Dublin Bus Network Review

devnull

Buses heading around with out of date displays as well, saw several 46A's with Mountjoy Square on them in Phibsboro on the way to Phoenix Park, and the 145's also seem to be showing the same despite the fact they did not go there.

Saw bus stops on Parnell Square are also out of date, still stating that the 145 was stopping there on the bus stop, despite the fact it does not go there anymore. Timetables mostly old ones but some of the newer design stops have a poster saying new ones will be posted soon.

Only congratulations of the morning goes for the new route 4, who still has bendy buses on, which look to have got a stay of execution (some rare common sense has prevailed!), with updated displays stating their new Monkstown destination!

devnull

noelfirl wrote: »

Speaking of routes that no longer exist, two 746's passed us heading into town :rolleyes:

Were there any pax on board and were they heading to the airport? Strange considering they were only supposed to be one an hour or so even when they were running?

markpb

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

well done DB. FFS how hard can it be to organise to getting feckin timetables replaced on the small number of affected routes :rolleyes:

It's very hard if you don't give a crap.

The new timetables that they put up two years ago showing local area maps, disabled service maps and some timetables have been wrong at several stops for two years. Buses that don't serve it are listed, buses that do are missing, the local area maps were removed several months ago and never replaced. I've contacted them numerous times, the timetables have been replaced or reprinted but never corrected. If they can't get a routine thing like that right, do you expect them to get a bigger plan like the Network Direct changeover done properly?

noelfirl

devnull wrote: »

Were there any pax on board and were they heading to the airport? Strange considering they were only supposed to be one an hour or so even when they were running?

The fact that there were two of them in the space of no more then 10 mins was what suprised me most, but thinking back on at least one occasion I've seen that before. Yes, both had passengers, one display was definitely for the airport, the other was in SuperBig(TM) 746 mode when it passed so I didn't see the destination, but presumably it was the same.

devnull

markpb wrote: »

It's very hard if you don't give a crap.

The new timetables that they put up two years ago showing local area maps, disabled service maps and some timetables have been wrong at several stops for two years. Buses that don't serve it are listed, buses that do are missing, the local area maps were removed several months ago and never replaced. I've contacted them numerous times, the timetables have been replaced or reprinted but never corrected. If they can't get a routine thing like that right, do you expect them to get a bigger plan like the Network Direct changeover done properly?

That map of accessible services has been the same version since 2005, so many routes have been added to low floor since then and so many have been canceled or had their routing changed.

Yet at one of the stops I use frequently there is a new print dated July 2010, which features the same map along with some NEW FOR 2005 marks next to it.

236 timetable has been wrong for years, half the buses don't even serve the place the timetable says try telling HQ that, can't possibly believe that they have it wrong and thats half the problem. They can't admit their mistakes.

devnull

noelfirl wrote: »

The fact that there were two of them in the space of no more then 10 mins was what suprised me most, but thinking back on at least one occasion I've seen that before. Yes, both had passengers, one display was definitely for the airport, the other was in SuperBig(TM) 746 mode when it passed so I didn't see the destination, but presumably it was the same.

If this continues I'm sure Aircoach would have something to say about that.

KC61

The 746 services are 41X buses returning in service to Harristown as they have done all along from UCD.

devnull

Still, if the route does not exist they should not be running anymore on a route that the company has given the license up on.

By all means operate the buses in service back to the garage, but it should be on a valid route not one which they have kicked out. Why not the 4 for instance? Or operate the 46A to the city centre then back to Harristown?

KC61

devnull wrote: »

Still, if the route does not exist they should not be running anymore on a route that the company has given the license up on.

By all means operate the buses in service back to the garage, but it should be on a valid route not one which they have kicked out. Why not the 4 for instance? Or operate the 46A to the city centre then back to Harristown?

Dublin Bus do not hold route licences.

devnull

But they are running services on a route that does not exist, and is not timetabled anymore, which should not be acceptable, otherwise it makes a mockery of the whole system if you ask me.

If it was Dublin Bus or any other operator I would say the same, it's one thing running extra departures, but it's a complete other to run services that no longer exist.

Cookie_Monster

lot of anxious looking people waiting for the 46c in Cherrywood today

noelfirl

So in other words, selected 746s, 46c's (and possibly 'b's and 'd's) will continue to operate for the forseeable future, despite not being timetabled at all anymore. Well that's not going to be confusing to any customers at all.

stop

noelfirl wrote: »

So in other words, selected 746s, 46c's (and possibly 'b's and 'd's) will continue to operate for the forseeable future, despite not being timetabled at all anymore. Well that's not going to be confusing to any customers at all.

Same as they have always been - the Xpressos return to City Centre from UCD mostly as 46?'s, better than running them empty (as is done with the afternoon expressos from city centre to UCD). But they really should be timetabled somewhere as a short running.

Pigwidgeon

I just noticed that as part of the new timetables, they now have place specific PDF ones, so hopefully there will be less guess work when your bus is due.
For example, you can now get a 145 timetable from Bray, and not just Kilmacanogue.

noelfirl

stop wrote: »

Same as they have always been - the Xpressos return to City Centre from UCD mostly as 46?'s, better than running them empty (as is done with the afternoon expressos from city centre to UCD). But they really should be timetabled somewhere as a short running.

I have no issues with running them as extra departures, yes it is entirely sensible to get use out of them on the return journey, but preferably not dressed up as a route which no longer officially exists?

KC61

Perhaps as a 46C (short working on 46a) to O'Connell Street and then 16a to Airport?

stop

noelfirl wrote: »

I have no issues with running them as extra departures, yes it is entirely sensible to get use out of them on the return journey, but preferably not dressed up as a route which no longer officially exists?

Well 46C would follow the convention of a short running to the City Centre.. of course as this is a recently cancelled use they should probably use something a bit more distictive.

Cookie_Monster

KC61 wrote: »

Perhaps as a 46C (short working on 46a) to O'Connell Street and then 16a to Airport?

if they are runninginto the CC, why not just "City centre" or 46. if outbound then simply "Belfield" or whereever they are going to.
All CC belfield buses used to be 46e's on the timetable anyway

Its like that ridiculous number 3 from Bray to Belfield, does nothing but confuse people.

stop

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

if they are runninginto the CC, why not just "City centre" or 46. if outbound then simply "Belfield" or whereever they are going to.

Belfield via 46a route or Belfield via 10/39a route though?
An informative number is crucial.
This is why having a generic number 1 for city centre short workings didn't work. You could have two short working (last buses) of say 122 & 123 calling at the same stop but no way for average joe to tell which was the one he wanted.

devnull

There used to be the same with 111's as well, when that existed there used to be multiple 111's going around in various parts of the city a few years ago just saying city centre, yet nowhere near the usual area that this route served!

Cookie_Monster

stop wrote: »

Belfield via 46a route or Belfield via 10/39a route though?
An informative number is crucial.
.

doesn't matter. If people want to go to Belfield they can get it, if not just wait for a numbered bus. these are just essentially OOS buses running to relieve pressure at rush hour after all (mostly).

Halve_ZOL

devnull wrote: »

There used to be the same with 111's as well, when that existed there used to be multiple 111's going around in various parts of the city a few years ago just saying city centre, yet nowhere near the usual area that this route served!

Usually I hop on the 39 into town every morning at 5.45. This morning and last thursday/friday I got onto a 111 going to 'city centre'. It runs through the Hartstown/Huntstown loop, crosses the N3 to Corduff and the NAC. Back to Blanch and Castleknock villages. Auburn Avenue and then Navan/Cabra road towards Mater. Through another detour it crosses the Liffey at Queen Street. Loops at Heuston Station and back along the northside quays....
I've been trying to find anything about this route but nothing on the DB site... Thought it had something to do with the network review.

Does anybody know what the story is with this 111 bus in Clonsilla/Blanch?

stop

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

doesn't matter. If people want to go to Belfield they can get it, if not just wait for a numbered bus. these are just essentially OOS buses running to relieve pressure at rush hour after all (mostly).

Why should they have to wait just because someone if too lazy to bother coming up with a numbering system?

AlekSmart

If they are runninginto the CC, why not just "City centre" or 46. if outbound then simply "Belfield" or whereever they are going to.

Ahhhh Cookie...you`re a Monster after my own heart

Not for the first time have you spotted how my employers have taken a situation where no problem existed (Fare Stage Markings anybody ?) and built a netwrok of suitably impressive problems which then take enormous effort to partially address...:mad:

Rewind a little here.

One of the benefits of the old cloth scroll steup,as the ability to have a destination-specific display with the Numerical aspect blank.

This I would describe as Flexibility.

When the Digital Display arrived this facility was continued with City Centre-An Lár as a stand alone display....grand job sez you ?

However,for some no doubt highly technical reason,a decision was taken and implimented pdq to remove this facility and restrict the City Centre-An Lár display to a route specific one,eg: 11C,16C,19C etc.....

Therein Cookie Monster,hangs the tale....

Once again I take the view that elements such as Destination displays and On-Street Information should not be up for discussion in terms of Service adjustments...they are,or at least should be ...a given..End Of.

The actual Busdrivers lot is considerably worsened by not having an ability to display accurate information and this always results in unpleasantness and confrontation..plus,in my humble,loss of business.

But that`s only my opinion.:)

Bazzer2

Halve_ZOL wrote: »

Does anybody know what the story is with this 111 bus in Clonsilla/Blanch?

This is a 'Ghost' bus, provided for early-morning staff getting to Garages (for example, Conyngham Road Garage, hence the Heuston loop), but doesn't have a problem in picking up regular punters who want to get to the city.

However it's not in the timetable as sometimes it may not run, or run at a later time.

KC61

Halve_ZOL wrote: »

Usually I hop on the 39 into town every morning at 5.45. This morning and last thursday/friday I got onto a 111 going to 'city centre'. It runs through the Hartstown/Huntstown loop, crosses the N3 to Corduff and the NAC. Back to Blanch and Castleknock villages. Auburn Avenue and then Navan/Cabra road towards Mater. Through another detour it crosses the Liffey at Queen Street. Loops at Heuston Station and back along the northside quays....
I've been trying to find anything about this route but nothing on the DB site... Thought it had something to do with the network review.

Does anybody know what the story is with this 111 bus in Clonsilla/Blanch?

It's a bus that operates to bring staff in to the garages, that deviates substantially from the normal route. They do also allow passengers use them. The loop at Heuston is to serve Conyngham Road depot. There are a number of such early morning services around the city.

The use of 111 is simply driver choice as there is no generic "City Centre" destination on the electronic display.

Similarly the use of "3 UCD" on the school bus from Kilcoole returning to Donnybrook was because there was no suitable alternative and also because if 84 was used people expected it to go all the way to the city - that has now been rectified by the curtailment of the 84.

honru

markpb wrote: »

It's very hard if you don't give a crap.

The new timetables that they put up two years ago showing local area maps, disabled service maps and some timetables have been wrong at several stops for two years. Buses that don't serve it are listed, buses that do are missing, the local area maps were removed several months ago and never replaced.

It's a joke. One of the stops on the Rock Road near Blackrock has the times for the 7 route on the Saturday blank, with the added statement "the times for this route will be updated next week", or something like that. Unless it has been updated recently, the poster hasn't been changed since it was added over a year ago.

stop

f®eak s©enery wrote: »

It's a joke. One of the stops on the Rock Road near Blackrock has the times for the 7 route on the Saturday blank, with the added statement "the times for this route will be updated next week", or something like that. Unless it has been updated recently, the poster hasn't been changed since it was added over a year ago.

Same on Northumberland Road

AlekSmart

Similarly the use of "3 UCD" on the school bus from Kilcoole returning to Donnybrook was because there was no suitable alternative and also because if 84 was used people expected it to go all the way to the city - that has now been rectified by the curtailment of the 84.

Au contraire KC,it most certainly has not been "rectified".

Because,having removed the pre-existing flexible destination display capability,thus manufacturing the problem,we then carried blissfully on,with drivers comments being happily brushed aside as "moaning".

What you are now suggesting is that it took a hugely expensive consultants review of the entire company to "rectify" a problem which the company did not accept existed at all..??...or am I missing something...?

Cookie_Monster

KC61 wrote: »

Similarly the use of "3 UCD" on the school bus from Kilcoole returning to Donnybrook was because there was no suitable alternative and also because if 84 was used people expected it to go all the way to the city - that has now been rectified by the curtailment of the 84.

of course there was an alternative. 84 with Belfield, if people are to stupid to get that then there's no hope for them. or 145 to Donnybrook, it's not like the bus went through Stillorgan Village anyway. or 84a to show its similar but not 84. having the 3 was (is) just ridiculous and confusing, why not 14 or 25 or 68 or any other number just pulled from their asses?

The problem will still not be solved as this bus I doubt will pull off for Cherrywood or Stillorgan, otherwise its a normal 84 and should be on the timetable as such.