Lothian Buses and ECB Discussion

[Auld reekie]

A reduction to Balerno isn’t great, but bus companies have never had as much real data about who is travelling where, and when. Only Lothian know, for example, the number of passengers per hour on any corridor. Their last financials included a drop of 1m passengers per annum – less than 1%, so actually not too bad – but they’ll want to match supply to demand. Look on the bright side. From over here in the west it still looks pretty good…

Fair comment.

 

[overthewater]

Yet, traffic in Edinburgh is just as bad as ever. Lothian now control nearly every single bus route in the city and parts outwith aswell and chased off most of the competition ni Mid lothian, yet has lost passengers? Clearly having a monopoly has lead to Lothian getting complacent.

 

[Auld reekie]

Yet, traffic in Edinburgh is just as bad as ever. Lothian now control nearly every single bus route in the city and parts outwith aswell and chased off most of the competition ni Mid lothian, yet has lost passengers? Clearly having a monopoly has lead to Lothian getting complacent.

Sad but true.

 

[overthewater]

So what can lothian do to get its passengers back?

 

[ScotRail158725]

So what can lothian do to get its passengers back?

not reduce frequency which is what they appear to be doing

 

[ScotRail158725]

something i’ve observerd is the pretty poor patch up jobs lothian are doing on vehicles now. numerous of the old livery vehicles have panels which are the same shade as the new ones, 833 has a panel from one of the older livery buses with the old logo on it, new livery buses get the branding half applied or not applied at all. this never used to be the case

 

[overthewater]

A revised network would also help, it has to many service running at lower freq now.

 

[ScotRail158725]

A revised network would also help, it has to many service running at lower freq now.

exactly. if it was in charge all the key routes should be a base 10 mins (u = under 10)so the 3, 11, 16, 22, 25, u26, u30, 31, 37, 44
then secondary routes such as the 1, 4, 5, 19 at 15 mins then stuff like 200, 400, 20 at half hourly

 

[smtglasgow]

I know I mentioned it, but that drop in passenger numbers is very small – most other cities would kill for Lothian’s figures. I’m sure I’ve read somewhere that Lothian are blaming increasing congestion for the drop – however good the bus service, the constant roadworks are a killer.

One thing I’ve noticed since working in Edinburgh is how busy the off-peak buses are compared to Glasgow. I’m out hunting for food around the South Bridge most lunchtimes and the buses are mainly well-loaded. Can’t all be tourists – Craigmillar in February isn’t *that* attractive – so Lothian must be doing something right and keeping some cars off the road.

 

[overthewater]

Its not enough. Lothian need to be pushing another 20% to just to get the congestion down. Some of the route really are to long and some like the 41 end up going all over the place in the city centre. Council are partly to blame.

 

[oldman]

Council are partly to blame.

Council is almost entirely to blame.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

I was about to ask if Lothian were ever going to start retrofitting Hanover displays again but I’ve noticed 395 now has one, is this a one off or can we expect to see more?

 

[ScotRail158725]

I was about to ask if Lothian were ever going to start retrofitting Hanover displays again but I’ve noticed 395 now has one, is this a one off or can we expect to see more?

Marines 391-398 have all had theirs updated in the last week so i’d assume the rest will follow

 

[alexf380]

I don't know if I like those screens, or if I just like uniformity, but that's good to know more are being done.

 

[Darklord8899]

Its not enough. Lothian need to be pushing another 20% to just to get the congestion down. Some of the route really are to long and some like the 41 end up going all over the place in the city centre. Council are partly to blame.

I don't think route length is the issue....
the issues are the amount of road works and scheduling of roadworks, where we end up with roadworks on diversion routes
The amount of bad on-street parking / driving .... I'd say about 90% of drivers in Edinburgh don't give a damn about the ramifications of their actions, as long as they can find a "parking" (sorry, an abandoning spot) that's all that matters, if it blocks pavements, blocks traffic lanes blocks bus stops then so what is their mentality,
Sundays are the worst.... anything goes day ... today, coming home from work, the amount of cars parked on double yellows or parked in places that aren't parking spaces is incredible....but nobody gives a f*** and they get away with it...

I do agree with you with the 41, its absolutely ridiculous that in order to get from Queensferry Street to Mound, it has to go: Qferry St., Princes St., Frederick St., George St., Hanover St., Mound....
There is no need for it, but thanks to a council unable to organise their way round a paper bag.... this is what we are left with, sadly.....

Emm, didn't quite mean to make this a rant

 

[Jordan Adam]

The bigger worry i'd have for Lothian is sustainability. While the group as a whole is still making a profit it declined massively in the period up to 2019 and if they've seen the decline continue during 2019/20 then they'll likely end up in the red. Service cuts and congestion due to the tram works won't help at all either and it does again raise questions about LCB, which the council are clearly not too happy with.

 

[A330Alex]

The bigger worry i'd have for Lothian is sustainability. While the group as a whole is still making a profit it declined massively in the period up to 2019 and if they've seen the decline continue during 2019/20 then they'll likely end up in the red. Service cuts and congestion due to the tram works won't help at all either and it does again raise questions about LCB, which the council are clearly not too happy with.

Not to forget that post-tram works, the extended tram will likely take millions of passengers off Lothian services.

The amount of bad on-street parking / driving .... I'd say about 90% of drivers in Edinburgh don't give a damn about the ramifications of their actions, as long as they can find a "parking" (sorry, an abandoning spot) that's all that matters, if it blocks pavements, blocks traffic lanes blocks bus stops then so what is their mentality,
Sundays are the worst.... anything goes day ... today, coming home from work, the amount of cars parked on double yellows or parked in places that aren't parking spaces is incredible....but nobody gives a f*** and they get away with it...

The council were/are looking into on-bus enforcement cameras (similar to New York/San Francisco) - I think that would make a huge difference given how little people seem care. Looking at you white van man parked outside of every Greggs at rush hour...

 

[scotrail158713]

I don't think route length is the issue....
the issues are the amount of road works and scheduling of roadworks, where we end up with roadworks on diversion routes
The amount of bad on-street parking / driving .... I'd say about 90% of drivers in Edinburgh don't give a damn about the ramifications of their actions, as long as they can find a "parking" (sorry, an abandoning spot) that's all that matters, if it blocks pavements, blocks traffic lanes blocks bus stops then so what is their mentality,
Sundays are the worst.... anything goes day ... today, coming home from work, the amount of cars parked on double yellows or parked in places that aren't parking spaces is incredible....but nobody gives a f*** and they get away with it...

I do agree with you with the 41, its absolutely ridiculous that in order to get from Queensferry Street to Mound, it has to go: Qferry St., Princes St., Frederick St., George St., Hanover St., Mound....
There is no need for it, but thanks to a council unable to organise their way round a paper bag.... this is what we are left with, sadly.....

Emm, didn't quite mean to make this a rant

It may have been a rant but I very much agree with everything you said

 

[tbtc]

Yes the X17/18 has plenty of seats going spare ( same can be said for the First bus X24/25) However neither are all stops. You have to remember the 100 has been increased in price to keep people off it aswell.

26 needs to be completely overhauled, it just feels like these changes are very half hearted, if the company are wishing to simplify its operations.

The 85/86 were always limited stop services (before the 26 was increased in frequency to replace them), so I think that a five minute 26/31 stopping service plus a fifteen minute semi-fast should work okay.

I'm not sure about how you'd "completely overhaul" the 26 though - other than swapping termini with something shorter at one end (e.g. Clemiston to the eastern side of the 4/5/19) but the frequencies don't balance... are you talking terminating in the city centre?

You’ve just said at the Wallyford end there is the 104 which is an alternative.
Well at the Balerno end there isn’t that luxury of any alternatives

Every twelve minutes is still pretty good frequency for somewhere as far out as Balerno, IMHO

Yet, traffic in Edinburgh is just as bad as ever. Lothian now control nearly every single bus route in the city and parts outwith aswell and chased off most of the competition ni Mid lothian, yet has lost passengers? Clearly having a monopoly has lead to Lothian getting complacent.

Most cities have seen a reduction in passenger numbers - it's nothing unique to Edinburgh - although Edinburgh has had the trams to contend with - but at least Lothian have been trying different things (the SkyLink services, the B8s etc)

exactly. if it was in charge all the key routes should be a base 10 mins (u = under 10)so the 3, 11, 16, 22, 25, u26, u30, 31, 37, 44
then secondary routes such as the 1, 4, 5, 19 at 15 mins then stuff like 200, 400, 20 at half hourly

Sounds good in principle but it'd mean a few areas facing frequency reductions just because they don't fit into your nice neat patterns.

Ideally I'd like to see co-ordinated services on all major corridors (e.g. the 26 and 31 on the A8, the 23/27, the 10/16, the 37/47), but if the South Queensferry service has sufficient passengers to warrant a twenty minute service then would you inconvenience passengers by making it every thirty minutes (because everything must be every ten/fifteen/thirty)?

As I say, nice in principle.

 

[overthewater]

The 85/86 were always limited stop services (before the 26 was increased in frequency to replace them), so I think that a five minute 26/31 stopping service plus a fifteen minute semi-fast should work okay.

I'm not sure about how you'd "completely overhaul" the 26 though - other than swapping termini with something shorter at one end (e.g. Clemiston to the eastern side of the 4/5/19) but the frequencies don't balance... are you talking terminating in the city centre?.

Yes, however the 26 shouldn't going to Tranent or seston sands. Maybe East coast could have a new route every 20mins Tranet to Muss and go via Wallyford Pnr to allow connection onto the Fast buses into Edinburgh? Thus passengers get a faster service, while local traffic is kept happy.

Most cities have seen a reduction in passenger numbers - it's nothing unique to Edinburgh - although Edinburgh has had the trams to contend with - but at least Lothian have been trying different things (the SkyLink services, the B8s etc).

Plus the train in Midlothian which keeps on nicking passengers due to the faster journey time. Stagecoach is trying different things, so is National Express Dundee, heck even First are tried some ideas in Glasgow. The point is everyone is missing a trick here and they but this is lothian thread. Lothian needs to look at where the city traffic is going and try to replicate there services to match that. Skylinks are mainly existing routes just extended to the Airport, It needs a new route in the city.

Hopeful the bus stop consultation will also help speed up services, and take away stops every 2 second. I wouldn't waste my time with lothian service to Ikea from City, it takes far too long, Border buses x62 much faster.

 

[Jordan Adam]

It is funny how in other threads people can have open discussions about declining bus yes and why it's happening, yet the minute you mention the exact same topic regarding Lothian you always get a reply saying "it's happening elsewhere". Numbers are generally in decline, yet the population is on the rise, so regardless of the reasons clearly public transport is failing to appeal to car users. And we need to look at the reasons why and how to fix it rather than saying it's happening in other cities or "at least Lothian have been trying different thigns", as truth be told all operators have been trying different things. I would agree that Lothian having a monopoly has made them complacent, it was the same with First Aberdeen between 2007 and 2017, now they've went from one of First's best opcos to barely making a profit, while the network and fleet is a mess.

Not to forget that post-tram works, the extended tram will likely take millions of passengers off Lothian services.

This is true, however Lothian will likely cut back services so the running costs are lower, theoretically not affecting profit that much. It could also lead to potential investment and increases elsewhere in the city. If worst comes to worst for the group as a whole then ditching LCB does seem the answer given that it's entirely loss making, if there is a management reshuffle (which seems likely in the future), the view on West Lothian could change - especially if the council start to have more of a say.

 

[tbtc]

Yes, however the 26 shouldn't going to Tranent or seston sands. Maybe East coast could have a new route every 20mins Tranet to Muss and go via Wallyford Pnr to allow connection onto the Fast buses into Edinburgh? Thus passengers get a faster service, while local traffic is kept happy.

So keeping the 26 every ten minutes as far as Musselburgh but with a connecting service from Musselburgh to Tranent/ Seaton Sands?

Stagecoach is trying different things, so is National Express Dundee, heck even First are tried some ideas in Glasgow. The point is everyone is missing a trick here and they but this is lothian thread. Lothian needs to look at where the city traffic is going and try to replicate there services to match that. Skylinks are mainly existing routes just extended to the Airport, It needs a new route in the city.

Hopeful the bus stop consultation will also help speed up services, and take away stops every 2 second. I wouldn't waste my time with lothian service to Ikea from City, it takes far too long, Border buses x62 much faster.

Well, the Dundee network is pretty much the same as it was at deregulation (generally just fairly direct routes from suburbs into the city centre, plus the outer circle), other than a general thinning out of frequencies and scrapping of the more marginal routes - about the only innovation has been the X90 (but that's obviously not a "city" route)

First's Glasgow operations has retained the general pattern of radial routes into/out of the city centre with very few new "orbital" links (other than bulking up the service through the Clyde Tunnel, due to the Hospital opening). For much of Glasgow, an Overground map from over twenty years ago would still be a good guide to what services are available from the city centre to a suburb (it's just that some of the numbers have changed or through services swapped). Some routes were diverted via the Clydeside Expressway but they are still radial services.

Lothian, on the other hand, has introduced a number of non-city centre links - there's the 36 from Morningside to the Gyle, there's the 49 from Leith to Fort Kinnaird, the 48 providing new links from Midlothian, the 200 was a new route from Leith to the Airport, the 275 from Edinburgh Park to West Lothian - all of these are new links that provide a direct service without the need to go into the city centre and back out again.

Contrast that with how badly served modern destinations in Glasgow are from nearby suburbs (e.g. Silverburn and The Fort are busy places but unless you happen to live on a direct bus route between there and the city centre, you'll not find many orbital services - Glasgow's commercial network is very radial.

Express services have been tried in Edinburgh and other cities before but scaled back - remember the days of the 81/85/86 etc. They just get stuck in the same traffic as everything else though (whilst you still need to run a local service for local people alongside them)

 

[Auld reekie]

The 85/86 were always limited stop services (before the 26 was increased in frequency to replace them), so I think that a five minute 26/31 stopping service plus a fifteen minute semi-fast should work okay.

I'm not sure about how you'd "completely overhaul" the 26 though - other than swapping termini with something shorter at one end (e.g. Clemiston to the eastern side of the 4/5/19) but the frequencies don't balance... are you talking terminating in the city centre?



Every twelve minutes is still pretty good frequency for somewhere as far out as Balerno, IMHO



Most cities have seen a reduction in passenger numbers - it's nothing unique to Edinburgh - although Edinburgh has had the trams to contend with - but at least Lothian have been trying different things (the SkyLink services, the B8s etc)



Sounds good in principle but it'd mean a few areas facing frequency reductions just because they don't fit into your nice neat patterns.

Ideally I'd like to see co-ordinated services on all major corridors (e.g. the 26 and 31 on the A8, the 23/27, the 10/16, the 37/47), but if the South Queensferry service has sufficient passengers to warrant a twenty minute service then would you inconvenience passengers by making it every thirty minutes (because everything must be every ten/fifteen/thirty)?

As I say, nice in principle.

Stop being condescending saying for being that far out a 12 minute service is okay.
Forgetting Wallyford being that far out have the luxury of another bus.

 

[overthewater]

Lothian, on the other hand, has introduced a number of non-city centre links - there's the 36 from Morningside to the Gyle, there's the 49 from Leith to Fort Kinnaird, the 48 providing new links from Midlothian, the 200 was a new route from Leith to the Airport, the 275 from Edinburgh Park to West Lothian - all of these are new links that provide a direct service without the need to go into the city centre and back out again..

That's because Lothian has been playing catch, on these routes. 275 is not a new link, First used to operate this route but pulled it. 48 only happened because old 33 was getting hammered ( it should have been done ages ago) by the trains plus there are much faster routes to the city from most parts of that route. 200 did replace parts of another bus route, however 36 is a new one.

Glasgow has great rail network, and has seen massive increase in usage, Dundee has orbital bus route, and there were further improvements with the old 13/14 but there did not work out.

Express services have been tried in Edinburgh and other cities before but scaled back - remember the days of the 81/85/86 etc. They just get stuck in the same traffic as everything else though (whilst you still need to run a local service for local people alongside them)

Those bus lanes must all be crap then. Why not make the X17/18/38 all stop then, if there stuck in the same traffic. Funny how Barton passengers still like to get on the Stagecoach express routes instead of the 41... or how maybury passenger prefere the 100/X17 x18 to the 31.

 

[gavin1985]

That's because Lothian has been playing catch, on these routes. 275 is not a new link, First used to operate this route but pulled it. 48 only happened because old 33 was getting hammered ( it should have been done ages ago) by the trains plus there are much faster routes to the city from most parts of that route. 200 did replace parts of another bus route, however 36 is a new one.

Glasgow has great rail network, and has seen massive increase in usage, Dundee has orbital bus route, and there were further improvements with the old 13/14 but there did not work out.



Those bus lanes must all be crap then. Why not make the X17/18/38 all stop then, if there stuck in the same traffic. Funny how Barton passengers still like to get on the Stagecoach express routes instead of the 41... or how maybury passenger prefere the 100/X17 x18 to the 31.

If I am not mistaken I believe the X17/X18/X38 will be stopping at all stops between Maybury and Drumbrae. Perhaps a trial before switching to all stops in Edinburgh?

 

[TheEastCoaster]

If I am not mistaken I believe the X17/X18/X38 will be stopping at all stops between Maybury and Drumbrae. Perhaps a trial before switching to all stops in Edinburgh?

I think it’s much like when the X27/X28 served all stops between Sighthill and Parkhead Terrace which to be fair is only like two more stops to pick up more passengers etc,

The stops between Maybury and Drumbrae are only 4 stops apart so it’s hardly an issue to be fair, and if it helps increase customers revenue then fair enough

 

[overthewater]

From twitter: https://twitter.com/passtrans/status/1231961501629583367?s=20

BREAKING: Richard Hall has announced his intention to stand down as Managing Director of Lothian Buses early next month.

I think we can see a few other cuts coming....

 

[scotrail158713]

From twitter: https://twitter.com/passtrans/status/1231961501629583367?s=20

BREAKING: Richard Hall has announced his intention to stand down as Managing Director of Lothian Buses early next month.

I think we can see a few other cuts coming....

I’d agree

 

[Jordan Adam]

If worst comes to worst for the group as a whole then ditching LCB does seem the answer given that it's entirely loss making, if there is a management reshuffle (which seems likely in the future), the view on West Lothian could change - especially if the council start to have more of a say.

I called it!...

 

[overthewater]

I think the writing on the wall for LCB..