North East Buses

(07 Jun 2014, 1:14 pm)peter wrote [ -> ]Just to let you know of a typo on the Darlington publication, as you currently have 1405s registration down as NK08BPO which should of course be NK09BPO.

Thanks Peter, correction attached.

(07 Jun 2014, 1:25 pm)Marcus wrote [ -> ]I'm not sure if 7626 is allocated to Stockton or Durham (I only recognise 7619 and 7620) but it was on the X2. Transfer?

(07 Jun 2014, 7:21 pm)Robert wrote [ -> ]Stockton run either some or all of the X1/X2 services.

7626 was new to Durham along with 7627. Stockton do not (and at present can not) have any decker allocation.

(07 Jun 2014, 7:24 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]7626 was new to Durham along with 7627. Stockton do not (and at present can not) have any decker allocation.

ok

A picture posted on Facebook earlier confirms that E400s 7503, 7504, 7506, 7507, 7508 are all refurbished and ready in Thorntons' yard. All looking on track for the launch which is likely to be early August.

Hang on, I now get it why it's 7501 to 7509 rather than 7514 to 7521. It's becuase all they have to do is re-cover the seats with leather trim instead of paying for and installing new seats. Not criticising but that'll be why.

(07 Jun 2014, 10:12 pm)tyresmoke wrote [ -> ]A picture posted on Facebook earlier confirms that E400s 7503, 7504, 7506, 7507, 7508 are all refurbished and ready in Thorntons' yard. All looking on track for the launch which is likely to be early August.

Will they still have the seat under the stairs or will they have photos there instead, like the Sapphire Pulsars?

We were told at the UEC AGM yesterday that the five remaining coaches will be gone by September. Replaced by three E400s and two Omnicities. Three have already been sold and the other two will be converted to trainers for Arriva Yorkshire.

Question for Richard, thank you for your excellent depot allocations, but I do not see the 2 recent repaints 1711/1712, are they spares in reserve and do not have a permanent allocation ?

(08 Jun 2014, 9:37 am)Coppercap40 wrote [ -> ]Question for Richard, thank you for your excellent depot allocations, but I do not see the 2 recent repaints 1711/1712, are they spares in reserve and do not have a permanent allocation ?

These were both at Ashington yesterday.

(08 Jun 2014, 9:37 am)Coppercap40 wrote [ -> ]Question for Richard, thank you for your excellent depot allocations, but I do not see the 2 recent repaints 1711/1712, are they spares in reserve and do not have a permanent allocation ?

Yes, that is correct, these vehicles are spares & can be allocated anywhere at very "Short Notice".

You can guarantee, that if I had allocated them to a Depot, some bright spark on here, would have no doubt made comment, that they were at x Depot, so that's why I have left them off.

On the Official Arriva Fleet Allocation Sheets, they are just down as Reserve with NO specific Depot Allocation. I can send you the Full Allocation Sheets, if you wish to PM me (your personal email address)
via the PM system, as I am NOT prepared to upload that particular file onto the forum.

(08 Jun 2014, 10:30 am)Richard Smiles wrote [ -> ]Yes, that is correct, these vehicles are spares & can be allocated anywhere at very "Short Notice".

You can guarantee, that if I had allocated them to a Depot, some bright spark on here, would have no doubt made comment, that they were at x Depot, so that's why I have left them off.

On the Official Arriva Fleet Allocation Sheets, they are just down as Reserve with NO specific Depot Allocation. I can send you the Full Allocation Sheets, if you wish to PM me (your personal email address)
via the PM system, as I am NOT prepared to upload that particular file onto the forum.

ive been told 1712 1766 are at durham but 1712 is spare and 1711 is te replace one of darlo solo

(08 Jun 2014, 12:36 pm)jaimz13 wrote [ -> ]ive been told 1712 1766 are at durham but 1712 is spare and 1711 is te replace one of darlo solo

1711/2 have moved to Ashington - 1711 is covering for the damaged 1764. Both were meant to cover the short gap between Darlington losing 2827/8 to Whitby and the end of the H1/H2 but 1712 went to Durham instead due to Durham rejecting one of the X-GGO Darts.

(08 Jun 2014, 12:53 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]1711/2 have moved to Ashington - 1711 is covering for the damaged 1764. Both were meant to cover the short gap between Darlington losing 2827/8 to Whitby and the end of the H1/H2 but 1712 went to Durham instead due to Durham rejecting one of the X-GGO Darts.

See photo:
https://flic.kr/p/nRBMaU

(08 Jun 2014, 12:53 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]1711/2 have moved to Ashington - 1711 is covering for the damaged 1764. Both were meant to cover the short gap between Darlington losing 2827/8 to Whitby and the end of the H1/H2 but 1712 went to Durham instead due to Durham rejecting one of the X-GGO Darts.

I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

(08 Jun 2014, 3:59 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

In some cases, the depots do arguably have a better idea of how things need to be ran, as they see the day to day running from first hand experience rather than from data presented to them via a spreadsheet, document, etc.

One of the Max Spec DB300's was spotted on the A1(M) this afternoon near Washington Services going north on suspended tow on way back from Bus & Coach World, Blackburn

(08 Jun 2014, 3:59 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

They can refuse to accept the transfer on the grounds of the mechanical state of the vehicle - which is the case in this instance.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:12 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]They can refuse to accept the transfer on the grounds of the mechanical state of the vehicle - which is the case in this instance.

Which is wrong. If Head Office says you are to take a bus, the depot shouldn take it.

The depot dictating what vehicles they want (or do not want) is totally unacceptable.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:12 pm)Kuyoyo wrote [ -> ]They can refuse to accept the transfer on the grounds of the mechanical state of the vehicle - which is the case in this instance.

I find it extremely concerning that Arriva would send a vehicle elsewhere, which has been refused by another depot, because of the mechanical state of the vehicle. I think the HSE would be just as concerned.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:06 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]In some cases, the depots do arguably have a better idea of how things need to be ran, as they see the day to day running from first hand experience rather than from data presented to them via a spreadsheet, document, etc.

You'd argue that knowledge should be in head office.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:28 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]I find it extremely concerning that Arriva would send a vehicle elsewhere, which has been refused by another depot, because of the mechanical state of the vehicle. I think the HSE would be just as concerned.

Darlington sent it to Durham, Durham inspected it, refused it until Darlington had sorted it out, so it returned to Darlington with 1310 moving in its place until the repairs had been made. However, since that, the allocation had been revised and that swap has now become official.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:28 pm)aureolin wrote [ -> ]You'd argue that knowledge should be in head office.

Depots - One overall Manager, and an engineering manager
Head Office - 3 separate management teams (Commercial, Marketing and Engineering)