Stephen15 wrote: » Also a DB SG on the 84 had it's back window on the lower deck outside Bray Station as it was hit by the wing mirror of a GAI Streetlite pulling away from the stop. I would say this is more due to the poor design of the Streetlites due the fact the passenger sides wing mirror protrudes more than most other buses.
TallGlass wrote: » Surely Go Ahead have SLAs with the NTA? Are they getting fined for the poor service levels
p_haugh wrote: » I was also waiting for that bus. I think it left 15 minutes early, as when I was getting off the DART from town at 6:50, I saw a 17 to Rialto leaving that stop :mad:
LastStop wrote: » Did you check the new timetable for the 17s? Monday - Friday from blackrock 06.52 and then 07.27. 07.05 is Saturday times
TallGlass wrote: » Out of interest. How much are NTA saving here? Surely Go Ahead have SLAs with the NTA? Are they getting fined for the poor service levels
AlekSmart wrote: » I personally see it as somewhat sinister for a Public Body to be so reluctant to reveal details of a Public Service Contract with a particular company,when the details of all other such PSO contracts remain freely available on the Authorities own website,and have done since inception.
Stephen15 wrote: » Just a guess that such SLAs may have some kind of cooling off period attached with them to allow for any teething issues.
Yer Da sells Avon wrote: » In addition to the protruding mirrors, they have a tendency to abruptly jump forward, rather than creep, as the driver releases the brake. This makes maneuvering extremely difficult. There have been several similar incidents, so it's obviously a fundamental design fault, rather than simple driver error. Eventually, this will result in injuries or deaths.
Stephen Gawking wrote: » Has anyone heard of a delay in the final transfer of routes frim DB to GAI? The 18 /76 apparently aren't being transferred until the end of march. Looking really shambolic at this stage. Hope its not true as this whole saga has been dominated by 'teething problems.'
cherryghost wrote: » That's terrible if true. The 76/a is unreliable as-is, and often full to the brim halfway through the journey. Some of the DB routes is in bad need of increased frequency following the handoff of these routes. Honestly it was one thing I was holding onto in my area for improved travel time (the awful 13 would have benefitted from increased frequency)
Thrashssacre wrote: » The 13 is fine bar a half hour to 45 minuite period in the morning peak. Not sure about the north side end but in all my years of getting it only once could I not get on and in fairness I was at the red cow at about 6pm 76 needs a serious overhaul. Filled to the brim even outside peak, no shows are a daily occurrences and the real time is absolutely no use a lot of the time.
markpb wrote: » I’d be very surprised if the NTA and GAI blindly assumed (like many here) that the changeover would be seamless, that everything would go according to plan and that the timetables would be perfect on day one. Even an ounce of common sense would say that they had planned for interruption. It’s not ideal but it was always extremely likely to happen.
cherryghost wrote: » I use the 13 a lot many times during the day due to my erratic work hours against my will (I always try to use 151 where possible). Bus is normally full after 7:15 til 9am. It's full mid morning quite often on weekdays because of a backup of buses after rushhour (there's a gap of sometimes an hour due to congestion of buses finishing its routes). The bus is full (along with 40) from CC outwards from around 4:30pm right out past 8pm. It's also terrible for bunching at all hours due to its long convoluted, lack of bus lanes, route.
dfx- wrote: » The 13 is a nightmare, to be avoided like the plague. iIt's too long. There's crushloads on a 15 minute frequency until 9pm. If you try to get it on Thomas St in the evening, you may as well take a book and settle in for a long wait. It's always worth the walk to the 151, 68 or 69 if possible.
Dravokivich wrote: » I doubt the brakes are a fault, they'd be taken off the road if it's the case. There's a lot of people driving with go ahead who are new to these types of vehicles and probably weren't also used to automatics either. I suspect they are going harder on the throttle than they expected.
TallGlass wrote: » I knew this would be a rocky hand over. Too many 'new' variables at play. Throw enough mud however and some will stick sort of approach from NTA, rather than a gentle easing in of services over 2 years.
punisher5112 wrote: » The SG model was totally different to anything we ever had. If you release the handbrake it does nothing that's why when you do put the foot on to get moving they jump. Terrible bus.
n!ghtmancometh wrote: » Happened this evening on a jam packed hardly any room for standing 69, moving off from the lights on the Naas Road. Engine revved for a second or two before jolting off. Great fun when you are struggling to keep a grip of the grab bars for balance.
thomasj wrote: » Pretty sure I just saw a go ahead single decker bus that was brought over for training , in service with passengers on board heading through Blanchardstown centre. At the back ,it said out of service , so I presume it has a paper destination on the front .
