Dual Door Buses

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, but not ideal because of the restricted width between the nearside wheelarch and staircase, plus the added dwell time for ramp deployment and manoeuvring of the wheelchair.

All of which is exactly the same for single door. The point is that there is no accessibility disadvantage for dual.

How much benefit dual brings depends on the nature of the route. For classic "suburb to bus station" routes it provides almost no benefit (as towards town people are only boarding, and away from it just alighting), but for cross-city routes the benefit is significant. I think this could easily be decided by route. For instance, Oxford Road would benefit from three-door artics with open boarding and RPIs on patrol, because there is constant passenger churn.

The biggest saving in PVR you could make, single or dual door, is to switch to London style contactless. The saving can be significant - a typical transaction takes maybe 10-20 seconds at the moment, reduced to under one second with tap-in. That saving could well entirely fund a move to flat fare to avoid the complexity of needing to touch out. Almost everyone is now paying for bus travel by card, be that a free pass or contactless, so the odd cash transaction is now moot. Not only does it save money, but by making journeys considerably faster (most stops being down to under 10 seconds total, particularly for single-deck) it makes the bus more attractive and so brings more passengers. One significant reason not to use the bus is it being too slow - and part of that is because it stops, often for over a minute, every 200m or so for people to negotiate a transaction. It's astonishing that bus companies don't get that and solve it.

 

[Gareth]

How much benefit dual brings depends on the nature of the route. For classic "suburb to bus station" routes it provides almost no benefit (as towards town people are only boarding, and away from it just alighting), but for cross-city routes the benefit is significant.

I'm not sure I agree. Most buses in most cities are suburbs to city centre. And whilst more people board on the way in and alight on the way out, it's still far from one way traffic in my experience. There's been plenty of occasions in busy periods where I've had to wait a while to board whilst others alight and when I myself have wanted to alight, had to muscle past both people boarding and people standing towards the front. Living in Hong Kong, the middle door made a world of difference in these scenarios.

Besides, the middle door is near universal in most countries. I've been on buses in large cities and small low density suburbs and it's always there as a matter of course. It also makes sense to have some uniformity on the matter. Having some dual for only certain routes restricts vehicle flexibility. It also messes about with passenger expectations. When in Hong Kong, I initially had a habit of walking to the front to get off. When I came back here, I had to remind myself that I had to do it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure I agree. Most buses in most cities are suburbs to city centre. And whilst more people board on the way in and alight on the way out, it's still far from one way traffic in my experience. There's been plenty of occasions in busy periods where I've had to wait a while to board whilst others alight and when I myself have wanted to alight, had to muscle past both people boarding and people standing towards the front. Living in Hong Kong, the middle door made a world of difference in these scenarios.

Yes, some routes have considerable intermediate traffic and some don't. Oxford Road is an example of one in Manchester that very much does. But some of the more local routes likely won't. To be fair, that will probably also correlate with bus size. Most people would agree that a centre door on an Optare Solo is a bit silly, but you could certainly universally provide them on a decker.

They're a legal requirement in Germany, which results in silliness like this: https://vhhbus.de/schnellbusse-48-49/ (pictures of historic small German minibuses with dual-door)

When I came back here, I had to remind myself that I had to do it.

I use buses in both MK (where it's all single door) and London (where it's all dual door) and this seems bizarre to me. I get off at the nearest door to my seat, and which one that is is always pretty obvious. Where it does cause confusion is "nose-in" bus stations, London has (I think) none of these, but the provinces plenty of them, and at those the rear door can't generally be used.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

I'm not sure I agree. Most buses in most cities are suburbs to city centre. And whilst more people board on the way in and alight on the way out, it's still far from one way traffic in my experience. There's been plenty of occasions in busy periods where I've had to wait a while to board whilst others alight and when I myself have wanted to alight, had to muscle past both people boarding and people standing towards the front. Living in Hong Kong, the middle door made a world of difference in these scenarios.

Besides, the middle door is near universal in most countries. I've been on buses in large cities and small low density suburbs and it's always there as a matter of course. It also makes sense to have some uniformity on the matter. Having some dual for only certain routes restricts vehicle flexibility. It also messes about with passenger expectations. When in Hong Kong, I initially had a habit of walking to the front to get off. When I came back here, I had to remind myself that I had to do it.

Yes indeed, for example here in Oxford, Oxford Bus Company routes City 2/2A/2B, 3/3A, 5, 8/9, BrookesBus U1 and U5 could benefit from dual doors as they get extremely busy, even if the majority of these are just basically town centre to suburb routes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes indeed, for example here in Oxford, Oxford Bus Company routes City 2/2A/2B, 3/3A, 5, 8/9, BrookesBus U1 and U5 could benefit from dual doors as they get extremely busy, even if the majority of these are just basically town centre to suburb routes.

Oxford Bus Company has operated dual-door at times in the past, it'd be interesting to know why they moved away from it.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Oxford Bus Company has operated dual-door at times in the past, it'd be interesting to know why they moved away from it.

They still have a couple of dual door Citaros in service!

I agree though, why they moved away from dual door for an important, famous university town just disgusts me. And funnily enough, the dual doors were allocated to routes that I indeed advocate for their return!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Nov 2021 ==

Yes, some routes have considerable intermediate traffic and some don't. Oxford Road is an example of one in Manchester that very much does. But some of the more local routes likely won't. To be fair, that will probably also correlate with bus size. Most people would agree that a centre door on an Optare Solo is a bit silly, but you could certainly universally provide them on a decker.

I can think the same thing here in Oxford with Cowley Road, Headington Road, Iffley Road and Banbury Road.

Woodstock Road, Marston Road, Abingdon Road and Botley Road routes don't tend to get busy, so they work fine with single doors

 

[Gareth]

Yes, some routes have considerable intermediate traffic and some don't. Oxford Road is an example of one in Manchester that very much does. But some of the more local routes likely won't. To be fair, that will probably also correlate with bus size. Most people would agree that a centre door on an Optare Solo is a bit silly, but you could certainly universally provide them on a decker.

They're a legal requirement in Germany, which results in silliness like this: https://vhhbus.de/schnellbusse-48-49/ (pictures of historic small German minibuses with dual-door)



I use buses in both MK (where it's all single door) and London (where it's all dual door) and this seems bizarre to me. I get off at the nearest door to my seat, and which one that is is always pretty obvious.

Because you're used to using both frequently. If you're mostly used to just one arrangement, autopilot kicks in.

 

[Robertj21a]

Yes, some routes have considerable intermediate traffic and some don't. Oxford Road is an example of one in Manchester that very much does. But some of the more local routes likely won't. To be fair, that will probably also correlate with bus size. Most people would agree that a centre door on an Optare Solo is a bit silly, but you could certainly universally provide them on a decker.

They're a legal requirement in Germany, which results in silliness like this: https://vhhbus.de/schnellbusse-48-49/ (pictures of historic small German minibuses with dual-door)



I use buses in both MK (where it's all single door) and London (where it's all dual door) and this seems bizarre to me. I get off at the nearest door to my seat, and which one that is is always pretty obvious. Where it does cause confusion is "nose-in" bus stations, London has (I think) none of these, but the provinces plenty of them, and at those the rear door can't generally be used.

Kingston is nose in.

 

[johncrossley]

Where it does cause confusion is "nose-in" bus stations, London has (I think) none of these

There's one in Kingston but I think that's the only one, and I think they want to demolish that. Such bus stations seem to be uncommon outside Britain for local buses, probably because most buses are not single door. Manchester does seem to be an anomaly in using single door buses for a city of its size. Is there a comparable sized city except Birmingham that uses single door buses?

 

[markymark2000]

All of which is exactly the same for single door. The point is that there is no accessibility disadvantage for dual.

How much benefit dual brings depends on the nature of the route. For classic "suburb to bus station" routes it provides almost no benefit (as towards town people are only boarding, and away from it just alighting), but for cross-city routes the benefit is significant. I think this could easily be decided by route. For instance, Oxford Road would benefit from three-door artics with open boarding and RPIs on patrol, because there is constant passenger churn.

The biggest saving in PVR you could make, single or dual door, is to switch to London style contactless. The saving can be significant - a typical transaction takes maybe 10-20 seconds at the moment, reduced to under one second with tap-in. That saving could well entirely fund a move to flat fare to avoid the complexity of needing to touch out. Almost everyone is now paying for bus travel by card, be that a free pass or contactless, so the odd cash transaction is now moot. Not only does it save money, but by making journeys considerably faster (most stops being down to under 10 seconds total, particularly for single-deck) it makes the bus more attractive and so brings more passengers. One significant reason not to use the bus is it being too slow - and part of that is because it stops, often for over a minute, every 200m or so for people to negotiate a transaction. It's astonishing that bus companies don't get that and solve it.

Oxford Road had (pre Covid, not sure if they still do) Stagecoach staff at the Uni to sell tickets off the bus.



I think that the places where dual doors work are minimal. Even in London where they are widespread, they can cause more issued than they're worth on the outer routes because of the door interlocks. It takes longer for the rear doors to open and close than it does the front so it has the opposite effect of increasing dwell times.

I do agree though that on routes which high loading/unloading, they can be favourable but you have to weigh it up as unloading only, it takes longer. You need a lot of stops where people board and alight simultaneously for dual doors to be worthwhile and provide a meaningful benefit (taking into account the reduced seating capacity and the many changes to infrastructure which would need to be funded)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Oxford Road had (pre Covid, not sure if they still do) Stagecoach staff at the Uni to sell tickets off the bus.

I think that the places where dual doors work are minimal. Even in London where they are widespread, they can cause more issued than they're worth on the outer routes because of the door interlocks. It takes longer for the rear doors to open and close than it does the front so it has the opposite effect of increasing dwell times.

Increasing numbers of buses now have interlocks on the front doors, so this is moot.

I do agree though that on routes which high loading/unloading, they can be favourable but you have to weigh it up as unloading only, it takes longer. You need a lot of stops where people board and alight simultaneously for dual doors to be worthwhile and provide a meaningful benefit (taking into account the reduced seating capacity and the many changes to infrastructure which would need to be funded)

I agree, and you will find many such routes in central London due to its distributed nature. Fewer in Manchester, but Oxford Road is certainly one and always has been. It used to take I believe about 15 minutes to fully load, including ticket sales, one of the Magic Bus Dragons. That is like setting fire to fifty quid notes the whole time.

 

[johncrossley]

I think that the places where dual doors work are minimal.

But dual door buses are vastly more common when looking at city buses in the world as a whole.

 

[Gareth]

So what's unique about the UK that makes dual door inappropriate in most situations but near universally necessary everywhere else?

 

[Bletchleyite]

So what's unique about the UK that makes dual door inappropriate in most situations but near universally necessary everywhere else?

In the UK the norm is suburb to central bus station. In other countries routes are much more likely to be multi centric, with far more interchange to rail on integrated ticketing, also taking into account that land use tends to be much more mixed.

 

[Gareth]

Having used buses in other countries, that's a gross generalisation and I struggle to see the uniqueness in the UKs bus networks. And I've used plenty of low frequency low density suburb-to-centre buses in other countries and there's a middle door, every time.

This is just one of those weird UK idiosyncrasies that the rest of the world pretty much chooses not to emulate, alongside ring circuits and those pedestrian traffic signals mounted in a little box on the nearside post rather than across the way.

 

[markymark2000]

Increasing numbers of buses now have interlocks on the front doors, so this is moot.

To an extent yes but there are also significant numbers without as it can be turned off. I believe Reading have the middle doors without interlock but this is more unsafe as the driver can't see what is going on as easily while these doors are closing, can't check for trapped passengers and such like as easily as the front doors so I would say for safety, the middle/rear doors should have interlock and in which

I agree, and you will find many such routes in central London due to its distributed nature. Fewer in Manchester, but Oxford Road is certainly one and always has been. It used to take I believe about 15 minutes to fully load, including ticket sales, one of the Magic Bus Dragons. That is like setting fire to fifty quid notes the whole time.

Oxford Road, it depends. The can be pick up or drop off at a lot of stops rather than simulaneous loading and unloading. In which case, it wouldn't have much benefit. The benefit which could be had here is off bus ticketing or tap in, tap off.

Having used buses in other countries, that's a gross generalisation and I struggle to see the uniqueness in the UKs bus networks. And I've used plenty of low frequency low density suburb-to-centre buses in other countries and there's a middle door, every time.

Just because everyone else does it, doesn't mean it's the right thing to do or the best thing to do. Abroad, they are heavily subsidised, have significantly higher bus usage, areas are built for dual door buses from the offset, abroad is much more mixed use than the UK so a lot more simultaneous loading/unloading.

 

[Bletchleyite]

To an extent yes but there are also significant numbers without as it can be turned off.

It shouldn't be turned off. Why should we encourage a less safe method of operation?

Oxford Road, it depends. The can be pick up or drop off at a lot of stops rather than simulaneous loading and unloading.

All of the stops between Oxford Road station and the MRI have very significant boarding *and* alighting at the same time, as well as some through Rusholme. Only south of Rusholme is it mostly alighting (south)/boarding (north).

 

[TheSel]

Wheelchair doesn't necessarily have to be in the centre doors. Brighton & Hove's dual door Streetdecks have the wheelchair ramp at the front door and are manually operated.

Indeed. In fact, it could be argued that REQUIRING wheelchair users to use the centre doors is, in itself, discrimatory.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Indeed. In fact, it could be argued that REQUIRING wheelchair users to use the centre doors is, in itself, discrimatory.

It really couldn't.

 

[A0]

There's one in Kingston but I think that's the only one, and I think they want to demolish that. Such bus stations seem to be uncommon outside Britain for local buses, probably because most buses are not single door. Manchester does seem to be an anomaly in using single door buses for a city of its size. Is there a comparable sized city except Birmingham that uses single door buses?

Well since you've managed to comment on the UK's second and third largest cities the answer is probably not....... the other cities around the UK are smaller than Manchester or Birmingham.

In terms of other cities it's unlikely where they have First, Stagecoach or Arriva as their main operator as outside London I can't think of any area where they operate dual door buses.

What about the municipals - Reading or Nottingham would spring to mind, possibly Ipswich (they certainly used to 30 years ago)

 

[RT4038]

It really couldn't.

Quite!

 

[johncrossley]

Well since you've managed to comment on the UK's second and third largest cities the answer is probably not....... the other cities around the UK are smaller than Manchester or Birmingham.

I was thinking worldwide, in advanced countries that have organised bus services that we would recognise as such.

 

[SouthEastBuses]

This is just one of those weird UK idiosyncrasies that the rest of the world pretty much chooses not to emulate, alongside ring circuits and those pedestrian traffic signals mounted in a little box on the nearside post rather than across the way.

Agreed. This is why all non-London UK bus operators who run city routes need to learn from Brighton & Hove and Reading Buses. The two non London UK bus operators that are now only ordering dual door buses for use on city routes!

Single door is perfectly fine on rural or long distance routes, where you are far more likely to see people seated, so you'd want to have as many seats as possible. But on a city route, where dwell times are essential and you have far more people only doing short journeys - you need dual doors I'm afraid.

 

[carlberry]

Agreed. This is why all non-London UK bus operators who run city routes need to learn from Brighton & Hove and Reading Buses. The two non London UK bus operators that are now only ordering dual door buses for use on city routes!

Single door is perfectly fine on rural or long distance routes, where you are far more likely to see people seated, so you'd want to have as many seats as possible. But on a city route, where dwell times are essential and you have far more people only doing short journeys - you need dual doors I'm afraid.

I'm not aware that Reading have bought anything for a few years and they've only got one batch of dual door buses. If companies actually thought that the savings on dwell times for the limited number of stops it would apply to outweighed the other costs involved then they'd be buying them. They fact they're not suggests they're happy as they are. However this is rapidly becoming nothing to do with Manchester franchising!

 

[SouthEastBuses]

I'm not aware that Reading have bought anything for a few years and they've only got one batch of dual door buses. If companies actually thought that the savings on dwell times for the limited number of stops it would apply to outweighed the other costs involved then they'd be buying them. They fact they're not suggests they're happy as they are. However this is rapidly becoming nothing to do with Manchester franchising!

Manchester badly needs dual door buses on some of their routes though, particularly the 192...

 

[GusB]

The last 27 posts in this thread were originally here:

TfGM Bus franchising

Andy Burnham sets out his plan for a London-style integrated transport system for Greater Manchester: Our Network Assessment into the future of bus market completed & recommends franchising Our Pass to give free bus travel to 16-to-18 year olds Contactless payment to be launched on Metrolink New...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[WAB]

Coming from London to the provinces, it is painfully clear that dwell times need to be reduced in order to reduce bunching and journey times. Dwell times of several minutes at bus stops and they wonder why usage is low!

They really need to implement:

1. Tap-in smartcard/contactless only
2. Dual door buses
3. Curtailments to fill gaps as needed

 

[Bungle158]

Hi there,

just want to share a few thoughts/ramblings on buses that have doors both by the driver and in the middle; sometimes even with yet another door at the back, or, indeed, several on articulated buses.

As a young kid, I wasn't even aware that dual door buses were a thing. All the buses in Liverpool were then (and are) single door. As the driver takes the fare, this seemed innately obvious and I gave little thought to it. Then, in the mid-nineties, Merseybus/MTL bought a whole load of second hand Leyland Titans from London. These were weird foreign things to me; the seating arrangement on the lower deck, the decor and of course, the extra set of doors. They even retained their all-red colour for quite a while. This door was kept out of use and I never saw it it in operation on any of them. There were usually signs saying "Doors Not In Use". I thought a middle door was weird. I wondered how it worked exactly and what stopped people bunking on. MTL even went to the trouble of having these doors removed eventually.

I've since used dual door buses in both London and abroad. In practice they seem to work perfectly well. Indeed, after living in Hong Kong for a short while I got so accustomed to them that it actually felt weird going all the way to the front of the bus to get off, when I came back to the UK.

A lot of people cite dual door buses as an example of London exceptionalism. That may be the case in the UK, but in the world as a whole, it's actually most of the UK that is unusual. Almost everywhere else I've been in the world, dual door buses are standard; and not just in big cities or on high capacity routes. Even quite small settlements which only have an hourly service and midi-buses still tend to have the second set of doors.

So my main query is: why is this the case? The big difference between London and the rest of the UK is that London has some control on the specification of bus services and so can mandate things like dual door vehicles. The rest of the UK is deregulated. This is actually pretty rare outside the UK and bus services in much of the world are either run by municipal corporations or at least have a some sort of franchising system. But whilst there seems to be a parallel between the UK (sans London) being deregulated and the prevalence of single door buses, I'm not sure deregulation can be the sole reason. For example, Liverpool had dual door buses (inclduing Leyland Atlanteans and the likes) but seemed to be phasing them out by the mid-70s; pretty much as soon as conductors were removed. But we're talking over a decade before deregulation and the PTE could've insisted on dual door buses if it wanted to. Evidently, they felt two sets of doors were now no longer necessary or perhaps even undesirable. Now, post-deregulation, the private bus operators could use dual door buses if they felt like it, even if the local authorities didn't approve but they generally don't. It seems the big companies who have both London and non-London operations go to the trouble of removing the door when cascading mid-life London vehicles. As such companies wouldn't go to such trouble and expense without deeming it absolutely necessary, they must feel dual door is absolutely a no-no for their services outside London. But like I said, it's the norm in much of the world so what are the specific local conditions that make dual door buses a negative in most of the UK?

I suppose the other question naturally is: which do you think is better? Does it even make much of a difference one way or the other? I must say I quite like dual door buses. I like the separation of those getting on and off, which helps during busy times. I'd certainly like to see a trial on some of the biggest routes here (i.e. 10, 86) but at the same time, it's probably not the biggest issue of the day and I cope well enough with the status quo.

Finally, I know the odd town/city outside of London has seen trials of dual door buses in recent years. I think Reading & Brighton are a couple. Anyone local to these areas know how these trails went and if they're still ongoing? I may as well point out here that Arriva cascaded some of its bendy buses, which had been expelled from London, to Liverpool to work the specially branded Airport 500 bus. I never got to go on one of these and I have no idea how the fare collection worked and even if any of the doors were in use other than the front ones. They disappeared after a couple of years, so were clearly not deemed a success; although articulated buses are quite a different beast to dual door standard length buses.

Sorry for the rambling post but it's a curious topic for me.

Reading ran OPO, single deck, dual door buses from 1958, well into the 70s

 

[SouthEastBuses]

Coming from London to the provinces, it is painfully clear that dwell times need to be reduced in order to reduce bunching and journey times. Dwell times of several minutes at bus stops and they wonder why usage is low!

They really need to implement:

1. Tap-in smartcard/contactless only
2. Dual door buses
3. Curtailments to fill gaps as needed

I fully agree. Dual doors are a possible reason why Brighton has the highest bus usage outside of London. A place to learn a lot from!

 

[Robertj21a]

I fully agree. Dual doors are a possible reason why Brighton has the highest bus usage outside of London. A place to learn a lot from!

Brighton has only had dual doors fairly recently. It's been 2nd to London in bus usage for many years, probably due to limited car facilities (and an excellent bus management team).