Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Swiftway - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

2456721

Comments

  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 24,122 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    MYOB wrote: »
    EVs as they currently stand are impractical for proper use - their existance is for people who don't need a car and could easily cope with public transport.

    Sorry I know OT, but I wouldn't say that, there is a guy here in Ireland who has a blog about his experience with his Nissan Leaf EV.

    He commutes 200km to work every day with his electric car:

    http://selfficiency.wordpress.com/automotive/nissan-leaf-diary/

    I agree however that they shouldn't be given access to bus lanes.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,229 ✭✭✭LeinsterDub


    The capital cost of a BRT system on a per kilometre basis is €9,520,000.
    Clongriffin to Tallaght €264 m and €140 for fleet renewals up to 2040

    This seems expensive if we are only getting a bus lane done correctly


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,315 ✭✭✭ballooba


    bmaxi wrote: »
    So do their owners. Not exclusively BMWs, just that particular sector of the population with the "I'm too important to be governed by the plebs' rules" attitude.
    Why not use it? There is (currently) no disincentive. Those guys can probably afford the BMW because they take calculated risks and aren't afraid of upsetting people.:eek:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,859 ✭✭✭bmaxi


    ballooba wrote: »
    Why not use it? There is (currently) no disincentive. Those guys can probably afford the BMW because they take calculated risks and aren't afraid of upsetting people.:eek:

    Exactly my point. As evidenced in recent times, those calculated risks are probably taken with yours and my money, no disincentive to that either when you live in a banana republic.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,552 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    The devil will be in the detail. Is it essentially going to be the existing QBC route with new multidoor buses and ticket machines at stops and some traffic light priority? or will the BRT line run in the centre of the road (so as to avoid sharing space with cars making left turning movements), be segregated from other road users by a barrier?

    will other buses and taxis be allowed?

    As has already been mentioned, UCD is remarkably central for a terminus, it should go out to Foxrock.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 75,487 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    NTA are performing market research on this now, got a survey on it today (which got rejected because I misread a question and put in conflicting details) looking for transport use details and then providing a 'which would you prefer?' option that was trying to find which of price, frequency and journey length were important to people. Although it was comparing your last public transport use to a proposed BRT system rather than your last journey which I would have imagined would have made more sense.


  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,825 Mod ✭✭✭✭dfx-


    bk wrote: »
    They also seems to be going out of their way to fix many of the issues that plague DB:

    - Each BRT bus will have a minimum of three double doors, preferably five!
    - All doors will be used at all stops to reduce dwell times.
    - Luas style off bus ticketing, again to reduce dwell times.
    - Articulated single decker to be used.
    - High quality bus stops to enable wheelchair accessible wheelchair use.
    - Audio and visual stop announcements.

    I see one of those as being a problem plaguing DB, the off bus ticketing and 'plaguing it' would be pushing it.

    With the implementation of mid doors on GTs and them being used along side stop announcements, I fail to see the fuss about them on this forum, especially the doors when they serve to reduce seating capacity downstairs unnecessarily.

    What will be the cost to the user?


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 24,122 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    dfx- wrote: »
    I see one of those as being a problem plaguing DB, the off bus ticketing and 'plaguing it' would be pushing it.

    DB has two major problems within (at least partly) their control * :

    - Most of their buses have only one door that increases dwell time and thus journey times.
    - Their fare and ticketing system is far too complicated.
    Too many people continue to pay by cash
    Even Leap usage requires slow driver interaction.

    This all means increased dwell times and journey times.

    Also single decker buses tend to be quicker to load and unload, compared to double deckers. Again effecting the journey and dwell times.

    * I agree the biggest issue to journey times is traffic and the introduction of more bus gates, bus lanes and congesting charging would go a long way to help this, but it is largely outside DB control.
    dfx- wrote: »
    With the implementation of mid doors on GTs and them being used along side stop announcements, I fail to see the fuss about them on this forum, especially the doors when they serve to reduce seating capacity downstairs unnecessarily.

    There are still a number of problems even with the GTs:
    - They make up less then 10% of the fleet.
    - The two doors certainly aren't always or even mostly used IME.
    - Two doors is still relatively few on such a large capacity vehicle. German double deckers and the new London bus all have three doors.
    - Even when they are used, people still aren't use to them, I've seen drivers scream bloody murder at people and refuse to open the front doors until people use the rare doors. Problem is people are using headphones and aren't hearing it and they don't see these buses often enough to know to use the rear door.
    - The rear door is badly placed on the GT in my opinion. It should be directly across from the stairway so people coming down the stairs go straight out the door rather then going forward as they are use to.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 29,810 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    BRT eh? Didn't they try this in the mid-90's with the CitySwift branding?

    That had specially branded buses, QBCs etc as well but as I recall it wasn't long before the idea was quietly dropped.

    It's not that it's a bad idea (it's actually a very good one), but considering many of the same issues still remain (driver's not using additional doors where fitted etc), they have an uphill battle to sell it internally never mind to the public.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 29,810 ✭✭✭✭_Kaiser_


    bk wrote: »
    There are still a number of problems even with the GTs:
    - They make up less then 10% of the fleet.
    - The two doors certainly aren't always or even mostly used IME.
    - Two doors is still relatively few on such a large capacity vehicle. German double deckers and the new London bus all have three doors.
    - Even when they are used, people still aren't use to them, I've seen drivers scream bloody murder at people and refuse to open the front doors until people use the rare doors. Problem is people are using headphones and aren't hearing it and they don't see these buses often enough to know to use the rear door.
    - The rear door is badly placed on the GT in my opinion. It should be directly across from the stairway so people coming down the stairs go straight out the door rather then going forward as they are use to.

    This sums up my point above perfectly :) - especially the last one. The old RH/RA/RV Olympians had the rear doors directly across from the stairs and they WERE used by alighting passengers coming downstairs whenever they were opened by the driver. The few AV's we got with rear doors had the same issue.. placed behind the stairwell.

    BUT.. those Olympians and the GT's (they pass my window here every 15 mins or so) are too small for more than 2 doors IMO. You'd need something bigger like the VT's to justify it - but those aren't practical on all routes either.


  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 24,122 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »
    It's not that it's a bad idea (it's actually a very good one), but considering many of the same issues still remain (driver's not using additional doors where fitted etc), they have an uphill battle to sell it internally never mind to the public.

    But in this case it won't be operated by Dublin Bus. The plan seems to have the RPA operate it in the same fashion as the LUAS, via contractors.

    So there shouldn't be any of the DB issues of using multiple doors, etc.

    Plus this seems to be designed much better from the ground up, while the DB effort was just some branding, with little real infrastructure towards it.


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 24,122 Mod ✭✭✭✭bk


    Kaiser2000 wrote: »
    BUT.. that bus and the GT's (they pass my window here every 15 mins or so) are too small for more than 2 doors IMO. You'd need something bigger like the VT's to justify it - but those aren't practical on all routes either.

    The new London Bus, is 11.23 meters and has three doors and two stairs.

    The GT are 10.7 meters, so only a half meter shorter, not really that big of a difference.

    The new London Bus seems to be very well thought out, with real thought given to how passengers move through the bus. The front stairs is placed half way between the front and middle doors and naturally leads people to go up the stairs when boarding. The rear stairs leads directly out the rear door and thus encourages people to use that door when leaving.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,922 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    bk wrote: »
    Articulated single decker to be used.
    they would be better off using articulated double deckers if they exist, unless the single deckers are going to be extremely long in which case good luck to anyone trying to drive them round the roads around the areas proposed, i agree them running all night would be good but that will probably only happen with the airport BRT.
    bk wrote: »
    The other interesting aspect of this is its effect on DB, if they aren't operating it. We have heard rumours that come 2014 DB might lose 10% of it's routes to private operators. But looking at these new BRT routes, they could easily add up to DB losing 10% or more of it's busiest routes! For instance the airport BRT looks like it would eliminate the need for most of the north side 16 and 41's and would probably also highly impact the 747 (and maybe Aircoach).
    would be worrying IMO if thats the case, dublin bus needs its busiest routes to bring in the cash, unless the government will give them more subsidy for what they lose? the loss making routes can't run on thin air. DB could probably get the 16 and 41 to serve other parts around the route not served, or maybe some of those routes will be merged where possible? TBH i don't see this BRT happening anyway

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 15,825 Mod ✭✭✭✭dfx-


    bk wrote: »
    There are still a number of problems even with the GTs:
    - They make up less then 10% of the fleet.
    - The two doors certainly aren't always or even mostly used IME.
    - Two doors is still relatively few on such a large capacity vehicle. German double deckers and the new London bus all have three doors.
    - Even when they are used, people still aren't use to them, I've seen drivers scream bloody murder at people and refuse to open the front doors until people use the rare doors. Problem is people are using headphones and aren't hearing it and they don't see these buses often enough to know to use the rear door.
    - The rear door is badly placed on the GT in my opinion. It should be directly across from the stairway so people coming down the stairs go straight out the door rather then going forward as they are use to.

    Honestly, doors are not a problem. My local route has allocated GT pullouts in the morning - usually GT112 and GT113, and the double doors are used and the bus leaves people behind closer to the city as it's full and I see no change in dwell time or journey time or exit time. I got another route in this afternoon, GT121, and it made no difference to journey time either compared to the standard EV on the route. And neither would be classed as heavy use routes like the N11, airport routes or blanchardstown.

    Doors are a red herring in my opinion.

    I can see some advantages in less bus stops - but I can see disadvantages there and I can see some advantages in automated traffic priority.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 19,633 ✭✭✭✭LXFlyer


    Frankly before multi-door operation becomes the norm, the infrastructure has to be addressed.

    For far too long our local authorities have viewed the bus stop markings (known as the bus stop cage) as merely a means of identifying a stopping point, when in fact they are far more than that.

    Looking at this lately, it is really becoming apparent to me that a full audit of all bus stops is needed to ensure that every single stop has a bus stop cage that allows buses to:
    • Approach;
    • Straighten up;
    • Stop; and
    • Exit
    This sort of thing is not rocket science, but looking at many of the stops the space allowed is totally insufficient.

    There needs to be uniform design standards applied so that the public transport system can actually operate as it is supposed to. That is something sadly lacking.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,002 ✭✭✭✭AlekSmart


    lxflyer wrote: »
    Frankly before multi-door operation becomes the norm, the infrastructure has to be addressed.

    For far too long our local authorities have viewed the bus stop markings (known as the bus stop cage) as merely a means of identifying a stopping point, when in fact they are far more than that.

    Looking at this lately, it is really becoming apparent to me that a full audit of all bus stops is needed to ensure that every single stop has a bus stop cage that allows buses to:
    • Approach;
    • Straighten up;
    • Stop; and
    • Exit
    This sort of thing is not rocket science, but looking at many of the stops the space allowed is totally insufficient.

    There needs to be uniform design standards applied so that the public transport system can actually operate as it is supposed to. That is something sadly lacking.

    Never was a truer word posted !

    I would start by a purge of DCC's Professional Branch,who have consistently refused to recognize the needs of a large passenger carrying vehicle to manouvere.

    Instead,DCC's :o "Professionals" :o have bent over backwards to superimpose Car,Van and Bicycle space directly on top of Bus Stop infrastructure.....For a Real-Time example just take a seat beside Stop number 847 at Leeson Street Bridge,a VERY busy Stop at Peaks,which has several of BAC's heavy hitting routes serving it...real Hi-Freeq stuff...YET,DCC's only input here has been to preside over the removal of the much used Bus Shelter,then erect Bike Locking Bars which have facilitated a Bicycle Graveyard of sorts.

    The net effect of this Twittery,is to make it largely impossible to SAFELY handle more than a single Bus at a time,and also makes it impossible to SAFELY utilise the Centre Doors as the departing passenger will most likely be impaled upon a protruding lump of Bicycle.

    It would appear that a pre-requisite for inclusion into the ranks of a DCC Professional is TOTAL detachment from reality,and an equally total belief that YOU are right whilst everybody else is Irrelevant !!! :(


    Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one.

    Charles Mackay (1812-1889)



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 29,922 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    AlekSmart wrote: »
    It would appear that a pre-requisite for inclusion into the ranks of a DCC Professional is TOTAL detachment from reality,and an equally total belief that YOU are right whilst everybody else is Irrelevant and wrong !!!
    fixed, completely agree, its their way or no way and other opinions or in fact nobody else matters apart from them and what they want or think

    I'm very highly educated. I know words, i have the best words, nobody has better words then me.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    When I think of BRT, as in France etc, this is the kind of layout I think of...

    280636.png

    280637.png


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 582 ✭✭✭annfield1978


    National Transport Authority have issued a tender to take the BRT Scheme from Swords to the City, to include Planning, Detailed Design, Tender, Construction etc over the next 5 yrs

    Blanchardstown to UCD Scheme to follow at some stage


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,552 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    National Transport Authority have issued a tender to take the BRT Scheme from Swords to the City, to include Planning, Detailed Design, Tender, Construction etc over the next 5 yrs

    Blanchardstown to UCD Scheme to follow at some stage

    have you a link to this info? doesn't seem to be on etenders


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 932 ✭✭✭paddyland


    If the people who design this 'BRT' are going to be the same people who 'designed' the QBCs, I would say, save the money, and don't bother.

    Similarly, if good BRT designs are going to be allowed to be scuttled by some council officials somewhere, the way some QBCs were, again, I would say don't bother.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 582 ✭✭✭annfield1978


    Issued via an NTA Framework


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,552 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    i.e. it has not yet gone out to tender.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Banjoxed


    Interesting thread about the Cambridge - St Ives busway here: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=95061

    Unsurprisingly the off road sections are reliable while the town sections are not. Any BRT in Dublin will need to be properly designed far in excess of the so-called "QBC" spec to have any usefulness at all.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 611 ✭✭✭MGWR


    monument wrote: »
    When I think of BRT, as in France etc, this is the kind of layout I think of...
    280636.png

    280637.png
    Enormous footprint for a comparatively low volume. The greens won't be happy at Drumcondra Road having the big increase in emissions.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,552 ✭✭✭✭cgcsb


    MGWR wrote: »
    Enormous footprint for a comparatively low volume. The greens won't be happy at Drumcondra Road having the big increase in emissions.

    How exactly will there be increased emissions? compared to the existing road?


  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,144 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    MGWR wrote: »
    Enormous footprint for a comparatively low volume. The greens won't be happy at Drumcondra Road having the big increase in emissions.

    What exactly are you talking about?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,391 ✭✭✭Yggr of Asgard


    While I like monument's example, I think this will lead to a massive increase in road death and accidents, imagine people in Ireland simply walking over the car drive lane to reach the bus shelter. I'm sure that the design will include pedestrian traffic lights at the stops, but in reality who is going to use them, everybody is just going to run across.

    Plus even if we ever get a reliable bus system, unless the transit shelter is configured to cope with our "no bus for a while than 3 in row" for the passenger queues it is going to be dangerous to stand there.

    I would love a BRT with dedicated physically separated bus lanes and quality stops but the bus stop might need to move to the pedestrian pathway.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,213 ✭✭✭✭ArmaniJeanss


    While I like monument's example, I think this will lead to a massive increase in road death and accidents, imagine people in Ireland simply walking over the car drive lane to reach the bus shelter. I'm sure that the design will include pedestrian traffic lights at the stops, but in reality who is going to use them, everybody is just going to run across.

    That's the way our tram lines are designed, trams on the inner, cars on the outer (prime example would be on the Naas road section of the Red Line) and it hasn't caused pedestrian mayhem.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,779 ✭✭✭Carawaystick


    That's the way our tram lines are designed, trams on the inner, cars on the outer (prime example would be on the Naas road section of the Red Line) and it hasn't caused pedestrian mayhem.
    Because there are hardly any tram stops on the Naas rd
    And it it a completely different road type to drumcondra ( pubs, shops, students)


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement
Advertisement