Consultation on new AdMet Network

Adelaide / South Australia Transport Discussion
T3331
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:08 am
Favourite Vehicle: 3331
Location: SA
Contact:

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by T3331 »

Merc1107 wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:51 am
T3331 wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 4:36 am
And why do they have to get rid of the 'F' services
How many variations does a single route need, and more importantly, how many more resources are expended providing additional all-stop services to fill in the gaps?

As I've repeatedly said, I'm an outsider, but I still haven't figured out the difference between some of the T buses versus the F buses. They both seem like a limited stop service, so why not just have one and save the confusion? Route consolidation isn't going to win everyone's favour, particularly where express or limited stops workings are lost to an all-stops service, but if that bus comes more frequently it probably makes up for the longer journey time.
In my opinion, I found F services to work very well (better than the T services at times) especially along Glen Osmond Road from the hills.

hillsbus
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by hillsbus »

interesting to see that there are proposed to be routes 810, 811 and 812 in the Hills when LinkSA have these numbers allocated to their Gawler - Barossa services. Very strange!

T3331
Posts: 44
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:08 am
Favourite Vehicle: 3331
Location: SA
Contact:

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by T3331 »

"South Australian Government back-pedals on plan to axe hundreds of bus routes and stops"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-29/ ... s/12403062

Route 506
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:22 am
Favourite Vehicle: R.I.P. #582 (1582) 29-12-2008
Location: On the Next Bus

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by Route 506 »

T3331 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:35 am
"South Australian Government back-pedals on plan to axe hundreds of bus routes and stops"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-29/ ... s/12403062
Glad to see the people have been heard on this issue.
If this Government want to tweak the system and “simplify it” here’s a starting suggestion. Get rid of the alpha number routes and replace them with normal three digit routes - easy enough to do and simple to follow eg:
H20 - 125 (East), 135 (West)
H21 - 126
H22 - 123 (East),132 (West)
H23 - 121
H24 - 124
H30 - 104 (East), 130 (West)
H30S - 105 (East)
H32 - 132 (West)
H33 - 102 (East), 133 (West)
X30/X30S - 104X/105X/130X (X or F services)

It worked with 106 to 167/168 and 500/501/502 to 110/112 and easy to understand
Now Running Express - Next Stop: City

TA3001
Posts: 1922
Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 7:01 am
Favourite Vehicle: 1640. In service - 898
Location: Earth's Scania capital

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by TA3001 »

I honestly don't mind the idea of removing time points though. This is something that should still be considered.

Many drivers still ignore the fact that certain time points are non-compulsory. Lonsdale drivers not excluded here.

It would be easy to implement, but a nuisance for those who are not familiar with average travel times. Or is another 20 years of drivers sitting on 40kph a better solution?

if the services are frequent enough, then missing one service won't be as annoying. Althought I do think this is sort of a hoax to eliminate negative ontime running statistics.

Merc1107
Posts: 724
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 8:38 am
Favourite Vehicle: High Floor Buses
Location: Perth

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by Merc1107 »

I agree with removing alpha-numerics, but the question is, is it necessary to have a different route for the (sometimes fairly small) variations between services, or one high-frequency service, and a lesser service to handle the busier back-street sections (where applicable)?
TA3001 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:54 am
Althought I do think this is sort of a hoax to eliminate negative ontime running statistics.
The limited information I could find on headway management suggests on-time performance is tracked by buses meeting the headway. E.g., if a bus runs too soon after the previous one, then this is an early bus. Likewise, if a bus doesn't come soon enough after the previous, that is a late bus.
What I don't know, is whether a bus running outside acceptable timing margins causes a cascade effect; will it make other buses leave sooner to make up the shortfall or let them depart as they were supposed to and let things work their way back to normal?

Route 506
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:22 am
Favourite Vehicle: R.I.P. #582 (1582) 29-12-2008
Location: On the Next Bus

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by Route 506 »

Another slight tweak that may not cause much fuss could be removing the 565 unless there is massive demand between Stop 37C and Ingle Farm Shops which still has 500-501-502, 560 and 229 services. 566 services cover the Mawson to Ingle Farm stretch and use the extra kms to extend the 415 to Golden Grove permanently. I think that Salisbury to Golden Grove link would prove popular.
Now Running Express - Next Stop: City

User avatar
Norman
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:25 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Scania L94UB
Location: Adelaide

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by Norman »

Route 506 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 9:45 am
T3331 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 5:35 am
"South Australian Government back-pedals on plan to axe hundreds of bus routes and stops"
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-06-29/ ... s/12403062
Glad to see the people have been heard on this issue.
If this Government want to tweak the system and “simplify it” here’s a starting suggestion. Get rid of the alpha number routes and replace them with normal three digit routes - easy enough to do and simple to follow eg:
H20 - 125 (East), 135 (West)
H21 - 126
H22 - 123 (East),132 (West)
H23 - 121
H24 - 124
H30 - 104 (East), 130 (West)
H30S - 105 (East)
H32 - 132 (West)
H33 - 102 (East), 133 (West)
X30/X30S - 104X/105X/130X (X or F services)

It worked with 106 to 167/168 and 500/501/502 to 110/112 and easy to understand
Please, no more of this changing of bus numbers in the city. Just keep the same number the whole way through, like it was proposed. It also makes it easier for the transit apps to show the full route, not just the stops up to the point where the bus changes number (like 1 Anzac Highway or 1 Port Road).

PD2/20
Posts: 148
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 1:45 pm

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by PD2/20 »

Norman wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 7:59 am
Please, no more of this changing of bus numbers in the city. Just keep the same number the whole way through, like it was proposed. It also makes it easier for the transit apps to show the full route, not just the stops up to the point where the bus changes number (like 1 Anzac Highway or 1 Port Road).
A problem with this is that over time the linking of routes through the city has been less stable than the routes from the city out to the suburbs. The leading two digits of the three digit numbers are associated with either an arterial route from the CBD or a group of services in the suburbs. When the through routing was changed, route numbers didn't have to change.

hillsbus
Posts: 151
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:17 am

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by hillsbus »

Route 506 wrote:
Mon Jun 29, 2020 10:19 pm
Another slight tweak that may not cause much fuss could be removing the 565 unless there is massive demand between Stop 37C and Ingle Farm Shops which still has 500-501-502, 560 and 229 services. 566 services cover the Mawson to Ingle Farm stretch and use the extra kms to extend the 415 to Golden Grove permanently. I think that Salisbury to Golden Grove link would prove popular.
The 565 route already had every second service cut to allow the creation of the 566. There generally are people who use the nlw hourly (or 2 hourly on Saturday) 565 service given it has a guaranteed connection with the 560 to/from TTP. Also alot of people in Montague Farm (Henderson Ave) seem to go to Ingle Farm Shops which is more convenient on the 565 given they don't need to cross any main roads.

Not sure what the 566 patronage is like however it is somewhat indirect going from Mawson Lakes to Golden Grove.

Route 506
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 3:22 am
Favourite Vehicle: R.I.P. #582 (1582) 29-12-2008
Location: On the Next Bus

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by Route 506 »

The 565 route already had every second service cut to allow the creation of the 566. There generally are people who use the nlw hourly (or 2 hourly on Saturday) 565 service given it has a guaranteed connection with the 560 to/from TTP. Also alot of people in Montague Farm (Henderson Ave) seem to go to Ingle Farm Shops which is more convenient on the 565 given they don't need to cross any main roads.

Not sure what the 566 patronage is like however it is somewhat indirect going from Mawson Lakes to Golden Grove.
[/quote]

Don’t get me wrong I personally think the 565 is a good little run, and should stay. I’ve used it several times myself.
I do think extending the 415 should be extended to Golden Grove, as I think this would increase patronage linking GGV and Salisbury directly.
I only used the 565 as an example because it seems usually any extension of a route = loss or reduction of a service, but would be great to extend 415 and keep 565 😀
Now Running Express - Next Stop: City

Eurostar
Posts: 534
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 3:42 am
Favourite Vehicle: XPT
Location: Adelaide Parklands Terminal

Re: Consultation on new AdMet Network

Post by Eurostar »

Route 506 wrote:
Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:32 pm
The 565 route already had every second service cut to allow the creation of the 566. There generally are people who use the nlw hourly (or 2 hourly on Saturday) 565 service given it has a guaranteed connection with the 560 to/from TTP. Also alot of people in Montague Farm (Henderson Ave) seem to go to Ingle Farm Shops which is more convenient on the 565 given they don't need to cross any main roads.

Not sure what the 566 patronage is like however it is somewhat indirect going from Mawson Lakes to Golden Grove.
Don’t get me wrong I personally think the 565 is a good little run, and should stay. I’ve used it several times myself.
I do think extending the 415 should be extended to Golden Grove, as I think this would increase patronage linking GGV and Salisbury directly.
I only used the 565 as an example because it seems usually any extension of a route = loss or reduction of a service, but would be great to extend 415 and keep 565 😀
[/quote]

I'd rather see a 227 running between City and Elizabeth Downs (Midway Tavern) via Main North Road and Midway Road. Thus extending Go Zone to Elizabeth East. Or 223 running between Mawson Lakes and Salisbury , thus a Salisbury Highway Go Zone
Next station is Victoria Square. Change here for all trains.

Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Adelaide / SA”