(02 Nov 2015, 9:22 pm)Andreos1 I am not sure more people will use the services just because of the Hobson omission though.
Even if the changes now saves a couple of minutes, compared to the previous, on a journey of that duration - it doesn't equate to much from a passenger perspective.
If the number of people complaining on social media represent even a portion of those affected, it would make sense to reinstate the link. I am sure they could cover up the mistake, with some PR spin.
If they don't, they face the possibility of facing the same negativity and the tarnished reputation, that they have in other areas.
The damage caused following the 2006 changes and meetings with communities where the 'tough' message was put out by company representatives, didn't go down well.
The M1/X1 changes following misleading questions in a consultation a few years later, could be classed as the catalyst for Bridget Phillipson's Big Bus campaign.
Not exactly PR master classes and certainly hassle the company could do without.
I was hoping they would have learned the lessons from those similar examples in the not to distant past.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:22 pm)Andreos1 I am not sure more people will use the services just because of the Hobson omission though.
Even if the changes now saves a couple of minutes, compared to the previous, on a journey of that duration - it doesn't equate to much from a passenger perspective.
If the number of people complaining on social media represent even a portion of those affected, it would make sense to reinstate the link. I am sure they could cover up the mistake, with some PR spin.
If they don't, they face the possibility of facing the same negativity and the tarnished reputation, that they have in other areas.
The damage caused following the 2006 changes and meetings with communities where the 'tough' message was put out by company representatives, didn't go down well.
The M1/X1 changes following misleading questions in a consultation a few years later, could be classed as the catalyst for Bridget Phillipson's Big Bus campaign.
Not exactly PR master classes and certainly hassle the company could do without.
I was hoping they would have learned the lessons from those similar examples in the not to distant past.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:27 pm)Michael Wasn't 2006 the year GNE started to brand their routes in Stanley?
Also what were the M1 changes they wanted or done to do again?
(02 Nov 2015, 9:31 pm)big mac A bit like they did when the Coaster service was extended to Wrekenton, which re-introduced the direct link to Newcastle for Waverley Road that was previously lost. All of the publicity on the GNE website went for the "we've listened to our customers" line, which obviously ignores the fact that they disregarded them in the first place.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:27 pm)Michael Wasn't 2006 the year GNE started to brand their routes in Stanley?
Also what were the M1 changes they wanted or done to do again?
(02 Nov 2015, 9:31 pm)big mac A bit like they did when the Coaster service was extended to Wrekenton, which re-introduced the direct link to Newcastle for Waverley Road that was previously lost. All of the publicity on the GNE website went for the "we've listened to our customers" line, which obviously ignores the fact that they disregarded them in the first place.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:22 pm)Andreos1 I am not sure more people will use the services just because of the Hobson omission though.
Even if the changes now saves a couple of minutes, compared to the previous, on a journey of that duration - it doesn't equate to much from a passenger perspective.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:22 pm)Andreos1 I am not sure more people will use the services just because of the Hobson omission though.
Even if the changes now saves a couple of minutes, compared to the previous, on a journey of that duration - it doesn't equate to much from a passenger perspective.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:52 pm)S813 FVK The route via Hobson provides quicker journey times than running via Burnopfield. Plus Burnopfield already have 2 services to Newcastle and 1 service to Metrocentre already (V7, X70 and X71) - all they'd need to do is re-route one of them via Lintz (could only be the V7 or X70) and the problem is sorted.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:52 pm)S813 FVK The route via Hobson provides quicker journey times than running via Burnopfield. Plus Burnopfield already have 2 services to Newcastle and 1 service to Metrocentre already (V7, X70 and X71) - all they'd need to do is re-route one of them via Lintz (could only be the V7 or X70) and the problem is sorted.
(02 Nov 2015, 10:03 pm)big mac Burnopfield also has the 6, which is another 2 buses an hour to both Newcastle and Metrocentre.
(02 Nov 2015, 10:03 pm)big mac Burnopfield also has the 6, which is another 2 buses an hour to both Newcastle and Metrocentre.
(02 Nov 2015, 8:26 pm)Dan Yes.
The afternoon Park View scholars 885 service to Fence Houses was previously operated by Chester-le-Street. This later ran onto the 17:08 #X1 service from Newcastle to Easington Lane, as depicted below:
This board has now moved to Washington, which is why Deptford has transferred 6042 to Washington. "Red Arrows" branded Volvo B9TL 6054 is pictured below showing the destination for service 885:
(02 Nov 2015, 8:26 pm)Dan Yes.
The afternoon Park View scholars 885 service to Fence Houses was previously operated by Chester-le-Street. This later ran onto the 17:08 #X1 service from Newcastle to Easington Lane, as depicted below:
This board has now moved to Washington, which is why Deptford has transferred 6042 to Washington. "Red Arrows" branded Volvo B9TL 6054 is pictured below showing the destination for service 885:
(02 Nov 2015, 10:08 pm)S813 FVK My point being without the 6, Burnopfield still has 2 buses to Newcastle and 1 to Metrocentre. Surely that is enough for the 6 to be re-routed via Hobson (which is the quicker way). Obviously, to cover for the loss of service to Lintz, the V7 or X70 would need to be sent around that way to cover for the loss.
I should have made myself clear, for that, i apologize.
(02 Nov 2015, 10:08 pm)S813 FVK My point being without the 6, Burnopfield still has 2 buses to Newcastle and 1 to Metrocentre. Surely that is enough for the 6 to be re-routed via Hobson (which is the quicker way). Obviously, to cover for the loss of service to Lintz, the V7 or X70 would need to be sent around that way to cover for the loss.
I should have made myself clear, for that, i apologize.
Go North East response to Quality Contract Scheme Board final report
Go North East welcomes the findings of the Quality Contract Scheme Board report on the proposal for a Quality Contract Scheme in Tyne & Wear which was released today.
Read more:
http://www.simplygo.com/news/go-north-ea...nal-report
(02 Nov 2015, 9:52 pm)S813 FVK The route via Hobson provides quicker journey times than running via Burnopfield. Plus Burnopfield already have 2 services to Newcastle and 1 service to Metrocentre already (V7, X70 and X71) - all they'd need to do is re-route one of them via Lintz (could only be the V7 or X70) and the problem is sorted.
(02 Nov 2015, 9:52 pm)S813 FVK The route via Hobson provides quicker journey times than running via Burnopfield. Plus Burnopfield already have 2 services to Newcastle and 1 service to Metrocentre already (V7, X70 and X71) - all they'd need to do is re-route one of them via Lintz (could only be the V7 or X70) and the problem is sorted.
(03 Nov 2015, 10:56 am)Andreos1 Yeah, I know the route that stays on the main road is quicker.
What I was trying to say, was that even if the new revision meant the service was quicker - it wouldn't benefit users that much, on a journey of that duration.
It has been a while since I used services over there on a regular basis.
Managed to get a Lance with a paper display on the last of my regular run - which shows how long ago it was.
Sure it was brought back into use and loaned to Stanley to cover repaints.
What I can't see changing too much in the intervening years, is a demand for buses in Burnopfield.
Certainly not enough, to warrant the level of service it has now and not at the expense of Hobson.
One thing that has crossed my mind, is the reliability seen with the X70/71.
Appreciate hands may be tied slightly due to the nature of its route, but I am starting to wonder if the V7 and 6 changes have been made to lessen the impact on passengers affected by the delays seen by the expresses.
The residents of Burnopfield have long been critical of the X70/71, but now have alternatives.
Finances and resources may have meant improvements to the X70/1 are limited.
An easy fix, is a diversion of other services.
(03 Nov 2015, 10:56 am)Andreos1 Yeah, I know the route that stays on the main road is quicker.
What I was trying to say, was that even if the new revision meant the service was quicker - it wouldn't benefit users that much, on a journey of that duration.
It has been a while since I used services over there on a regular basis.
Managed to get a Lance with a paper display on the last of my regular run - which shows how long ago it was.
Sure it was brought back into use and loaned to Stanley to cover repaints.
What I can't see changing too much in the intervening years, is a demand for buses in Burnopfield.
Certainly not enough, to warrant the level of service it has now and not at the expense of Hobson.
One thing that has crossed my mind, is the reliability seen with the X70/71.
Appreciate hands may be tied slightly due to the nature of its route, but I am starting to wonder if the V7 and 6 changes have been made to lessen the impact on passengers affected by the delays seen by the expresses.
The residents of Burnopfield have long been critical of the X70/71, but now have alternatives.
Finances and resources may have meant improvements to the X70/1 are limited.
An easy fix, is a diversion of other services.
(03 Nov 2015, 11:36 am)Venturego The problem has arisen from reducing the Diamond (former 43/44) route from Stanley to Newcastle from 4 per hour to 2 per hour on new service 6. The Hobson section having previously been operated by 44. - Solution would be to re-adopt the former route/timings of 43/44 as possibly 6 & 6A.
Lintz estate could be picked up by Nexus R5 or Venture V7 and Sunniside Glebeway routing could be picked up by Whickham local services to Metro Centre where further connections can be made to Newcastle etc... - This would give a quicker and more comfortable journey from Stanley, Metro Ctr & Newcastle. Not sure if it may reduce PVR from former 43/44 Diamond. - Maybe when new Streetlites arrive?
I travelled from Stanley to Newcastle last week on Omnidekka and it was torture. Windows misted up, Seat too uncomfortable (almost upright) - Service has definitely been downgraded.
(03 Nov 2015, 11:36 am)Venturego The problem has arisen from reducing the Diamond (former 43/44) route from Stanley to Newcastle from 4 per hour to 2 per hour on new service 6. The Hobson section having previously been operated by 44. - Solution would be to re-adopt the former route/timings of 43/44 as possibly 6 & 6A.
Lintz estate could be picked up by Nexus R5 or Venture V7 and Sunniside Glebeway routing could be picked up by Whickham local services to Metro Centre where further connections can be made to Newcastle etc... - This would give a quicker and more comfortable journey from Stanley, Metro Ctr & Newcastle. Not sure if it may reduce PVR from former 43/44 Diamond. - Maybe when new Streetlites arrive?
I travelled from Stanley to Newcastle last week on Omnidekka and it was torture. Windows misted up, Seat too uncomfortable (almost upright) - Service has definitely been downgraded.
Lintz estate is in County Durham isn't it? Why should nexus fund a bus there?
6041 has lost it's ''Pronto'' vinyls around the destination screen.
6130 has gained Northern branding:
(03 Nov 2015, 4:10 pm)R852 PRG 6041 has lost it's ''Pronto'' vinyls around the destination screen.
(03 Nov 2015, 4:10 pm)R852 PRG 6041 has lost it's ''Pronto'' vinyls around the destination screen.
Blue 5295 was on the 57, must say that it is a much better shade than that used on Connexion 4 & Durham Diamonds.
Also 5203 is still without any form of branding