![]() |
Local/Express bus routes
"Sky Fly" wrote in message
... Here's an idea I thought about to improve bus services in London. Instead of having all bus routes serve all bus stops in London, there would be a division of bus routes into 'local' and 'express' bus routes. A problem (perhaps a show stopper) is that most bus lanes do not allow buses to overtake stopped buses. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Local/Express bus routes
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... "Sky Fly" wrote in message ... Here's an idea I thought about to improve bus services in London. Instead of having all bus routes serve all bus stops in London, there would be a division of bus routes into 'local' and 'express' bus routes. A problem (perhaps a show stopper) is that most bus lanes do not allow buses to overtake stopped buses. What if the express buses took the bus lane but moved out into main traffic once approaching a bus stop with stopped buses? |
Local/Express bus routes
"Sky Fly" wrote in message
... "John Rowland" wrote in message ... A problem (perhaps a show stopper) is that most bus lanes do not allow Er, I meant enable buses to overtake stopped buses. What if the express buses took the bus lane but moved out into main traffic once approaching a bus stop with stopped buses? By the time the adjacent queue of cars had moved enough for the express bus to get through, the stopped bus would have pulled away and so would remain ahead of the express bus. Repeat procedure at every stop until bus lane ends. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Local/Express bus routes
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 11:31:50 +0100, "Sky Fly"
wrote: Here's an idea I thought about to improve bus services in London. Instead of having all bus routes serve all bus stops in London, there would be a division of bus routes into 'local' and 'express' bus routes. Local routes would serve all currently designated bus stops, but their range would be limited so that no journey was longer than 5 miles. This would be to improve reliability - the longer a bus route, the greater the chance that 'bunching' will happen and the more the timetable is thrown out of whack. Express routes would serve specially designated stops (which would be at major town centres - as an example, the 109 which currently runs from Brixton to Croydon might stop at Brixton, Streatham, Norbury, Thornton Heath and Croydon). The routes would be longer distance routes, because the limited stops would mean that the journey would be a lot faster. Any comments? I have long been a fan of such an idea. This is borne out of experience of express routes running in the old Met county areas like Tyne and Wear and West Yorkshire where a multi centred conurbation can support such services. The other key example which works well is Hong Kong which has a hierarchical bus service network. The really big issues for a London express network are (IMO) a) ensuring sufficiently quick journeys to make the services attractive in their own right. b) ensuring they can operate reliably. c) how to deal with the very strong competition provided by the rail and tube network. One of the main reasons why such routes don't exist is that they fail the "value for money" test when you look at the density and capacity of the rail network in Greater London. I appreciate that peak capacity is a big problem on much of the rail network but just running express buses at that time just pushes up the peak time costs of the transport network as a whole. d) how you structure the network to balance journey objectives (which are densely clustered in London) against quick journey time. There is no point in providing express buses that don't take people where they want to go but which are also slow! In Hong Kong there are quite long distances between parts of the territory and a good but limited rail network. There is a distinct price difference between modes. The bus network is subject to government control via a franchising process and limits on the total number of buses in the company fleets. Hong Kong therefore has feeder buses to the rail network, local routes serving all stops, a layer of express routes which will link say Hong Kong Island and the New Territories plus supplemental peak journeys that link big housing developments with key employment centres. This structure tends to work very well but there is a huge public transport market which can sustain high demand all day every day - the lack of access to cars being the big difference to London. I would certainly like to see some additional radial express routes but I think the key gap that does need to be tackled is orbital travel. There are only a few routes that try to do such journeys and they are not very quick - just look at the level of private transport on the same routes e.g. A406. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Local/Express bus routes
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:26:14 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote:
c) how to deal with the very strong competition provided by the rail and tube network. The answer is that they should not. Why? Well, what's the point in running parallel with railway lines, except where necessary to get beyond the railway line? In fact, I'd propose the best solution for the latter would be to run an express service from the end of the railway line to the ultimate destination. Express bus services are really best filling in where the railway does not serve. That said, Hamburg[1] takes a different approach; direct, express buses to and from the city centre do duplicate some railway lines, but at a supplementary fare of (I think) EUR 1. They are provided with high-quality, low-density seating and are treated as "first class". [1] Yes, I mention it a lot - but I feel it has one of the best practical examples of a properly-run public transport network including most modes (though admittedly not trams) and is a fine example to Britain. It's also one I had the chance to use over a period of 9 months, which is enough to get a decent impression of its strengths and weaknesses. Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK Mail me on neil at the above domain; mail to the above address is NOT read |
Local/Express bus routes
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Neil Williams wrote:
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 18:26:14 +0100, Paul Corfield wrote: c) how to deal with the very strong competition provided by the rail and tube network. The answer is that they should not. Why? Well, what's the point in running parallel with railway lines, except where necessary to get beyond the railway line? Hear hear. That said, Hamburg[1] takes a different approach; direct, express buses to and from the city centre do duplicate some railway lines, but at a supplementary fare of (I think) EUR 1. They are provided with high-quality, low-density seating and are treated as "first class". What do you mean by a 'supplementary fare'? You mean that the duplicating buses are more expensive than standard buses? But are thus still cheaper than the train, while being as nice and not a lot slower? [1] Yes, I mention it a lot No need to apologise - i think we're all fairly open-minded here. but I feel it has one of the best practical examples of a properly-run public transport network including most modes (though admittedly not trams) and is a fine example to Britain. Although it remains true that they do not like it up them. tom -- Throw bricks at lawyers if you can! |
Local/Express bus routes
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Tue, 6 Apr 2004 11:31:50 +0100, "Sky Fly" wrote: Here's an idea I thought about to improve bus services in London. Instead of having all bus routes serve all bus stops in London, there would be a division of bus routes into 'local' and 'express' bus routes. I have long been a fan of such an idea. This is borne out of experience of express routes running in the old Met county areas like Tyne and Wear and West Yorkshire where a multi centred conurbation can support such services. The other key example which works well is Hong Kong which has a hierarchical bus service network. Vancouver has something similar as well - they have a mesh of local bus services, and for rapid transit, they have two light rail lines serving the middle-southwest part of the city, plus three express bus routes, the B-Lines, in the other areas. they run articulated buses, have few stops, and get you around fast. i think they're equivalent to normal buses in terms of fares etc. tom -- Throw bricks at lawyers if you can! |
Local/Express bus routes
On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 20:54:56 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote:
What do you mean by a 'supplementary fare'? You mean that the duplicating buses are more expensive than standard buses? But are thus still cheaper than the train, while being as nice and not a lot slower? No, they are more comfortable than the train, and more expensive (EUR1 or so on top of the standard fare). The idea is that they save you having to change, but you are charged for the privilege, mainly because of the limited capacity. They aren't always that quick. It's worth bearing in mind that the number of bus routes entering central Hamburg can probably be counted on the fingers of both hands. The public transport system is geared up such that buses mainly provide links from non-rail-served locations to the nearest rail station, as well as quieter circumferential routes, with the Schnellbusse (express) and Nachtbusse (night) being a separate, largely radial network "on top" of the rail network. This supplement is also charged for night buses. The difference in bus and train fares seems to be a British thing - in the German Verkehrsverbuende (like TfL or the PTEs) there is no differential - your ticket is valid for a through journey, with connections if desired, on any or all of the available modes of transport. There isn't a "train fare" or a "bus fare", just a "public transport fare". Neil -- Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK Mail me on neil at the above domain; mail to the above address is NOT read |
Local/Express bus routes
"John Rowland" wrote in message ... "Sky Fly" wrote in message ... "John Rowland" wrote in message ... A problem (perhaps a show stopper) is that most bus lanes do not allow Er, I meant enable buses to overtake stopped buses. What if the express buses took the bus lane but moved out into main traffic once approaching a bus stop with stopped buses? By the time the adjacent queue of cars had moved enough for the express bus to get through, the stopped bus would have pulled away and so would remain ahead of the express bus. Repeat procedure at every stop until bus lane ends. Ah, I see what you mean. I guess it would be up to the judgment of the express bus driver as to whether to use the bus lane or not, depending on the volume of traffic. This means that there are times when the express bus would be faster than regular traffic but just as fast as local buses (when there's a lot of traffic on the road) and there are times when it would be faster than the local buses but slightly slower than regular traffic (when there's not so much traffic on the road). I don't think this is too bad. Hopefully, the express bus driver would also be anticipating well ahead of time whether there were buses stopped at a bus stop ahead. This would mean that the express bus would have enough time to merge with the main lane if it was possible and keep on moving, so maybe the scenario you describe wouldn't happen all the time. -- Akin aknak at aksoto dot idps dot co dot uk |
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk