Volvo Service - Suggestions to BMTC!

It is necessary for BMTC to mark ALL busstops. Even a simple pole like the one in the picture is sufficient. Even if it there is a possibility of the stop being shifted its only a bolt on pole which can be moved. It can be really unpleasant experience without signs. Maybe the drivers dont stop at most places because there is no sign indicating there is a stop.

Syed,

In BMTC parlance, schedules is the number of buses on a route and not trips.  

First off - the whole assumption here is that we need a Volvo service and that is not under question. 

One of the principles that BMTC needs to think of is that if a Volvo route is there then it needs to run at a particular frequency.  No point having 4 trips a day with 1 bus.  335E is successful because it runs frequently and along an important corridor.  

BMTC cannot please everyone with 224 buses.  ITPL and E-City are good destinations which should be served with Volvos (people working there can pay a premium)

.Here are some suggestions.

a. V402D - 1 bus!!!.  Might as well club this with 285M and terminate it at Yelahanka.  Volvos till Dodaballapur prima facie makes very little sense.  Unless there is strong data that suggests a lot of traffic beyond Yelahanka.

b. Club 600KA, 500N and 500K into 500K and let it run from VJN to ITPL via Ring Road.  Ideal if we can route it somehow via Koramangala by bringing it along Hosur Road and joing back Ring Road via Sarjapur Road.

c. Club V319C into V315 and terminate at KR Puram.  Having another bus from ITPL via OM Road to Majestic somehow makes no sense.  Or have 319C only

d. Terminate V365 on weekdays and non-holidays at Arakere/IIMB so that frequency can improve.  It will serve BG Road.  On holidays extend it to National Park. 

e. Club V360B and V356M and V356 N/S and stop at Attibele.  Check if people really go past E-City a lot.  Or else club with V356N (Narayana Hrudayalaya)

f. Club V500A and V500D and run it from BTM/Jayanagar 9th block/Jayadeva to Hebbal (if really needed).  Who are these people who take this route?  Can't imagine.  Maybe this can be put to better use on a different route

g. Club 201G and 201R. 

h V333P, V333T and V333Z and V331A can use some rationalizing.  With Big 10 now running from Hope Farm side, do we need all these?  Should they all run from Mahalaxmi Lyout to HAL or ITPL?

h. Need one route - Domlur to E-City via IRR and Koramangala.  Koramangala does not feature very prominently on Volvo.  Neither does Indiranagar.

Srivathsa

 

 

Hi,

Plenty of duplications as pointed out by Srivathsa, which could very well be rationalised as mentioned above.

BTW, the Volvos on 333Z/333T have very poor patronage beyond  KBS. The ITPL-KBS sector does well. BMTC's idea was probably to connect residential areas to ITPL, but it seems to have flopped for some reason.

Regards,

~~~~

Manish, Nagarbhavi.

Hello Srivathsa,

I cant agree even slightly to many portions in your post. Following are my observations:

 (Quoted portions in Italics)

b. Club 600KA, 500N and 500K into 500K and let it run from VJN to ITPL via Ring Road.  Ideal if we can route it somehow via Koramangala by bringing it along Hosur Road and joing back Ring Road via Sarjapur Road.

### 600 KA runs from Vijayanagara to Electronic City Phase-2. How on earth would passengers be benefited it this service is merged with 500K? 

500N and 500K take different routes between Agara and Jayadeva Hospital. 500N is operated via Sarjapur Road Junction -> Madivala Market -> St Johns -> Forum -> Dairy Circle -> Jayadeva Hospital.

500K runs via ORR -> Silk Board ->BTM Layout -> Jayadeva Hospital.

Merging all these into one will surely not make sense. 500N usually operates only during peak hours, and I have never seen these buses go empty

d. Terminate V365 on weekdays and non-holidays at Arakere/IIMB so that frequency can improve.  It will serve BG Road.  On holidays extend it to National Park. 

### Only about 25-30% of the crowd gets down at Arakere. I stay close to Arakere, and travel daily from Shantinagar to Arakere. These bsues have to go atleast till Gottigere. These services have to be operated for longer time - not just 8 am to 6 pm. The first bus HAS to leave from Gottigere atleast by 0700, and the last bus to Gottigere should not leave KBS before 2000. Frequency of atleast 15-20 mins should be maintained during morning/evening peak hours.

f. Club V500A and V500D and run it from BTM/Jayanagar 9th block/Jayadeva to Hebbal (if really needed).  Who are these people who take this route?  Can't imagine.  Maybe this can be put to better use on a different route

### V500A and V500D are kind of "milk runs" for BMTC. There are lots of IT institutions on the way, and these buses run full at most times. In fact, services on this route is very irregular. They should work towards making these services more efficient and punctual.
--
Thanks,
Binai Sankar
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Switch to Public Transportation, Save your city

You have put too many things in your list Syed. Should have provided the suggestions that you think are most critical (relatively speaking). When providing big lists, it is good to provide priorities as well. Plus, I think you have mixed up topline (get more customers) and bottomline (reduce operating costs) suggestions. Good list there, but some items are too generic (how to define "most desirable routes" and "reasonable fare"?) , and some are not Volvo specific or non-feasible for Volvo service (like - very high frequencies - as it is, its argubale if BMTC needs to invest too much in Volvos).

As we learned during our interaction with Ashwin Mahesh, there are a lot of basic nice-to-dos that are known, but practical difficulties limit them. Usually, people look for suggestion that provide creative fix for practical probems. For example, how would BMTC act to "ensure that its Volvo service takes most desirable route"? The whole deal itself is in figuring out the desirable routes! Big10 is an effort in rationalizing routes to make some of them very desirable by design.

Or take up this one "fare must be reasonable and affordable to majority of the city population" Who decides, and how is it decided what is "reasonable" and "affordable" here!?

Didn't mean to belittle your comprehensive suggestions Syed. But I wanted to call out why some members may not have jumped on the thread to add on more suggestions.

So anyway. My list by priority will be

• Public feedback and data driven decisions on timing and frequency. Decisions should be data or real consumer survey driven. BMTC will do well to engage a professional agency to do a user need and traffic pattern survey on the routes it has identified to be profitable for Volvos
• Work on bus exchange points to promote the culture of "bus changes". Two needs here - 1) info on important connection points or bus junctions to connect with Volvo or Big10 services 2) work with BBMP to improve these big bus junctions. Bus stops are already coming up at many places, work a bit more to mark out pedestrian points near bus stops, some focused work to keep bus stops clear, information boards showing major routes that come to that stop.
• Last mile options - encourage tech parks and big companies to run shuttles to and from the nearest Volvo route.
• Club some Volvos routes with Big10 (OMR Big10, 319c, Varthur Road Big10, 333P and 335E), may be once every 20 mins, a Big10 is Volvo, could be higher frequencies in morning and evening on some routes.
• Got to be clear on "positioning" of Volvo service. Don't push Volvo for city wide connectivity, it may not be possible to promise an upper tier service that will take you anywhere to anywhere, not needed, and not feasible. Volvo started as "commuting alternative" for car users, it should stick to that - commuter chariot for select industrial areas. But even there, promise end to end connectivity via "connection" with other BMTC services. What I mean to say is - have trunk routes to ITPL, E-City, Airport, but promote "connecting" to these trunk long-haul routes via Big10, upcoming local shuttles etc. going down the path of "I will provide Volvo from every corner of city to ITPL or Airport" is not possible, not doable.

SB,

Same thought came to me.  We cannot please everyone staying in all parts of Bangalore with 225 or even 400 buses.

Need to clarify with BMTC the objective of Volvo!  Is it to add a profitable segment to their services?  Is it to offer an alternative to car/bike users and get them off the road? 

Which are the key areas that they want to serve?  Put a priority - ITPL, E-City, Vijayanagar, Jayanagar, Yelahanka, Srinagar, Koramangala.   Areas should be decided by some sort of data around commuter preferences, willingness to pay and destinations.

Maybe then define some  key hubs - (they also need to be able to do maintenance here - heard that from Prof Mahesh).  Maybe - KBS (!), ITPL, E-City, Vijayanagar, Yelahanka

Have routes interconnecting these hubs

e.g. Yelahanka to E-City via Marathahalli.   say 5 hrs return trip including break - 25 buses - average - 12 min frequency. 

Vijayanagar to ITPL - via ORR and Marathahalli - 4 hrs return trip - 20-24 buses - 10 min frequency

KBS - ITPL - 335E - leave as it is - 30 buses - 10 mins

KBS - E-City - 356(?) -4 hrs return (take elevated road?) - 24 buses - 10 mins

Yelahanka to ITPL via Hebbal, Cantonment, Ulsoor Lake, OM Road - 4 hrs return - 15 buses - 15 mins

Domlur to E-City via Koramangala - 4 hrs return - 20 buses 12 mins

140 buses used up for these.

Remaining 100 buses use for maybe V18, V201, V36, V402, V252 and local loops to connect nearby areas.

Srivathsa

 

 

This comment has been moved here.

Volvo Consoldiation with changeover points is needed to increase the frequency. For example, all the Vijaynagar bound Volvos can come till Banashankari where a TTMC is going to be set. From Banashankari, we can have buses to Bannerghatta, ITPL Via  Jayanagar and Koramangala, ITPL via Ring Road, Electronic City.

Same way 201R can be run from Srinagar till Banashankari from where they can catch buses.

But, one flaw that I see is the reluctance from people to changeover the buses because of the environment in the bus stops. This makes it unattractive compared to a single bus journey.

Yajaman - I think the Volvo services are positioned with both objectives in mind - to add a profitable segment as also to offer an alternative to car /bike users to get them off the streets.

Why are Indiranagar & Koramangala not having sufficient Volvo services ? There are a few volvos passing on Indiranagar 80 ft road (due to Metro construction on CMH & 100 ft roads) as also some along Hosur rd (opposite Forum mall), but none on Koramangala 100-ft rd or 7th main (BDA complex rd) or along 80-ft peripheral & the other 80-ft rd perpendicular to it (the one in front of Police station & Raheja arcade). These can be potentially good catchment routes.

As you recommend, I have a suggestion for two possible routes :

1) From Byappanahalli along OMR, Indiranagar 80-ft &100 ft roads (this will avoid Metro construction site/s & Metro routes later), via Domlur & IRR & through KML peripheral 80-ft road, Sarjapur rd, road west of Agara kere, via HSR Layout (ORR) to join Hosur rd at Silkboard, then onwards to E-city along Hosur rd.

2) From Kadugodi via Kundalahalli on old Airport rd, turning into Lower Agaram rd & via KML 80-ft peripheral road (past passport office, NDDB), thence on KML 80-ft rd (past Police station), Kalyan mantap rd onto KML 100-ft rd to 7th Main (turn at BDA complex), thence onto Sarjapur rd, road west of Agara kere, HSR layout (ORR), Silkboard, Hosur rd & onwards to E-city.

These services will cover both Indiranagar & Koramangala well. Both routes will also go past the upcoming Koramangala TTMC. The 1st service will skim the eastern parts of Koramangala, whilst the 2nd one connects Austin town & Viveknagar also whilst slicing through inner parts of Koramangala. Also, there will be direct conncetivity between ITPL & E-city with Volvo services.

Mr.Murali - Yelli Iddira, as discussed with BMTC the other day is a must & SMS/s must be made chargeable to the commuter. Could you throw some light as to why this actually failed ? I have a feeling that the company that sposored itwere losing money since it was a free service & BMTC might have been tardy paying their bills (?). You would know better.

Yajaman /IDS - Enjoyed your non-volvo related exchanges - thanks for the entertainment !

This comment has been moved here.

[off-topic comment, moved to a thread of its own - moderator]

These posters (as in above comment) may not attract pass-holders, so why not accept the pass-holders into the Volvo, by asking them to pay the differnce amount?

     So if point A to B is priced Rs8 on Suvarna and Rs12 on Volvo, I may not be interested to take a Volvo even if its the first bus I get after coming to the bus stop. So, to tempt me into the Volvo, why not allow me to pay the difference Rs4 (or charge a rupee extra for the 'upgrade') ad ttravel in the Volvo? Such a move will help reach out to a large number of peopleusing daily passes. Its a lot more easier to attractexisting bus users into Volvos and convincing car users to opt for buses.

    Such upgrades are not be difficult to implement, with the electronic ticketing units used in Volvos.

-Srivatsava V

Here's a serious anomaly in our government's policy on public transport, notwithstanding the stress laid on it in the NUTP.

Out of the Volvo's cost of Rs. 75 Lakhs, taxes account for Rs. 24 Lakhs - one third. Public transport is not only not subsidized, but is on the contrary heavily taxed.

Private transport on the other hand gets heavy subsidies, like the  Nano which is subsidized to the extent of Rs. 50,000 according to Sunita Narain of the CSE. See this article. http://www.downtoearth.or...

Hi,

@ Srivathsa,

On such mixed fleet routes, the BMTC should put up posters/ads that compare the rates of different services on a particular route.

Excellent idea. Even stand-alone posters of the fares should help, since most commuters already know the fares of the ordinary Parisara Vahini buses. In fact, I spotted the fare-list of 201-R put up on a wall at the C.V. Raman Nagar bus stand. More such initiatives would go a long way in dispelling the myth of the Volvo as an outrageously expensive mode of transport - in most cases, it's cheaper and better than an auto.

@Das,

One thing I find deeply troubling is that the poorer ordinary bus user is subsidizing the richer Volvo user to a crazy extent.

One crucial correction in the stats you have mentioned. The Volvo's capacity is 70, not 35. Thus, any calculation made on the basis of the earlier figure must be slashed by half.

@Naveen,

Out of the Volvo's cost of Rs. 75 Lakhs, taxes account for Rs. 24 Lakhs - one third. Public transport is not only not subsidized, but is on the contrary heavily taxed.

That is stunning, to say the least. It should be public transport that is subsidised by private, not the other way round. Just forgoing the tax (or shifting it to Nano and other cars) will result in the Volvos becoming cheaper by a third - which will go a long way in improving profitability.

Sadly, BMTC's approach even to its Volvo users is lopsided - there are plenty of them around, and yet BMTC does not seem to care for all of them equally. Thanks to its warped approach, BMTC might just be running the risk of losing even its existing Volvo commuters. Read this to find out why.

Regards,

~~~~

Manish, Nagarbhavi.

I think an earlier post that I had made is relevant here. Hence, I am reproducing it verbatim below :

Unlike international practices, public transport, mainly bus services in India being a low-income country, have generally been governed by low fares at low levels of service. One type of low-quality service was acceptable to all then & even now, except for the better off cities (such as Bangalore, Mumbai & Delhi), public transport is generally based on these principles.

As a result, there had been leakages – keeping fares low to assist poor travelers & low-income groups involves a leakage of benefits to better off passengers. The lower the fare, for a given level of service, the higher is the leakage. Conversely, for a given fare, increasing the level of service will also increase leakage. Most public bus operators in the country are thus, deep in the red, with increasing subsidies.

BMTC though, since bifurcation from KSRTC has been managing without subsidies, & with low pilferage of revenues. The low fare /low level of service had been producing a flight to 2-wheelers & cars. This in turn had produced a very heavy load on the road system. BMTC’s network continues to be diffuse & tries to connect the maximum number of origins & destinations to limit transfers to just one – SBS or Shivajinagar or KR Market (implying low frequency of service on individual routes).

The fare /quality issue has finally begun to be tackled – BMTC has introduced differentiated services (Volvo Vajras & lately, Suvarna skip-stop services with reserved seats /without over-crowding) to try to capture the quality-seeking passengers, with higher service /quality levels at higher fares.

But, is it too little too late ? The flight to private vehicles continues unabated & might intensify if the current pace of motorization is not halted & restraining measures are not pushed into place.

No matter how excellent the supply side of public bus transport is, the service will only have as much quality as the traffic conditions allow. The city does not seem to want to introduce public bus transport priority measures on city roads, & appears to be pinning it’s hopes on the Metro-rail, still several years away, & with limited coverage. The consequences of this approach might be negative for both, road-based bus operations & the Metro-rail. A low-cost, effective option is thus being neglected & only other expensive ones, like Metro /LRT /Mono remain on the table. At the very least, this means that fewer corridors can be provided with prioritized public transport modes.

praja.in/bangalore/blog/naveen/2008/05/01/public-bus-transport-%E2%80%93-the-fare-quality-nexus

I agree that a meeting with BMTC is required. Das's analysis is quite revealing & expensive volvo services on certain non-productive segments (such as Hop-On/Off) is indeed questionable.

It appears that there is diversion of profits from ordinary operations as also other revenue streams to keep these volvos running. The answer is to cut the flab & operate services where they cover their own costs, nothing more.

I believe the bus cost is a diversionary conversation which doesnt solve the purpose of providing timely bus services. You solve nothing by focusing on the type of bus. I would encourage taking up the cause of priority bus lanes instead which will lead to something fruitful. You may be able to convince the BMTC and BBMP to hasten the process and try out bus lanes the Big 10 corridor which anyway has been suggested in ABIDe report.

@Das,
I am not sure where you got the numbers for doing the comparison between the Volvos and ordinary buses, particularly regarding the Capital cost and Fuel consumption. The numbers for fuel consumption for Volvos I have seen in some websites is around 2.5 kmpl. Also 12 lakhs seems to be too low for a regular bus. My understanding is that an Ashok Leyland bus chassis itself costs upwards of 16 lakhs and if you add the cost of the body it would bring the cost closer to 20 lakhs.

By the way private operators who provide long distance intercity services are able to run their Volvo services profitably just by charging a 30% to 40 % premium over their regular non A/C buses with just the air-suspension. These private operators have no reason to subsidize their Volvo operations from their regular operations, and the ticket prices should reflect their operating costs. This leads me to believe that the capital cost is just one part of the cost of running these buses. There are other significant costs such as cost of fuel, salaries of staff, maintenance etc. From a total cost of operation, the Volvos do not appear to be more than 50% more expensive compared to ordinary buses, by looking at the ticket prices at least for long distance operations. 

If the above comparison holds true for the intra-city low floor Volvos also, BMTC should be able to run a profitable service even at the current ticket rates.

 

I think Rithesh has said what we had all been thinking for quite some time now. Perhaps it may be a good idea to pursue the PIL previously thought of  ( praja.in/gyan/draft-pil ).

It may not be sufficient to just make BMLTA the umbrella authority. Through the PIL, we will also have to push for the institution to have staff with sufficient know-how & capability & eventually build capacity to make recommendations to other entities & regulate various PT issues & infratsructure development, such as BRT.

Further, I think we need to include the point about PTs being given tax exemptions & benefits since they are an important social service sector. This of course may involve further discussions & expert opinion from lawyer/s.

Syed,

Could you read the rest of my comment and see if it makes sense.  My point was that BMTC is spreading its Volvo resources way too thin across to many routes.

Srivathsa

@skumaras,

The technical numbers are from the BMTC web site, Volvo site, etc. The costs are from a senior BMTC officer.

Fuel consumption

A press article mentioned that the Vayu Vajra has an average fuel consumption of 2.73 kmpl.

I read that the average for the Volvos in the city is 1.7 kmpl. Remember that the Vayu Vajras mostly run on the highway. The difference between highway and city consumption is typically 25 %, so this is reasonable.

Cost of buses
The cost data is from the BMTC itself, from a personal conversation.

Ultimately, the BMTC is the best judge of their profitability. Even if they are not profitable but the BMTC's long term plan takes care of this, there's no issue here. Sort of like airline companies charging low rates and running at a loss for a couple of years to increase load factor.

This thread seems to have gone into hiding!  Any updates on this?  When do we meet BMTC next?  What are the next steps?

Srivathsa

Be it a premium service or the common man's service, the attitude of BMTC staff is the same. Buses never operate on time and is hardly a medium that one can depend on for their daily travel.

BMTC on itself claims that the revenue it earns from the Bannerghatta Road service is almost equal to what it earns on its IT sector routes (Electronic City/ITPL). However, the service on this road leaves a lot to be desired. There remains of gap of about 45 minutes between buses during peak hours, and one can see buses one-behind-the-other during noon hours. 

BMTC website claims that the route (V365) had 12 buses on it. The frequency on this leaves a LOT to be desired. 

BMTC introduced two more Volvo service on the Bannerghatta Road route - but were designed as if they wanted it to fail. The first is V368 - the first bus leaves from BN Park at 0930, and the last bus from Shivaji Nagar at 1630!!! Which office goer is being targeted by this service? The frequency - one approximately every hour (there are/were only two buses). 

The other is 411K - BN Park to ITPL. The first bus from BNP at 1230 and last at 1630! Do office goers travel at this hour???

It is evident from the timing itself that the corporation wanted the services to fail and not succeed.

When is BMTC changing its attitude?

See my blog for one of my very bad experiences in a BMTC Volvo. I continue using their services since I am major fan of public transport despite all its ills. But I am very confident that BMTC would scare me away from Public Transport very soon.

--
Thanks,
Binai Sankar
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Switch to Public Transportation, Save your city

May i know whether the Gold pass holder is allowed to travel in Vayu Vajra till Hebbal or Yelahanka

319C comes to KRpuram. BMTC had stopped the service some time back.. But, they seem to have started it again.. Recently, I found 319C a few times on the road..