Why is public transport in Dublin so bad?

Stephen15

You always be like the great modern day Romans themselves and get a moped with poor public transport and traffic I'm surprised they're not more popular with Irish people. They look handy for getting in and out of traffic. A very popular way of getting around cities such as Paris and Rome.

_Kaiser_

Stephen15 wrote: »

For the proposed metro why don't they just build a proper heavy rail metro the plans seem to be for just a glorified Luas if they're going to be building a metro at least do it properly.

Because that's the "Irish way".. build a half-assed inadequate "solution" at massive expense, and then spend another fortune upgrading it years later, rather than doing it properly the first time.

But as long as it allows our politicians to be "seen to be doing something" it'll result in a few votes and that's the real objective.

We need a fully independent and financed Transport for Dublin that can do everything from set bus timetables and targets for the operators, to fares, to infrastructure development. The city is the primary centre for commerce and employment in this country and the taxes collected should be reinvested into things like the above.

But that wouldn't sit well with our rural electorate or their TDs.. despite the fact that most of them rely on the above taxes to keep their own counties afloat!

Stephen15

Another complaint I have of MN and DU is their lack of connectivity with Connolly Station the busiest Mainline railway station in the country. If MN ever did come in Connolly Station/Busaras could become the biggest transport hub in the country. I would be of terminating or just having all Bus services go through there in what is now the carpark if that ever did happen it would be very good for inter connectivity. Which there is a severe lack of in Dublin particularly between buses and trains.

Trampas

I go to get a night link home to be told bus has left early. Over 5 minutes early and tough you have to wait 90 minutes for next one or get another night link to elsewhere and get home from there.

Should be floaters especially at this time of the year.

Macy0161

Plenty of examples of the mentality that makes it politically hard for spending on infrastructural development in Dublin and the surrounding area on the news the last 24 hours. Virtually every report from the areas affected by flooding has included at least one local saying something along the lines of "if it was happening in Dublin it would be sorted out". Incidentally, it was only last Thursday that parts of Dublin were flooded...

LeinsterDub

Stephen15 wrote: »

For the proposed metro why don't they just build a proper heavy rail metro the plans seem to be for just a glorified Luas if they're going to be building a metro at least do it properly.

Because they've no intention of building it and thought they may as well give us something to discuss for the next few years?

Irish_rat

Metro North and DU are only the start, a serious underground system is badly needed for the Greater Dublin Area.

Idbatterim

we hear all about this growth and exchequer returns are 3 billion ahead of expectation. So why is MN being long fingered for five years, with an inferior alternative, MNR, when the sums involved are a total and utter f**cking irrelevance! It will allegedly "save" 1 billion, now an idiot like me thought, that a huge amount of that money would circulate around the economy and ultimately end up back in the governments pockets. Joan Burton was championing welfare increases saying it would help the economy and spending, so is infrastructure different? NO need to answer that!

Plenty of examples of the mentality that makes it politically hard for spending on infrastructural development in Dublin and the surrounding area on the news the last 24 hours. Virtually every report from the areas affected by flooding has included at least one local saying something along the lines of "if it was happening in Dublin it would be sorted out". Incidentally, it was only last Thursday that parts of Dublin were flooded...

this shouldn't be about Dublin v the rest. This should be about adequate amounts being spent in key areas, infrastructure, health, policing and prison spaces etc. NOT being blown on the world class welfare system! This is the cost of the world class welfare system, everything else is near 3rd world!

Chivito550

Was in Nuremberg for the weekend. The city is the same population as Dublin, although the metropolitan area seems to have a bigger population. A very impressive city in terms of getting around.

Firstly, a large portion of the city centre is completely pedestrianized. I’m not just talking isolated streets like with Grafton street, but an interconnected network of pedestrian streets. Then the roads in the city centre that do allow cars are never all that busy with them, as it seems like such a pain in the ass to drive into the city centre that most don’t bother. Cars seem to drive around the city centre, rather than through it. It makes walking around a very pleasant experience.

Secondly, the public transport is top notch for a city which is not really that big. They have 3 underground U-Bahn lines, which interconnect with each other in more than just one centralized point. I only took the underground to Furth, so can only speak for the frequency on that line (though I assume it’s the same on all 3), but looking at the timetable at the platform, they come every 3 minutes during peak hours, and every 7 minutes off peak.

Then you have 5 tram lines which all interconnect with each other and with the U-Bahn. On top of all that there’s 4 S-Bahn train lines which serve the outer suburbs. 2 of them are city to suburb, and 2 of them are suburb to city out to different suburb. The timetables show that they come 2 to 3 times per hour all day. There are plenty of buses too which I didn’t really look into.

I went out to Bamberg for the day, population 71,000. Despite being a small city they had around 8-9 platforms in their train station. Imagine a city that size in Ireland having that. Then they have a pretty good bus network too. Not amazing, but for the size of the city it looks very decent. Buses come every 15 minutes at peak hours, while every 30 minutes off peak,

So, is Nuremberg a city that Dublin should benchmark itself against, and a standard we should strive towards? If we set our standards high then we have more chance of seeing good things happen, than if we just compare ourselves with Leeds or Bristol. With the supposed agreements with regards climate change, is now the time for our politicians to take this stuff seriously, and go out to these cities in Central Europe, see how things are done, and start copying them?

Thargor

All we need to do is get the RAF and the USAF to completely flatten Dublin then get the Americans to cut a nice big cheque to rebuild it like happened with Nuremberg and we're golden.

Macy0161

Thargor wrote: »

All we need to do is get the RAF and the USAF to completely flatten Dublin then get the Americans to cut a nice big cheque to rebuild it like happened with Nuremberg and we're golden.

Plenty of european cities made a decision in the 60's and 70's to switch away from being car focused. It's a bit of a myth that continental european cities have great infrastructure because they were flattened in World War II - a lot of them were initially rebuilt with cars the transportation focus.

RainyDay

Idbatterim wrote: »

we hear all about this growth and exchequer returns are 3 billion ahead of expectation. So why is MN being long fingered for five years, with an inferior alternative, MNR, when the sums involved are a total and utter f**cking irrelevance!

Possibly because we still owe a sh1tload of money that our children and grandchildren will be saddled with paying off, unless we can manage to clear some of those debts early.

markpb

RainyDay wrote: »

Possibly because we still owe a sh1tload of money that our children and grandchildren will be saddled with paying off, unless we can manage to clear some of those debts early.

And, likewise, if we don't invest in infrastructure, we're condemning them to living a life in a city with poor infrastructure so they'll spend too long commuting. Either that or companies will invest elsewhere and our children and grandchildren will be forced to emigrate.

Irish Steve

The only thing that's going to get the attention of the gombeen politicians is when the large multinationals start voting with their feet and relocating out of Ireland because they can't get the calibre of people that they want at a price they are prepared to pay, which will become an issue when the high flyers decide that the daily commute is not worth the hassle, and they go somewhere where their skills are appreciated and it doesn't take them over 2 hours a day each way to commute to work.

A good while ago now, before they brought in barrier free tolls on the M50, it was quicker for me to drive to Belfast for some doors than to get them in Dublin (Sandyford), and I'm only 10 miles from Dublin. The result was that I spent a significant sum on 18 hardwood doors and associated fittings and the like outside of the local economy, simply because I wasn't prepared to spend half a day going across Dublin and back. My daughter lives in Duleek, and she goes to Newry rather than Dublin, (even with the exchange rate as bad as it is now) simply because it's easier to get there, and parking is available, and cheaper, than fighting into Dublin with the attendant hassles and costs.

When enough people start taking those actions, it WILL get the attention of even the politicians from the boreens, when they can't get the funding for their pet projects because the economy has once again gone down the tubes, they will have to start facing up to the reality that ignoring infrastructure issues has come home to haunt them. Doesn't matter if it's roads, rail, airports, flooding, Irish Water, Health or any of the other similar issues, we're in a global economy now, and if we don't get it right, the results will be another melt down, especially if the Multi Nationals become disillusioned with this country.

end of the road

Irish Steve wrote: »

The only thing that's going to get the attention of the gombeen politicians
it WILL get the attention of even the politicians from the boreens
they will have to start facing up to the reality

3 things that will never happen unfortunately

skrble

As I am staying in Dublin over the holidays, so I can compare few things with transport system in Prague. I will talk about bus service only.

1) Location of bus stops (mostly on the suburbs)
I still haven't fully understood, why are so many "towns" on the outskirts fenced. For example "Blackwood", which is near from here: quite a big area, but has only one exit. I would like to see someone walking the whole way for the bus. This is very stupid in general, as far as there could be more entrances to the areas just for pedestrians.

2) Timetables
If you can't get buses on their stations in a time, you have a big problem. In Prague, there is "guarantee" that bus can't leave the stop in advance to it's schedule. It may go later (traffic conjunctions etc.), but when it arrives 2 minutes in advance, it has to wait.
However, bigger problem is the lack of time schedules itself. It can arrive 5 minutes "earlier" or later, you have basically almost none chance to come "just on time". This means, that the whole system is unreliable. In Prague, if the bus leaves the stop earlier than in timetable, and some passanger complains to the carrier, driver is penalised, when the old GPS data of each vehicle tells against his behalf. It doesn't have to be so "cruel" here though!
On the other hand, as there as separated bus/taxi lines almost through the whole city, there is a HUGE opportunity to make the system work. Prague doesn't have anything like that, as far as commies never expected that people could own a car(s) so the routes could be full one day.

3) Routes
All the bus lines (as far as I've seen) are from the city centre to the outskirt. This is mostly due the lack of subsequent services as tram (sorry, that is not real tram) and metro. This means, that bus has to go a very long route - but it needs to interlace through maaaaany streets as well at first, because, one big area is usually served with one bus only. This is horrible. It means, that you have to go for a very long time to get to the city centre.

4) Lack of simplicity
In Prague, all bus stops have their names. It makes sense in certain way. You don't have to know names of all the bus stops in the system, passanger will just remember the ones he uses. Example: I live on "O'Conell's street", my school is on "Woodenhill", my friend lives on "Greyhound south". Still, I haven't remembered all the f###ing number I use. 7123? 4371? What the hell is that? Have anyone tried to search for connection in the Dublin Bus app with filling the numbers?

5) Lack of unification
Again, even small things can make life better. Why are here different bus stop's columns? In Prague, all of the columns MUST HAVE the name of the stop. Why is there anything like that? I've been on several station and couldn't find the stop number. Do the architects expect me as soothsayer?

I can add many more aspects, that I've figured out. It feels like the system is from the beginning of the 60s.

However, let me say one thing. Comparing to superior bus service at Prague, Dublin's has still a lot to offer. Vehicles are clean, relatively new, and look in quite good condition. Haven't seen almost any graffiti, scratched windows. There is a big opportunity to make the system more attractive... But one thing is true: in Prague, metro is the basic brick of the system. Without it, it will never work as "expected". But, would government force people to leave their cars at home? Imagine the amout of money they get from gas taxes...

Dyr

skrble wrote: »

4) Lack of simplicity
In Prague, all bus stops have their names. It makes sense in certain way. You don't have to know names of all the bus stops in the system, passanger will just remember the ones he uses. Example: I live on "O'Conell's street", my school is on "Woodenhill", my friend lives on "Greyhound south". Still, I haven't remembered all the f###ing number I use. 7123? 4371? What the hell is that? Have anyone tried to search for connection in the Dublin Bus app with filling the numbers?

This was one of the dublin buses great coups, getting away with a route finder application that assumes you actually want to travel to a bus stop number from a bus stop number

Use "O'Connell Street" as a search term on their route planner, it will draw a blank

devnull

That's why you use the NTA route planner and not the stop to stop planner on the DB site.

Boulevardier

The DB route planner is not fit for purpose and should be taken down.

The same applies to the Bus Eireann route planner.

Dyr

devnull wrote: »

That's why you use the NTA route planner and not the stop to stop planner on the DB site.

I'm sure all the tourists appreciate that.

But then you might be tempted to use the NTA's RTPI app which isn't to be trusted because RTPI in Ireland is not actually real time

You couldn't make it up

beauf

skrble wrote: »

As I am staying in Dublin over the holidays, so I can compare few things with transport system in Prague. I will talk about bus service only.

1) Location of bus stops (mostly on the suburbs)....
2) Timetables...
3) Routes..
4) Lack of simplicity
5) Lack of unification

I can only agree with everything you say.

Some people seem to always do things the most complicated way possible.

Its very obviously that most of the people who design & implement these systems, don't actual use them. Otherwise they would realise how inconvenient they are to use.

The bus stop numbers is a classic example.

monument

Thargor wrote: »

All we need to do is get the RAF and the USAF to completely flatten Dublin then get the Americans to cut a nice big cheque to rebuild it like happened with Nuremberg and we're golden.

What about Amsterdam then?

Cookie_Monster

monument wrote: »

What about Amsterdam then?

when Dublin has 40% of journeys by bike and more than 2 tram lines and an underground maybe then you could compare...

magicbastarder

i kinda read that as that several european cities with excellent transport are usually held up as examples of what you can do after a city has been flattened - but that in fact, the transport revolution in those cities happened *after* the rebuilding.

anyway, monument can confirm.

cgcsb

Munich was not 'flattened', they're building their second S bahn tunnel.
Vienna wasn't flattened and has an excellent network, same with Barcelona, Paris, Lyon, Amsterdam, Copenhagen, list goes on...

magicbastarder

what are the criteria - or are there any - which are used to separate dublin bus and bus eireann routes?
i'm thinking of a specific comparison; you can get a dublin bus from the city centre to maynooth (about 25km) but if you want to travel the (shorter) 22km to ashbourne, it's a bus eireann bus you need, at approx. twice the cost.
(for the record, the online calculators for BE and DB claim €6.20 from beresford place to ashbourne, €3.30 from westmoreland street to main st. maynooth).

cgcsb

Maynooth to Dublin is almost continuously urban with just a short gap of rural area between it and Leixlip, which is suited to a frequent stop urban service. In comparison, there is nothing but farms between the M50 and Ashbourne. I'd imagine that's the logic.

magicbastarder

yeah, i suspected that'd be the case.

L1011

cgcsb wrote: »

with just a short gap of rural area between it and Leixlip

Which actually gets a surprisingly high amount of use at the one stop in it - Carton House.

LXFlyer

magicbastarder wrote: »

what are the criteria - or are there any - which are used to separate dublin bus and bus eireann routes?
i'm thinking of a specific comparison; you can get a dublin bus from the city centre to maynooth (about 25km) but if you want to travel the (shorter) 22km to ashbourne, it's a bus eireann bus you need, at approx. twice the cost.
(for the record, the online calculators for BE and DB claim €6.20 from beresford place to ashbourne, €3.30 from westmoreland street to main st. maynooth).

cgcsb wrote: »

Maynooth to Dublin is almost continuously urban with just a short gap of rural area between it and Leixlip, which is suited to a frequent stop urban service. In comparison, there is nothing but farms between the M50 and Ashbourne. I'd imagine that's the logic.

Very simply it boiled down to who operated the service historically and how they were merged.

Routes such as the 33, 65, 66, 67, 84 were operated by the GNR or Dublin United Tramways Company and were subsumed into CIE Dublin City Services which then became Dublin Bus.

Services to places like Ashbourne & Dunshaughlin were operated by longer distance bus companies and were generally only stops on those routes, and became part of CIE Provincial Services which then became part of Bus Eireann. It's only in relatively recent times (the last 30-40 years) that shorter services have built up on those routes to the extent that they go as far as those towns only.

foggy_lad

L1011 wrote: »

Which actually gets a surprisingly high amount of use at the one stop in it - Carton House.

Back in the 80s and 90s there was only one or two people a day using that stop but then Carton house and demesne was developed and also Intel greatly expanded. I remember when the first phase was built and the only bus stop for Intel was at the Hitching Post pub.

magicbastarder

so would dublin bus have any mandate where they could step on the toes of BE and announce a route out to ashbourne?

LXFlyer

magicbastarder wrote: »

so would dublin bus have any mandate where they could step on the toes of BE and announce a route out to ashbourne?

No - the services are contracted by the NTA - they make the call on who operates them and they decide the fares charged.

Unfortunately I don't see the fares changing (as in dropping) - that would require much more PSO funding from the government and that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

I'm afraid that people using those BE services are victims of circumstance.

thomasj

magicbastarder wrote:

so would dublin bus have any mandate where they could step on the toes of BE and announce a route out to ashbourne?

Given that bus eireann offer the people of ashbourne a 24 hour bus route and a route to the airport, I wouldn't mind if BE stepped on DBs toes and started operating a service out to blanchardstown .

LXFlyer

thomasj wrote: »

Given that bus eireann offer the people of ashbourne a 24 hour bus route and a route to the airport, I wouldn't mind if BE stepped on DBs toes and started operating a service out to blanchardstown .

But again - this is NTA driven not the operating companies.

You keep going on about this, but frankly the longer routes are more economic I'm afraid. But they are planning 24 hour services in Dublin - they just need funding and drivers to operate them. Personally I think getting the existing services increased to meet demand has to be the first priority before implementing new services.

It has taken BE 18 months to get funding, buses and drivers to implement the M3 changes.

The issues facing the NTA were set out clearly yesterday by the CEO.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/nta-is-designing-bus-corridors-it-cannot-build-chief-says-1.2776300

There is a lack of funds that means developing new services and expanding existing ones is happening very slowly.

cgcsb

This makes me very angry:

"The authority has also proposed a new “livery” for all State-subsidised bus services, a rebranding which would encompass all Dublin Bus services, about half of the Bus Éireann fleet and a number of private operators who operate subsidised routes under tender."

Are we seriously going to waste more money on stupid rubbish like this that does nothing to improve the service.

Carawaystick

lxflyer wrote: »

No - the services are contracted by the NTA - they make the call on who operates them and they decide the fares charged.

Unfortunately I don't see the fares changing (as in dropping) - that would require much more PSO funding from the government and that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

I'm afraid that people using those BE services are victims of circumstance.

It seems perverse and completely irrational of the NTA to determine that people in Ashbourne should pay double per km what people on DB routes pay for essentially the same trip.

LXFlyer

Carawaystick wrote: »

It seems perverse and completely irrational of the NTA to determine that people in Ashbourne should pay double per km what people on DB routes pay for essentially the same trip.

The NTA didn't decide that - it's as a result of the historical operations.

For that to change would require a massive increase in state funding - do you see that happening in the current climate?

LXFlyer

cgcsb wrote: »

This makes me very angry:

"The authority has also proposed a new “livery” for all State-subsidised bus services, a rebranding which would encompass all Dublin Bus services, about half of the Bus Éireann fleet and a number of private operators who operate subsidised routes under tender."

Are we seriously going to waste more money on stupid rubbish like this that does nothing to improve the service.

But does give the public far clearer vision of what the State pays for and what it does not.

It also puts a further separation between the operators of the service (including the unions) and the people who actually plan and control it - the NTA.

If it were to happen it would be over the course of a normal repainting cycle so hardly that big an issue. Buses get repainted every few years regardless.

end of the road

or more likely it will say to some "the state pays for liveries instead of services"
we know that isn't true but that will be the line that will be spun by the media i should think.
it's a waste of money anyway.
throw a DTA/NTA/TFI/whatever they are calling themselves this week tag on the busses but the liveries are fine.

Stephen15

Why did DB/CIE insist on changing the livery every 10 years what was wrong with the orginal cie livery on city buses which think was green most cities have kept the same livery since the beiginning of time. I can the advantage of having a single colour livery to save on money when respraying vehicles. I don't think most people care about livery they care about efficient bus service. Why can't we have a no frills public transport model that keeps buses running efficiently and as cheaply as possible without the frills like free WiFi another thing that would save costs is fake leather seats which provide the same comfort and are easier to clean.

Carawaystick

lxflyer wrote: »

The NTA didn't decide that - it's as a result of the historical operations.

For that to change would require a massive increase in state funding - do you see that happening in the current climate?

lxflyer wrote:

No - the services are contracted by the NTA - they make the call on who operates them and they decide the fares charged.
[\quote]

It's one or the other

If BÉ are running double decker busses from Ashbourne to Dublin under a pso scheme, the NTA could get DB to do the same thing instead sing the same busses the NTA bought

holly44

1.Underfund it and let it deteriorate.
2.Privatise a few routes and ensure that these are given everything needed to succeed.
3.After a few years hold these routes up as a shining example of success, privatise everything, England style.
4.Leave public office
5.Along with family and friends take up high paying job on board of private operators.
6.Profit!

Chromosphere

Fairly simple actually; historical lack of money and legacy of very bad planning based on a notion that urban = bad and rural = good that had been pushed since the foundation of the state with this baloony vision of an agrarian society with Irish speaking, catholic maidens dancing at cross roads. That policy saw the undermining of development in the cities and wrecked city centres in the mid 20th century, with suburbia being seen as a better alternative and the cities were left to rot.

We didn't have the cash to implement big infrastructure until the 1990s. Basically no investment went into public transit projects at all other than what amounted to emergency maintenance. They spent money on new trains in the 80s because of the Buttevant crash.

The result is that Dublin grew without normal levels of investment in the systems it needed. The same mistake is currently being repeated in Cork in particular which probably should have a tram or two by now if it's going to not just be in the same mess in a few decades as we're not spending or planning.

Retrofitting metros and trams is hideously expensive. Can you imagine if there had been tunnels or proper luas or dart like overground lines built in the 40s, 50s, 60s and 70s and all of Dublin's suburbs would be connected and the only retrofit needed would have been a hub in the city centre.

Irish infrastructure has been massively improved. It's basically unrecognisable compared to 1980s when we didn't even have really any motorway, there were no tunnels, very few serious bridges, a rail network that was failing apart and held together with sellotape pretty much and land transport that was so bad that internal flights were needed to do 250km trips in reasonable time.

Sure in the late 1970s and well into the 1980s we didn't even have a phone network. Many areas were still manually switched by operators, other areas were depending on automatic exchanges using technology that was so dated it should have been in a museum and a few lucky areas had modern 60s - 70s crossbars but the lines linking them were so bad you regularly couldn't get through our hear people on the other end. The whole thing was rebuilt and was cutting edge digital by the mid 80s.

It's too easy to forget how broke Ireland was and just how much catch-up we did, most of which occurred since the 80s. So it's not at all surprising that we've lousy public transit systems as they're long term, slow build projects.

Very few European countries have a similar legacy ; planning attitudes about suburbanisation and throwing up tons of low density housing are way more like what happened in cities in the USA and maybe that's why Auckland also ranks badly for transit.

Non London in the UK is very poorly built out for transit infrastructure too though by European standards. You've a lot of Dublin (and much bigger) UK cities that are extremely reliant on buses and have no metros/underground. London is very much the exception not the rule.

We've an odd history in Ireland though.

Dyr

Chromosphere wrote: »

Fairly simple actually; historical lack of money and legacy of very bad planning based on a notion that urban = bad and rural = good that had been pushed since the foundation of the state with this baloony vision of an agrarian society with Irish speaking, catholic maidens dancing at cross roads.

The nice thing about that bloody cliche is that once you see it then you can save yourself reading whatever comes after it

Chromosphere

Bambi wrote: »

The nice thing about that bloody cliche is that once you see it then you can save yourself reading whatever comes after it

It's a lot more than a cliche. I've read plenty of Irish economic history and there was a very deliberate and sustained policy to prevent urbanisation here that undermined city and regional town development.

You've a history or setting city and country against each other rather than seeing towns and cities as resources for whole regions.

Ireland is almost uniquely in the position of being almost the least urbanised country in the OECD and probably the only country with high income (which is only in the last few decades) that has such a remarkably low level of urbanisation.

Lack of urbanisation for most of the history of the state played a huge part in why the cities are how they are.

You had a dismantling and lack of development of city authorities because of centralisation of power in the Oireachtas. That was largely about a concern about a risk of power centres that might have grown that wouldn't have been aligned with national government. There was a lot of post civil war worry about ensuring it didn't kick off again and you'd a state that feared a rise of the left which was perfectly possible in Dublin and Cork.

The towns and cities never had any serious degree or autonomy or ability to fund anything or drive development in an urban area like they do elsewhere in Europe and in north America.

Weak local local politics and the city / county manager approach.

Even today you've got the absolute daft proposal to merge cork city with cork County - predominantly rural area 1/3 the size or northern Ireland instead of creating a decent metro area by expanding the city.

Instead of creating a Dublin authority what did the state do? Split it into 4 councils that have no metropolitan authority to link them up..

Meanwhile the state abolished ALL the town council effectively removing any urban democratic structures - most or the world has strong; well developed town council structures with power over planning, transit etc

Every role local authorities had has basically been systematically removed into national quangos.

Irish cities have no power over public transport, policing, education, major infrastructure (all TII now) and have had even their roles in water, drainage and waste management removed entirely. The housing crisis will probably soon spin up a National Housing Agency and that'll be the end of their role in public housing.

What exactly do Irish local authorities do? They seem to be being systematically destroyed and dismantled.

Nobody see a pattern emerging ?!

Vic_08

magicbastarder wrote: »

what are the criteria - or are there any - which are used to separate dublin bus and bus eireann routes?
i'm thinking of a specific comparison; you can get a dublin bus from the city centre to maynooth (about 25km) but if you want to travel the (shorter) 22km to ashbourne, it's a bus eireann bus you need, at approx. twice the cost.
(for the record, the online calculators for BE and DB claim €6.20 from beresford place to ashbourne, €3.30 from westmoreland street to main st. maynooth).

Firstly the fares on longer distance DB routes have been slashed with the removal of the outer suburban fares, they now have much lower fares per km than an average DB route. The fare on the 66 from Dublin CC to Maynooth is the same as the fare from the CC to any point beyond Fonthill Road, approx 10 km.

Compare your €3.30/10km with €6.20/22km.

Secondly the cash single may be double but not all fares are and cash singles are not the most used fare on the 103 by a long shot, Day Returns, 10 Journey paper, Leap 24hr and Leap 7 Day are as well as Taxsavers.

A return to Maynooth on DB is €6.60, Ashbourne on BE is €8.80

Leap week cap DB is €27.50, 7 day BE Red zone Leap is €39.10, Paper 10 journey is €40.80.

Annual DB Taxsaver is €1320, Be Red Zone Taxsaver is €1692

lxflyer wrote: »

No - the services are contracted by the NTA - they make the call on who operates them and they decide the fares charged.

Unfortunately I don't see the fares changing (as in dropping) - that would require much more PSO funding from the government and that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

I'm afraid that people using those BE services are victims of circumstance.

Sorry but the suggestion that Ashbourne passengers are being victimised here is nonsense. Yes their bus service is more expensive but it is also a very different, higher quality service than a comparable DB served town of a similar distance such as Maynooth.

The 103 is a semi-express service that provides a high all day frequency and fast journey times, it is more comparable to the likes of Swords Express than any outer suburban DB service.

While people may complain about the higher fares they don't complain about the ability to get to the CC in less than 40 minutes in peak traffic
or the bus whizzing past a dozen stops inside the M50
or the bus diverting to serve the likes of Finglas Village or St Margarets Road/Charlestown or any other area DB need to serve en-route
or the bus being full up with local traffic leaving the city and driving past Ashbournites full.
or anti-social behaviour due to serving rougher parts of the city.
or drivers not giving change.

The closer equivalent to the 103 for Maynooth is the rail service not the 66 bus, even then I'd argue Ashbourne gets a better deal; more frequent all day (and now 24 hour/ 7 day service), multiple stops through the town, more or less guaranteed seat for all passengers and a similar and often quicker journey time.

I would argue that more outer suburban towns would benefit from having a 103 style service rather than their current slow all stops and often indirect DB routes.

cgcsb wrote: »

This makes me very angry:

"The authority has also proposed a new “livery” for all State-subsidised bus services, a rebranding which would encompass all Dublin Bus services, about half of the Bus Éireann fleet and a number of private operators who operate subsidised routes under tender."

Are we seriously going to waste more money on stupid rubbish like this that does nothing to improve the service.

Seeing as we are talking about Ashbourne, this is certainly one area where a single livery for buses will not be helpful. People on the Finglas corridor generally understand that buses in BE colour will not take them so do not flag them down, attempt to make short journeys inside the M50 or try to board a 103 setting down Ashbourne passengers on inbound services. If the buses all look the same there will be much more unnecessary confusion.

The NTA seem to be great at aping TfL in all the skin deep aspects (bus stops, 100 page style guides, uniform bus liveries) but not the fundamental aspects that cost big money or real operational expertise.

Having buses running different grades of sevices and services with non inter-available fares (such as all the tendered country routes) is stupid, pointless and conveys a false sense of connection to passengers.

Carawaystick wrote: »

It seems perverse and completely irrational of the NTA to determine that people in Ashbourne should pay double per km what people on DB routes pay for essentially the same trip.

As explained the "double per km" statistic really isn't a fair assesment but isn't it funny how people complaining about something always manage to pick out the most extreme examples to make their case rather than an average or an unbiased comprehensive comparison.

Carawaystick wrote: »

It's one or the other

If BÉ are running double decker busses from Ashbourne to Dublin under a pso scheme, the NTA could get DB to do the same thing instead sing the same busses the NTA bought

Yes, that is the choice. Either the current premium Be service with higher fares or a slower DB service with equivalent lower fares. The fantasy that some have where DB would just take over the 103 and run it the same just cheaper is nonsense.

Even more unrealistic is the idea the DB would run alongside BE to Ashbourne and passengers could pick and choose which they wanted to use because it would simply not be financially viable.

Cookie_Monster

Stephen15 wrote: »

Why did DB/CIE insist on changing the livery every 10 years what was wrong with the orginal cie livery on city buses which think was green most cities have kept the same livery since the beiginning of time. I can the advantage of having a single colour livery to save on money when respraying vehicles. I don't think most people care about livery they care about efficient bus service. Why can't we have a no frills public transport model that keeps buses running efficiently and as cheaply as possible without the frills like free WiFi another thing that would save costs is fake leather seats which provide the same comfort and are easier to clean.

CIE have a long history of trying to suppress or remove any kind of long term brand recognition by totally changing their various liveries. IE are particularly bad for it.

beauf

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

CIE have a long history of trying to suppress or remove any kind of long term brand recognition by totally changing their various liveries. IE are particularly bad for it.

Really?

Do they not do it to reinvent themselves. Disassociate themselves from something.

Chuchote

The car is king.
Ireland is a country that still holds to 19th-century ideas of profitability, rather than sharing and economies of scale.
Politicians are themselves allied to interest groups like motorists and the car industry.
Politicians are short-term thinkers, and don't think things through - for example, the current craze for taller buildings. In Paris, when the city rose to 5 storeys in the 18th century, it was done through razing many old streets to build wider, straighter streets. If we build high-rise in Dublin, we will have narrow, twisting, dark canyons - unless we follow the Paris model and raze streets to build wider streets. That's not going to happen because it would cost and it would offend…