Green Line 797

[Busaholic]

I doubt it with the larger operators (who are also the more likely to run longer services). Many of them seem to have now agreed a lump sum payment for ENCTS reimbursement - hence why there's often no need to now state your destination.

I think you've made my point for me! Two journeys at £X will bring in 2 x £X.

 

[Robertj21a]

I think you've made my point for me! Two journeys at £X will bring in 2 x £X.

No, the lump sum payment is just that, a lump sum - regardless of passenger numbers or their destinations. I know it won't be the same all over England but that certainly applies to a number of the bigger operators.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Nothing dodgy at all. It's now a recognised practice and Stagecoach took the lead in obtaining approval.

Recognised by whom? What possible benefit can it bring?

Is it then the UK Government or DfT who are taking the mickey out of the obvious intention of the EU legislation?

Either way it is an utter nonsense.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Which is preferable? Losing links because they're either sliced and diced, or are uneconomic and so lost, or the alternative in jumping through a few hoops in terms of destination screens?

The Government properly engaging with the EU to have this farcical law changed. Or just doing as the French do and ignoring it entirely.

The workaround is a joke and is actively misleading to passengers. The services are not "connectional". They are through services. Suggesting they are connectional with misleading and false information on destinations screens and in timetables is just stupid.

Neil

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Recognised by whom? What possible benefit can it bring?

Is it then the UK Government or DfT who are taking the mickey out of the obvious intention of the EU legislation?

Either way it is an utter nonsense.

Neil
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The Government properly engaging with the EU to have this farcical law changed. Or just doing as the French do and ignoring it entirely.

The workaround is a joke and is actively misleading to passengers. The services are not "connectional". They are through services. Suggesting they are connectional with misleading and false information on destinations screens and in timetables is just stupid.

Neil

Neil - get a grip. It's not dodgy. It's recognised and advised by the DfT and it's their guidance. You've had this explained to you on a number of occasions so why persist in questioning that?

The original legislation was designed for a problem in the EU. However, it was NEVER anticipated to cover local bus services which it does in the UK. You ask what benefit - well, the guidance is designed to interpret the law with this unintended consequences. The benefit to passengers - well at least they don't lose some of the links OR if they are retained, have a lesser service or higher fares to reflect the higher costs of operating on EU drivers hours.

The services are shown in timetables as through services and advertised as such. If I'm stood in Peterborough bus station and want to go to Kettering and see a Gold X4 with Corby (for Northampton) on the screen, I might still work out that's the bus or at least ask the driver.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Neil - get a grip. It's not dodgy. It's recognised and advised by the DfT and it's their guidance. You've had this explained to you on a number of occasions so why persist in questioning that?

I am entitled to that opinion if I want; it is a workaround complying to the letter of the EU law but questionably the spirit of it. I stand corrected in that it is DfT-endorsed but no further.

The services are shown in timetables as through services and advertised as such. If I'm stood in Peterborough bus station and want to go to Kettering and see a Gold X4 with Corby (for Northampton) on the screen, I might still work out that's the bus or at least ask the driver.

Or you might not, and you might miss your bus.

Public transport is confusing enough without this kind of thing going on, and the Government, the EU and the operators should collectively be ashamed of themselves.

Neil

 

[jon0844]

I didn't know until a short while ago (last year) that Uno was using the same bus and driver to run the 700. It did say a guaranteed connection in the timetable, but even that didn't say why/how. Given their awful timekeeping I just assumed they were forcing the driver to wait, but how many others wouldn't be convinced?

Far easier, I'd say, to have a single bus with a single driver retaining the same number throughout.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Far easier, I'd say, to have a single bus with a single driver retaining the same number throughout.

The problem being that a poorly-drafted piece of legislation heavily increases the costs of doing that. Well, unless you put misleading and incorrect destinations on the blind.

Neil

 

[radamfi]

The root cause of the loophole exploitation, as with so many things, is the failure to fund public transport properly. The Netherlands, contrary to popular opinion, has a rather sparse rail network outside the heavily populated west of the country. So there are quite a few long distance bus services to fill in the gaps. Groningen to Emmen, Groningen to Emmeloord, Leeuwarden to Alkmaar, Breda to Utrecht are all over 50 km and don't seem to have a problem. Although they don't run local buses in deliberate and direct competition with trains, that would of course be nuts.

These buses may be run by 'dual purpose' buses or proper coaches, but are walk on services that charge regular bus fares and can be used for local journeys. They could have split these routes into pseudo routes of less than 50 km, but it doesn't look that way from the timetable or destination blind. So I would guess that these buses have tachographs installed. Or maybe they even install tachos for all local buses, I don't know. Either way, they've put the investment in.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And the Stagecoach X5's old coaches were run with tachos as well. Stagecoach have just found that the "workaround" was a means of cutting costs a bit and increasing profit. (The route is massively profitable anyway, tachos or no).

Neil

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I am entitled to that opinion if I want; it is a workaround complying to the letter of the EU law but questionably the spirit of it. I stand corrected in that it is DfT-endorsed but no further.



Or you might not, and you might miss your bus.

Public transport is confusing enough without this kind of thing going on, and the Government, the EU and the operators should collectively be ashamed of themselves.

Neil

Yes but what's an opinion if it's based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts? As you've been told on several occasions, this is an officially sanctioned guidance from the DfT - got it?

Also, the EU legislators never envisaged the rule sweeping up regular local bus services of that length. Now there are three things that can happen..

• You can recommend ignoring the law - that is never going to happen
• You can implement the law to the letter - so we lose the benefits of these longer services
• You employ a workaround

Also, what with the hyperbole? "They should be ashamed of themselves".... No, not on this. On the scandals of losing dossiers on high profile paedophiles....yes. On not pursuing tax evaders....yes. This....get some perspective!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And the Stagecoach X5's old coaches were run with tachos as well. Stagecoach have just found that the "workaround" was a means of cutting costs a bit and increasing profit. (The route is massively profitable anyway, tachos or no).

Neil

Really..... can you back that up as well? Or is that opinion too?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The root cause of the loophole exploitation, as with so many things, is the failure to fund public transport properly. The Netherlands, contrary to popular opinion, has a rather sparse rail network outside the heavily populated west of the country. So there are quite a few long distance bus services to fill in the gaps. Groningen to Emmen, Groningen to Emmeloord, Leeuwarden to Alkmaar, Breda to Utrecht are all over 50 km and don't seem to have a problem. Although they don't run local buses in deliberate and direct competition with trains, that would of course be nuts.

These buses may be run by 'dual purpose' buses or proper coaches, but are walk on services that charge regular bus fares and can be used for local journeys. They could have split these routes into pseudo routes of less than 50 km, but it doesn't look that way from the timetable or destination blind. So I would guess that these buses have tachographs installed. Or maybe they even install tachos for all local buses, I don't know. Either way, they've put the investment in.

Or that there isn't the equivalent of UK drivers hours legislation in the Netherlands??

And, of course, the UK isn't going to spend much on public transport anyway (apart from high profile, politically impressive capital projects) so it's a false argument.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes but what's an opinion if it's based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the facts? As you've been told on several occasions, this is an officially sanctioned guidance from the DfT - got it?

But clearly not from the EU, unless you can prove so? So the mickey is still being taken, it's just being taken by the DfT, and to the detriment of the quality of passenger information.

Also, the EU legislators never envisaged the rule sweeping up regular local bus services of that length. Now there are three things that can happen..

Do you have a reference for that? Or did they perhaps intend that it would sweep up things like the X5 that are really a coach service that happens to be a walk-on rather than pre-booked operation? Quite similar, in fact, to the Dutch fill-in services the other poster referred to.

Are the Government lobbying the EU to redraft the legislation?

You employ a workaround

Short-term maybe. But something needs to be done about it. Either...

1. The EU decide they did mean it to apply, and close the loophole;
or 2. The EU decide they didn't mean it to apply, and change it so it doesn't.

Really..... can you back that up as well? Or is that opinion too?

What, the Oxford-Cambridge X5 being highly profitable, thus the move can only have served to increase profit? It's well known the route does well - why on earth would it receive so much investment if it didn't? It's understandable that Stagecoach wish to increase its profitability - why would they not?

Or that there isn't the equivalent of UK drivers hours legislation in the Netherlands??

Quite possibly not. Perhaps the EU should have thought of that. Perhaps the EU did think of that, and is moving towards standardisation as it has on many other things? I don't know; neither of us seem to have a reference on their specific intention.

Neil

 

[radamfi]

The last time I caught the Stagecoach bus from Lincoln to Skegness, I remember making a specific effort to see if I could locate the tachograph in the cab when boarding as it was just after the 50 km rule had gone in. In fact, I even saw the driver loading it. This was a bog standard Enviro 400. I used to use this example in discussions as a route that wasn't affected by the 50 km rule.

However, I just looked at the timetable now and they've split it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Or that there isn't the equivalent of UK drivers hours legislation in the Netherlands??

And, of course, the UK isn't going to spend much on public transport anyway (apart from high profile, politically impressive capital projects) so it's a false argument.

The Dutch do seem to have quite rigorous regulations regarding drivers' hours. From the Dutch Govenment's website (in Dutch):

http://www.ilent.nl/onderwerpen/transport/bus/chauffeurs/wet_en_regelgeving/rij_en_rusttijden/

http://www.ilent.nl/Images/Rij- en ...ervoer_tcm334-318003-blanco_tcm334-349055.pdf

My point was more resources will likely to lead to higher standards. Clearly that's obvious. Tachograph installation and use is desirable from a safety point of view, but it costs money. The Dutch are prepared to pay for it.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

But clearly not from the EU, unless you can prove so? So the mickey is still being taken, it's just being taken by the DfT, and to the detriment of the quality of passenger information.



Do you have a reference for that? Or did they perhaps intend that it would sweep up things like the X5 that are really a coach service that happens to be a walk-on rather than pre-booked operation? Quite similar, in fact, to the Dutch fill-in services the other poster referred to.

Are the Government lobbying the EU to redraft the legislation?



Short-term maybe. But something needs to be done about it. Either...

1. The EU decide they did mean it to apply, and close the loophole;
or 2. The EU decide they didn't mean it to apply, and change it so it doesn't.



What, the Oxford-Cambridge X5 being highly profitable, thus the move can only have served to increase profit? It's well known the route does well - why on earth would it receive so much investment if it didn't? It's understandable that Stagecoach wish to increase its profitability - why would they not?



Quite possibly not. Perhaps the EU should have thought of that. Perhaps the EU did think of that, and is moving towards standardisation as it has on many other things? I don't know; neither of us seem to have a reference on their specific intention.

Neil

You want reference....

Under the Regulation, vehicles travelling for more than 50km on a route were required to be fitted with tachographs by 31 December 2007. As stated above, a vehicle first registered 12 the scheme was implemented via seven separate statutory instruments, SIs 2009/483, 488, 491, 493, 494, 495, and 498 before 1 May 2006 may be fitted with either an analogue or a digital tachograph. A vehicle first registered on or after 1 May 2006 must only be fitted with a digital tachograph. Between 11 April 2007 and the date a tachograph was fitted, drivers had to, in the case of passenger vehicles, keep an extract of the duty roster and service timetable.

As stated above, the Regulation was adopted in March 2006 and published in the EU Official Journal; the UK Government then conducted a consultation on the implementing regulations in October 2006. The potential effects on bus route length do not appear to have discussed at all by either the Government or the respondents to the consultation. The issue was raised, however, when the implementing regulations were debated in Committee in June 2007.

The then Liberal Democrat Transport Spokesman, Alistair Carmichael, said:
To my mind, the law of unintended consequences is at work here, particularly in relation to rural bus services (…) For the bus and coach industry … the process is more onerous, because the 50 km is measured by the total route length. That means that a person travelling for just one stop, but on a route that has an overall length of over 50 km, bears a greater cost simply because of the route length. That feature of rural bus services is growing in frequency.

The fact it's one of the those rabid, free market anti EU LibDems should tell you all you want to know.

However, if you want my credentials.... I'm a holder of two CPCs (national and international operations) and have been an O license holder. You??

Also, I know several bus industry managers (most major bus groups) and you know what, among their letters/complaints, the issues of people missing buses for THAT reason just doesn't happen. For other reasons (e.g. perceived early running, total lack of destination, etc) but for the reason you suggest..... doesn't happen.

For the X5, yes they may well wish to improve the operating margin to pay for the nice modern fleet that they've just put in.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

My point was more resources will likely to lead to higher standards. Clearly that's obvious. Tachograph installation and use is desirable from a safety point of view, but it costs money. The Dutch are prepared to pay for it.

Amusing, if only for the fact that the tachograph was originally a means to RAISING AND ENSURING LONGER WORKING HOURS AND PROFITABILITY

However, we're onto old ground about spending on public transport. Not gonna happen on the run of the mill operations, day to day.

 

[radamfi]

I didn't realise the X5 had done the splits before reading this thread, and I was quite taken aback until I realised we were talking about the UK, where nothing should surprise me now. I certainly think this ought to have the same regulations as a National Express type service given it is run by proper coaches and is such a long route. Whilst I can obviously understand why there is a debate about rural bus routes run by normal buses, I would have thought that most people would think differently about the X5. The X5 arguably has more reason to have a tacho than the shorter National Express routes, like the London airport routes or 025 London to Brighton with its frequent stops in south London, and on the A23 between Gatwick and Brighton.

 

[jon0844]

Could bus operators with ticket machines and GPS tracking (as Uno employs) not be able to provide suitable journey tracking/monitoring that renders tachographs virtually obsolete?

It might require a few software tweaks to have drivers sign in/out if they don't already (I assume they do for monitoring ticket sales) but they must be able to give extremely detailed information on each and every journey.

The bigger problem for people, and already many are saying they're quite disappointed, is the loss of a pretty comfortable coach for a bus (a bus that is likely to change from one day to the next, as Uno swap things around all the time so nobody can expect a regular bus).

I'm still wondering why people would take this service over the train. It was always quicker for me to get to a meeting at Baker Street via train/tube than the 797. And going back, I would never be certain of when the meeting would end so have to risk a lengthy wait for a bus over just taking the first tube and never more than 30 minutes for a train.

 

[Robertj21a]

But clearly not from the EU, unless you can prove so? So the mickey is still being taken, it's just being taken by the DfT, and to the detriment of the quality of passenger information.



Do you have a reference for that? Or did they perhaps intend that it would sweep up things like the X5 that are really a coach service that happens to be a walk-on rather than pre-booked operation? Quite similar, in fact, to the Dutch fill-in services the other poster referred to.

Are the Government lobbying the EU to redraft the legislation?



Short-term maybe. But something needs to be done about it. Either...

1. The EU decide they did mean it to apply, and close the loophole;
or 2. The EU decide they didn't mean it to apply, and change it so it doesn't.



What, the Oxford-Cambridge X5 being highly profitable, thus the move can only have served to increase profit? It's well known the route does well - why on earth would it receive so much investment if it didn't? It's understandable that Stagecoach wish to increase its profitability - why would they not?



Quite possibly not. Perhaps the EU should have thought of that. Perhaps the EU did think of that, and is moving towards standardisation as it has on many other things? I don't know; neither of us seem to have a reference on their specific intention.

Neil

Are you being deliberately awkward ?

How many times do people have to provide you with the facts ?

 

[radamfi]

However, if you want my credentials.... I'm a holder of two CPCs (national and international operations) and have been an O license holder. You??

You will probably see this as irrelevant, but I've been reading Neil's posts for about 20 years, notably on uk.railway when he lived in Germany. That knowledge of how things work in a country noted for its public transport has clearly influenced his way of how he sees things in the UK. The UK is a very insular country and I think this is to a large degree why things are so different in the UK. When challenged by the few people who dare to understand foreign operations in detail, both politicians and operators can only see things from a UK-perspective, claim that 'British is best', and then carry on as before.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

You will probably see this as irrelevant, but I've been reading Neil's posts for about 20 years, notably on uk.railway when he lived in Germany. That knowledge of how things work in a country noted for its public transport has clearly influenced his way of how he sees things in the UK. The UK is a very insular country and I think this is to a large degree why things are so different in the UK. When challenged by the few people who dare to understand foreign operations in detail, both politicians and operators can only see things from a UK-perspective, claim that 'British is best', and then carry on as before.

Let's get this absolutely nailed.... I'm not anti-EU, or indeed insular. I've had the privilege of travelling on public transport in European cities such as Lisbon, Seville, Brussels, Paris, Berlin, Maastricht, Dublin, Amsterdam, whilst not forgetting North America.

I freely admit there's a lot to be envious of in terms of how various countries do things. However, there's also the healthy dose of reality and pragmatism in that we live in the UK. We are bound by the laws but, more importantly, the politics in the UK. I would love to see better investment in public transport, I really do. Are there any votes in that? In the list of public concerns (i.e. the electorate), transport doesn't get close to the NHS or Welfare or indeed most other competing issues.

I mean, for pity's sake, I've heard this stuff about how other countries do this and that and how commercial operators are the devil incarnate yet, as we are seeing all over the country, local authorities are continuing to cut and cut more support. The latest in Devon (a hitherto very pro public transport county) where sweeping changes will see places like Tavistock have no public transport after 8pm unless companies decide to take it on commercially.

Anyway, I thought you had left the country?

 

[radamfi]

Let's get this absolutely nailed.... I'm not anti-EU, or indeed insular. I've had the privilege of travelling on public transport in European cities such as Lisbon, Seville, Brussels, Paris, Berlin, Maastricht, Dublin, Amsterdam, whilst not forgetting North America.

I can tell you know more than most about foreign transport from your posts. That doesn't appear to be the case when you read or hear stuff written by transport ministers or transport spokespeople. Or from columns written by current/former transport managers, including blogs such as the former Omnibuses blog.

Anyway, I thought you had left the country?

That unfortunately has gone on the back burner for a while due to a change in circumstances, but is still the plan.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I can tell you know more than most about foreign transport from your posts. That doesn't appear to be the case when you read or hear stuff written by transport ministers or transport spokespeople. Or from columns written by current/former transport managers, including blogs such as the former Omnibuses blog.



That unfortunately has gone on the back burner for a while due to a change in circumstances, but is still the plan.

I know a good few bus company managers and they too are ardent travellers. They've been across Europe and the Far East even. They're not insular but realise where they are.

There will always be the odd person who seems to run contrary to this. However, most bus company managers entered the industry through love not through ambition. Hence why you see people like James Freeman

 

[Robertj21a]

You will probably see this as irrelevant, but I've been reading Neil's posts for about 20 years, notably on uk.railway when he lived in Germany. That knowledge of how things work in a country noted for its public transport has clearly influenced his way of how he sees things in the UK. The UK is a very insular country and I think this is to a large degree why things are so different in the UK. When challenged by the few people who dare to understand foreign operations in detail, both politicians and operators can only see things from a UK-perspective, claim that 'British is best', and then carry on as before.

I too have travelled across much of Europe for very many years, also parts of Asia and Australasia. There's no doubt in my mind that the UK does *not* follow 'best practice' in a number of transport-related areas but we do have our own laws and, in general, we usually keep to them. It's really quite ridiculous for Neil to continually suggest that something unlawful is happening when the issue has been in the public arena for many years.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I too have travelled across much of Europe for very many years, also parts of Asia and Australasia. There's no doubt in my mind that the UK does *not* follow 'best practice' in a number of transport-related areas but we do have our own laws and, in general, we usually keep to them. It's really quite ridiculous for Neil to continually suggest that something unlawful is happening when the issue has been in the public arena for many years.

To clarify, I have not suggested it is unlawful, it is clearly a legal workaround - it is in one sense similar to tax avoidance rather than evasion. However I do feel it is taking advantage of a possibly unintentional (at EU level) loophole, and also that it is very confusing to passengers, particularly occasional ones. Therefore there should, at the same time as using the workaround, be work done at Government level to solve the actual problem in some way so the workaround is not permanent.

Neil

 

[jon0844]

Yes, it's exactly like tax avoidance and evasion. I've merely said words like cheeky and more recently 'dodgy' as a reference to one Ed Miliband.

I do also agree that we shouldn't need to use clever tricks at the expense of the passenger that wants things kept simple. If the law has unintended consequences, change the law or make it clear that it won't be enforced. Just as other countries seem to pick and choose as they see fit.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The then Liberal Democrat Transport Spokesman, Alistair Carmichael, said:
To my mind, the law of unintended consequences is at work here, particularly in relation to rural bus services (…) For the bus and coach industry … the process is more onerous, because the 50 km is measured by the total route length. That means that a person travelling for just one stop, but on a route that has an overall length of over 50 km, bears a greater cost simply because of the route length. That feature of rural bus services is growing in frequency.[/I]

The fact it's one of the those rabid, free market anti EU LibDems should tell you all you want to know.

That is interesting. It would be interesting to know the view of those involved in the making of the EU law, however, and what *they* intended.

However, if you want my credentials

No, they are of no particular interest; being a "refugee" from USENET I read posts based on their content, not on who posts them.

Also, I know several bus industry managers (most major bus groups) and you know what, among their letters/complaints, the issues of people missing buses for THAT reason just doesn't happen.

It doesn't mean it's not unfriendly and confusing (there are many things that are confusing about public transport information provision that people put up with and work around, but could still be better - people weren't missing trains because of the much lower standard of passenger information 10 years ago, for instance, but it has still been improved beyond recognition not to stop people missing trains, but to be better, more friendly and generally to be good to the passenger to attract them back). It also doesn't mean there aren't people not writing in because they feel it'll get them nowhere.

For the X5, yes they may well wish to improve the operating margin to pay for the nice modern fleet that they've just put in.

Quite possibly, though as the old coaches (also a full fleet replacement when they came in, and also brand new) used tachos it surprised me they went that way.

Neil

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

That is interesting. It would be interesting to know the view of those involved in the making of the EU law, however, and what *they* intended.



No, they are of no particular interest; being a "refugee" from USENET I read posts based on their content, not on who posts them.



It doesn't mean it's not unfriendly and confusing (there are many things that are confusing about public transport information provision that people put up with and work around, but could still be better - people weren't missing trains because of the much lower standard of passenger information 10 years ago, for instance, but it has still been improved beyond recognition not to stop people missing trains, but to be better, more friendly and generally to be good to the passenger to attract them back). It also doesn't mean there aren't people not writing in because they feel it'll get them nowhere.



Quite possibly, though as the old coaches (also a full fleet replacement when they came in, and also brand new) used tachos it surprised me they went that way.

Neil

No, I wasn't listing my qualifications because I'm an egotist but because it indicates I've actually done the job. Also, I'm professionally qualified but hey, why would people like me know. Of course, if you're just happy to read only what chimes with your opinion, then what can anyone do.

Fact is, it's clunky but changing EU legislation is not a quick fix. Of course, we can just wait and in the meantime lose these longer services which will doubtless inconvenience more people.

 

[Deerfold]

Has the timetable been posted on this thread yet?

If not...

http://heretotherepublishing.com/h2toldsite/blog/?p=2438

Coming back to the 797, I was having a look at the timetable. I'm not sure if all the buses will run through at Hatfield unless they've revamped all their duties - especially the connections onto the 101.

And is it just me, or is it a bit odd that the last bus from Victoria seems to leave 5 minutes before the last one arrives. Is that a mistake or is there a lot of dead mileage somewhere?

 

[Busaholic]

And is it just me, or is it a bit odd that the last bus from Victoria seems to leave 5 minutes before the last one arrives. Is that a mistake or is there a lot of dead mileage somewhere?

This is not a facetious suggestion - maybe that last journey into London has 15 or 20 miutes late running built into the timetable. Hence, if it makes up time and arrives 'early' it will depart on time: if not, departure will be later than timetabled, but the passenger must be there on time.

 

[jon0844]

If it arrives early, there's always a chance it will leave early. And if it gets a nice easy run up the A1, it may continue to run early.

While a lot of drivers are now aware of the fact that the equipment on the bus can catch them out, plenty still run early and either don't know they can be caught or are actually smart enough to know that nobody is checking.

 

[LS-Colin]

I really do empathise with you mate, but unfortunately virtually everything nowadays is down to hard cash profits rather than the need to provide a viable social service. Coupled with the minimal commitment by local authorities and governments to ensure buses have priority on the roads in the hope of keeping to time as best as possible, the poor 797 didn't really stand much of a chance. The real strong point of routes like this is that they serve residential areas which are not close to a railway station. So even if the bus/coach journey from Somewhere in Stevenage or Hatfield to London was a bit longer than that by rail, it was probably more convenient and possibly even quicker if a passenger takes into account the time taken to get to the nearest railway station in the first place. It was this ability that the former Green Line network used to thrive on. However, with the extremely heavy volume of traffic nowadays together with frequent, sudden and long road closures for todays accident investigations to take place it's no wonder that our bus/coach services are in such chaos. The old Green Line network certainly couldn't have survived under todays traffic conditions. I doubt if there'll be much improvement because cost and greed seem to be ever more prevalent.

 

[jon0844]

I think part of the problem for the 797 is that it travels a route that is well served by rail (and when into London, by other buses/tubes). Perhaps other coaches serve more isolated areas (let's face it, nowhere on the 797 route is like that).

Even travelling into London and back out (albeit at greater expense) is likely to be quicker, or as quick, especially factoring in a turn up and go service by rail/tube/London bus compared to the service frequency of the 797. I always took the train to get to Baker Street, for example.

Clearly allowing pass holders free travel makes it a popular choice for people who can go by bus for free, against the train where the biggest discount will likely be 33%. But the bus operator doesn't really make money from that.