Tuesday, 30 August 2011

Tackling Deficiencies

This weekend, both Stagecoach and Whippet increase their Sunday bus services on the Cambridgeshire guided busway. This sees one of the busway’s most serious deficiencies tackled. Indeed, Stagecoach goes from one to three an hour. Whippet increases from every two hours to Stagecoach’s current hourly. It would’ve been nice to see a co-ordinated quarter-hourly service that approaches the frequency where passengers need no timetable but such is deregulated life. At least the traffic commissioner has granted short notice.

In Cambridge bus station are two of the Stagecoach busway-liveried vehicles plus, on the left, a further biofuelled bus in a livery that can be used on other services. We asked whether readers had any photos they wished to share and today’s are some of them, with thanks

As for weekday services, there’s a divergence of opinion. Stagecoach is already contemplating buying more vehicles and operating additional services. This might include buses starting from Longstanton park & ride, to cure problems of full upstream buses from St Ives. This follows a busy week two, during which you’d’ve expected the novelty to have worn off. It hasn’t, yet. And, who knows what will happen next week, when the world returns to normal travel patterns. Stagecoach is expecting good things. Let’s hope its optimism is justified.

Whippet, on the other hand, is being far more circumspect. It wishes to see whether the current numbers are stable. Will patronage settle?

Why the difference in approach? Whippet cannot afford to do anything precipitous. It’s a small business without the deep pockets of its near neighbour.

Even were Whippet to increase its hourly weekday service, it cannot easily compete against giant Stagecoach. Stagecoach bought Whippet’s site ahead of the original busway opening to garage its fleet of busway vehicles, with a handful of other biofuelled guidewheel buses in reserve.

Whippet therefore hasn’t the resources to flood the busway with vehicles. It has three only and to ratchet things up from its hourly service to anything approaching Stagecoach’s level would result in expenditure that would not be diligent.

Instead, Whippet is calling for joint ticketing. This would address a second major deficiency in busway operation. But any revenue sharing via the busway ‘station’ ticket machines would also benefit Whippet more than Stagecoach. Whippet knows it’s on the back foot as regards frequency. As things currently stand, if apportioned by mileage, Whippet would presumably gain 1/7th of all revenue on tickets sales that would be priced at the Stagecoach rate of eight per cent higher than Whippet’s own. Presumably, Whippet passengers with busway tickets would then have access to both Whippet and Stagecoach services at either end of their journeys. Add in the busway livery used by both and we have a Quality Contract in the making.

Meanwhile, in spite of Stagecoach’s confidence and Whippet’s cautious Sunday optimism, the naysayers still abound. There’s conspiracy talk in Cambridgeshire of operators deliberately keeping frequencies lower to ensure full buses. Poppycock. Or that commuters will only use the busway because they have no car. Or that the busway will go the way of the strange 1973 100 mph Erith hover train experiment. Or that operators will be pulling services owing to financial difficulties (Stagecoach is committed to five years at the current frequency).

For me, I’d actually rather await the autumn when work, university, college & school resumes full time. A picture will then emerge. But I’m still optimistic.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

The frequency increase is needed but could do with being publicised given the changes are not publicised on the busway website or the stagecoach website. Whippet do at least mention their increase.

RC169 said...

"There’s conspiracy talk in Cambridgeshire of operators deliberately keeping frequencies lower to ensure full buses. Poppycock."

That's an interesting way of presenting it. I guess that it could also be described as "matching supply to demand" - which would be less controversial, and probably describes what most bus operators do most of the time. I would also suggest that operators of the busway services have probably been cautious at first to avoid a situation of initial over-provision having to be reduced a few months later. On such an high profile project, that would have been embarrassing, to say the least. On the other hand, an increase to an initially low level of service can be spun as a positive story - which makes the apparent lack of publicity all the more strange!

John said...

Going on the trips I made last Monday on the Busway, a modest increase in services would definitely be sensible.

The initial queue at the Park & Ride for the A was definitely more than the single decker would be able to take (shame that the busway design only allows single deckers on that section), so we headed into the City on the regular Park & Ride.

We then left Cambridge on the B (the double decker), were probably half full leaving the bus station, completely full by the time we'd made it onto the mock busway (the bit without guide track), and so whizzed past every stop on the Busway (well we would have if the traffic light transponders were working, we stopped at every set of lights) where there upwards of a dozen people waiting at each stop, apart from the one by the country park.

Coming back was just the same, completely rammed by the time the bus was at St Ives, huge queues waiting, and buses barely able to keep up with demand.

With a bus every 10 minutes (plus Whippet's one an hour) it's clearly not enough at the moment.

As Mr Busing said it'll be interesting to see what happens when schools, universities etc. return to normality in September and October. I'm hopeful demand will remain as it is though.

Anonymous said...

Why on earth doesn't someone buy all those spare £20k ex-London bendies and use them on this spacious uncluttered busway ? Ideal for purpose are they not ? They are built to bust queues,and the public won't suffer overcrowding,or long waits for the next bus for long.

Neil said...

I went for a ride at the weekend, and the frequency increase was being posted as a one-off for the Bank Holiday weekend, perhaps being aimed at travel to/from the bank holiday market at St Ives.

Quite an interesting operation - it had most of the feel of a rural railway branch line, but with double-decker "trains" on it, rather than a bus service. Reminded me of Deutsche Bahn's brief experiment with bus-like double-decker railcars. Put FTRs or similar on it and it'd feel very much like a railway.

I agree it'd be better with shared ticketing (particularly as the timetables don't make it very clear who runs what), and I think they need more stop name signage and perhaps on-board announcements as you might if it was a railway.

What was noticeable was a vertical pitching movement - no more than you'd get on a rural railway, but still noticeable. I wonder will this get worse over time as the beams distort?

Also, does anyone know why the Orchard Park bit isn't guided?

Neil said...

"Why on earth doesn't someone buy all those spare £20k ex-London bendies and use them on this spacious uncluttered busway ? Ideal for purpose are they not ? They are built to bust queues,and the public won't suffer overcrowding,or long waits for the next bus for long."

Not so good for the narrow streets of Cambridge, I'm guessing. But if you did, per my other post, it'd *really* feel like a railway.

Neil

Neil said...

One other comment - they'd do well to recruit a special set of drivers for it. On the way out the driver was friendly and polite, but on the way back the driver rudely refused my X5 Dayrider Gold (which I understand is valid - at least the X5 driver thought so when he sold me it) with a blunt "No", but then let it through when I explained what it was.

This sort of thing is what I've come to expect from poorly-trained bus drivers with smaller operators, but it's not becoming of modern-day Stagecoach, and they really need to do better than that.

Sure, if he doesn't know what it is, it's fine to ask for an explanation politely, but to refuse rudely like that is not acceptable in this day and age, not if the busway wants to build custom. Even if it specifically wasn't valid, a polite explanation is needed, not a rude rebuke.

Anonymous said...

The blog has mist out an important point, main increase will be at peak time. Morning and night. Who in there right would use the busway at 7am for fun? Stagecoach know there a demand!

RC169 said...

Anonymous said...

"Why on earth doesn't someone buy all those spare £20k ex-London bendies and use them on this spacious uncluttered busway ? Ideal for purpose are they not ?"

They're not ideal in this case. Stagecoach are promoting their services on the busway with leather seats and WiFi, so a crush-loading artic, where a majority of the passengers might have to stand, would not fit the marketing at all. Standing for longer periods in artic doing 50 - 55 mph is probably not the most comfortable way to travel - and not likely to attract motorists out of their cars.

Certainly, they could refit the artics as fully seated vehicles, with the other frills, but then their capacity advantage would be lost. Modified in that way, I suppose they might be useful for the section south of Cambridge city centre, where the low bridge means that double deckers cannot be used.

Most of the other guided bus routes that I am aware of are in urban areas, and artics are fairly widely used in those cases.

N90734 said...

Interesting comments.

I went for a look and ride on the first Saturday and did it again last Saturday.

Good crowds travelling and thus full buses having to miss stops, helpful drivers, fairly smooth ride on the guided sections if not quite to light rail standards.

Generally positive comments from other passengers, some of whom, to be slightly subjective, seemed typical non-regular bus users.

Overall, I was more impressed than I expected to be.

But joint ticketing and better publicity about ticket options are key.

Plus improved frequencies as already pointed out, once the novelty factor has worn off, the schools are back and the level of abstraction from routes using the A14 is known.

~~~

The Orchard Park 'ersatz' Busway: for those that haven't seen it, is concrete roadway with a narrow grassed centre reservation. I guess this form of construction is cheaper than guided track, but would be unsafe at other than relatively low speeds.

Neil said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Neil said...

"The Orchard Park 'ersatz' Busway: for those that haven't seen it, is concrete roadway with a narrow grassed centre reservation. I guess this form of construction is cheaper than guided track, but would be unsafe at other than relatively low speeds."

That it might be, but the ride is crap, and I bet it's not all that easy to keep the bus perfectly aligned to it. I hope they replace it with proper "track".

Unless, that is, the reason is that the guideway can't deal with such tight curves. But if that's the case I'd just turn it into a normal road with the "car traps" at each end.

Neil

Neil said...

Also, I must admit that the frequency increases (and the speed of implementation) speak very much in favour of the concept over traditional heavy or even light rail. Frequency increases on rail take months or years to bring in.

RC169 said...

Neil said...

'Unless, that is, the reason is that the guideway can't deal with such tight curves. But if that's the case I'd just turn it into a normal road with the "car traps" at each end.'

I'm not sure if the guideway cannot deal with sharp curves. I did read somewhere that all of the individual sections are in fact straight, but I presume curved sections could be created with the appropriate machinery and/or moulds (and, no doubt, extra money!). I understand that the guided busway in Essen includes a section through a narrow, curvaceous street.

The loading on a road used by just one bus every few minutes (even it was every two or three minutes) would not be as great as a conventional road for all types of traffic, so I presume that the construction of the busway is lighter duty, and cheaper, than for a conventional tarmac road. I would imagine that is the reason for the 'unguided' section of the busway.

Anonymous said...

"The blog has mist out an important point"

Usually, this blog is very clear. I thought today's post was as clear as usual and not at all foggy.