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

[Bletchleyite]

Just like the bus station discussion, once again you latch onto the penny while ignoring the pound.

Look after the pennies and the pounds look after themselves. In public transport operation, seconds count. Despite this, bus operators seem not to even care about minutes as long as they can blame someone else for them while the solutions to the ones they control are staring them in the face and practiced in pretty much every country bar the UK.

If the UK is the only country doing something (running single door buses in urban areas) it's probably reasonable to conclude that the UK is likely wrong, not all the other countries.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

NET had conductor operation in the past but that was considered uneconomic. As I said, they could force people to board through a single door like Amsterdam and check all tickets if they wanted to. There would be a massive cost in dwell time and mean they would probably have to buy more trams. Almost everywhere that has trams uses roving inspectors. I am not saying anything earth shattering here. In this respect, Britain is not unusual.

Is this really relevant in terms of buses though?

Nottingham has recorded impressive levels of bus patronage, second highest per capita outside London, despite the tram and, somewhat tellingly, having single door buses.

What they have done is provide a great service allied to targeted bus priority and other measures funded by a workplace parking levy.

 

[NCT]

Look after the pennies and the pounds look after themselves. In public transport operation, seconds count. Despite this, bus operators seem not to even care about minutes as long as they can blame someone else for them while the solutions to the ones they control are staring them in the face and practiced in pretty much every country bar the UK.

Cruising speeds are a far bigger fish to fry and Nottingham have effectively fried it.

Nottingham manages 25 minutes town to Beeston, 40 minutes town to Long Eaton. These are good journey times. Dwells are not the issue. Passengers value the 'eh up me duc'.

If the UK is the only country doing something (running single door buses in urban areas) it's probably reasonable to conclude that the UK is likely wrong, not all the other countries.

This is not a logically formed position.

In Nottingham's context, NET's Chilwell line has some slow curves around the Queen's and NG2, and takes the long way round to Market Square and Royal Centre - the places people actually want to travel to (the 36 and the Indigo take you directly to the Vic Centre and Market Square). As a result its journey time is hardly competitive to buses. The buses have more comfortable seats, and are as a result remain extremely popular. The seats are the buses' selling point - those extra 4 seats are far more valuable than an extra door.

Dwell time are bus one small factor among many more bigger ones. It's a complete red herring.

 

[duncombec]

It's relevant because it shows that Nottingham is big enough to have trams, and therefore big enough to justify multiple door buses as only the biggest urban areas tend to get trams. We are only classing trams as completely separate because of the way transport has evolved in Britain. In other countries, trams and buses would be considered to be part of the same urban public transport network with the same fare structure, and often with the same ticketing policy. It is possible to run trams forcing passengers to use certain doors so that tickets can be checked, just like a bus. Amsterdam has bizarrely operated with this policy, although that doesn't apply on its newer trams.

It does feel a little like we're getting into "don't feed the troll" territory here...

I wonder if you've ever done research with non-enthusiast customers in "Europe", as to whether they'd actually favour extra seats in return for single-doors, or double-deckers over artics. Or whether they'd like to pay less tax and have a more responsive industry in return for single-glazed windows and franchise contracts. Much as you choose not to accept examples where "Europe" does things poorly, I suspect not!

In any case, discussion on trams seems off topic in the bus section of the forum.

 

[johncrossley]

It does feel a little like we're getting into "don't feed the troll" territory here...

I wonder if you've ever done research with non-enthusiast customers in "Europe", as to whether they'd actually favour extra seats in return for single-doors, or double-deckers over artics. Or whether they'd like to pay less tax and have a more responsive industry in return for single-glazed windows and franchise contracts. Much as you choose not to accept examples where "Europe" does things poorly, I suspect not!

In any case, discussion on trams seems off topic in the bus section of the forum.

I only used trams as an example to demonstrate that Nottingham is big enough to have double door buses, as the argument used previously was that Nottingham isn't big enough. It's really sad, though, that we have to classify trams and buses as completely separate, and that really shows how bad Britain is at integration.

Of course it is always best to cite good practice. Why on earth would I be interested in bad practice? Just because not everywhere is perfect doesn't mean we have to stop improving things here.

 

[NCT]

I only used trams as an example to demonstrate that Nottingham is big enough to have double door buses, as the argument used previously was that Nottingham isn't big enough. It's really sad, though, that we have to classify trams and buses as completely separate, and that really shows how bad Britain is at integration.

32-metre and 12-metre vehicles are not comparable.

On a 32-metre vehicle the marginal calculation of 4 extra doors vs revenue protection favours 4 doors.

On a 12-metre vehicle the marginal calculation of 1 extra doors vs revenue protection favours revenue protection.

Of course it is always best to cite good practice. Why on earth would I be interested in bad practice?

It's best to analyse a multitude of factors and decide the most suitable practice for the specific application.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Look after the pennies and the pounds look after themselves. In public transport operation, seconds count. Despite this, bus operators seem not to even care about minutes as long as they can blame someone else for them while the solutions to the ones they control are staring them in the face and practiced in pretty much every country bar the UK.

If the UK is the only country doing something (running single door buses in urban areas) it's probably reasonable to conclude that the UK is likely wrong, not all the other countries.

Thing is… in a country where operators are commercial beasts, were there to be a cost benefit, wouldn’t operators avail themselves of that benefit and improve their bottom line?

That they don’t indicates that dwell time positives don’t outweigh the negatives? And that it isn’t the pivotal issue in journey times

 

[johncrossley]

In Nottingham's context, NET's Chilwell line has some slow curves around the Queen's and NG2, and takes the long way round to Market Square and Royal Centre - the places people actually want to travel to (the 36 and the Indigo take you directly to the Vic Centre and Market Square). As a result its journey time is hardly competitive to buses. The buses have more comfortable seats, and are as a result remain extremely popular. The seats are the buses' selling point - those extra 4 seats are far more valuable than an extra door.

You talk as if trams are in competition with buses. They shouldn't be. If they are then that simply emphasises how badly Britain does integration. You keep talking about seats, but one thing Britain does badly compared to other countries is the number of downstairs seats. Artics and long single decks (even with multiple doors) have more seats accessible to people who can't climb stairs. This might be part of the reason why one of your Nottingham bus companies is, unusually for the UK, a single deck only operator.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

You talk as if trams are in competition with buses. They shouldn't be. If they are then that simply emphasises how badly Britain does integration. You keep talking about seats, but one thing Britain does badly compared to other countries is the number of downstairs seats. Artics and long single decks (even with multiple doors) have more seats accessible to people who can't climb stairs. This might be part of the reason why one of your Nottingham bus companies is, unusually for the UK, a single deck only operator.

He was saying why buses still work in Nottingham because of some of the limitations of the tram. An ideologue would obviously remove such heinous duplication but they do peacefully coexist.

However, can we please stop talking trams on a bus thread?

As for TrentBarton specifying single decks, its because you get 40+ accessible seats which you wouldn’t get on a decker and they’d not want to sacrifice seats for doors as their longer journey durations mean that is more important for their customers. NCT continues to have a predominantly double deck fleet though.

 

[NCT]

You talk as if trams are in competition with buses. They shouldn't be. If they are then that simply emphasises how badly Britain does integration. You keep talking about seats, but one thing Britain does badly compared to other countries is the number of downstairs seats. Artics and long single decks (even with multiple doors) have more seats accessible to people who can't climb stairs. This might be part of the reason why one of your Nottingham bus companies is, unusually for the UK, a single deck only operator.

You repeat your ideological positions without considering what passenger actually want.

Passengers care about journey time and comfort. On the Beeston Chilwell corridor, for a substantial number of passengers the bus offers comparable journey times at greater comfort. Putting a second door in the 36 or the Indigo will give no net benefit to passengers whatsoever. This is what matters.

A single door E400 on the 36 has more good low-floor seats than a 3-door rigid Citaro.

You are blinded by your ideological positions with no understanding or care of the things that actually matter to passengers. Much of what you say is either irrelevant or plain wrong.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thing is… in a country where operators are commercial beasts, were there to be a cost benefit, wouldn’t operators avail themselves of that benefit and improve their bottom line?

There is, and they still don't get it. If we take an extreme example, a route like Oxford Road in Manchester has buses spending easily 5 to 10 minutes loading at Owens Park* or the Uni at peak times. Indeed a huge long stop was provided at Owens Park specifically to enable multiple buses to do this. If most buses are doing this, this is significantly adding to the peak vehicle requirement of the route and thus massively increasing costs.

The difference it will make, by contrast, to a rural "one man, dog, and no bicycle because it's a bus and they aren't allowed"** route is negligible. But Oxford Road would easily significantly reduce its PVR if it was to be operated with three-door artics or even double-artics rather than single-door deckers.

I wonder will Bee Network consider addressing this? It's really a tram route with buses, so why not run it like a tram route? The comparable route in Hamburg is.

* OK, maybe less so at the moment while that site is being redeveloped - but Oak House and Ashburne Hall are still there, and Owens Park will itself no doubt be replaced with modern accommodation in due course.
** A nod to my description of some branch lines on the railway

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

There is, and they still don't get it. If we take an extreme example, a route like Oxford Road in Manchester has buses spending easily 5 to 10 minutes loading at Owens Park* or the Uni at peak times. Indeed a huge long stop was provided at Owens Park specifically to enable multiple buses to do this. If most buses are doing this, this is significantly adding to the peak vehicle requirement of the route and thus massively increasing costs.

The difference it will make, by contrast, to a rural "one man, dog, and no bicycle because it's a bus and they aren't allowed"** route is negligible. But Oxford Road would easily significantly reduce its PVR if it was to be operated with three-door artics or even double-artics rather than single-door deckers.

I wonder will Bee Network consider addressing this? It's really a tram route with buses, so why not run it like a tram route? The comparable route in Hamburg is.

* OK, maybe less so at the moment while that site is being redeveloped - but Oak House and Ashburne Hall are still there, and Owens Park will itself no doubt be replaced with modern accommodation in due course.
** A nod to my description of some branch lines on the railway

No - they’ll have done their sums and worked out across the whole life of the vehicle that the minimal time saving of one or two mins has so little benefit as to be negligible compared to the negatives. If they were able to strip out hundreds of thousands of pounds from that, they’d be doing it.

 

[NCT]

No - they’ll have done their sums and worked out across the whole life of the vehicle that the minimal time saving of one or two mins has so little benefit as to be negligible compared to the negatives. If they were able to strip out hundreds of thousands of pounds from that, they’d be doing it.

I do think GM ought to be getting into dual-door territory.

Up to now the Oxford Road corridor has clearly been an exception. Having a dedicated dual door fleet among otherwise single door buses would have created inefficiencies, and indeed re-conversion costs once buses were to be redeployed.

Think back to the bus-war days, operators were using the cheapest buses they could find. Did Stagecoach remove the centre door from the ex-Hong Kong buses? My recollection is not. This suggests there was no ideology on the number of doors, they just did what was the most pragmatic for the bottom line.

 

[johncrossley]

You repeat your ideological positions without considering what passenger actually want.

Passengers care about journey time and comfort. On the Beeston Chilwell corridor, for a substantial number of passengers the bus offers comparable journey times at greater comfort. Putting a second door in the 36 or the Indigo will give no net benefit to passengers whatsoever. This is what matters.

A single door E400 on the 36 has more good low-floor seats than a 3-door rigid Citaro.

You are blinded by your ideological positions with no understanding or care of the things that actually matter to passengers. Much of what you say is either irrelevant or plain wrong.

Many passengers can use the raised seats at the back of a single deck but can't go upstairs.

If you want to talk about ideology, why do you think you (and many others on this thread) are in favour of single door buses, even in big cities like Nottingham? Because you grew up with British bus culture. If you grew up in, say, Switzerland, more than likely you wouldn't have that view.

 

[rmHawk765]

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.

This is what I mentioned earlier in this thread... ultimately a bus is probably the hardest type of transport vehicle to mitigate far evasion on. You can't have 3 door buses and make the driver alone ensure everyone taps. You can't have mobile revenue inspections on busy buses (I really don't understand how this supposedly is done on the continent!). You can't scrap cash entirely across the country, at least not for a good while, and someone paying with cash negates the time advantage from others boarding using other doors. And when buses often run early, late, or don't show up at all (essentially how all my experiences with non-London buses go), people become less morally willing to pay for such a service, especially when it is so easy to fare evade.

With trams and trains, not only is there the psychological element with the average passenger seeing them as more 'robust', but they are genuinely just more reliable for obvious reasons. There are less moral excuses to fare evade. I do think this side of it all is seriously worth looking at; is there really a better way to check bus tickets that works every time than what we use already, that does not involve a) making buses free entirely or b) reconsidering where we should even use buses?

Personally though I'm all for a), for the economic advantages of easy-to-use and affordable public transport have been shown time and time again to outweigh losses...

 

[NCT]

Many passengers can use the raised seats at the back of a single deck but can't go upstairs.

If you want to talk about ideology, why do you think you (and many others on this thread) are in favour of single door buses, even in big cities like Nottingham? Because you grew up with British bus culture. If you grew up in, say, Switzerland, more than likely you wouldn't have that view.

I grew up in Shanghai. I’ve spent roughly equal numbers of my years in Shanghai, Nottingham and London, and have first hand experience of the differences in bus markets and operating conditions.

I ‘grew up with British bus culture’. How dare you.

 

[johncrossley]

I grew up in Shanghai. I’ve spent roughly equal numbers of my years in Shanghai, Nottingham and London, and have first hand experience of the differences in bus markets and operating conditions.

I ‘grew up with British bus culture’. How dare you.

You can surely see the point though. Hardly anyone who grew up somewhere where they routinely have two (or more) door buses would think that a one door bus makes more sense.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I do think GM ought to be getting into dual-door territory.

They possibly could as the commercial dynamic has changed. The operator is merely a contractor - the specification can be changed by TfGM and the operator has no revenue risk or responsibility.

Think back to the bus-war days, operators were using the cheapest buses they could find. Did Stagecoach remove the centre door from the ex-Hong Kong buses? My recollection is not. This suggests there was no ideology on the number of doors, they just did what was the most pragmatic for the bottom line.

The Dennis Dragons were converted to single door. Capacity was seen as priority.

You can surely see the point though. Hardly anyone who grew up somewhere where they routinely have two (or more) door buses would think that a one door bus makes more sense.

Yes but you’re seeing it in isolation. We only have to change a load of bus infrastructure and move the entire bus industry to a different commercial model whilst failing to address adequate bus priority and road space usage.

 

[johncrossley]

You can't have mobile revenue inspections on busy buses (I really don't understand how this supposedly is done on the continent!).

It's not rocket science and it is practised across the world. TfL do it and now even TfGM does it on buses. Inspections just have to be reasonably frequent and the fine needs to be sufficiently high.

You can't scrap cash entirely across the country, at least not for a good while

The whole of the Netherlands has scrapped cash. Maybe there is some quirky bus somewhere that accepts cash but at least 99% of buses don't accept cash any more. Most of them still sell some tickets from the driver using contactless bank cards but for the vast majority of passengers they are better off using a smartcard or tap in tap out with a bank card because it is cheaper.

There's arguably no need to scrap cash as long as there is always a substantial discount for paying in another way. That's how it works in many other countries and how it worked in London before cash was scrapped many years ago now. What we don't want is lots of passengers buying paper tickets for single fares (for example, the £3, soon to be £2, English fare cap) from the driver, whether that ticket is paid for using cash or contactless bank card. Although of course driver safety is a reason to get rid of cash altogether, plus the cost of banking it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2026 ==

I wonder will Bee Network consider addressing this? It's really a tram route with buses, so why not run it like a tram route? The comparable route in Hamburg is.

I'm sure I read somewhere that TfGM are actually going to increase the frequency of buses along Oxford/Wilmslow Road (believe it or not), so it seems not, at least at the moment. At least their neighbours in Liverpool seem to be considering an articulated bus service to the airport.

 

[NCT]

You can surely see the point though. Hardly anyone who grew up somewhere where they routinely have two (or more) door buses would think that a one door bus makes more sense.

That’s right, keep digging.

You made a generalisation. It was clumsy. It was wrong.

 

[johncrossley]

That’s right, keep digging.

You made a generalisation. It was clumsy. It was wrong.

Do you disagree with the general point? Why do you think most countries use more than one door and think that is normal?

 

[NCT]

Do you disagree with the general point? Why do you think most countries use more than one door and think that is normal?

I grew up in a three door environment.

Stop attempting to justify your clumsy generalisation.

 

[johncrossley]

It is clear that most people who grew up outside the UK don't understand the attraction of one door buses.

 

[NCT]

It is clear that most people who grew up outside the UK don't understand the attraction of one door buses.

Citation needed.

 

[rmHawk765]

It's not rocket science and it is practised across the world. TfL do it and now even TfGM does it on buses. Inspections just have to be reasonably frequent and the fine needs to be sufficiently high.

Please enlighten me on how an inspector can move through a rammed double-decker bus and check even a single passenger, and/or how they can stand at the door(s) blocking everyone and delaying departure (!). How can you have random inspections when the only buses they're done on are quiet ones? Also, I have not once had an inspection on a TfL bus...

What we don't want is lots of passengers buying paper tickets for single fares (for example, the £3, soon to be £2, English fare cap) from the driver, whether that ticket is paid for using cash or contactless bank card.

Why? What is wrong with this? Last time I checked paper is recyclable. If one prefers a simple single fare, so be it.

You can surely see the point though. Hardly anyone who grew up somewhere where they routinely have two (or more) door buses would think that a one door bus makes more sense.

I grew up in a 2-door area and I can see the purpose of a 1-door bus clearly. Ticketing habits are completely different outside of major cities with sophisticated smartcard systems.

 

[johncrossley]

Please enlighten me on how an inspector can move through a rammed double-decker bus and check even a single passenger, and/or how they can stand at the door(s) blocking everyone and delaying departure (!). How can you have random inspections when the only buses they're done on are quiet ones? Also, I have not once had an inspection on a TfL bus...

Sometimes departures are delayed when they do this. It just depends on how rigorous the check is. Even if you only inspect some of the bus that is still a deterrent. In London inspections are sometimes done with police. This is useful for the police as fare dodgers are sometimes wanted for general crimes.

Why? What is wrong with this? Last time I checked paper is recyclable. If one prefers a simple single fare, so be it.

The reason is because it takes time to ask for a ticket and issue a ticket. That's why many big cities have stopped their drivers issuing tickets, even by card. It is quicker for a passenger to touch their card on the reader without interacting with the driver.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2026 ==

Citation needed.

See evidence from earlier linked thread from the International Transport section. I didn't survey the whole world. That's the best I can do.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2026 ==

I grew up in a 2-door area and I can see the purpose of a 1-door bus clearly. Ticketing habits are completely different outside of major cities with sophisticated smartcard systems.

We are really talking about big cities here, although some other countries use mutiple door buses for all or nearly all regional and urban buses.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It may seem that the near absence of dual or multi door buses seems odd to some, and as I said, with changes in Greater Manchester and other "franchise" areas in terms of revenue risk, dual doors could make a reappearance. That said, the move away from dual doors in those areas happened many years ago and the infrastructure may prove an issue in certain places e.g. having dual doors through Fallowfield but not being able to access Wigan bus station.

The flip side is, of course, there are places in Europe that have such vehicles with no real need. @johncrossley often comes across as seeming to think that others haven't experienced life outside the UK but, of course, we have. And in places where multi-door buses are overkill. I visited Reykjavik and travelled on the city buses - they had dual and triple doors in a city the size of Poole in Dorset, and they weren't busy either.

Perhaps there's a pragmatic view in that some places in the UK would benefit (not withstanding the challenges on infrastructure) but likewise, there's places in Europe that have multi-doored buses where it is moderately laughable.

 

[NCT]

See evidence from earlier linked thread from the International Transport section. I didn't survey the whole world. That's the best I can do.

You don't know. You are making things up.

And earlier, instead of addressing the substance of my argument, you choose to attack my personal circumstance, a wrong assumption of my personal circumstance at that. At the very least acknowledge that and withdraw that piece of generalisation.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Aug 2026 ==

It may seem that the near absence of dual or multi door buses seems odd to some, and as I said, with changes in Greater Manchester and other "franchise" areas in terms of revenue risk, dual doors could make a reappearance. That said, the move away from dual doors in those areas happened many years ago and the infrastructure may prove an issue in certain places e.g. having dual doors through Fallowfield but not being able to access Wigan bus station.

The flip side is, of course, there are places in Europe that have such vehicles with no real need. @johncrossley often comes across as seeming to think that others haven't experienced life outside the UK but, of course, we have. And in places where multi-door buses are overkill. I visited Reykjavik and travelled on the city buses - they had dual and triple doors in a city the size of Poole in Dorset, and they weren't busy either.

Perhaps there's a pragmatic view in that some places in the UK would benefit (not withstanding the challenges on infrastructure) but likewise, there's places in Europe that have multi-doored buses where it is moderately laughable.

Indeed. I spend about 4 weeks a year travelling around Europe taking buses to the non-touristed suburbs.

It's not as though Europe is homogeneous either. The Germanic practices @johncrossley frequently cites only represent a subset of a wide range of European practices. Much of France and Spain have supervised boarding for buses. In Greece people ignore fares altogether. Different places have different cultural norms - what in the opinion of one person constitutes best practice isn't necessarily replicable in a different cultural and geographical context.

With low passenger number stops, dual door buses can have longer dwells than single door buses. With single door the bus can pull away as the front door closes. On a dual door close the rea door must be fully closed. Modern plug doors are not so bad, but some of the inward sliding doors of the 2000s were so slow. My experience from back then was dwells in London buses were far more painful than those in Nottingham.

Nowadays when I'm on a slow moving bus in London at no point do I think 'thank god for the two doors'. Whatever savings from dwells come nowhere near compensating for the slow cruising speeds. In the 2000s when I used to do my 5am - 10pm London bus circuits from Nottingham on National Express, it was often when I was on the 2215 Rainbow 5 from Broadmarsh back home did I finally feel the joy of travelling on a bus.

 

[duncombec]

You can't have mobile revenue inspections on busy buses (I really don't understand how this supposedly is done on the continent!).

I can only talk from my one experience of checks on buses in Germany, whilst travelling to a meeting in Kiel about 15 years ago. Whether they are still done this way, or whether it's common, I wouldn't like to say! I recall it well, because I was a little stressed from running late... and the inspectors were waiting at the same stop as me.

Bus pulls up, we all get on. I'm still struggling to get my backpack off and sit down properly in that "+ sized" seat behind the driver favoured on a German Citaro, when an ID card gets slid under my nose, "tickets please!" I looked up to find it the person who'd been standing next to me at the bus stop who'd got on directly behind me!

With three of them on board, they each focussed on their particular area - I assume one did door 1-2, one did door 2-somewhere near door 3, and one did somewhere near door 3 to the back. It was mobile, too - I don't know where they got off as they obviously exited using the doors behind me, but I'd be surprised if it was more than one or two stops in the city centre.

It appears that fare dodging has been decriminalised in Kiel in December 2025, but there is still a €60 fine if caught. Germany operates an "Ausweispflicht" (an obligation to identify yourself*), which can be demanded by revenue protection, train ticket inspectors, etc., for the purposes of issuing the fine.

In the UK, we could do something similar: have two or three people get on, sit down as normal, then "tickets please" as soon as the bus pulls away. We are so very fond of uniforms, and making it Very. Incredibly. Obvious. that a ticket inspection is going on.


* A rule I thought I broke regularly, not being keen on carrying my passport everywhere for 18 months and not having a driving licence, but I recently discovered there isn't actually a requirement to carry it with you (presumably you just have to take it to a police station within a deadline). It helped that I was quite literally the only Englishman in the village (and almost the only one in the neighbouring town), so I don't think I'd have had too much problem locally. I still recall the shock I got seeing two police officers at the tiny border station between Germany and Denmark and realising I'd inadvertently left my passport at home... that could have been awkward!

 

[GusB]

Sometimes departures are delayed when they do this. It just depends on how rigorous the check is. Even if you only inspect some of the bus that is still a deterrent. In London inspections are sometimes done with police. This is useful for the police as fare dodgers are sometimes wanted for general crimes.

I can't remember which programme it was but I recall seeing a TfL revenue check on telly; the entire bus was held up while this was carried out, so how does this cut dwell times?

The reason is because it takes time to ask for a ticket and issue a ticket. That's why many big cities have stopped their drivers issuing tickets, even by card. It is quicker for a passenger to touch their card on the reader without interacting with the driver.

If a passenger has the exact fare and knows which fare they need, a ticket can be issued almost as quickly as someone tapping on with a card. Card readers aren't infallible anyway - concession cards are the biggest source of delays, in my experience.

See evidence from earlier linked thread from the International Transport section. I didn't survey the whole world. That's the best I can do.

That's only anecdotal evidence, and not a scientific study.

We are really talking about big cities here, although some other countries use mutiple door buses for all or nearly all regional and urban buses.

Yes, as usual you're ignoring the population who live outwith the larger conurbations; many people live in smaller towns where having more than one door is simply unnecessary.

Yes, there's there's a conversation to be had about using multi-doored buses that operate primarily in urban areas, but:

• There's an additional cost to purchase and maintain those vehicles, as well as in modifying infrastructure (raised kerbs, relocating shelters etc.) - who funds this?
• We no longer have the demarcation between purely urban and out of town operations that we used to have.

In days gone we had Anytown Corporation which ran urban routes and Anytown & District which operated routes to neighbouring towns and villages. It made sense for ACT to run dual door buses because they were essentially dedicated buses. A&D was only permitted to drop off passengers on inbound journeys, and to pick up on the outbound (no local passengers), so single-doored buses were adequate. Since then the entire structure of the bus industry has changed, though, and a bus that runs on a city route one week can find itself running in some country backwater the next week, on a route that's once every two hours and where seating capacity is more important than boarding times.

Honestly, I think that you should really give up on your crusade because we end up having the same tired old argument time after time. I don't think that anyone here is really arguing against having more than one door in urban areas, but it has been explained to you on many occasions why we don't have them.

You very much seem to have a city mentality where everything happens at breakneck speed and the slightest delay, however many nanoseconds that may be, is the cause of much wailing and gnashing of teeth. It always amuses me when Londoners miss their tube and get upset, especially when there's another one coming in two minutes time. Do we really have that much of a problem with dwell times, or are we simply lacking in patience?