Why is public transport in Dublin so bad?

Chuchote

Bambi wrote: »

RTPI has never given you the time a bus arrives at, it gives you a rough estimation of the time your bus might arrive if its not already full, or pulled from service, or the driver decides to drive past the stop etc.

Dublin needs a mass transit solution thats reliable and frequent. Buses ain't gonna do that. Until we have automated cars we're screwed

Dublin Bus app is usually reliable, in my experience, and my experience is every time I take a bus.

A mass transit solution that's reliable and frequent also relies on cars staying out of the bus/bicycle lanes, and that's not going to happen until we have cameras that can automatically issue fines to offenders.

magicbastarder

RTPI is 90% accurate for me.

Dravokivich

brickmauser wrote: »

Are we the only city in the Western world that doesn't have a rail link to the airport?

Why don't we have lateral bus routes? If you live in Lucan or Finglas or Blanchardstown or Tallaght you have to go into the city centre and back out again. Lunatic.

Why not have a Luas or Dart line running parallel with the M50 with stations at some of the major junctions with trams and trains into town or out into the suburbs like spokes of a cartwheel?

Why not have a suspension bridge across Dublin Bay so all traffic does not have to go around the M50?

Do the muppets who run this country ever open their eyes and look at the transport infrastructure in other cities when they go abroad?

The issue is Liffey Valley for the most part. The 2 main options for crossing are West Link and Lucan. Which are both chock a block at peak traffic times. The closest examples of routes doing a similar service right now would be 239 and 76( a or b ), but they are low frequency and mainly only run during morning and evening.There needs to be more done to feed into those routes, to take out the need for going into and out of the city.

There was a light rail solution drawn up that would have served those locations better, but it got pushed aside.

devnull

Carawaystick wrote: »

I'm missing your point here. What mish mash of various different stations?
Mainline rail serves Heuston or Connolly; same number as in Manhatten.
A small few commuter services also serve Docklands.

Paris has Gare du Nord, Gare du lEst, Gare du Lyon, Gare dAusterlitz, Gare Montparnasse, and Gare st Lazare

Who would pay to build a new station in Dublin?

Whilst generally all those stations in Paris are good and the city network is excellent, Gare du Nord is far far too big and is nearly a Town by itself with all the levels and passages, even with the excellent signage in Paris stations, it can become very confusing.

Gare du Est and Saint Lazare and Gare du Lyon are nice stations though with some interesting rolling stock

brickmauser

Dravokivich wrote: »

The issue is Liffey Valley for the most part. The 2 main options for crossing are West Link and Lucan. Which are both chock a block at peak traffic times. The closest examples of routes doing a similar service right now would be 239 and 76( a or b ), but they are low frequency and mainly only run during morning and evening.There needs to be more done to feed into those routes, to take out the need for going into and out of the city.

There was a light rail solution drawn up that would have served those locations better, but it got pushed aside.

Point taken.
But surely suburbs NOT divided by the Liffey Valley should have lateral routes? Are only routes that go into the city centre viable? When you visit other cities there are transport routes that ring the city centre.

ArmaniJeanss

brickmauser wrote: »

Why don't we have lateral bus routes? If you live in Lucan or Finglas or Blanchardstown or Tallaght you have to go into the city centre and back out again. Lunatic.

17a does the Blanchardstown Finglas journey, good frequency, wanderly route though.

Dyr

brickmauser wrote: »

Point taken.
But surely suburbs NOT divided by the Liffey Valley should have lateral routes? Are only routes that go into the city centre viable? When you visit other cities there are transport routes that ring the city centre.

Network dire wrecked. Because what we really needed was get from finglas to liffey valley etc.

17a is one of the few lateral routes left and it is plenty busy.

Dravokivich

brickmauser wrote: »

Point taken.
But surely suburbs NOT divided by the Liffey Valley should have lateral routes? Are only routes that go into the city centre viable? When you visit other cities there are transport routes that ring the city centre.

yeah, that's what needs to be looked into to have other routes feeding people to the 2 which cross the Liffey.

Weepsie

The 17 is also a lateral route pretty much on the Southside. Rialto to Blackrock or something

LXFlyer

They're called orbital routes.

On the northside there are:

17a (Kilbarrack-Finglas-Blanchardstown)
102 (Airport-Malahide-Sutton)
104 (Clontarf-DCU)

On the west side there are:
76 (Ballyfermot-Tallaght)
76a (Blanchardstown-Ballyfermot-Tallaght)
239 (Blanchardstown-Lucan-Liffey Valley)

On the south side there are:
17 (Rialto-Crumlin-Rathfarnham-Dundrum-UCD-Blackrock)
18 (Palmerstown-Ballyfermot-Crumlin-Rathmines-Sandymount)
45a (Dún Laoghaire-Shankill-Bray)
75 (Tallaght-Rathfarnham-Dundrum-Stillorgan-Dun Laoghaire)
114 (Blackrock-Sandyford-Ticknock)

M50 Ring:
750 (Dublin Coach) (Dublin Airport-Red Cow-Dundrum)

I've left out other airport routes as they don't allow journeys between other locations along the route.

There are also local services in Blanchardstown, Bray and Dun Laoghaire and North County Dublin.

There is a need to implement network direct changes to some of these - in other words straighten them out and implement new routes, particularly on the west and southern sides of the city.

But planning orbital routes is really difficult as due to our poor planning very few individual journeys are identical and as a result bus routes have to generally take longer routes from one terminus to the other to maximise the number of traffic generators along the route and thereby get more backsides on seats.

In other words the numbers of passengers on these buses are maximised by facilitating many short and medium length journeys along the route rather than end to end as the latter (outside of peak times) wouldn't be economically viable.

There may be scope for some peak hour express services, but while these can work well in the mornings, planning them in the evenings is far more difficult due to most people having variable finishing times and the fact that many people are not consistent in their post-work routines.

There were plans for extra routes as part of Network Direct but shortfalls in funding from the Department of Transport meant that these were put on ice.

These were:
Enhanced all day route 76a
Route 175 - Tallaght-Knocklyon-Ballinteer-Dundrum-Sandyford-Dún Laoghaire
Route 166 - Liffey Valley-South Lucan-Grange Castle-Citywest-Tallaght

The 18 was to extend to Docklands, and the 17 and 75 straightened out somewhat.

At the moment I can't see major changes happening until the capacity issues facing the radial routes into and out of the city centre are addressed.

magicbastarder

i'll have to confirm with a couple of people i know who used to work in UCD SU, but i do recall being told that DB contacted the union about 20 years ago, and informing them that they were withdrawing a service from the UCD campus (i think the 17) as they'd done a usage survey and there was very little use by UCD students found. the survey had been done in july that year.

LXFlyer

magicbastarder wrote: »

i'll have to confirm with a couple of people i know who used to work in UCD SU, but i do recall being told that DB contacted the union about 20 years ago, and informing them that they were withdrawing a service from the UCD campus (i think the 17) as they'd done a usage survey and there was very little use by UCD students found. the survey had been done in july that year.

I would find that VERY difficult to believe.

Local management in Donnybrook were and are very aware of the loadings on the 17, as it has several relief buses during school and college terms.

There may have been a thought of removing it from UCD for the summer months but it would never be removed during term time.

Times have changed and there's now a significant all year round passenger flow to/from UCD.

magicbastarder

yep, take the above with a pinch of salt unless i am able to confirm it.

Chuchote

lxflyer wrote: »

They're called orbital routes.
There is a need to implement network direct changes to some of these - in other words straighten them out and implement new routes, particularly on the west and southern sides of the city.

Buses aren't just for bringing people to work. 'Straightening out' routes can be disastrous for old people when a bus stops going through their estate and they can't hobble out to the main road to get it.

Stephen15

Chuchote wrote: »

'Straightening out' routes can be disastrous for old people when a bus stops going through their estate and they can't hobble out to the main road to get it.

But are buses really cut out for housing estates with narrow roads, poor parking and speedbumps. Allowing housing estates to built is more poor planning just like everything this country has to offer.

Idbatterim

Are we the only city in the Western world that doesn't have a rail link to the airport?

I think so in europe and out airport is going to hit 28,000,000+ this year, its beyond farcical!

Why don't we have lateral bus routes? If you live in Lucan or Finglas or Blanchardstown or Tallaght you have to go into the city centre and back out again. Lunatic.

agreed, nearly everything is an lar, what kind of idiot or martyr if they have or can afford a car, will put up with dublins transport "system"

Why not have a Luas or Dart line running parallel with the M50 with stations at some of the major junctions with trams and trains into town or out into the suburbs like spokes of a cartwheel?

there was a plan for this, recently scrapped, i.e. metro west...

Why not have a suspension bridge across Dublin Bay so all traffic does not have to go around the M50?

there is a plan for an eastern bypass with land reserved, I cant see a hope in hell of the suspension bridge option being given the go ahead, it will be tunnel...

Do the muppets who run this country ever open their eyes and look at the transport infrastructure in other cities when they go abroad?

excellent question, about if those morons actually notice how horrific our transport system is here, maybe they are just whisked in the mercs from the foreign airports and dont use their light year ahead systems...

plodder

Another part of the problem, in my opinion, is the philosophy, repeated here also, that engineering isn't the answer, but pricing is. In other words, you don't build anything. You just penalise people by forcing them out of their cars, with tolls, road-blocks, whatever it takes.

I think it stems from the experience in other countries, where they found that just building infrastructure creates more demand, and you have to use incentives/pricing etc to change people's behavior. The flaw of course, is you shouldn't resort to measures like that until after you build decent infrastructure. For example, I doubt anyone in London would have accepted the congestion charge on roads, without decent public transport already existing, and the promise of more (which is being delivered). Yet, you have people calling for more tolls on roads here, without the same commitment.

LXFlyer

Chuchote wrote: »

Buses aren't just for bringing people to work. 'Straightening out' routes can be disastrous for old people when a bus stops going through their estate and they can't hobble out to the main road to get it.

I think that you'll find that whenever the routes were straightened out before, a service was still maintained for the local estates - for example the 83a still serves Tolka Estate in Glasnevin.

I'm not suggesting that you abandon local communities but there are definitely ways around this whereby a local service can be maintained alongside a more direct service.

The original proposals for the 75 saw it being removed from Ballinteer altogether and staying on Nutgrove Avenue and Churchtown Road, while the new 175 route would operate from Tallaght along the Green Route to Ballinteer and then down to Dundrum.

Thus the 75 gets accelerated and Ballinteer retains a link to Tallaght and Dún Laoghaire.

Calina

Chuchote wrote: »

How on earth can you loathe an 'activity'? :pac:

It is certainly a solution for moving large numbers of people around - you only have to look at Copenhagen and Amsterdam to see that.

If nine in ten of the drivers I saw yesterday in a massive traffic jam on Strand Road in Sandymount were on bikes, they would have sped along, instead of sitting there miserably moving two metres at a time.

The space occupied by 100 bikes is far greater than the space occupied by two double decker buses. Both Copenhagen and Amsterdam have significantly better public transport than Dublin has and this thread is about the public transport issue.

You're welcome to cycle if you want. But other people have different interests, likes and wants to you in terms of moving around the city. I'd personally prefer to live somewhere within a 20 minute walk of work. This is not financially possible because of the accommodation crisis and record high rents so I am already dealing in figuring out a balance that suits me. This will not include bikes. You're fortunate if you've never encountered an activity that you utterly hate doing. I have and cycling is top of that list for getting around.

This won't stop me supporting better cycling facilities in general for cyclists - the network of cycle lanes such as it exists is truly tragic and often in poor condition. The tendency of people to park in and otherwise block those lanes is massively annoying. The tendency of broken glass to accumulate in it and the very poor repair of the surface in a lot of areas is annoying. Where the lane is shared with the footpath and that slopes to the road, that can't be comfortable to cycle on. This could all be improved and I'd like to see it improved but this doesn't mean I ever want to use that infrastructure myself because I honestly don't want to engage in the activity of cycling. Ever. But for the people who do, they deserve better infrastructure. I deserve peace from the question as to how I could possibly not like cycling, though. Not everyone likes it.

Bikes are not the answer for everyone.

brickmauser wrote: »

Are we the only city in the Western world that doesn't have a rail link to the airport?

I'm going to assume you mean capital city in the Western world yada yada.

Currently Luxembourg does not have a rail link to its airport. It's in the process of building a tramline to it though.

Helsinki got its rail connection in 2015. Edinburgh got its tram connection in 2014 I think.

FWIW, I think the connections to all three airports from Milan are bus based.

That being said, the north side of Dublin could do with a decent rail based mass transport line between the westbound rail line and the DART lines which feasibly could reach the airport and really, the current situation is not ideal.

magicbastarder

and the problem is that the current mooted rail link which would go to the airport is not a high speed link between the airport and the city centre, but a commuter line which is being used to serve the suburbs. not a bad thing itself, but not fulfilling what i believe was the original brief.

Calina

magicbastarder wrote: »

and the problem is that the current mooted rail link which would go to the airport is not a high speed link between the airport and the city centre, but a commuter line which is being used to serve the suburbs. not a bad thing itself, but not fulfilling what i believe was the original brief.

I'm not sure what's really currently mooted since the last I heard was "needs to be scaled back can be done more cheaply" but who knows.

magicbastarder

last i heard was the metro north going via drumcondra and DCU, and out to the airport and on to swords. due to start construction around 2021, so the notion that it was the option that had been 'decided on' is a slight stretch of the language.

markpb

magicbastarder wrote:

and the problem is that the current mooted rail link which would go to the airport is not a high speed link between the airport and the city centre, but a commuter line which is being used to serve the suburbs. not a bad thing itself, but not fulfilling what i believe was the original brief.

I wonder which is more important to Dublin, rail based transport for its citizens including those who work in the airport or are traveling there or a rapid rail link for tourists?

Cookie_Monster

It's a minor thing overall but DB seem to be the only bus company that have an issue with centre door use when not perfectly lined up at high rise kessel curbing. With some many badly built busstops where buses cannot pull in perfectly this adds time to every single journey as only one door is in use.

I fail to understand why everywhere else can work around this issue with ease but Dublin can't.

Chuchote

markpb wrote: »

I wonder which is more important to Dublin, rail based transport for its citizens including those who work in the airport or are traveling there or a rapid rail link for tourists?

Not just tourists who go to the airport, mind.

Stephen15

Calina wrote: »

FWIW, I think the connections to all three airports from Milan are bus based.

Nope Malapensa has rail link personally I think a metro would be a better airport connection for dublin airport than something to the Stansted or Gatwick Express since dublin isint too far from the centre. I'm not that mad on the metro north plans they look more like a light rail project than a proper heavy rail metro

markpb

Chuchote wrote:

Not just tourists who go to the airport, mind.

Workers presumably? A suburban rail line linking the areas around the airport would likely serve them better than a rapid rail link from the city centre.

Chuchote

markpb wrote: »

Workers presumably? A suburban rail line linking the areas around the airport would likely serve them better than a rapid rail link from the city centre.

Well, I, umm, go to the airport when I want to take a plane

markpb

Chuchote wrote:

Well, I, umm, go to the airport when I want to take a plane

Are you not a tourist in that case?

Chuchote

markpb wrote: »

Are you not a tourist in that case?

No. I'm normally going to work abroad or returning from work.

markpb

Chuchote wrote: »

No. I'm normally going to work abroad or returning from work.

That's a fair point but my original point remains valid (I think). Do you think a suburban rail link via the airport would benefit more or less people than a dedicated airport rail link? A suburban line linking into the rest of the rail network serves both the people around the airport and everyone else on the network. A dedicated rail link serves only the people on the existing rail network but doesn't do anything for the people in between.

Chuchote

markpb wrote: »

That's a fair point but my original point remains valid (I think). Do you think a suburban rail link via the airport would benefit more or less people than a dedicated airport rail link? A suburban line linking into the rest of the rail network serves both the people around the airport and everyone else on the network. A dedicated rail link serves only the people on the existing rail network but doesn't do anything for the people in between.

Ah, maybe I'm misunderstanding. Obviously a link that would serve as many people as possible is preferable.

Cookie_Monster

markpb wrote: »

That's a fair point but my original point remains valid (I think). Do you think a suburban rail link via the airport would benefit more or less people than a dedicated airport rail link? A suburban line linking into the rest of the rail network serves both the people around the airport and everyone else on the network. A dedicated rail link serves only the people on the existing rail network but doesn't do anything for the people in between.

The problem with DB to the airport is most routes go all over the place and stop losts making it really slow. Same with a suburban rail link. The airport link needs to have a couple of stops at most, making it a slow link like the dart defeats the purpose of getting people to the airport and back in a reasonable time

Chuchote

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The problem with DB to the airport is most routes go all over the place and stop losts making it really slow. Same with a suburban rail link. The airport link needs to have a couple of stops at most, making it a slow link like the dart defeats the purpose of getting people to the airport and back in a reasonable time

I've got the 16 to the airport a couple of times. Mostly it was ok, but it was a white-knuckle ride. Once the bus broke down, and the driver, a calm, kindly authoritative black guy, immediately called for backup and told us it would be straight along. It was, to our surprise, and when it arrived it really booted it to the airport, but the passengers, a mix of flyers going to the airport and airport workers, had an unhappy couple of minutes.

There's definitely nonjoinedupness in operation. For instance, how mad is it that the Ikea bus from Rathmines doesn't go to the airport, a stone's throw away (or a turnip and rotten egg's throw if you're one of the local kids)?

magicbastarder

the harristown bus depot is just the other side of the M50 from ikea. that's why a few buses terminate in and around that area (4, 140, 13, 9, etc.)

LXFlyer

magicbastarder wrote: »

the harristown bus depot is just the other side of the M50 from ikea. that's why a few buses terminate in and around that area (4, 140, 13, 9, etc.)

I think you mean the 83/83a rather than the 9, as the 9 operates out of Phibsboro depot.

Frankly it is utterly ludicrous that there is a complete lack of PSO services to the airport from anywhere but the N1/R132 corridor.

The 140 and 27b are the two obvious candidates to operate to/from the airport.

magicbastarder

lxflyer wrote: »

I think you mean the 83/83a rather than the 9, as the 9 operates out of Phibsboro depot.

ah - i'd assumed the 9 operated out of harristown because it terminates at charlestown.

Chuchote

lxflyer wrote: »

I think you mean the 83/83a rather than the 9, as the 9 operates out of Phibsboro depot.

Frankly it is utterly ludicrous that there is a complete lack of PSO services to the airport from anywhere but the N1/R132 corridor.

The 140 and 27b are the two obvious candidates to operate to/from the airport.

And the 16 should start earlier and end later. For the many people who take a flight for 8am, the 6.30am 16 won't get you there in time to make it through the airport.

And the Terenure route for the Aircoach should be returned, and should be routed up through Clanbrassil Street and Harold's Cross, where many foreigners and tech workers live.

LXFlyer

Chuchote wrote: »

And the 16 should start earlier and end later. For the many people who take a flight for 8am, the 6.30am 16 won't get you there in time to make it through the airport.

And the Terenure route for the Aircoach should be returned, and should be routed up through Clanbrassil Street and Harold's Cross, where many foreigners and tech workers live.

Well the Aircoach service was a commercial one and clearly failed to make money.

I'm not sure you could expect them to restart it if it doesn't make money.

Routing it via Harold's X would be in direct competition with a subsidised service - can't really see that happening.

Chuchote

lxflyer wrote: »

Well the Aircoach service was a commercial one and clearly failed to make money.

I'm not sure you could expect them to restart it if it doesn't make money.

Routing it via Harold's X would be in direct competition with a subsidised service - can't really see that happening.

Not according to an Aircoach driver I talked to; he was baffled at why it was pulled.

What subsidised service goes from the airport up through Clanbrassil Street through Harold's Cross to Terenure? Eager to know!

LXFlyer

Chuchote wrote: »

Not according to an Aircoach driver I talked to; he was baffled at why it was pulled.

What subsidised service goes from the airport up through Clanbrassil Street through Harold's Cross to Terenure? Eager to know!

Really?
I can tell you exactly why it was pulled - very few customers.

A service like that requires hotels and/or major business parks to survive - it only had the residential market which isn't enough for an unsubsidised service.

To get from Terenure to Clanbrassil Street it is exactly parallel to the 16. Clanbrassil St starts at Harold's X Bridge.

h57xiucj2z946q

Chuchote wrote: »

Not according to an Aircoach driver I talked to; he was baffled at why it was pulled.

What subsidised service goes from the airport up through Clanbrassil Street through Harold's Cross to Terenure? Eager to know!

Doesn't the 16 Dublin Bus?

Chuchote

Gael Nutty Circus wrote: »

Doesn't the 16 Dublin Bus?

No, the 16 doesn't go up Clanbrassil Street, it goes along the South Circular and then turns down Camden Street.

howiya

Chuchote wrote: »

No, the 16 doesn't go up Clanbrassil Street, it goes along the South Circular and then turns down Camden Street.

Turns right from Clanbrassil Street to the SCR

Chuchote

howiya wrote: »

Turns right from Clanbrassil Street to the SCR

Sorry, yes, always mix up Clanbrassil Street and Harold's Cross Road (not to mention Terenure Road North).

LXFlyer

Chuchote wrote: »

No, the 16 doesn't go up Clanbrassil Street, it goes along the South Circular and then turns down Camden Street.

It serves the southern half of Clanbrassil St and all of Harold's X Rd and Terenure Rd North - putting in a unsubsidised service alongside a PSO route like that wouldn't be the wisest business decision, given that routing through the city centre wouldn't have any real speed advantage over the 16.

Sam Russell

Chuchote wrote: »

I've got the 16 to the airport a couple of times. Mostly it was ok, but it was a white-knuckle ride. Once the bus broke down, and the driver, a calm, kindly authoritative black guy, immediately called for backup and told us it would be straight along. It was, to our surprise, and when it arrived it really booted it to the airport, but the passengers, a mix of flyers going to the airport and airport workers, had an unhappy couple of minutes.

There's definitely nonjoinedupness in operation. For instance, how mad is it that the Ikea bus from Rathmines doesn't go to the airport, a stone's throw away (or a turnip and rotten egg's throw if you're one of the local kids)?

The 4 goes from Monkstown via Ballsbridge, Ballymun and onto Harristown. It neither serves Ikea although it passes within 100 metres of it and Harristown is right next to the airport. I doubt that anyone goes to Harristown.

Chuchote

lxflyer wrote: »

It serves the southern half of Clanbrassil St and all of Harold's X Rd and Terenure Rd North - putting in a unsubsidised service alongside a PSO route like that wouldn't be the wisest business decision, given that routing through the city centre wouldn't have any real speed advantage over the 16.

By this logic, shouldn't the Aircoach be stopped altogether? It competes with buses in other places, surely?

Carawaystick

Talk of busses going to the airport from the southside are missing the point a little. There should be services to and from the airport to where the staff of the airport live, (Swords, Portmarnock,Sutton, Artane, Raheny etc) at times that suit the staff there, as lxflyer pointed out.
Airline passengers will go the the airport twice a year on average. Staff go 300 times a year...

markpb

Sam Russell wrote: »

I doubt that anyone goes to Harristown.

My wife worked in Harristown for a few years and ironically, had a terrible bus service. When she was going there in the mornings, outbound buses would frequently be turned around early to make up for missing inbound buses. The same happened in the evenings, despite being at the terminus for the 27b, several of them would fail to run for various reasons. The only people it suits are Dublin Bus staff.