Loop Services

[achiruel]

I think loop services are acceptable, providing the following conditions are met:

1. Bidirectional.  This is a really important one to me.  Unidirectional loops suck
2. Relatively short, three suburb span maximum
3. Reasonably direct, i.e. not winding through twenty back streets to get wherever they're going
4. Decent frequency and span of hours (but that applies to any bus route)

[somebody]

Does the bit at the end of the 444 count as unidirectional or bidirection (both directions travel around Pioneer Cres IIRC in the same direction).

How about some examples of what you are thinking of?

[achiruel]

444 Pioneer Cr loop wasn't really what I was thinking of, I don't really see how that could be improved anyway.  Largely the fault of BCC for allowing bus-unfriendly residential developments to be approved.

Bad:

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/080331_558.pdf
http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/081027_198.pdf

Better:

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/100222_336,337.pdf - Needs better frequency, and remove the Picadilly St dogleg (unless there's some really important reason for it being there that I'm unaware of)

http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/110606_230,P231,235,P236.pdf - not strictly a loop service except at night, but can be used as such, could be used for travelling from Bulimba to Morningside Station for example.  But also needs better frequency.

[Mr X]

230/235 shouldn't be designed as a loop service imho. Our transport system has failed if we need to go outbound to the terminus in order to go inbound...

[SurfRail]

Deviations into side streets like on the 444, 758 etc - not ideal, but acceptable.

I think the guiding principle should be whether anybody on the loop would be put out by only being able to travel in one direction.  Services like the 688/689 which do an entire master-planned development are clearly on the right track being bi-directional.  Services like the 687 (which is the peak hour version doing the same circuit but only travelling in one direction and extending to and from Petrie Station) are fine because they only set down and pick up peak hour passengers.  The loop on the 444 is irrelevant because the travel demand between the stops on the loop would be nil, or otherwise able to be met by walking.

I prefer Jarrett's method, which is where you have a bi-directional loop of reasonable size, you split it into 2 separate bi-directional route numbers each responsible for about half the loop, and then they just swap route numbers 180 degrees around the circuit.  Easier to remember that you just live on the 985, rather than the 985 clockwise and the 986 anti-clockwise.  This happening in a macro sense with the GCL replacement routes.

[HappyTrainGuy]

This is how loop service frequencies should resemble (I'd like to see a 7-7 timetable at least which could be utilized as a normal peak hour services instead of the 6pm network shutdown). Should tie in nicely with the Kippa Ring rail line aswell.
http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/services-and-timetables/timetables/111128-693,694,696,697.pdf