Reduce bus stops to attract more passengers?

[AutoKratz]

Would buses become more attractive to passengers, particularly car drivers, if the infrastructure was more tram-like?

I'm thinking of a situation where the bus follows a main A-road directly into a town or city centre.

Would it be better if existing stops were removed and new 'enhanced' stops were installed but at longer distances apart?

To my mind better, more substantial bus infrastructure and a quicker journey would certainly help make the bus a more attractive option. Although I can see that people with mobility issues may be disadvantaged as they would need to walk a bit further to get to the 'enhanced' stop.

I'm wondering if the buses and fares along the route were kept exactly the same, if this infrastructure enhancement alone could encourage people to use the bus who would normally just drive both initially due to the investment and over the long term?

 

[py_megapixel]

I'm not really sure what's "enhanced" about the stop in the second picture - other than the departure screen, which in my opinion should be present at every bus stop where it's practical to install the electrical supply for one - excluding special cases such as alighting-only stops, or stops that only get a few buses a day (or eve

Yes, the bus shelter is bigger, but of course it would be - it's handling more passengers because there are fewer stops.

I think the principle is valid in some cases, but the enhancements would have to be more. For example, I think stops should have some way of requesting the bus to stop at the press of a button rather than having to stick your hand out.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I am sure that the blasé comment of "walking a bit further" was made in full ignorance of what that actually means to a wide range of bus passengers who would be inconvenienced by the implications inherent by that comment. Adverse weather conditions such as heavy rainfall and icy pavements in winter, people with infirmities', people with no car who use the bus to go shopping and return carrying heavy bags of shopping are just three matters that spring to mind.

Yet another posting where the operational nicety of the service totally ignores the actual needs of the bus passengers.

 

[Dai Corner]

I think if you expect car owners to walk half a mile, say, to their nearest bus stop they'll be more likely to drive instead of catching a bus.

 

[RT4038]

I think if you expect car owners to walk half a mile, say, to their nearest bus stop they'll be more likely to drive instead of catching a bus.

However, giving them the stop close to the house and then the bus route wandering hither and thither to give others a similar facility is just as likely to cause them to drive rather than catch the bus.

I am sure that the blasé comment of "walking a bit further" was made in full ignorance of what that actually means to a wide range of bus passengers who would be inconvenienced by the implications inherent by that comment. Adverse weather conditions such as heavy rainfall and icy pavements in winter, people with infirmities', people with no car who use the bus to go shopping and return carrying heavy bags of shopping are just three matters that spring to mind.

Yet another posting where the operational nicety of the service totally ignores the actual needs of the bus passengers.

You are right, but if this facility is making the bus so slow and tortuous that able passengers simply don't use it..... Maybe the answer is direct, fast bus routes with stops on main roads only, with DRT service for those unable to use it?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Surely what the OP is suggesting can be achieved, (assuming of course that there is sufficient demand), by running, alternately, "all stops" and then limited stop services, along the same bus route and numbering them accordingly, maybe the 500 and then the ("faster") x500.

 

[GusB]

Surely what the OP is suggesting can be achieved, assuming of course that there is sufficient demand, by running, alternately, "all stops" and then limited stop services, along the same bus route.

You've just said what I was about to say. Limited stop services would serve the same purpose, but there would need to be enough demand for it.

Then you've got the issue of people boarding the limited stop services without realising and either being dropped off at their normal stop anyway, or complaining because they've been made to stop further away.

 

[mmh]

Most of the London bus network has, in many places far, shorter distances between stops yet is also by far the most used bus network. Reliability and frequency is important.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Then you've got the issue of people boarding the limited stop services without realising and either being dropped off at their normal stop anyway, or complaining because they've been made to stop further away.

Or, like I once did, tried (and, of course, failed) to hail an express bus from a stop it wasn't scheduled to call at, the bus sailing past at a fair old rate of knots as I quickly realised my error.

 

[py_megapixel]

Surely what the OP is suggesting can be achieved, (assuming of course that there is sufficient demand), by running, alternately, "all stops" and then limited stop services, along the same bus route and numbering them accordingly, maybe the 500 and then the ("faster") x500.

But then you'd get people flagging down the X500 at stops it doesn't serve - which would either lead to buses sailing past stops where people were hoping to get on (customer dissatisfaction) or drivers just stopping anyway (which defeats the object).

Or rather, you'd get some drivers who stop anyway and some who don't, leading to scenarios where someone gets on the Monday-Thursday, and then they are absolutely furious when it sails through on Friday.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

But then you'd get people flagging down the X500 at stops it doesn't serve - which would either lead to buses sailing past stops where people were hoping to get on (customer dissatisfaction) or drivers just stopping anyway (which defeats the object).

Indeed. Just mentioned that.

 

[RT4038]

You've just said what I was about to say. Limited stop services would serve the same purpose, but there would need to be enough demand for it.

Then you've got the issue of people boarding the limited stop services without realising and either being dropped off at their normal stop anyway, or complaining because they've been made to stop further away.

I think that would depend on whether the 'all stops' route diverted off into estates and villages. I don't think merely reducing stops on a direct routeing anyway would make enough difference, and lead to the sort of issues that are mentioned above.

 

[JonathanH]

Having been on an X26 in South London where the police had to attend because the passengers were abusive to the driver who was rightly just observing the stops, limited stop bus services along busy corridors need to be carefully planned.

 

[leedslad82]

We have an x11 Bradford to Leeds via Pudsey which is all stops to a certain point then limited stop. It acts as a local bus between Bradford and Swinnow then as a limited stop between Swinnow and Leeds. The only issue is it's only half hourly daytime Mon to Sat and stops at different stops to the stopping service in Leeds.

 

[Busaholic]

What holds up buses unnecessarily in this country as opposed to most other places in the world is the whole business of fare collection at stops. Just watch videos from other countries and see those buses/trolleybuses/trams disgorge and swallow people up, including the elderly and less mobile, and get back into the traffic or otherwise continue their journey, often whizzing past queues of cars. I really do think the Luxembourg free public transport solution should be trialled in a big city and, if the true economic costs of it were calculated, it might be a big surprise in public transport's favour. Vested interests and antediluvian political prejudices won't allow the experiment, of course.

 

[JonathanH]

I really do think the Luxembourg free public transport solution should be trialled in a big city and, if the true economic costs of it were calculated, it might be a big surprise in public transport's favour. Vested interests and antediluvian political prejudices won't allow the experiment, of course.

Contactless flat fares get quite close (and bring in money for the operator) as do tickets on a phone application.

 

[alex397]

Contactless flat fares get quite close (and bring in money for the operator) as do tickets on a phone application.

But people still have to queue up to scan it by the driver. The continental way, generally, is to allow passengers all on through more than one door (something many UK operators seem to absolutely hate) where they can scan at a machine, either as they get on, or as the bus is already on its way. Far more time efficient. It is also, generally, not the driver’s responsibility to make sure everyone has the right ticket, who can instead spend more time concentrating on driving.
I’m not saying the continental way is perfect, especially in terms of customer service, where drivers are often reluctant to resolve issues a passenger might have, but in terms of efficiency it’s better.

 

[RT4038]

But people still have to queue up to scan it by the driver. The continental way, generally, is to allow passengers all on through more than one door (something many UK operators seem to absolutely hate) where they can scan at a machine, either as they get on, or as the bus is already on its way. Far more time efficient. It is also, generally, not the driver’s responsibility to make sure everyone has the right ticket, who can instead spend more time concentrating on driving.
I’m not saying the continental way is perfect, especially in terms of customer service, where drivers are often reluctant to resolve issues a passenger might have, but in terms of efficiency it’s better.

It also results in large scale fares evasion, which we are unlikely to wish to pay for through taxation.

 

[WM Bus]

X1/X2 on the Coventry Road skip out several stops including a lightly used stop between the Swan and the Wheatsheaf.
900/957 which they replaced used to stop at some of those at one point.

Also on the Coventry Road corridor TFWM are currently isntalling enhanced stops for the new Sprint service to Solihull. Which could probably end up replacing the X2.

 

[Paul Jones 88]

My thoughts some time ago concerning the 149 Edmonton Green to London Bridge which is a great service and provides a low cost option for travel into London from the outskirts.
I'd like to see a 149A that follows the same route, however, only calls at major stops such as shopping centers, railway stations and hospitals.

 

[alex397]

It also results in large scale fares evasion, which we are unlikely to wish to pay for through taxation.

Do we actually know this is the case? No doubt it does make it fare evasion easier (which we seem obsessed with), but I think it would be better overall for bus passengers (and drivers).

 

[Glasgowbusguy]

My personal opinion is that limited stop or big gaps between stops services only work when there is a portion of high speed running , such as motorway running

 

[scosutsut]

I agree with earlier posts, speed of boarding is the killer not number of stops, and even on flat fare buses with contactless payment boarding is still painfully slow.

That and proper bus prioritisation would help.

Oh that and not running 17 year old un-refurbished scrap on mainline routes!

What holds up buses unnecessarily in this country as opposed to most other places in the world is the whole business of fare collection at stops. Just watch videos from other countries and see those buses/trolleybuses/trams disgorge and swallow people up, including the elderly and less mobile, and get back into the traffic or otherwise continue their journey, often whizzing past queues of cars. I really do think the Luxembourg free public transport solution should be trialled in a big city and, if the true economic costs of it were calculated, it might be a big surprise in public transport's favour. Vested interests and antediluvian political prejudices won't allow the experiment, of course.

100% agree. On trams and trains customers board without payment validation of course and use staff and or gatelines to check and issue tickets.

Buses, having had that and got rid of it will struggle to justify its return but that's ultimately what would solve the problem. If you don't do that you have to do away with payment altogether.

 

[Citistar]

Surely what the OP is suggesting can be achieved, (assuming of course that there is sufficient demand), by running, alternately, "all stops" and then limited stop services, along the same bus route and numbering them accordingly, maybe the 500 and then the ("faster") x500.

All that serves to do is alienate passengers who want to use the stops which aren't the "limited stop" ones, and there are so few places in the UK where there are enough services to alternate between stopping and fast services as this becomes an irrelevance.

What holds up buses unnecessarily in this country as opposed to most other places in the world is the whole business of fare collection at stops. Just watch videos from other countries and see those buses/trolleybuses/trams disgorge and swallow people up, including the elderly and less mobile, and get back into the traffic or otherwise continue their journey, often whizzing past queues of cars. I really do think the Luxembourg free public transport solution should be trialled in a big city and, if the true economic costs of it were calculated, it might be a big surprise in public transport's favour. Vested interests and antediluvian political prejudices won't allow the experiment, of course.

I don't agree about the wholesale free fare aspect (unless the railways are joining in as well), but simplifying fares is the key to this. Contactless card payments are not fast enough and the latest craze of the industry (tap on, tap off) will only make this worse. Cash fares are too often clumsy and not rounded off. In my opinion, the solution is flat fares over large urban areas where everybody knows the single fare will be £2 before they get on because every single fare is £2 and this has been advertised effectively.

 

[johncrossley]

I don't agree about the wholesale free fare aspect (unless the railways are joining in as well), but simplifying fares is the key to this. Contactless card payments are not fast enough

Do you mean like in London, where you just use the card like a smartcard, or are you talking about buying paper tickets from the driver using the card? The latter is too slow but the former seems fast enough.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't agree about the wholesale free fare aspect (unless the railways are joining in as well), but simplifying fares is the key to this. Contactless card payments are not fast enough and the latest craze of the industry (tap on, tap off) will only make this worse. Cash fares are too often clumsy and not rounded off. In my opinion, the solution is flat fares over large urban areas where everybody knows the single fare will be £2 before they get on because every single fare is £2 and this has been advertised effectively.

I'd like to rephrase that a bit if I may - "the clunky Ticketer ticketing system is not fast enough". We should give Ticketer its credit for (finally) bringing in universal contactless acceptance across the UK, but processing a transaction is slower than cash, and this is a huge design flaw.

It takes only a trip to London to see how fast contactless can be processed - people tap without even breaking stride. This can also be done as tap-on, tap-off, which I don't agree is a problem but rather a benefit, particularly if you go dual-door.

I used to be big into the idea of open boarding, but with a well designed bus (e.g. two staircases on the Borismasters - I know most other aspects aren't well-designed but this aspect is) can achieve pretty much the same dwell times using tap-in, tap-out contactless so the revenue loss is probably not worth it. And even the Germans accept there is revenue loss, with most areas having switched to "on at the front, off at the back" either at certain times or all the time.

As regards the number of stops, this is where you get conflict between two user groups. Those holding passes who are retired and have all the time in the world on their hands are fine with a slower journey but typically want (or even need) a stop near both origin and destination, but you won't get people out of cars if you have a stop every 100m or so at which 5 people have a chat with the driver about their day before going into their pocket/handbag for their wallet and counting the fare out in 10ps. In most European countries stop spacing is at least 500m (that's before you even consider express services) but then that can be a long walk. I think it's very difficult to reconcile the two needs.

 

[Magdalia]

I haven't travelled on buses much since the pandemic, but I have a lot of neighbours who do, and I used buses a lot myself in the past.

I think the initial question is based on a false premise. Lots of bus users are time rich but money poor. For them, journey time is not a significant factor. These factors are more important:

I am sure that the blasé comment of "walking a bit further" was made in full ignorance of what that actually means to a wide range of bus passengers who would be inconvenienced by the implications inherent by that comment. Adverse weather conditions such as heavy rainfall and icy pavements in winter, people with infirmities', people with no car who use the bus to go shopping and return carrying heavy bags of shopping are just three matters that spring to mind.

Also with smartphones and social media time spent sitting on a bus is no longer dead time, even for someone who is time poor.

The speeding up of boarding time also misses an important point, for quite a few bus users the social interaction with the driver is an important part of the journey.

For me, the two biggest factors affecting bus schedules have not been mentioned yet.

One is phasing of traffic lights, particularly on busy arterial routes in London. Junctions with traffic lights are frequent, usually with a bus stop between each set of lights. Every time the bus stops it misses its phase at the next junction, and spends a huge amount of time sitting at red lights. The bus ends up taking twice as long as other motor traffic.

The other is delivery vans blocking bus lanes. This has got much, much worse in recent years.

Doing something about these would still be good because faster and more predictable journey times lead to a more efficient service, using fewer vehicles and drivers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Also with smartphones and social media time spent sitting on a bus is no longer dead time, even for someone who is time poor.

It still is - in particular if it's the morning, as sleep is a valuable thing and often you'll need to get up much earlier to go to work by bus than by car. Fiddling with a smartphone does alleviate boredom but isn't a good use of time.

 

[Dai Corner]

One is phasing of traffic lights, particularly on busy arterial routes in London. Junctions with traffic lights are frequent, usually with a bus stop between each set of lights. Every time the bus stops it misses its phase at the next junction, and spends a huge amount of time sitting at red lights. The bus ends up taking twice as long as other motor traffic.

Aren't many traffic lights on such routes equipped to detect an approaching bus and give it priority?

On ones that aren't I'd expect it's just as likely for a bus to stand at a stop as at a red light.

It still is - in particular if it's the morning, as sleep is a valuable thing and often you'll need to get up much earlier to go to work by bus than by car. Fiddling with a smartphone does alleviate boredom but isn't a good use of time.

Pre-smartphones people read books or newspapers. They even gave away the latter on buses.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Aren't many traffic lights on such routes equipped to detect an approaching bus and give it priority?

On ones that aren't I'd expect it's just as likely for a bus to stand at a stop as at a red light.

In my experience the UK badly designs these things. Even 20 years ago, in Germany and the Netherlands things would be set up so a bus stops only when it wishes to. Having stops at junctions is another effective option - the driver presses a button just before he is ready to depart and the lights change in the bus's favour as he sells the last fare. Long bus lanes that end 10m before a junction, as the UK tends to do, are about the least effective way to do it after having nothing at all.