Demand Responsive Transport

[GusB]

There's another new service to add to the list:

Borders Buses launches Pingo on-demand service - Bus & Coach Buyer

Borders Buses, supported by Scottish Borders Council, is launching an on-demand, app-enabled bus service. Named Pingo, it offers bespoke travel for Berwickshire journeys not served by a scheduled bus service. It operates seven days a week from 7am to 9pm, serving Cockburnspath to Coldstream...

www.busandcoachbuyer.com

Borders Buses, supported by Scottish Borders Council, is launching an on-demand, app-enabled bus service.

Named Pingo, it offers bespoke travel for Berwickshire journeys not served by a scheduled bus service. It operates seven days a week from 7am to 9pm, serving Cockburnspath to Coldstream, Gordon and St Abbs and everywhere in between. It is available to both fare paying and concessionary card holders and is expected to be a popular choice for those looking to meet the main bus network and for those looking to travel in and around the Berwickshire area to places where there is no current bus service.

To book the service customers use the Ride Pingo app, which will keep customers updated on pick-up times and allow them to track bus journeys live. Alternatively, customers can call the Pingo line on 01289 385506.

The fare for Pingo is a £2 base fare plus 20p per mile. However to celebrate the launch of the service it will be £1 per journey until 15 May 2022.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In case anyone hasn't seen it and might be interested there was a discussion about this on Radio 4.

BBC Radio 4 - Positive Thinking, On-demand buses

Sangita Myska meets key innovators on a mission to change our world for the better.

www.bbc.co.uk

Unfortunately they don't seem to have heard much from people pointing out the downsides of DRT. It looked like the presenter might have been onto something when asking about lots of people needing to be in one place at the same time from different starting points, but the person promoting DRT simply said you'd need more vehicles. As the original thread of the programme was talking about places served at most several times a day by a service with a PVR of 1, I was surprised this didn't go into what the costs were for lots of vehicles.

In my view many-to-one DRT can work, but many-to-many without prebooking never will (because journeys simply don't match up in real time). An example of something that might work in a dreamworld of integrated transport (yeah, right) is that you could have one take people to/from an hourly train service in a rural location, somewhere like Grange over Sands, maybe. Whereas Milton Keynes Connect is just being used by those who can get a journey as a cheap taxi, which is a very expensive way of delivering subsidised taxis for those who live away from bus routes (if that was what was wanted).

One thing I suggested to Milton Keynes Council as a viable use-case would be one or two vehicles based at a suburban supermarket which would do a 50 minute route around adjacent unbussed estates once an hour picking up and dropping off as it went. They could also connect there with a faster service to the centre.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

In case anyone hasn't seen it and might be interested there was a discussion about this on Radio 4.

BBC Radio 4 - Positive Thinking, On-demand buses

Sangita Myska meets key innovators on a mission to change our world for the better.

www.bbc.co.uk

For the BBC, that was a poor effort. It pretended a critical review of DRT, but failed to include more than limp scrutiny.

The programme made an excellent case for on-demand transport. But I don't think it made the case for DRT. The benefits described could as easily be achieved by sending people in a taxi - and at lower cost, unless you can be sure of achieving good levels of trip-sharing. Nobody seemed to making any claims about that.

The presenter did ask about cost of rural DRT, but only in a binary "will it ever break even?" way. Once it had been explained that this wasn't about breaking even but about delivering Mobility to those without it, any question of value-for-money seemed to be lost.

[And that isn't just a failing of this programme. There seems a marked reluctance for anyone to publish any review of the actual cost per passenger for rural DRT (ideally cost per passenger-who-really-needs-to-travel as opposed to the cheaper-than-a-taxi-after-a-snifter-at-the-golf-club user). And nobody seems keen to survey all of those for whom the service might be intended. Instead, just ask those on the bus - no surprise: they are delighted, just as lottery winners will tell you that their £2 ticket was a good buy.]

I was disappointed that the head of Public Transport for Norfolk was unchallenged when suggesting that one of the key benefits of rural DRT is a saving in carbon. I think that is far from clear:

* As the programme identified, there is considerable doubt whether a limited DRT service is going to be attractive enough to get car users to take a bus instead of their car. Where DRT replaces a timetabled service, then much of the demand will be substitution of one bus service for another. Where DRT serves areas without a previous service, then how much of the demand will be additional journeys (shopping at a supermarket in the hub town rather than a village shop), rather than replacement of car journeys?

* Even when it does result in removal of a car journey, rural DRT will struggle to reduce carbon unless there are useful numbers of people making compatible trips that can be combined to make a shared journey for the vehicle. (And if that is true, then perhaps a timetabled service would be even better?) Unless there is a nicely-balanced two-way demand, the vehicle will often travel out empty to collect passengers and bring them back to the hub, and then later take the passengers back home, returning empty to the hub. So that would be 50% dead mileage for the minibus, vs no dead mileage for the car. "Low-carbon" minibuses vs average-carbon cars will help the balance a bit, but it still seems far from axiomatic that the move from rural car use to DRT is a carbon-saver.

On top of this, the Norfolk manager seemed to be dangerously gung-ho about building DRT demand. Sure, it would be wasteful to introduce a service and then discourage people from using it. But you need to be careful how far you encourage demand beyond the highest-need users who are the core justification for continued subsidy. When the Rural Mobility Fund money runs out in four years' time, will they really be counting it a success that they have built up a load of people who have other transport options, but have come to expect the convenience of a taxi for the price of a bus?

All in all, a brilliant bit of PR for ViaVan, but a fail for the BBC.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

Fflecsi to end in Newport

11th August 2022: Transport Focus produced a somewhat-fawning review of the Fflecsi service around Newport, declaring that "The research points towards a valuable role for DRT as a part of the overall transport mix"

The Welsh Government also hailed the Newport trial as "successful" and said it had provided "substantial data... to improve future public transport route planning" in the area."

18th August 2022 The trial has been so successful that "Transport for Wales (TfW) has announced that its fflecsi bus pilot scheme for Newport will be coming to an end on 25 September 2022, after a successful 12-month period of trialling demand responsive travel in an urban environment." (Source)

It's amazing how often trials are closed down with a declaration of triumph.

What a shame that nobody seems bothered to publish the data from these trials so that others can learn from them. If DRT were as good a solution as local and national government want us to believe, wouldn't we expect the software suppliers to offer the creation of useful performance metrics as a standard part of their package, and for operators to share such results?

Other operators considering DRT need to know what they might expect for:

• the average cost per passenger journey
• the proportion of the time that the vehicles are:

- idle​

- running empty​

- carrying just one booked group (eg one or more people, travelling together, same booking)​

- carrying more than one booked group​

Has anybody seen any performance data like this, from any DRT scheme?

Even collection and retention of the raw data in a sensible format would be good. I have asked two operators for trip-by-trip DRT data. Shockingly, Derbyshire Connect had kept no such data (just daily totals of miles and passengers). North Yorks Yorbus did manage to provide most of the info, but was insistent that it would take 176 hours of staff time to say which ride had been served by which vehicle for the 5000 rides during the sample period (so I am having to write an algorithm to try and work this out before I can calculate stats).

The "South Wales Argus" article on the demise of Fflecsi in Newport included a user comment that I think sums up the problem of lack of predictability:

"It was good in the beginning until more people started using them," said Leanne Cook. "My worst experience, aside from not regularly not being able to book one, was a journey from Bassaleg to the Royal Gwent Hospital early in the morning. Normally a 15-20 min journey, but on this particular day took over an hour."

 

[Dai Corner]

I came here to post about the Newport scheme as a regular (would be) user but the previous poster beat me to it.

The worst decision in my view was that the local municipal bus company assumed the four-bus Fflecsi service provided by TfW in the evenings and on Sundays would be adequate and withdrew nearly all their own. Consequently, being able to book one at less than half a day's notice is a matter of luck.

I've usually had one to myself, or at most two other passengers, on my journeys home from the city centre and the bus then returns empty. The fare is £2 and concessionary passes are valid so the losses must be huge.

The irony is that having decided DRT is not the answer for Newport TfW are introducing yet another scheme in Flintshire. A triumph for minibus and booking system salesmen (and agency drivers on very good money apparently) over naive politicians.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've not seen data for the MK scheme but I've seen lots of them and they're always 1-2 people on board in an 8 seat vehicle. I think Via's "many to many, on demand" model (and it's normally them) is an abject failure. To work it requires two key elements - it needs to be many to one/one to many (e.g. vehicles based in a town centre, at a supermarket, at a hospital etc taking people to/from that place) and prebooked with time flexibility at one end* to allow journeys to be coordinated.

I also see a "hybrid model" potentially working, i.e. that you run some bookable, timetabled journeys at peak times using the same vehicles then something more flexible during quieter hours.

Guaranteed quality connections are also important in a distributed town; direct from anywhere to anywhere simply won't work.

* By which I mean e.g. it's based around "arriving at the station in time for a train departure at xx:18, then departing after the arrival at xx:28", or somesuch, with pickup/drop off times varying as per what is necessary once you've got the bookings all in an hour or so beforehand.

 

[MotCO]

I've not seen data for the MK scheme but I've seen lots of them and they're always 1-2 people on board in an 8 seat vehicle. I think Via's "many to many, on demand" model (and it's normally them) is an abject failure. To work it requires two key elements - it needs to be many to one/one to many (e.g. vehicles based in a town centre, at a supermarket, at a hospital etc taking people to/from that place) and prebooked with time flexibility at one end* to allow journeys to be coordinated.

I also see a "hybrid model" potentially working, i.e. that you run some bookable, timetabled journeys at peak times using the same vehicles then something more flexible during quieter hours.

Guaranteed quality connections are also important in a distributed town; direct from anywhere to anywhere simply won't work.

* By which I mean e.g. it's based around "arriving at the station in time for a train departure at xx:18, then departing after the arrival at xx:28", or somesuch, with pickup/drop off times varying as per what is necessary once you've got the bookings all in an hour or so beforehand.

Given that 'pure' DRT's are an abject failure (can you think of any successful ones?), I think what you suggest (peak hour fixed / offpeak flexible) may work. It would still need the tech side to work in the off-peaks, or alternatively, you could have a semi fixed route and times, with deviations to other villages en route if required. Or, you could simply use the data acquired from running the DRT to determine a replacement bus service based on where you need a fixed bus route and at what times.

 

[Dai Corner]

you could simply use the data acquired from running the DRT to determine a replacement bus service based on where you need a fixed bus route and at what times.

That's what TfW and Newport claim to be doing. My fear is that they'll ignore the unfulfilled requests, just look at the loaded journeys and come to the conclusion that only about 50 passengers want to take a bus in the city between 1900 and 2300 on a weeknight.

 

[markymark2000]

The irony is that having decided DRT is not the answer for Newport TfW are introducing yet another scheme in Flintshire. A triumph for minibus and booking system salesmen (and agency drivers on very good money apparently) over naive politicians.

The demographic is very very different. In Flintshire, because of how the inept council has ran down local buses over the past 5 years or so, the scheme isn't replacing that many buses and those that it replaces, it's probably a good thing that it's replacing routes which ran previously 3 days per week with a Mon-Sat DRT scheme. The LT8 does run the same times as the service is available for booking though.

My issue with the Flintshire scheme is unlike Newport, the Flintshire service isn't offering local buses as an option so people are discouraged from using the local buses which in turn, takes people off the normal buses, they make less money and become less viable, routes get cut. Arriva has 3 buses per hour Buckley to Broughton. Why isn't that being pushed as an option? Also, why isn't this scheme following the rest of the Ffleccsi schemes. This one will be ran by the current Flintshire Go Green buses. No low floor minibuses for this service.

 

[Dai Corner]

The demographic is very very different. In Flintshire, because of how the inept council has ran down local buses over the past 5 years or so, the scheme isn't replacing that many buses and those that it replaces, it's probably a good thing that it's replacing routes which ran previously 3 days per week with a Mon-Sat DRT scheme. The LT8 does run the same times as the service is available for booking though.

My issue with the Flintshire scheme is unlike Newport, the Flintshire service isn't offering local buses as an option so people are discouraged from using the local buses which in turn, takes people off the normal buses, they make less money and become less viable, routes get cut. Arriva has 3 buses per hour Buckley to Broughton. Why isn't that being pushed as an option? Also, why isn't this scheme following the rest of the Ffleccsi schemes. This one will be ran by the current Flintshire Go Green buses. No low floor minibuses for this service.

I don't know Flintshire. Would I be correct in thinking that the Fflecsi service area is a mixture of rural and urban as frequencies varying from three times a week to three times an hour suggest? Fflecsi only serves the urban parts of Newport, stopping at the city boundary even though the urban area extends well beyond to the north. The rural parts to the east and west retain their conventional, book by phone the day before, DRT services with much more restricted operating hours.

Regarding competition with scheduled services, you cannot book Fflecsi if it determines that there is a suitable Newport Transport (municipal) service but happily competes with Stagecoach on the corridors it serves.

Possibly the Newport Fflecsi fleet will move to Flintshire once it's finished with here? I don't know.

 

[markymark2000]

Regarding competition with scheduled services, you cannot book Fflecsi if it determines that there is a suitable Newport Transport (municipal) service but happily competes with Stagecoach on the corridors it serves.

Double standards isn't it. Welsh Labour pushing their 'anti private bus company' agenda.

Possibly the Newport Fflecsi fleet will move to Flintshire once it's finished with here? I don't know.

Flintshire Council has confirmed it will be ran with their own fleet of 'Flintshire Go Green' vehicles

https://www.flintshire.gov.uk/en/PDFFiles/Roads-and-Travel/Bus-Timetables/Fflecsi-Information-for-Passengers.pdf

The existing Flintshire “Go Travel” Green bus will remain in operation meaning passengers can easily recognise the vehicles.

I don't know Flintshire. Would I be correct in thinking that the Fflecsi service area is a mixture of rural and urban as frequencies varying from three times a week to three times an hour suggest? Fflecsi only serves the urban parts of Newport, stopping at the city boundary even though the urban area extends well beyond to the north. The rural parts to the east and west retain their conventional, book by phone the day before, DRT services with much more restricted operating hours.

Yes, a mixture of both rural and more urban areas.

The below map may be able to help. Give or take, the red is the Fleccsi boundary. In the green shows the core bus routes. These run at least hourly a good few parts are half hourly.. The blue route is the 29. This was previously hourly but the council cut it completely then had to reinstate it due to backlash and so it now runs 5 times per day.
(map doesn't include the 2 routes being withdrawn by the introduction of these routes)

 

[Dai Corner]

Text from the Flintshire notice linked to above

Information for Passengers

New Fflecsi Service launching in Buckley and surrounding areas
Fflecsi is a new way to travel around Buckley and surrounding areas.
To use the service you need to book in advance. There are currently two main booking options – via the app or by telephoning 0300 234 0300, the call centre can also help you plan a journey.
• Operational from 7.45 am to 6.30 pm Monday to Saturdays (*except between 8.15 to 9.15 & 14.30 to 15.30 school term time) the service is ideal for getting to work, shopping, meeting with friends, appointments, school or connecting with other buses or trains.
• You can choose where to be picked up from or dropped off as the bus doesn’t run to a fixed timetable or route. However, the route varies based on who else has booked at similar times or destinations.
• You can book via an app (which also allows you to track your bus) on the website and by telephone on 0300 234 0300.
• There are a number of ways to pay: on-board with cash, £2.50 per journey for adults/ £1.50 for children. MyTravel Pass is also accepted whilst concessionary card holders travel for free.
• The existing Flintshire “Go Travel” Green bus will remain in operation meaning passengers can easily recognise the vehicles.
• The managed booking system means that Fflecsi bus passengers are guaranteed a seat

As it doesn't run between 0815 and 0915 or 1430 and 1530 it hardly seems ideal for getting to work, school or appointments as claimed. Presumably they're doing scheduled school runs for qualifying pupils only at these times.

 

[Deerfold]

Given that 'pure' DRT's are an abject failure (can you think of any successful ones?), I think what you suggest (peak hour fixed / offpeak flexible) may work. It would still need the tech side to work in the off-peaks, or alternatively, you could have a semi fixed route and times, with deviations to other villages en route if required. Or, you could simply use the data acquired from running the DRT to determine a replacement bus service based on where you need a fixed bus route and at what times.

The 900 Huddersfield to Hebden Bridge service which was launched using the Rural Bus Grant would initially divert up to half a mile off the route on its three trips a day - the driver's mobile phone number was in the timetable to book. But it was very successful and became hourly for much of the day and the flexibility was withdrawn to ensure a trip could be done in 55 minutes. (Annoyingly it's now every 70 minutes, making the connection from the hourly service I used to do regularly fairly poor).

 

[Busaholic]

Text from the Flintshire notice linked to above





As it doesn't run between 0815 and 0915 or 1430 and 1530 it hardly seems ideal for getting to work, school or appointments as claimed. Presumably they're doing scheduled school runs for qualifying pupils only at these times.

Why don't they just start at 09.15? Also, switching between the 24 hour clock and a.m./p.m. is amateurish and only sows confusion.

 

[markymark2000]

Why don't they just start at 09.15?

Because one of the routes that they are replacing, the LT8 has a 07:45 Penyffordd to Broughton trip which gets workers to the retail park. This was brought in after a good bit of fight from Higher Kinnerton Parish Council and so they will be trying to keep that area open for people who make that journey.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

North Yorkshire Yorbus DRT vehicles - where based?

I am analysing data on the service (obtained under FOI), working out how much of the time the vehicles are spending idle, how much time relocating empty, and how much time carrying passengers (and then breaking passenger-carrying time down by how many groups on the vehicle at once).

As part of that analysis, I need to estimate the time from base to the start of the first journey for each vehicle each day, and the time taken to relocate back to base at the end of the day.

I am guessing that the buses are based overnight in Ripon, but I'd like to be sure. I called North Yorkshire CC to speak to the person who is in charge of Yorbus, to be told "there really isn't anyone in charge". (!)

Does anyone know where the vehicles are based overnight?

 

[Dai Corner]

North Yorkshire Yorbus DRT vehicles - where based?

I am analysing data on the service (obtained under FOI), working out how much of the time the vehicles are spending idle, how much time relocating empty, and how much time carrying passengers (and then breaking passenger-carrying time down by how many groups on the vehicle at once).

As part of that analysis, I need to estimate the time from base to the start of the first journey for each vehicle each day, and the time taken to relocate back to base at the end of the day.

I am guessing that the buses are based overnight in Ripon, but I'd like to be sure. I called North Yorkshire CC to speak to the person who is in charge of Yorbus, to be told "there really isn't anyone in charge". (!)

Does anyone know where the vehicles are based overnight?

I can't help you with your question, but would like to do a similar analysis for DRT services in my area.

Would you be prepared to share how you worded your FOI request? My experience is that information officers are good at avoiding supplying information!

 

[GusB]

North Yorkshire Yorbus DRT vehicles - where based?

I am analysing data on the service (obtained under FOI), working out how much of the time the vehicles are spending idle, how much time relocating empty, and how much time carrying passengers (and then breaking passenger-carrying time down by how many groups on the vehicle at once).

As part of that analysis, I need to estimate the time from base to the start of the first journey for each vehicle each day, and the time taken to relocate back to base at the end of the day.

I am guessing that the buses are based overnight in Ripon, but I'd like to be sure. I called North Yorkshire CC to speak to the person who is in charge of Yorbus, to be told "there really isn't anyone in charge". (!)

Does anyone know where the vehicles are based overnight?

You seem to dedicate your life to trashing all DRT schemes: why?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You seem to dedicate your life to trashing all DRT schemes: why?

Because they're by and large ineffective and a poor use of money, and primarily exist to tick a box (and to make profit for the Via company which clearly has a very good sales team)?

DRT has potential but very few current schemes if any actually work well.

 

[GusB]

Because they're by and large ineffective and a poor use of money, and primarily exist to tick a box (and to make profit for the Via company which clearly has a very good sales team)?

DRT has potential but very few current schemes if any actually work well.

I wasn't asking you!

 

[Dai Corner]

I wasn't asking you!

He's right though.

Ask Roger French, who definitely knows what he's talking about.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

You seem to dedicate your life to trashing all DRT schemes: why?

I am trying to keep an open mind about the potential of rural DRT. My interest is in seeing the best use of the available public funding to help rural non-car-users move around to help them lead viable lives - whether that is delivered by timetabled buses, DRT minibuses, or subsidised (and, where appropriate, shared) taxis.

Living in Derbyshire, where the County Council has £47m of BSIP funds to spend on innovative approaches to bus transport, my fear is that once the grant funding is gone, we will be left with a modest ongoing subsidy and a very high-cost-per-user DRT service. Yorbus is quoted at costing £17 per passenger-journey. My analysis is that with an average of 1.18 passengers per booking, that comes to just on £20 per booking - for what looks like an average ride distance of 6.5 miles. So just about £3 per mile.

Where timetabled bus services have too few users to make them economic, it isn't intuitively obvious that an anywhere-anytime rural DRT service is going to do any better. The obvious danger is that if the demand is too dispersed (or the method of aggregating individual demands into vehicle schedules is too poor) then rural DRT would result in minibuses behaving like taxis (but at much higher running costs and pollution).

I am very suspicious that proponents of rural DRT haven't published any detailed reviews that show how well the software (or even manual systems) can achieve efficient use of vehicles by building a schedule instantly as requests come in. (Even a three-phase schedule process - request, build, notify - may not be sufficiently better).

That is why I made a FOI request to NYCC for the Yorbus data - so that I could produce a proper analysis that shows how well DRT delivers on its promises.

North Yorks CC have been better than Derbyshire CC - who, for the Ashbourne Connect "trial", hadn't bothered to keep ride-by-ride data to allow any sort of detailed evaluation (and their cabinet member for Transport has declined to promise that they will keep better data for future trials). The Yorbus data does show ride-by-ride information, but it doesn't identify which vehicle ran which trip, which has taken quite some modelling to work out. (NYCC claimed that it would take 176 staff hours to work out which vehicle ran which trip for the 5,000-odd records - vastly more expensive than the FOI limits demand. It makes you wonder how they plan to do their own analysis.)

Once I have confirmed the depot location, I will finalise my analysis and send it to North Yorks CC (in case my figures are substantially at odds with any analysis of their own that they might wish to share) and when I have resolved any issues found, I will publish my results.

 

[RT4038]

I am very suspicious that proponents of rural DRT haven't published any detailed reviews that show how well the software (or even manual systems) can achieve efficient use of vehicles by building a schedule instantly as requests come in. (Even a three-phase schedule process - request, build, notify - may not be sufficiently better).

Being involved in four schemes, of varying area size and complexity, I have come to the conclusion that the most efficient scheme would be of an @Bletchleyite 'one to many' (or v.v.) to a loose schedule, coupled to a three phase schedule process, to optimise loadings. Too much inefficiency is caused(as already observed) by disparate journeys across an area and allocating trips as the bookings come in, rather than after they have all come in. The 'one' to many is relatively easily dealt with, with some downsides, but the trip allocation would be a bit of a problem with the non-app cohort who 'phone in for the bookings.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

TransportInfo is today listing a Times story titled "Uber minibuses open route out of rural isolation", and summarised as: "A £50 million Uber for the countryside is being launched by councils to help those living in rural areas without a car who have become more isolated as bus services dwindled away."

The detail of the story is behind the Times paywall. Is there anyone with a suitable subscription who could offer a brief synopsis here?

 

[Bletchleyite]

TransportInfo is today listing a Times story titled "Uber minibuses open route out of rural isolation", and summarised as: "A £50 million Uber for the countryside is being launched by councils to help those living in rural areas without a car who have become more isolated as bus services dwindled away."

The detail of the story is behind the Times paywall. Is there anyone with a suitable subscription who could offer a brief synopsis here?

It sounds a bit like yet another VIA scheme. If so, I'll just point people to the incredibly poor service that is MK Connect (Milton Keynes) as to why open app based many to many DRT is not a solution to anything, ever.

The article doesn't say who it is (I don't want to breach copyright by posting it), indeed it is a short article saying not very much, but if taxpayers' money is going to VIA for their flawed service I am most disappointed.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

Having failed to find any published data on DRT operational efficiency (has anyone else found anything?), I have done an analysis on the North Yorkshire "Yorbus" operation in the Ripon area, using data that I obtained through a FOI request.

I've written up a brief report, but here are the headlines:

• During the period that I analysed (2,293 rides in Feb 22 to April 22 inc), the two vehicles were carrying passengers for just under 33% of their operating time. They spent 25% of their time repositioning, and 43% of the time idle.
• The vehicles had more than one "group" of passengers (defined as a single traveller, or multiple people booking and travelling together) just 8% of the time, and more than two groups just 2% of the time.
• A standard taxi could have substituted for the minibuses for 97.5% of their operating hours

I have also learned from a report to NYCC (North Yorkshire County Council) that availability (chance of getting the ride you want) is at around the 80% that they targeted. At that rate, anyone trying to use the service for commuting to a job would have a 1.3% chance of getting through a month without missing a day because of DRT nonavailability.

The cost per passenger has been quoted at around £17, which allowing for multi-person trips means that a cost-per-journey (which is the basis for comparing with a taxi) of just about £20 each way.

The service has been running since June 2021, so clearly there is still scope for demand growth, but these figures are stark enough to show that "anywhere-anytime" DRT really isn't a good solution - except from the political angle that even the thinnest DRT service appears to tick the box to discharge the statutory duty to provide public transport.

 

[RT4038]

The service has been running since June 2021, so clearly there is still scope for demand growth, but these figures are stark enough to show that "anywhere-anytime" DRT really isn't a good solution - except from the political angle that even the thinnest DRT service appears to tick the box to discharge the statutory duty to provide public transport.

There is no statutory duty to provide public transport. But the sentiment may well be correct - in many areas clearly fixed bus routes are not working (both from a farebox covering costs point of view, and an actual number of passengers travelling). A service that only provides a vehicle when people want to travel (i.e. by booking) seems ideal from an efficiency and environmental point of view - what is not to like? If only it really worked like that. On the darker side, if you're currently running six buses on poorly used fixed routes, replacing with four DRT buses achieves a saving. If the people can't get the ride they want, too bad - book earlier or travel at a different time, or not at all.

 

[Hophead]

A couple of weeks ago, there was an article in the Watford Observer: "Under-performing Arriva Click service in Watford 'will never work'"

It quotes the owner of a local taxi firm, saying "Demand response transport will never work. Passengers travelling from the same place at roughly the same time and going to roughly the same place is extremely rare. The council visited similar schemes in Oxford and Sittingbourne before going ahead – both have since failed."

You may feel he has a vested interest, but the underlying point is surely correct. If you want to go to a specific place at a specific time and you can't or won't use public transport, then you book a cab. All DRT seems to be offering is a massive subsidy for what is, essentially, a taxi.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A couple of weeks ago, there was an article in the Watford Observer: "Under-performing Arriva Click service in Watford 'will never work'"

It quotes the owner of a local taxi firm, saying "Demand response transport will never work. Passengers travelling from the same place at roughly the same time and going to roughly the same place is extremely rare. The council visited similar schemes in Oxford and Sittingbourne before going ahead – both have since failed."

You may feel he has a vested interest, but the underlying point is surely correct. If you want to go to a specific place at a specific time and you can't or won't use public transport, then you book a cab. All DRT seems to be offering is a massive subsidy for what is, essentially, a taxi.

That's exactly what's happening with the "MK Connect" service. People are simply using it as a cheap taxi. The only way you get the "synergies" (nasty business speak but hey) to make DRT work is if you fix one end of it. And yet Milton Keynes Council's Councillors seem to have been convinced by someone (I wonder who?) that that form of DRT is somehow illegal despite it having been used before (I think one of the Lancashire schemes did it). You do have to register that sort of operation as a local bus service and have a PCV operator's licence rather than simply run it under private hire taxi licensing, but it's not *illegal*.

The figures above do seem to tally with my observation of loadings on MK Connect - basically journeys almost never tally up, and so the number of people in a vehicle is just the number who book that one journey. Yet the 8 seat electric vehicles are expensive to run compared with off the shelf cars. You could run the same thing with e.g. Berlingos or Tourneo Connects for a fraction of the cost.

The other way you can deliver this in rural areas (as again sometimes happens) is having a local taxi firm run it - then there's zero cost if it isn't used at all. I'm fairly sure this has been done at some point too.

But the model used by VIA and Arriva Click is just flawed - it can never be economic, and as noted it's useless for work or school, as nobody's employer will accept 80% attendance.

 

[RT4038]

The other way you can deliver this in rural areas (as again sometimes happens) is having a local taxi firm run it - then there's zero cost if it isn't used at all. I'm fairly sure this has been done at some point too.

But the model used by VIA and Arriva Click is just flawed - it can never be economic, and as noted it's useless for work or school, as nobody's employer will accept 80% attendance.

Whilst I don't disagree with your general sentiment - a few points:
It is not necessarily zero cost if it isn't used at all - the agreement will usually include a standing cost, or if not the standing cost will be reflected in the rates when they do move!
The VIA / Arriva Click can never be economic, but there are ways to at least mitigate the work or school options - allowing regular bookings for instance. Of course one early booking in the peak period for an obscure origin & destination pair will decimate the availability for everyone else......

As VIA would say - Depends how precious you view the right to public transport, irrespective of the cost !