Brought through from "The level of road use" - that 52 registrattions thread is springing new ones everywhere!
Paul: <<We have First buses in Sheffield too (I think it's actually the largest bus operator after Stagecoach), and yes, a great deal of them are brand new, very clean and bright, and I dare say more efficient on fuel than older ones.>>
In Leeds there's First and Arriva (and a couple of cheap and scruffy alternatives, like Black Prince - after the statue in City Square, whose drivers don't even have uniforms). The only ones you're ever likely to get on unless you're a student though are First and Arriva.
Arriva have nice, new looking double deckers with green and cream livery and uncluttered looking sides and adverts that simply say "Arriva" with the logo, and a simplified version of the bus route printed down each side.
First have gone the other way. They have nice, new looking double deckers and bendy buses with grey and pink and purple livery (hideous). They have the First logo and then very cluttered sides: they do something called the Overground. This is what I started this thread to talk about.
Every bus has the complex "Overground" logo that's unreadable and looks messy anyway, then an Underground-style map on the side. Each "line" now has a colour instead of a number. Just to make things even more confusing, they aren't even memorable numbers. Personally I think "1" is easier to remember than "Turquoise" and "18" simpler to bring to mind than "Indigo". I'd hate to go to the wrong side of Leeds just because I have the wrong shade of blue. Then of course there's the issue that Arriva run some of the same routes and they don't use the colour coding!
Do First run this confusing and rather laughable branding elsewhere? It really irritates me because it's not the "Overground", it's a bloody bus, and the routes have numbers already!
I can't help but wonder if it has anything to do with Leeds's short lived plans for an underground system (I remember them digging holes in the central reservation of the Ring Road to see if they could do it).
Chris
Daft buses (was: The level of road use)
Moderator: Site Management Team
Oops...
Me: <<Just to make things even more confusing, they aren't even memorable numbers.>>
That should be "colours", not "numbers"!
Chris
Me: <<Just to make things even more confusing, they aren't even memorable numbers.>>
That should be "colours", not "numbers"!
Chris
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
-
A68Nick
- Account deactivated at user request
- Posts: 633
- Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:45
- Location: Milkyway
First's "Overground" branding operation started in Glasgow and has spread everywhere. So far the following cities have had their services branded as such:
First Glasgow
First Leeds
First South Yorkshire (Sheffield)
First Western National (Plymouth)
Overground services are operated at 10 minute frequencies, although some operate at 15 minutes.
Some towns retain the older "Metro" branding, although these are apparently all going to be converted to "Overground" brands:
First Southampton
First Aberdeen
First South Yorkshire (Doncaster, Rotherham)
Metro services are operated at 15 minute frequencies.
Routes that don't operate at the frequencies required of the brands are not branded. Sometimes First cheat by combining different routes under the same colour and give them number suffixes (e.g. Southampton, 5/5A) even though the two routes may often be operating on separate roads for some surprisingly long sections of route. In Southampton this means that since the whole of Hill Lane is served by the 5A (ex-25) while Shirley is covered by the 5, the route doesn't have the frequency required except on the common sections.
To confuse the issue even more, in First Manchester operate "High Frequency Services" and"Goldservice"that are every 10 minutes and have their own branding and tube-style maps but aren't branded as Overground or Metro. They also operate "Qualityservice" although these don't necessarily operate at the high frequency.
First launched the Overground in Edinburgh, promised that it wouldn't change for 10 years and then it all fell apart after a few months as First decided to take on the council-owned Lothian Buses. After about 9 months of competitionFirst gave up and has basically left Edinburgh internal services alone, allowing us to enjoy the superb services provided by Lothian.
Nick
<HR>
N i c h o l a s A l la n
First Glasgow
First Leeds
First South Yorkshire (Sheffield)
First Western National (Plymouth)
Overground services are operated at 10 minute frequencies, although some operate at 15 minutes.
Some towns retain the older "Metro" branding, although these are apparently all going to be converted to "Overground" brands:
First Southampton
First Aberdeen
First South Yorkshire (Doncaster, Rotherham)
Metro services are operated at 15 minute frequencies.
Routes that don't operate at the frequencies required of the brands are not branded. Sometimes First cheat by combining different routes under the same colour and give them number suffixes (e.g. Southampton, 5/5A) even though the two routes may often be operating on separate roads for some surprisingly long sections of route. In Southampton this means that since the whole of Hill Lane is served by the 5A (ex-25) while Shirley is covered by the 5, the route doesn't have the frequency required except on the common sections.
To confuse the issue even more, in First Manchester operate "High Frequency Services" and"Goldservice"that are every 10 minutes and have their own branding and tube-style maps but aren't branded as Overground or Metro. They also operate "Qualityservice" although these don't necessarily operate at the high frequency.
First launched the Overground in Edinburgh, promised that it wouldn't change for 10 years and then it all fell apart after a few months as First decided to take on the council-owned Lothian Buses. After about 9 months of competitionFirst gave up and has basically left Edinburgh internal services alone, allowing us to enjoy the superb services provided by Lothian.
Nick
<HR>
N i c h o l a s A l la n
Chris: <<Do First run this confusing and rather laughable branding elsewhere? It really irritates me because it's not the "Overground", it's a bloody bus, and the routes have numbers already!>>
The idea of Metro style branding is not new - but it does sound as if they've got themselves into a bit of a mess in Leeds.
I first heard of this with reference to First services in Brighton. The concept is actually a very good one. To start with, let's consider reasons why people don't use buses:
1. They don't run on time.
2. They're dirty and smelly.
3. There isn't atime table at the stop.
4. On the odd occasion there is a timetable, it says buses arrive at 18 and 48 minutes past the hour between 10 and 12 except on school days where they run at 22 and 52 minutes past the hour. (i.e. it is too bl**dy complicated).
5. No service after 6pm or on Sundays.
6. They take 4 times as long as the equivalent car journey.
7. They cost too much money.
8. I can't get my pram / wheel chair / golf trolley on the bus.
I could go on.
To give bus companies credit, they, in conjunction with highway authorities, are trying ot address these issues. As has been stated elsewhere, Arriva and First have made significant investment in their vehicle fleets and reduced their average age of vehicle. The new vehicles are usually low floor accessible buses (though I've yet to see anyone taking a golf trolley on board:-) ). They are cleaner, both in terms of the interior and emissions - a number use LPG rather than diesel. Highway authorities are providing the infrastructure for bus priority, though some of the stuff that is built seems to be very misguided and put there for the sake of putting it there.
Back to the point, the idea of the true metro branding is that you do away with the timetable and run enough buses on a route so you'll never have more than a ten minute wait (and usually less). The routes are well defined, and relatively simple and can be easily displayed in the style of a London Underground map. That way, you'll know that within a few minutes of arriving at your stop, a relatively new vehicle will arrive and can run along a route with sufficient bus priority to make the journey time consistent from day to day.
This is supposed to be more appealing to people, and make them more likely to use the bus because it is cleaner and more reliable. Of course, if the branding is unclear, then much of this benefit is lost.
Speaking personally, I have four options to get to work in the morning.
The first is a 15 minute journey in the car. (Using Inland Revenue rates of 45p/mile for my car, that costs at ?4.50 per return trip).
Second is a 30 minute walk into town followed by a 5 minute train journey and another 5 minute walk at the other end. Cost - around ?4 return
Third is a 40 minute bus ride - cost - around ?3.50 return
Fourth - 30 minutes on the bike - free at point of use.
At first glance, the car works out more expensive - until you realise that much of that cost covers depreciation, tax and insurance- and I need the car at least twice a week for work once I get there - so I need the car whether I use it or not on a particular day. I do cycle from time to time but I usually end up needing to carry stuff home and planning to cycle requires a bit of organisation.
Notwithstanding that, I find the car far more convenient and I am prepared to spend ?1 extra to have an extra 50 minutes to myself each day. (When else would I find the time to keep up with the SABRE boards????). For that reason, for me personally the choice of the car is not difficult.
Well, I've rambled around the subject a little - you have a mix of my own personal views there and an element of the thinking of bus companies / local authorities which I have picked up from my work in this area.
Simon
The idea of Metro style branding is not new - but it does sound as if they've got themselves into a bit of a mess in Leeds.
I first heard of this with reference to First services in Brighton. The concept is actually a very good one. To start with, let's consider reasons why people don't use buses:
1. They don't run on time.
2. They're dirty and smelly.
3. There isn't atime table at the stop.
4. On the odd occasion there is a timetable, it says buses arrive at 18 and 48 minutes past the hour between 10 and 12 except on school days where they run at 22 and 52 minutes past the hour. (i.e. it is too bl**dy complicated).
5. No service after 6pm or on Sundays.
6. They take 4 times as long as the equivalent car journey.
7. They cost too much money.
8. I can't get my pram / wheel chair / golf trolley on the bus.
I could go on.
To give bus companies credit, they, in conjunction with highway authorities, are trying ot address these issues. As has been stated elsewhere, Arriva and First have made significant investment in their vehicle fleets and reduced their average age of vehicle. The new vehicles are usually low floor accessible buses (though I've yet to see anyone taking a golf trolley on board:-) ). They are cleaner, both in terms of the interior and emissions - a number use LPG rather than diesel. Highway authorities are providing the infrastructure for bus priority, though some of the stuff that is built seems to be very misguided and put there for the sake of putting it there.
Back to the point, the idea of the true metro branding is that you do away with the timetable and run enough buses on a route so you'll never have more than a ten minute wait (and usually less). The routes are well defined, and relatively simple and can be easily displayed in the style of a London Underground map. That way, you'll know that within a few minutes of arriving at your stop, a relatively new vehicle will arrive and can run along a route with sufficient bus priority to make the journey time consistent from day to day.
This is supposed to be more appealing to people, and make them more likely to use the bus because it is cleaner and more reliable. Of course, if the branding is unclear, then much of this benefit is lost.
Speaking personally, I have four options to get to work in the morning.
The first is a 15 minute journey in the car. (Using Inland Revenue rates of 45p/mile for my car, that costs at ?4.50 per return trip).
Second is a 30 minute walk into town followed by a 5 minute train journey and another 5 minute walk at the other end. Cost - around ?4 return
Third is a 40 minute bus ride - cost - around ?3.50 return
Fourth - 30 minutes on the bike - free at point of use.
At first glance, the car works out more expensive - until you realise that much of that cost covers depreciation, tax and insurance- and I need the car at least twice a week for work once I get there - so I need the car whether I use it or not on a particular day. I do cycle from time to time but I usually end up needing to carry stuff home and planning to cycle requires a bit of organisation.
Notwithstanding that, I find the car far more convenient and I am prepared to spend ?1 extra to have an extra 50 minutes to myself each day. (When else would I find the time to keep up with the SABRE boards????). For that reason, for me personally the choice of the car is not difficult.
Well, I've rambled around the subject a little - you have a mix of my own personal views there and an element of the thinking of bus companies / local authorities which I have picked up from my work in this area.
Simon
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Please contact me if you want to know more
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Please contact me if you want to know more
-
PeterA5145
- Member
- Posts: 25347
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
- Location: Stockport, Cheshire
- Contact:
<<After about 9 months of competition First gave up and has basically left Edinburgh internal services alone, allowing us to enjoy the superb services provided by Lothian.>>
Although, unless they have changed recently, they fall down on an absolutely basic tenet of customer service by refusing to give change. One of the major problems of PT services over the years is that they have been run for operational rather than customer convenience. There are a lot of tourists in Edinburgh. What kind of image does this give of the city?
Regards,
Peter
Although, unless they have changed recently, they fall down on an absolutely basic tenet of customer service by refusing to give change. One of the major problems of PT services over the years is that they have been run for operational rather than customer convenience. There are a lot of tourists in Edinburgh. What kind of image does this give of the city?
Regards,
Peter
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
As it runs through the Aldwych underpass, my bus route to work has to be single deck and so was chosen to be one of London's first two "Bendybus" routes. Much better than before, although I think the three door entry and no tickets sold on board is the biggestcause of improved times - they can swallow a200 yard queue in a couple of minutes - with the oldbuses and their single door entry the queuecould begrowingeven whilst a buswas loading. But then, improvement was long overdue:the old buses were over 20 years old)
No tickets sold on board rapidly became free travel for some opportunists - I've had my season ticket checked just once in three months.
However, they aredreadfully cumbersomein London's narrow streets - only one of thetwo routesthrough the Aldwych underpass (which the trams should never have left) survived the change to Bendybuses - they coulnd't negotiate the Bank of England junction.
They seem to be popular with TfL though, several more routes are planned. Asheadroom isn't an issue on these routes someone suggested bendybuses might be more manoevrable if you detached the rear section, and mounted it on top of the front section.(Some means of access would be needed to reach this upper section). The point where the bellows had been could remainopen, allowingaccess to the bus at any point along the route where the bus is stationary (not just at those arbitrary points where TfL have plonked a bus stop).I've even thought of a name for such a bus - a "Routemaster".
No tickets sold on board rapidly became free travel for some opportunists - I've had my season ticket checked just once in three months.
However, they aredreadfully cumbersomein London's narrow streets - only one of thetwo routesthrough the Aldwych underpass (which the trams should never have left) survived the change to Bendybuses - they coulnd't negotiate the Bank of England junction.
They seem to be popular with TfL though, several more routes are planned. Asheadroom isn't an issue on these routes someone suggested bendybuses might be more manoevrable if you detached the rear section, and mounted it on top of the front section.(Some means of access would be needed to reach this upper section). The point where the bellows had been could remainopen, allowingaccess to the bus at any point along the route where the bus is stationary (not just at those arbitrary points where TfL have plonked a bus stop).I've even thought of a name for such a bus - a "Routemaster".
Aberdeen actually introduced the Overground system, then when they got laughed at quite considerably (seeing as First came from here, as Grampian Regional Transport), the Metro name was quickly introduced.
So in a sense, we've gone from the new system to the old system, but in Aberdeen, the Metro really has worked. All the subarbs are catered for wonderfully, the only people who have complained are the old people who might have to walk about 10 minutes to get a bus. They don't seem to realise that instead of having a bus infrequently, they have a nice, new, regular bus service a short walk away.
The only problem is the price - it's horribly cheap to get from a bus terminus to the city centre (in some cases, nearly 10 miles), it's just ?1.30 for that. But for me, to travel a mile on the bus home from the city centre (It's a really, really steep walk), it's ?1. That isn't right, so it seems that the people who only go short distances are subsidising those who go long distances.
So in a sense, we've gone from the new system to the old system, but in Aberdeen, the Metro really has worked. All the subarbs are catered for wonderfully, the only people who have complained are the old people who might have to walk about 10 minutes to get a bus. They don't seem to realise that instead of having a bus infrequently, they have a nice, new, regular bus service a short walk away.
The only problem is the price - it's horribly cheap to get from a bus terminus to the city centre (in some cases, nearly 10 miles), it's just ?1.30 for that. But for me, to travel a mile on the bus home from the city centre (It's a really, really steep walk), it's ?1. That isn't right, so it seems that the people who only go short distances are subsidising those who go long distances.
Aberdeen actually introduced the Overground system, then when they got laughed at quite considerably (seeing as First came from here, as Grampian Regional Transport), the Metro name was quickly introduced.
So in a sense, we've gone from the new system to the old system, but in Aberdeen, the Metro really has worked. All the subarbs are catered for wonderfully, the only people who have complained are the old people who might have to walk about 10 minutes to get a bus. They don't seem to realise that instead of having a bus infrequently, they have a nice, new, regular bus service a short walk away.
The only problem is the price - it's horribly cheap to get from a bus terminus to the city centre (in some cases, nearly 10 miles), it's just ?1.30 for that. But for me, to travel a mile on the bus home from the city centre (It's a really, really steep walk), it's ?1. That isn't right, so it seems that the people who only go short distances are subsidising those who go long distances.
So in a sense, we've gone from the new system to the old system, but in Aberdeen, the Metro really has worked. All the subarbs are catered for wonderfully, the only people who have complained are the old people who might have to walk about 10 minutes to get a bus. They don't seem to realise that instead of having a bus infrequently, they have a nice, new, regular bus service a short walk away.
The only problem is the price - it's horribly cheap to get from a bus terminus to the city centre (in some cases, nearly 10 miles), it's just ?1.30 for that. But for me, to travel a mile on the bus home from the city centre (It's a really, really steep walk), it's ?1. That isn't right, so it seems that the people who only go short distances are subsidising those who go long distances.
I'm going to make a sweeping generalisation here, but as things go, the best uses of transport seem to be as follows:
1) National cross-country journeys: car, train
2) Inter-city 'express' journeys: train
3) Intra-urban journeys: light/suburban rail, bus, taxi, not car.
Just been reading a book called Future Transport in Cities, and it's an eye-opener.
Paul
1) National cross-country journeys: car, train
2) Inter-city 'express' journeys: train
3) Intra-urban journeys: light/suburban rail, bus, taxi, not car.
Just been reading a book called Future Transport in Cities, and it's an eye-opener.
Paul
Regards,
Paul
Paul