FUTURE TENSE

The future of bus transport was looking pretty bleak a few decades ago. The buses were ageing, they were noisy and smelly and in terms of city route buses they provided the minimum standards of comfort as well as lacking convenience in many cases. Today however we stand on the cusp of some of the biggest shifts in bus technology the industry has ever witnessed, from the way buses are powered, to how we use them, how they are controlled and even how big they can be. C&B takes a look at where the bus industry is headed.

Buses haven’t really changed the way they have operated since the early 1900’s, however now due to technology, transit authorities and operators are faced with the opportunity to create a new and agile experience for the bus industry.

With technology, conditions are perfectly poised for a more agile and efficient approach to running buses.

While trunk route buses may get bigger, with larger passenger capacity, many buses in the future will be smaller, more agile and efficient, while importantly, they will be there when you need them—just-in-time, not just-in-case.

On-Demand Bus technology is yielding benefits to passengers, operators and public transport authorities with increased efficiency, lower cost of operations and expanded service coverage. All of which, is providing us with a technology-enabled sustainable pathway for the future of buses.

Public buses have been a constant in the transport landscape for decades. Most bus services today operate the same way they did in the early 1900s. They run on fixed timetables and fixed routes—essentially functioning on a principle of ‘just-in-case’.

The operating proposition for most bus services has and remains generally, we will operate on a specific route at a specific timetabled route, so long as it is on time and it is there just in case you need it.

In the age before mobile phones and instant communications, this approach was entirely necessary and was the only practical option. Effectively, the just-in-case model has instilled the idea that bus services should aspire to rigid predictability. As long as the bus is running to its timetable, passengers are getting a good service.

However, research shows that the justin-case model is a highly inefficient way to run a bus network. The following statistics illustrate the extent of the problem:

In the USA the National Transit Database, found in 2016 that the average urban transit or route bus had 39 seats but carried an average of just 11 people. That number may be different in Australia but

we doubt it is very different. Certainly anecdotally, and without the benefit of accurate data, we believe that many Australian route buses would have similarly low average levels of passenger load.

How many times have we stood watching large city route buses weaving their way down narrow back streets with half a dozen people onboard in the middle of the day? Well plenty actually, in fact about once every 45 minutes every day of the week near us.

To rub salt into that gaping wound research by the U.S. Bureau of Transportation Statistics has confirmed that given those low passenger loads, the average city bus requires 20 per cent more energy per passenger than the average car.

The ‘empty bus’ problem is a symptom of an outdated model, and low bus loads explain why buses use about as much energy per passenger kilometre as the average SUV.

Most passengers who regularly use public bus services will attest to the fact that buses are very often severely overcrowded, or almost completely empty.

As a result, any efficiencies that buses might deliver when they are running at full capacity are wiped out if they are running empty at other times. But with the advent of smartphones, the old model is no longer the only option. We can now use our phones to make a travel request—we do it all the time for services like Uber. People are far more comfortable booking transport with their phones than they were in the past and complex machine learning algorithms have become adept at computing the optimum routes for vehicles looking to service the demand for trips.

Passengers can lodge a request for a trip from point A to B at a specific time and bus operators can analyse the demand for travel. This is known as On-Demand, or a Demand Responsive Transport service.

This emerging model can ensure that a passenger’s requirements are met by a bus at the right location, at the right time. The value proposition for passengers is clear, even if they need to pay a slightly

higher fare.

The On-Demand Bus model means a personalised travel experience with a bus when a customer wants it, from the location of their choice. It also will ensure no more overcrowding because on-demand vehicles stop taking bookings and passengers when they reach capacity.

We have all suffered the frustration of standing for inordinate amounts of time at a bus stop, only to have three buses turn up at once. That is eliminated by on demand because each passenger is allocated a spot on a specific bus, a factor that gives passengers more confidence to plan trips effectively.

The certainty of where and when buses will turn up is delivered by booking via smart phone, which also gives passengers the ability to track the live location of the bus as it approaches, and that will also improve the passenger experience.‍

For public transport funding bodies, the key value proposition of an on-demand model is the ability to unlock more efficiency from the network—essentially, moving more passengers with less funding.

Potential benefits of On-Demand Buses include, less road damage, particularly in suburban back streets because the buses will be smaller.

Another benefit will be the ability to service areas that were previously inaccessible or commercially unviable on fixed routes. Real-time data on the patronage of buses, mobility demand, and trip outcomes will also flow immediately to operators to enable better planning by transport authorities. Already data from tap and go card payment systems like the NSW Opal Card and Victorian MyKi have already given authorities detailed data on usage that they have never had access to.

The Smart Phone apps also enable Instant feedback from passengers, which will further help to hone services to meet expectations and needs.

The On-Demand Bus model will also bring a significant value proposition for transport operators themselves, whether public or private, with better asset utilisation and higher patronage per kilometre of travel. Operating costs will also be reduced, as buses will no longer be running empty and revenue will increase as new passengers are attracted by the efficient new service model. ‍So, is it out with the old, in with the new? Not exactly.

Nothing can replace the efficiency of a good old express bus service, running regular, high volume, fixed routes in high-

demand corridors.

However, the On-Demand Bus model can complement existing public transport services by providing an excellent method of transporting passengers to mass transit hubs from the outer suburbs.

In addition, a demand-responsive bus offers a more efficient prospect for moving people around in areas with lower passenger volumes, during off-peak periods, for passengers with accessibility requirements and for remote communities.

Smartphone market saturation and related technologies have led to a paradigm shift in the traveling public’s expectations. Fixed, timetable-driven services, previously the norm, are now in the process of becoming the exception, with on-demand mobility emerging as a significant part of future models.

An On-Demand Bus network could unlock significant benefits for passengers, operators, and society as a whole.

Importantly, this nascent transport mode could also attract people away from their cars to deliver a positive outcome for the environment. Leading transport operators are recognising the possibilities of technology and beginning to adapt their delivery models accordingly.

As well as on demand services the prospect of zero emission powertrains promise less noise, no emissions and lower operating costs with less maintenance and better reliability.

The appearance of battery-powered electric buses in cities will represent a technological milestone for the workhorse of mass transit.

As we said earlier, buses have barely changed in concept since the early part of the 20th century and when they took

over from tram services in many cities and private cars became the preferred commuter transport.

Give or take the addition of airconditioning and a few other tweaks, the passenger experience on buses has been fairly basic and spartan, but buses stand poised to reclaim top spot in the urban mobility food chain.

From the inside, electric buses appear little different to conventional diesel buses, save for the fact that in some instances they can be slightly roomier, because the electric motors take up less space. Once the bus moves away from the kerb you immediately feel the faster acceleration and in most instances less vibration, not to mention less noise.

There is little doubt electric buses will be a total game changer because battery power will turn bus-riding into a truly green mode of transport.

China, which has to manage the burden of a massive population and how to move it, is now leading the world in electrifying its bus networks. It is estimated that China now hosts 99 per cent of the world’s 385,000 electric buses, with some Chinese cities, such as Shenzhen for instance, now have fully electric bus fleets.

While China has started to face the weight of emissions on its economy and global climate change, the rest of the world is catching on as well.

The largest U.S. based manufacturer of electric buses, Proterra, a company which has Daimler as a major shareholder, has sold buses to, or is negotiating orders with 70 U.S. transit agencies, or approximately 10 per cent of the nationwide total.

Like our own metropolis of Sydney, where NSW Transport minister Andrew Constance has vowed to change the entire diesel route fleet to electric by 2030, both New York City and Los Angeles plan to completely transition their fleets to electric in the coming years.

All of this is happening as the economics are finally starting to add up for the electric bus.

Initial purchase costs are are still $250,000 to $350,000 higher than for diesel buses, but maintenance and energy costs are lower, leading to a lifetime investment that is comparable, or cheaper.

“It checks all of the boxes that you would desire in terms of a future state of mass transit,” said Ryan Popple, CEO of Proterra.

Popple reckons that the current generation of electric bus models achieve an 80 per cent reduction in fuel costs compared with equivalent diesel buses.

That is against a background which is seeing both energy efficiency and battery technologies continuing to improve. Proterra recently drove one of its new 12 metre buses more than 600km on a single charge, breaking the world record for the longest distance travelled by any electric vehicle without recharging.

Then there’s the very significant fact that these vehicles do not contribute to streetlevel air pollution. “You can get a lot of people who are interested in helping the environment to ride the bus, because it’s a much more direct argument that riding the bus is the

“IT APPEARS THAT THE MOST PROMISING TERRITORY FOR AUTONOMOUS MASS TRANSIT, AT LEAST IN THE NEAR FUTURE”

right thing to do,” Popple said,

While there have been a number of issues in the USA with self driving cars involved in fatal accidents, the future may be brighter for autonomous buses.

There is a general consensus among experts that autonomous trucks and buses will be on our roads before any mass volume of autonomous cars, because primarily routing is predictable, and easily programable.

Overseas several trials are already being piloted in urban environments, of level 4 autonomous shuttles, without a driver or steering wheel, including in Las Vegas and Stockholm.

Many of these pioneering autonomous buses, including models from Navya and Olli, are also electric and Proterra is currently piloting lower level autonomous features as well.

It appears that the most promising territory for autonomous mass transit, at least in the near future, could be deep in the suburbs, where there is less traffic, fewer pedestrians, and, for better or worse, fewer potential conflicts with bus driver unions.

While the mini shuttles and on demand buses will likely become the new normal in our suburbs, particularly small eight to twelve passenger driverless shuttles future autonomous buses are likely to be on the small side.

Little buses are easier to drive, for human and robot alike, and they make more sense in low-density suburbs, where a full-sized bus is seldom justified.

By eliminating the costly overhead of the driver, AV shuttles could provide more frequent suburban service at a lower expense, making transit a more viable option for communities that are now poorly served by buses.

If there’s a 12-person little vehicle coming down the street every 5 minutes versus a 40-person vehicle coming every 20 minutes, then you’ve got more capacity in that corridor and a much better experience for people and in a lot of Australian cities that could really make a huge difference.

These minibuses might function more like ride-hailing vehicles, roving around a dedicated area, rather than a specific route. Especially in lower-density areas.

The reality is buses have got to become more dynamic because the competition is rising from transportation network companies and one-way car sharing.

In Arlington, Texas, smaller mass transit vehicles have been put into service in a program called Via Pilot, which replaced a traditional bus route. The program is citysubsidised and had 5,000 riders in the first month of operation, scoring a 97 per cent approval rating from passengers.

On the other side of the size spectrum are dense areas with lots of people moving in the same direction, where high-capacity light rail and metros are probably better suited, but may not be economically feasible. The cost blow outs of the Sydney Light Rail, not to mention the massive costs of the Metros being built there, may reduce the desire of governments to invest in such big infrastructure in the future, if other more flexible and cheaper transport solutions come to the fore.

“THE ONLY WAY YOU CAN IMPROVE CONGESTION WITHOUT EXPANDING ROADS IS TO INCREASE PASSENGER CAPACITY”

One increasingly popular solution is super-high-capacity buses, including double-deckers, such as those employed on Sydney’s B-Line on the Northern Beaches, and extra-long, 20metre metro buses like those being employed in Brisbane.

According to Proterra’s Ryan Popple, as traffic increases in dense CBDs choked with Ubers and Lyfts, cities will be trying to get as many bums on seats in as few vehicles they possibly can, because the only way you can improve congestion without expanding roads is to increase passenger capacity.

These high-capacity buses will be more effective if they have their own dedicated lanes, or, even better, their own separated right of way, as in the most advanced bus rapid transit systems, like Adelaide’s O-Bahn and the aforementioned Brisbane Metro.

They could also blur the definition of what exactly a “bus” is.

Proterra has received a request for a 27 metre monster bus, which Ryan Popple described as “basically a land train,” while a Chinese bus maker is currently developing a trackless tram, a rubbertyred tram like articulated bus, designed to autonomously follow tracks simply painted on the road. No need for laying tracks, or even placing wires in the road, its guidance systems capable of reading the painted line and maintaining its path of travel.

The other advance in transport tech that might not be as sexy as vehicle design, is ease of fare payment.

This can play a huge role in whether someone chooses to take a bus and whether that bus is able to complete its journey efficiently.

In Australia most states now have a unified cashless travel card system like Opal and Myki.

Most will tell you this has revolutionised public transport usage, making it more attractive and much, much easier to use, not to mention less expensive and easier to track and budget. That happens on both sides because as we mentioned earlier, authorities are now able to tap into better more qualitative data on when, where and how people are travelling around our cities.

In the U.S., yes that bastion of technology and the latest and greatest, they’re still in the wild west when it comes to cashless transit payments and travel cards.

Between fumbling for cash in odd increments, transit cards, and paper transfers, coming up with the bus fare in most American cities can be an infuriating process. It is good to know there is another area where Australia is ahead of the US of A.

Tap and go travel payment cards benefit transport systems in other ways that help transport efficiency. Tap on cards allow passengers to hop on from all doors, speeding up boarding procedures because they don’t hold up the whole bus paying the driver a fare or when their notes or coins are rejected by a payment machine, time after time. The time saved in boarding is a massive boost to keeping transit buses moving and getting passengers to their destinations quickly and efficiently.

The key for the US may be via credit card companies rather than city transit authorities initiating payment card systems. Visa is working with transit agencies, as they have done here, to allow riders to pay their fares with the tap of a debit or credit card.

Transit apps, like Masabi, which recently entered a partnership with Uber, also enable multi-agency transit payments via smartphone.

The reality is that buses could learn a lot from ride-hailing companies because the thing that Uber and Lyft have is really revolutionary removing the anxiety that exists from not knowing whether you’re going to be able to get a ride, not knowing how long it’s going to take the ride to get there and not knowing exactly how much it’s going to cost.

If bus operators could make all of this information as transparent as Uber and Lyft do, they’d win more passengers.