|
Post by VMH2537 on Sept 14, 2022 22:43:47 GMT
As another member has said, it's the waiting time that retains and grows users usage on busses. If I'm sitting in a cafe and see busses from the same route passing frequently, I will consider it as one of the options I could get home. A less frequent service gives less options for users if they can drive instead But equally if you have a route with a lower frequency you learn to adapt to timings so you just plan around them. It’s the 21st century most people have smart phones so they can check bus times through apps. I'm a local who lives on the 377 route, it routes through mainly homes with large car ownerships and homeowners before reaching Oakwood station. I don't see the route well filled outside of the school hours, the only types of people I see using it are the elderly, young students or the disabled. Those types don't have a choice to use a bus to get from point A to B as they can't drive. The people who live on the section have a option to drive and won't wait for a half hourly service especially as it doesn't pass often where it's unlikely to be considered as an option
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Sept 14, 2022 22:49:28 GMT
But equally if you have a route with a lower frequency you learn to adapt to timings so you just plan around them. It’s the 21st century most people have smart phones so they can check bus times through apps. People don't like planning around stuff which is the point. Would I plan around an every hour bus route or would I drive? Of course they do, just because you don’t see it doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Do you just turn up at a station and expect a train to be there, of course not, you plan in advance. Do you drive to a tube station or a mainline station with limited expensive parking or do you plan a bus journey there?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 14, 2022 23:36:45 GMT
Actually I think both groups here are correct in that it matters to have welcoming interiors but it certainly matters to have frequent and reliable services as well.
The 497’s problem won’t be cured with a welcoming interior but a frequency increase. It’s not a useless route and anyone who thinks such a thing should look the word up - it has low use which is completely different and that’s primarily down to a combination of publicity and an unattractive frequency - the 497 has untapped potential that sadly probably won’t ever be realised whereas in provincial land, such a route probably would of done decently.
Frequencies and reliability (without unnecessary timetable padding) should be the priority in order to retain people as people do and have seeked attractive alternatives as bus frequency cuts have been implemented but there is definitely a place for welcoming interiors too in attracting those much more stubborn towards using buses. A combination of all is seriously what’s needed to get the bus network into a 21st century state
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 15, 2022 0:15:25 GMT
I disagree. A bus user who experiences an unpleasant environment will not be a repeat user. A bus user who experiences a pleasant environment may well become a repeat user. The interior of a London bus was spartan at best and not very welcoming. I think it is money well spent, if anything do not think it has gone far enough, if TfL wants to be leaders and innovators in the public transport sector. As another member has said, it's the waiting time that retains and grows users usage on busses. If I'm sitting in a cafe and see busses from the same route passing frequently, I will consider it as one of the options I could get home. A less frequent service gives less options for users if they can drive instead Doesn't matter how frequent a service is, if it is an unpleasant experience you will not be doing it again when you can have the pleasant experience of your car. Evidence from rest of country says you don't need 6 bph to run a successful bus service. You just need a reliable service, that runs to a published timetable. A 30 minute train service is not considered to be unusable. Which bus would you make you want to use it more? A London bus or this Transdev Coastliner www.keybuses.com/article/transdev-ups-coastliner-standards
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 15, 2022 5:55:00 GMT
I just can't see how the 497 will ever be viable but improving interiors is certainly not a waste of money, more a case of getting the basics right. If the 497 ran every 15 minutes or more, I'd imagine the case would be different particularly how it's structured to feed to Harold Hill station where users don't need to look at the timetable before boarding. A option is given to users to use it from the station I'm sure a x15 minute service would attract more users, whether enough to make it viable?
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Sept 15, 2022 6:40:05 GMT
As another member has said, it's the waiting time that retains and grows users usage on busses. If I'm sitting in a cafe and see busses from the same route passing frequently, I will consider it as one of the options I could get home. A less frequent service gives less options for users if they can drive instead Doesn't matter how frequent a service is, if it is an unpleasant experience you will not be doing it again when you can have the pleasant experience of your car. Evidence from rest of country says you don't need 6 bph to run a successful bus service. You just need a reliable service, that runs to a published timetable. A 30 minute train service is not considered to be unusable. Which bus would you make you want to use it more? A London bus or this Transdev Coastliner www.keybuses.com/article/transdev-ups-coastliner-standardsRelaibility is only one part that retains existing users, it doesn't support any new usage it's trying to get especially when a service runs only every hourly. Even with a reliable service, users will less likely consider it as a option to get from point A to B if the frequency is limited. It again requires planning which results in complexity of the journey, an ideal journey for every user is to have a short time interchanging without planning to arrive for a specific time. My local Great Northern service was recently reduced to 2tph in the off peaks, from my observations more users are traveling to Southgate station where more frequent services are offered. It shows a class 717 unit that's air conditioned, quite and with free wifi won't make a difference when trying to get users on the line
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Sept 15, 2022 8:12:50 GMT
As another member has said, it's the waiting time that retains and grows users usage on busses. If I'm sitting in a cafe and see busses from the same route passing frequently, I will consider it as one of the options I could get home. A less frequent service gives less options for users if they can drive instead Doesn't matter how frequent a service is, if it is an unpleasant experience you will not be doing it again when you can have the pleasant experience of your car. Evidence from rest of country says you don't need 6 bph to run a successful bus service. You just need a reliable service, that runs to a published timetable. A 30 minute train service is not considered to be unusable. Which bus would you make you want to use it more? A London bus or this Transdev Coastliner www.keybuses.com/article/transdev-ups-coastliner-standards Generally speaking London buses are well presented and much cleaner than they used to be. People make it sound like London buses are the pits and that’s not the experience I have even on older buses yes they might look a little tired but inside is generally okay. There is often a comparison here to elsewhere and standard of buses with fancy features. I don’t think that’s always fair as in London it’s more about speed and buses arriving on time. Blackpool Transport have some very nice buses with leather seats and USB etc but social media is always full of complaints about cut services. It doesn’t matter how nice a bus is if it doesn’t turn up.
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Sept 15, 2022 9:27:27 GMT
If the 497 ran every 15 minutes or more, I'd imagine the case would be different particularly how it's structured to feed to Harold Hill station where users don't need to look at the timetable before boarding. A option is given to users to use it from the station I'm sure a x15 minute service would attract more users, whether enough to make it viable? I think the 497 would be perfect on a x20 minute service using something like an EVM bodied Mercedes Sprinter. If only TfL could be that innovative
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Sept 15, 2022 9:49:45 GMT
Doesn't matter how frequent a service is, if it is an unpleasant experience you will not be doing it again when you can have the pleasant experience of your car. Evidence from rest of country says you don't need 6 bph to run a successful bus service. You just need a reliable service, that runs to a published timetable. A 30 minute train service is not considered to be unusable. Which bus would you make you want to use it more? A London bus or this Transdev Coastliner www.keybuses.com/article/transdev-ups-coastliner-standards Generally speaking London buses are well presented and much cleaner than they used to be. People make it sound like London buses are the pits and that’s not the experience I have even on older buses yes they might look a little tired but inside is generally okay. There is often a comparison here to elsewhere and standard of buses with fancy features. I don’t think that’s always fair as in London it’s more about speed and buses arriving on time. Blackpool Transport have some very nice buses with leather seats and USB etc but social media is always full of complaints about cut services. It doesn’t matter how nice a bus is if it doesn’t turn up. I agree, reliability is key ... but you can have a reliable 30 or 60 minute service ... any bus service that is not reliable is doomed to failure. High frequency does not equal reliability! The London bus might attract the Escort Popular usrs, but has not chance with those in an Escort Ghia. Looking at cars on the road today, how many of the are of a Popular standard? Virtually zerol This is what the bus is competing against. The revised London spec is the equivalent the Popular+. The current spec has no chance of being even a distant second, if it was a horse race, the bus would have been pulled up! This is from someone that is pro bus, so you can see the battle London buses face if they are to be successful.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Sept 15, 2022 19:58:48 GMT
I think the case of the 497 is what happens when a attractive service is not provided for a user to use. A route structured to feed to a rail station on most standards needs to run at least 15 to 20 minutes where a user can turn up and go without looking at the timetable. Anything more than that may deter people finding alternatives such as walking, driving etc. I'm not really a fan of the current strategy imo where we are seeing new services such as the 456 and 497 introduced with a limited frequency aswell other services such as the 424, 549, 383 etc. It's a shame they have potential but are not able to attract those users with the current service. We are wasting money enchanting a new interior for busses, but can't enchant those limited services. I disagree. A bus user who experiences an unpleasant environment will not be a repeat user. A bus user who experiences a pleasant environment may well become a repeat user. The interior of a London bus was spartan at best and not very welcoming. I think it is money well spent, if anything do not think it has gone far enough, if TfL wants to be leaders and innovators in the public transport sector. I remember a cousin that came over from the States a few years ago on holiday. She got on the bus, and said it smelled stinks and did not want to go on it again. I had to convince her to get back on another one. She is from New York and could not understand the junk and food on board as people are not allowed to eat food in that way on buses over there.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Sept 15, 2022 21:11:23 GMT
I disagree. A bus user who experiences an unpleasant environment will not be a repeat user. A bus user who experiences a pleasant environment may well become a repeat user. The interior of a London bus was spartan at best and not very welcoming. I think it is money well spent, if anything do not think it has gone far enough, if TfL wants to be leaders and innovators in the public transport sector. I remember a cousin that came over from the States a few years ago on holiday. She got on the bus, and said it smelled stinks and did not want to go on it again. I had to convince her to get back on another one. She is from New York and could not understand the junk and food on board as people are not allowed to eat food in that way on buses over there. I've heard a few people say things like that, cans and bottles rolling round the bus etc.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Sept 15, 2022 21:27:58 GMT
I remember a cousin that came over from the States a few years ago on holiday. She got on the bus, and said it smelled stinks and did not want to go on it again. I had to convince her to get back on another one. She is from New York and could not understand the junk and food on board as people are not allowed to eat food in that way on buses over there. I've heard a few people say things like that, cans and bottles rolling round the bus etc. Yes and what’s your point? No amount of fancy interiors will stop this. Been on plenty of trains too with bottles rolling about so not just buses! Greater Anglia Trains can be pretty messy at weekends! I still say what I said earlier buses are much cleaner now than a few years ago unless you catch a bus that’s had a very intense day.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Sept 15, 2022 22:20:02 GMT
Doesn't matter how frequent a service is, if it is an unpleasant experience you will not be doing it again when you can have the pleasant experience of your car. Evidence from rest of country says you don't need 6 bph to run a successful bus service. You just need a reliable service, that runs to a published timetable. A 30 minute train service is not considered to be unusable. Which bus would you make you want to use it more? A London bus or this Transdev Coastliner www.keybuses.com/article/transdev-ups-coastliner-standards Generally speaking London buses are well presented and much cleaner than they used to be. People make it sound like London buses are the pits and that’s not the experience I have even on older buses yes they might look a little tired but inside is generally okay. There is often a comparison here to elsewhere and standard of buses with fancy features. I don’t think that’s always fair as in London it’s more about speed and buses arriving on time. Blackpool Transport have some very nice buses with leather seats and USB etc but social media is always full of complaints about cut services. It doesn’t matter how nice a bus is if it doesn’t turn up. I find the interiors are still messy, worse now to be honest. Around 20 years ago when buses used to be cleaned by LBSL cleaners at stations, it made a major difference. You would only now find buses cleaned during the day if they go back to the garage. This can only happen on routes like 29, 141, 38, etc or spread-over buses. Some routes are worst than others. The 5 is notoriously filthy inside with junk on both decks! One thing you here a lot from car users is 'dirty slow buses' term. The Underground does get messy as well, although some terminals the train gets cleaned.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 15, 2022 23:29:06 GMT
Generally speaking London buses are well presented and much cleaner than they used to be. People make it sound like London buses are the pits and that’s not the experience I have even on older buses yes they might look a little tired but inside is generally okay. There is often a comparison here to elsewhere and standard of buses with fancy features. I don’t think that’s always fair as in London it’s more about speed and buses arriving on time. Blackpool Transport have some very nice buses with leather seats and USB etc but social media is always full of complaints about cut services. It doesn’t matter how nice a bus is if it doesn’t turn up. I find the interiors are still messy, worse now to be honest. Around 20 years ago when buses used to be cleaned by LBSL cleaners at stations, it made a major difference. You would only now find buses cleaned during the day if they go back to the garage. This can only happen on routes like 29, 141, 38, etc or spread-over buses. Some routes are worst than others. The 5 is notoriously filthy inside with junk on both decks! One thing you here a lot from car users is 'dirty slow buses' term. The Underground does get messy as well, although some terminals the train gets cleaned. Bus interiors are cleaner than they were pre pandemic, not perfect but better than before.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Sept 16, 2022 10:49:07 GMT
I find the interiors are still messy, worse now to be honest. Around 20 years ago when buses used to be cleaned by LBSL cleaners at stations, it made a major difference. You would only now find buses cleaned during the day if they go back to the garage. This can only happen on routes like 29, 141, 38, etc or spread-over buses. Some routes are worst than others. The 5 is notoriously filthy inside with junk on both decks! One thing you here a lot from car users is 'dirty slow buses' term. The Underground does get messy as well, although some terminals the train gets cleaned. Bus interiors are cleaner than they were pre pandemic, not perfect but better than before. But that is in part to no way near the same amount of passengers on some routes.
|
|