Why is public transport in Dublin so bad?

SantryRed

lxflyer wrote: »

Roughly 25 minutes of that journey was spent going through a massive building site that is causing mayhem in the city centre.

What exactly do you expect buses to do? Sprought wings?

Citing examples of poor performance when there are major infrastructural works in the heart of the city centre that are severely impacting on the reliability of the bus service is just daft I'm afraid.

I don't disagree btw that we do need rail alternatives, but as another poster has suggested there are alternatives and as a start might I suggest you download the NTA Journey Planner app for your smartphone - it is very useful.

For the airport the 757 does that trip in 45 mins max from the Camden Court.

If I were going to Morton Stadium I'd probably go for a 33, 41/b/c from Abbey Street as they avoid the LUAS works on. OCS - yes it involves a bit of a walk, but it also avoids the detour around Beaumont.

I'm sorry but that 16 bus route has forever been a farce. It has nothing to do with the cross city works.

devnull

MOH wrote: »

You don't need a crystal ball, if you have the real-time location of the buses you should be able to estimate the time to a particular stop. But then this system has never been real-time, which is why it's so unreliable.

How long it takes with roads open vs road closes is different.

The problem is people have unrealistic expectations of fortune telling type systems.

Dyr

devnull wrote: »

How long it takes with roads open vs road closes is different.

The problem is people have unrealistic expectations of fortune telling type systems.

It's not unrealistic to expect RTPI information to match the information displayed on the front of the bus

But you keep ignoring that

MOH

lxflyer wrote: »

There were full diversions listed on the Dublin bus website and notices advising of this on the on-street displays all of last week and that RTPI wouldn't be working.

The 14 was diverted via the Stillorgan Road from Churchtown due to the marathon. The driver had the correct number on the front of the bus.

The displays are all pre-programmed for each route.

Preparing real time schedules for that single day is a massive ask - probably impossible. For RTPI to work it has to have full stop by stop predictive timetables prepared by the schedulers for each individual departure. The system then applies those predictive times to where the bus is.

Do you really think DB have armies of people to do that for one day's schedules given the mass diversions that were in place? Or that they have crystal balls to figure out what the delays are going to be like?

It's asking the impossible to be honest.

Hahahaha. Sorry, I'm not laughing at you, I'm genuinely sitting here laughing because that is probably exactly how they've set up the system, which explains how it's so ludicrously inaccurate.

You shouldn't need to "prepare" real-time schedules at all. You don't need crystal balls. It's supposed to be real time. They should be derived from the flood of information available. The only time it should ever have been necessary for an army of schedulers to manually prepare estimated timetables was seeding the system at the very start. And even that could have been avoided by just driving the buses around for a while before launch.

You know where a bus is. You know where the stops are. You know how long it took the previous bus, and all the buses over the previous ten mins/30 mins/hour, to cover the distance between each stop. Given all that, it should be trivial to provide a fairly accurate estimate.

That's how I'd expect a real-time system to work. The tricky bit would be getting the weighting right, and also discounting buses that had a specific issue (passengers with mobility issues, waiting for a driver change). But you'd build a prediction model, store your predictions, and refine the model based on how they turned out, so you'd get more accurate over time.

You could improve it by having a system of allocating specific buses to routes, so if the 46A which is due to start the next inbound service is currently ten minutes away from completing its outbound route, feed that in.

A system that requires schedulers to manually estimate timings in advance isn't remotely real-time.

And as for the 14 - if the bus is operating the same route as a 46A, why not just stick 46A on the front?

devnull wrote: »

How long it takes with roads open vs road closes is different.

The problem is people have unrealistic expectations of fortune telling type systems.

If the road is closed now, it was probably closed for the previous 3 buses in the last half hour.
And you have GPS info for where each of them was at regular intervals. So you should be able to make a fair guess at how long the next bus is going to take.

The problem is it shouldn't be a fortune telling system at all. It should just be a data analysis.

LXFlyer

MOH wrote: »

Hahahaha. Sorry, I'm not laughing at you, I'm genuinely sitting here laughing because that is probably exactly how they've set up the system, which explains how it's so ludicrously inaccurate.

You shouldn't need to "prepare" real-time schedules at all. You don't need crystal balls. It's supposed to be real time. They should be derived from the flood of information available. The only time it should ever have been necessary for an army of schedulers to manually prepare estimated timetables was seeding the system at the very start. And even that could have been avoided by just driving the buses around for a while before launch.

You know where a bus is. You know where the stops are. You know how long it took the previous bus, and all the buses over the previous ten mins/30 mins/hour, to cover the distance between each stop. Given all that, it should be trivial to provide a fairly accurate estimate.

That's how I'd expect a real-time system to work. The tricky bit would be getting the weighting right, and also discounting buses that had a specific issue (passengers with mobility issues, waiting for a driver change). But you'd build a prediction model, store your predictions, and refine the model based on how they turned out, so you'd get more accurate over time.

You could improve it by having a system of allocating specific buses to routes, so if the 46A which is due to start the next inbound service is currently ten minutes away from completing its outbound route, feed that in.

A system that requires schedulers to manually estimate timings in advance isn't remotely real-time.

And as for the 14 - if the bus is operating the same route as a 46A, why not just stick 46A on the front?

That is exactly how these systems work for bus services - a scheduler prepares them initially but the system will however then adjust over time based on prior performance.

How exactly do you expect a computer to know how long the bus is going to take along a totally new route which all the bus routes were having to take on Sunday with the diversions, with completely unique traffic patterns.

It would require brand new schedules given that most routes had massive diversions and there were totally different traffic conditions to normal - how do you expect a computer to deal with that? There is no prior performance data.

As for the 14 - I don't you think numbering it 46a would help the people it is mainly serving - those in Dundrum, Ballinteer and Churchtown. It just happened to divert along the Stillorgan Road. For most of the route it had nothing in common with the 46a.

Route 14
From Dundrum Luas Station Towards Adelaide until 10:00hrs
Normal route to Braemor Park, then divert right to Orwell Road, right to Lower Churchtown Road, left to Upper Churchtown Road onto Taney Road, right to Drumartin Road Lower to Lower Kilmacud Road, left to Stillorgan Road, onto Donnybrook Road after Leeson Street Bridge, left onto Adelaide Road and terminate.

From Dundrum Luas Station Towards Hawkins Street from 10:00hrs to 18:00hrs
Normal route to Braemor Park, then divert right to Orwell Road, right to Lower Churchtown Road, left to Upper Churchtown Road onto Taney Road, right to Drumartin Road Lower, Lower Kilmacud Road, left to Stillorgan Road onto Donnybrook Road, continue to Leeson Street, Stephens Green East and normal route to Westmoreland Street, then divert right to Fleet Street, Townsend Street, left to Tara Street, left to Hawkins Street and Terminate.

From Beaumont From first bus until 18:00hrs
Normal route to Amiens Street then right to Talbot Street, left to Marlborough Street, left to Eden Quay and Terminate.

I understand your frustration but frankly you really don't seem to be thinking this through.

Dyr

MOH wrote: »

, I'm genuinely sitting here laughing because that is probably exactly how they've set up the system, which explains how it's so ludicrously inaccurate.
.

Yes, but rule 1 of irish public transport applies: this mess is all someone else's fault.

Anyway the system you envisage would provide extremely accurate statistics as to how dublin bus are performing, and none of the stakeholders want that

Except the commuter of course

MOH

lxflyer wrote: »

That is exactly how these systems work for bus services - a scheduler prepares them initially but the system will however then adjust over time based on prior performance.

How exactly do you expect a computer to know how long the bus is going to take along a totally new route which all the bus routes were having to take on Sunday with the diversions, with completely unique traffic patterns.

It would require brand new schedules given that most routes had massive diversions and there were totally different traffic conditions to normal - how do you expect a computer to deal with that? There is no prior performance data.

As for the 14 - I don't you think numbering it 46a would help the people it is mainly serving - those in Dundrum, Ballinteer and Churchtown. It just happened to divert along the Stillorgan Road. For most of the route it had nothing in common with the 46a.

I understand your frustration but frankly you really don't seem to be thinking this through.

I've certainly thought it through. I've a very clear picture of how a flexible system would cater for diversions and re-routeing.
Buses weren't taking totally new routes. They were passing existing stops. Using existing segments of existing routes. Many of them had only minor detours from their normal route, e.g. the 46A wasn't using the Belfield flyover, but that was it. Plenty of routes weren't diverted at all. Why do you think it's acceptable to shut down the entire RPTI system?

There's also no such thing as normal traffic conditions, not in this city.
Relying solely on prior performance data any day is going to be inaccurate. There's live performance data from the other buses currently operating, which should be incorporated in the prediction model. If you have that, and enough of it, prior performance data is largely irrelevant. Except for lightly travelled segments where there aren't frequent enough buses to provide an estimate.

It was the driver of the 14 who told me it was taking the same route of the 46A, wasn't me who brought it up. After I got on a bus with a display saying it was going to Rathmines, which wasn't. If you can't see something wrong with that, you definitely don't understand my frustration.

LXFlyer

MOH wrote: »

I've certainly thought it through. I've a very clear picture of how a flexible system would cater for diversions and re-routeing.
Buses weren't taking totally new routes. They were passing existing stops. Using existing segments of existing routes. Many of them had only minor detours from their normal route, e.g. the 46A wasn't using the Belfield flyover, but that was it. Plenty of routes weren't diverted at all. Why do you think it's acceptable to shut down the entire RPTI system?

There's also no such thing as normal traffic conditions, not in this city.
Relying solely on prior performance data any day is going to be inaccurate. There's live performance data from the other buses currently operating, which should be incorporated in the prediction model. If you have that, and enough of it, prior performance data is largely irrelevant. Except for lightly travelled segments where there aren't frequent enough buses to provide an estimate.

It was the driver of the 14 who told me it was taking the same route of the 46A, wasn't me who brought it up. After I got on a bus with a display saying it was going to Rathmines, which wasn't. If you can't see something wrong with that, you definitely don't understand my frustration.

The 14 followed the 46a route from Stillorgan inwards - before that it operated along part of its normal route and then along totally new sections not normally served before taking the Stillorgan QBC. The route number displayed was quite correct. it was a 14C from Dundrum to the city centre but diverted for some of the route.

Here are the full diversions - most of them are significant.

http://dublinbus.ie/News-Centre/General-News-Archive/SSE-Airtricity-Dublin-Marathon-2016-Diversions/

I think you do overestimate the ability of systems to deal with this kind of thing. Someone would still have to input the revised routings for each departure on all of the revised routes as they do read from a schedule based on the prior performance. The GPS is what then dictates where to read from. The exact same system works in many other cities as above, including London.

I think you're looking for something that doesn't exist.

If you find a system that does what you suggest then great - pass it on to the NTA.

MOH

lxflyer wrote: »

Here are the full diversions - most of them are significant.

http://dublinbus.ie/News-Centre/General-News-Archive/SSE-Airtricity-Dublin-Marathon-2016-Diversions/

I think you do overestimate the ability of systems to deal with this kind of thing.

I think you underestimate how flexible a properly designed system would be.

Say a route segment is the stretch between one stop and the next. A route is just made up of route segments. You want to divert a bus, just change the definition of that route for the duration of the diversion. You have to be doing something pretty similar anyway to actually produce the list of diversions.

All buses sharing a segment (or a series of segments) are providing real time information about how long it's taking to traverse that segment, which can feed into the estimates for following buses.

The only manual intervention you need is redefining the route, which you're doing anyway. You don't need prior data once you have the live date from the first few buses.

LXFlyer

MOH wrote: »

I think you underestimate how flexible a properly designed system would be.

Say a route segment is the stretch between one stop and the next. A route is just made up of route segments. You want to divert a bus, just change the definition of that route for the duration of the diversion. You have to be doing something pretty similar anyway to actually produce the list of diversions.

All buses sharing a segment (or a series of segments) are providing real time information about how long it's taking to traverse that segment, which can feed into the estimates for following buses.

The only manual intervention you need is redefining the route, which you're doing anyway. You don't need prior data once you have the live date from the first few buses.

Have you evidence of an off the shelf system in place elsewhere that does precisely all of those things, rather than you saying what such a system should do?

And where is the money going to come from to fund such a system if one exists? What you're looking for would be a brand new system and that's not going to be cheap. Purely to deal with two days of the year (Mar 17 and Marathon Day).

My understanding is that this is an off the shelf system, and that most other city's systems work on the the same premise.

But maybe you know differently.

Calina

Dublin Bus collects GPS data on a regular basis and this could be used as input to a predictive system. IIRC the tube does it in london. This could be used to map the buses on an app on a phone or ipad. Irisk Rail does something similar on its website although it seems to be dependent on checking in at a station.

MOH

lxflyer wrote: »

Have you evidence of an off the shelf system in place elsewhere that does precisely all of those things, rather than you saying what such a system should do?

And where is the money going to come from to fund such a system if one exists?

My understanding is that this is an off the shelf system, and that most other city's systems work on the the same premise.

But maybe you know differently.

Eh, no, you're the expert on DBs inner workings. I've no idea whether DB bought a system or contracted someone to develop one in-house. I don't really care, I'm just a commuter wondering why our supposedly real-time system is incapable of handle anything that isn't scheduled.
Why on earth would I be giving you "evidence" of anything? :rolleyes:

I'm just outlining how it would be relatively straightforward for a real-time system to use real-time information from other buses in the fleet to provide more accurate estimates, with minimal user involvement.
In response to your earlier accusations that I hadn't thought this through and was overestimating the capabilities of a real-time system.
Which, again, clearly isn't what we have.

LXFlyer

Calina wrote: »

Dublin Bus collects GPS data on a regular basis and this could be used as input to a predictive system. IIRC the tube does it in london. This could be used to map the buses on an app on a phone or ipad. Irisk Rail does something similar on its website although it seems to be dependent on checking in at a station.

The rail based systems on the tube and IE are both linked directly to the signalling systems and not GPS.

Hence the very poor info on the sub-surface lines (Metropolitan, Circle, H & C) which won't be improved upon until the signalling system is finally upgraded in the early 2020s.

LXFlyer

MOH wrote: »

Eh, no, you're the expert on DBs inner workings. I've no idea whether DB bought a system or contracted someone to develop one in-house. I don't really care, I'm just a commuter wondering why our supposedly real-time system is incapable of handle anything that isn't scheduled.
Why on earth would I be giving you "evidence" of anything? :rolleyes:

I'm just outlining how it would be relatively straightforward for a real-time system to use real-time information from other buses in the fleet to provide more accurate estimates, with minimal user involvement.
In response to your earlier accusations that I hadn't thought this through and was overestimating the capabilities of a real-time system.
Which, again, clearly isn't what we have.

With respect if you're saying "it's relatively easy to do" without any evidence of a system that does it elsewhere to back that claim up, then you how can you possibly stand over it?

The devil with any of these systems is in the detail and without citing examples of where such things work I'm finding it difficult to understand how you think this should be implemented from a practical perspective, together with where the money is going to come from to develop it, together with the cost/benefit for two days of the year, when there are probably far more pressing requirements for such funds, such as extra buses to cope with the loadings.

MOH

lxflyer wrote: »

With respect if you're saying "it's relatively easy to do" without any evidence of a system that does it elsewhere to back that claim up, then you how can you possibly stand over it?

The devil with any of these systems is in the detail and without citing examples of where such things work I'm finding it difficult to understand how you think this should be implemented from a practical perspective, together with where the money is going to come from to develop it, together with the cost/benefit for two days of the year, when there are probably far more pressing requirements for such funds, such as extra buses to cope with the loadings.

How can you possibly stand over a system that calls itself real-time but is woefully inaccurate and requires an army of schedulers to maintain?

I'm saying it's relatively straightforward to design a system that's flexible enough to deal with route variations, which is directly addressing the claim you made that I underestimate how a computerised system could deal with such issues.
Of course the devil is in the detail. It is with any project. Off the top of my head you're going to have issues like what happens if the GPS on a bus stops working, how to deal with individual buses that have delays due to mechanical/passenger issues, how to weight the reports from other buses, dwell times for more popular routes vs less popular ones.
But the notion that you wouldn't spend time on an IT project unless you could find a proven example of exactly the same thing already working elsewhere is baffling.

I don't know where you're getting the notion that this is only for two days a year. Using real time data from the rest of the fleet is clearly going to give you a more accurate picture all the time. It would also actually be real-time. If they'd called what we have something like "Predictive Passenger Information" I wouldn't have such an issue with it, but it's continually claimed that it's real time when it's not, and falls over at the first sign of problems.

I really don't care where the funding would come from. I've no idea how much they spent on the existing system. Or where else it's used. Or whether there's more accurate, actual real-time systems in use elsewhere. It's of zero interest to me, because it doesn't affect me, and I'm not an expert in international urban transport passenger information systems.

MOH

Sorry for the double post, but out of curiosity I went looking to see where DB sourced their RTPI from.

It appears they paid €15 million (including hardware costs) for it, form a German company called Init.
A look at the Init website is interesting.

Init wrote:

You want your passengers to experience excellent service? Then reliability has to be your main focus. And your passengers feel your service to be the more reliable the better Real-time Passenger Information (RTPI) is. Especially, when something goes wrong and their bus or train is going to be late first-class information is a priority in order to keep your passengers satisfied.

the passenger information system is able to consider dispatching measures like detours as well as future effects of disturbances, like when a major delay will affect the vehicle’s next trip as well. This improves the reliability of your real-time passenger information extremely.

In the event of major incidents, passengers also need further information on how to best continue their trip to reach their destination. MOBILE-STOPinfo provides your employees with comfortable tools to design and communicate that specific information and fill the gaps for your passengers.

So it pretty much sounds like it should provide an accurate means of responding to unexpected delays.
Unless of course it's not being used properly. Surely not though.

devnull

There is equipment and solutions from a few companies involved. Init provide the hardware but not the whole thing.

LXFlyer

MOH wrote: »

How can you possibly stand over a system that calls itself real-time but is woefully inaccurate and requires an army of schedulers to maintain?

I'm saying it's relatively straightforward to design a system that's flexible enough to deal with route variations, which is directly addressing the claim you made that I underestimate how a computerised system could deal with such issues.
Of course the devil is in the detail. It is with any project. Off the top of my head you're going to have issues like what happens if the GPS on a bus stops working, how to deal with individual buses that have delays due to mechanical/passenger issues, how to weight the reports from other buses, dwell times for more popular routes vs less popular ones.
But the notion that you wouldn't spend time on an IT project unless you could find a proven example of exactly the same thing already working elsewhere is baffling.

I don't know where you're getting the notion that this is only for two days a year. Using real time data from the rest of the fleet is clearly going to give you a more accurate picture all the time. It would also actually be real-time. If they'd called what we have something like "Predictive Passenger Information" I wouldn't have such an issue with it, but it's continually claimed that it's real time when it's not, and falls over at the first sign of problems.

I really don't care where the funding would come from. I've no idea how much they spent on the existing system. Or where else it's used. Or whether there's more accurate, actual real-time systems in use elsewhere. It's of zero interest to me, because it doesn't affect me, and I'm not an expert in international urban transport passenger information systems.

Listen - I don't have to stand over anything. I am just someone who happens to have an interest in how public transport works - and in particular scheduling. I've nothing to do with any of our public transport operators, I'm just someone who takes an interest in the business and industry - I am simply explaining how the systems in place work to people such as yourself who doesn't have the same level of knowledge.

As for real-v-predictive, well I didn't call the system anything - I used the normal industry term which is RTPI. But yes, the system clearly is a predictive system based upon the current GPS location of the bus on the bus route. The predictive schedules that it reads from are refined by the system itself based on historic performance regularly.

But I just am not aware of any systems in place that do what you expect it to do as outlined in the previous posts. Maybe there are, but I've not read about them in any of the industry journals.

The system is only switched off two days a year when cross-city routes get split in two and many routes have long diversions - that was my reference to two days (St Patrick's Day and Marathon Day).

With respect to your last paragraph - making sweeping claims as you did that something is easy to do without any evidence to back that up is pushing credibility a bit. If the systems aren't there - then what you expect may not be possible. And if they are then perhaps the funds weren't available for whatever additional cost was required - I don't know, but you're dealing with public sector funds which means that while you might sometimes want something, it may not be possible financially. What's the incremental cost of being able to cope with diversions if that capability exists?

MOH

lxflyer wrote: »

L I am simply explaining how the systems in place work to people such as yourself who doesn't have the same level of knowledge.

Thanks for that, but I'm not particularly interested in how the systems in place work, when they don't. There's far more wrong with RTPI than this. Buses that regularly vanish, sometime shortly before they reach a stop. Buses that are listed as going their full route but are terminating early. Buses (and stand on Eden quay for 10 minutes of any day to see this) that leave minutes before the RTPI show them due to depart, while others sit there for minutes afterwards for no apparent reason.

But I just am not aware of any systems in place that do what you expect it to do as outlined in the previous posts. Maybe there are, but I've not read about them in any of the industry journals.

I was responding to your claim that I haven't thought things through and was overestimating the ability of an automated system to deal with disruption. I was pointing out one way of doing it. As it turns out, the system we have should be capable of it.

The system is only switched off two days a year when cross-city routes get split in two and many routes have long diversions - that was my reference to two days (St Patrick's Day and Marathon Day).

The system is frequently unavailable, far more than on just two days a year. And you were implying that having a proper real-time system would only be beneficial for those two days.

With respect to your last paragraph - making sweeping claims as you did that something is easy to do without any evidence to back that up is pushing credibility a bit. If the systems aren't there - then what you expect may not be possible.

It may very well not be possible. I've no idea. But again, in response to your specific claim that an automated system would be unable to cope without massive manual intervention, it's straightforward to design a system flexible enough to involve minimal user intervention.

Whether there's some practical issue preventing building such a system, I don't know. Again, you're the expert, you tell me.

LXFlyer

MOH wrote: »

Thanks for that, but I'm not particularly interested in how the systems in place work, when they don't. There's far more wrong with RTPI than this. Buses that regularly vanish, sometime shortly before they reach a stop. Buses that are listed as going their full route but are terminating early. Buses (and stand on Eden quay for 10 minutes of any day to see this) that leave minutes before the RTPI show them due to depart, while others sit there for minutes afterwards for no apparent reason.


I was responding to your claim that I haven't thought things through and was overestimating the ability of an automated system to deal with disruption. I was pointing out one way of doing it. As it turns out, the system we have should be capable of it.


The system is frequently unavailable, far more than on just two days a year. And you were implying that having a proper real-time system would only be beneficial for those two days.


It may very well not be possible. I've no idea. But again, in response to your specific claim that an automated system would be unable to cope without massive manual intervention, it's straightforward to design a system flexible enough to involve minimal user intervention.

Whether there's some practical issue preventing building such a system, I don't know. Again, you're the expert, you tell me.

Please stop putting words into my mouth.

I said that the system is switched off fully twice a year in a pre-planned manner due to significant diversions being put in place.

I'm not going to bother continuing this discussion as you clearly have your own opinions which are pretty much inflexible, and at this point frankly am considering withdrawing all together from C & T as I'm getting increasingly fed up of all the tone of posts directed at me.

What's the point in trying to explain technicalities when people like yourself just don't want to listen?

Dyr

MOH wrote: »

How can you possibly stand over a system that calls itself real-time but is woefully inaccurate and requires an army of schedulers to maintain?
.

Because Dublin bus needed editorial control over RTPI to perpetuate the fantasy of their stats

Like you said, one would assume any real time tracking system would use all the relevant current data it can access as the primary method to build an accurate picture.

If it is tracking numerous vehicles right across a network then all that data would be used predict travel time for vehicles, in conjunction with any other data that it can access.

Using the historic data of only a subset of vehicles for real time tracking seems mental. Especially if its combined with human guesstimation.

Muahahaha

The thing Ive never quite gotten about the RTPI system is the way it is set up on predictive schedules. Surely a system that sends a GPS signal from the bus every 30 seconds or so would have been much more like real time? All the taxi companies use this kind of software to track where their fleet is at a given point in time, Im not sure why the same cant apply to DB?

Also buses showing up on RTPI and vanishing again can be infuriating. Wouldnt it have been much better to have an app that allows passengers to see in real time by GPS exactly where the bus they are expecting actually is? Like the technology is there for the system to be amazingly accurate by using real time GPS but DB dont seem to want to use it for some reason

devnull

MOH wrote: »

It may very well not be possible. I've no idea. But again, in response to your specific claim that an automated system would be unable to cope without massive manual intervention, it's straightforward to design a system flexible enough to involve minimal user intervention.

Whether there's some practical issue preventing building such a system, I don't know. Again, you're the expert, you tell me.

You are the one who keeps saying the service is not fit for purpose and claiming that it does not do what it says it does and you imply it could be done better, so I think that you should be the one backing that up, rather than asking other posters to back up your own point. You claim it is straightforward to design such system but offer no back-up to it and merely are asking the opposition to back up their point, that's not the way it works in life situations, if you have a point be prepared to support it.

Whilst I agree that the RTPI system is not perfect, I can't think of many that are, that is the nature of the beast unfortunately, things which we cannot predict do happen, hundreds of thousands of small events make up traffic flow and traffic volumes and hold ups and effect journey times on a daily basis, especially through a city which is having so much work done to it as Dublin has, and that's before you take into account any of the many hundreds of events that take place each year, tourist numbers, weather etc for a start. There are so many variables no system is perfect.

What I do know is that the system being provided on the backend is not a system that is done on the cheap or a system that is unproven or somehow second rate. It's powered by a system called VIX Connect (formerly ACIS) which is regarded as the leading provider of intelligent transport products such as RTPI. They did not get to that position by providing an inferior product that you seem to suggest they are to the rest of companies providing such services.

People see to think that the NTA etc did everything whether it be LEAP or RTPI on a low budget using cheap non experienced companies. Actually the reverse is true, they have used the companies who have a proven track record in delivering such systems in many other cities not just in the UK but across Europe and beyond. No system is perfect, and quite frankly some peoples expectations on here are unrealistic.

Sometimes I wish that they would turn RPTI off for a few weeks solidly and see how people cope maybe then they would appreciate it more. Because to be quite frank, whilst the system is not perfect, it's a damn sight better than the lottery that existed before when you didn't have the faintest idea of what was going on or when the bus would or would not turn up and would wait in the rain in the vain hope that a bus would come soon, not going into shelter of a shop in case you would miss it, and believe me that happened many times, since RTPI came into being those occasions are virtually zero and it saves me a hell of a lot of time.

Dyr

Muahahaha wrote: »

Like the technology is there for the system to be amazingly accurate by using real time GPS but DB dont seem to want to use it for some reason

Because they need editorial control of the information to maintain the illusion of their service levels.

devnull

Muahahaha wrote: »

The thing Ive never quite gotten about the RTPI system is the way it is set up on predictive schedules. Surely a system that sends a GPS signal from the bus every 30 seconds or so would have been much more like real time? All the taxi companies use this kind of software to track where their fleet is at a given point in time, Im not sure why the same cant apply to DB?

You seem to be of the view that the same journey takes the same time each day.

When the RTPI came out I used to take a bus from one stop to another every day
One day it took 24 minutes
The next day it took 19
The day after that it took 21
The following day it took 29
The day after it took 17

The following week it was raining a lot and
One day it took 18 minutes
The next day it took 38 minutes
The day after it took 32 minutes
The day after it took 41 minutes (the previous bus broke down)
The day after it took 23 minutes.

I use Halo quite regularly and I can tell you that the predictive times on there are not much better than using Dublin Bus RTPI, sometimes they predict long periods and sometimes they predict short periods. The reason they are slightly better is there is less variables in the operation of a taxi, nothing to do with the so called "proper" real time.

Think about a way a taxi works from end to end and a way a bus works from end to end. Dwell times per stop can differ significantly due to many factors, something that is not a factor on other modes of transport, and this will allow for some of what you believe to be difference.

By the way, true real time if what you are asking for is less accurate than a historical based prediction. Many people more intelligent than me or you have discovered this which is the whole reasons they use such systems in the first place. The reason is in the absence of a crystal ball, past performance is the best indicator we have of future performance. So the system uses it.

Is it perfect? Certainly not. Is it better than what came before it? Yes, 100x.

devnull

Bambi wrote: »

Because they need editorial control of the information to maintain the illusion of their service levels.

Actually they only have editorial control over what goes onto DublinBus.ie and the Dublin Bus App.

The system goes from each bus to the central system, that delivers feeds to appropriate mediums in raw format. One feed goes to DublinBus.ie, another to the signs and another to the NTA.

There clearly is some post processing on the feeds before they publish them on DublinBus.ie and the Dublin Bus App.

Dyr

devnull wrote: »

Actually they only have editorial control over what goes onto DublinBus.ie and the Dublin Bus App.

The system goes from each bus to the central system, that delivers feeds to appropriate mediums in raw format. One feed goes to DublinBus.ie, another to the signs and another to the NTA.

There clearly is some post processing on the feeds before they publish them on DublinBus.ie and the Dublin Bus App.

Firstly you're assuming that the NTA are proactive in checking and holding dublin bus to account. Thats a big presumption in this country

The reason that the NTA app shows different data to dublin bus is because the NTA might have access to the raw GPS data but they don't know what's going with the short runs, buses running as out of service etc. unless dublin bus tell them

Dublin bus still maintain editorial control because they can choose whether or not to pass that data on to both their own app, the RTPI signs and the NTA. In my experience, Dublin bus game the RTPI system a lot.

The fact that the NTA app is the least likely to display accurate information would suggest that either dublin bus don't feed them the info or they can't process it in a timely manner.

I asked dublin bus a few times if all this data makes its way to the NTA and they refuse to say. "you'd have to ask them" was the response :rolleyes:

Muahahaha

devnull wrote: »

You seem to be of the view that the same journey takes the same time each day.

When the RTPI came out I used to take a bus from one stop to another every day
One day it took 24 minutes
The next day it took 19
The day after that it took 21
The following day it took 29
The day after it took 17

The following week it was raining a lot and
One day it took 18 minutes
The next day it took 38 minutes
The day after it took 32 minutes
The day after it took 41 minutes (the previous bus broke down)
The day after it took 23 minutes.

I get all that, journey times can be unpredictable. But what Im proposing is a GPS system that checks the location of the bus every 30 seconds. So if a bus has a long dwell time then the system knows it and can update how long the bus might take to the app and the electronic signs at bus stops further along the route. Same if it gets stuck in heavy traffic, a GPS reading every 30 seconds would tell the system that Bus ABC took 5 minutes to cover one kilometre and therefore apply its speed of 12kph to arrive at an estimate of when it will arrive at the stops further down the route.

Like in your example above on rainy days your bus took between 18 minutes all the way up to 38 minutes. That tells us that the time taken to do your trip can vary by as much as 100%. So as it stands the predictive system of RTPI is dealing with analysing thousands of journeys to best estimate how long it takes. Problem with that is when you have variances of 100% in how long the journey takes then it can never attain anything like full accuracy as it is simply averaging off lots of journey times. Which isnt much good when you are getting data from the RTPI which doesnt reflect the everyday realities of long dwell times, heavy traffic, wet days, etc. A GPS system tracking where the buses actually are every 30 seconds would be able to allow for all that with extreme levels of accuracy as it would be completely dynamic and respond to all unexpected circumstances.

devnull

RTPI is a best guess at what time a bus will arrive based on where it is and historical information at that particular time. It cannot tell the future regardless of how you configure the system.

There could be a huge smash that blocks all lanes, the RTPI cannot know or allow for this so therefore the information it gave 5 minutes ago will be wrong.

Muahahaha wrote: »

I get all that, journey times can be unpredictable. But what Im proposing is a GPS system that checks the location of the bus every 30 seconds. So if a bus has a long dwell time then the system knows it and can update how long the bus might take to the app and the electronic signs at bus stops further along the route. Same if it gets stuck in heavy traffic, a GPS reading every 30 seconds would tell the system that Bus ABC took 5 minutes to cover one kilometre and therefore apply its speed of 12kph to arrive at an estimate of when it will arrive at the stops further down the route.

But the next km may take 10 minutes and then someone is waiting for double the amount of time they though they should be and they moan about RTPI being incorrect.

The next km may take 1 minute since it was caused by a car that blocked all lanes that has now removed, now person misses their bus and complains about RTPI being incorrect.

A GPS system tracking where the buses actually are every 30 seconds would be able to allow for all that with extreme levels of accuracy as it would be completely dynamic and respond to all unexpected circumstances.

By responding to all unexpected circumstances, it means responding to previous data which is bad, because of those circumstances which have happened, which by it's very definition means that the information before the unexpected circumstance happen would have been wrong, because it couldn't see it coming. It doesn't fix anything at all.

It brings the live data to be correct in view to what has just happened, yes, but people will still moan about the data being incorrect because before these events happened it was showing a different figure which now it does not meet and instead the system increases it to allow for things and people moan about why a bus that was due to take 9 minutes now shows 18, 18 minutes is correct, but RTPI was still wrong before it could allow for things. Same drawback as we currently have, nothing can predict the future.

Say a bus has 10 minutes showing and suddenly it starts raining and a group of students get on the bus and delay it. The bus ends up taking 25 minutes because of large group of people. Would your system allow for that? No, because it has no idea of what is going to happen and will run into the same roadblocks that the current situation does.

However the difference is the current system knows that this happens on a regular basis, so works this into the calculations, that a certain bus is always hit by college students every friday night if they arrive at a particular time, so this journey always takes 20 minutes longer and the RTPI allows for this a dumb system that does not know this will carry on repeating the same mistake and not learning the lessons of history.

Any RTPI system cannot tell the future and some people on here want it to do so, it's not an exact science and nothing ever is. If it was an exact science the time of everything would be bang on, planes would depart and land exactly as expected before they took off nothing would ever run late in any transport anywhere and all predictions would be correct. That's in a perfect world, sadly the perfect world does not exist.

Case study
I see 20 minutes on a bus showing in Ballsbridge that comes from the city centre towards Blackrock using your system, it uses live date and knows it will take 20 minutes based on average speed. There is an accident on O'Connell Street that blocks all lanes.

Explain in simple terms, how your "GPS system tracking where the buses actually are every 30 seconds would be able to allow for all that with extreme levels of accuracy as it would be completely dynamic and respond to all unexpected circumstances." would work out a time for arrival for the bus.

Since you claim that your system can do this without giving any misleading information, I'd be delighted to hear it.

Calina

Muahahaha wrote: »

I get all that, journey times can be unpredictable. But what Im proposing is a GPS system that checks the location of the bus every 30 seconds. So if a bus has a long dwell time then the system knows it and can update how long the bus might take to the app and the electronic signs at bus stops further along the route. Same if it gets stuck in heavy traffic, a GPS reading every 30 seconds would tell the system that Bus ABC took 5 minutes to cover one kilometre and therefore apply its speed of 12kph to arrive at an estimate of when it will arrive at the stops further down the route.

Like in your example above on rainy days your bus took between 18 minutes all the way up to 38 minutes. That tells us that the time taken to do your trip can vary by as much as 100%. So as it stands the predictive system of RTPI is dealing with analysing thousands of journeys to best estimate how long it takes. Problem with that is when you have variances of 100% in how long the journey takes then it can never attain anything like full accuracy as it is simply averaging off lots of journey times. Which isnt much good when you are getting data from the RTPI which doesnt reflect the everyday realities of long dwell times, heavy traffic, wet days, etc. A GPS system tracking where the buses actually are every 30 seconds would be able to allow for all that with extreme levels of accuracy as it would be completely dynamic and respond to all unexpected circumstances.

This data is collected by Dublin Bus, iirc every 60 seconds. I am certain of this because there is a data set of it floating around on data.gov.ie. I've downloaded the dataset and done some rudimentary analysis on it in the past. It is absolutely possible for this data to be used, together with other sources of information, such as departure time, most recent stop, to build a predictive system and to be honest, I would be surprised if it did not form a component into the existing system.

I'm pretty certain that operationally, Dublin Bus generally knows where their buses are because they track them using this data. However, the location data is not, as far as I can see (and it's a cursory look I've given at the methods today) available through the REST API for RTPI. And the dataset I've mentioned above was released via Dublin City Council. If the GPS data was made available, it would be trivial to plot buses on a map.

Links:
2013 GPS sample data:
https://data.gov.ie/dataset/dublin-bus-gps-sample-data-from-dublin-city-council-insight-project

REST API for RTPI data
https://data.dublinked.ie/dataset/real-time-passenger-information-rtpi-for-dublin-bus-bus-eireann-luas-and-irish-rail

Muahahaha

devnull wrote: »

But the next km may take 10 minutes and then someone is waiting for double the amount of time they though they should be and they moan about RTPI being incorrect.

The next km may take 1 minute since it was caused by a car that blocked all lanes that has now removed, now person misses their bus and complains about RTPI being incorrect.

If the next km takes 10 minutes then during that time the GPS tracker at 30 seconds intervals will have been applied 20 times to know this information. It can then apply the delay to information at all subsequent bus stops. As things stand right now in the current situation passengers are looking at a system that says your bus is 10 minutes away and then the information stays at 10 minutes for ages. What are passengers to think? Is the system working? Is the bus actually coming? All the current system does is sow confusion, I would much rather have a system that changes that 10 minutes to 15 minutes or whatever the delay might be. At least with accurate real time data I am then in a position to decide whether to take a taxi or wait the extra 5 minutes. As things stand now I dont have the information to make that decision, all that is there is utter confusion which is hardly what passengers want.

By responding to all unexpected circumstances, it means responding to previous data which is bad, because of those circumstances which have happened, which by it's very definition means that the information before the unexpected circumstance happen would have been wrong, because it couldn't see it coming. It doesn't fix anything at all.

So responding to previous data is bad Isnt that exactly what RTPI has done to arrive at its estimated journey times

It brings the live data to be correct in view to what has just happened, yes, but people will still moan about the data being incorrect because before these events happened it was showing a different figure which now it does not meet and instead the system increases it to allow for things and people moan about why a bus that was due to take 9 minutes now shows 18, 18 minutes is correct, but RTPI was still wrong before it could allow for things. Same drawback as we currently have, nothing can predict the future.

People will always moan regardless. But if you offer them a choice of having accurate real time information that will tell them when their bus is late and how much by versus the RTPI system which doesnt then Ive no doubt people would go for something that gives them full information so they can make alternative arrangement to complete their journey if they have to be in a certain place by a certain time, like work for example.

Say a bus has 10 minutes showing and suddenly it starts raining and a group of students get on the bus and delay it. The bus ends up taking 25 minutes because of large group of people. Would your system allow for that? No, because it has no idea of what is going to happen and will run into the same roadblocks that the current situation does.

Well yes it would. If the bus takes 15 minutes to load up all these students then the GPS tracker will have 30 pieces of data to tell the system that the bus hasnt moved an inch. So then the system adds on that 15 minutes to the expected time of all subsequent stops. Again passengers at those stops now have full information and can make a choice of waiting it out or getting in a taxi. What is so wrong with passengers having full and accurate information?

However the difference is the current system knows that this happens on a regular basis, so works this into the calculations, that a certain bus is always hit by college students every friday night if they arrive at a particular time, so this journey always takes 20 minutes longer and the RTPI allows for this a dumb system that does not know this will carry on repeating the same mistake and not learning the lessons of history.

Im not advocating throwing the entire RTPI system out the window. All Im saying is GPS tracking would make the system a lot better. For sure use the predictive times gathered by data from thousands of previous trips, but on top of that patch a GPS system so that passengers literally know where the bus actually is rather than knowing where the bus actually would be on its average journey at that time of day.

Like we all know a rainy day can add 15 minutes to a bus journey, its a fact of life. But the RTPI cannot account for rain because the data it is constructed of was gleamed on some days where it was dry and other days when it was wet. So the system is some sort of a halfway house between wet and dry days.

Case study
I see 20 minutes on a bus showing in Ballsbridge that comes from the city centre towards Blackrock using your system, it uses live date and knows it will take 20 minutes based on average speed. There is an accident on O'Connell Street that blocks all lanes.

Explain in simple terms, how your "GPS system tracking where the buses actually are every 30 seconds would be able to allow for all that with extreme levels of accuracy as it would be completely dynamic and respond to all unexpected circumstances." would work out a time for arrival for the bus.

Since you claim that your system can do this without giving any misleading information, I'd be delighted to hear it.

Sure. So in Ballsbridge the system says 20 minutes and now the bus is stuck on OConnell St. So the GPS tracker checks twice a minute and sees it has remained static for a minute and therefore is going to take longer to get to Ballsbridge so adds an extra minute to the display in Ballsbridge, if it is still static on the next two checks then add another minute, and so on. It could even have an arrow next to it pointing upwards to let passengers know that this bus is taking longer than what would have been expected on the RTPI system with a down arrow telling passengers its moving faster than is normal and may get there slightly quicker than the time on the board.

devnull

Muahahaha wrote: »

If the next km takes 10 minutes then during that time the GPS tracker at 30 seconds intervals will have been applied 20 times to know this information. It can then apply the delay to information at all subsequent bus stops.

Then the accident clears and buses run quicker and the time is still wrong? You forget the factor of bus bunching which often makes one bus run much quicker than another, your system would not allow for this, the current system does.

At least with accurate real time data I am then in a position to decide whether to take a taxi or wait the extra 5 minutes. As things stand now I dont have the information to make that decision, all that is there is utter confusion which is hardly what passengers want.

It isn't accurate though, since by adding minutes you are making the previous data inaccurate, since if it was 10 minutes 2 minutes ago and is now 15 minutes, it meant the data 2 minutes ago was inaccurate. This is a different figure, but like with the current system, it's not perfect because it cannot tell the future so it's still a best guess.

So responding to previous data is bad Isnt that exactly what RTPI has done to arrive at its estimated journey times

My point is that all data that is updated by subtracting or adding minutes in excess of that time that was previously shown, makes the data from the previous minutes bad and incorrect. because nobody can tell what will happen in the future. This effects both systems.

People will always moan regardless. But if you offer them a choice of having accurate real time information

Neither system is accurate.

I would define a system that shows 10 minutes and arrives in 10 minutes, not plus or minus anything. This kind of system is impossible as the system cannot predict the future, all it can do is make a guess the best it can based on the details it has avaliable to it at a particular time and historically.

Well yes it would. If the bus takes 15 minutes to load up all these students then the GPS tracker will have 30 pieces of data to tell the system that the bus hasnt moved an inch. So then the system adds on that 15 minutes to the expected time of all subsequent stops.

What about the following bus? You previously argued that you should base buses on previous buses, what do you count as being a unique event that shouldn't influence buses versus ones which should be applied to all buses? How can you know the difference between broken down, stuck in traffic or dwell time, specifically when some bus lanes and bus stops are not an exact location,

Again passengers at those stops now have full information and can make a choice of waiting it out or getting in a taxi. What is so wrong with passengers having full and accurate information?

They do not have accurate information. If that was the case all information would never be wrong and would never change. This is impossible because things happen which could cause the bus to arrive later or earlier than the RTPI predicted a few minutes ago. at 19:55 RTPI might predict 6 minutes to one bus, but at 19:58 the same bus may be 9 minutes. This means that the RTPI info given at 19:55 was neither full or accurate.

Sure. So in Ballsbridge the system says 20 minutes and now the bus is stuck on OConnell St. So the GPS tracker checks twice a minute and sees it has remained static for a minute and therefore is going to take longer to get to Ballsbridge so adds an extra minute to the display in Ballsbridge,

But this does not provide a full and accurate information still, because the original information is not adhere to or met, because in it's original prediction, it could not forsee what would happen later in the journey which causes it to take longer than was originally predicted, therefore whilst the current time is more accurate, it still means that the time given a short while ago was incorrect.

if it is still static on the next two checks then add another minute, and so on. It could even have an arrow next to it pointing upwards to let passengers know that this bus is taking longer than what would have been expected on the RTPI system with a down arrow telling passengers its moving faster than is normal and may get there slightly quicker than the time on the board.

But it still means that it provides neither a full or an accurate information because 5 minutes ago it was showing one figure now it is showing more which means the information it provided 5 minutes ago was neither full or accurate, because it could not tell the future.

The very same drawbacks exist. An inability to tell the future, but you seem to be only focusing on the data being correct in the present, but what happens with RTPI essentially is at the time it gives correct data, but what happens in the future means that what was correct at the time was contradicted by events it could not predict.

Sorry if you don't see the way it works, but this is it and the issues with your system, I don't just get these facts from the back of my ass, this is based on knowing people in the trade who build these systems. But as LXflyer says, pointless talking about it since some people on here believe they know it all.

Anyway, like Lxflyer, I'm not saying any more on the matter.

Muahahaha

devnull wrote: »

Then the accident clears and buses run quicker and the time is still wrong? You forget the factor of bus bunching which often makes one bus run much quicker than another, your system would not allow for this, the current system does.

Of course it would because the bus behind would have its own GPS tracker

It isn't accurate though, since by adding minutes you are making the previous data inaccurate, since if it was 10 minutes 2 minutes ago and is now 15 minutes, it meant the data 2 minutes ago was inaccurate. This is a different figure, but like with the current system, it's not perfect because it cannot tell the future so it's still a best guess.

The previous data was accurate at the time and now is not accurate because of an accident, delay, etc. What exactly is wrong about correcting unforeseen circumstances so that passengers can actually know what is going on?

My point is that all data that is updated by subtracting or adding minutes in excess of that time that was previously shown, makes the data from the previous minutes bad and incorrect. because nobody can tell what will happen in the future. This effects both systems.

Of course. But under a GPS based system the time will get way more accurate as the bus gets closer. Under the current system its just best guess which means the system fails when there are unexpected circustances and passengers are left at stops in complete confusion wondering if the bus will show up at all

Neither system is accurate.

I would define a system that shows 10 minutes and arrives in 10 minutes, not plus or minus anything. This kind of system is impossible as the system cannot predict the future, all it can do is make a guess the best it can based on the details it has avaliable to it at a particular time and historically.

No system can predict the future. But a GPS based system can take data from the present and give a more accurate prediction of the future than what we currently have. As you said earlier your bus can take anything from 18 minutes to 38 minutes. With such wide variances the only thing that will solve that problem for passengers is GPS. It wont be perfect but it would be better than RTPI in its current guise of using a best guess solution. Best guessing might work 70% of the time but add in a little rain, an accident, road works, etc and that all goes out the window. Thats where GPS can fill the gap.

What about the following bus? You previously argued that you should base buses on previous buses, what do you count as being a unique event that shouldn't influence buses versus ones which should be applied to all buses? How can you know the difference between broken down, stuck in traffic or dwell time, specifically when some bus lanes and bus stops are not an exact location,

I dont remember arguing this at all, not sure where youre getting that from

They do not have accurate information. If that was the case all information would never be wrong and would never change. This is impossible because things happen which could cause the bus to arrive later or earlier than the RTPI predicted a few minutes ago. at 19:55 RTPI might predict 6 minutes to one bus, but at 19:58 the same bus may be 9 minutes. This means that the RTPI info given at 19:55 was neither full or accurate.

Again, what do you want- inaccurate information? Because you seem to be arguing for it. Think of what the airlines do when a plane is delayed. They update their system to tell the arrival airport that it is going to be late. They tell their passengers on the plane too so now everyone knows and people just accept the delay. But with Dublin Bus we get none of this information and are instead fed inaccurate information that is not dynamic and reacting to present circumstances rather than an average of the journey from past events.

But this does not provide a full and accurate information still, because the original information is not adhere to or met, because in it's original prediction, it could not forsee what would happen later in the journey which causes it to take longer than was originally predicted, therefore whilst the current time is more accurate, it still means that the time given a short while ago was incorrect.

Again the GPS is updating itself every 30 seconds, it is not about *the future* only, a GPS system is about what normally happens in the future but also taking the present into account, every 30 seconds, thus making the prediction more dynamic and accurate.

But it still means that it provides neither a full or an accurate information because 5 minutes ago it was showing one figure now it is showing more which means the information it provided 5 minutes ago was neither full or accurate, because it could not tell the future.

The very same drawbacks exist. An inability to tell the future, but you seem to be only focusing on the data being correct in the present, but what happens with RTPI essentially is at the time it gives correct data, but what happens in the future means that what was correct at the time was contradicted by events it could not predict.

And thats all fine, such is the unpredictability of public transport. But if events overtake what was correct and now clearly isnt then surely it is optimum to tell passengers that fact

Sorry if you don't see the way it works, but this is it and the issues with your system, I don't just get these facts from the back of my ass, this is based on knowing people in the trade who build these systems. But as LXflyer says, pointless talking about it since some people on here believe they know it all.

Anyway, like Lxflyer, I'm not saying any more on the matter.

Im not claiming I know it all so no need for the personal jibes. Ive explained how a GPS based system based on 30 seconds could work, you have done nothing with your arguments to persuade me that it couldnt work.

In any case I doubt all the engineers at Uber and Google are thinking with your mindset when it comes to designing their driverless cars and buses and making moving people around more efficient and user friendly.

my commute is shorter than these posts

Zipppy

Calina wrote:

I'm pretty certain that operationally, Dublin Bus generally knows where their buses are because they track them using this data. However, the location data is not, as far as I can see (and it's a cursory look I've given at the methods today) available through the REST API for RTPI. And the dataset I've mentioned above was released via Dublin City Council. If the GPS data was made available, it would be trivial to plot buses on a map.

Have you contacted DB seeking the location data?
Alternatively you could contact info @ dublinked.ie and ask they source the data .....

Calina

Zipppy wrote: »

Have you contacted DB seeking the location data?
Alternatively you could contact info @ dublinked.ie and ask they source the data .....

It's been a while, but I seem to remember asking and being told there was an API coming, so then later I went and asked if there were more recent datasets available than the 2013 I linked above and was told there was now an API and got details for the API which as I noted doesn't have the gps data. What I wanted to do with the data depended on having a fair raft of historic data rather than dynamic data. So I got credentials for the API but have not since done anything with it because I simply haven't had time and it wasn't exactly what I was looking for. I need to have a closer look at the available method calls again because stop progress information might provide some proxy information anyway. I just haven't time to look at that side of things right now.

I do know that Dublin City Council has traffic progress data as well which I found yesterday when I dug out the links mentioned above so I will probably add that to my to do list to have a delve into when I next have time.

Chivito550

Regarding the specifics of how the RTPI works, I've no idea which of you is correct. All I can say it is highly unreliable. I was at the top of grafton walking to Townsend St this evening to catch the 1 to Irishtown. The RTPI says 12 minutes. I walk along thinking I have loads of time. I refresh 2 minutes later and it says 4 minutes. WTF! So I have to run from the middle of grafton st to Townsend St, on the narrowest footpaths imaginable, trying to dodge about 1000 people in the process. Just about made it, but it shouldn't be this way!

Calina

Chivito550 wrote: »

Regarding the specifics of how the RTPI works, I've no idea which of you is correct. All I can say it is highly unreliable. I was at the top of grafton walking to Townsend St this evening to catch the 1 to Irishtown. The RTPI says 12 minutes. I walk along thinking I have loads of time. I refresh 2 minutes later and it says 4 minutes. WTF! So I have to run from the middle of grafton st to Townsend St, on the narrowest footpaths imaginable, trying to dodge about 1000 people in the process. Just about made it, but it shouldn't be this way!

One of the things I would be interested in knowing is whether there is any post hoc validation of predicted times and how much they deviated from reality in the end. I don't know if Dublin Bus has a data scientist looking at this stuff, or whether IBM Smart Cities has. I'd like to hope so but I am not sure they do.

The thing is, there are things I would like to do like calculating dwell times and loadings and seeing if they would work as inputs to a predictive system, how behaviour varies depending on which direction the route is following at a given time, how bunching develops from day to day. You could do this relatively straightforward from a bunch of day datasets - not all fancy schmancy datascience has to be done against dynamically updating data.

Point is, as a customer, there are questions you'd like answers to: is the next bus looking like it's going to be full, what time is it most likely to arrive at a specific destination, what are the options for consolidating bus stops. Some of this data is operational stuff based on where the bus is, some of it is yield/farebox/leapcard based. Bringing it together could be quite interesting. I'd like to hope it's done but I suspect that the less discretion the service operators (in this case Dublin Bus) have over the services and infrastructure, the less likely they are to do it. Maybe it is something Dublin City Council could look into.

It's been a while since I thought about this stuff but ultimately, I suppose the base question is "how would we like public transport to look in Ireland" and that brings us back to the OP I suppose. I would like to look at the data, see what's available, and how it could be worked with to create improvements for the passenger experience. Across all modes if possible.

Dr Crayfish

Such a really depressing thread. I was in Holland last week, my friend lives in Arnhem which is just over 100k or so from Schipol Airport. Off the plane, onto the train in 10 minutes and there in just over an hour. They have 2 decker trains that are super quiet and just so comfortable.
Anyway I know we'll never have anything like that but it made me realise how much better life is if you live in a well connected country. My friend has buddies in places like Amsterdam and Den Haag and Utrecht and visiting them is super easy, you just go to the train station and jump on a train and you're there in no time.

I'm lucky that I have a house only 8km from city centre of Dublin where I work and I can cycle every day. The odd day when I take the dart, there seems to be some kind of delay more often than not, and it dilly dallies around the f**king East Wall area every single time, especially when I'm coming home. Really from Raheny where I live to Pearse should only take 10 minutes or so in total. It's a dinosaur of a system.

I went on a date with a girl not too long ago who drove to work every day from Artane to George's St South every day. I asked her why and how she copes sitting in that traffic snake every day, and she said "It's lovely and warm and comfortable". It really made my blood boil and I haven't spoken to her since that date!
In my section of work alone there are 3 women who drive from Santry, Malahide and Swords every day, and park in town, only because the department provides parking spaces. Drives me nuts...

Anyway I'd say our public transport is probably on par right now with somewhere like Guatamala City, and if I'm lucky enough to live for another 40 years there'll be very little change, let's face it.

Just enjoy the public transport when you visit Europe, you'll never experience anything like it here.

Stephen15

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

Such a really depressing thread. I was in Holland last week, my friend lives in Arnhem which is just over 100k or so from Schipol Airport. Off the plane, onto the train in 10 minutes and there in just over an hour. They have 2 decker trains that are super quiet and just so comfortable.
Anyway I know we'll never have anything like that but it made me realise how much better life is if you live in a well connected country. My friend has buddies in places like Amsterdam and Den Haag and Utrecht and visiting them is super easy, you just go to the train station and jump on a train and you're there in no time.

I'm lucky that I have a house only 8km from city centre of Dublin where I work and I can cycle every day. The odd day when I take the dart, there seems to be some kind of delay more often than not, and it dilly dallies around the f**king East Wall area every single time, especially when I'm coming home. Really from Raheny where I live to Pearse should only take 10 minutes or so in total. It's a dinosaur of a system.

I went on a date with a girl not too long ago who drove to work every day from Artane to George's St South every day. I asked her why and how she copes sitting in that traffic snake every day, and she said "It's lovely and warm and comfortable". It really made my blood boil and I haven't spoken to her since that date!
In my section of work alone there are 3 women who drive from Santry, Malahide and Swords every day, and park in town, only because the department provides parking spaces. Drives me nuts...

Anyway I'd say our public transport is probably on par right now with somewhere like Guatamala City, and if I'm lucky enough to live for another 40 years there'll be very little change, let's face it.

Just enjoy the public transport when you visit Europe, you'll never experience anything like it here.

While public transport may be good in Holland, Germany and the Scandinavian. Some countries would have public transport on a similar level to Ireland. Greece would probably have worse public transport than Ireland.

Romes public transport would perhaps be on a par with Dublin although they do have two metro lines and few tram lines aswell.

I do believe public transport has improved here in Ireland in the last five years. Network Direct has improved some but not all routes most changes it made were fairly logical. The introduction of Real Time and Leap cards has to be classed as a success.

Sam Russell

My sister lives in a rural area not that far from Geneva. They do not have an RTPI system, they have a timetable for buses and trains. They do not need the RTPI system because both buses and trains run to timetable. The bus meets the train - always. And the trains meet the bus - always.

Oh, if only .......

markpb

Are you serious?

Stephen15 wrote:

Greece would probably have worse public transport than Ireland.

The metro in Athens is far better than what Dublin has now or even what is planned for Dublin.

Stephen15 wrote:

Romes public transport would perhaps be on a par with Dublin although they do have two metro lines and few tram lines aswell.

Rome has 3 metro lines, 6 tram lines, 8 suburban lines and a comprehensive bus service. And it was built in a historical environment that would make most cities cry.

strandroad

Stephen15 wrote: »

Romes public transport would perhaps be on a par with Dublin

Oh please! Rome's public transport might be shockingly dirty, but it's a robust network, a lot of it rail based. Buses look like you could catch something off the seats, but they are fast.

salmocab

Dr Crayfish wrote: »

I went on a date with a girl not too long ago who drove to work every day from Artane to George's St South every day. I asked her why and how she copes sitting in that traffic snake every day, and she said "It's lovely and warm and comfortable". It really made my blood boil and I haven't spoken to her since that date!
In my section of work alone there are 3 women who drive from Santry, Malahide and Swords every day, and park in town, only because the department provides parking spaces. Drives me nuts...

I can understand her attitude, I'm travelling from rathfarnham to Dorset street everyday and if I had parking I would use it, the bus is a pain in the hole. I like using public transport but I have to drive to the stop anyway and with my hours 8 to 4 30 I would be quicker driving.

devnull

mhge wrote: »

Oh please! Rome's public transport might be shockingly dirty, but it's a robust network, a lot of it rail based. Buses look like you could catch something off the seats, but they are fast.

That's a re-occurring issue that we keep seeing here on Boards, that people keep saying that other countries transport is poorer than Ireland, or no better, normally mentioning countries they have never even been to, or thinking that said country is in Central or Eastern Europe and therefore it must be worse than Ireland because we are in Western Europe and pretty ridiculous generalizations which are totally far from the mark.

I've been in 7 different countries this year, and some of the guff I read on here really makes me laugh because some of the stuff posted by the uneducated on here has no comparison to the actual reality, it's all just generalizations and assumptions.

Which comes back to what I've said before, the people who believe Ireland has a good or decent transport infrastructure are the ones that have no idea what a good system looks like in the rest of Europe, they just go on what they read or think without any actual experience.

strandroad

devnull wrote: »

Which comes back to what I've said before, the people who believe Ireland has a good or decent transport infrastructure are the ones that have no idea what a good system looks like in the rest of Europe, they just go on what they read or think without any actual experience.

Agreed. Or perhaps they have some comparison with US or UK at best, none of them famous for their public transport to put it mildly.
Even poorer or ex-communist countries can have functional, robust networks - not surprising seeing how cars were not exactly common there when they were built...

devnull

When I was in Budapest recently it was a good example.

About half the city has very old buses, trams and metro, with half almost new some things dating back 40 years or so and are in desperate need of replacing, however the problem is there is a lot of old stuff that needs replacing from Soviet Union or Communism days where there was little investment for decades, so it cannot be done all in one go and needs to be done in stages.

In the areas where there has been modernization in the last few years you see;

- Good spec Mercedes Citaro / Lion City Buses that are brand new, comfortable seating with lightning fast dwell times, fully bilingual inside with bilingual announcements and LCD screens showing the next several stops in easy to follow diagrams with connection information.

- Superlong Siemens and CAF trams, which I believe are the longest trams in Europe with excellent on board information (much better than LUAS) at very high frequency, with some lines going up to every 3 minutes, with plenty of capacity, very reliable with very easy to follow stop timetables (better than luas)

- Metro line 4 which is fully automated using Siemens technology and Alstom trains, no drivers or staff inside, you can walk right through the train, very comfortable and fully automated, apparently done as a way to stave off strikes that they were worried about holding the city to ransom.

That's before you take into account the excellent intergration and ticket options and the fact that the information provided in English at stations, stops and on board is BETTER IN ENGLISH in a country that it isn't a native language, than informtion is on Dublin Bus in English. It's not just about investment in transport, Hungary has had far less money than Ireland does, but Hungary also does the basics right as well which cost little to nothing.

I was there when there was a national celebration. Every bus stop and tram stop had a poster with details on how it effected that route IN DETAIL in two languages, ticket machines were in 9, fare details clearly advertised at every stop, none of this is rocket science.

Don't believe me, see attached

strandroad

devnull wrote: »

When I was in Budapest recently it was a good example.

About half the city has very old buses, trams and metro, with half almost new some things dating back 40 years or so and are in desperate need of replacing, however the problem is there is a lot of old stuff that needs replacing from Soviet Union or Communism days where there was little investment for decades, so it cannot be done all in one go and needs to be done in stages.

The oldest metro line in Budapest looks positively Victorian, it's so shallow under the surface that its ceiling must be the road surface itself. But it works.

devnull

Metro line 3 has the oldest rolling stock, Dates back to the mid to late 1970s, this was cascaded from Line 2 which got brand new stock a few years back, which allowed them to withdraw even older stock from late 60s and early to mid 70s. Stations look that age too.

But Metro line 1 is the oldest line in mainland Europe I believe, which is what you are talking about, it has a weird loading gauge and the trains are very particularly and quite slow, but has a lot of character that is for sure.

Metro Line 4 is very modern, there's no cabs in it at all, you can stand right next to the window. Line 2 is not far behind, same vehicles, but has drivers but that is supposed to be going driverless at some point.

Stephen15

markpb wrote: »

Are you serious?



The metro in Athens is far better than what Dublin has now or even what is planned for Dublin.



Rome has 3 metro lines, 6 tram lines, 8 suburban lines and a comprehensive bus service. And it was built in a historical environment that would make most cities cry.

So that really must make Dublin look really bad when country's with trillions of euro in debt have better public transport systems. I do quite like Italian public transport. If Romes public transport can run well as dirty then why does CIE spend so much money on cleaning graffiti off trains when they should be focusing on making trains and buses run to their timetables that's the problem withas CIE then they're more concerned about their brand image than running efficiently.