Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
(28/03/2021 10:16)knutstransport Wrote: [ -> ]Cities like London were congested with cars and had extremely high levels of pollution, it made sense to do something to encourage people to switch to greener modes of travel.
I know people who live in Greater Manchester and who drive to work who have come unstuck when a problem has arisen meaning either their car is unavailable or they are unable to drive it and they need to look at public transport instead, only to find there isn't a suitable public transport option. I know of one person from Oldham who had to pay £25 per day in taxi fares (and hoping his insurer would refund it) after someone hit him on his motorbike and he had no motorbike to ride and even if he had been provided a courtesy one he wouldn't have been able to ride it. Not everyone works in the city centre so the trams every few minutes couldn't get him to work.
I'm not sure I understand your office workers subsiding pubs statement, given that many pubs benefit from office workers going there for their lunch or after work drinks.
Agreed. Whilst manchesters linear bus&tram routes are generally frequent enough (if slow), the orbital routes, and routes radial to secondary centres usually aren’t enough to offer a good alternative to the car if you can’t make the journey without changing.
A good example is that my radial route is changing its hourly evening service by 20-25 minutes in April. It currently times well with 3 of the 4 secondary routes that cross it. . After the change it only links with the the one it currently doesn’t interline with
(28/03/2021 10:16)knutstransport Wrote: [ -> ]Cities like London were congested with cars and had extremely high levels of pollution, it made sense to do something to encourage people to switch to greener modes of travel.
I know people who live in Greater Manchester and who drive to work who have come unstuck when a problem has arisen meaning either their car is unavailable or they are unable to drive it and they need to look at public transport instead, only to find there isn't a suitable public transport option. I know of one person from Oldham who had to pay £25 per day in taxi fares (and hoping his insurer would refund it) after someone hit him on his motorbike and he had no motorbike to ride and even if he had been provided a courtesy one he wouldn't have been able to ride it. Not everyone works in the city centre so the trams every few minutes couldn't get him to work.
I'm not sure I understand your office workers subsiding pubs statement, given that many pubs benefit from office workers going there for their lunch or after work drinks.
Agreed. Whilst manchesters linear bus&tram routes are generally frequent enough (if slow), the orbital routes, and routes radial to secondary centres usually aren’t enough to offer a good alternative to the car if you can’t make the journey without changing.
A good example is that my radial route is changing its hourly evening service by 20-25 minutes in April. It currently times well with 3 of the 4 secondary routes that cross it. . After the change it only links with the the one it currently doesn’t interline with
(28/03/2021 14:27)djb Wrote: [ -> ]A good example is that my radial route is changing its hourly evening service by 20-25 minutes in April. It currently times well with 3 of the 4 secondary routes that cross it. . After the change it only links with the the one it currently doesn’t interline with
This seems to be an argument
for an integrated public transport service where operators are compelled to provide coordinated routes rather than simply work in isolation.
(29/03/2021 15:35)Barney Wrote: [ -> ]This seems to be an argument for an integrated public transport service where operators are compelled to provide coordinated routes rather than simply work in isolation.
Have you looked or ever used the subsidised network in GM?? If anything TFGM seem to purposely plan subsidised services not to interwork with other services at night effectively to put people off using them.
A few years ago a late night subsidised evening service was retimed from 15 past the hour to 48 past the hour. They received many complaints from shift workers including me expressing our concern at finishing work on the hour and having to wait 50 mins for the only bus out of town. They didn’t want to know so the service went from carrying a good 20 shift workers everynight to running empty. How did them shift workers get home...... in their own cars.
(29/03/2021 15:35)Barney Wrote: [ -> ]This seems to be an argument for an integrated public transport service where operators are compelled to provide coordinated routes rather than simply work in isolation.
It is. I’m agreeing with their comments about the person from oldham who can’t get to work without private transport as they don’t travel radially into manchester.
Although I should point out that in the evening all the services involved in my point are subsidised already.
I had issues when I worked at Trafford Centre and M.M.U
When I was at the Trafford centre I had allow 2 hour travel time from Oldham due to lack of options when it would probably only take 30 minutes in the car.
I had to get the tram to Trafford Bar then 250 to Trafford Centre or Tram to Victoria then 100. I used to finish at 8pm and didn't get home until turned 10.
When I worked at Co-op Oxford Road at the Uni I had to be up at 3.30 am for 5.30/6am start so I could get the 83 and 250/86 e.t.c but back in 1986 I could have simply gotten the 82 Waterhead to Chorlton bus straight there every day I do hope they bring that service as it would provide a great alternative to the tram if that fails.
also another route suggestion is a Bury - F.G.H - Roch Vale - Kirkholt - Royton - R.O.H - Oldham to restore a much needed Bury service to Oldham. whislt making it easier for people from Oldham to access Fairfield Hospital
There is an article in the paper today stating that TFL will require massive subsidies to keep going as passenger numbers in London will fall by 20-40% from pre-pandemic levels. This is because of changing work patterns so, assuming that Manchester is in the same situation, then franchising costs will also go through the roof without any benefits as most suggested ones are pie in the sky.
Whilst this is still all speculation, bus usage during lockdown has still been busy especially during peak times due to keyworkers (education, construction and health staff) and pupils depending on bus services where there are no other viable options (no Metrolink / Rail or access to personal car).
One thing I do hope from post-pandemic is that general car usage drops (especially during peak) so that traffic decreases. This would help to have faster services that would both be more appealing and cost less.
From a financial perspective (despite the main goal of franchising to provide a better service for the general public) if the profits made from busier routes are used to help subsidise quieter routes then it is achieving it's goal of being better value than what is already offered. Companies are happily able to run frequent and high demand in the daytime and make substantial profit, but are much more reluctant to use that to run it in the evening expecting TfGM to pay them through the tendering process.
(30/03/2021 22:00)dounowhoiam Wrote: [ -> ]Whilst this is still all speculation, bus usage during lockdown has still been busy especially during peak times due to keyworkers (education, construction and health staff) and pupils depending on bus services where there are no other viable options (no Metrolink / Rail or access to personal car).
One thing I do hope from post-pandemic is that general car usage drops (especially during peak) so that traffic decreases. This would help to have faster services that would both be more appealing and cost less.
From a financial perspective (despite the main goal of franchising to provide a better service for the general public) if the profits made from busier routes are used to help subsidise quieter routes then it is achieving it's goal of being better value than what is already offered. Companies are happily able to run frequent and high demand in the daytime and make substantial profit, but are much more reluctant to use that to run it in the evening expecting TfGM to pay them through the tendering process.
As a bus driver in Manchester in Manchester I’d disagree completely with your comments above. Bus usage levels have varied but they haven’t been anything like what they were pre covid. During the initial lockdown it was actually quite scary how quiet evening peak journeys were. Yes numbers have increased slightly but I’d say they are no where near what they were before the pandemic and I honestly think they will take a long time to get any where near what they once were.
Private used car sales are up. The value of second hand cars is up because of demand and car dealerships despite being closed for 60% of the lockdown have also reported a surge in sales. Peoples patterns have changed. Shoppers now shop on line, keyworkers who once used public transport now drive to and from work and city centre office workers now work from home using WiFi and zoom etc.
There’s never going to be a day when we are told it’s suddenly safe to go about business as normal and people are unlikely to fall back into old ways. Yes patronage will rise again but I don’t think you can ever truly repair the damage that’s been done.
(30/03/2021 22:00)dounowhoiam Wrote: [ -> ]From a financial perspective (despite the main goal of franchising to provide a better service for the general public) if the profits made from busier routes are used to help subsidise quieter routes then it is achieving it's goal of being better value than what is already offered. Companies are happily able to run frequent and high demand in the daytime and make substantial profit, but are much more reluctant to use that to run it in the evening expecting TfGM to pay them through the tendering process.
I think this logic is great but what I think is being missed out here is that in London a tender can be 2-4x the cost of an equivalent tender in Manchester. I know that London does have a number of extra costs involved but TFGM may well want those extra costs put in (the centre comm system and driver radio people for example in London requires more staff than the current, a bit more limited service offered in Manchester. London operators lease buses due to the requirements and limited use once London life is done. Operators in London are also very limited in terms of interworking so a lot of dead millage. You get the idea, there are extra costs in London but if TFGM aspire to be TFL, those costs could end up here too.
Companies basically get a bit greedy when they know that money is more guaranteed and they know TFL has large pockets so they kind of milk that. Purely to show the extent of this. Outside of London, companies seem to be wanting £100-£150k per bus, per year and the tender prices seem to reflect that. In London, a 1 bus service in Bromley had the lowest complaint bid at £475k. In the end, it was awarded in a group tender for £258k Still way over what a company would want for the same tender outside of London.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10