Had 3874 tonight and i wish i didn't - its the lolyne versio of 3814. Powerless, takes ages to gain any speed even when on a hill and is extremely loud (although 3814 isnt the last of the list). Have to say, the interior was very clean when i got on but that was quickly changed by some of the immature year 7s messing with water and ending up getting it on the floor. 

I also saw 5400 today - the streetlite that Dan mentioned about having part of the main branding missing (not route like 5396) - as i was sitting on the other side, i was unable to get a photo of it but i have searched on flickr, grabbed a photo that had a good side angle and placed a yellow box around the panel that is missing.

ex-Megabus YN14 FVR at Chester-le-Street depot:

(04 Sep 2015, 3:36 pm)S813 FVK wrote ex-Megabus YN14 FVR at Chester-le-Street depot:

Could possibly be there for the staff to check it out and see what it's like, similar to the EYMS Evolution thing?

(04 Sep 2015, 3:40 pm)R852 PRG wrote Could possibly be there for the staff to check it out and see what it's like, similar to the EYMS Evolution thing?

Haven't a clue - guessing it will be aimed at the Nat Ex drivers rather than the main drivers. Don't even think the National Express drivers are employed through Go North East?

(04 Sep 2015, 3:40 pm)R852 PRG wrote Could possibly be there for the staff to check it out and see what it's like, similar to the EYMS Evolution thing?

Demonstration for National Express Operations perhaps.

(04 Sep 2015, 3:43 pm)S813 FVK wrote Haven't a clue - guessing it will be aimed at the Nat Ex drivers rather than the main drivers. Don't even think the National Express drivers are employed through Go North East?

I'm fairly certain they are... I know two of them! lol

(04 Sep 2015, 3:44 pm)Malarkey wrote Demonstration for National Express Operations perhaps.

No, I was personally expecting it to be trialed on the X21. 

(04 Sep 2015, 3:36 pm)S813 FVK wrote ex-Megabus YN14 FVR at Chester-le-Street depot:

Yes, this is a demonstration vehicle (previously used with Stagecoach as fleet number 80025 on Megabus work). To my knowledge, it will only be used for engineering staff to compare to the current Scania coaches in the fleet, similar to the Euro 6 Mercedes Citaro K last year at Riverside.

Evobus: Unregistered - Mercedes Benz Citaro K by Daniel Graham, on Flickr

(04 Sep 2015, 3:45 pm)tyresmoke wrote I'm fairly certain they are... I know two of them! lol

Yes, all coaching staff are employed through Go North East. Only time when this is not the case is when TUPE applies (ie if Go North East acquires another operator's work) - an example of this would be the Yourbus services taken over not so long ago.

(04 Sep 2015, 1:24 pm)Michael wrote Come and join our Passenger Panel

http://www.simplygo.com/news/passenger-panel

Signed up, but rather miffed that I had to select a picture of someone with long hair to demonstrate that I'm a woman.

(04 Sep 2015, 3:33 pm)S813 FVK wrote I also saw 5400 today - the streetlite that Dan mentioned about having part of the main branding missing (not route like 5396) - as i was sitting on the other side, i was unable to get a photo of it but i have searched on flickr, grabbed a photo that had a good side angle and placed a yellow box around the panel that is missing.

Had a Photo on my Camera of 5400 which I had forgot about which shows the missing branding, seems the Streetlites have been taking a right battering as of late.

(04 Sep 2015, 4:21 pm)Malarkey wrote Had a Photo on my Camera of 5400 which I had forgot about which shows the missing branding, seems the Streetlites have been taking a right battering as of late.

Thanks.

Seems we're copying off Arriva by running around without legal lettering, given that it was located on that panel which has been replaced/repainted... 

Also its a bit odd that the bus has parked up on that part of the bus station... is it allowed?

(04 Sep 2015, 4:28 pm)Michael wrote Also its a bit odd that the bus has parked up on that part of the bus station... is it allowed?

Doesnt seem to be blocking the path of other vehicles so yes, id assume it would be allowed. For how long it would have been there for though...

(04 Sep 2015, 4:28 pm)Michael wrote Also its a bit odd that the bus has parked up on that part of the bus station... is it allowed?

Stagecoach regularly do it, and it used to be where Arriva parked their Solo every night prior to working the secured 26A service (contract since acquired by Go North East - what is now the 35A).

(04 Sep 2015, 4:24 pm)Dan wrote Thanks.

Seems we're copying off Arriva by running around without legal lettering, given that it was located on that panel which has been replaced/repainted... 

Looks like the whole lot has been replaced judging by the missing branding above the window too?

Ah right cheers, wasn't sure if it was allowed!

(04 Sep 2015, 4:21 pm)Malarkey wrote Had a Photo on my Camera of 5400 which I had forgot about which shows the missing branding, seems the Streetlites have been taking a right battering as of late.

Only 5396 and 5400 have missing branding as far as im aware - both of which occurred quite early on (5396 just a week after entering service).

(04 Sep 2015, 4:36 pm)S813 FVK wrote Only 5396 and 5400 have missing branding as far as im aware - both of which occurred quite early on (5396 just a week after entering service).

5405 is also missing branding (nearside front wheel arch).

The Limes were battered too, but obviously it's a lot more noticeable with such an extravagant design.

(04 Sep 2015, 4:28 pm)Michael wrote Also its a bit odd that the bus has parked up on that part of the bus station... is it allowed?

The entire Layover Bay on that side of the Bus Station was in use by other Buses, and iirc there was a late 8 still on the Stand so the driver had no choice but to park up 5400 there for a few minutes.

(04 Sep 2015, 4:36 pm)S813 FVK wrote Only 5396 and 5400 have missing branding as far as im aware - both of which occurred quite early on (5396 just a week after entering service).

Think there is a few Drifter/Saltwell Parks also missing branding also.

(04 Sep 2015, 4:40 pm)Dan wrote 5405 is also missing branding (nearside front wheel arch).

The Limes were battered too, but obviously it's a lot more noticeable with such an extravagant design.

And the panels being far more flimsy on Streetlites won't help... Not that I would know anything about that of course 

(04 Sep 2015, 4:44 pm)Malarkey wrote Think there is a few Drifter/Saltwell Parks also missing branding also.

I think all the Drifters have had their missing branding re-applied now, but not 100% on that. There may be one still kicking around without branding on the front bumper still, as that one is fairly recent. As for Saltwell Parks - yes, 8340 has been missing a substantial amount of branding for months. Irritates the life out of me, and I've had the misfortune of seeing it every day this week. 

To go back to the general topic of branding discussed last night / this morning, this is another disadvantage to branding. There's a cost to replace the vinyls and a cost for the third party to come out and fit them, and the whole process from start to finish seems to take far too long. In the mean time, the buses look absolutely dreadful. Goes back to what Gary M was saying yesterday - these buses are mobile billboards, but would you see McDonalds showcasing an advertisement on a billboard with a burger that wasn't looking absolutely fantastic?

6037 has has the branding off the front missing since last NOV.

But hopefully they will be repainted soon... eh Dan

(04 Sep 2015, 6:18 pm)pdiddy wrote 6037 has has the branding off the front missing since last NOV.

But hopefully they will be repainted soon... eh Dan

(04 Sep 2015, 4:46 pm)Dan wrote As for Saltwell Parks - yes, 8340 has been missing a substantial amount of branding for months. Irritates the life out of me, and I've had the misfortune of seeing it every day this week. 

As is 8344:

(04 Sep 2015, 7:23 pm)S813 FVK wrote As is 8344:

That is annoying me now.

(04 Sep 2015, 7:25 pm)R852 PRG wrote That is annoying me now.

Certainly looks a mess. Not so good for a vehicle only 2 years old but accidents happen i guess. Just a shame the clearing up process can't be done as quickly.

(04 Sep 2015, 7:23 pm)S813 FVK wrote As is 8344:

That might be the one I thought was 8340 given that it appears to be the same as what I've seen recently. 8340 was certainly victim to the same sort of damage though.

(04 Sep 2015, 7:33 pm)Dan wrote That might be the one I thought was 8340 given that it appears to be the same as what I've seen recently. 8340 was certainly victim to the same sort of damage though.

Just shows how many accidents happen these days. Obviously easier to tell with buses than cars with missing branding etc. Maybe the corporate livery is so basic in an attempt to save money on vinyls and hiring the third party? The only cost would be paint.

(04 Sep 2015, 2:04 pm)Coppercap40 wrote Of course  they do not have aircon so still do not know what caused the racket !!!

They might not have aircon as such, but will, presumably, have fans to distribute air.