Swiftway - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

monument · 10-02-2014 12:37AM

AlekSmart wrote: »

I admire,and commend Monuments confidence in the NTA to finally impliment the above list of prerequisites for an efficient and operable public bus service operation.

However,bearing in mind the same NTA's total inability to oversee these principles in our pre-existing bus network,I have only the slimmest belief that they will see it through this time around.

Whilst it is easy to denigrate the CitySwift project,it has to be borne in mind that Bob Montgomery's original concept depended upon the commitment of the supposedly supportive local and national authorities to ensure success.....did'nt happen and I'm betting it won't be radically different here.

Lots of "sturm und drang" in the initial stages,followed by the usual diminution of interest as the thing progresses,which is when the compromises and concessions to pressure groups start to whittle away at the essential benefits of the original schemes....It's all been done before,so many times.....

I was mainly just giving what has been outlined.

For the record: I'm a little less than fully confidant that it will be done right. For example: centre-of-road running is the best practice but we've yet to get any indications never mind commitment that such will be looked at.

I do have to add that while it would have been preferable to have had an fairly powerful NTA from day one, that's not the set up they were given and they are still gaining control bit by bit. Time will tell if things are different this time.

Aard · 10-02-2014 02:01AM

Like others, I'm sure, I am not defending the proposed BRT, but merely saying let's leave the mud-slinging until we actually see the plans. BRT can and does work, and I am hopeful that the Dublin version will be successful.

AlekSmart · 10-02-2014 01:25PM

Aard wrote: »

Like others, I'm sure, I am not defending the proposed BRT, but merely saying let's leave the mud-slinging until we actually see the plans. BRT can and does work, and I am hopeful that the Dublin version will be successful.

It's not mudslinging,from my perspective Aard.

We have traditionally been very slow to demand stuff from our Professionals,preferring instead to accept what they come up with,on the basis that they have letters after their names and so MUST know more than us.

However in the post Paddy Neary era,the gloss has been well and truly rubbed off,which is why outfits such as the NTA,RSA and the likes are now being treated with a little less deference....no bad thing IMO.

The inference from the NTA on this particular project appears to be of a fully resourced European style system...some,however (me included),are reluctant to accept this line without somewhat more hard evidence that these agencies actually understand HOW these projects manage to work effectively elsewhere in Europe (Now known as "The Mainland"

)

Godge · 10-02-2014 01:39PM

monument wrote: »

Here's a possible solution for the Old Cabra Road... access controlled BRT like this is used for sections of BRT routes I've seen in the Netherlands...

Google Maps link and image for those who are not too bothered:

Key cross sections also attached.

No, reworked space.

That can be done -- I'm not saying it will be done.

Yes, it can theoretically be done according to your proposal. However, it means putting extra presssure on car traffic through Phibsboro, Blackhorse Avenue (already ramped up) or the Phoenix Park.

Now you can argue that there should be less car journeys on those routes because of the BRT but not everyone wants to go to UCD from Blanchardstown.

The essential problem with access to the city centre from Dublin 15 is the Phoenix Park which limits the number of routes.

The solution is the Dart Underground and electrification of the Maynooth line which will bring a high capacity solution.

The other issue being overlooked with the Cabra Road idea is that it will be running parallel to the Broombridge Luas extension. Surely it would be better tying in with this project?

cgcsb · 10-02-2014 02:18PM

All of the artist impressions of swiftway thus far are showing the bus lanes on the side of the road, i.e. exactly the same conflicts with left turning vehicles that we already have with QBC's

TheBandicoot · 10-02-2014 02:42PM

Godge wrote: »

The solution is the Dart Underground and electrification of the Maynooth line which will bring a high capacity solution.

I think that is only one of the parts needed(though it is crucial). To complement it it needs a high quality feeder system to connect the sprawl of D15 to the high capacity railway line. This can be a network of bus routes or maybe even a light rail solution, or also making use of Metro West to move people around D15 and towards the rail route. It's all very well having a high capacity DART route, but when people are facing a 40 minute walk from the likes of Huntstown, Littlepace and even more from Mulhuddart and Corduff it's not going to see the patronage.

monument · 10-02-2014 03:29PM

Everybody is not going to UCD or Blanch bus the D15 BRT route offers much more locations and connections to even more again.

Edit: it's worth stressing that the revised routing stretches beyond the Blanch centre and covers more of D15 than the railway currently does. See my post with the newer maps.

The city centre is starting to become less and less accessible by the current volume of cars and the population is growing.

Finishing some of the QBCs, Luas Cross City and the Liffey Route for walking and cycling will only be the tip of the iceberg.

Leo is putting Dart Underground back on the agenda and that's good, but other things look like they will or will for sure happen first.

LXFlyer · 10-02-2014 04:14PM

As I've said before - until an EIS appears, outlining exactly what is proposed, in terms of priority, traffic re-routing, road space etc., it's impossible to make any form of informed judgement on this.

Dyr · 10-02-2014 04:33PM

lxflyer wrote: »

The only reason they had a problem there was again the lack of proper infrastructure - look at South Great Georges Street or in Dundrum village - stop lines are deliberately painted further back to allow buses make tight turns

The AWs could still get around the corners - to suggest otherwise is being somewhat disingenuous.

And yes I did travel on them quite a bit.

i travelled on one every day while they were in service and experienced everything sam russell did and more, including leaking fluids in passenger carriage. The junction at broadstone recieved many a whack across its pedestrian railings from the bendy four turning from western way

Heres some video I shot of the standard of transport that they provided. Presumably you never experienced one of these jalopies shaking themselves to pieces

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asx6BJM6vaM

Sam Russell · 11-02-2014 08:16PM

Bambi wrote: »

i travelled on one every day while they were in service and experienced everything sam russell did and more, including leaking fluids in passenger carriage. The junction at broadstone recieved many a whack across its pedestrian railings from the bendy four turning from western way

Heres some video I shot of the standard of transport that they provided. Presumably you never experienced one of these jalopies shaking themselves to pieces

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asx6BJM6vaM

Notice how long they wait at stops while the passengers at the back fight their way up to the driver to get out, and how the rear door remains shut. No passegers were shown standing. If they were they would have been thrown about.

No more bendy buses. We had enough with 20 of them. We do not need to go through that again.

No more bendy buses.

cdebru · 11-02-2014 10:20PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Notice how long they wait at stops while the passengers at the back fight their way up to the driver to get out, and how the rear door remains shut. No passegers were shown standing. If they were they would have been thrown about.

No more bendy buses. We had enough with 20 of them. We do not need to go through that again.

No more bendy buses.

Bendy buses can work if you put in the infrastructure to support them that was never done here they just tried to shoehorn them into the infrastructure for the existing buses.
If and it is a big if the proper infrastructure was installed then then the issues with loading unloading tight turns and rattling from poor road surface would not be a problem.

Dyr · 11-02-2014 10:46PM

cdebru wrote: »

Bendy buses can work if you put in the infrastructure to support them that was never done here they just tried to shoehorn them into the infrastructure for the existing buses.
If and it is a big if the proper infrastructure was installed then then the issues with loading unloading tight turns and rattling from poor road surface would not be a problem.

So bendy buses can work do long as we overhaul almost everything on our capitals roads and redesign a few streets

They just arent worth it.

cdebru · 11-02-2014 10:49PM

Bambi wrote: »

So bendy buses can work do long as we overhaul almost everything on our capitals roads and redesign a few streets

They just arent worth it.

If you are doing BRT properly that's exactly what you would be doing.

Sam Russell · 11-02-2014 11:27PM

cdebru wrote: »

If you are doing BRT properly that's exactly what you would be doing.

If is a very good word. They have two chances .....

strassenwo!f · 11-02-2014 11:37PM

cdebru wrote: »

Bendy buses can work if you put in the infrastructure to support them that was never done here they just tried to shoehorn them into the infrastructure for the existing buses.
If and it is a big if the proper infrastructure was installed then then the issues with loading unloading tight turns and rattling from poor road surface would not be a problem.

Of course they can work. But these buses, particularly, because of their length, are totally hamstrung if you have a system where people can only get on and off at the front of the bus.

This bizarre loading/unloading system of buses in Dublin is not widely replicated in other cities. Unsurprisingly.

Aard · 12-02-2014 12:16AM

What's all the fuss about? You don't need "bendy busses" to implement BRT...

cdebru · 12-02-2014 01:05AM

strassenwo!f wrote: »

Of course they can work. But these buses, particularly, because of their length, are totally hamstrung if you have a system where people can only get on and off at the front of the bus.

This bizarre loading/unloading system of buses in Dublin is not widely replicated in other cities. Unsurprisingly.

I guess you skipped over the bit about infrastructure then?

If you put in the infrastructure as in a BRT system then you would not be limited to using the one door no more than the luas is.

strassenwo!f · 12-02-2014 05:54AM

The current bus stop infrastructure in Dublin would allow use of more than one door.

LXFlyer · 12-02-2014 08:57AM

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The current bus stop infrastructure in Dublin would allow use of more than one door.

Are you even remotely attempting to suggest that the infrastructure is or was in place for the safe operation of multi-door articulated buses?

If you are, you clearly haven't got a clue.

cdebru · 12-02-2014 10:04AM

strassenwo!f wrote: »

The current bus stop infrastructure in Dublin would allow use of more than one door.

Would it really ? Have a look around at the number of stops with railings with a gap not much wider than the front door, then have a look at the number of stops with parking allowed either side and a bus stop not big enough to enter get parallel and exit. Then look at the stops with a small patch of hard surface just around the bus stop.
That's before you even start on bus stops being used for parking as loading bays and of course as taxi ranks .

I can only presume you weren't suggesting that the infrastructure for multidoor use was in place for the bendybuses as that would be ridiculous.

Sam Russell · 12-02-2014 10:10AM

Dublin Bus bought a whole load of multidoor buses which the drivers refused to use as designed. The middle doors remained resolutely shut. Dublin bus bought more of the buses but without the middle doors. The NTA then bought more buses, this time with middle doors. Some drivers do open these doors, but by no means all drivers.

Bendy-buses were in the first group, and going from the bouncy back to the front to get off was near impossible if the bus was full.

NO BENDY BUSES.

cdebru · 12-02-2014 10:20AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Dublin Bus bought a whole load of multidoor buses which the drivers refused to use as designed. The middle doors remained resolutely shut. Dublin bus bought more of the buses but without the middle doors. The NTA then bought more buses, this time with middle doors. Some drivers do open these doors, but by no means all drivers.

Bendy-buses were in the first group, and going from the bouncy back to the front to get off was near impossible if the bus was full.

NO BENDY BUSES.

Just repeating what you have already said is pointless.
A BRT system if done properly would have the infrastructure to support multi door use just like the luas has, saying bendybuses didn't work before when absolutely no effort was made at supporting them so they couldn't work with BRT is just nonsense.

LXFlyer · 12-02-2014 10:36AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Dublin Bus bought a whole load of multidoor buses which the drivers refused to use as designed. The middle doors remained resolutely shut. Dublin bus bought more of the buses but without the middle doors. The NTA then bought more buses, this time with middle doors. Some drivers do open these doors, but by no means all drivers.

Bendy-buses were in the first group, and going from the bouncy back to the front to get off was near impossible if the bus was full.

NO BENDY BUSES.

Once again - the buses were bought on the insistence of the DTO, and against the wishes of Dublin Bus.

No proper infrastructure was put in place for their safe operation, such as extended bus stop cages, extended kerbing, stop lines moved back at tight junctions, etc.

It wasn't the buses that failed - it was the lack of any proper infrastructure being out in place to operate them safely.

Sam Russell · 12-02-2014 11:13AM

I accept that the original bendy-buses were a mistake and that they were inappropriate for use in Dublin streets as they were (and still are), and perhaps a different approach would have helped. However, they had no advantages over standard double-decker buses and many disadvantages. They may have had some use if they had been used from Loughlinstown on the N11 in as far as Donneybrook Church as there is a continuous bus lane, but not on Lincon Place/Westland Row.

Are these BRT vehicles just bendy-buses or are they more sophisticated, allowing for more tram-like performance? Will they accelerate like an electric vehicle or like a diesel? Will they be cramped? Will they bounce along?

If the basic vehicle is not suitable it rather damns the whole system. If they need that amount of infrastructure, why not trams?

cdebru · 12-02-2014 11:19AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

I accept that the original bendy-buses were a mistake and that they were inappropriate for use in Dublin streets as they were (and still are), and perhaps a different approach would have helped. However, they had no advantages over standard double-decker buses and many disadvantages. They may have had some use if they had been used from Loughlinstown on the N11 in as far as Donneybrook Church as there is a continuous bus lane, but not on Lincon Place/Westland Row.

Are these BRT vehicles just bendy-buses or are they more sophisticated, allowing for more tram-like performance? Will they accelerate like an electric vehicle or like a diesel? Will they be cramped? Will they bounce along?

If the basic vehicle is not suitable it rather damns the whole system. If they need that amount of infrastructure, why not trams?

Because BRT is cheaper than trams even with the cost of infrastructure.

Sam Russell · 12-02-2014 11:28AM

Something like this might be OK.

bk · 12-02-2014 11:46AM

Sam Russell wrote: »

However, they had no advantages over standard double-decker buses and many disadvantages.

That is completely false.

1) Bendy buses carry more passengers then a double deckers
2) Single decker buses are quicker to load and unload (no going up and down the stairs)
3) Single deck buses have more space for mobility impaired people (no stairs)

There is a reason why so few cities use Double Deckers, most use single deckers.

With the correct infrastructure, bendy buses are great.

Banjoxed · 12-02-2014 11:50AM

cdebru wrote: »

Because BRT is cheaper than trams even with the cost of infrastructure.

And less passengers per euro invested.

Sam Russell · 12-02-2014 12:36PM

bk wrote: »

That is completely false.

1) Bendy buses carry more passengers then a double deckers

There is more space to stand. .... and more chance of being knocked over when it bounces.

2) Single decker buses are quicker to load and unload (no going up and down the stairs)

Only if the rear doors are used, which DB drivers never did.

3) Single deck buses have more space for mobility impaired people (no stairs)

There is no extra space. Only one space per bus, single or double decker.

There is a reason why so few cities use Double Deckers, most use single deckers.

With the correct infrastructure, bendy buses are great.

Most cities use single decker buses because that is what they have always used.
Single decker buses are easier to control for ticket checking.
Single decker buses (not bendy buses) are more stable.
Single decker buses are cheaper to produce.

DB has always used double deckers as long as I can remember. (Except for a few trials). The old Dublin trams were double deckers.

bk · 12-02-2014 01:30PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

There is more space to stand. .... and more chance of being knocked over when it bounces.

Come on that is laughable. Not a problem in the 100's of other cities that use BRT.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Only if the rear doors are used, which DB drivers never did.

Given that this is a whole new project being set up by the NTA, all doors will be used 100% of the time. DB won't be able to interfere with this.

This is the whole point of this project and the point you can't seem to admit, that this isn't just a few bendy buses, this is a whole BRT project, with all the required infrastructure and polices to make it work correctly.

These buses will have at least three if not four doors and all doors will be used 100% of the time at all stops.

Sam Russell wrote: »

There is no extra space. Only one space per bus, single or double decker.

I said more space for mobility impaired people. That isn't just wheelchair users, but for instance older people who can't make it up and down the stairs. Bendy buses have a lot more seats for these people.

Sam Russell wrote: »

DB has always used double deckers as long as I can remember. (Except for a few trials). The old Dublin trams were double deckers.

DB used single decker buses extensively, for instance on the 123 route for many years.

Swiftway - Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)

Comments