(30 Aug 2013, 1:54 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]4986 broken down at beamish entrance
When i left on the 28 it was smoking not badly but a fire engine turned up... dunno y
trying to get rid by burning them
(30 Aug 2013, 3:02 pm)danpick wrote [ -> ]trying to get rid by burning them
LOL, I really have to praise the one i got to Beamish it did well and i enjoyed the ride.. however the one on the way back... that was a different story..
(30 Aug 2013, 11:41 am)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]Article about the Coaster
http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/nort...in-5817163
It says that the residents of Harlow Green have "won". Well, they have in the sense that the direct link to Newcastle is to be restored, but the frequency is reduced from 20 to 30 minutes.
Before the 24 was revised, when it ran under the Angel brand, the residents had a direct bus to Newcastle which ran every 10 minutes. It was also more reliable than what the Coaster is likely to be.
The Coaster had some serious reliability issues when they ran to Kibblesworth and Wrekenton first time around. You can almost write the Facebook complaints now when the changes come into force.
(30 Aug 2013, 2:44 am)ADLEnviro wrote [ -> ]Your not searching properly..........
https://www.tan.gov.uk/tanen/vosa_selfse...gID=246831&txtBusRegNo=PB0002400/419&txtLicenceId=98132&txtLicenceNo=PB0002400
Was going to try and explain how registrations and N&P are put together, but better option is just take a back seat, this forum will die a death if people don't stop telling the insiders there wrong.
I've looked at that link, all it confirms is that the service is number 4 from 20th October. Would welcome you showing me how to find that it says its been numbered 4 since 2010, and explaining how registrations & N&P are put together as its a mystery to me.
(30 Aug 2013, 8:23 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]Wish it was as easy in every job to take something that was working, change it and balls it up, then undo your changes and claim it as a success!
Don't be too surprised to see it get changed again in March or so when they realise its not working...
(30 Aug 2013, 8:23 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]Wish it was as easy in every job to take something that was working, change it and balls it up, then undo your changes and claim it as a success!
Is it just me or have they replaced 3 buses an hour with 2 buses an hour? and then that Councillor is bigging it up as some success story? Does anyone have the PVR figures for the 24 and the 1 handy pre-change? And what the proposed PVR will be post-change?
(30 Aug 2013, 8:28 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]Is it just me or have they replaced 3 buses an hour with 2 buses an hour? and then that Councillor is bigging it up as some success story? Does anyone have the PVR figures for the 24 and the 1 handy pre-change? And what the proposed PVR will be post-change?
Is it on that Nexus spreadsheet?
(30 Aug 2013, 8:23 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]Wish it was as easy in every job to take something that was working, change it and balls it up, then undo your changes and claim it as a success!
Mr Hill has quite an interesting CV - lots of qualifications and recognition of his skills, but very little industry experience.
Just googled 'Graham Hill Go North East' and it is all there.
(30 Aug 2013, 8:36 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Is it on that Nexus spreadsheet?
Very good point.
Service 1 has a peak PVR of 12.0
Service 24/24A has a peak PVR of 3.0
Looking at the timetable at a glance, I'd say the PVR for the new service 1 is 15.0.
(30 Aug 2013, 8:28 pm)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]Don't be too surprised to see it get changed again in March or so when they realise its not working...
I'm sure they would do another highly scientific, representative passenger survey to support any future innovative improvements... I'd bet next will be the (re)severing of the direct link to Newcastle, while maintaining the decreased frequency.
(30 Aug 2013, 12:17 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Even though the highways department have signs up stating the road is closed?
I wasn't in the area over the ashes weekend, so wasn't able to clarify whether they were diverted - but the road closure signs were up then too.
Yip, the signs were up saying that the road was closed, but the day before the game started there was extra signage went up which said no through road except buses - so the 71's & 78's all ran to their usual route and they will again tomorrow !
Pulse Renowns 5160/61/62/63 have all been transferred to Saltmeadows.
Yellow Renown 5164 has also been transferred from Percy Main.
The southern section of Cuthbert Street in Gateshead, between Bensham Road and Derwentwater Road will be closed between 8am and 4pm on Sunday 1st September to allow for soft patching and remedial works in preparation for a further full closure due in October.
Read more:
http://www.simplygo.com/news/closure-of-...-september
(31 Aug 2013, 6:00 am)Daniel wrote [ -> ]Pulse Renowns 5160/61/62/63 have all been transferred to Saltmeadows.
Yellow Renown 5164 has also been transferred from Percy Main.
Speaking of Pulses...
It looked like one had broken down on Windy Nook Road, Gateshead, approximately 5 mins ago.
On another note, 4944 is covering for the usual DAF on Waggonway duties today - gtomlinson will be chuffed! Left Gateshead on 28A a few minutes ago, heading for CLS.
4944 was on their yesterday to haha
is 4986 out today as i seen it yesterday broken down at beamish entrance... or what could be left of it LOL
Consett locals have apparently been told that they are to get new minibuses in November, according to an old woman gossiping to another on this V1... Think it is somewhat odd that such information would be released to passengers?
3830 is on said V1.
(31 Aug 2013, 11:14 am)Liam wrote [ -> ]Bring us so something a bit more current Dan 
Hush!
(31 Aug 2013, 10:48 am)Daniel wrote [ -> ]Consett locals have apparently been told that they are to get new minibuses in November, according to an old woman gossiping to another on this V1... Think it is somewhat odd that such information would be released to passengers?
3830 is on said V1.
If this is true.. please to god, Don't paint them yellow.... LOL
(31 Aug 2013, 11:23 am)Michael wrote [ -> ]If this is true.. please to god, Don't paint them yellow.... LOL
http://northeastbuses.co.uk/forum/showth...hp?tid=491&pid=10893#pid10893
Christ, imagine Solo SRs in Venture livery... Horrid!
Hoping they go for something a little better and less...cheap looking.
(31 Aug 2013, 11:27 am)Daniel wrote [ -> ]http://northeastbuses.co.uk/forum/showth...hp?tid=491&pid=10893#pid10893
Christ, imagine Solo SRs in Venture livery... Horrid!
Hoping they go for something a little better and less...cheap looking.
Sorry i meant, if the Venture were getting the Solo SR's... don't paint them Yellow.. haha
Should of made it more clear
When they said there was 12 solo SRs they could go to Consett with then the next rumoured 15 new vehicles (was mentioned on here a few days back) could be more Solos SR's for Peterlee. I can see North Tyne Links getting something a bit bigger than Solos maybe Cadets? Versa's possibly? Then it's just the remaining Washington W5/W6, TyneDale Links & OK Way buses to displace. The 39 needs a new alloaction but I'm going to guess that's already been sorted and then there's just the few spares at Deptford & the 2 Saltmeadows buses.
Do the Venture services get busy, do they run at decent passenger numbers, iv'e never really seen them?
(31 Aug 2013, 11:34 am)Michael wrote [ -> ]Do the Venture services get busy, do they run at decent passenger numbers, iv'e never really seen them?
Pretty marginal hence they're run by a low cost depot in Consett. I think they've been commercial since the start though unlike the operation at Peterlee?
(31 Aug 2013, 11:36 am)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]Pretty marginal hence they're run by a low cost depot in Consett. I think they've been commercial since the start though unlike the operation at Peterlee?
I find that MPDs can often be full, depending on the service.
Let's exclude the 689 from everything. It is not worthy in the slightest.
I'd like to see the new Solos for Consett go into this livery again.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/emdjt42/3761800750/ think that's looks quite good with a venture logo and lettering. I think that's would be quite nice.
And what services at Peterlee are not ran commercially?
(31 Aug 2013, 11:36 am)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]Pretty marginal hence they're run by a low cost depot in Consett. I think they've been commercial since the start though unlike the operation at Peterlee?
Thanks, they are the few services i see when out and about.
Is only the V1|V2|V3|V4|V5|V6|V8|V9/689 counted as only venture now?
Because the X43, 131, 704 on the timetable is north but under the Venture logo on the GNE site, their venture branded
(31 Aug 2013, 11:40 am)Michael wrote [ -> ]Thanks, they are the few services i see when out and about.
Is only the V1|V2|V3|V4|V5|V6|V8|V9/689 counted as only venture now?
Because the X43, 131, 704 on the timetable is north but under the Venture logo on the GNE site, their venture branded
X43 is excluded.
131 interworks with V8 so is under the Venture brand.
(31 Aug 2013, 11:40 am)CatsFast101 wrote [ -> ]I'd like to see the new Solos for Consett go into this livery again. http://www.flickr.com/photos/emdjt42/3761800750/ think that's looks quite good with a venture logo and lettering. I think that's would be quite nice.
And what services at Peterlee are not ran commercially?
Yeh better than the rubbish Venture Brand now, it will look good with a decent logo on them colours