|
Post by redbus on Aug 10, 2019 19:47:36 GMT
Quite frankly I hope this 'experiment' fails. To make this change after so many years of any door boarding is ridiculous. As for fare dodging, this is the wrong solution to the problem, better enforcement by revenue inspectors is needed.
The problem with CSA was just that, they were CSAs. If they had been conductors and collected fares there could have been better enforcement and less fare dodging.
It will be interesting to see what happens to passenger numbers and revenue on these routes. Will revenue really go up, or will people either still not pay or not bother with the bus.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Aug 10, 2019 21:48:22 GMT
Quite frankly I hope this 'experiment' fails. To make this change after so many years of any door boarding is ridiculous. As for fare dodging, this is the wrong solution to the problem, better enforcement by revenue inspectors is needed. The problem with CSA was just that, they were CSAs. If they had been conductors and collected fares there could have been better enforcement and less fare dodging. It will be interesting to see what happens to passenger numbers and revenue on these routes. Will revenue really go up, or will people either still not pay or not bother with the bus. TfL were humouring the Mayor as it seemed expedient, necessary even, to do so, but I doubt there was anyone at the top of that organisation who in reality thought the LT concept was a viable, long-lasting idea. CSAs were a compromise, and compromises are often shoddy. Everyone knew the first 'accident' involving a passenger and the rear doors would attract adverse press attention, just as much as the 'dangerous, flammable bendies.' I noticed Boris seemed to lose all interest once the 24 incident got attention: a great attribute for a future P.M. , God help us. My own attitude to LTs is simple - TfL are stuck with the wretched things for the foreseeable future for financial reasons, so they should continue to make use of the one feature that could be said to be worthwhile now, namely open boarding. It's a dereliction of duty to consider scrapping it and, as you say, if faredodging is so prevalent on them other means are available to curb it e.g. revenue inspectors.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Aug 10, 2019 21:58:55 GMT
I was traveling tonight on the N8 and unbeknownst to me, I was subject to the new boarding changes on the LT route. There are stickers stating the middle & rear doors are for exit only and to board at the front door with your ticket. Middle doors has its wheelchair logo as is expected. All readers bar the driver's has a red sticker and points to the cab if in case anyone falls through the net. The problem with those new stickers is that many punters will approach the doors when they are already opened so are even less likely to read them in comparison to when they are closed. Mind you, the notices are not very attentive in the first place as there are not exactly user-friendly in size for everyone to read, especially those that may be short-sighted or have various degrees of visual impairment. Photo credit to Donell Walter
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Aug 10, 2019 22:54:59 GMT
Quite frankly I hope this 'experiment' fails. To make this change after so many years of any door boarding is ridiculous. As for fare dodging, this is the wrong solution to the problem, better enforcement by revenue inspectors is needed. The problem with CSA was just that, they were CSAs. If they had been conductors and collected fares there could have been better enforcement and less fare dodging. It will be interesting to see what happens to passenger numbers and revenue on these routes. Will revenue really go up, or will people either still not pay or not bother with the bus. TfL were humouring the Mayor as it seemed expedient, necessary even, to do so, but I doubt there was anyone at the top of that organisation who in reality thought the LT concept was a viable, long-lasting idea. CSAs were a compromise, and compromises are often shoddy. Everyone knew the first 'accident' involving a passenger and the rear doors would attract adverse press attention, just as much as the 'dangerous, flammable bendies.' I noticed Boris seemed to lose all interest once the 24 incident got attention: a great attribute for a future P.M. , God help us. My own attitude to LTs is simple - TfL are stuck with the wretched things for the foreseeable future for financial reasons, so they should continue to make use of the one feature that could be said to be worthwhile now, namely open boarding. It's a dereliction of duty to consider scrapping it and, as you say, if faredodging is so prevalent on them other means are available to curb it e.g. revenue inspectors. You will start me off on a rant if you are not careful. Open rear doors should be at the passengers risk if the bus is not stopped at a stop. Sorry, TfL can't be expected to be responsible for passengers who hop on / off dangerously. Trouble is law and nanny state mean they probably are.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 11, 2019 2:13:19 GMT
Quite frankly I hope this 'experiment' fails. To make this change after so many years of any door boarding is ridiculous. As for fare dodging, this is the wrong solution to the problem, better enforcement by revenue inspectors is needed. The problem with CSA was just that, they were CSAs. If they had been conductors and collected fares there could have been better enforcement and less fare dodging. It will be interesting to see what happens to passenger numbers and revenue on these routes. Will revenue really go up, or will people either still not pay or not bother with the bus. Is there a report anywhere detailing the amount of revenue lost on LT routes compared to other routes?
|
|
|
Post by joefrombow on Aug 11, 2019 3:26:42 GMT
Quite frankly I hope this 'experiment' fails. To make this change after so many years of any door boarding is ridiculous. As for fare dodging, this is the wrong solution to the problem, better enforcement by revenue inspectors is needed. The problem with CSA was just that, they were CSAs. If they had been conductors and collected fares there could have been better enforcement and less fare dodging. It will be interesting to see what happens to passenger numbers and revenue on these routes. Will revenue really go up, or will people either still not pay or not bother with the bus. I don't see why tfl didn't put extra inspectors on NRM routes at the start of introduction and not have the fake conductor "CSA" role and I'm not taking anything away from any CSA's I am sure many done a amazing job however some routes had them some didn't the whole thing was a shambles plus the fact most only worked Monday to Friday and 8-8 which defies the whole point , if you had regular revenue checks and I mean regular like a squad patrolling a certain number of routes day in day out 24 hours a day or even just a patrol per route on a regular basis people would be deterred from evading fares . This one entrance malarky in my opinion is nonsense defies whole reason the bus was made use them to their advantage and make use of all 3 doors I say but we all know once tfl have a idea it's going ahead .
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Aug 11, 2019 6:23:28 GMT
I always thought something similar with Bendy buses (at the time could have provided some work for redundant conductors) where a 10 a day (everyday) strong team patrol just the bendy routes maybe in pairs and each pair would aim to visit each route. Over time a presence would soon build up and they would be expected to be seen more.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Aug 11, 2019 8:49:08 GMT
I was traveling tonight on the N8 and unbeknownst to me, I was subject to the new boarding changes on the LT route. There are stickers stating the middle & rear doors are for exit only and to board at the front door with your ticket. Middle doors has its wheelchair logo as is expected. All readers bar the driver's has a red sticker and points to the cab if in case anyone falls through the net. The problem with those new stickers is that many punters will approach the doors when they are already opened so are even less likely to read them in comparison to when they are closed. Mind you, the notices are not very attentive in the first place as there are not exactly user-friendly in size for everyone to read, especially those that may be short-sighted or have various degrees of visual impairment. Photo credit to Donell Walter Despite the stickers, do the card readers at the middle/rear doors still work?
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Aug 11, 2019 9:09:47 GMT
Despite the stickers, do the card readers at the middle/rear doors still work? Said to be deactivated, although originally they were to have been removed. Perhaps because it's still a trial the former was done. It would be interesting to know how long the trials are for and what will happen based on its outcome. I personally do not see the ongoing fare evasion being reduced by much (if even at all) with this present practice on the 8/N8....not unless the revenue squad 'heavily' step up their game.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 11, 2019 19:28:14 GMT
Spoke to my family relative today who did a rest day Friday on the 8. Told me he had passengers boarding throughout the day using the rear doors and just sitting down after realising the card readers were not in use. Drivers have been told to make a announcement if they spot this and to ask the passengers to come to the front, a few did and had a moan!
He also said as soon as you don't open the front doors passengers go straight to the other doors which is natural as they will assume you are not planning to open them. I know its not practical but if TfL do decide to proceed with this I think it would be best to swap out all the LT routes with conventional buses and move the LTs out of central London.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Aug 11, 2019 20:40:00 GMT
Quite frankly I hope this 'experiment' fails. To make this change after so many years of any door boarding is ridiculous. As for fare dodging, this is the wrong solution to the problem, better enforcement by revenue inspectors is needed. The problem with CSA was just that, they were CSAs. If they had been conductors and collected fares there could have been better enforcement and less fare dodging. It will be interesting to see what happens to passenger numbers and revenue on these routes. Will revenue really go up, or will people either still not pay or not bother with the bus. TfL were humouring the Mayor as it seemed expedient, necessary even, to do so, but I doubt there was anyone at the top of that organisation who in reality thought the LT concept was a viable, long-lasting idea. CSAs were a compromise, and compromises are often shoddy. Everyone knew the first 'accident' involving a passenger and the rear doors would attract adverse press attention, just as much as the 'dangerous, flammable bendies.' I noticed Boris seemed to lose all interest once the 24 incident got attention: a great attribute for a future P.M. , God help us. My own attitude to LTs is simple - TfL are stuck with the wretched things for the foreseeable future for financial reasons, so they should continue to make use of the one feature that could be said to be worthwhile now, namely open boarding. It's a dereliction of duty to consider scrapping it and, as you say, if faredodging is so prevalent on them other means are available to curb it e.g. revenue inspectors. Wretched things definitely. Following on from that I know it’s a few years yet but I’m going to be very intrigued to see the 24’s next tender vehicles, by which time its LTs will be 12.5 years old (14.5 if the contract is extended). Will TfL try and squeeze another term out of them as they’re all but destined for the scrap heap for a value of next to nothing after the term is finished (as no operator is even slightly interested in purchasing them from them) meaning they may as well keep running them, or will they call it quits and get rid of them? Re having more inspectors controlling fare dodging, will hiring more inspectors cost more than the actual money they’re losing from fare dodging? If that’s the case they’re really stuck in a rut over the matter.
|
|
|
Post by rugbyref on Aug 23, 2019 8:50:43 GMT
Yesterday was the first time I had used LTs since the ‘experiment’ began. It was outside rush hour, so no issue with boarding the 8 by the front door, but the driver seemed to be mixed up, and we had to wait a silly time after he had opened the front door before he would open the rear door (and yes we had rung the bell) to debus. Later we used route 9, and boarded via the rear door as that was immediately in front of us. This was on the Strand, with the 11 pulling up at the closed stop by building works, rather than at the dolly 10 yards ahead. We moved behind the 11 to get on the 9, and had to choose a gap in the building works, which just happened to equate to the rear door. Front door would have been difficult to access. Long live 3 door entry, and yes we did tap in.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 23, 2019 13:06:23 GMT
Yesterday was the first time I had used LTs since the ‘experiment’ began. It was outside rush hour, so no issue with boarding the 8 by the front door, but the driver seemed to be mixed up, and we had to wait a silly time after he had opened the front door before he would open the rear door (and yes we had rung the bell) to debus. Later we used route 9, and boarded via the rear door as that was immediately in front of us. This was on the Strand, with the 11 pulling up at the closed stop by building works, rather than at the dolly 10 yards ahead. We moved behind the 11 to get on the 9, and had to choose a gap in the building works, which just happened to equate to the rear door. Front door would have been difficult to access. Long live 3 door entry, and yes we did tap in. I am surprised that there is no publicity for the change, apart from the notices on the buses themselves. I would have expected posters on bus shelters and in timetable panels all along the route. If the drivers are being expected to police this that is wrong, it should not be their responsibility.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 23, 2019 15:10:15 GMT
Yesterday was the first time I had used LTs since the ‘experiment’ began. It was outside rush hour, so no issue with boarding the 8 by the front door, but the driver seemed to be mixed up, and we had to wait a silly time after he had opened the front door before he would open the rear door (and yes we had rung the bell) to debus. Later we used route 9, and boarded via the rear door as that was immediately in front of us. This was on the Strand, with the 11 pulling up at the closed stop by building works, rather than at the dolly 10 yards ahead. We moved behind the 11 to get on the 9, and had to choose a gap in the building works, which just happened to equate to the rear door. Front door would have been difficult to access. Long live 3 door entry, and yes we did tap in. I am surprised that there is no publicity for the change, apart from the notices on the buses themselves. I would have expected posters on bus shelters and in timetable panels all along the route. If the drivers are being expected to police this that is wrong, it should not be their responsibility. Even the excellent people at LDN Bus Updates on Twitter haven’t mentioned it which is odd as they do mention everything related to bus route changes including publicity. They even mentioned how the 159’s cutback is a permanent change despite TfL not wanting to reveal that fact.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 3, 2019 14:21:26 GMT
FOI request answer on changes to front door boarding etc The conversion was signed off in May, and the 1000th LT was supposed to have been modified by Friday 6 December 2019 But conversion was being done by Wrightbus (who went bust), and hoping that Bamford might help do it Now hoping bus modifications will be done by early 2020 Also says TfL estimating losing £3.6m revenue per year Doing a bit of maths from average fare yield of about 74p (per finance report) suggests about 4.9m people were not attempting to pay (or about 15 people per bus per day based on 900 in service daily) which I find suprisingly low
|
|