|
|
Post by foxhat on Oct 16, 2018 15:29:59 GMT
Well the whole point of buses being regulated in this way was because of passengers in the first place. If people were not moaning when two buses turned up at once then this wouldn't happen. IMO if I have waited an excessive amount of time for a bus, I would rather 2-3+ buses turn up as I know I would be able to get on, with at least one of them being turned. But since TfL counts 2+ buses going through a QSI point together as one bus on a high frequency route, this measure would be here to stay. The operators direct customer is TfL, TfL's customer is the public, they set the rules....
Totally agree ... the current tendering process is fundamentally broken and needs a wholesale review ... which has to be driven by TfL ... why this has not been done before now is incomprehensible to me. I can totally understand why the companies and controllers do what the do ... financial benefit ... but please dont tell me they have the passengers interests at heart ... infact sure they regard passengers as an operational inconvenience. I would like to see a system whereby they get rewarded for increased passenger satisfaction ... but might cost TfL dearly as the current baseline is so low! If Tendering is mainly based on cost at the moment, then I cannot see the process changing. At least not until TfL have made all of their "savings"
|
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Oct 16, 2018 15:31:49 GMT
It seems you don't understand the difference between a rule and a dispensation. There is kit on the bus that shows that the bus is early, on time or late. There are times when running early will happen but not daily unless the bus is leaving early every day. If you have an early duty from Monday to Friday and you find you are running early on Monday you should not do it for the rest of the week. Bus drivers are professionals. Why run early anyway? It would make sense to run early on a route where you would lose time in other places. On the 386 you lose time around the estate in Kidbrooke. Anyway, you are allowed to run two minutes early so they are simply doing what they are told. And there are other reasons why you could be early. If the driver is finishing or going on his break he wouldn't hang around would he? Or maybe he needs the toilet at the other end so needs his stand time. Plus if you have gained the time elsewhere, drivers don't enjoy holding back any more than passengers do! Clearly you are taking this out on the wrong people. TfL allow it, so it is not the drivers fault for running early. They are simply following what they are told! Anyway the problem isn't with new drivers because new drivers are not allowed on the route because it's a high accident route! It makes no sense to run early on the first three or four buses in the morning. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Oct 16, 2018 15:33:22 GMT
Totally agree ... the current tendering process is fundamentally broken and needs a wholesale review ... which has to be driven by TfL ... why this has not been done before now is incomprehensible to me. I can totally understand why the companies and controllers do what the do ... financial benefit ... but please dont tell me they have the passengers interests at heart ... infact sure they regard passengers as an operational inconvenience. I would like to see a system whereby they get rewarded for increased passenger satisfaction ... but might cost TfL dearly as the current baseline is so low! If Tendering is mainly based on cost at the moment, then I cannot see the process changing. At least not until TfL have made all of their "savings"
So they just do nothing and watch revenue streams continue to reduce ... meaning even more savings are required? I hope this is one thread TfL are reading! |
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Oct 16, 2018 15:43:00 GMT
Seems there has been some sort of launch today for the new safety spec on London buses that applies from next year. Tom Edwards has been at Milbrook seeing an electric bus "with added noise" so pedestrians can hear them going. That was a Wright Streetair single decker. Also a ADL MMC double deck with automatic braking system being driven at an object and it stops before colliding with it. Going to be interesting to see automatic braking works in London traffic conditions. I assume the bus will just stop and then never move again. The new buses on route 20 are going to be fun!
Meanwhile "safety campaigner" Tom Kearney is still not satisfied. What a ******* surprise!
This is all a load of needless complexity and spend. I assume buses will not be allowed out in service if any aspect of the new technology is not working so that's more performance risk for the operators to manage and more cost loaded into vehicle costs, maintenance costs and contract risk. The end result of all that will be less service operated because TfL will have to contain the cost increases by reducing service levels. That doesn't look like a win to me. The additional sounders are for electric buses (as on the BYD vehicles on the 98.) |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Oct 16, 2018 15:52:31 GMT
Not sure I quite agree it's mostly lifestyle related. It is clearly a factor *but* if services are being cut repeatedly or people lose part of a servce they used they are left with no choice to find an alternative. Also both Labour and Tory governments have switched off the "fuel duty escalator" which has massively skewed the cost of car ownership relative to public transport costs. This is a ludicrous decision from the point of view of economic rationality and the environment as it just pushes people into life long car dependency. Obviously it's pure politics because of the power of the oil and motoring lobby and not wishing to "upset" car owners but as a long term policy is it illiterate. Bus usage and the integrity of bus networks are the obvious casualty from this policy but so is air quality and congestion that affects everyone. Its only a ludicrous decision because you don't drive or own a car; but to many its not. The cost of petrol/Diesel in the UK is extortionate to many countries around the globe, before any other taxes etc are applied it is one of the cheapest shockingly. I fully disagree that bus users are the casualty from it. What makes you think most of these people would go on the bus, they probably wouldn't travel, use uber or walk.
|
|
|
|
Post by Pilot on Oct 16, 2018 16:06:22 GMT
Uber is pretty expensive to use and should never be considered as something that makes people not to use a bus imo. Uber on the other hand is good for like airport travel or something. You also can't expect people to do full grocery shopping (5-6) bags and use a bus...neither you want it as a bus driver, nor it's convenient for the passenger especially if the bus is packed. For buses to be at their peak again, I think there has to be more bus lanes in busy areas, so people get encouraged to use bus services because that's the only benefit bus provides is to skip the traffic as buses are always moving is there is a bus lane. But that will never happen imo and for that reason I'll always keep my car because routes with no bus lanes you're just a sitting duck just like the bus.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 16, 2018 16:54:45 GMT
Not sure I quite agree it's mostly lifestyle related. It is clearly a factor *but* if services are being cut repeatedly or people lose part of a servce they used they are left with no choice to find an alternative. Also both Labour and Tory governments have switched off the "fuel duty escalator" which has massively skewed the cost of car ownership relative to public transport costs. This is a ludicrous decision from the point of view of economic rationality and the environment as it just pushes people into life long car dependency. Obviously it's pure politics because of the power of the oil and motoring lobby and not wishing to "upset" car owners but as a long term policy is it illiterate. Bus usage and the integrity of bus networks are the obvious casualty from this policy but so is air quality and congestion that affects everyone. Its only a ludicrous decision because you don't drive or own a car; but to many its not. The cost of petrol/Diesel in the UK is extortionate to many countries around the globe, before any other taxes etc are applied it is one of the cheapest shockingly. I fully disagree that bus users are the casualty from it. What makes you think most of these people would go on the bus, they probably wouldn't travel, use uber or walk.
I was talking at a broad policy level. There are enormous pressures on the government to do something about air quality. At some point the whole issue of "carbon dependency" and the impact on public health from using petrol and diesel powered vehicles is going to become a world wide scandal and political crisis. I am not saying this from some crackpot viewpoint. I am merely noting that public opinion, political priorities and legal judgements are slowly but surely heading in one direction only. If UK politicians had even half a brain they would be making some obvious investment choices now to prepare us for an inevitable future. Instead they are pursuing the same old worn out policies that have not worked since the 1950s. None of this is to do with whether I own a car or not. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Oct 16, 2018 17:01:05 GMT
Its only a ludicrous decision because you don't drive or own a car; but to many its not. The cost of petrol/Diesel in the UK is extortionate to many countries around the globe, before any other taxes etc are applied it is one of the cheapest shockingly. I fully disagree that bus users are the casualty from it. What makes you think most of these people would go on the bus, they probably wouldn't travel, use uber or walk.
I was talking at a broad policy level. There are enormous pressures on the government to do something about air quality. At some point the whole issue of "carbon dependency" and the impact on public health from using petrol and diesel powered vehicles is going to become a world wide scandal and political crisis. I am not saying this from some crackpot viewpoint. I am merely noting that public opinion, political priorities and legal judgements are slowly but surely heading in one direction only. If UK politicians had even half a brain they would be making some obvious investment choices now to prepare us for an inevitable future. Instead they are pursuing the same old worn out policies that have not worked since the 1950s. None of this is to do with whether I own a car or not. Vehicle emissions at Euro6 are negligible to what they were 20 years ago .... and engines more efficient .... can't you see that if vehicles were the main source of pollutants, pollution would have greatly reduced .... but no this conspiracy theory is promoted so that the motorist can be taxed incessantly by both local and national governments around the world .... |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Oct 16, 2018 17:03:08 GMT
Seems there has been some sort of launch today for the new safety spec on London buses that applies from next year. Tom Edwards has been at Milbrook seeing an electric bus "with added noise" so pedestrians can hear them going. That was a Wright Streetair single decker. Also a ADL MMC double deck with automatic braking system being driven at an object and it stops before colliding with it. Going to be interesting to see automatic braking works in London traffic conditions. I assume the bus will just stop and then never move again. The new buses on route 20 are going to be fun!
Meanwhile "safety campaigner" Tom Kearney is still not satisfied. What a ******* surprise!
This is all a load of needless complexity and spend. I assume buses will not be allowed out in service if any aspect of the new technology is not working so that's more performance risk for the operators to manage and more cost loaded into vehicle costs, maintenance costs and contract risk. The end result of all that will be less service operated because TfL will have to contain the cost increases by reducing service levels. That doesn't look like a win to me. The additional sounders are for electric buses (as on the BYD vehicles on the 98.) Actually it looks like might also include the hybrids with silent start ( see document I linked in intelligent speed trials thread) this afternoon. Some bits are sensible such as removing protruding wing mirrors, and soft padding the hard spindles of wiper blades. I am sure I read somewhere that all the serious and fatal pedestrian collisions occurred where Kearns were removed or road surface raised as cushion as it caused confusion |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Oct 16, 2018 20:21:15 GMT
But the current system is driving people away from buses ... do you think a system that actively encourages and finacially benefits companies to pad out services to run excessively slowly is the right way to go ... customer numbers suggest not! I dont mind waiting for a bus ... it is accepted ... but being deliberated delayed is unacceptable in my eyes. The few weeks ago, I was on a bus and needed to make a connection. My bus was due 2 minutes before my connecting bus. 3 stops away we were regulated and arrived to see my connecting bus pull away as I arrived ... had to wait 20 mins for next one ... so delayed by 23 minutes. Since then I have driven when making that journey, as I do not appreciate my time being wasted, and driving takes less time than that time that was needlessly wasted. As passengers, why should we care about commercial bonuses or fines? We just want to feel our journey does matter. The current system just peees them off! In retail the most important customer is the one you are dealing with ... a lesson London Bus operators and TfL could learn from. Exactly, TfL seem to have become so transfixed with hitting the right targets and ticking the right boxes that the whole purpose of running buses in the first place seems to have been completely overlooked. I use Brighton & Hove buses quite regularly and they don't get delayed in order to regulate the service and they don't change destination mid route, late running is sorted out when the bus reaches its destination usually by sending it out of service to a point further along the route where they will be back on time.I know I don't always (or even often  ) agree with your posts, but I concur that regulation of the service mid-route should only occur in rare, exceptional cases and short turning in those circumstances should also be far less prevalent than now. After all, TfL have long believed that passengers aren't able to understand SCHEDULED short workings, any more than with suffixed route numbers, so let's have some consistency! |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Oct 17, 2018 15:04:47 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Oct 17, 2018 16:00:14 GMT
30 minutes to get from Oxford Circus to TCR on a 25. Such is the congestion right now!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 17, 2018 18:28:53 GMT
One thing that really annoys me is that the iBus for the 79 says "79 to Edgware Station" and all the other routes which terminate in the same place simply say "x to Edgware". Why would they have changed the 79 but not the other routes..?
|
|
|
|
Post by rambo on Oct 17, 2018 19:31:52 GMT
Alexander Dennis are now introducing the Smart Vision camera feature for the Enviro range in place of regular rear view mirrors. I'm presuming the features are optional but i wouldn't be surprised if it's trialled out with at least one London operator. youtu.be/VU9vXw2b5g02 big blind spots there! These will last 5 minutes, what happens when camera lenses get dirty or a monitor packs up? |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Oct 17, 2018 19:53:23 GMT
Alexander Dennis are now introducing the Smart Vision camera feature for the Enviro range in place of regular rear view mirrors. I'm presuming the features are optional but i wouldn't be surprised if it's trialled out with at least one London operator. youtu.be/VU9vXw2b5g02 big blind spots there! These will last 5 minutes, what happens when camera lenses get dirty or a monitor packs up? If the monitor packs up the bus goes no further. I've seen this idea mooted before and it will probably catch on sooner or later, no more broken mirrors. |
|
) agree with your posts, but I concur that regulation of the service mid-route should only occur in rare, exceptional cases and short turning in those circumstances should also be far less prevalent than now. After all, TfL have long believed that passengers aren't able to understand SCHEDULED short workings, any more than with suffixed route numbers, so let's have some consistency!