Dublin - BusConnects

bk · 22-10-2018 3:44pm

Thing to keep in mind, during the recession Network Redirect was a major redesign of the network to basically severly cut back on the number of buses and drivers and basically do more with less. It sort of worked because of the big drop in numbers of passengers (folks out of work) and cars on the road.

It is that same network direct network we have today and it is no longer suitable with the economy back in full swing, bus passenger numbers way up and traffic congestion way up.

Even without the infrastructure side we still need to redesign the network to go back to a more pre network direct design, with more buses, more capacity and less very long routes going right through the city center and constantly getting stuck and delayed in traffic.

BC definitely greatly benefits from the infrastructure changes, but it still makes a lot of sense even before that.

LXFlyer · 23-10-2018 9:18am

CatInABox wrote: »

Most likely, the infrastructure will be built in phases, otherwise it'd cause traffic jams on every road in and out of the city. We're likely to see them finish each route one by one, with the Quays being one of the first built.

The only infrastructure that's truly needed beforehand to get the bus reorg right is the hubs. There are currently buses running on almost all of the routes designated for spines already, so it's not like they're suddenly going from no buses to hundreds.

I think that you are underplaying the need for the infrastructural improvements before implementing the network redesign.

That will entirely depend upon what changes take place in the network redesign when it is published in the New Year.

There are a number of areas who currently have a direct route to the city which, under the initial plan, would instead have a connecting service which would be running at intervals of 30-60 minutes to a location where they can change to a spine route.

Depending on the location of the where the interchange is, that connection will generally be fine on the inbound trip, but it has serious implications on the return trip, where passengers will have to judge the connecting service along the spine with a large element of guesswork. Such people will be far more dependent upon the vagaries of Dublin traffic and could end up with waits of 25-55 minutes that they never used to have if the connecting spine service doesn't get to the interchange point on time.

Given that the spine routes will, in the main, be long cross-city routes, then in the absence of infrastructural improvements the arrival time of said buses at an interchange on the other side of the city is going to be a game of Hobson's Choice. As it is journey times on existing cross-city routes can vary wildly from one day to the next. Hence it will be a game of chance that people making connections into the low frequency (30-60 minutes) connecting service.

That's not an improvement for those people, who currently have direct services to/from the city, and most likely aren't showing up randomly for buses, but rather are using the timetable, and frankly one of two things is going to have to happen for them to be catered for:

1) Direct services to/from the city retained
2) Infrastructure to be put in place that can deliver reliable journey times

Without this happening, many people's journey times will be extended unnecessarily and frankly that in my opinion isn't acceptable.

CatInABox · 23-10-2018 10:11am

LXFlyer wrote: »

I think that you are underplaying the need for the infrastructural improvements before implementing the network redesign.

That will entirely depend upon what changes take place in the network redesign when it is published in the New Year.

There are a number of areas who currently have a direct route to the city which, under the initial plan, would instead have a connecting service which would be running at intervals of 30-60 minutes to a location where they can change to a spine route.

Depending on the location of the where the interchange is, that connection will generally be fine on the inbound trip, but it has serious implications on the return trip, where passengers will have to judge the connecting service along the spine with a large element of guesswork. Such people will be far more dependent upon the vagaries of Dublin traffic and could end up with waits of 25-55 minutes that they never used to have if the connecting spine service doesn't get to the interchange point on time.

Given that the spine routes will, in the main, be long cross-city routes, then in the absence of infrastructural improvements the arrival time of said buses at an interchange on the other side of the city is going to be a game of Hobson's Choice. As it is journey times on existing cross-city routes can vary wildly from one day to the next. Hence it will be a game of chance that people making connections into the low frequency (30-60 minutes) connecting service.

That's not an improvement for those people, who currently have direct services to/from the city, and most likely aren't showing up randomly for buses, but rather are using the timetable, and frankly one of two things is going to have to happen for them to be catered for:

1) Direct services to/from the city retained
2) Infrastructure to be put in place that can deliver reliable journey times

Without this happening, many people's journey times will be extended unnecessarily and frankly that in my opinion isn't acceptable.

Wasn't saying that every route will be perfect right at the start, or that some people won't be inconvenienced, just that for most people, BusConnects will be an improvement with or without infrastructure changes.

The way some people are talking, it's as if the bus network will collapse into a black hole if BusConnects comes in without every infrastructure project completed.

LXFlyer · 23-10-2018 10:30am

CatInABox wrote: »

Wasn't saying that every route will be perfect right at the start, or that some people won't be inconvenienced, just that for most people, BusConnects will be an improvement with or without infrastructure changes.

The way some people are talking, it's as if the bus network will collapse into a black hole if BusConnects comes in without every infrastructure project completed.

Well I think that you were grossly over-simplifying it. To say that the only place that needs infrastructure improvements to be complete before the network redesign takes place are the interchanges is simply not true.

There will have to be major works done on the corridors before people who currently have direct services to/from the city can be expected to change onto connecting services running every 30-60 minutes. Otherwise their direct services will have to be retained. People are (quite rightly) not going to accept the risk of having a long wait on their commute that they currently don't have.

I still consider that certain areas, particularly those at the outer end of spines, may face significant service decreases under these plans, and I'm basing that on the current and planned series of Dublin Bus and Go Ahead timetable changes. The "existing" frequencies used in the BusConnects plan for many areas for comparative purposes will be completely out of date by January 2019, with many areas gaining significant improvements. These improved frequencies need to be the benchmark against which BusConnects is compared with going forward.

bk · 23-10-2018 10:44am

Having read the plan in detail, most of it could go ahead without the need for major infrastructure IMO. Sure some bus stops need moving closer to junctions, etc. but the whole CPO side isn't needed, but would certainly enhance the benefits of it.

As I mentioned, much of BC is just rolling back the Network Direct changes that shrunk the network and putting capacity back in place.

Many of the core concepts can go ahead without major infrastructure:
- The core routes A, B, C, etc. is simply a smart amalgamation of mostly existing routes, making it simpler to use and more importantly allowing separate routes that share the same route for long distances to be smartly scheduled as one to reduce bunching.

- The orbital routes can mostly be put in place with just the moving of bus stops that I mentioned, really not a big deal.

Yes there are some routes and areas that you will want to hold off on if the infrastructure is there. But those certainly don't include the majority of the core of this plan from what I can see.

LXFlyer · 23-10-2018 11:26am

bk wrote: »

Having read the plan in detail, most of it could go ahead without the need for major infrastructure IMO. Sure some bus stops need moving closer to junctions, etc. but the whole CPO side isn't needed, but would certainly enhance the benefits of it.

As I mentioned, much of BC is just rolling back the Network Direct changes that shrunk the network and putting capacity back in place.

Many of the core concepts can go ahead without major infrastructure:
- The core routes A, B, C, etc. is simply a smart amalgamation of mostly existing routes, making it simpler to use and more importantly allowing separate routes that share the same route for long distances to be smartly scheduled as one to reduce bunching.

- The orbital routes can mostly be put in place with just the moving of bus stops that I mentioned, really not a big deal.

Yes there are some routes and areas that you will want to hold off on if the infrastructure is there. But those certainly don't include the majority of the core of this plan from what I can see.

The current round of service changes between now and January 2019 will see the capacity cuts from Network Direct reinstated in the main - many routes will see significant improvements including orbital routes.

The additional orbital routes are the main improvements in BusConnects, which are to be welcomed.

But for me the question really is whether the capacity cuts on the spines (and particularly at the outer points) as per the original BusConnects plan are too great as compared with the new frequencies being offered by DB and GAI as a result of the current round of changes. I happen to think that they are overestimating the numbers of people who will switch to orbitals off radial routes, which frankly are bursting at the seams currently.

Compared with the new frequencies on certain routes, there are going to be significant cuts for some locations.

As for bunching, well Jarrett Walker himself admitted at Fingal CC that BusConnects won't eliminate bunching, but that buses would in the main be scheduled not to bunch. That's quite a difference. Many Dublin Bus routes aren't scheduled to bunch either, but do suffer from that problem to a significant degree due to the poor infrastructure that is in place.

That's again, why I view the infrastructure as core to delivering the network redesign, along with effective enforcement of bus priority measures. It should not be viewed as a completely separate project. The two are integral to one another.

Bray Head · 23-10-2018 11:28am

Potential for bunching would be much reduced by use of middle doors and elimination of pay-the-driver.

This reduces the time buses spend stopped and eliminates the random element (someone digging in their purse for coins for 30 seconds) that causes some buses to slow down and others to catch up.

None of this needs Bus Connects for implementation.

tom1ie · 23-10-2018 8:48pm

bk wrote: »

Having read the plan in detail, most of it could go ahead without the need for major infrastructure IMO. Sure some bus stops need moving closer to junctions, etc. but the whole CPO side isn't needed, but would certainly enhance the benefits of it.

As I mentioned, much of BC is just rolling back the Network Direct changes that shrunk the network and putting capacity back in place.

Many of the core concepts can go ahead without major infrastructure:
- The core routes A, B, C, etc. is simply a smart amalgamation of mostly existing routes, making it simpler to use and more importantly allowing separate routes that share the same route for long distances to be smartly scheduled as one to reduce bunching.

- The orbital routes can mostly be put in place with just the moving of bus stops that I mentioned, really not a big deal.

Yes there are some routes and areas that you will want to hold off on if the infrastructure is there. But those certainly don't include the majority of the core of this plan from what I can see.

I dont see how bc can reach any kind of happy outcome without qbc's into and out of the city centre.
Without the qbc'c we have the equivalent of luas cross city- pt sharing road space with cars, bikes pedestrians, and you can see how well that works!
bc without the qbc infrastructure, will be a disaster, especially in dublin sw.

CatInABox · 23-10-2018 8:52pm

tom1ie wrote: »

I dont see how bc can reach any kind of happy outcome without qbc's into and out of the city centre.
Without the qbc'c we have the equivalent of luas cross city- pt sharing road space with cars, bikes pedestrians, and you can see how well that works!
bc without the qbc infrastructure, will be a disaster, especially in dublin sw.

And again, most of the spines already have bus lanes on them, and plenty of buses are already running on those roads.

There are valid concerns around people travelling from town out to the interchange hubs with scheduling of the less frequent onward buses, but the spines work for buses now.

tom1ie · 23-10-2018 8:59pm

CatInABox wrote: »

And again, most of the spines already have bus lanes on them, and plenty of buses are already running on those roads.

There are valid concerns around people travelling from town out to the interchange hubs with scheduling of the less frequent onward buses, but the spines work for buses now.

nope.
They are not continuous qbc's.
The busses do not have transponders fitted to give them green light priority at junctions.
They are not 24h bus lanes, with people regularly parking in said bus lanes.
There aren't pull in spots at all bus stops along the qbc's to allow busses take on passengers without blocking busses behind.
We dont have tag on tag off systems in place.
We dont have enter front door, exit back door in place.

These are all items that must be implemented before bc can be called any type of success, and guess what its all infrastructure and policy.
The routes im basing my observations are coming from greenhills, walkinstown, rathfarnham, via harolds x, terenure, templeogue etc.

bk · 23-10-2018 9:11pm

Those are all definitely nice to have and many of them are part of the overall BusConnects plan, including the infrastructure side, the ticketing side, etc.

But those aren't necessary to gain benefits from the network redesign side. They would certainly greatly enhance the usefulness of a redesigned network, but they certainly aren't a pre-requiste.

It seems to me that some people aren't aware of what a big reduction in service Network Direct was and how just undoing that and doing some other enhancements that are planned under the network redesign of BusConnets would be very welcome in the short term.

Yes, we then need to follow that up with the infrastructure side, but that will take 10 years. We can't wait 10 years to undo Network Direct and expand the fleet and routes. Action needs to be taken today.

tom1ie · 23-10-2018 9:18pm

bk wrote: »

Those are all definitely nice to have and many of them are part of the overall BusConnects plan, including the infrastructure side, the ticketing side, etc.

But those aren't necessary to gain benefits from the network redesign side. They would certainly greatly enhance the usefulness of a redesigned network, but they certainly aren't a pre-requiste.

It seems to me that some people aren't aware of what a big reduction in service Network Direct was and how just undoing that and doing some other enhancements that are planned under the network redesign of BusConnets would be very welcome in the short term.

Yes, we then need to follow that up with the infrastructure side, but that will take 10 years. We can't wait 10 years to undo Network Direct and expand the fleet and routes. Action needs to be taken today.

but your talking about sending more busses out into already choked up piece meal bus lanes? People will be glad of the capacity, but they wont see any reduction in speed, if anything it could worsen (if thats a word?) the congestion in the cc and hence increase journey times.
B.k i remember you talking about the improvements done around the cat and cage pub and how it knocked 10-15 mins off your overall journey time. This was only achieved through hard infrastructure.
Until we all get our own cat and cage job done, and by that i mean bc infrastructure routes, journey times wont decrease.

LXFlyer · 23-10-2018 9:24pm

CatInABox wrote: »

And again, most of the spines already have bus lanes on them, and plenty of buses are already running on those roads.

There are valid concerns around people travelling from town out to the interchange hubs with scheduling of the less frequent onward buses, but the spines work for buses now.

Not in south central Dublin they don’t - the roads aren’t wide enough in places for any bus lanes such as Rathmines, Rathgar and Terenure villages, and in most places can only fit one bus lane.

There’s a massive infrastructural deficit along the Templeogue and Rathfarnham QBCs and frankly planning a bus network that requires connections based on existing infrastructure in that area is doomed to fail.

LXFlyer · 23-10-2018 9:36pm

bk wrote: »

Those are all definitely nice to have and many of them are part of the overall BusConnects plan, including the infrastructure side, the ticketing side, etc.

But those aren't necessary to gain benefits from the network redesign side. They would certainly greatly enhance the usefulness of a redesigned network, but they certainly aren't a pre-requiste.

It seems to me that some people aren't aware of what a big reduction in service Network Direct was and how just undoing that and doing some other enhancements that are planned under the network redesign of BusConnets would be very welcome in the short term.

Yes, we then need to follow that up with the infrastructure side, but that will take 10 years. We can't wait 10 years to undo Network Direct and expand the fleet and routes. Action needs to be taken today.

The fleet capacity will have been expanded pretty much back to pre-Network Direct levels by January 2019 and service levels increased across the DB and GAI route network.

BusConnects really has nothing to do with that.

What it does deliver is more orbital services, but at a cost of less radial services. There is a real danger that the capacity reductions on those radial routes (yes they are reduced overall, not increased, even based on the pre-current service expansion levels) will be too great, especially at outer ends - I honestly think they’re overestimating the numbers that will switch from radial services.

If anything these current service expansions are going to make some of the BusConnects proposals even more difficult to implement as the service cuts on spines will have a greater impact compared to the newly improved service levels on many routes - are people going to be happy to gain services now and then lose them?

Stephen15 · 23-10-2018 10:20pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

The fleet capacity will have been expanded pretty much back to pre-Network Direct levels by January 2019 and service levels increased across the DB and GAI route network.

BusConnects really has nothing to do with that.

What it does deliver is more orbital services, but at a cost of less radial services. There is a real danger that the capacity reductions on those radial routes (yes they are reduced overall, not increased, even based on the pre-current service expansion levels) will be too great, especially at outer ends - I honestly think they’re overestimating the numbers that will switch from radial services.

If anything these current service expansions are going to make some of the BusConnects proposals even more difficult to implement as the service cuts on spines will have a greater impact compared to the newly improved service levels on many routes - are people going to be happy to gain services now and then lose them?

Tbh I think some of the frequencies need to be increased on the radial routes. The revised plans need to take into account the increased service levels. We need to remember that the bus connects proposals were drawn up on the assumptions that the service levels would be at the same as they were as of last summer.

LXFlyer · 23-10-2018 10:30pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Tbh I think some of the frequencies need to be increased on the radial routes. The revised plans need to take into account the increased service levels. We need to remember that the bus connects proposals were drawn up on the assumptions that the service levels would be at the same as they were as of last summer.

This was a flaw that I identified from the outset.

Knowing full well that there was going to be a massive service expansion in Autumn 2018 including new routes, particularly the 175 route which the NTA themselves were planning, it was quite misleading to be comparing proposed service levels against those existing service levels knowing full well that they were going to be massively changed within a couple of months.

That will have to be addressed in the revised proposals.

Otherwise the comparisons will be totally meaningless.

Stephen15 · 23-10-2018 10:40pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

This was a flaw that I identified from the outset.

Knowing full well that there was going to be a massive service expansion in Autumn 2018 including new routes, particularly the 175 route which the NTA themselves were planning, it was quite misleading to be comparing proposed service levels against those existing service levels knowing full well that they were going to be massively changed within a couple of months.

That will have to be addressed in the revised proposals.

Otherwise the comparisons will be totally meaningless.

I would agree with you there to an extent however when it comes to these type of plans I would imagine it is better to under estimate these types of proposals than over estimate them. It was likely that the NTA and DB were still drawing up the plans for expanded services while the plans for bus connects were still being drawn up.

bk · 24-10-2018 11:12am

It is important to keep in mind, that this isn't about building a network that would then be set in stone!

It is about realigning the network to make more sense and to create a solid basis from which future changes and frequency increases would absolutely be built upon.

Of course the new BusConnects routes would gain greater frequency in time as more buses are bought and levels of demand on the new routes are assessed.

This seems to be a fatal assumption that people seems to be making and I don't understand why. It seems people think the BC changes will happen and then it is set in stone.

Of course that isn't the case, what will happen is the BC changes happen, the NTA/DB/GA carefully monitor the impact, make tweaks and changes where they are needed and then expand on that BC network and routes over time and take advantage of the infrastructure changes as they come online too.

BC certainly isn't a one time thing, it is just the start of a long and ongoing evolving process.

LXFlyer · 24-10-2018 11:52am

bk wrote: »

It is important to keep in mind, that this isn't about building a network that would then be set in stone!

It is about realigning the network to make more sense and to create a solid basis from which future changes and frequency increases would absolutely be built upon.

Of course the new BusConnects routes would gain greater frequency in time as more buses are bought and levels of demand on the new routes are assessed.

This seems to be a fatal assumption that people seems to be making and I don't understand why. It seems people think the BC changes will happen and then it is set in stone.

Of course that isn't the case, what will happen is the BC changes happen, the NTA/DB/GA carefully monitor the impact, make tweaks and changes where they are needed and then expand on that BC network and routes over time and take advantage of the infrastructure changes as they come online too.

BC certainly isn't a one time thing, it is just the start of a long and ongoing evolving process.

Anyone who has witnessed these kind of network changes before in detail will know that getting things right can end up taking for ever.

Last time round DB got running times badly wrong in the first and second phases of Network Direct and buses ended up being cancelled and curtailed ad nauseum. It took almost 5-6 months to fix. By that time many people just gave up.

The same thing is happening with GAI where they clearly have not enough running time and departures are all over the place, particularly on the 75.

The 184 has no increase in weekday frequency, but capacity was halved by switching to single decks, with repeated reports of people not being able to use it. This kind of thing is basic.

People are rightly annoyed and I don’t share your confidence that the NTA can get this right. They’re clearly understaffed and don’t have sufficient operational expertise in place.

Reducing capacity on the routes through the city centre by the magnitude planned is a recipe for disaster in my view, particularly at a time when Dublin Bus is currently ramping up frequency.

tom1ie · 24-10-2018 11:55am

Infrastructure needs to be built first then everyone can see the benefit straight away and people get fully onboard with the idea.
For example,
Stage 1:
we start off with the n4. Fully expand the qbc’s all the way up to Hueston, and up the quays. That won’t take much. Bus gates at Palmerston and kilmainham.
Introduce tag on tag off for the n4 routes and any orbital routes that would bisect it plus Luas.
Use this as the shining light for everyone else in dublin.
Stage 2:
We pick the next easiest route, m11, m1?

Stage 3:
All the while developing radial bus corridors in the sw area.

Only when the infrastructure is in place will bc work, if you try and put the re-org in place first people will say it’s made things worse and wont see the infrastructure project as part of the overall bc plan, they’ll just see it as a fix to the bc fiasco.

devnull · 24-10-2018 12:09pm

tom1ie wrote: »

Infrastructure needs to be built first then everyone can see the benefit straight away and people get fully onboard with the idea.
For example,
Stage 1:
we start off with the n4. Fully expand the qbc’s all the way up to Hueston, and up the quays. That won’t take much. Bus gates at Palmerston and kilmainham.
Introduce tag on tag off for the n4 routes and any orbital routes that would bisect it plus Luas.
Use this as the shining light for everyone else in dublin.
Stage 2:
We pick the next easiest route, m11, m1?

Stage 3:
All the while developing radial bus corridors in the sw area.

Only when the infrastructure is in place will bc work, if you try and put the re-org in place first people will say it’s made things worse and wont see the infrastructure project as part of the overall bc plan, they’ll just see it as a fix to the bc fiasco.

The problem often is in Ireland though, the only way to get infrastructure to be built and to be put in place, is to make the case overwhelming so something has to be fixed rather than stating what the infrastructure may allow us to do in the future.

bk · 24-10-2018 12:13pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

Anyone who has witnessed these kind of network changes before in detail will know that getting things right can end up taking for ever.
....

The 184 has no increase in weekday frequency, but capacity was halved by switching to single decks, with repeated reports of people not being able to use it. This kind of thing is basic.

LOL you say it things are slow to change, but yet just a few days after complaints about single decekers on the 184, NTA/GA have today announced that they are putting the Double Deckers back on the route.

https://twitter.com/GoAheadIreland/status/1054717046884249600

Seems very quick and responsive to me and pretty much proves my point.

LXFlyer · 24-10-2018 12:28pm

bk wrote: »

LOL you say it things are slow to change, but yet just a few days after complaints about single decekers on the 184, NTA/GA have today announced that they are putting the Double Deckers back on the route.

https://twitter.com/GoAheadIreland/status/1054717046884249600

Seems very quick and responsive to me and pretty much proves my point.

Should they have made that kind of basic mistake in the first place?

Either way, it was a relatively easy fix - GAI haven’t taken over the full complement of routes yet - they have spare capacity that will now need realigning between routes in due course, as it appears they may have too many single decks given this change and the fact that they can’t use them on the 59 as planned, as they’re too long to turn at Killiney terminus.

Meanwhile the 75 is daily reporting buses late, missing or full and leaving people behind.

I don’t see that as the same as cutting capacity as much as the BusConnects plan does to and from the city centre. It’s a massively different kettle of fish.

Once you’ve done it it’s going to be rather more difficult to reinstate as the buses taken away will have been reallocated to orbital services.

tom1ie · 24-10-2018 12:56pm

devnull wrote: »

The problem often is in Ireland though, the only way to get infrastructure to be built and to be put in place, is to make the case overwhelming so something has to be fixed rather than stating what the infrastructure may allow us to do in the future.

Ah Jesus though, that doesn’t make it the right way to go about business or the most cost effective.
We need to get over this mentality that “it’s ireland we have our own special way of doing things”.
**** that, give me the tried and tested world (especially Asian) norms.

24-10-2018 2:21pm

bk wrote: »

LOL you say it things are slow to change, but yet just a few days after complaints about single decekers on the 184, NTA/GA have today announced that they are putting the Double Deckers back on the route.

https://twitter.com/GoAheadIreland/status/1054717046884249600

Seems very quick and responsive to me and pretty much proves my point.

Reversing an inconsequential and tiny operational change 'proves your point' that NTA/Operators are quick to change in general?

That may make sense in your head, but it doesn't outside it.

Stephen15 · 24-10-2018 2:21pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

Should they have made that kind of basic mistake in the first place?

Either way, it was a relatively easy fix - GAI haven’t taken over the full complement of routes yet - they have spare capacity that will now need realigning between routes in due course, as it appears they may have too many single decks given this change and the fact that they can’t use them on the 59 as planned, as they’re too long to turn at Killiney terminus.

Meanwhile the 75 is daily reporting buses late, missing or full and leaving people behind.

I don’t see that as the same as cutting capacity as much as the BusConnects plan does to and from the city centre. It’s a massively different kettle of fish.

Once you’ve done it it’s going to be rather more difficult to reinstate as the buses taken away will have been reallocated to orbital services.

You can blame the NTA for that one they were the ones who decide to allocate single deckers to the 184. Go Ahead has now gotten permission to allocate double deckers to it at peak times so the issue has been sorted for the moment regarding that. Go-Ahead now have 53 of their 125 fleet in service so far.

Go-Ahead are now discussion about what routes they will give a single decker allocation too. I'd also agree it was a mistake to buy buses too long for the 59. I think they should allocate them to same routes DB used to allocate them too such the 59, 63, 104 111, 114 and the 185.

LXFlyer · 24-10-2018 2:57pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

You can blame the NTA for that one they were the ones who decide to allocate single deckers to the 184. Go Ahead has now gotten permission to allocate double deckers to it at peak times so the issue has been sorted for the moment regarding that. Go-Ahead now have 53 of their 125 fleet in service so far.

Go-Ahead are now discussion about what routes they will give a single decker allocation too. I'd also agree it was a mistake to buy buses too long for the 59. I think they should allocate them to same routes DB used to allocate them too such the 59, 63, 104 111, 114 and the 185.

I do absolutely blame the NTA for that decision, and for not checking whether the model of single deck was suitable or not to use on a route before deciding on the number of buses ordered. You check the infrastructure out first!

This kind of stuff is basic.

The timetables the NTA have published and handed out at the weekend still have mistakes on them - there seems to be no proofing of them.

It is Network Direct phase 1 all over again. That was shambolic and so has this rollout been.

bk · 24-10-2018 5:08pm

LXFlyer, first you were going on about taking changes taking years to make and gave the example of the 184.

You were literally proven wrong on that one with a super quick turn around and a fix put in place within days. Completely proving you wrong. But instead of admitting you are wrong, you are now blathering on about how they should not have made the mistakes in the first place. Just admit it, you've been proven wrong.

I've been genuinely impressed by the rollout of GoAhead's services. Sure there have been bumps along the way, any major change in transport services always involves mistakes and teething issues. How I judge a company and organisation and company is how quick they react to issues and how quickly they fix them.

And GA/NTA seem to be doing a great job in this regard, they seem to be actually reading these threads on boards and very quickly fixing issues that are raised. I'm seriously impressed and it is a breath of fresh area from the DB changes and lack of communication in the past.

There are a lot of people who would love to see GA/NTA stumble and fail. But so far it seems to be going very well and they are very quickly fixing any issues that arise.

I'd expect the same speed and responsiveness to BusConnects changes and any issues that arise from that.

tom1ie · 24-10-2018 5:19pm

bk wrote: »

LXFlyer, first you were going on about taking changes taking years to make and gave the example of the 184.

You were literally proven wrong on that one with a super quick turn around and a fix put in place within days. Completely proving you wrong. But instead of admitting you are wrong, you are now blathering on about how they should not have made the mistakes in the first place. Just admit it, you've been proven wrong.

I've been genuinely impressed by the rollout of GoAhead's services. Sure there have been bumps along the way, any major change in transport services always involves mistakes and teething issues. How I judge a company and organisation and company is how quick they react to issues and how quickly they fix them.

And GA/NTA seem to be doing a great job in this regard, they seem to be actually reading these threads on boards and very quickly fixing issues that are raised. I'm seriously impressed and it is a breath of fresh area from the DB changes and lack of communication in the past.

There are a lot of people who would love to see GA/NTA stumble and fail. But so far it seems to be going very well and they are very quickly fixing any issues that arise.

I'd expect the same speed and responsiveness to BusConnects changes and any issues that arise from that.

Its great that GA/NTA have made this change it shows that they do listen to customers.
However, bc without its associated infrastructure in place will be doomed to fail.
The problem being once the politicians see the failure of bc without the radial routes they'll exploit that window of opportunity to increase their own standing in the community. This makes sense, i dont know how you can argue against this?

bk · 24-10-2018 5:30pm

tom1ie wrote: »

Its great that GA/NTA have made this change it shows that they do listen to customers.
However, bc without its associated infrastructure in place will be doomed to fail.
The problem being once the politicians see the failure of bc without the radial routes they'll exploit that window of opportunity to increase their own standing in the community. This makes sense, i dont know how you can argue against this?

I'd say the same to you. I don't understand why you can't understand how crazy it is to argue that we have to wait ten years for infrastructure changes with a rubbish Network Direct network, that is already bursting at the seems.

You really don't need infrastructure changes to redesign a network when you are significantly increasing the number of buses available. At the very least you'd want to undo the network direct changes.

I think perhpas you aren't personally aware what happened with Network Direct and that is the key part you are missing. ND was a big reduction in numbers of buses, drivers, routes and frequency. It was a big cut back to the bare minimum of what was needed during the recession. We really can't continue with that.

The radial routes make absolute sense as do the orbital routes. These are the core parts of BC and we need those today, not 10 years from now.

Stephen15 · 24-10-2018 5:33pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

I do absolutely blame the NTA for that decision, and for not checking whether the model of single deck was suitable or not to use on a route before deciding on the number of buses ordered. You check the infrastructure out first!

This kind of stuff is basic.

The timetables the NTA have published and handed out at the weekend still have mistakes on them - there seems to be no proofing of them.

It is Network Direct phase 1 all over again. That was shambolic and so has this rollout been.

To be fair to the NTA they could have ended with more problems if they had of ordered single decker buses which were too small. Tbh I would say no offence to you there but you're slightly over reaction calling the whole transfer of services to GAI from DB a shambles.

Ok there have been some issues some of which are to be expected when there are changes. The main issue has been regarding the 75 where the NTA have shown off their naivety by re-routing it through Dundrum which was a very stupid decision if you ask me and it wouldn't surprise if it's what's causing the majority of the issues atm with the 75. There are also some issues with real time but then again it's not like real time for DB services is always accurate either.

The first phase was done very badly with the 45a/b, 59, 63/a and 75/a I would agree with out of date timetables not being replaced and no real time for nearly two days but the second phase with 111, 184 and 185 has been better with updated timetables at stops and no problems with real time. We'd never get anywhere if we delayed/didn't do changes to the system because there may be potential teething problems.

tom1ie · 24-10-2018 7:22pm

bk wrote: »

I'd say the same to you. I don't understand why you can't understand how crazy it is to argue that we have to wait ten years for infrastructure changes with a rubbish Network Direct network, that is already bursting at the seems.

You really don't need infrastructure changes to redesign a network when you are significantly increasing the number of buses available. At the very least you'd want to undo the network direct changes.

I think perhpas you aren't personally aware what happened with Network Direct and that is the key part you are missing. ND was a big reduction in numbers of buses, drivers, routes and frequency. It was a big cut back to the bare minimum of what was needed during the recession. We really can't continue with that.

The radial routes make absolute sense as do the orbital routes. These are the core parts of BC and we need those today, not 10 years from now.

Bk, where are all these busses going to go? There isn't the road space for them. They'll be stuck in traffic.

L1011 · 25-10-2018 8:24am

tom1ie wrote: »

Bk, where are all these busses going to go? There isn't the road space for them. They'll be stuck in traffic.

We still have less buses than before the crash, with enhanced bus priority measures in places already and more to come

tom1ie · 25-10-2018 10:03am

L1011 wrote: »

We still have less buses than before the crash, with enhanced bus priority measures in places already and more to come

What bus priority measures have been put in place in the areas I quoted before and what more are to come, bar the BC infrastructure that I am saying needs to be built yesterday?

L1011 · 01-11-2018 9:37am

tom1ie wrote: »

What bus priority measures have been put in place in the areas I quoted before and what more are to come, bar the BC infrastructure that I am saying needs to be built yesterday?

The double bus lane on the Quays is the biggest change there and has had a major impact

There's also been improvements elsewhere, minor stuff that all adds up. Cat and Cage buslane had a huge impact on services there, Whitehall Church hugely improved by a few bits of plastic

CatInABox · 01-11-2018 10:39am

L1011 wrote: »

Whitehall Church hugely improved by a few bits of plastic

I'd be shocked if those plastic bollards aren't rolled out near every problem junction.

While it's massively improved, there's still work to be done there. They should really CPO some of the car park there and turn it into a traffic light free turn left lane. Cars are actually already using it as as such, going in the entrance at the main gates, and then out on Collins Avenue.

Of course, if they do manage to do something with turning left there, then they'd probably have to something with the parking with the row of shops there, and then the lights at Beaumont Rd, so..... nothing will probably happen.

tom1ie · 01-11-2018 2:22pm

L1011 wrote: »

The double bus lane on the Quays is the biggest change there and has had a major impact

There's also been improvements elsewhere, minor stuff that all adds up. Cat and Cage buslane had a huge impact on services there, Whitehall Church hugely improved by a few bits of plastic

Yeah agree the double bus lane has had a very positive effect, but that was relatively easy (bar the vested interest groups opposing it) to implement as the road space was already there.
Problem in the sw, as myself and lx flyer are constantly alluding to is, the road space simply isn’t there.
Until the cpo’ing of gardens etc happens and the continuous qbc’s are built into the cc, bc redesign just wont work, in the sw area.

cgcsb · 01-11-2018 3:30pm

tom1ie wrote: »

Yeah agree the double bus lane has had a very positive effect, but that was relatively easy (bar the vested interest groups opposing it) to implement as the road space was already there.
Problem in the sw, as myself and lx flyer are constantly alluding to is, the road space simply isn’t there.
Until the cpo’ing of gardens etc happens and the continuous qbc’s are built into the cc, bc redesign just wont work, in the sw area.

While I agree with the sentiment, simple measures in the City Centre have shown positive impacts even at long distances.

Hypothetical scenario: if George's st/Parliament St and the more central part of the quays were to become bus only, CG was pedestrianized, Stoneybatter and Rathmines given 2 way bus lanes and so on. That has a positive impact even in the south west of the city. Less people will drive to their destination if more destinations are harder to reach by car.

Spanish Eyes · 01-11-2018 3:37pm

On a lighter note, re the problematic SW corridor of Templeogue, Terenure, Harolds X etc. it might be easier to instal bus lanes on stilts above the traffic or vice versa rather than CPO the gardens. :P

Sam Russell · 01-11-2018 3:42pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

On a lighter note, re the problematic SW corridor of Templeogue, Terenure, Harolds X etc. it might be easier to instal bus lanes on stilts above the traffic or vice versa rather than CPO the gardens. :P

Sorting out Harold's Cross Bridge would be a massive help. It would ease Leonard's Corner, which also needs work. As does the illegal parking outside Tescos on the SCR at Leonard's Corner.

A lot of small improvements will all build up to a massive total.

BusConnects will benefit incrementally if it is implemented ASAP, and the more successful it gets, the more will shift from car to bus, which becomes self feeding.

LXFlyer · 01-11-2018 6:38pm

tom1ie wrote: »

Yeah agree the double bus lane has had a very positive effect, but that was relatively easy (bar the vested interest groups opposing it) to implement as the road space was already there.
Problem in the sw, as myself and lx flyer are constantly alluding to is, the road space simply isn’t there.
Until the cpo’ing of gardens etc happens and the continuous qbc’s are built into the cc, bc redesign just wont work, in the sw area.

The southwest is not the issue - it is south central Dublin that has the real problems, and I wish people would stop calling it southwest Dublin as it isn’t. The corridors may have routes serving southwest Dublin but it is the south central area that has daily gridlock.

It is the routes through Rathmines, Rathgar, Terenure and Harold’s Cross that suffer the slowest bus speeds in the city by a mile and quite frankly all the tinkering in the world isn’t going to change bus speeds significantly in those areas due to the lack of road space, the narrow villages, and the severe pinch points en route. Add to that the complete lack of any enforcement of existing bus priority measures, delivery trucks parked on clear ways at the height of the morning peak, and peak bus journey times have simply been getting worse every year. They have now reached up to 90 minutes on the 14, 15 and 16 from their respective termini to the city centre in the morning peak, which is scandalous. I don’t think CPO activity will actually make that much difference to bus speeds as they’ll still get hit by the pinch points which aren’t like the cat & cage in any respect before anyone mentions it, as on these routes there are buildings right up to the footpaths. I just don’t see the suggested one way suburban routes being acceptable politically.

The only solution that will make a genuine difference is underground rail.

Tom to correct you regarding adding buses, Dublin Bus have already increased the numbers of buses on those corridors on the 14, 15 and 15b routes all day long, and other routes will be seeing capacity increases in the coming months. It’s needed as buses are already full, but it does mean more buses in the same space.

LXFlyer · 01-11-2018 6:39pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

Sorting out Harold's Cross Bridge would be a massive help. It would ease Leonard's Corner, which also needs work. As does the illegal parking outside Tescos on the SCR at Leonard's Corner.

A lot of small improvements will all build up to a massive total.

BusConnects will benefit incrementally if it is implemented ASAP, and the more successful it gets, the more will shift from car to bus, which becomes self feeding.

Most of that is down to lack of enforcement of existing measures - nothing to do with BusConnects.

Spanish Eyes · 01-11-2018 8:08pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

Most of that is down to lack of enforcement of existing measures - nothing to do with BusConnects.

More space for PT is absolutely mandatory now.

The lack of enforcement is something else entirely, but I agree with you, very few seem to care about yellow boxes, bus lanes etc. because they know they will get away with it.

Any chance of CCTV and reg recognition, could be done from buses too I reckon.

Sounds too easy doesn't it.

Qrt · 01-11-2018 8:53pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

More space for PT is absolutely mandatory now.

The lack of enforcement is something else entirely, but I agree with you, very few seem to care about yellow boxes, bus lanes etc. because they know they will get away with it.

Any chance of CCTV and reg recognition, could be done from buses too I reckon.

Sounds too easy doesn't it.

Any update on that bill that was to make this easier? I remember there being something, but I can't exactly remember what...

Spanish Eyes · 01-11-2018 8:58pm

Qrt wrote: »

Any update on that bill that was to make this easier? I remember there being something, but I can't exactly remember what...

Contact our Minister for Transport.

Main Phone:
(01) 604 1062
Postal Address:
Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Leeson Lane, Dublin 2, Ireland D02TR60
Email Address:
minister@dttas.ie (link sends e-mail)
Website URL Address:
http://dttas.ie/about-us/2013/our-minister

Qrt · 01-11-2018 9:13pm

Spanish Eyes wrote: »

Contact our Minister for Transport.

Main Phone:
(01) 604 1062
Postal Address:
Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, Leeson Lane, Dublin 2, Ireland D02TR60
Email Address:
minister@dttas.ie (link sends e-mail)
Website URL Address:
http://dttas.ie/about-us/2013/our-minister

I would but I don't think he knows where he is most of the time.

marno21 · 02-11-2018 1:33am

Qrt wrote: »

I would but I don't think he knows where he is most of the time.

Send him an email with the title "Stepaside Garda Station" and you can be sure it will be read at least.

cgcsb · 02-11-2018 11:59am

To the more pessimistic posters. Small improvements can lead to significant journey time reductions, see cat n cage and the Whitehall junction barriers.

I have a theory that if current rules of the road were enforced, journey times would improve by about 10 minutes across all routes.

At present we have a system with 0% enforcement. If we had 100% enforcement, that in it's self would affect modal shift and improve journey times. The camera enforcement solution is quite cheap and has massive benefits.

schemingbohemia · 02-11-2018 12:21pm

Bus I was on last night, the 26 took 15 minutes to get from Merrion Square to the Quays. Not one single Garda seen, multiple private cars and vans in Bus lanes, blocking yellow boxes and the College Green Bus gate.
That route has bus lanes for the entire journey but given the lack of enforcement are useless.
Use DB own CCTV, give the drivers a fiver for each infringement they "catch" and forward details to AGS and force them to prosecute.

CatInABox · 02-11-2018 2:15pm

schemingbohemia wrote: »

Use DB own CCTV, give the drivers a fiver for each infringement they "catch" and forward details to AGS and force them to prosecute.

ANPR, and enforcement based on GPS location would make it automatic. If there's car in a bus lane and the bus sees the number plate, the driver should get a €300 fine and a penalty point (two if they bring it to court). That'd end people going into bus lanes overnight.

Dublin - BusConnects

Comments