(08 Feb 2025, 11:07 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote [ -> ]Ik this will probs be the wrong thread to ask this(I couldn’t find the correct thread lol) but why does GNE not trial out with ppl getting of the back door on dual door buses like what London does or is it for safety,bc i always walk past the dual door e400s and just wonder why not use both doors for ease lol?
I have always thought this as well, why not just save time at stops and let people off at the rear doors where possible...
(09 Feb 2025, 1:06 pm)d9817362 wrote [ -> ]I have always thought this as well, why not just save time at stops and let people off at the rear doors where possible...
North East infrastructure isn't really set-up for dual door operation, so you'd have passengers walking out of the rear doors directly into the side of shelters/fences/walls.
(09 Feb 2025, 4:07 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]North East infrastructure isn't really set-up for dual door operation, so you'd have passengers walking out of the rear doors directly into the side of shelters/fences/walls.
Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.
(09 Feb 2025, 4:46 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote [ -> ]Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.
The operators could look to invest and support any changes to the infrastructure.
After all, it's the kit they're choosing to buy...
(09 Feb 2025, 4:46 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote [ -> ]Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.
There's loads of places where it wouldn't really work as the bus stops are in bays so you'd be stuck on the road.
To be honest though I'm not sure they'd really benefit GoNorthEast services, they're not really busy enough to warrant it as they only really benefit places where there's a massive load of people leaving at the same time as boarding.
Think the likes of the Stagecoach services in the centre of Newcastle near Monument etc. There's not really any GoNorthEast decker services where that happens. Not enough to benefit them as rear door boarding has bad fare evasion as people just sneak on the middle door.
(09 Feb 2025, 4:46 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote [ -> ]Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.
Still wouldn't really work, at majority of stops there's a raised curb for accessibility which is generally only ever large enough to cover one entrance.
Take the High Level Bridge stop in Newcastle, given there are lots of dual door vehicles on the 21:
The raised curb is in front of the shelter, so if the driver stopped short of the shelter not only is there no raised curb, but the rear of the vehicle would be blocking the junction. If the driver stopped at the raised curb, on a dual-door vehicle passengers couldn't alight from the rear entrance because there'd be a bus shelter blocking them. Appreciate that it's unlikely anyone would be alighting at that stop on a 21, but it's the same across multiple stops in the NE.
(09 Feb 2025, 4:55 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]The operators could look to invest and support any changes to the infrastructure.
After all, it's the kit they're choosing to buy...
More chance of pigs flying than the operator in question spending a penny more than they need to on anything, let alone infrastructure.
(09 Feb 2025, 4:57 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]Still wouldn't really work, at majority of stops there's a raised curb for accessibility which is generally only ever large enough to cover one entrance.
Take the High Level Bridge stop in Newcastle, given there are lots of dual door vehicles on the 21:
The raised curb is in front of the shelter, so if the driver stopped short of the shelter not only is there no raised curb, but the rear of the vehicle would be blocking the junction. If the driver stopped at the raised curb, on a dual-door vehicle passengers couldn't alight from the rear entrance because there'd be a bus shelter blocking them. Appreciate that it's unlikely anyone would be alighting at that stop on a 21, but it's the same across multiple stops in the NE.
Side discussion here, have they actually bothered to convert the vehicles? As far as I'm aware London deckers wheelchairs etc board on the middle door.
I know there was a lot of moaning about it in the past which has quietly gone quiet lately, no doubt, because of the other bigger issues.
They trialled it when the pink angel was dual door operated
Passengers didn’t really use the middle door and the only certain stops could be used
Was quickly ditched
(08 Feb 2025, 11:07 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote [ -> ]Ik this will probs be the wrong thread to ask this(I couldn’t find the correct thread lol) but why does GNE not trial out with ppl getting of the back door on dual door buses like what London does or is it for safety,bc i always walk past the dual door e400s and just wonder why not use both doors for ease lol?
The dual door E400s should be nowhere near frontline use. If you're a wheelchair user, how do you get on at Eldon Square?
(09 Feb 2025, 4:57 pm)PH - BQA wrote [ -> ]Still wouldn't really work, at majority of stops there's a raised curb for accessibility which is generally only ever large enough to cover one entrance.
Take the High Level Bridge stop in Newcastle, given there are lots of dual door vehicles on the 21:
The raised curb is in front of the shelter, so if the driver stopped short of the shelter not only is there no raised curb, but the rear of the vehicle would be blocking the junction. If the driver stopped at the raised curb, on a dual-door vehicle passengers couldn't alight from the rear entrance because there'd be a bus shelter blocking them. Appreciate that it's unlikely anyone would be alighting at that stop on a 21, but it's the same across multiple stops in the NE.
More chance of pigs flying than the operator in question spending a penny more than they need to on anything, let alone infrastructure.
Oh aye, we all know that.
But from an operational and logistical perspective, it seems to be a no-brainer.
Imagine the PR they would get too!
It could work in their favour massively!
Nexus and the Local Highway Authorities need to start making allowances for dual door vehicles when installing or repositioning bus shelters and any other offending kerbside street furniture.
Otherwise we’ll continue being locked into using tedious single door vehicles.
(09 Feb 2025, 6:17 pm)ne14ne1 wrote [ -> ]Nexus and the Local Highway Authorities need to start making allowances for dual door vehicles when installing or repositioning bus shelters and any other offending kerbside street furniture.
Otherwise we’ll continue being locked into using tedious single door vehicles.
Not sure I agree personally. I don't see the need for dual door buses bar a very few select routes (1/22/39/40/62/63). There's no benefits to using them if there's not massive loads of people getting on and off at the same stop.
There is massive negatives though when it comes to fare loss with people evading paying and the loss of seats downstairs which pensioners need, something which isn't an issue in London as the average age is much younger or Europe where they only use single decker vehicles.
It's just a massive expense for little benefit imo.
(09 Feb 2025, 6:42 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Not sure I agree personally. I don't see the need for dual door buses bar a very few select routes (1/22/39/40/62/63). There's no benefits to using them if there's not massive loads of people getting on and off at the same stop.
There is massive negatives though when it comes to fare loss with people evading paying and the loss of seats downstairs which pensioners need, something which isn't an issue in London as the average age is much younger or Europe where they only use single decker vehicles.
It's just a massive expense for little benefit imo.
Even on the likes of the 10 & 21 when it’s full to capacity with standees right up the front doors at peak times, dual doors would make it so much easier for us to manouve around inside the bus and to alight from it.
I regularly find myself stepping off the bus to allow other passengers to squeeze off.
We used to have dual door buses here.
Numerous other cities in the UK utilise dual doors buses on at least some of their routes.
Countless cities across the world use dual (or more) doored buses.
Public transport should be quick & easy to use, and optimised for people, not profit.
So frustrating here.
(09 Feb 2025, 6:17 pm)ne14ne1 wrote [ -> ]Nexus and the Local Highway Authorities need to start making allowances for dual door vehicles when installing or repositioning bus shelters and any other offending kerbside street furniture.
Otherwise we’ll continue being locked into using tedious single door vehicles.
Why?
Assuming it's one operator using the dual doors and one operator only doing it because they're acquiring second hand tat from another division - then that's on them. Not Nexus or an LA.
(09 Feb 2025, 8:22 pm)ne14ne1 wrote [ -> ]Even on the likes of the 10 & 21 when it’s full to capacity with standees right up the front doors at peak times, dual doors would make it so much easier for us to manouve around inside the bus and to alight from it.
I regularly find myself stepping off the bus to allow other passengers to squeeze off.
We used to have dual door buses here.
Numerous other cities in the UK utilise dual doors buses on at least some of their routes.
Countless cities across the world use dual (or more) doored buses.
Public transport should be quick & easy to use, and optimised for people, not profit.
So frustrating here.
See when stuff is full to capacity then it should be having a capacity increase if you ask me but when it's all about profits they don't care.
imo one of the biggest problems in the UK is the refusal to use bendy buses, on busy routes where people do generally short journeys so having a seat doesn't really matter they're much much better for capacity with multiple doors and the lack of time wasted with people trundling up and down stairs.
Sadly local government seem to be totally aware of it aswell since they're all pushing the 'Glider' buses which are just glorified bendy buses, let's be honest, but if anyone dared announced bendy buses then it'd be like WW3 with the media because of London.
It doesn't help that we use reversal bus stations either which are just generally crap for everything bar saving space which can't take dual door buses at all.
(09 Feb 2025, 8:28 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Why?
Assuming it's one operator using the dual doors and one operator only doing it because they're acquiring second hand tat from another division - then that's on them. Not Nexus or an LA.
No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system.
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them.
(09 Feb 2025, 8:29 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]It doesn't help that we use reversal bus stations either which are just generally crap for everything bar saving space which can't take dual door buses at all.
Dual door buses can use reversal bus stations.
You can either spec from new or retrofit ramps to the front doors and move any offending internal grab poles. Don’t need to go to the expense of a full single door conversion.
Actually, Im pretty sure at Eldon Sq several of the stands could have longer boarding platforms put in if in future we wanted to accommodate rear doors, although as I mention above once we’re in control and setting the spec, front door boarding and alighting for wheelchair users could be stipulated.
(09 Feb 2025, 9:38 pm)ne14ne1 wrote [ -> ] No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system.
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them.
Dual door buses can use reversal bus stations.
You can either spec from new or retrofit ramps to the front doors and move any offending internal grab poles. Don’t need to go to the expense of a full single door conversion.
Actually, Im pretty sure at Eldon Sq several of the stands could have longer boarding platforms put in if in future we wanted to accommodate rear doors, although as I mention above once we’re in control and setting the spec, front door boarding and alighting for wheelchair users could be stipulated.
I think the basic fundamentals need to be sorted, such as identifying passenger habits and fixing the network needs to be the initial priority.
Those basic fundamentals are key to it working imo.
Once that's done and the public start to use the system, a second stage process can look at options such as vehicle spec, dual door compliant stops etc.
It's patently obvious that ensuring contracts are watertight and penalties for not running services are introduced too mind.
(09 Feb 2025, 9:38 pm)ne14ne1 wrote [ -> ]No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system.
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them.
Dual door buses can use reversal bus stations.
You can either spec from new or retrofit ramps to the front doors and move any offending internal grab poles. Don’t need to go to the expense of a full single door conversion.
Actually, Im pretty sure at Eldon Sq several of the stands could have longer boarding platforms put in if in future we wanted to accommodate rear doors, although as I mention above once we’re in control and setting the spec, front door boarding and alighting for wheelchair users could be stipulated.
A comment on a local West Durham forum mentioned an issue with boarding a dual-door Enviro 400. The passenger was informed by the driver that they couldn’t be let off at Consett Bus Station and had to disembark at the previous stop due to the centre door. Even if it’s just one person, this situation is still unacceptable.
(09 Feb 2025, 5:06 pm)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]The dual door E400s should be nowhere near frontline use. If you're a wheelchair user, how do you get on at Eldon Square?
Or Durham. Yet these vehicles seem to be regular on the 21.
(09 Feb 2025, 9:38 pm)ne14ne1 wrote [ -> ]No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system.
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them.
I think once we have franchising (and hopefully, eventually public ownership), then I think we can start to take a strategic view of how routes, vehicles and infrastructure all play a part in the passenger journey.
It's been difficult under privatisation, and it inevitably comes down to a chicken/egg situation. Where lots of money has been invested in infrastructure, it ends up underused or not at all, because there's a complete disconnect between operators, the PTE and Local Authorities. Gateshead and Centrelink is a cracking example of that, but there's numerous others, such as the West-bound bus lane on the Felling bypass between Lingey Lane junction and Heworth Interchange.
Anyone who used the Washington services in the 1990s will remember how bad that traffic used to get, yet since the journeys were sped up, frequencies and services were cut. Why would any council want to invest on the basis the operator could change their mind, and more to the point, how would they ever build a business case to seek Govt funding.
(10 Feb 2025, 4:47 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]I think once we have franchising (and hopefully, eventually public ownership), then I think we can start to take a strategic view of how routes, vehicles and infrastructure all play a part in the passenger journey.
It's been difficult under privatisation, and it inevitably comes down to a chicken/egg situation. Where lots of money has been invested in infrastructure, it ends up underused or not at all, because there's a complete disconnect between operators, the PTE and Local Authorities. Gateshead and Centrelink is a cracking example of that, but there's numerous others, such as the West-bound bus lane on the Felling bypass between Lingey Lane junction and Heworth Interchange.
Anyone who used the Washington services in the 1990s will remember how bad that traffic used to get, yet since the journeys were sped up, frequencies and services were cut. Why would any council want to invest on the basis the operator could change their mind, and more to the point, how would they ever build a business case to seek Govt funding.
I'm not too sure either mind. Our local bodies haven't exactly had the best track record either like mentioning Centrelink there.
The scheme is utterly stupid since the vast majority of people want to be in Newcastle and it effectively bypasses the place and heading towards Gateshead it goes away from the bus station so is actually longer to use.
It's not the only thing either, the Silverlink Bus Lane is another, now totally unused pretty much, not to mention the P&R at The Great Park so you can sit on a bus to Newcastle, or you could use your brain and drive 1/2 mile down the road to The Regent Centre and use a much quicker and frequent Metro service instead.
It's not just old stuff either, since there's recent things like:
- North Shields Interchange - Buses avoiding the thing because it's too far out the way to resource extra buses and would significantly increase the time for punters further down the route with no benefit for those customers either (306 in particular)
- Potential Angel P&R - Won't be used if people are expected to use local bus services.
- Rebuilding Gateshead Interchange - Why...?
- Gateshead Flyover - Unacceptable
- Metrocentre P&R - Complete waste of tax payer funds
If we're bringing Teesside into it:
(10 Feb 2025, 6:49 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]I'm not too sure either mind. Our local bodies haven't exactly had the best track record either like mentioning Centrelink there.
The scheme is utterly stupid since the vast majority of people want to be in Newcastle and it effectively bypasses the place and heading towards Gateshead it goes away from the bus station so is actually longer to use.
It's not the only thing either, the Silverlink Bus Lane is another, now totally unused pretty much, not to mention the P&R at The Great Park so you can sit on a bus to Newcastle, or you could use your brain and drive 1/2 mile down the road to The Regent Centre and use a much quicker and frequent Metro service instead.
It's not just old stuff either, since there's recent things like:- North Shields Interchange - Buses avoiding the thing because it's too far out the way to resource extra buses and would significantly increase the time for punters further down the route with no benefit for those customers either (306 in particular)
What u exactly getting at with the hub. Every bus serves it bar the 306 and so what if it doesn't. The negative round the hub was extremely pathetic to anyone who doesn't live in or around it. It's been a hell of a lot better than sitting on a cold rainy damp day waiting for a bus on Bedford Street to actually being in a shelter place. North Shields has good links with the buses in the hub. Sending the 306 in there would make no sense since the 307 follows the 306 for the most part. It about a 5 minute walk from the top of Alblion road to the hub anyway.
(10 Feb 2025, 7:40 pm)Aaron21 wrote [ -> ]What u exactly getting at with the hub. Every bus serves it bar the 306 and so what if it doesn't. The negative round the hub was extremely pathetic to anyone who doesn't live in or around it. It's been a hell of a lot better than sitting on a cold rainy damp day waiting for a bus on Bedford Street to actually being in a shelter place. North Shields has good links with the buses in the hub. Sending the 306 in there would make no sense since the 307 follows the 306 for the most part. It about a 5 minute walk from the top of Alblion road to the hub anyway.
It's not just the 306 since the 1 avoids it Newcastle bound aswell. It's a complete white elephant if you ask me. If bus routes aren't serving it as it's in the wrong place then it's a failure, especially the two busiest routes in the town.
It's just another we don't know how to get people into the town so let's build a bus station which North East councils are obsessed about. Bishop Auckland is another one going down the route when the reason people aren't going to the town is there's nothing there.
(10 Feb 2025, 7:40 pm)Aaron21 wrote [ -> ]What u exactly getting at with the hub. Every bus serves it bar the 306 and so what if it doesn't. The negative round the hub was extremely pathetic to anyone who doesn't live in or around it. It's been a hell of a lot better than sitting on a cold rainy damp day waiting for a bus on Bedford Street to actually being in a shelter place. North Shields has good links with the buses in the hub. Sending the 306 in there would make no sense since the 307 follows the 306 for the most part. It about a 5 minute walk from the top of Alblion road to the hub anyway.
The get out clause for an extra PVR is so Arriva can save paying approx 75p per journey for entering the bus interchange at North Shields just like the 317 (when ran by Stagecoach changed to avoid using Wallsend Metro )
We need to change the attitude and go back to the 80s and 90s and create an integrated transport where All Nexus secured Services must service Bus Stations and Metro stations where possible. all commercial buses are "encouraged" or "forced" to visit transport hubs and Metro Stations within reason
We need positivity on making it easier for passengers not local to get to locations.
Q How do you get from Battlehill to Cramlington Hospital by bus?
If we can change the mindset so you get to North tyneside Hub there is a bus that goes directly there...
NOT get a bus to the hub then walk to Shakespeare Street which is only a 5 min walk... (20min self propelling in a wheelchair up hill across 4 roads 3 traffic lights 1 zebra crossing avoid the temp roadworks. Or advise someone who has a white stick how to walk 5 mins up roads they have never done before because they live in Carlisle and are visiting family...
We need buses to be forced to use transport hubs for this reason
(10 Feb 2025, 6:49 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]I'm not too sure either mind. Our local bodies haven't exactly had the best track record either like mentioning Centrelink there.
The scheme is utterly stupid since the vast majority of people want to be in Newcastle and it effectively bypasses the place and heading towards Gateshead it goes away from the bus station so is actually longer to use.
It's not the only thing either, the Silverlink Bus Lane is another, now totally unused pretty much, not to mention the P&R at The Great Park so you can sit on a bus to Newcastle, or you could use your brain and drive 1/2 mile down the road to The Regent Centre and use a much quicker and frequent Metro service instead.
It's not just old stuff either, since there's recent things like:- North Shields Interchange - Buses avoiding the thing because it's too far out the way to resource extra buses and would significantly increase the time for punters further down the route with no benefit for those customers either (306 in particular)
- Potential Angel P&R - Won't be used if people are expected to use local bus services.
- Rebuilding Gateshead Interchange - Why...?
- Gateshead Flyover - Unacceptable
- Metrocentre P&R - Complete waste of tax payer funds
If we're bringing Teesside into it:
Could add Park Lane to that list too, at least for the Stagecoach stuff. To their credit GNE continue to run most of their services via it whereas Stagecoach only ever did in one direction (can't remember which now!) and then pulled out altogether to save the usage fee. Whether it's tightness from an operator or stupidity from Nexus in charging operators out of the infrastructure, I fear it goes to show doesn't matter whether private or public run, decisions will be made for the benefit of the balance sheet, not the public.
(10 Feb 2025, 9:55 pm)DaveFromUpNorth wrote [ -> ]The get out clause for an extra PVR is so Arriva can save paying approx 75p per journey for entering the bus interchange at North Shields just like the 317 (when ran by Stagecoach changed to avoid using Wallsend Metro )
We need to change the attitude and go back to the 80s and 90s and create an integrated transport where All Nexus secured Services must service Bus Stations and Metro stations where possible. all commercial buses are "encouraged" or "forced" to visit transport hubs and Metro Stations within reason
We need positivity on making it easier for passengers not local to get to locations.
Q How do you get from Battlehill to Cramlington Hospital by bus?
If we can change the mindset so you get to North tyneside Hub there is a bus that goes directly there...
NOT get a bus to the hub then walk to Shakespeare Street which is only a 5 min walk... (20min self propelling in a wheelchair up hill across 4 roads 3 traffic lights 1 zebra crossing avoid the temp roadworks. Or advise someone who has a white stick how to walk 5 mins up roads they have never done before because they live in Carlisle and are visiting family...
We need buses to be forced to use transport hubs for this reason
Tongue in cheek, 309 to Whitley Bay then the 57 to the hospital doors.
Seriously though, North Shields is the wrong place for a hub though imo. It involves doubling back for most journeys which results in extended journey times for the vast majority of people. I live on the 19 route and if I was going to Battle Hill I'd never interchange at North Shields as it's just too long or infact really anywhere as there's nowhere sensible to change for. I do agree that a hub would be good but it's not the right place for it.
imo the best place would be Northumberland Park if additional services were actually serving the place. Like really you've got on the doorstep:
Metro: Whitley Bay / North Shields / Tynemouth / Byker / Wallsend / Newcastle
Northumberland Line: Ashington / Bedlington Station / West Blyth / Seaton Delaval
19: Cramlington Hospital / Cramlington / North Shields Ferry / North Shields
22*: Howdon / Cobalt / Silverlink / Wallsend / Byker
41/41A*: Battle Hill / Wallsend
351: Whitley Bay / Benton ASDA
353/354/356: Killingworth
356: North Tyneside Hospital
* Potential extensions
That's pretty much everywhere in the area linked who needs a link, other than maybe Blyth Town Centre. Northumberland Park is a right missed opportunity imo and it would literally cost nothing since the infrastructure is already build.
(10 Feb 2025, 10:17 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]Could add Park Lane to that list too, at least for the Stagecoach stuff. To their credit GNE continue to run most of their services via it whereas Stagecoach only ever did in one direction (can't remember which now!) and then pulled out altogether to save the usage fee. Whether it's tightness from an operator or stupidity from Nexus in charging operators out of the infrastructure, I fear it goes to show doesn't matter whether private or public run, decisions will be made for the benefit of the balance sheet, not the public.
Must admit I don't understand why bus operators are charged to use interchanges, when they don't get anything in return since they shut all the travel shops etc. Surely it would be in their best interest to have the links so all of them have onward travel to the Metro so is a benefit for them especially when some of them are questionably not in the best place anyway - Park Lane definitely fits that category.
(10 Feb 2025, 10:17 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote [ -> ]Could add Park Lane to that list too, at least for the Stagecoach stuff. To their credit GNE continue to run most of their services via it whereas Stagecoach only ever did in one direction (can't remember which now!) and then pulled out altogether to save the usage fee. Whether it's tightness from an operator or stupidity from Nexus in charging operators out of the infrastructure, I fear it goes to show doesn't matter whether private or public run, decisions will be made for the benefit of the balance sheet, not the public.
It ways always served coming out of the city centre, so heading to the likes of Plains Farm, Springwell, Grindon etc
E services terminated at Park Lane.
I'm sure theres a map in the bygone era for park lane and at one point it was rammed with services.
Noticed 5443 is still wandering about with an orange back L.E.D display
(10 Feb 2025, 8:37 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]It's not just the 306 since the 1 avoids it Newcastle bound aswell. It's a complete white elephant if you ask me. If bus routes aren't serving it as it's in the wrong place then it's a failure, especially the two busiest routes in the town.
It's just another we don't know how to get people into the town so let's build a bus station which North East councils are obsessed about. Bishop Auckland is another one going down the route when the reason people aren't going to the town is there's nothing there.
I would certainly agree with the above comments that there is nothing there. one Saturday before the the covid pandemic in 2019 I got the Metro to North Shields then the 11 (now 317 again) from West Percy Street a journey I used to do many years ago. Whilst waiting for the bus I looked along the road towards Northumberland Square and I could nearly count the amount of people I saw. I thought to myself this place used to be a busy thriving town now it is dead and this was a Saturday afternoon.
(10 Feb 2025, 6:49 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]I'm not too sure either mind. Our local bodies haven't exactly had the best track record either like mentioning Centrelink there.
The scheme is utterly stupid since the vast majority of people want to be in Newcastle and it effectively bypasses the place and heading towards Gateshead it goes away from the bus station so is actually longer to use.
The Centrelink scheme was late 90s, so it was a completely different world back then. Metrocentre was booming at the time, and indeed it was a regular feat to see those Centrelink Scanias full to the brim. It's the kind of scheme that we need to see more of, very much in the same way as guided busways have taken off towards Leigh, in Cambridge and in Luton.