25/10/2020 Bus service changes - Inner West

[Qantas94Heavy]

Speaking of 'on demand', I've just received the following email from BRIDJ:

From 25 October, BRIDJ’s On Demand service zone will expand to include:

• the eastern end of Gipps Street,
• Bayview Road and,
• the Northern end of Burwood Road.

[CityRail]

This weekend some Scania buses at Kingsgrove are moving to Leichhardt which will be very squashy unless some buses at Leichhardt are moved elsewhere.

As M10 cease to exist, the artics at L can move to K until route 100 is launched and transfer over to STA Region 8?

[swtt]

This weekend some Scania buses at Kingsgrove are moving to Leichhardt which will be very squashy unless some buses at Leichhardt are moved elsewhere.

As M10 cease to exist, the artics at L can move to K until route 100 is launched and transfer over to STA Region 8?

Most of the M10's service frequency has been redistributed to other routes for growth, e.g.

• 440 (3x additional service, Leichhardt - Railway Square in the off peak)
• 438x (2x additional services, Abbotsford - Martin Place in the off peak)
• 461x (2x additional services, Burwood - Domain in the off peak)

I suspect the total number of buses on the road has in fact increased in the off peak.

[stupid_girl]

As M10 cease to exist, the artics at L can move to K until route 100 is launched and transfer over to STA Region 8?

Most of the M10's service frequency has been redistributed to other routes for growth, e.g.

• 440 (3x additional service, Leichhardt - Railway Square in the off peak)
• 438x (2x additional services, Abbotsford - Martin Place in the off peak)
• 461x (2x additional services, Burwood - Domain in the off peak)

I suspect the total number of buses on the road has in fact increased in the off peak.

Not quite

M10: -4 per hour

440: +0 per hour
No increase in the off-peak. The Covid-19 short workings have existed for quite some time.

438x: +2 per hour
The current combined frequency of 436,438,439 is 8 buses per hour. The future combined frequency of 437,438X is 10 buses per hour.

461x: +1 per hour
The frequency is boosted from 3 buses per hour to 4 buses per hour.

[1whoknows]

Volvo artics are moving to region 3 depots

[Special_K]

Today's running of the last through Route 466 between Cabarita and Ashfield (4.25pm from Cabarita Wharf and 5.15pm from Ashfield Station) ended 111 years of direct public transport between Ashfield and the Cabarita Pleasure Grounds. The Cabarita Line opened in 1907 as a steam tram service branching off the Mortlake line.Direct services from Ashfield commenced in 1909, being converted from steam to electric trams in 1912.

The Cabarita and Mortlake electric trams ceased in 1948 and have been operated by buses ever since with the 466 diverted via Strathfield for about a decade before reverting back to Liverpool Road and the more recent detour via Bayview Park.

History changing before our eyes. Mortlake losing a city service with the cancellation of the 439 and Cabarita gaining a City (Peak) and Drummoyne link with the extended 502.

[pgt]

Although not mentioned, they slipped in a couple of additional early evening 320 services on weekdays from Gore Hill, terminating at Zetland.
Timing wise they seem to be more about running a service rather than dead running back to the depot (there's possibly demand further down the line anyway), as they seem to correspond to the last couple of services that head out of the city to Gore Hill.

[CityRail]

I drove on Parra Road today during peak as well as being in the city at lunch time, I observed that 438X and 461X has pretty low patronage, yet they appear to be more frequent than 440.

I also observed there are some double up of 438X and 461X, possibly due to Covid or traffic.

I wonder how the Victoria Road front go today as M50 cease to exist and replaced by 502, 503, 504 and 504X?

Also, was there any outrage from Eastern Suburbs today as there are less buses in Coogee and Maroubra?

Sent from my SM-A7050 using Tapatalk

[Qantas94Heavy]

Some poking around on social media reveals some complaints about 438X. Despite having fewer stops, it's timetabled to take 2 minutes longer than the old 438 during peak, and 14 minutes longer than the old L38. There were also claims that their bus was more crowded than before, though this is likely anecdotal.

A couple more complaints were about route 503 being stuck in traffic on the approach to Bathurst St. Apparently some trips were delayed up to 10 minutes as a result.

Also real time data shows 438X/461X outbound buses being quite delayed between Museum and Haymarket LR. I suspect there is an issue with the right turn into Rawson Pl, but haven't had time to go there to observe what's happening.

[boronia]

I was waiting for a tram at Haymarket about 17:30 today, and there were 2x 438Xs in the stop, with another one waiting to turn in.

Perhaps the timetable variations are a more realistic indication of the actual times taken?

[Cazza]

Why do so many buses still travel into the CBD proper beyond Railway Square/Belmore Park? It just astounds me why they feel the need to have bus services run into the congested CBD core, when changing to a train or light rail is quicker (in most cases) and so much more efficient for bus operators (especially now that TS run the Inner West services).

The new 438X TT says it takes 14 mins (off-peak) from Railway Square to Martin Place (12 mins on the outbound).

Compare this to a 10 min tram ride from Haymarket to Wynyard (plus a transfer time of 2 mins from bus to tram stop and an average of 2.5 min wait). In total, a 14.5 min (round up to 15min) consistent journey from Central to the heart of the CBD.

For a train journey, call it a 6 min transfer from bus stop to Central Station platforms, average 3 min wait for the next City bound train and 6 mins to Wynyard and 5 to either St James or Martin Place.
That's a consistent 14 min (to Martin Place/St James) or 15 min (to Wynyard) trip (even less if you time the train connection right which is more often than not the case).

For peak hour, this bus journey jumps out to 17 mins inbound AM Peak and 16 mins outbound PM Peak (which we all know are pretty optimistic times on most days).

Either way, 17 mins in, 17 mins out. That's an extra 34 mins travel time per bus, per route (not even taking into account layover times between services which should be upwards of 10 mins). That's around 45 mins of travel time just to try and keep a one seat journey for commuters. Any global city should know that you should not be catering to people with one seat journeys if it is inefficient and pretty detrimental to the rest of the network (like these CBD services). You'd like a door-to-door one seat journey? That's what a car is for.

Interchanging is a part of any successful city and transport network (like pretty much any European city). I know sometimes it's comparing apples to oranges but it's what Sydney should be striving for.

And before people point out to me, yes I know layover space in and around Central is sparse and wouldn't be able to currently cope with the number of Inner-West terminating services. And yes, the key points to a successful network where interchanging between services is common place involves reliability (buses can cross that one out), frequency (buses once again) and a standardised fare network that doesn't have different prices for different modes of transport (and if I'm reading it correctly, a penalty for changing modes???). Like come on, what kind of joke is that?

But that's nothing Sydney can't work towards. Biting the bullet and committing to the changes that may cause a bit of initial fuss, but once the NIMBYs get shut down with the facts that a greater number of people will benefit than miss out and they too will in fact be better off, they won't have a case to argue for.

[tonyp]

I don't know what's happened to the inner west interchange at Rawson Place. All buses were supposed to turn around there (no layover, just in and out on about a 15-20 second dwell). I think there is space for two artics or three rigids. That was the original concept. Has it since gone pear-shaped like the SE interchanges?

[stupid_girl]

Why do so many buses still travel into the CBD proper beyond Railway Square/Belmore Park? It just astounds me why they feel the need to have bus services run into the congested CBD core, when changing to a train or light rail is quicker (in most cases) and so much more efficient for bus operators (especially now that TS run the Inner West services).

Changing to a train or light rail is much more expensive in peak hours!!!

[Linto63]

Why do so many buses still travel into the CBD proper beyond Railway Square/Belmore Park? It just astounds me why they feel the need to have bus services run into the congested CBD core, when changing to a train or light rail is quicker (in most cases)

It's hardly a proper interchange with a fair walk from Railway Square to both the light and heavy rail platforms, and likewise can be a fair way from people's ultimate destination and the nearest tram stop / station. The number of buses proceeding through to the cbd is far fewer than it used to be.

I don't know what's happened to the inner west interchange at Rawson Place. All buses were supposed to turn around there (no layover, just in and out on about a 15-20 second dwell). I think there is space for two artics or three rigids. That was the original concept. Has it since gone pear-shaped like the SE interchanges?

If that was the original concept, then it was conceived by someone with no sense of reality. Buses coming up Broadway often bunch into conga lines far longer than the 3 buses that can be accommodated at Rawson Place. Result would be tailbacks around the corner into Pitt Street. Turning around without a layover would only be possible on services with a turn up and go frequency, of which the Broadway corridor has none. As to 15-20 seconds to unload and load, completely unrealistic; even a moderately loaded bus in a perfect scenario with no fumbling for opal cards etc will take far longer than that, much less one that is heavily loaded.

[boronia]

The buses coming off Broadway should be able to stop in Pitt St, before (or maybe just past) Rawson Place, so it is only a short walk to the interchange. Connections from Railway Sq to Central would be enhanced if there was an entrance off the western end of the tunnel. It is ridiculous that you have to walk all the way to the end to get through the barriers, then perhaps walk half way back to the platforms.
The main bottleneck for the buses seems to be the lights getting out into George St I watched tonight and only two of four buses got out on the green, then there was a 90 second wait for the next green.

[tonyp]

As I've said previously, I think in reality most commuters don't even think about the extra cost of changing modes as they tap their way through a journey and no doubt governments trade on that. It happens in every area of commerce with the change from cash to smartcard. The card detaches one from reality. The pain comes later when you look at your bank statement. With cash you see the reality in front of you.

I haven't given much attention to timing bus dwells here, but my survey of such things in central Europe is that a typical peak bus will exchange passengers (boarding and alighting) in about 15-20 seconds, rarely worse than 30 seconds, similar to a tram. If it's taking longer than that here, somebody should be looking at issues of design and productivity. The passenger is not the major cause of such issues.

[grog]

Not sure what the earlier plans were for how the interchange would work, but the EIS had inbound buses dropping on Pitt Street before Rawson, and outbound services commencing from the interchange in Rawson Pl. I don't think left turn are allowed from Pitt to Rawson (it's a sharp turn) so presumably, at least from the time of the EIS, services were always supposed to turn around and layover somewhere else and then come back.

[tonyp]

Buses shouldn't be laying over in the city. It should be straight in and out with layover at the outer termini.

[grog]

I don't disagree, with appropriate headway management (i.e. low frequency services shouldn't go to the CBD at all)

I'm just calling out what was in the EIS, which never seemed to contemplate services operating in that way, especially given the way the project seems to have been designed to not allow buses to turn left from Pitt to Rawson.

[Glen]

Buses shouldn't be laying over in the city. It should be straight in and out with layover at the outer termini.

Agree in principle but in practice that depends on the reliability (on inward trips) and the frequency.

On an unreliable route with lower frequency services (however you define that) loops in the city can result in less reliability for passengers on outward trips.

[Geo101]

The buses coming off Broadway should be able to stop in Pitt St, before (or maybe just past) Rawson Place, so it is only a short walk to the interchange.

There are many services which both terminate and pass-through the Pitt St opp Barlow St, Haymarket bus stop.

I have started doing this myself during off-peak travel, instead of catching the bus to my local station then a train to the city, I now get the bus to the Pitt street stop, then walk to the tram stop, then on down George St.

I never used to do this before because, as pointed out above, to get to one of the city circle platforms from railway square is a cut lunch and a waterbag trek.

Trip planner estimates an 8-minute walk, which would be about right if not power walking.

[stupid_girl]

As I've said previously, I think in reality most commuters don't even think about the extra cost of changing modes as they tap their way through a journey and no doubt governments trade on that. It happens in every area of commerce with the change from cash to smartcard. The card detaches one from reality. The pain comes later when you look at your bank statement. With cash you see the reality in front of you.

Occasional travellers may not think about the extra cost. However, regular commuters will very likely do so.

[iamthouth]

I would think it would be the other way around, a regular (daily) traveller will reach the weekly cap, and will know the time benefits, an occasional traveller will not, and is thus more price sensitive.

[stupid_girl]

I would think it would be the other way around, a regular (daily) traveller will reach the weekly cap, and will know the time benefits, an occasional traveller will not, and is thus more price sensitive.

Most bus commuters will not reach the weekly cap if they do not interchange to another mode. Therefore, it makes perfect sense for them to stay on the bus.

[pylelo]

Any shared observations on the patronage as a result of these network changes? Would be particularly interested to know how the 437 is performing.

A few anecdotal observations from me:

• The introduction of the 438X and 461X have placed a greater proportion of pax on the 413, 440, 480 and 483

• With the frequency reduction on the 431, observed spikes in pax through outbound from Railway Sq