North East Buses

(27 Jul 2024, 2:11 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]The H being staff only is a ridiculous waste of a service.

Why?

(27 Jul 2024, 2:11 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]Presumably Regent Centre to Freeman will be a Stagecoach route or the GCT 653 replacing the 553 to restore the Regent Centre to Battle Hill link. The H being staff only is a ridiculous waste of a service.

It's really not. It's a vital service for the staff, quick and easy as they just jump on showing their staff pass so not slowed down by passengers who don't know where they're going, how to pay etc. It is regularly busy as well and you'll often see doctors/nurses working while on it so having the public on would stop that because of GDPR, plus if no seats then standing doesn't lend itself to reading or writing.

isnt the 47 used by RVI staff to get to where the |General hospital was as they have to park and ride from there? they can use it for 0 too. Does the ?? 36 go that way and would they be able to use that for free??

(27 Jul 2024, 4:33 pm)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]isnt the 47 used by RVI staff to get to where the |General hospital was as they have to park and ride from there?  they can use it for 0 too.  Does the ?? 36 go that way and would they be able to use that for free??

The 36 doesn't go that way, I don't think.

Newcastle General Hospital is served by the 10/11, 12, 32/32A, 37/38, 39/40, 684, 685, 941, X82 and X85.

Free travel could be arranged for RVI staff.

(27 Jul 2024, 4:52 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]The 36 doesn't go that way, I don't think.

Newcastle General Hospital is served by the 10/11, 12, 32/32A, 37/38, 39/40, 684, 685, 941, X82 and X85.

Free travel could be arranged for RVI staff.

32/32A would be the only service from CAV-RVI(-City Centre) that is of use and probably worth paying for a Free Travel Zone.

(26 Jul 2024, 7:32 am)Shrek wrote [ -> ]It's all part of their sustainable travel policies though. I guarantee H will stay the same as it is now, I suspect there'll be a Regent Centre to Freeman link in the end. The 47 however is the one I could see being scrapped.

Aye no arguments, just guess it depends if they have the money to spend on it though.

On a side note does anyone know what the loads are like on the 553, it's a bus I've never actually seen in service even known it goes past places I go? I assume not very busy most the time though.

(27 Jul 2024, 8:19 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aye no arguments, just guess it depends if they have the money to spend on it though.

On a side note does anyone know what the loads are like on the 553, it's a bus I've never actually seen in service even known it goes past places I go? I assume not very busy most the time though.

Loadings are decent enough on the 553/653. The 653 is probably the busier service though. I don't see the 553 often, and it only requires a minibus so could be operated by GCT but I think it's an important service.

(27 Jul 2024, 8:25 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]Loadings are decent enough on the 553/653. The 653 is probably the busier service though. I don't see the 553 often, and it only requires a minibus so could be operated by GCT but I think it's an important service.

Aye that's fair, must say it was a surprise when they upgraded it to a Pulsar. Seemed a bit overkill.

(27 Jul 2024, 8:48 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Aye that's fair, must say it was a surprise when they upgraded it to a Pulsar. Seemed a bit overkill.

Some journeys, especially around rush hour could get really busy with people standing. Throughout the day it gets steady loads. I guess once they removed the Battle Hill end which required the minibus due to the roads it went down, it probably could just about justify the pulsar.

(27 Jul 2024, 8:25 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ] The 653 is probably the busier service though. I don't see the 553 often, and it only requires a minibus so could be operated by GCT but I think it's an important service.

It's literally operated by a branded Pulsar and takes full seated loads as a minimum most mornings?

So the prediction is the 47 is withdrawn and won't be replaced (possibly Free Travel Zone on the 32/32A, but no evening service like there is on the 47, so might need to be reinstated for at least some of the route.) and the 553 will be operated by a different operator, probably SNE or GCT or could also be withdrawn and not replaced (Free Travel Zone on the 6/7?).

So, I'm guessing nothing is replacing the 47 or the 553 next month as nothing has been registered?

PB0002032/624 Registered (Short notice)
ARRIVA NORTHUMBRIA LTD

Route: Regent Centre to Freeman Hospital

Service number: 553

Service type: Normal Stopping

Effective date: 01 Sep 2024

PB0002032/625 Registered (Short notice)
ARRIVA NORTHUMBRIA LTD

Route: Newcastle to General Hospital CAV via via RVI

Service number: 47

Service type: Normal Stopping

Effective date: 01 Sep 2024

(08 Aug 2024, 11:45 am)GuyParkRoyal wrote [ -> ]PB0002032/624 Registered (Short notice)
ARRIVA NORTHUMBRIA LTD

Route: Regent Centre to Freeman Hospital

Service number: 553

Service type: Normal Stopping

Effective date: 01 Sep 2024

PB0002032/625 Registered (Short notice)
ARRIVA NORTHUMBRIA LTD

Route: Newcastle to General Hospital CAV via via RVI

Service number: 47

Service type: Normal Stopping

Effective date: 01 Sep 2024

The 47 and 553 are cancelled from next month aren't they? Why are they registered with effect from 1st September 2024?

Apparently Park and Ride facilities at the General Hospital/CAV are being removed, and that's why the 47 is withdrawn. It's on the Arriva website now.

(08 Aug 2024, 12:23 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]The 47 and 553 are cancelled from next month aren't they? Why are they registered with effect from 1st September 2024?

Apparently Park and Ride facilities at the General Hospital/CAV are being removed, and that's why the 47 is withdrawn. It's on the Arriva website now.

HMMM Im not sure about this as the crocodile  who works at the RVI requested ON Site parking but was told no and offered Parking at the General and that was only a couple of weeks ago?

https://www.arrivabus.co.uk/latest-news/...ar-sept-24

Changes are here. Weirdly it does not mention they are running the 392 or the fact the 47 is withdrawn according to it

(08 Aug 2024, 12:52 pm)Aaron21 wrote [ -> ]https://www.arrivabus.co.uk/latest-news/...ar-sept-24

Changes are here. Weirdly it does not mention they are running the 392 or the fact the 47 is withdrawn according to it

47 is mentioned. 392 and 553 aren't, weirdly. 

The 47 is listed between the 44 and 306 changes.

(08 Aug 2024, 1:05 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]47 is mentioned. 392 and 553 aren't, weirdly. 

The 47 is listed between the 44 and 306 changes.

I know the 47 is mentioned. I'm saying they are saying it's withdrawn

(08 Aug 2024, 1:15 pm)Aaron21 wrote [ -> ]I know the 47 is mentioned. I'm saying they are saying it's withdrawn

You said weirdly it doesn't mention they are running the 392 or the 47 is withdrawn. But it does mention it's withdrawn from 30th September. Extended by a month interestingly. Presumably that's when the Park and Ride facilities are removed.

If they’ve put a reg in for the 553 to continue, why would they need to mention anything? As the public would see no difference

(08 Aug 2024, 8:47 pm)NMS26222 wrote [ -> ]If they’ve put a reg in for the 553 to continue, why would they need to mention anything? As the public would see no difference

I've only noticed since there is a new registration for the 553. Maybe a temporary contract.

Yep the CAV is closing as land is owned by Uni and they must have plans for it. Not sure where all the cars that use it are going to go though??

(09 Aug 2024, 6:58 am)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]Yep the CAV is closing as land is owned by Uni and they must have plans for it. Not sure where all the cars that use it are going to go though??

There was a period (no idea if it still applies) where they were using the car parks at SJP.

The bigger question probably needs to be asked about why the vast majority of employees for possibly the biggest employer in the city, aren't using public transport and why they're needing all of these spaces.

(09 Aug 2024, 12:58 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]There was a period (no idea if it still applies) where they were using the car parks at SJP.

The bigger question probably needs to be asked about why the vast majority of employees for possibly the biggest employer in the city, aren't using public transport and why they're needing all of these spaces.

Yep they still park in the multi storey at leaze's end.

The ex croc/fun police has a permit for St James.  She could ( and did) get the 29 at 7am to get her to work at the rvi.  She cant get the 8am one to work as it get her there too late and the hospital wont budge on 830 start. There also the big deal breaker that the she's waited for the first bus at 7 and its not turned up and like STORK said in another thread an hourly service is no good to anyone.

Also it takes her about 15/20 minutes to get to carpark with short walk to work in car.  It takes up to an hour on the 29 and then she has wo walk up the hill to work.  Same on way back

She also got a % deduction on her network one but still pays over 100 a month!!!!

(09 Aug 2024, 1:42 pm)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]Yep they still park in the multi storey at leaze's end.

The ex croc/fun police has a permit for St James.  She could ( and did) get the 29 at 7am to get her to work at the rvi.  She cant get the 8am one to work as it get her there too late and the hospital wont budge on 830 start. There also the big deal breaker that the she's waited for the first bus at 7 and its not turned up and like STORK said in another thread an hourly service is no good to anyone.

Also it takes her about 15/20 minutes to get to carpark with short walk to work in car.  It takes up to an hour on the 29 and then she has wo walk up the hill to work.  Same on way back

She also got a % deduction on her network one but still pays over 100 a month!!!!

You two still not sorted it out I take it? 

But either way, yet another example of a car being on the road that wouldn't need to be if public transport worked for the owner.

(09 Aug 2024, 4:22 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]You two still not sorted it out I take it? 

But either way, yet another example of a car being on the road that wouldn't need to be if public transport worked for the owner.

Nood.

True but it's part electric maybe bspi funding cod have sent a 21 through kibblesworth the straight to gateshead on a1.

These new 306 timetable changes are annoying but must be to do with

A, Not many people riding the 306 to Whitley
B, Loss of time on 306 causing 308 to be delayed
C, Possible major road works coming up soon

But here is what I've figured out from the timetable via Traveline

Every hour journey will terminate at Tynemouth
Every hour journey will terminate at Marden Estate
Every hour will terminate at Whitley Bay

Still gonna be Every 20 minutes but all 3 journeys will terminate at different points

(12 Aug 2024, 11:43 pm)Aaron21 wrote [ -> ]These new 306 timetable changes are annoying but must be to do with

A, Not many people riding the 306 to Whitley
B, Loss of time on 306 causing 308 to be delayed
C, Possible major road works coming up soon

But here is what I've figured out from the timetable via Traveline

Every hour journey will terminate at Tynemouth
Every hour journey will terminate at Marden Estate
Every hour will terminate at Whitley Bay

Still gonna be Every 20 minutes but all 3 journeys will terminate at different points

If the 306 was curtailed in Tynemouth and a half hourly X38 ran doing:

Marden Estate (clockwise loop) - Marden Road - Hillheads - NT Hospital - Billy Mill - all stops to St Peter's Park** then non-stop to Newcastle Civic Centre, 

That would only use 1 more bus than the current PVR whilst:

- Giving Marden residents plenty of links to shops and restoring a direct NT Hospital link

- Relieving pressure of the 306/308/309

- Faster journeys to/from Hillheads, Preston Grange, Chirton, West Chirton, Silverlink and nearby parts of Howdon & Battle Hill

Heck....even grounds to technically use BSIP funding if recent grants are anything to go by. Only issue is who would run the service. Could Arriva run from Blyth interwork it with the X10/X11 or GNE operate from Percy Main? Only downside unless GNE did driver reliefs in the Marden Estate, the changeover at Norham Road (where GNE/Coastline used to change when they ran the 308). Maybe it could instead be interworked with the 307 & 309 to reduce the need for driver reliefs en-route.

** Wallsend Dene could be served.....but bus would need to be able to quickly re-join the Coast Road and join into nearside lane westbound otherwise would not be safe.

The X21/22 and 35 have variations registered to start on 03 November. I believe these are the result of significant work in recruitment over the past few months, and a subsequent huge improvement in driving staff numbers.

From the same date, the following also have variations:

X7, X8, X9, X10, X11, X14, X15, X18, X30, 415, and 460.

(22 Sep 2024, 7:41 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]The X21/22 and 35 have variations registered to start on 03 November. I believe these are the result of significant work in recruitment over the past few months, and a subsequent huge improvement in driving staff numbers.

From the same date, the following also have variations:

X7, X8, X9, X10, X11, X14, X15, X18, X30, 415, and 460.

Will be quite surprising if the X21/X22/35 is re-increased to every 20 mins given the pending launch of the ABTRL.

Arriva must know something we don't about future viability.

Although quite sone walk, people thought the opening of Horden Station would reduce passengers on GNE's X9/X10 around Peterlee as well as the improved frequencies MBoro > NCL. Turns out now that the X10 is at bursting point, with only the lack of suitable vehicles (or GNE's p*** poor route planning around Derwentside) stopping a return of the X9.

Maybe the ABTRL won't have a determential impact on Arriva's Ashington network.