Campbelltown busboy wrote: ↑Wed Sep 30, 2020 2:02 pm
Something says that operators in Sydney need to be told by someone from Transport For NSW that has a actually been somewhere where full flat floor aisleway/doorway buses are the main type of bus in use the differences between the perferred low entry flat floor to centre door layout and the full flat floor aisleway/doorway layout
Plus, the problem with the Bustechs is that they don't even have the low entry flat floor extending to the centre door.
There's some awareness of the issues emerging in Victoria and Queensland, but in general the Australian bus sector is still stuck about 25 years back. Nobody in TfNSW would understand anything about operational efficiencies - issues like passenger exchange and internal passenger flows and distribution - and how improved design engineering could increase productivity. I haven't looked at figures since a couple of years back, but DPP Prague carries about 360 million people per annum over a similar-sized network with about 1,150 buses while STA as it then was needed about 2,000 buses to move less than 200 million ppa. The answer in NSW to poor productivity is to throw more buses at the problem, money no object, and the politicians and auditors don't have the knowledge to know that there's a better solution. In any case, the unions in NSW put the lid on the notion of improved efficiencies too, so we're stuft.
A few years back, my answer was to roll out the trams as quickly as possible, but since they've stuft that too, I believe the faster they roll out the complete metro network, the better. Take the pressure off both the suburban network and the buses as much as possible. Much higher capacity, far better productivity and no unions.
I do think it's amusing that in Europe they're already putting in museums buses that are more advanced than any latest new bus currently in everyday service here.
Perpetually on a T3 to "I. P. Pavlova, přestup na Metro. Příští zastávka, Náměsti Míru"