NSW Electric Bus Plan

[Merc1107]

An operator being happy with a bus is no indication of its success.

Rubbish.

There is always a disconnect between management and the people tasked with fixing buses, driving them, and the passengers. So yes, Tony is on the money.

[Linto63]

Not rubbish. Functionality is an important measure of success, along with the other issues such as reliability, maintenance and economics. After all, the bus is there for a purpose and should be fit for that purpose.

Yes rubbish. That Carbridge has placed multiple orders for the same type of bus indicates it suits its needs. You don't like it, an opinion you are entitled to, but that doesn't make it an unsuccessful product. The sales numbers don't lie.

As you like to often tell us, bus operations should be left to the private sector as they are more customer focussed ands profit motivated. Well here is a private operation that I believes receives no government subsidy making a commercial decision.

There is always a disconnect between management and the people tasked with fixing buses, driving them, and the passengers.

Management will have an integral knowledge on which buses need more maintenance, as excess costs will burn a hole in their pocket.

[Merc1107]

There is always a disconnect between management and the people tasked with fixing buses, driving them, and the passengers.

Management will have an integral knowledge on which buses need more maintenance, as excess costs will burn a hole in their pocket.

Yet so many are happy to go either for the cheapest, nastiest crap, or the more expensive, well-marketed stuff (which is still crap) that is either well-known to be a maintenance nightmare, unpopular among drivers or uncomfortable for passengers.

Different story when you have large procurement contracts as seem in some states. Although again, what the Government buys, and what the contractors, their mechanics or drivers would prefer to operate seem to be very different things.

To allege repeat sales are indicative of success is so subjective; think of the Australian car market. For years the Falcon and Commodore were our most popular cars. Successful? Sure. But the competition was strangled by tariffs and the local makers being subsidised. As those protections were removed, the most successful makers suddenly had real competition and sales dwindled. So it is with buses - do you buy the cheap bus that will be delivered the next day, and run it till the warranty runs out ans buy another, or spend time investigating all the options and finally settle on a more expensive make that will last longer, but take time to deliver?

[Swift]

The Carbridge example is another example of the operator's bottom line coming a distant first to all other factors such as passenger amenity. Passengers will still use the bus but are getting severely short changed in quality of experience which management doesn't have to suffer from in their luxury private cars.
That's why regulation exists. Companies will provide the bare minimum every time unless they are forced to do better, especially notoriously unscrupulous dodgy Australian businesses.

[ScaniaGrenda]

But at the end of the day does this matter to the general public through? I don't recall the last time I've ever ridden a citybus and overheard a conversation from any passengers that say that having a floor that runs flat to the rear of the bus would be nice instead of always dealing with steps. Everyone's just catching the bus to get from A-B and B-A, only thing they'll care about in terms of the bus is likely the ride quality & noise, if the bus isn't making a whole heap of rattles and isn't a noisy EURO III piece of junk then that's all that matters to the public.

We're just drawn to these things because we take way further notice of the details compared to the general public and know exactly what to look out for and what can be improved upon.

Don't get me wrong through I'm not against improvements as I've already said before (and I don't want E-Buses just because they could be flat floor) however if we can also use the introduction of E-Buses to rid of some or the majority of unnecessary flaws that of an ICE bus has then we should be pursuing it.

And as for the operators, if their going with some inferior solution that's going to get them through today but not tomorrow, well that's on them really.

[Swift]

You're entitled to your views Scangren but I don't agree.
The public here deserve to be offered a better standard if it's available and shouldn't be hoodwinked into second or fifth best.
On that basis, should we still be in cars without airbags and other safety gadgets like lane keeping assist because the buying public just want to get about?
1990s tech cars won't fly these days but that's what we're getting with buses.

[Linto63]

Yet so many are happy to go either for the cheapest, nastiest crap, or the more expensive, well-marketed stuff (which is still crap) that is either well-known to be a maintenance nightmare, unpopular among drivers or uncomfortable for passengers.

Ultimately it is their business and bottom line. If they elect not to do their due diligence about whole of life costs, that's their call.

Different story when you have large procurement contracts as seem in some states. Although again, what the Government buys, and what the contractors, their mechanics or drivers would prefer to operate seem to be very different things.

Do we want buses speced by drivers or their unions? They would want enough bells and whistles to sink a ship. As to which model i preferable is debatable, some prefer the big bang agreements link Adelaide, Brisbane and Perth do, others the smaller deals in Sydney and Melbourne where operators have the choice. Yes it does lock in the next contractor to operate a vehicle if may prefer not to, but they know this and can factor this in when deciding to bid.

But at the end of the day does this matter to the general public through?

No, 99% of people couldn't care less. Bit like I couldn't care whether the next plane I fly on is an Airbus or Boeing, or taxi I use is a Hyundai or Toyota. As long as it is safe, clean and gets me there in a timely manner I'm happy.

[Campbelltown busboy]

There isn't any mainstream activist movements when it comes to the flat floor bus issue where there was a movement 30 years ago to introduce low entry easy accessible buses in Sydney which became a reality in 1996 and the current ongoing movement to electrify the bus fleet which is a slow process. The disability lobby was pushing the low entry bus movement back then and the climate issue is pushing the electrifying of the bus network now

[tonyp]

There isn't any mainstream activist movements when it comes to the flat floor bus issue where there was a movement 30 years ago to introduce low entry easy accessible buses in Sydney which became a reality in 1996 and the current ongoing movement to electrify the bus fleet which is a slow process. The disability lobby was pushing the low entry bus movement back then and the climate issue is pushing the electrifying of the bus network now

The DDA was the mandatory trigger for accessible vehicles, but only as far as minimum standards rather than best practice. The Europeans, who faced similar legislation, went much further in studying more deeply the functionality and efficiency of public transport vehicles in general, not just for the mobility restricted. This passenger focus is what drove the rapid transformation to stepless floors and multiple doors over there. Other jurisdictions in the world have gradually followed, but Australia is a bit of a sleepy hollow because public transport hasn't been a big thing in the last several decades and there's a general attitude that passengers are a burden. That's changing with ramping up of demand in the last two decades, but it's really up to the agencies to provide leadership. Without that, we're going nowhere, except for one smart manufacturer who's ahead of the curve.

[Merc1107]

Do we want buses speced by drivers or their unions? They would want enough bells and whistles to sink a ship.

They should be, to an extent. There would be limited cases where heated mirrors, electrically-adjustable mirrors, fog lights, heated seats, and all the other bells and whistles would be needed here. However I have driven buses with two-piece, electrically-adjustable, heated mirrors and found them exceedingly useful in inclement weather.

Compare the likes of the Citaro or the Lion City to the equivalent chassis sent here and made a dog's breakfast of by a combination of the operators, Governments and the body-builders themselves. The integrals will have their flaws, I'm sure, but to have the dashboard move with the steering column, and other frequently-used controls at your fingertips are concepts almost completely foreign to any locally-bodied vehicle. The placement of the park-brake and door controls on Custom Coaches vehicles (like the CB80), is a step in the right direction, whereas the placement of kneeling buttons, wheelchair ramp controls and even the park brake on the dash (!) on other buses is an example of utter stupidity. Failing that, what about heating and cooling the cab? Often sub-optimal, at best. In one common type of bodywork, the air-conditioning for the driver is first used to cool down a fusebox (and a barrage of computer equipment) located above the driver. Not only does this constrict the airflow (necessitating the use of often-noisy booster fans), what airflow you do get has already been warmed by a significant thermal mass until hours after the bus finally cools down.

What does a badly designed vehicle do? Induce fatigue or necessitate sub-optimal movements by the driver. The former can manifest in accidents and misjudgements, the latter in lost-time injuries. Both ultimately cost the taxpayer money.

[Campbelltown busboy]

The DDA was the mandatory trigger for accessible vehicles, but only as far as minimum standards rather than best practice. The Europeans, who faced similar legislation, went much further in studying more deeply the functionality and efficiency of public transport vehicles in general, not just for the mobility restricted. This passenger focus is what drove the rapid transformation to stepless floors and multiple doors over there. Other jurisdictions in the world have gradually followed, but Australia is a bit of a sleepy hollow because public transport hasn't been a big thing in the last several decades and there's a general attitude that passengers are a burden. That's changing with ramping up of demand in the last two decades, but it's really up to the agencies to provide leadership. Without that, we're going nowhere, except for one smart manufacturer who's ahead of the curve.

This sounds like you are bringing up your any door boarding argument in another thread. You know that the NSW branch of the RTBU won't allow any door boarding because it would be too hard for drivers to constantly look up at a CCTV monitor as we know that the same union is saying that driver only trains aren't safe. But this thread isn't about bus floor set ups or the number of doors a bus can have it's about the NSW governments electric bus rollout plan

[tonyp]

There is always a disconnect between management and the people tasked with fixing buses, driving them, and the passengers.

Drivers should be a vital source of consultation by managements when it comes to bus design. They should be the first to know if a bus isn't functioning as best it should. (Like the age-old issue of passengers not moving down the aisle away from the front of the bus.) How many managements include drivers in discussion of new procurements? I suspect maintenance staff, on the other hand, get a better look-in.

That Carbridge has placed multiple orders for the same type of bus indicates it suits its needs. You don't like it, an opinion you are entitled to, but that doesn't make it an unsuccessful product. The sales numbers don't lie.

Chinese-made buses are cheaper to buy. That's the main driver of their uptake here.

[lunchbox]

^^^^^^^^^^AND trains, AND trams.....

[tonyp]

^^^^^^^^^^AND trains, AND trams.....

Except for Melbourne, which has profound legacy issues, trams are fine on the functionality and accessibility fronts. In Sydney, they just didn't talk to the engineers about the wheel/rail interface!

For trains, the two rapid transit systems in Sydney and Perth are fine on those grounds. The rest of the rail systems suffer from having to rectify legacy issues, in common with most other commuter railways around the world. That takes years to work through.

[Swift]

That Carbridge has placed multiple orders for the same type of bus indicates it suits its needs. You don't like it, an opinion you are entitled to, but that doesn't make it an unsuccessful product. The sales numbers don't lie.

Just means they stick to the cheapest heaps of garbage and learn nothing.

[Linto63]

It means the product serves the operator’s and its customers’ needs hence why repeat orders have been placed, unfathomable as some may find it.

[Fleet Lists]

I could not agree more.

[eddy]

It means the product serves the operator’s and its customers’ needs hence why repeat orders have been placed, unfathomable as some may find it.

Although I do not know if the mirrors on buses are heated and electrically adjustable having used them on trucks they provide more safety.

[tonyp]

The Blue Emu electrics certainly don't serve the customers' needs very well at all. Their layout and functionality is terrible. It's no use just saying they do, because they don't. Passengers put up with them of course because they don't have a choice if they use that car park, but the crowd handling and the turmoil at the two air terminals are terrible - for design reasons. The operator is probably unaware of this (or, if they are, they don't want to change the buses until they're life expired) and the drivers probably don't speak up. This sort of situation is widespread across the bus sector. I've described in the past what happens on the Nowra Coaches CB80 Cargos when a crowd of wheelchairs, prams and the elderly get on board. The message there did eventually get through after several years because they eventually acquired buses with larger low floor areas. Too many entrenched old-school attitudes still in the industry (and on this forum), whom we have to wait to retire so that some new blood can hopefully bring the industry into modern times.

[Linto63]

It may not be world's best practice but it obviously works. Carbridge is a private business and it is up to its management to run it as it sees fit. We are all well aware that some people don't like certain products, but no amount of groundhog day carping on this forum is going to change that.

[Merc1107]

It means the product serves the operator’s and its customers’ needs hence why repeat orders have been placed, unfathomable as some may find it.

In the context of Carbridge, is it okay for customers who have paid exorbitant amounts of money to park their car to be left behind by a full bus?
On a public bus service, is it okay for mobility-impaired passengers who need (and are entitled) a service to be left behind because the other cattle could not be paid to move all the way to the back or because there was insufficient space for prams, walking frames, wheelchairs, etc?

On multiple occasions on the job I have had to leave passengers behind because they could not be accommodated onboard due to that famous cave up the back repeatedly cited here, and/or because operations simply could not proactively deploy higher-capacity buses to save their lives. Many a time I've seen impaired passengers struggle to make their way up and down the stairs in the back of a bus, because the low-floor area where they could sit was full (sometimes with a large number of mobility-impaired passengers) ... particularly where you're dealing with intoxicated passengers, it's no fun for the operator and other passengers if someone (with poor mobility) falls over and injures themselves.

To allege the status-quo is "meeting customer's needs" is balderdash. The only thing unfathomable is why some people here continually feel the need to dismiss other's contributions as twaddle, without offering any evidence for their contrary point.

[Swift]

To allege the status-quo is "meeting customer's needs" is balderdash. The only thing unfathomable is why some people here continually feel the need to dismiss other's contributions as twaddle, without offering any evidence for their contrary point.

Standards in Australia are clearly very low and "backwaterish". It's dismissive apathetic attitudes that fosters this low standard absolutely continuing unabated with years passing by and no sign of progress just flasher looking vehicles achieving nothing better.
Even Russia has three door buses as the norm, making Moscow doing things vastly superior to any Aussie capital. If Russia does it better, that's your indication were doing it wrong.
Repeated criticism is richly deserved here and giving platitudes certainly won't get people's fingers out.

[tonyp]

Some impressive acceleration, keeping up with the traffic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoKku8e5LFI

To compare with a diesel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-g4e-maIH2A

[Linto63]

To allege the status-quo is "meeting customer's needs" is balderdash. The only thing unfathomable is why some people here continually feel the need to dismiss other's contributions as twaddle, without offering any evidence for their contrary point.

Make a point by all means, but what does banging on endlessly on this forum about it achieve? Two-fifths of five-eighths of nothing. That Carbridge manages to remain in business suggests that it does meet its customers needs, if it didn't revenue would dry up and it would go out of business.

[In Transit]

Without ongoing discussion the forum dies.. and its never really all that far off dying in terms of the numbers posting regularly.

A big issue in public transport is that often things aren't terrible.. but without much effort and just a little more care they could be a lot better. This is an endemic problem, caused by many factors not least of which is ineffective management and lack of strategic thought.

Things don't get better, in my experience, without a lot of effort in pushing various barrows... or you can just give up, and join the apologists in maintaining the status quo.