New Sydney and Outer Metro bus contracts (as from 2020)

Sydney / New South Wales Transport Discussion
Aurora
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 10:54 pm
Favourite Vehicle: C set
Location: Sydney Reg 3

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Aurora »

And as rightly said above, that is TfNSW’s job, not the operator’s, and why Transport has it own website for this.
An asset of NSW. All opinions/comments are strictly my own.
M 5885.
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Merc1107 »

In Transit wrote:On paper the story can be told in wonderful ways by the big consultancies who develop these structures and the professional executive class who speak the right buzz words, but the reality is public transport expertise and focus becomes diluted across the many silos that such a huge organisation inevitably develops.
Broadly speaking, the issues (read: damage) caused by the professional executive class, their buzzwords and tendency to act like Peacocks cannot be overstated. These types, often lacking practical experience, are a blight on any industry they interfere with. Would NSW's reported tendency to reinvent the wheel be attributable to these types?

Unfortunately the Transport sector is not immune. Those on the outside get occasional glimpses to the inside, whenever job vacancies are posted, for instance!
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by tonyp »

Merc1107 wrote: Mon Feb 14, 2022 10:07 pm
Broadly speaking, the issues (read: damage) caused by the professional executive class, their buzzwords and tendency to act like Peacocks cannot be overstated. These types, often lacking practical experience, are a blight on any industry they interfere with. Would NSW's reported tendency to reinvent the wheel be attributable to these types?

Unfortunately the Transport sector is not immune. Those on the outside get occasional glimpses to the inside, whenever job vacancies are posted, for instance!
During my stint in the NSW public service, our unit originally had just a manager and deputy manager and a bunch of very skilled staff who accomplished heaps. Then (in the 80s I think) the special executive service was created and a lot of seagulls flew in from far and wide (most of whom didn't have a background in the field) and settled on top of us in complex and often self-cancellling stratas of management and everything ground to a halt in a tangle of "due process". I feel that I was there long enough to see the public service change from being quite a functional entity to one that became almost completely dysfunctional. I can understand perfectly the byzantine nightmare that is TfNSW. There are a lot of good people there but also a lot of dead wood and there hasn't been a department head in living memory good enough to take it all in hand and reform and rebuild it into a good agency.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Fleet Lists »

Some work has now been done to move buses from STA to Busways. The change records for the STA are still not being formatted correctly but they have all been corrected manually.
STA Willoughby still shows 24 buses at https://fleetlists.busaustralia.com/sta ... Willoughby
STA Ryde sill shows 294 buses at https://fleetlists.busaustralia.com/sta ... otreq=Ryde
Busways Willoughby shows 159 buses at https://fleetlists.busaustralia.com/bus ... Willoughby
With five changed fleet numbers as far as I can see
3841 ex 2211
3842 ex 2212
3843 ex 2213
3852 ex 2749
3853 ex 2751 (Shown incorrectly as 27511 ST in one place)

Other changed fleet number reported in earlier posts (2513, 2514, 2517 and 2518) are Ryde buses and hence are still to be done.
Living in the Shire.
lunchbox
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:50 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Bicycle - no waiting - on time
Location: Sydney

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by lunchbox »

NSW LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL INQUIRY INTO PRIVATISATION OF BUS SERVICES

Here is an opportunity for those who are not happy with the recent changes to Sydney's bus network to have their say. The findings of the Inquiry will be placed on the historical record, which in my view is very important. Submissions from the public are invited. The closing date for submissions is 31 March 2022. Lodge your submission here -

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/commi ... ubmissions

(64630)
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Merc1107 »

Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?
Privatisation is a day-to-day operational matter, whereas network reform should really be considered in terms of needing to produce the needed modal shift away from driving. And regardless of whether the private sector or the STA adopted a do-nothing or major reform approach to their networks (if they even have much responsibility for planning in NSW), there are going to be issues with an outdated network not servicing people's needs, being inefficient or a new network perhaps overshooting the mark.
User avatar
boronia
Posts: 21567
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 6:18 am
Favourite Vehicle: Ahrens Fox; GMC PD4107
Location: Sydney NSW

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by boronia »

"Public consultation" results mainly in comments based on the submitters' personal needs, with no understanding of the operational restraints in catering for millions of passengers per month. For each person "inconvenienced" by a change, there may be 3 or 4 people better off.

If, say, 500 people make submissions, they will be largely different. Only 1 can be chosen; the other 499 complain "they didn't listen to us".
Preserving fire service history
@ The Museum of Fire.
Glen
Posts: 3365
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Glen »

Merc1107 wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 10:05 am Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?
I'd think so.

Changes such as those made recently could have been done regardless of who runs the buses. After all, TfNSW has the final say.

Terms of Reference below.

Inquiry into the privatisation of bus services
TERMS OF REFERENCE
1. That Portfolio Committee No. 6 inquire into the privatisation of bus services via the Sydney
Metropolitan Bus Contracts, and in particular:
(a) the modelling, rationale and process of privatising bus services,
(b) the impact on the commuting public through the loss of bus stops and services,
(c) the economic, social, safety, employment and environmental implications of bus privatisation,
(d) the transition to an electric bus fleet and supporting infrastructure,
(e) the impact of bus privatisation on worker pay and conditions, and
(f) any other relevant matter.
2. That the committee report by 1 October 2022
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Fleet Lists »

Merc1107 wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 10:05 am Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?
In most cases the answer would be yes.
However in this case the two are related as the STA regions had to be changed to allow each region to be privatised separately. Only region 9 is somewhat different as the service changes also related to the reduction of services after the introduction of the Light Rail.
Living in the Shire.
Glen
Posts: 3365
Joined: Thu May 27, 2004 10:54 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Glen »

They didn't "have to be" changed to allow tendering, although TfNSW chose to make changes like that at the same time.

When Region 6 was tendered it included a number of routes operating into other regions.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by tonyp »

The terms of reference look like they've been written up by the Greens and Labor. Oh wait ...

I trust that they'll take account of the NSW Auditor's report.
Merc1107
Posts: 2243
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2012 6:38 pm
Favourite Vehicle: MAN 18.310, MB O405NH, L94
Location: A Coastal City

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Merc1107 »

Fleet Lists wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:27 pm In most cases the answer would be yes.
However in this case the two are related as the STA regions had to be changed to allow each region to be privatised separately. Only region 9 is somewhat different as the service changes also related to the reduction of services after the introduction of the Light Rail.
While that makes sense, it seems a pedantic approach to transferring stewardship to the private sector. The lines are always going to be blurred between contracts in the big cities to some extent - even the little ones, like Darwin, where CDC-Buslink and Territory Transit share almost all the urban running.

Perhaps untangling old messes is desirable. Or maybe it was easier to do so prior to handover, rather than leave major reform until afterwards - avoiding large swaps of buses taking place, and the operators planned cost structures blowing up in their faces. Even so, perhaps if the network reform was put to the contractors for input - particularly in the event they won adjoining regions, there wouldn't need to 'package' it all so neatly?
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Fleet Lists »

Glen wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:32 pm They didn't "have to be" changed to allow tendering, although TfNSW chose to make changes like that at the same time.

When Region 6 was tendered it included a number of routes operating into other regions.
From the region 6 experience I think TfNSW did not want to get caught in the same situation again. So get it all cleaned up before the remaining 3 tenders were approved.
Living in the Shire.
User avatar
Fleet Lists
Administrator
Posts: 23803
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:49 pm
Location: The Shire

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Fleet Lists »

Merc1107 wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 1:08 pm - particularly in the event they won adjoining regions, there wouldn't need to 'package' it all so neatly?
That was most unlikely as it was commonly known that they wanted the four regions to go to four different operators.
Living in the Shire.
lunchbox
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:50 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Bicycle - no waiting - on time
Location: Sydney

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by lunchbox »

"Merc1107" wrote, on Sat Feb 19, 2022 10:05 am -
"Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?"

I've heard alegations that the 2021 "network reform" or wholesale route changes, was precisely and primarily to make the network amenable, even attractive, to private operators, thus reducing the cost to government, and bugger the passengers!
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services

Post by Linto63 »

Merc1107 wrote: Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?
They already are. Of all of the recent regional reviews have been conducted, only region 6 review was conducted after the region transitioned from State Transit. The operator would have had input, but it was ultimately driven by TfNSW.
Glen wrote: They didn't "have to be" changed to allow tendering, although TfNSW chose to make changes like that at the same time.
The reason that route reviews are conducted before a region is contracted out is that gives a clearer specification against which bidders can tender rather than one which will change. Happened in regions 7 and 8 and presumably was envisaged for region 9. But by the time the final specification for region 9' review was locked in, the bids were already lodged, presumably bidders tendered against the draft specification that had been released earlier.
Glen wrote: When Region 6 was tendered it included a number of routes operating into other regions.
These were largely the Metrobus routes. At this point is appeared that the decision hadn't been made to axe them all given that they operated for 2-3 years after the July 2018 handover. Although the M10 and M50 were always planned to go once the light rail opened. Regardless of who they were allocated to, by their cross regional nature they were always going to see buses from one operator in the territory of another.
Fleet Lists wrote: That was most unlikely as it was commonly known that they wanted the four regions to go to four different operators.
One of the successful tenderers from an earlier contest was still in the running for another region until the end, so unlikely.
In Transit
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:13 am

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by In Transit »

Fleet Lists wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 12:27 pm
Merc1107 wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 10:05 am Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?
In most cases the answer would be yes.
However in this case the two are related as the STA regions had to be changed to allow each region to be privatised separately. Only region 9 is somewhat different as the service changes also related to the reduction of services after the introduction of the Light Rail.
This isn't correct - the network operating in 2019 could just have easily been tendered as the post reform network in 2021. Allocating routes to regions always results in some scheduling inefficiencies - it can be seen in various existing private regions, and region 6 showed how routes can finish up extending far outside a nominal contract area).

No doubt the network reform reduced some dead running that might have occurred post privatisation if there'd been no changes - but this would have principally been limited to the 340 and 343 and wouldn't have been a huge amount of dead running in the overall scheme of things. There's a strong argument that splitting these routes makes sense from a planning perspective anyway - and would have enabled both efficiencies and improvements that would have been realised whether or not different operators were responsible for regions 7 and 9.

The extensive changes across the northern beaches clearly had little to no relationship to separating region 8 from the other regions. Similarly the changes to Victoria Rd and Ryde services in region 7 were independent of the other regions in STA. Finally region 9 was obviously influenced by shaping the network to include light rail, however the network changes went beyond light rail interaction (eg upgrading the 304 and 343 to Green Square, and adjusting region 6 routes in the same area). The whole mantra about reducing services, so beloved of the opposition, seems at odds with many of the service improvements.

Better connectivity, the All Day Frequent Network, improved overnight services, better frequency and span of hours on many routes... these don't sound to me like changes driven by a pending separation of contract areas or privatisation. They sound like fundamental good practice in service planning. Have a read of any good book or blog on service planning. The same themes come up time and time again.
In Transit
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:13 am

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by In Transit »

lunchbox wrote: Sat Feb 19, 2022 4:37 pm "Merc1107" wrote, on Sat Feb 19, 2022 10:05 am -
"Shouldn't privatisation and major network reform be taken as separate issues?"

I've heard alegations that the 2021 "network reform" or wholesale route changes, was precisely and primarily to make the network amenable, even attractive, to private operators, thus reducing the cost to government, and bugger the passengers!
I'm yet to hear a single line of actual reasoning explaining why the network reform in regions 7, 8 and 9 would have benefited private operators compared to the old network - despite a lot of wailing and huffing and puffing from all the usual suspects. I'm open to hearing any, although I can think of quite a few reasons why the network reform would actually not have helped private operators....
Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services

Post by Linto63 »

In Transit wrote: This isn't correct - the network operating in 2019 could just have easily been tendered as the post reform network in 2021.
Yes it could have been, but by getting all of the shuffling done beforehand means there is one network to bid against, rather than TfNSW saying we want you to operate network A for x number of months and then network B beyond.
In Transit wrote: No doubt the network reform reduced some dead running that might have occurred post privatisation if there'd been no changes - but this would have principally been limited to the 340 and 343 and wouldn't have been a huge amount of dead running in the overall scheme of things.
Had there been a desire to keep these cross regional routes and keep a lid on dead running, it would have been able to have more than one operator operate a route as happens (or at least did) in Melbourne and Perth. But TfNSW has opted for the one run, one operator method.
In Transit wrote: The extensive changes across the northern beaches clearly had little to no relationship to separating region 8 from the other regions.
There were a few routes that were operated by both regions 7 and 8, mainly route 136 (now 160X) Chatswood - Dee Why and 144 Chatswood - Manly. The replacement of route 430 north of the CBD by route 100, allowed Transit Systems to withdraw from region 8 territory.
In Transit wrote: The whole mantra about reducing services, so beloved of the opposition, seems at odds with many of the service improvements.
By and large service levels have either remained stagnant or improved. The cuts in services line being pushed by some is a bit of a myth. Can't really see the purpose of the inquiry, the horse has already bolted. Unless Labor are planning to run a renationalisation election campaign. Then when they get into office 'discover' that the contracts are water tight. Shades of Bob Carr and pledges to remove road tolls in 1995.
In Transit
Posts: 385
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:13 am

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services

Post by In Transit »

My point was a simple one - that any changes to routes and timetables were not essential to tendering regions 7, 8 and 9. Those routes which STA had chosen to operate by two regions could easily have been allocated to a single region for tendering purposes without any service adjustments being made - similarly the 430 could have been left as is.

When you look at the range of service changes that did occur, it becomes clear that the vast majority of them clearly had no link whatsoever to the separation of regions. The few that might be argued to have assisted separation (really just the 340 and 343) were probably not changed to assist tendering, but on the merits of the service changes themselves, as they could quite simply have been left as they were if wider network reform had not been undertaken, yet there are benefits to splitting them which go beyond simply easing allocation to regions. By logical extension, this suggests the overall design of the service changes themselves were driven by the benefits of network reform - not by the needs of contracting out STA's regions.

Obviously, having decided to implement service changes the timing of those was then influenced in part at least by the tendering process, which is sensible and good management - but if those service changes had not been on the table, the tendering could have gone ahead with the services as they were. This is in direct contrast to a suggestion made earlier that "the STA regions had to be changed to allow each region to be privatised separately", and to another allegation that "...the 2021 "network reform" or wholesale route changes, was precisely and primarily to make the network amenable, even attractive, to private operators, thus reducing the cost to government, and bugger the passengers..."

I'm still waiting for someone to offer specific examples of why the latter point could be true, in terms of attractiveness to private operators.
moa999
Posts: 2923
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:12 pm

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by moa999 »

Far better to do significant changes before tendering.. it's a very separate thing (even with the Covid impact)

Just disappointed that they didn't make the Randwick transfers any better or have anything at Moore Park


Sent from my Nokia 8.3 5G using Tapatalk

Linto63
Posts: 2809
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 3:44 pm

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services

Post by Linto63 »

The network reviews weren't made to make them more attractive to private operators, but there were some benefits to them, e.g. operating a more concentrated network reduces driver training costs. The tendering could have proceeded without the reviews, but clearly regions 7 and 8 were done to create a more relevant base specification to be tendered against.
lunchbox
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:50 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Bicycle - no waiting - on time
Location: Sydney

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by lunchbox »

REGION 9 – A PASSENGER'S VIEW.

Many of the posts in this forum regarding bus service changes in Sydney's Eastern Suburbs ( which I understand is “Region 9”) appear to come from persons apparently well informed on operations or planning matters. I'm not equipped to argue with them. I just know that, as a user of the $2.50-a-day Opal “seniors” card, resident in the Inner West, but working and shopping in the East, bus travel has become much more difficult since the Region 9 route changes on 5 December 2021. Earlier, similar changes to the north-western routes, have also contributed to my travel difficulties.

For me, a single point-to-point trip now requires many more changes of vehicle, causing inconvenience, much walking between bus stops, and additional waiting, all of which has not only increased overall trip times, but made total travel times highly variable, and therefore very unpredictable. Passengers trying to make the new connections now need to devote additional time to consulting timetables, maps, or devices, with the added risk of making errors. Even determining the location of the stop from which one's next bus departs can be a challenge. It won't be the same stop, probably won't even be adjacent, and is often city blocks away!

My hope is that this post might elicit some informed responses before I refine this document and lodge it with the NSW Legislative Council Inquiry into the Privatisation of Bus Services, for which the closing date for submissions is in two weeks time, on 31 March 2022. I also bear in mind that the Inquiry is due to report on 1 October 2022 and a State election is due in March 2023.

THE REGION 9 CHANGES.
The extent of the changes in Region 9 are dramatic, probably unprecedented, and its very easy to get lost in the details. However, some significant decisions were made which are highly questionable and will remain contentious:-

What was the rationale for the removal of the Bondi to Burwood Route 400, arguably one of the most effective and popular bus routes in Sydney? Its ''replacement'' is the route 390X and the route 350. Interaction between these new routes at Maroubra Junction is especially weak so important destinations such as UNSW university and Prince Of Wales Hospital have lost their direct link to the airport area and transferring between these routes to access the airport is problematic to say the least, and especially for trips to the International Terminal, as there is no “same-stop” transfer.

What was the rationale for ceasing to operate ANY bus service to the International Airport terminal from the East? Route 350 only operates as far as the DOMESTIC Terminal. This is now a forced transfer (to route 420), to get to or from the International terminal. For some passengers up to 3 buses are now required to access the International Terminal. Another great ''achievement'' of the plan?

What was the rationale for eliminating the critical interface between South Eastern buses and Western bus services at the purpose-built dedicated bus interchange at Railway Square? Only the peak hour 310 remains, offering a token connection for residents in Botany/Mascot or for customers seeking to transfer off south-east (SE) services to westbound buses. Passengers now suffer the experience of travelling PAST the nearest transfer stop in Pitt St before they can alight from SE services that loop around Belmore Park. Seamless transfers? - not likely ! Again, there is no “same-stop” transfer.

What was the rationale for splitting the PM peak hour services to E and SE suburbs between Elizabeth St and Castlereagh Streets? All departing PM express services now operate on Castlereagh St - not Elizabeth St - and the remaining E and SE all-stops services are located in Elizabeth St.

Why have “loop” routes been introduced? What are the implications for passenger information systems with these suburban style loop routes? What are the implications for service quality and on-time running with loop routes compared to the previous operating patterns.
Why have forced transfers been implemented just short of Sydney's CBD, and other key destinations in this Region, well known for its high patronage based on DIRECT SERVICES to key destinations with minimal or nil transfers required?
This list is by no means exhaustive.
So why were the changes made? That is the key question.
I believe that FEWER buses are needed to run the network introduced on 5th December 2021.
So, was the prime consideration COST CUTTING, and manipulating the network into a shape that would satisfy an accountant? There can be no other logical conclusion. In such circumstances public convenience naturally becomes a casualty.
Any benefits which might have arisen from the December 2021 Region 9 changes are certainly debatable when compared to the previous network. I assert that it is most certainly not the users who have benefited.
It has become clear - Sydney's buses are now a “business” – and no longer a public service!
66032. 456@24
Last edited by lunchbox on Tue Mar 22, 2022 7:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Swift
Posts: 13247
Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 1:23 pm
Favourite Vehicle: Porshe 911 Carerra
Location: Ettalong- the world capital of 0405s.

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by Swift »

Exactly as Nick Greiner wanted it 30 years back. Thanks to that disgrace of a Labor regime, Nick's demented vision is being realised and enabled.
Our two party system, just as in the U.S.A, is our undoing as our persists in the 21st century.
Money being the prime consideration to unprecedented levels.
I want 1975 -1985 back as a groundhog decade.
NSW, the state that embraces mediocrity.
tonyp
Posts: 12348
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 2:31 am

Re: New bus contracts to drive improved services (as from 2020)

Post by tonyp »

Isn't TfNSW responsible for these changes? Nothing to do with operational privatisation.
Post Reply

Return to “Discussion - Sydney / NSW”