(22 Feb 2022, 6:50 pm)Thomas12 wrote [ -> ]Yeah I can see reliability suffering.
Although isn’t the 13 only hourly at the minute? If so I wonder if the 62 will only be extended to Throckley once an hour?
Genuinely I think reliability does suffer on longer routes. But I guess it's what the people in Walbottle, Newburn and Throckley want.
Yes, the 13 is hourly. I expect all 62s will be been extended, but I guess as Nexus are funding it maybe it could be hourly or half-hourly.
(22 Feb 2022, 7:00 pm)OrangeArrow49 wrote [ -> ]Genuinely I think reliability does suffer on longer routes. But I guess it's what the people in Walbottle, Newburn and Throckley want.
Yes, the 13 is hourly. I expect all 62s will be been extended, but I guess as Nexus are funding it maybe it could be hourly or half-hourly.
It is doable, the 71 takes 28 mins to get from North Walbottle to Throckley and back again including sitting for 6 minutes at Lindisfarne House. The 62 would have to do the same journey in about 35 minutes to fit in with its current timetable.
At the moment GNE service 1 is every 20 minutes daytime on the GNE website, but on the nexus changes it states that “go north east is introducing a new Monday to Saturday daytime operating every 20 minutes”.
Service: 1 (Go North East) between Whitley Bay, Newcastle and Gateshead
What: Go North East is introducing a new Monday-Saturday daytime operating every 20 minutes and Sunday daytime every 30 minutes and has withdrawn evening services on this route. Nexus currently fund half hourly daily evening trips on service 1 between Whitley Bay - North Shields.
So it’s changing from every 20 minutes daytime to introducing a new every 20 minutes daytime?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(23 Feb 2022, 7:07 pm)cbma06 wrote [ -> ]At the moment GNE service 1 is every 20 minutes daytime on the GNE website, but on the nexus changes it states that “go north east is introducing a new Monday to Saturday daytime operating every 20 minutes”.
Service: 1 (Go North East) between Whitley Bay, Newcastle and Gateshead
What: Go North East is introducing a new Monday-Saturday daytime operating every 20 minutes and Sunday daytime every 30 minutes and has withdrawn evening services on this route. Nexus currently fund half hourly daily evening trips on service 1 between Whitley Bay - North Shields.
So it’s changing from every 20 minutes daytime to introducing a new every 20 minutes daytime?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's technically not wrong.
It currently operates a 20 minute day time service AND a 30 minute evening service (between Gateshead and North Shields) now it's operating a new 20 minute day time service only.
Badly worded though.
(23 Feb 2022, 8:02 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]It's technically not wrong.
It currently operates a 20 minute day time service AND a 30 minute evening service (between Gateshead and North Shields) now it's operating a new 20 minute day time service only.
Badly worded though.
Yeah, it is worded incorrectly.
On another note:
I wonder with all these changes happening from commercially to being secured funding from the local authorities, maybe that all bus service journeys that are secured by the local authorities/Nexus should have a prefix S before the bus service number to show taxpayers/passengers that this service is being paid by your council tax and also when you board the bus you are also paying fares to use that bus service that you already paid for to get to point A to point B.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
https://twitter.com/BethIsobelRobso/stat...4sfJZONhgg&s=19 more on the reduction in bus services.
The media has been quiet on the state of the network for too long now, but thinking about the survey that was shared the other day, it looks like there is going to be some sort of concerted campaign across the North.
I just hope they direct their attention in the most appropriate direction.
(23 Feb 2022, 8:34 pm)cbma06 wrote [ -> ]Yeah, it is worded incorrectly.
On another note:
I wonder with all these changes happening from commercially to being secured funding from the local authorities, maybe that all bus service journeys that are secured by the local authorities/Nexus should have a prefix S before the bus service number to show taxpayers/passengers that this service is being paid by your council tax and also when you board the bus you are also paying fares to use that bus service that you already paid for to get to point A to point B.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There was a bit of a discussion the other day about that. I certainly think it should be used and no doubt it would probably score a few political points too.
Particularly with the media jumping on the 'anti bus cuts' bandwagon.
(23 Feb 2022, 8:34 pm)cbma06 wrote [ -> ]Yeah, it is worded incorrectly.
On another note:
I wonder with all these changes happening from commercially to being secured funding from the local authorities, maybe that all bus service journeys that are secured by the local authorities/Nexus should have a prefix S before the bus service number to show taxpayers/passengers that this service is being paid by your council tax and also when you board the bus you are also paying fares to use that bus service that you already paid for to get to point A to point B.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure I'd like the S idea as it would cause confusion. I do think that they should be displayed though in timetables and at the very least there's a page on the Nexus detailing what they're subsidising like on the WYMetro site -
https://www.wymetro.com/corporate/do-bus...ct-awards/
Nice and transparent rather than hidden away through freedom of information requests.
(23 Feb 2022, 10:24 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]https://twitter.com/BethIsobelRobso/stat...4sfJZONhgg&s=19 more on the reduction in bus services.
The media has been quiet on the state of the network for too long now, but thinking about the survey that was shared the other day, it looks like there is going to be some sort of concerted campaign across the North.
I just hope they direct their attention in the most appropriate direction.
Biggest change in 35 years seems somewhat OTT. Yes these are pretty savage cuts but from what I see Nexus have done a pretty decent job of mitigating and in some cases improving links despite the operators interest solely in profit. I'm not sure these cuts are that much greater in magnitude than some we saw a few years ago for example across the Stagecoach networks in Sunderland and Newcastle, or indeed even as some of the GNE changes back when we were getting fit for the future to create a sustainable network six months ago!
I do think it should be much more visible when journeys or entire services are being run under subsidy rather than commercially (and this particularly applies where the commercial operator takes public money to run journeys on the same service in the evenings that don't give them enough profit to cream off for shareholders).
Could there not be a scrolling message saying 'this service is subsidised by Nexus' on the LED displays
(24 Feb 2022, 12:50 am)V514DFT wrote [ -> ]Could there not be a scrolling message saying 'this service is subsidised by Nexus' on the LED displays
Maybe Nexus could just specify they’ve got to be run in Nexus branded buses.
(24 Feb 2022, 12:53 am)Bazza wrote [ -> ]Maybe Nexus could just specify they’ve got to be run in Nexus branded buses.
At which point the costs will go up, as operators will need to have buses in Nexus livery for the Nexus contracts, and different buses in their own livery for non-contract - they won't be able to use the same vehicles for both contract and non-contract.
(24 Feb 2022, 8:00 am)Ianthegoon wrote [ -> ]At which point the costs will go up, as operators will need to have buses in Nexus livery for the Nexus contracts, and different buses in their own livery for non-contract - they won't be able to use the same vehicles for both contract and non-contract.
Probably why Nexus moved away from doing this around 5-7 years ago…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(24 Feb 2022, 12:08 am)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]Biggest change in 35 years seems somewhat OTT. Yes these are pretty savage cuts but from what I see Nexus have done a pretty decent job of mitigating and in some cases improving links despite the operators interest solely in profit. I'm not sure these cuts are that much greater in magnitude than some we saw a few years ago for example across the Stagecoach networks in Sunderland and Newcastle, or indeed even as some of the GNE changes back when we were getting fit for the future to create a sustainable network six months ago!
I do think it should be much more visible when journeys or entire services are being run under subsidy rather than commercially (and this particularly applies where the commercial operator takes public money to run journeys on the same service in the evenings that don't give them enough profit to cream off for shareholders).
Maybe it is OTT, but I think it's getting to the stage where the public need to know what's going on.
Operators are quick to stand there and show off a new vehicle and use the power of the media when its suits them. Maybe its time the media (and maybe even Nexus) use their voices at the times the operator is a little more reluctant to speak or communicate.
I've said it for a while and I'll say it again. The network is not fit for purpose. Cutting and axing routes does not fix the network or the problems that exist because of it.
The first of the GNE cancellations are now appearing on Vosa - of course we knew them but the 643 has also now appeared to be cancelled.
PB0003954/1158
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 19 Ashington Bus Station North Shields
PB0003954/1073
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 11 Wallsend Whiteley Bay
PB0003954/1226
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 643 Metrocentre Asda Sunnside Front Street
PB0003954/1153
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 42 (42A) Wallsend, Interchange Cramlington/Kingston Park
(24 Feb 2022, 10:17 am)Michael wrote [ -> ]The first of the GNE cancellations are now appearing on Vosa - of course we knew them but the 643 has also now appeared to be cancelled.
PB0003954/1158
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 19 Ashington Bus Station North Shields
PB0003954/1073
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 11 Wallsend Whiteley Bay
PB0003954/1226
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 643 Metrocentre Asda Sunnside Front Street
PB0003954/1153
Cancellation GO NORTH EAST LIMITED 42 (42A) Wallsend, Interchange Cramlington/Kingston Park
Dan said with regard to the Stagecoach changes that they may be cancelled at first then re-registered if they win the tenders, so possible that may be the case here.
(23 Feb 2022, 8:34 pm)cbma06 wrote [ -> ]Yeah, it is worded incorrectly.
On another note:
I wonder with all these changes happening from commercially to being secured funding from the local authorities, maybe that all bus service journeys that are secured by the local authorities/Nexus should have a prefix S before the bus service number to show taxpayers/passengers that this service is being paid by your council tax and also when you board the bus you are also paying fares to use that bus service that you already paid for to get to point A to point B.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Anyone else old enough to remember that " twerly thing " that use to have 4 side and was attached to the the dashboard at the left hand side of the bus... had i thnnk the company on one eg northumbria so ran by them, secured service - ran with funds from TWPTE, transfer bus as some were and some weren't and something else thats slip my mind..... could go back to this as long as drivers remembered to give it a twirl!
(24 Feb 2022, 11:35 am)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]Anyone else old enough to remember that " twerly thing " that use to have 4 side and was attached to the the dashboard at the left hand side of the bus... had i thnnk the company on one eg northumbria so ran by them, secured service - ran with funds from TWPTE, transfer bus as some were and some weren't and something else thats slip my mind..... could go back to this as long as drivers remembered to give it a twirl!
Aye, was an oblong shape and span around. Can remember some vehicles having them on the front windscreen near the door and others having them displayed at the top of the front windscreen.
(24 Feb 2022, 12:10 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Aye, was an oblong shape and span around. Can remember some vehicles having them on the front windscreen near the door and others having them displayed at the top of the front windscreen.
thats the one...... just relying on the driver changing it to the correct side
(24 Feb 2022, 12:25 pm)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]thats the one...... just relying on the driver changing it to the correct side
I'm sure that was used as the reason they originally got rid of the side and rear number blinds too.
Drivers forgetting or refusing to change them
Edit: found an example of one on a preserved Metrobus
https://www.flickr.com/photos/27204054@N07/4577907721/
(24 Feb 2022, 9:04 am)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Maybe it is OTT, but I think it's getting to the stage where the public need to know what's going on.
Operators are quick to stand there and show off a new vehicle and use the power of the media when its suits them. Maybe its time the media (and maybe even Nexus) use their voices at the times the operator is a little more reluctant to speak or communicate.
I've said it for a while and I'll say it again. The network is not fit for purpose. Cutting and axing routes does not fix the network or the problems that exist because of it.
I agree with much of the sentiment here but what does the media or Nexus shouting about it achieve? It's the cost of deregulation and a focus on profit instead of public service.
(24 Feb 2022, 6:37 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]I agree with much of the sentiment here but what does the media or Nexus shouting about it achieve? It's the cost of deregulation and a focus on profit instead of public service.
There's the potential to achieve various different things.
There's the angle I would hope for, which would be to increase the pressure on the local operators and sway public opinion against them after their frankly shambolic operational decisions which have led us to the current position and having the taxpayer bale them out.
(24 Feb 2022, 7:40 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]There's the potential to achieve various different things.
There's the angle I would hope for, which would be to increase the pressure on the local operators and sway public opinion against them after their frankly shambolic operational decisions which have led us to the current position and having the taxpayer bale them out.
You do know TfL has been bailed out too don't you?
(24 Feb 2022, 7:40 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]There's the potential to achieve various different things.
There's the angle I would hope for, which would be to increase the pressure on the local operators and sway public opinion against them after their frankly shambolic operational decisions which have led us to the current position and having the taxpayer bale them out.
But then what? Sway them where? On the vast majority of routes, there is zero choice/competition. So sway them into cars?
(24 Feb 2022, 8:34 pm)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]You do know TfL has been bailed out too don't you?
Not sure what that's got to do with bus ops in the NE like, but aye. I did.
(24 Feb 2022, 8:41 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]But then what? Sway them where? On the vast majority of routes, there is zero choice/competition. So sway them into cars?
Howay man. I've already come up with one idea today. I need to think about what happens next
(24 Feb 2022, 8:34 pm)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]You do know TfL has been bailed out too don't you?
Absolutely, but TfL is a public service. Most other bus operations in the UK are private enterprise, in it to run a profit-generating business for investors.
There is an easier solution
Every secured service by Nexus in timetables including bus stops will be in a shaded rectangle box
(24 Feb 2022, 9:39 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Absolutely, but TfL is a public service. Most other bus operations in the UK are private enterprise, in it to run a profit-generating business for investors.
What's happening is simple maths. Its the same sums no matter what the operating model or ownership structure is. If it costs you more to run something then it you take in, then there is an obvious issue.
(24 Feb 2022, 9:51 pm)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]What's happening is simple maths. Its the same sums no matter what the operating model or ownership structure is. If it costs you more to run something then it you take in, then there is an obvious issue.
Nobody is talking about the ownership model though.
Regardless of who runs the network in the NE (public or private), it's not fit for purpose. It hasn't evolved or adapted in 35+ years, despite the populations shopping and working habits evolving and adapting over the same period.
Axing, cutting or reducing fleets and routes doesn't increase revenue if people aren't using those routes and aren't going to or from the places the operators insist on running the services to and from. It just reduces costs.
It's simple maths.
(24 Feb 2022, 9:51 pm)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]What's happening is simple maths. Its the same sums no matter what the operating model or ownership structure is. If it costs you more to run something then it you take in, then there is an obvious issue.
Simple maths is a very simplistic way of looking at it, when in fact the two are very different issues.
Most deregulated markets have been operating in managed decline for the best part of 25 years. Happy enough to run anything profitable and to send that money straight back to investors. Any accountant can make most things either profitable or loss-making on a balance sheet, and it doesn't help that bus services are always looked at parochially. Anything that is a bit tight, even if its the odd trip, is quickly shoved in the local authorities' direction to sort out. Usually ending up in the situation that the tax payer then funds their business, if not farmed out to another operator. It doesn't increase the operators profits, it just decreases the overhead and cuts more customers off from their bus network.
I was trying to think of examples of other businesses that are able to do this. I wonder what my local shop decided they didn't want to open between 6am-10am for morning papers, should the tax payer fund them to do that instead? Or do we just admit that the model is broken?
On the other hand, TfL's financial issues are politically motivated and most people can see exactly what is happening.
There's an aim to reduce Government funding to 0%, which is why any funding deals lately have been subject to making cuts. It's really no different to what was done to Councils up and down the country since 2010, and I assume TfL are in the same position as Councils whereby they must set a balanced budget every year or the Finance Officer has to issue a section 114 notice.
Who knows what the long-term plan is, but likely to make TfL services attractive enough to be deregulated, carved out and sold off.