(01 Aug 2014, 4:52 pm)cbma06 wrote (So you wanting the 57A as a 25) service 57/57A provides a 30 minute frequency between Durham Bus Station and Coxhoe, then service 57 goes to Kelloe and service 57A goes to Hartlepool. so instead of having the service as 57/57A you suggesting to have the service as 57/25.

Don't forget County Durham and Hartlepool is countryside places and Tyne and Wear is heavy populated area, express services work in Tyne and Wear to get passengers quicker to certain points, this will not work internal County Durham areas as between the villages their are a lot of countryside (fields etc..) so instead of having a lot of bus services going in a straight line from Durham to Hartlepool, these services has to go via each village on route and also don't forget the bus companies are cutting back on bus services, so more buses will be going out of the way to serve a village to get passengers. Don't forget their used to be quite a few express services 20 or 30 years ago, but since the decline of patronage from bus travel to car travel.

Are you suggesting that service 21/21A should be extended to Durham from you quote?

If as you say that people of Hartlepool doesn't want to go via the world to get to durham, then I would suggest to them to get a taxi or save up and purchase a car, or ask someone with a car to take you, otherwise purchase a book or look out of the window and see the fields going past

You can't really extend the 21/21A much further due to driving hours, also if the 21/21A were to extended beyond Peterlee it would have to be split at Peterlee or tachos would have to be fitted.

The 57A is the fastest route from Hartlepool to Durham and takes about an hour.

(01 Aug 2014, 5:07 pm)Jimmi wrote You can't really extend the 21/21A much further due to driving hours, also if the 21/21A were to extended beyond Peterlee it would have to be split at Peterlee or tachos would have to be fitted.

The 57A is the fastest route from Hartlepool to Durham and takes about an hour.

To be fair you could go another 2.5 hours, though anything more than 2 hours would be asking for trouble. We used to go to Sunderland which was an additional hour (made them both a 4 hour rotation)

(04 Aug 2014, 8:44 am)Tom wrote Was thinking, the X25 could be extended to Durham once a hour, along the 13 route to replace it. As passenger numbers on the 13 and X25 are crap, could the whole route be reduced to hourly?

Wrong thread!!

(04 Aug 2014, 8:46 am)peter wrote Wrong thread!!

Silly me

I would like to see more services from Hartlepool 236 Hartlepool-West Park-Elwick-Trimdons-Sedgefield-Ferryhill-Bishop Auckland. Yes I know that service has already existed before anyone says

(09 Aug 2014, 6:13 pm)col87 wrote I would like to see more services from Hartlepool 236 Hartlepool-West Park-Elwick-Trimdons-Sedgefield-Ferryhill-Bishop Auckland. Yes I know that service has already existed before anyone says

It would be nice to see that sort of bus service to come back, but these days Arriva wants the passengers to travel via Durham City to get to the likes of those destinations. Since the evolution of the car and many car ownerships these days which was the result of the possible withdrawl of these service.

(09 Aug 2014, 8:09 pm)cbma06 wrote It would be nice to see that sort of bus service to come back, but these days Arriva wants the passengers to travel via Durham City to get to the likes of those destinations. Since the evolution of the car and many car ownerships these days which was the result of the possible withdrawl of these service.

people should not have to go to Durham to get to another place all 3 bus companies have become stail and need fresh ideas The 236 could work as a 2 hourley service using a solo

(09 Aug 2014, 8:55 pm)col87 wrote people should not have to go to Durham to get to another place all 3 bus companies have become stail and need fresh ideas The 236 could work as a 2 hourley service using a solo

See I think we're stuck in a deadlock situation. Many people you speak to who commute by car do so because it convenient, and it saves faffing on. At the same time though, they often complain about the cost of parking in city centres. Operators aren't willing to cross subsidise services or take as many risks of creating new services, and existing services tend to just be altered to accommodate more people. Look at the X1 for example. Changed to serve every stop between Coxhoe and Durham, without a second thought for those travelling long distance on the service.

Which is my point the bus companies have just become lazy. I would love to see the days when a company would operate for the community and not for shareholders living 100s of miles away who couldent care less as long as they get some money. Rant over

(09 Aug 2014, 9:16 pm)col87 wrote Which is my point the bus companies have just become lazy. I would love to see the days when a company would operate for the community and not for shareholders living 100s of miles away who couldent care less as long as they get some money. Rant over

Maybe you could start a company and operate "for the community" and not make any money? See how long it lasts

(09 Aug 2014, 9:16 pm)col87 wrote Which is my point the bus companies have just become lazy. I would love to see the days when a company would operate for the community and not for shareholders living 100s of miles away who couldent care less as long as they get some money. Rant over

That's not the point I was making though. Both customers and operators are looking after their own interests, with neither wanting to make the first move. Customers don't want the inconvenience of having to travel from A to B via C (and sometimes D), and operators don't want to take a commercial risk to start new services off willy nilly. You can understand both points of view, hence the deadlock situation. I don't like capitalism as much as the next 'lefty', but that's reality.

It's going to take someone to force change to happen, hence my stance on other 'subjects'.

(09 Aug 2014, 9:20 pm)tyresmoke wrote Maybe you could start a company and operate "for the community" and not make any money? See how long it lasts

which is something I would love to do but since i have no money to start a company at the minuate i cant. Now the big 3 i belive should be made to serve local communities properly not just what suites them or lose the right to operate they are a public service after all

(09 Aug 2014, 9:31 pm)col87 wrote which is something I would love to do but since i have no money to start a company at the minuate i cant. Now the big 3 i belive should be made to serve local communities properly not just what suites them or lose the right to operate they are a public service after all

Don't the council's help out with this?
(With the running of non-profit making services)

(09 Aug 2014, 9:31 pm)col87 wrote which is something I would love to do but since i have no money to start a company at the minuate i cant. Now the big 3 i belive should be made to serve local communities properly not just what suites them or lose the right to operate they are a public service after all

I do agree with your point about the service to local communities and routes, but they're not a public service any more as things stand. Since deregulation, they're a commercial organisation providing a service to the public.

(09 Aug 2014, 9:32 pm)mb134 wrote Don't the council's help out with this?
(With the running of non-profit making services)

There's your other deadlock situation. They're supposed to, but at the time of deregulation, it wasn't intended that they'd be bailing out services left right and centre. Hence they can't afford to any longer. Deregulation was supposed to increase competition, but it's probably had the oppose effect in most areas.

The point i trying to make is they should be made to serve all areas not just were the most profit is. Perheaps they needs to be some regulation and more competition in places. I am aware I have gone off topic so if a mod wants to move this to another part of the forum then feel free

(09 Aug 2014, 9:45 pm)col87 wrote The point i trying to make is they should be made to serve all areas not just were the most profit is. Perheaps they needs to be some regulation and more competition in places. I am aware I have gone off topic so if a mod wants to move this to another part of the forum then feel free

That's where local authority support usually steps in.

Unfortunately, with the cuts the government has placed on all of our local authorities, subsidising bus services has fallen way down the list of priorities.

I think we can all see your point and don't disagree, however as pointed out already, bus companies these days need to make money to pay for their outlay (Drivers, fuel, insurance, maintenance, overheads etc). Local authorities simply don't have the funds (or don't want to allocate the funds) to provide support for services that do not quite meet operational costs.

The bus company then has the decision to make. Withdraw the loss making route or retain it, if it has benefits elsewhere (such as a feeder into a much more profitable route). Most of the time, loss making services are either significantly reduced to suit demand, or withdrawn in full.

A tongue in cheek example would be that you wouldn't see ASDA buying bread for 50p a loaf and selling it for 30p, would you? The exact same principle applies in business, irrespective of the product you are supplying.

Social responsibility is irrelevant now. Only a QCS would make sure the poorer services were catered for, by wrapping them up into tenders with the most profitable.

I think the problem lies somewhat in the genera public assumption that a public service should provide everything that may be wanted. Infact, most people still seem to think that their council tax entitles them to a service. That was dissolved a long time ago. Bus operators are businesses, that happen to make money by driving vehicles around and letting people get on for a fare. No social obligations whatsoever and that will not change, no matter how many people get upset by it.

(10 Aug 2014, 8:48 am)VolvoMarkII wrote That's where local authority support usually steps in.

Unfortunately, with the cuts the government has placed on all of our local authorities, subsidising bus services has fallen way down the list of priorities.

I think we can all see your point and don't disagree, however as pointed out already, bus companies these days need to make money to pay for their outlay (Drivers, fuel, insurance, maintenance, overheads etc). Local authorities simply don't have the funds (or don't want to allocate the funds) to provide support for services that do not quite meet operational costs.

The bus company then has the decision to make. Withdraw the loss making route or retain it, if it has benefits elsewhere (such as a feeder into a much more profitable route). Most of the time, loss making services are either significantly reduced to suit demand, or withdrawn in full.

A tongue in cheek example would be that you wouldn't see ASDA buying bread for 50p a loaf and selling it for 30p, would you? The exact same principle applies in business, irrespective of the product you are supplying.

Social responsibility is irrelevant now. Only a QCS would make sure the poorer services were catered for, by wrapping them up into tenders with the most profitable.

I think the problem lies somewhat in the genera public assumption that a public service should provide everything that may be wanted. Infact, most people still seem to think that their council tax entitles them to a service. That was dissolved a long time ago. Bus operators are businesses, that happen to make money by driving vehicles around and letting people get on for a fare. No social obligations whatsoever and that will not change, no matter how many people get upset by it.

You often get businesses doing just that and label the practice as a loss leader.

In areas of competition, operators often run at a loss - just to get rid of the competition or claim a patch as their own.
I can't imagine the tickets on GNE's weekly ticket between Silksworth and Sunderland makes much money - just as they lost out financially on the Durham Road war with Classic.
Ditto Magic Buses up and down the country.
We all know about the bus war in Darlington too.

But as others point out - the current system in place for almost 30years, is working!

How about this suggestion for a Sunday variation of service 7 to have two buses from Darlington to Durham as service 7A which would replace service 8 between Darlington and Ferryhill except it would stop at the Churchill House stop rather than the stop opposite St. Clare's Church in Newton Aycliffe on Durham bound journeys. Times marked with "A" at the end are 7A journeys.

Darlington Tubwell Row
15 45A
Newton Aycliffe Town Centre
37 08A
Woodham
45 ##A
Chilton Wheatshaf
52 18A
Ferryhill Station
## 24A
Ferryhill Market Place
59 29A
Durham Bus Station
17 47A


Durham Bus Station
31 01A
Ferryhill Market Place
49 19A
Ferryhill Station
## 24A
Chilton Wheatshaf
56 31A
Woodham
03 ##A
Newton Aycliffe Town Centre
11 41A
Darlington Tubwell Row
33 03A

On an evening, after the X20 stops, could Arriva send the X22 down to North Seaton, so that they still have a service direct to/from Newcastle after 6/7 PM?

I think that the mini x14 should stop and that arriva just have 4 deckers and keep minibuses used on the current service for the 57/33

I wonder what the feasibility would be for Arriva to serve Durham Rail station? I'm thinking of the 64 in particular, but it may be feasible to run the 56 up there on the inward journey to Durham Bus station too. It'd certainly be helpful for those using Plusbus tickets.

(31 Aug 2014, 1:01 pm)aureolin wrote I wonder what the feasibility would be for Arriva to serve Durham Rail station? I'm thinking of the 64 in particular, but it may be feasible to run the 56 up there on the inward journey to Durham Bus station too. It'd certainly be helpful for those using Plusbus tickets.

They used to serve the station as the terminus of the 6 prior to the original Bishop Auckland network recast about 2008.

(31 Aug 2014, 12:21 pm)Philly rf wrote I think that the mini x14 should stop and that arriva just have 4 deckers and keep minibuses used on the current service for the 57/33

That wouldn't work - would wreck the 15 minute frequency along the Newcastle-Morpeth corridor.

Ahh right just then that will mean if the x14 runs to thropton from newcastle and not change from x14 to 57a it might be on time at morpeth not 15 minutes late

(31 Aug 2014, 1:45 pm)Philly rf wrote Ahh right just then that will mean if the x14 runs to thropton from newcastle and not change from x14 to 57a it might be on time at morpeth not 15 minutes late

And there is demand for a half hourly service beyond Morpeth?

(31 Aug 2014, 1:01 pm)aureolin wrote I wonder what the feasibility would be for Arriva to serve Durham Rail station? I'm thinking of the 64 in particular, but it may be feasible to run the 56 up there on the inward journey to Durham Bus station too. It'd certainly be helpful for those using Plusbus tickets.

I am surprised none of the P&R buses do to be honest.
If they were to set aside a section of each P&R for long term parking, it could solve some of the parking issues at the station at the same time.

The Cathedral Bus serves some purpose, but isn't too handy if travelling into Durham from the outlying areas.

(31 Aug 2014, 1:01 pm)aureolin wrote I wonder what the feasibility would be for Arriva to serve Durham Rail station? I'm thinking of the 64 in particular, but it may be feasible to run the 56 up there on the inward journey to Durham Bus station too. It'd certainly be helpful for those using Plusbus tickets.

Problem with sending the 64 up there would be it would add extra running time and some people would not want to use the 64 as it will take longer than other services so they'd use other services like the 21.

You could perhaps send some services that currently terminate at the Bus Station like the 6 and 7, but did anyone go up to the rail station when service 6 used to go up there.

(31 Aug 2014, 3:05 pm)Jimmi wrote Problem with sending the 64 up there would be it would add extra running time and some people would not want to use the 64 as it will take longer than other services so they'd use other services like the 21.

You could perhaps send some services that currently terminate at the Bus Station like the 6 and 7, but did anyone go up to the rail station when service 6 used to go up there.

I reckon you could get up and round in under 2 minutes, as there's no traffic to combat. I don't think it'd be too much of an issue. The 21 is faster than the 64 anyway, so you'd expect people to be using that already if that's the way they wanted to go.

(31 Aug 2014, 3:06 pm)aureolin wrote I reckon you could get up and round in under 2 minutes, as there's no traffic to combat. I don't think it'd be too much of an issue. The 21 is faster than the 64 anyway, so you'd expect people to be using that already if that's the way they wanted to go.

Even a slightly longer journey time can make people want to use a different service, like some people won't use service 5/5A between Darlington and Newton Aycliffe Town Centre which takes 4 minutes longer than service 7 even though waiting the extra few minutes for service 7 will get them there even later.

(31 Aug 2014, 3:15 pm)Jimmi wrote Even a slightly longer journey time can make people want to use a different service, like some people won't use service 5/5A between Darlington and Newton Aycliffe Town Centre which takes 4 minutes longer than service 7 even though waiting the extra few minutes for service 7 will get them there even later.

I think it can also increase at the same time though. I remember when I lived on the 50's route, they diverted it through Lambton and Ayton instead of Galleries direct to Chester le Street. Same passengers, but extra when it reached the two new stopping points. It didn't really add any time on to the journey itself, as it just ate into the sitting time it had at Chester le Street.