Things which cause bus boarding/alighting to be slower now than 40 years ago.

[The exile]

The PisaMover was a standard vehicle and arguably, if you have such a small vehicle and a small capacity (30 passengers max) then how busy/troublesome are any conflicting flows? That's the point!

Now watch 20-25 people all with hold luggage and/or small children (hence not saying 30 people) get off a single door bus and note the time it takes until the last person has alighted. An airport shuttle service (particularly a slower bus replacing a dedicated transit) is time critical. I agree that it is odd that anyone would manufacture a small bus with dual doors, but the service it was running seems about the only niche where it makes sense.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Now watch 20-25 people all with hold luggage and/or small children (hence not saying 30 people) get off a single door bus and note the time it takes until the last person has alighted. An airport shuttle service (particularly a slower bus replacing a dedicated transit) is time critical. I agree that it is odd that anyone would manufacture a small bus with dual doors, but the service it was running seems about the only niche where it makes sense.

I did - I travelled on it

To be honest, the extra 30 seconds that it may have taken with a single door wasn't probably the issue that exercised my mind but the fact that there was no luggage storage and very few seats for a 20 minute journey.

 

[The exile]

I did - I travelled on it

To be honest, the extra 30 seconds that it may have taken with a single door wasn't probably the issue that exercised my mind but the fact that there was no luggage storage and very few seats for a 20 minute journey.

So is the Pisamover out of action again? Italy seems to like radical but technically-challenged airport shuttle systems!

 

[mayneway]

As a driver in Manchester the things that slow things down the most I’ve listed below:

TFGM’s insistence to block any bank card that’s previously been declined, resulting in angry passenger logging into online banking and arguing that there’s money in the account.

People paying with phones/smart watches - so much slower than using a bank card.

Elderly and infirm getting on and either insisting on putting their pass away while stood blocking the area around the cab or then trying to get an uncreased copy of the metro.

People that board then stand searching pockets and huge bags trying to find pass or ticket.


Just as a side note I’ve seen a few comments at the start of the tread about people waiting till the bus stops before getting up. That’s fine with me but why go upstairs and sit right at the back of the bus? If balance or simply walking on a moving vehicle is a problem sit downstairs towards the front.

 

[BuhSnarf]

Elderly and infirm getting on and either insisting on putting their pass away while stood blocking the area around the cab or then trying to get an uncreased copy of the metro.

I love this comment about the uncreased Metro. I see this so often, usuaully by getting their uncreased copy they manage to crease up and damage the top 10 copies. Surely you can still read the words on the creased copy?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

So is the Pisamover out of action again? Italy seems to like radical but technically-challenged airport shuttle systems!

This photo was 2015 so it was in the midst of being constructed IIRC. I was also struck by the curiousness/cuteness of the gazebo

Pisa - lovely place to depart from. Aside from one wonky tower next to church.... I digress!

 

[Dwarfer1979]

As a driver in Manchester the things that slow things down the most I’ve listed below:

TFGM’s insistence to block any bank card that’s previously been declined, resulting in angry passenger logging into online banking and arguing that there’s money in the account.

That isn't a TfGM thing, that is a banking thing - we have the same issue everywhere it is just some areas suffer more than others and, of course, if you are buying more expensive season tickets it is more common than someone buying single tickets but we do get people not having enough money to pay £3 fares. The issue is that to speed the payment process bus ticket machines don't process the payments on boarding (as shops do, checking that the money is available before approving the transaction) with the payments being grouped and downloaded to the banking system during the day when it has a good enough connection. If the payment request is refused, either due to insufficient funds or other reasons (occasionally it can flag as fraud though that is rare for on bus sales), the card is blocked. The banking system will retry to get that money occasionally over the next day or so and then less frequently after this. When a card that has been blocked is presented to the ticket machine again later this will activate another attempt to get payment, once it goes through the card is unblocked and then can be used again though that takes several minutes.

The only way to avoid these issues is not accepting card payments at all but then you back to cash only and the delays with change giving and the like instead.

 

[TheSel]

...

The only way to avoid these issues is not accepting card payments at all but then you back to cash only and the delays with change giving and the like instead.

With respect, that's not the only way. You could make all bus services free to use. Problem solved. Oh - and as a bonus, it immediately reduces to zero the amount of revenue lost to fares evasion.

(Cue someone complaining that such a move would devalue the ENCTS pass, so is discriminatory against the elderly and diasbled who currently benefit from this scheme )

 

[ox_chap]

Here in Oxford, there is a large range of single bus tickets in the £2-£3 range. So when the cap changed to £3, suddenly, if using tap-on, tap-off, it was worth tapping off. And this noticeably slowed things down.

But come the 1st January 2027, I reckon things will speed up a bit. Because if you tap on, it's not worth faffing tapping off, because your fare will be two pounds wherever you get off.

 

[The exile]

This photo was 2015 so it was in the midst of being constructed IIRC. I was also struck by the curiousness/cuteness of the gazebo

Pisa - lovely place to depart from. Aside from one wonky tower next to church.... I digress!

Woukd agree - though their totally illegible (because no ink) exit stamp caused no end of explaining for the best part of a year…

 

[U-Bahnfreund]

It's about revenue risk as @izvor states.

I don't know the figures for fare evasion in mainland Europe (and suspect it varies markedly from place to place) but in short, if you're a contractor to the local authority, you don't have to worry about fare evasion. You just run the service as contracted and get paid accordingly. For most routes in the UK, that revenue risk sits with the operator - lose the fare, lose the cash.

This isn't true for Germany at least: many bus routes are actually operated on a for-profit basis without public subsidies. Less so in urban areas, but more interurban and regional buses, at least in former West Germany (due to their history, East German bus operations were of course structured differently). And even then I can't remember seeing any bus in Germany bigger than a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter, that has one door only (and even those sometimes have two).

 

[The exile]

This isn't true for Germany at least: many bus routes are actually operated on a for-profit basis without public subsidies. Less so in urban areas, but more interurban and regional buses, at least in former West Germany (due to their history, East German bus operations were of course structured differently). And even then I can't remember seeing any bus in Germany bigger than a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter, that has one door only (and even those sometimes have two).

Really - how does that work with acceptance of Verbundtarife etc?

 

[U-Bahnfreund]

Really - how does that work with acceptance of Verbundtarife etc?

There are complex calculations where the Verkehrsverbünde refund the difference between the Verbund price and the commercial price of the fares paid. But it's the still case that if there's no fare paid at all, they also don't get those 'refunds', and the operators have the commercial risk. I can't find more recent numbers, but in 2021, around a third of bus mileage in the VVS (Verkehrsverbund around Stuttgart) were run commercially, for example.

 

[WelshBluebird]

I use the buses in Bristol almost daily and tbh all of what is discussed in this thread is petty negligable compared to the time wasted by poorly timed traffic lights, bad parking on narrower roads and other motorists (including sometimes other bus drivers) not letting the bus out when pulling away.

You could spend all the money in the world on double doors, implement flat fares to remove the need to tap off, have cashless / no buy on board policies etc but those aren't the major issues in my experience!

 

[johncrossley]

You could spend all the money in the world on double doors, implement flat fares to remove the need to tap off, have cashless / no buy on board policies etc but those aren't the major issues in my experience!

Nobody is pretending that dwell time is more important than general traffic delays. But even in the most congested areas you benefit from low dwell times. Where dwell times are long the bus is more likely to pick up latecomers, which delays the bus further. We can all think of times when the bus arrives on time but ends up being several minutes late due to slow boarding and more passengers arriving while tickets are being sold. Arriving at traffic lights just a few seconds later means you are delayed a full traffic signal cycle. Buses outside the UK suffer from traffic delays as well but they still see the merit of keeping dwell times low.

 

[Kaliwax]

When Arriva Yorkshire operated the tempos, you could open the doors from anywhere, and a lot of drivers tended to open the doors before they stopped and a lot of people disembarked the bus before it came to a complete stop, compared to the 57 plate Wright Commanders, where it felt a lot slower of people getting on and off the bus, as drivers had to put the handbrake on, and bus could not move until the door was completely shut, and if there was any last minute stragglers, drivers would have to start the process again.

 

[NCT]

Good lord... How many times are we going to have this discussion? I can almost predict the same arguments and from the same people.

• Europe is much better (cites random examples)
• We shouldn't have cash and fares should be managed off bus - anyone with cash is too poor and those sort of people shouldn't be encouraged
• Double deckers should be banned and we should have multi doored bendy buses with open boarding

Of course, we absolutely ignore that London bus speeds have fallen 8.3 mph because of removal of bus priority, removal of capacity for active travel (cycling, walking). Across the country, you could do a little to improve dwell times but it's not the bigger problem.

*** For those unfamiliar with the forum, these are subjects that certain posters return to with almost indecent regularity. My comments above relate to many, many posts on previous threads that have been made over several years, covering old ground with no new insight. I sincerely trust this clarifies any confusion ***

I feel you!

Of course, the usual doses of 'grass greener elsewhere' and 'back in my days' ...

We are a more safety conscious society and that's a good thing. We have a much older population so of course we'll have a greater proportion of passengers who move slowly.

I do agree there is probably an overuse of touch-screen user interfaces, and tactile is useful for things that need speed. That said, we are in a digital and cashless (yes) age. Memorising fare charts and rapid operation of coin slots were useful skills 20 years ago but I can guarantee you no trainees coming through now will have these are part of their training and for very good reasons.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

This isn't true for Germany at least: many bus routes are actually operated on a for-profit basis without public subsidies. Less so in urban areas, but more interurban and regional buses, at least in former West Germany (due to their history, East German bus operations were of course structured differently). And even then I can't remember seeing any bus in Germany bigger than a Mercedes-Benz Sprinter, that has one door only (and even those sometimes have two).

This article from Passenger Transport https://www.passengertransport.co.u...ators are,a much tighter regulatory framework suggests otherwise with this quote...

German LTAs have a large degree of freedom to design their franchises within the framework set by federal and European law. However, a typical franchising model has emerged. This involves gross-cost contracts, with the LTA setting fares and taking on the revenue risk. While franchise sizes vary greatly, the average in 2025 was 500,000 route-km per year, representing the service provided by about 10 buses. Operators are usually responsible for providing the depots, fleet and staff. Most contracts have a length of 8 to 10 years. The LTA sets the timetable for all routes, sometimes expressed as minimum frequencies throughout the day. Branding requirements range from carrying the LTA’s logo on the bus to an LTA-wide unified livery and interior design.

This model has become the norm in Germany because of the following key advantages for LTAs and operators:

• It enables a high degree of integration with local and regional rail and tram systems; timetables, tickets and branding are often co-ordinated between the different modes.
• It helps LTAs to evaluate bids in a simple, transparent manner.
• It provides a level playing field for all operators and limits the advantages of incum-bency; competing operators do not need to design timetables or have detailed knowledge of current passenger patterns.
• It removes key risks for operators, notably revenue risk.
• It is arguably SMO-friendly, as evidenced by the continuing high participation of SMOs in the German market.

That same model is also pursued in the Netherlands, and in France where we see RATPs share being reduced in the greater Paris conurbation.

Nobody is pretending that dwell time is more important than general traffic delays. But even in the most congested areas you benefit from low dwell times. Where dwell times are long the bus is more likely to pick up latecomers, which delays the bus further. We can all think of times when the bus arrives on time but ends up being several minutes late due to slow boarding and more passengers arriving while tickets are being sold. Arriving at traffic lights just a few seconds later means you are delayed a full traffic signal cycle. Buses outside the UK suffer from traffic delays as well but they still see the merit of keeping dwell times low.

Indeed but what is the real kicker in delays to UK bus operation. Given the number of people who have physical passes or use m-tickets to board, the number using cards or cash really is a minority.

I can't think of many times when buses have been delayed because of slow boarding, and many of those wouldn't be solved by changes to fare collection or vehicle design - they can't help those who haven't got their card ready or decide to ask the driver questions about the route or some other information. However, have I experienced delays from poorly parked cars and vans (hazards on whilst they attend to their own business), poor bus stop design, or a thundering lack of bus priority. Most definitely and most frequently.

When Arriva Yorkshire operated the tempos, you could open the doors from anywhere, and a lot of drivers tended to open the doors before they stopped and a lot of people disembarked the bus before it came to a complete stop, compared to the 57 plate Wright Commanders, where it felt a lot slower of people getting on and off the bus, as drivers had to put the handbrake on, and bus could not move until the door was completely shut, and if there was any last minute stragglers, drivers would have to start the process again.

I'm trying to think when interlocks were first becoming prevalent.

Certainly, the days of vehicles in service with the doors open seem a long time ago...except when I was on a Hulley's Dart a few years ago.

 

[Ballyheigue]

Significantly fewer bus stops will help a lot, people can walk more than they say. For example, you get pensioners arguing the toss in Leeds that the 62 East End Park circular is a life saver cos they can't walk back from York Road, yet these same people walk round town and down to the bus station for the 62 with heavy shopping lol, I've seen them with my own eyes. Some stops are way too close together anyway, there are 2 stops on Harrogate Road close to Harehills Lane that are way too close together (Post office/Tesco area) and there are a pair of stops on the 110 route in Lofthouse very close to each other.

 

[NCT]

As to the door argument - I do agree that larger conurbations with more complex travel patterns should probably embrace two doors.

For smaller cities (like Nottingham), the value of 4 seats exceeds that of the second door. Also saying 'thank you' to the driver as you get off the front is a proud British institution and you can lose that over my dead body.

 

[johncrossley]

Significantly fewer bus stops will help a lot, people can walk more than they say. For example, you get pensioners arguing the toss in Leeds that the 62 East End Park circular is a life saver cos they can't walk back from York Road, yet these same people walk round town and down to the bus station for the 62 with heavy shopping lol, I've seen them with my own eyes. Some stops are way too close together anyway, there are 2 stops on Harrogate Road close to Harehills Lane that are way too close together (Post office/Tesco area) and there are a pair of stops on the 110 route in Lofthouse very close to each other.

That's a good point. I believe bus stops in Britain are, on average, closer together compared to those on the mainland. In US cities they can be ridiculously close together.

 

[NCT]

Significantly fewer bus stops will help a lot, people can walk more than they say. For example, you get pensioners arguing the toss in Leeds that the 62 East End Park circular is a life saver cos they can't walk back from York Road, yet these same people walk round town and down to the bus station for the 62 with heavy shopping lol, I've seen them with my own eyes. Some stops are way too close together anyway, there are 2 stops on Harrogate Road close to Harehills Lane that are way too close together (Post office/Tesco area) and there are a pair of stops on the 110 route in Lofthouse very close to each other.

This I agree with. Bus stops shouldn't be closer than 350 metres apart. Particularly in London, bus stops can be so close together there isn't sufficient distance to overtake cyclists even if traffic condition otherwise allows.

We also have the habit of having bus stops both sides of a junction as soon as the road is wider than one lane each way. In continental Europe they don't do that despite roads and junctions typically being much bigger.

 

[johncrossley]

For smaller cities (like Nottingham), the value of 4 seats exceeds that of the second door. Also saying 'thank you' to the driver as you get off the front is a proud British institution and you can lose that over my dead body.

I'm not sure I class Nottingham as a "smaller city", at least if you count the built up area outside its absurdly tight boundaries. The Nottingham Urban Area, as defined by the Office of National Statistics (ONS), had a population of over 700,000 in 2011.

Nottingham Urban Area - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

(The ONS still hasn't advertised a corresponding figure for the 2021 Census).

This includes places like Arnold and West Bridgford which most sensible people would consider to be Nottingham.

That makes it bigger than many European cities such as Bern or Salzburg where four door trolleybuses are commonplace.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Nobody is pretending that dwell time is more important than general traffic delays. But even in the most congested areas you benefit from low dwell times. Where dwell times are long the bus is more likely to pick up latecomers, which delays the bus further. We can all think of times when the bus arrives on time but ends up being several minutes late due to slow boarding and more passengers arriving while tickets are being sold. Arriving at traffic lights just a few seconds later means you are delayed a full traffic signal cycle. Buses outside the UK suffer from traffic delays as well but they still see the merit of keeping dwell times low.

I'm not disagreeing entirely, its just you should focus on where there is the most bang for the buck. Replacing entire fleets of buses with dual door variants and the associated bus stop works needed for that is insanely expensive and that money would be better spent on say some bus segregation or bus priority junctions. Quick / cheap wins in terms of dwell times I agree should be looked at though!

 

[NCT]

I'm not sure I class Nottingham as a "smaller city", at least if you count the built up area outside its absurdly tight boundaries. The Nottingham Urban Area, as defined by the Office of National Statistics (ONS), had a population of over 700,000 in 2011.

Nottingham Urban Area - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

(The ONS still hasn't advertised a corresponding figure for the 2021 Census).

This includes places like Arnold and West Bridgford which most sensible people would consider to be Nottingham.

That makes it bigger than many European cities such as Bern or Salzburg where four door trolleybuses are commonplace.

The traffic pattern is people getting on in the suburbs and the whole bus gets off in town. You'll have a few getting off at Arnold ASDA. That's not dual-door land use.

And in Trent Barton land the whole operating ethos is friendly drivers interacting with passengers (including the *mandatory* 'thank you driver'). On the other hand Trent Barton drivers also know how to put the foot down.

 

[johncrossley]

I'm not disagreeing entirely, its just you should focus on where there is the most bang for the buck. Replacing entire fleets of buses with dual door variants and the associated bus stop works needed for that is insanely expensive and that money would be better spent on say some bus segregation or bus priority junctions. Quick / cheap wins in terms of dwell times I agree should be looked at though!

Bus priority often isn't easy, is often impossible because of narrow roads and can be expensive. As I mentioned earlier, bus priority without fast dwell times is an insult to taxpayers. Obviously where multiple door is the default like it is in most countries you would replace the fleet as normal when buses are life expired. Where you currently have one door buses you don't have to replace the whole fleet overnight. Just buy two door buses next time, like Brighton and Belfast for example.

 

[mattb7tl]

Bus priority often isn't easy, is often impossible because of narrow roads and can be expensive. As I mentioned earlier, bus priority without fast dwell times is an insult to taxpayers. Obviously where multiple door is the default like it is in most countries you would replace the fleet as normal when buses are life expired. Where you currently have one door buses you don't have to replace the whole fleet overnight. Just buy two door buses next time, like Brighton and Belfast for example.

Exactly. Not to go too far off topic but this ties in with the culture issue discussed in the other thread. Whenever someone questions why a bus operator has failed to grow patronage or improve a network, the immediate response is often "we need more bus priority". While bus priority is important the reality is that on many routes there simply is not the road space to deliver significant schemes, so it cannot be the answer to every problem.

On the original point, my own observations are that contactless payment and mobile tickets are noticeably quicker than cash. Personally, I would like to see cash gradually phased out on urban bus networks where every second at a stop matters. Faster boarding can deliver meaningful journey time improvements without relying solely on expensive infrastructure.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Exactly. Not to go too far off topic but this ties in with the culture issue discussed in the other thread. Whenever someone questions why a bus operator has failed to grow patronage or improve a network, the immediate response is often "we need more bus priority". While bus priority is important the reality is that on many routes there simply is not the road space to deliver significant schemes, so it cannot be the answer to every problem.

It isn't necessarily masses of road space that is needed in many instances though. The fact is that there is no point in saving literally a few seconds on boarding if you're then stuck in the same traffic as everyone else. Look at the places where bus patronage has been growing. Other than Cornwall and a few small outliers where a small change has a disproportionate impact (like Rutland), they are the places that have invested in extensive bus priority. Of course, bus priority is simply one area and is all part of a blend of modern vehicles, simplified ticketing, marketing etc.

When I head into central Bristol, very few cash fares get proffered these days; it's mainly mtickets though TOTO is now growing. However, what does really impact is bus priority. Some of it is really effective whilst other bits can a) be poorly designed or b) the space IS there but it's either not taken (don't wish to upset businesses) OR c) bus lanes exist but parking restrictions are not enforced.

Otherwise you end up in the position as in Manchester where they've done little to manage car use/bus priority in recent years and the solution has been to simply add more buses and cost into the PVR.

On the original point, my own observations are that contactless payment and mobile tickets are noticeably quicker than cash. Personally, I would like to see cash gradually phased out on urban bus networks where every second at a stop matters. Faster boarding can deliver meaningful journey time improvements without relying solely on expensive infrastructure.

Phasing out cash will disadvantage the poorest in society.

 

[NCT]

If you want successful buses be like Nottingham. Bus priority not just in road space allocation but also pricing off car use (workplace parking levy, congestion charge - you need something). It helps that Nottingham has retained a relatively undamaged inner city and there isn't an overdominance of out-of-town land use, so it could afford to deter car use from the city centre. Same with Edinburgh and Brighton.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

If you want successful buses be like Nottingham. Bus priority not just in road space allocation but also pricing off car use (workplace parking levy, congestion charge - you need something). It helps that Nottingham has retained a relatively undamaged inner city and there isn't an overdominance of out-of-town land use, so it could afford to deter car use from the city centre. Same with Edinburgh and Brighton.

Also the rationing of on-street car parking would help in both discouraging car use. Might even use it for moving traffic… now there’s a thing