One-man Buses the Answer
Page 50
Page 53
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE solution of many of the problems facing public transport operators lies in the use of oneman-operated buses. Apart from the lqwer operating cost of this type of vehicle, as against the standard doubledecker, the higher wages that it is possible to pay the driver-conductor place transport on a more competitive basis for manpower with other industries. Its use would nearly halve the industry's demands on the labour market, and would halve the number of employees at present required for spreadover duties.
These conclusions were reached by Mr. W. L. Russell, B.Sc., engineer and manager, Dundee Transport Department, in a paper: "The One-man Bus: the Operation, the Vehicle, the Man," which he read to the annual conference of' the Scottish Road Passenger Transport Association at Turnberry, on Wednesday.
Year's Experience Mr. Russell's paper was based on the experimental use by his undertaking of a crush-load single-decker, which was placed in serviata just over a year ago. A standard 30-ft.-long, 8-ft.-wide A.E.C. Regal Mark IV underfloor-engined chassis, with a maximum capacity of 44 seats, was chosen because it most nearly approximated to the American design of one-man-operated vehicle.
It was fitted with a special body built by Walter Alexander and Co. (Coachbuilders), Ltd., having 39 seats facing forward, and accommodation for 20 standing passengers. This carrying capacity was only five short of that of the standard double-decker of the • period (56 plus eight standing).
The ratio of platform staff charges per hour per passenger between the crush-loader—where the driver-conductor was paid an additional IS per certhl—and the standard double-decker, was 4s. per hour (0.815d. per passengerhour) for the former, and 6s. 11d. (I.3d.) for the latter, a difference of 2s. lid, per hour (0.485d.) in favour of the crush-loader. This was 58 per cent. less than the " platform " cost of a double-decker.
Staff Charges Down The effect of this percentage reduction upon the platform staff charges generally found in municipal operation was to lower the average figure of lid, per mile to 7d. per mile, with a corresponding reduction in the costs of welfare and superannuation from Id. per mile to 0.63d. per mile.
In 'addition to the slightly lower carrying capacity, the crush-loader also had the disadvantage, against the double-decker, of reducing operating speed. "Since speed of operation affects, in one way or apother, practically all the individual charges that make up the total working costs, any reduction in average speed would prove a not inconsiderable disadvantage," commented Mr. Russell.
TI16 One example of the effect of average speed on vehicle requirements was that on a round trip of 20 miles, a drop from 12 m.p.h. to 10 m.p.h. in scheduled speed called for an increase from five to six vehicles to maintain the same frequency. That represented a 20-percent. addition to costs.
"At what point any lowering of the operational speed cancels out advantage in one-man operation is extremely difficult to determine, since a considerable number of variable factors become involved," said Mr. Russell, A rough indication could be given by plotting the total working cost per hour for one-man operation and two-man operation against average speed.
At 10 m.p.h., a double-decker cost approximately 28d. per mile to run, against about 23.5d. per mile for crushIoaders—a difference of 4.5d. per mile. The reduction in speed could be as much as 3 m.p.h. before the costs of operation reached parity.
Loading Times
Investigations into the loading and unloading times of single-front-entrance 44-seat single-deck buses showed that an average of 2 sec. was taken by a passenger boarding a vehicle, and 3 sec. in alighting.
On peak-period journeys, on a service running at an average of 10 m.p.h. and carrying an average of 30 passengers per mile, standing time at stops represented 20 per cent. of the total time taken for a journey. Of this 20 per cent., at least half was wasted while intending passengers waited for others to alight.
Similar investigations with doubledeckers revealed that it took an average of If see. for each passenger to board and 1 sec. to alight. This reduced standing time at stops to an average of 11 per cent.
This factor was more important as the number of passengers per mile increased, and for city operation, where the average number of passengers per mile over the. day generally fell between 10 and 20, it was imperative that the minimum time be spent in loading and unloading.
It was, therefore, decided that the experimental vehicle should have one door for loading and another for
unloading, and the sacrifice of some seats was considered justified.
It was also decided to operate the crush-loader as a duplicate to a regular service at peak periods only, because under such conditions the traffic tended to be in one direction, and the percentage of terminal passengers would be higher than normal. There was also less likely to be adverse public reaction to standing.
Experience of 15,000 miles of operation had shown that the standard running times could be maintained with ease. A comparison with figures for double-deckers showed that at a scheduled speed of 10.5 m.p.h. the simultaneous loading and unloading of the two-door crush-loader took 3 see,, against 2+ sec. for the double-decker. Average speed between stops was 17 m.p.h. for the crush-loader and 14 m.p.h. for the double-decker, the number of passengers per mile being 8.65 and 10.8, respectively.
Flat 3d. Fare On the services concerned, there were only 2d. and 3d. fares. Because of the method of fare collection used, the crush-loader operated at a flat 3d. fare, and it was found that passengers were willing to pay this for a 2d. stage rather than wait for the normal service hu3.
Fares on the crush-loader were collected by an American Johnson automatic machine, adapted to accept a 3d. piece (silver or bronze), 6d., or 1s., which were recorded as one, two or four units respectively. Money passing through the machine was available to the driver for change, and he was responsible for the equivalent money value of the number of units (3d.) recorded.
The passenger dropped his fare into a slot, the action starting up the machine. The coin was deposited on to a moving belt, where it was visible to the driver for about 2 sec. before passing through the recording mechanism. No trouble had been experienced with the unit during 130,000 operations.'
Advantages of System Against the disadvantages of the system, said Mr. Russell, were advantages such as the elimination of the cost of tickets and waybill extensions; a possible reduction in the number of inspectors needed, and high speed in fare collection.
As all passengers paid on entering and payment was observed by other passengers, losses were likely to be negligible or, at the worst, would not exceed the amount saved by the advantages stated, estimated at 0.5d. per mile, or 2 per cent, of total working cost.
Although not contending that the Johnson system was ideal, or that flat fares were practicable or desirable. Mr. Russell thought that the speed of fare collection by automatic machine was essential to one-man operation where the density of passengers was over eight per mile. Otherwise, financial advantage was lost in lower speed of operation.
While employed on the crush-loader. the driver qualified for an additiopal 1'4 per cent. on his basic rate. " Assuming, however, that the operator [as Mr. Russell prefers to style the driver] is employed full-time on the job, it is possible for him to earn, at present rates, an average of £8 .16s. per week without working any overtime."
This average wage compared favourably with that paid in other industries. and should provide some compensation for the irregular hours of work peculiar to transport.
Since drz experimental crush-loader was placed in service, a Ministry of Transport memorandum had been sent to certifying officers, slating that a minimum floor space of 300 sq. in. must be provided for each standing passenger in a crush-loader. This had reduced to
18 the number permitted in the Dundee bus, but Mr. Russell said that it would be possible to fit another two seats.
He believed that the Government could help still further by increasing the present maximum permitted length of 30 ft. to enable single-deckers to be built to carry more than 70 passengers. [The vehicle used in the experiments on which this paper was based was
described in The Commercial Motor
on April 9, 1954.]