Britain's bus industry in 50 years time

[slowroad]

Precisely because of the exclusion of cycling from the statistics, that is why the car modal share looks so high for the Netherlands. If cycling was in there, the Netherlands would have one of the lowest car modal shares, even by distance.

This sits uneasily with the fact that (excluding cycling) bus mode share in Netherlands is low but car is not. Suggests cycling is substituting for bus (and perhaps walking) rather than car.

 

[johncrossley]

This sits uneasily with the fact that (excluding cycling) bus mode share in Netherlands is low but car is not. Suggests cycling is substituting for bus (and perhaps walking) rather than car.

They achieve 20-40% mode shares for cycling in most towns which is better than you would hope from public transport other than in big cities. So cycling does a better job at replacing car trips than buses do in other countries. But it is true, bikes replace buses more than they replace cars. That's no bad thing. The key aim is to cut car trips as much as possible. In the biggest cities you have more of a balance between bike and tram/bus.

There is no developed country where car mode share is low.

 

[slowroad]

They achieve 20-40% mode shares for cycling in most towns which is better than you would hope from public transport other than in big cities. So cycling does a better job at replacing car trips than buses do in other countries. But it is true, bikes replace buses more than they replace cars. That's no bad thing. The key aim is to cut car trips as much as possible. In the biggest cities you have more of a balance between bike and tram/bus.

There is no developed country where car mode share is low.

This data indicates that cycling accounts for around 8 per cent of distance travelled in the Netherlands as a whole. If - say - 3 per centage points would otherwise be bus and - say - 2 per cent walking, the impact on overall car modal share would be very low. But I accept other assumptions are available!

Mobility; per person, modes of travel, purposes of travel and regions

www.cbs.nl

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Jan 2023 ==

This data indicates that cycling accounts for around 8 per cent of distance travelled in the Netherlands as a whole. If - say - 3 per centage points would otherwise be bus and - say - 2 per cent walking, the impact on overall car modal share would be very low. But I accept other assumptions are available!

Mobility; per person, modes of travel, purposes of travel and regions

www.cbs.nl

…..and I think I am basically agreeing with you. Though favouring cycling may have some adverse affects on less able bodied etc people.

 

[GusB]

We really should be discussing what we think things will be like in 50 years' time, rather than discussing how things are now. Please remain on topic

 

[domcoop7]

The problem is this. If you asked someone in 1963 (someone, like, perhaps the Chairman of ICI whom you decided to appoint to the British Railways Board) what rail usage would be like in 50 years' time, you'd get a different - an incorrect answer than if you asked someone in 2013. Likewise if you asked Peter Serpell in 1982 what railways would be like, you'd get a different answer than if you asked in 2019, which itself is entirely different to if you ask in 2023!

At the moment, the predictions appear to be doom and gloom, much as those in the 60s and the 80s felt about the railway. Fortunately, doom and gloom on buses is much more reversible than in rail.

But factors, such as we can see them will include:-

• Autonomous cars / taxis:-
  • They provide convenience, and personal security; but
  • They are still expensive, subject to congestion and presumably demand exceeding supply
• Autonomous or semi-autonomous buses:-
  • With economies of scale, and AI algorithms, they may be (almost) as fast as cars on the routes on which they travel, but at considerably cheaper cost
• Increased population (Probably the major issue which the reviews of the railway I referred to above really failed to take properly into account):-
  • Assuming population continues to rise, which it almost certainly will as a result of immigration (given that irrespective of what any political party says, they are all happy to get the numbers up to keep the workers / pension payments Ponzi scheme on the road for as long as they can), even a drop in the percentage of modal share to buses can result in more bus passengers
  • Population rise will also mean denser cities, which favours planned transport over personal transport because of congestion
  • More people driving more autonomous vehicles means more congested roads
  • More people in a very densely populated island, with little space for building, means few if any more roads, which means more congestion
  • More people long-distance commuting or travelling longer distances (perhaps in "hybrid" jobs) means people getting trains to some railway station and needing transport from the station to the business park / office at the other end, even if they have and use a car for their shopping trip.
• More working from home:-
  • Obvious decreased effects
• Greater wealth:-
  • despite the efforts of left-wing politicians to tell everybody that we're all poor foodbank users who can't heat our homes without starving, the reality is that even the poorest in 2023 would not accept a standard of living and lifestyle that wasn't uncommon when I grew up in a council estate in 1980s Salford. There's no comparison. In another 50 years, expectations and society will have moved further.
  • Will this mean that using a bus is beyond the pale for most people?
  • Or will buses become a "luxury" product, charging premium fares?
  • Again comparing to the railway, could you imagine if they tried to withdraw new trains on Transpennine Express and replace a 5 car loco-hauled with a 2 car Pacer? That was possible in 1984, but wouldn't be politically acceptable today.
• Regulation:-
  • If re-regulation becomes the order of the day, as it seems to be in Scotland and the Metro Regions (and always has been in Northern Ireland), where will the innovation come from? Will it take a brave metro mayor somewhere to listen to a pitch from some bus company for a luxury autonomous bus? Would a local authority ever invest in something like that, when the safe, tried and tested option of "doing what we've always done" is the politically safest. Parkinson's "bike shed effect" would likely kick in, when a committee of councillors is in charge.
  • On the other hand, if those in control of buses also have control of roads, planning, etc., could we have more bus-only infrastructure?

It's probably a fools' errand, but for what it's worth my views taking into account my random ramblings above is that it is unlikely to be anywhere like as doom and gloom as it may seem!

 

[johncrossley]

• Autonomous cars / taxis:-
  • They provide convenience, and personal security; but
  • They are still expensive, subject to congestion and presumably demand exceeding supply

Why should autonomous taxis be expensive? The whole point of them is to take away the most expensive part of the cost of taxi operation (the driver). In addition, the fixed costs of operation would be split amongst a large number of users. As a result, it should be less expensive than running your own car. That does sound on the face of it catastrophic for buses. One of the few advantages that UK buses enjoy is the avoidance of parking costs and hassle, but that is eliminated by using taxis. Road pricing will probably be essential when automated cars and taxis become the norm. That may be necessary anyway because of the need to replace lost revenue from fuel duty.

Certainly there would be no point in rural buses when automated taxis operate but that could be good news overall for buses if you have urban road pricing. Frequent high capacity autonomous buses from the edge of towns could be fed by autonomous taxis from neighbouring villages, meaning less need for your own car in rural areas than now.

• Greater wealth:-
  • despite the efforts of left-wing politicians to tell everybody that we're all poor foodbank users who can't heat our homes without starving, the reality is that even the poorest in 2023 would not accept a standard of living and lifestyle that wasn't uncommon when I grew up in a council estate in 1980s Salford. There's no comparison. In another 50 years, expectations and society will have moved further.
  • Will this mean that using a bus is beyond the pale for most people?
  • Or will buses become a "luxury" product, charging premium fares?

Wealth doesn't automatically mean people stop using buses. The richest country in Europe is also the one where street public transport (bus/trolleybus/tram) has the best reputation and has the best modal share for such modest sized cities. The wealthiest city in the UK uses buses the most, even in outer London where the barriers to car use are nothing like they are in inner/central London.

• Regulation:-
  • If re-regulation becomes the order of the day, as it seems to be in Scotland and the Metro Regions (and always has been in Northern Ireland), where will the innovation come from? Will it take a brave metro mayor somewhere to listen to a pitch from some bus company for a luxury autonomous bus? Would a local authority ever invest in something like that, when the safe, tried and tested option of "doing what we've always done" is the politically safest. Parkinson's "bike shed effect" would likely kick in, when a committee of councillors is in charge.

Arguably, much of the innovation in the UK has come from London with the rest of the country following years later, if at all. For example, low floor buses, Oyster cards, contactless, real time information at bus stops and online, next stop announcements, electric buses, flat fares and the Hopper fare. TfL has been able try radical things out because its political leaders have demanded it, even if the Mayor's ideas are sometimes deranged, and TfL has historically been able to take the financial hit if it goes wrong. Whereas outside London is generally characterised by extreme conservatism and risk aversion because of the need to meet short term financial targets.

 

[duncombec]

Arguably, much of the innovation in the UK has come from London with the rest of the country following years later, if at all. For example, low floor buses,...

Wasn't that Liverpool? And the first deckers were Bristol and West Midlands

Unless I've missed it, I think so far we've only seen your critique of the ideas of others, not your own opinions as to what things may be like?

 

[johncrossley]

Wasn't that Liverpool? And the first deckers were Bristol and West Midlands

But London rolled them out on normal bus routes in big numbers before elsewhere. If I recall, the Merseyside initiative came from the PTE anyway and was for a tendered route. My main point was that you don't need deregulation for innovation.

Unless I've missed it, I think so far we've only seen your critique of the ideas of others, not your own opinions as to what things may be like?

I presume you missed my prediction that rural villages might be fed into park and ride schemes. And I don't recall any restriction on discussing ideas put forward by others.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

... But I'd not be surprised to see mandatory audio visual passenger information, as the benefit for both people unfamiliar with a route and those with disabilities is massive. I'd expect that far sooner than 50 years - perhaps 10 to 20 - and even sooner on franchised urban operations.

Surely within a few years we will see smartphone use becoming a requirement for participation in society (with special provision for those with poor vision or motor impairment) - so displays at stops and stations (and probably direction signs too) will disappear in favour of getting that info from the device in your hand. It will save a lot in infrastructure, and vastly reduce the cost of handling vandalism. And it will offer a better service too - no longer the need to stand and wait as a display scrolls through pages to give the info you want to see.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

50 years?! It's difficult enough to predict how things will look in 5 years.

Won't we all be getting about with our personal jet packs, as we were promised er.. 70 years ago?!

In 50 years time, I will have reached the ripe old age of 127 and will be in no condition to make use of bus services...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Surely within a few years we will see smartphone use becoming a requirement for participation in society (with special provision for those with poor vision or motor impairment) - so displays at stops and stations (and probably direction signs too) will disappear in favour of getting that info from the device in your hand. It will save a lot in infrastructure, and vastly reduce the cost of handling vandalism. And it will offer a better service too - no longer the need to stand and wait as a display scrolls through pages to give the info you want to see.

I would agree with that in terms of stop displays which are expensive to provide, but I think there's still a case for on board announcements and similar, and I don't think they will go away, quite the opposite.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely within a few years we will see smartphone use becoming a requirement for participation in society (with special provision for those with poor vision or motor impairment)

If that be the case, my clogs need to be made ready for "popping" as compulsion as stated will be reminiscent of the future so well portrayed in the novel "1984".

 

[richard13]

An interesting subject; What will today's school children create?

A few thoughts:

The Office of National Statistics expects the UK population to keep rising but slower. However the main point is that most of the growth is in the over 65 age group, which will make up over 25% of the population. The elderly become less mobile and so walking to and from bus stops becomes increasingly challenging as does carrying shopping etc. So far more door to door shared taxi arrangements will be needed. Of course another pandemic or global famine could change that!

The pendulum swings or life goes round in near circles. 50 years ago urban buses (trams etc) were mostly run by the town's transport department. Having been through a commercial era, I suspect that Unitary Councils will take back control or run public transport in one model or another. Somerset County (Unitary from April) now runs several routes (around 20) itself rather than contracting them out - Taunton town 3 and 12 for example. The councils could set unified fares, route network, timetables and subsidies for conventional buses, trams, trains, ferries, etc plus the door to door service. Cross boundary may need some national policy.

Technology - this keeps evolving and much of life is becoming electric. So electric buses and electric cash (smartphones, ...). However compressed gas may prove to be better than batteries. If we run out of materials for chips or batteries, then returning to coins and horses could happen!

Another aspect is human geography - where do we live in relation to where we work, shop, have entertainment etc. In a way I see that going round the circle and people won't plan to travel as much again. Local community facilities will increase and working from home or local office at least some of the week becomes more normal. Devon are creating a regional park to serve Cranbrook new town and East of Exeter to give access to the country without the need for cars. That area has increasing employment locally and a big 3-18 school. They have a new railway station and plans for a second and double track, a bus into Exeter about every 20 mins (M-F) from 04:30 to 01:00 7 days a week, plus cycleways etc. This is mostly Devon sponsored and not commercial.

 

[domcoop7]

Why should autonomous taxis be expensive? The whole point of them is to take away the most expensive part of the cost of taxi operation (the driver). In addition, the fixed costs of operation would be split amongst a large number of users. As a result, it should be less expensive than running your own car. That does sound on the face of it catastrophic for buses. One of the few advantages that UK buses enjoy is the avoidance of parking costs and hassle, but that is eliminated by using taxis. Road pricing will probably be essential when automated cars and taxis become the norm. That may be necessary anyway because of the need to replace lost revenue from fuel duty.

Certainly there would be no point in rural buses when automated taxis operate but that could be good news overall for buses if you have urban road pricing. Frequent high capacity autonomous buses from the edge of towns could be fed by autonomous taxis from neighbouring villages, meaning less need for your own car in rural areas than now.

Wealth doesn't automatically mean people stop using buses. The richest country in Europe is also the one where street public transport (bus/trolleybus/tram) has the best reputation and has the best modal share for such modest sized cities. The wealthiest city in the UK uses buses the most, even in outer London where the barriers to car use are nothing like they are in inner/central London.


Arguably, much of the innovation in the UK has come from London with the rest of the country following years later, if at all. For example, low floor buses, Oyster cards, contactless, real time information at bus stops and online, next stop announcements, electric buses, flat fares and the Hopper fare. TfL has been able try radical things out because its political leaders have demanded it, even if the Mayor's ideas are sometimes deranged, and TfL has historically been able to take the financial hit if it goes wrong. Whereas outside London is generally characterised by extreme conservatism and risk aversion because of the need to meet short term financial targets.

In terms of costs of taxis, I meant the capital cost. Presumably the number of taxi vehicles required to satisfy the peak requirement would always have an up-front capital cost greater than the number of buses required to satisfy that same requirement. For that reason alone, surely a taxi fare will always be more expensive than a bus fare, except in areas where the peak requirement is only a handful of passengers.

In terms of wealth, I don't know about the European city you refer to. But London as well as being the wealthiest city in the UK also has a large number of areas of "multiple deprivation". In terms of raw numbers, because of its size, it is therefore simultaneously the poorest city in the UK at the same time, paradoxically. I don't know London well enough, but my limited experience is that the main users of buses in London are a less well off demographic than tube and rail.

Oyster is certainly an innovation TfL and its predecessor can take credit for, but the ITSO-Compliant Smart Card platform that the public sector mandated for the rest of the UK shows that innovation by dictat isn't always best. And contactless is obviously a function of Visa, Mastercard and smartphones rather than something a politician has introduced. As for the other things, they are exactly what I meant when I referred to the "bike shed effect". This is where a committee meets to plan a nuclear power station. They spend 10 minutes talking about the design of the power station (because they don't understand it, and even if they did, there's nothing useful they can add) and two hours debating what colours and designs to put in the bike shed because this is something within the experience of the committee members. Bus fare structures and bus stop information displays are not radical innovations.

===

On the speculation for the future, I wonder if the Exeter Minibus experiment will get dusted off and tried again, combined with some sort of demand responsive element? I suspect even today it would be possible to use an algorithm to work out how to plan buses in real time according to the likely demand, actual demand (if people had a smart phone app and pressed a button saying "I intend getting on a bus in the next ten minutes"), traffic conditions, etc. That sort of thing is only going to get more accurate in the future.

I can press a few buttons on my phone and get pretty much anything I'm realistically likely to want delivered to me by tomorrow - and for some items even today! That would have been beyond comprehension only 20 years ago.