DB: any new buses this year

Cookie_Monster

As per title will DB be adding any buses to the fleet this year?

In the current climate I doubt it and I don't think there are too many 98's left for the 12 year rule but ya never know with DB, so any new ones to watch for?

KC61

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

As per title will DB be adding any buses to the fleet this year?

In the current climate I doubt it and I don't think there are too many 98's left for the 12 year rule but ya never know with DB, so any new ones to watch for?

No there are no new buses this year.

There was a huge influx of extra buses in 1999 and I suspect that it will be 2012 before we get another round of fleet replacement deliveries.

antoinolachtnai

Why would DB only keep the buses for 12 years, if they are serviceable and if there is maintenance capacity (which there is)? The only thing that expires after 12 years is the chassis guarantee. But if the chassis hasn't broken by year 12, it's not going to break?

Cookie_Monster

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Why would DB only keep the buses for 12 years, if they are serviceable and if there is maintenance capacity (which there is)? The only thing that expires after 12 years is the chassis guarantee. But if the chassis hasn't broken by year 12, it's not going to break?

they write them off depreciation wise over 12 years and then sell then on to other users.
Mainly so they can get a newer fleet while there was money around I suspect. Maybe going forward we'll see longer retention periods now that most are low floor.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Why would DB only keep the buses for 12 years, if they are serviceable and if there is maintenance capacity (which there is)? The only thing that expires after 12 years is the chassis guarantee. But if the chassis hasn't broken by year 12, it's not going to break?

Listen lets not go back to the days of the 1980s and 1990s when an aging fleet was visibly stretching the maintenance resources to the limit and buses were frequently seen to be breaking down all around the city. Nowadays you rarely see that thankfully.

If you are going to encourage new users onto the bus the last thing you need are 15 year old + buses - you need to have some form of reasonably modern fleet.

Perhaps Swords Express should have launched their service with some 15 year old coaches? Eh I don't think so!

antoinolachtnai

KC61 wrote: »

If you are going to encourage new users onto the bus the last thing you need are 15 year old + buses - you need to have some form of reasonably modern fleet.

Well, it hasn't worked so far.

Passenger numbers for 2008 are the same as they were in 2000, and when the figures come for 2009, they may well show retreat to 1999 levels.

This is despite new buses and a 25 percent increase in capacity.

trad

Maybe Dublin Bus could go out and buy some new vehicles out of their profits like every other bus company that operates in the real world.

KC if the Swords Xpress got their buses for nothing of course they would have used the brand new buses that the government gave them but in the real world you have to buy buses.

loyatemu

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Well, it hasn't worked so far.

Passenger numbers for 2008 are the same as they were in 2000, and when the figures come for 2009, they may well show retreat to 1999 levels.

This is despite new buses and a 25 percent increase in capacity.

there's a lot of problems with the DB service, but the quality of the buses is not one of them. I can remember sitting down the back of the old Bombardier buses as they crawled over Bray Head, engines screaming, fumes leaking into the passenger compartment, at about 10mph, frequently breaking down halfway up the hill (though they probably weren't even 12 years old, they were junk the day they rolled of the line). Nobody wants to go back to that.

schemingbohemia

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Well, it hasn't worked so far.

Passenger numbers for 2008 are the same as they were in 2000, and when the figures come for 2009, they may well show retreat to 1999 levels.

This is despite new buses and a 25 percent increase in capacity.

How are your passenger numbers holding up? If yours haven't decreased, what would you put it down to?

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Well, it hasn't worked so far.

Passenger numbers for 2008 are the same as they were in 2000, and when the figures come for 2009, they may well show retreat to 1999 levels.

This is despite new buses and a 25 percent increase in capacity.

A significant proportion of the increase in passenger numbers came from the immigrant population who in very large numbers used public transport. With large numbers of these people leaving Ireland, coupled with a fall off in the numbers working, all modes of public transport (LUAS, rail and bus) have seen their numbers fall in the last eighteen months.

The challenge facing Dublin Bus now is to attract new users out of their cars - and hopefully the output from the network review, the impact of the bus gate, and the fringe benefits from the implementation of the AVLC system, namely the real time passenger information, will see real benefits.

robd

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

they write them off depreciation wise over 12 years and then sell then on to other users.
Mainly so they can get a newer fleet while there was money around I suspect. Maybe going forward we'll see longer retention periods now that most are low floor.

Also CIE (whole group) where somewhat unique in the public transport world in that they had access to fairly limitless capital over the last decade. Therefore Dublin Bus got to choose between new buses with low maintenance or old buses with high maintenance. The costs actually work out about the same. Newer buses cost far less to maintain. Probably won't have access to much capital for the foreseeable future so back to old buses with high maintenance.

_Kaiser_

KC61 wrote: »

The challenge facing Dublin Bus now is to attract new users out of their cars

Well speaking for myself as a private motorist, until public transport (especially outside the capital) can offer an attractive alternative to the benefits of car ownership I described here, then passenger numbers will continue to decline in my opinion.

Unless of course the powers that be make more short-sighted "stick" approaches to resolving the problem, ala the failed speed limit reduction in the city centre, but those who can will still take their car regardless.

Victor

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Why would DB only keep the buses for 12 years,

To keep Ian Paisley sweet.

KC61

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Well speaking for myself as a private motorist, until public transport (especially outside the capital) can offer an attractive alternative to the benefits of car ownership I described here, then passenger numbers will continue to decline in my opinion.

Unless of course the powers that be make more short-sighted "stick" approaches to resolving the problem, ala the failed speed limit reduction in the city centre, but those who can will still take their car regardless.

Fair enough - but you would like to think that with the introduction of real time information online, at stops and on mobile phones, together with a redesigned and rescheduled bus network offering cross-city options, and increased bus priority that at least some people will be tempted to switch.

In fairness the condensation problem is one specific to the Olympian fleet - none of the buses bought since 2000 suffer that problem.

A lot of the other issues you describe and wish for, while nice to have, are from utopia. There are always going to be people in society who will play their MP3 player with no concern for anyone else, and there will be occasions where people have to stand - its not ideal but it is a fact of travelling on public transport around the world.

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Plus I can also travel from A to B without having to unnecessarily detour via City Centre, and leave when I want to - not some arbritary timetable that is rarely kept to anyway.

This could be asking the impossible. For orbital journeys not to and from the city centre or alpong radial routes, it is very difficult to plan a bus service as by and large no two people's journeys are going to be identical. No matter how the bus service is designed it will not suit everyone, but the goal should be to suit a reasonable number of people. For orbital routes to be anywhere near economical they need to pass through areas where high usage is likely. That's why the 17 goes via Belfield from Blackrock to Dundrum rather than taking a more direct route. That's why the 75 goes via Ballinteer rather than Churchtown. Introducing timetables with intermediate times and realtime information will help, but it's never going to suit everyone.

Dyr

KC61 wrote: »

Listen lets not go back to the days of the 1980s and 1990s when an aging fleet was visibly stretching the maintenance resources to the limit and buses were frequently seen to be breaking down all around the city. Nowadays you rarely see that thankfully.

Apart from the fact that they're completely unsuitable for use in dublin, Those van hool buses that serve the 4 route break down regularly.

Cookie_Monster

Surely maintenance needs are based on miles travelled rather than time for DB since buses do such huge mileage?

In its 12 years life I would assume every major component apart from the chassis and body would be replaced at least once anyway. If they are kept at a certain standard for 10-12 years why not for another 10, I don't really see maintenance skyrocketing for the above reason. The much older fleet in perfectly serviceable order in the UK backs this up

KC61

Bambi wrote: »

Apart from the fact that they're completely unsuitable for use in dublin, Those van hool buses that serve the 4 route break down regularly.

"Van hool" buses??? Dublin Bus doesn't have any!

I assume that you are referring to the AW Wrights bodied Volvo articulated buses?

These were not buses that Dublin Bus chose to purchase but were forced on them by the DTO.

I'm not aware that they are that unreliable?

KC61

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Surely maintenance needs are based on miles travelled rather than time for DB since buses do such huge mileage?

In its 12 years life I would assume every major component apart from the chassis and body would be replaced at least once anyway. If they are kept at a certain standard for 10-12 years why not for another 10, I don't really see maintenance skyrocketing for the above reason. The much older fleet in perfectly serviceable order in the UK backs this up

The industry average is between 12 and 16 years.

The problem in Dublin before was that buses went well over 20 years and the results of that were plain to see - I am old enough to remember in the 1990s that seeing a bus broken down was a daily occurrence and generally more than once!

antoinolachtnai

KC61 wrote: »

With large numbers of these people leaving Ireland, coupled with a fall off in the numbers working, all modes of public transport (LUAS, rail and bus) have seen their numbers fall in the last eighteen months.

One mode of transport has increased its usage. The private, one-driver car.

The challenge facing Dublin Bus now is to attract new users out of their cars

No, that has been the challenge since 1987.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

One mode of transport has increased its usage. The private, one-driver car.

You did not read my post - I said PUBLIC transport. The fact is that we have become a nation of multiple car owners per household during that period - and that is in some way down to the Celtic Tiger explosion and a desire to have everything. As a nation we failed in this regard I think - and I feel that is right across the board, not just in relation to public transport.

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

No, that has been the challenge since 1987.

It is an ongoing challenge that I personally think DB and indeed the political masters should have woken up to a long time ago. They didn't, but I think that there is a realisation that change is necessary and steps are being taken to address it.

Let's see what 2010 brings - I do still remain optimistic as a customer that we are going to see real change this year. It is a massive task to completely redesign the network, the schedules, the public information, and implementing the AVLC and RTPI systems. But if it is done right, we will have a significant improvement.

schemingbohemia

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

One mode of transport has increased its usage. The private, one-driver car.



No, that has been the challenge since 1987.

Any chance of a reply to my previous question there antoin? How are your numbers for 2009? And if they did hold up better than Dublin Bus to what do you attribute that?

antoinolachtnai

Numbers are down a bit at peak, but really very little. We still need the same number of buses on the road. Off peak is not so good. There is less money for discretionary journeys. But the basic numbers are still there. We haven't had the sort of collapse that DB is talking about. We did have to take off the Sunday service. We would have preferred to keep investing in it to build it up. We are pretty sure that an extended route would make it profitable. However, with licence application for the extended route taking over two years to process, it was not realistic to continue carrying the loss in the hope that the licence might eventually come through.

It isn't for me to say why people use our service. However, taking a direct route and having a reasonable level of comfort definitely comes into it. The perception is that we adhere to the timetable reasonably well. I would say that our service is 'positioned' quite a bit differently to DB's.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Numbers are down a bit at peak, but really very little. We still need the same number of buses on the road. Off peak is not so good. There is less money for discretionary journeys. But the basic numbers are still there. We haven't had the sort of collapse that DB is talking about. We did have to take off the Sunday service. We would have preferred to keep investing in it to build it up. We are pretty sure that an extended route would make it profitable. However, with licence application for the extended route taking over two years to process, it was not realistic to continue carrying the loss in the hope that the licence might eventually come through.

It isn't for me to say why people use our service. However, taking a direct route and having a reasonable level of comfort definitely comes into it. The perception is that we adhere to the timetable reasonably well. I would say that our service is 'positioned' quite a bit differently to DB's.

I would not disagree with that. Swords Express is a niche service that offers an express coach operation from Swords to Dublin. It does just that and quite well too. It is these sort of operations that the private sector can do very well provided there is the opportunity to operate a direct express - similarly Flybus and Aircoach to/from the Airport.

Indeed the continued operation of the bus services via the Port Tunnel established during the Malahide viaduct collapse by both Bus Eireann and Dublin Bus have showed that provided that the priority is in place the the bus can be a viable option.

Dublin Bus is a public service that operates seven days a week providing mass transportation all over the city. This is a different business altogether.

antoinolachtnai

Comfortable public transport that operates to a schedule is not a niche service.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

Comfortable public transport that operates to a schedule is not a niche service.

An express coach service is different to an all day stage carriage bus operation in a variety of respects. It is a different product.

I am not in any way casting aspersions on the product, but operating a city bus operation of over 1000 buses is a hell of a different ball game to an express coach service operating 6 coaches. Factor in that Swords Express do not operate late at night or on Sundays.

You saw an opportunity for a service and you went for it. And I genuinely wish you the best of luck. At the end of the day, Dublin Bus however has an obligation to operate bus services - that is a different ball game.

Dyr

KC61 wrote: »

"Van hool" buses??? Dublin Bus doesn't have any!

I assume that you are referring to the AW Wrights bodied Volvo articulated buses?

These were not buses that Dublin Bus chose to purchase but were forced on them by the DTO.

I'm not aware that they are that unreliable?

I seem to remember seeing van hool logos on them somewhere maybe its a component or summat. I could just be completely wrong too

Since they've been put on the 4 route I've repeatedly seen them knocked out by the doors jamming, I've also seen green oily fluid leaking from the ceiling onto the passengers about four times, also repeated breakdowns from overheated engines in the summer. Thats only the shows stoppers, things like the rear suspension not working or not being turned on is fairly regular too.

paulm17781

KC61 wrote: »

AI am not in any way casting aspersions on the product, but operating a city bus operation of over 1000 buses is a hell of a different ball game to an express coach service operating 6 coaches.

Not if the process is solid. Fact is, I don't think DB know what a process is let alone how to stick to it.

AlekSmart

The Volvo/Wrights articulated buses (AW) could indeed be described as more of the "traditional" purchase of a CIE company.

By this I mean they represented a type of vehicle totally unsuited to the purpose to which they were originally procured for,but in true CIE fashion,Bus Atha Cliath persevered until a purpose could be found for them.

The initial accquisition of the AW`s came hot on the heels of London`s decision to retire the venerable Two Person Operated Routemaster and replace them with Articulated Single Deck vehicles.
(In London`s case Mercedes Benz Citaro`s)

At that time Articulated Buses were widely seen as offering a capacity boost over the old outdated (TPO) Routemaster and London went on a spending spree,eventually ending up with over 200 of the type.

However,London,whose public transport was attended to by Transport for London (TfL) had the foresight to actually put some thought into the mechanics of replacing 9 mtr long 2 mtr wide vehicles with 18Mtr long 2.55 Mtr wide replacements.

This resulted in MAJOR alterations to the very basis of the London Central Zone operations.
The most obvious of these being the elimination of ALL on-bus cash transactions and the introduction of Kerbside Ticket Vending Machines allied to a totally Flat Fare.
Additionally the roadside infrastructure was radically altered with new Bus-Stands and Bus Stops as well as Artic Friendly turning places.

Thias allowed for several high frequency Central London routes such as the 25,38 and 73 (or Seventy FREE as it came to be known) to be converted with some level of success.

With the London Citaro`s having THREE doors and with there now being no requirement on each passenger to loiter and gabble to the Driver the Citaro`s actually became a VERY useful mass-transit tool.

Just to underline the type of Routes we are talking of,the 38 would have had a peak frequency in excess of every 3 minutes and these buses would have spent most of their working lives very well laden indeed.

I remember standing on the corner at Victoria Terminal watching the 38`s Routemasters steaming in with full standing loads at 2300 !!...not a scene likely to be repeated in dear old Dublin town.

The problem with Articulated Bus operation in London was one of traditional perceptions,not helped by a rather disconcerting habit of the Citaro`s to spontaneously combust with a couple of them being totally destroyed and quite a few more badly damaged by "mysterious" fires.
(Worryingly,Mercedes Benz products appear to have a problem with Fire,as there are many incidences,including here in Ireland,of their Ambulance bodied vehicles burning out also).

Anyway,that was London.....This is Dublin,and the traditional Irish methodologies of introducing new-stuff was adhered to rigidly....

Essentially this menat introducing our version of hi-capacity,hi-frequency artic,with two doors.
We deployed them initially on the Number 10 route,definitely a suitable case for them and then sat back to watch.

Not surprisingly,"problems" began to arise.....

Totally unforseen problems,such as the massive queue`s as the 50% of passengers still clinging to the old style cash transaction insisted on crosing the Drivers palm with silver.

Then the added and also unforseen problem of a hinged 18Mtr vehicle being unable to safely fit into the road space allotted to a 9.8 Mtr vehicle.

Additionally the Volvo articulated chassis proved to be rather quirky if not downright troublesome,with many incidences of relatively minor faults totally disabling the entire vehicle,often at the MOST inconvienent location.

The entire route 10 episode was a fiasco,clearly outlining our inability to make adequate plans BEFORE embarking upon flights of fancy.

It was`nt long before the AW`s were quietly slipped away from the mainline routes and they spent a while languishing down the back of the Garage before reappearing on the Number 4 route,by which time a few artic specific modifications had been made to allow them to fully realize their potential.

The real icing on the cake of course was Dublin City Council`s embarkation on a wide ranging programme of Lengthening Bus Bay`s,altering junction layouts and repositioning traffic signal arrays to cater for Articulated operation...all of this on the 10 route and a full year AFTER the beasts had been withdrawn from it...but hey..it`s the thought that counts...is`nt it ??

Ah Jeebus,but I`m tired out here and it`s all water under the bridge now anyway,nobodys fault,nobodys responsible and most of all..never,ever,ever ask the opinions of those who will operate or use the vehicles...!

PS: Just in case anybody thinks I`m needlessly singling out the Irish in all of this....I was in York for the introduction of the "ftr" Articulated Bus-Tram service on their number 4 route.

This was a joint operation between the local authority and First Group,utilising very futuristic looking (The clue is in the name..."ftr"....The FUTURE of Bus travel) articulated Wrights Street Car (Same basic Volvo running gear as the Dublin AW`s).

It was a Shambles..from beginning to end...with vehicle breakdowns,traffic and roadside issues,ticketing system failures and much else.
Travelling around on the First day of the StreetCar`s high-profile introduction I kept expecting to see some Dublin functionary who might have being doing a bit of "consulting" in their spare time.

The thing was so bad that the brand new Ticket System had to be withdrawn and replaced by on-board "Assistants" who would meet,greet,assist and sell tickets...the Yorkonians merely called them Conductors :eek: ,a term which greatly disturbed the sharp-suited eager young FirstGroup PR professionals..

The York fiasco led to a major reappraisal by First Group of future ventures and the recriminations are still being felt today,BUT,York City Council also went back to the drawing board to rewrite its own groundrules for future "ftr" type adventures.

Now,where`s my hot water bottle ??

KC61

paulm17781 wrote: »

Not if the process is solid. Fact is, I don't think DB know what a process is let alone how to stick to it.

We could go around in circles until the cows come home on this one. Every one agrees that there needs to be a major revamp in the bus service in Dublin.

We all know there is one coming - I think that at this stage we could all moan and groan but frankly until we see what changes the network review actually proposes I think we need to hold back somewhat.

_Kaiser_

Let me just say at this point that I'm not anti-public transport, I just feel that it has a LONG way to go in this country to be considered a viable and attractive alternative for a lot of motorists.

I lived in Holland in the mid-80s for a number of years and even back then you had integrated ticketing/smartcards, timetables on bus stops for THAT stop (not a terminus maybe an hour away), punctual and reliable services, interlinking services etc - that's 25 years ago now and we STILL haven't gotten these fundamentals right in this country.

KC61 wrote: »

Fair enough - but you would like to think that with the introduction of real time information online, at stops and on mobile phones, together with a redesigned and rescheduled bus network offering cross-city options, and increased bus priority that at least some people will be tempted to switch.

Perhaps, but enough to make a real difference - that's the question!

In fairness the condensation problem is one specific to the Olympian fleet - none of the buses bought since 2000 suffer that problem.

I'll give you that one, but it's a flaw that started with the RH class in 1990 and still hadn't been resolved by the RV class of 1997-99?

A lot of the other issues you describe and wish for, while nice to have, are from utopia. There are always going to be people in society who will play their MP3 player with no concern for anyone else, and there will be occasions where people have to stand - its not ideal but it is a fact of travelling on public transport around the world.

True there are some things (like standing) that will always be a factor - but this can be addressed by increasing frequency, or at least ensuring that the ones that are there turn up and on time. The rest are factors that public transport DOES need to come up with SOME answer to if it's to encourage people to switch, and late/missing overcrowded buses with scumbags on the top-deck (on many routes) is not gonna do it!

This could be asking the impossible. For orbital journeys not to and from the city centre or alpong radial routes, it is very difficult to plan a bus service as by and large no two people's journeys are going to be identical. No matter how the bus service is designed it will not suit everyone, but the goal should be to suit a reasonable number of people. For orbital routes to be anywhere near economical they need to pass through areas where high usage is likely. That's why the 17 goes via Belfield from Blackrock to Dundrum rather than taking a more direct route. That's why the 75 goes via Ballinteer rather than Churchtown. Introducing timetables with intermediate times and realtime information will help, but it's never going to suit everyone.

Also true but there is as yet no DB service between the Coolock area and Blanchardstown (for example), or any service that uses the M50.

This means that to get between those 2 points, you need to either go via "an lar", or take 3 buses each way (27, 17A, 220) via Ballymun and Finglas.

Now you may say that there's no demand for this particular service, but considering that there's people all over the city trying to get to these suburban business parks (and considering that I can make the same trip by car in 25 minutes on the M50), surely it's high time that DB management wake up to the fact that not everyone either wants (or needs) to go through the city centre!

The above example would also serve several large working class areas where bus usage is higher than say better-off middle-class areas.
It's also worth noting that (dreams of metros aside), these areas never saw the DART, or the LUAS, but that's probably partly down to the fact that voter turnouts in these areas is historically lower as well, and there's no SMB influence to lobby for additional services - basically the "poor working class people" don't count in our modern Irish society.. at least as far as the government is concerned!

And again, what about outside the cities, where "public transport" might consist of a antiquated Bus Eireann coach twice a day (if even that!), or where you have to drive 20 minutes to get to the bus stop and again, wait for a random time for it to show up. The reality is that it's simply impractical to live outside Dublin without having access to a car, and THIS is perhaps the even larger issue that has to be addressed.

antoinolachtnai

KC61 wrote: »

An express coach service is different to an all day stage carriage bus operation in a variety of respects. It is a different product.

Yes, it's a much more lucrative, profitable product, because a much bigger market is served.

At the end of the day, Dublin Bus however has an obligation to operate bus services - that is a different ball game.

No it doesn't. Dublin Bus signed up to a contract and agreed to provide these services. It can give up the contract any time it wants. (Dublin Bus does however, have a perpetual, exclusive *right* to operate these services for as long as it wishes.)

Cookie_Monster

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

No it doesn't. Dublin Bus signed up to a contract and agreed to provide these services. It can give up the contract any time it wants. (Dublin Bus does however, have a perpetual, exclusive *right* to operate these services for as long as it wishes.)

do you think the gov would let DB operate for more than 5 mins if they pulled out of the "community service" part of the netwrok, don't be so nieve.

I don't like private operators in Dublin in general, they strip DB of its profitable routes and means more tax payers subsidies are required to run the same service, look at the UK, all privatised and a total mess service wise.

antoinolachtnai

Sure they would. No question about it. DB is just a contractor, and would be replaced with another.

They wouldn't receive any further payments under the public service contracts, obviously.

KC61

I'll put this a different way. Dublin Bus operate an essential public service. Swords Express' product is a desireable extra.

KC61

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Also true but there is as yet no DB service between the Coolock area and Blanchardstown (for example), or any service that uses the M50.

This means that to get between those 2 points, you need to either go via "an lar", or take 3 buses each way (27, 17A, 220) via Ballymun and Finglas.

Now you may say that there's no demand for this particular service, but considering that there's people all over the city trying to get to these suburban business parks (and considering that I can make the same trip by car in 25 minutes on the M50), surely it's high time that DB management wake up to the fact that not everyone either wants (or needs) to go through the city centre!

I wouldn't disagree that the northside orbital routes are not as integrated as they could and should be. However, a bus operating along the M50 is simply not going to carry enough people to be economically justifiable. It needs to call at the various places en route - i.e. Santry, Ballymun, Finglas etc to get sufficient passengers.

While there might be a reasonably high number using the bus in the mornings, experience also shows that numbers in the evenings taper downwards, as while people may well all start work at around the same time, they tend to finish at different times, some get lifts home, while others go to different locations beforehand.

The next question would be how would you route a service through all the business parks - which one do you serve first etc.? People who work in the last one served are less likely to use the bus.

Regrettably, as I've said it really is impossible to please everyone with orbital routes as each person's journey is different. What can be done is to try to broadly satisfy the majority of people.

antoinolachtnai

So a service from (say) Dublin City Centre to Dundrum (a corridor served by the Luas) is an 'essential' service, or (say again) Connolly to Heuston is an 'essential' service, whilst a service from Coolock to Blanchardstown is not? An express service from Swords (Ireland's largest town) to the city centre is 'essential', but an express service in the opposite direction is not? This is very confusing.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

So a service from (say) Dublin City Centre to Dundrum (a corridor served by the Luas) is an 'essential' service, or (say again) Connolly to Heuston is an 'essential' service, whilst a service from Coolock to Blanchardstown is not? An express service from Swords (Ireland's largest town) to the city centre is 'essential', but an express service in the opposite direction is not? This is very confusing.

Please stop trying to play semantics with my posts. You know exactly what I mean.

I anm referring to the Dublin Bus core product - the stage carriage city bus service. I made that clear several times above.

That is an essential service.

If we take your reasoning above then people in Ballinteer and Enniskerry would be deprived their bus service to/from the city because some of the route passes alongside the LUAS.

I qualified my comments on the orbital services heavily above by explaining how difficult they are to plan.

antoinolachtnai

If the objective is modal shift from car to bus, then it is very hard to see how any service which attracts commuter passengers is any less essential than any other.

A fifteen minute frequency service to the Luas station would seem like a more essential service than an hourly service to the city.

The fact that something requires research and non-obvious answers is not a reason not to do it.

patrickbrophy18

KC61 wrote: »

I wouldn't disagree that the northside orbital routes are not as integrated as they could and should be. However, a bus operating along the M50 is simply not going to carry enough people to be economically justifiable. It needs to call at the various places en route - i.e. Santry, Ballymun, Finglas etc to get sufficient passengers.

While there might be a reasonably high number using the bus in the mornings, experience also shows that numbers in the evenings taper downwards, as while people may well all start work at around the same time, they tend to finish at different times, some get lifts home, while others go to different locations beforehand.

The next question would be how would you route a service through all the business parks - which one do you serve first etc.? People who work in the last one served are less likely to use the bus.

Regrettably, as I've said it really is impossible to please everyone with orbital routes as each person's journey is different. What can be done is to try to broadly satisfy the majority of people.

The R113 could be used from Tallaght Square to Liffey Valley picking up large sums of people. From here, hop on to the M50. Exit at the Ballymun Road. Take to the R104 where you would eventually end up in Coolock. Also, other route variants could serve City West, Blanchardstown and Sandyford even. These are the kind of services which should have been introduced upon the completion of These Industrial Estate Developments.However, the M50 would have to be used between certain Junctions to speed up the service. Therefore, the M50 is being used wisely all the while picking up passengers at large catchment areas.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

If the objective is modal shift from car to bus, then it is very hard to see how any service which attracts commuter passengers is any less essential than any other.

A fifteen minute frequency service to the Luas station would seem like a more essential service than an hourly service to the city.

The fact that something requires research and non-obvious answers is not a reason not to do it.

Ah yes and the LUAS drops you to St Stephen's Green while the bus brings you right into the city centre to either Townsend Street or Parnell Square.

So you're suggesting someone should have to pay three times rather than having the option of once if they're going to say O'Connell Street? And incidentally isn't that what they'll be doing with the proposed smartcard purse too!!!

As for the orbital service - I did not say it should not happen - in fact if you read my post earlier I agreed that better co-ordination on the northside was needed. I just said that a service along the M50 would be unlikely to be economically viable.

At the end of the day you and I could go on and on with this. You have your view of what constitutes essential public transport, I have mine. Let us agree to disagree.

antoinolachtnai

So work out a combined fare with the Luas. Next.

I thought services that were required but weren't economically viable was what public service was all about.

KC61

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

So work out a combined fare with the Luas. Next.

I thought services that were required but weren't economically viable was what public service was all about.

There is not one currently - other than a period pass and that is more expensive than the bus fare. And perhaps you should say that to the RPA because that is not what is on the cards for the smartcard purse and you know that.

Please can you stop being quite so patronising. I have been an observer of the transport scene as a customer in Ireland for far longer than you have been involved in Swords Express. I know the battles that go on versus regulators and with other operators. I like to think I do understand the history of the politics too.

As a non driver and a daily user of public transport in Ireland I am all too aware of the shortcomings of our transport operations but I am also aware of each of the individual operators' (and I include Dublin Bus) vested interests which are not necessarily in the best interests of the customer.

I am getting rather tired of reading your rather simplistic views of how the transport world does and will operate in the future. It is far more complicated than you ever will suggest particularly because of the involvement of civil servants and politicians.

antoinolachtnai

I am not being patronizing. I am being realistic. I am a bit tired of hearing lame excuses being trotted out for a system that has increased capacity by 25 percent, but is carrying fewer people than it did in 2000.

Why is it not on the cards to have a single fare for bus and luas? I do not 'know' anything about it, other than that it makes no sense to run state-funded buses in competition with a state-funded tram.

AlekSmart

Rather than get involved in any unpleasantness between two committed but differing views on our agreed level of Public Transport dysfunctionality,I believe we should be crying foul at the continuing antics regarding the single most important piece of Irish Public Transport Infrastructure ever.....Integrated Ticketing.

http://www.nationaltransport.ie/index.html

The current announcement regarding two senior appointments to the National Transport Authority continue to cause me a degree of woe.

Specifically the following element of the duties of the Director of Public Transport Services,

Take over responsibility of the Integrated Ticketing Project from the Railway Procurement Agency and manage its implementation and development;

This now inserts yet another level of uncertainty into what is already an unduly protracted process which deserved to totally wrapped up and implimented as the FIRST [/B

Instead we now have yet another period of familioarization whilst a new director(ate) gets up to speed on whats afoot.]element of a National Public Transport strategy.

Indeed I was surprised that two such Senior NTA appointments are being advertised now,well after the setup of the Authority itself.
I would have assumed that the entire ethos of the Authorities remit would have required strong input from BOTH these officers as an integral part of the NTA`s policy formulation....it appears I was mistaken ?

antoinolachtnai

No, I would not think you are mistaken. However, the NTA does not consider policy to be essential. NTA plans to act first and develop strategies and policies later. At present it is going ahead with developing rules for bus licensing in the absence of any policy.

AlekSmart

At present it is going ahead with developing rules for bus licensing in the absence of any policy.

Oh Dear...shades of a bygone era..."An Irish solution to an Irish problem"......Incompetency ?