Proper bus lanes

KingBrian2

bk wrote: »

Bull****! I use this route almost every day and even with the one new extra stop, it is still WAY faster then it use to be. As in at least 10 minutes if not more off my commute into town.

To be honest, what I've seen on this road really drove home the point to me that the idea there are too many bus stops is a complete red herring. Obviously they have an impact, but the impact is a very small compared to the other measures.

What I've seen on this route and elsewhere is that REAL bus priority measures, like this road widening, these bollards to keep cars out and the bus gate in town are what have a real massive impact on bus journey times and not just drawing lines on a road.

Probably the second priority is reducing dwell time at the stops, by getting rid of cash and driver interaction with flat fares, etc. and the use of multiple doors.

Bus stops are a red herring, as people actually need to get on the bus! Obviously the bus would fly into town if their were no stops, but that would sort of defeat the purpose of a bus! Sure there maybe a few places where there are two stops closer together then needed, but I really don't think there are as many of these as people seem to think and it wouldn't be such a big deal if the dwell times were so damn slow.

That would require building buses with more than two exits.

bk

KingBrian2 wrote: »

That would require building buses with more than two exits.

Well first of all the word "multiple" can mean just two.

However the plan for the BRT routes, 3 to 4 doors, enter/exit through any door, same as how the Luas works and how almost all buses in Poland, Germany, etc. work.

Though just making use of the second door on Dublin Bus at every stop would be a good, easy start.

CIARAN_BOYLE

bk wrote: »

Well first of all the word "multiple" can mean just two.

However the plan for the BRT routes, 3 to 4 doors, enter/exit through any door, same as how the Luas works and how almost all buses in Poland, Germany, etc. work.

Though just making use of the second door on Dublin Bus at every stop would be a good, easy start.

Not to completly derail the thread but there are two bus drivers on my route that use the centre doors at all.

Would love if they introduced disciplinary procedures to force the use of centre doors.

newacc2015

heroics wrote: »

Owning a car is already expensive. Also just because someone lives in the IFSC does not mean they want to spend there whole life/day in the IFSC. Maybe they want to go other places that they need a car. Planners should include some sort of provision for car parking in developments. Just because you don't want a car does not mean everyone is the same.

Yes owning a car is somewhat expensive, but the negative externalities it places on society is not covered by the taxes and fuel duties on owning a car. The fact you can go to inner suburbs of Dublin and find 2/3 cars outside every house yet a bus ride into the city is 20 mins and a fraction of owning a car. Obviously owning a car is not expensive enough to stop these people owning car.

Have you driven around the IFSC? It is a nightmare to drive around and it is completely surrounded by congestion. So planners should endorse car ownership in the centre of the city in an area surrounded by excellent public transport? IMO if you want to own a car in the centre of the city, you should pay a €10k levy to DCC and a €1k per year for deciding to own a car in an area that you dont really need it at all. It is a luxury and tax it accordingly.

If you give them a free space (as you have suggested planners have forced developers to build them), you will probably own a car. The residents of Phisboro have the lowest car ownership rates in Ireland and IMO it is down to the fact there is hardly anywhere in Phisboro to park a car.

Policy makers tend to start passing on the negative externalities of car ownership onto users to a greater extent.

Idbatterim

You might be able to get into town in twenty, with no traffic. The issue emerges as soon as you want to get anywhere else. Until mn and du in particular, but also luas extensions in place and metro west, there are just too many issues for people to start ditching their cars...

newacc2015

Idbatterim wrote: »

there are just too many issues for people to start ditching their cars...

And yet the residents of Phisboro without the Luas extension or any decent rail connections are able to get by without cars...

If there is a car in your driveway, you will use it. If you live in Phisboro where you have no driveway or no one street parking, you get on with life. Likewise if you live in an apartment block with no car space you get on with it.

There is car sharing, renting a car etc. A lot of people who own a car in Dublin City dont need it. A lot of younger people are no longer getting licenses and are thriving. IMO a lot of people who have a car over thirty have it as a status symbol rather than a necessity. There is this notion in Ireland, if you are over 21 without a license you are a failure.

If people had to pay a lot more for owning a car I feel these 'too many issues' would no longer be issues as the cons of owning a car would outweigh the pros

ted1

josip wrote: »

As long as that public transport wasn't noisy diesel buses.
Can you imagine how pleasant the city centre would be if the bus fleet was electrified?

With unsightly over cables or expensive battery powered?

eeguy

ted1 wrote: »

With unsightly over cables or expensive battery powered?

Batteries are cheaper than fuel and maintenance in the long run.

It's the whole appeal of electric.

Isambard

eeguy wrote: »

Batteries are cheaper than fuel and maintenance in the long run.

It's the whole appeal of electric.

source?

Sam Russell

eeguy wrote: »

Batteries are cheaper than fuel and maintenance in the long run.

It's the whole appeal of electric.

Trolley buses work off the grid so no heavy batteries to cart around. High torque is a given for electric motors, so rapid acceleration from stationary - it would suit some routes but not most. The BRT routes would be better as trolley buses rather than diesels or even hybrids.

eeguy

Isambard wrote: »

source?

www.google.ie

ted1

eeguy wrote: »

Batteries are cheaper than fuel and maintenance in the long run.

It's the whole appeal of electric.

In the long run........
Any idea of how much capital expenditure would be required to put a batttery on over 800 busses?
Bear in mind that they did look at putting batteries in the LUAS so that they didn't require overhead cables along O Connell street and other such streets. They found the cost to be prohibited

eeguy

ted1 wrote: »

In the long run........
Any idea of how much capital expenditure would be required to put a batttery on over 800 busses?
Bear in mind that they did look at putting batteries in the LUAS so that they didn't require overhead cables along O Connell street and other such streets. They found the cost to be prohibited

Yep, in the long run. A CBA was done in New York between electric and diesel busses.
The figures they use are quite conservative, but they estimate a 12.5% saving over 12 years, which would be greater here considering fuel is more expensive.

They estimate an electric bus would be 300k more than an ICE bus, which seems inflated, given that battery prices will soon drop with Gigafactory production.

http://www.columbia.edu/~ja3041/Electric%20Bus%20Analysis%20for%20NYC%20Transit%20by%20J%20Aber%20Columbia%20University%20-%20May%202016.pdf

magicbastarder

Isambard wrote: »

source?

electricity power stations generally.

bk

Thousands of fully electric buses already run all over China every day and are increasingly turning up in the US and across Europe. They have become very popular.

The issue we have here with them is that most of those electric buses are single deckers. Only a few countries use double deckers, the vast majority use single deckers. It is relatively easy to build single decker battery buses, you just put the batteries on the roof of the bus.

You can't do the same for double deckers obviously, it would add too much height to them and they would be too top heavy which would be dangerous. BYD has built a fully electric double decker that they are currently trialling in London. But the issue with it is that the batteries are at the back of the lower deck of the bus and take up about the space of two rows of seats, which results in less capacity. However battery technology is advancing very quickly, so hopefully they will be able to reduce this space soon.

So in fairness to Dublin Bus, for double deckers this tech is still pretty immature for the moment and probably needs a few more years to develop. However Hybrid Double Deckers is a very mature technology now, with thousands of them operating in London Bus every day, so there is no reason for Dublin Bus not to have them too (other then the issue of who pays for them between the NTA and DB).

El_Duderino 09

magicbastarder wrote:

i'm sure there would be legal issues with ownership of data, chain of evidence, etc., but surely it's in dublin bus's interests to pass dashcam footage of people abusing bus lanes to the gardai?

Is there any such thing as summary judgment? In some cases police can issue a judgement so why not use dash cam footage to issue summary judgements? Fines or penalty points.

Governments are under pressure so they are pushing lots of policing duties onto the public. The if hey embrace it by using information from the public, then they could actually police the bus lanes properly. It would be the equivalent to low level whistleblowing

bk

BTW for those interested, in London, they found the following fuel savings with Hybrid buses:

A conventional diesel uses 49l/100km,
a normal hybrid uses 33l/100km (a 33% fuel saving),
the new Boris Bus which has a more advanced hybrid system, uses 26l/100km a 46% fuel saving.

Page 18 of this report:
http://www.repic.ch/files/7114/4126/7442/Grutter_FinalReport_e_web.pdf

All new buses bought in London since 2012 are at least Hybrid, they now make up 20% of the fleet and they are now also experimenting with fully electric buses and wireless charging "plug-in" hybrid double deckers which run off battery 80% of the time during their 20 hours per day, 7 days a week, in operation time!

AndrewJRenko

El_Duderino 09 wrote: »

Is there any such thing as summary judgment? In some cases police can issue a judgement so why not use dash cam footage to issue summary judgements? Fines or penalty points.

Governments are under pressure so they are pushing lots of policing duties onto the public. The if hey embrace it by using information from the public, then they could actually police the bus lanes properly. It would be the equivalent to low level whistleblowing

It's actually very awkward to get a fine or conviction issued from dashcam footage at present. You have to report the issue to TrafficWatch phone line first. If you report it by phone to your local station, it tends to get filed in the bin, in my experience. Then when you get the callback from the local station, you arrange to go in to give a statement. This takes anything from 30-60 minutes depending on the complexity of the issue and the chattiness level of the Garda. You have to hand over your video footage on DVD or memory stick (which you won't get back). The Garda will probably have to use their personal laptop to view the footage, as they don't have a computer that will read dvds and their USB ports are (understandably) locked down.

The Garda has to contact the other driver. If it is a company car, this takes it into a whole new league of complexity. If the company refuses to say who was driving, the Garda probably won't take it any further. The other driver then gets invited to give a statement, and might want to involve their solicitor. When the Garda has both statements, they send a file up to their Inspector. The Inspector can decide whether to issue a fixed penalty notice, or a summons or do nothing.

It is more than cumbersome. I don't think the solution is through dashcams or helmetcams. It would be easy enough for them to use fixed cameras or CCTV or camera vans.

Dravokivich

newacc2015 wrote: »

And yet the residents of Phisboro without the Luas extension or any decent rail connections are able to get by without cars...

If there is a car in your driveway, you will use it. If you live in Phisboro where you have no driveway or no one street parking, you get on with life. Likewise if you live in an apartment block with no car space you get on with it.

There is car sharing, renting a car etc. A lot of people who own a car in Dublin City dont need it. A lot of younger people are no longer getting licenses and are thriving. IMO a lot of people who have a car over thirty have it as a status symbol rather than a necessity. There is this notion in Ireland, if you are over 21 without a license you are a failure.

If people had to pay a lot more for owning a car I feel these 'too many issues' would no longer be issues as the cons of owning a car would outweigh the pros

So what about phibsboro. Do you know why some of those other people have cars? Why do you assume they are just going to/from the city centre?

El_Duderino 09

AndrewJRenko wrote:

It is more than cumbersome. I don't think the solution is through dashcams or helmetcams. It would be easy enough for them to use fixed cameras or CCTV or camera vans.

Sounds unworkable. It could be workable but it doesn't sound like there's a will to do it.

Do you think people would support the idea of using dashcam footage to issue wuick, sullary judgements?

He idea isn't to catch people. The idea is to deter people from using the lane illegally. Then make it better to use the bus. It would take investment but it would increase people's quality of like and make business better in Dublin.

Sam Russell

Buses (at least some) have internet connectivity. Fit a forward facing dash-cam with a direct feed to Garda Traffic, along with GPS location and time. Bus comes up behind car illegally in bus lane. Driver presses button which alerts Garda Traffic. Recorded film is made as evidence and FPCN issued.

Currently ANPC is fitted at Sydney Parade level crossing (and possibly others), with a notice saying it can be used in a prosecution (presumably for vehicles crossing when red lights show). If that works through the courts, then bus based ones will work as well.

magicbastarder

bk wrote: »

Thousands of fully electric buses already run all over China every day and are increasingly turning up in the US and across Europe. They have become very popular.

battery or cable powered?
i was in seattle a few years back - their buses were hybrids; diesel outside the city centre, and hooked into an overhead cable system when in the city centre.

another useful thing was there was a flat fare - so you paid getting on on inbound trips, and getting off on outbound trips; a significant reduction in dwell time for city centre stops as a result.

bk

Sam Russell wrote: »

Buses (at least some) have internet connectivity. Fit a forward facing dash-cam with a direct feed to Garda Traffic, along with GPS location and time. Bus comes up behind car illegally in bus lane. Driver presses button which alerts Garda Traffic. Recorded film is made as evidence and FPCN issued.

Yup, all Dublin Bus have a 3G connection, it is how the RTPI works.

However uploading video over 3G might be pushing it a bit. However a slight variation on your idea would work fine.

- Bus driver sees a car in front of him in the bus lane, pushes button.
- This marks the recording for review.
- All these marked recordings get uploaded to the Gardai over wifi when the bus returns to the depot.
- Gardai issue Fixed Penalty Notices.

Perhaps it could even be arranged for Dublin Bus to receive a portion of the fine, similar to how the private company who operates the speed cameras receives some of it. Might make DB even more enthusiastic about putting a system like this in place.

bk

magicbastarder wrote: »

battery or cable powered?
i was in seattle a few years back - their buses were hybrids; diesel outside the city centre, and hooked into an overhead cable system when in the city centre.

Most of the new ones these days are battery. Battery technology has come along in leaps and bounds over the last few years, making cables largely unnecessary.

They come in different forms:
- Hybrid, combines both a Diesel Engine and Electric Battery and Motor. The Diesel engine runs at all times, but it runs at a constant rate. The battery is charged either the Diesel engine and/or regenerative braking.

Diesel Engines run best and most efficient at a constant pace, they don't like to adjust constantly. The battery helps keep the Diesel engine at it's optimal rate, instead using the electrical power to accelerate and decelerate.

All new London Buses from 2012 use this type of technology and probably is where Dublin Bus should be going to start with.

- Plugin Hybrid. Again use both a Diesel Engine and a Battery/Electric Motor. However the battery is much larger in these ones, which means it is possible for the bus to run off just battery power and switch off the Diesel Engine. This is handy, so for instant in the core inner city you can just run on battery, this less polluting, but the Diesel Engine fires up to assist the battery when on the motor way.

Some of these use wireless charging along the stops, so that you can run on battery for even longer. For instance a trial of Double Deckers is currently been run in London, where the goal is to run using battery 80% of the time.

- Full Battery. No diesel engine at all. These tend to be single decker buses, with lots of batteries on the roof of the bus. They typically are charged over night in the depot.

Overhead cables is kind of an old fashioned idea that is increasingly going out of favour now that battery tech is progressing so quickly.

Bray Head

Long, battery-powered single decker buses with no driver interaction (essentially trams on wheels with a cab at each end and doors on each side) could be implemented without too much difficulty on a select number of radial routes (N11 to Stephen's Green, N4 to Heuston, N1 to Dorset St).

They wouldn't be able to negotiate the core city really at all given the narrow streets and variety of other traffic. But they could feed into the Luas at key points (SSG, Heuston, Dominick).

This would mean various modes co-operating with each other though, which I don't think DB management are really ready for.

bk

Bray Head wrote: »

Long, battery-powered single decker buses with no driver interaction (essentially trams on wheels with a cab at each end and doors on each side) could be implemented without too much difficulty on a select number of radial routes (N11 to Stephen's Green, N4 to Heuston, N1 to Dorset St).

Well except for the battery part (and that is possible too), that is what is planned for the BRT routes, starting with Swords - Airport - City Center

Banjoxed

bk wrote: »

Well except for the battery part (and that is possible too), that is what is planned for the BRT routes, starting with Swords - Airport - City Center

We've had this all before with CitySwift in the nineties.

Bus as a capacity and speed rival to rail or trams is a chimera, that keeps being chased by those opposed to infrastructural investment beyond motorways.

bk

Banjoxed wrote: »

We've had this all before with CitySwift in the nineties.

Bus as a capacity and speed rival to rail or trams is a chimera, that keeps being chased by those opposed to infrastructural investment beyond motorways.

If you read the NTA's report into BRT, they are quiet clear that it isn't a replacement for rail.

They are clear that in terms of capacity it is:
bus < BRT < rail

However that doesn't mean that BRT can't be a good idea too and play an important part in the over all bigger picture of public transport. The BRT lines, while not cheap, are still WAY cheaper then the likes of Metro North or even trams and they also have the benefit that other buses such as DB, BE, Aircoach, etc. can also use and benefit from the infrastructure built for BRT.

Ideally we would be building these BRT lines, plus Metro North and Dart Underground, plus more Luas lines.

Peregrine

bk wrote: »

If you read the NTA's report into BRT, they are quiet clear that it isn't a replacement for rail.

I've no doubt that the NTA are but are the government and people?

BRT on the Swords-CC corridor will only kick MN further down the line. BRT should be considered on other routes and MN should be prioritised on the Swords route. We can talk about supplementing the corridor with BRT once MN is built.

dermot18173

The new traffic bollards have created a go slow for cars inbound to Dublin even in the afternoon where previously it was just a few cars inbound at the junction with Collins Avenue.
What we have now is a line of cars in the left lane trying to turn across the bus to Collins avenue causing a holdup for the inbound traffic.

markpb

dermot18173 wrote:

What we have now is a line of cars in the left lane trying to turn across the bus to Collins avenue causing a holdup for the inbound traffic.

There's a remarkably simple fix for that. The current layout is a bus lane, a left and straight lane, a straight lane and a right lane. The bus and one of the straight lanes continue through the junction but the other straight lane merges immediately after.

If the straight + left lane became a left only lane with its own signal, each lane would have a single purpose. The merge would still be there, just ahead of the junction instead of afterwards.