That would be more lame thinking from TfNSW than anything to do with the
operators, who don't mind running out-of-area services. There are plenty of
routes running across different operational regions in Perth without any
issues. Again, it's down to the capability of the agency. TfNSW struggles
with a lot of its tasks.

One of the original objectives of the CSELR project was to free up numbers
of buses by truncating routes at tram interchanges so that the buses could
be cascaded to improving local and cross-suburban services.. The slowness
of the tram put a spanner in that which obviously caught TfNSW off guard,
but it seems to be now pressing ahead with that.

I do think that there is a real resentment of the trams among people living
beyond its catchment because of its slowness and the effect it will have on
their journey times with enforced interchange. It's completely unlike the
situation in the 1950s where people resented the replacement of trams by
buses and the terrible capacity issues that followed that (starting with
the disastrous North Sydney conversion). It was a major impetus to people
abandoning public transport altogether and driving their cars to the inner
city and parking. Today, people want the public transport (largely because
it's now impossible to park in the inner city), but they don't like a
slower journey, one that they're also more likely to be riding standing
up.

They made all the wrong choices setting up CSELR. Over micro-managed
operation plus the wrong type of trams, resulting in slowness. Double-ended
trams, resulting in major loss of seating compared to equivalent buses. I
was talking about this over a decade ago and it's come to pass as I warned.

Tony P

On Wednesday, October 20, 2021 at 10:39:51 AM UTC+11 gregsut...@... wrote:

> "All those bus service/route changes are implemented by TfNSW" is 100%

> correct, but what we are talking about here is the 'preparation' of Region

> 9 for the incoming private operator.

>

> Examples quoted below reveal how the 'preparation' by TfNSW which State

> Transit has been forced to implement has negatively impacted local bus

> commuters with enforced transfers bus/bus, the cutbacks in cross suburban

> services (focus has been on elimination of cross regional runs

> (fragmentation of the 400 service for example) so that each region's

> services stays within the region. This 'streamlines' the service

> requirements placed upon the regional operator and suits TfNSW's

> oversight(!) task by ensuring a lovely silo arrangement is created across

> each of the privatised regions. Pity about the services being optimised

> for the passengers.

>

> It is generally agreed that one of the benefits of buses is that they

> facilitate the introduction of cross regional services by avoiding CBD

> traffic congestion with direct connecting services. What is being done

> here is totally contrary to the effective implementation of cross regional

> bus services in the future.

>

> Greg

>

>

> On 16/10/2021 5:19 pm, TP wrote:

>

> All those bus service/route changes are implemented by TfNSW and are

> nothing to do with who operates the services.

>

> Tony P

>

> On Saturday, October 16, 2021 at 1:40:19 PM UTC+11

>gregsut...@... wrote:

>

>> I think a major factor contributing to the high number of petition

>> signatures is Treasury/Transport's ongoing and longstanding antipathy

>> towards public bus transport in the Eastern Suburbs. Going back even to

>> the outrageous "Better Buses East" fiasco and the accompanying lies

>> which saw an 18% across the board cut in local bus services even though

>> the spin generators were saying how much better bus services would be.

>> There has been a great deal of agitation, supported by local politicians

>> from both sides of politics and even with this level of support

>> additional services have only been augmented when services are

>> hopelessly overcrowded. I once, after visiting my local Member of

>> Parliament, had to wait outside her Double Bay office for an hour and 45

>> minutes (5:30 pm to 7:15 pm) to get on a bus as all the previous buses

>> sailed past full and not picking up.

>>

>> No one in the Region 9 area believes that the privitisation of the

>> operation of local bus services will in any way improve the services.

>> In preparation for the 'new' order we have already seen the

>> disappearance of the direct 389 bus service (the one that replaced the

>> Bondi via Bellevue tram) linking North Bondi/Bellevue Hill/Woollahra to

>> St Vincent's Hospital, the diversion of the 379 (Bronte tram) service

>> from the Oxford Street/Railway corridor to North Bondi (7Ways) which has

>> had a major adverse impact on Bronte/Waverley commuters, the break up of

>> the 400 Bondi Junction/Airport/Rockdale route and a plethora of changes

>> to cross country bus services NOT related to the CSELR interchanges.

>>

>> The people of the East fought to keep their trams as they knew that the

>> 'improved' service was an illusion, as it proved to be. They have seen

>> the lies and retrograde 'improved' bus services in the Inner West and

>> hence the extent of petitioners. They are not against light rail they

>> are against incompetence in public transport provision and the

>> transparent spin they are being exposed to.

>>

>> Greg

>>

>>

>> On 14/10/2021 7:06 pm, TP wrote:

>> > I see that the local political campaign against diverting buses to

>> > interchange with the light rail has taken on new energy with the

>> > arrival of Rob Stokes as a new Transport Minister to be persuaded. The

>> > total number of signatures on petitions has now risen over 80,000.

>> > This is over half the total population of Randwick and probably much

>> > of the commuting population! So tell me now that people will prefer a

>> > tram over a bus any time.

>> >

>> > I think it's more complex than just the mode. The tram seems to now

>> > satisfy most users within its own catchment. The discontent comes with

>> > the curtailing of through buses, exacerbated by the slowness of the

>> > tram service, which means a much longer journey when interchange time

>> > is taken into account. It doesn't have to be thus, as many European

>> > (non French) tram operations demonstrate. With new occupants in key

>> > Ministerial portfolios, it will be interesting to see where this

>> > heads. The restructure was supposed to have been finalised before the

>> > end of this year.

>> >

>> > Tony P

>> >

>>

> --

> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups

> "TramsDownUnder" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an

> email totramsdownunde...@....

> To view this discussion on the web visit

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/a6dd58f6-4c49-46e5-a878-3296a2f66d56n%40googlegroups.com

> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tramsdownunder/a6dd58f6-4c49-46e5-a878-3296a2f66d56n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer

> .

>

>