Buses in Greater Manchester - Current State/Future

[Jozhua]

Many areas of Greater Manchester rely on their bus connections as one of the only means of public transportation. This shouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but the state of buses in Greater Manchester seems to be really quite poor, not only in comparison to other countries, but also other areas of the UK.

(I'm aware that a lot of people probably work buses so my disclaimer is the vast majority of drivers and staff are really good at their jobs, just the system as a whole is poor and disjointed.)

I'll start off with the things that are good, though:
-Good coverage.
-Reasonable frequency of routes.
-Plenty of routes.

However, there are many issues with the network:

1. Pricing - The cost of bus tickets is incredibly high, especially in comparison to Metrolink and heavy rail. For me, someone who lives about 1.5 miles from the city centre, it usually costs £4.00 - 5.40 to make a return trip by bus. Singles are expensive and there appears to be no cost incentive to make a return journey. I'm unsure about transferring between routes run by different operators, but my gut feeling is it would involve paying a full single fare twice. There is no sensible pricing structure and I have no idea what's going on with Get Me There.
2. Reliability/Information - The reason I put these together, is that good information can really help when presented with delays, etc. When I go back to suburban Nottingham, I just monitor the TrentBarton live departures page and pop out the door a couple minutes before the bus leaves. Ultimately, unless you BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) the entire country, buses will inevitably encounter some level of delays, however, providing live information can help people better plan their day and minimise how much time they have to stand out in the cold/rain/heat! Bus operators in GM do have this technology, however the number of operators means it's pretty disjointed AND some of the web implementations are incredibly poor/mobile unfriendly.
3. Early AM/Late PM running - Buses run a bit later than the trains, but it's still not amazing. The number of services run drops off sharply after 7/8pm. When I worked in Central Manchester for a couple of months, getting back was an absolute pain unless it was in the middle of the day. Waiting at 9pm for a service which runs around every 5-10 minutes in the daytime could involve waiting for around 30 minutes. These services were well utlised too, usually full and standing on a double decker.

Poor bus service really affects the ability of Greater Manchester residents to access jobs, opportunities, shopping and entertainment. Typically light rail connections increase the prices of homes around them, not everyone can afford or will physically be able to live within walking distance of a Metrolink stop. Manchester is a city writhed with congestion, which would be helped if people didn't need to rely on their cars so heavily to get around. Ultimately it hurts the economy, social fabric and growth of the city.

I'm a pro free-market kinda guy, but looking at this whole situation, I have to conclude that the free market has failed Manchester on buses. The figures don't lie either, bus use is declining not only in Manchester, but many other areas too. Ultimately, we want something that is efficient and efficiency is something that can only be provided with a degree of planning.

Ultimately, I feel some fairly simple changes could improve bus services drastically:

• Simple fares, with an easy to understand pricing structure. Provision of good smart payment, off bus ticket purchasing options and a simpler ticket buying process could also help to reduce dwell times at stops. Included transfers within a certain time window for any GM route and a discount for returns would be fantastic for bus users.
• Better integration with other routes, more efficient fleet utilisation. Ultimately, a lot of routes step on each other's toes just so one company can get their nose in to another's market. Oxford Road could probably have a decent reduction in services while still having plenty of capacity and frequency. Whilst saving resources, this may actually be a good thing for those living on the route. Less unnecessary bus-induced congestion could speed up journies and not having to wait for a bus run by a specific operator could really reduce wait times for some. This could definitely apply for the A6 up from Chapel Street too.
• Shorter, more reliable routes, convenient transfers - Bus bunching and late running is an issue to some extent that is unsolvable, but that doesn't mean improvements cannot be made. Some routes really don't need to run cross-city, which hurts their overall reliability and often means 3/4 buses bunch together, literally arriving seconds apart. If you split these routes up, they would likely run to time much better and if good transfer points were established, with the fare reform I mentioned, passengers who have previously rode the full journey shouldn't suffer to much. Schedules/routes can also be adjusted to better match other bus services or modes such as heavy rail or Metrolink.
• Overall better, cheaper service - My hope is, the savings in overhead of not having things like three almost identical routes running on top of each other, would allow for cheaper fares and service earlier/later in the day. The network effect is important and a centrally planned system would be able to justify running unprofitable 'shuttles' into bigger routes, or unprofitable night time routes to encourage/facilitate people using the profitable daytime services in the other direction.

I'm aware everything I'm saying has probably been said before, but it would be nice to start a conversation about my suggestions as well as hear other people's thoughts and feelings on the situation here in Manchester especially!

Oh, and I have a corny name for the new Greater Manchester buses...'Bee Bus'! The colour scheme can be yellow and black, mixing in with the yellow Metrolink branding.

 

[Samuel88]

How does a city such as Manchester, supposedly our second city, have such a poor transport system? I have to say, Andy Burnham has been very slow off the ball in introducing a franchise system for the bus system. It should’ve been the first thing he did when he got into power.

 

[Jozhua]

How does a city such as Manchester, supposedly our second city, have such a poor transport system? I have to say, Andy Burnham has been very slow off the ball in introducing a franchise system for the bus system. It should’ve been the first thing he did when he got into power.

Considering the amount of money spent on transportation in Manchester, projects like Metrolink have delivered a considerable degree of value to the areas they pass through. Buses, however are still the main mode for many areas and their fragmented being makes the system inefficient and expensive.

I don't know why exactly buses are taking so long, I filled out the franchising questionare that they did across Greater Manchester and the proposals for franchising dates still seem super far off. I can't tell whether it's to do with relying on the placement of a proper legal framework required to enact such changes, or a lack of speed within the council itself!

 

[Alexbus12]

Oh, and I have a corny name for the new Greater Manchester buses...'Bee Bus'! The colour scheme can be yellow and black, mixing in with the yellow Metrolink branding.

Please no. Black and yellow are awful, makes me think of the previous Blackpool Transport livery.

 

[daodao]

Considering the amount of money spent on transportation in Manchester, projects like Metrolink have delivered a considerable degree of value to the areas they pass through. Buses, however are still the main mode for many areas and their fragmented being makes the system inefficient and expensive.

I don't know why exactly buses are taking so long, I filled out the franchising questionare that they did across Greater Manchester and the proposals for franchising dates still seem super far off. I can't tell whether it's to do with relying on the placement of a proper legal framework required to enact such changes, or a lack of speed within the council itself!

There is little effectively that can be done; franchising will be a money pit that won't increase patronage. The low density suburban housing and semi-rural areas across much of Greater Manchester make bus provision non-viable over much of the region. It is only on key corridors, typically former tram routes such as Manchester to Hazel Grove, where the demand justifies a frequent enough service to attract passengers. Compare bus route 50 (former tram route 40) from Albert Square to Parrs Wood, with outer suburban/interurban service 130 (former NWRCC 29/30) which has been withdrawn completely within Greater Manchester.

 

[radamfi]

There is little effectively that can be done; franchising will be a money pit that won't increase patronage. The low density suburban housing and semi-rural areas across much of Greater Manchester make bus provision non-viable over much of the region. It is only on key corridors, typically former tram routes such as Manchester to Hazel Grove, where the demand justifies a frequent enough service to attract passengers. Compare bus route 50 (former tram route 40) from Albert Square to Parrs Wood, with outer suburban/interurban service 130 (former NWRCC 29/30) which has been withdrawn completely within Greater Manchester.

It is widely assumed in the English speaking world that you need high densities for public transport. This book

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Transport-Suburbia-Beyond-Automobile-Age/dp/1844077403

blows that out of the water. It shows that good public transport mode share is achieved in Switzerland even in areas of low density. It also confirms that densities in British towns are very high by international standards, and thus the mode share achieved in Britain is very poor by comparison. England has a higher population density than any other European country other than the Netherlands and microstates.

 

[Jozhua]

There is little effectively that can be done; franchising will be a money pit that won't increase patronage. The low density suburban housing and semi-rural areas across much of Greater Manchester make bus provision non-viable over much of the region. It is only on key corridors, typically former tram routes such as Manchester to Hazel Grove, where the demand justifies a frequent enough service to attract passengers. Compare bus route 50 (former tram route 40) from Albert Square to Parrs Wood, with outer suburban/interurban service 130 (former NWRCC 29/30) which has been withdrawn completely within Greater Manchester.

Whilst I would agree that Manchester is more suburban than would perhaps be ideal, I would disagree that low frequencies discourages everyone from using public transport. I came from a rural area originally, and one bus per hour from the town was absolutely normal. For people who can't drive, you take what you can get.

It is widely assumed in the English speaking world that you need high densities for public transport. This book

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Transport-Suburbia-Beyond-Automobile-Age/dp/1844077403

blows that out of the water. It shows that good public transport mode share is achieved in Switzerland even in areas of low density. It also confirms that densities in British towns are very high by international standards, and thus the mode share achieved in Britain is very poor by comparison. England has a higher population density than any other European country other than the Netherlands and microstates.

I was about to say, I returned a week or so ago from a trip which included a stay in suburban Ontario and me and my friend used the buses there quite a lot. They were run by a central transit authority for the 'city', and I was impressed by their cost, efficiency and ease of use. This all in an area which makes British suburbia look about as dense as Manhattan!

The system ran with 15-minute headways, and just had simple circular routes, to maximise coverage with interchange points at local malls, the downtown and long distance transit stations. Now, if this level of planning and efficiency could be applied to Manchester, I think we'd be really in for a winner.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

You were impressed by their cost, efficiency and ease of use.

That efficiency and cost does come at a price and it won't be sorted by franchising!!

 

[mic]

i do not know why First Manchester apart from Vantage fleet have taken themselfs of uk bus checker and bustimes on the other hand Go North west are really improving the fleet with the getting rid of ex first B7 single decks apart from the YJ 09 plated ones

 

[Jozhua]

You were impressed by their cost, efficiency and ease of use.

That efficiency and cost does come at a price and it won't be sorted by franchising!!

To be fair, the routes were a bit limited and it could take a while to get to some areas. But we're comparing a city with around half to a quarter of the density of Manchester, with only 100,000 people. Roads are typically not congested and parking is free/plentiful. Still, simple things like more reasonable fares and transfer-inclusive tickets make life a hell of a lot easier.

I do have my concerns about the franchising proposals. To me, it seems like two sets of management and the associated overhead that will come with it. There seems like there will be a lot of overhead for running a simple bus service. I'd prefer the council to just take on the stagecoach, First and Arriva buses/staff and just run the services with those existing fleets.

Many bus systems seem to have their flaws, but they generally get the basics right...cheap, accessible transport for those without cars. Once that criteria is satisfied, it would then be wise to look towards ways buses can become more competitive with personal vehicles.

Currently, if I'm travelling with more than one person, Uber is not only more convenient, but it is often cheaper than getting the bus. If two people want to get about a mile across Salford with heavy shopping, it's either 2.60 each on the bus, or a £3-4 Uber. If the basics of cheap, accessible public transport were satisfied, a decent percentage of trips on private hire vehicles would likely disappear!

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It is widely assumed in the English speaking world that you need high densities for public transport. This book

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Transport-Suburbia-Beyond-Automobile-Age/dp/1844077403

blows that out of the water. It shows that good public transport mode share is achieved in Switzerland even in areas of low density. It also confirms that densities in British towns are very high by international standards, and thus the mode share achieved in Britain is very poor by comparison. England has a higher population density than any other European country other than the Netherlands and microstates.

Population density per se is not the issue. It's about a more holistic approach to planning - enabling buses to adequately serve suburban areas that aren't clogged with cars parked on roadsides etc. Good public transport costs - the UK has long decided that it would prefer to move the onus onto the farebox and not upset drivers.

Many bus systems seem to have their flaws, but they generally get the basics right...cheap, accessible transport for those without cars. Once that criteria is satisfied, it would then be wise to look towards ways buses can become more competitive with personal vehicles.

Currently, if I'm travelling with more than one person, Uber is not only more convenient, but it is often cheaper than getting the bus. If two people want to get about a mile across Salford with heavy shopping, it's either 2.60 each on the bus, or a £3-4 Uber. If the basics of cheap, accessible public transport were satisfied, a decent percentage of trips on private hire vehicles would likely disappear!

Remember that the fare levels are usually subsidised and/or non-commercial but socially necessary services are also paid for, all via forms of taxation. I'm sure that most people on this forums are pro public transport - I know I am. However, we aren't typical of the general public - hence why fuel duty has been retained at the same level since 2011 whilst BSOG (that is used by operators to reduce fares) has been halved in the same period.

It's often said (by those who believe franchising in itself is a utopia) that you can't invest in buses in a commercial environment. You can and it's been demonstrated with infrastructure improvements etc. However, don't think any government (esp with the populist approach we now have) is going to upset the car driver and limit their addiction.

 

[radamfi]

It's often said (by those who believe franchising in itself is a utopia) that you can't invest in buses in a commercial environment. You can and it's been demonstrated with infrastructure improvements etc.

How do you get affordable fares under deregulation, especially for single journeys where you change between bus and tram?

 

[carlberry]

How do you get affordable fares under deregulation, especially for single journeys where you change between bus and tram?

The current ones must be 'affordable' otherwise nobody would be using the systems. Plusbus shows that intermode tickets are perfectly possible and, as the tram part of the bus/tram interface is usually under public control it shouldnt be that difficult to agree a way forward if one of the parties dosent start off wanting to have absolute control over everybody else.
Again, if people are willing, subsidising fares is perfectly possible; you could even get to the point of offering free bus travel (for example to pensioners as an off the wall idea) under deregulation!

 

[Rod Harrison]

You were impressed by their cost, efficiency and ease of use.

That efficiency and cost does come at a price and it won't be sorted by franchising!!

Couldn’t agree more. People who think franchising will lead to cheaper fares are living in cloud cuckoo land. The only ways are either a Council Tax increase or congestion charge like a London. Either way the taxpayers of Manchester would subsidise the buses which is ok if they would, or do, use them. Nothing costs nowt!

 

[radamfi]

The current ones must be 'affordable' otherwise nobody would be using the systems. Plusbus shows that intermode tickets are perfectly possible and, as the tram part of the bus/tram interface is usually under public control it shouldnt be that difficult to agree a way forward if one of the parties dosent start off wanting to have absolute control over everybody else.
Again, if people are willing, subsidising fares is perfectly possible; you could even get to the point of offering free bus travel (for example to pensioners as an off the wall idea) under deregulation!

Plusbus only covers day tickets and doesn't cover multi-modal journeys within the same urban area.

How do you subsidise fares under deregulation? Increased BSOG and/or reimbursement rates like with pensioners' passes? How do you ensure that the full subsidy is passed to the passenger? With the latter, how do you work out what the reimbursement rate is? What if new bus companies start competing and want the subsidy as well?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Plusbus only covers day tickets and doesn't cover multi-modal journeys within the same urban area.

How do you subsidise fares under deregulation? Increased BSOG and/or reimbursement rates like with pensioners' passes? How do you ensure that the full subsidy is passed to the passenger? With the latter, how do you work out what the reimbursement rate is? What if new bus companies start competing and want the subsidy as well?

All fine questions. Clearly, there is a mechanism that did work with pensioners when ENCTS was introduced. However, it was when the government unilaterally decided to ratchet down the cost of the scheme that the onus was transferred onto fare paying customers. Of course, you could increase BSOG, you could reduce VAT on bus fares? You could actively support the provision of socially necessary services and provide the correct level of funding to achieve this?

You could even have a Transfare as they do in Tyne and Wear that does allow multi-modal travel. In the past, this might have required a small army of people in darkened rooms working out revenue apportionment but that's not necessary these days.

Instead, we have a view in Manchester that the answer will be franchising and the operators will have their depots purchased from them at market value so they have no competitive advantage (unlike London). The cost of that will be substantial, as will the cost of administering and managing the operators. How will that be paid for....

• Reducing wasteful competition? Yet we're told that there is no meaningful competition between operators and so the idea that frequencies are artificially high seems unlikely. That this has resulted in overbussing yet clearly that flies in the face of commercial operation.
• Reduced margins - well Stagecoach may make a healthy return (just over 11%) but the difference between that and what a London operator expects to make (7-8%) - hardly a huge amount there available for reinvestment

There is no doubt that the early days of deregulation were massively disruptive for GM and that was shown by the decline in ridership in that period from 1986. However, it stabilised and the decline since then is largely attributable to the Metrolink that has naturally taken up many existing public transport users, as well as the natural decline of many high streets.

Instead, rather than buying bus depots, imagine how much bus priority that could buy. Unless I'm missing something, congestion and a lack of bus priority isn't suddenly going to be solved by franchising.

On a related note on operator margins, it was interesting to see that UNITE were against franchising in Tyne and Wear. No prizes for guessing why?

 

[Jozhua]

How do you get affordable fares under deregulation, especially for single journeys where you change between bus and tram?

It's definitely a big issue, the big bus operators at the very least need a scare to make them actually co-operate and work on integrating with the rest of the transportation system better.

Population density per se is not the issue. It's about a more holistic approach to planning - enabling buses to adequately serve suburban areas that aren't clogged with cars parked on roadsides etc. Good public transport costs - the UK has long decided that it would prefer to move the onus onto the farebox and not upset drivers.

Remember that the fare levels are usually subsidised and/or non-commercial but socially necessary services are also paid for, all via forms of taxation. I'm sure that most people on this forums are pro public transport - I know I am. However, we aren't typical of the general public - hence why fuel duty has been retained at the same level since 2011 whilst BSOG (that is used by operators to reduce fares) has been halved in the same period.

It's often said (by those who believe franchising in itself is a utopia) that you can't invest in buses in a commercial environment. You can and it's been demonstrated with infrastructure improvements etc. However, don't think any government (esp with the populist approach we now have) is going to upset the car driver and limit their addiction.

Instead, we have a view in Manchester that the answer will be franchising and the operators will have their depots purchased from them at market value so they have no competitive advantage (unlike London). The cost of that will be substantial, as will the cost of administering and managing the operators. How will that be paid for....

• Reducing wasteful competition? Yet we're told that there is no meaningful competition between operators and so the idea that frequencies are artificially high seems unlikely. That this has resulted in overbussing yet clearly that flies in the face of commercial operation.
• Reduced margins - well Stagecoach may make a healthy return (just over 11%) but the difference between that and what a London operator expects to make (7-8%) - hardly a huge amount there available for reinvestment

There is no doubt that the early days of deregulation were massively disruptive for GM and that was shown by the decline in ridership in that period from 1986. However, it stabilised and the decline since then is largely attributable to the Metrolink that has naturally taken up many existing public transport users, as well as the natural decline of many high streets.

Instead, rather than buying bus depots, imagine how much bus priority that could buy. Unless I'm missing something, congestion and a lack of bus priority isn't suddenly going to be solved by franchising.

On a related note on operator margins, it was interesting to see that UNITE were against franchising in Tyne and Wear. No prizes for guessing why?

These are good points, although I feel there are definitely some glaring inefficiencies in the market run system. I do wonder, though, how many of the strange routes and detours are a result of council mandated coverage in certain areas, even if it comes at the cost of journey time, competitiveness and ultimately fares. What might work better if buses were controlled locally is to prioritise faster, higher frequency routes on certain corridors as long as people have access to a stop within say quarter of to half a mile. Then for those with particularly limited mobility, a good on demand community transport service.

Where I have to completely agree with you is your points in regards to planning and funding. The UK has planned very poorly for transportation in general. New suburban housing and developments are built with limited parking, to encourage people to use public transportation that doesn't or barely exists. Traffic clogging up local streets and fighting over on street parking then causes tensions between local residents. What also hurts is that many of the people responsible for allocating funding spend their time in London and the South East, where public transportation is plentiful. To them, they probably think that public transport is already incredibly well funded, so go about trying to make 'efficiency savings' across the whole country. Perhaps if they spent longer in the Midlands and North than simply the 'Honeymoon Phase', they'd understand the struggles that face us when getting around. Car drivers are perhaps one of the most vocal groups, I find many are a contradictory mix of PAVE EVERYTHING, BUILD MORE ROADS with NIMBYism *Jeremy Clarkson*. Especially as they're also a large voting bloc, not many politicians will stand up to them. Which is a shame, as our towns and cities are full of noise, traffic and pollution, largely the result of personal vehicles.

Manchester City Council has to ensure new satellite and suburban developments make provision for public transportation, perhaps with a subsidised bus service for the first 10 years or so, along with infrastructure such as bus stops. The city seems to be doing well with mixed use development within a couple of miles of the city centre though and Mediacity is a boomtown of new development right on top of Metrolink.

 

[radamfi]

What also hurts is that many of the people responsible for allocating funding spend their time in London and the South East, where public transportation is plentiful.

"London" (as defined by the GLA area), yes, but "the South East" (outside the GLA area) is a different story. Trains to central London from the rest of the south east are frequent and often fast, but local buses are typically poor and many areas have negligible bus modal share.

There are a lot of buses in GM and hundreds of bus routes. So in that sense public transportation in GM is also plentiful. But that doesn't translate into high modal share. A lot of buses are concentrated on certain corridors and the web of routes is extremely complicated.

 

[Man of Kent]

Plusbus only covers day tickets and doesn't cover multi-modal journeys within the same urban area.

PlusBus is usually available for longer periods - in Sheffield, for example, up to a year. And where it is also valid on Supertram. And while it is only available as a daily ticket in Nottingham and the West Midlands, it is also accepted by the trams there.

So it would seem that in Manchester, it's another case of not wanting to play ball with the nasty buses....

 

[markymark2000]

However, there are many issues with the network:

1. Pricing - The cost of bus tickets is incredibly high, especially in comparison to Metrolink and heavy rail. For me, someone who lives about 1.5 miles from the city centre, it usually costs £4.00 - 5.40 to make a return trip by bus. Singles are expensive and there appears to be no cost incentive to make a return journey. I'm unsure about transferring between routes run by different operators, but my gut feeling is it would involve paying a full single fare twice. There is no sensible pricing structure and I have no idea what's going on with Get Me There.
2. Reliability/Information - The reason I put these together, is that good information can really help when presented with delays, etc. When I go back to suburban Nottingham, I just monitor the TrentBarton live departures page and pop out the door a couple minutes before the bus leaves. Ultimately, unless you BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) the entire country, buses will inevitably encounter some level of delays, however, providing live information can help people better plan their day and minimise how much time they have to stand out in the cold/rain/heat! Bus operators in GM do have this technology, however the number of operators means it's pretty disjointed AND some of the web implementations are incredibly poor/mobile unfriendly.
3. Early AM/Late PM running - Buses run a bit later than the trains, but it's still not amazing. The number of services run drops off sharply after 7/8pm. When I worked in Central Manchester for a couple of months, getting back was an absolute pain unless it was in the middle of the day. Waiting at 9pm for a service which runs around every 5-10 minutes in the daytime could involve waiting for around 30 minutes. These services were well utlised too, usually full and standing on a double decker.

1. The pricing of buses in Manchester is very much to favour the regular passengers. A week pass is equivalent to 3.5 day tickets. a 28 day ticket is equivalent to 12.5 day tickets. Based on an 'office' commuter (return trip, 5 days per week), the fares for Manchester are only £1.50 more expensive (Weekly compared to 10 single TFL bus fares). The buses feel expensive because you part with a fair bit of money at once whereas London or cars, the money is little but often.
2. Reliability isn't that bad. Some corridors are worse than others I admit but a lot of it is unpredictable traffic combined with some routes definitely not having enough time as depots are under pressure to keep PVR down. Information is available on the respective bus operator apps. Again, some are better than others. One of the best things I can recommend is just use bustimes.org. Though it can have a lot of delay updating at peak time, just keep an eye on it and work out how far a bus can get in the time since it was last tracked. TFGM do have an app but i'm not sure how good it is.
3. I can't answer.

Ultimately, I feel some fairly simple changes could improve bus services drastically:

• 
  
  • Simple fares, with an easy to understand pricing structure. Provision of good smart payment, off bus ticket purchasing options and a simpler ticket buying process could also help to reduce dwell times at stops. Included transfers within a certain time window for any GM route and a discount for returns would be fantastic for bus users.
  • Better integration with other routes, more efficient fleet utilisation. Ultimately, a lot of routes step on each other's toes just so one company can get their nose in to another's market. Oxford Road could probably have a decent reduction in services while still having plenty of capacity and frequency. Whilst saving resources, this may actually be a good thing for those living on the route. Less unnecessary bus-induced congestion could speed up journies and not having to wait for a bus run by a specific operator could really reduce wait times for some. This could definitely apply for the A6 up from Chapel Street too.
  • Shorter, more reliable routes, convenient transfers - Bus bunching and late running is an issue to some extent that is unsolvable, but that doesn't mean improvements cannot be made. Some routes really don't need to run cross-city, which hurts their overall reliability and often means 3/4 buses bunch together, literally arriving seconds apart. If you split these routes up, they would likely run to time much better and if good transfer points were established, with the fare reform I mentioned, passengers who have previously rode the full journey shouldn't suffer to much. Schedules/routes can also be adjusted to better match other bus services or modes such as heavy rail or Metrolink.
  • Overall better, cheaper service - My hope is, the savings in overhead of not having things like three almost identical routes running on top of each other, would allow for cheaper fares and service earlier/later in the day. The network effect is important and a centrally planned system would be able to justify running unprofitable 'shuttles' into bigger routes, or unprofitable night time routes to encourage/facilitate people using the profitable daytime services in the other direction.

I'm aware everything I'm saying has probably been said before, but it would be nice to start a conversation about my suggestions as well as hear other people's thoughts and feelings on the situation here in Manchester especially!

Off bus purchasing is available, it's called M-Tickets! The only other example of off bus purchasing is at the Uni where an inspector stands to issue Unitickets to reduce bus dwell time for the Magics. Off bus ticket machines however would be problematic as you would need to make it card payments only or you need to empty the machine quite often (especially when the busiest stops are normally in the roughest areas where theft is most likely).
Better integration with routes is not as good as people think. It leads to less routes taking people directly where they want to go and instead diverting around the world to link into other modes of transport. An example which I will use is Hollinswood and Central Park Metrolinks. For a bus to serve these, it would add around 2-3 minutes each way and would likely result in about 1 passenger per trip (if that). That 2-3 minute journey time increase though puts off a lot of passengers because other forms of transport then become much quicker.
Oxford Road.... I love it when people come up with this. If the buses weren't used, they wouldn't be running. It's quite well documented that if a bus isn't commercially viable, it can and will be cut back. Clearly the buses on Oxford Road do well or they wouldn't be running as often as they are. A small note to that which a lot of people don't know is that the Magicbus timetable does reduce the frequency quite a lot. This isn't documented though because the registrations state 'and at frequent intervals' meaning as long as there is a bus every 10 minutes, it is ok. Stagecoach do run the Magics to suit demand. The non magic routes serve very different markets once they branch off so their focus is on the 'through' passengers and not the Oxford Road passengers. (43 for example has a lot of people travelling down to Wythenshawe and down to the Airport, 42/42A/42B all run off half hourly from Parrs Wood to their respective end destinations

On the next point, you contradict yourself. You want less cross city routes but also more convenient transfers. This isn't really possible. There are very few cross city buses, most of those which are close to cross city are running from Salford to one of the bus stations. There are only a few official cross city routes to my knowledge. These are the Vantage buses (specified by TFGM), 41 (Sale to Middleton), 18 (MRI - Middleton) and the 50 (East Didsbury to Media City).

Finally, as for cheaper fares, they are out there but you have to know about them. Most buses in Manchester have evening riders and/or reduced fares after 7pm. Most operators have route specific tickets and though these don't cover a huge area, they are around. Most operators also offer group or family tickets.

 

[radamfi]

PlusBus is usually available for longer periods - in Sheffield, for example, up to a year. And where it is also valid on Supertram. And while it is only available as a daily ticket in Nottingham and the West Midlands, it is also accepted by the trams there.

So it would seem that in Manchester, it's another case of not wanting to play ball with the nasty buses....

I was really referring to the lack of single fares on Plusbus. A single journey involving a connection between a bus and tram would generally cost at least £6 and could well be £7.50, the cost of a System One Bus and Tram off-peak day ticket.

 

[radamfi]

Off bus purchasing is available, it's called M-Tickets! The only other example of off bus purchasing is at the Uni where an inspector stands to issue Unitickets to reduce bus dwell time for the Magics. Off bus ticket machines however would be problematic as you would need to make it card payments only or you need to empty the machine quite often (especially when the busiest stops are normally in the roughest areas where theft is most likely).

You don't have to have roadside ticket machines. Big cities in other countries have for decades managed to sell the vast majority of its single tickets off the bus using low tech paper solutions. Nowadays with smartcards, touch in touch out contactless and smartphones there is no excuse.

Better integration with routes is not as good as people think. It leads to less routes taking people directly where they want to go and instead diverting around the world to link into other modes of transport. An example which I will use is Hollinswood and Central Park Metrolinks. For a bus to serve these, it would add around 2-3 minutes each way and would likely result in about 1 passenger per trip (if that). That 2-3 minute journey time increase though puts off a lot of passengers because other forms of transport then become much quicker.

The combined journey time should be faster than sitting on the bus the whole way. But the main benefit comes from not needing to run as many buses as now, meaning that the resources can be used elsewhere.

The non magic routes serve very different markets once they branch off so their focus is on the 'through' passengers and not the Oxford Road passengers. (43 for example has a lot of people travelling down to Wythenshawe and down to the Airport, 42/42A/42B all run off half hourly from Parrs Wood to their respective end destinations

The perceived need to run direct buses from the city centre to as many places as possible leads to such a high frequency on Oxford Road as well as other radial corridors. This is not really a deregulation thing, though, this is a cultural British thing, and this has been policy long before deregulation and is also used in Belfast and Dublin which don't have deregulation. London has finally decided to change this in the last few years, but only because it was forced on them because of budget cuts.

In some other countries, there would be fewer direct routes from the city centre but instead they provide more frequent non-city centre routes. Whilst this means that some people going to the city centre have to change people can make most journeys within the city easily without taking a massive diversion via the city centre. Compared to the British system, this method leads to a fewer number of routes, an easier to understand network, improved intra-suburban service and possibly even reduced total vehicle requirement.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Andy Burnham has been very slow off the ball in introducing a franchise system for the bus system.

Nexus showed what happens if you try a franchising system and don't get it right and get operators to support it. The botched attempt up here cost Nexus millions.

It's often said (by those who believe franchising in itself is a utopia) that you can't invest in buses in a commercial environment. You can and it's been demonstrated with infrastructure improvements etc.

I agree, but it is harder to invest in a deregulated environment, because you can't force operators to make a commitment to a route. There are examples up here in South Tyneside where very expensive bus gates were installed at the behest of GoNE, who then promptly withdrew the services that used the bus gate. A £1m investment in road infrastructure is now used by an hourly Nexus-supported breadvan.

There are also countless examples in Yorkshire where First demanded- and got- expensive street furniture improvements before promptly withdrawing services from those roads.

But there isn't a way in the deregulated industry of making operators commit to long-term use of infrastructure unless you do some sort of franchising (like with Vantage).

 

[Jozhua]

1. The pricing of buses in Manchester is very much to favour the regular passengers. A week pass is equivalent to 3.5 day tickets. a 28 day ticket is equivalent to 12.5 day tickets. Based on an 'office' commuter (return trip, 5 days per week), the fares for Manchester are only £1.50 more expensive (Weekly compared to 10 single TFL bus fares). The buses feel expensive because you part with a fair bit of money at once whereas London or cars, the money is little but often.
2. Reliability isn't that bad. Some corridors are worse than others I admit but a lot of it is unpredictable traffic combined with some routes definitely not having enough time as depots are under pressure to keep PVR down. Information is available on the respective bus operator apps. Again, some are better than others. One of the best things I can recommend is just use bustimes.org. Though it can have a lot of delay updating at peak time, just keep an eye on it and work out how far a bus can get in the time since it was last tracked. TFGM do have an app but i'm not sure how good it is.
3. I can't answer.

Off bus purchasing is available, it's called M-Tickets! The only other example of off bus purchasing is at the Uni where an inspector stands to issue Unitickets to reduce bus dwell time for the Magics. Off bus ticket machines however would be problematic as you would need to make it card payments only or you need to empty the machine quite often (especially when the busiest stops are normally in the roughest areas where theft is most likely).
Better integration with routes is not as good as people think. It leads to less routes taking people directly where they want to go and instead diverting around the world to link into other modes of transport. An example which I will use is Hollinswood and Central Park Metrolinks. For a bus to serve these, it would add around 2-3 minutes each way and would likely result in about 1 passenger per trip (if that). That 2-3 minute journey time increase though puts off a lot of passengers because other forms of transport then become much quicker.
Oxford Road.... I love it when people come up with this. If the buses weren't used, they wouldn't be running. It's quite well documented that if a bus isn't commercially viable, it can and will be cut back. Clearly the buses on Oxford Road do well or they wouldn't be running as often as they are. A small note to that which a lot of people don't know is that the Magicbus timetable does reduce the frequency quite a lot. This isn't documented though because the registrations state 'and at frequent intervals' meaning as long as there is a bus every 10 minutes, it is ok. Stagecoach do run the Magics to suit demand. The non magic routes serve very different markets once they branch off so their focus is on the 'through' passengers and not the Oxford Road passengers. (43 for example has a lot of people travelling down to Wythenshawe and down to the Airport, 42/42A/42B all run off half hourly from Parrs Wood to their respective end destinations

On the next point, you contradict yourself. You want less cross city routes but also more convenient transfers. This isn't really possible. There are very few cross city buses, most of those which are close to cross city are running from Salford to one of the bus stations. There are only a few official cross city routes to my knowledge. These are the Vantage buses (specified by TFGM), 41 (Sale to Middleton), 18 (MRI - Middleton) and the 50 (East Didsbury to Media City).

Finally, as for cheaper fares, they are out there but you have to know about them. Most buses in Manchester have evening riders and/or reduced fares after 7pm. Most operators have route specific tickets and though these don't cover a huge area, they are around. Most operators also offer group or family tickets.

In regards to your points on fares, I'm not a frequent bus user to I'll take your points on fares being cheaper for regular passengers. I'm also sure that there are route specific cheaper tickets available as you say. I'd say I'm a fairly observant person, but I'm completely baffled by the bus system. Pretty sure there's three operators running the three routes that go near to my flat. I wouldn't have any idea how to even find the offers available to me. As an irregular user, I just get on the bus and see the exorbitant price I have to pay and then decide it's not worth the bother. It's a shame, because I'd really like to spend more time exploring different places, but it isn't worth it if it will cost me such a ridiculous amount of money. There's not many people I've spoken to at uni who don't think the buses are ridiculously overpriced, many would rather walk. Maybe it's just Salford in particular, at least with Magic Bus those at UOM & MMU get some cheaper fares available.

M-tickets is an operator specific thing, frankly I've not seen much marketing available for it. My friend mentioned something about it in Bristol, but frankly wasn't that impressed and said it was a bit confusing. I believe you buy a 'pack' of tickets and then redeem them? Again, not so great for irregular bus users. He's certainly decided it's a lot easier to not bother. After spending some time in different cities where I used the bus system a fair bit, such as Budapest, the ability to buy a ticket and hop on whatever bus going in the direction you wanted, that arrived next, was really nice. I don't think First run any buses that go near my flat, it's Arriva/Go Northwest I believe.

Anyway, I'll head into the city Centre one day using the buses, attempt to find the best fare possible and report back here with my experience.

Information being available on the respective bus operator apps is part of the problem! Between Stagecoach, First, Arriva, Go Northwest and probably a few more, that's four different apps! It's so fractured, how is anyone new to public transport, or their area supposed to navigate it all? Frankly the rail system with it's TOC's and weird ticketing, etc is at least easier to navigate. All the timetabling, ticket & live information for trains is at least available in one place.

Perhaps my points in regards to transfers and the like apply to rural transport, where I used to come from there was a bus to one of the local villages that went directly under a train station, leaving about a minute before the train actually arrives??? (Why?) Tbh, in Manchester we already have the infrastructure and routes to make transferring a more convenient option, just not the ticketing system to let it happen. Imagine how much more positive someone's experience would be if they could hop on any bus to the local bus terminal and any other leaving in the direction they wanted under the same ticket.

 

[njlawley]

Being a bit out of the loop these days, but do any of the GM operators sell smartcard or app ticket bundles? I know this is a feature some companies offer, whereby you can by a bundle of x number of singles or day tickets at once, but can use them as and when you so wish but still save quite a bit off normal walk on prices.

 

[radamfi]

Being a bit out of the loop these days, but do any of the GM operators sell smartcard or app ticket bundles? I know this is a feature some companies offer, whereby you can by a bundle of x number of singles or day tickets at once, but can use them as and when you so wish but still save quite a bit off normal walk on prices.

According to their websites, Go and Diamond do 5 singles for £12 and 10 for £20. First do 5 for £15. (Also 10 for £30. I suppose you are insulated against a possible rise in the 5 for £15). These "singles" don't allow interchange.

 

[Jozhua]

Just paid £3 for a single to go from Oxford Road to just north of the city centre. Journey was about 3 miles in total. £1 per mile!

The multipack tickets don't really work for me, I use buses irregularly and they're a pretty even split across all operators. Unless there was an option that spread across all operators, it really wouldn't be viable.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Off bus purchasing is available, it's called M-Tickets! The only other example of off bus purchasing is at the Uni where an inspector stands to issue Unitickets to reduce bus dwell time for the Magics. Off bus ticket machines however would be problematic as you would need to make it card payments only or you need to empty the machine quite often (especially when the busiest stops are normally in the roughest areas where theft is most likely).

It would be much better to implement touch-on touch-off contactless than off-bus ticketing.

 

[KendalKing]

Many areas of Greater Manchester rely on their bus connections as one of the only means of public transportation. This shouldn't necessarily be a bad thing, but the state of buses in Greater Manchester seems to be really quite poor, not only in comparison to other countries, but also other areas of the UK.

If you honestly think that bus services are poor in Greater Manchester, then I suggest that you have good long look at bus services in neighbouring counties.

 

[Jozhua]

If you honestly think that bus services are poor in Greater Manchester, then I suggest that you have good long look at bus services in neighbouring counties.

Oh, I have, they're considerably better where I'm from in Derbyshire. Contactless-Oyster-Style payment with Mango, live bus departures displayed at the stops and buses that make Manchester's look like a horse and cart. I don't doubt there is probably worse service in more rural areas or smaller cities, but I'd expect better of Manchester.

Compared to other countries, our service across the UK is frankly embarrassing.