Some of my followers on X (formerly Twitter), BlueSky, and Mastodon may have noticed that I have been posting research such as survey results for the high-spec buses, the New Routemaster, and bendy buses.
I have decided to post some of the text in my article to widen the outreach for researchers.
To start off, a Freedom of Information request to Transport for London (TfL) has published the customer research for the high-specification double-deck buses that are used in relation to the New Bus Vehicle Specification.
Customer experience research for new buses with high-spec features
Request ID: FOI-1422-2425
Date published: 30 August 2024
Please see the attached slide which refers to the customer research we conducted to understand how much customers value the features listed when we conducted the route 63 trial. The slide references features which are included in the bus specification which make up some of the customer research conducted.
 |
| Customer research on high-spec features |
Then we take a look at the Independent Disability Advisory Group (IDAG) on the high-spec electric buses used for routes 40 and 63, where they use the Alexander Dennis-BYD Enviro400EV City.
IDAG Agenda papers for Thursday 21st March 2024
➤ Session 1: New Bus Layout and Design Features
➤ IDAG Clarifications
- Although 250k is a good sum, but presumably it is not enough to cover all procurement, i.e. new buses, retro fits etc?
- How does the team research or reference stuff already learnt in relation to disabled or wheelchair users?
- How do you assess projects against the potential impact on disabled travellers?
- In particular, were buttons assessed?
- Are EQiAs part of the process?
TfL Clarifications & background information (no slides)
- Bus action plan scheduling changes up to 2030. Conducting survey to understand what passengers want and what is needed.
- Our customer journey starts from when they are planning their journey, at the bus stop, before they have even boarded the bus.
- Project started this year.
- In the past we have had access to a small pool of research run quarterly plus annual bus customer satisfaction surveys.
- This is the very early planning and early implementation stage - need to assess what funds and actions are needed. Would welcome IDAG support now and capture your ideas.
- Still forming and scoping project at this stage, but plan to do EQIA.
- Hope to include improvements in new bus production, most changes will be cosmetic and design related. However, more major works would be taken on if changes were affordable, such as flip down seats, individual aircon, etc.
- £250k funding every two years - bit more funding in 2025 £315k.
- Funding trials of new projects, ideas and assess success for implementation.
- Currently looking at retro features, such as on buses 40 and 63, a number of possible improvements have been identified (note 63 is not a Routemaster), for instance
o wood effect flooring and contrast poles, not yellow.
o Digital displays, bus stop buttons on each two chairs and charging points.
o A phone holder that is often mistaken for a bag hook and breaks.
o It also has a skylight, that can make the bus hot.
o Neither have rear windows.
o Wheelchair and buggy space is larger, but not marked on all buses, so priority is not clear.
- Driver intercoms have been assessed this year 2023/24.
- Buttons are one of the things that we’d also like to review.
IDAG Comments
General comments
- Members grateful for the opportunity to input at such an early stage.
- Needs for disabled passengers are usually critical to improving journeys. The changes can have a major impact.
- Having a button on every seat is beneficial to everyone.
- Wooden floor effect doesn’t offer good contrast, introduced as an aesthetic aim or to reduce a slippery floor? Reviewing how was this assessed for disabled use would be useful and possibly replacing with more practical surface.
- Communication for drivers could be better. Drivers do need to be kept safe, but it does need to be improved as the plastic screen makes it difficult for drivers to hear and be heard.
Wheelchair and mobility scooters
- The sooner buses can offer spaces for two wheelchairs the better. It not only provides more space - it also improves mobility.
- Centre poles at top of ramp in the wheelchair space is obstructive, particularly for mobility scooters (although it was noted by the speaker that it could be that it is required for structural purposes).
- The wheelchair bell is not always clearly visible to the people using the space, nor are they in the right place for many people.
- Can there be a better way of engaging communications with wheelchair users and with other passengers to clear the way so that they can exit. Wheelchair users do need to be engaged with everyone so that all passengers understand what is going on, people do get a little distressed and do not know what to do or help in the process.
- The onus shouldn’t be on the passenger and wheelchair/mobility scooter user to inform others. Could there be displays in the wheelchair user to inform people how to assist?
- Could an app or other virtual means be available to enable communication with the bus/driver?
- Buttons in this area should also be suitable for elbows or dog’s noses/paws.
- 24 bus has a large button and the ring has a different tone to alter the driver needs to lower ramp.
- EQiAs are recommended. A light touch at this stage might be useful at this stage. Need to assess how to build positive results into the process, rather than amend further along to identify something that may not benefit the majority.
Visual aids
- There are many factors for consideration for visually impaired, and there is a lot of material available to address this. Recommend reviewing beneficial bus features already in place.
- LCD displays have lesser contrast than the previous screens. Need to assess whether certain ‘improvements’ have met their aims.
- Priority seats often do not have clear views of screens.
- Visually impaired people do not often know which bus is approaching, or connecting to.
- Google search on ‘visual impairment bus’ will provide a lot of information.
- Research on pole colours confirmed that yellow is proven best for all passengers, including visually impaired. Having said that, it was noted that any bright good contrast colour can work, unlike silver or grey poles which are not easy to spot.
TfL Comments
- Will go back to engineers for stats and send to IDAG
- We are rolling out 275 driver mic intercoms. New routemaster and rolling out to other buses.
- Also trialing a third information screen and its positioning on the bus. This could be visible to rear facing wheelchairs.
- Really useful feedback.
Actions Agreed:
- Members to share top friction points for wheelchair users & people who are visually impaired.
- Members are available and you are welcome to come back to group. Lead to be appointed.
Here's the customer research for the three-door, two-staircase hybrid bus named New Routemaster (NRM).
April 2011
Research on the mock-up of the New Bus for London (New Routemaster) to gauge reaction towards the design aspects on the bus April 2011
The mock up of the New Bus for London was very well rated by both stakeholders and members of the general public.
Key findings
• There was a very positive response from the general public and stakeholders to the overall bus design:
– 93-94% liked or strongly liked exterior and only 0-2% disliked it
– 82-89% liked or strongly liked overall design and environment and only 1-7% disliked it
• Other aspects of the design which were particularly well rated were:
– design of the flooring at the rear platform
– the design of the stairs
– height of the seats from the floor
– design of the open platform
• For the 30 specific design aspects 62%-95% gave positive ratings and 0- 16% gave negative ratings
• The only areas where the design was less successful were with respect to the design of the space for wheelchairs/buggies and some seating issues:
– ease of getting into/out of raised seats
– seat personal space
– design of seats facing each other
Transport for London - Travel Experience research:
— CLondoner92 (@CLondoner92) August 31, 2024
Highlights of the research on the mock-up of the New Bus for London (New Routemaster) to gauge reaction towards the design aspects on the bus (April 2011) pic.twitter.com/1g2VCndR7r
Links to the documents:
Research summary
Presentation
Results for the New Routemaster consultation:
TfL Ref: FOI-2450-1920
The New Bus for London consultation ran between 16 December 2011 and closed on 31 January 2012. This consultation received 106 responses via the online questionnaire. Of this 100 respondents had viewed the bus, 4 had not, 1 viewed it online and 1 did not answer.
The results of the closed question analysis of this consultation are as follows:
· How often do you use buses in London?
Response % of respondents that selected this response
A) Once a week 16%
B) Once a day 14%
C) More than once a day 25%
E) Other 43%
Not Answered 1%
· What do you think about the overall design of the bus? - The open rear platform:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 9%
2 5%
3 8%
4 22%
5 49%
No response 7%
· What do you think about the overall design of the bus? - Three door boarding:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 10%
2 6%
3 11%
4 20%
5 42%
No response 11%
· What do you think about the overall design of the bus? – Exterior styling:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 12%
2 5%
3 9%
4 25%
5 41%
No response 8%
· What do you think about the overall design of the interior? - Lower deck seating layout:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 11%
2 8%
3 20%
4 27%
5 26%
No response 8%
· What do you think about the overall design of the interior? - Seat pattern:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 8%
2 6%
3 8%
4 32%
5 37%
No response 9%
· What do you think about the overall design of the interior? - Lighting:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 7%
2 5%
3 8%
4 26%
5 41%
No response 13%
· What do you think about the overall design of the interior? - Colour Scheme:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 8%
2 5%
3 7%
4 18%
5 52%
No response 11%
· What do you think about the overall design of the interior? - Two staircases:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 8%
2 2%
3 8%
4 18%
5 53%
No response 11%
· What do you think about the overall design of the interior? - Accessibility:
Respondents could choose an answer on a sliding scale of 1 (don’t like), up to 5 (Like it a lot)
Score % of respondents that selected this score
1 7%
2 3%
3 7%
4 27%
5 42%
No response 14%
The open question “Do you have any other comments or suggestions relating to the new bus?” was responded to by 93 people.
June 2012
Research of in-service perceptions of ambience on board the New Bus for London compared with conventional double decker buses
Methodology Face to face interviews with 221 customers on the NBfL and 529 on conventional double decker bus serving the same route (Route 38)
Abstract
Pre-launch customer assessment of the NBfL was very positive, but in-service research was required to understand how customers perceive the NBfL in operation, and how it compares with conventional buses. While both the NBfL and the conventional bus performed well, the NBfL consistently gained higher ratings. The NBfL has the ‘wow factor’; it received a high proportion of ‘top box’ ratings on all measures. The conventional bus performed better for temperature and ventilation (but there were known issues with the NBfL air conditioning during fieldwork) and lighting.
AMTS assessments by wheelchair users were also conducted to complement this research – see job number 12017.
Key findings
Both the NBfL and the conventional bus generally received high ratings from customers. However, the NBfL performed better than the conventional bus in almost all areas. The NBfL generated a ‘wow’ factor, with customers giving a high proportion of ‘top box’ ratings: for example, 35% ‘strongly like’ the overall design and environment of the NBfL, compared with 11% for the conventional bus.
The NBfL was rated significantly higher for the amount of vibration, smoothness of ride and engine noise – around nine out of ten customers were satisfied with these aspects of the NBfL, compared with around two thirds for the conventional bus. Customers also rated the design of facing seats, the mix of forward and rear-facing seats, the fabric design, and layout for standing passengers more highly on the NBfL. Customers valued having two sets of stairs on the NBfL, and the rear platform caused very few difficulties during the trial.
The conventional bus was rated more highly than the NBfL for lighting, temperature and ventilation. However, there were known issues with the air conditioning on the NBfL during the fieldwork period. The vast majority of customers on both buses were satisfied with lighting levels; however the conventional bus scored slightly higher; most likely due to the fact the lights were on during the day, whilst the NBfL lights are not on all the time. Timetabling restraints meant that no after-dark assessment was possible, so views on lighting reflect day time only.
The conductor received very high satisfaction ratings (89 out of 100), with 49% of customers giving the rating the conductors’ behaviour and attitude as 10 out of 10. Customers generally understood that the conductor’s role is to ensure safety when using the rear platform; very few thought that the conductor was there to check tickets. Most customers could not suggest any improvements to the NBfL; where they did, these tended to relate to ventilation and windows.
Transport for London - Travel Experience research:
— CLondoner92 (@CLondoner92) September 2, 2024
New Routemaster in-service ambience
Highlights of the research of in-service perceptions of ambience on board the New Bus for London compared with conventional double decker buses (June 2012) pic.twitter.com/ti23hIMEjw
Links to the documents:
Research summary
Full report
September 2013
New Bus for London Route 24 awareness campaign
To assess the performance of a communications campaign to raise awareness of the introduction of New Bus for London to route 24
Methodology
Face to face interviewers in August 2013 with 291 adults aged 16 years or older who use Route 24 at least two days per week. Respondents were recruited disembarking from buses at bus stops along the route.
Abstract
TfL’s New Bus for London (NBfL) Route 24 awareness campaign achieved a high level of recognition among route users, and successfully communicated the main messages around the introduction of the NBfL and the features of the new bus. Route 24 users recognised the benefits of the new bus, and appreciated the work TfL is doing to improve bus services in London.
Key findings
The campaign was seen by three fifths (61 per cent) of regular users of Route 24, with the poster being the most recognisable element.
Nearly all route users were aware that the NBfL had been introduced to the route (96 per cent), with a similar proportion aware that it has three entrances and exits (95 per cent) and conductors on board (97 per cent). Of those aware that there is a conductor on board the bus, ‘ensuring passenger safety when boarding’ was cited most frequently (85 per cent) as falling under the role of the conductor. However, a fifth (21 per cent) incorrectly thought that collecting fares falls under the conductor’s role.
A high proportion (86 per cent) of Route 24 users agreed that the NBfL is accessible and convenient, and 71 per cent agreed that the campaign successfully communicated this point, indicating that the accessibility benefits were well understood. Over two thirds (71 per cent) of route users agreed that the NBfL uses green technology and that it is a new London icon.
The reputation of London Buses was well perceived among Route 24 users, with 79 per cent agreeing that ‘bus services in London are really improving’ and 84 per cent agreeing that ‘TfL is investing to improve bus services’.
Transport for London - Customer research reports:
— CLondoner92 (@CLondoner92) September 3, 2024
New Bus for London (New Routemaster) route 24
To assess the performance of a communications campaign to raise awareness of the introduction of New Bus for London to route 24 (September 2013) pic.twitter.com/0v4ECW2SAh
Links to the documents:
Research summary
Full report
Bendy bus
From TfL’s press release:
1st August 2003
Bendy buses win passenger approval
New research from London Buses today revealed significantly higher levels of customer satisfaction with bendy buses than conventional double decks or Routemaster vehicles.
Two new bendy bus routes are planned to serve north and north west London in the next year.
Interviews with more than 700 passengers on routes 436 (Lewisham to Paddington) and 453 (Marylebone to Deptford) two months after the services started asked passengers to score various aspects of the new service and old service.
On both routes the 18 metre-long bendy buses came out top on all of the performance criteria. The survey also found that over a quarter of single ticket holders on Routemaster services used the roadside ticket machines to buy their tickets.
Commenting on the findings London Buses Director of Strategy and Policy Dick Halle said:
“I’m delighted that the innovative bendy buses are proving a hit with passengers on all counts.
“Given their success in speeding up journeys and providing more comfortable journeys for passengers we are planning to introduce bendy buses on at least two more routes in the next year. In addition, all buses across the West End will be speeded up by the pay before you board system which starts this month.”
The bendy buses can carry up to 140 people, at least 60 passengers more than a double deck bus and as in many cities on the continent passengers can use all three doors for boarding and alighting. Tickets must be purchased in advance from roadside ticket machines.
Bendy buses are due to be introduced on route 18 Sudbury to Euston in November 2003 and route 149 Edmonton Green to London Bridge in Spring 2004.
The pay before you board system aims to slash the time all buses in the West End spend at stops, as the few remaining cash passengers will need to buy tickets before boarding. The scheme starts on 23rd August and is expected to cut boarding times by more than 10 per cent.
More than 300 ticket machines will serve all the stops in the West End used by 60 routes to enable passengers to buy £1 single journey or £2 one day pass tickets before getting on the bus. Most of these will become operational over the next couple of weeks and can be used as soon as they are switched on.
#Throwback #Year2003 - Transport for London press release:
— CLondoner92 (@CLondoner92) August 25, 2024
Bendy buses win passenger approval
"New research from London Buses today revealed significantly higher levels of customer satisfaction with bendy buses than conventional double decks or [AEC] Routemaster vehicles." pic.twitter.com/42ROEC82kU
Bus User Survey 2008 - January 2009
5.8 Bus Type
Day bus passengers
Over two-thirds (68%) of day bus trips take place on double-decker buses, a figure that has risen from just under half (49%) in 2003. If Routemaster buses are categorised as double-deckers in the 2003 dataset, the increase in double-decker usage is less dramatic at 7%.
The percentage of trips taking place on articulated buses has also seen a sharp rise over the last five years from 1% to 7% whilst conventional single-decker buses represent a lower percentage of trips (26%) than they did in 2003 (38%). This can be attributed to the rise in the number of routes that use articulated buses.
Conclusion
For high-spec buses, it’s kind of disappointing there has been some disapproval for the sun roof at the top deck and wood effect flooring for the interior. These features have been used on various buses throughout the United Kingdom to improve customer satisfaction.
As for the New Routemaster, of course there was high satisfaction for the conductor to enable the open platform, which allowed people to enter and exit the bus between stops.
The original purpose of the New Routemaster was to reinstate the conductor and a rear open platform like the vintage AEC Routemasters, but they were only used on six routes (9, 10, 11, 24, 38, and 390) till September 2016.
In my previous article, I have researched through the consultation reports and comments released by FOI respondents and shown the number of comments requesting more New Routemaster buses and tram-style buses.
Certain design features of the New Routemaster are seen on buses throughout the UK and certain parts of the world, such as Hong Kong and Singapore.
The survey involving the bendy bus was taken before the Oyster card was launched on 30 June 2003, and roadside ticket machines have no longer been in use since the 2010s.
Bendy buses have been useful for increasing capacity and improving accessibility both for wheelchair, pram, and pushchair users.
Suggestion
London needs a new chapter for providing bus services. I have suggested in my previous articles and on social media that there should be a new double-deck zero-emission bus with improved accessibility features, including three doors, two staircases, two wheelchair spaces, a stylish design, high-spec features, etc.
I'm not advocating for the relaunch of the New Routemaster project; I'm advocating for a more improved accessible bus with high-spec features to make travel by bus more attractive, accessible, and convenient.
 |
| My suggestion for a new accessible zero-emission bus for London and elsewhere |
I would like to see a new survey and a consultation by TfL to make a comparison of the design features used on the New Routemaster and high-spec buses, then to combine the best of these for a new zero-emission bus.
I would like to see the reinstatement of bendy buses, especially for express bus routes such as the super loop and routes that use trunk roads, with suitable road safety and bus priority measures. Of course, open-boarding buses have always been prone to fair evasion, but there are other transport services in London that have "proof-of-payment" ticketing procedures, such as the Docklands Light Railway, trams, and various underground and railway stations without ticket gatelines. Also to add, many cities around the world already have bus services with open boarding and a "proof-of-payment" ticketing system.
The next generation of bendy buses will be zero-emission and may utilise the latest Bus Safety Standards.
My ideas also apply to bus services throughout the United Kingdom and beyond, they do not have to be exclusively to London.
I have more suggestions to improve public transport from my previous articles linked below:
Why is Creativity in Public Transport Important, Including Bus Route Planning and Branding?
Suggestion: I Believe It’s Time for a New Regional Transport Body for the South East of England? (This will require change to the legislation in Parliament).
I Believe TfL Should Reform The Travelcard Agreement To Offer Smart Flexible Ticketing Options
You are welcome to share my ideas to raise awareness to improve public transport; this can include engaging with your local elected official, such as a Councillor or a Member of Parliament.
I invite you to follow me on X by searching for @CLondoner92 or by clicking on the direct link to my X page here. I'm also on BlueSky and Mastodon.
