Bus numbers and speed of journey

[CPR Dave]

The last Citroen C1 model was just under 2 metres wide!! It's no longer in production. 

Honda Jazz is even wider.

[Earl Aelfheah]

A Honda Jazz is 1694 mm. It's narrower than a Ford Fiesta.

A Citroen C1 is around 1620 mm.

A Range Rover by comparison is well over 2 metres wide (as are several other car models). 

You are correct however that cars are getting wider (about 1 cm very two years on average), that's the point; There is no 'safety' reason that they should growing, and when you have cars that are exceeding typical UK parking bay widths and making them challenging for narrow roads, that's a problem

Edited Wednesday at 18:10 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

41 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

The experts (your words) from Travel Watch, who appear in the video you've shared, have compiled a report making a list of recommendations. Do you agree with those recommendations (any or all of them)?

There is only one expert from Travel Watch on the panel and I love how you now question whether they are experts or not.....! (One wonders if that might be because they are saying things you are opposed to - it's a bit predictable).

Travel Watch compiled a list of recommendations in 2024 and yes, of course, many of the suggestions make perfect sense. But we are talking about their expert opinion during the panel - they did not mention any of the points raised in the report they published in 2024 because the expert panel was about what was slowing buses down not how to speed them up. I am sure that discussion will come later - then I am sure the report you reference will be revisited and scrutinised accordingly whether it is still their best advice.

Edited Wednesday at 15:22 by Rockets

[first mate]

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Oh give us a break.  So a bus driver or two do not like cyclists.  What a surprise.  Very selective reporting. 

Are you saying the Bus Union Rep was selectively reporting? Are you implying that the Rep is biased against cyclists and therefore what he reported to the LA session is not to be trusted? 
 
You do sometimes seem to take the line that if someone says something about cycle infrastructure or cyclists, that you do not agree with, this is because they are angry or dislike cyclists (even when the observations you disagree with are made by other cyclists). 

[CPR Dave]

You've taken off the wing mirrors! Laughable.

[Rockets]

1 minute ago, first mate said:

You do sometimes seem to take the line that if someone says something about cycle infrastructure or cyclists, that you do not agree with, this is because they are angry or dislike cyclists (even when the observations you disagree with are made by other cyclists). 

This is the go-to position. But remember the culture war has nothing to do with this sort of behaviour.....the culture war is only being waged by those who are anti-cycling!

[CPR Dave]

Actual Citroen C1 width: 1,888 mm

Actual Honda Jazz width: 1,966 mm

Actual Range Rover width: 2,220 mm

Most people aren't driving round in Range Rovers, but they are driving round in wide cars.

[Earl Aelfheah]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

I love how you now question whether they are experts or not

I am not questioning it, just establishing the fact that you have recognised them as experts and suggested that their views should be taken seriously. 

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

Travel Watch compiled a list of recommendations in 2024 and yes, of course, many of the suggestions make perfect sense

Great, so do you agree with:

• Increasing the operating hours of existing bus lanes and enforcing them, and
• Continuing to develop other elements of bus priority, such as bus gates and removal of parking spaces in appropriate locations?

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

But we are talking about their expert opinion during the panel - they did not mention any of the points raised in the report they published in 2024 because the expert panel was about what was slowing buses down not how to speed them up.

They were taken as read actually - agreeing with TfL analysis that the primary causes where linked to congestion, emergency incidents, demonstrations and the mechanical performance of the bus fleet. They were asked about any additional factors - and pointed out increases in roadworks and reallocation of road space.

You have made several different arguments against bike lanes, first

1. bike lanes don't work, they're not increasing cycling numbers, to;
2. cycling numbers have increased, but nowhere near as much as a target that never existed said it would, to;
3. Representative from Travel Watch say reallocation of space (including to pedestrians) is one factor in slowing some buses.

May we just establish what you're asking to be done about what you appear to consider the 'problem' of bike lanes? Are you calling for cycle lanes to be removed? 

Edited Wednesday at 16:24 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

@Earl Aelfheah I really don't know as I am not a travel expert (and I am presuming you aren't either) and no, I am not advocating for the removal of cycle lanes. That is up to the experts to determine but what we do know is that these panelists were called due to their expertise. 9

And it is interesting to read what they actually said (BTW does anyone know a good way to transcribe a YouTube video with AI maybe as I think it would be interesting for people to see what they actually said).

So...

25 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

They were asked about any additional factors - and pointed out increases in roadworks and reallocation of road space.

Yes and what was said by the man from the bus company was that the two "big ones" were roadworks (number and nature) and "problems with road space for buses".

The exact words form that section from the attendee from the bus company is as follows (he doesn't mention car size BTW!):

"There are more challenges now with road space for buses - there are a lot of competing demands for roadspace. Tfl has to make lots of decisions that are very difficult and I will say that and I have a particular view and it is difficult for TFL to allocate road space for all of the competing priorities but there is no doubt having said that there is more of a challenge for the bus network as it is less well protected, there is less capacity, whether it is cycle lanes, some of the LTNs, 20mph or some of the urban realm projects. There are lots and lots of things that within themselves are good and worthy to be doing, I am not saying they are not, but are they having an impact on the bus network? Yes they are."

"So that the capacity of the network is less than it was. So in very simple terms when a problem happens, you know it is a breakdown or roadworks or whatever it is, an accident, it will tends to have a bigger impact than it used to over a wider area for longer because the capacity isn't in the network to recover from that problem in the way that it was in the past."

So he puts the reduction in capacity in road space for buses to "cycle lanes, some of the LTNs, 20mph and urban realm projects". It will be interesting to see how TFL reacts.

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

20 minutes ago, Rockets said:

 I really don't know as I am not a travel expert (and I am presuming you aren't either) and no, I am not advocating for the removal of cycle lanes. That is up to the experts to determine but what we do know is that these panelists were called due to their expertise

OK, so you defer to the experts. Fair enough. Those experts have recommended:

• Increasing the operating hours of existing bus lanes and enforcing them, and
• Continuing to develop other elements of bus priority, such as bus gates and removal of parking spaces in appropriate locations

I strongly agree with this and would like both applied to Lordship Lane and other major routes.

I'm glad that you're not advocating for the removal of cycle lanes. It is very clear that they have been successful in contributing to the sustained, long term trend of increasing numbers of people travelling by bicycle.

20 minutes ago, Rockets said:

Yes and what was said by the man from the bus company was that the two "big ones" were roadworks (number and nature) and "problems with road space for buses"

Yes, the bus driver said these were the two big additional factors in slowing buses. 

20 minutes ago, Rockets said:

So he puts the reduction in capacity in road space for buses to "cycle lanes, some of the LTNs, 20mph and urban realm projects"

Yes, there has been reallocation of some road space, which of course reduces capacity. That is one of the additional factors (on top of congestion, emergency incidents, demonstrations and the mechanical performance of the bus fleet) that will contribute to slower buses. Of course unlike those other factors, which do nothing to move people more quickly, safely or efficiently - protected pedestrian and cycle areas do. 

Edited Wednesday at 16:50 by Earl Aelfheah

[Rockets]

2 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Yes, the bus driver said these were the two big additional factors in slowing buses. 

16 minutes ago, Rockets said:

No that was the exec from the bus company.

The union member who represents bus drivers said in response to the question below (I found a clever AI tool to transcribe it - timestamps included!!!)::

 

Um so so TfL have um made an assessment. They they've stated that uh the bus speeds have been impacted because of

Show less

01:02:54

 

congestion, emergency incidents, demonstrations and mechanical performances of the bus fleet. Um is there anybody here who agrees with that assessment? Um and are there any other issues that TfL have not identified? Yeah, >> I think when I when I look at there's some of the reasons, but a lot of this has been own goals. So when we look at um like you're looking for space for pedestrians, so we've narrowed roads, cyclists. Yeah. Once again, we've narrowed it, you know, and quite often

Show less

01:03:31

 

if you're behind a push bike, you can't overtake it as a bus driver because there just isn't enough room, you know, so you're stuck now at that speed all the way until that cyclist moves. Um so yeah uh it is I think there's quite a lot that needs to be looked at when we we you know because you've got >> prime example is when they've made a lot of these places pedestrian >> personal let's imagine Oxford Street when that if that actually happens where's all that traffic go

Show less

01:04:05

 

>> park lane park lane's never going to move >> you know and these are the things that aren't being thought about which are the knock on events from doing all of this. >> You know, I'm fully behind everyone being safe. But if that means by doing that that actually the service that you're trying to run on other things are now impacted, that's a concern, isn't it? Because eventually you're going to say like they did in the old days, there's too many

Show less

01:04:36

 

buses in London.

 

And here is what the Travel Watch person said (where he address congestion):

 

decline in bus speeds we've obviously heard a little bit from other panelists but from travel watches his perspective what's what's gone wrong if you like. >> Uh thank you. I think it's all all of the things that were mentioned previously not not not just by assembly member Prakari but also from the from the panel members. Um the one bit of gloss I would I I would add uh to all of that is that I think the first thing that was listed was congestion. Um it kind of begs the question what's causing

Show less

01:10:37

 

the congestion. you know that could be increased road traffic um but actually road traffic by and large hasn't been increasing um or it could be something to do with the road space that's available for any given level of traffic which I think takes you into the points that we made made very well which is about you know the incident of road works um having an impact on congestion um and that's important certainly from the point of view of of TfL's response to addressing bus speeds because they

Show less

01:11:07

 

place a lot of emphasis this upon interventions which I'm sure we'll talk about later which are designed to um reduce the impact of of um road works. But it also begs a question about um uh the point that's been made previously about uh space that might previously been available, road space that might have been available for buses not being there um uh now. Um I mean I have struggled to find some good data uh to uh paint a picture as to what has happened in terms of the the number of

Show less

01:11:40

 

bus lane kilometers uh the number of cycle lane uh lanes segregated cycle lanes over this period of time. Um but uh I have some sympathy with the views that have been expressed by my my fellow panelists that there is that there does seem to be something that's been going on with regard to the reallocation of road space which I think is contributing to this factor. I saw a there was a piece from a couple of years ago in the in the in the Times newspaper uh which sought to try and understand what has been going on and it had

Show less

01:12:08

 

identified there are at least 20 roads in the capital uh for example which is a high street just to pick an example so an example in west London um where the bus lane has been removed and and in its place a cycle route has been been put in place um is that having a major impact Londonwide I just don't No, but logic would suggest it's got to be having an impact at least at a local level. And I was intrigued to read the comments reported um very recently last few days from um the former transport

Show less

 

commissioner was then Sir Peter now Lord Hendy admitting, "Yeah, I took a lot of road space out that formerly used to be for buses for cycle lanes. I almost certainly uh introduced some cycle lanes which were badly designed and have had an impact on bus speeds." Don't misunderstand me. That's not a reason for not implementing cycle lanes to promote cycling which has many many benefits but it's about how these things are done and making sure they're done better. Just to re go back to my point

Show less

01:13:09

 

about traffic levels are they part of the equation. If you look at the stats, average bus speeds have been in London across London have been declining had had been had declined noticeably in the early part of the last decade and they sort of flatlined with the brief exception of COVID. They flatlined and they've been flatlined. So they they were near or even in the more distant past over 10 miles an hour on average. They are now 9.2 two miles an hour and if anything over the last three years so postcoid they've been getting

Show less

01:13:43

 

marginally worse. Um if you look at what's been happening with car traffic for example in London inner central uh um central inner and outer um broadly speaking it has been gently coming down again with one or two exceptions um and is now currently at a it is lower than the prepandemic level. So simply the volume of carrot by itself doesn't seem to on the face of it explain what's going on with bus speeds which is why I think you need to look at what else is going on in terms of the allocation of

Show less

01:14:20

 

road space capacity and also the management of that road space capacity whether it's road works or things like signals which I'm sure we'll come on to later

 

[CPR Dave]

Park Lane used to really move back when the speed limit was 50 mph.

[Earl Aelfheah]

@Rockets - yes, I don't think we're disagreeing on what was said. But the conversation starts with the chair laying out what TfL have put forward as the cause of slow bus speeds, and asking the panellists if they agreed (Which they did) and whether there were any additional factors that TfL did not identify. So to highlight the 'additional factors' without mentioning the premise of the question, gives a slightly misleading impression.

That's not to say that they don't identify the reallocation of road space as a factor, it obviously is. But it is one additional factor alongside congestion, emergency incidents, demonstrations, and the mechanical performance of the bus fleet (as are road works).

Of course unlike those other factors (the primary factors identified by TfL and addressed in the Travel Watch report), which do nothing to move people more quickly, safely or efficiently - expanded pedestrian areas and protected cycle lanes do. 

Edited yesterday at 07:50 by Earl Aelfheah

[malumbu]

55 minutes ago, CPR Dave said:

Park Lane used to really move back when the speed limit was 50 mph.

Oh, was in only 50?  Whoops.  

It was a silly race track. Which I sillily raced on many years ago.  I've long since seen the errors of my ways.

[Rockets]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/bus-speeds-london-slow-9mph-tfl-sadiq-khan-assembly-b1261821.html

[malumbu]

Do you have view on the article?

Like Christmas round robins I generally can't be bothered to read attachments unless there is something of particular interest.

[Spartacus]

1 hour ago, malumbu said:

Do you have view on the article?

Like Christmas round robins I generally can't be bothered to read attachments unless there is something of particular interest.

Mal , is that an Internet version of fingers in ears, I can't hear la la la la lala la? 

[malumbu]

Nope it is just repetitive stuff that has all been said before and is not any sort of discussion.  

[Rockets]

#seenoevil? 😉

[Earl Aelfheah]

Reposting the same thing repeatedly is a bit pointless. You've now provided a video, a partial transcript of the video, and an article reporting on what was said. I'm not sure what you think you're adding.

[Spartacus]

10 minutes ago, Earl Aelfheah said:

Reposting the same thing repeatedly is a bit pointless. You've now provided a video, a partial transcript of the video, and an article reporting on what was said. I'm not sure what you think you're adding.

So in future you too will only post a reference, link or video.only once and never mention it again ? 

Okay got it 🤐

[exdulwicher]

It's not cycle *lanes* as such. 

What has happened a fair bit going back to the introduction of cycle superhighways was the use of bus lanes to connect things up very easily and cheaply. Back then of course there weren't as many cyclists and generally it all worked fairly well but asking a small squashy cyclist who wants to travel at a relatively constant speed and a very large heavy bus that wants to go fast - stop - fast - stop - fast etc to share the same space is a stupid idea.

Yes, it kind of works when there aren't many cyclists but you get to a crunch point where there are so many cyclists now (there's another thread about that!) that every time the bus stops, a flow of cyclists passes and keeps passing which makes it difficult for the bus to pull out again. Once it's out and going, it's trying to pass all the cyclists before then trying to pull in again, right in front of them. And so it repeats. It slows the bus down, it's very dangerous for cyclists, especially if they're caught in a blind spot and it's frustrating for the driver who is then tempted into taking more risks.

There are various answers and options:
1) Bus stop bypasses. In spite of the wails of protest from some people, far and away the best (in fact almost the only) solution if you're going to ask bikes and buses to share the same space is to give the bikes a bypass at the back of the stop and the bus can then pull in and out without ever having to negotiate a constant flow of bikes.

2) 24/7 bus lane enforcement. This works for both bikes and buses because it means they're not constantly having to pull out into traffic and back in again to avoid a single parked car. Also bus priority junctions. There's a few of these up the Walworth Road and also at the bottom of DKH heading south; traffic lights with a lane for buses to nip in up the side and get in front while the cars are stopped. Saves the bus having to wait forever until a driver finally lets them out and also largely negates the bike overtaking issue - either the bikes wait behind the bus and follow it through or they move right which puts them in the main traffic lane stopped at the light.

3) Completely segregated cycle lanes. Stop the bikes and buses mixing in the first place.

4) And related to that, reallocation of road space to both buses and bikes. A lane for bikes here. A lane for buses there. Remove the cars. Not going to work everywhere of course but there are some roads where cars could be sent a longer way around. Tottenham Court Road is a good example.

 

[CPR Dave]

Quote

Bus speeds varied from a low of 6.25mph in the City of London to a high of 11.73mph in Bexley and 11.68mph in neighbouring Bromley.

Well that is interesting.

 

The City of London is chock full of cycle lanes and they have even banned cars from a number of roads there. 

And yet they have the slowest bus speeds of all of London.

cf Bexley and Bromley which have very few cycle lanes or bus lanes and no bans on cars and yet they have the highest bus speeds.

very interesting.

 

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

52 minutes ago, exdulwicher said:

reallocation of road space to both buses and bikes. A lane for bikes here. A lane for buses there. Remove the cars.

100%. Segregated bike lanes (of which there are very few outside of central London), are extremely space efficient.

Data from central London segregated cycle lanes show they move people five times more efficiently per square metre than the main carriageway. A great example is on Blackfriars Bridge, where the cycle lanes occupy 20% of the road space but account for 70% of the people crossing during peak times.

The most space-efficient means of moving people – walking, cycling and public transport – should be prioritised over low-occupancy private transport.

10 minutes ago, CPR Dave said:

very interesting.

It's not remotely interesting if you actually give it 1 seconds thought.

Edited 2 hours ago by Earl Aelfheah

[exdulwicher]

15 minutes ago, CPR Dave said:

Well that is interesting.

The City of London is chock full of cycle lanes and they have even banned cars from a number of roads there. 

And yet they have the slowest bus speeds of all of London.

cf Bexley and Bromley which have very few cycle lanes or bus lanes and no bans on cars and yet they have the highest bus speeds.

very interesting.

The fact that they are completely different areas with totally different population density, land use and traffic volumes etc has seemingly passed you by?

Edited 2 hours ago by exdulwicher