London Buses Discussion

[bakerstreet]

The proposed cuts to bus services in London will only lead to savings of £35 million per year for TfL, it has been revealed.

This figure surprised me.

The upheaval to savings ratio seems somewhat skewed towards upheaval.

The TfL savings goal is well over £700m.

Is there a better way of bus reorganisation which would lead to less upheaval and more savings?

 

[Busaholic]

This figure surprised me.

The upheaval to savings ratio seems somewhat skewed towards upheaval.

The TfL savings goal is well over £700m.

Is there a better way of bus reorganisation which would lead to less upheaval and more savings?

I'd have thought that a reduction in PVR on many of the existing routes featured in the consultation, by a combination of slightly widened headways and some reductions in running time, coupled with significantly widened headways in evenings and (in some cases) Sundays could produce much the same savings. If TfL came to the heretical conclusion that some routes didn't need a full headway over the full extent of the route 24/7 even more could be 'saved' without the self-inflicted sabotage that is being threatened.

 

[Snow1964]

This figure surprised me.

The upheaval to savings ratio seems somewhat skewed towards upheaval.

The TfL savings goal is well over £700m.

Is there a better way of bus reorganisation which would lead to less upheaval and more savings?

One of the big costs of the current bus operation is that TfL have tried to simplify everything regardless of cost.

Running peak hour frequency for many hours, not thinning the between peaks to allow breaks and lunch, no short workings even if a route is only busy at one end, no short runs to garage so there are lots of dead runs, excessive evening frequency to copy daytime frequency, buses that continue to about 1am. Sunday (apart from shopping hours) frequency that is excessive. All examples of why the bus network in current form loses £2.5m per day.

The effect is lot of dead cost, running many buses with just handful of passengers. To put it bluntly mainly carrying fresh air.

Then things that are not cheap to operate, such as night buses are run at standard (not premium) fares, and often within the previous days fare cap, so bring in no revenue.

The TfL Finance papers (before the format was simplified) used to give the average fare yield, it was something like 71p simply because so many fares were either freebies or part of a capped or hopper fare. They might claim fares are £1.65, but in reality are less than half that.

 

[Snow1964]

Go Ahead have put the first few of their pantograph equipped BYD E400 electric buses in service today.

per London vehicle finder, EP1, EP3, EP4 have been used so far.
(you need to register to see the history)

London Vehicle Finder

Search current and historic bus routes and locations in London, Reading, Edinburgh. Created to help photographers track down ellusive vehicles.

lvf.io

 

[londonbridge]

Couple of things to mention, firstly today I was surprised to see an old Routemaster heading through Wallington with destination and number blinds of 164 and Tooting Broadway….. no passengers on board, no idea if it was some sort of heritage trip or was en route to a function for private hire use, etc, but I don’t remember the 164 running to Tooting Broadway?

Secondly yesterday I got on a bus at lunchtime, packed full of school kids (no idea why they were out from school so early as I thought they didn’t break up for another couple of weeks). Three of them were standing on the stairs completely ignoring the driver and there were ibus announcements of “no standing on the upper deck or stairs” and the driver taking no other action to remove them from the stairs. I've recently also seen dogs downstairs, and in one case sprawled across two seats (I thought the rules were dogs not allowed on seats and should be upstairs on double deckers unless the driver allows a small dog to be carried downstairs). There was also a guy getting on and his oyster or bank card was failing to work; he had four goes at it with two different cards before the driver just waved him on and gave him a free ride. I'm just getting a bit irritated at some drivers seemingly not bothering to follow the rules (not saying I expect the rules to be followed to the letter though).

 

[Busaholic]

Couple of things to mention, firstly today I was surprised to see an old Routemaster heading through Wallington with destination and number blinds of 164 and Tooting Broadway….. no passengers on board, no idea if it was some sort of heritage trip or was en route to a function for private hire use, etc, but I don’t remember the 164 running to Tooting Broadway?

Secondly yesterday I got on a bus at lunchtime, packed full of school kids (no idea why they were out from school so early as I thought they didn’t break up for another couple of weeks). Three of them were standing on the stairs completely ignoring the driver and there were ibus announcements of “no standing on the upper deck or stairs” and the driver taking no other action to remove them from the stairs. I've recently also seen dogs downstairs, and in one case sprawled across two seats (I thought the rules were dogs not allowed on seats and should be upstairs on double deckers unless the driver allows a small dog to be carried downstairs). There was also a guy getting on and his oyster or bank card was failing to work; he had four goes at it with two different cards before the driver just waved him on and gave him a free ride. I'm just getting a bit irritated at some drivers seemingly not bothering to follow the rules (not saying I expect the rules to be followed to the letter though).

Routemaster buses are out and about somewhere in London almost every day of the year, though almost never in public service. You are right in thinking the 164 has never reached Tooting Broadway, but it's quite common that blinds are not synchronised to show precisely accurate routes. Sometimes it's a foible of the blind setter to show a combination they have fantasised about.

Regarding dogs on London buses, there is no requirement to take them upstairs, and to do so might cause more accidents than already happen. They are not allowed on seats, but neither are people's shoes!

 

[londonbridge]

Maybe not now, but I clearly remember the posters on buses that said “dogs travel free, and are carried at the discretion of the driver or conductor. On double deck buses they normally travel upstairs, but in special circumstances the driver or conductor may allow a small dog to be carried downstairs. They are not allowed on seats and must be kept under control at all times” (not an exact quote, but best I can recall).

 

[MotCO]

One of the big costs of the current bus operation is that TfL have tried to simplify everything regardless of cost.

Running peak hour frequency for many hours, not thinning the between peaks to allow breaks and lunch, no short workings even if a route is only busy at one end, no short runs to garage so there are lots of dead runs, excessive evening frequency to copy daytime frequency, buses that continue to about 1am. Sunday (apart from shopping hours) frequency that is excessive. All examples of why the bus network in current form loses £2.5m per day.

The effect is lot of dead cost, running many buses with just handful of passengers. To put it bluntly mainly carrying fresh air.

Then things that are not cheap to operate, such as night buses are run at standard (not premium) fares, and often within the previous days fare cap, so bring in no revenue.

The TfL Finance papers (before the format was simplified) used to give the average fare yield, it was something like 71p simply because so many fares were either freebies or part of a capped or hopper fare. They might claim fares are £1.65, but in reality are less than half that.

I agree with the above, and can suggest some more:

• Reduce dead mileage by joint operation of some routes, where one operator is based at one end of the route and another operator at the other end.
• Revise free travel for under 16s so that only travel to and from school is covered.
• Charge a small sum for each journey by passengers using 'free passes'. Even 10p would generate a lot of income.
• Co-ordinated procurement for diesel, tyres, spare parts etc to aid the smaller operators who may not have the buying clout of the big operators.

 

[Simon75]

Maybe not now, but I clearly remember the posters on buses that said “dogs travel free, and are carried at the discretion of the driver or conductor. On double deck buses they normally travel upstairs, but in special circumstances the driver or conductor may allow a small dog to be carried downstairs. They are not allowed on seats and must be kept under control at all times” (not an exact quote, but best I can recall).

Some operators outside London charge for dogs, TFL could make some extra money in charging

 

[markymark2000]

I agree with the above, and can suggest some more:

• Reduce dead mileage by joint operation of some routes, where one operator is based at one end of the route and another operator at the other end.

This wouldn't work on most routes due to the headways. The company controller keeps an even headway and so two firms would need a more joint control. On timetabled routes where it is schools linked to a peak bus, this could work but I think would be more hassle than it's worth to do a complete 1/2 and 1/2.
An area which could be exploited though is tendering daytime and night trips separately (even when they come under the same route number). The smaller firms don't like night routes and so if they could bid separately, that would help the smaller firms and save it being an 'all or nothing' situation.

• Revise free travel for under 16s so that only travel to and from school is covered.

Agreed. Free travel needs to be more in line with elsewhere in the UK. I think free travel is given away like sweets. I think the logic is if they give free travel to young people, the hope is to win their votes when they become eligable (Like a 'look at all that we have done for you, now you help us out by voting for us').

• Co-ordinated procurement for diesel, tyres, spare parts etc to aid the smaller operators who may not have the buying clout of the big operators.

Not sure this would do a huge amount really. Otherwise you might as well scrap the normal operators and TFL run everything in house. Smaller operators can still get buying power.

 

[Deerfold]

Agreed. Free travel needs to be more in line with elsewhere in the UK. I think free travel is given away like sweets. I think the logic is if they give free travel to young people, the hope is to win their votes when they become eligable (Like a 'look at all that we have done for you, now you help us out by voting for us').

I saw it more as a way of getting young people used to using public transport, so they're more likely to use it as paying customers - for most young people there's not just one party that will have provided their free travel.

 

[FOH]

I saw it more as a way of getting young people used to using public transport, so they're more likely to use it as paying customers - for most young people there's not just one party that will have provided their free travel.

I think it's also done as an incentive to reduce car traffic for pickups and dropoffs

 

[Snow1964]

TfL have amended the bus tenders again and have now deferred route 137 to tranche 860

Route 137/N137 was scheduled to be retendered as part of Tranche 837 of the 2023 - 2024 Tendering Programme.
Although tenders for routes 53/N53 and 417 from this tranche have already been issued, the tender for route 137/N137 has been delayed. Taking account of this, route 137/N137 will now be reallocated to Tranche 860.

The revised tender programme is on the link.
As a quick reminder the previous update split it, and routes proposed for withdrawal were moved to suffix C tranches, and those with suffix A are subject to alterations in the central London review

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/uploads/forms/tendering-programme-update-july-2022.pdf

 

[MotCO]

Not sure this would do a huge amount really. Otherwise you might as well scrap the normal operators and TFL run everything in house. Smaller operators can still get buying power

Even for smaller operators like Sullivan Buses, Uno, and HCT?

 

[Busaholic]

Maybe not now, but I clearly remember the posters on buses that said “dogs travel free, and are carried at the discretion of the driver or conductor. On double deck buses they normally travel upstairs, but in special circumstances the driver or conductor may allow a small dog to be carried downstairs. They are not allowed on seats and must be kept under control at all times” (not an exact quote, but best I can recall).

You're absolutely right, and some conductors (a minority) would show that they were the boss by using these petty powers to be a little dictatorial. In the time I believe you're talking about, LT management went out of their way to avoid strife with the Transport and General Workers Union on minor matters, bearing in mind the staffing problems caused in East and West London in particular by the presence of Fords, Dagenham and Heathrow Airport respectively.

 

[markymark2000]

Even for smaller operators like Sullivan Buses, Uno, and HCT?

Uno are quite big. As are Sullivans really. Certainly not as big as the major ops but they can't be called 'small' either. Uno, they are only small when it comes to TFL routes, they have a fair size operation other than TFL routes though. Sullivan's similarly. HCT has over 130 buses.

 

[londonbridge]

Revise free travel for under 16s so that only travel to and from school is covered.

I saw it more as a way of getting young people used to using public transport, so they're more likely to use it as paying customers - for most young people there's not just one party that will have provided their free travel.

I think it's also done as an incentive to reduce car traffic for pickups and dropoffs

You’re all correct, the original argument for free travel was to reduce the amount of school run traffic and get kids into the habit of using public transport. No problem there, except there is no school run traffic outside of school hours and weekends, so why should kids be travelling free 24/7? It should be restricted to 7.00am-6.00pm on school days only. I’ve also long argued that free travel 24/7 is a contributing factor in the growing problem of obesity in kids, as they’re not going to be bothered with walking too far if they can get a bus for nothing for two or three stops. Indeed less than a year after free travel started, there was a massive publicity campaign encouraging kids to WALK to school…..

 

[AM9]

You’re all correct, the original argument for free travel was to reduce the amount of school run traffic and get kids into the habit of using public transport. No problem there, except there is no school run traffic outside of school hours and weekends, so why should kids be travelling free 24/7? It should be restricted to 7.00am-6.00pm on school days only. I’ve also long argued that free travel 24/7 is a contributing factor in the growing problem of obesity in kids, as they’re not going to be bothered with walking too far if they can get a bus for nothing for two or three stops. Indeed less than a year after free travel started, there was a massive publicity campaign encouraging kids to WALK to school…..

Getting kids into the habit of using public transport has nothing to do with whether there are 'school runs' outside of school hours or weekends. And kids using public transport has everything to do with reducing obesity, because the lack of school travel provision means they are carried around in cars. There are children who have never travelled in public (road) transport because they are take everywhere by their parents. They are, (or soon will be) the ones with obesity issues. I doubt that waiting for a bus to take them 'two or three stops' is much more likely outside school hours because of free travel.

 

[jumble]

Routemaster buses are out and about somewhere in London almost every day of the year, though almost never in public service. You are right in thinking the 164 has never reached Tooting Broadway, but it's quite common that blinds are not synchronised to show precisely accurate routes. Sometimes it's a foible of the blind setter to show a combination they have fantasised about.

Regarding dogs on London buses, there is no requirement to take them upstairs, and to do so might cause more accidents than already happen. They are not allowed on seats, but neither are people's shoes!

An exception is next Sunday
There will be routemasters on the 11 as part of Victoria Coach station 90th Birthday Year

Thames Valley & Great Western Omnibus Trust

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Jul 2022 ==

Some operators outside London charge for dogs, TFL could make some extra money in charging

I don't approve of that idea
Regards
The Spaniel

 

[Busaholic]

I don't approve of that idea
Regards
The Spaniel

Yes, it'd be very ruff...

 

[Snow1964]

GoAhead London have shared some images of its new Irizar ie tram buses for route 358 that are under construction

https://twitter.com/Go_Ahead_London?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

They are 12m single decks with pantograph opportunity charging

 

[miklcct]

You’re all correct, the original argument for free travel was to reduce the amount of school run traffic and get kids into the habit of using public transport. No problem there, except there is no school run traffic outside of school hours and weekends, so why should kids be travelling free 24/7? It should be restricted to 7.00am-6.00pm on school days only. I’ve also long argued that free travel 24/7 is a contributing factor in the growing problem of obesity in kids, as they’re not going to be bothered with walking too far if they can get a bus for nothing for two or three stops. Indeed less than a year after free travel started, there was a massive publicity campaign encouraging kids to WALK to school…..

I'm surprised that there is free travel scheme for teenagers as well. If these schemes are scrapped and replaced with half-price travel, it will be a massive revenue boost for TfL.

In Hong Kong, free travel is until 3 years old only on the railways, and up to 4 years old on buses, and half-price travel is up to 12 years old. Furthermore the elderly still need to pay a token fare before the government subsidies the rest.

We should at least scrap free travel for those over 11 here and replace it with half-price travel.

 

[MotCO]

GoAhead London have shared some images of its new Irizar ie tram buses for route 358 that are under construction

https://twitter.com/Go_Ahead_London?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

They are 12m single decks with pantograph opportunity charging

That was quick! The order has only just been announced. Maybe they can give a few lessons to Optare Switch.

 

[150249]

GoAhead London have shared some images of its new Irizar ie tram buses for route 358 that are under construction

https://twitter.com/Go_Ahead_London?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

They are 12m single decks with pantograph opportunity charging

How many have been ordered?


Is it just me or does anyone else smell another failure here?

 

[Snow1964]

How many have been ordered?


Is it just me or does anyone else smell another failure here?

I understand 20 are on order, TfL included pictures of it on the documents as part of planning applications for charging stations, 16 months ago

https://searchapplications.bromley.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=QPZZJ0BTG0X00&activeTab=summary

https://searchapplications.bromley.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=QQVDZTBTH4600&activeTab=summary

That was quick! The order has only just been announced. Maybe they can give a few lessons to Optare Switch.

If the Irizar Ie-tram was illustrated in these planning applications 16 months ago, then the order might have been 2021 (even if only announced more recently). This is an extract from planning application dated March 2021

The Route 358 is a long, busy, high frequency bus route operating entirely in the LB Bromley, between Crystal Palace and Orpington. It operates for more than 21 hours a day using 20, 12m single deck EURO VI diesel buses. The route characteristics are ideal to trial opportunity charging, and initial conversations with senior officers at LB Bromley and Councillors have indicated strong support for the trial. Go Ahead will be the operator for the trial and will deliver the infrastructure and buses on behalf of TfL. They have extensive experience with installing electrification equipment, and in operating electric buses.
The technology required to implement the trial include 20 new electric buses and a pantograph, transformer and substation at both Crystal Palace bus station and Orpington bus station.
The chosen bus design, the ‘Irizar ieTram’ (see picture below), will provide the highest specification safety standard London bus and customer experience. The pantograph and associated equipment have been designed to minimise visual impact on the local environment, remain entirely within the existing bus stations at each site, and to provide a reliable and resilient charging to the buses throughout the day.

 

[MotCO]

I understand 20 are on order, TfL included pictures of it on the documents as part of planning applications for charging stations, 16 months ago

https://searchapplications.bromley.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=QPZZJ0BTG0X00&activeTab=summary

https://searchapplications.bromley.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=QQVDZTBTH4600&activeTab=summary

If the Irizar Ie-tram was illustrated in these planning applications 16 months ago, then the order might have been 2021 (even if only announced more recently). This is an extract from planning application dated March 2021

I think it was planned to buy le-tram sometime ago, but there were problems with planning permission for the charging gantries, so I am not sure when the order was actually placed. It certainly has only been publically announced in the last month or so.

 

[Deerfold]

I'm surprised that there is free travel scheme for teenagers as well. If these schemes are scrapped and replaced with half-price travel, it will be a massive revenue boost for TfL.

If they still travel on public transport.

In Hong Kong, free travel is until 3 years old only on the railways, and up to 4 years old on buses, and half-price travel is up to 12 years old. Furthermore the elderly still need to pay a token fare before the government subsidies the rest.

We should at least scrap free travel for those over 11 here and replace it with half-price travel.

That depends what you're trying to achieve.

Not everything has to be like Hong Kong.

 

[DaveHarries]

Link to the original GAL post: https://twitter.com/Go_Ahead_London/status/1551960536975155201
That bus is an interesting design and will probably turn a few more heads than your average Enviro400. It will be interesting to see how they fare.

Dave

 

[Deerfold]

I’ve also long argued that free travel 24/7 is a contributing factor in the growing problem of obesity in kids, as they’re not going to be bothered with walking too far if they can get a bus for nothing for two or three stops.

Is there any evidence that obesity is any worse in London's schoolchildren than in other cities?

 

[Andyh82]

The info on bus stops about the strike was a bit poor - just referring to ‘some services in West London’ or similar. Why not actually mention the service numbers that were effected?