Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

Vic_08

It is pretty obvious that the fault primarily lies with the NTA for over ordering streetlites.

Contrary to what many keyboard experts assumed there were very good reasons that DB migrated towards a nearly 100% DD fleet, the very small number of duties where a SD would not lead to overcrowding on at least 1 or 2 journeys was not worth the inflexibility of rostering completely separate fleets.

IMO the only reasonable option is for the NTA to admit their mistake and replace enough SDs in the GAI fleet to convert the 102 and 184 ASAP.

I am sure part of the problem is that GAI are going to be contracted for the current fleet and will expect extra payment for running more expensive DDs.

The interlinking of routes is done to benefit GAI, no doubt they have run the timetables through their scheduling program and come up with the most efficient duties which utilise a lot of interworking. Ironically this is the opposite of their own commercial preference in their UK operations where they tend to route-brand buses and keep allocations tightly fixed on individual routes.

Keeping the routes separate in order to better allocate DDs will mean more duties, higher fleet utilisation and increased costs for GAI, if this is not specified in their contract they are going to be looking for more funds to do this also.

Stephen15

Vic_08 wrote: »

It is pretty obvious that the fault primarily lies with the NTA for over ordering streetlites.

Contrary to what many keyboard experts assumed there were very good reasons that DB migrated towards a nearly 100% DD fleet, the very small number of duties where a SD would not lead to overcrowding on at least 1 or 2 journeys was not worth the inflexibility of rostering completely separate fleets.

IMO the only reasonable option is for the NTA to admit their mistake and replace enough SDs in the GAI fleet to convert the 102 and 184 ASAP.

I agree the NTA did order too many Streetlites however I do believe there is some place for single deck buses within the Dublin city fleet. I was under the impression DB got rid of most of the single deckers in order to keep capacity up when they were cutting back the fleet during the recession. However GAI services and increases to DB services come as an increase to capacity to what are similar levels to before Network Direct and the recession.

I'm fully aware of the issues with the 102 but I was under the impression that the issues with the 184 have now been more or less sorted out as some of the busiest departures are now covered by double deckers. I also get the impression double deckers are only really required on that route at school times as for most of the day loadings on the 184 are relatively light and suitable for single deck operation. However the 102 definitely needs to be allocate double deckers once more.

I do think too many Streetlites were ordered I think 40 was too many and somewhere around the 25 mark would have been more suitable. Also another issue is they should have ordered some Streetlites with the shorter wheelbase for the 59 which cannot take the Streetlite Max. The 59 as with a number of GAI routes is for the most part a fresh air carrier hence why single deckers should be used.

SG317

devnull wrote: »

SG317 wrote: »

I'm jusy going to sum as briefly as possible in bullet points why the 102 being SD operated is beneficial to GAI, if anyone has anything to provide on the contrary or in favour please go ahead.

Whether you think it's beneficial for them to operate it as single deckers or not is not what this debate is about. You have made a claim and you continue to state that in your opinion it is true because someone cannot prove it is false, which is fallative. You have a theory, but it doesn't mean it's true and you have not proven anything to back-up this.

Go Ahead have themselves confirmed that they want to run double deckers on the 102 but they are not allowed to. Even though the burden of proof is on you in this debate and it's not up to me to prove you are false, I'm going to do it anyway by using comments from GAI itself to prove the 102 allocation is not their choice.

https://twitter.com/GoAheadIreland/status/1141031907565723652

>102 is outbased + far away from Ballymount hence it is cheaper to run SDs in the route, fuel efficiency.
>interworked with 33A/B both of which are outbased and far away from Ballymount, both perfectly suitable for SDs.
>Route 17 carries practically fresh air in the summer, yet it is still allocated DDs, while the 102 is busier in the summer but still allocated SDs.

You also seem to be claiming here that Go-Ahead Ireland have free reign on what vehicles are allocated to what particular route, again you have been unable to back it up and even though the burden of proof is on you again and it's not up to me to prove you are false, I'm going to do it anyway by using comments from GAI itself to prove they do not have free reign on allocations

https://twitter.com/GoAheadIreland/status/1146471987612725249

At the end of the day people can make their own mind up whether they believe, me, you or what Go-Ahead Ireland say on Twitter and who is the most trustworthy out of us all. It's not for me to say who they should believe.

I don't think there is anything more to say with this debate, truth be told, we're going around in circles and I don't think we are going to agree whatever we put forward, so I'm going to leave it at that with this last post. Even though I don't agree with you I appreciate that the debate has been civil

https://twitter.com/GoAheadIreland/status/1086156806605455360?s=19

Here GAI state that the 236 is to be SD allocated. Two months later when they take over the 76A, route 236 becomes DD operated. Which happens to be interworked with 76/A. So if you are going to argue that is not leniancy then you are going to ignore the facts again.

SG317

devnull wrote: »

SG317 wrote: »

I see that you have composed quite a convoluted argument, that in one sentence argues that there is no evidence to prove my claims. First of all, I was not arguing that the theory I have provided is correct because you have provided no alternative reasoning. What I said is, that you claim the 'outbasing theory'" has been proven wrong, and that the evidence suggest otherwise. Yet you provided none of this 'evidence'

You can keep using fallacies all you like, but let me remind you that the first one to bring up any discussion of outstations was yourself and you indicated that this was the reason for the single deckers being allocated on this route, so therefore the burden of proof is very much on you. But once again you still attempt to argue that because I don't prove you are wrong, that you are right.

You say you are indeffirent to who operates the routes, yet you have consistently portrayed an anti Dublin Bus agenda, where every time GAI is criticised you immediately scapegoat to DB.

Just because I criticise elements of what an operator does, it doesn't mean there is something personal against them. I understand that some people may have that perception, particularly those who were fond of such operator and not very fond of another, but I can tell you with complete honesty that I am far more concerned with what an operator does than who they are since I am not an enthusiast of any company but the overall public transport picture.

I have previously been accused of being pro NTA and that I defend them to the hilt no matter what, even though that's not true, and the fact I'm now being accused of being anti them is an interesting change somewhat. There are some people who want Go-Ahead Ireland to fail or have any excuse to have a pop at them because they never wanted routes to be tendered in the first place just as there were some people who wanted more routes up for tender as they have some dislike for Dublin Bus because of some over the top belief about unions.

If I was ao anti Dublin Bus I wouldn't have praised them at all over the last few years but I have and I wouldn't have been strongly supportive of no further existing Dublin City bus routes being open to tender but I was, as I believed that these routes should stay with DB for now until we can make a better judgement as to how the Go-Ahead services performed over a longer term, that's sensible and to do anything else would be doing it for ideology sake which is something I've always been against. I'm sure I'll be moaning about GAI sooner or later as well

You keep asking for firm evidence however I suspect the only reason for that is, that the circumstances strongly suggest that the 102 is operated by SDs as that is what is most operationally convenient for GAI, however you know a lot of the evidence may be considered commercially sensitive and hence innacessable to the public, hence you can push through you pro GAI agenda claiming any criticism is false because of 'no evidence'.

If you want to make a claim and argue that it's true then it's down to you to prove that claim not someone to prove that you are wrong. Saying that you're right but the evidence to prove that you are right cannot be seen so we should take your word for it as we I cannot prove the evidence doesn't exist is almost a perfect textbook example of an argument from ignorance fallacy.

Actually it was reported on the enthisiast forums that GAI was looking for an outstation at the Old Airport Road. However, it seems they weren't able to secure one there so they are using the Red Car Park instead.

Do you have a link?

If the leniancy is false, then why is it that the 236 was on the SD list, but when GAI got the 76/A which is interworked with the 236, it got converted to DD orpration. It also must be the case that the 111 interworked with 75A getting DDs when the 111 is SD designated, is not leniancy.

Can you supply me with this list that you claim to have seen as I've been looking for one and have not been able to find one. Since you say the vehicles are on the list, then obviously the list must be in existence?

The reason I said that the NTA have to approve what vehicles are on a route is because that is what Go-Ahead have told me, that is what Ed Walls has said in the press and that is what Go-Ahead have been tweeting for the last few months.

However you can't argue with such certainty that is false, while you blatantly ignore any arguments for the theor. You talk about burden of proof, yet you have provided with circumstantial evidence that you have failed to address.

Again, you're using a logical fallacy here, saying that I have to prove something is certainly false rather than you proving it to be true, it's going round and round in circles and when so many fallacies are being used

Look you have taken what I say out of context and you do that a lot. You can talk about burden if proof all you like. However, you are provided with circumstantial evidence that you say have bee proven false, however you can't provide any of this evidence. If you are going to claim it is proven false but can't say how. You can say what you like but that is just a double standard.

Once again what I said was that you can't state that something has been proven wrong with evidence yet provide none of this evidence. As then there is nothing to back up your claim. You can twist what I said all you like though.

SG317

Stephen15 wrote: »

Vic_08 wrote: »

It is pretty obvious that the fault primarily lies with the NTA for over ordering streetlites.

Contrary to what many keyboard experts assumed there were very good reasons that DB migrated towards a nearly 100% DD fleet, the very small number of duties where a SD would not lead to overcrowding on at least 1 or 2 journeys was not worth the inflexibility of rostering completely separate fleets.

IMO the only reasonable option is for the NTA to admit their mistake and replace enough SDs in the GAI fleet to convert the 102 and 184 ASAP.

I agree the NTA did order too many Streetlites however I do believe there is some place for single deck buses within the Dublin city fleet. I was under the impression DB got rid of most of the single deckers in order to keep capacity up when they were cutting back the fleet during the recession. However GAI services and increases to DB services come as an increase to capacity to what are similar levels to before Network Direct and the recession.

I'm fully aware of the issues with the 102 but I was under the impression that the issues with the 184 have now been more or less sorted out as some of the busiest departures are now covered by double deckers. I also get the impression double deckers are only really required on that route at school times as for most of the day loadings on the 184 are relatively light and suitable for single deck operation. However the 102 definitely needs to be allocate double deckers once more.

I do think too many Streetlites were ordered I think 40 was too many and somewhere around the 25 mark would have been more suitable. Also another issue is they should have ordered some Streetlites with the shorter wheelbase for the 59 which cannot take the Streetlite Max. The 59 as with a number of GAI routes is for the most part a fresh air carrier hence why single deckers should be used.

The only thing about that is the 59 is interworked with the other DL locals, so even if the shorter wheelbase streetlites were bought, would GAI allocate these, or leave it DD operated so it can be interworked with other routes.

dfx-

punisher5112 wrote: »

As in allocation?

Maintenance has the last call so say it is usually an sg but something happens then it could be anything replacing it but as we all know certain routes are double door no matter what....

It's actually similar to when we still had the RV and they would want all low floor no matter what on said certain route.

Buses are allocated to a certain number of routes as it helps follow service schedules also.

I use to find like with nitelink it was AX only and was like that for quite a few years.

Some of them got worked hard.

It's like any company if change is needed it is slow but can be done very quickly if needed.

I'm not sure if this helps.

I mean DB had routes where they would put their new buses on - the 1/69/150/11 etc and routes like the 14, 27 and 40 would have AVs or AXs. The old 14/A was notorious for getting RAs and RVs even.

The NTA demanded that the new dual doors were to be put on the 14, 27 and 40 and others. How quick could that happen.

Do DB need a week's notice to implement this sort an allocation change on a route, a weekend, a month, six months? Not a specific bus, but a change of type or batch of a type.

The 13 get the newest buses in C/rd now. So when the next newest batch are changed off the 13 to somewhere else, how long does it take?

Vic_08 wrote: »

It is pretty obvious that the fault primarily lies with the NTA for over ordering streetlites.

Contrary to what many keyboard experts assumed there were very good reasons that DB migrated towards a nearly 100% DD fleet, the very small number of duties where a SD would not lead to overcrowding on at least 1 or 2 journeys was not worth the inflexibility of rostering completely separate fleets.

IMO the only reasonable option is for the NTA to admit their mistake and replace enough SDs in the GAI fleet to convert the 102 and 184 ASAP.

I am sure part of the problem is that GAI are going to be contracted for the current fleet and will expect extra payment for running more expensive DDs.

The interlinking of routes is done to benefit GAI, no doubt they have run the timetables through their scheduling program and come up with the most efficient duties which utilise a lot of interworking. Ironically this is the opposite of their own commercial preference in their UK operations where they tend to route-brand buses and keep allocations tightly fixed on individual routes.

Keeping the routes separate in order to better allocate DDs will mean more duties, higher fleet utilisation and increased costs for GAI, if this is not specified in their contract they are going to be looking for more funds to do this also.

This is a great post, but then, what do you do with all the streetlites you've ordered?

Stephen15

SG317 wrote: »

The only thing about that is the 59 is interworked with the other DL locals, so even if the shorter wheelbase streetlites were bought, would GAI allocate these, or leave it DD operated so it can be interworked with other routes.

They could be interworked with just the 111. On Sundays that's already the case the 59 and 111 are interworked and the 111 uses only double deckers could do that the rest of the week but with short wheelbase Streetlites instead of double deckers also the 63 doesn't need double deckers all the time.

From what I've observed generally it seems to be the 63 and 75 which are the routes that are interworked the most in DL many a time I've seen a 63 come into DL and then go back out as a 75and vice versa but it seems to be less common to see a 63 or a 75 go back out as a 45a or a 59. The 59 is only a one bus at a time allocation.

Stephen15

dfx- wrote: »

I mean DB had routes where they would put their new buses on - the 1/69/150/11 etc and routes like the 14, 27 and 40 would have AVs or AXs. The old 14/A was notorious for getting RAs and RVs even.

The NTA demanded that the new dual doors were to be put on the 14, 27 and 40 and others. How quick could that happen.

Do DB need a week's notice to implement this sort an allocation change on a route, a weekend, a month, six months? Not a specific bus, but a change of type or batch of a type.

It seems to me that the allocations of the SGs seem to be more random than previous classes. For example it seems that most routes could be operated by any random SG which gives me the impression that the induvidual SG allocations on the cross city routes changes on a daily basis.

This is a great post, but then, what do you do with all the streetlites you've ordered?

I guess some of them could be sent to other PSO operators like BE for their city/town services in places like Waterford or even DB as some routes with DB do not need double deckers the 40e, 53 and the 61 would all stick out off the top of my head as DB routes that do not need double deckers and could manage with Streetlites. However I could not see the longer Streetlite Max being able to manage the 44b.

ITV2

i'm sure they'd manage on the 44B. I know an AV/AX did operate the 44B only last year.. it's tight alright on the roads up there.

Stephen15

ITV2 wrote: »

i'm sure they'd manage on the 44B. I know an AV/AX did operate the 44B only last year.. it's tight alright on the roads up there.

I didn't think it went the full way though

dashcamdanny

Some garages only allocate buses at the start of the day. In Ringsend, relief and late drivers have their pick of what is in the yard I think. Double door buses are usually kept for cross city routes and dont terminate in garages.

ITV2

yes all the way. I was on the 44 at the time and spoke to the driver who operated it.. not for the faint hearted.

Stephen15

ITV2 wrote: »

yes all the way. I was on the 44 at the time and spoke to the driver who operated it.. not for the faint hearted.

Bloody hell always thought the double deckers were banned off the 44b up around Glencullen sure the roads around there are tight enough even in a car

Stephen15

I see a good few of the GAI buses are still going around with ads for the kids go free Leap promotion even though it ended two weeks ago

ITV2

they now have an Anti-racist advert on some.

Contrails

I know this has been discussed to death but I saw a 102 streetlite at Pavillions yesterday fit to blow it's rivets it was so full. Any further info on possibility of double deck on that route for the foreseeable?

I had never actually seen it with my own eyes before but Jesus it looked like a rolling sweatbox.

Stephen15

Contrails wrote: »

I know this has been discussed to death but I saw a 102 streetlite at Pavillions yesterday fit to blow it's rivets it was so full. Any further info on possibility of double deck on that route for the foreseeable?

I had never actually seen it with my own eyes before but Jesus it looked like a rolling sweatbox.

Meanwhile I saw two double deckers on the 111 a single decker route which regularly get's double deckers yesterday both were completely empty also the 63 was fairly empty aswell. Both routes would probably manage fine with single deckers.

I do believe there is an element of operational convience with GAI putting single deckers on busy routes. It wouldn't be the only reason but likely a reason as it seems nearly every single decker route is interworked and likewise with double decker routes.

dfx-

Contrails wrote: »

I know this has been discussed to death but I saw a 102 streetlite at Pavillions yesterday fit to blow it's rivets it was so full. Any further info on possibility of double deck on that route for the foreseeable?

I had never actually seen it with my own eyes before but Jesus it looked like a rolling sweatbox.

No news eight months in.

Stephen15

dfx- wrote: »

No news eight months in.

I'd say they have more than enough double deckers now to convert to double deck operation. They must have received the guts of 14 191 SGs diverted from DB as I noticed the fleet number on a bus was on was 11587 and some of the double deck routes could be made either fully or partly single deck operated the 63 and 114 spring to mind. Problem is this wouldn't suit GAIs operational model of interworking routes with the same buses and drivers.

dublinman1990

At long last. There was a double decker on the 102 today.

Csalem has a photo of it here at Dublin Airport.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/60501971@N08/48559369031/in/photostream/

Stephen15

dublinman1990 wrote: »

At long last. There was a double decker on the 102 today.

Csalem has a photo of it here at Dublin Airport.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/60501971@N08/48559369031/in/photostream/

There have been plenty of double deckers on it sure I was out in Howth a few weeks ago and saw a double decker at the level crossing on the 102 when I was passing on the Dart. Virtually every GAI single deck route has had double deckers on it at some stage.

john boye

dublinman1990 wrote: »

At long last. There was a double decker on the 102 today.

Csalem has a photo of it here at Dublin Airport.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/60501971@N08/48559369031/in/photostream/

I saw one on it in the airport last Friday or Saturday.

Stephen15

So it's been nearly year now since GAI first started operating in Dublin and I'm going to give my opinion on how I've found the service so far. I am happy with some elements of the service but not others. The GAI service from my expierence on the routes I use has generally been relatively punctual and I am happy with the more frequent service particularly at weekend and in the evening.

Many of the issues with the service can be blamed on traffic conditions and high loadings which are by no means issues unique to GAI and existed when the current routes were operated by DB and still continue on many DB routes today aswell as GAI.

However what I feared was we would end up with a fragmented system which unfortunately is to some extent what we have been given. This is especially in relation to passenger information for example there is yet to be any single page where one can find the timetable to every city bus route in Dublin put in front of them in a clear, concise and uniform manner regardless of whether it be operated by Dublin or Go-Ahead.

At bus stops which are served by routes operated by both operators the timetables posted look inconsistent with the Dublin Bus routes in a different font and whereas the GAI routes have a spider diagram with a list of stops and stop specific information DB routes do not have this and instead only have termini departures listed. Also ther eis no mention of any additional information at bus stops such as fare information which is present at stop only served by DB buses.

Finally what's the story with DB buses being painted into the same livery as GAI buses always thought this was going to be the case. I know DB were harping on about brand identity but why haven't DB their latest SG deliveries in the TFI livery just like in the same way BE have now got Streetlites in TFI livery and are due to receive Sunsundegi Sb3/Volvo B8RLEs in TFI livery. How come BE buses have been delivered in TFI livery but not DB buses.

LuckyLloyd

Personally feel that - so long as they are different services in respect of staff remuneration, app, stop information, etc - they should remain separately branded. So DB are right to maintain their own livery imo.

Stephen15

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Personally feel that - so long as they are different services in respect of staff remuneration, app, stop information, etc - they should remain separately branded. So DB are right to maintain their own livery imo.

Not much use for confused passengers though. Look at London loads of bus operators but the average passenger wouldn't even know as the information is the same likewise the bus livery etc.

LuckyLloyd

Stephen15 wrote: »

Not much use for confused passengers though. Look at London loads of bus operators but the average passenger wouldn't even know as the information is the same likewise the bus livery etc.

The integration of branding and livery needs to be justified by integration of information provision.

Stephen15

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

The integration of branding and livery needs to be justified by integration of information provision.

Yes I agree if you painted DB buses into NTA livery right now you run the risk of cauing more confusion as people would think DB buses are GAI buses. What should be done first intergration of information.

dublinman1990

GAI have put up new revised timetables for the 33b, 75/75a & 161 on their website.

https://www.goaheadireland.ie/timetable-changes-25th-august-2019

Summary of changes

33b

To better align this route during school finishing times. This route will leave 7 minutes later from Swords at 15:02 & at 15:30 at Seaview.

75/75a

The 75 will have an extra departure at 07:20 from Dun Laoghaire on Monday to Friday mornings.

It will depart in-between the 75a departures at 06:50 & 07:35 from Dun Laoghaire.

161

A revised timetable has been made to improve reliability & punctuality of the service.

They will be in service from Sunday the 25th of August.

Revised Timetables are here.

https://images-goaheadireland.passenger-website.com/downloads/Timetable%2033B.pdf

https://images-goaheadireland.passenger-website.com/downloads/Timetable%2075_75A_0.pdf

https://images-goaheadireland.passenger-website.com/downloads/Timetable%20161.pdf

dublinman1990

I used the 114 twice today. I had got on it near St Augustines School but the bus arrived 10 minutes late at my stop which arrived at 14:55. I got the 114 later in the evening for the 16:50 bus at Blackrock Station. That particular bus, which was 11557, had the new seat cover designs in it. I thought they looked very nice & it was my first time sitting down on them. It's also that my first time ever that I had used the 114 route on a Sunday. There was quite a handful of passengers being seen in each bus which was great to see. I just don't understand why DB did not do this before when they ran the route in the past. It seems like a lost opportunity now on their part which should have been exploited long ago because there is clearly a level of demand there that is needed for a route like this on a weekend. I suppose the exact same thing could be said for using the 111 between Bride's Glen & Dalkey running on a Sunday. Clearly; with rising populations being recorded in our census statistics over the past number of years; demand for bus routes like these ones are needed for their customers on a weekend.

Stephen15

dublinman1990 wrote: »

I used the 114 twice today. I had got on it near St Augustines School but the bus arrived 10 minutes late at my stop which arrived at 14:55. I got the 114 later in the evening for the 16:50 bus at Blackrock Station. That particular bus, which was 11557, had the new seat cover designs in it. I thought they looked very nice & it was my first time sitting down on them. It's also that my first time ever that I had used the 114 route on a Sunday. There was quite a handful of passengers being seen in each bus which was great to see. I just don't understand why DB did not do this before when they ran the route in the past. It seems like a lost opportunity now on their part which should have been exploited long ago because there is clearly a level of demand there that is needed for a route like this on a weekend. I suppose the exact same thing could be said for using the 111 between Bride's Glen & Dalkey running on a Sunday. Clearly; with rising populations being recorded in our census statistics over the past number of years; demand for bus routes like these ones are needed for their customers on a weekend.

Pretty sure the 239 didn't have Sunday service either until GAI started operating it.

Up until the recent changes you could actually nearly say that certain routes were only operating a skeleton service on Sundays. Three routes along with the ones which don't run full stop on Sundays which would spring to mind would be the 4, 17 and 184 for me. The 184 operated every two hours on a Sunday but now runs every half hour.

I do wonder if it would be anything to with DB's Sunday premium rates for drivers being higher than GAIs. The Sunday service with DB seemed to date back to a time before shops opened on a Sunday and few people were about.