Dublin Bus Network Review

bg07

New timetables up for Maynooth. Maynooth now has a clock face service but with a reduction in the number of services especially at the weekend.

Dyr

liger wrote: »

They've been active for a good few months now, You probably seen it saying .........Driving....... while the bus was moving. System just not in use yet.

it appeared to be active..displayed the locations.

KC61

New timetables here:

25

25a

25b

25x

26

66

66a

66b

66x

67

67a Cancelled - replaced by 67

67x

151

markpb

Bambi wrote: »

it appeared to be active..displayed the locations.

Not only is it working, it's also supplying data to the back office computers in Broadstone and to the test on-street displays, like the one at Malahide rd / Collins Ave (Donneycarney).

stop

25x to Belfield down from 8 to 3 a morning..

KC61

stop wrote: »

25x to Belfield down from 8 to 3 a morning..

Replaced by 25a/25b in south Lucan.

The 66d also appears to be replaced by additional 66x services.

stop

KC61 wrote: »

Replaced by 25a/25b in south Lucan.

The 66d also appears to be replaced by additional 66x services.

I was refering to Lucan-Belfield services

KC61

Fair enough - but that was well flagged (for better or worse).

dfx-

KC61 wrote: »

Replaced by 25a/25b in south Lucan.

The 66d also appears to be replaced by additional 66x services.

'Covered' or actually replaced..

We see how the 92 has been 'covered' by the 145

From my experience on the N4 outbound in the mornings and inbound on the evenings, there is no need to take away 25Xs, certainly from a demand point of view anyways..

KC61

dfx- wrote: »

'Covered' or actually replaced..

We see how the 92 has been 'covered' by the 145

From my experience on the N4 outbound in the mornings and inbound on the evenings, there is no need to take away 25Xs, certainly from a demand point of view anyways..

I'd stress that I am guessing here.

The 66d was a once a day service in each direction (hardly the same as the 92/145).

There are now several 66x services now serving Easton Road - either starting there or going via Easton Road to/from Maynooth.

stop

As an aside, 37X, 70B, 70X timetables still in place at belfield terminus.

I just hope when putting new timetables on the carousels, they have a bit of sense this time.

On Leeson St outbound, previously the had the once daily 66D, but not the 11/A

noelfirl

As a relatively frequent user, I've never found that many of the 25x/66x/67x have had more then 3-4 (at a push, 6) people on them by the time they get to Belfield, and that's in term, out of term being even fewer. Ditto they never pick up more then 2-3 leaving whenever I've got them in the evening, so I don't particularly think losing them going all the way out is going to be such a big deal. The greater impact will be on Lower Baggot Street, where along the stretch more then a dozen people would usually get off. There will be inconvenience for those used to getting the South Lucan 25x's being left on Merrion Square, but it's not massive.

The bigger issue I see is with the new stop variations-
25/25a/25b - College St. (In)/Aston (Out), Kildare/Dawson
66/67 - College St./Westmoreland, Nassau St./Clare St.
25x/66x/67x - D'Olier/Westmoreland, Nassau St./(No outbound), Kildare/SSG (Junc Dawson)

Now accepting that they may have easily bolloxed up the timetables (they have in the 66x - two Baggots with a Kildare sandwiched in between), it's a bit random, no? E.g. No D'Olier stops for the normal routes, 66/67 get Westmoreland, but 25/a/b gets shoved around the corner, a fairly long leg without stops between Dawson and Aston Quay, and gets no stop on Stephen's Green, that being a stop where the existing Xpresso's usually tend to pick up the greatest number of people before Westmoreland.

Not entirely sold on this at all, and it's going to be a nightmare to explain to the mother who is only recently a bus convert due to altered working hours.

markpb

noelfirl wrote: »

As a relatively frequent user, I've never found that many of the 25x/66x/67x have had more then 3-4 (at a push, 6) people on them by the time they get to Belfield, and that's in term, out of term being even fewer.

I always assumed the reason they went to UCD was because it's a handy place to dump an awful lot of buses for a short amount of time. Finding somewhere similar in the city centre where they won't end up blocking each other or causing traffic jams will be challenging.

KC61

noelfirl wrote: »

As a relatively frequent user, I've never found that many of the 25x/66x/67x have had more then 3-4 (at a push, 6) people on them by the time they get to Belfield, and that's in term, out of term being even fewer. Ditto they never pick up more then 2-3 leaving whenever I've got them in the evening, so I don't particularly think losing them going all the way out is going to be such a big deal. The greater impact will be on Lower Baggot Street, where along the stretch more then a dozen people would usually get off. There will be inconvenience for those used to getting the South Lucan 25x's being left on Merrion Square, but it's not massive.

The bigger issue I see is with the new stop variations-
25/25a/25b - College St. (In)/Aston (Out), Kildare/Dawson
66/67 - College St./Westmoreland, Nassau St./Clare St.
25x/66x/67x - D'Olier/Westmoreland, Nassau St./(No outbound), Kildare/SSG (Junc Dawson)

Now accepting that they may have easily bolloxed up the timetables (they have in the 66x - two Baggots with a Kildare sandwiched in between), it's a bit random, no? E.g. No D'Olier stops for the normal routes, 66/67 get Westmoreland, but 25/a/b gets shoved around the corner, a fairly long leg without stops between Dawson and Aston Quay, and gets no stop on Stephen's Green, that being a stop where the existing Xpresso's usually tend to pick up the greatest number of people before Westmoreland.

Not entirely sold on this at all, and it's going to be a nightmare to explain to the mother who is only recently a bus convert due to altered working hours.

Noel - stages do not equal stops.

There may well be more stops (Suffolk Street for example).

The timetables look ok in that the 25a and 25b are integrated to give a consistent service via the Chapelizod by-pass and the 66, 66a, 66b give a consistent 15 minute service to Leixlip, and with the 26 and 67 a 7-8 minute service to Chapelizod.

The key will be that the buses have sufficient running time to deliver the service - they do appear to have lengthened the running times so hopefully this one will work. The problem remains the 25b replacing the 25x.

thomasj

Wow! There was a time baggot street had 1 bus route now it has 7!

I can see this going pear-shaped! Talking to a driver on the 39 the other day in peak time it's taking 30 minutes to get from baggot street to Aston quay!

This and foxborough will cause problems longer waits etc just look at the 38 and 39.

noelfirl

KC61 wrote: »

Noel - stages do not equal stops.

There may well be more stops (Suffolk Street for example).

I am aware of that KC, but on the Xpressos, Stops purely do mean stops, don't they? In which case there is no Suffolk Street stop... And whilst I'd love to have your optimism about there being more stops then stages shown, I don't. Not until I see the maps, and until then based on previous aspects of Network Direct it's better to be pessimistic I think (e.g. the 39a doesn't stop on SSG either, which is suprising).

EDIT: Although I do see that on the existing 67x timetable it's not listed either, so we'll wait and see.

Corruptedmorals

Looks like the 66, 66a and 66b won't be racing each other into town anymore which is great. Really seems to work, using almost the exact same amount of busses. Used to get a lot of off-peak busses and there's awful long gaps around 7/8/9 but they seem to have fixed that. Don't know how the slightly longer route will affect the time the 66 arrives in Leixlip, already wildly unpredictable..could be a disaster when it's extended to Gleneaston next year.

dfx-

KC61 wrote: »

I'd stress that I am guessing here.

The 66d was a once a day service in each direction (hardly the same as the 92/145).

There are now several 66x services now serving Easton Road - either starting there or going via Easton Road to/from Maynooth.

Apologies, I was referring to the 25Xs disappearing:)

KC61

dfx- wrote: »

Apologies, I was referring to the 25Xs disappearing:)

That will be an issue - a rather hot potato.

AlekSmart

Annual DTO/NTA census.

This interests me greatly and in my opininion really needs to be picked up on PDQ if it`s not to compound an already fraught Dublin Public Transport scene.

This annual survey produces data which the relevant bodies,and,one supposes the new National Transport Authority,will use to assist in the modelling and formulation of FUTURE public transport provision.

Now,the problem we now have is that the data being manually recorded by the observers will record a truly out of sync pictire of the BUS service.

For example the recording of actual bus numbers going in one direction at peaks will often bear no resemblance to actual service provided as so many are operating Out-Of-Service.

For example a 145 displaying (under instruction) Private Hire will be recorded as a Bus,theoretically in-service but in reality not.
Anecdotally It would appear that the recording of such instructions is somewhat haphazard and I suspect that there is a lot of incorrect data being collated in this manner.

This spells disaster for Dublins Bus Services if this information is then used as a base for further extrapolation in planning terms...Garbage in=Garbage Out.

Whilst KC 61`s post is accurate and informative,some clarification may help.

3) Amazingly, despite point 1 above, productivity in terms of driver rosters still leaves an awful lot to be desired with some routes I understand still having low average working hours.

Point 1 is down to poor judgement, point 2 is down to incompetence, and point 3 is down to marked-in drivers (to my mind) having a veto on rosters.

The issue of average working hours for drivers is not one of simply asserting that they work longer.

The Busdrivers hours situation is already one of the most regulated in any employment,with many permutations in force.

Of course there are variables,but Total Duty hours system wide will be within a sliver of the 7hrs 38 minutes KC61 speaks of.

The issue of overall efficiency whilst encompassing Working Hours is not solely dependant on them.

The long layover examples KC61 speaks of,are as much testimony to a specific rushed,and some might say,botched,introduction of changes on the Ballinteer/Dundrum areas some years ago now whereby senior management ably encouraged by Local Political figures had to get the thing sorted as of yesterday...and the results never even mattered.

I`m also happy to see that KC61 qualifies his opinion of the supposed Marked-In drivers "Veto" in relation to schedules.

Whilst at one time it could be said that Drivers could obstruct and delay schedule alterations,this is no longer the situation.

One of the integral parts of the last Busdrivers productivity agreement was the acceptance of a new arrangement for the drawing up of schedules.

This allows for a maximum of 3 drafts of a schedule to be "rejected" before the schedule is submitted to a Tribunal under an independent chairperson who will then adjudicate and issue a binding decision.

The schedules as introduced for the Phase 1 ND elements were all agreed without recourse to the Tribunal,but were well flagged by both Union representatives and "Ordinary" Drivers as being largely unworkable.

The Drivers viewpoints have been totally vindicated,and then some,but therer is not so much as a hint of a public announcement of mea-culpa on this issue from the ND "Team".

It is to my mind a hugely risky enterprise to plough on with the remainder of ND whilst Phase One remains a very obviously unproven work-in-progress.

I think Cookie_Monster sums it up well....

Now the real question is who fault is it, DB or Deloitte. Did deloitte get it so wrong in there consultants reports and DB are just following what was recommended or are DB implementing the basics of the report with their own spin (and plenty of outside help from the politicians). Either way someone did / is doing very wrong at the top levels in there.

If I were asked to identify the fundamental error,I would opt for the decision,for I suspect,PR reasons to embark upon "Public Consultation Roadshows" at which it appears some people got to have a totally unreasonable level of attention paid to their requirements to the detriment of the greater good.

This I fear will become somewhat more apparent with the Lucan Corridor changes.

In the meantime everybody,both Staff and Customers can now only wait and see as to the way this will pan out...or go totally down the pan !

Jaysoose

Got on a bus with 39 on the front at 17:45 at pembroke street, got down to the quays and he stops at the bus stop where he is overheard telling somebody its a 39a.. queue people panicking and asking him why does he have 39 on the front if its not a 39.

His eloquent reply "its a 39a thats whats on the front of the bus" and going back into his seat and repeating "its a 39a" so apparently the 20 people on the bus read the front of the bus wrong and this one driver was right.

He was especially dismissive of a woman who was complaining, we all had to get off and wait for a 39 and he couldnt have cared less.

FAir play to that man for making a bad situation worse.

CIE

FAir play to that man for making a bad situation worse

Fair is foul and foul is fair, ride the bus through the fog and filthy air...?

Chuchoter

Are the city centre bus stops listed on th website still correct after these changes?

dirtynosebeps

KC61 you seem to know your stuff fairly well. but what you dont seem to be telling the public is that drivers also get to vote on the new timetables. now over the last couple of months drivers have voted on and rejected 95% of new timetables on the grounds that they drive the buses and know how long it gets from A to B ,not managment. the drivers know it's nearly impossible to make these runs in the amount of time given. yet when these timetables were rejected and dublin bus management pushed them in anyway. now what's happening is anarchy and chaos with any new timetables coming in. what i mean by this is buses running late, not showing up etc then the knock on affect is that drivers are getting abuse left right and centre for something thats out of their hands and control. as i have said before dont take your frustrations out on the bus drivers. it's not their fault. they're working with a mess created by others. i can tell you all for a fact that abuse is increasing daily due to these changes that are not going to work.
KC as for your remark about buses lying over an hour. i'd rather have a bus lying for 2 hours somewhere if i knew that bus was going to leave on it's alloted time and show up.you seem to be missing this picture.

jack presley

Has anyone ever gotten a reply from Dublin Bus to an email sent? I waiting over a week now for answers to why certain buses on the timetable don't seem to exist in reality.

med1

i have got replys to emails sent but they are always that things are rosy and that your views will be considered .
the unfortunate ting about the roadshows is that the staff at them are getting abuse but are not the people in charge of the changes .
in fact donal keating made an appearence at the finglas roadshow and made some promises that i guarentee he will break like he spoke about diverting the 40d down to scribblestown via carrdiffsbridge road and also said that the 40 78a change wont happen till janruary at the earliest even though the changes have been promised by him for end november

TheChrisD

jack presley wrote: »

Has anyone ever gotten a reply from Dublin Bus to an email sent?

Only once, and probably only because it was a complaint and they were chiming back with a "oh well, you know you're really supposed to do this, despite the fact that technically the thing that says you don't really need to isn't worded well at all".

richardjjd

jack presley wrote: »

Has anyone ever gotten a reply from Dublin Bus to an email sent? I waiting over a week now for answers to why certain buses on the timetable don't seem to exist in reality.

I've probably mailed them 4 times over the past three or four years - always about operational issues. I've never got a response to the first email. I have always had to send it a second time (at least) before getting a response. I generally left it at least week before following up, so it's not as if I'm emailing them twice in a day, or even over the course of a couple of days. [If anyone from DB is reading this and doubts this, please PM as I've kept the emails sent and received].

KC61

dirtynosebeps wrote: »

KC61 you seem to know your stuff fairly well. but what you dont seem to be telling the public is that drivers also get to vote on the new timetables. now over the last couple of months drivers have voted on and rejected 95% of new timetables on the grounds that they drive the buses and know how long it gets from A to B ,not managment. the drivers know it's nearly impossible to make these runs in the amount of time given. yet when these timetables were rejected and dublin bus management pushed them in anyway. now what's happening is anarchy and chaos with any new timetables coming in. what i mean by this is buses running late, not showing up etc then the knock on affect is that drivers are getting abuse left right and centre for something thats out of their hands and control. as i have said before dont take your frustrations out on the bus drivers. it's not their fault. they're working with a mess created by others. i can tell you all for a fact that abuse is increasing daily due to these changes that are not going to work.

I think it was fairly obvious in my post that drivers have a vote.

My posts have also made it quite clear that I would view that the running times have been cut too fine. To that point I suspect that the 25/25a/25b may have peak hour issues based on their outbound routing via Fitzwilliam Place (a major traffic problem location), Leeson Street, Dawson St etc.

AlekSmart wrote: »

The long layover examples KC61 speaks of,are as much testimony to a specific rushed,and some might say,botched,introduction of changes on the Ballinteer/Dundrum areas some years ago now whereby senior management ably encouraged by Local Political figures had to get the thing sorted as of yesterday...and the results never even mattered.

dirtynosebeps wrote: »

KC as for your remark about buses lying over an hour. i'd rather have a bus lying for 2 hours somewhere if i knew that bus was going to leave on it's alloted time and show up.you seem to be missing this picture.

I am fully aware of the circumstances in which the changes with the 14, 14a and 48a in Ballinteer and Dundrum took place, but frankly it is a disgrace that this has been left sit as they are so long. These routes have far too long running times in the evenings and at weekends with the result that buses and drivers are laying over for long periods of time when they could be used far more productively.

I am not missing any picture here. Of course running times have to be realistic in order to allow for traffic disruption etc., but in the case of the 48a they are anything but. The 0640 bus outbound has 1 hour 20 minutes to do the trip - it is at the outer terminus every morning in 35 minutes, and sits there for 45 minutes. The evening buses get 1 hour 40 minutes to do the outbound trip and 1 hour 20 to go back in. Each trip is being done in 45 minutes maximum. Two complete return journeys could be done in the time that it takes a bus to do one single return trip at the moment on the 48a in the evenings.

At the same time the 14 and 14a depart each terminus all evening within 10 minutes of one another and then there is a 40 minute gap until the next bus. It is utter madness. No private company would have allowed these sort of inefficiencies to persist for over 18 months. In fact they have existed (but not to this degree) ever since the 14/14a were extended to Dundrum over 5 years ago.

The bigger picture is that Dublin Bus has to become more efficient and eliminate this sort of nonsense if it is to survive - and I am not being overly dramatic in saying that. The company has seen revenues nose-dive while taking for ever to implement changes.

The problem now is that (from where I sit) on both the N11 and N3 they have cut the resources too much (in terms of running time), and that is having a seriously negative impact on reliability. At the same time they are still not in certain cases maximising internal efficiencies.

There is a balance to be struck and to my mind it is still some way off.

devnull

richardjjd wrote: »

I've probably mailed them 4 times over the past three or four years - always about operational issues. I've never got a response to the first email. I have always had to send it a second time (at least) before getting a response. I generally left it at least week before following up, so it's not as if I'm emailing them twice in a day, or even over the course of a couple of days. [If anyone from DB is reading this and doubts this, please PM as I've kept the emails sent and received].

Personally I find 8/10 times emailing head office is pointless, you tend to get a little bit further if you phone them, and even better if you know the right individuals contact details. Garages forward their calls a lot of the time to the central control room these days, so thats not as useful to call as they used to be.