Dublin - BusConnects

cgcsb · 30-04-2021 10:59am

yascaoimhin wrote: »

The H Spine will launch in Mid/Late June now.

The reason for the delay is two-fold and related directly to Level 5 restrictions.

1. Some construction is required to bus stops along the spine for new bus poles, shelters and moving bus stops closer to junctions for interchange but as construction was not permitted under Level 5 that could not go-ahead

2. Prior to the launch of the Spine the NTA wanted to have brand ambassadors on the street giving people in formation on the new routes but obviously that was not permitted under Level 5.

The rest of the spines have been only slightly delayed as a result. The next Spine due for launch is the C in September, which has been pushed back to October, but the NTA said that further delays to the rollout would be recouped by them just working harder to get back on track

Any info on the O, N2, and W routes? I think these had a misprint in the date on the previous release.

yascaoimhin · 30-04-2021 11:11am

cgcsb wrote: »

Any info on the O, N2, and W routes? I think these had a misprint in the date on the previous release.

The W routes are out for tender and are due for implementation in Dece,ber this year.

The O and N routes arent due until March 2022

L1011 · 30-04-2021 1:51pm

If the C spine is launched without the W6 in place there will be... problems, as the W6 is replacing the Celbridge-Maynooth link of the 67. w

Which is extensively used, particularly at school times. The John of Gods services also have a number of step-down houses in Maynooth with clients that would need to travel to Celbridge up to daily, and use the 67.

Temporarily extending the C4 to Maynooth would solve it but need extra vehicles, and probably lead to calls to not shorten it back

VonLuck · 30-04-2021 1:58pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

The rest of the spines have been only slightly delayed as a result. The next Spine due for launch is the C in September, which has been pushed back to October, but the NTA said that further delays to the rollout would be recouped by them just working harder to get back on track

I'm sure there's a logical reason, but why are all the routes so spaced out (timeline wise). Can they not construct some of them concurrently?

yascaoimhin · 30-04-2021 2:18pm

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1388118975310188552?s=20

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 2:28pm

VonLuck wrote: »

I'm sure there's a logical reason, but why are all the routes so spaced out (timeline wise). Can they not construct some of them concurrently?

You need to think about this. There are two separate projects here.

The post to which you replied is referring to the redesigned route network implementation.

The corridor infrastructure is a separate project that is going to ABP this summer.

The work involved in developing schedules is highly intricate and specialised. Doing it in one go really was never practical.

Also there will be investment in additional buses and funding for them needs to be spread out.

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 2:32pm

L1011 wrote: »

If the C spine is launched without the W6 in place there will be... problems, as the W6 is replacing the Celbridge-Maynooth link of the 67. w

Which is extensively used, particularly at school times. The John of Gods services also have a number of step-down houses in Maynooth with clients that would need to travel to Celbridge up to daily, and use the 67.

Temporarily extending the C4 to Maynooth would solve it but need extra vehicles, and probably lead to calls to not shorten it back

There will be crossover between spine phases. A temporary connection between the two towns could still be maintained until the full W6 is launched.

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 2:36pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1388118975310188552?s=20

Still plenty of unanswered questions.

How will the short fare distance be measured?
Will it mean that the fare stages are retained and that it is for 1-3 stages as at present?

Will the rail zones be clearly publicised?

How will all of this be presented and explained to the public?

Fare stages for GoAhead routes are not even available to the public.

Transparency and clear explainers are needed!

yascaoimhin · 30-04-2021 3:11pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

Still plenty of unanswered questions.

How will the short fare distance be measured?

3km

LXFlyer wrote: »

Will it mean that the fare stages are retained and that it is for 1-3 stages as at present?

No

LXFlyer wrote: »

Will the rail zones be clearly publicised?

They already are

LXFlyer wrote: »

How will all of this be presented and explained to the public?

Through marketing and on street ambassadors

VonLuck · 30-04-2021 4:05pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

You need to think about this. There are two separate projects here.

The post to which you replied is referring to the redesigned route network implementation.

The corridor infrastructure is a separate project that is going to ABP this summer.

The work involved in developing schedules is highly intricate and specialised. Doing it in one go really was never practical.

Also there will be investment in additional buses and funding for them needs to be spread out.

Yes I understand that but there are construction works associated with the implementation of the routes i.e. bus stops, shelters etc. The larger works with CPO's and realignment of roads will obviously take longer to develop.

That's a reasonable point regarding funding, if that indeed is a main factor in their timeline.

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 4:19pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

3km

No

They already are

Through marketing and on street ambassadors

With all due respect, I suspect that the real answer to that level of detail is you don’t know.

There has to be a basis for how ticket machines will know how far the short fare is valid to at any point along the route. At the moment that’s using fare stages. The machines can’t calculate 3km - there needs to be a physical fixed basis.

I’m interested in the detail, not the broad brush as that’s what counts.

And no, the IE rail fare zones are certainly not clearly publicised. The fares are available from the fare calculator on the IE site, but the suburban fares matrix isn’t published there and the vast majority of people other than those of us with a specific interest wouldn’t have a clue what “zone 4” means.

For the record I do know but 99% of people won’t.

I’m pretty sure that I’ve been around a lot longer than you, and I wouldn’t in any shape or form be as confident about how this will be explained to Joe Public. Customer information has been the Achille’s heel of all the transport companies over the years, and while the NTA have got some things right, they still make some pretty basic mistakes (such as leaving on street timetables out of date for a year on a whole swathe of orbital routes).

bk · 30-04-2021 5:44pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

3km

Hmm.. That seems much further then the current short Stage 1 to 3 fare.

I'm less then 3km from O'Connell St, 5 stages and currently pay €2.25 on leap. So it sounds like I'll be included in this new wider zone.

This is disappointing as I assume to get this fare I'll need to continue to interact with the driver. It sounds like lots more people will continue to be interacting with the driver then might otherwise do.

And I've no doubt, lots will ask for this fare and travel much further then the 3km.

Sounds like it will be a mess, couldn't they have just given us a truly flat fare.

cgcsb · 30-04-2021 5:47pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

I’m pretty sure that I’ve been around a lot longer than you,

You just can't help yourself can you? Honestly who are you to talk down to people? I bet you don't go on like that in real life.

loyatemu · 30-04-2021 5:53pm

is it 3km along the road or as the crow flies?
how are passengers supposed to know how far away their destination stop is?
are they still taking cash on the buses (sorry, haven't been on one for some time for obvious reasons)?

as bk says, this seems like a compromise to head off complaints that willl negate many of the benefits of the 90 minute fare.

cgcsb · 30-04-2021 5:53pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

https://twitter.com/DublinCommuters/status/1388118975310188552?s=20

Will be great if that happens.

bk · 30-04-2021 6:14pm

Thinking about it, maybe they can set the right hand validator by the door to automatically give the 90 minute ticket, while having the driver validator automatically give a "short" fare without any driver interaction. That might work.

I can still for-see issues with folks getting the "short" ticket and travelling too far. But at least it would allow for speedy boarding times.

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 8:00pm

cgcsb wrote: »

You just can't help yourself can you? Honestly who are you to talk down to people? I bet you don't go on like that in real life.

I actually meant what I said literally, in terms of the fact that I’m older than that poster concerned (assuming that they are the main person behind DCC).

Watching and studying the quality of information for over forty years in detail that the transport companies put out (including the NTA) would not lead me to share their confidence that the brand ambassadors are going to know much more than high level stuff, or more importantly that the NTA are going to get this kind of thing right.

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 8:16pm

bk wrote: »

Hmm.. That seems much further then the current short Stage 1 to 3 fare.

I'm less then 3km from O'Connell St, 5 stages and currently pay €2.25 on leap. So it sounds like I'll be included in this new wider zone.

This is disappointing as I assume to get this fare I'll need to continue to interact with the driver. It sounds like lots more people will continue to be interacting with the driver then might otherwise do.

And I've no doubt, lots will ask for this fare and travel much further then the 3km.

Sounds like it will be a mess, couldn't they have just given us a truly flat fare.

It does indeed seem much longer - I expected a 1-3 stage distance too and the main fare to be a merger of the current €2.25 and €2.50 fares.

That to me sounds like it is going to cause problems like the ones that you suggest.

LXFlyer · 30-04-2021 9:14pm

To go back to people using rail - the twitter thread linked to above would suggest that people making rail journeys from any of the following Dublin Short Hop Zone stations - Balbriggan, Skerries, Kilcock, Maynooth, Sallins & Naas, Greystones or Kilcoole to a city centre station would be outside the scope of being able to avail of the 90 minute ticket benefits (note that Maynooth customers could change to LUAS at Broombridge and avail of it).

Would they still get a LEAP90 discount as they do now? Or will they lose out?

To explain this, Irish Rail fares in the Dublin short hop zone (the area within which fares are more heavily subsidised) are set on the basis of six different fares calculated based on the distance between two station combinations.

They don't use zones as in London or as on LUAS, but rather are based on individual station combinations. Hence my comment about how this will be somewhat complicated to explain to people. Someone would need to know how far they can travel for EUR 2.80 on LEAP from a particular station if they are to be able to use the 90 minute unlimited travel.

yascaoimhin · 01-05-2021 1:11pm

bk wrote: »

Thinking about it, maybe they can set the right hand validator by the door to automatically give the 90 minute ticket, while having the driver validator automatically give a "short" fare without any driver interaction. That might work.

I can still for-see issues with folks getting the "short" ticket and travelling too far. But at least it would allow for speedy boarding times.

Pretty much how it works now. The 90 minute fare is due to replace the €2.50 "Over 13 stages" fare that you get automatically it you tap your leap on the right hand validator.

Phase 1 of the change over will replace the
1-3 Stages
4-12 Stages and
Over 13 Stages fares with

Short
Medium and
Long fares.

Then they'll get rid of the medium fare and change the Long to the 90 minute. Tag on the right for long, tag on the left for short

LXFlyer · 01-05-2021 7:30pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

Pretty much how it works now. The 90 minute fare is due to replace the €2.50 "Over 13 stages" fare that you get automatically it you tap your leap on the right hand validator.

Phase 1 of the change over will replace the
1-3 Stages
4-12 Stages and
Over 13 Stages fares with

Short
Medium and
Long fares.

Then they'll get rid of the medium fare and change the Long to the 90 minute. Tag on the right for long, tag on the left for short

Thanks for that update - but the detail of how this is planned to work in practice is what we need to understand - how will the fares calculated using the driver's machine?

That cannot be done on a distance basis so I am struggling to understand how it could work without fare stages?

Before I get accused of it again, I'm not having a go - I am genuinely perplexed about this.

MJohnston · 01-05-2021 9:47pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

Thanks for that update - but the detail of how this is planned to work in practice is what we need to understand - how will the fares calculated using the driver's machine?

That cannot be done on a distance basis so I am struggling to understand how it could work without fare stages?

Before I get accused of it again, I'm not having a go - I am genuinely perplexed about this.

Why could a drivers machine not calculate based on distance?

bk · 02-05-2021 12:13am

yascaoimhin wrote: »

Pretty much how it works now. The 90 minute fare is due to replace the €2.50 "Over 13 stages" fare that you get automatically it you tap your leap on the right hand validator.

Phase 1 of the change over will replace the
1-3 Stages
4-12 Stages and
Over 13 Stages fares with

Short
Medium and
Long fares.

Then they'll get rid of the medium fare and change the Long to the 90 minute.

So to be clear. Are you saying that after Phase 2, the Short fare will cover what is now Stages 1 to 12? Or perhaps some variant of that, like Stage 1 to 6?

Because 3km is much longer than the current Stage 1 to 3, it is more like Stage 1 to 6.

yascaoimhin wrote: »

Tag on the right for long, tag on the left for short

But the key question is, will you still need to interact with the driver like you do now when getting a ticket from the drivers ticket machine?

Will you have to hold your card on the ticket machine, tell the driver how far you are going and wait for the driver to press a couple of buttons on the ticket machine to enter the fare?

Or will you just be able to quickly hold the card there and automatically get a short fare ticket without talking with the driver or needing the driver to take any action.

If it is the latter, it might be ok (but folks with cash will still get in the way), but if it the former, like today, then it is a disaster and would just continue the rubbish dwell times we have today.

I hope they have thought this out.

LXFlyer · 02-05-2021 7:25am

MJohnston wrote: »

Why could a drivers machine not calculate based on distance?

How is it going to know what stop is 3km away for every stop at a particular point in time?

These machines aren't exactly powerful in terms of memory.

Each route surely will need some method of assigning the fares to a range of stops along the route.

Also, as a passenger, I can look at a Dublin Bus timetable and quickly calculate the fare if I want to beforehand by looking at the fare stages. Will I still be able to do that?

LXFlyer · 02-05-2021 7:37am

bk wrote: »

So to be clear. Are you saying that after Phase 2, the Short fare will cover what is now Stages 1 to 12? Or perhaps some variant of that, like Stage 1 to 6?

Because 3km is much longer than the current Stage 1 to 3, it is more like Stage 1 to 6.

But the key question is, will you still need to interact with the driver like you do now when getting a ticket from the drivers ticket machine?

Will you have to hold your card on the ticket machine, tell the driver how far you are going and wait for the driver to press a couple of buttons on the ticket machine to enter the fare?

Or will you just be able to quickly hold the card there and automatically get a short fare ticket without talking with the driver or needing the driver to take any action.

If it is the latter, it might be ok (but folks with cash will still get in the way), but if it the former, like today, then it is a disaster and would just continue the rubbish dwell times we have today.

I hope they have thought this out.

I'd certainly worry about far more people paying the lower fare if the distance that it applies is increased - the 1-3 stage fare corresponds mainly to journeys of up to about 2km at the moment.

That could mean more fare evasion and not have any real impact on dwell times.

MJohnston · 02-05-2021 8:27am

LXFlyer wrote: »

How is it going to know what stop is 3km away for every stop at a particular point in time?

These machines aren't exactly powerful in terms of memory.

Each route surely will need some method of assigning the fares to a range of stops along the route.

Also, as a passenger, I can look at a Dublin Bus timetable and quickly calculate the fare if I want to beforehand by looking at the fare stages. Will I still be able to do that?

Seems to me it’d be fairly easy to program in the distance from stop X to stop Y - you could give each stop a latitude-longitude value, which would only add around 2 bytes per stop. That’s 2 kilobytes per 1000 stops, which is a minuscule amount of memory, even if the whole machine only has even 1MB thats 0.2% of available memory per 1000 stops (how many does Dublin have?)

Then the distance between two stops is just simplified to the distance between their geopoints. That’d favour the customer if the as-the-crow-flies distance is less than the actual travelled distance, but that would be minimal between most stops. And it could never be the other way around (crow-flies distance being the shortest possible connection between two points).

I’d be happy with that system. It could be easily marked on network maps and apps, because each stop would have a circular radius to display, rather than some unnecessarily complex distance-by-road map.

Busman Paddy Lasty · 02-05-2021 10:37am

^^ +1 was about to post similar bit with no technical knowhow! Tag on left validator and get a ticket with 'valid to Stop XXXX' or something like that. Policing it with fare inspectors is another matter though as would require staff and a card reader. Otherwise people not needing a connection could pay the short hop fare.

Why not buy in a system from another country that is already proven? I've been abroad and seen systems like; tag on front door - full fare deducted. Tag off (and exit) rear door - fare calculated and rebate given if necessary.

Over here any stops deemed unsafe for middle door exit to be remodelled or even removed if there is a stop nearby.

bk · 02-05-2021 11:54am

MJohnston wrote: »

Seems to me it’d be fairly easy to program in the distance from stop X to stop Y - you could give each stop a latitude-longitude value, which would only add around 2 bytes per stop. That’s 2 kilobytes per 1000 stops, which is a minuscule amount of memory, even if the whole machine only has even 1MB thats 0.2% of available memory per 1000 stops (how many does Dublin have?)

DB has 5,000 stops and the TGX150 only 1MB of storage.

Keep in mind that the ticket machine also needs to store data on every single ticket fare collected throughout the day + all topups to be applied to tickets for that day + any lost/stolen cards to be revoked.

It can all add up and 1MB would be quiet tight, but it probably would just about be doable.

Busman Paddy Lasty wrote: »

^^ +1 was about to post similar bit with no technical knowhow! Tag on left validator and get a ticket with 'valid to Stop XXXX' or something like that. Policing it with fare inspectors is another matter though as would require staff and a card reader. Otherwise people not needing a connection could pay the short hop fare.

Fare evasion is the key issue here. Bus drivers is how fare evasion is mostly enforced on Dublin Bus. In 20 years of taking buses on Dublin, I've never seen an inspector.

I can kind of see how it might sort of work for the normal into town routes.

Take a route like the 41 from Swords to City Center. If someone tags on a short fare in Drumcondra heading to town, a driver would know that it is well within 3km of the city center, so probably say nothing *. On the other hand if someone in Swords tried to go tag on for the short fare, the driver might be suspicious and stop them and ask where they are going, as it would be unusual. Of course the person might only be going a few stops to visit a friend, but a driver could keep an eye on it.

* Of course a person boarding in Drumcondra might head well beyond the city center, and thus beyond 3km. But I'd say 90%+ people get off in one of the city center stops, so probably not worth stressing about.

In some ways this isn't much different to the moment. Nothing stopping someone asking for a short fare, lying about the bus stop they will get off and travel much further. It happens all the time. It is up to observant drivers to notice where such people are getting off and challenging them when they leave.

In some ways this might make it a little simpler for them. As there will be only one short fare to watch out for rather then many now.

BTW This is what 3km from O'Connell Bridge looks like:
https://2kmfromhome.com/share?lat=53.34737470187197&lon=-6.259117126464845

Maybe it would be easier if they just made it a zone system like London, saying the short fare is any trip within the above 3km circle. But I can see the objections to that too.

The key question for me though that hasn't been answered yet, is will this new short fare actually be automated. Like a simple tap-on with no interaction?

Also I'd like to see them add a separate automated validator next the driver, on the door, outside of the actual ticket machine. Would be easier then actually having to reach into the ticket machine to place the card.

Sam Russell · 02-05-2021 12:09pm

bk wrote: »

BTW This is what 3km from O'Connell Bridge looks like:
https://2kmfromhome.com/share?lat=53.34737470187197&lon=-6.259117126464845

That is actually 20 km from O'Connell Bridge, not 3 km.

p_haugh · 02-05-2021 1:19pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is actually 20 km from O'Connell Bridge, not 3 km.

I think that page resets the radius to 20km each time you load it, hence why it's not showing 3km

yascaoimhin · 02-05-2021 1:25pm

I think people are thinking too much into this whole Short Hop fare and how it will be "calculated"

You tag on at the driver's reader if you just want to take a single bus journey.
You tag on at the right for a journey where you plan to utilise another bus, Luas or DART within 90 minutes.

Now I know what you're going to say,
"What if someone is going end to end on the bus for the whole length and just pay for the short journey?"

My answer is, so what? The very fact that we're moving to a time-based ticket instead of a length confirms to me that the NTA isn't going to lose sleep over people paying for a bus journey and staying on longer than they should. Maybe it shouldn't be referred to as a Short journey but a Bus Only journey.

The NTA has already stated that if you tap on for a "short" journey on the bus, get off, go shopping and then get on a bus Luas or DART within the 90s minutes, it will convert into a 90 minute fare so you won't pare for two short journeys.

The point being if you tag on with the driver, the NTA are expressly intending that you don't interact with the driver at all so you don't have to tell him where you're going, so no journey has to be calculated, you'll pay the bus only fare (probably €1.50/€2) and you get off when you want. If you want to get on another bus luas or dart, then you get charged another €1 to upgrade to a 90 minute ticket.

I honestly don't think there will be a need to calculate distance or stages because that would require driver interaction which getting rid of is the precision reason for the next generation ticketing project

Qrt · 02-05-2021 5:43pm

A flat fare was never really an option imo. Dublin’s suburbs are heavily reliant on the bus networks to get to their respective centres; Ongar to Blanch, Jobstown to The Square etc. Pushing the fare to a fiver for a round trip would have been scandalous really.

bk · 02-05-2021 9:02pm

Sam Russell wrote: »

That is actually 20 km from O'Connell Bridge, not 3 km.

Apologies, the share function most not work well, I had 3km selected when I clicked on the share link. Just adjust down to 3km so.

bk · 02-05-2021 9:18pm

yascaoimhin wrote: »

The point being if you tag on with the driver, the NTA are expressly intending that you don't interact with the driver at all so you don't have to tell him where you're going, so no journey has to be calculated, you'll pay the bus only fare (probably €1.50/€2) and you get off when you want. If you want to get on another bus luas or dart, then you get charged another €1 to upgrade to a 90 minute ticket.

This is the important piece of information that you hadn't answered until now.

It hasn't been clear how much interaction would be needed with the driver or not. If the intention is to just quickly tag on, even for the short fare, with zero interaction with the driver, then it should be ok. Still a bit overly complex, but a big improvement over the current situation.

Though I would like to see a validator placed in front of the cash chute (eventually replace it). Getting your ticket on the drivers machine is a bit awkward and will slow things down.

If they are going to do this, it should be done properly. Don't get me wrong, it is great news to finally get this 90 minute ticket, as long as it is well thought out and implemented well.

Though it does leave the question of fare evasion and who will enforce it. Is the NTA planning to rollout more inspectors like the Luas, etc.

Also another unanswered question is will this new "short zone" be bigger then the current stage 1 to 3.

Sam Russell · 03-05-2021 11:22am

bk wrote: »

If they are going to do this, it should be done properly. Don't get me wrong, it is great news to finally get this 90 minute ticket, as long as it is well thought out and implemented well.

Though it does leave the question of fare evasion and who will enforce it. Is the NTA planning to rollout more inspectors like the Luas, etc.

Also another unanswered question is will this new "short zone" be bigger then the current stage 1 to 3.

I think it would make sense to have just two tickets. The 90 min fare (say €2.75) used for multiple journeys over the 90 mins inc Luas and Dart and the single bus journey fare (say €1). Obviously, this gets over the need for ticket inspectors as everyone entering the bus has to validate their ticket.

It would also make sense to make it cashless.

New machines would make sense that were faster and a single validator - with a simple choice of ticket required.

Make the buses cheap and fill them up - every full bus reduces the number of people in cars which allows the bus to travel quicker.

LXFlyer · 03-05-2021 11:37am

yascaoimhin wrote: »

I think people are thinking too much into this whole Short Hop fare and how it will be "calculated"

You tag on at the driver's reader if you just want to take a single bus journey.
You tag on at the right for a journey where you plan to utilise another bus, Luas or DART within 90 minutes.

Now I know what you're going to say,
"What if someone is going end to end on the bus for the whole length and just pay for the short journey?"

My answer is, so what? The very fact that we're moving to a time-based ticket instead of a length confirms to me that the NTA isn't going to lose sleep over people paying for a bus journey and staying on longer than they should. Maybe it shouldn't be referred to as a Short journey but a Bus Only journey.

The NTA has already stated that if you tap on for a "short" journey on the bus, get off, go shopping and then get on a bus Luas or DART within the 90s minutes, it will convert into a 90 minute fare so you won't pare for two short journeys.

The point being if you tag on with the driver, the NTA are expressly intending that you don't interact with the driver at all so you don't have to tell him where you're going, so no journey has to be calculated, you'll pay the bus only fare (probably €1.50/€2) and you get off when you want. If you want to get on another bus luas or dart, then you get charged another €1 to upgrade to a 90 minute ticket.

I honestly don't think there will be a need to calculate distance or stages because that would require driver interaction which getting rid of is the precision reason for the next generation ticketing project

Some of us are very interested in the detail of this sort of thing for the very simple reason that plenty of great ideas have come along in the past only to be diluted by poor attention to the details.

Getting the high level stuff right is important, but getting the micro stuff right too is also important, as failing to do so can turn a good idea into a shambles.

bk · 03-05-2021 11:42am

Sam Russell wrote: »

It would also make sense to make it cashless.

New machines would make sense that were faster and a single validator - with a simple choice of ticket required.

Yes, according to previous NTA presentation that is the plan. New machines + ccontactless debit card and smartphone support + remove cash.

Though I think 90 minute tickets is happening first without the above and the above will then be phased in over a few years. I'd say another few years before cash is gone.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Make the buses cheap and fill them up - every full bus reduces the number of people in cars which allows the bus to travel quicker.

I agree, but we would need a lot more buses (and depots + drivers) to do that. Pre-covid at peak times buses were already jam packed, reducing fares without increasing buses wouldn't help other to leave a lot of people standing at bus stops as buses drive by full.

What might make sense short term, is to reduce the off-peak fare to €1 or whatever, get more people using buses off-peak and maybe even take some pressure off peak times.

loyatemu · 03-05-2021 11:46am

bk wrote: »

What might make sense short term, is to reduce the off-peak fare to €1 or whatever, get more people using buses off-peak and maybe even take some pressure off peak times.

make PT free on Sundays, trial it over the summer.

bk · 03-05-2021 11:49am

LXFlyer wrote: »

Some of us are very interested in the detail of this sort of thing for the very simple reason that plenty of great ideas have come along in the past only to be diluted by poor attention to the details.

Getting the high level stuff right is important, but getting the micro stuff right too is also important, as failing to do so can turn a good idea into a shambles.

The original Leap card project is itself a perfect example of this. The card itself and the technology around it is mostly fine, but overall the project has greatly under delivered on it's potential, in particular to deliver meaningful reduction in dwell and journey times.

And it failed to do so because they failed to change the broken stage fare ticket system and failed to consider and test how the leap cards would actually be used on the buses and how slow the driver interaction is.

I really hope the same mistakes aren't made again.

bk · 03-05-2021 11:54am

loyatemu wrote: »

make PT free on Sundays, trial it over the summer.

The last time they tried free travel days is was a bit of disaster. Gangs of trouble making teenagers travelled the length of the network. Regular, fare paying commuters hated it and it was never tried again.

I think trying a reduced fare would be better then free fares. It helps reduce such trouble making.

The kids travel free scheme in the summer that has happened the past few years is also nice. As it requires an adult present.

Peregrine · 03-05-2021 12:10pm

MJohnston wrote: »

Seems to me it’d be fairly easy to program in the distance from stop X to stop Y - you could give each stop a latitude-longitude value, which would only add around 2 bytes per stop. That’s 2 kilobytes per 1000 stops, which is a minuscule amount of memory, even if the whole machine only has even 1MB thats 0.2% of available memory per 1000 stops (how many does Dublin have?)

Then the distance between two stops is just simplified to the distance between their geopoints. That’d favour the customer if the as-the-crow-flies distance is less than the actual travelled distance, but that would be minimal between most stops. And it could never be the other way around (crow-flies distance being the shortest possible connection between two points).

I’d be happy with that system. It could be easily marked on network maps and apps, because each stop would have a circular radius to display, rather than some unnecessarily complex distance-by-road map.

You have to remember that this is a stop gap for 2 years because the NTA completely dropped the ball on buying new ticket machines. The new system is designed to work with the existing old testament Wayfarers without too much work until the new machines arrive in 2023. They'll be working on rolling out the new machines in just over a year after they implement this so they'll implement whichever system they can get away with doing the least work on.

LXFlyer · 03-05-2021 12:30pm

bk wrote: »

The original Leap card project is itself a perfect example of this. The card itself and the technology around it is mostly fine, but overall the project has greatly under delivered on it's potential, in particular to deliver meaningful reduction in dwell and journey times.

And it failed to do so because they failed to change the broken stage fare ticket system and failed to consider and test how the leap cards would actually be used on the buses and how slow the driver interaction is.

I really hope the same mistakes aren't made again.

How the companies were funded was the real reason for that, and funding from DoT, and the wish by the NTA not to cause a shock to their finances or indeed to customers by making a rapid change to fares.

To be fair, I would argue that the staged fare system was not broken as such, as it is an equitable one, but it doesn't lend itself at all to shorter dwell times when there are more than two fares in operation. It could continue to be a basis for a short and a long fare as you suggest with different fares on the left and right validators.

LXFlyer · 03-05-2021 12:31pm

As an example of the impact of getting the details right.....

One aspect of BusConnects that is coming for Dublin Bus routes are the fixed timetables that have a fixed schedule for every stop all along the route. Until now DB have regularly changed the stop-by-stop times in the background to reflect the prevaling traffic conditions. That's going to change to either two or three fixed timetables during the course of the year I believe (summer, autumn, and possibly winter/spring).

These are already in place on GoAhead routes, and I understand why, but I do rather worry that mediocrity is going to flow as a result/

The premise is that the companies get penalised if they are more than a minute early at stops, or are more than six minutes late.

That means that they need to get the stop-by-stop running times right. But the penalties may well encourage the companies to be conservative in their timings.

Yesterday morning I took two trips on a GoAhead route. For the entire trip in both cases, the bus barely got out of second gear, and on both trips it waited at stops due to being early until it was back on time. On the second trip it waited to get back on time twice, and one of the waits was for almost four minutes. That's not been a particularly unusual experience for me on GAI routes.

In this case the timings are too generous, but I do have to wonder if the company is doing it deliberately to avoid the risk of penalties.

Either way I cannot imagine too many people being tempted out of their cars if the buses are regularly going to continue to crawl along the route and potentially wait at various locations en route until they are on time again.

tobsey · 03-05-2021 12:58pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

As an example of the impact of getting the details right.....

One aspect of BusConnects that is coming for Dublin Bus routes are the fixed timetables that have a fixed schedule for every stop all along the route. Until now DB have regularly changed the stop-by-stop times in the background to reflect the prevaling traffic conditions. That's going to change to either two or three fixed timetables during the course of the year I believe (summer, autumn, and possibly winter/spring).

These are already in place on GoAhead routes, and I understand why, but I do rather worry that mediocrity is going to flow as a result/

The premise is that the companies get penalised if they are more than a minute early at stops, or are more than six minutes late.

That means that they need to get the stop-by-stop running times right. But the penalties may well encourage the companies to be conservative in their timings.

Yesterday morning I took two trips on a GoAhead route. For the entire trip in both cases, the bus barely got out of second gear, and on both trips it waited at stops due to being early until it was back on time. On the second trip it waited to get back on time twice, and one of the waits was for almost four minutes. That's not been a particularly unusual experience for me on GAI routes.

In this case the timings are too generous, but I do have to wonder if the company is doing it deliberately to avoid the risk of penalties.

Either way I cannot imagine too many people being tempted out of their cars if the buses are regularly going to continue to crawl along the route and potentially wait at various locations en route until they are on time again.

I think people would prefer consistency over speed. Knowing a journey will take 40 minutes is better than knowing it’ll take somewhere between 25 and 50 minutes. That could include walk and wait times too and it’s not reasonable that you’d see that variation today.

donvito99 · 03-05-2021 1:06pm

tobsey wrote: »

I think people would prefer consistency over speed. Knowing a journey will take 40 minutes is better than knowing it’ll take somewhere between 25 and 50 minutes. That could include walk and wait times too and it’s not reasonable that you’d see that variation today.

I would certainly prefer the bus to be fast (i.e. faster than a car at rush hour and reasonably quick off peak) and consistent. Which means that BC needs to be implemented as much as possible in full.

punisher5112 · 03-05-2021 1:07pm

The smart card reader at the door should be removed, anyone wants to travel should have to tap where they put the cash in now.

The amount that still just walk right past the driver is not on.

No checkers at all in over a year.

LXFlyer · 03-05-2021 1:08pm

tobsey wrote: »

I think people would prefer consistency over speed. Knowing a journey will take 40 minutes is better than knowing it’ll take somewhere between 25 and 50 minutes. That could include walk and wait times too and it’s not reasonable that you’d see that variation today.

My specific example was first thing on a Sunday morning. There's never any variation at that time and yet both buses literally crawled for the entire journey and had extended waits at certain stops.

I agree that consistency is important but not at the price of where buses end up regularly waiting which is happening on GAI routes particularly at weekends.

Indeed in their first summer GAI never changed the running times at all, which led to farcically slow driving as the timetables were designed for autumn/winter traffic.

The running times clearly need to be achievable, and not impossible, but also should not be overly generous. I fear that the companies will take the latter approach to avoid penalties.

Getting the running times right is a massive challenge, and certainly is one reason for doing the implementation in phases as schedules may need to be tweaked after they initially start.

You are not going to entice people out of their cars and onto buses if they are going to be regularly waiting at stops along the routes (such as the four minute wait that I had yesterday, and similarly on other trips).

LXFlyer · 03-05-2021 1:13pm

We also need the NTA to start thinking about the network as one network, rather than GAI and Dublin Bus.

The two companies had different operating patterns over the Christmas period and GAI returned to a full Monday-Friday service on 11 April, while Dublin Bus do so tomorrow.

The result of this was that the 33 and 33A were operating out of sync on Monday-Friday during those periods (they are scheduled to offer an integrated service between Skerries and Swords normally).

I've seen new bus stops with city bus routes separated by operator, thus the route numbers shown separately - why not brand them as one and list in numerical order.

It's details like this that aren't thought through, that can have negative consequences, or just look daft.

LXFlyer · 03-05-2021 1:44pm

To add to my previous post:

Simple English goes a long way. GoAhead regularly refer to their Dublin City services as "ODMA". No one outside of the NTA, the operators and those of us with a specific interest in the area would have a clue what that means (it's "Outer Dublin Metropolitan Area" FYI).

Why not use a simple term like "Dublin City Bus Services" or a similar term for all of the city bus services rather than a vague acronym that Joe Public will not understand?

bk · 03-05-2021 2:57pm

LXFlyer wrote: »

How the companies were funded was the real reason for that, and funding from DoT, and the wish by the NTA not to cause a shock to their finances or indeed to customers by making a rapid change to fares.

To be fair, I would argue that the staged fare system was not broken as such, as it is an equitable one, but it doesn't lend itself at all to shorter dwell times when there are more than two fares in operation. It could continue to be a basis for a short and a long fare as you suggest with different fares on the left and right validators.

Yes, I should have said the approach to ticketing and the operating model of Dublin Bus, rather then specifically the "stage fare system".

Though I will say that no one but bus drivers actually understand the stage fare system and I've found some bus drivers to not even really know it. So from the ease of use perspective it is broken.

The mistake really stems from the decision by Dublin Bus in the 80's when they got rid of conductors and decided to get rid of dual door buses and instead go for single door buses, with drivers selling tickets and making sure people pay.

This entire operating model has proven to be a disaster and even a major step back from when we had conductors.

Instead at the time they should have gone with the mainland European model. Off bus ticketing, enter via any door, validate ticket onboard, inspectors.

Basically like how the Luas works. You didn't even need technology for this, just a print date/time on a paper ticket like happened in the past.

You could have even kept the same fare system, it would have had no impact on revenue (other then needing to pay for inspectors).

The mistake, which happens with a lot of government IT projects around the world, is layering technology on top of an already broken manual process and think that will fix it. It rarely does, you normally also need to fix the underlying issues first or at least at the same time.

This really isn't rocket science, this is very much a solved problem.

Btw the fairest system I've ever used is in Amsterdam, you pay per km travelled. Tag on at the start of the journey, tag off at the end and the ticket machine works out the distance travelled via GPS and thus how much you pay.

You can also transfer between bus/tram/metro and it works out the distance, with a slightly higher per km fare for Metro versus bus.

Nice, easy system that is very fair and works well.

Sigh, it has taken us so long to fix the mistakes made in the 80's.

Dublin - BusConnects

Comments