why was the 22 taking off as double deckers then replaced with "City Imp"and then called the 122 .this bus runs from ashington to the other side of the city to drimnagh . now,why did they replace this route with smaller buses?
i live in cabra and those imps are very rarely seen on this route ,so why are double deckers back on this route now?
it was just a waste of time putting the imps on .
and the 121 is usally operated by imps ,why,i thought this was supposed to be a double decker route.
can anybody tell me why???
[posted by: gary]
BUSRAGE Discussions » Timetables and Routes
the 122
(7 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
And can anybody tell us what to call you, young sir…? At this point, I do not know whether to call you Gary, Mark, Bernard, Tomo, Vinny Mullins, Popeye, or Myles Kenny. My name is actually Al, of course. Stick with one handle, at the very least, because I’m getting a bit of a headache from all your handle changes, thank you…Posted 5 years ago #
-
The introduction of IMP buses in the late ninties was part of Dublin Bus's changing image.
Before the imps were introduced both the 22 and 22A were low frequency routes as a result of low passenger numbers travelling, as a resident of Cabra you will appreciate the unreliability of these routes. The idea behind the imps were that passengers would be attracted to use the service if they felt it was reliable and these new style buses fitted the image of a new way to travel. Like on other imp routes such as the 83/130/123 etc. this new fast frequency service was extremely popular as people waiting for a bus knew there would be a bus along in about 10 min.
The fact that these routes have reverted back to using double deckers is an indication of their success, where passenger demand exceeded the type of bus operating the route.
Unfortunally there is a small amount of minibuses still operating out of Phibsboro depot and usually these end up on the 120 or 121 as these would have the lowest passenger levels but vehicle delivery over the next year should see these routes being more single/double deck operated.
While very few people like the imps its got to be said they were very effective in getting people back on buses and have paved the way to some of the busiest routes in the city - eg. 123
[posted by: Pat]Posted 5 years ago # -
The fact that these routes have reverted back to using double deckers is an indication of their success, where passenger demand exceeded the type of bus operating the route
If you believe that, then you probably believe in wingèd boars too? All that has been proven is that frequency and reliability sell, not that people would be attracted to ride a bus route because it had City Imps on it. If the Imps were the cause of the renaîssance of bus usage, then their removal would result in the reversal of the attraction of passengers. However, I truly suspect that the passenger count numbers thereof were distorted by the low passenger-carrying capacity of the Imps themselves. If no Imps had ever been introduced and the frequency of the buses had been increased (and if they actually ran every eight minutes instead of five buses at once every twenty minutes), the same increase of passenger counts would have occurred, simple as that.
In case you have not noticed the topics of other threads on this forum, people were being driven away from using the DB bus routes (Imps included) towards motorcar usage, thanks to the overall unreliability of DB operations.
While very few people like the imps its got to be said they were very effective in getting people back on buses
That’s a very contradictory statement. Very few people like the Imps, but they were attracted to ride DB thanks to the Imps?? Sorry, but that makes no sense.
The only reason that DB is reverting Imp routes back to double-deck is not because of passenger constraints but because of the higher maintenance costs of the Imp buses versus the larger single and double deckers. It’s a standardisation issue as well, I suspect—they wish to consolidate insofar as bus types and spare-parts inventories, the latter of which takes up a lot of space.
Trust me, the number of the cars on the road in Dublin is the real indication of how “successful” any of the DB services have been.
[posted by: ]Posted 5 years ago # -
"If you believe that, then you probably believe in wingèd boars too? All that has been proven is that frequency and reliability sell, not that people would be attracted to ride a bus route because it had City Imps on it."
Of course i believe it, the fact is on all routes converted to city imp, the passenger levels did rise, this was due to a combination of a number of things and one of them was branding which dublin bus spent a fortune on. Before the city imps were introduced all buses in Dublin were green and the unfortunally people regarded all routes as being the same - unreliable, dublin bus set out to change that and the facts and figures speak for themselves that the imps were a success unfortunally in later years they became a victim of their success as they simply could'nt cope with passenger loads.
Marketing is an important tool in any business and bus companies are no different - route branding has proven to be successful in many countries and when the imps came along to dublin they were seen as being diffderent and new, they were bright yellow and stood out among the other ageing buses in the dublin bus fleet, so yes to answer your question - people were attracted to using these new buses on the basis that they were different. I can recall shortly after the 123 became into operation it was not unusual the hear people saying "im getting the imp into town"... the fact that they replaced the word 'imp' with 'bus' proved that dublin bus had succeded in getting peoples thoughts away from their 'old green bus' image. That is good marketing!
"If the Imps were the cause of the renaîssance of bus usage, then their removal would result in the reversal of the attraction of passengers."
Again back to my previous point, they were a victim of their own success, after 3 or 4 years in service it was realised that these minibuses were too small to cater for passenger demand so newer bigger minibuses - midibuses then single deck buses became painted into the city imp livery, these serve some routes well eg. the 121 and 150 but again the use of double deck buses is required on many previous imp routes such as the 130 and 123 because they are needed!
If you look back at the imp routes before they bacame imp operated you will see they have all become successful.
Route 83 was on the verge of being cancelled but now is operating to Finglas on a 25/20 min frequency using double decks.
Route 22A had its northside routing cancelled and only ran an hourly service but the 121 has increased its passenger loadings and frequency.
Route 24 has had its serviced boosted from 40 min peak to 5 min peak on the 123, originally the 24 was a single deck route but now requires double decks because of passenger demand. These are just a few examples.
The fact is introducing imp buses did get people back on buses!
"While very few people like the imps its got to be said they were very effective in getting people back on buses
That’s a very contradictory statement. Very few people like the Imps, but they were attracted to ride DB thanks to the Imps?? Sorry, but that makes no sense."
Sorry let me clairfy that, i was talking about the posters on this board who dont like the imps...
While they dont like them, its clear that the 'city imp' package did get passengers back on buses.
By package im talking about Frequency, Branding i.e. New route Number, Livery, New Vehicles, Hail and Ride and customer focus.
"The only reason that DB is reverting Imp routes back to double-deck is not because of passenger constraints but because of the higher maintenance costs of the Imp buses versus the larger single and double deckers."
I would love to know where you get this from?
You're teling me the maintenance of a Mercedes 23 seater minibus is higher than that of a 72 seater Volvo double deck???
Finally if you want to mention the number of cars on the roads then i suggest you point the finger at Dublin City Council and our government as opposed to Dublin Bus who in fairness i feel do a fantastic job considering the state of the roads in this city.
[posted by: pat]Posted 5 years ago # -
I would love to know where you get this from?
You’re teling me the maintenance of a Mercedes 23 seater minibus is higher than that of a 72 seater Volvo double deck???
Absolutely correct. Just consider their relatively short life on DB’s roster. The Volvo Olympians (well, they have yet to prove themselves, so let’s say some earlier type like the Leyland Atlanteans, either body-style) are built tougher, have more durable components, and are less prone to being shaken apart from daily use than those little Mercedes-Benz “jitneys” (to use a parallel term for them). The higher fuel costs of an Olympian would be diminished in contrast to the higher maintenance and repair costs of your MB minibus, which cannot take as much stress from over-the-road driving, frequent stops, stresses on the suspension from constant loading/unlading of passengers, having tolerances for drive-train and suspension exceeded due to, perhaps, not intent by manufacturer to have standees on all the time as excess weight, etc. You do the maths—it’s simple enough to understand.
Again back to my previous point, they were a victim of their own success, after 3 or 4 years in service it was realised that these minibuses were too small to cater for passenger demand so newer bigger minibuses - midibuses then single deck buses became painted into the city imp livery, these serve some routes well eg. the 121 and 150 but again the use of double deck buses is required on many previous imp routes such as the 130 and 123 because they are needed!
So I take it that you concede that the Imps would not have been needed after all, merely an increase of service frequency. I concur in full—like I said in my last post, “Frequency and reliability sell” and if you diminish both, you diminish passenger faith and they will seek alternate modes of transport. But let us see where our routes are now:
Route 83 was on the verge of being cancelled but now is operating to Finglas on a 25/20 min frequency using double decks.
The 83 was the first Imp “experiment”, and I would say that some of the narrow streets in Kimmage would still require the smaller buses. Right now, during the week, the frequency is every 15 minutes, which is actually down from the 10-minute frequency that was introduced initially with the Imp branding. Combining the route with the 134 going up to Finglas will only serve to exacerbate time-keeping; the route will become more unreliable over time.
Route 22A had its northside routing cancelled and only ran an hourly service but the 121 has increased its passenger loadings and frequency.
Splitting the 22A into the 120 and 121 (after a fashion) did help matters insofar as adding markets (the 121 using its unique routing on the south-side was sorely needed, for example), but as noted, continuing to use double-deckers would have attracted just as many passengers.
Route 24 has had its serviced boosted from 40 min peak to 5 min peak on the 123, originally the 24 was a single deck route but now requires double decks because of passenger demand.
CIE Dublin District had destroyed the 23 and 24 by reducing service frequency over time (going back twenty years, both routes ran as frequently as City Imps—also, the 24 operated via Fairview while the 23 was the exclusive Ballybough bus—both routes were full-time double-deck). All that is happening with the 123 is a partial return to what was, over 20 years ago before CIE Dublin District division surreptitiously threw it away.
I still stand by my statement that it is mostly thanks to DB that the motorcar usage in Dublin city has gone up instead of down. No amount of deceptive re-branding will be able to fix that, and certainly not replacing over-stuffed and falling-apart Imps with double-deckers…Posted 5 years ago # -
put the 220 and 122 together
[posted by: nick]Posted 5 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.