having officially announced their future Fare Collection policy will be totally cashless,and based upon direct payment via wireless Bank Card,which is already now in widespread use across ALL modes in London,the NTA's 10 YEAR target would appear to be wildly out of step with the real-world.

( TfLondon also have adopted a policy of removing ALL tip-up seating from their surface transport fleet,rail & road alike,but since this coincides with the NTA suddenly discovering the merits of them,it'll take an equally long time before the penny drops there as well)

What's tip up seating and why do TFL not want to keep using it?

Personally I thought it was absurd to turn the creaky old fare stage system over to leap cards AND keep dwell times by requiring drivers machine take the fare. One flat €2 fare for all DB journeys capped at €6 a day would speed everything up

AlekSmart

XPS_Zero wrote: »

What's tip up seating and why do TFL not want to keep using it?

Personally I thought it was absurd to turn the creaky old fare stage system over to leap cards AND keep dwell times by requiring drivers machine take the fare. One flat €2 fare for all DB journeys capped at €6 a day would speed everything up

Tip-Up....Flip Down....the occasional seating designed to allow multi use of floor space on buses/trams/trains....crush em in standing during peak but have seats available during quiet periods.

Good idea in principle....until folks sit up to straighten clothing...and the seat flips up beneath them.....:)

Vic_08

XPS_Zero wrote: »

Personally I thought it was absurd to turn the creaky old fare stage system over to leap cards AND keep dwell times by requiring drivers machine take the fare. One flat €2 fare for all DB journeys capped at €6 a day would speed everything up

So you want cheaper fares and lower caps. Where will the revenue shortfall be recovered from then?

AndrewJRenko

Vic_08 wrote: »

FFS here is a case of a woman getting €40k for tripping on a forest path. Patently ridiculous and completely impossible for hiking trails to be made trip-hazard free but still €40k no bother at all to the Judge. In this climate opening a rear door on a bus that is not adjacent to a pavement is just asking for a claim.

.

In fairness, the claim arose because NPWS had put in steps on the trail, and then failed to maintain them. If they had never touched the steps, no claim would have arisen.

XPS_Zero

Vic_08 wrote: »

So you want cheaper fares and lower caps. Where will the revenue shortfall be recovered from then?

The existing caps only a few cent above that

Fares have been going up yearly since I was in primary school (with lower subsidies)I'm finishing college next year. Ideally what I'd do is introduce zonal fare system across all 5 services designed to maximise revenue while incentivising use that balance can be struck, then I'd freeze all fares for 5 years

I'd also argue the state subsidies should go up (though I'd get an independent external audit of CIE first for waste then reform it, if they strike I'd utterly crush them) to lower fares we need to incentiveise public transport use the future of our planet demands we get people out of their cars as much as we can.

I'd argue if fares are low with low caps you'd have far more use and may get higher revenue we should at least try it. Why can airlines fly people across Europe for half what IE costs Dublin to Cork their only one trick soloution is higher fares it's their only soloution. We need to try something new, if it = lower revenue we can go back to the old model.

AlekSmart

XPS_Zero wrote: »

The existing caps only a few cent above that

Fares have been going up yearly since I was in primary school (with lower subsidies)I'm finishing college next year. Ideally what I'd do is introduce zonal fare system across all 5 services designed to maximise revenue while incentivising use that balance can be struck, then I'd freeze all fares for 5 years

I'd also argue the state subsidies should go up (though I'd get an independent external audit of CIE first for waste then reform it, if they strike I'd utterly crush them) to lower fares we need to incentiveise public transport use the future of our planet demands we get people out of their cars as much as we can.

I'd argue if fares are low with low caps you'd have far more use and may get higher revenue we should at least try it. Why can airlines fly people across Europe for half what IE costs Dublin to Cork their only one trick soloution is higher fares it's their only soloution. We need to try something new, if it = lower revenue we can go back to the old model.

Two very pertinent points,and both tied-up with a National Administrative trait to do nothing in the face of challenge.....
"fán go bhfeicmíd" appears to be the Status Quo...and it will be defended to the hilt.

Take the onset of Christmas in Dublin City....a fantastic opportunity to incentivise Leapcard AND a Public Transport option.....Extra Weekend Bus Services,with a flat adult fare of €2 and Child 79c ALL DAY Saturday & Sunday.....try it...suck it 'n see.....or simply watch the queues for the Multi-Storey Car Parks get longer and longer.....Dundrum Centre Abú

WoollyRedHat

Introduce slides for the top deck so people don't have to go downstairs getting off. Hop on hop off.

MJohnston

I'm curious, why do they keep buying the centre door bus designs - would it not be better for them to try something different - I've often thought that the layout could be rearranged so there were boarding and alighting "lanes" (for want of a better word) that both used a wider front-side door.

strandroad

MJohnston wrote: »

I'm curious, why do they keep buying the centre door bus designs - would it not be better for them to try something different - I've often thought that the layout could be rearranged so there were boarding and alighting "lanes" (for want of a better word) that both used a wider front-side door.

Because centre doors make perfect sense when they are used properly... It's not rocket science!

MJohnston

mhge wrote: »

Because centre doors make perfect sense when they are used properly... It's not rocket science!

Yeah but I'm fairly confident when I say they'll never be used properly.

So do you keep trying to 'fix' this problem? Or do you accept that it's not possible (or at best, extremely unlikely and expensive to do) and try alternative solutions?

One thing that's an immovable fact is that DB vehicles really need separate boarding and alighting spaces, dwell times could be heavily improved if its done properly.