Bus - rear door go loading ..

[ozbob]

The CityGlider bus service is being promoted as providing rear door boarding for go card holders.

Some concerns were expressed today about this, particularly in a fare evasion context.  Personally, I am not that concerned in that context as some aggressive enforcement should sort that out.  What is perhaps an issue is confusion about rear door loading generally . Permitted on this service but not others?  Why not the whole lot?

Any comments?

[Otto]

It could become the norm once paper tickets are no longer sold.

[Golliwog]

Well, seeing as the city glider has rear door boarding plus you can use paper tickets, just paper ticket holders have to use the front door, why can't this be done on all bus's? Is there something magically different about the city glider bus's? It shouldn't be that hard to roll out across the whole system.

[WTN]

Today's first Cityglider looked very much like a regular bus, just painted differently.  If they can program the rear readers on Cityglider to allow touch ons, why not do it across all buses?  It makes sense to keep things consistent.

[#Metro]

Mutli-door boarding is a good idea but:

The bus isn't designed for this.
Unlike the front door, the back door is tiny, should be big double door (artics have this).
People are going to be exiting either way.

To be fair, CityGlider is an excellent service and I am really glad that it is here.

[somebody]

Since I've already made a number of comments on this, there is only one thing that I'll add: I've noticed that the passenger behaviour is significantly worse in Brisbane than Sydney.  Sydneysiders almost always use the rear door to get off the bus, except at or near the outer terminii.  That makes the advantage of rear door boarding much less.

[stephenk]

Until Boris Johnson removed the bendy buses from London as a political stunt, there was a mix of front loading double and single decker, and multi entry door loading bendy-buses. Londoners seemed the cope fine, although there were concerns about fare dodging on the multi entry bendy-buses. It should be noted that all Central London bus stops have ticket machines, and all buses are pre-pay only in Central London.

[dwb]

The fact that Glider is so obviously differently branded makes it a perfect opportunity to see how consumers react to a 'trial' run.
It is also significantly more important for inner urban routes where people are getting on and off constantly, and ultimately should include a double mid door plus a rear door. In my mind it would also go perfectly with seat reduction, wider aisles and more hold points.  For an example look at the buses in Mobilien in Paris in this video http://www.streetfilms.org/archives/mobilien/
It is hard to see how multi-door boarding will not eventually become part of the operational approach across routes across the network, at minimum in busway and bus stations.

[Jon Bryant]

Since I've already made a number of comments on this, there is only one thing that I'll add: I've noticed that the passenger behaviour is significantly worse in Brisbane than Sydney.  Sydneysiders almost always use the rear door to get off the bus, except at or near the outer terminii.  That makes the advantage of rear door boarding much less.

Why can a bus not opperate like a train.  Wait till all passengers alight through both doors and then passengers board?

[mufreight]

Manners

[#Metro]

Just get a tram.
Its the real thing.

Bus + LRT is possible (but have to see if it is appropriate for BNE)
LRT in far left and right lane is possible
Take your bicycle on the LRT (and hopefully QR trains as well)

http://www.streetfilms.org/seattles-link-light-rail-the-start-of-something-big/#more-27671
http://www.streetfilms.org/phoenixs-metro-light-rail-takes-flight/#more-1505

[Golliwog]

I think that to make rear door boarding worth while, the rear door on the standard bus needs to be enlarged to the same size as the front door. Not to allow passengers to enter and exit at hte same time, but to allow for both to be done faster. Theres no point in being able to enter from theback door if by the time everyone has finished exiting there, the front door has been vacant already.

[somebody]

Theres no point in being able to enter from theback door if by the time everyone has finished exiting there, the front door has been vacant already.

Which was exactly my point.  If 20 people are getting off and 20 people are getting on and all the people getting off use the rear door then rear door boarding would be of no advantage.  It's only when lots of people are getting on and only a few are geting off.

[mufreight]

If public transport fares were abolished the problem and a lot of hot air would not exist, no Go card equipment malfunctions, no fumbling for fares, faster loading and unloading, no need for the Translink duplication of administration.

[#Metro]

We are trying to make buses something they are not...

[somebody]

If public transport fares were abolished the problem and a lot of hot air would not exist, no Go card equipment malfunctions, no fumbling for fares, faster loading and unloading, no need for the Translink duplication of administration.

That's true but it's not the time to propose such a thing after spending a gazillion dollars getting the Go card system implemented.

Perhaps that's the model Sydney should follow after torpedoing their own implementation of such a system.

[mufreight]

Why not, it would solve all the shortcomings of the Go Card system and definately provide incentive to use public transport, the loss of fare box revenue is less than the advantages and savings in other areas that it would create.

[stephenk]

We are trying to make buses something they are not...

Is a bus with 3 sets of double doors not a bus then Tramtrain?
Please explain when a bus is not a bus?

I know you are obviously a tram fanatic, but you must try and justify your comments rather than coming out with unjustified and foolish statements.

[somebody]

Why not,

Because the authorities would be seen to be foolish for implementing it in the first place.  It's not like the project went belly up, which is what happenned in Sydney.  I thought that was obvious from my previous post.

[mufreight]

Why not,

Because the authorities would be seen to be foolish for implementing it in the first place.  It's not like the project went belly up, which is what happenned in Sydney.  I thought that was obvious from my previous post.

Well Somebody obviously you feel that it is more important not to show up as foolish and inflexible our current crop of incompetent politicians and transport planners than to resolve the problem.
To admit that the current system has major failings which you yourself have commented on is the first step to resolving the problems but a new possibly out of the square approach holds more chance of resolving the problems than more of same old same old.

[Otto]

Fare Free travel..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-fare_public_transport

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_transport_in_Hasselt

[Golliwog]

I think free PT could be done. But one of the issues I can see coming is the lack of knowledge of where passengers are ultimately traveling, which they are now getting with the go card. While I don't see this as 100% necessary, it help for planning new services/route changes, as planners can see where people are trying to get to and from.

[somebody]

Well Somebody obviously you feel that it is more important not to show up as foolish and inflexible our current crop of incompetent politicians and transport planners than to resolve the problem.
To admit that the current system has major failings which you yourself have commented on is the first step to resolving the problems but a new possibly out of the square approach holds more chance of resolving the problems than more of same old same old.

It's a fantasy to think that the authorities will do a mea culpa on this one.  Perhaps if there's a change of government at the next election, but even then I think it will be a hard sell given the state's finances especially.  But when have I ever called "Go card" a system with major failings?  It's not perfect, but no system ever is.

[mufreight]

Again have to disagree, a fareless system has been tried and is now being expanded overseas, but must agree that with the current crop of monkeys that is possibly the case as they do not even know how to climb trees for their coconuts, they just sit under the tree and stare up waiting for the next nut to fall, with some luck one will and make a suitable impression on their head and we might see a change.
The point remains that it can be done and that a no fare system does work, the question however remains will they?   

[somebody]

Look, I'm not disagreeing that it's a valid way of doing it, but why should RailBoT waste its time arguing for something which they will never do in the near term when there are many issues which they should be addressing now?

[mufreight]

perhaps for the same reason that yourself and a number of others float proposals that hold the potential to resolve problems raised with relation to public transport, in particular rail.

[dwb]

I don't think "free" PT is viable for a number of reasons and like any "resource" I believe it should be charged for.

This is not to say that I don't think users should receive a "free component" of travel.

It is also not to say that I don't think the primary source of funding shouldn't be broad tax bases (rates, income, gst whatever).

It is also not to say that a station designed without the need for paid and unpaid divides would not be cheaper, smaller, more efficient.

However in a community I don't think it is fair or desireable to inequally distribute the costs and benefits in such a manner. I think it is much more responsible to charge a fair and reasonable charge for use of PT services AND road services (as we do not currently).

We should not be advocating the solution to undercharging for road use be the continual undercharging for PT use. It just doesn't make sense on any level.

[longboi]

Its pretty much a situation where if free PT was implemeted, all progress on PT improvements would slow down to a trickle because TransLink would have no farebox revenue to use.

I would much prefer to pay a reasonable fare (yes it is reasonable) for PT and have fast, efficient, clean, well connected transport network than make some small savings that you can only spend on things you don't need.

[#Metro]

You know the funny thing in all of this is:

Roads are Free BYO car and petrol.

And anyway, isn't PT cheaper than driving by some astronomical amount anyway?
And cycling, not to mention the health benefits and money saved on an expensive gym membership?

Price is not the button to press if you want more passengers. Press "Frequency" instead.
Even if trains were free, at one every 30 minutes I still would not catch them.

[Jon Bryant]

A fifteen minute city needs a 15 min frequency off peak.... all services all modes... Now!!!!

[stephenk]

...a fareless system has been tried and is now being expanded overseas...

Where, out of interest?

[somebody]

...a fareless system has been tried and is now being expanded overseas...

Where, out of interest?

I think Zurich and/or Geneva might be examples.

[ButFli]

You know the funny thing in all of this is:

Roads are Free BYO car and petrol.

Except for the rego paid for the car and the huge amount of tax paid on the petrol.

It doesn't go all the way to paying for roads but it is far from free. You're sounding like a foamer.

[dwb]

Whether or not road transport is free or not is not the point. The point is that the user costs are no where near to the actual costs and they're not paid for up front.

[stephenk]

...a fareless system has been tried and is now being expanded overseas...

Where, out of interest?

I think Zurich and/or Geneva might be examples.

I've just had a very quick google. Couldn't find anything about Zurich, but in Geneva the free transport is an 80min free ticket for people arriving at the airport, and a free day tourist pass. Whilst not free for the average commuter, this is good for tourists who are usually used to be ripped off by inflated airport trains and overpriced tourist cards.

[somebody]

wikipedia didn't support it either.  I'm pretty sure I've heard it annecdotally, but it may be that my information wasn't correct.

But here's a link which suggests Hasselt, Belgium has it: http://www.freepublictransport.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=5&Itemid=5

[mufreight]

From memory it was a program on this subject presented on TV recently where I saw this system in use, that it was in Belgium strikes a chord with if memory serves corectly with another city in that country and a major town in Sweden also trialing a fareless system with interest shown by other continental cities having expressed interest in running trials.
A fareless public transport system is only the next step from the free city loop bus operating at present in Brisbane or the free city tram service also operated at the present time in Adelaide.

[frereOP]

The CityGlider bus service is being promoted as providing rear door boarding for go card holders.

Some concerns were expressed today about this, particularly in a fare evasion context.  Personally, I am not that concerned in that context as some aggressive enforcement should sort that out.  What is perhaps an issue is confusion about rear door loading generally . Permitted on this service but not others?  Why not the whole lot?

Any comments?

Fare evasion is possible but then again how many people tag on at the front door then walk down to the back and tag off then take their seat.  I saw a school kid do it yesterday.  Inspection is the answer.

[mufreight]

If it was a fare free operation none of these problems would arise   

[Golliwog]

Re: The issue about the size of the rear door restricting the rate of passengers entering/exiting the bus. I was on the 140 on Monday (bus 1701 I think). When I boarded it seemed to be just you standard non-artic bus, but once onboard I realised it had a rear door the same size as the front. Seat were arranged slightly differently than usual, and when I got off I noticed a sign on the back warning motorists it was a long bus, but if the newer buses are all being manufactured like this, then this would solve the problem with the squeeze through the back door would it not?