(18 Oct 2021, 7:17 pm)Keeiajs wrote I know they are called the Peterlee Purples, but why not the Little Lilacs, or Little Violets to connect with the 55.
(18 Oct 2021, 7:22 pm)cbma06 wrote Same here, Little Purples or Durham District Purples, then could corporate service 204/204A and 59 in the brandEast Durham Purples or East Durham District. As Peterlee Purples name is a bit short sighted considering what routes they operate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(18 Oct 2021, 7:26 pm)Keeiajs wrote East Durham Purples or East Durham District. As Peterlee Purples name is a bit short sighted considering what routes they operate.
(18 Oct 2021, 7:45 pm)Dan wrote How is Peterlee Purples short-sighted?Well I would say 3 is probs enough. But I just think Peterlee Purples is a bit short sighted as it operates the 38A.
The X6, 62/62A, 201, 206, 209/210 and 239 all serve Peterlee.
The routes which don’t serve Peterlee - the 59 and 204/204A - aren’t branded as Peterlee Purples.
The Peterlee Purples are the local buses which offer connections in and around the Peterlee area, either locally within the town or to places further afield (Seaham, Sunderland, etc).
Go North East received criticism for having too many ‘little’ named brands, after Little Coasters and Little Pinks, now seemingly it seems Little Purples, Lilacs or Violets would be preferable?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(18 Oct 2021, 7:49 pm)Keeiajs wrote Well I would say 3 is probs enough. But I just think Peterlee Purples is a bit short sighted as it operates the 38A.None of the alternative names you’ve come up with would solve that problem
(18 Oct 2021, 8:45 pm)Wybus wrote None of the alternative names you’ve come up with would solve that problem
The 38A doesn’t run in East Durham, or Durham, or have anything to do with the Lilac 55
(18 Oct 2021, 8:50 pm)JP6004 wrote For a 10min run every hour is no different than the connections4 citaro that used to run the short X20s between rainton and houghtonYes and pre Covid didn’t a Tyne Valley Ten bus do a Hexham local between trips, maybe the whole TVT brand should have been dropped as a result
(18 Oct 2021, 9:17 pm)Wybus wrote Yes and pre Covid didn’t a Tyne Valley Ten bus do a Hexham local between trips, maybe the whole TVT brand should have been dropped as a resultTheres loads of interworkings like that. I dont get what all the fuss is about.
There’s been loads of examples like this, it’s all a bit of an exaggeration for a 10 minute trip round the Docks
(18 Oct 2021, 9:17 pm)Wybus wrote Yes and pre Covid didn’t a Tyne Valley Ten bus do a Hexham local between trips, maybe the whole TVT brand should have been dropped as a resultI think there is a bit of a difference for a peak service once or twice a day, but as every day service.
There’s been loads of examples like this, it’s all a bit of an exaggeration for a 10 minute trip round the Docks
(18 Oct 2021, 9:17 pm)Wybus wrote Yes and pre Covid didn’t a Tyne Valley Ten bus do a Hexham local between trips, maybe the whole TVT brand should have been dropped as a resultProblem is TyneValleyTen is based off Hexham/Newcastle.
There’s been loads of examples like this, it’s all a bit of an exaggeration for a 10 minute trip round the Docks
(18 Oct 2021, 10:51 pm)Drifter60 wrote It’s currently operationally efficient to use the 62/X6 interworking pattern to operate those short 38A trips. I imagine other avenues to use an unbranded bus may be looked at for the next changes if possible. Is the current situation ideal? Far from it - is it better than no bus at all? Well of course it is.
I think one of the points being raised is that each hour for around 10 hours of the day, 6 days a week, a bus heavily branded as “Peterlee” is operate a short local circular service some 8 miles away. Which is different, in my opinion, to just a few peak time runs. But really the same branding argument could potentially be said for the X6/62 themselves - they spend a total of 4 minutes and 20 minutes in Peterlee out of journey times of 35 minutes and 78 minutes respectively, hardly just “Peterlee” based.
(13 Nov 2021, 11:56 pm)Wybus wrote Regarding the 55, X1 being on top of each otherTbf is the X1 Peterlee/Dalton Park journeys were switched that would be for the better, as the X1 to Newcastle from DP comes the same time as the X10 to Newcastle, same with the X9 coming 10 mins earlier.
Surely if the 55 was changed to run 5 minutes earlier and the X1 changed to run 15 minutes later, (I.e same times as now, just changing which journeys run to Peterlee/Dalton Park) there would be a better split of services
From Easington Lane it would be 09 (55), 24 (X1), 39 (55), 47 (62)
And from Peterlee it would be 17 (62), 29 (55), 45 (X1), 59 (55)
Also if the X6 was moved to run half an hour later than currently it would both give a better spacing of journeys between Seaham and Sunderland with the 62 than currently, and also mean the 38A doesn’t need to be interworked with it?
(13 Nov 2021, 11:56 pm)Wybus wrote Regarding the 55, X1 being on top of each other
Surely if the 55 was changed to run 5 minutes earlier and the X1 changed to run 15 minutes later, (I.e same times as now, just changing which journeys run to Peterlee/Dalton Park) there would be a better split of services
From Easington Lane it would be 09 (55), 24 (X1), 39 (55), 47 (62)
And from Peterlee it would be 17 (62), 29 (55), 45 (X1), 59 (55)
Also if the X6 was moved to run half an hour later than currently it would both give a better spacing of journeys between Seaham and Sunderland with the 62 than currently, and also mean the 38A doesn’t need to be interworked with it?
(14 Nov 2021, 6:00 am)Dan wrote Whilst I agree with all these comments about co-ordination, there are reasons behind it.
For the 55, the timetable is driven by shift patterns at Doxford International. In a new world post-Covid where patronage here is far less with remote work continuing, it is perhaps time to move away from that and look at where co-ordination would be beneficial to more customers. For me personally, it would be more advantageous to customers to offer a 7-8 minute frequency headway from East Herrington into Sunderland (with the 20 and X20), but you could also look at something like the X1, 55 and 62.
The 62 elsewhere on its route is a difficult one to fix, due to the interworking cycle. There have been comments about poor co-ordination between the 62 and X6 but when the two services interwork, you’re very limited in what you can do without adding an extra bus to the cycle.
It’s absolutely not about trying to kill off any service but there’s more to consider than one specific corridor.
The other favourite on here is the poor co-ordination of the 71 and 78 between Chester-le-Street and Great Lumley - but when the timetable for the 78 is co-ordinated with the 8, and the 8 is co-ordinated with the 35 from Castletown to Sunderland, and the 35 is co-ordinated with something else on another section of its route, it all gets quite tricky to achieve. Ironically a lot of the network is driven by bus station departure times, such as Durham where there aren’t enough stands to meet the service provision.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(14 Nov 2021, 6:00 am)Dan wrote Whilst I agree with all these comments about co-ordination, there are reasons behind it.I think the 35/X20/55 are all badly timed leaving Sunderland to West Park (a690) all leaving between 10 mins of each other, down the same set of road, leaving the 20 for 40 mins to cover the busy section. They could all be retimed especially the X20. And the 8/78 leaving Stanley is about 5 mins apart.
For the 55, the timetable is driven by shift patterns at Doxford International. In a new world post-Covid where patronage here is far less with remote work continuing, it is perhaps time to move away from that and look at where co-ordination would be beneficial to more customers. For me personally, it would be more advantageous to customers to offer a 7-8 minute frequency headway from East Herrington into Sunderland (with the 20 and X20), but you could also look at something like the X1, 55 and 62.
The 62 elsewhere on its route is a difficult one to fix, due to the interworking cycle. There have been comments about poor co-ordination between the 62 and X6 but when the two services interwork, you’re very limited in what you can do without adding an extra bus to the cycle.
It’s absolutely not about trying to kill off any service but there’s more to consider than one specific corridor.
The other favourite on here is the poor co-ordination of the 71 and 78 between Chester-le-Street and Great Lumley - but when the timetable for the 78 is co-ordinated with the 8, and the 8 is co-ordinated with the 35 from Castletown to Sunderland, and the 35 is co-ordinated with something else on another section of its route, it all gets quite tricky to achieve. Ironically a lot of the network is driven by bus station departure times, such as Durham where there aren’t enough stands to meet the service provision.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(14 Nov 2021, 11:20 am)Andreos1 wrote Which means naff all in the grand scheme of things, when the 71 is stand-alone and could easily have its timetable tweaked to improve its headway with the 78.
The 35 fits around the 8, which fits around the 78 (no major timetable changes with the latter for many a year if I remember correctly - always a quarter to and quarter past from Park Lane with the 638 being bottom of the hour and 777 top of the hour).
Absolutely nothing to do with the 71 running. That's just poor planning. Or not?
(14 Nov 2021, 12:29 pm)Keeiajs wrote I think the 35/X20/55 are all badly timed leaving Sunderland to West Park (a690) all leaving between 10 mins of each other, down the same set of road, leaving the 20 for 40 mins to cover the busy section. They could all be retimed especially the X20. And the 8/78 leaving Stanley is about 5 mins apart.The 35 and X20 are both half hourly services so how is the 20 left with the section on its own for 40 mins? the 20 runs every 15 mins so even if the X20 is retimed 5 mins later there is still a chance the 20 and X20 will run behind each other from park lane to the board inn and vice versa, the 35 serves sunderland royal hospital so offers different connections to the 20 so passengers will wait for the 35 if that is where they need to be, then you have all the stagecoach services running up ad down durham road too, there is plenty of choice for users to use up durham road so retiming a couple will make no difference at all to this busy corridor
Aswell the X1 is so badly timed with the X10/X9 to Newcaslte, if you switch the times that they go to Peterlee & dalton park that will solve that.
(14 Nov 2021, 11:20 am)Andreos1 wrote Which means naff all in the grand scheme of things, when the 71 is stand-alone and could easily have its timetable tweaked to improve its headway with the 78.
The 35 fits around the 8, which fits around the 78 (no major timetable changes with the latter for many a year if I remember correctly - always a quarter to and quarter past from Park Lane with the 638 being bottom of the hour and 777 top of the hour).
Absolutely nothing to do with the 71 running. That's just poor planning. Or not?
(14 Nov 2021, 2:25 pm)Dan wrote The 71 was secured between Houghton-le-Spring and Seaham and ran at the times specified in the contract, so the commercially operated section between Houghton-le-Spring and Chester-le-Street ran at the times it did because of the contracted times on the other section of the route.
This means that the 78 would need to be re-timed to fit around the 71, to maintain an even headway between Chester-le-Street and Great Lumley on these services. But to do that, the 8 would also need to be re-timed, then the 35 too. The challenge with this is that the 35 is secured on an evening so needs to run at the times it does so that it easily runs onto the secured evening service without impacting on customers.
As I said before, it’s not that simple and there’s a wider context to be considered. It’s not within anyone’s interests to have a poorly planned timetable with uneven headways on common sections of route.
Appreciate customers don’t care about any of this and they’d prefer an even headway on services, but given this is an enthusiasts’ forum, we can have a greater appreciation for the logistics and why things aren’t as simple as one might think at first.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
(14 Nov 2021, 3:39 pm)Andreos1 wrote And the 14 years it wasn't secured (including the period when it was the 36)? What was the reasoning for the headway issue then?
I know it's a big if. Huge in fact.
If GNE took on the Houghton - Seaham side commercially, then they would be able to do all sorts with it. Including managing the commercial part of the route in a more effective manner.
Taking on a contracted route, integrating it with a struggling commercial service and then seeing that commercial service hamstrung... Well, it's not really the best decision that's ever been made.
It's interesting you mention that the 35 timetable needs to be maintained with its secured evening counterpart.
Why doesn't the Sunday 78 tie in with its weekday equivalent?
