North East Buses

(08 Aug 2022, 9:15 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]We've never (from what I recall) asked people not to talk about bus incidents on here, unlike most other enthusiast groups.  

The bus/cyclist incident in Washington was a rare exception, because there was a criminal case at the time, and therefore a need to protect the site and posters from finding themselves potentially in contempt of court. We'd reluctantly do the same if a similar situation occurred in the future.

(08 Aug 2022, 9:19 am)idiot wrote [ -> ]What year was the cycle/bus collision?

(08 Aug 2022, 9:15 am)Adrian wrote [ -> ]We've never (from what I recall) asked people not to talk about bus incidents on here, unlike most other enthusiast groups.  

The bus/cyclist incident in Washington was a rare exception, because there was a criminal case at the time, and therefore a need to protect the site and posters from finding themselves potentially in contempt of court. We'd reluctantly do the same if a similar situation occurred in the future.

(08 Aug 2022, 10:20 am)streetdeckfan wrote [ -> ]What would be their reasoning for not allowing people to talk about incidents, assuming there were no legal proceedings that could be affected?.

Would it be to protect the driver (and potentially their feelings from people saying things about them), is it pressure from the operators to not show their drivers in a bad light, or is it something else?

(08 Aug 2022, 10:57 am)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]January 2015. Peel Retail Park.

---

I think it was eazypeazy a couple of times and I can't remember the exact reason given for the Washington incident other than some sort of connection to a family member.

Sure specific comments will be hidden away in the forum somewhere.
I'm sure someone can do some digging.

Can I ask that we avoid further discussion of the bus/cyclist incident which happened earlier in Washington? Discussing a potentially fatal accident on the forum may upset readers.

Thanks.

(08 Aug 2022, 3:22 pm)xpm wrote [ -> ]Getting back to safety systems and their effectiveness. The fire suppression systems which were fitted to the citaros on refurb - bearing in mind how many went up in flames - how effective were they!  It did preserve one not long after return from refurb, but it’s obviously not helped in a lot of other cases.  Bridge warning system is now linked to cctv system so if the cctv system is broken or in a reboot loop, the bridge warning system is also not working.  Ironically the rollout of this system seemed to be accelerated after an incident with a Viking running NIS going up the wrong bit of the centre link.

(08 Aug 2022, 7:52 pm)wibblejunior wrote [ -> ]I think the X66 usually goes via Askew Road instead of Centrelink nowadays.

(08 Aug 2022, 9:13 pm)streetdeckfan wrote [ -> ]I thought they couldn't use Centrelink at all because of the change in road layouts making it inacessible

(07 Aug 2022, 11:43 am)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]It does, but what about a double decker covering for a single decker route - The Duty Sheet will not tell them that will it....

(09 Aug 2022, 2:06 pm)morritt89 wrote [ -> ]With regards to vehicle height and low bridges (or other obstacles) at GNE the vehicle height needs to be written on the defect card by each driver. You are also required to test the low bridge detector as part of the first  use check.

This wasn't something that formed part of an Arriva defect card when I was there (this may have changed and once again shows differences between various operators). Speaking of Arriva, I seem to vaguely remember an E400 being stuck under a building (shopping centre?) in Darlington.

(09 Aug 2022, 3:18 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Cornmill that would be.

This isn't related per say but is there actually any low bridges, other than the above, where Arriva Decker's could get stuck? I can't think of any anywhere near any of Blyth, Ashington or Jesmond's routes and obviously Stockton and Redcar doesn't really matter as there isn't any deckers at both depots (bar the X93 Deckers).

I might be missing an obvious one though.


The only one I was aware of when I was at Belmont was the one on the 62 near the prison. I can't remember any other routes that deckers were banned from. 

(09 Aug 2022, 2:06 pm)morritt89 wrote [ -> ]With regards to vehicle height and low bridges (or other obstacles) at GNE the vehicle height needs to be written on the defect card by each driver. You are also required to test the low bridge detector as part of the first use check.

This wasn't something that formed part of an Arriva defect card when I was there (this may have changed and once again shows differences between various operators). Speaking of Arriva, I seem to vaguely remember an E400 being stuck under a building (shopping centre?) in Darlington.

(09 Sep 2022, 8:50 pm)TEN 6083 wrote [ -> ]


12078 collided with a bus stop on Blackett Street this morning


Sent from my iPhone 13 Pro using Tapatalk

(11 Oct 2022, 9:44 pm)Rob44 wrote [ -> ]Posted this elsewhere but a 21 'hit the bus stop outside carters well on lownfell. From video.glass on shelter shook and glass smashed. No one injured according to video

(11 Oct 2022, 10:26 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]How on earth is that possible?

(11 Oct 2022, 10:26 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]How on earth is that possible?

(12 Oct 2022, 6:48 am)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]I've been a passenger on that section of that's been involved in bumps twice.

First one was on a VR that somehow ended up hitting the wall outside the Shell garage at Harlow Green.
Well before bus lanes were a thing and the council became that obsessed with white paint. 

The second was heading in to Newcastle on a Prestige, when a car went in to the back of us at the end of the bus lane outside Low Fell library.