SEQ Bus Network Review

[ozbob]

Media release 21st August 2013



SEQ: Bus Cost Explosion Engulfs Brisbane CityCats

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport passengers calls for the break up of Brisbane Transport's local government bus monopoly.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"Brisbane's Public Transport network is falling further into the 'death spiral' of spin, inaction and chaos. There has been an enormous cost explosion at Brisbane Transport. This is placing huge pressure on TransLink to increase fares and further exacerbates the affordability death spiral."

"The failure to follow through with the TransLink bus review has has led to a freeze in bus driver hiring and services cut across the network (and therefore less driver hours). Had BCC co-operated with the TransLink review rather than refuse on at least six occasions, Brisbane would have got an upgrade to 26 BUZ services, high frequency buses to Yeronga, Inala, The Northwest, Centenary Suburbs and Morningside. None of BCC's bus depots would have had to close, fares could have come down and fare revenue and passengers would have gone up!"

"Instead, $2 million dollars will now be ripped out of the CityCat network in BCC's CityCat Cuts and none of these said suburbs are getting upgraded high frequency services."

"There is duplication and waste within the BCC's bus network itself. One example is the Maroon CityGlider to Stones Corner. Another is the Adelaide Street Bus Bridge - costing hundreds of millions of dollars- potentially to be uploaded to the Queensland Government, despite bus congestion at Cultural Centre being due to high volumes of excess air carried by the BCC bus network because BCC insists on clinging to a high waste network design."

"This parlous state of affairs was entirely predictable and avoidable. Which is why TransLink were commissioned to do the bus review in the first place!"

"The City of Brisbane Act 2010 should be altered to strip BCC of all public transport functions. The Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run Brisbane's buses or ferries. After a decade of games, it's time to dump Brisbane City Council and separate Brisbane Transport."

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

References:

1. SEQ: Bus Bridge Cost to be Uploaded to State Government? http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=10154.0

2. Brisbane CityCat and ferry services cut back in council $2m savings drive http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/brisbane-citycat-and-ferry-services-cut-back-in-council-2m-savings-drive/story-fnihsrf2-1226700378484

3. Lord Mayor and BCC can no longer be trusted to run city's buses http://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=9895.0

[techblitz]

Seems james and LD have issues over the current prepaid rocket system. Hence their favourite punchline `rocket to my doorstep'

I guess these legit translink stats are testament to how much of a failure the prepaid rocket to doorstep system is james and ld? 
I see a total of 3 bad performing routes and 10 average performing routes...out of how many?
And take note that a whopping ZERO have less than HIGH Value for Money. May I suggest one of you guys get up to the top end of Adelaide st around 5pm and FILM the so called air parcels leaving for the CCB. Lets see how that pans out.

              VFM        Patronage

P119   High   Moderate <<<will go straight to High patronage under the new review
P129   High   Very High
P133   High   Very High
P137   High   High
P141   High   Very High
P142   High   Very High
P151   High   Moderate
P157   High   High
P173   High   Moderate
P176   Very High   Very High
P179   High   High
P189   Very High   High
P201   High   High
P205   High   Moderate
P206   Very High   Very High
P207   Very High   Very High
P208   Very High   High
P211   Very High   Very High
P216   High   Moderate
P217   High   Very High
P221   High   Moderate
P231   Very High   High
P236   Very High   High
P331   High   High
P332   High   High
P341   High   Moderate
P343   Very High   Very High
P344   High   Low
P374   Very High   Moderate
P384   Very High   High
P426   High   Moderate
P443   High   Very High
P455   High   High
P456   High   Moderate
P457   High   Moderate
P458   High   Low
P459   High   Low
P546   Very High   Very High
P569   Very High   High
P581   Very High   High
P583   N/A   N/A

[HappyTrainGuy]

What about the P339?


















 

[techblitz]

What about the P339?
 

http://jp.translink.com.au/travel-information/network-information/buses/all-timetables   

[#Metro]

I guess these legit translink stats are testament to how much of a failure the prepaid rocket to doorstep system is james and ld? 
I see a total of 3 bad performing routes and 10 average performing routes...out of how many?
And take note that a whopping ZERO have less than HIGH Value for Money. May I suggest one of you guys get up to the top end of Adelaide st around 5pm and FILM the so called air parcels leaving for the CCB. Lets see how that pans out.

Ah techblitz, you're just jealous because you don't have a personal home rocket yourself :-)

On a more serious note, I can't see the 161 rocket there. Where is it?

Secondly, peak hour services are likely to be high value for money because they run such few services. I think 108 came up as high value for money. It has like 2 services per day. There are a number of rockets that are OK, but others I'm skeptical about. I was on a mostly empty P157 today. The 150 service was packed to the rafters. Seems like a waste no?

I would also be very very curious about how much fresh air makes it over the Captain Cook Bridge in am and pm peaks. Would be very interesting to know...

It seems to be totally plausible re: Centenary suburbs what James is saying:

P456   High   Moderate
P457   High   Moderate
P458   High   Low
P459   High   Low

And finally, just because a route is good value and good patronage does not mean that it should be immune from scrapping. It should only be retained if there is no better alternative configuration available. For example, look at the list:

P231   Very High   High
P236   Very High   High

These routes should still be scrapped despite their having good VFM and patronage. Why? Because a BUZ 230 and BUZ 235 would do an even better job. Thus a better alternative configuration is available.

[James]

Seems james and LD have issues over the current prepaid rocket system. Hence their favourite punchline `rocket to my doorstep'

I guess these legit translink stats are testament to how much of a failure the prepaid rocket to doorstep system is james and ld? 
I see a total of 3 bad performing routes and 10 average performing routes...out of how many?
And take note that a whopping ZERO have less than HIGH Value for Money. May I suggest one of you guys get up to the top end of Adelaide st around 5pm and FILM the so called air parcels leaving for the CCB. Lets see how that pans out.

              VFM        Patronage

P119   High   Moderate <<<will go straight to High patronage under the new review
P129   High   Very High
P133   High   Very High
P137   High   High
P141   High   Very High
P142   High   Very High
P151   High   Moderate
P157   High   High
P173   High   Moderate
P176   Very High   Very High
P179   High   High
P189   Very High   High
P201   High   High
P205   High   Moderate
P206   Very High   Very High
P207   Very High   Very High
P208   Very High   High
P211   Very High   Very High
P216   High   Moderate
P217   High   Very High
P221   High   Moderate
P231   Very High   High
P236   Very High   High
P331   High   High
P332   High   High
P341   High   Moderate
P343   Very High   Very High
P344   High   Low
P374   Very High   Moderate
P384   Very High   High
P426   High   Moderate
P443   High   Very High
P455   High   High
P456   High   Moderate
P457   High   Moderate
P458   High   Low
P459   High   Low
P546   Very High   Very High
P569   Very High   High
P581   Very High   High
P583   N/A   N/A

I never said the P-rockets were air parcels, a lot of them are just needless duplication and waste when better solutions could be put forward. I do not hate P-rockets, its just there are far too many of them where they are simply not necessary.

Lets take the P205/P208. Why the hell do we need the P208 running on half-hourly frequency? Why don't we just re-route the 202 so it no longer uses a sh%t alignment? If people from Carindale want to get to the PA, either catch the 209 or change.  P205 is just a rocket going down Chatsworth Road (precisely where a BUZ should be put instead) which then proceeds to serve Carindale Heights. Meanwhile, P201 does the exact same thing but instead runs express on Old Cleveland Road. And in typical BCC fashion, the 200, P201 and P205 all leave from different locations.

Instead, Chatsworth Road should get a proper service (I nominate it for a good, steam-ironed BUZ route that goes via Buranda and avoids the winding the current routes do) with ONE pre-paid rocket which runs via CCB (for Cultural Centre capacity reasons only). Both buses will leave from the same stop in the CBD. P201 can be consolidated with the 200, which will be moved to KGSBS after the 222 is thrown in the bin like it should have been ages ago. On the note of the 200 - why does P206 even exist? Is it a way just to get buses to a depot? Are we introducing a new concept of the rocket that runs express part of the way, and stops every 200m the rest of the way? P207, same thing. Why does it exist? Can't we just short-run P217?

P456-P459 - Yes, they're high value for money, but low patronage. P457-P459 often have low patronage and mean that all the pre-paid rockets leave from up to three locations. Useful for customers... NOT. I'm writing up my own review, but I'll briefly outline it now. Centenary BUZ a la TransLink review. Terminate the 453 at Indro and steam iron it slightly, and stick the Mt Ommaney - Heathwood leg of the 460 on to it. Cut the 460. Now have TWO rockets - one covering the current 454, and one the new 453 routing (Mt Ommaney northwards only). DONE! Legible, frequent network for all.

And then there's gems like the 118. Most on this forum have seen my opinion on people who demand rockets to their place of residence up to 30km from the CBD, and it is not a very positive one. Why the hell do we have a bus route which travels all that distance just for the benefit of a few? Pax can be fed to rail, or heaven forbid, take the "extremely slow" 100 BUZ routing. You also forgot similar non-prepaid rockets like the 431 and 446. Both peak hour rockets, both total wastes of money which run 2-3x a day. 131 is another one. Prepaid rocket, only variation on the 130 is a slight deviation via Hellawell Road. And no, it doesn't leave from QSBS.

These are just a few examples. If you go searching, you can find peak hour express messes everywhere. This is why I believe in the consolidation of rocket services to all go from the one stop location.

Capacity measures like the P119 are necessary, and I have never rubbished those. What P119 does is very sensible. But needless introduction of P-rockets just leads to confusing routes which duplicate each other and depart from multiple stop locations in the CBD, leading to a spaghetti mess of rockets firing everywhere which nobody can understand.

Peak hour services naturally fill up because they cater for peak demand. Unfortunately, a lot of peak services do not fill up because either too much capacity is put on a bus route, or the rocket is so infrequent people just go for the regular service. Even awful bus routes like the 417 (seriously, this route should just be chopped up and counter-peak 428s used to feed rail in its catchment area) do well in peak hour.

[HappyTrainGuy]

P331 make up half of the 330 services during peak hour and can regularly be seen trailing or leading the 330 service.....

[longboi]

I really wish those VFM and Pax. indicators weren't included in the info which informed the initial stages of the review.People just don't get it.

Many of your high and very high VFM routes on that list are due to factors such as low staff cost (Usually operated by a casual for a few hours), low fuel cost (only a few quick shuttles to/from the CBD) and they sometimes mitigate dead running. On a micro level they might have value but from a macro level they could be used in a more strategic and efficient way.

Likewise, a route may only have high or very high patronage for less than 50% of the entire trip. *cough 444*

[ozbob]

I really wish those VFM and Pax. indicators weren't included in the info which informed the initial stages of the review.People just don't get it.

Many of your high and very high VFM routes on that list are due to factors such as low staff cost (Usually operated by a casual for a few hours), low fuel cost (only a few quick shuttles to/from the CBD) and they sometimes mitigate dead running. On a micro level they might have value but from a macro level they could be used in a more strategic and efficient way.

Likewise, a route may only have high or very high patronage for less than 50% of the entire trip. *cough 444*

Thanks Nikko.   Bingo ...

[techblitz]

I really wish those VFM and Pax. indicators weren't included in the info which informed the initial stages of the review.People just don't get it.

Many of your high and very high VFM routes on that list are due to factors such as low staff cost (Usually operated by a casual for a few hours), low fuel cost (only a few quick shuttles to/from the CBD) and they sometimes mitigate dead running. On a micro level they might have value but from a macro level they could be used in a more strategic and efficient way.

Likewise, a route may only have high or very high patronage for less than 50% of the entire trip. *cough 444*

Thanks Nikko.   Bingo ...

the everyday commuter wouldn't give 2 squirts about terms like d/running or casual driver hours,fuel costs. They wanted to know how busy their local service was to get a general idea if it was successful or not. Trasnlink obliged them with an easy to understand format 

[ozbob]

The point well made by Nikko, who does actually understand the data, was that as presented the data was misleading, and gave false justifications for route retention.  For example if the 444 carried the bulk of its pax from Indooroopilly to CBD, the proposed changes were rational.  Similar situation for the 100.   The changes proposed covered where the bus routes were really working (they have the real data) and still provided coverage and service, but importantly extended high frequency to a lot more potential passengers. 

[Gazza]

Also, to get "Very high" patronage, didn't a route just have to have a certain number of full buses per week?
So a route might have a few full buses, but otherwise carry air, and that makes it look like it is well utilised?

They wanted to know how busy their local service was to get a general idea if it was successful or not. Trasnlink obliged them with an easy to understand format

Nothing to stop them saying the raw numbers and percentages though.

[James]

the everyday commuter wouldn't give 2 squirts about terms like d/running or casual driver hours,fuel costs. They wanted to know how busy their local service was to get a general idea if it was successful or not. Trasnlink obliged them with an easy to understand format 

It is not just about how much the passengers like the service, but it is about the wider network effect. People need to know that there is more to the bus network than one's bus to their doorstep. Just because the 417 has a 'High' value for money doesn't mean it should continue to exist in its current form. Same can be said for the 107/108. Only sustainable in peak.

[BrizCommuter]

The "rockets" would also perform well is they existed as just additional/consolidated services to existing bus routes e.g. just running 345s every 5 mins instead of 345s every 10 mins and P343s every 10 mins to/from different CBD locations.  In fact, having shared CBD bus stop locations, more predictable stopping pattern, better load sharing, and less bus routes (less confusing) may even result in the routes being even more value for money.

[techblitz]

131 is another one. Prepaid rocket, only variation on the 130 is a slight deviation via Hellawell Road. And no, it doesn't leave from QSBS.

too right it doesn't leave from QSBS as its obviously serving it purpose well from its starting point and is well used from Adelaide st also....
Heres the stop in case you don't know that it exists.

http://jp.translink.com.au/travel-information/network-information/stops-and-stations/stop/000148/timetable

Take note of how close to the river it is and how close to those big tall riverside skyscrapers it is  . I see a pretty useful starting point there myself for the 131 plus the other routes from that stop.

Fear not though..it could be on the lookup...the p119 into QSBS might be a little test run by BT to see how pulling services from the wharf st area pans out. Current pax who catch this service from there and don't want to bother with the walk to the mall will need to connect to it at Buranda from one of the other wharf st services. Used it this afternoon and there was a decent amount that hopped on near wharf st.
LD >>>> 119<<<  is my rocket

As for the 118...perhaps you can ask translink why they decided to keep it as #p106 along the same alignment even though it is a low patronage route. Clearly a route chosen for coverage not patronage...
Benefits of 118 >>>> quick access from riverside to garden city. Ultra quick access for Griffith students/shoppers to forest lake from garden city instead of mucking around crosstowning it via Clifton hill 125 or the 122. Give it time...the forest lake/doolendella region is growing steadily. More subdivisions happening as noted on my recent trip on the 101.

[James]

too right it doesn't leave from QSBS as its obviously serving it purpose well from its starting point and is well used from Adelaide st also....
Heres the stop in case you don't know that it exists.

http://jp.translink.com.au/travel-information/network-information/stops-and-stations/stop/000148/timetable

Take note of how close to the river it is and how close to those big tall riverside skyscrapers it is  . I see a pretty useful starting point there myself for the 131 plus the other routes from that stop.

Fear not though..it could be on the lookup...the p119 into QSBS might be a little test run by BT to see how pulling services from the wharf st area pans out. Current pax who catch this service from there and don't want to bother with the walk to the mall will need to connect to it at Buranda from one of the other wharf st services. Used it this afternoon and there was a decent amount that hopped on near wharf st.
LD >>>> 119<<<  is my rocket

As for the 118...perhaps you can ask translink why they decided to keep it as #p106 along the same alignment even though it is a low patronage route. Clearly a route chosen for coverage not patronage...
Benefits of 118 >>>> quick access from riverside to garden city. Ultra quick access for Griffith students/shoppers to forest lake from garden city instead of mucking around crosstowning it via Clifton hill 125 or the 122. Give it time...the forest lake/doolendella region is growing steadily. More subdivisions happening as noted on my recent trip on the 101.

I know users of the 411 who worked in the Riverside precinct. Heaven forbid, they walked. That's right, they walked. Goodness, walking, who'da thought? They didn't transfer to a ferry at the Regatta, or a City loop bus, they walked.

And this large trend of people who refuse to walk to P119 is evident by massive amounts of people transferring at Buranda?  Here's something revolutionary. They could walk. If a 400m walk is the difference between someone using PT and not using PT (and they are an able bodied individual), that's pretty pathetic.

There is already quick access to Garden City to Riverside from the 162. The bus review's P106 was soemthing I didn't get. Sure, I would LOVE a rocket that runs express to my place of work. I'm sure the few Griffith students in St Lucia would LOVE a rocket that runs non-stop Indooroopilly - Griffith Uni. But no, having rockets being fired everywhere is unsustainable. The 118, while it may be quick, is an awful route which will never make money simply because it is too long and hence, cannot have standing loads. It is not financially sustainable. Cross-town links should be done by frequent cross-town routes running all day, not P-rockets which take circuitous routings. Note how most pax have just as fast a journey if they go to Richlands station and transfer to rail.

I never said the development out there meant buses weren't warranted. But if you choose to live in zone 5 or beyond, you should not expect to have a bus which runs directly from within 400m of your house to the CBD. In fact, they should not have a bus going to the City full-stop (yes, 130/140/150/330 are exceptions due to failure to develop rail, as are others, and 555/Logan P-rockets are excluded as always being busway services).

The "rockets" would also perform well is they existed as just additional/consolidated services to existing bus routes e.g. just running 345s every 5 mins instead of 345s every 10 mins and P343s every 10 mins to/from different CBD locations.  In fact, having shared CBD bus stop locations, more predictable stopping pattern, better load sharing, and less bus routes (less confusing) may even result in the routes being even more value for money.

I heartily endorse this posting.

[#Metro]

All of this needs major simplification. I have seen air on rockets, TransLink need to do an audit, particularly of how much air is going over the Captain Cook Bridge.

I don't like Brisbane's one way roads as I think they hinder decent legible networks. There has to be better answers than the current network surely.

[HappyTrainGuy]

330 is currently an exception but as soon as Norris Road is extended I'd want to see the 330 deleted as a City route. Retain the P331 during peak to cover off but once the railway frequency is there cut the route. Get the train from Carseldine or interchange to a 333 service. The off peak frequency might not be there just yet but the peak frequency certainly already trumps the Buz network standard with a train every 7 minutes and there is still pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenty of capacity left to spare with seats still available at Northgate. Remember the entire morning peak hour capacity of the 330/331 can fit onto 2 trains.

[longboi]

I really wish those VFM and Pax. indicators weren't included in the info which informed the initial stages of the review.People just don't get it.

Many of your high and very high VFM routes on that list are due to factors such as low staff cost (Usually operated by a casual for a few hours), low fuel cost (only a few quick shuttles to/from the CBD) and they sometimes mitigate dead running. On a micro level they might have value but from a macro level they could be used in a more strategic and efficient way.

Likewise, a route may only have high or very high patronage for less than 50% of the entire trip. *cough 444*

Thanks Nikko.   Bingo ...

the everyday commuter wouldn't give 2 squirts about terms like d/running or casual driver hours,fuel costs. They wanted to know how busy their local service was to get a general idea if it was successful or not. Trasnlink obliged them with an easy to understand format 

You're absolutely correct. The average commuter doesn't need to know that information because they don't know or care how to interpret it.

I believe it was a bad move to just release these simple little indicators because they meant nothing without some sort of explanation. They only served to confuse the average commuter who couldn't understand why a 'high' or 'very high' service might have frequency reduced or be removed altogether.

If you take notice, many rocket services carry passengers simply because they turn up first. Most of the Mains Rd corridor is an example of this. They would have no issue with catching a 130 but a 131 happens to arrive first. 

There is absolutely no time saving involved for the majority of pax.
For example, A 130 departs Parkinson East at 0633 and arrives QSBS at 7:25. A 131 departs Parkinson East  at 0644 and arrives Elizabeth St near Albert St (stop 84) at 0636. 11 minutes difference between Parkinson East and Myer Centre for the entire trip. How many continue on the one extra stop to Riverside? Not enough to warrant a completely separate route, I'm guessing.

If this was simply another 130, you could double the frequency between Parkinson East and Buranda - Cultural Centre immediately. Yes, I realise CC doesn't need more buses, this is just an example of what was possible.

Then there are examples of where rockets are necessary to provide a particular level of service to an area where there are constraints on the alternatives (i.e. pick-up, set-down or layover space - especially in the CBD) or where only part of a route needs additional coverage (i.e. 119/120).

[techblitz]

TransLink need to do an audit, particularly of how much air is going over the Captain Cook Bridge.

If translink classed the prepaid rockets as a MAJOR patronage problem they would have done a more indepth study (Eg: who's getting on/off at the other end of the cbd or how many are losing out to their duplicated routes etc)  and made it public BUT their focus was mainly on the CC. Perhaps nikko can comment on that.
Take a look at how well Buranda is performing over the CC at peak when looking at peak capacity utilisation >>> 82% over 38%

LD take a trip out to Buranda around 5pm and you will be quaintly surprised with how well loaded most of the o/b buses are ( Especially the Redland bay,thornside and logan buses...yes air parcels like 77 and some rockets but overall that 82% stat hasn't just manifest itself. You will be impressed with how well the buses move through there as well for such a plethora of buses.

Translink un-successfully attempted to delete most of the rockets in their review for a no doubt better benefit. But its done and dusted. Lets talk about the current system and translinks capacity utilisation chart by route 

They selected certain routes. Heres translinks basic quoted definition of capacity utilisation

Capacity Utilisation measures the average load compared to the number of seats provided in the bus
network. Essentially, it is a measure of how full the buses are. The bus network capacity in SEQ is well
utilised during the peak periods on weekdays

Heres the top 25% on that list: (p stands for peak hour only route)

141     p
P189   P
275     P
P137   P
333  buz
577    P
P236  P
305   P
345 buz
171  P
178 p
179 p
363 p
561 p
261 p
454  <<<< full time non frequent route
765 <<<< full time non frequent route
186 P
100 buz

All routes listed are above the network average which you would probably class as low overall. But still...that list clearly shows a hands down majority of peak hour only routes.


@james

I do understand this to be a free speaking forum with each person entitiled to their own views...but I for one am getting rather tired of your one lined repsonses calling people hopeless,patheitc,lazy for not wanting to walk 400m - 800m. Im not expecting you to tone it down but would be good. You've been singled out because you say it the most.
I easily walk these distances to multiple stops all over Brisbane and the cbd....relying on this network....yet do you hear me calling fellow commuters whingers? Each commuter is different with various tolerance levels when walking through polluted streets or up hills, over pedestrian bridges with no elevators etc etc...surely you realise that? They are the minority but they're still out there with the power to start a petition or influence a local councellor....usually to a good effect.
Eagerly awaiting your proposed bus review...

@nikko

I think TL did a decent enough job with their charts analysis...stating the network average on capacity utilisation and value for money.....however I feel TL should have taken a bit of extra time ( I realise they were time constrained ) and did some forecast charts to at least show what their implementations would likely achieve. They would have done a good job in ironing out the spikes on the graphs but how much we will never know...

[James]

330 is currently an exception but as soon as Norris Road is extended I'd want to see the 330 deleted as a City route. Retain the P331 during peak to cover off but once the railway frequency is there cut the route. Get the train from Carseldine or interchange to a 333 service. The off peak frequency might not be there just yet but the peak frequency certainly already trumps the Buz network standard with a train every 7 minutes and there is still pleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeenty of capacity left to spare with seats still available at Northgate. Remember the entire morning peak hour capacity of the 330/331 can fit onto 2 trains.

This is something I'm not really sure about. I think the 333, as it exists now, should be deleted, and the 330 should operate as the 333 does Chermside - RBWH. I don't believe it is sound logic to operate a BUZ route from Point A to Point B, and then another BUZ route from Point B to Point C on identical frequency profiles. (Yes there would be short-runnings, let a P-rocket do that).

I see the link the 330 does as a 'fortunate' opportunity for a CBD-bound bus - like sending a frequent to Riverhills. It just so happens that this corridor needs BUZ frequency, and this corridor needs BUZ frequency too, so we combine the two and a lucky few do end up with an express bus to the CBD. This isn't a bad thing.

TransLink need to do an audit, particularly of how much air is going over the Captain Cook Bridge.

If translink classed the prepaid rockets as a MAJOR patronage problem they would have done a more indepth study (Eg: who's getting on/off at the other end of the cbd or how many are losing out to their duplicated routes etc)  and made it public BUT their focus was mainly on the CC. Perhaps nikko can comment on that.
Take a look at how well Buranda is performing over the CC at peak when looking at peak capacity utilisation >>> 82% over 38%

LD take a trip out to Buranda around 5pm and you will be quaintly surprised with how well loaded most of the o/b buses are ( Especially the Redland bay,thornside and logan buses...yes air parcels like 77 and some rockets but overall that 82% stat hasn't just manifest itself. You will be impressed with how well the buses move through there as well for such a plethora of buses.

Translink un-successfully attempted to delete most of the rockets in their review for a no doubt better benefit. But its done and dusted. Lets talk about the current system and translinks capacity utilisation chart by route 

They selected certain routes. Heres translinks basic quoted definition of capacity utilisation

Capacity Utilisation measures the average load compared to the number of seats provided in the bus
network. Essentially, it is a measure of how full the buses are. The bus network capacity in SEQ is well
utilised during the peak periods on weekdays

Heres the top 25% on that list: (p stands for peak hour only route)

141     p
P189   P
275     P
P137   P
333  buz
577    P
P236  P
305   P
345 buz
171  P
178 p
179 p
363 p
561 p
261 p
454  <<<< full time non frequent route
765 <<<< full time non frequent route
186 P
100 buz

All routes listed are above the network average which you would probably class as low overall. But still...that list clearly shows a hands down majority of peak hour only routes.


@james

I do understand this to be a free speaking forum with each person entitiled to their own views...but I for one am getting rather tired of your one lined repsonses calling people hopeless,patheitc,lazy for not wanting to walk 400m - 800m. Im not expecting you to tone it down but would be good. You've been singled out because you say it the most.
I easily walk these distances to multiple stops all over Brisbane and the cbd....relying on this network....yet do you hear me calling fellow commuters whingers? Each commuter is different with various tolerance levels when walking through polluted streets or up hills, over pedestrian bridges with no elevators etc etc...surely you realise that? They are the minority but they're still out there with the power to start a petition or influence a local councellor....usually to a good effect.
Eagerly awaiting your proposed bus review...

It is because I am tired of this mentality that everybody deserves an express bus to the CBD with no interchange. I change all the time right across the network. I change from bus to bus, bus to rail, rail to rail and sometimes even ferry to bus. Shocking, I know...

The Brisbane CBD, by and large, is flat. I accept there is a use for buses like the Spring Hill loop because that area is very hilly. But the Brisbane CBD is for the most part, flat and has very even footpaths. I would feel far more comfortable as an 80 year old walking along Adelaide Street than I would along the footpaths in our area (some are uneven, some have bushes which protrude so far as to force you to walk on the road and so on). In my travels in the CBD, I have never found certain places where mobility is such a huge issue as to require a rocket from another part of the CBD.

And worst comes to worst - there is the City Loop if you are that immobile.

Regarding the best routes patronage wise - that is merely a sample. Yes, P-rockets will do well. They operate at peak time, when most people wish to travel, and they go to their destination quickly. Does not mean every P-rocket is a good use of resources. The ones you have listed are good uses of resources - but not all rockets are.

To extend on this - the 415 and 445 are slightly above the network average. This does not mean those routes should not be improved to attract more patronage and provide better connectivity.

[longboi]

If translink classed the prepaid rockets as a MAJOR patronage problem they would have done a more indepth study (Eg: who's getting on/off at the other end of the cbd or how many are losing out to their duplicated routes etc)  and made it public BUT their focus was mainly on the CC. Perhaps nikko can comment on that.
Take a look at how well Buranda is performing over the CC at peak when looking at peak capacity utilisation >>> 82% over 38%

Yep.

Pretty much all the contentious routes that have been mentioned here had manual counts done, in addition to ongoing monitoring of go card data.

I think projected figures would have been next to impossible to create because the scope of the changes in Brisbane would have had a massive impact on travel behaviour. It's apples for oranges.

[HappyTrainGuy]

This is something I'm not really sure about. I think the 333, as it exists now, should be deleted, and the 330 should operate as the 333 does Chermside - RBWH. I don't believe it is sound logic to operate a BUZ route from Point A to Point B, and then another BUZ route from Point B to Point C on identical frequency profiles. (Yes there would be short-runnings, let a P-rocket do that).

I see the link the 330 does as a 'fortunate' opportunity for a CBD-bound bus - like sending a frequent to Riverhills. It just so happens that this corridor needs BUZ frequency, and this corridor needs BUZ frequency too, so we combine the two and a lucky few do end up with an express bus to the CBD. This isn't a bad thing.

Well the express part. That had to go yesterday. My main point was focusing on getting people that live in Bracken Ridge onto the nearby railway line for going to the city. I'd like to see the 330+333 and the 330+333+340+370 along Gympie Road-City merged into a single route tomorrow in a heartbeat for the existing network but long term I'd like to see the 2 routes maintained with the 330 getting cut at Chermside and rerouted through Bracken Ridge to terminate at Carseldine Railway Station. Frequency on the 333 could be maintained for a greater period using higher capacity vehicles. This would then give an incentive to establish a better feeder and support network. Frequency could then be cut during the night for the feeders as patronage dips rather than have the current mess of the 330 transporting air Chermside-Bracken Ridge at its current frequency. For example local feeder routes could be 15 minutes during the day and revert to a 20/30/60 min frequency at night but still maintain a high frequency Chermside-City.

[#Metro]

LD take a trip out to Buranda around 5pm and you will be quaintly surprised with how well loaded most of the o/b buses are ( Especially the Redland bay,thornside and logan buses...yes air parcels like 77 and some rockets but overall that 82% stat hasn't just manifest itself. You will be impressed with how well the buses move through there as well for such a plethora of buses.

I will believe it when I see numbers. Nobody on here suspected any excess air problem at Cultural Centre until the numbers came out and shocked everyone.

141     p
P189   P
275     P
P137   P
333  buz
577    P
P236  P
305   P
345 buz
171  P
178 p
179 p
363 p
561 p
261 p
454  <<<< full time non frequent route
765 <<<< full time non frequent route
186 P
100 buz

^ I think there are some fair points, some rockets do carry load. I am not anti-rocket, I am anti-waste. I think the point that James and  myself are driving home is that even if some rockets do well, is not sufficient enough to give them "untouchable sacred cow" status in a review. Everything should be on the table for consideration. Look at route 454. It should be axed and replaced with the two BUZ routes that TL had in mind for the Centenary Suburbs. Possibly the same deal with P236 - replace it with a BUZ.

[ozbob]

Ipswich and western region changes

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/ipswich

Changes will be implemented in December 2013 (weather permitting), to align with the completion of the Richlands to Springfield train line.

Prior to any changes, we will communicate detailed service and route information, including new bus timetables, to ensure you understand any changes to your individual services.

More --> http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/ipswich

=============

This seems to confirm that trains will commence running to Springfield in December ...

[#Metro]

Just noticed this tweet:

PT fact of the day: Bendigo - public bus 16 routes --> http://www.christiansbus.com.au/index.php?mode=Bendigo ... #ptfact

There are more services for some routes in Bendigo on Sunday than to some inner city suburbs (e.g. Yeronga) on Sunday in Brisbane.

[ozbob]

Ipswich and western region changes

http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/ipswich

Changes will be implemented in December 2013 (weather permitting), to align with the completion of the Richlands to Springfield train line.

Prior to any changes, we will communicate detailed service and route information, including new bus timetables, to ensure you understand any changes to your individual services.

More --> http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/ipswich

=============

This seems to confirm that trains will commence running to Springfield in December ...

Twitter

Robert Dow ‏@Robert_Dow 52m

Embarrassing. TransLink moves the bus network forward for Ipswich & region. BCC clings to 1960s network http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/ipswich ... #qldpol

[ozbob]

Just noticed this tweet:

PT fact of the day: Bendigo - public bus 16 routes --> http://www.christiansbus.com.au/index.php?mode=Bendigo ... #ptfact

There are more services for some routes in Bendigo on Sunday than to some inner city suburbs (e.g. Yeronga) on Sunday in Brisbane.

ROFL   and all myki enabled as well ...

[James]

Been a bit bored this afternoon, so I've decided to play a fun game. It's called Spot the difference between bus services in 2005 vs. those in 2013!

First up is the 417! Can you spot any new services between this timetable in 2005 and this timetable current in 2013?

Next up is the Centenary suburbs! This one is a bit more fun. Take a look at this timetable from 2005 and this timetable from 2013. So far I've found one additional AM peak service for both the 453 and 454! Can anybody else find them?

I think fun like this is stuff the whole family can play! I think next time I wait for a bus at Indooroopilly for up to an hour on a Sunday, I'll bring all the bus timetables from the western suburbs - one from 2005 and one from 2013, and try and spot the differences.

[kazzac]

Been a bit bored this afternoon, so I've decided to play a fun game. It's called Spot the difference between bus services in 2005 vs. those in 2013!

First up is the 417! Can you spot any new services between this timetable in 2005 and this timetable current in 2013?

Next up is the Centenary suburbs! This one is a bit more fun. Take a look at this timetable from 2005 and this timetable from 2013. So far I've found one additional AM peak service for both the 453 and 454! Can anybody else find them?

I think fun like this is stuff the whole family can play! I think next time I wait for a bus at Indooroopilly for up to an hour on a Sunday, I'll bring all the bus timetables from the western suburbs - one from 2005 and one from 2013, and try and spot the differences.

same with the 230/235 services  ,I know that they have not been changed since 2006,since I have been living in this area

[ozbob]

Sent to all outlets:

2nd September 2013

TransLink Bus Review - Ipswich and the Western Region improvements

Greetings,

TransLink have announced the bus changes for Ipswich and the Western Region.

See  http://translink.com.au/travel-information/service-updates/seq-bus-network-review-2013/ipswich?news&utm_content=ipswich

What a contrast to the continuing mediocrity with the Brisbane Bus Network.  TransLink had attempted to sort it, but weak political leadership at the state level, and hysterical councillors and media means that Brisbane continues to have a 1960s high cost, low efficiency, non-connected network that is already causing more cuts.  For example, depot closures and river ferry services cutbacks.

The Western region is getting:

Simple, direct and frequent services where you travel regularly

Better connections between bus and train services

Improved local services to get you where you want to go

What a fiasco the bus reviews are turning out to be for Brisbane.

Well done TransLink on moving forward with the rest of the network.

Best wishes
Robert

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org
RAIL Back On Track http://backontrack.org

[techblitz]

was out there Saturday and came across a regular 513 user. His biggest gripe was the unreliability of services where the bus constantly turns up late. He says hes never seen buses anywhere as late as the 513.
So I end up taking the route and spoke to the driver and he said that the bremer bridge and its plethora of traffic from, 3-5 is what sets a lot of the riverlink routes back.
If this new review is all its cracked up to be...then it needs to improve O.T.P to counter increased congestion and traffic flow around the bridge.

[ozbob]

A lot of bus routes are experiencing peak road congestion issues all over, all regions.

There are times at Goodna where there is virtual gridlock, and like wise Ipswich.

Not encouraging widespread public transport use (poor connections, poor fare structure, limited frequency and span) is just making the congestion issues worse by the day.  At least TransLink has started.   Eventually the BCC bus network will be improved, the congestion reality will see to it.

[techblitz]

A lot of bus routes are experiencing peak road congestion issues all over, all regions.

There are times at Goodna where there is virtual gridlock, and like wise Ipswich.

yea its happening with the cross-town routes like 550 (up to 20 minutes late in peak and because the drivers are rostered to loop back and do the return route...it flows on).
If you have a look at what this route has to put up with in peak lol....its no wonder it has reliability issues.

[techblitz]

Been a bit bored this afternoon, so I've decided to play a fun game. It's called Spot the difference between bus services in 2005 vs. those in 2013!

First up is the 417! Can you spot any new services between this timetable in 2005 and this timetable current in 2013?

Next up is the Centenary suburbs! This one is a bit more fun. Take a look at this timetable from 2005 and this timetable from 2013. So far I've found one additional AM peak service for both the 453 and 454! Can anybody else find them?

I think fun like this is stuff the whole family can play! I think next time I wait for a bus at Indooroopilly for up to an hour on a Sunday, I'll bring all the bus timetables from the western suburbs - one from 2005 and one from 2013, and try and spot the differences.

same with the 230/235 services  ,I know that they have not been changed since 2006,since I have been living in this area

GCL 2002! 

[James]

GCL 2002! 

For the 417, I'm only looking at how far timetables go back. I would not be surprised if the 417 hasn't changed its frequency since the late 90s. The area hasn't changed since then, and BCC only really ever seems to think about changing a route when there is some massive change in the area.

And as long as BCC stays at the helm, I see the 417's frequency going nowhere. Was heading O/B on Coronation Drive this afternoon and passed a completely empty 417. Yes, completely empty. Another bus joining the conga line to the City.

[#Metro]

There is little justification for services like 417 entering the CBD. Services such as these should be terminated at Toowong Rail Station. By shortening this route, the frequency could actually be boosted significantly for virtually no cost. The same applies to route 411.

[James]

There is little justification for services like 417 entering the CBD. Services such as these should be terminated at Toowong Rail Station. By shortening this route, the frequency could actually be boosted significantly for virtually no cost. The same applies to route 411.

417 should be cut entirely. Re-route the 432 via Harts Road and Indooroopilly Road for coverage functions, turning it into a rail feeder.  Additional resources will not be required, as out-of-service buses running back from the Uni can be used for the 432s going to Indro/UQ in AM and PM peak respectively. By re-routing the 432, there are only a few stops in east Taringa and stops in Long Pocket not covered - and most would be within 800m walk of the corner of Harts/Indooroopilly Rd. Do the same for the 428 minus the re-routing.

Cut the 417 entirely. No reason why it needs to exist, and the windy routing it takes in east Taringa makes the route useless for attracting any patronage.

[SurfRail]

I recall coming up with a Toowong to UQ via Indooroopilly route which took in effectively all of the catchment of the 414, 415, 416, 417 and 432 and would have overlaid with the 411, 412 and 428 to create a fairly simple 4-route network for the whole area - all of which could run more frequently than their actual equivalents do now.

[Set in train]

Changes will be implemented in December 2013 (weather permitting), to align with the completion of the Richlands to Springfield train line.

Prior to any changes, we will communicate detailed service and route information, including new bus timetables, to ensure you understand any changes to your individual services.

So what feeders will begin to service the Springfield railway station?