London buses, how do they know how long your journey was (Hopper)?

[edwin_m]

The getting around faster bit is possible anywhere, but the authorities that control the infrastructure don't want to do it. Commercial operation dosent preclude subsidy, the lack of money to do it is what prevents it.

The issue isn't commercial operation as such, it is the lack of regulation. How do you subsidise operator A without operator B complaining that they'd like to compete on the same route but can't because A has an unfair advantage?

 

[radamfi]

Why would anybody do that though? There is no need to change modes as Mornington Crescent, Camden Town and Chalk Farm stations are so close together and it is a short bus ride or perfectly reasonable walk (even for me at 68).
I assume of course that you mean Camden Town. If you mean a random point within the borough then all you have to do is stand on Euston concourse and you have done the journey for nothing.

There are plenty of reasonable journeys though which involve a change between bus and Tube. Before Hopper Fare, taking the bus at both ends of a Zone 1-2 trip would have cost an eye watering £5.90 in peak and still costs at least £3.90 off-peak. That's why it is unhelpful for people to complain about London's "cheap" fares when it has among the most expensive fares in the world. Maybe London isn't too bad when compared to outside London, but that's like comparing a top Premier League team with one from a lower league. "Cheap" is what I call Vienna with its 365 euro a year season ticket.

 

[radamfi]

The issue isn't commercial operation as such, it is the lack of regulation. How do you subsidise operator A without operator B complaining that they'd like to compete on the same route but can't because A has an unfair advantage?

The government could pay lavish amounts of BSOG so that you would make money simply by running an empty bus. I wouldn't recommend this and I hope this isn't how the Tories are planning to fund cheap buses in Cornwall.

 

[carlberry]

The issue isn't commercial operation as such, it is the lack of regulation. How do you subsidise operator A without operator B complaining that they'd like to compete on the same route but can't because A has an unfair advantage?

Again lack of regulation wouldn't prevent bus fares being subsidised and the buses in the UK are degulated, not unregulated. There are plenty of rules they have to follow and countless new ones like quality contracts that can be used to achieve goals like this. It does, however, require people who believe in the end goal of more people using buses, not an end goal of allowing them to dictate how bus services should be run which is different. However we're going seriously off thread!

 

[AlbertBeale]

Iirc the average bus fare was 70p when mayor Sadiq Khan came to power, I was told the hopper fare dropped it to 60p but it appears to have gone up to 70p the main determination of average bus fare revenue is zip card usage and travel card reimbursement. Travel card reimbursement is low for buses because it is done on a per mile basis which disadvantages the mode that Carey's the passenger the shortest distance which is most likely a bus zip card revenue has a notional value of 0 same with staff passes 60+ passes , veterans etc etc. Freedom passes have a notional value of £1.05 per trip as this is what TfL gets reimbursed by London councils

The loss of subsidy has meant the planning capacity of bus routes (basically how full the bus needs to be before the frequency is reviewed) has gone up from 70% - 90%, bus routes have been shortened and realigned based on the principle that there is less of a need to provide a direct services.

Also by transferring the route mileage from inner London to outer London they can cut the amount of buses used to deliver those miles. This is because the average bus speed is slower in inner London than outer London, so outer London requires less buses to cover the same mileage.

I also believe there have been huge cuts on buses that cross the greater London boundary , this is because TfL are no longer willing to cover the loss of revenue that is made by serving these areas without a subsidy from the local authority from which the bus serves

The key thing is not so much the bus speeds but speed/time for end-to-end journey for a passenger hopping around central London. A combination of abolishing and shortening central London routes, combined with closing the open back platforms on the new buses, has massively increased end-to-end times for journeys of a mile or two. These policies - irrespective of the reason for them - has made life much slower and more inefficient for people around central London who rely on buses. But then, unlike rail passengers, bus passengers' time isn't counted as being valuable.

Add to that the abolition of bus maps (relied on by visitors) and the cutting of useful information shown at bus stops, and you have a pattern of major worsening of the utility of bus services in central London - it really is a scandal.

 

[matt_world2004]

The key thing is not so much the bus speeds but speed/time for end-to-end journey for a passenger hopping around central London. A combination of abolishing and shortening central London routes, combined with closing the open back platforms on the new buses, has massively increased end-to-end times for journeys of a mile or two. These policies - irrespective of the reason for them - has made life much slower and more inefficient for people around central London who rely on buses. But then, unlike rail passengers, bus passengers' time isn't counted as being valuable.

Add to that the abolition of bus maps (relied on by visitors) and the cutting of useful information shown at bus stops, and you have a pattern of major worsening of the utility of bus services in central London - it really is a scandal.

I wasn't talking from a customer service perspective but how they have managed to hide cuts by moving bus mileage from slower moving inner London to faster moving outer London which requires less buses to achieve the same mileage

 

[PeterC]

The key thing is not so much the bus speeds but speed/time for end-to-end journey for a passenger hopping around central London. A combination of abolishing and shortening central London routes, combined with closing the open back platforms on the new buses, has massively increased end-to-end times for journeys of a mile or two. These policies - irrespective of the reason for them - has made life much slower and more inefficient for people around central London who rely on buses. But then, unlike rail passengers, bus passengers' time isn't counted as being valuable.

Add to that the abolition of bus maps (relied on by visitors) and the cutting of useful information shown at bus stops, and you have a pattern of major worsening of the utility of bus services in central London - it really is a scandal.

I thought that policy was to discourage bus use in favour of cycling.

 

[AlbertBeale]

I thought that policy was to discourage bus use in favour of cycling.

Are you joking? Even TfL surely see cycling and bus use as complementary, with both taking over from private cars - which (together with the growth of mini-cabs) are still an absolute scourge in central London .

It seems that TfL's financial problems have led them to slash bus services in the centre (even though the underground is often not a good alternative for many journeys, and is more expensive). But - as with so many public authorities - they won't admit they're in a bind and say frankly that they're making things worse because they have no choice; they'd rather try to rationalise what they feel forced to do and to pretend it's a good thing. They'd get a lot more understanding, and less flack, if they were honest about the situation.

 

[HSTEd]

Being pedantic This assumes the clocks on both the busses are exactly synchronised !

In the post GPS era, clocks are regularly synchronised to the second these days.

One of the other reasons GPS is an incredibly important invention in human history.

 

[Mikey C]

Are you joking? Even TfL surely see cycling and bus use as complementary, with both taking over from private cars - which (together with the growth of mini-cabs) are still an absolute scourge in central London .

It seems that TfL's financial problems have led them to slash bus services in the centre (even though the underground is often not a good alternative for many journeys, and is more expensive). But - as with so many public authorities - they won't admit they're in a bind and say frankly that they're making things worse because they have no choice; they'd rather try to rationalise what they feel forced to do and to pretend it's a good thing. They'd get a lot more understanding, and less flack, if they were honest about the situation.

TfL seem less committed to bus travel than before though

Going back to the days of Ken, then TfL policy was very much about discouraging private car use and encouraging bus use, whereas in recent years encouraging cycling seems more of a priority. Whenever road junctions are redesigned now, it's to benefit cyclists at the expense of other road users, and buses are suffering from this squeeze on road space as well

 

[AlbertBeale]

TfL seem less committed to bus travel than before though

Going back to the days of Ken, then TfL policy was very much about discouraging private car use and encouraging bus use, whereas in recent years encouraging cycling seems more of a priority. Whenever road junctions are redesigned now, it's to benefit cyclists at the expense of other road users, and buses are suffering from this squeeze on road space as well

I know what you mean - though some major junction redesigns around the centre have made it much more hairy for cycling, despite what's claimed. For example, take the Lambeth North station angled crossroads, where I cycle fairly often. There's been one change which makes cycling safer, but 3 of the routes across the junction (because of the way they've relaid the traffic lanes) now feel much worse when cycling, on account of pinch points mainly. I've felt threatened much more when cycling there, since the redesign.