(21 Aug 2015, 3:49 pm)Dan wrote As we regularly hear on this forum, running a bus operation is neither easy nor simple. We need to look at the bigger picture and realise not everything is black and white.

I don't get involved with where and when driver changeovers take place as it's not my department, but as I suggested previously, it's entirely possible that the control room could have opted to regulate that service on the basis that the driver was close to exceeding his/her driving hours. The supervisors' hands would have been tied in this instance, if this was the case. Bus operators have to make sure there's enough lee-way in duty boards to allow drivers to be late without exceeding driving hours, but they also have to make the duties efficient to avoid wasting resources.

This, I feel, is the disadvantage to cross-town and cross-city services. Whilst popular in years gone by, a large number of bus operators have moved away from this model, and now favour simple streamlined frequencies between the different 'hubs' across their network, allowing passengers to transfer from service to service as appropriate. These services face problems of their own, as a small delay can lead to quite a big impact with services ultimately running in tandem, which is why some members of the forum have suggested that they prefer the old cross-city service model. I recently read quite a cynical article based on Arriva's new "Frequenta" brand, which branded the services under this identity (and those intended to fall under this identity in the future) as some of the most unreliable, given that they regularly bunch up and run in pairs.

In Sunderland, most customers seemingly prefer cross-city services. Stagecoach's services in the area are very successful, but peak-times are a nightmare and regularly see buses running in excess of 20 minutes late. Over in Newcastle, Stanley and Durham, Go North East has recently undertaken a customer consultation which asked for feedback on the company's plans to split the services at Stanley, in an attempt to overcome delays. The company has yet to reveal the results of this customer consultation on the public domain, but I'd expect that most would approve of the "hub" model if it was going to provide a more reliable service.

A timetable has to be realistic and achievable; simply put, if it isn't, changes must be made accordingly. If Go North East's AVL data proves that there are issues with timekeeping on service 17, perhaps the next step to improve it could be by splitting the service.

I completely understand what your saying, and I doubt they would have been as annoyed if the next service was on time too, but as you said it was outside of GNEs control. 

BIB - Best option in my opinion! At present the service is pretty unreliable, and a lot of people not happy with it, especially as in some cases where the 17 is the only option (like Holy Cross, East Howdon etc.).  Used to be great when it was the 17 and 81, which is basically the Sunday operation of the services too. The only issue with that would be driver changeovers, as they take place at North Shields now. There definitley isn't enough layover time on the current timetable (three minutes in Cramlington to get around the roundabout, and load passengers), and three or four minutes at Whitley Bay I think too. Compared to the 17, the Coaster is generally an excellent service (and of a similar style, cross town/city), because it has enough layover time throughout the route, which I personally think the 17 lacks. Hopefully something can be done, and changes are going ahead in October like rumoured, but not to hourly like people are suggesting. To be honest, smaller buses could even be used on the 17 between Rosehill and Cramlington which would justify the extra PVR, something like Cadets or Versas, but I can't see them being an option just yet.