Dublin Bus Network Review

LXFlyer

liger wrote: »

But if they are putting up plans, example the 140

"Route 140 will be extended and offer a full cross city option for customers to Rathmines, Terenure, Tallaght (The Square) and Kiltipper. It will operate on its current alignment in the Finglas area"

And know very well that they are going to change it when the Tallaght phase is announced then arent they just misleading people!

As for the start point, i really think there would have been less confussion if they had of came out with a brand new network all at once. Announced it a month before the summer school holidays and implemented it one week into them. Instead its been dragged out and will last about a year.

Physically doing that would be impossible - there would simply not be the resources to deal with it. Can you imagine the volume of emails that would be coming into the office and trying to sort out which area was which? It would be chaotic. There are not presumably armies of people in the office managing this process - in terms of dealing with the areas I think that they are doing it the right way, i.e. in phases. The important part of this is that what happened at the start (the changes to route 4) are not repeated - i.e. implementing one area without consulting the other. From the face of it they appear to be now carrying out all of the consultations before making any more implementations.

I cannot see that for example, the Finglas East area can be implemented until Tallaght/Templeogue have been consulted as well. The element of the 140 that was up for consultation was the northside phase. The southside element will presumably follow in due course.

LXFlyer

Peadar_85 wrote: »

They're saying their "consultation period" is open until April 2nd and to send comments via e-mail to networkdirect@dublinbus.ie so I guess that's our only forum. I've already expressed my views to them not that I'm expecting them to pay any attention. Maybe if enough people shout loud enough.......

At the end of the day if people don't submit their views, positive or negative it really does reduce their case for complaining later.

I've always been of the opinion that it is better to make a submission - especially if you agree with the changes - then the chances of later changes diminish.

Jaysoose

lxflyer wrote: »

At the end of the day if people don't submit their views, positive or negative it really does reduce their case for complaining later.

I've always been of the opinion that it is better to make a submission - especially if you agree with the changes - then the chances of later changes diminish.

Are you serious? what exactly are people meant to do when the spin is in full effect beforehand and network direct will do this...and network direct will do the other...are we meant to see into the future and pre-empt all additional route changes and curtailements all in the name of improvment that are not advertised initially.

Its been proven by people posting on this subject that dublin bus/network direct management dont give a flying fvck what the passengers are telling them. The changes are being put in place regardless of how obvious it is they will not work and complaining now or later wont make a blind bit of difference but the Paying customers still have as big a right to complain about the quality of the service they are paying for.

Just because some passengers adopt a wait and see approach thus giving the geniuses running dublinbus and network direct the chance to work doesnt mean they have any less of a right to complain.

LXFlyer

Jaysoose wrote: »

Are you serious? what exactly are people meant to do when the spin is in full effect beforehand and network direct will do this...and network direct will do the other...are we meant to see into the future and pre-empt all additional route changes and curtailements all in the name of improvment that are not advertised initially.

Its been proven by people posting on this subject that dublin bus/network direct management dont give a flying fvck what the passengers are telling them. The changes are being put in place regardless of how obvious it is they will not work and complaining now or later wont make a blind bit of difference but the Paying customers still have as big a right to complain about the quality of the service they are paying for.

Just because some passengers adopt a wait and see approach thus giving the geniuses running dublinbus and network direct the chance to work doesnt mean they have any less of a right to complain.

Some years of experience (both on my own count and that of my father who was actively involved in the local residents association) does tell me that it is important to make submissions on this sort of thing, be it Dublin Bus or local authorities - especially if you agree!! Most people, if they see plans and agree with them, do nothing and that then does lead to the possibility of negative changes to perfectly good plans being made.

As for the pr bumph - I've already said several times that there should be more honesty in it - where services are being improved, say so, and where they are being cut back due to low patronage etc then say so too. People are not fools. Explain why things are happening and people (while they might not like them) may accept them more readily.

And I've already said several times here that I think that they made a mess of the running times/capacity on the N11 and N3 which they have partly fixed, but not completely. I do think that these need fixing before any more rounds of implementation get started. Had these mistakes not being made and the public timetables were being delivered properly and reliably from day 1 I think that this thread would be half the size it is now.

Jaysoose

lxflyer wrote: »

Some years of experience (both on my own count and that of my father who was actively involved in the local residents association) does tell me that it is important to make submissions on this sort of thing, be it Dublin Bus or local authorities - especially if you agree!! Most people, if they see plans and agree with them, do nothing and that then does lead to the possibility of negative changes to perfectly good plans being made.

As for the pr bumph - I've already said several times that there should be more honesty in it - where services are being improved, say so, and where they are being cut back due to low patronage etc then say so too. People are not fools. Explain why things are happening and people (while they might not like them) may accept them more readily.

And I've already said several times here that I think that they made a mess of the running times/capacity on the N11 and N3 which they have partly fixed, but not completely. I do think that these need fixing before any more rounds of implementation get started. Had these mistakes not being made and the public timetables were being delivered properly and reliably from day 1 I think that this thread would be half the size it is now.

All the above is very well and good but its your statement that paying customers somehow have less right to complain if they do not initially give feedback that is my issue.

I completely disagree that the N3 38/38a changes have been partly fixed, the timetables are as they have been since the implementation of network direct and buses are not running to the times on the schedule. I have started getting the 39 from the village as the 38/38a simply is not running anything like the schedule and i need to be in work. Take for example this morning the 8:06 38 coming through the village with a 'not in service' sign showing as the bus was absolutely jammed to capacity.

Take again for example passengers arriving for the 38a on snugborough road at 8:00 last friday morning only for no bus to arrive until 8:40. The whole exercise is a monumental disaster.

LXFlyer

Jaysoose wrote: »

All the above is very well and good but its your statement that paying customers somehow have less right to complain if they do not initially give feedback that is my issue.

I completely disagree that the N3 38/38a changes have been partly fixed, the timetables are as they have been since the implementation of network direct and buses are not running to the times on the schedule. I have started getting the 39 from the village as the 38/38a simply is not running anything like the schedule and i need to be in work. Take for example this morning the 8:06 38 coming through the village with a 'not in service' sign showing as the bus was absolutely jammed to capacity.

Take again for example passengers arriving for the 38a on snugborough road at 8:00 last friday morning only for no bus to arrive until 8:40. The whole exercise is a monumental disaster.

Look - all I said was that people should make a submission whether they agree with the plans or not. But if you don't it does reduce your opportunity to object to the revised routings.

You have every right to object however to the poor performance post-implementation as it is perfectly clear there are serious problems and that in certain cases the advertised service is not being delivered.

However, I did not specify particular routes that have been fixed - I said some of them have and I did not specify the 38/a so please don't suggest that I did!

Specifically the routes that have been addressed are the 46a, 47, 63 and 236 and it would seem the 25/25a.

I have already said several times that the 38/a has yet to be fixed, as indeed have the 39/39a, and 145, and to a lesser extent the 84, and no I don't find their non-resolution any more acceptable than you do.

Jaysoose

lxflyer wrote: »

Look - all I said was that people should make a submission whether they agree with the plans or not. But if you don't it does reduce your opportunity to object to the revised routings.

You have every right to object however to the poor performance post-implementation as it is perfectly clear there are serious problems and that in certain cases the advertised service is not being delivered.

However, I did not specify particular routes that have been fixed - I said some of them have and I did not specify the 38/a!

Specifically the routes that have been addressed are the 46a, 47, 63 and 236 and it would seem the 25/25a.

I have already said several times that the 38/a has yet to be fixed, as indeed have the 39/39a, and 145 and no I don't find their non-resolution any more acceptable than you do.

I disagree that somebody paying for a service would have a diminished right to complain about the service that is implemented if they didnt give their input. To be honest its a ridiculous statement to make when people are expected to stump up the readies.

Devilman40k

lxflyer wrote: »

Look - all I said was that people should make a submission whether they agree with the plans or not. But if you don't it does reduce your opportunity to object to the revised routings.

You have every right to object however to the poor performance post-implementation as it is perfectly clear there are serious problems.

However, I did not specify particular routes that have been fixed - I said some of them have and I did not specify the 38/a!

Specifically the routes that have been addressed are the 46a, 47, 63 and 236 and it would seem the 25/25a.

I have already said several times that the 38/a has yet to be fixed, as indeed have the 39/39a, and 145 and no I don't find their non-resolution any more acceptable than you do.

I think its more than their non-resolution which is the problem. Those particular phases of ND were announced (and on N11 took place) last September and here we are in March still ranting while the cracks have only been papered over...and yet there are going to be a larger number of changes coming down the road probably in May/June/July which we will most likely STILL be ranting about come Christmas and DB will be chasing their tails trying to paper over those cracks too.

ND could and should have been a triumph for Dublin Bus, a dawn for a new streamlined flexible service, all it has become is an unmitigated disaster, where they are now burying their heads in the sand and continuing on hoping that the users who are left (i.e. those currently without an alternative mode of travel) don't decide to join those of us who do!

LXFlyer

Jaysoose wrote: »

I disagree that somebody paying for a service would have a diminished right to complain about the service that is implemented if they didnt give their input. To be honest its a ridiculous statement to make when people are expected to stump up the readies.

My comments were based on plans being put forward and people commenting on them or not. In particular I was referring to proposed routings that may change pre-and post consultation, which is one of the main components, and indeed frequency/capacity being the other. If those then change as a result of the consultations then I do think that you have less of a right to complain if you do not make any input.

As far as performance post-implementation is concerned that is a different matter. If what was planned and advertised is not being delivered then you of course should be complaining. I would not in any way suggest that you ought not complain if buses aren't showing up, or are all full - of course you should! But the consultation is primarily around the redesign of the network. Your principal problems are that buses are not showing up when they should, nor are they always going where they are supposed to be going. That boils down to shoddy implementation of the plan and of course you have every right to be mad as hell!

What is happening in Blanchardstown is that the advertised service is not being delivered as per the plan.

However, it would be nice of you to acknowledge that I am not disagreeing with you regarding the poor performance and lack of resolution of the ongoing problems (such as that on the 38/a) when you suggested that I was.

LXFlyer

Devilman40k wrote: »

I think its more than their non-resolution which is the problem. Those particular phases of ND were announced (and on N11 took place) last September and here we are in March still ranting while the cracks have only been papered over...and yet there are going to be a larger number of changes coming down the road probably in May/June/July which we will most likely STILL be ranting about come Christmas and DB will be chasing their tails trying to paper over those cracks too.

ND could and should have been a triumph for Dublin Bus, a dawn for a new streamlined flexible service, all it has become is an unmitigated disaster, where they are now burying their heads in the sand and continuing on hoping that the users who are left (i.e. those currently without an alternative mode of travel) don't decide to join those of us who do!

I would disagree that it has all been an unmitigated disaster. I use the Lucan corridor every day and my commute has improved through the 25a/25b now by-passing Chapelizod all day, and having a bus every 15 minutes rather than at random times as before, and operating southside. It has reduced my commute by 10 minutes in each direction.

There were serious implementation issues and I certainly do not make any light of those whatsoever. However, some have now been addressed as above (not by any means all) and are now working properly.

It is I agree completely and utterly ludicrous that they have not all been resolved at this stage. Rapid resolution of problems needs to be implemented rather than just leaving them lie for months.

AlekSmart

Jaysoose wrote: »

.....

I completely disagree that the N3 38/38a changes have been partly fixed, the timetables are as they have been since the implementation of network direct and buses are not running to the times on the schedule. I have started getting the 39 from the village as the 38/38a simply is not running anything like the schedule and i need to be in work. Take for example this morning the 8:06 38 coming through the village with a 'not in service' sign showing as the bus was absolutely jammed to capacity.

.

Jaysoose`s observation here does rather put-it-up to those who suggest that Dublin Bus`s somewhat odd interpretation of the Deloitte recommendations is actually fit-for-purpose.s.

It should be remembered that the sole reason behind the Deloitte Report was the suspicion of tyhe Minister for Transport,Noel Dempsey,that Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann were not operating to the desired levels of efficiency.

Probably the first conclusion which Deloitte and it`s sub-contactors,the TAS partnership,reached was that both companies were within the efficiency norms for the Bus Industry EU wide,with Bus Eireann particulary highly rated for its lean and hungry look !

Where inefficiencies were detected,these tended to be due to operational conditions imposed upon the companies rather than any inherent conspiracy to operate that way.

However,with such a ringing and independent endorsement of it`s basic strength`s I feel that Dublin Bus and particularly it`s Network Direct "Team" have somewhat spectacularly failed to capitalize on those findings.

Instead the "every bus should be a full bus" philosophy appears to have taken root on many routes (:)) due to the shortsighted and commercially dubious methods involved in Phase 1.

Even now,for example if one stands on O Connell Bridge of a morning and notes the unusual amount of Full Buses turning right off Bachelors Walk displaying "Out-of-Service", "Private Hire","Special","City Tour" or,in fact anything except what they should be displaying...92-UCD BELFIELD.

For,although one will struggle to get an admission of this,the reality is that during the peaks Dublin Bus is now running a de-facto 92 route in an attempt to shore up the misroute which the 145 now is.

Route amalgamations and curtailments are all well and good but they really do require an element of hands-on research and input from a variety of exterior sources to augment or rebut the bare statistics which appear to have driven so much of the Network Direct ethos.

Yet again,I would suggest that the Deloitte Inspired restructuring of DB`s route-network is well worth what Noel Dempsey paid for it (After all he did use OUR Money to pay them !)

With the National Transport Authority recognising Dublin Bus`s requirement to maximise capacity and thus specifying Double-Door tri-axle vehicles as the new "Dublin Standard" it is beyond arguement that the means to operate these assets to their maximum needs to be in place asap,which should render the "Out-of-Service" full bus a definite no-no.

However also at this juncture it can be argued that some saner counsel is required to take control of the Phase 2 element before it all goes horribly pear-shaped again.....:o

D14

I got an email from Dublin bus last night telling me that the 14/a,48a & 44 changes should be up within the next 10 days

The_Wrecker

Even now,for example if one stands on O Connell Bridge of a morning and notes the unusual amount of Full Buses turning right off Bachelors Walk displaying "Out-of-Service", "Private Hire","Special","City Tour" or,in fact anything except what they should be displaying...92-UCD BELFIELD.

Yes there is a batch of morning buses reserved for rail users only that go 'Private hire' or 'OOS' depending on the weather! They operate a drop off service to Leeson st. While late buses from Bray go special back down the N11 to get back ontime and lose it again inbound.

antoinolachtnai

AlekSmart wrote: »

Probably the first conclusion which Deloitte and it`s sub-contactors,the TAS partnership,reached was that both companies were within the efficiency norms for the Bus Industry EU wide,with Bus Eireann particulary highly rated for its lean and hungry look !

They did come to this conclusion but they had no basis for it. It seemed to be more of a 'gut feel' than anything they actually measured. Important figures they depended upon for subsidies were actually calculated wrongly by the consultants.

With the National Transport Authority recognising Dublin Bus`s requirement to maximise capacity and thus specifying Double-Door tri-axle vehicles as the new "Dublin Standard" it is beyond arguement that the means to operate these assets to their maximum needs to be in place asap,which should render the "Out-of-Service" full bus a definite no-no.

When did this become the standard? Keeping these fueled during quiet hours is quite a commitment.

Corruptedmorals

The 66 and 66B internet timetables are wrong. Got caught out on the 66 Saturday and Sunday timetables, and both on the weekday. Particularly the Sunday one, as busses are only once an hour. What a joke:mad: Would appropriate email contact be Head Office or the garage, Phibsboro?

LXFlyer

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

The 66 and 66B internet timetables are wrong. Got caught out on the 66 Saturday and Sunday timetables, and both on the weekday. Particularly the Sunday one, as busses are only once an hour. What a joke:mad: Would appropriate email contact be Head Office or the garage, Phibsboro?

Where are they wrong (out of curiousity)?

The reason I ask is that they are the same as the printed versions.

Head Office would be the place to contact as they do the information.

Jaysoose

lxflyer wrote: »

My comments were based on plans being put forward and people commenting on them or not. In particular I was referring to proposed routings that may change pre-and post consultation, which is one of the main components, and indeed frequency/capacity being the other. If those then change as a result of the consultations then I do think that you have less of a right to complain if you do not make any input.

As far as performance post-implementation is concerned that is a different matter. If what was planned and advertised is not being delivered then you of course should be complaining. I would not in any way suggest that you ought not complain if buses aren't showing up, or are all full - of course you should! But the consultation is primarily around the redesign of the network. Your principal problems are that buses are not showing up when they should, nor are they always going where they are supposed to be going. That boils down to shoddy implementation of the plan and of course you have every right to be mad as hell!

What is happening in Blanchardstown is that the advertised service is not being delivered as per the plan.

However, it would be nice of you to acknowledge that I am not disagreeing with you regarding the poor performance and lack of resolution of the ongoing problems (such as that on the 38/a) when you suggested that I was.

Again i disgaree that PAYING customers's right to complain is diminished if they dont submit comment on a "plan" that dublinbus may or may not be implementing, your missing the point completely by saying that customer dont have the same right to voice their opinions on this unmitigated disaster if they didnt complain initially. We were told by the people implementing this 'plan' that network direct would improve the bus service and make the whole operation more efficient. Why exactly would people complain about that before using the service that has been implemented?

At the end of the day the passengers are paying to use this service and have every right to complain just as much as somebody that gave their input at the start of the process.

Dublinbus have with network direct removed buses from the roads and reduced frequency to cut costs, obviously the people in charge of network direct are sitting in meetings with dept of transport officials and showing them charts and spreadsheets with reduced costs etc and claiming they have increased efficiency and reduced costs when in reality they have not.

Then we have the insult to our intelliegence when dublin bus put out a report which claims 96% of buses are running to a 5 minute window when this report has obviously been fudged by taking a tiny amount of data from specified routes while ignoring the obvious trouble routes.

I hope whoever is getting the promotion out of all this mess feels that its worth it to alienate a large amount of the remaining passengers, but the aleksmart said it in an earlier post 'the changes are going through and they can complain all they want'.

Its a disgrace at the end of the day and i said it before the passenger is not even considered in all of this.

Corruptedmorals

lxflyer wrote: »

Where are they wrong (out of curiousity)?

The reason I ask is that they are the same as the printed versions.

Head Office would be the place to contact as they do the information.

The outgoing weekday 66 timetable has the 66 leaving at quarter past and quarter to, it actually leaves at twenty five past and five to, which is correct on the bus stop timetables. http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/Your-Journey1/Timetables/All-Timetables/66/

The Saturday timetable says the same times, quarter past and to, I'm pretty sure they actually leave on the hour and at half past, but would need to check the times at the stop again. The Sunday outgoing says 5 to, they actually leave at 20 to. Very frustrating when I thought I'd just missed a bus, so I went up for the train..only to see from the platform the bus going over the bridge soon after 20 to..and the train was half an hour late. The 66B timetable says busses leave town on the hour, they leave at 10 past.

Will contact Head Office about it.

LXFlyer

Corruptedmorals wrote: »

The outgoing weekday 66 timetable has the 66 leaving at quarter past and quarter to, it actually leaves at twenty five past and five to, which is correct on the bus stop timetables. http://www.dublinbus.ie/en/Your-Journey1/Timetables/All-Timetables/66/

The Saturday timetable says the same times, quarter past and to, I'm pretty sure they actually leave on the hour and at half past, but would need to check the times at the stop again. The Sunday outgoing says 5 to, they actually leave at 20 to. Very frustrating when I thought I'd just missed a bus, so I went up for the train..only to see from the platform the bus going over the bridge soon after 20 to..and the train was half an hour late. The 66B timetable says busses leave town on the hour, they leave at 10 past.

Will contact Head Office about it.

What stops are you talking about?

The internet timetables that you link to are the departure times ex-Merrion Square.

The times on the stops from Pearse Street onwards are the intermediate times from the stops at Pearse Street which are here.

Same for the 66b - Full timetable is here, with intermediate times from Pearse Street (linked from that timetable) here.

qerty

Has anybody noticed that the proposed route 13 has had its new frequency cut?
It was advertised as a peak service of 10 minutes and an off peak service of 12 minutes in the clondalkin area announcement.


Subsequently, when the Finglas east anouncement was made, the frequency was dropped to 10 minutes peak and 15 minutes off peak.

Rather sneaky

AlekSmart

qerty wrote: »

Has anybody noticed that the proposed route 13 has had its new frequency cut?
It was advertised as a peak service of 10 minutes and an off peak service of 12 minutes in the clondalkin area announcement.


Subsequently, when the Finglas east anouncement was made, the frequency was dropped to 10 minutes peak and 15 minutes off peak.

Rather sneaky

I suspect you`ll find Gerty,that this type of thing has become the norm for Network Direct and it`s "Improvements"

However in the new Public Transport Order,much of the responsibility for timetabling now lies with the NTA,so perhaps they could be appraised of concerns such as yours with a bit more regularity ?

Jaysoose

AlekSmart wrote: »

I suspect you`ll find Gerty,that this type of thing has become the norm for Network Direct and it`s "Improvements"

However in the new Public Transport Order,much of the responsibility for timetabling now lies with the NTA,so perhaps they could be appraised of concerns such as yours with a bit more regularity ?

LOL so dublinbus can blame the NTA and the NTA can blame Dublinbus? this way nobody will have to accept responsibility for the current disaster.

Cookie_Monster

Jaysoose wrote: »

LOL so dublinbus can blame the NTA and the NTA can blame Dublinbus? this way nobody will have to accept responsibility for the current disaster.

Maybe Leo will wade in and sort it all out. Not like the dept of Transport has much to do these days with the NTA, RPA, IAA, RTSB, IL, MSD, NRA, RSA, CAR, GTC and so forth taking over nearly every aspect of Transport operation, planning and management

Peadar_85

Would love to know who these "improvements" (or should I say cuts) benefit aside from the Dublin Bus balance sheet.

As I've mentioned on a previous post, the good folk of Glasnevin are due to lose 67% of their bus routes so I'd challenge Mr.Network Direct to explain to them how these proposals will deliver an "improved connection" for them

Jaysoose

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Maybe Leo will wade in and sort it all out. Not like the dept of Transport has much to do these days with the NTA, RPA, IAA, RTSB, IL, MSD, NRA, RSA, CAR, GTC and so forth taking over nearly every aspect of Transport operation, planning and management

But whats to sort out when the network direct boys have proven to have a mastery on the spin game. Could you imagine the amount of charts with 96% on them his head will be spinning coming out of the meeting and will probably try to sell the network direct model to the germans.

Also i cant see leo standing waiting on the 38/38a and wondering why the promised 10 minutes peak time frequency wasnt happening..he will rely on the same fudged information that we are being fed so nothing will change.

Aard

Jaysoose wrote: »

Also i cant see leo standing waiting on the 38/38a and wondering why the promised 10 minutes peak time frequency wasnt happening..he will rely on the same fudged information that we are being fed so nothing will change.

Afaik, he does actually use public transport in that area.

antoinolachtnai

As I understand it from the documentation I have seen, Network Direct is a Dublin Bus project. Dublin Bus is fully responsible for it and the results. The NTA approves changes before they are put into effect, but that's about it.

Jaysoose

Aard wrote: »

Afaik, he does actually use public transport in that area.

No offence but i find this hard to believe.

Jaysoose

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

As I understand it from the documentation I have seen, Network Direct is a Dublin Bus project. Dublin Bus is fully responsible for it and the results. The NTA approves changes before they are put into effect, but that's about it.

Thats the way it should work but it obviously doesnt a la the impromtu changes to the 38/38a route recently and the dublin bus defenders hiding behing the "NTA have to approve the timetable changes" etc.

Its a typically irish situation were the thing is banjaxed but its nobodies responsibilty to sort the problem out while looking at the ground sheepishly.

AlekSmart

antoinolachtnai wrote: »

They did come to this conclusion but they had no basis for it. It seemed to be more of a 'gut feel' than anything they actually measured. Important figures they depended upon for subsidies were actually calculated wrongly by the consultants. .....

....When did this become the standard? Keeping these fueled during quiet hours is quite a commitment.

Interesting opinion Antoin.

Just to clarify,are you suggesting that the conclusions reached,and recommendations made by Deloitte in their report are therefore invalid ?

If so then we,the people are surely in-line to claim a repayment of the €400,000 reputedly invoiced by Mssrs Deloitte for the work.

Deloitte subcontracted much of the legwork to the rather more Public Transport focused duo of the TAS partnership and Sir Colin Buchanan`s consultancy,both highly regarded in this specialized field and neither of whom purport to be "Gut-Feel" practitioners

It will I suspect be interesting to hear the Deloitte/TAS/Buchanan response to any suggestion that their report is less than fit-for-purpose

On the issue of vehicle specification,I can only observe that the NTA appears to be quite a different animal to the old Department of Transport and there are already strong indications to that effect.

It appears that high-capacity tri-axle,dual door,double deck vehicles with provision for two wheelchairs each is to be the initial "Dublin Spec" to be placed in service.(I do hope they resist the temptation to install the Wheelchair Ramp at the rear door a lá TfL).

I`m equally confident the NTA will expand on their Bus Design thinking quite soon.