Manchester Transport Network

[Oliver Hardy]

Manchester has taken over public control of public transport despite legal challenges. cost I believe is around £1 billion. Fares will be £2 for adult and £1 for child. According to local BBC the authority needs to raise the use of public transport by 30%, I wonder if Andy Burnham will be taking the bus from now on, apparently he was caught speeding, 78 in a 40, earlier this year.

https://marketingstockport.co.uk/news/greater-manc...

[abzmike]

Not sure what your point is… isn’t simplifying access to public transport a good thing?

[greygoose]

abzmike said:

Not sure what your point is… isn’t simplifying access to public transport a good thing?

You would think so, but NP&E is a weird place at times.

[Oliver Hardy]

abzmike said:

Not sure what your point is… isn’t simplifying access to public transport a good thing?

Yes, but it cost a billion and they need to get a lot more people to use it, so simply asking if the architected will be using it too

They have a lot of ULEz cameras already if they need extra funds I guess.

[bitchstewie]

greygoose said:

You would think so, but NP&E is a weird place at times.

I swear it's getting weirder.

[valiant]

A central transport authority works very well in London with millions using the buses alone with a simplified, easy to understand fare structure. If Manchester can get anywhere near that then it’s onto a winner just with the buses.

People like options. It won’t be for everyone and no doubt we’ll have people here complaining that the they need 17 different buses and takes 48 hours to get where they want but for many it will provide a credible alternative and now it’s got a lot easier and hopefully prove to be a lot more reliable.

Unless this is just another Burnham bashing thread then crack on.

Edited by valiant on Saturday 23 September 16:45

[abzmike]

Oliver Hardy said:

abzmike said:

Not sure what your point is… isn’t simplifying access to public transport a good thing?

Yes, but it cost a billion and they need to get a lot more people to use it, so simply asking if the architected will be using it too

They have a lot of ULEz cameras already if they need extra funds I guess.

Don’t know where you get your cost estimate…. The article you helpfully link says congestion costs more than that, so seems like a win all round to me. Anyway, your issue seems to be with the mayor…

[NerveAgent]

The bus system hasn’t exactly been good under the mishmash of private companies in Manchester has it? But I suspect that’s not the reason for this thread…

[Oliver Hardy]

NerveAgent said:

The bus system hasn’t exactly been good under the mishmash of private companies in Manchester has it? But I suspect that’s not the reason for this thread…

No, not the reason, it is the 30% increase in usage that is needed.

[Oliver Hardy]

abzmike said:

Oliver Hardy said:

abzmike said:

Not sure what your point is… isn’t simplifying access to public transport a good thing?

Yes, but it cost a billion and they need to get a lot more people to use it, so simply asking if the architected will be using it too

They have a lot of ULEz cameras already if they need extra funds I guess.

Don’t know where you get your cost estimate…. The article you helpfully link says congestion costs more than that, so seems like a win all round to me. Anyway, your issue seems to be with the mayor…

I take it you be using it then?

[abzmike]

Oliver Hardy said:

abzmike said:

Oliver Hardy said:

abzmike said:

Not sure what your point is… isn’t simplifying access to public transport a good thing?

Yes, but it cost a billion and they need to get a lot more people to use it, so simply asking if the architected will be using it too

They have a lot of ULEz cameras already if they need extra funds I guess.

Don’t know where you get your cost estimate…. The article you helpfully link says congestion costs more than that, so seems like a win all round to me. Anyway, your issue seems to be with the mayor…

I take it you be using it then?

If I stayed there, then yes I probably would.
I visited a few years back and used busses, trams and rail a good deal.
We have no meaningful public transportation in my locale, it’s a delight when cheap and easy integrated networks are available, and they have wide benefits to society as a whole. What’s not to like about good public transport?

[valiant]

Oliver Hardy said:

No, not the reason, it is the 30% increase in usage that is needed.

And if a more reliable, cheaper service is offered then why shouldn’t it be achievable?

People are put off by an unreliable service and when you have a myriad of companies offering their own non-interchangeable fare structure that becomes confusing except for the most committed bus enthusiast, it’s no wonder take up is relatively poor.

If people can rely on it then they will use it.

[G-wiz]

I spent 3 days visiting Manchester last month and found the tram network very good to use. Got me around zones 1, 2 & 3, I thought, fantastically well.

[Oliver Hardy]

valiant said:

Oliver Hardy said:

No, not the reason, it is the 30% increase in usage that is needed.

And if a more reliable, cheaper service is offered then why shouldn’t it be achievable?

People are put off by an unreliable service and when you have a myriad of companies offering their own non-interchangeable fare structure that becomes confusing except for the most committed bus enthusiast, it’s no wonder take up is relatively poor.

If people can rely on it then they will use it.

OK, I am wrong then, everyone will be using buses in Manchester as they do in London, apparently. I personally doubt it, but we will see

[bitchstewie]

I really don't get what your point is.

I don't live in Manchester so I have no idea what the existing bus service is like there but it's a big city so presumably there's a demand for cheap clean reliable public transport.

[Mikebentley]

I think Oliver is going for a record. How many threads can I start between 17:15 hrs and 17:30hrs today.

[valiant]

Oliver Hardy said:

OK, I am wrong then, everyone will be using buses in Manchester as they do in London, apparently. I personally doubt it, but we will see

No they won’t but some will.

If you create the conditions that give people a viable alternative then they will use it. It won’t work for everyone but it may work for enough people that it achieves it aims of increasing bus use.

London has proved that ‘if you build it, they will come’.

[abzmike]

Mikebentley said:

I think Oliver is going for a record. How many threads can I start between 17:15 hrs and 17:30hrs today.

I suspect he’s been abandoned by Mrs Hardy in Weatherspoons whilst she goes shopping, and has time on his hands with free wifi.

[Earthdweller]

Burnham’s wish is to provide Manchester with its own equivalent to TFL and make it just like London which in someways is applaudable

Hope it doesn’t lose as much money as TFL!

Only problem is GMC is nothing like London, it’s a small city surrounded by a number of satellite towns

The Met is brilliant and the Oxford Rd bus corridor is the busiest in the U.K. iirc but it isn’t really suited to commuting into the city by bus from the satellite towns and beyond

It’s been tried before with SELNEC and the GM buses maybe this time the Beeline will work

I think the money would be better spent expanding the Met to Bolton/Wigan/Stockport etc

[andy43]

Oliver Hardy said:

They have a lot of ULEz cameras already if they need extra funds I guess.

We 'paused' our 'ulez' - it's now (and I quote from Mayor Burnham) "a non-charging congestion zone" which is kinda what we had before, but with less trees, more signs, a stload of cameras and less money in the bank.
Don't think it'll be raising funds anytime soon