Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

devnull · 10-08-2018 7:24pm

Re-Reg troll banned for what must be about the 10th time in recent times.

Again a reminder to report posts where you suspect trolling rather than confronting them.

- Moderator

Stephen15 · 11-08-2018 2:26pm

What should be done with the 185 is it should be split up into 3 separate routes to prevent the issues with the timetable. It should be remembered the 85 to allow for the following alpha suffixes.

It should be as follows

85- Bray to Shop River/Powerscourt

85a- Bray to Palermo

85b- Bray to Palermo via Fassaroe

All the timetables should be interworked and easy to understand it would be a simple solution really and prevent a lot of confusion.

KD345 · 11-08-2018 6:53pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

85b- Bray to Palermo via Fassaroe

The 185 has not served Fassaroe since 2012. The change was never removed from the timetable.

The 185 needs a much clearer timetable, something which will hopefully happen soon. The above rumoured removal of this service from Shop River would be a big loss to those in the Kilgarron and Kilmolin areas.

Stephen15 · 11-08-2018 7:22pm

KD345 wrote: »

The 185 has not served Fassaroe since 2012. The change was never removed from the timetable.

The 185 needs a much clearer timetable, something which will hopefully happen soon. The above rumoured removal of this service from Shop River would be a big loss to those in the Kilgarron and Kilmolin areas.

Just judging by the timetable how many departures actually go to Shop River from Bray. It appears there's a big gap between 08:45 and 18:45. Why is Shop River even supposed "destination" of this when appears most journies don't even go there at all.

The Bus Connects document says it's considering different options for services West of Enniskerry so perhaps that void could be served by a local link service with an improved timetable on what's currently in place.

punisher5112 · 12-08-2018 4:29pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Just judging by the timetable how many departures actually go to Shop River from Bray. It appears there's a big gap between 08:45 and 18:45. Why is Shop River even supposed "destination" of this when appears most journies don't even go there at all.

The Bus Connects document says it's considering different options for services West of Enniskerry so perhaps that void could be served by a local link service with an improved timetable on what's currently in place.

This is likely as you may see a Palermo service.

There still is a 185 going up/down shopriver.

devnull · 12-08-2018 4:45pm

The stops for new route 175 can be found here:
https://journeyplanner.transportforireland.ie/nta/XSLT_SELTT_REQUEST?itdLPxx_page=rop

Just type 175 into the box, select the service, select inbount or outbound and show on map.

Qrt · 12-08-2018 4:55pm

devnull wrote: »

The stops for new route 175 can be found here:
https://journeyplanner.transportforireland.ie/nta/XSLT_SELTT_REQUEST?itdLPxx_page=rop

Just type 175 into the box, select the service, select inbount or outbound and show on map.

Great news. It's kinda insane how a bus like this hasn't existed already. But as I've mentioned before, considering this route is due to be pulled under BusConnects, some very stern submissions shall be made.

KD345 · 12-08-2018 6:14pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Just judging by the timetable how many departures actually go to Shop River from Bray. It appears there's a big gap between 08:45 and 18:45. Why is Shop River even supposed "destination" of this when appears most journies don't even go there at all.

The Bus Connects document says it's considering different options for services West of Enniskerry so perhaps that void could be served by a local link service with an improved timetable on what's currently in place.

There is roughly one bus an hour to Shop River, about 16 buses per day. There is no gap as the timetable suggests. The buses marked as “c to Powerscourt” should say via Powerscourt, as they all terminate at Shop River.

The timetable is very confusing and needs to be tidied up. It has been like this for years.

Stephen15 · 12-08-2018 6:53pm

sugarman wrote: »

Exactly, hardly worth having for little over a year.

EDIT: Although looking at the Bus Connects map, it looks like the S8 will feed the same areas of the 175 as far as Stillorgan where you can then change to an E1/2 Spine route to UCD. It just wont serve Dundrum anymore which will be the bigger complaint, but I can see it being a quicker route to UCD.

The S6/7 from Blackrock will run via UCD and continue to The Square via Dundrum every 15 mins.

Qrt · 12-08-2018 7:51pm

sugarman wrote: »

Exactly, hardly worth having for little over a year.

EDIT: Although looking at the Bus Connects map, it looks like the S8 will feed the same areas of the 175 as far as Stillorgan where you can then change to an E1/2 Spine route to UCD. It just wont serve Dundrum anymore which will be the bigger complaint, but I can see it being a quicker route to UCD.

I'm more interested in the Tallaght end. I've a they've placed/are placing six to eight new stops along a road that has never had a bus before. It's kinda insane.

tabbey · 12-08-2018 7:56pm

devnull wrote: »

The stops for new route 175 can be found here:
https://journeyplanner.transportforireland.ie/nta/XSLT_SELTT_REQUEST?itdLPxx_page=rop

Just type 175 into the box, select the service, select inbount or outbound and show on map.

Still does nothing to accelerate Dun Laoghaire - Tallaght services. But probably is useful for students & staff of UCD.

devnull · 12-08-2018 8:02pm

sugarman wrote: »

Same and that's what I meant. It happens in several places along the new route. Even people living in the back arse of Firehouse and Ballycullen or Knocklyon would have to walk 15/20mins to a stop at present that would link them to central Tallaght/Square. They now have a bus on their door step.. for what, 16 months? Before it's taken away in favour of bus connects. Asking for trouble.

You do realise that the Bus Connects proposals are not set in stone? They can be changed in line with demand and also in line with feedback. Note that whilst the BusConnects proposals were being designed the route of the 175 wasn't decided.

Qrt · 12-08-2018 8:18pm

sugarman wrote: »

Same and that's what I meant. It happens in several places along the new route. Even people living in the back arse of Firehouse and Ballycullen or Knocklyon would have to walk 15/20mins to a stop at present that would link them to central Tallaght/Square. They now have a bus on their door step.. for what, 16 months? Before it's taken away in favour of bus connects. Asking for trouble.

The S8 will replace the 175's "green route" coverage. It'll be essentially the same between The Sq and Ballinteer Avenue. It's only really the Fortunestown Way segment I'm talking about here, as that will lose all buses (except the two stops where the 27 goes) along the road. I'd propose bringing the planned Rathcoole-Saggart local bus down to The Sq, but I do realise that's for the other thread.

Stephen15 · 12-08-2018 10:24pm

sugarman wrote: »

Thats what I was saying in my first post, but then they also lose a direct link to Dundrum also.

None of this effects me in anyway, both the 175 and S8 are welcomed additions either way.

The only point I was trying to make is theyve made more work for themselves in regards to proposals and any replanning etc.. for bus connects. Surely it could have been shelved and the buses used to increase the frequency of the 75 even further under Go Ahead.

Issue is if you put extra buses on the 75 they would likely end up sitting in traffic bunched together. I suspect that the 75 may get a revised timetable with improved frequencies when Go-Ahead take over the route anyway not much point on having a 75 every 10 mins it's not that busy a route and like I said it would likely end up bunched at peak times.

I can see the 175 just ending up as another bus like the 17, 18 or the 75. Which will suffer from all sorts of reliability issues around peak times due to it being given unrealistic running times and spend most of it's time sitting in traffic. For the proposed BC orbitals to work big investment will needed on the routes corridors with improved bus priority otherwise they will just end up in gridlock like our current orbitals like the 17, 18 and the 75.

A big issue I see with the routing of the 175 is the windy routing it takes to serve Dundrum Village and SC that's going to be a traffic nightmare for the bus. It should turn left at The Goat onto Drumartin, right onto Kilmacud Rd. Upper, around Airfield connecting with these Luas and the Shopping Centre at Balally. Sandyford Road is nearly always bumper to bumper and there should be a bus lane from Balally Luas Station as far as the Roundabout to facillatate this routing. This route is going to face big traffic issues around Dundrum SC around Christmas time.

KD345 · 12-08-2018 10:43pm

The last time I took the 75 a few months ago during morning peak from Tallaght it was full by Old Bawn and passed by stops on Firhouse Road. This was using a VT bus.

I’m guessing they hope some of these passengers will swap to the 175 to ease the pressure for when Go Ahead take over the 75 using the much smaller SG/GT buses.

Stephen15 · 12-08-2018 11:02pm

KD345 wrote: »

The last time I took the 75 a few months ago during morning peak from Tallaght it was full by Old Bawn and passed by stops on Firhouse Road. This was using a VT bus.

I’m guessing they hope some of these passengers will swap to the 175 to ease the pressure for when Go Ahead take over the 75 using the much smaller SG/GT buses.

The VTs were only allocated to the 75 since the new bill was passed which reduced the frequency at peak times from every 15 or 20 mins (can't remember exactly) to every half hour.

I should hope that the NTA will restore the previous peak time frequency on the 75 once GA takeover as the SG's and GT's will reduce capacity on the route. I would also hope the NTA sorts out the Sandyford diversion which is lengthy and confusing for many 75 users.

dfx- · 13-08-2018 12:35pm

The VTs are a great addition to the 75 and will be a great loss.

Stephen15 · 13-08-2018 4:25pm

dfx- wrote: »

The VTs are a great addition to the 75 and will be a great loss.

The route never required VTs before the timetable was butchered enhanced by the NTA, the only improvement was an increased Sunday frequency. Hopefully the NTA restore the old peak timetable and keep the increased Sunday frequency.

Fact is plenty of other routes need the extra space of the VTs more than the 75 such as the 16 but it's convient for DB to put them on the 75 because they are in Donnybrook.

devnull · 13-08-2018 4:53pm

Update from Go-Ahead that seems to suggested we're heading for a fragmented system

In advance of the transition of bus routes from Dublin Bus to Go-Ahead Ireland this autumn, we are currently working closely with the National Transport Authority (NTA) on all route scheduling and timetables. These will be available on our website over the coming weeks but if you have any questions now please contact the NTA who will be happy to assist you.

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

pat ticket · 13-08-2018 4:58pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

Issue is if you put extra buses on the 75 they would likely end up sitting in traffic bunched together. I suspect that the 75 may get a revised timetable with improved frequencies when Go-Ahead take over the route anyway not much point on having a 75 every 10 mins it's not that busy a route and like I said it would likely end up bunched at peak times.

This is anecdotal but the bus stop I use most days is on the 75 route towards DL. From what I see, the bus appears to be full or near full most of the time, inc. @ off peak times and at weekends.

On the odd occasion I've used it, it seems well patronised, especially from Dundrum onwards.

alane20 · 13-08-2018 5:02pm

A lot of time and money has been spent on bus connects, which is designed to work in grid city's, Dublin is not a grid city, it will be be spun and brought in, it will be a disaster and it will revert to the way it is now

Stephen15 · 13-08-2018 5:03pm

devnull wrote: »

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

Agreed but I could see a situation happening where timetables are listed the NTA website, the DB website and the GAI website. What do the NTA expect happen in places where Go-Ahead routes and DB routes share the same stop. Have the NTA learned no lessons from the disastrous implementation of the 139?

ITV2 · 13-08-2018 5:25pm

Stephen15 wrote: »

The route never required VTs before the timetable was butchered enhanced by the NTA, the only improvement was an increased Sunday frequency. Hopefully the NTA restore the old peak timetable and keep the increased Sunday frequency.

Fact is plenty of other routes need the extra space of the VTs more than the 75 such as the 16 but it's convient for DB to put them on the 75 because they are in Donnybrook.

I think the problem with VT's on the 16's is the left turn at Leonard's Corner, remember Phibs also have 40 VT's too.

Stephen15 · 13-08-2018 5:26pm

pat ticket wrote: »

This is anecdotal but the bus stop I use most days is on the 75 route towards DL. From what I see, the bus appears to be full or near full most of the time, inc. @ off peak times and at weekends.

On the odd occasion I've used it, it seems well patronised, especially from Dundrum onwards.

It has always been a busy enough route but not the busiest nowhere as busy as any of the core routes such as the 4, 7, 15, 16, 25a/b, 39a, 46a, 145 etc.

I used to use it semi regularly about 2 years ago to go to Dundrum or Ballinteer now and it always seemed busy but never so busy that you wouldn't get a seat this was before the new bill was introduced by the NTA which decreased peak services on it. It's only been since then VTs got allocated to it so I can only presume there's a direct correlation as extra capacity was needed.

Stephen15 · 13-08-2018 5:43pm

ITV2 wrote: »

I think the problem with VT's on the 16's is the left turn at Leonard's Corner, remember Phibs also have 40 VT's too.

I was more just using the 16 as an example of a route which could do with VTs more than the 75 needs them. I don't think there's that much of an issue with them on the 16 mind you as they usually do workings on it during Marlay Park concerts. There are a few tight turns in DL like the junction between Lwr. George's Street and York Road which even regular buses two axle buses struggle with at times.

L1011 · 13-08-2018 6:19pm

The VTs aren't the youngest - are there any plans for replacement with similar capacity vehicles?

Qrt · 14-08-2018 9:27am

L1011 wrote: »

The VTs aren't the youngest - are there any plans for replacement with similar capacity vehicles?

I'm fairly sure I heard there were no plans for more tri-axle vehicles.

punisher5112 · 14-08-2018 1:54pm

Qrt wrote: »

I'm fairly sure I heard there were no plans for more tri-axle vehicles.

They are mad for buying in the sg type and now reverting back to many single Decker's coming shortly... Not a huge amount mind.

Vt are a great bus.

Qrt · 14-08-2018 2:14pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

They are mad for buying in the sg type and now reverting back to many single Decker's coming shortly... Not a huge amount mind.

Vt are a great bus.

Except for the lack of middle door.

L1011 · 14-08-2018 2:58pm

Had to check if Wright do a triaxle seeing as they appear wedding to them. They do. They are still going to be needed on some routes at peak even after BusConnects.

punisher5112 · 14-08-2018 3:26pm

Qrt wrote: »

Except for the lack of middle door.

In Japan I believe they have 3 door vt style.

Probably one of the best buses ever drove.

I would put the vt up with the RV type for been best ever.

We should be looking at the bendy buses again but on suitable routes such as N11 where it's straight.

It would need better designed stops though.

AlekSmart · 14-08-2018 7:34pm

punisher5112 wrote: »

In Japan I believe they have 3 door vt style.

Probably one of the best buses ever drove.

I would put the vt up with the RV type for been best ever.

We should be looking at the bendy buses again but on suitable routes such as N11 where it's straight.

It would need better designed stops though.

Right now,if I was Hugh Creegan,I'd be sending my assorted young planners,schedulers and engineers off to Singapore,with orders to look,listen and learn.....

https://landtransportguru.net/volvo-b8l/

If you want it..Volvo will build it,,,

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

Unlike liberal,democratic and all embracing Ireland,where details of NTA PSO contracts remain TOP SECRET !!....these cunning oriental types lay everything out for all to see....poor oul Volvo beaten by MAN...who'd a thunk it ?

https://landtransportguru.net/euro-6-double-deck-buses-procured-by-lta/

dfx- · 14-08-2018 10:47pm

devnull wrote: »

Update from Go-Ahead that seems to suggested we're heading for a fragmented system

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

What of the NTA's history of a hands off, 'contact the operator' approach to day to day services makes this any surprise? This is exactly how they've regulated the network 'from a distance' to put it mildly.

Stephen15 · 15-08-2018 9:46pm

devnull wrote: »

Update from Go-Ahead that seems to suggested we're heading for a fragmented system

The NTA have to do this properly and make it work as one functional system rather than one of two parts who look after themselves only otherwise people will get confused and it will not be a great start to Go-Ahead to put it lightly if both them and DB are going to be out for themselves rather than working together.

There shouldn't even be a Go-Ahead website for anything other than corporate purposes and recruitment etc since everything should be going through TFI. If we have a situation where the DB site exists in it's current form and the GAI site does something similar in October and both not listing each others services then the NTA have failed.

I decided to seek clarification regarding this issue from the NTA. They confirmed that the timetables will be posted on the GAI website and also the TFI journey planner.

I did not realise that detailed timetables are in fact posted on the journey planner in PDF form however the writing on them is tiny. Exact times are available for each and every bus stop. I'm not sure is this a new a feature or not. If this is the format the NTA are going to use for the timetables posted at bus stops then that is unacceptable as timetables must be clear.

http://www.a-b.ie/nta/XSLT_SELTT_REQUEST?itdLPxx_page=ttb

devnull · 15-08-2018 10:12pm

The more I hear, the more I fear this will go badly.

Stephen15 wrote: »

I decided to seek clarification regarding this issue from the NTA. They confirmed that the timetables will be posted on the GAI website and also the TFI journey planner.

Well if the Dublin Bus website is still using it's own journey planner when the Go-Ahead website launches and just stops taking into account the routes that have gone over to Go-Ahead, then that is going to be a huge mess as patrons are going to be sent via two radial routes to get to places most likely when they can use Go-Ahead orbitals to get to their places easier.

Having two distinct sets of timetables as part of a network in two totally different places, of which at least one operator may not acknowledge the existence of the other to the detriment of public transport users is completely unacceptable because it makes it very hard for people to understand how the services are run as one overall network and not on totally separate systems and at worst a tourist could look up Dublin Bus, unaware that there is another operator that even exists.

It would be interesting to know the reasons that the NTA have gone down this road. Whether it is a decision that has been made purely by themselves or it is as the result of pressure or objections from other parties.

I did not realise that detailed timetables are in fact posted on the journey planner in PDF form however the writing on them is tiny. Exact times are available for each and every bus stop. I'm not sure is this a new a feature or not. If this is the format the NTA are going to use for the timetables posted at bus stops then that is unacceptable as timetables must be clear.

Been there for years - not the format the NTA will be using.

GM228 · 15-08-2018 11:18pm

devnull wrote: »

It would be interesting to know the reasons that the NTA have gone down this road. Whether it is a decision that has been made purely by themselves or it is as the result of pressure or objections from other parties.

This would not surprise me, look at the DB resistance to a new livery or even using the appropriate TFI logo and you can see the level of cooperation DB offer the NTA.

devnull · 15-08-2018 11:27pm

GM228 wrote: »

This would not surprise me, look at the DB resistance to a new livery or even using the appropriate TFI logo and you can see the level of cooperation DB offer the NTA.

Well if the NTA have a contractual right to enforce it they should be doing so and not giving them an option of not complying. If the regulator is being bullied by the people it regulates then it's a pretty toothless regulator.

If DB want to put private interests over the public good then that just gives the NTA an even bigger reason to put more and more out to tender as they have a contractor who is not willing to co-operate.

The wording of some of the next direct award contract will be very interesting as I suspect that will say a lot about this and if the NTA were clever enough they could put clauses and penalties and requirements structured in a way to make non co-operative operators suffer heavily.

IE 222 · 15-08-2018 11:48pm

Why would DB be advertising services of a different provider on their website.

DB have no commitment to these GA routes anymore. It's up to the NTA to create an umbrella timetabing site not DB or GA. I can't think of any company that would provide a link to another providers services. DB and GA will be competing against each other from here on that's the reality of opening up the market.

Some people have a serious hard on for bashing DB.

xper · 16-08-2018 1:04am

IE 222 wrote: »

Why would DB be advertising services of a different provider on their website.

DB have no commitment to these GA routes anymore. It's up to the NTA to create an umbrella timetabling site not DB or GA. I can't think of any company that would provide a link to another providers services. DB and GA will be competing against each other from here on that's the reality of opening up the market.

Some people have a serious hard on for bashing DB.

Why? Because DB is being funded by the state to provide a public transport service, its clearly in the public interest to do so as part of providing that service and and they (at least should be) contractually obliged to do so as part of their franchise.

Want an example? Look at any private train operator's website in the UK where you can find routes and book a ticket between any two stations on the whole network, not just the services of that operator. Yes, even in the clusterfck that is the privatised British railways system, this is done right.

Same applies to Go Ahead and any other future franchise holder.

Stephen15 · 16-08-2018 1:11am

The DART and the Luas are on the DB journey planner so I don't see why GAI services wouldn't be there too.

Charles Babbage · 16-08-2018 1:22am

IE 222 wrote: »

Why would DB be advertising services of a different provider on their website.

DB have no commitment to these GA routes anymore. It's up to the NTA to create an umbrella timetabing site not DB or GA. I can't think of any company that would provide a link to another providers services. DB and GA will be competing against each other from here on that's the reality of opening up the market.

Some people have a serious hard on for bashing DB.

It is up to the NTA to have a timetabling site. This should be linked by any other bus website, there should not be sites giving incomplete info.

LuckyLloyd · 16-08-2018 7:27am

If the Go Ahead site isn’t showing DB info the DB site obv shouldn’t show Go Ahead into. What’s fair is fair.

So here we go: separate operator; separate hiring and training system; separate livery; separate website. Where’s that tender offer? The public have a right to that information.

devnull · 16-08-2018 7:32am

IE 222 wrote: »

DB have no commitment to these GA routes anymore. It's up to the NTA to create an umbrella timetabing site not DB or GA. I can't think of any company that would provide a link to another providers services.

At the end of the day Dublin Bus is not a commercial company we are often told, we are told that it is better than a commercial company because it puts the needs of public transport users ahead of commercial and self interests and when it comes to a conflict between those two it would pick the former.

Dublin Bus cannot have a weird hybrid of having the best parts of being a private commercial company and the best parts of being a public company and not have the downsides of either.

DB and GA will be competing against each other from here on that's the reality of opening up the market.

No, they should be all working together to do what is in the interest of the public as that is the whole idea of a public transport system. They are competing for tenders but the network should be integrated like in London and many other cities.

Some people have a serious hard on for bashing DB.

Not really, the problem is that some people seem to think that operators are more important than the level of service and information offered to customers for a supposedly public service operated for the public.

I care for the many who use transport services and the tourists, the people travelling to school, work, and going about their daily life using public transport rather than the comparatively few working for Dublin Bus.

The first priority for a publicly owned public transport company should be to serve the public. The argument for such companies instead of commercial companies is they put the public before any self gain or commercial interests. If they do not do that, then there is little reason to have a publicly owned public transport company at all.

devnull · 16-08-2018 7:38am

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

If the Go Ahead site isn’t showing DB info the DB site obv shouldn’t show Go Ahead into. What’s fair is fair.

They should both show it - agreed - any operator getting funding from the state to run public transport services should have to show all of that info.

Dravokivich · 16-08-2018 7:56am

devnull wrote: »

They should both show it - agreed - any operator getting funding from the state to run public transport services should have to show all of that info.

Then Dublin bus field complaints about go ahead info being outdated?

The should not have to retain another's companies details.

If NTA want to drive a one stop shop, they should provide one. Each operator shouldn't be lumbered with it.

devnull · 16-08-2018 8:10am

Dravokivich wrote: »

Then Dublin bus field complaints about go ahead info being outdated?

The should not have to retain another's companies details.

If NTA want to drive a one stop shop, they should provide one. Each operator shouldn't be lumbered with it.

There should be a one stop shop and all operators should be forced to use it for real time info. Timetabling info and journey planning because that would be better for customers.

I agree that having each operator show each others routes is not ideal but if someone is blocking a one stop shop then there has to be a solution that puts the interests of users ahead of operators.

Do you think London bus would be better if it was fragmented into ten different sites that deny each other exist for journey planning purposes or do you think having a one stop shop makes it easier.

The customer has to come first. I would like Dublin Bus to continue to exist because I believe that it has a place in our city. But if it is determined to continually put its own interests ahead of the public despite being paid by the public to do the opposite then the main benefit of keeping it is gone.

People need to look at the public interest. Not that of the operator. If Dublin Bus wants to look after commercial interests it should look at registering some commercial routes and it can do what it wants with them.

IE 222 · 16-08-2018 9:17am

xper wrote: »

Why? Because DB is being funded by the state to provide a public transport service, its clearly in the public interest to do so as part of providing that service and and they (at least should be) contractually obliged to do so as part of their franchise.

Want an example? Look at any private train operator's website in the UK where you can find routes and book a ticket between any two stations on the whole network, not just the services of that operator. Yes, even in the clusterfck that is the privatised British railways system, this is done right.

Same applies to Go Ahead and any other future franchise holder.

Dublin bus is no longer responsible for them routes anymore. The NTA decided to take them routes away from DB. As a result you can not expect DB to willingly promote and provide resources to routes they no longer serve. DB is ran independent and competes for routes.

I've check some London bus operators sites and none seem to show competitors timetables. Trains are different in the sense that people travel between stations and not necessarily routes.

IE 222 · 16-08-2018 9:18am

Stephen15 wrote: »

The DART and the Luas are on the DB journey planner so I don't see why GAI services wouldn't be there too.

Dart and Luas are not rival competitors.

IE 222 · 16-08-2018 9:22am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

It is up to the NTA to have a timetabling site. This should be linked by any other bus website, there should not be sites giving incomplete info.

Agree DB should probably add a link at the bottom of their website to the NTAs site for a complete timetable of "other services".

The NTA took control of this and decided to change things around. It's up to them to see this through and provide all general information required and not expect other companies to provide it for them.

devnull · 16-08-2018 9:26am

IE 222 wrote: »

Dart and Luas are rival competitors.

Dublin Bus isn't a commercial company though, we're told it's something better than that and not like the bad commercial companies who put their own interests ahead of that of the public.

It's paid tens of millions per year and other grants and tens of millions in vehicles provided for it to run a network of the routes for the benefit of the public. If it decides that it doesn't want to run the routes for the benefit of the public, despite being contracted to do so then essentially it's sticking two fingers up at the public it is paid to serve.

The many hundreds of thousands of regular public transport customers must always come before the few staff in Dublin Bus. I will always support the former over the later because I care about public transport provision and the public interest far more than the commercial interests of a company that claims it is not commercial and has no commercial interests which apparently make it better.

Go-Ahead Dublin City Routes - Updates and Discussion

Comments