|
Post by Catford94 on Jun 29, 2024 22:11:00 GMT
TfL will does need to look at coordinating timetables / ask operators to do this as part of the tender. In my area three routes all depart within 2 minutes of each other and are often caught at the same stop bunched together. Passengers seem an after thought when it comes to running buses. Whilst I think TfL could do more to improve timetable co-ordination (and the 406/418 shows it can be done), in reality there are so many different overlaps between routes that it will be impossible to please everybody.
In an ideal world, yes, more could be done to co-ordinate between different routes on shared sections. It is often within TFL's tender specifications (there's an example for route 208 via this page - one of the buttons at the bottom of the page) but in my time working for a London operator (I'd rather not go in to more detail), I don't think anybody really took much notice of this.
There are several obstacles -
One is TFL's own specifications - TFL don't write the entire timetable, they specify first and last bus times, and frequencies, along with times when the frequency increases / decreases. The first thing would be a need to co-ordinate these better, and there are going to be chunks of road where route A runs (say) every 15 minutes but route B only runs every 20 minutes for at least some times of day / week. Then multiply that by all the routes that share sections of route with others. It would be a big task, although arguably it could be given more attention when individual routes are re-tendered.
There are some examples where TFL's specifications end up with buses on different routes running very close to each other at the start and end of the day (I can't remember the detail, but have encountered at least one example where the last night bus was at almost the same time as first day bus along a substantial bit of route.)
To achieve the co-ordination, operators would often need to add an extra journey or two in the day to stay compliant with the contract requirements for frequency and also co-ordinate with another route, for example it might be necessary to keep the mid-evening 15 minute headway for a bit longer before dropping on to the 20 minute headway to get the 20 minute bit of evening at the right times to co-ordinate. Unless TFL made it clear they would be prepared to pay a bit extra for operators to do that, operators aren't going to risk putting a higher tender price in than an operator that didn't, or even put the time and effort in to preparing and costing an 'option' bid.
What would happen when routes are re-tendered, or where a revised specification is issued, or an operator re-writes the timetable for better reliability? Which operator on a shared section of route would have to fit round who? And would TFL be prepared to pay more to other operators if the change cost them additional journeys / driver time?
And as for the idea of a bus on route A slowing down because of a gap on route B - route A would then have a longer gap, or late running, which is what TFL measure performance against - and in turn this affects the performance related payment to the operator of route A, as well as being unhelpful to passengers waiting for the route A bus after the shared section of road.
I agree to a large extent that passengers are an after-thought. The bus operators' customer is TFL, and their greatest efforts are put in to meeting TFL's targets. I'm not convinced that operators receiving an element of revenue per passenger would solve this - there would then be the risk of some drivers running early to try and get ahead of 'the opposition' and others hanging back to pick up passengers that would otherwise have caught the bus behind.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jun 30, 2024 10:27:19 GMT
Whilst I think TfL could do more to improve timetable co-ordination (and the 406/418 shows it can be done), in reality there are so many different overlaps between routes that it will be impossible to please everybody. In an ideal world, yes, more could be done to co-ordinate between different routes on shared sections. It is often within TFL's tender specifications (there's an example for route 208 via this page - one of the buttons at the bottom of the page) but in my time working for a London operator (I'd rather not go in to more detail), I don't think anybody really took much notice of this. There are several obstacles -
One is TFL's own specifications - TFL don't write the entire timetable, they specify first and last bus times, and frequencies, along with times when the frequency increases / decreases. The first thing would be a need to co-ordinate these better, and there are going to be chunks of road where route A runs (say) every 15 minutes but route B only runs every 20 minutes for at least some times of day / week. Then multiply that by all the routes that share sections of route with others. It would be a big task, although arguably it could be given more attention when individual routes are re-tendered.
There are some examples where TFL's specifications end up with buses on different routes running very close to each other at the start and end of the day (I can't remember the detail, but have encountered at least one example where the last night bus was at almost the same time as first day bus along a substantial bit of route.)
To achieve the co-ordination, operators would often need to add an extra journey or two in the day to stay compliant with the contract requirements for frequency and also co-ordinate with another route, for example it might be necessary to keep the mid-evening 15 minute headway for a bit longer before dropping on to the 20 minute headway to get the 20 minute bit of evening at the right times to co-ordinate. Unless TFL made it clear they would be prepared to pay a bit extra for operators to do that, operators aren't going to risk putting a higher tender price in than an operator that didn't, or even put the time and effort in to preparing and costing an 'option' bid. What would happen when routes are re-tendered, or where a revised specification is issued, or an operator re-writes the timetable for better reliability? Which operator on a shared section of route would have to fit round who? And would TFL be prepared to pay more to other operators if the change cost them additional journeys / driver time?
And as for the idea of a bus on route A slowing down because of a gap on route B - route A would then have a longer gap, or late running, which is what TFL measure performance against - and in turn this affects the performance related payment to the operator of route A, as well as being unhelpful to passengers waiting for the route A bus after the shared section of road. I agree to a large extent that passengers are an after-thought. The bus operators' customer is TFL, and their greatest efforts are put in to meeting TFL's targets. I'm not convinced that operators receiving an element of revenue per passenger would solve this - there would then be the risk of some drivers running early to try and get ahead of 'the opposition' and others hanging back to pick up passengers that would otherwise have caught the bus behind.
Your last paragraph makes an important point: the bus companies only have one customer and that's TfL. I think that often gets forgotten.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Jun 30, 2024 13:25:51 GMT
In an ideal world, yes, more could be done to co-ordinate between different routes on shared sections. It is often within TFL's tender specifications (there's an example for route 208 via this page - one of the buttons at the bottom of the page) but in my time working for a London operator (I'd rather not go in to more detail), I don't think anybody really took much notice of this. There are several obstacles -
One is TFL's own specifications - TFL don't write the entire timetable, they specify first and last bus times, and frequencies, along with times when the frequency increases / decreases. The first thing would be a need to co-ordinate these better, and there are going to be chunks of road where route A runs (say) every 15 minutes but route B only runs every 20 minutes for at least some times of day / week. Then multiply that by all the routes that share sections of route with others. It would be a big task, although arguably it could be given more attention when individual routes are re-tendered.
There are some examples where TFL's specifications end up with buses on different routes running very close to each other at the start and end of the day (I can't remember the detail, but have encountered at least one example where the last night bus was at almost the same time as first day bus along a substantial bit of route.)
To achieve the co-ordination, operators would often need to add an extra journey or two in the day to stay compliant with the contract requirements for frequency and also co-ordinate with another route, for example it might be necessary to keep the mid-evening 15 minute headway for a bit longer before dropping on to the 20 minute headway to get the 20 minute bit of evening at the right times to co-ordinate. Unless TFL made it clear they would be prepared to pay a bit extra for operators to do that, operators aren't going to risk putting a higher tender price in than an operator that didn't, or even put the time and effort in to preparing and costing an 'option' bid. What would happen when routes are re-tendered, or where a revised specification is issued, or an operator re-writes the timetable for better reliability? Which operator on a shared section of route would have to fit round who? And would TFL be prepared to pay more to other operators if the change cost them additional journeys / driver time?
And as for the idea of a bus on route A slowing down because of a gap on route B - route A would then have a longer gap, or late running, which is what TFL measure performance against - and in turn this affects the performance related payment to the operator of route A, as well as being unhelpful to passengers waiting for the route A bus after the shared section of road. I agree to a large extent that passengers are an after-thought. The bus operators' customer is TFL, and their greatest efforts are put in to meeting TFL's targets. I'm not convinced that operators receiving an element of revenue per passenger would solve this - there would then be the risk of some drivers running early to try and get ahead of 'the opposition' and others hanging back to pick up passengers that would otherwise have caught the bus behind.
Your last paragraph makes an important point: the bus companies only have one customer and that's TfL. I think that often gets forgotten. In theory... and I emphasise, in *theory*, public ownership and operation could change things... but cost (savings) will likely trump it all as always.
Oh well...
|
|
|
Post by mkay315 on Jul 1, 2024 14:50:42 GMT
Folks I had a thought the other day about all four corners of London.
There's a lot of routes in all of those corners that have famous bus routes for various reasons and has a lot of history behind it.
I don't know if I should put it here as a general discussion or create a separate thread for this. Moderators if it does get clogged up on this thread then my apologies and could the comments be moved onto a new thread to continue it there.
So I'll start with East London. The famous routes in that part of London I would say is the 8, 15, 25, 38, 5, 55 and 86.
West London I would say is the 207, 9, 94, E2 and 237
South London that one I have too many routes to choose from. I.e the 36, 2, 68, 53, 12, 77, 155, 1, 47, 21, 57,
North London, there's the 29, 279, 341, 43, 134, 76, 259, 210, 83, 221.
Please share yours.
|
|
|
Post by yunus on Jul 1, 2024 17:52:30 GMT
Will every bus in Coventry be EV by the end of next year? I was up there and seems to me the operators still have a lot of Diesels running!
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Jul 1, 2024 18:36:22 GMT
Folks I had a thought the other day about all four corners of London. There's a lot of routes in all of those corners that have famous bus routes for various reasons and has a lot of history behind it. I don't know if I should put it here as a general discussion or create a separate thread for this. Moderators if it does get clogged up on this thread then my apologies and could the comments be moved onto a new thread to continue it there. So I'll start with East London. The famous routes in that part of London I would say is the 8, 15, 25, 38, 5, 55 and 86. West London I would say is the 207, 9, 94, E2 and 237 South London that one I have too many routes to choose from. I.e the 36, 2, 68, 53, 12, 77, 155, 1, 47, 21, 57, North London, there's the 29, 279, 341, 43, 134, 76, 259, 210, 83, 221. Please share yours. 149 is a shout for North London
|
|
|
Post by Catford94 on Jul 1, 2024 18:55:09 GMT
Your last paragraph makes an important point: the bus companies only have one customer and that's TfL. I think that often gets forgotten. In theory... and I emphasise, in *theory*, public ownership and operation could change things... but cost (savings) will likely trump it all as always.
Oh well...
In theory, yes, if the whole thing was centrally planned.
Although (and without wishing to get in to the merits of public ownership or otherwise here) it could be done within the existing model, if TFL put more thought in to their specifications in the first place, then took notice of the requirement to co-ordinate when assessing tender bids, and were prepared to accept the (relatively modest) increase in prices that would almost certainly result.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jul 1, 2024 19:19:48 GMT
In an ideal world, yes, more could be done to co-ordinate between different routes on shared sections. It is often within TFL's tender specifications (there's an example for route 208 via this page - one of the buttons at the bottom of the page) but in my time working for a London operator (I'd rather not go in to more detail), I don't think anybody really took much notice of this. There are several obstacles -
One is TFL's own specifications - TFL don't write the entire timetable, they specify first and last bus times, and frequencies, along with times when the frequency increases / decreases. The first thing would be a need to co-ordinate these better, and there are going to be chunks of road where route A runs (say) every 15 minutes but route B only runs every 20 minutes for at least some times of day / week. Then multiply that by all the routes that share sections of route with others. It would be a big task, although arguably it could be given more attention when individual routes are re-tendered.
There are some examples where TFL's specifications end up with buses on different routes running very close to each other at the start and end of the day (I can't remember the detail, but have encountered at least one example where the last night bus was at almost the same time as first day bus along a substantial bit of route.)
To achieve the co-ordination, operators would often need to add an extra journey or two in the day to stay compliant with the contract requirements for frequency and also co-ordinate with another route, for example it might be necessary to keep the mid-evening 15 minute headway for a bit longer before dropping on to the 20 minute headway to get the 20 minute bit of evening at the right times to co-ordinate. Unless TFL made it clear they would be prepared to pay a bit extra for operators to do that, operators aren't going to risk putting a higher tender price in than an operator that didn't, or even put the time and effort in to preparing and costing an 'option' bid. What would happen when routes are re-tendered, or where a revised specification is issued, or an operator re-writes the timetable for better reliability? Which operator on a shared section of route would have to fit round who? And would TFL be prepared to pay more to other operators if the change cost them additional journeys / driver time?
And as for the idea of a bus on route A slowing down because of a gap on route B - route A would then have a longer gap, or late running, which is what TFL measure performance against - and in turn this affects the performance related payment to the operator of route A, as well as being unhelpful to passengers waiting for the route A bus after the shared section of road. I agree to a large extent that passengers are an after-thought. The bus operators' customer is TFL, and their greatest efforts are put in to meeting TFL's targets. I'm not convinced that operators receiving an element of revenue per passenger would solve this - there would then be the risk of some drivers running early to try and get ahead of 'the opposition' and others hanging back to pick up passengers that would otherwise have caught the bus behind.
Your last paragraph makes an important point: the bus companies only have one customer and that's TfL. I think that often gets forgotten. I beg to differ on that on, as a contractor the law of agency makes the passengers the operators customers. A passenger would have the right to sue both TfL and the operator if they had a solid legal basis.
|
|
|
Post by Catford94 on Jul 1, 2024 19:29:56 GMT
Your last paragraph makes an important point: the bus companies only have one customer and that's TfL. I think that often gets forgotten. I beg to differ on that on, as a contractor the law of agency makes the passengers the operators customers. A passenger would have the right to sue both TfL and the operator if they had a solid legal basis.
From certain legal angles, yes - for example, if a passenger was injured while travelling on a bus, their claim would be against the operator not TFL. I'm not sufficiently legally qualified to think of a situation where the claim could be against TFL, although I suppose it might be possible if the operator was not adequately insured.
But for all practical purposes, if I travel on a bus, I am paying TFL not the operator for that journey. It's TFL who are paying the operator to run that journey. In terms of satisfying 'the customer' it's fairly clear that bus operators aim to satisfy TFL first and passengers second. (As in the 'this bus is being held to regulate the service' one or two stops before a major interchange point.)
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Jul 1, 2024 19:35:07 GMT
Folks I had a thought the other day about all four corners of London. There's a lot of routes in all of those corners that have famous bus routes for various reasons and has a lot of history behind it. I don't know if I should put it here as a general discussion or create a separate thread for this. Moderators if it does get clogged up on this thread then my apologies and could the comments be moved onto a new thread to continue it there. So I'll start with East London. The famous routes in that part of London I would say is the 8, 15, 25, 38, 5, 55 and 86. West London I would say is the 207, 9, 94, E2 and 237 South London that one I have too many routes to choose from. I.e the 36, 2, 68, 53, 12, 77, 155, 1, 47, 21, 57, North London, there's the 29, 279, 341, 43, 134, 76, 259, 210, 83, 221. Please share yours. East / North London 253 and 254
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Jul 1, 2024 22:52:37 GMT
Folks I had a thought the other day about all four corners of London. There's a lot of routes in all of those corners that have famous bus routes for various reasons and has a lot of history behind it. I don't know if I should put it here as a general discussion or create a separate thread for this. Moderators if it does get clogged up on this thread then my apologies and could the comments be moved onto a new thread to continue it there. So I'll start with East London. The famous routes in that part of London I would say is the 8, 15, 25, 38, 5, 55 and 86. West London I would say is the 207, 9, 94, E2 and 237 South London that one I have too many routes to choose from. I.e the 36, 2, 68, 53, 12, 77, 155, 1, 47, 21, 57, North London, there's the 29, 279, 341, 43, 134, 76, 259, 210, 83, 221. Please share yours. I would say for west/south west the 414 must surely be contender, it constantly has the rumour mill working overtime!!🤣
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 1, 2024 23:16:07 GMT
Folks I had a thought the other day about all four corners of London. There's a lot of routes in all of those corners that have famous bus routes for various reasons and has a lot of history behind it. I don't know if I should put it here as a general discussion or create a separate thread for this. Moderators if it does get clogged up on this thread then my apologies and could the comments be moved onto a new thread to continue it there. So I'll start with East London. The famous routes in that part of London I would say is the 8, 15, 25, 38, 5, 55 and 86. West London I would say is the 207, 9, 94, E2 and 237 South London that one I have too many routes to choose from. I.e the 36, 2, 68, 53, 12, 77, 155, 1, 47, 21, 57, North London, there's the 29, 279, 341, 43, 134, 76, 259, 210, 83, 221. Please share yours. 109 & 159 for South London
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Jul 2, 2024 5:51:10 GMT
Park Lane I have to say has got a lot worse since the introduction of Cycle Lanes. Once a wide road is now so small down to a bus lane and a normal traffic lane heading Northbound. Westminster Council should change it to Car Park Lane… A tale of central London overall. Introduce cycle lanes all over (not used too well!) and buses take the hit
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 2, 2024 7:26:20 GMT
Park Lane I have to say has got a lot worse since the introduction of Cycle Lanes. Once a wide road is now so small down to a bus lane and a normal traffic lane heading Northbound. Westminster Council should change it to Car Park Lane… A tale of central London overall. Introduce cycle lanes all over (not used too well!) and buses take the hit Go on any cycling forum and the general view will be that far more cycling facilities are needed in Central London.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 2, 2024 7:50:39 GMT
A tale of central London overall. Introduce cycle lanes all over (not used too well!) and buses take the hit Go on any cycling forum and the general view will be that far more cycling facilities are needed in Central London. It is meant to be a road isn’t it though all of a sudden they want more facilities to abuse I think the majority are colour blind too do they see Red? Special rights at crossings I’m not stopping for no one…
|
|