North East Buses

(27 Mar 2014, 10:06 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]The jest of this survey is simply to get the passenger's view of the recent changes and what could be improved upon on the service they use. These changes then come into effect from the 20th July.

Are they given an option of what could be improved? Possible route diagrams to show that the company have thought about ways in which changes could be made to benefit the customer - by creating new links, upgrading frequency, etc?

I'm shocked if Arriva are leaving all of the work to customers. I do think customers should have a say, but I don't think that they should have the ability to completely decide on improvements (I'd imagine it would lead to a lot of completely irrational suggestions with such a large range that it would have been pretty pointless to carry out the survey in the first place). Giving them the opportunity to select from a number of options which the company has thought of, often based on e-mails sent in to the Commercial Team often via Customer Services (as is the case with GNE), seems a lot better to me.

(27 Mar 2014, 10:09 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]I do agree from a targeting point of view, but going back to solely paper based consultation is a massive backwards step. I'd rather see investment in a digital solution to this. They have a huge wealth of data in front of them to target the right audience, and then personally invite them to an online consultation.

Pull a report from the Key database for example. Select passengers who live in the area, or use the affected services x many times a week. Email them a link and pass code. That data should form the basis to your results, and any additional paper forms should simply complement. Assume similar data can be pulled for ENCTS and POP smart cards ?

It would allow for greater ease in collating the results, that's for sure. With the digital divide in mind, especially for those who hold ENCTS cards, I do feel a paper leaflet is something which is easier for those filling out the form.

I'd imagine that someone could pick up a leaflet on board the bus, fill it in and give it to the driver of the bus to hand in to the depot at the end of his shift (who would in turn give it to the apt department).

However, for a lot of people (especially fare paying passengers), there's a sense of simplicity about doing it online. I prefer to fill things out online too, but I'd assume that the company had their reasons for going for paper only.

(27 Mar 2014, 10:11 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]Are they given an option of what could be improved? Possible route diagrams to show that the company have thought about ways in which changes could be made to benefit the customer - by creating new links, upgrading frequency, etc?

I'm shocked if Arriva are leaving all of the work to customers. I do think customers should have a say, but I don't think that they should have the ability to completely decide on improvements (I'd imagine it would lead to a lot of completely irrational suggestions with such a large range that it would have been pretty pointless to carry out the survey in the first place). Giving them the opportunity to select from a number of options which the company has thought of, often based on e-mails sent in to the Commercial Team often via Customer Services (as is the case with GNE), seems a lot better to me.

Just to show exactly what the survey is:

[attachment=5347]
[attachment=5349]
[attachment=5348]

(27 Mar 2014, 10:20 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]Just to show exactly what the survey is:

The timetable links in with punctuality which in turn links in with reliability. Reliability can be recorded internally by regularly assessing lost mileage. Why do Arriva need to ask passengers about this?

I can understand why Vehicle Type/Condition has been included, but again, it goes without saying that most customers will know their service has been upgraded without the need to consult. Again, newer buses should mean that the service is more reliable.

For me, Length of Journey Time/Destination Options is the only really useful thing. I'm assuming that the survey doesn't allow for this to happen as it seems far too idealistic, but if I ticked the negative box for one of those two things - it would be good if there was a follow up question with something along the lines of:
"We have thought of a number of things to improve [destination options]. Please refer to the maps below. Do you think re-routing service 27 via Route A, B or C would be a good idea?"
Of course you'd include a 'None' box too, but you get my drift... Shows the company have put thought into it and are willing to adapt the route if a large number of respondants are in favour of changes to the route. They could give their own personal feedback on top of this at the end.

(27 Mar 2014, 10:32 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]The timetable links in with punctuality which in turn links in with reliability. Reliability can be recorded internally by regularly assessing lost mileage. Why do Arriva need to ask passengers about this?

I can understand why Vehicle Type/Condition has been included, but again, it goes without saying that most customers will know their service has been upgraded without the need to consult. Again, newer buses should mean that the service is more reliable.

For me, Length of Journey Time/Destination Options is the only really useful thing. I'm assuming that the survey doesn't allow for this to happen as it seems far too idealistic, but if I ticked the negative box for one of those two things - it would be good if there was a follow up question with something along the lines of:
"We have thought of a number of things to improve [destination options]. Please refer to the maps below. Do you think re-routing service 27 via Route A, B or C would be a good idea?"
Of course you'd include a 'None' box too, but you get my drift... Shows the company have put thought into it and are willing to adapt the route if a large number of respondants are in favour of changes to the route.

Why bother? They are asking what the customers think about the changes, not giving them a choice over future plans. Likely any planned changes are actually in the planning stages right now and they are consulting people to see what exactly could be done rather than 'right, here's what we want to do, what do you think?'. I honestly prefer the way Arriva are handing it, they are giving the customers a significant part in designing the routes and timetables rather than only getting a say in something that's already been planned.

The service I chose to get those screenshots (17 Middlesbrough - Ingleby Barwick/Eaglescliffe) hasn't really had a vehicle upgrade in a way - it's been Cadet/Prestige worked for the last few years and remains so at present apart from a certain number of journeys working off other duties (last trip Monday-Friday is on the end of a 9 board so should be Pulsar worked but mixes between Cadet and Pulsar). The service that should get the most negative remarks over vehicles should be the 29/29a services as they have, on paper, gone from Pulsars and Cadets to Prestiges (although all 3 types are turning up on there regularly).

(27 Mar 2014, 10:40 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]Why bother? They are asking what the customers think about the changes, not giving them a choice over future plans. Likely any planned changes are actually in the planning stages right now and they are consulting people to see what exactly could be done rather than 'right, here's what we want to do, what do you think?'. I honestly prefer the way Arriva are handing it, they are giving the customers a significant part in designing the routes and timetables rather than only getting a say in something that's already been planned.

But surely opinions were gathered in the consultation period prior to the services being changed? Reliability (and the factors which derive from that) can all be monitored in-house. Even late running can be monitored, it doesn't just have to be lost mileage.

Granted, if no consultation was carried out and Arriva made the changes and told passengers what was happening and from what date, I can understand why all of this is necessary - but this is completely different to the Go North East consultation process which it is being compared to.
If this is the case, customers aren't on the same level as the company, and Go North East are undoubtedly better in that respect.

You (and others) make it sound like despite a Go North East consultation taking place, they are going to go ahead with whatever they want to do. This is simply not the case at all.

I think the main point being missed here is that this is not a consultation on massive changes, its simply a quick exercise to find out what our customers think about the recently implemented major network change in the T&EC areas. They were asked to help form the ideas for the network change and many of the ideas were implemented, and passenger numbers are actually growing (despite less resources being used, but used more intensively). Now it has had a month to settle in they are looking for any improvements that can be made with the tweaks coming in July, in case there is anything that has been missed or any other suggested improvements, very much like the X3 that was extended to start at North Slelton as a result of requests, just a week after the changes were implemented in February.

(27 Mar 2014, 11:01 pm)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]I think the main point being missed here is that this is not a consultation on massive changes, its simply a quick exercise to find out what our customers think about the recently implemented major network change in the T&EC areas. They were asked to help form the ideas for the network change and many of the ideas were implemented, and passenger numbers are actually growing (despite less resources being used, but used more intensively). Now it has had a month to settle in they are looking for any improvements that can be made with the tweaks coming in July, in case there is anything that has been missed or any other suggested improvements, very much like the X3 that was extended to start at North Slelton as a result of requests, just a week after the changes were implemented in February.

Summed the T&EC consultation and survey up perfectly.

If it was GNE doing these, everybody would love the idea
Overall, I think some more detail could be added to the surveys though, with additional questions with what you choose.

(28 Mar 2014, 7:50 am)Tom wrote [ -> ]If it was GNE doing these, everybody would love the idea
Overall, I think some more detail could be added to the surveys though, with additional questions with what you choose.

I'm the only one who seemingly has a negative opinion of the Arriva survey, so I disagree with what you've said in the first half of the post.

I understand the points Kuyoyo and tyresmoke have made, but the majority of the questions are factors which can be monitored by the company more accurately than if they ask their customers (if I have one bad experience, I can't strongly agree that reliability has improved - but the company can see exactly how many journeys have operated late, have been curtailed and ran light, etc..)

As for the other factors in the survey, I agree that there is a point in asking them to seek further improvements with the route. All in all, however, this method is completely different to what Go North East use, and Arriva's method holds a completely different purpose to Go North East's Customer Consultations - I am struggling to comprehend why the two methods are being compared.

Personally, I think there are huge flaws in Arriva's method, just how members of this forum think there are flaws in Go North East's method. My main issue with Arriva's method is how much of a waste of resources it is for what it actually achieves. People are having a go at Go North East but their consultations achieve what Arriva's does and more - as a customer I have an insight into future plans for my service. I can't say I know what any 'tweaks' will be with Arriva.

(28 Mar 2014, 8:25 am)Dan wrote [ -> ]I'm the only one who seemingly has a negative opinion of the Arriva survey, so I disagree with what you've said in the first half of the post.

I understand the points Kuyoyo and tyresmoke have made, but the majority of the questions are factors which can be monitored by the company more accurately than if they ask their customers (if I have one bad experience, I can't strongly agree that reliability has improved - but the company can see exactly how many journeys have operated late, have been curtailed and ran light, etc..)

As for the other factors in the survey, I agree that there is a point in asking them to seek further improvements with the route. All in all, however, this method is completely different to what Go North East use, and Arriva's method holds a completely different purpose to Go North East's Customer Consultations - I am struggling to comprehend why the two methods are being compared.

Personally, I think there are huge flaws in Arriva's method, just how members of this forum think there are flaws in Go North East's method. My main issue with Arriva's method is how much of a waste of resources it is for what it actually achieves. People are having a go at Go North East but their consultations achieve what Arriva's does and more - as a customer I have an insight into future plans for my service. I can't say I know what any 'tweaks' will be with Arriva.

Arriva's is letting customers travel arrangements dictate what the network is, Go North East have the network designed and want the customer to decided what they would prefer. This survey of Arriva's is getting the customer's point of view.

As for 'the company can get the dead mileage/lost mileage figures themselves', using the 17 for example, it could be 10 minutes late leaving Yarm for the terminus at Kingsmead but on time when it leaves there. The timings for most routes are quite slack (X17s for example, the long trips get 51 minutes to do the run compared to he 44 minutes the X6 got pre-changes). The only service I'm aware of drivers have complains about timings at present is the 28 due to it's re-routing back to operating down Marton Road rather than via Easterside and Marton Manor. Previously the short journeys got 8 minutes layover in Nunthorpe, now they get 2 minutes on paper but whether they do get that is not known to me at present.

It's perhaps ironic here that, apart from myself and tyre smoke, the other two people who have voiced their opinions for the method Arriva are using, are both keen on Nexus' QCS and the persons who aren't would prefer the partnership method - yet this Arriva T&EC consultation/survey are perfect examples of partnership in action (a partnership of passengers and company designing a network together, passengers' giving their travel arrangement and preferred designation and the company then acting on that).

(28 Mar 2014, 9:06 am)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]Arriva's is letting customers travel arrangements dictate what the network is, Go North East have the network designed and want the customer to decided what they would prefer. This survey of Arriva's is getting the customer's point of view.

As for 'the company can get the dead mileage/lost mileage figures themselves', using the 17 for example, it could be 10 minutes late leaving Yarm for the terminus at Kingsmead but on time when it leaves there. The timings for most routes are quite slack (X17s for example, the long trips get 51 minutes to do the run compared to he 44 minutes the X6 got pre-changes). The only service I'm aware of drivers have complains about timings at present is the 28 due to it's re-routing back to operating down Marton Road rather than via Easterside and Marton Manor. Previously the short journeys got 8 minutes layover in Nunthorpe, now they get 2 minutes on paper but whether they do get that is not known to me at present.

It's perhaps ironic here that, apart from myself and tyre smoke, the other two people who have voiced their opinions for the method Arriva are using, are both keen on Nexus' QCS and the persons who aren't would prefer the partnership method - yet this Arriva T&EC consultation/survey are perfect examples of partnership in action (a partnership of passengers and company designing a network together, passengers' giving their travel arrangement and preferred designation and the company then acting on that).

Lateness isn't just recorded at each terminus - it is recorded every time the driver touches the EPM as far as I know. The company should still therefore be aware of any timekeeping issues on route.

(28 Mar 2014, 9:09 am)Dan wrote [ -> ]Lateness isn't just recorded at each terminus - it is recorded every time the driver touches the EPM as far as I know. The company should still therefore be aware of any timekeeping issues on route.

Shows your knowledge of Arriva, the Wayfayer 200s automatically update upon entering the next fare stage. I was basically using an example to show the company might not be aware of late journeys given the slack timings - the 17 could be 5 minutes late leaving Yarm on the return journey but be back on-time by the next timing point (Sober Hall, Pennie Way in Ingelby Barwick) because they have that much slack built into the timetable (Kingsmead 17s have 2hr 25mins plus a 13 minutes layover at Kingsmead to do a round trip). So they could be late at one timing point but on-time at the next one. Hence asking passengers their opinions - it's working in partnership, something Go North East should be doing.

Riding on B7TL 7494 - x93 into Middlesbrough 0945 at present? Very impressed. Will Redcar be able to keep them this way?

(27 Mar 2014, 10:01 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]I'm positive one of our forum members we associate with Go North East mentioned it as a possibility at the time - though it may have been amongst other reasons too, I'm not sure.

It goes without saying that the online presence would have allowed for a greater number of consultation responses, but the responses were not necessarily coming from the people that they should have been. Someone living in Fencehouses had the option to fill out the survey when it was online, and they might have only used the affected services once or twice per month yet had the same voice as someone who used the services multiple times per day. While 'spoof' seems a little exaggerated in this example, I don't think it's right that they had the ability to influence network changes. How likely is it that someone who lives in Fencehouses will travel to Park Lane, the City's main Library, or use a bus to Monkwearmouth for the sake of picking up a consultation leaflet? Far less, I'm sure.

I'm not being bias in any way whatsoever, but I really do think the new method is a lot better. Realistically, there is no way someone should be missed out. If I'm completely honest, the people who are less likely to notice the leaflets are the elderly. They should still have a say (and will if they receive one through their letter box), but I feel they're less likely to spot the leaflets on board buses. I don't know if this was the intention or not, but I can understand why it would be. The major thing which bugs me is that the results aren't available in the old .pdf document which was previously circulated, but this is mainly from an enthusiasts' point of view.

It would take a pretty dedicated person to go out of their way just to pick up a leaflet, but taking into account people in Fencehouses are possibly going to their nearest city centre for a number of reasons, the probability of them picking up a leaflet in a travelshop, in a library or on a bus (a Northern spare from Deptford or a 35a that goes through Monkwearmouth), is increased quite a bit.
If they are travelling to Monkwearmouth for work, pleasure or something else, which is entirely possible - then they can pick up a leaflet and be entitled to vote, just as much as you are as a regular passenger.
Using a service once or twice a month, doesn't make that person less important.

I haven't been consulted on North Sunderland changes, but not too long ago, my Dad was being treated in Monkwearmouth Hospital.
Those changes could have affected visiting using public transport and I am sure the families of many others (in or out patients) could have been affected by changes too.

Only 300 people responded to the changes, yet the changes were approved, based on a 15% return.
Limiting the sample to 2000 leaflets, restricted to people who happened to be in the right place at the right time or who went out of their way to request one via post, doesn't assist the wider population nor the company.
It may save money in the short term, but not sure on long term.
The more people an operator can engage with, then despite the odd rogue response (just look at AdamY's ethnicity and sexual background), the better an understanding they can get.
And as aureolin has quite rightly pointed out technology can be used. Pretty sure Survey Monkey is restricted via an ip address to one response too.

Passengers make a company tick. Not the other way around.

On VOSA today.


PB0002717/322 - ARRIVA DURHAM COUNTY LTD, 1 ADMIRAL WAY, DOXFORD INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS PARK, SUNDERLAND, SR3 3XP

Cancellation Accepted: Operating between Middlesbrough and Scarborough given service number 93/X93 effective from 24-May-2014.


3. PB0002717/363 - ARRIVA DURHAM COUNTY LTD, 1 ADMIRAL WAY, DOXFORD INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS PARK, SUNDERLAND, SR3 3XP

Registration Accepted
Starting Point: Middlesbrough
Finish Point: Scarborough
Via:
Service Number: X93
Service Type: Limited Stop
Effective Date: 24-MAY-2014
Other Details: Operates daily, up to every 60 minutes


4. PB0002717/364 - ARRIVA DURHAM COUNTY LTD, 1 ADMIRAL WAY, DOXFORD INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS PARK, SUNDERLAND, SR3 3XP

Registration Accepted
Starting Point: Middlesbrough
Finish Point: Scarborough
Via:
Service Number: X93
Service Type: Limited Stop
Effective Date: 24-MAY-2014
Other Details: Operates daily, up to every 60 minutes

A genuine survey will be widely available to passengers - on buses, in travelshops, on-line and even sent house to house - and will seek views on current services and how they could be improved, both regarding structure and operation, how and why people use buses and what changes would encourage greater use. Arriva seems genuinely interested in how people have reacted to their latest Teesside changes. Then you have GNE surveys, not widely available and with biased questions designed only to gain approval for changes already decided. The recent North Sunderland survey proved this, everything it suggested was implemented. The only difference was that the X3 wasn't mentioned at all as it was obviously intended to be cancelled, and was only reprieved - with Britain's most pathetic and badly designed bus timetable intended to ensure the final demise if this previously quite well used route - because people like me wrote on the reply that we wanted it to continue.

Just seen an interesting post on Service Suggestions by Tyresmoke with regard to the forthcoming introduction of Sapphire on routes 5/5a Middlesbrough-Guisborough-Brotton-Easington. He commented that this was likely to be the most complex Sapphire introduction so far. As a regular 5/5a user I'm naturally pleased we are going over to Sapphire and interested to hear from a driver's point of view how it will operate and what the issues are? Obviously it's a dedicated rota with dedicated drivers, also gone will be the infamous yellow waistcoat (it's all about image). What about the services themselves though? Clearly it's a revenue success as it wouldn't be going Sapphire; seemingly it's at maximum capacity and could only be extended, in terms of additional journeys by the use of more single deck resources. That then brings the question as to why we cannot have a re-introduction of the X5 express journeys, if only between M'bro and say Loftus? I could never understand why we llost them, but then towards their demise they were merely operating as 5 trips. Just a few thoughts guys.

(28 Mar 2014, 1:02 pm)Greg in Weardale wrote [ -> ]A genuine survey will be widely available to passengers - on buses, in travelshops, on-line and even sent house to house - and will seek views on current services and how they could be improved, both regarding structure and operation, how and why people use buses and what changes would encourage greater use. Arriva seems genuinely interested in how people have reacted to their latest Teesside changes. Then you have GNE surveys, not widely available and with biased questions designed only to gain approval for changes already decided. The recent North Sunderland survey proved this, everything it suggested was implemented. The only difference was that the X3 wasn't mentioned at all as it was obviously intended to be cancelled, and was only reprieved - with Britain's most pathetic and badly designed bus timetable intended to ensure the final demise if this previously quite well used route - because people like me wrote on the reply that we wanted it to continue.

Christ, it all boils down to the X3 again...

(28 Mar 2014, 1:53 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]Christ, it all boils down to the X3 again...

Yep, stupidity like the X3 and GNE's pointless surveys needs to be highlighted whenever the opportunity arises. But regarding services generally both Arriva and GNE change them far too often. They should follow the Stagecoach example of infrequent alteration giving stability and thus passenger confidence that the service they rely on will not suddenly disappear. It's only worth doing surveys if they're going to be comprehensive and the results properly analysed and used; wide ranging ones can be valuable in network and route planning.

It's fact that Stagecoach do not appear to do much in the way of wholesale service changes, from my experience, sadly limited unfortunately, they do seem to attempt to maintain what is the essence of a service, namely continuity and reliability, as such taking action where individual and specific issues arise. The last one such that I read about was regarding the works at Newport and how these would affect services operating across that corridor? That idea seems to make sense rather than continually swoping and changing things; if there is a clear and identifiable problem on a particular service/route such as late running or overloading then deal accirdingly. It seems sensible as the relative information can, as far as I'm aware, be sourced directly from both the drivers and ticket machines.

(28 Mar 2014, 3:33 pm)robisdave wrote [ -> ]It's fact that Stagecoach do not appear to do much in the way of wholesale service changes, from my experience, sadly limited unfortunately, they do seem to attempt to maintain what is the essence of a service, namely continuity and reliability, as such taking action where individual and specific issues arise. The last one such that I read about was regarding the works at Newport and how these would affect services operating across that corridor? That idea seems to make sense rather than continually swoping and changing things; if there is a clear and identifiable problem on a particular service/route such as late running or overloading then deal accirdingly. It seems sensible as the relative information can, as far as I'm aware, be sourced directly from both the drivers and ticket machines.

Have to say they don't often change things but they do tend to tweak things to help with reliability, but they rarely use extra resources to do this so it never tends to solve much.

The use of the Tridents and interworking 36/38 to deal with Newport Road and Stockton delays is a good idea of what they do well. When services are changed to help with reliability its never more than a few minutes either way though, and I know from experience that there are services which run late every day that never get looked at. Some of it is delays you can't really deal with though (I should know, been driving 7s today in Yarm.....!!)

I remember one memorable night when I picked up a 36 in Stockton 25 mins late and was still 25 late at Park End but then was on time by the time I'd gone all the way to Hartlepool, with the early evening extra running time (and partially slack timings beyond Billingham) dealing with the delay.

There's a fine line between running a realistic timetable and running a clockface timetable though, you can't make things too confusing for your customers, even if that's how realistically the service does run. Nobody would remember a timetable that had services at say 0958, 1013, 1027, 1048, 1102, 1121, 1134, 1152 etc whereas every 15 mins is easier to remember, even if the service isn't actually that reliable. I think I mentioned the other day there is some delays you can't timetable for, like school loading issues and things like that, as they don't happen every day.

You also wouldn't believe how much tactical 'games' go on between drivers too! I know I've been part of them too many times.

Rather than Streetlites, wouldn't Citaros be more suited to the 5/5a, X3/X3a and X4/4. The Streelite are lightweight buses and not sure if they'd be good on the routes.

(28 Mar 2014, 1:05 pm)robisdave wrote [ -> ]Just seen an interesting post on Service Suggestions by Tyresmoke with regard to the forthcoming introduction of Sapphire on routes 5/5a Middlesbrough-Guisborough-Brotton-Easington. He commented that this was likely to be the most complex Sapphire introduction so far. As a regular 5/5a user I'm naturally pleased we are going over to Sapphire and interested to hear from a driver's point of view how it will operate and what the issues are? Obviously it's a dedicated rota with dedicated drivers, also gone will be the infamous yellow waistcoat (it's all about image). What about the services themselves though? Clearly it's a revenue success as it wouldn't be going Sapphire; seemingly it's at maximum capacity and could only be extended, in terms of additional journeys by the use of more single deck resources. That then brings the question as to why we cannot have a re-introduction of the X5 express journeys, if only between M'bro and say Loftus? I could never understand why we llost them, but then towards their demise they were merely operating as 5 trips. Just a few thoughts guys.

My comment about the 5/5a being the most complex "Sapphire" service is the amount of variations. If you compare the 7 that we operate with the "Sapphire" brand already, there is one route for all journeys (bar the odd extensions up to New College Durham - which I believe the college pay for on various routes, replacing their free coach network a while ago??) unlike the 5 which obviously has the diversions via Liverton Mines or Skinningrove depending which side of the hour it is.

The 5a going via Skelton Asda is another variation to the main route and terminating short at Brotton, with another difference by serving Kilton Lane. I have to say I don't really see the point in that, I could understand it if we went into the hospital but we don't!

As far as the drivers go, all we know is it will be dedicated rota but we haven't seen the rota yet nor do we know who is going on it. Everyone who is interested has applied to go on the rota though. Obviously not every duty can be solid 5s though so you will see them on other services from time to time, there are odd trips on X66s on Darlington's Sapphire rota for example. I definitely think the dedicated drivers will help to boost the route even further, as it helps with familiarity between the passengers and drivers, I know from the X1 at Darlington that the dedicated team on there are well looked after by their passengers! Some of those are now on the 7 too! This is definitely the way to go in the future, similar to how GNE have dedicated rotas with only a handful of services on each one at the bigger depots.

As for the "yellow waistcoats" - its a safety feature but they shouldn't be worn in the cab ideally! Definitely agree with the image comment!

As for the capacity, it will be interesting to see what happens with this. I can only really see issues if we see serious growth at the peak times during the day, there is ample surplus capacity during the middle part of the day in my opinion. I'd be interested to know whether there is a big usage from North Ormesby to points past Guisborough to be honest, as it would discourage those "North Ormesby hoppers" if we ran non-stop from/to Brambles Farm at peak times, not only would it free up a bit of capacity (last time I did an evening peak time one I had 5 or 6 get off in NO, there are enough other services they could use that they wouldn't be inconvinienced) it would also boost journey times a bit I would think. Maybe something to look at in the future, although as you say we can't double deck them so any extra capacity would have to come in the form of frequency increases which would ultimately mean extra resources required. Some expresses from Loftus, Brotton and Skelton may be something to look at to start with, who knows. Definitely watch this space I think.

A quick note that the X4 will also be getting "Sapphire" conversion of course, it will be interesting to see what happens during the summer as I'm intrigued to see how well the Redcar-Saltburn-Sandsend-Whitby coastal link is used. I really think it could take off as a coastal service, a true "Seasider" !

(28 Mar 2014, 4:51 pm)Tom wrote [ -> ]Rather than Streetlites, wouldn't Citaros be more suited to the 5/5a, X3/X3a and X4/4. The Streelite are lightweight buses and not sure if they'd be good on the routes.

They appear to be the new standard Arriva UK single deck as other divisions are also getting Streetlites. I am told the ones for our Sapphire routes will have uprated engines in them though. I'm not too sure on the exact details though, maybe someone else knows what specifications are offered?

(28 Mar 2014, 4:55 pm)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]They appear to be the new standard Arriva UK single deck as other divisions are also getting Streetlites. I am told the ones for our Sapphire routes will have uprated engines in them though. I'm not too sure on the exact details though, maybe someone else knows what specifications are offered?

Oh right, thanks. I hope the passengers on the services increase, and the 23 passengers will too! X4 looks a promising service in my opinion!

Tactical games between drivers!! As if a group of professionals would!! I jest a bit there so being serious take a peek at what I say about Sapphire on the 5/5a above and let me know any thoughts you have please. As a regular user of these routes it's useful to know. Also, had a ride on B7TL 7494 this morning? Only from G'boro into town mind but seemed pretty lively and s distinct improvement on the E400's. Not as much seating capacity though?

(28 Mar 2014, 4:59 pm)robisdave wrote [ -> ]Tactical games between drivers!! As if a group of professionals would!! I jest a bit there so being serious take a peek at what I say about Sapphire on the 5/5a above and let me know any thoughts you have please. As a regular user of these routes it's useful to know. Also, had a ride on B7TL 7494 this morning? Only from G'boro into town mind but seemed pretty lively and s distinct improvement on the E400's. Not as much seating capacity though?

See my 2nd reply.

Good to hear 7494 is decent, I've heard good things about that one too today. 7485 failed on the X93 earlier, so briefly both of them were out! lol
I think they're 67 seaters, so definitely less seats...

(28 Mar 2014, 5:06 pm)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]See my 2nd reply.

Good to hear 7494 is decent, I've heard good things about that one too today. 7485 failed on the X93 earlier, so briefly both of them were out! lol
I think they're 67 seaters, so definitely less seats...

I'd like to see deckers on the 306. Between Newcastle and North Shields the service always seems very busy, but we all know, they're getting Pulsars so that'll never happen! But the 43/44/45 are by far the busiest routes at Jesmond, so maybe 7461-64 could remain in service and replace the Prestiges are Jesmond, while giving the 43/44/45 a full decker operation?

(28 Mar 2014, 9:06 am)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]Arriva's is letting customers travel arrangements dictate what the network is, Go North East have the network designed and want the customer to decided what they would prefer. This survey of Arriva's is getting the customer's point of view.

As for 'the company can get the dead mileage/lost mileage figures themselves', using the 17 for example, it could be 10 minutes late leaving Yarm for the terminus at Kingsmead but on time when it leaves there. The timings for most routes are quite slack (X17s for example, the long trips get 51 minutes to do the run compared to he 44 minutes the X6 got pre-changes). The only service I'm aware of drivers have complains about timings at present is the 28 due to it's re-routing back to operating down Marton Road rather than via Easterside and Marton Manor. Previously the short journeys got 8 minutes layover in Nunthorpe, now they get 2 minutes on paper but whether they do get that is not known to me at present.

It's perhaps ironic here that, apart from myself and tyre smoke, the other two people who have voiced their opinions for the method Arriva are using, are both keen on Nexus' QCS and the persons who aren't would prefer the partnership method - yet this Arriva T&EC consultation/survey are perfect examples of partnership in action (a partnership of passengers and company designing a network together, passengers' giving their travel arrangement and preferred designation and the company then acting on that).

Do you really think Arriva have let passengers decide the new network? Most of the proposed changes were widely known before the 'consultation' even began!