Demand Responsive Transport

[Bletchleyite]

Is there any guarantee of availability with DRT? Our Bletchley Correspondent's experience suggests not.

Certainly not. I find taxi availability to be markedly better for me than the DRT system, though that's only an example of one system.

I suppose there's not guaranteed availability of a timetabled bus service either, as it might be cancelled or full, but generally they would be; a < 30% success rate would be seen as very poor.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

I've had a go at comparing various flavours of DRT with bus, taxi, and the key variants of Uber - as a draft Wikitable (eventually to add to the Wikipedia entry on DRT) - suggestions for improvements/correction would be very welcome.

 

[option]

So, relevantly to this thread, it seems Milton Keynes Council have gone forward with their plan, as reported on the Oxford-Chiltern Bus Page this week:

Editorial

This is a much more swingeing set of cuts than I expected - most notably the loss of the 7 will result in a significant swathe of west MK having no fixed-route bus service at all, and also Woburn Sands I think going from 2 buses per hour to nothing at all to CMK (this was a planning gain service, to be fair, but still).

With the £3.50 fare (£7 return for a commuter and no season tickets, so a £5 increase on the cost of daily journeys for commuters) I think this is going to be a disaster and result in far more car and taxi journeys and indeed car purchases. It also isn't much use for commuting anyway, as...

MK Connect: Demand-responsive transport in Milton Keynes.

Via develops innovative solutions for on-demand and pre-scheduled transit, powered by the world’s most advanced technology.

ridewithvia.com

No way are people going to accept non-specific variance in journey time of that extent for a local journey which by car/taxi takes well under 10 minutes. I certainly won't. The local taxi firms allow a time to be booked - it is a bit woolly but they mostly deliver it - and indeed this (and price) were reasons Uber is not very well established here.

Don't try to get it to school, either, because:



So again kids in a fairly large area of MK previously served by routes 7 and 9 plus Woburn Sands lose a big chunk of their mobility. (The partial replacement the 4 provides to the 7 is just a short diversion via Shenley Church End, presumably to avoid the adverse publicity ceasing to serve Denbigh School entirely would bring - but not providing journeys any use to most of that school's catchment!)

I think this will be an abject failure, and do wonder if Via (nee ViaVan, I guess they realised that "van" is not a selling point in the UK!) have funded it to get an "in" on a particular town, which has allowed cash-strapped MK Council to withdraw most/all bus subsidies - but then it'll be quietly dropped when nobody uses it.

I must admit I was astonished to see it going this far - withdrawal of the routes noted for March is something I overall support as they were near-unused, but the removal of a half-hourly "mainstream" route (the 7) is quite something.

On the other hand - this is the first "big" experiment to prove or disprove its viability in a major town setting, rather than the rural "to market" type services where I feel it does have a niche.

I assume that those at the council who proposed and then authorised the changes, live in the area affected and will be using the new service?

Of course not!

If DRT spreads as I fear, then we are looking at a world where if you don't have use of a car, the ability to travel will for many people become a lottery-style gamble - "it could be you" who gets a DRT ride. Does "Computer Say Yes" when you come to request an immediate ride, or are you one of the first to get through when a book-ahead service opens reservations?

Do any of the Bus-On-Demand apps offer documentation that would allow the user to prove a failed attempt to book a ride? Should this be required as part of the service specification?

And how far will organisations accept even a documented DRT failure as a reasonable excuse? Will a Job Centre accept a failed attempt to get a DRT ride as a reasonable excuse for being late for an appointment? Will a hospital accept DRT failure as a reason for failing to attend an outpatient appointment, or will you risk having your referral cancelleed? What if you missed the previous appointment because you were unlucky on DRT on that occasion too?

Very good points.

ANYONE proposing these sort of schemes MUST be made to use them themselves.
If that means having to clamp their car, then so be it.

Eating your own dog food - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Certainly not. I find taxi availability to be markedly better for me than the DRT system, though that's only an example of one system.

I suppose there's not guaranteed availability of a timetabled bus service either, as it might be cancelled or full, but generally they would be; a < 30% success rate would be seen as very poor.

At least with a normal timetabled service you could make a complaint, and if it's a subsidised service the local authority could take action.

You do have to wonder if it may, in the long term, be cheaper to move the demand closer to the destination(s) rather than subsidising these sort of services for X years...
(not to derail the thread, but yes, moving people/communities. eg. Milburn in Cumbria, pop. 171, smallest school in the country. Move it to nearby Kirkby Thore, pop. 758, or Culgaith, pop. 826.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I assume that those at the council who proposed, & then authorised, the changes, live in the area affected & will be using the new service?

Of course not!

Nope. Cllr Wilson-Marklew who is the main driver behind this service (this is public knowledge, she regularly speaks in its favour and gets really defensive if you criticise it) lives in, I believe...Wolverton, which is one of the best-served places in Milton Keynes (MK) with conventional bus services.

(not to derail the thread, but yes, moving people/communities. eg. Milburn in Cumbria, pop. 171, smallest school in the country. Move it to nearby Kirkby Thore, pop. 758, or Culgaith, pop. 826.)

In the end if you live in a really rural place you need to purchase a car or be willing to cycle a long way, and if you're elderly and infirm and can't do those things you need to consider moving to a town so it has the services you need within reach. You can't serve everywhere with public transport.

But we're talking here about a built-up area of MK which had a half hourly bus route which was only just not commercially viable. This would be a fairly decent replacement for the infrequent "shopper buses" but isn't to what was one of the main routes.

It might be slightly conspiratorial, but I do wonder if this was part of the deal, i.e. the operator wanted the income from a main route being given to them. It's interesting that despite originally stating they would not subsidise any bus routes, they have actually carried on with a few of them, yet not this one.

 

[Deerfold]

Is there any guarantee of availability with DRT? Our Bletchley Correspondent's experience suggests not.

This was being suggested as a better solution.

 

[anthony263]

Fflecsi has been expanded in Newport. However it has made life more difficult for customers trying to book on other fflecsi routes such as my G1 fflecsi around North Cardiff.

Frequently my customers can't get through to the call centre and then when they do they're saying the bus is full even when its parked next to them and empty.

 

[Dai Corner]

Fflecsi has been expanded in Newport however since it has its made life more difficult for customers trying to book on fflecsi routes in other parts like my g1 fflecsi around North Cardiff.

Frequently my customers can't get through to the call centre and then when.they do kts saying the bus is full even when its parked next to next and empty

Fflecsi was "too good" for me last night. I was in a central Newport pub after the last timetabled bus had left at 1845. The Fflecsi app continually offered me a journey from the nearest pickup point in 1 minute, which wasn't long enough to finish my pint and walk there (or even just to walk there for someone with less than average mobility). The first scheduled Fflecsi offered was in 45 mins.

After a few more tries I was offered a Fflecsi in 7 minutes. Perfect! Shared with one other passenger (only the second time I've ever had todo that) who was dropped off a couple of stops before me.

I understand from conversations with drivers that there are nine vehicles out Mon-Sat daytimes, four in the evenings and five on Sundays.

 

[anthony263]

I've had issues again today. Many of my elderly customers have been struggling to get through to the call centre to book the bus.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

North Yorkshire County Council (NYCC) have been boasting that their Yorbus DRT scheme in Ripon, Bedale and Masham has clocked up 1,000 "users". The Northern Echo has an article that presumably draws on a NYCC press release and paints the early results very positively. But a bit of analysis says otherwise.

The article, which appeared on 16 August, doesn't say what period the data covers: the scheme started on 1 July, so let's be kind and assume that we are talking of the data just for the month of July.

The headline figure of 1,000 actually covers registrations, not users. Only 726 trips were actually made. And that means an average 2.5 passengers per hour over the operating period. If we guessed at an average group size of 1.25 passengers and a trip taking half an hour, then the bus is averaging just one group at a time. If the journeys are predominantly from the outskirts or nearby villages into a town (rather than town-to-town), then the trips would be much shorter and the utilisation even worse.

I know it's early days, summer holidays, and with Covid still affecting travel volumes. But a minibus (16 seats?) running around achieving loadings little better than a taxi (but at much higher cost) doesn't sound terrific.

But all is well in North Yorkshire, because the passengers are happy. NYCC report a score of 4.9 out of 5 for satisfaction - having apparently asked only those who got to make a trip. I guess that the Lottery operators might be able to report a similarly stellar satisfaction among their players, if they only asked those whose tickets had won a prize!

 

[Typhoon]

North Yorkshire CC (NYCC) have been boasting that their Yorbus DRT scheme in Ripon, Bedale and Masham has clocked up 1,000 "users". The Northern Echo has an article that presumably draws on a NYCC press release and paints the early results very positively. But a bit of analysis says otherwise.

The article, which appeared on 16 August, doesn't say what period the data covers: the scheme started on 1 July, so let's be kind and assume that we are talking of the data just for the month of July.

The headline figure of 1,000 actually covers registrations, not users. Only 726 trips were actually made. And that means an average 2.5 passengers per hour over the operating period. If we guessed at an average group size of 1.25 passengers and a trip taking half an hour, then the bus is averaging just one group at a time. If the journeys are predominantly from the outskirts or nearby villages into a town (rather than town-to-town), then the trips would be much shorter and the utilisation even worse.

I know it's early days, summer holidays, and with Covid still affecting travel volumes. But a minibus (16 seats?) running around achieving loadings little better than a taxi (but at much higher cost) doesn't sound terrific.

But all is well in North Yorkshire, because the passengers are happy. NYCC report a score of 4.9 out of 5 for satisfaction - having apparently asked only those who got to make a trip. I guess that the Lottery operators might be able to report a similarly stellar satisfaction among their players, if they only asked those whose tickets had won a prize!

Question: I've looked at the Yorbus website and cannot find the answer. Is there a fee to register? I may have missed it because I was struck by the statement:

“The flexibility of the scheme also means that a high proportion of seats on buses will be occupied on every journey, which will lead to better value for money and greater environmental benefits too.”

by the county councillor, the Executive Member for Access. Councillors and other officials need to learn not to over-promise; underplay the offer, then you can go back to the media and state what a success it has been.

There were 7 roadshows for the service prior to the service starting, 2 of which were at tourist locations (a National Trust property and a theme park); since the current bus service to these places amounts to no more than 2 journeys in each direction on any day (some days, no journeys at all) that most arrived by their own transport. It would be wonderful to convert them to bus use but there are unlikely to be any more than a few irregular users. You might get others to take a journey or two just to try it out. By all means promoting these leisure locations to users of the service. However, I suspect those staffing the roadshows were able to persuade attendees to sign up, if it is free and the staff are pushy.

What would be interesting is how many different users made a trip.

I don't know the area at all well, I spent a very pleasant week just north of there many years ago and it would seem like an area where DRT may be successful, but not if the current bus services are still running. It is one or the other, I doubt the area can support both. And not if you promise Gold and find a lesser metal,

One thing that I would say in support of NYCC is that, although I take your point on the ratings, they can hardly ask those who have not used it. It would be like Tripadvisor asking me to rate Disney World when I've never been to the US!

 

[edwin_m]

The headline figure of 1,000 actually covers registrations, not users. Only 726 trips were actually made. And that means an average 2.5 passengers per hour over the operating period.

It also means a significant number of those who registered didn't find it worthwhile or possible to try the service out, and/or many that tried it once didn't use it again.

 

[MotCO]

It also means a significant number of those who registered didn't find it worthwhile or possible to try the service out, and/or many that tried it once didn't use it again.

Especially if you assume that all 726 users made return trips, and possibly multiple trips over different days. Even if all 726 trips were made by different people, that means 363 return trips, and that at least 637 registered and did not or could not make a journey.

I'm still surprised that new DRT schemes are being seen as the Holy Grail. The pros seem to be:

• Passengers get a bespoke journey without the need for changing buses
• The journey usually costs less than a taxi or minicab

The cons are:

• You can't always book at the time you need (in some ways similar to taxis or minicabs, but probably taxis and minicabs are more likely to be available)
• The service must surely run at a loss
• You need more back office support than controlling a normal bus service

Why not simply run bus services over the routes requested by DRT users - there must be a lot of data available to suggest where people actually want to travel to, and at the times / days identified by the users?

 

[carlberry]

Especially if you assume that all 726 users made return trips, and possibly multiple trips over different days. Even if all 726 trips were made by different people, that means 363 return trips, and that at least 637 registered and did not or could not make a journey.

I'm still surprised that new DRT schemes are being seen as the Holy Grail. The pros seem to be:

• Passengers get a bespoke journey without the need for changing buses
• The journey usually costs less than a taxi or minicab

The cons are:

• You can't always book at the time you need (in some ways similar to taxis or minicabs, but probably taxis and minicabs are more likely to be available)
• The service must surely run at a loss
• You need more back office support than controlling a normal bus service

Why not simply run bus services over the routes requested by DRT users - there must be a lot of data available to suggest where people actually want to travel to, and at the times / days identified by the users?

DRT is usually suggested in areas where the services already make a loss anyway, however the schemes always tick two important boxes for the Councillors/politicians who promote and launch them:

1. They appear modern and trendy (this has always been true, previous experiments promoting how advanced being able to book by phone was, and having two way radio to the drivers.)
2. It makes it look like they're doing something, even if (long term) DRT just makes the issue worse.

They're also attractive because a lot of the setup costs can come out of a capital budget, either locally or nationally, so the ongoing costs look good (in the short term). The same Councillors/politicians are rarely around in subsequent years when the scheme has to fold once the actual running costs have to be met.

(To be fair several bus companies have also tried their own schemes over the last few years, which is why there are so many spare minibuses in those companies now!).

The schemes that survive long term are similar to the 'Wigglybus' idea in Wiltshire a few years ago, the name perfectly explains what happens with various parts of each journey being fixed and a time allowance for it to 'wiggle' a bit. The fixed points provide the base level of passengers with a predictable service and the timings allowed for the wiggles. Usually this meant people arriving at the final destination early with the worse case meaning having to wait around at some of the fixed timing points to kill time.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

The cons are:

• You can't always book at the time you need (in some ways similar to taxis or minicabs, but probably taxis and minicabs are more likely to be available)
• The service must surely run at a loss
• You need more back office support than controlling a normal bus service

Why not simply run bus services over the routes requested by DRT users - there must be a lot of data available to suggest where people actually want to travel to, and at the times / days identified by the users?

An additional "con" of moving away from (subsidised) timetabled service buses in rural areas is that these often use the vehicles that take children to secondary school in the morning, and back in the afternoon: services that the local authority has a statutory duty to continue to provide. Take away the middle-of-the-day services and the tender price won't drop dramatically: the operator only saves the marginal per-mile costs of the cancelled runs, and perhaps a bit of driver time - they still have to pay for the vehicle, and probably the middle-of-the-day driver hours too. So the local authority will have to cut a lot of timetabled runs to fund each shiny new DRT vehicle.

 

[RT4038]

DRT is usually suggested in areas where the services already make a loss anyway, however the schemes always tick two important boxes for the Councillors/politicians who promote and launch them:

1. They appear modern and trendy (this has always been true, previous experiments promoting how advanced being able to book by phone was, and having two way radio to the drivers.)
2. It makes it look like they're doing something, even if (long term) DRT just makes the issue worse.

They're also attractive because a lot of the setup costs can come out of a capital budget, either locally or nationally, so the ongoing costs look good (in the short term). The same Councillors/politicians are rarely around in subsequent years when the scheme has to fold once the actual running costs have to be met.

(To be fair several bus companies have also tried their own schemes over the last few years, which is why there are so many spare minibuses in those companies now!).

The schemes that survive long term are similar to the 'Wigglybus' idea in Wiltshire a few years ago, the name perfectly explains what happens with various parts of each journey being fixed and a time allowance for it to 'wiggle' a bit. The fixed points provide the base level of passengers with a predictable service and the timings allowed for the wiggles. Usually this meant people arriving at the final destination early with the worse case meaning having to wait around at some of the fixed timing points to kill time.

The Government have also provided grants to some Authorities for DRT service out of a Rural Mobility Fund. This means that costs (typically for 5 years) are being funded wholly or partly by Central Government, and probably represent a saving for the LA on the current subsidised fixed route service. I predict the DRT will burn at the end of the 5 years and a token fixed route bus service being re-instated. (almost certainly worse than that pre-DRT).

Government is looking for some kind of solution to the subsidised bus problem. The most likely outcome in the medium term is a mixture of home deliveries and taxis, with passengers travelling much less often as the cost per journey is so much more.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To be fair single point DRT (town to/from a set of villages as per demand on a roughly hour long route once an hour) does work reasonably well. It is the Uber style DRT that seems to me as being onto a loser.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

To be fair single point DRT (town to/from a set of villages as per demand on a roughly hour long route once an hour) does work reasonably well. It is the Uber style DRT that seems to me as being onto a loser.

Agreed. This sort of "Many-To-One" DRT can be done with existing vehicles and doesn't even need any very complicated software. Unfortunately that means that there aren't any salespeople smelling a decent profit from promoting it, whereas "Many-to-Many" dynamically-routed DRT with brand new minibuses has vehicle and software suppliers pushing it hard. And I fear that if you are an overloaded local authority officer (or a councillor with the transport brief but only a hazy grasp of the details) then it is pretty irresistible to accept help from the salespeople in "solving" the challenge of providing a usable service with dwindling funds.

 

[miklcct]

I now seriously think that subsidising residents directly for taxi journeys in truly rural areas (where a bus never works) may be the cheapest way to subsidise rural travel rather than setting up all those fancy DRT schemes.

For example, a scheme may set up to subsidise up to 2 taxi journeys per day per resident by a certain fixed amount, such that the effective fare paid by the resident to take a taxi from his home to the nearest town where life necessities can be found, will be £5 each way (the effective fare can be set less by means testing, such as disability or unemployment, or in case of pensioners). The resident will need to get a receipt and submit to the council to collect the money, or use a specific app to automatically do so.

For example, if the nearest town from home is 5 km, where a taxi ride will cost £11, the council will subsidise at most £6 for each resident to take at most two taxi trips every day, with the minimum fare paid by the passenger at £5. For example, if the actual taxi fare paid is £8, the passenger can claim back £3, but if the actual taxi fare paid is £20, the passenger can only claim back £6.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agreed. This sort of "Many-To-One" DRT can be done with existing vehicles and doesn't even need any very complicated software. Unfortunately that means that there aren't any salespeople smelling a decent profit from promoting it, whereas "Many-to-Many" dynamically-routed DRT with brand new minibuses has vehicle and software suppliers pushing it hard. And I fear that if you are an overloaded local authority officer (or a councillor with the transport brief but only a hazy grasp of the details) then it is pretty irresistible to accept help from the salespeople in "solving" the challenge of providing a usable service with dwindling funds.

Of course if you look at the actual demands in towns and cities this sort of DRT will work there as well. For instance, base a vehicle at the big Tesco, and once an hour it does a demand responsive loop around nearby areas lasting about 55 minutes, then on the next hour it does it again. As it is based there, you could even queue in the traditional manner for the return trip if you preferred that over booking. Base a few more in the town centre and do the same. One at the railway station. Etc.

This sort of DRT might even be profitable if you can fill the vehicle (which as you say could be a larger bus) each hour even if you wouldn't on a fixed route.

Many to many DRT will never be anything more than a costly taxi operation charged at individual fares - both inferior to and more expensive than just offering subsidised taxis to people living in otherwise unserved areas. But yes, the software companies are shouting loudly.

 

[MotCO]

Of course if you look at the actual demands in towns and cities this sort of DRT will work there as well. For instance, base a vehicle at the big Tesco, and once an hour it does a demand responsive loop around nearby areas lasting about 55 minutes, then on the next hour it does it again. As it is based there, you could even queue in the traditional manner for the return trip if you preferred that over booking. Base a few more in the town centre and do the same. One at the railway station. Etc.

This sort of DRT might even be profitable if you can fill the vehicle (which as you say could be a larger bus) each hour even if you wouldn't on a fixed route.

I quite like this idea. If you say that a bus will serve a certain area and will leave Tesco, or the hospital or the station, at the same time each hour, then people queue up, tell the driver where they want to go, and either the driver or an app works out an appropriate route. The only problem is how do you get to Tesco in the first place?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I quite like this idea. If you say that a bus will serve a certain area and will leave Tesco, or the hospital or the station, at the same time each hour, then people queue up, tell the driver where they want to go, and either the driver or an app works out an appropriate route. The only problem is how do you get to Tesco in the first place?

On the same route, having pre booked your pickup on an earlier circuit.

 

[MotCO]

On the same route, having pre booked your pickup on an earlier circuit.

But if the route varies depending on the destinations of the people queueing up at Tescos, they may not come past your house when you want to go to Tesco.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But if the route varies depending on the destinations of the people queueing up at Tescos, they may not come past your house when you want to go to Tescos.

You prebook the outward trip.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

I now seriously think that subsidising residents directly for taxi journeys in truly rural areas (where a bus never works) may be the cheapest way to subsidise rural travel rather than setting up all those fancy DRT schemes.

For example, a scheme may set up to subsidise up to 2 taxi journeys per day per resident by a certain fixed amount ...

I agree with you that subsidised taxis may be the least-bad solution in what I would term "very rural" areas. And perhaps in "fairly rural" areas where the travel needs are not to one dominant hub (for which a "wiggly" bus might be the best option) but a messy anywhere-to-anywhere mix.

BUT there is a big problem. Timetabled bus services are relatively inconvenient, and that limits the number of people who use them. Taxis are very convenient, and a subsidy on rides would see some people start to use subsidised taxis rather than their cars (no problems parking or having a drink) while others would start making extra journeys that they are currently dissuaded from making because of the full cost.

By the time you offer a large enough number of subsidised trips to meet the needs of those who unequivocally require public transport (most obviously: no car, or not able to drive for medical reasons), you will be spending a fortune also subsidising those who would like cheap taxi rides, but who are currently not making those trips using public transport.

The only solution would be formal rationing - by user (another "means test") and/or by purpose. Neither is easy to do properly, and politicians hate having to justify why Case A gets help when Case B doesn't.

DRT offers a value-free method of rationing. It may be crude (the less organised or frail are less likely to get a booking than the sharp-elbowed full-fitness retiree who sits hitting Redial to increase their chances the moment bookings open). It may be inefficient (achieveing loadings little better than a taxi but at much higher cost). But politicians can set the level of provision that they can afford, and then claim that because everyone has an equal chance, they have discharged their statutory duty.

 

[Typhoon]

You prebook the outward trip.

If it is a trip to Tesco (other supermarkets etc. ...), then it is quite possible that many residents. humans being creatures of habit, would want to travel same day next week so have a low-tech booking method - a clipboard with a sheet on. Passenger writes name, address and time of travel (from start point. so 9, 10, 11, 12, 1). Maybe an initial deposit, if they book and miss they lose the deposit. Deposit needs to be replaced if lost.

Other booking by phone; when my mother was alive she used to use a volunteer driver service, bookable by phone. It became clear that for some users, this might have been the only person they spoke to in a day. Have text or e-mail in addition, no apps. Try to have the same driver on the same routes so they go similar ways each time. and they get to know the passengers. This does mean no predicted arrival time at the passenger's door (or wherever the agreed stop is) but from my understanding these are often wrong. Also explain to Tesco (,,,) what you are doing, encourage them to set aside a space for the bus to stop and maybe some wooden benches for the customers to wait, if Tesco won't co-operate look to see if there is an alternative who will (or threaten to). If it is Tesco, they owe its more vulnerable customers having

If the trip is to a health centre, come to some agreement with the health centre as to when the bus will arrive from certain locations so that a receptionist does not try to give a patient an appointment 10 minutes before the first bus is due just because it fills a gap. Patients would have to tell the Health Centre that they are bus users.

There are probably thousands of flaws in this but the system needs to be easy for the potential passengers to use, not just looks hi-tech so they can impress the media.

DRT offers a value-free method of rationing. It may be crude (the less organised or frail are less likely to get a booking than the sharp-elbowed full-fitness retiree who sits hitting Redial to increase their chances the moment bookings open). It may be inefficient (achieveing loadings little better than a taxi but at much higher cost). But politicians can set the level of provision that they can afford, and then claim that because everyone has an equal chance, they have discharged their statutory duty.

Surely if a route is that popular then they need a bigger bus, more buses, more times or it will stand a fixed route bus? In reality, many frail or elderly people will be grateful for a service and take the next one if it is the supermarket. They would probably be to happy to avoid the company of someone boasting about how they sit by the phone punching redial. The problem appears to be under used DRT, not over used!

 

[TheManOnThe172]

...The problem appears to be under used DRT, not over used!

I am talking about DRT turning down attempted bookings away because the schedule can't accommodate their journey, not because every seat on the bus has been booked.

Whether DRT schemes take requests a week ahead or at the last minute, I believe all build their schedule in a single "pass" - ie as each requests comes in, the schedule is checked to see whether the new journey can fit with what is already committed. As the bookings come in there is a lower and lower chance that the passenger's ideal timing can be accommodated. In some cases the passenger may be willing/able to flex their timing enough to fit in with the schedule that has already been committed (in which case the bus will carry more than one group at a time - good news). In other cases, the passenger won't be able to cope with the timings offered (or the schedule won't include any trips anywhere near where they need to go) and their needs will go unmet.

You could improve loadings for services that take bookings a week ahead - by using a "two-pass" process, where passengers are asked to make requests (specifying earliest time they can start the journey, latest they can arrive - and for return journeys, the minimum and maximum time at their destination). Requests then close and a person (or some software) builds a best-fit schedule that satisfies the maximum number of requests, and then passengers are contacted to tell them whether their request has been successful (if so, at what time) or not. This is much more complicated and resource-intensive, and I am not aware of any schemes that run this way. (Does anyone know differently?)

With single-pass journey planning, the expectation (borne out by observation of the Oxford experiment, reports from others in this thread, and from my analysis of the very basic data that Derbyshire County Council were able to provide from their Ashbourne DRT service) is of a bus darting around its zone, largely carrying just one group of passengers (solo passenger, or a couple, perhaps even with children) at a time. So - lots of spare seats, but plenty of passengers not getting to make the journeys they want to make.

 

[Typhoon]

I am talking about DRT turning down attempted bookings away because the schedule can't accommodate their journey, not because every seat on the bus has been booked.

Whether DRT schemes take requests a week ahead or at the last minute, I believe all build their schedule in a single "pass" - ie as each requests comes in, the schedule is checked to see whether the new journey can fit with what is already committed. As the bookings come in there is a lower and lower chance that the passenger's ideal timing can be accommodated. In some cases the passenger may be willing/able to flex their timing enough to fit in with the schedule that has already been committed (in which case the bus will carry more than one group at a time - good news). In other cases, the passenger won't be able to cope with the timings offered (or the schedule won't include any trips anywhere near where they need to go) and their needs will go unmet.

You could improve loadings for services that take bookings a week ahead - by using a "two-pass" process, where passengers are asked to make requests (specifying earliest time they can start the journey, latest they can arrive - and for return journeys, the minimum and maximum time at their destination). Requests then close and a person (or some software) builds a best-fit schedule that satisfies the maximum number of requests, and then passengers are contacted to tell them whether their request has been successful (if so, at what time) or not. This is much more complicated and resource-intensive, and I am not aware of any schemes that run this way. (Does anyone know differently?)

With single-pass journey planning, the expectation (borne out by observation of the Oxford experiment, reports from others in this thread, and from my analysis of the very basic data that Derbyshire CC were able to provide from their Ashbourne DRT service) is of a bus darting around its zone, largely carrying just one group of passengers (solo passenger, or a couple, perhaps even with children) at a time. So - lots of spare seats, but plenty of passengers not getting to make the journeys they want to make.

Sorry, I thought the discussion had moved to the solution proposed by @Bletchleyite in #199 of a many-to-one system. Perhaps this could be adapted so it served say the hamlets to the north and east of a town on three days a week, south and west the other three. I know that this would not be true DRT but they normally promise more than they can ever achieve. If that hamlet is getting one journey on one day a week, then just about anything is better.

 

[station_road]

Cheshire East are launching their on-demand rural service south-west of Nantwich on 4 October, called 'go-too'. Can be booked by app or phone and up to 14 days in advance, £3 per journey for adults and using two 16 seat minibuses. Runs between 7am and 9pm Monday to Saturday.

http://www.go-too.co.uk/home.aspx

 

[leedslad82]

Leeds version goes live 27th sept

FlexiBus East Leeds | Metro

wymetro.com

FlexiBus East Leeds is West Yorkshire’s first demand responsive trial for public transport, launching on the 27 September 2021. It is a pre bookable service that connects people to local places within the East Leeds area. You must book at least one hour before you wish to travel and the bus will pick you up at a safe and convenient place within 200m (3 minutes walk) of your location.



It works like this:

Download the FlexiBus App - Google Play Store and Apple Store.
Register with FlexiBus.
Book a journey on the app, at least one hour in advance, entering your destination and pick up point, the app will confirm your booking.
We will pick you up in one of our new electric minibuses, other passengers may be on board. All FlexiBus vehicles are fully accessible.
You will pay on the bus using contactless payment. If you have bought a DaySaver on the MCard Mobile app, show the barcode to the driver, if you have a free bus pass show this to the driver.
We will drop you off at a safe location a short walk from your destination.
Book your return journey on the app.
Who can use FlexiBus?

Anyone seeking to make a journey within the FlexiBus East Leeds operating area

Where can I go?

You can use it to travel to work, the shops, a health appointment or to visit family and friends in the East Leeds area.



Travelling beyond East Leeds?

If you are travelling further afield, FlexiBus will connect you to buses on the main routes and to trains at Cross Gates. Consider downloading a ticket on the MCard Mobile app which will cover all your journey in West Yorkshire including FlexiBus.

How do I book on to the service?

Download the FlexiBus app:
Apple Store

Google Play Store

Call MetroLine on 0113 245 7676 between 7am and 8pm Monday to Saturday or 8am to 8pm on Sunday.
When does the service operate?

Monday - Saturday 7am-7pm

How much does it cost?

£2 flat fare – pay by contactless payment card/app when you board the bus.

Under 19s pay £1.20

All MCard products are accepted - smartcards and MCard Mobile

Holders of Senior, Blind and Disabled Person’s bus pass travel free after 9.30am on weekdays and all day on Saturdays.

 

[Bletchleyite]

"You must book at least one hour before you travel"

At least it does bookings, and that will mean more efficient scheduling, but that seriously limits its utility.