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

AlmightyCushion

Technocentral wrote: »

Nothing to get excited about so. Was hoping for more frequency Cheers.

There are a lot more buses coming online so there will be increased frequency. That won't be limited to just GoAhead routes though.

devnull

Technocentral wrote: »

Nothing to get excited about so. Was hoping for more frequency Cheers.

There is going to be an increase of over 30% of the frequency on the routes that transfer from DB to Go-Ahead Ireland with no loss of vehicles and drivers for Dublin Bus.

This will then allow the freed up buses and drivers to be used to deploy into additional capacity and routes with Dublin Bus which will see increased frequencies on them also.

punisher5112

Technocentral wrote: »

Any advantages of Go Ahead over DB for the commuter?

One is there uniform makes them look like pilots.

dashcamdanny

New livery looks well. Hope it sticks..

Should save money respraying the fleet as well

MJohnston

dashcamdanny wrote: »

New livery looks well. Hope it sticks..

Should save money respraying the fleet as well

Well?? I can understand defending it as an unimportant element, or because of disability reasons, but in what world does that look "well"?

dfx-

devnull wrote: »

There is going to be an increase of over 30% of the frequency on the routes that transfer from DB to Go-Ahead Ireland with no loss of vehicles and drivers for Dublin Bus.

This will then allow the freed up buses and drivers to be used to deploy into additional capacity and routes with Dublin Bus which will see increased frequencies on them also.

if you trust the NTA to choreograph all that together...

Kh1993

dfx- wrote: »

if you trust the NTA to choreograph all that together...

If it doesn’t work, them and C&T can just blame DB or unions as always..

As I’ve said before; DB do something wrong, they get blamed, IR, they get blamed, yet when it’s the prodigal son of the NTA, it must be Dublin Bus or O’Learys fault.

I’d love to work for the NTA, there is literally nothing they can mess up that they’ll actually be blamed on or held accountable by some quarters.

devnull

dfx- wrote: »

if you trust the NTA to choreograph all that together...

The jury is very much out on that at the moment, but it's too early to say either way for sure.

Kh1993 wrote: »

If it doesn’t work, them and C&T can just blame DB or unions as always..

As I’ve said before; DB do something wrong, they get blamed, IR, they get blamed, yet when it’s the prodigal son of the NTA, it must be Dublin Bus or O’Learys fault.

I’d love to work for the NTA, there is literally nothing they can mess up that they’ll actually be blamed on or held accountable by some quarters.

As I said above, serious questions are going to come up in relation to the NTA's ability to deliver the project and everything that comes with it whilst also making sure that there is a proper level of integration to make things as seamless as possible for the likes of you and me who depend on public transport services to get us to work, see family, university, school or on leisure trips.

I'm very much of the opinion that the launch of the 139 route was not great and what I've seen in recent weeks has not been that encouraging. But there's still another couple of weeks until the 175 launch and another month on top of that until the routes start moving to Go-Ahead, so there is still time to deal with some of those issues, but I have to admit that the signs are not the most promising at present.

My opinion of the NTA certainly hasn't been enhanced in recent weeks, put it that way.

Stephen15

I get the impression that the lobby groups are not really concerned about people with disabilities but rather dislike change and want to keep things the same as much as possible either that or they have direct ties to DB or the CIE group and want to protect the brand.

I don't really get the whole visability argument if they wanted to make the buses more visible they could have put a dash of yellow or orange around the grill. Although I do think there should be some TFI or GAI branding at the front of the bus.

Look at how many other cities around the world don't have bright yellow buses and are still used by people with disabilities. It's a bloody big double decker bus it's hard to miss. I don't get the argument about painting the front of trains yellow either and I believe it's something that's being done away with in the UK as the recently delivered Crossrail/Elizabeth Line trains are not painted yellow at the front they will be the first trains to run on the UK rail network without yellow front powered by electricity or diesel. Again plenty of counties don't have trains with yellow fronts.

punisher5112

Yellow bus poles are not only getting the blue sticker on top circle but they are replacing the timetable/info boards for longer ones exactly the same style.

So it seems these fancy silver poles aren't being fitted anytime soon.

Tarabuses

The bus stops being used on Mount Anville Road are an improvement on what seems to be happening elsewhere. Maybe benefiting from the fact that there have never been bus stops here before?

punisher5112

Tarabuses wrote: »

The bus stops being used on Mount Anville Road are an improvement on what seems to be happening elsewhere. Maybe benefiting from the fact that there have never been bus stops here before?

Any pic?

devnull

GM228 wrote: »

What is to say the grab rails need to be repainted?

They just need to contrast in comparison to what is adjacent to them, whilst the grey handrails in the new GA buses is poor IMO they do contrast with the dark blue seats and that is all that DB (and other operators and disability groups) ever agreed to - to have contrasting handrails, mind you I'm not so sure they contrast with the stairwells.

Any vehicles that have been delivered with silver handrails are going to have them changed to yellow. Also the handles above the seats are also going to have to be changed to yellow and there is now also concern in general about the interior colour scheme overall.

Tarabuses

punisher5112 wrote: »

Any pic?

devnull

Tarabuses wrote: »

Well it's in line with the TFI design guidelines, so that is good.

However if they're still going to go with branding DB buses as DB and Go-Ahead buses as Go-Ahead on the stops rather than just not mentioning the operators at all, like in London and other cities and just listing the numbers, then that isn't ideal.

I wonder if they will be took down to be replaced with DB style yellow poles.

punisher5112

devnull wrote: »

Any vehicles that have been delivered with silver handrails are going to have them changed to yellow. Also the handles above the seats are also going to have to be changed to yellow and there is now also concern in general about the interior colour scheme overall.

What a shambles.

Cookie_Monster

Tarabuses wrote: »

invalid link...

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

Any vehicles that have been delivered with silver handrails are going to have them changed to yellow. Also the handles above the seats are also going to have to be changed to yellow and there is now also concern in general about the interior colour scheme overall.

I knew there was going to be issues with the handrails. I can't understand why they weren't delivered with yellow handrails in the first place. Who made the decision on the interior the NTA or GAI?

devnull

Stephen15 wrote: »

I knew there was going to be issues with the handrails. I can't understand why they weren't delivered with yellow handrails in the first place. Who made the decision on the interior the NTA or GAI?

The issues with the colours were originally not thought to be a problem, but there was a meeting which took place with the National Disability Authority in the middle of July about the livery and interior of the vehicles, where concerns were raised to the NTA who went away and considered the points that were presented.

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

The issues with the colours were originally not thought to be a problem, but there was a meeting which took place with the National Disability Authority in the middle of July about the livery and interior of the vehicles, where concerns were raised to the NTA who went away and considered the points that were presented.

Seems completely riddiculous that they did that after they decided on the livery and interiors

Stephen15

Tarabuses wrote: »

Link invalid could someone repost?

devnull

Stephen15 wrote: »

Link invalid could someone repost?

See attached

devnull

Stephen15 wrote: »

Seems completely riddiculous that they did that after they decided on the livery and interiors

I think that the NTA did not expect there to be the issues in relation to it which there have been. I reckon in June/July, the NDA were possibly prompted by something or someone to extensively lobby the NTA for a change.

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

I think that the NTA did not expect there to be the issues in relation to it which there have been. I reckon in June/July, the NDA were possibly prompted by something or someone to extensively lobby the NTA for a change.

I think it was rather naive of them not to consider it. I'm annoyed because it's a complete waste of money I should hope this riddiculous change is not coming out of the bus connects pot.

punisher5112

Even the luas has yellow poles.

AlekSmart

GM228 wrote: »

First thing which came to mind (as pointed out by Devnull) is DBs Airlink livery. It is darker than the GA blue livery, wonder if any groups made their concerns known to DB about it?

Contrasting handrails, destination boards etc are no thanks to DB or any working relationship with disability groups, they are a result of a legally mandated standard set by the EU, and before that under adopted UN ECE Regulations from 1958, the EU adopted them long before DB even existed.

How to you know the NTA has not involved various disability groups? My understanding is they have worked with and sought submissions from various groups for various projects and reports such as for example their Statement of Strategy.

Also the last major consultation between DB and the various disability groups was in 2005 when the Accessibility Guidelines Standard Series 2 was agreed, it was not just DB though, it was various disability groups, transport operators (state and private) and Government departments - the NTA did not exist at the time.

What is to say the grab rails need to be repainted?

They just need to contrast in comparison to what is adjacent to them, whilst the grey handrails in the new GA buses is poor IMO they do contrast with the dark blue seats and that is all that DB (and other operators and disability groups) ever agreed to - to have contrasting handrails, mind you I'm not so sure they contrast with the stairwells.

As has been pointed out by other posters,the small extent of the Airlink fleet in comparison to the BAC service fleet does have a relevance here.

However,although a current BAC employee,I am in no way a spokesperson for the company,and my opinions remain purely personal.

In relation to the involvement with Disabled Representative Groups,the reality of BAC's involvement with these goes back to the inception of the company and further back into the CIE (DCS) days.

The reality of BAC's involvement & consultation,with both Disabled representatives AND disabled individuals,is at a far deeper and ingrained level than merely Head Office CEO level,PR based schtick.

The daily involvement of Area Managers,Chief Inspectors,and Operations Support and Platform staff regarding accessibility,at all levels far exceeds the NTA's current involvement,yet,for whatever reason,some posters appear to feel compelled to portray this negatively.

Is it your suggestion,for example,that BAC's last major interaction with Disabled Groups was 13 years ago ?

Are you suggesting that the Company is acting in a manner which ignores or fails to prioritize Disabled access to it's services ?

Put at it's simplest,BAC's involvement with Disability,is at a far more ingrained level across the greater organization,a point which has been raised during recent consultations with the stakeholders.

You may indeed suggest that a simple contrast between the new NTA Dark Grey interior panels and Light Grey stanchions,is in fact an improvement upon that between the pre-existing Yellow and Grey,however I am quite confident that the majority of those with vision deficiencies will disagree with you.

As has been noted earlier in thread,the light grey poles are indeed having to be recovered to the pre-existing standard,at the expense of the NTA,which is prompting the question as to why the Authority felt the need to depart from long standing and effective design in the first place.

The fact that it was'nt broken,was not reason enough to go and break it themselves.

It may come as a surprise to some,but with a total staff of 3,000+,there are now many BAC employees,who now have family members entering employment with Go-Ahead Ireland,with incredibly nobody being thrown out of the family home or otherwise blackballed as a result.

Again,from a personal perspective,I see very little threat from Go-Ahead Ireland's arrival.
In regard the Go-Ahead arrival in a positive light,as it will allow for real-time comparison and benchmarking,after a fashion,which has not been possible to date.
Equally,I see the BusConnects proposal as significantly improving Bus Service provision in Dublin,with significant benefits for both Busworkers AND Passengers ,but it is contingent upon the Busconnects principle being maintained,and robustly pursued by the NTA.
Currently I have no sense that this robustness is there in the desired quantities.

I would be a very strong proponent of the "London Model" of Bus Service Provision,but I am acutely aware that,even at senior executive level,the NTA's understanding of this term,is somewhat less than is required to deliver on the promises of a london style service pattern.

Were,for example,Anne Graham to announce a €6,000,000 programme to install Busdriver specific network of Sanitary Facilities across main Bus Routes I would robustly support her,in the same manner as London Mayor Saddiq Khan is being applauded by Busworker representatives there.

The future is bright-The future is BUS.

AlekSmart

devnull wrote: »

I think that the NTA did not expect there to be the issues in relation to it which there have been. I reckon in June/July, the NDA were possibly prompted by something or someone to extensively lobby the NTA for a change.

Do you think it might be possible that the NDA,as a statutory body itself,may have been prompted by,the level and extent of representations it was recieving,from many local & national Disability Representative Groups ?

Is it your contention that the NDA is somehow incapable of acting independently, and without the "extensive lobbying" which you reckon prompted their action ?

Could the situation actually be that the NDA itself,were compelled to react to another statutory body facilitating a significant lowering of standards,which had been developed over an extended period and which worked very well.

devnull

AlekSmart wrote: »

As has been pointed out by other posters,the small extent of the Airlink fleet in comparison to the BAC service fleet does have a relevance here.

Dublin Airport is one of the biggest transport destinations in the state. There have been approx 200,000,000 airport passengers that could potentially use Dublin Bus services to travel to the airport in the last 10 years. Do you not feel that these patrons, of which a fair number may have vision deficiencies should have the chance to avail of the benefits of a livery that assists them like their friends and family who also travel with Dublin Bus? I believe that accessibility considerations by any company should apply to all passengers.

The daily involvement of Area Managers,Chief Inspectors,and Operations Support and Platform staff regarding accessibility,at all levels far exceeds the NTA's current involvement,yet,for whatever reason,some posters appear to feel compelled to portray this negatively.

You claim that Dublin Bus have daily involvement in these issues, but those who have been involved daily for the last 3,000 days of operating airlink services haven't been able to identify an accessibility issue with their own service in a darker livery in over 9 years of operating it, but have seemingly been able to identify an issue with a brighter livery that they haven't even seen operate in revenue service by another company?

I would be a very strong proponent of the "London Model" of Bus Service Provision,but I am acutely aware that,even at senior executive level,the NTA's understanding of this term,is somewhat less than is required to deliver on the promises of a london style service pattern.

As said up-thread, I remain to be convinced they will be able to do it as well, the recent actions and what I have seen from them hasn't filled me with the feeling that they will get this right off the bat, rather the opposite. But then again Dublin is not London and who knows what obstacles and pressures the NTA may face from various stakeholders which make it hard to get everyone to agree. I wish they could click their fingers and it would all work out like London, but it'd be exceptionally naive to think it's as simple as that.

Stephen15

devnull wrote: »

However if they're still going to go with branding DB buses as DB and Go-Ahead buses as Go-Ahead on the stops rather than just not mentioning the operators at all, like in London and other cities and just listing the numbers, then that isn't ideal.

Agreed it should say 'Dublin City Services' however I don't it's a huge issue on that particular stop as it's the only service stopping so there's only one column for GAI services and not two one for GAI and one for DB. The 175 has now been added to the number listings on some of it's stops.

dublinman1990

That 175 bus stop pole on Deerpark Road looks so much better than the crap example on the Dublin Bus poles in Firhouse.

I heard the 17 bus stop shelter in UCD has gotten new signage on the top of it. But I'm not sure if it is the same one as the Firhouse example.

What I don't understand; why does the NTA agree by spend taxpayers hard earned money by releasing two conflicting bus stop designs around Dublin in which one type of stop is meant to be replaced in it's entirety & one type bus stop that is meant to be it's new & permanent replacement. I really am amazed at what they are doing with their own rollout of bus infrastructure improvements. The good thing is that the NTA purchase new replacement buses on behalf of the state for Dublin Bus when some of the older fleet went to GAI. But the bus stop rollout & the repaint of the livery in Dublin in particular has been a joke so far on their part in the eyes of the public. Just on the livery designs with the inclusion of the yellow; this is one thing that I do not get at all. Why release a livery with a massive big media launch from GAI's depot in Ballymount & try make adjustments afterwards behind the scenes to cater for those with disabilities?

Why did the NTA just delay the rollout of the livery until it's completely finished & revealed to the public to save vital amounts of taxpayers money in the process. The NTA at this point do not have any clear accountability with regard to how they spend other's peoples money in good faith through for which it is solely given through the wishes of our government. If they were sensible with this idea of trying to rollout this plan of improving the bus service with no mistakes. Their reputation will be at a greater improved level of accountability through the eyes of the public & the government at large.

But the NTA are not trying hard enough to be good beacons with this virtue when dealing with other transport matters like the numerous redesigns for the DART Underground project which has going countless hoops of starting or not starting properly over the years from it's official announcement. Just think about that for a second. Possibly hundreds of millions of euro spent on trying to get some clear consensus on their many different versions of that project all within a specific period of hard earned time & they still can't go about in the right way. It makes the public frustrated & fed up with it's lack of progress when it will somehow get onto it's final possibility for an actual start date for building the bloody thing in the first place.

I wonder what happens now with their full news of where their CPO's are going for BusConnects. I hope the public don't get eventually fed up with the NTA's proposals about the infrastructure later in the year because I would like to see this become a game changer to make the bus service become much better for Dublin's commuters. But how the NTA are spending money by somehow trying to keep up with the joneses while compared with other countries is not a really good & frugal way of keeping accountability by making things go a little bit clearer. They should save their wares much more by not spending money for temporary vanity projects they clearly do not have because it will bite them back somewhere in unpleasant ways if they are not careful with the eyes of the public on their backs.