(06 Aug 2021, 3:57 pm)DeltaMan wrote [ -> ]I'm not sure what the answer is with the 71 situation. The 78 duplicates most of the route west of Fence Houses (although not FH itself) and the 4 covers most of Fence Houses to Houghton.
Houghton to Seaham "feels" like it needs a bus route but that costs you a bus alone. I wonder if it would have been more of a success back in the day if the Seaham part was tagged on a 4 once an hour ,like the proposed extensions to the X1
If there was a clock-face timetable between Chester and Woodstone village, then I could see the 71 and 78 working in harmony between those points.
As it is, they not only duplicate each other, but can follow each other too. Not much headway at all.
That tweaking of the timetable, coupled with a synchronisation with trains at Seaham and promotion of the route, may have seen it succeed.
This must be the third or fourth reincarnation of the route that never has worked and it was never going to suddenly start working this time.
Their repeated insistence on doing the same thing over and over... well it reeks of that laziness I mentioned the other day.
Do we know what the pvr will now be on the 1
(06 Aug 2021, 4:24 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]If there was a clock-face timetable between Chester and Woodstone village, then I could see the 71 and 78 working in harmony between those points.
As it is, they not only duplicate each other, but can follow each other too. Not much headway at all.
That tweaking of the timetable, coupled with a synchronisation with trains at Seaham and promotion of the route, may have seen it succeed.
This must be the third or fourth reincarnation of the route that never has worked and it was never going to suddenly start working this time.
Their repeated insistence on doing the same thing over and over... well it reeks of that laziness I mentioned the other day.
It was the 238 which worked quite well, but I do think ur right if you time it with the trains that would be good. But the 71 is actually quite busy
(06 Aug 2021, 4:20 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]I'm not surprised to see most of these changes. Some feel a bit premature, some I think were inevitable and others feel like a problem solved by cobbling everything together - the old square pegs in round holes approach.
I think the idea of producing a booklet for network changes is a good one, but I feel like I could have gotten around an 18 hole golf course in the time I've read through that intro. Headlines like 'Getting buses fit for the future', in a booklet of service cuts, and force-feeding readers with 11 pages of 'look how good we are', feels like the work of an excessively-paid consultant or spin-doctor. I somehow think that those losing their bus services in parts of West Durham and East Durham, will feel very little positivity from hearing about the 'luxury Xlines network' or how there's been a £17 million investment in modern, green buses. Can we just have spin-free in the future, please!
The statement "The pandemic has, however, had a detrimental impact on the usage of all public transport and is changing the way people work, shop and more, in turn impacting travel patterns that we must work through adjusting to" feels somewhat premature. Although services are pretty much all reopened, the guidance to work from home if you can" has only been dropped on the 19th July, and in fact a lot of employers are yet to start the transition of those staff back into the workplace yet - including the Government and local authorities themselves. It's inevitable that office-based workers patterns of work will change, which is why flexible ticketing is going to be so important, but it feels premature going down this road so soon.
A few that stand out -
- 21 - Good to see the Brandon extension still happen. It'll give people there a real choice, rather than the current offering they have from Arriva.
- [b]28/28A - I'm a bit surprised about this one, as I'm not sure how operationally practical it is to terminate at Ouston. Unless it moves to Riverside for driver changeovers at GHM? Feels somewhat of a ransom note to DCC for cash, as if its not supported between CLS-Ouston, it'll end up being another service left to die.[/b]
- 71 - See below
- 8 - Sensible to divert via Brady Square, as the 85 doesn't really do much. The new 84 will at least serve the Vic and towards the Village again. Also pleased to see evening and Sunday services introduced.
- 56 - I'm surprised at the move to drop this down to every 15 minutes. I probably use it more than I do the X1 now and find it to be quite busy no matter the time of day. I also find it odd telling people in Washington or Southwick that your bus is being cut so that Old Durham Road can have a bus every 7/8 minutes...
- X1 - Extensions to Peterlee and Dalton Park are nice, but it remains to be seen how they're promoted and how popular they are. I really cannot see many shopping trips from Washington to Dalton Park, nor can I see any real reason to go to Peterlee, other than for employment.
On the Washington Locals - I'm pleased to see the ridiculous system of splitting at the Galleries is being axed, and not surprised to see the Heworth extension also axed.
For the new 82, I think its a mistake using Waterview Park as a terminus point. You're cutting a shopping links off to the main High Street and a retail park from Washington Village, and instead extending to an office complex that is earmarked for closure. The age demographic in Washington Village is above retirement age, so having a half hourly service to an office complex is pointless. There's already regular links from the Galleries for anyone who does work there. I wonder if the 82 changes are largely to 'make' Barmston Court fit, which is a bit of an anomaly due to its location.
The new 84 looks OK, but I wish we could avoid this ridiculous system of needing to serve both Barmston Bus link and Horsley Road. Even at the furthest distance, they are in walkable distance from each other. It would make more sense to omit the bus link and serve Horsley Road only. I also think it'd have made more sense to retain the 83 service number throughout, as customers are going to find it confusing with the current 84.
I'm not surprised to see the 85 curtailed at the Galleries. It doesn't do much between there and Brady Square, and there are already plenty of links to the main road, and now the 8 if required to the old terminus.
I used the 71 lately for the entire route and I was surprised how busy it was from Seaton onwards into Seaham. There were about 3 of us into Houghton, but nobody boarded or alighted there. I had forgotten it even existed, before I went to use it, but the route reminds me a bit of a service that has been designed to die - a bit like the North Sunderland estates fiascos of a couple years ago. Whilst I don't think promoting connections to the rail network at Seaham are likely to make much impact, given the 21/X21/X1s links to Newcastle, the 21/X21 links to Durham, and the upcoming increase of services at Chester-le-Street, I do think they could have done more to promote the Houghton to Seaham section of the route.
I really hate the ransom demands to local authorities though, and that is exactly how the wording on the 71 changes come across - and after 18 months of the Treasury funding the business.
Although the info hasn't been changed yet, the timetable after the 5th September indicates that the 28 will continue to run but hourly and the 28A between Perkinsville Bungalows and Newcastle only.
(06 Aug 2021, 4:25 pm)Train8261 wrote [ -> ]Do we know what the pvr will now be on the 1
https://www.northeastbuses.co.uk/forum/s...p?tid=3489&page=29
Peter did some working out earlier, this was post 5 hours ago.
(06 Aug 2021, 4:25 pm)Keeiajs wrote [ -> ]It was the 238 which worked quite well, but I do think ur right if you time it with the trains that would be good. But the 71 is actually quite busy
Seaham Station isn't exactly in the best location compared to the rest of the town (residential, leisure etc).
Plenty of commuters use the station. Day trippers too.
To have the only bus running near the station, totally unaligned with the trains arriving at the station and therefore missing out on any organic footfall... It makes no sense to me.
It's like having a pub that doesn't open when there's fans going to and from the match.
You're not going to get people traipsing from Chester to Seaham to connect to the rail network, but you are going to attract those within seaham and potentially towards Houghton.
I've used it once to connect to the train and never again.
Never used the 71 since and if I've used the bus to connect to the Durham Coast line, it's been via Heworth or Sunderland. Despite Seaham being the nearest station for those living or working in the coalfields.
The old 238 (when it went to Barnwell) did get quite busy around the Seaham to Houghton section. I distinctly remember that a trip (on a Saturday) was split into 3 sections:
Sunderland to Ryhope Village (1 trip number)
Ryhope Village to Houghton (another number - I believe this was supported financially)
Houghton to Barnwell (another trip number and also supported)
Northlea in Seaham was always busy but you can't get anything bigger than a Solo around there.
Regarding the 61, I believe this to be branded Mercs from what I've seen
(06 Aug 2021, 4:32 pm)morritt89 wrote [ -> ]The old 238 (when it went to Barnwell) did get quite busy around the Seaham to Houghton section. I distinctly remember that a trip (on a Saturday) was split into 3 sections:
Sunderland to Ryhope Village (1 trip number)
Ryhope Village to Houghton (another number - I believe this was supported financially)
Houghton to Barnwell (another trip number and also supported)
Northlea in Seaham was always busy but you can't get anything bigger than a Solo around there.
Regarding the 61, I believe this to be branded Mercs from what I've seen
Is the 60 being repainted & can you also say what depot will operate the 65?
(06 Aug 2021, 4:20 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]I'm not surprised to see most of these changes. Some feel a bit premature, some I think were inevitable and others feel like a problem solved by cobbling everything together - the old square pegs in round holes approach.
I think the idea of producing a booklet for network changes is a good one, but I feel like I could have gotten around an 18 hole golf course in the time I've read through that intro. Headlines like 'Getting buses fit for the future', in a booklet of service cuts, and force-feeding readers with 11 pages of 'look how good we are', feels like the work of an excessively-paid consultant or spin-doctor. I somehow think that those losing their bus services in parts of West Durham and East Durham, will feel very little positivity from hearing about the 'luxury Xlines network' or how there's been a £17 million investment in modern, green buses. Can we just have spin-free in the future, please!
The statement "The pandemic has, however, had a detrimental impact on the usage of all public transport and is changing the way people work, shop and more, in turn impacting travel patterns that we must work through adjusting to" feels somewhat premature. Although services are pretty much all reopened, the guidance to work from home if you can" has only been dropped on the 19th July, and in fact a lot of employers are yet to start the transition of those staff back into the workplace yet - including the Government and local authorities themselves. It's inevitable that office-based workers patterns of work will change, which is why flexible ticketing is going to be so important, but it feels premature going down this road so soon.
A few that stand out -
- 21 - Good to see the Brandon extension still happen. It'll give people there a real choice, rather than the current offering they have from Arriva.
- 28/28A - I'm a bit surprised about this one, as I'm not sure how operationally practical it is to terminate at Ouston. Unless it moves to Riverside for driver changeovers at GHM? Feels somewhat of a ransom note to DCC for cash, as if its not supported between CLS-Ouston, it'll end up being another service left to die.
- 71 - See below
- 8 - Sensible to divert via Brady Square, as the 85 doesn't really do much. The new 84 will at least serve the Vic and towards the Village again. Also pleased to see evening and Sunday services introduced.
- 56 - I'm surprised at the move to drop this down to every 15 minutes. I probably use it more than I do the X1 now and find it to be quite busy no matter the time of day. I also find it odd telling people in Washington or Southwick that your bus is being cut so that Old Durham Road can have a bus every 7/8 minutes...
- X1 - Extensions to Peterlee and Dalton Park are nice, but it remains to be seen how they're promoted and how popular they are. I really cannot see many shopping trips from Washington to Dalton Park, nor can I see any real reason to go to Peterlee, other than for employment.
On the Washington Locals - I'm pleased to see the ridiculous system of splitting at the Galleries is being axed, and not surprised to see the Heworth extension also axed.
For the new 82, I think its a mistake using Waterview Park as a terminus point. You're cutting a shopping links off to the main High Street and a retail park from Washington Village, and instead extending to an office complex that is earmarked for closure. The age demographic in Washington Village is above retirement age, so having a half hourly service to an office complex is pointless. There's already regular links from the Galleries for anyone who does work there. I wonder if the 82 changes are largely to 'make' Barmston Court fit, which is a bit of an anomaly due to its location.
The new 84 looks OK, but I wish we could avoid this ridiculous system of needing to serve both Barmston Bus link and Horsley Road. Even at the furthest distance, they are in walkable distance from each other. It would make more sense to omit the bus link and serve Horsley Road only. I also think it'd have made more sense to retain the 83 service number throughout, as customers are going to find it confusing with the current 84.
I'm not surprised to see the 85 curtailed at the Galleries. It doesn't do much between there and Brady Square, and there are already plenty of links to the main road, and now the 8 if required to the old terminus.
I used the 71 lately for the entire route and I was surprised how busy it was from Seaton onwards into Seaham. There were about 3 of us into Houghton, but nobody boarded or alighted there. I had forgotten it even existed, before I went to use it, but the route reminds me a bit of a service that has been designed to die - a bit like the North Sunderland estates fiascos of a couple years ago. Whilst I don't think promoting connections to the rail network at Seaham are likely to make much impact, given the 21/X21/X1s links to Newcastle, the 21/X21 links to Durham, and the upcoming increase of services at Chester-le-Street, I do think they could have done more to promote the Houghton to Seaham section of the route.
I really hate the ransom demands to local authorities though, and that is exactly how the wording on the 71 changes come across - and after 18 months of the Treasury funding the business.
I think we must have posted at a similar time, otherwise I would have included your post in one of my earlier replies.
Most of what I have said, aligns with your comments and there's some additional response too.
I'd be ashamed to have used public funds to bail out a network and specifically with a service as flawed as the 71.
Launched not that long ago, maintaining vital links whilst financially propped up and after all that, someone then has the nerve to do their best Oliver Twist impression when it suits operational demands.
(06 Aug 2021, 4:32 pm)morritt89 wrote [ -> ]The old 238 (when it went to Barnwell) did get quite busy around the Seaham to Houghton section. I distinctly remember that a trip (on a Saturday) was split into 3 sections:
Sunderland to Ryhope Village (1 trip number)
Ryhope Village to Houghton (another number - I believe this was supported financially)
Houghton to Barnwell (another trip number and also supported)
Northlea in Seaham was always busy but you can't get anything bigger than a Solo around there.
Regarding the 61, I believe this to be branded Mercs from what I've seen
I wonder if the 62/62A will use Solo's and the 65 either Versa or Streetlite.
(06 Aug 2021, 4:37 pm)Michael wrote [ -> ]I wonder if the 62/62A will use Solo's and the 65 either Versa or Streetlite.
Do you think 65 would ever get DD?
(06 Aug 2021, 4:24 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]If there was a clock-face timetable between Chester and Woodstone village, then I could see the 71 and 78 working in harmony between those points.
As it is, they not only duplicate each other, but can follow each other too. Not much headway at all.
That tweaking of the timetable, coupled with a synchronisation with trains at Seaham and promotion of the route, may have seen it succeed.
This must be the third or fourth reincarnation of the route that never has worked and it was never going to suddenly start working this time.
Their repeated insistence on doing the same thing over and over... well it reeks of that laziness I mentioned the other day.
I know it doesn't help the Western side of route but by what people are saying it seems to be rather quiet anyway and mostly duplicates the 78 anyway (bar the Houghton to Chester Le Street link). Wonder if it could be an option of working with Nexus and extending the 79 through to Seaham and just having a Barnwell - Seaham bus route additionally serving the new Tesco once it opens (if it does). Could be able to pull a few punters from Seaham who want to go to Tesco or the estates inbetween and at least it doesn't leave places without a bus route at all.
(06 Aug 2021, 4:39 pm)Keeiajs wrote [ -> ]Do you think 65 would ever get DD?
Used to be DD in its older life, doesn’t warrant double deckers on that service now, there’s no demand for it now
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(06 Aug 2021, 4:51 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]I know it doesn't help the Western side of route but by what people are saying it seems to be rather quiet anyway and mostly duplicates the 78 anyway (bar the Houghton to Chester Le Street link). Wonder if it could be an option of working with Nexus and extending the 79 through to Seaham and just having a Barnwell - Seaham bus route additionally serving the new Tesco once it opens (if it does). Could be able to pull a few punters from Seaham who want to go to Tesco or the estates inbetween and at least it doesn't leave places without a bus route at all.
If you serve the new Tesco, you're going to end up missing a big chunk of the residential area out.
Agree that an alternative like the 79 (the 238 operated a similar route until last year) could work.
Can't be any worse than what seems like a deliberate managed decline of the 71.
That's all it can be. Surely?
(06 Aug 2021, 2:48 pm)Keeiajs wrote [ -> ]isn't the 26 just doing the old 88?
I'd say its a mixture of the 27 and 88
(06 Aug 2021, 1:21 pm)cbma06 wrote [ -> ]I wouldn’t put the 204/204A as a 64/64A as it might confuse passengers at sherburn with Arriva 64 route, I would change the number 55 to the 60’s series so the number 55 can be used at Gateshead area
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It happens alot,eg theres 2 11's serving North Shields,there was also 3 10's and 2 11's serving Newcastle at one point,thats one thing i hope gets sorted with this bus strategy thing,duplicate bus numbers
(06 Aug 2021, 5:20 pm)V514DFT wrote [ -> ]I'd say its a mixture of the 27 and 88
It happens alot,eg theres 2 11's serving North Shields,there was also 3 10's and 2 11's serving Newcastle at one point,thats one thing i hope gets sorted with this bus strategy thing,duplicate bus numbers
Just that there be 2 lots of service 64’s with the same destination each way (Durham and Sherburn) even though there go different ways, there both go to the same destination, passenger will board the GNE 64 at sherburn thinking it will go the same way as the Arriva 64 as it says Durham on the destination.
With all these duplicating service numbers , I blame GNE as there dropped a lot of 3 digit service numbers, didn’t have these problems in the pte days
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I've seen no mention of this on social media yet or have I missed it?
(06 Aug 2021, 4:24 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]If there was a clock-face timetable between Chester and Woodstone village, then I could see the 71 and 78 working in harmony between those points.
As it is, they not only duplicate each other, but can follow each other too. Not much headway at all.
That tweaking of the timetable, coupled with a synchronisation with trains at Seaham and promotion of the route, may have seen it succeed.
This must be the third or fourth reincarnation of the route that never has worked and it was never going to suddenly start working this time.
Their repeated insistence on doing the same thing over and over... well it reeks of that laziness I mentioned the other day.
The Houghton to Seaham part of the 71 has been subsidised for most of the last 35 years - for many years it was the 148, operated from memory by JC Bell and then by Redby before Go North East.
Of course, before 1986 it was also subsidised, but as part of the overall financial support that Durham County Council paid the bus operators under a network wide grant.
The X1 change replaces the direct link between Peterlee and washington that was broken when the old Newcastle-Hartlepool X5 was scrapped.
(06 Aug 2021, 6:28 pm)idiot wrote [ -> ]I've seen no mention of this on social media yet or have I missed it?
It's almost as if they don't want to publicise it, it's not even that noticeable on the website either
Sent from my LM-G710 using Tapatalk