The BUZ standard, late at night.

[Gazza]

I've been meaning to start a discussion on this since the bus review.

But basically, for a frequent network, do the buses have to be running every 15 mins till 11pm?

To me it just seems a bit arbirtary that any routes that become a BUZ automatically get that span of frequency, irrespective of whether it's warranted.
Certainly the 199 or routes operating exclusively in high density areas warrant it, but as we move down the list and start BUZzing 'lesser' routes operating in (180, 340 etc) I think it starts becoming a case of concentrating resources on one route at the expense of others, and potentially stopping high frequency being rolled out more widely.

I'd rather have more routes operating till 6am-8pm at high frequency 7 days, with a ramp down in frequency to the last bus at 11, then have less routes with full 15 min frequency right through.

For me actually, the 600 ( http://translink.com.au/resources/travel-information/network-information/timetables/110606-600,601.pdf ) is a more realistic way of providing a frequent useful route (Though personally I'd push the span of 15 min frequency say for an extra half hour or more to what they have)

Thoughts?

[cartoonbirdhaus]

Indeed, service minimums along the lines of the 600 would be appropriate (better to extend Sunday service a couple of hours later, maybe)—and certainly more adequate than either the SmartBus (Melbourne) or Go Zone (Adelaide) minimums.

[Gazza]

Indeed, the half hourly weekend service on SmartBus I don't think is that good, and Adelaide I think just needs to acquire buses more aggressively so the span is better.

People talk of a Centenary BUZ for instance, but I'd be more than happy just having 15 min services where it matters (till 8pm or so), and lesser frequency later at night . All that is really anchoring the BUZ is the shopping centre, but even then its only open late one night per week.
Could you just have a longer span of higher frequency thurs/friday/saturday nights when people are doing stuff?

Similarly, the "BulimbaGlider"  idea comes up, but why isn't a BUZ 230 combined with N226 sufficient? Does it need to be a full blown 24h operation? Does the cinema run at 3am?

[HappyTrainGuy]

That's something that should really be looked at. 340/330 can really carry some low numbers and can frequently run empty into the night. Heaven forbid should someone see them at night on a weekend. In saying that at certain times particular services tend to get okay patronage due to shift changes/later finishing workers. But still.

I guess its a route on route basis. I don't know the procedures that happen for services in the city in terms of rest breaks/delayed services/timing etc but it would be interesting to know if certain routes could be terminated at interchanges while still maintaining a 15 min frequency to the terminus compared to a 30 minute frequency all the way to the city ie cutting 330/340 at Chermside interchange after 9pm to transfer to a 333 service (all services still at 4bph). Might even be an option to go to a 30 min frequency and terminating at the interchange while providing better services for a proper feeder network.

[achiruel]

Could you just have a longer span of higher frequency thurs/friday/saturday nights when people are doing stuff?

I remember a few years ago (it as before the bus renumbering in Brisbane, so quite a while back now) there were a few routes to major shopping centres that had increased frequency and/or longer operating hours on Thursday nights.  However apparently TransLink thinks every weeknight except Friday should have the same timetable, so aren't willing to do this (too many variations confused people apparently).

[#Metro]

BUZ routes are basically car replacement. I've used the 412 very very late at night and also the CityGlider - they're still very well loaded, even at this hour!

So no.

[somebody]

I've thought this is strange too.  A number of times I would have rathered the 11:05pm service to be operated at 11:50pm, so half hour frequency for the last hour of operation.

To be honest, I think it's acceptable as is though.  It is simple and consistent except for peak hour.

It's far better than the Sydney Metrobus way.

What is stupid is two BUZes on the Old Cleveland Rd corridor.  I don't agree with the BUZ 340 either.

[achiruel]

BUZ routes are basically car replacement. I've used the 412 very very late at night and also the CityGlider - they're still very well loaded, even at this hour!

So no.

For inner-city BUZ routes lined with destinations and medium-high density residential, that's hardly surprising.  What's being talked about here is BUZ services to the urban fringes such as 100, 330, 340.  Yet we are fighting for BUZ to Northwest & Centenary, I think that would have similar results.  Maybe 30 minutes after 9pm is really enough frequency for these areas.

[SurfRail]

I'm not really in favour.  On many BUZ  routes the late night frequency is quite sustainable and justified.

I don't think saving on these resources is worth it.  If you really want to save resources, reduce peak hour rockets and get more people travelling in the off peak on more BUZ routes, where most travel actually occurs.

[BrizCommuter]

BrizCommuter quite often uses the inner INB (the Buzing of the 330 and 340 is a god send) and the 345 Buz at the "quiet times" early Sunday am, and late night, and the loadings are usually pretty good (circa 20 pax). There should be no question of reducing the frequency of Buz routes on a pro-public transport forum. The whole point of making these routes attractive is the guaranteed frequency!

[somebody]

BrizCommuter quite often uses the inner INB (the Buzing of the 330 and 340 is a god send) and the 345 Buz at the "quiet times" early Sunday am, and late night, and the loadings are usually pretty good (circa 20 pax). There should be no question of reducing the frequency of Buz routes on a pro-public transport forum. The whole point of making these routes attractive is the guaranteed frequency!

It's a legitimate thing to discuss.

EDIT: I'd add that line of thought taken to its logical conclusion would mean we wouldn't bag routes like the 88 or Maroon Glider.

[somebody]

If you really want to save resources, reduce peak hour rockets

I just don't understand this argument.  It is axiomatically incorrect, as has been discussed in the Bus Review threads.

[HappyTrainGuy]

BrizCommuter quite often uses the inner INB (the Buzing of the 330 and 340 is a god send) and the 345 Buz at the "quiet times" early Sunday am, and late night, and the loadings are usually pretty good (circa 20 pax). There should be no question of reducing the frequency of Buz routes on a pro-public transport forum. The whole point of making these routes attractive is the guaranteed frequency!

It's a legitimate thing to discuss.

EDIT: I'd add that line of thought taken to its logical conclusion would mean we wouldn't bag routes like the 88 or Maroon Glider.

Agreed with Simon. IMHO the buz standard at night on a weekday (excluding thursday/friday) should be to 9pm but then on a route by route basis frequency can be maintained at every 15 minutes or reduced to a 30 minute frequency. It might even then be an option to consider terminating a service at interchanges (340 at Chermside) if there is an option available to transfer to another service instead of having multiple routes running along a corridor nearly empty just so people in the city can have a better frequency ie 330/333/340 at Chermside when the 66/111 operations could be extended for those inner city. Having used the 330/340 late at night/early morning and seeing both of these routes run as I drive past its a pure miracle that they were both given a buz status to start with. I can understand the 330 getting a frequency boost for the daytime services but at night time a service every 15 mins is just overdone.

The INB is a joke for the quiet times as the inbound 330 can gain some serious time compared to the schedulled running time between Chermside-Cultural Centre and can sometimes run in clusters rather than an averaged timeframe. As it is the early morning weekend 330 services already are running 5-6 minutes early into Chermside to wait for the timetable to catch up and then 5 minutes early into the CCBS. The same can be said for services at night as they start to creep up on running ahead of time by more than a couple minutes. 340 is similar in that it can gain some time but the route it travels gains that time back. Mostly the lights along Gympie Road and then that stupid intersection at Gympie/Hamilton Road. 333 is mixed. It can run early or it can run a couple minutes down. Similar to the outbound 340 late at night it gains a little time over the schedulle RBWH-Chermside. There has been 2 times where the 330 bus I was on got to the CCBS 12 and 14 minutes faster than schedulled time when the drivers didn't stop for the timetable to catch up at Chermside. The majority of the night services run a few mins earlier in CCBS and outbound starts to creek up on running ~5 minutes early depending on how the driver drives to keep as close as possible to the time.

Example from a couple weeks back. Its not at night but its a similar timeframe of what can be experienced. The 330 arrived at the Gympie Road stop following directly behind the 333 when both stopped at the lights. Everyone got on the 333 and it left. The 330 was held at the stop for 5 minutes for the timetable to catch up for and departed on time at 6.51. Arrived at CCBS 5 minutes before the schedulled 7.15 arrival right behind that very same 333 service that had stopped infront of the 330 back on Gympie Road some 20 minutes before. During the weeknight drivers tend to ignore waiting for the timetable but also tend to drive the bus slower by waiting everyone to sit down, taking off slowly from the lights and dordling along the busway. Others just go like normal.

06:46 AM    'Chermside (Gympie Road)' Gympie Road (37/38)    07:10 AM    Cultural Centre Terminating Services)

[somebody]

For the record, I didn't say it was a good idea to cut back BUZ (except the 222 duplicating the 200).  In general it's the duplicative routes which should reduce on the common corridors.

[Gazza]

BUZ routes are basically car replacement. I've used the 412 very very late at night and also the CityGlider - they're still very well loaded, even at this hour!

So no.

No, I specifically excluded these routes in the OP:

Certainly the 199 or routes operating exclusively in high density areas warrant it

The 412 runs past offices/apartment blocks along coro, as well as all the blocks along Sir Fred Schonell Drive, so id call that a  route operating exclusively in high density.

BrizCommuter quite often uses the inner INB (the Buzing of the 330 and 340 is a god send) and the 345 Buz at the "quiet times" early Sunday am, and late night, and the loadings are usually pretty good (circa 20 pax). There should be no question of reducing the frequency of Buz routes on a pro-public transport forum. The whole point of making these routes attractive is the guaranteed frequency!

What I'm getting at this that beyond now, I think we start scratching the barrel in terms of routes that warrant 15 min frequency till 11pm (And certainly, I'm questioning the economics on routes like the 100, 340 etc) . This is different to somewhere central like on the INB.
Particularly for longer routes, I see the service standard as a barrier for making a business case for BUZing.

The 620 on the sunshine coast is a good example. Makes a lot of sense to be upgraded 15 min frequency all day every day, but not till 11pm.

Just makes me lol a bit that the bus review is sweating some routes by proposing to cut sunday services etc when they are already poor, yet we use buses like water on some routes and run them 4bph till 11pm, purley because thats what the first BUZ had and we seemingly cant deviate from that formula under any circumstance?

I've thought this is strange too.  A number of times I would have rathered the 11:05pm service to be operated at 11:50pm, so half hour frequency for the last hour of operation.

+1

To be honest, I think it's acceptable as is though.  It is simple and consistent except for peak hour.

But what's wrong with a similarly simple statement.
A bus every 15 minutes 6am-9pm. Every 10 mins in peak. Last bus at 11pm

[somebody]

To be honest, I think it's acceptable as is though.  It is simple and consistent except for peak hour.

But what's wrong with a similarly simple statement.
A bus every 15 minutes 6am-9pm. Every 10 mins in peak. Last bus at 11pm

What's wrong with that is it makes people dig up info to find out how often the buses run between 9pm and 11pm.

I think removing the late evening trips saves too little value and would reduce the all day patronage.

[Gazza]

What's wrong with that is it makes people dig up info to find out how often the buses run between 9pm and 11pm.

I think people adopting their local BUZ for the first time would suss it out.

Or else why do any frequency improvement thats non BUZ? Since to understand it you inevitably have to read a timetable at least once to familarise yourself.

[somebody]

Or else why do any frequency improvement thats non BUZ? Since to understand it you inevitably have to read a timetable at least once to familarise yourself.

That doesn't follow.

The guiding purpose of this is to save money to BUZ other routes?  The saving is trivial but the reduction in the BUZ brand is not.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Oh boo hoo so a few people have to look at a timetable. Why does everything have to be so difficult for a few lazy people. If you go on a route a few times you get to know the timings especially if its their local bus. "Oh its 15mins till 9pm then 30mins till last service". If Translink had a decent transport app that could display the stop times and a better journey planner then that would be excellent but they don't.

[SurfRail]

If you really want to save resources, reduce peak hour rockets

I just don't understand this argument.  It is axiomatically incorrect, as has been discussed in the Bus Review threads.

Rubbish.  Only a few of the existing peak routes are both good value and well loaded.  What is evident is that most travel occurs in the interpeak and a very large portion of that is not being carried on PT.  Rockets do not achieve anything except make the system more peak centric.

Living in a city with no peak hour services, and working in a city with awfully designed ones, tends to colour my perspective.

[#Metro]

Melbourne, by and large, does not have rockets.
I can't speak for Sydney or Perth. Trains run express, but I guess they have the capacity to do that and the distances are waaaay longer.

[Gazza]

The guiding purpose of this is to save money to BUZ other routes?  The saving is trivial but the reduction in the BUZ brand is not.

I don't think so, who really cares that its every 15 mins at 11pm?

My concern is also that the service standard becomes a barrier to implementation on other routes which do need 15 min frequency, but would probably start falling below a good level of cost recovery if it were provided too late.

[Golliwog]

I'm of the opinion that BUZ should be a minimum decent standard, which can be exceeded as required. While I understand Simon's point about lessening the impact of the BUZ 'brand', what's worse: people thinking a BUZ route is slightly less amazing OR people having both a BUZ standard, and another to denote the same deal except for the 15 minute guaranteed frequency ending earlier at 9pm? There would be nothing stopping existing BUZ routes continuing to run as is, though I agree with the notion that some could cut back a bit later to either 3bph or 2bph.

[somebody]

Oh boo hoo so a few people have to look at a timetable. Why does everything have to be so difficult for a few lazy people. If you go on a route a few times you get to know the timings especially if its their local bus. "Oh its 15mins till 9pm then 30mins till last service". If Translink had a decent transport app that could display the stop times and a better journey planner then that would be excellent but they don't.

You and your bl**dy boo hoos!  You say that about reverse peak on the Ipswich Line, and increased Caboolture line services. 

Smartphones are hardly universal.  The KISS principle should be applied, which means no one has to look at a timetable.  The act of having to look at a timetable is a disincentive.

If you really want to save resources, reduce peak hour rockets

I just don't understand this argument.  It is axiomatically incorrect, as has been discussed in the Bus Review threads.

Rubbish.  Only a few of the existing peak routes are both good value and well loaded.  What is evident is that most travel occurs in the interpeak and a very large portion of that is not being carried on PT.  Rockets do not achieve anything except make the system more peak centric.

Living in a city with no peak hour services, and working in a city with awfully designed ones, tends to colour my perspective.

The Gold Coast also has no real CBD either which would make it hard to have a sensible rocket.

Do you have a reference for your comment that "most travel occurs in the interpeak"?  Per hour, most travel occurs in peak, but there are less hours of that, so it might be true.

I'm dismayed that you would want to remove even the profitable rockets.

Melbourne, by and large, does not have rockets.
I can't speak for Sydney or Perth. Trains run express, but I guess they have the capacity to do that and the distances are waaaay longer.

Sydney has a pretty strong system of peak only bus services.

Melbourne probably doesn't have "rockets" because it doesn't have a focus on bus services into the CBD.  It does have peak only stopping patterns on its train services though.

[HappyTrainGuy]

No smartphone then read a paper timetable. People need to take some responsibility rather than be some oblivious idiot that struggles to figure out when a bus runs after 9pm. Plan ahead.

[BrizCommuter]

I don't think so, who really cares that its every 15 mins at 11pm?

Shift workers (hospital, hospitality, etc) for starters!

[Mr X]

The last bus on my BUZ route (whoch goes past my work) leaves approx. 54mins before most of us clock off. Even those who clock off early pretty much have to run to the stop if they want to make the bus.

Any wonder 100% of the team members in my department drive?

[SurfRail]

The Gold Coast also has no real CBD either which would make it hard to have a sensible rocket.

I think that is largely a contradiction in terms with very limited exceptions.  Very few southside routes would qualify, certainly nowhere near as many as exist now.

Do you have a reference for your comment that "most travel occurs in the interpeak"?  Per hour, most travel occurs in peak, but there are less hours of that, so it might be true.

Not at hand, but I've seen one which shows that the 2x2 hr peaks really only represent around 40% or less of all travel.

I'm dismayed that you would want to remove even the profitable rockets.

Explain why having route variations at peak hour is a good thing. 

People are not going to just abandon the network, and even if they did, I subscribe to the maxim that nobody is irreplaceable.

[HappyTrainGuy]

I don't think so, who really cares that its every 15 mins at 11pm?

Shift workers (hospital, hospitality, etc) for starters!

So what. And half hourly isn't as good for those that can clock off before the last service leaves? Its after 9pm. Why should they expect to have a service that is still frequent as something thats running at 2pm?. 330/340 really do struggle for patronage beyond Chermside later in the night. Just go out there and observe.

I don't understand why everyone treats the buz services as the holy grail of routes that shouldn't be modified what so ever when services are constantly running empty or with a few people later at night. Warner has no bus service after 8pm so what about shift workers that are there. There's a private hospital just down the road. What about shift workers at Bracken Ridge that work in the Strathpine or Sandgate area? Just because there are shift workers doesn't mean that its a justification to keep services running every 15 minutes for less dense urban areas.

[SurfRail]

People are going to be more inclined to use public transport if they know it runs at decent headways into the night.  I fully expect a route which runs half-hourly 6am to 6pm (eg some of the Kangaroo routes) will be much less patronised during the day than if the same route ran until 9pm.

[somebody]

People are going to be more inclined to use public transport if they know it runs at decent headways into the night.  I fully expect a route which runs half-hourly 6am to 6pm (eg some of the Kangaroo routes) will be much less patronised during the day than if the same route ran until 9pm.

Exactly.  BUZ routes have been responsible for most of the growth which has occurred in SEQ's PT.  Don't water down the formula, it works!

I think that is largely a contradiction in terms with very limited exceptions.  Very few southside routes would qualify, certainly nowhere near as many as exist now.

I'd say that routes like the 443, 157, 206, 211, AM 207/137 would be examples OTOH.   Surprisingly the Charlotte St routes are profitable.

Without the 443, people would need to go via Indro interchange and a slower trip along Coro.

Not at hand, but I've seen one which shows that the 2x2 hr peaks really only represent around 40% or less of all travel.

That's believable.  Weekends and evenings only have to exceed 10% to disprove the hypothesis.

Explain why having route variations at peak hour is a good thing. 

People are not going to just abandon the network, and even if they did, I subscribe to the maxim that nobody is irreplaceable.

I think forcing them on to slower services will drive them away in droves.

I support more full time versions of peak hour routes really.

[HappyTrainGuy]

Exactly.  BUZ routes have been responsible for most of the growth which has occurred in SEQ's PT.  Don't water down the formula, it works!

And yet other routes and corridors eg Webster Road corridor are being considered for a service reduction in operating hours. Go Figure.

[somebody]

Exactly.  BUZ routes have been responsible for most of the growth which has occurred in SEQ's PT.  Don't water down the formula, it works!

And yet other routes and corridors eg Webster Road corridor are being considered for a service reduction in operating hours. Go Figure.

They are also considering significant upgrades for the Everton Park corridor.  If it was a job lot, I'd consider it a net advance.  Webster Rd has partly common catchment with the 345 and 333.

[Gazza]

Exactly.  BUZ routes have been responsible for most of the growth which has occurred in SEQ's PT.  Don't water down the formula, it works!

But I don't think it's the late night bit that matters, what has made a difference is 7 day frequency, and having the span of frequency go either side of peak and interpeak. It's like saying the reason CityGlider has been sucessful is because it runs 24 hours on weekends.

In Perth their rail network has seen strong growth year on year, without having the 4tph go right till final train.

You've said yourself that the growth in SEQ PT has been brought on by BUZ, but obviously the vast majority of those passengers are being carried at more reasonable hours, and weekends (Eg the much quoted Sunday patronage exceeding weekdays pre-BUZ)

[techblitz]

cant see translink being too worried about near empty late running buz services anyway.Weekday special events eg: concerts ,games etc make up some of the loss.

[somebody]

It's like saying the reason CityGlider has been sucessful is because it runs 24 hours on weekends.

No it isn't.

Go to Sydney to see the growth on the system caused by the Metrobus routes.  Can't see it?

[HappyTrainGuy]

Webster Rd has partly common catchment with the 345 and 333.

Still doesn't mean that the 345 and 333 are valid options for people to use given the elevation differences in the area and the stop locations for the buz services. If anything it just encourages people to drive even more. Then what comes to the catchment areas after Webster road. Nothing along Newman Road as the 326/327/336/337 aren't running. No 326/327 and depending on the time/direction no 325/335 services in Zillmere/Taigum. The only services that operate after 8pm in that area are the railway lines, the 330 buz, a few inbound 325s, outbound 325/335, one inbound 310 and 2 outbound 310s. That becomes even more pethetic on the weekends.

Go to Sydney to see the growth on the system caused by the Metrobus routes.  Can't see it?

If you won't go to the northside to see how the bus network really underperforms for locals or out to Darra to see how trains operate why should someone go to Sydney to look at the M40 bus run around 

cant see translink being too worried about near empty late running buz services anyway.Weekday special events eg: concerts ,games etc make up some of the loss.

If they aren't worried about buz services running empty why are they considering reducing the frequency of the 325 which operates next door from the Boondall Entertainment Centre and feeds into Chermside Shopping Centre, Geebung and Kedron Wavell RSLs (Kedron closes at something like 12.30-1am), the Newmarket Hotel and nearby shops. Most games occur friday/saturday/sunday which is when they can still maintain that frequency such as many bus routes and railway lines do as that's when most people go out and utilise PT at and well into the night. If its on a weekday special event/extra services can be run.

As I said before the standard should be 15 mins until 9pm. Then on a route by route basis it can still be maintained at 15 mins or it can drop back to as far as 30 mins until last service. Inner city services such as the 111 buz or the 66 service could have their operations modified to cover off the missing services.

[somebody]

I've been to the northside and I've been through Darra.  I still think it an unreasonable argument that I have to sit at Corinda for a number of hours on end on a weekday.

I didn't mean an actual trip - look at the stats, they are clear.

[BrizCommuter]

I don't think so, who really cares that its every 15 mins at 11pm?

Shift workers (hospital, hospitality, etc) for starters!

So what. And half hourly isn't as good for those that can clock off before the last service leaves? Its after 9pm. Why should they expect to have a service that is still frequent as something thats running at 2pm?. 330/340 really do struggle for patronage beyond Chermside later in the night. Just go out there and observe.

I don't understand why everyone treats the buz services as the holy grail of routes that shouldn't be modified what so ever when services are constantly running empty or with a few people later at night. Warner has no bus service after 8pm so what about shift workers that are there. There's a private hospital just down the road. What about shift workers at Bracken Ridge that work in the Strathpine or Sandgate area? Just because there are shift workers doesn't mean that its a justification to keep services running every 15 minutes for less dense urban areas.

So what? It's a big deal if you are shift worker!
If you finish work late, and then have a long wait for public transport, you will be inclined to drive instead. The point of frequency is to attract people to using public transport. Your suggestions would only deter public transport use (both for daytime to work and late night to home journeys).

BTW, BrizCommuter previously lived in a city with public transport frequencies after 9pm at approx. every 4 minutes. Brisbane is a long way behind!!

[HappyTrainGuy]

So what? It's a big deal if you are shift worker!

Frequency isn't the big deal for shift workers. Its the operating hours of routes. I should know as I myself have been a shift worker for god knows how long now. Personally I'd rather see a better span of operating hours over frequency as I and many other shift workers could actually be able to use PT more. I'd like to see prepaid hourly nightlink buses and trains a all week thing but I know that's just not going to happen as the patronage isn't there to support it. Frequency is good and all but its just so pointless to many shift workers if they can't even get to that bus to start off with. If a buz went past my front door I'd hardly use it for work as the buz standard still isn't good enough. As it is now many shift workers can't even access PT services including the all mighty buz for work (early morning Caboolture line services carries the most shift workers hands down every day including weekends across the entire SEQPT network which are usually provided before most buz routes even start up. Departs Caboolture @ 3.52 with a ~4.59 arrival at Roma Street. First Buz from the northside gets there about an hour later at ~6.05 being the 345). If I work the arvo shift I have to drive regardless because I know if I work overtime I am guaranteed that I'll have no PT options. As it is now I'm just lucky enough to be able to get the last train to about ~8km from home at night. But just because there are some shift workers that might be able to catch them it doesn't justify that kind of frequency for an area that becomes a one directional trip route (outbound) at those times. If the buz route can justify 4bph at those times like the 199 then that's fine. When buz routes like the 330 and 340 are transporting cold air most of the time because the major trip generators along the route are closed then 4bph is just plain and simple over kill and the frequency should be cut back.

330/340 in my books can easily have their night duties after 9pm cut back to 2bph/333 maintained at 4bph with those removed services then provided to other local feeder routes such as the 310/326*/327*/inbound 335s/359.

* Route needs the route to be modified.