(26 Feb 2023, 5:06 pm)V514DFT wrote [ -> ]Errrm what was their reason for withdrawing it from the Metrocentre again?
Unless they're planning to cut the 96 down to hourly or upto every 20 minutes or 1 down to every 30 minutes then it won't work.
That's why btw, the 1 was reduced from every 15 minutes to every 20 minutes.
(26 Feb 2023, 5:56 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Unless they're planning to cut the 96 down to hourly or upto every 20 minutes or 1 down to every 30 minutes then it won't work.
That's why btw, the 1 was reduced from every 15 minutes to every 20 minutes.
Thought it was something like that
The 1 might go down to every 30 mins tbh. Which is just going to destroy the service further
(26 Feb 2023, 10:11 pm)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]The 1 might go down to every 30 mins tbh. Which is just going to destroy the service further
Who knows, the 1 might go up to every 10 minutes with drivers spare
An interesting but potentially controversial suggestion here, but extend the 58 from Follingsby Park to Washington Galleries (thus allowing Washington Depot to run the service reducing the distance for driver changeovers with them being done at Concord). Curtail the 4 to terminate at either Galleries or Concord with odd journies at certain times going to Follingsby Park Amazon to coincide with shift changeover times.
(26 Feb 2023, 11:06 pm)Rapidsnap wrote [ -> ]An interesting but potentially controversial suggestion here, but extend the 58 from Follingsby Park to Washington Galleries (thus allowing Washington Depot to run the service reducing the distance for driver changeovers with them being done at Concord). Curtail the 4 to terminate at either Galleries or Concord with odd journies at certain times going to Follingsby Park Amazon to coincide with shift changeover times.
Honestly I think it depends on how many people go from Houghton through Washington and go onto Heworth/Concord.
Perhaps combined the 4/58?
If the 1 did go to Metrocentre again. Would it warrant a 30 minute service reduction and allocated decekrs instead
96 can get pretty busy, tho on a night it is dead
Tbf it could just be on a night/evening
(26 Feb 2023, 5:56 pm)Storx wrote [ -> ]Unless they're planning to cut the 96 down to hourly or upto every 20 minutes or 1 down to every 30 minutes then it won't work.
That's why btw, the 1 was reduced from every 15 minutes to every 20 minutes.
Was the 1 not split into the 1A/1B running up to every 20 minutes or 20/40 / hourly until the extension was withdrawn?
In theory, if Riverside needs resource and Percy Main has the available drivers, it would make sense to re-instate the 1A/1B.
And it would allow the X72 to be quickened up.
(27 Feb 2023, 5:51 am)L469 YVK wrote [ -> ]Was the 1 not split into the 1A/1B running up to every 20 minutes or 20/40 / hourly until the extension was withdrawn?
In theory, if Riverside needs resource and Percy Main has the available drivers, it would make sense to re-instate the 1A/1B.
And it would allow the X72 to be quickened up.
Yeah think so but that would mean effectively upping the 96 upto 20 minutes again and not sure it's needed tbh unless they do that instead of the 97 and run the 1/97 every 10 minutes but that's confusing numbers wise vs 96 every 30 minutes and 97 every 15 minutes. It's technically the same number of buses on the core bit down Bensham Bank.
(26 Feb 2023, 11:06 pm)Rapidsnap wrote [ -> ]An interesting but potentially controversial suggestion here, but extend the 58 from Follingsby Park to Washington Galleries (thus allowing Washington Depot to run the service reducing the distance for driver changeovers with them being done at Concord). Curtail the 4 to terminate at either Galleries or Concord with odd journies at certain times going to Follingsby Park Amazon to coincide with shift changeover times.
Christ, don't give them ideas which enable them to cut the frequency of the 4 any further south of the Gallieries!
(24 Feb 2023, 7:22 pm)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]Such as?
Also how would u change Houghton-Chester leg causing it to have demand without removing links.
And the 71 going to GCT will that just decrease passenger numbers especially around 78 route where presumably thoses traveling to CLS to Newcastle will have daily/weekly tickets
Remove the 78 from Bournmoor and Lumley, sending it straight along the A183 from Shiney Row to Chester-le-Street.
Bournmoor doesn't need 6 buses an hour (78 combined with the 4), plus removing it would still leave it with a 15 minute frequency between Houghton (to Interchange) and Shiney Row. Having the 71 service half-hourly between Houghton and Chester-le-Street would cover the rest of the route, providing a more natural link to Houghton-le-Spring or Chester-le-Street.
Of course, the bonus is also a quicker journey time for those using the 78 to/from Sunderland.
(24 Feb 2023, 8:04 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]When the 21a ran, the extension to the Chester - Houghton section was on the northern portion. Where the demand was.
The southern portion (the weaker part) was the extension. Clearly the stronger portion kept the weaker portion going.
Since they got rid of the 21a, the focus has been on the weaker portion and tagging even weaker portions on it.
Whilst having it run in the shadows of the 78 both on the half hourly frequency and then the hourly frequency.
The extention of the 238 over Copt Hill didn't work.
The shortlived X4 over Copt Hill didn't work.
Why would the 71?
When it originally ran to Sunderland, it replaced the poorly performing 160 and 163. They didn't work. Why would the 71?
Fares fell into the ridiculous stage from day 1.
I can't remember the exact figures, but a T&W Day ticket that allowed travel to Birtley and beyond on the 21a was circa £3.
When the 71 was launched, a single to Chester was circa £3.
The T&W ticket was suddenly invalid and the equivalent day ticket was circa £6.
The 71 didn't work, so why did they think the 36 would? When that failed, why did they go back to the original 71 and go back to the work that didn't work originally?
Houghton to Seaham isn't exactly a natural travel link either. Having something direct to Newcastle may attract a few more than tagging the section on to something else, but likely to cause complaints from Seaham residents that want a bus that'll drop them off at their door step.
(27 Feb 2023, 12:49 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Remove the 78 from Bournmoor and Lumley, sending it straight along the A183 from Shiney Row to Chester-le-Street.
Bournmoor doesn't need 6 buses an hour (78 combined with the 4), plus removing it would still leave it with a 15 minute frequency between Houghton (to Interchange) and Shiney Row. Having the 71 service half-hourly between Houghton and Chester-le-Street would cover the rest of the route, providing a more natural link to Houghton-le-Spring or Chester-le-Street.
Of course, the bonus is also a quicker journey time for those using the 78 to/from Sunderland.
Houghton to Seaham isn't exactly a natural travel link either. Having something direct to Newcastle may attract a few more than tagging the section on to something else, but likely to cause complaints from Seaham residents that want a bus that'll drop them off at their door step.
Theres been a decker on the 71 several times, its when it anything longer than 10.8m such as Country Ranger StreetLites whcih can't get around
In my opinion services around Seaham declined when they started withdrawing the local service and absorbing them into the longer distance routes, which then agains stilts growth on those services as they’re restricted to mini buses (MPD, Solo) which of course can quickly overcrowd and routes take longer to get to the end destination. Even the mid-to late 2000s you had the Seaham circular doing the local stuff around Deneside, Westlea and Northlea, which meant that the routes going out of town could take more direct routes. Arriva did the same in Peterlee with service 24 now taking a year and a day to get round Peterlee, GNE currently doing it with the Peterlee extension of the 61 around Murton too.
If you had a Houghton to Seaham bus that went direct from the Harbour via Station Road and Seaton, maybe as an X1 extension it could be relatively quick and then offer new connections to Seaham, Washington, Newcastle. For years, GNE had an every ten minutes X1 and a half hourly 55 (X5/X35 etc,) going between Houghton and Easington Lane + the 35 half hourly too, which was overkill on that corridor. Rerouting one or two an hour could have opened up more people on that section of route who were going further afield, and you were still giving a very decent service on the corridor to Easington lane. They tried doing a bit of that at one stage as the X4 but if I remember it was pretty much 90 minutes end to end and seemed to serve any possible location along the way.
(27 Feb 2023, 12:49 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Remove the 78 from Bournmoor and Lumley, sending it straight along the A183 from Shiney Row to Chester-le-Street.
Bournmoor doesn't need 6 buses an hour (78 combined with the 4), plus removing it would still leave it with a 15 minute frequency between Houghton (to Interchange) and Shiney Row. Having the 71 service half-hourly between Houghton and Chester-le-Street would cover the rest of the route, providing a more natural link to Houghton-le-Spring or Chester-le-Street.
Of course, the bonus is also a quicker journey time for those using the 78 to/from Sunderland.
Houghton to Seaham isn't exactly a natural travel link either. Having something direct to Newcastle may attract a few more than tagging the section on to something else, but likely to cause complaints from Seaham residents that want a bus that'll drop them off at their door step.
See if I was doing that sort of stuff I'd change it so it's like:
19 - Sunderland to Chester Le Street -
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/54.85389...01!1m0!3e0
35 - Sunderland to Low Moorsley Direct -
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/54.81025...01!1m0!3e0
20 - Every 15 Minutes
20A - Withdrawn (Replaced Partially by 19)
X20 Peaks - Withdrawn (Replaced by 35)
39A Extension - Withdrawn (Replaced by 35)
79 - Extended to Seaham
Least then Great Lumley doesn't lose it's Sunderland connections - I'd doubt they'll ever want to go to Seaham and it cleans up the Rainton mess with the 20A leaving the estates of Houghton with a crap 30 minute service currently (down from 12 minutes) plus Hetton etc get a trip to Sunderland without a detour around the world.
Haven't worked it out but imagine the PVR isn't too different to now.
(26 Feb 2023, 10:58 am)Unber43 wrote [ -> ]Yeah it does. Thanks. Also I suppose its straight down the A1, which can't be much further than what it is from Washington, according to Google Maps it says it takes 12-16 mins from Concord to CLS, and it takes 16-20 from Metrocentre so I suppose that it just minor. Hopefully they'll not be moved till Riverside have enough drivers pretty sure they'll need around 18-21 to run 28/29/25 (Monday - Saturday)
Peterlee still has some remote reliefs doesn't it Im pretty sure it's 206/208, if the X6 were to go to every 30 mins that would stop reliefs for 208/206 presumably if it could all time right
The 206 and 208 do both appear to operate standalone and must have remote reliefs at Peterlee.
With clever interworking patterns, I’m sure you could work the X6 to be half hourly. One bus an hour doing the 201/209/210 as now, and the other moving onto 206 then 208 then back on X6.
I’ve said before and I’ll say it again, a half hourly service is such a difference for passengers and it seems like the X6 maybe be a little stilted with just hourly mini buses. And the fact this could remove the need for remote reliefs on 206 & 208, it would at least make some operational sense too.
Could swear I wrote this somewhere but can't seem to find it.
Either the X1 a short one hourly only to Houghton then extended to Seaham, however I would change the route of the 71, I would take it through Seaton, Station Road, Train Station, Seaham then possibly either upto the Business Park (GNE should do surveys to see how many people would use it), or along Princess Road then turn around to replace missed links from the 202/62.
or 21 should extended from Chester-Le-Street and follow the 71 including my idea to re-route it.
If the X1 is an option you could add the 71 onto the current 39A to Houghton and extend it to CLS this would also open up links for people who work at Doxford.
(27 Feb 2023, 7:31 pm)Drifter60 wrote [ -> ]The 206 and 208 do both appear to operate standalone and must have remote reliefs at Peterlee.
With clever interworking patterns, I’m sure you could work the X6 to be half hourly. One bus an hour doing the 201/209/210 as now, and the other moving onto 206 then 208 then back on X6.
I’ve said before and I’ll say it again, a half hourly service is such a difference for passengers and it seems like the X6 maybe be a little stilted with just hourly mini buses. And the fact this could remove the need for remote reliefs on 206 & 208, it would at least make some operational sense too.
I agree, hourly services are really no good as they offer no real flexability.
Honestly I've looked at timings and the 206 gets in just before the 208, not sure if you could do it the other way around, but there would be some way, also running dead to Peterlee is easily 20-30 mins, the X6 route is just under 40
(27 Feb 2023, 12:49 pm)Adrian wrote [ -> ]Remove the 78 from Bournmoor and Lumley, sending it straight along the A183 from Shiney Row to Chester-le-Street.
Bournmoor doesn't need 6 buses an hour (78 combined with the 4), plus removing it would still leave it with a 15 minute frequency between Houghton (to Interchange) and Shiney Row. Having the 71 service half-hourly between Houghton and Chester-le-Street would cover the rest of the route, providing a more natural link to Houghton-le-Spring or Chester-le-Street.
Of course, the bonus is also a quicker journey time for those using the 78 to/from Sunderland.
Based.
(27 Feb 2023, 3:26 pm)Drifter60 wrote [ -> ]In my opinion services around Seaham declined when they started withdrawing the local service and absorbing them into the longer distance routes, which then agains stilts growth on those services as they’re restricted to mini buses (MPD, Solo) which of course can quickly overcrowd and routes take longer to get to the end destination. Even the mid-to late 2000s you had the Seaham circular doing the local stuff around Deneside, Westlea and Northlea, which meant that the routes going out of town could take more direct routes. Arriva did the same in Peterlee with service 24 now taking a year and a day to get round Peterlee, GNE currently doing it with the Peterlee extension of the 61 around Murton too.
If you had a Houghton to Seaham bus that went direct from the Harbour via Station Road and Seaton, maybe as an X1 extension it could be relatively quick and then offer new connections to Seaham, Washington, Newcastle. For years, GNE had an every ten minutes X1 and a half hourly 55 (X5/X35 etc,) going between Houghton and Easington Lane + the 35 half hourly too, which was overkill on that corridor. Rerouting one or two an hour could have opened up more people on that section of route who were going further afield, and you were still giving a very decent service on the corridor to Easington lane. They tried doing a bit of that at one stage as the X4 but if I remember it was pretty much 90 minutes end to end and seemed to serve any possible location along the way.
I tried saying this a while ago but got questioned about it. I don’t know why they don’t split it into 3 and have it every ten minutes between penshaw and newcastle.
X1 ~ Current
X2 ~ X1 to penshaw then 2/2A route to park lane.
X3 ~ X1 to houghton then follow 65, or follow the old extension to dalton park then follow the 65.
I think Easington Lane - Houghton needs more than a 1/2 hourly service. It should be every 15 mins.
If a new service was brought in that would push it back upto every 12