Hagley Road First Sprint Network.

[karl724223]

The only change I would make to Sprint network is that they use standard buses.

New bus lanes, traffic lights priority, etc included in the Sprint routes package would do wonders to reduce journey times we've all been complaining about.

or three axel two door deckers

[Steve3229vp]

Sprint protest

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/commonwealth-games-sprint-birmingham-bus-15272896?fbclid=IwAR3oqO7DR2KGAuqYLevoJpJpF0-CwqBw-ZOgvsykyxD153sd3vMzPKfB1ks

With the new cycle path being built on A34 (city to perry barr), where is the Sprint going to go, there's no space left for it !

[winston]

Sprint protest

https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/commonwealth-games-sprint-birmingham-bus-15272896?fbclid=IwAR3oqO7DR2KGAuqYLevoJpJpF0-CwqBw-ZOgvsykyxD153sd3vMzPKfB1ks

With the new cycle path being built on A34 (city to perry barr), where is the Sprint going to go, there's no space left for it !

The residents are clearly talking sense, another pointless / expensive scheme to a corridor that is more than adequately served by buses. Doesn't TfWM realize that Artics / FTR's were a fad between 1999-2006, that took up too much road & depot space with poor fuel economy. Where are most of those artics now??

[DJ]

The residents are clearly talking sense, another pointless / expensive scheme to a corridor that is more than adequately served by buses. Doesn't TfWM realize that Artics / FTR's were a fad between 1999-2006, that took up too much road & depot space with poor fuel economy. Where are most of those artics now??

Artics do fine over in mainland Europe though it seems, so why can't they do as well over here? If it's a lack of suitable infrastructure, then surely Sprint would solve that.

[Tony]

Artics do fine over in mainland Europe though it seems, so why can't they do as well over here? If it's a lack of suitable infrastructure, then surely Sprint would solve that.

The reason attics do better in mainland Europe is most of the cities are far more compact, so journies are shorter meaning people are willing to stand. Double decks are generally restricted to 4m height as well which isn't perfect for city work.

A 70 seat double deck will nearly always be more efficient than a 50 seat bendy in the UK

[winston]

Artics do fine over in mainland Europe though it seems, so why can't they do as well over here? If it's a lack of suitable infrastructure, then surely Sprint would solve that.

Surely, the fact that there's numerous Citaro artics sat in fields that have been for sale for years at £10k & less with no takers will tell you that artics will never work over here. First have scrapped FTR's at just over 10 years old, some of which were in store for a number of those years. Other than airport / car park shuttles which travel short distances / people accept standing up, they have no place in this country, the double decker will always rule as the biggest people mover.

All of the proposed Sprint corridors already have more than adequate bus services, TfWM would be better spending the money on infrastructure improvements to give buses more priority, ban cars & lorries from certain City Centre streets and build park & ride sites local to major corridors in to the City and serve them with high spec / frequent dedicated buses aimed at reducing congestion.

[Stu]

My personal opinion is that it doesn't matter what the results of any public consultation might say, this is the kind of project that will go ahead anyway regardless.

The decision has been made already, these public consulation exercises are just to give the appearance of some semblance of what is left of democracy in this country.

While there may be some case in favour of Sprint routes elsewhere, certainly with regard to the A34 corridor north of Brmingham, it would appear that most people see nothing wrong with the current express bus routes already provided.

[dingding]

Absolutely!

[V89MOA]

They do say things come in three's, makes sense to have another White Elephant to go with the Metro and HS2!

[don]

They do say things come in three's, makes sense to have another White Elephant to go with the Metro and HS2!

I well recall local press loving posting film and pictures of half empty HS1 regional trains when they first started, claiming a white elephant - they're full to standing capacity these days in the peaks (12 coaches), everyone seemingly willing to pay a surcharge of £5 per return journey for the privilege of travelling high speed for some of the journey - HS2 won't be a white elephant and I seriously doubt the Metro is. It's a god send everywhere else trams operate so I can't see why it would be in the West Midlands. My 20 min tram journey in the London suburbs takes 35 mins off peak by bus when there's  no congestion or traffic disruption - and the trams are packed.

Regarding bendibuses, the history is of course that they went out of favour for political reasons in London purely and simply, and that seemingly put paid to them everywhere else. The alleged operational problems were more an excuse to support the political decision rather than reality. Anyone who used them on the 507 Waterloo to Victoria stations would concur with their ability to hoover up a vast number of passengers in a minuscule space in time. The replacement single deckers needed larger numbers.

One day someone might publish the extra cost to the taxpayer of the 'political' expedients in London to get rid of bendibuses and introduce that 'New Routemaster' - both unnecessary political expedients at an alleged time of austerity!! I'm also not totally convinced on Sprint either though.

The dual door thing in London was also inextricably linked to LTs preoccupation with using entry turnstiles on one person operated buses which they persevered with until the early 70s but required a centre door for passengers to leave. Turnstiles were a disaster and totally unnecessary, as are dual doors in much of London.

[Kevin]

I'm not necessarily against the vehicles themselves, but the way the whole project is being done

The A34 route in question in the Birmingham Mail article has the one major drawback being that it isn't going to be better than the current offering, as the Sprint service will stop in more places than the current Platinum bus routes so will simply be less popular. And despite all the planned priority measures there is no plan to improve the Scott Arms junction, which will be the major stumbling block.

The main reason for the backlash against it on the Walsall Road is that the Sprint lane will take up what people currently think is a parking lane (incorrect, it's a lane for residents to safely reverse out of their driveway without pulling straight into traffic), and that they've been told they won't be able to do the same if it were a bus lane - not entirely sure how true that is. Likewise the rumour that conventional buses will be pushed out into traffic and the segregated lane for Sprint only - not sure how true that is either

[RW]

They do say things come in three's, makes sense to have another White Elephant to go with the Metro and HS2!

Cheer up V89MOA there's a rumour that the need for a red flag to proceed moving vehicles is being re-introduced and that the line of route of HS2 and the Metro is being reconsidered as possible grazing grounds for dinosaurs!

[V89MOA]

I well recall local press loving posting film and pictures of half empty HS1 regional trains when they first started, claiming a white elephant - they're full to standing capacity these days in the peaks (12 coaches), everyone seemingly willing to pay a surcharge of £5 per return journey for the privilege of travelling high speed for some of the journey - HS2 won't be a white elephant and I seriously doubt the Metro is. It's a god send everywhere else trams operate so I can't see why it would be in the West Midlands. My 20 min tram journey in the London suburbs takes 35 mins off peak by bus when there's  no congestion or traffic disruption - and the trams are packed.

Regarding bendibuses, the history is of course that they went out of favour for political reasons in London purely and simply, and that seemingly put paid to them everywhere else. The alleged operational problems were more an excuse to support the political decision rather than reality. Anyone who used them on the 507 Waterloo to Victoria stations would concur with their ability to hoover up a vast number of passengers in a minuscule space in time. The replacement single deckers needed larger numbers.

One day someone might publish the extra cost to the taxpayer of the 'political' expedients in London to get rid of bendibuses and introduce that 'New Routemaster' - both unnecessary political expedients at an alleged time of austerity!! I'm also not totally convinced on Sprint either though.

The dual door thing in London was also inextricably linked to LTs preoccupation with using entry turnstiles on one person operated buses which they persevered with until the early 70s but required a centre door for passengers to leave. Turnstiles were a disaster and totally unnecessary, as are dual doors in much of London.

HS1 only cost £7.3bn, a bargain compared to HS2... It also carries significantly less passengers than the predictions that were made before it opened, despite how full it may look. HS2 has split opinion, many say it will be a godsend, equally as many say it will be a waste of money. Will we truly know until it is done? To begin with I didn't mind the concept but as things have progressed my opinion has rapidly turned. Some people may use it, but I can't see the service making any money, especially when this line already has competing end to end services (which could comfortably compete at much cheaper prices), and the future of the planned connecting HS3 links is looking evermore uncertain by the day, it looks as likely as it ever has that HS2 will just be an isolated line, especially with the prospect of a general election creeping it's way forward any month now...
Every day we are learning more and more of the REAL facts of HS2, rather than the rose tinted spin of the last few years from across the political parties, one member of Theresa May's own cabinet admitting this week the final bill could potentially rise to as much as £100 Billion, granted that is an extreme it is also a demonstration of just how easy it is to lose sight of the point where a project goes from being good value for money to an expensive mistake. Bearing in mind the original quoted cost was £32.7bn, the current estimated quote is £56bn, you are telling me the increased costs will not ultimately end up being passed on to passengers once the service is operational? It would be considerably more than a fiver too! More and more people are speaking out now as the project advances and the real story is becoming clear. They say this project represents good value for money and will be affordable to all, I worry...

The Metro which hasn't made a profit since it opened in 1999, and has done naff all to make public transport better for the majority of residents in Birmingham? Brilliant if you live in the Black Country and enjoy paying higher fares of course! The current bus and railway networks are a far bigger success story and considering that buses are capable of reaching all areas of the cities and surrounding areas, investing in existing infrastructure should be the priority to make things better and easier for passengers. Instead every decision taken by tfwm and the councils over the last few years seems to have the opposite effect! Bus Shelters no longer fit for purpose, interchanges being moved further and further away from each other, Combined cross operator schemes designed to reduce PVR while making things worse for passengers (less seats, buses that give change & buses with live tracking per hour and less buses that accept contactless for all tickets etc.), Coventry has even seen bus lanes removed... The only positive commitment I can think of is the re-opening of the Willenhall and Camp Hill railway lines, at least there is some positive change coming! I also hear tfwm are already struggling to cover the losses on the Metro and they've only had it a few months! I wonder how long it will be before other areas such as tendering start seeing the budgets cut to offset these losses... People will soon start piping up then! It'd be fascinating to compare the reliability of the Metro service now to this time last year too!

As for Sprint all I can do is laugh at tfwm's determination to throw their money away into schemes which offer no benefit to passengers, I wouldn't be surprised if Sprint was axed before even opening just to keep the Metro running! Quite what a bendibus can do that a top spec Platinum can't is beyond me, just means less seats for passengers and a bus with both more parts to go wrong and higher operating costs aswell as slower more cramped journeys for passengers at a higher price! The future, don't make me laugh...

Cheer up V89MOA there's a rumour that the need for a red flag to proceed moving vehicles is being re-introduced and that the line of route of HS2 and the Metro is being reconsidered as possible grazing grounds for dinosaurs!

I wouldn't be putting that idea out there, tfwm might pounce to keep the budget in line...

[don]

I can understand a lot of the frustrations you state. You've mixed a lot of issues in there - however just to take a couple:-

1) Since when was public transport and overall transport strategy intended to run at a 'profit'. That is a presumption rooted in the economics of the early 80s and has little to do with transport Policy (curiously an 'accountancy' based approach - can you guess which party?). Does road investment make a profit? I doubt users cover even the maintenance costs. Transport strategy is more than just running a local route from A to B at a profit (although that may have a part to play).

2) If HS2 costs £100 billion, have you considered the value of the 5 year roads programme - one scheme alone (A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon) is £1.5 billion - just to provide enough carriageway to remove existing queues. The fact is the WCML (along with most radial routes into London) doesn't have capacity for additional high speed use - HS2 and beyond could take a lot of domestic airline passengers (which may reduce the need for increased airport capacity).

3) I'm not sure about international passenger usage of HS1 but domestic usage is extremely high. Basically those services were provided as a sweetener for the residents of Kent for putting up with HS1 going through the County. They must make South Eastern a tidy amount these days!

4) Platinum double deckers would not fair well on a short distance, high volume route like 507 (in fact it's the sort of route Tony was referring to where bendies are successful on the continent). As an aside, I travelled on the preserved 4001 yesterday - what a smooth running and refined double decker - I was not the only person extolling its virtues (several people thinking engineering wise, it's smoother than an MMC or 4001's Trident/B7TL peers).

People in the West Midlands over generations have grown used to certain trunk routes having high traffic capacity - and thus there is high reliance on cars - I think this is a long term issue in the West Midlands and unless there is a form of congestion charging providing initiatives like Sprint may be perceived to simply create unacceptable traffic congestion and not generate the necessary modal shift.

[V89MOA]

You've mixed a lot of issues in there - however just to take a couple:-

1) Since when was public transport and overall transport strategy intended to run at a 'profit'. That is a presumption rooted in the economics of the early 80s and has little to do with transport Policy (curiously an 'accountancy' based approach - can you guess which party?). Does road investment make a profit? I doubt users cover even the maintenance costs. Transport strategy is more than just running a local route from A to B at a profit (although that may have a part to play).

2) If HS2 costs £100 billion, have you considered the value of the 5 year roads programme - one scheme alone (A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon) is £1.5 billion - just to provide enough carriageway to remove existing queues. The fact is the WCML (along with most radial routes into London) doesn't have capacity for additional high speed use - HS2 and beyond could take a lot of domestic airline passengers (which may reduce the need for increased airport capacity).

3) I'm not sure about international passenger usage of HS1 but domestic usage is extremely high. Basically those services were provided as a sweetener for the residents of Kent for putting up with HS1 going through the County. They must make South Eastern a tidy amount these days!

4) Platinum double deckers would not fair well on a short distance, high volume route like 507 (in fact it's the sort of route Tony was referring to where bendies are successful on the continent).

People in the West Midlands over generations have grown used to certain trunk routes having high traffic capacity - and thus there is high reliance on cars - I think this is a long term issue in the West Midlands and unless there is a form of congestion charging providing initiatives like Sprint may be perceived to simply create unacceptable traffic congestion and not generate the necessary modal shift.

I merely replied about the things you quoted me on...

Strictly speaking most public transport projects don't tend to last long term unless they can either pay for themselves/are viable longer term, or without heavy subsidy from other areas as has been the case in the aforementioned projects... The question isn't solely about profit I never said it was, but getting the balance right. If a service has potential to solve issues we face with congestion, poor connectivity, future-proofing our network, brings economic benefits, yields positive results for the majority of the general public, but most importantly came at a price that was good value for money for the taxpayer, then I would welcome it regardless of how it was paid. Thing is in my opinion The Metro, HS2 and Sprint do/will not do this. Wasting silly amounts of money when we are living in a time of austerity with the NHS at breaking point, Police cuts left right and centre & people sleeping rough every night, how can anyone possibly justify spending a potential £100bn on a railway line that may or may not solve a problem, and may end up solely just linking two cities that in fairness are already reasonably well linked up just isn't sensible? I'm also at a loss as to who flies between London and Brum!
My issue is not that the money is being spent, but what it is being spent on, ie things the Majority of the public here do not want and will not use.
For the record you seem to have misunderstood me I think, I did not say HS2 would cost £100bn, I said it's an extreme, it was Esther McVile who came up with that figure just yesterday! I do not know what the final cost of HS2 will be I don't think anyone does! I know I don't believe for one minute it will be good value for money for the taxpayer, we are way past that point now.

With regards to the Platinums I'm at a loss at exactly what it is you are trying to say? NX don't and wouldn't use them on a short route like the 507, they are already in place on the X51 and by all accounts they have done a good job at bringing in more passengers on the route, to the point where the peak frequency has had to be increased. This is exactly the kind of thing that should be being invested in, better buses, freeing up pinch points, putting in place far far more bus priority measures, improving bus interchange and definitely as you say a Congestion Charge. Where exactly is the benefit in undoing all of that good now with slow, cramped and more expensive bendybuses? You mentioned the New Routemaster earlier, but that's exactly the category bendybuses fall into over here, just an overpriced fad that offers less benefits than other products already available that can do a better job for less and keep fares lower.
In short... Don't waste money trying to fix something that isn't broken!!!!