20 March 2015

What is happening with the bus network?

| Tyyco
Join the conversation
48
ask-riotact-default

Yesterday morning I took the bus from Phillip to Civic at about 8am, or I should say, I eventually took the bus from Phillip to Civic, getting on a bus at 8:40am. The 300 series buses were few and far between and when they did come, they would (or could not stop) as they were full.

When I finally managed to board a bus, thanks to a passenger alighting, when we got to the Woden interchange there were probably 200 people waiting to board. (My bus took two lucky souls)

A elderly gentleman on the bus said the situation was the same on Tuesday.

Does anyone know what has changed or what is going on with the buses?

Join the conversation

48
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Evilomlap said :

Kim F said :

dungfungus said :

Evilomlap said :

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

I can speak as both a current bus passenger and former driver of heavy vehicles. It’s not a visibility issue for either. You can see out the windows easily as a passenger. As a driver, you don’t do headchecks as you would in a car, the drivers don’t use the same windows the passengers do. As a driver you rely heavily on your mirrors (which are far larger than a normal car and provide excellent visibility), your indicators, and common sense. You can’t get a heavy vehicle licence without learning a lot about this stuff.

No, no, no!
I am talking about someone driving another vehicle who pulls up next to one of these buses covered with signwriting.
They can’t see through the bus in order to gauge whether there is any cross traffic coming.

Would have to be a bleedin’ high car to be able to see through the busses windows!

LOL my thoughts exactly.

Never in almost 20 years of driving on city and rural roads have I encountered a situation where I have needed to look *through* a bus to gauge traffic, even when driving vehicles high enough to even make this a possibility.

It is also a problem for passengers:
http://www.danielbowen.com/2013/12/12/train-window-ads/
Have a good laugh at the expense of the visually disabled why don’t you.

Kim F said :

dungfungus said :

Evilomlap said :

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

I can speak as both a current bus passenger and former driver of heavy vehicles. It’s not a visibility issue for either. You can see out the windows easily as a passenger. As a driver, you don’t do headchecks as you would in a car, the drivers don’t use the same windows the passengers do. As a driver you rely heavily on your mirrors (which are far larger than a normal car and provide excellent visibility), your indicators, and common sense. You can’t get a heavy vehicle licence without learning a lot about this stuff.

No, no, no!
I am talking about someone driving another vehicle who pulls up next to one of these buses covered with signwriting.
They can’t see through the bus in order to gauge whether there is any cross traffic coming.

Would have to be a bleedin’ high car to be able to see through the busses windows!

LOL my thoughts exactly.

Never in almost 20 years of driving on city and rural roads have I encountered a situation where I have needed to look *through* a bus to gauge traffic, even when driving vehicles high enough to even make this a possibility.

dungfungus said :

Evilomlap said :

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

I can speak as both a current bus passenger and former driver of heavy vehicles. It’s not a visibility issue for either. You can see out the windows easily as a passenger. As a driver, you don’t do headchecks as you would in a car, the drivers don’t use the same windows the passengers do. As a driver you rely heavily on your mirrors (which are far larger than a normal car and provide excellent visibility), your indicators, and common sense. You can’t get a heavy vehicle licence without learning a lot about this stuff.

No, no, no!
I am talking about someone driving another vehicle who pulls up next to one of these buses covered with signwriting.
They can’t see through the bus in order to gauge whether there is any cross traffic coming.

Would have to be a bleedin’ high car to be able to see through the busses windows!

VYBerlinaV8_is_back said :

Ideas like this should have been explored more fully, especially when you consider that we could have started by using existing buses to keep cost down, then move to newer buses, then use the newer buses for the existing bus network while we put the rail down over the busways. If we were smart we might even have been able to build a bus/traim hybrid system whereby the route remains static but the vehicles vary depending on demand.

I like the idea of modernising public transport, but the whole light rail concept just doesn’t seem very well thought out.

More or less what they are doing actually. Started off using existing buses and routes. Introduced a high frequency (by Australian standards) route, with new buses and moving towards light rail.

As for the thought, been plenty of thought put into it really. The whole corridor has for many many years now (actually from the very early days of Gungahlin) been developed as a high density transport corridor, the light rail is the natural extension of that.

rosscoact said :

Re the roads in Gungahlin, Gundaroo Drive, Horsepark Drive, Gungahlin Drive, Flemington Road are all pretty congested of a morning and will require duplication in the near future as the town keeps growing.

If the tram won’t stop the conjection and the need to duplicate roads, then remind me why the ACT Gov’t is ploughing ahead with it ?

Surely there is a security risk with people out side not able to see inside the bus. What happens if a Mad Monis takes over a bus. He has a big advantage, no one can see him.

Someone can steal an advertised bus drive right up to parliament house with the inside loaded with anything inside . No one can see.

Evilomlap said :

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

I can speak as both a current bus passenger and former driver of heavy vehicles. It’s not a visibility issue for either. You can see out the windows easily as a passenger. As a driver, you don’t do headchecks as you would in a car, the drivers don’t use the same windows the passengers do. As a driver you rely heavily on your mirrors (which are far larger than a normal car and provide excellent visibility), your indicators, and common sense. You can’t get a heavy vehicle licence without learning a lot about this stuff.

No, no, no!
I am talking about someone driving another vehicle who pulls up next to one of these buses covered with signwriting.
They can’t see through the bus in order to gauge whether there is any cross traffic coming.

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

I can speak as both a current bus passenger and former driver of heavy vehicles. It’s not a visibility issue for either. You can see out the windows easily as a passenger. As a driver, you don’t do headchecks as you would in a car, the drivers don’t use the same windows the passengers do. As a driver you rely heavily on your mirrors (which are far larger than a normal car and provide excellent visibility), your indicators, and common sense. You can’t get a heavy vehicle licence without learning a lot about this stuff.

watto23 said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Remember, the same people who were responsible for these projects (some of which were bungled and became outrageously expensive) are the same people that are going to build the tramway.
Are you comfortable with that?

You don’t seem to have an issue with waste and competence: So long as it builds roads.

btw Are you fingering the Labor/Greens for this or are you tossing in the Liberals as well?

Or any and all contractors and consultants involved?

Agree, the problem with our conservative commenter’s here is its all doom and gloom. They also ignore the facts when it suits them.

I’m not a fan of the proposed tram, I think it offers a marginal improvement over buses. However I can the government has a plan, by creating a high density transit corridor, to firstly increase the number homes and also increase potential patronage on the tram. So at least the plan is coherent.

What I’d like to know is what would the cost of say a Rapid bus network to the town centres cost? If they built a road for buses that could travel between towncentres at 100km/h without stopping. that would be much more time efficient. Haven’t got a clue on the costs though. However that doesn’t work to well when creating a high density trasport corridor.

Also while the tram will cost money, I’m almost certain this means many of Gungahlins roads will not get/need the improvements over roads elsewhere. So there will be savings there.

Instead of scare mongering and conspiracy theories which seems the norm these days when someone opposes a political decision, it would be nice to use facts.

I have the idea that the grade separated Belco to city busway was $120-$130M for 7.5k in 2006. I don’t know if it was two way or not. That’s 3/4 of the length and a decade ago so you’d have to make allowances for that. On the other hand there’s no bridges on the City-Gungahlin route.

Re the roads in Gungahlin, Gundaroo Drive, Horsepark Drive, Gungahlin Drive, Flemington Road are all pretty congested of a morning and will require duplication in the near future as the town keeps growing.

rubaiyat said :

OK then HOW do you come to your conclusion above?

Just curious about the process.

Well, unless you live in Gungahlin and have to travel to the city return (and vice versa) what is the point in driving from Tuggers to the city or Gungahlin (if one can find somewhere to park) and catch the tram to one extremity and then return?
Only a die hard tram enthusiast would do that.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Remember, the same people who were responsible for these projects (some of which were bungled and became outrageously expensive) are the same people that are going to build the tramway.
Are you comfortable with that?

You don’t seem to have an issue with waste and competence: So long as it builds roads.

btw Are you fingering the Labor/Greens for this or are you tossing in the Liberals as well?

Or any and all contractors and consultants involved?

?

VYBerlinaV8_is_back1:51 pm 23 Mar 15

watto23 said :

What I’d like to know is what would the cost of say a Rapid bus network to the town centres cost? If they built a road for buses that could travel between towncentres at 100km/h without stopping. that would be much more time efficient. Haven’t got a clue on the costs though. However that doesn’t work to well when creating a high density trasport corridor.

Ideas like this should have been explored more fully, especially when you consider that we could have started by using existing buses to keep cost down, then move to newer buses, then use the newer buses for the existing bus network while we put the rail down over the busways. If we were smart we might even have been able to build a bus/traim hybrid system whereby the route remains static but the vehicles vary depending on demand.

I like the idea of modernising public transport, but the whole light rail concept just doesn’t seem very well thought out.

watto23 said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Remember, the same people who were responsible for these projects (some of which were bungled and became outrageously expensive) are the same people that are going to build the tramway.
Are you comfortable with that?

You don’t seem to have an issue with waste and competence: So long as it builds roads.

btw Are you fingering the Labor/Greens for this or are you tossing in the Liberals as well?

Or any and all contractors and consultants involved?

Agree, the problem with our conservative commenter’s here is its all doom and gloom. They also ignore the facts when it suits them.

I’m not a fan of the proposed tram, I think it offers a marginal improvement over buses. However I can the government has a plan, by creating a high density transit corridor, to firstly increase the number homes and also increase potential patronage on the tram. So at least the plan is coherent.

What I’d like to know is what would the cost of say a Rapid bus network to the town centres cost? If they built a road for buses that could travel between towncentres at 100km/h without stopping. that would be much more time efficient. Haven’t got a clue on the costs though. However that doesn’t work to well when creating a high density trasport corridor.

Also while the tram will cost money, I’m almost certain this means many of Gungahlins roads will not get/need the improvements over roads elsewhere. So there will be savings there.

Instead of scare mongering and conspiracy theories which seems the norm these days when someone opposes a political decision, it would be nice to use facts.

Seattle appeared to build it’s network this way. They created a bus transport route where one day the tram would go. A number of years ago I visited Seattle and took a bus along this route. Initially the bus ran on diesel and drove on the road; then it stopped and changed to overhead electricity and entered a light rail tunnel with tracks. In the centre of the city it pulled up to let passengers off at a low platform. Last year I again visited Seattle and instead of the bus there was now light rail. The train again entered the city area through those tunnels and pulled up at the platform that the bus had stopped at years earlier. Buses still come to these platforms from other routes. The buses and light train all line up together. This light rail is such a success they are extending it.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Remember, the same people who were responsible for these projects (some of which were bungled and became outrageously expensive) are the same people that are going to build the tramway.
Are you comfortable with that?

You don’t seem to have an issue with waste and competence: So long as it builds roads.

btw Are you fingering the Labor/Greens for this or are you tossing in the Liberals as well?

Or any and all contractors and consultants involved?

Agree, the problem with our conservative commenter’s here is its all doom and gloom. They also ignore the facts when it suits them.

I’m not a fan of the proposed tram, I think it offers a marginal improvement over buses. However I can the government has a plan, by creating a high density transit corridor, to firstly increase the number homes and also increase potential patronage on the tram. So at least the plan is coherent.

What I’d like to know is what would the cost of say a Rapid bus network to the town centres cost? If they built a road for buses that could travel between towncentres at 100km/h without stopping. that would be much more time efficient. Haven’t got a clue on the costs though. However that doesn’t work to well when creating a high density trasport corridor.

Also while the tram will cost money, I’m almost certain this means many of Gungahlins roads will not get/need the improvements over roads elsewhere. So there will be savings there.

Instead of scare mongering and conspiracy theories which seems the norm these days when someone opposes a political decision, it would be nice to use facts.

So you had to wait 40 mins for a bus.
I’m still standing in the middle of Northboure Ave waiting for a train.

OK then HOW do you come to your conclusion above?

Just curious about the process.

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

Every Canberran who has a car (and that is just about everyone) can use the aforementioned roads.
Very few will be able to use the tram.

Really? How?

You don’t seem unintelligent but you do come to some quite extraordinary conclusions.

No many of us have common sense AND intelligence, though.

dungfungus said :

Remember, the same people who were responsible for these projects (some of which were bungled and became outrageously expensive) are the same people that are going to build the tramway.
Are you comfortable with that?

You don’t seem to have an issue with waste and competence: So long as it builds roads.

btw Are you fingering the Labor/Greens for this or are you tossing in the Liberals as well?

Or any and all contractors and consultants involved?

rubaiyat said :

Sad as I am to admit it* they also seem to be well into the engineering drawings. Probably to stop anyone backing out of the project.

Well that was the election commitment of the now government at the last election. So shock horror the government is doing what it said.

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

They are cheap when you are spending someone else’s money with no accountability and this is the core issue with this folly.

Cheaper than the 800m of Cotter Road duplication?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/14m-bill-to-upgrade-800m-of-road-20120919-267bn.html

And the Kings Avenue overpass?

http://www.nationalcapital.gov.au/index.php/past-projects/564-new-kings-avenue-parkes-way-intersection

And the Majura Parkway?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/majura-parkway-project-facing-crisis-as-earthworks-contractor-set-to-abandon-job-20140505-zr4uh.html

…and the Gungahlin Drive Extension? and the William Slim Drive & Barton Highway intersection? and…

Every Canberran who has a car (and that is just about everyone) can use the aforementioned roads.
Very few will be able to use the tram.

Umm actually no, in the same vane as your road example, everyone can also use the tram. Whether one needs to or wants to is another matter, which also very much applies to roads.

I personally am offended at the waste of money spend duplicating roads in Tuggernong, that I am paying for but never ever use. I would prefer my share of the money be spent duplicating the last bit of William Hovell Drive. But that isn’t how it works is it?

dungfungus said :

Every Canberran who has a car (and that is just about everyone) can use the aforementioned roads.
Very few will be able to use the tram.

Really? How?

You don’t seem unintelligent but you do come to some quite extraordinary conclusions.

rubaiyat said :

Found the $14.7 million spent on just the Glenloch Interchange:

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/major-construction-projects/parkes_way_widening

Amazing how a relatively simple X intersection could be made that expensive, poorly designed and take so long.

Remember, the same people who were responsible for these projects (some of which were bungled and became outrageously expensive) are the same people that are going to build the tramway.
Are you comfortable with that?

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

They are cheap when you are spending someone else’s money with no accountability and this is the core issue with this folly.

Cheaper than the 800m of Cotter Road duplication?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/14m-bill-to-upgrade-800m-of-road-20120919-267bn.html

And the Kings Avenue overpass?

http://www.nationalcapital.gov.au/index.php/past-projects/564-new-kings-avenue-parkes-way-intersection

And the Majura Parkway?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/majura-parkway-project-facing-crisis-as-earthworks-contractor-set-to-abandon-job-20140505-zr4uh.html

…and the Gungahlin Drive Extension? and the William Slim Drive & Barton Highway intersection? and…

Every Canberran who has a car (and that is just about everyone) can use the aforementioned roads.
Very few will be able to use the tram.

Found the $14.7 million spent on just the Glenloch Interchange:

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/roads-transport/major-construction-projects/parkes_way_widening

Amazing how a relatively simple X intersection could be made that expensive, poorly designed and take so long.

Oh dear, that was just for the 2009 work. Damn hard to find what they spent on the latest “folly”.

…and the $15.5 million Airport road upgrade…

http://www.canberraairport.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/MediaRelease09_3Apr.pdf

Should I keep going?

dungfungus said :

They are cheap when you are spending someone else’s money with no accountability and this is the core issue with this folly.

Cheaper than the 800m of Cotter Road duplication?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/14m-bill-to-upgrade-800m-of-road-20120919-267bn.html

And the Kings Avenue overpass?

http://www.nationalcapital.gov.au/index.php/past-projects/564-new-kings-avenue-parkes-way-intersection

And the Majura Parkway?

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/majura-parkway-project-facing-crisis-as-earthworks-contractor-set-to-abandon-job-20140505-zr4uh.html

…and the Gungahlin Drive Extension? and the William Slim Drive & Barton Highway intersection? and…

rubaiyat said :

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubyat, are you aware of how much the Capital Metro authority on its own is costing us?

No. Do you?

According to Hansard,the total of “payments” made from 1 July 2014 to 29 October 2014 by Capital Metro Agency was $6,567,319.21.
That’s about $20 million annualised.
I suspect the real cost will be twice that this year but that is the price of vision dreaming these days.

I don’t think that can be annualised as it will have all the set-up costs of any organisation. Startups from scratch aren’t cheap.

Sad as I am to admit it* they also seem to be well into the engineering drawings. Probably to stop anyone backing out of the project.

* I believe it is the wrong route.

“Startups from scratch aren’t cheap.”
They are cheap when you are spending someone else’s money with no accountability and this is the core issue with this folly.

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubyat, are you aware of how much the Capital Metro authority on its own is costing us?

No. Do you?

According to Hansard,the total of “payments” made from 1 July 2014 to 29 October 2014 by Capital Metro Agency was $6,567,319.21.
That’s about $20 million annualised.
I suspect the real cost will be twice that this year but that is the price of vision dreaming these days.

I don’t think that can be annualised as it will have all the set-up costs of any organisation. Startups from scratch aren’t cheap.

Sad as I am to admit it* they also seem to be well into the engineering drawings. Probably to stop anyone backing out of the project.

* I believe it is the wrong route.

dungfungus said :

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubyat, are you aware of how much the Capital Metro authority on its own is costing us?

No. Do you?

According to Hansard,the total of “payments” made from 1 July 2014 to 29 October 2014 by Capital Metro Agency was $6,567,319.21.
That’s about $20 million annualised.
I suspect the real cost will be twice that this year but that is the price of vision dreaming these days.

And again I ask how much has Roads cost?

A few more figures for you to get disgusted over:

$10 million just for an intersection “upgrade” at William Slim Drive & Barton Highway.

$500,000 for additional parking at Weston Creek (cars going nowhere seem to cost heaps).

$4.099 million for a Canberra Connect Shopfront in Gungahlin.

$11.3 million for extra garbage.

$2 million for new dirty, boring and imaginative “refurbishments” to shopping centres in Cook, Rivett and Kambah to the previous dirty, boring and imaginative “refurbishments”.

…and two you will really hate because you never use them:

$300,000 for safety upgrades to skate parks

and $140,000 for drinking fountains.

rubaiyat said :

miz said :

Rubyat, are you aware of how much the Capital Metro authority on its own is costing us?

No. Do you?

According to Hansard,the total of “payments” made from 1 July 2014 to 29 October 2014 by Capital Metro Agency was $6,567,319.21.
That’s about $20 million annualised.
I suspect the real cost will be twice that this year but that is the price of vision dreaming these days.

miz said :

Rubyat, are you aware of how much the Capital Metro authority on its own is costing us?

No. Do you?

Rubyat, are you aware of how much the Capital Metro authority on its own is costing us?

Pushing the australia card from the nationally recognised student card transition, combined with transport log ons regardless if public transport is free (it should be) and government credit points for fee payments sounds idealistic to me.

If ACTION buses were free, it would make more sense as to why it operates without a profit. Money that ACTION makes from purchasing tickets is not enough and was never enough to make a profit. ACTION is not designed to make money directly from bus fares. ACTION is designed to move people around, and indirectly support the economy, and support education.

The reason for the decline is because of the myway ticket fiasco when it started. People bought myway tickets, charged them up with credit for automatic payments, or otherwise charged with credit and did not use them. This leads to people eventually managing their myway credit properly a few years later, and a predictable drop in profit.

Profit? Why does ACTION need to make a profit at all? They don’t.

miz said :

I have it on good authority that 300 route frequency has been reduced – I understand to cover increasing other routes. In other words, there is no money for buses (because all the public transport money is going to the tram)and ACTION is having to cannibalise itself to try and ‘improve’ services.
This means that Canberrans who will never use the planned tram (and which doesn’t even exist yet for those who might use it in the future) are supposed to ‘suck up’ continued less than satisfactory, and declining, public transport. Unacceptable. The government just does not have a Canberra wide public transport plan, only a porkbarrel plan.

Another hurdle for the winning tram consortium to cross will be dealing with the TWU.
Tram drivers in cities where buses compete with trams (integration) receive considerably less money that bus drivers but as someone else mentioned about Canberra, “we are different” so expect a lot of argy-bargy with the drafting of an award for the tram drivers.
Another aspect that will make it interesting is that tram drivers have a separate union and somehow I can’t see the TWU in Canberra accepting that.

rubaiyat said :

How could that be possible? No significant amounts of money have yet gone into the trams, and ACTION is certainly not in charge of, nor paying for, the alternative Light Rail. More likely There is a driver shortage.

I do agree though that there is no Canberra wide public transport plan. If there was, the Government may actually win over the doubters.

Are you saying they are stashing it all

They are not stashing it – yet. With the 2014-15 territory budget deficit more than doubling to M$712 (i think that was the figure ?) what the ACT Gov’t is trying to do is to reduce ACTION’s operating loss and the cost of providing municiple services whilst raising more revenue from fees, charges, Annual Rates, supporting calls for the GST to increase, etc, in preparation for the est.M$75-100pa lease payments for the next 25 odd years to the tram private partner. That cost to Ratepayers will be in addition to ACTION’s opearting loss each year for the other mass transport system Ratepayers support. They also have to find the $ for the infrastructure costs associated with the tram – which will be very substantial and are the responsibility of the ACT Gov’t – and so, ACT Ratepayers – to fund.

miz said :

I have it on good authority that 300 route frequency has been reduced – I understand to cover increasing other routes. In other words, there is no money for buses (because all the public transport money is going to the tram)and ACTION is having to cannibalise itself to try and ‘improve’ services.
This means that Canberrans who will never use the planned tram (and which doesn’t even exist yet for those who might use it in the future) are supposed to ‘suck up’ continued less than satisfactory, and declining, public transport. Unacceptable. The government just does not have a Canberra wide public transport plan, only a porkbarrel plan.

How could that be possible? No significant amounts of money have yet gone into the trams, and ACTION is certainly not in charge of, nor paying for, the alternative Light Rail. More likely There is a driver shortage.

I do agree though that there is no Canberra wide public transport plan. If there was, the Government may actually win over the doubters.

Are you saying they are stashing it all

I have it on good authority that 300 route frequency has been reduced – I understand to cover increasing other routes. In other words, there is no money for buses (because all the public transport money is going to the tram)and ACTION is having to cannibalise itself to try and ‘improve’ services.
This means that Canberrans who will never use the planned tram (and which doesn’t even exist yet for those who might use it in the future) are supposed to ‘suck up’ continued less than satisfactory, and declining, public transport. Unacceptable. The government just does not have a Canberra wide public transport plan, only a porkbarrel plan.

I think the 300 routes are ACTION’s most profitable routes (of the few actually that are profitable) so it’s pretty silly to under service that run.

I wonder how many passengers got off at the Albert Hall. Could demand have increased since paid parking in the Parly Triangle?

I don’t catch the 300 to work but I’ve found my bus (58) than normal going both to and from work. It’s also now 5 mins late 🙁

I put this down to uni starting recently and probably more students.. however could be wrong.

Not sure on the 300 front. Have you tried using nxtbus to see what is listed on it?

Solidarity said :

Commercial vehicles can have completely blacked out windows behind the driver, it’s not an issue.

Many utes have advertising covering the entire rear window, as they’re commercial vehicles this is not against the law… Same goes with vans.

That has always been the case.
I am talking about buses doing something different after they were delivered.
Buses are passenger vehicles and so are cars so this means we can cover our car windows with advertising?
I don’t think so.

JC said :

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

You understand wrong. Tinting is legal just has to be under a certain darkness.

As for buses and advertising if you take a close look the windscreen, drivers window and the front doors are NOT covered. So no visibility issue for the driver what so ever.

Opaque window glass tinting is illegal and we are talking about opaque coverings of window glass, not windscreens. I don’t think you have a clue about what I was trying to say.

Commercial vehicles can have completely blacked out windows behind the driver, it’s not an issue.

Many utes have advertising covering the entire rear window, as they’re commercial vehicles this is not against the law… Same goes with vans.

dungfungus said :

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

You understand wrong. Tinting is legal just has to be under a certain darkness.

As for buses and advertising if you take a close look the windscreen, drivers window and the front doors are NOT covered. So no visibility issue for the driver what so ever.

It seems every second ACTION bus now has full advertising on the sides and glass windows above.
I am not sure if people inside can see out but people on the outside can’t see in and more importantly, drivers can’t see through both sides.
I believe this is a safety hazard as when when a bus is waiting to turn left at an intersection and a car is waiting to turn right, the driver of the car has to wait until the bus has cleared the intersection to enable the car driver to proceed with safety after it can be seen that no traffic is coming from the left.
I understand that tinted windows on cars are illegal so what law gives buses the concession to make their window glass opaque?

It is being crippled intentionally to push the train agenda.

The Government seems to have abandoned its 2012 election commitment to increase Canberra’s public transport journey-to-work mode share to 10.5% by 2016.

In 2011 the mode share was 7.8%. Since then population has grown faster than ACTION patronage. We are on track for 7.6% in 2016.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.