Could bus stops on busy routes be further apart?

Zaph0d

Could the journey time on buses be improved by reducing the number of stops? Would it be worth the inconvenience of longer walks to the stop for some people?

The Luas line B has 13 stops over 9km of track or about 750m between stops (10 minutes walk). The N11 QBC, meanwhile, has 33 stops over the 12km route from Foxrock Church to O'Connell Street, or about 370m between stops (5 minutes walk). Wherever you are on the N11, you are only a max of 2.5 minutes walk from a stop.

What if the number of stops was halved on the N11? Would the extra 2.5 minutes walk be repaid by faster journey time due to the bus saving 16 stops?

With just 16 stops you could have a ticket machine at each stop like on the Luas, and then boarding times would be faster.

Whaddya think?

raphaelS

Zaph0d wrote:

Could the journey time on buses be improved by reducing the number of stops? Would it be worth the inconvenience of longer walks to the stop for some people?

The Luas line B has 13 stops over 9km of track or about 750m between stops (10 minutes walk). The N11 QBC, meanwhile, has 33 stops over the 12km route from Foxrock Church to O'Connell Street, or about 370m between stops (5 minutes walk). Wherever you are on the N11, you are only a max of 2.5 minutes walk from a stop.

What if the number of stops was halved on the N11? Would the extra 2.5 minutes walk be repaid by faster journey time due to the bus saving 16 stops?

With just 16 stops you could have a ticket machine at each stop like on the Luas, and then boarding times would be faster.

Whaddya think?

You've been busy in the bus this morning!

I am not sure it would be faster because as it is now during the peak morning hours you have so many buses that most of them stops only every 2 stops, especially because at the start of their journey the stops are mostly to hope in rather than hope off, apart few like near schools or ucd.

Then I agree that in some part of the QBC there's too many stops, the fact that they stop using Stillorgan from 4pm to 7pm was a great idea.
I think they should work on the few "black spots" to improve the speed, like Donnybrook where the bus get stuck by the traffic. I don't know how though!

Raphael

loyatemu

this is a definite problem with Dublin Bus - far too many stops
between Bray and Shankill there are about 12 stops in the space of 2 miles

in many places you can stand at one stop and see the adjacent stops in either direction along the road - it definitely makes the service less efficient

but presumably if DB tried to remove any of the stops they'd get inundated with protests from passengers living nearby not wanting to walk the extra 100 yards.

Capt'n Midnight

Only if they had shelters
In this country it rains on most days. Walking long distances in the rain will drive people back into cars, as will standing at an uncovered stop.

BTW: the 25X etc. don't stop at every stop so it's a simple matter of funding to create more QBC's than to remove stops.

Zaph0d

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Only if they had shelters

The shelters are getting much better. The new ones are nicely designed and have removed a critical design flaw: the old shelters had an advertising poster blocking the view of the oncoming buses. This meant if you wanted to stay dry you'd miss the bus!

Capt'n Midnight wrote:

Walking long distances in the rain will drive people back into cars, as will standing at an uncovered stop.

This what I'm asking: would the journey time saved by halving the number of stops encourage more people to use the bus than it would discourage by making them walk further?

eg There is a bus stop on the bend in Donnybrook outside the Garda station, but there are already stops 200 yds behind and in front of this point.

Would the Luas line B be improved by having 25 stops instead of 13?

Maybe every second stop could be set down only.

I don't think that having a few Xpresso buses are the answer. They suffer from the same problem as any infrequent bus service: you can't predict when or if they will arrive due to traffic and schedule unreliability.
The stopping time for the bus is way too long in any case. I'd love to see only prepaid tickets, no ticket stamping and exit via the rear doors (where they exist).

Does DB allow their drivers and passengers to suggest ideas to them?

antoinolachtnai

There would be some improvement, obviously, but my feeling the improvement would be smaller than you'd expect for the following reasons:

1. The time the bus is stopped at the stop is in proportion to the number of people getting on and off at that stop. Changing the number of stops wouldn't reduce the number of users (or if it did, there would be a big problem).

2. The big factor driving 'dwell-time' is the amount of time it takes to get on and off the bus. If you want to reduce the dwell-time, you have to do two things.

a. Have a faster ticketing system.

b. having a separate entrance and exit.

The first of these is underway, although a lot depends on the 'follow-through' in implementing the new system. The second of these has been abandoned, apparently for safety reasons.

Perhaps reducing the number of stops would really reduce congestion on the QBC and so reduce the need for overtaking, particularly by express or full buses. Also the amount of time spent decelerating and accelerating would obviously be reduced.

However, I don't think the benefit would be very big, compared to the benefit of sorting out the ticketing and entrance/exit issues. Also, you'd have to weigh the benefit against the possible disincentive to use public transport if there were a longer walk.

As to the Luas stations question, you really either have to have the stops open or closed. You can't have 'set down only' - there's no way of enforcing or managing it. There is a system used some places in New York called 'skip-stop' where only every second train stops at each stop, but it tends not to work out all that well. There is a book that considers these topics by a guy called Glover. It's basically a manual of London Underground operations but I can't remember the name (something like Underground Operations), but I will dig it up if someone is really desperate to find it.

segadreamcast

Four stops within 400 metres on Glasnevin Avenue 19A/17A route...this could easily be cut down to two, or even one tbh.

I'd have to agree - too many bus stops along many parts of the route.

cdebru

Zaph0d wrote:

Does DB allow their drivers and passengers to suggest ideas to them?

yeah they do then they ignore them or wait for a while and pretend they tought of it

Flukey

raphaelS wrote:

the fact that they stop using Stillorgan from 4pm to 7pm was a great idea.

Not if you want to get off at Stillorgan it isn't. It has led to a dangerous situation with people having to attempt to cross a dangerous dual carriageway at rush hour. It is an inconvenience to the people who want to get off at Stillorgan. You may not want to get off there, but a lot of people do. A lot of people also want to get on there as well and are faced with having to get across the dual carriageway to get to the stop. A lot of people are coming out of the shopping centre and it is not convenient for them to have to drag their shopping down to the stop on the far side of the dual carriageway. Skipping the village in the morning for inbound buses was not too bad because the stop on the dual carriageway is more accessible from Stillorgan, but the same can't be said for the outbound stops.

In defence of the decision to axe it Dublin Bus said a majority of passengers favoured it. That sounds very reasonable, until you think about it. Using that logic the majority of people on a bus would not want to stop at any given stop. So following the logic, a bus would not stop at any stop at all, because although there might be some people wanting to get off at a particular stop, the majority of passengers on the bus wouldn't. A wonderful piece of Dublin Bus logic. The only people who should have been asked as to whether they should bypass Stillorgan were the people who get on or off there. In that case there would be 100% in favour of retaining it.

We are getting the arguments here that people should be prepared to walk a bit further. If you think about it what you are really saying is that everyone else should have to walk further, so that you can get home quicker! Every stop is someone's stop and they are entitled to it, even if it slows your journey home by stopping there. You would not be happy if your stop was done away with, but it's alright for everyone else. Dublin Bus has to serve all its customers. It would be wonderful to get on a bus and then for it not to stop until it got to your stop, but it has to serve everyone, even if that does take longer. I agree that positions of some stops certainly need to be reviewed or repositioned, but it is wrong to inconvenience someone else just so you can get home quicker. Anyway, even if you remove a stop, that means that at the next stop or previous stop more people will have to get on or off there, which will mean the bus will have to spend more time there, so you don't gain as much as you think.

John R

Flukey wrote:

Not if you want to get off at Stillorgan it isn't. It has led to a dangerous situation with people having to attempt to cross a dangerous dual carriageway at rush hour. It is an inconvenience to the people who want to get off at Stillorgan. You may not want to get off there, but a lot of people do. A lot of people also want to get on there as well and are faced with having to get across the dual carriageway to get to the stop. A lot of people are coming out of the shopping centre and it is not convenient for them to have to drag their shopping down to the stop on the far side of the dual carriageway. Skipping the village in the morning for inbound buses was not too bad because the stop on the dual carriageway is more accessible from Stillorgan, but the same can't be said for the outbound stops.

In defence of the decision to axe it Dublin Bus said a majority of passengers favoured it. That sounds very reasonable, until you think about it. Using that logic the majority of people on a bus would not want to stop at any given stop. So following the logic, a bus would not stop at any stop at all, because although there might be some people wanting to get off at a particular stop, the majority of passengers on the bus wouldn't. A wonderful piece of Dublin Bus logic. The only people who should have been asked as to whether they should bypass Stillorgan were the people who get on or off there. In that case there would be 100% in favour of retaining it.

We are getting the arguments here that people should be prepared to walk a bit further. If you think about it what you are really saying is that everyone else should have to walk further, so that you can get home quicker! Every stop is someone's stop and they are entitled to it, even if it slows your journey home by stopping there. You would not be happy if your stop was done away with, but it's alright for everyone else. Dublin Bus has to serve all its customers. It would be wonderful to get on a bus and then for it not to stop until it got to your door, but it has to serve everyone, even if that does take longer. I agree that positions of some stops certainly need to be reviewed or repositioned, but it is wrong to inconvenience someone else just so you can get home quicker.

The same could be said by the majority who have to sit through the stillorgan village detour for the few that want to get off there.


Isn't there a subway under the dual carriageway?

Many stillorgan residents live on the far side of the dual carriageway from the village, is it fair for them to have to cross the dangerous road just to get to the bus.

The 46B stops at the other side of the village, no need to cross the dangerous road from there.

That detour saves a good 10 minutes in peak times, the point was to improve the service to most users which it does very well, it is a very short extra walk to the original bus stop and considering how much quicker the buses get to Stillorgan it is quicker to get off on the main road and walk to the shopping centre than the crawl through the junction and the old road to the stop.

Flukey

The 46B no longer goes to the other side of the village. Even so, the 46B is not a regular service, so it doesn't serve many of those that would use it. Most of the people getting off at Stillorgan village would be going towards Kilmacud. That stop has a very large catchment area in that direction. Those living on the other side of the dual carriageway would have got off at the stops on the dual carriageway, like the one when you come back onto the dual carriageway. That is now the one the people heading to the village get off at and that is the way the majority getting off at it now go. The others getting off at it are not being inconvenienced by the bus going through the village. The location of the subway is of no real benefit to people wanting to cross the dual carriageway having got off the bus. A lot of people get on and off at the shopping centre, and it is always a busy stop and therefore deserves to be properly serviced.

The benefit to outbound commuters is only for the ones who are getting off after Stillorgan, which is the very point I was making in my last post. They are getting home faster at the inconvenience of others. The inbound bypassing of the village in the mornings works OK, because the stops are easily accessible to those the village stops service, so there is no real inconvenience to them. The evening bypass is different however. As I clearly outlined, it is nonsense to say the majority of commuters want it, as then no bus would stop at any stop between each terminus, so it is not a valid argument. Every stop before a bus reaches you and every stop after you get on until your own stop slows your journey down and the same can be said for any individual passenger. If you don't want stops for others, that kind of service is provided by a taxi.

Buses have to serve all their customers so the fact that the majority of the people on the bus would prefer the bus didn't have to stop at your stop is irrelevant and a totally invalid argument. There are other places on the 46A route that you could also argue could be bypassed like the stops for UCD or by going straight down Kill Avenue instead of going round by Abbey Road and back around by Monkstown Farm, but they have the right to be serviced just as much as Stillorgan village. There are lots of other parts of routes and stops around Dublin that could be bypassed, but all those stops are there to service commuters. I would not advocate the bypassing of your stop, even if it speeds up my journey, because you have the right to be serviced just as much as any other commuter. The only people who should decide if your stop should be bypassed are the people who get off at it and the only valid majority that should be considered are those of their views.

cdebru

afaik
the reason that stillorgan village is bypassed is to try and ensure that the buses keep to a timetable if they went in there then the chances are that they would get stuck there and then every one would have a worse service better to walk a bit further and have a more reliable service than not walk and have buses sitting in stillorgan village for 20 minutes and the knock on effects that would have on the timetable

if you were left standing in town because your bus was stuck in stillorgan village that would not be of much use to the majority of anything

Flukey

The 46A is a very frequent service and you never have to wait long for it. Arguing that the majority of people don't want to go through the village is like arguing that because the majority of people don't want to live in your home that you and all the others there should have to move out and it should be demolished or that because the majority of people don't wear the size of clothes that fit you, that the size should be discontinued. If you are going to get rid of the Stillorgan village stops, why not get rid of them all? The 46A would fly along then!

cdebru

mmm dont know who you are answering flukey

i never said the majority wanted to do anything
the point is that the reason that 46a is a very frequent service is that it avoids the traffic if it goes into stillorgan at the peak times then the buses will get stuck there then the benefit of the qbc will be lost you are not going to entice people to use public transport if you are going to make them sit in stillorgan for 20 odd minutes every evening
i honestly think you have little to complain about
there are people who would give their right arm to have a bus service like the 46a
if you stop to think about what you are saying is that everyone else should be put out for your convenience

of course it doesn't bother you that the bus will be stuck there for another 20 minutes because your getting off
however my original point was that if the buses get stuck in the village bringing you home from work then they will not be there to take you into town later on
the only way to get around this would be to increase the running time but that would mean a less frequent service

jlang

I'd rather a bus every 5 minutes with an extra 2 min walk at each end than a 15min frequency on the bus right outside my door (unless I lived at the terminus and could predict when that 15 minutes would be). Crossing the dualler is a small price to pay for the 46A's frequency and timekeeping. Before they did this you'd often see 4 busses lined up going through the village, meaning it could be quicker to get off at Oatlands and walk up to the shopping centre than wait for the bus to get there.

cdebru

jlang wrote:

I'd rather a bus every 5 minutes with an extra 2 min walk at each end than a 15min frequency on the bus right outside my door (unless I lived at the terminus and could predict when that 15 minutes would be). Crossing the dualler is a small price to pay for the 46A's frequency and timekeeping. Before they did this you'd often see 4 busses lined up going through the village, meaning it could be quicker to get off at Oatlands and walk up to the shopping centre than wait for the bus to get there.

exactly

John R

The usage of the route before and after the changes were made says it all, the passenger figures have risen by several hundred percent.

I used to use the route daily before they bypassed stillorgan and it was just apalling. It would take an age to get through Stillorgan in the morning and in the evening.

Flukey

I know it speeds up for some other people, but the same could be applied to any stop you could remove, which is my point. Every stop the bus stops at before you get on or off effects the bus, but those stops are servicing someone. You are only looking at it from your own perspective and forgetting that there are people that want to get off there. Any time a bus goes through Stillorgan village, there is always a large amount of people getting on and off, which justifies the stop. We'd all love if the bus picked us up and didn't stop again until you got off, but that is not the case. The Stillorgan stops are just as important to the passengers wanting to get on and off there as any other stop on the route, even if it does take a little longer.

There are other slow stops on the route too and the total stopping time for all others stops far exceeds Stillorgan, even if they are the slowest stops on the route. Some stop had to be, but it averages out over the route. I don't hear you calling for the bypassing of the stops at D'Olier Street, Nassau Street, St. Stephen's Green or Leeson Street Bridge etc., which all slow it down for people. Those stops slow the 46A down, so why not get rid of them? Chances are you might get on or off at some of those stops, so you certainly don't want them bypassed, do you? You'd be right. You are entitled to use them, just as the people of Stillorgan are entitled to theirs.

If you remember before the QBC started at all: now that was slow. So even with Stillorgan, things are far better than they used to be. As to the frequency and timetable, well if there is one leaving one terminus every 5 minutes, and they all get stopped for the same time in Stillorgan, then there will still be one arriving at the other terminus every five minutes.

shltter

its not a case of the bus not stopping its avoiding an area of very heavy traffic the bus still stops to let people off who want to go to stillorgan village it doesn't just keep going
secondly if you can suggest an alternative route into the city centre that would leave people within walking distance of stephens green d'olier st etc but avoid all the traffic i would love to hear it
lastly your suggestion that all the buses will be held up for the same amount of time so it would have no efect on the timetable is very simplistic
i will try to explain to you as simply as i can
lets say at the moment the bus has a running time of an hour
average 8 hour day driver does 8 journeys
now in order to stop at stillorgan running time is 1 hour 15 minutes
thats less than 6 and a half journeys already you have lost 1.5 journeys per driver
roughly 40 drivers a day on the 46a thats over 60 journeys per day
in other words to have same service it would need 10 more buses or have a increased gap between the buses if you dont have anymore buses which dublin bus doesn't
apart from that putting on more buses would make no sense you would have all the increased cost but less revenue as less people would use a service that took longer
not to mention it would discourage people from using the route so they would go back to their cars more traffic more delays
this is a very simplistic example of how it would effect the service
so feel free to pick holes in it
but the basic point is that to provide a reliable service it is important to avoid as much traffic as possible when a bus can move freely it is possible to predict fairly accurately
how long a journey will take when it is stuck in traffic it is impossible to predict how long a journey will take

Flukey

Yes, but we could say that if we remove all stops between the Savoy Cinema and the Burlington Hotel, the bus would save the time it loses going through Stillorgan village. Would you agree to that? Of course not. Why? Because people want to get on and off at those stops. People want to get on and off at the Stillorgan stops too, so they should not be passed either. "But that slows the bus down" I hear you say. True, but so does stopping at those other stops. There is not one single stop on any bus route in the city that does not slow a bus down if it has to stop at it, but they are there because people want to use them.

The arguments for getting rid of the Stillorgan stops can be made for any stop. I have never denied that going through Stillorgan slows the bus down, but nevertheless people want to get on or off there. If you can argue to get rid of them, you can argue to get rid of the others, for the exact same reasons. If you argue to keep the others, you can argue to keep the Stillorgan ones for the exact same reasons. You can't have it both ways. I am the only one making a consistent argument, that all stops should be kept because people use them, even though stopping at them slows the bus for those not getting on and off at them. If you don't want stops on your journey and you want the direct route, get a taxi. If you want to remove the Stillorgan stops then we should get rid of the ones at D'Olier St., Nassau, the Montrose Hotel and the stops going around by Monkstown Farm - a far bigger detour than Stillorgan village - amongst others, for the exact same reason: They slow the bus down.

Victor

Hang on. If the routes is popular, shouldn't you be adding stops, not taking them away. To improve the service speed, you need to provide semi-express services.

Regarding Stillorgan village, route 10A and other services do service the area.

AndrewMc

Flukey wrote:

The arguments for getting rid of the Stillorgan stops can be made for any stop. I have never denied that going through Stillorgan slows the bus down, but nevertheless people want to get on or off there. If you can argue to get rid of them, you can argue to get rid of the others, for the exact same reasons.

In reality, though, the Stillorgan issue was on an entirely different scale to your average stop.

To have hundreds of people spend 15-20 minutes each way every day to save walking 200m is just ridiculous, even if half the passengers lived there. I took the 46A in the mornings before it used the main road, and it could take up to a quarter of an hour from the time it turned off the main road just to get to the shopping centre. I often thought that if I lived in Stillorgan, I'd much rather walk up from the dual carriageway than sit on the bus for ages.

I can appreciate that walking up from the southbound side is probably quite awkward. A footbridge mightn't be a bad idea there.

I vaguely remember the 75 bypassed Dundrum completely the traffic was so bad. Don't know if it still does.

raphaelS

Flukey wrote:

...If you want to remove the Stillorgan stops then we should get rid of the ones at D'Olier St., Nassau, the Montrose Hotel and the stops going around by Monkstown Farm - a far bigger detour than Stillorgan village - amongst others, for the exact same reason: They slow the bus down.

Well, in fact I don't think a stop is slowing down the bus... but the red light, trafic are especialy from O'Connel street to the Green which is the worst part of the route. The same thing happen in Stillorgan, some traffic to get in (leave the N11) and traffic jam at the junction near the lesiureplex.

If they want to speed up the route at the beginning, they would have to have a car free city center (in our dreams!!) or starting the route at the green. You can try to walk from O'Connel to the Green to get the 46a and save time but at the moment, during peak hour you are more likely to end up with a full bus that won't stop... ! :rolleyes:

Raphael

shltter

Flukey wrote:

Yes, but we could say that if we remove all stops between the Savoy Cinema and the Burlington Hotel, the bus would save the time it loses going through Stillorgan village. Would you agree to that? Of course not. Why? Because people want to get on and off at those stops. People want to get on and off at the Stillorgan stops too, so they should not be passed either. "But that slows the bus down" I hear you say. True, but so does stopping at those other stops. There is not one single stop on any bus route in the city that does not slow a bus down if it has to stop at it, but they are there because people want to use them.

The arguments for getting rid of the Stillorgan stops can be made for any stop. I have never denied that going through Stillorgan slows the bus down, but nevertheless people want to get on or off there. If you can argue to get rid of them, you can argue to get rid of the others, for the exact same reasons. If you argue to keep the others, you can argue to keep the Stillorgan ones for the exact same reasons. You can't have it both ways. I am the only one making a consistent argument, that all stops should be kept because people use them, even though stopping at them slows the bus for those not getting on and off at them. If you don't want stops on your journey and you want the direct route, get a taxi. If you want to remove the Stillorgan stops then we should get rid of the ones at D'Olier St., Nassau, the Montrose Hotel and the stops going around by Monkstown Farm - a far bigger detour than Stillorgan village - amongst others, for the exact same reason: They slow the bus down.

yet again you fail to see the difference the stops have not been got rid of the bus takes a detour to avoid very heavy traffic an alternative stop is provided on the detour
the issue is not wether stopping to pick up passengers slows the bus down its wether taking a detour speeds the journey up the passengers are still picked up and dropped off a few hundred yards from where they would normally get on or off
as i said if you can identify a detour within walking distace of the city centre stops you mentioned that has a lot less traffic iam sure dublin bus and the dto would love to hear about it

Flukey

I understand the point perfectly about detours. The detours at the Montrose Hotel and the big one going around by Monkstown Farm and that awful narrow road could equally be bypassed. The 75 bus goes straight through avoiding that detour. I know Stillorgan village slows the bus down, for people travelling past it, but nevertheless it goes there to serve other people and they are entitled to that service, even if it does slow down people going further. It goes through the village at off-peak times, but at the times it would be most in demand the service is lost. The dual carriageway in this case makes it a particularly awkward and dangerous addition to the journey of those having to get off there, so there is a safety issue. You could even argue that because there are a lot of people wanting to use those stops, it is not really a detour. If it went through Stillorgan for no reason then it could be considered a full detour. Even though it is not a direct line along the dual carriageway, it goes that way because people want it. The whole 46A route is not the most direct way to Dun Laoghaire, so you could argue that it is a detour in itself. It may slow down the overall journey, but there is a demand for that detour through Stillorgan village and the passengers that use it should have equal rights to their service as any other passenger has.

As I said from the beginning, saying a majority favoured it is a flawed statistic. Naturally anyone going further is not going to favour it, so it is pointless asking them. The only people to have asked would have been the people who use those stops. When the majority of them say they don't mind be dropped off on the dual carriageway, then it should be done. If it slows others down, well that is unfortunate, but those passengers that want to get on and off at those two stops should be allowed to do so as they are for the rest of the day.

shltter

Flukey wrote:

I understand the point perfectly about detours. The detours at the Montrose Hotel and the big one going around by Monkstown Farm and that awful narrow road could equally be bypassed. The 75 bus goes straight through avoiding that detour. I know Stillorgan village slows the bus down, for people travelling past it, but nevertheless it goes there to serve other people and they are entitled to that service, even if it does slow down people going further. It goes through the village at off-peak times, but at the times it would be most in demand the service is lost. The dual carriageway in this case makes it a particularly awkward and dangerous addition to the journey of those having to get off there, so there is a safety issue. You could even argue that because there are a lot of people wanting to use those stops, it is not really a detour. If it went through Stillorgan for no reason then it could be considered a full detour. Even though it is not a direct line along the dual carriageway, it goes that way because people want it. The whole 46A route is not the most direct way to Dun Laoghaire, so you could argue that it is a detour in itself. It may slow down the overall journey, but there is a demand for that detour through Stillorgan village and the passengers that use it should have equal rights to their service as any other passenger has.

As I said from the beginning, saying a majority favoured it is a flawed statistic. Naturally anyone going further is not going to favour it, so it is pointless asking them. The only people to have asked would have been the people who use those stops. When the majority of them say they don't mind be dropped off on the dual carriageway, then it should be done. If it slows others down, well that is unfortunate, but those passengers that want to get on and off at those two stops should be allowed to do so as they are for the rest of the day.

no iam afraid you dont understand
those are not detours they are the route not going into stillorgan village is a detour
bus routes rarely take the most direct route
your point about majorities is nonsense
so if only one person was boarding at stillorgan village that person being the majority at that stop would have a veto over every other person using the service
have you ever heard of the concept of the greater good
the point about equal rights
it is not aparthied they are not picking on you because you are from stillorgan

John R

AndrewMc wrote:

I can appreciate that walking up from the southbound side is probably quite awkward. A footbridge mightn't be a bad idea there.

There is a pedestrian underpass at Stillorgan already.

John R

The fact is that apart from a very small walk Stillorgan has the best, fastest, most frequent, most reliable bus service into and out of the city.

Where I live there is one return service to the city a day and a 40 minute frequency local service. I would like a better service but the fact is when there was one it was not used so was sacrificed to provide services where they were needed more.

Stillorgan benefits greatly from the frequent services that primarily serve other parts of the city, a small walk in peak hours to ensure these services run smoothly and are beneficial to others is a small price to pay.

Let's not forget that there are many other routes that do serve Stillorgan village in peak hours. 10A, 11, 63, 75, 86, 115, 116, 117.

Flukey

I am not from Stillorgan. There is a lot more than one person stopping at those stops. You could apply that "greater good" logic to each stop on the route and they'd all be passsed. What you mean by the "greater good" is the people going past Stillorgan. If you got off in Donnybrook, you'd not be worried about Stillorgan and not care if it passed through it or not. It may not suit you to go through Stillorgan, but there are passengers that it does suit. I doubt when they get off they are thinking "This is a bit of a nuisance, but we don't want to delay shltter and the others, so it is OK." I travel on a lot of buses and a lot of them at certain parts of their route go off the beaten track a bit before returning to the main route. It slows my journey down, but I know it is there to serve others on the route, so I don't complain about it. It might suit me and most of the passengers on board if the bus didn't go into those places, but it goes into them because there is a need for it, so I accept it. The buses are there to serve all the passengers. The 46A is there to serve all the passengers, not just the ones getting off after Stillorgan.


The 11 does not serve Stillorgan village and is extremely slow going into the city or out of it at rush hour. The 75 is not very frequent and does not go into town. The 63, 10A and the 84, which you did not mention, are not frequent services either. The 86 now has one single service a day, at 8:25am. The 117 has one service a day each way. The 115 has 2 services a day each way. The 116 has very few services too. So the only decent bus service for Stillorgan village is the 46A.

jlang

There's also the new 145 which has 20 minute frequency on the QBC out the whole way beyond Bray. The timetable says it serves the shopping centre, but I don't think it should (anybody know if it does?). Regardless, it adds to the frequency of the 46A from Foxrock Church in.

Flukey

Yes it does. It has just been introduced at the beginning of October. I only saw it for the first time last week. There should be more buses going out the Stillorgan Road towards Bray. The 84 is not frequent enough, so this is welcome. Another bus serving Stillorgan is the 746 from the airport, but again it is not very frequent.

shltter

Flukey wrote:

Yes it does. It has just been introduced at the beginning of October. I only saw it for the first time last week. There should be more buses going out the Stillorgan Road towards Bray. The 84 is not frequent enough, so this is welcome. Another bus serving Stillorgan is the 746 from the airport, but again it is not very frequent.

but you could get the 5minute service on the 46a into town
then get the 10 minute sevice on the 41's to the airport

Flukey

I am not concerned about going to the airport, just pointing out that like most of the other buses, it doesn't serve Stillorgan very often. People in the area have the Aircoach which provides a 15 minute interval service to the airport, so they are more likely to go for that rather than a two bus option. Dublin Bus, in their wisdom, :rolleyes: are not likely to change their mind on the bypassing of Stillorgan at rush hour so there is not much point in us continually debating it.

We should move on to something else other than the service of Stillorgan village. There are far bigger problems with Dublin Bus than that, like not having a decent night service. There is a need for more imaginative routes linking suburbs instead of the "into town and back out" option to get to somewhere that wasn't that far from where you started. There are some routes that don't go into the city at all, but there is a need for a lot more of them. There are some that cross the city, but there is a need for more of those too. They could also try some novel ideas like circular routes, instead of ones that go back and forth between two points by the same route. Circular routes, with one designated terminus, could be good to link nearby suburbs. They could have buses running clockwise and anti-clockwise along the route. There are a lot of large areas of population or areas of work that are not properly served, like the IFSC which has been mentioned. I'd love to get into Dublin Bus and address some of the yawning gaps in their service and give them a few imaginative ideas as well as the downright obvious solutions to problems that everyone bar them can see.

antoinolachtnai

I agree completely about inter-suburb routes. It strikes me that the obvious thing to do would be to have a number of circular routes serving the M50 and surrounding areas, with high quality, covered luas-style stations at the intersections. This would effectively mean that you could get to or from any point near the M50 to any other point around Dublin by taking a maximum of two buses, and without going into the centre. That has to be something that would be worth doing.

It would obviously not be cheap to do, because you would need 100 or more buses and some civil engineering for stations and bus priority, but the capital cost would still be less than EUR 100 million, a tiny fraction of the cost of any of the tunneled rail projects that are proposed. It would benefit literally hundreds of thousands of people within two or three years.

shltter

antoinolachtnai wrote:

I agree completely about inter-suburb routes. It strikes me that the obvious thing to do would be to have a number of circular routes serving the M50 and surrounding areas, with high quality, covered luas-style stations at the intersections. This would effectively mean that you could get to or from any point near the M50 to any other point around Dublin by taking a maximum of two buses, and without going into the centre. That has to be something that would be worth doing.

It would obviously not be cheap to do, because you would need 100 or more buses and some civil engineering for stations and bus priority, but the capital cost would still be less than EUR 100 million, a tiny fraction of the cost of any of the tunneled rail projects that are proposed. It would benefit literally hundreds of thousands of people within two or three years.

there is /was aplan (not from dublin bus) called the circle plan which was something similar to that
reckoned they could provide a better service with less buses
involved feeder buses

shltter

Flukey wrote:

I am not concerned about going to the airport, just pointing out that like most of the other buses, it doesn't serve Stillorgan very often. People in the area have the Aircoach which provides a 15 minute interval service to the airport, so they are more likely to go for that rather than a two bus option. Dublin Bus, in their wisdom, :rolleyes: are not likely to change their mind on the bypassing of Stillorgan at rush hour so there is not much point in us continually debating it.

We should move on to something else other than the service of Stillorgan village. There are far bigger problems with Dublin Bus than that, like not having a decent night service. There is a need for more imaginative routes linking suburbs instead of the "into town and back out" option to get to somewhere that wasn't that far from where you started. There are some routes that don't go into the city at all, but there is a need for a lot more of them. There are some that cross the city, but there is a need for more of those too. They could also try some novel ideas like circular routes, instead of ones that go back and forth between two points by the same route. Circular routes, with one designated terminus, could be good to link nearby suburbs. They could have buses running clockwise and anti-clockwise along the route. There are a lot of large areas of population or areas of work that are not properly served, like the IFSC which has been mentioned. I'd love to get into Dublin Bus and address some of the yawning gaps in their service and give them a few imaginative ideas as well as the downright obvious solutions to problems that everyone bar them can see.

yeah okay think that one is done to death

as regards new routes and route extensions or changes
the department of transport will not allow dublin bus to introduce new routes
change routes or extend routes except in exceptional cases
that has been the position for the last couple of years
dont know if it has changed since brennan got the boot

antoinolachtnai

Yes, the circle plan. I found this online: http://www.gov.ie/committees-29/c-publicenterprise/20031021-J/Page1.htm

The problem with not introducing new routes has to do with the government's plan to partly restructure Dublin Bus. They're not going to allow Dublin Bus to expand and recruit, then have to pay the cost of restructuring it later.

Personally, I think that there is an argument for doing this sort of restructuring, but the government should either get on and do it regardless of the consequences, or else forget about it.

One obvious way around this would be to bring in a new bus company to run 'circle' style routes with completely separate operations from Dublin Bus. Tickets would have to work on both services, of course. There would have to be a big government injection involved to make it worth anyone's while doing this. (Exactly the same was done with the Luas.)

shltter

yes thats the reason but brennan is gone and people need services now

it was not restructuring it was gradual privitisation
there was no real restructuring of dublin bus just taking 25% of dublin bus and giving it to private operators to operate to start with and gradually franchising all of its services

cant see the sense in setting up another bus company when there is already one there

Flukey

One company would do, if it was run right. We as passengers can see all the obvious problems that would not take much to sort out. There are obvious flaws that if were addressed could help to make more money. We hear complaints that they don't make profits and yet in many areas they don't provide a proper service. The amount of potential passengers that are just driven past by the Nitelink is a classic example. Stopping scheduled services at 11:30pm when there are still thousands of customers that want the service is madness for a company that wants to make money. At times you feel like saying "Dublin Bus should do something really radical: Provide a bus service."

John R

Flukey wrote:

One company would do, if it was run right. We as passengers can see all the obvious problems that would not take much to sort out. There are obvious flaws that if were addressed could help to make more money. We hear complaints that they don't make profits and yet in many areas they don't provide a proper service. The amount of potential passengers that are just driven past by the Nitelink is a classic example. Stopping scheduled services at 11:30pm when there are still thousands of customers that want the service is madness for a company that wants to make money. At times you feel like saying "Dublin Bus should do something really radical: Provide a bus service."

The whole "we should have a full night bus service" is complete rubbish.

Almost all routes post 10pm in all directions are lightly used, services to the city are almost empty.

Monday - Thursday, despite the 1 hour + gap after regular services stopped the 00.30 or 1am Nitelinks are never close to full.

The Mon - Thurs service has been cut back in frequency and routes because it was not well used and was not making close to a profit.

Dublin is not a 24 hour city, apart from the city centre the streets are practically empty and even the city centre does not generate hugh amounts of custom except for Friday and Saturday nights. expecting a full night bus service is just ridiculous.

Civilian_Target

About the stops, this seems to be only an N11 problem: I take the 33/41 to work every morning. My route would take about 35 mins to walk (and I walk quickly), it's about 2 and a bit miles long, through Santry. On this route there's 6 stops, including the one I get off at, which is one every 5 mins walk. It's slightly too many, I agree, but every stop is justified, except for perhaps the one at the back Morton Stadium. Overall, I think the solution though is more busses at peak times, not fewer stops. With more busses, the frequecy of the stops will naturally reduced. And I don't know about your busess, but there's barely room to breathe on the 41 out of town in the morning...

Flukey

JohnR, I am not expecting a full all night bus service, but stopping altogether at 11:30 is ridiculous. Naturally there is a drop in demand from about 10pm. People are all out socialising or whatever else they may be doing by then. The buses have been bringing them there for the past couple of hours. Then we have the lull, like we do between other busy parts of the day, but then those people start wanting to go home again later, but the buses aren't there.

As to Nitelinks, part of it is that people don't use them because they don't expect buses to be running. People have got used to there not being any buses, so they automatically start going for taxis. There are no buses to be seen when they come out on the street so they head for taxis. Still, you will see plenty of people waiting for buses after 11:30 not realising that there are none. You'll often get a look of shock from them if you tell them this as you are passing by.

Scheduled services should run later than 11:30 certainly. The Nitlelink runs a very limited service, outbound only and only picking up at a few stops. That is why people don't use it. If you've ever stood at a Nitelink stop, or anywhere after 11:30 you'll see taxi after taxi after taxi, full with people going to places that the buses are not going to anymore. People go for taxis not by choice, but because they know the buses have stopped. You can be certain that a very significant amount of the people that you see getting taxis late at night, probably got the bus into town earlier that night and would get one home or to wherever they are going if they were still running.

I live on the southside. I have a friend who was living on the northside for some time. Usually when we'd meet up we would do so in town. If I was going over to meet for a drink in one of the pubs near him, or he near me, unless we got a taxi we'd have to finish early. If we were in town we'd have the Nitelink, which would be handier for both of us and give us more time, so we rarely drank near each other's homes. On a few occasions when I would have gone over to his local, to get home I would get a taxi into town to get the Nitelink out. So I can't get a bus into the city, but I can get one out. That is a bit silly, isn't it? You could potentially have the situation where you could get the last bus into town and have to wait around for an hour to get another one out to complete your journey.

The taxis do great business at that time because the buses just disappear at 11:30. There are still lots of people that want to get into town or to other places that would use buses if they were running. The Nitlelink is fine if you are right in the centre of the city, but if like me and my friend, you want to cross the city or travel from the suburbs, not even the Nitelink is of any use.

The Nitelink is ok if you are in the centre of town wanting to go out, but if you are in Crumlin wanting to go to Santry or in Phibsborough wanting to go to Rathfarnham or Dun Laoghaire wanting to go to town or whatever, the Nitelink is useless. If you are in the suburbs you might not even get a service as late as 11:30. If the service continued to a proper level for another couple of hours, that would make more sense. People don't stop wanting to travel at 11:30. If they did, the taxis would stop too. People would much rather get a bus than be fleeced by a taxi.

There is a safety issue too. More public transport would make it easier to get the people off the streets late at night. Lots of fights break out in taxi queues because they are there so long. Nitelinks are not 100% safe of course, but they can get a lot more people out of town a lot quicker. Because of the lack of buses a lot of people head to the centre of town instead of to other suburbs, because it is easier for them to get home from. If it was easier to get to and from other places, people would be spread out more, reducing the crowd in town. When it comes to meeting friends anywhere outside the centre of the city, it is usually no problem getting there, but difficult to get home from, because the bus that got you there is no longer running. We have taxis or if you want you can walk or drive, but the buses that bring you to a place early in the evening should still be there at some level of service to bring you back home again. We don't need 24 hour buses, but we do need more after 11:30pm.

Victor

Flukey wrote:

Lots of fights break out in taxi queues because they are there so long.

To be honest, I can't remember the last time I saw a queue (of people) at a taxi rank.

Flukey

You still see queues alright. Personally if I am getting a taxi I'll start walking towards home and hail one on the street, which makes far more sense than standing at a rank. The queues aren't as long now since there are more taxis. There never was a shortage of taxis at night, just a shortage of buses. Even taxi drivers have said to me that they would welcome more buses at night.

shltter

Flukey wrote:

As to Nitelinks, part of it is that people don't use them because they don't expect buses to be running. People have got used to there not being any buses, so they automatically start going for taxis. There are no buses to be seen when they come out on the street so they head for taxis. Still, you will see plenty of people waiting for buses after 11:30 not realising that there are none. You'll often get a look of shock from them if you tell them this as you are passing by.

.

flukey your talking nonsense

people dont expect there to be buses thats crap
i doubt if you will find anyone who socialises in town that does not know about the nitelink
friday and saturday night there is a bus every 20 minutes from 12:30 till 4:30
on about 20 routes plus another 3 routes that go out to ashbourne or balbriggan

it is one of the most heavily advertised services that dublin bus provide

there are two main reasons why the buses dont ooperate back into town
one is security
second is that there are not that many people travelling in to town at that time so it does not make much sense to have a bus working back into town carrying 1 or 2 people and have a 100 people standing in town waiting for it

in your next post you actually prove the point the reason you can get a taxi by starting to walk is that the taxis are coming back into town empty to take someone from town back to the suburbs that is where the demand is


there are no buses to be seen
mmm maybe you should have a look around trinity college d'olier st or westmoreland st

shltter

Flukey wrote:

One company would do, if it was run right. We as passengers can see all the obvious problems that would not take much to sort out. There are obvious flaws that if were addressed could help to make more money. We hear complaints that they don't make profits and yet in many areas they don't provide a proper service. The amount of potential passengers that are just driven past by the Nitelink is a classic example. Stopping scheduled services at 11:30pm when there are still thousands of customers that want the service is madness for a company that wants to make money. At times you feel like saying "Dublin Bus should do something really radical: Provide a bus service."

scheduled services dont stop at 11:30

the nitelinks are a scheduled service a timetable is provided
it makes sense to tighten the service down to 23 routes with a regular 20 minute service rather than spread an irregular service over 50 or 60 routes


the problem is that dublin bus is charged with operating as a commercial company ie that it should be profitable
but it is also charged with providing a public service

hopefully when the new public transport regulator is appointed it will be their job to identify services that should be provided and to provide funding for these services to be provided

Flukey

Scheduled services stop for an hour at 11:30 even if you classify Nitelinks as scheduled. They can reduce service but they shouldn't stop. A company wanting to make a profit, shouldn't be leaving potential customers for an hour without a service and then passing willing and paying customers, by only allowing a few pick up stops on the Nitelink. There are elements of their daytime services that could be iimproved to improve their profits. Sure there are routes that make losses that they still have to serve as part of their public service duty, but there are other areas where they could make improvements and make some money.

shltter

Flukey wrote:

Scheduled services stop for an hour at 11:30 even if you classify Nitelinks as scheduled. They can reduce service but they shouldn't stop. A company wanting to make a profit, shouldn't be leaving potential customers for an hour without a service and then passing willing and paying customers, by only allowing a few pick up stops on the Nitelink. There are elements of their daytime services that could be iimproved to improve their profits. Sure there are routes that make losses that they still have to serve as part of their public service duty, but there are other areas where they could make improvements and make some money.

it is a timetabled service that operates on a set route for a set fare
thats scheduled

what do you suggest that they should start at 11:30 as well

the fact is that there is not really much demand for buses at that time
you dont see queues at the taxi ranks at 11:45 or 12:00

what are the elements of daytime service your talking about tell us

Flukey

There may not be much demand, but there is some and they should be serviced. The "rushing to get the last bus" people would stay a bit longer and be part of the demand after 11:30pm. There is usually lots of people on the last bus, but only because it is the last bus. Lots of them would still be around after 11:30 if they knew there were more buses. There are always lots of people around after 11:30pm. Lots of people miss the 11:30pm bus so they want the service, but have to go for a taxi, start to walk or go off somewhere to kill an hour before the Nitelink. Whatever way you look at it, the demand for a bus service does not completely dry up at 11:30pm and resume again at 12:30am. There should not be that hour of a gap. It should be a lot narrower.

What are the other elements to be improved? I think they've been covered plenty of times in the Communting/Transport forum. Dublin Bus has improved a lot over the past 10 or 15 years, but look through the threads here and you will see areas that could be improved. Everyone here has voiced their opinions on Dublin Bus so there are no shortage of problems and solutions out there.

shltter

you see thats the problem that i tried to point out to you
dublin bus is charged with operating as a commercial company as well as providing a public service
you as a customer dont care how much it costs you want a bus there when you want it irrespective of demand that is the public service you want
however there is not an endless supply of money to deliver the service you are looking for unfortunately dublin bus cannot just provide services because you think its a good idea the cost has to come into it if the demand is not there to sustain the service


the second part of your answer is a cop out you made a statement about things to improve the service and profitability that these were obvious
i asked what they are but you haven't provided an answer yet
what are the problems and solutions that there is no shortage of

Flukey

I know Dublin Bus just can't put buses out anywhere and everywhere when there isn't enough demand. I am using buses for a long time and they have improved the service by extending services and introducing new ones. That is the type of thing I am saying they should continue to do. They've plugged a lot of the gaps in their service. I remember the dark old days of CIE and the service they used to provide. They've brought in new routes and new types of services, like the Swifts and Imps. There was a requirement for those long before they were finally brought in.

What improvements would I like to see? An improved night service, as well you know. No matter what you may say, the current service does not meet the current demand. People do want to travel after 11:30pm and although we have the Nitelink the majority of people that want to travel aren't within 5 minutes walk of the wall of Trinity College or D'Olier St. The Nitelink only serves a small part of the customer market. I've frequently seen or been on half empty Nitelinks, getting emptier as they go out, passing willing and paying customers. With the amount of traffic on the street at that time of the night, picking them up is not going to slow it down much, particularly when they are dropping people off at many of the same stops. Then of course the bus returns empty, again passing customers that want to travel in that direction. Of course at one time we did not even have the Nitelink, so that is an improvement and at first it had even fewer routes and no pick up points, so it is improving, but there is still a large market not being tapped into. There is definitely more money to be made.

We get the arguments that it isn't profitable to provide some services. That can be true but often it has proved not to be the case. A few years ago we were told that serving the airport would not be profitable and there was little or no demand. Along comes Aircoach and suddenly Dublin Bus start running a number of routes, all of which are very busy. They've had to add more since they started. So a lot of the situations do turn out to be profitable when a service is put in.

So what other new things should they add? There should be more buses going into workplaces like industrial estates. Slowly they have been doing that. I know of a number of routes that have been extended into them and there is more scope to do so. Customers also want to be able to get into them, so there should be some runs in between the rush hours too.

We mentioned the IFSC in other threads. Having worked near it for a while, I used to see huge numbers walking down the quays, many of whom, including myself, had got off buses in the city centre. A lot of the buses running down the North Quays could go further down and serve it. With the IFSC and other developments down there, it is like a whole new city, which is hardly served by any bus bar the 53(A). We also have the ferry ports down there and guest and residential accommodation. Many of the companies are running their own buses, because Dublin Bus doesn't go down there. Special buses are put on for the events in the Point, because Dublin Bus doesn't go down there. Some of the existing buses could either go down and loop back around into the city or even have their terminus down there somewhere. There is more and more development going on there, so demand will increase further. Luas intends going there. Dublin Bus should already be there in force. Other growth areas around the city need to be watched too.

Most routes are radial, with the city centre as the hub. Often to get to somewhere, this means getting a bus in towards the city and another back out towards your destination, which wasn't that far from where you started. There are some routes that don't go into the city at all, like the 17 and 18 and there are some that go right through the city. There should be more of both of those kind of buses. With a bit of research they could find out where people travel to and add more routes on some of those areas that would have sufficient traffic. This could also take some pressure off the other routes as not as many people would be using them to go into and out of town, so some of the resources could be got from freeing up those routes a bit.

I mentioned circular style routes in another thread, where instead of going back and forth between two points along the same route, you could have routes that go and return by a different route. This would be handy for linking areas that are near to each other, without going near the city. A sort of a variation on the Imps idea. They could also be used for linking areas within the city. You could have routes that follow the two canals around the city for example. Research and planning could identify viable routes. As has been the experience before, some may prove more profitable than expected. More traffic might be taken off the roads, speeding things up and some pressure could be taken off other routes as I have said.

There are lots of problems on individual routes, where there are not enough services. One good example, is a non-city route (a good thing), the 75 running between Tallaght and Dun Laoghaire. I have had occasion to work in Tallaght and get it from Kilmacud to Tallaght. There is definitely a need for more runs toward Tallaght in the morning. There seems to be more coming from Tallaght than Dun Laoghaire. The 75 has a number of points where it really fills up. Approaching the Industrial Estate, approaching the school just before Ballinteer and coming in towards Tallaght itself. As the bus gets nearer to each of these, it really fills up and often has to pass some stops leaving passengers stranded. The next 75 generally isn't for at least half an hour, so if you miss it or it passes you by, you are stuck. It obviously is not meeting the demand there and just a few extra ones in the morning are needed. That is just one route I am familiar with, having travelled on it often, but I have seen the same kind of thing on other routes and heard similar things from people who travel on other routes. We all know routes that at certain times have certain stops with a lot of people waiting at and have full buses go by them. Some are on well served routes, so an empty one is likely to come by soon, but some are not so well served, yet this happens day after day.

There are a few ideas. I am sure you have a few yourself and others have too. It would be nice if we could all sit down with a map of Dublin, a map of the route network and a few of the management from Dublin Bus. We'd come up with lots of potential ideas that could be looked into. Over the years Dublin Bus has been "Changing with the city" and they are getting closer to "Serving the entire community" but there is scope for more. As a sister company puts it, they are not there yet, but they are getting there.

I don't drive and my work has taken me to different parts of the city for periods of time so I have a lot of experience as a regular passenger on various routes and a particular interest in the whole area. Many of the shortcomings I saw years ago have now been addressed. Hopefully some of the others, like proper night services, will be too. Many of their initiatives have proved far more successful than expected and generated further customers, so some of the things you have doubts about would probably work out a lot better than you expect. Sometimes the demand creates the service, but we have often seen a service creating a bigger demand.