Chinese whispers in the foothills of Consett! V8 is getting bigger buses (Streetlites?) and the 47 is extended to Consett in place of the V9. If it happens, there would be surplus Solos available.
(01 Apr 2015, 3:22 pm)grandad wrote [ -> ]Chinese whispers in the foothills of Consett! V8 is getting bigger buses (Streetlites?) and the 47 is extended to Consett in place of the V9. If it happens, there would be surplus Solos available.
The V8 isn't getting new buses but the 78 is. Heard nowt about the 47 being extended and V9 been withdrawn as a result though.
(01 Apr 2015, 5:20 am)Dan wrote [ -> ]I don't know where you've all got this idea from that the 82/82A services are loss-making... If they were, why would they exist (in whichever form they take?)
I think the Cadets were moved from the 88/88A to keep them more local, as there was concerns with reliability on the South Tyne services. It also UPGRADED services M2/M3 (at the time) to provide vehicles with a larger capacity, and the Cadets are much more reliable for short journeys in and around Washington...
So explain to me then if the were not "Loss Making Services" why the 82/82As Frequency was reduced to Every 30 Minutes from Birtley to Washington and Concord to Heworth, other than not many Passengers using the Service between the two points, there has to be other reasons as to why you would cut the frequency of the Service in Half.
Would of thought with opening of the New Morrisons Supermarket and Housing Development on Birtley Northside, a frequency of Every 15 Minutes would be maintained and perhaps justified, As for the Allocation of Cadets that is fair point, at the time they were put onto the Service there were a lot of Standees on Service when using MPDs, so the Vehicle upgrade was Justified, but now as a Result of recent Service Changes I think they would cope just fine with MPDs hence what I have said to Davie in my previous posts, obviously everyone has a difference of opinion when it comes to using these Services.
Just looked back through my notes and I've got this to say about my last two 82/82A (and 83 at the time) journeys.
83 - Washington to Birtley - Cadet 8260: no more than half a dozen people on when we left the Galleries, and people got on and off throughout the journey, eventually just myself and two OAPs onboard by the time we hit Birtley.
82 - Washington to Concord - Cadet 8255: this journey was quite crowded, about 2/3 of the bus was full when we left Washington, and like the last journey people got on and off throughout, but it died down towards Concord when a lot of people left the bus.
Obviously only one experience is from AFTER the changes, but thought I'd just share them anyway.
To be honest I agree with Malarkey, how can it be making money if like 90% of the passengers are pensioners who don't pay!
(01 Apr 2015, 3:33 pm)MarcTheA4 wrote [ -> ]Just looked back through my notes and I've got this to say about my last two 82/82A (and 83 at the time) journeys.
83 - Washington to Birtley - Cadet 8260: no more than half a dozen people on when we left the Galleries, and people got on and off throughout the journey, eventually just myself and two OAPs onboard by the time we hit Birtley.
82 - Washington to Concord - Cadet 8255: this journey was quite crowded, about 2/3 of the bus was full when we left Washington, and like the last journey people got on and off throughout, but it died down towards Concord when a lot of people left the bus.
Obviously only one experience is from AFTER the changes, but thought I'd just share them anyway.
The 83 was one of the most pointless services i've ever seen when in Birtley
(01 Apr 2015, 3:35 pm)leestransportphotos wrote [ -> ]To be honest I agree with Malarkey, how can it be making money if like 90% of the passengers are pensioners who don't pay!
But don't DCC or who ever is in control of these OAP passes not pay for their journeys instead?
(01 Apr 2015, 3:35 pm)leestransportphotos wrote [ -> ]To be honest I agree with Malarkey, how can it be making money if like 90% of the passengers are pensioners who don't pay!
The 83 was one of the most pointless services i've ever seen when in Birtley
Didn't appear to be as popular as the 82!
The Galleries to Concord section of the route takes quite a few cash fares. Especially from around the Barmston area. That's certainly been my experience when using the routes.
Personally I dont think you can argue with my point of View when it comes to the Washington Local Services, as I lived where I am currently living (Lambton) for 15 Years now, and before that from the Day I was Born I lived at (Barmston), so I have lived on the Route all my life at two different points, which just so happen to be the two sections of the Route in which we are debating are the Busiest in terms of Passenger Numbers, and of course I have lived through numerous variations of the current service provided, just I thought I would share this for this those who are unaware and would like to continue having a topical debate with me on this batch of services
.
(01 Apr 2015, 3:29 pm)Malarkey wrote [ -> ]So explain to me then if the were not "Loss Making Services" why the 82/82As Frequency was reduced to Every 30 Minutes from Birtley to Washington and Concord to Heworth, other than not many Passengers using the Service between the two points, there has to be other reasons as to why you would cut the frequency of the Service in Half.
Would of thought with opening of the New Morrisons Supermarket and Housing Development on Birtley Northside, a frequency of Every 15 Minutes would be maintained and perhaps justified, As for the Allocation of Cadets that is fair point, at the time they were put onto the Service there were a lot of Standees on Service when using MPDs, so the Vehicle upgrade was Justified, but now as a Result of recent Service Changes I think they would cope just fine with MPDs hence what I have said to Davie in my previous posts, obviously everyone has a difference of opinion when it comes to using these Services.
Just because a 15-minute frequency could not be justified on two sections of the route does not mean to say that it's a "loss-making service". Are you suggesting that the 56 is a "loss-making service" because it was reduced to a 12-minute frequency opposed to its previous 10 minute frequency? I think not.
As for the majority of passengers being concessionary pass holders - all bus operators receive a "no better no worse off" average fare for these customers.
(01 Apr 2015, 4:05 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]Just because a 15-minute frequency could not be justified on two sections of the route does not mean to say that it's a "loss-making service". Are you suggesting that the 56 is a "loss-making service" because it was reduced to a 12-minute frequency opposed to its previous 10 minute frequency? I think not.
As for the majority of passengers being concessionary pass holders - all bus operators receive a "no better no worse off" average fare for these customers.
The 56 I think we are all aware was reduced to therefore improve Reliability of the Service which is completely understandable given the the length and time it takes to go from A to B, which I might say looks to of worked, how often since the changes do you see a 56 running in twos or threes, I certainly I havent seen it occur whether that while on the 56, or passing by on another Service e.g. X1, how often has a 56 since the service changes been terminated at Gateshead and awaited time there due to being late, personally I dont know the answer to the latter but I would guess it doesnt happen at all now, and would I say the 56 is a "Loss Making Service", would it of received the investment in New Vehicles in 2013 if it was? I think not.
(01 Apr 2015, 4:18 pm)Malarkey wrote [ -> ]The 56 I think we are all aware was reduced to therefore improve Reliability of the Service which is completely understandable given the the length and time it takes to go from A to B, which I might say looks to of worked, how often since the changes do you see a 56 running in twos or threes, I certainly I havent seen it occur whether that while on the 56, or passing by on another Service e.g. X1, how often has a 56 since the service changes been terminated at Gateshead and awaited time there due to being late, personally I dont know the answer to the latter but I would guess it doesnt happen at all now, and would I say the 56 is a "Loss Making Service", would it of received the investment in New Vehicles in 2013 if it was? I think not.
To be fair I have still seen the 56 and 27 a few mins apart or in 2s or 3s. Yes the reliability has improved, however they are still occasionally regulated at Gateshead. I think it was the right decision to reduce the frequency of the 56 and 27. There have been numerous times when it was carrying little more than fresh air; especially between Sulgrave and Sunderland.
In regard to the 82/82A/85/86, I do think the 85 & 86 do carry the most numbers. However I wouldn't say the services are making a loss. I can totally understand the curtailing of 82/82A as the majority of people use the 4 to get to Heworth as its the quickest option. To be fair, since the 4 was increased to every 20mins on an evening, I would say the numbers travelling toward Heworth have increased........so all in all a good decision.
(01 Apr 2015, 4:48 pm)JP6004 wrote [ -> ]To be fair I have still seen the 56 and 27 a few mins apart or in 2s or 3s. Yes the reliability has improved, however they are still occasionally regulated at Gateshead. I think it was the right decision to reduce the frequency of the 56 and 27. There have been numerous times when it was carrying little more than fresh air; especially between Sulgrave and Sunderland.
In regard to the 82/82A/85/86, I do think the 85 & 86 do carry the most numbers. However I wouldn't say the services are making a loss. I can totally understand the curtailing of 82/82A as the majority of people use the 4 to get to Heworth as its the quickest option. To be fair, since the 4 was increased to every 20mins on an evening, I would say the numbers travelling toward Heworth have increased........so all in all a good decision.
Yes but that is a result of scrapping the GNE operated 82 on an evening between Heworth and Concord.
(01 Apr 2015, 5:07 pm)Malarkey wrote [ -> ]Yes but that is a result of scrapping the GNE operated 82 on an evening between Heworth and Concord.
Which, according to them - wasn't making enough money.
The re-jig of the services this year, will have been for a couple of different reasons.
Which, may have been to reduce losses OR increase margins.
The mean/average loads and fares, may have justified the reducing of frequency.
However, the downside to reducing a frequency, can be the ongoing drop in passenger numbers. The exact opposite of the pattern that can emerge when a service is pump primed (like the X1 or 56).
Time will tell, whether the change has worked or not.
Personally, I have found the changes inconvenient and where in the past, I could turn up and know a bus would (or should turn up), with a decent frequency at either the Galleries or Birtley (even it meant a quick sprint across a road or up a hill in Birtley).
The changes have put me off using the service and my usage has dropped.
Do you know if they have sorted the map on the timetable out yet?
Having the incorrect route, can't help.
(01 Apr 2015, 5:16 pm)Andreos1 wrote [ -> ]Which, according to them - wasn't making enough money.
The re-jig of the services this year, will have been for a couple of different reasons.
Which, may have been to reduce losses OR increase margins.
The mean/average loads and fares, may have justified the reducing of frequency.
However, the downside to reducing a frequency, can be the ongoing drop in passenger numbers. The exact opposite of the pattern that can emerge when a service is pump primed (like the X1 or 56).
Time will tell, whether the change has worked or not.
Personally, I have found the changes inconvenient and where in the past, I could turn up and know a bus would (or should turn up), with a decent frequency at either the Galleries or Birtley (even it meant a quick sprint across a road or up a hill in Birtley).
The changes have put me off using the service and my usage has dropped.
Do you know if they have sorted the map on the timetable out yet?
Having the incorrect route, can't help.
And is it any wonder it wasnt making any money when Arriva are operating the Evening Service from Concord to Birtley and all Tickets purchased on the Arriva Service are Valid as a Through Ticket, and Vice Versa with Go North East, quite obvious who got the better end of that deal isnt it, As for the Map by the looks of it I think it has been updated.
(01 Apr 2015, 3:22 pm)grandad wrote [ -> ]Chinese whispers in the foothills of Consett! V8 is getting bigger buses (Streetlites?) and the 47 is extended to Consett in place of the V9. If it happens, there would be surplus Solos available.
That might tally with the RUMOURS at peterlee, "MPDs already sold, new buses on the way, then newer buses instead, multiple mentions of Solos, Summer mentioned as the likely time for it happening". Think they'd need 15, but I'm sure that someone will correct me on the numbers..
(04 Apr 2015, 7:00 am)pcvdriver wrote [ -> ]That might tally with the RUMOURS at peterlee, "MPDs already sold, new buses on the way, then newer buses instead, multiple mentions of Solos, Summer mentioned as the likely time for it happening". Think they'd need 15, but I'm sure that someone will correct me on the numbers..
I think they would need 12-14? Something along those lines is the total PVR of the ''East Durham'' services.
Go North East are soon to receive some scania omnidekkas from brighton and hove
(12 Apr 2015, 3:26 pm)Citaro5292 wrote [ -> ]Go North East are soon to receive some scania omnidekkas from brighton and hove
WTF?!
Them 'orrid things? Got to say, if we send them crap, we get crap in return.
(12 Apr 2015, 3:34 pm)Tommy_1581 wrote [ -> ]WTF?!
Them 'orrid things? Got to say, if we send them crap, we get crap in return.
They are for scholars to assist with unreliability issues