nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

Stephen15

So since the last thread on this got closed and dosen't appear to be reopening any time soon. Heres a new one for you.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

tabbey

devnull wrote: »

The stops for new route 175 can be found here:
https://journeyplanner.transportforireland.ie/nta/XSLT_SELTT_REQUEST?itdLPxx_page=rop

Just type 175 into the box, select the service, select inbount or outbound and show on map.

Still does nothing to accelerate Dun Laoghaire - Tallaght services. But probably is useful for students & staff of UCD.

devnull

sugarman wrote: »

Same and that's what I meant. It happens in several places along the new route. Even people living in the back arse of Firehouse and Ballycullen or Knocklyon would have to walk 15/20mins to a stop at present that would link them to central Tallaght/Square. They now have a bus on their door step.. for what, 16 months? Before it's taken away in favour of bus connects. Asking for trouble.

You do realise that the Bus Connects proposals are not set in stone? They can be changed in line with demand and also in line with feedback. Note that whilst the BusConnects proposals were being designed the route of the 175 wasn't decided.

Qrt

sugarman wrote: »

Same and that's what I meant. It happens in several places along the new route. Even people living in the back arse of Firehouse and Ballycullen or Knocklyon would have to walk 15/20mins to a stop at present that would link them to central Tallaght/Square. They now have a bus on their door step.. for what, 16 months? Before it's taken away in favour of bus connects. Asking for trouble.

The S8 will replace the 175's "green route" coverage. It'll be essentially the same between The Sq and Ballinteer Avenue. It's only really the Fortunestown Way segment I'm talking about here, as that will lose all buses (except the two stops where the 27 goes) along the road. I'd propose bringing the planned Rathcoole-Saggart local bus down to The Sq, but I do realise that's for the other thread.

Stephen15

sugarman wrote: »

Thats what I was saying in my first post, but then they also lose a direct link to Dundrum also.

None of this effects me in anyway, both the 175 and S8 are welcomed additions either way.

The only point I was trying to make is theyve made more work for themselves in regards to proposals and any replanning etc.. for bus connects. Surely it could have been shelved and the buses used to increase the frequency of the 75 even further under Go Ahead.

Issue is if you put extra buses on the 75 they would likely end up sitting in traffic bunched together. I suspect that the 75 may get a revised timetable with improved frequencies when Go-Ahead take over the route anyway not much point on having a 75 every 10 mins it's not that busy a route and like I said it would likely end up bunched at peak times.

I can see the 175 just ending up as another bus like the 17, 18 or the 75. Which will suffer from all sorts of reliability issues around peak times due to it being given unrealistic running times and spend most of it's time sitting in traffic. For the proposed BC orbitals to work big investment will needed on the routes corridors with improved bus priority otherwise they will just end up in gridlock like our current orbitals like the 17, 18 and the 75.

A big issue I see with the routing of the 175 is the windy routing it takes to serve Dundrum Village and SC that's going to be a traffic nightmare for the bus. It should turn left at The Goat onto Drumartin, right onto Kilmacud Rd. Upper, around Airfield connecting with these Luas and the Shopping Centre at Balally. Sandyford Road is nearly always bumper to bumper and there should be a bus lane from Balally Luas Station as far as the Roundabout to facillatate this routing. This route is going to face big traffic issues around Dundrum SC around Christmas time.

KD345

The last time I took the 75 a few months ago during morning peak from Tallaght it was full by Old Bawn and passed by stops on Firhouse Road. This was using a VT bus.

I’m guessing they hope some of these passengers will swap to the 175 to ease the pressure for when Go Ahead take over the 75 using the much smaller SG/GT buses.

Stephen15

KD345 wrote: »

The last time I took the 75 a few months ago during morning peak from Tallaght it was full by Old Bawn and passed by stops on Firhouse Road. This was using a VT bus.

I’m guessing they hope some of these passengers will swap to the 175 to ease the pressure for when Go Ahead take over the 75 using the much smaller SG/GT buses.

The VTs were only allocated to the 75 since the new bill was passed which reduced the frequency at peak times from every 15 or 20 mins (can't remember exactly) to every half hour.

I should hope that the NTA will restore the previous peak time frequency on the 75 once GA takeover as the SG's and GT's will reduce capacity on the route. I would also hope the NTA sorts out the Sandyford diversion which is lengthy and confusing for many 75 users.

dfx-

The VTs are a great addition to the 75 and will be a great loss.

Stephen15

dfx- wrote: »

The VTs are a great addition to the 75 and will be a great loss.

The route never required VTs before the timetable was butchered enhanced by the NTA, the only improvement was an increased Sunday frequency. Hopefully the NTA restore the old peak timetable and keep the increased Sunday frequency.

Fact is plenty of other routes need the extra space of the VTs more than the 75 such as the 16 but it's convient for DB to put them on the 75 because they are in Donnybrook.

devnull

Update from Go-Ahead that seems to suggested we're heading for a fragmented system

In advance of the transition of bus routes from Dublin Bus to Go-Ahead Ireland this autumn, we are currently working closely with the National Transport Authority (NTA) on all route scheduling and timetables. These will be available on our website over the coming weeks but if you have any questions now please contact the NTA who will be happy to assist you.

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

pat ticket

Stephen15 wrote: »

Issue is if you put extra buses on the 75 they would likely end up sitting in traffic bunched together. I suspect that the 75 may get a revised timetable with improved frequencies when Go-Ahead take over the route anyway not much point on having a 75 every 10 mins it's not that busy a route and like I said it would likely end up bunched at peak times.

This is anecdotal but the bus stop I use most days is on the 75 route towards DL. From what I see, the bus appears to be full or near full most of the time, inc. @ off peak times and at weekends.

On the odd occasion I've used it, it seems well patronised, especially from Dundrum onwards.

alane20

A lot of time and money has been spent on bus connects, which is designed to work in grid city's, Dublin is not a grid city, it will be be spun and brought in, it will be a disaster and it will revert to the way it is now

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

Agreed but I could see a situation happening where timetables are listed the NTA website, the DB website and the GAI website. What do the NTA expect happen in places where Go-Ahead routes and DB routes share the same stop. Have the NTA learned no lessons from the disastrous implementation of the 139?

ITV2

Stephen15 wrote: »

The route never required VTs before the timetable was butchered enhanced by the NTA, the only improvement was an increased Sunday frequency. Hopefully the NTA restore the old peak timetable and keep the increased Sunday frequency.

Fact is plenty of other routes need the extra space of the VTs more than the 75 such as the 16 but it's convient for DB to put them on the 75 because they are in Donnybrook.

I think the problem with VT's on the 16's is the left turn at Leonard's Corner, remember Phibs also have 40 VT's too.

Stephen15

pat ticket wrote: »

This is anecdotal but the bus stop I use most days is on the 75 route towards DL. From what I see, the bus appears to be full or near full most of the time, inc. @ off peak times and at weekends.

On the odd occasion I've used it, it seems well patronised, especially from Dundrum onwards.

It has always been a busy enough route but not the busiest nowhere as busy as any of the core routes such as the 4, 7, 15, 16, 25a/b, 39a, 46a, 145 etc.

I used to use it semi regularly about 2 years ago to go to Dundrum or Ballinteer now and it always seemed busy but never so busy that you wouldn't get a seat this was before the new bill was introduced by the NTA which decreased peak services on it. It's only been since then VTs got allocated to it so I can only presume there's a direct correlation as extra capacity was needed.

Stephen15

ITV2 wrote: »

I think the problem with VT's on the 16's is the left turn at Leonard's Corner, remember Phibs also have 40 VT's too.

I was more just using the 16 as an example of a route which could do with VTs more than the 75 needs them. I don't think there's that much of an issue with them on the 16 mind you as they usually do workings on it during Marlay Park concerts. There are a few tight turns in DL like the junction between Lwr. George's Street and York Road which even regular buses two axle buses struggle with at times.

L1011

The VTs aren't the youngest - are there any plans for replacement with similar capacity vehicles?

Qrt

L1011 wrote: »

The VTs aren't the youngest - are there any plans for replacement with similar capacity vehicles?

I'm fairly sure I heard there were no plans for more tri-axle vehicles.

punisher5112

Qrt wrote: »

I'm fairly sure I heard there were no plans for more tri-axle vehicles.

They are mad for buying in the sg type and now reverting back to many single Decker's coming shortly... Not a huge amount mind.

Vt are a great bus.

Qrt

punisher5112 wrote: »

They are mad for buying in the sg type and now reverting back to many single Decker's coming shortly... Not a huge amount mind.

Vt are a great bus.

Except for the lack of middle door.

L1011

Had to check if Wright do a triaxle seeing as they appear wedding to them. They do. They are still going to be needed on some routes at peak even after BusConnects.

punisher5112

Qrt wrote: »

Except for the lack of middle door.

In Japan I believe they have 3 door vt style.

Probably one of the best buses ever drove.

I would put the vt up with the RV type for been best ever.

We should be looking at the bendy buses again but on suitable routes such as N11 where it's straight.

It would need better designed stops though.

AlekSmart

punisher5112 wrote: »

In Japan I believe they have 3 door vt style.

Probably one of the best buses ever drove.

I would put the vt up with the RV type for been best ever.

We should be looking at the bendy buses again but on suitable routes such as N11 where it's straight.

It would need better designed stops though.

Right now,if I was Hugh Creegan,I'd be sending my assorted young planners,schedulers and engineers off to Singapore,with orders to look,listen and learn.....

https://landtransportguru.net/volvo-b8l/

If you want it..Volvo will build it,,,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVvvpACxFMU

Unlike liberal,democratic and all embracing Ireland,where details of NTA PSO contracts remain TOP SECRET !!....these cunning oriental types lay everything out for all to see....poor oul Volvo beaten by MAN...who'd a thunk it ?

https://landtransportguru.net/euro-6-double-deck-buses-procured-by-lta/

dfx-

devnull wrote: »

Update from Go-Ahead that seems to suggested we're heading for a fragmented system

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

What of the NTA's history of a hands off, 'contact the operator' approach to day to day services makes this any surprise? This is exactly how they've regulated the network 'from a distance' to put it mildly.

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

Update from Go-Ahead that seems to suggested we're heading for a fragmented system

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

I decided to seek clarification regarding this issue from the NTA. They confirmed that the timetables will be posted on the GAI website and also the TFI journey planner.

I did not realise that detailed timetables are in fact posted on the journey planner in PDF form however the writing on them is tiny. Exact times are available for each and every bus stop. I'm not sure is this a new a feature or not. If this is the format the NTA are going to use for the timetables posted at bus stops then that is unacceptable as timetables must be clear.

http://www.a-b.ie/nta/XSLT_SELTT_REQUEST?itdLPxx_page=ttb

devnull

The more I hear, the more I fear this will go badly.

Stephen15 wrote: »

I decided to seek clarification regarding this issue from the NTA. They confirmed that the timetables will be posted on the GAI website and also the TFI journey planner.

Well if the Dublin Bus website is still using it's own journey planner when the Go-Ahead website launches and just stops taking into account the routes that have gone over to Go-Ahead, then that is going to be a huge mess as patrons are going to be sent via two radial routes to get to places most likely when they can use Go-Ahead orbitals to get to their places easier.

Having two distinct sets of timetables as part of a network in two totally different places, of which at least one operator may not acknowledge the existence of the other to the detriment of public transport users is completely unacceptable because it makes it very hard for people to understand how the services are run as one overall network and not on totally separate systems and at worst a tourist could look up Dublin Bus, unaware that there is another operator that even exists.

It would be interesting to know the reasons that the NTA have gone down this road. Whether it is a decision that has been made purely by themselves or it is as the result of pressure or objections from other parties.

I did not realise that detailed timetables are in fact posted on the journey planner in PDF form however the writing on them is tiny. Exact times are available for each and every bus stop. I'm not sure is this a new a feature or not. If this is the format the NTA are going to use for the timetables posted at bus stops then that is unacceptable as timetables must be clear.

Been there for years - not the format the NTA will be using.

GM228

devnull wrote: »

It would be interesting to know the reasons that the NTA have gone down this road. Whether it is a decision that has been made purely by themselves or it is as the result of pressure or objections from other parties.

This would not surprise me, look at the DB resistance to a new livery or even using the appropriate TFI logo and you can see the level of cooperation DB offer the NTA.

devnull

GM228 wrote: »

This would not surprise me, look at the DB resistance to a new livery or even using the appropriate TFI logo and you can see the level of cooperation DB offer the NTA.

Well if the NTA have a contractual right to enforce it they should be doing so and not giving them an option of not complying. If the regulator is being bullied by the people it regulates then it's a pretty toothless regulator.

If DB want to put private interests over the public good then that just gives the NTA an even bigger reason to put more and more out to tender as they have a contractor who is not willing to co-operate.

The wording of some of the next direct award contract will be very interesting as I suspect that will say a lot about this and if the NTA were clever enough they could put clauses and penalties and requirements structured in a way to make non co-operative operators suffer heavily.

IE 222

Why would DB be advertising services of a different provider on their website.

DB have no commitment to these GA routes anymore. It's up to the NTA to create an umbrella timetabing site not DB or GA. I can't think of any company that would provide a link to another providers services. DB and GA will be competing against each other from here on that's the reality of opening up the market.

Some people have a serious hard on for bashing DB.

xper

IE 222 wrote: »

Why would DB be advertising services of a different provider on their website.

DB have no commitment to these GA routes anymore. It's up to the NTA to create an umbrella timetabling site not DB or GA. I can't think of any company that would provide a link to another providers services. DB and GA will be competing against each other from here on that's the reality of opening up the market.

Some people have a serious hard on for bashing DB.

Why? Because DB is being funded by the state to provide a public transport service, its clearly in the public interest to do so as part of providing that service and and they (at least should be) contractually obliged to do so as part of their franchise.

Want an example? Look at any private train operator's website in the UK where you can find routes and book a ticket between any two stations on the whole network, not just the services of that operator. Yes, even in the clusterfck that is the privatised British railways system, this is done right.

Same applies to Go Ahead and any other future franchise holder.

Stephen15

The DART and the Luas are on the DB journey planner so I don't see why GAI services wouldn't be there too.