Dublin Bus - The No. 4 Bendy Bus

Well given that none of the bus stop bays are extended to fit the articulated buses, safety is generally the reason.

There was no planning for these buses - the DTO decided that Dublin Bus should buy them but without ever organising a proper infrastructure in which to operate them.

the middle doors fit into most stops though.

OP its the same reason all new buses only have one door. Short sighted stupidity. :pac:
I think the real reason is to stop fare evasion.

OP its the same reason all new buses only have one door. Short sighted stupidity.
I think the real reason is to stop fare evasion.

Indeed Cookie-Monster,but "short-sighted stupidity" is only part of the reasoning and fare evasion does`nt enter the equation at all as "Officially" it hardly exists...less than 3% according to the last BAC figures I came across...( :rolleyes: )

In spite of what many might think Dublin Bus did put quite some degree of consideration into speccing it`s first Low Floor Double Deck vehicles back in the 1990`s.

At that time the Irish Low Floor Double Deck market was (and remains) dominated by UK thinking.

Experience in the UK,particularly in London demonstrated that there was serious negative customer reaction to the lack of seating in the lower-saloon of the LFDD vehicles.

Some of the London LFDD`s had as few as 15 seats available for the able-bodied customer which resulted in many problems with Dpuble-Deck vehicles operating at well below capacity as folks simply clustered around the Wheelchair Space and bottom of the stairwell.

Not alone did this result in those who DID wish to travel upstairs being unable to get up there but it also prevented those upstairs from getting down and off the bus.

The lack of a definite policy on Wheelchair/Baby Carriage use also causes serious problems on the London Bus network,a situation entirely of their own making as they never devised or implimented a clear policy on the use of this space.
Interestingly this lack of policy has serious Health & Safety implications given the TfL insistence on the Disablity Ramp being located at the Centre-Door which causes all-sorts of dangerous situations with Wheelchair users being unable to get through the doorway due to abandoned Baby Carriages or shopping trollies etc.

By far the greatest level of negative feedback to both Bodywork designers and Bus Operators related to "ordinary" passengers being unable to get a seat downstairs.

Even more pertinent was the fact that this complaint carried through across the Commute,with short-hop passengers being just as vocal about their desire for a seat as the full-route passenger.

Armed with this knowledge,Bus Atha Cliath decided to go for a specification which would maximize the seating capacity of its fleet whilst meeting it`s legal requirements vis Disabled Access.

I would contend that this has been a positive policy BUT it has been overshadowed by a serious lack of progress on modernising and improving the entire Fare collection regieme.

Currently Dublin Bus has approx a 50/50 Cash/Prepaid split,which is abysmal if full efficient use is to be gained from it`s vehicular resources.

With the introduction of "Smart" technology there was an immediate possibility of fitting multiple Card Readers,say one at front of bus,one at mid-point lower and one at top of upper saloon stairwell.

This policy,of course has to be reinforces with a much increased level of ticket-checking to ensure compliance,and it is this which the company appear reluctant to embrace.

That said,the vast majority of Bus Passengers are fully compliant and totally honest in their transactions.

The problem,however lies in the Company being seen to support those Customers who DO observe the rules as against being seen to willingly facilitate and even encourage those who desire only to take and abuse the service and it`s equipment.

This managerial attitude defecit is perhaps best illustrated by the ongoing and worsening situation on the Luas system.

Here,we are seeing a Public Relations nightmare being allowed to develop in slow-motion before our eyes on a virtually new Public Transport system.

Veolia/RPA are in danger of throwing away the hard won Public Perception of Luas as a "Clean,Safe and Rapid" commuting tool and instead allowing the concept of a dangerous and unpredictable service to replace it.

Dublin Bus could be said to have lost that particular battle long-ago and so therefore may have lost the focus on what it`s "compliant" customers require as it installs more and more automated security features to deal with anti-social behaviour AFTER it occurs rather than being pro-active about preventing it BEFORE the kettle boils over.

Anyway,I`m rambling a bit..but the essence of the Multi Door arguement boils down to passengers preferring seat availability to standing or strap-hanging.

(Its perhaps also important to underline that there are NO Trade Union issues with the use of multi-door vehicles,all of that was long ago sorted back in the Leyland Atlantean days...almost Black & White ! )

Good post AlekSmart.

I supposed if it weren't for the fare evasion factor then, they could have double-doored the VTs?

I remember being shocked the first time I used a smartcard that the reader on the driver's machine is for checking only, they could easily have had that in use. Though I suspect the current system is based upon the driver getting one message (by the beep or on his screen) from one ticket machine at a time to cut down on fare evasion.

Deleted User wrote: »

Off topic I know but relating to this particular bus.

When they were relatively new, my boss was almost knocked off her bike as the back end of the bus bent. She rang Dublin Bus to complain and was told "ah sure they're only learning how to drive them, they're not used to them yet" :eek:

under what circumstances, I'd reckon 99% of the time that'd be the cyclist fault, if they overtake you you let them do it as quick as possible, you don't ever undertake them; thats just silly.

Deleted User wrote: »

I agree 99% of the time, but the way she explained it to me definitely sounded like it was the bus's fault. She was overtaking him as he was stopping at a bus stop and the tail end bent outwards or something like that.

That would make it the fault of the cyclist who overtook the bus without giving it enough room.

The amount of cyclists and motorists who try to squeeze past large vehicles turning is astounding. All large buses and trucks have a tail swing, some will sweep out significantly, ignorance of this fact does not mean other road users are absolved of responsibility for their bad driving/cycling.

Deleted User wrote: »

Still though, regardless of whos fault it was, that response wouldn't instil confidence :pac:

No it wouldn't. It gives me no confidence at all in some of the office-bound people that have no PSV training or experience who answer random phonecalls from the public. Apparently some of them will throw out off the cuff comments about situations they have no direct knowledge of suggesting that drivers who ARE properly trained have been in the wrong.

Oh and of course, the doors would open and close every time a person validated their card. It would have to be swift enough to prevent tail-gating (pardon the pun).:D