(08 Jun 2023, 2:40 pm)cbma06 wrote Even though it was stated on the Arriva bus changes page that new timetables are available on there own website , but there not


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, they are now:  North East July Changes | Arriva Bus UK

(03 Jun 2023, 1:13 pm)RobinHood wrote https://www.arrivabus.co.uk/latest-news/...ly-changes

Full details are now online. I can see some specific comments around discussions ongoing with Durham County Council on Service 6, 43, 48 and X75, which may stop some of the planned actions on those services from taking place.

idk why they focus so much on Barnard Castle and Durham, the 43 and 48 cuts aren't even that bad compared to others, the x21 being cut entirely will definitely affect people as that bus always seems full when college / sixth form end, now people would have to go to Durham, Ferryhill or Stockton to get to Sedgefield.

(11 Jun 2023, 10:59 pm)Countydurhambuses wrote idk why they focus so much on Barnard Castle and Durham, the 43 and 48 cuts aren't even that bad compared to others, the x21 being cut entirely will definitely affect people as that bus always seems full when college / sixth form end, now people would have to go to Durham, Ferryhill or Stockton to get to Sedgefield.

There's no bus services at all to those places on a evening/Sunday that's why basically. Also a chunk of the withdrawn part of the X21 is within Darlington and nothing to do with Co. Durham.

(12 Jun 2023, 9:57 am)Storx wrote There's no bus services at all to those places on a evening/Sunday that's why basically. Also a chunk of the withdrawn part of the X21 is within Darlington and nothing to do with Co. Durham.

And the vast majority of the affected section have alternative bus services still.

I can see why the X21 has been withdrawn and the passengers who lose out are those going across Sedgefield.

Bluntly honest though, ive seen the X21 between Rushyford and Sedgefield and it is usually practically empty, which i suspect has influenced the decision somewhat.

(12 Jun 2023, 1:23 pm)RobinHood wrote And the vast majority of the affected section have alternative bus services still.

I can see why the X21 has been withdrawn and the passengers who lose out are those going across Sedgefield.

Bluntly honest though, ive seen the X21 between Rushyford and Sedgefield and it is usually practically empty, which i suspect has influenced the decision somewhat.

Must admit I don't know the route too well, but I'm not surprised. It does seem to connect places which don't exactly have much of a connection. There's not exactly much at Sedgefield and/or Newton Aycliffe why people would exactly want to go between the two and there's tonnes of buses between Darlington and Newton Aycliffe and of course the X22 at the other end.

(12 Jun 2023, 1:47 pm)Storx wrote Must admit I don't know the route too well, but I'm not surprised. It does seem to connect places which don't exactly have much of a connection. There's not exactly much at Sedgefield and/or Newton Aycliffe why people would exactly want to go between the two and there's tonnes of buses between Darlington and Newton Aycliffe and of course the X22 at the other end.

Loads of houses in Sedgefield and a huge employment site in Aycliffe. 
The sort of thing that should attract people on to using the service. 
It uses pretty much the quickest route between the two (as a car would), but clearly isn't attractive and doesn't go right in to the industrial estate. 
https://aycliffebusinesspark.co.uk/ 10,000 employees apparently.

I've only ever used it between Peterlee and Sedgefield (missed an X10 and worked out there wasn't much of a wait between the X21 and X12 at Sedgefield).

(12 Jun 2023, 1:23 pm)RobinHood wrote And the vast majority of the affected section have alternative bus services still.

I can see why the X21 has been withdrawn and the passengers who lose out are those going across Sedgefield.

Bluntly honest though, ive seen the X21 between Rushyford and Sedgefield and it is usually practically empty, which i suspect has influenced the decision somewhat.

There is some through traffic to/from Sedgefield and Aycliffe/Darlo but its not exactly major numbers and seems like it's only at certain times of the day. From my observations at least, the X22 towards Middlesbrough is much the same although may just take the edge over the X21 although I suspect numbers will take a nose dive on the Teesside end of the X22 with terminating at Stockton on the vast majority of journeys.

I think one of the major benefactors over retaining the X22 over the X21 is operational convenience where that the X22 can be done in a 4 hour cycle from Stockton depot saving 2 buses over the current PVR of 6, it wouldn't have really been possible to do the same from Darlington depot, only way may have been to have gone direct along the A1(M) between junctions 59 and 60 missing out Aycliffe in the process.

It's a shame for the direct links to be lost although many of the villages in this area have lost direct links over the last few years:
* 113 no longer running to Bishop Auckland for those in Sedgefield, Fishburn etc.
* Chilton only has a bus to Bishop on a nighttime on the 35A.
* currently there's no direct bus from the Trimdons to Durham, instead being covered by a subpar arrangement where people must change buses in Kelloe - this has been the subject of much ridicule and is seemingly one of the main locations those in the Trimdons wish to travel to.
* West Cornforth lost direct bus to Spennymoor (112).

Sadly with much of the above in mind, I can't see any alternative being put in place by Durham County Council.

(12 Jun 2023, 9:57 am)Storx wrote There's no bus services at all to those places on a evening/Sunday that's why basically. Also a chunk of the withdrawn part of the X21 is within Darlington and nothing to do with Co. Durham.

It is a Darlington bus but most of it is in county durham and it's registered with Durham county council so it would be up to them to do something not Darlington council

(12 Jun 2023, 2:17 pm)Andreos1 wrote Loads of houses in Sedgefield and a huge employment site in Aycliffe. 
The sort of thing that should attract people on to using the service. 
It uses pretty much the quickest route between the two (as a car would), but clearly isn't attractive and doesn't go right in to the industrial estate. 
https://aycliffebusinesspark.co.uk/ 10,000 employees apparently.

I've only ever used it between Peterlee and Sedgefield (missed an X10 and worked out there wasn't much of a wait between the X21 and X12 at Sedgefield).

Aye fair points about the business park mind, forgot about it actually. Shame someone ie. the council couldn't support a route something like Durham - Kelloe - Trimdon(s) - Sedgefield - Newton Aycliffe.

It ticks most the boxes in that area where the biggest complaints are coming from, especially with the stupid 59 timetable, in that area tbh and offers connections to other services ie. if you wanted to go to Darlington on the 7.

(12 Jun 2023, 4:06 pm)Storx wrote Aye fair points about the business park mind, forgot about it actually. Shame someone ie. the council couldn't support a route something like Durham - Kelloe - Trimdon(s) - Sedgefield - Newton Aycliffe.

It ticks most the boxes in that area where the biggest complaints are coming from, especially with the stupid 59 timetable, in that area tbh and offers connections to other services ie. if you wanted to go to Darlington on the 7.

It would probably be a hard thing to work, it'd have to be fast enough so people would think working in Aycliffe would be a good option and then it's debatable whether it will get any use outside of when the shifts finish.

(12 Jun 2023, 4:06 pm)Storx wrote Aye fair points about the business park mind, forgot about it actually. Shame someone ie. the council couldn't support a route something like Durham - Kelloe - Trimdon(s) - Sedgefield - Newton Aycliffe.

It ticks most the boxes in that area where the biggest complaints are coming from, especially with the stupid 59 timetable, in that area tbh and offers connections to other services ie. if you wanted to go to Darlington on the 7.

Funnily enough, my suggestion was to run the 59: Hartlepool - Trimdon's - Sedgefield - Newton Aycliffe but this likely wouldn't go down well for those in the Trimdons wanting to travel to/from Durham.

(12 Jun 2023, 2:31 pm)Jimmi wrote There is some through traffic to/from Sedgefield and Aycliffe/Darlo but its not exactly major numbers and seems like it's only at certain times of the day. From my observations at least, the X22 towards Middlesbrough is much the same although may just take the edge over the X21 although I suspect numbers will take a nose dive on the Teesside end of the X22 with terminating at Stockton on the vast majority of journeys.

I think one of the major benefactors over retaining the X22 over the X21 is operational convenience where that the X22 can be done in a 4 hour cycle from Stockton depot saving 2 buses over the current PVR of 6, it wouldn't have really been possible to do the same from Darlington depot, only way may have been to have gone direct along the A1(M) between junctions 59 and 60 missing out Aycliffe in the process.

It's a shame for the direct links to be lost although many of the villages in this area have lost direct links over the last few years:
* 113 no longer running to Bishop Auckland for those in Sedgefield, Fishburn etc.
* Chilton only has a bus to Bishop on a nighttime on the 35A.
* currently there's no direct bus from the Trimdons to Durham, instead being covered by a subpar arrangement where people must change buses in Kelloe - this has been the subject of much ridicule and is seemingly one of the main locations those in the Trimdons wish to travel to.
* West Cornforth lost direct bus to Spennymoor (112).

Sadly with much of the above in mind, I can't see any alternative being put in place by Durham County Council.

Rumour has it that some x22 journeys are going to be starting from Aycliffe

(12 Jun 2023, 5:49 pm)Jimmi wrote Funnily enough, my suggestion was to run the 59: Hartlepool - Trimdon's - Sedgefield - Newton Aycliffe but this likely wouldn't go down well for those in the Trimdons wanting to travel to/from Durham.

Not the worst shout really, it's an awkward place around there - especially now the 56 has turned into a basketcase of a route aswell and I think everyone knows my thoughts on hourly bus routes.

(12 Jun 2023, 6:47 pm)ross13 wrote Rumour has it that some x22 journeys are going to be starting from Aycliffe

The X22 timetable is online and it doesn't start at Aycliffe.

(12 Jun 2023, 7:50 pm)RobinHood wrote The X22 timetable is online and it doesn't start at Aycliffe.

It doesn't even go to Middlesbrough most the day now, seems like an odd choice though tbh

(13 Jun 2023, 4:58 pm)Countydurhambuses wrote It doesn't even go to Middlesbrough most the day now, seems like an odd choice though tbh

I can see why, as that would require another bus, whereas terminating at Stockton means there is a net saving of 2 vehicles overall.

(13 Jun 2023, 5:16 pm)RobinHood wrote I can see why, as that would require another bus, whereas terminating at Stockton means there is a net saving of 2 vehicles overall.

Most of the passenger usage in my experience is from/to Stockton anyway with the odd few going through to Middlesbrough. There are lots of other services available for this if desired.

There used to be - unsure if it still does - be a large pull by Stockton market on market days, especially from the Trimdons and Fishburn. God knows why as the market is nowt special but it still pulls the crowds for some reason! Often had standing loads on morning trips into Stockton on those days!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(03 Jun 2023, 1:13 pm)RobinHood wrote https://www.arrivabus.co.uk/latest-news/...ly-changes

Full details are now online. I can see some specific comments around discussions ongoing with Durham County Council on Service 6, 43, 48 and X75, which may stop some of the planned actions on those services from taking place.

Just came across this on the local councillor Facebook page for the area:


48/43 BUS SERVICE


Further to the proposed changes to local bus services by Arriva from 9 July 2023 I am pleased to be able to confirm that, in response, the Council has been able to secure, through negotiated contracts, the following services:

Service 43: Durham to Esh Winning
· Monday to Saturday: 22:32 from Durham to Esh Winning and return.
· Friday and Saturday: 23:32 from Durham to Esh Winning.

Service 48 Durham to New Brancepeth
Sunday service: current timetable or close equivalent.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's taken a little bit of time to go public but Durham County Council are also funding the Cockfield extension on service 6, on an hourly basis in place of the existing half hourly. DCC are also funding an extension of service 6 to Ramshaw which will see the Hodgsons operated service 104 reduced to operate Newfield to Bishop Auckland only, losing the through travel to Tindale Crescent.

Funding is also in place to retain the Barnard Castle journeys, plus additional journeys.

Arriva's website has been updated with this information now, though a timetable is not yet showing available.

(14 Jun 2023, 7:34 pm)cainebj wrote It's taken a little bit of time to go public but Durham County Council are also funding the Cockfield extension on service 6, on an hourly basis in place of the existing half hourly. DCC are also funding an extension of service 6 to Ramshaw which will see the Hodgsons operated service 104 reduced to operate Newfield to Bishop Auckland only, losing the through travel to Tindale Crescent.

Funding is also in place to retain the Barnard Castle journeys, plus additional journeys.

Arriva's website has been updated with this information now, though a timetable is not yet showing available.

At this point they may as well extend it through to Darlington/Barnard Castle during the day to replace the 84/85.

I'm also quite surprised Darlington have done nothing about the 3 and the 12 - you could realistically re-route the 16 to cover the 3 and as for the 12, that's Houchen's ever precious bus link to the airport gone

(14 Jun 2023, 10:08 pm)peter wrote At this point they may as well extend it through to Darlington/Barnard Castle during the day to replace the 84/85.

I'm also quite surprised Darlington have done nothing about the 3 and the 12 - you could realistically re-route the 16 to cover the 3 and as for the 12, that's Houchen's ever precious bus link to the airport gone

Different local authority for Darlington, so would be different people to go though and Darlington aren't one for supporting much nowadays, 16 is about the only thing that is, would make sense to alter the 16 route to cover parts being left without a service by the 3 being axed round Mowden but would mean there wouldn't be enough time to go down to Harrowgate Hill to serve that small unique section of route, not that it will be the only bit to lose a bus with much of the 3A stops being abandoned.

Sedgefield MP Phil Howell seemingly met with Arriva today and there doesn't seem to be any budging on Arriva's part at least with the 12 and the X21.

Basically, unless local authorities step in, then I think all links proposed to be withdrawn will be gone (few pieces saved like Cockfield on the 6 and the 59 in Trimdon is extended to Durham with Stagecoach running the contract, few evening runs have been saved on the 43 at least too).

Makes you wonder, TVCA saving millions in their ENCTS budget (as they suggest, Stagecoach and Go Ahead have seemingly accepted the same reduced deal) and they also have £1.5milion from government.

What are they actually doing with that money? Now is definitely the time to even stick a tender out there for Service 12 or Service 3, places that have lost completely? They just seem completely inadequate as an authority.

(14 Jun 2023, 10:39 pm)Jimmi wrote Different local authority for Darlington, so would be different people to go though and Darlington aren't one for supporting much nowadays, 16 is about the only thing that is, would make sense to alter the 16 route to cover parts being left without a service by the 3 being axed round Mowden but would mean there wouldn't be enough time to go down to Harrowgate Hill to serve that small unique section of route, not that it will be the only bit to lose a bus with much of the 3A stops being abandoned.

Sedgefield MP Phil Howell seemingly met with Arriva today and there doesn't seem to be any budging on Arriva's part at least with the 12 and the X21.

Basically, unless local authorities step in, then I think all links proposed to be withdrawn will be gone (few pieces saved like Cockfield on the 6 and the 59 in Trimdon is extended to Durham with Stagecoach running the contract, few evening runs have been saved on the 43 at least too).

Yeah, well aware it's a different shall we say, 'less generous when it comes to funding bus services' local authority for Darlington (only stuck it on the end of my DCC-related comment about the 84/85 to save double posting)! Indeed, the 16 is the only one after the once a week 20 got withdrawn. Tbh I reckon the 16 could do a loop of Mowden, in via Abbey Road, out via Pierremont, then follow the 3A route to Harrogate Hill also serving Glebe Road - not sure how long that would take even if a bus every 2 hours would still be better than none - I think the fact there's a quick fix by altering the 16 is why I'm surprised it hasn't been done, and the 12 because of the airport link. Tbh for Hurworth you could divert service 72 through Hurworth and back to Blackwell via Neasham Road and the A66 but with it being a NYCC tender may not be possible. 

DCC are supposedly exploring options for replacing the Newton Aycliffe to Sedgefield section - the only realistic option I foresee is an extension to the 113.

(15 Jun 2023, 5:57 pm)peter wrote Yeah, well aware it's a different shall we say, 'less generous when it comes to funding bus services' local authority for Darlington (only stuck it on the end of my DCC-related comment about the 84/85 to save double posting)! Indeed, the 16 is the only one after the once a week 20 got withdrawn. Tbh I reckon the 16 could do a loop of Mowden, in via Abbey Road, out via Pierremont, then follow the 3A route to Harrogate Hill also serving Glebe Road - not sure how long that would take even if a bus every 2 hours would still be better than none - I think the fact there's a quick fix by altering the 16 is why I'm surprised it hasn't been done, and the 12 because of the airport link. Tbh for Hurworth you could divert service 72 through Hurworth and back to Blackwell via Neasham Road and the A66 but with it being a NYCC tender may not be possible. 

DCC are supposedly exploring options for replacing the Newton Aycliffe to Sedgefield section - the only realistic option I foresee is an extension to the 113.

Arriva had the 84/85 and 95/96 contracts back in like 2011, it would be very odd to see them take over the problem mainly being that they all run into eachother and are rural routes, the only depot which could do it is darlington and they've already scrapped most the solos and the e200s will be needed on more profitable runs. It's also unlikely they would extend the 6 to barnard castle there likely wouldn't be much through travel to durham and most would get off in west auckland and bishop which is already provided by 85

---

(14 Jun 2023, 7:34 pm)cainebj wrote It's taken a little bit of time to go public but Durham County Council are also funding the Cockfield extension on service 6, on an hourly basis in place of the existing half hourly. DCC are also funding an extension of service 6 to Ramshaw which will see the Hodgsons operated service 104 reduced to operate Newfield to Bishop Auckland only, losing the through travel to Tindale Crescent.

Funding is also in place to retain the Barnard Castle journeys, plus additional journeys.

Arriva's website has been updated with this information now, though a timetable is not yet showing available.

it seems like an odd choice to go to ramshaw, the 104 bus sits in bishop quite a bit during the day the only fixes which would work would be going to newfield hourly which there wouldn't be demand for or pretty unlikely if they got the 9 contract and the 104 was weardale drive to newfield.

(16 Jun 2023, 2:38 pm)Countydurhambuses wrote Arriva had the 84/85 and 95/96 contracts back in like 2011, it would be very odd to see them take over the problem mainly being that they all run into eachother and are rural routes, the only depot which could do it is darlington and they've already scrapped most the solos and the e200s will be needed on more profitable runs. It's also unlikely they would extend the 6 to barnard castle there likely wouldn't be much through travel to durham and most would get off in west auckland and bishop which is already provided by 85

---

it seems like an odd choice to go to ramshaw, the 104 bus sits in bishop quite a bit during the day the only fixes which would work would be going to newfield hourly which there wouldn't be demand for or pretty unlikely if they got the 9 contract and the 104 was weardale drive to newfield.

At least it feels less silly than the 104 being supported to effectively dupe the 6 & 85 between Bishop and Evenwood for the sake of the few stops up to Ramshaw, also at least Ramshaw now gets an hourly service as opposed to the 3 trips a day currently on offer.

Suppose the time freed up on the 104 may allow drivers to swap between buses on the 81/89, 87 & 104 rather than having to send a Transit over to Bishop Auckland for changeovers/breaks.

(16 Jun 2023, 2:38 pm)Countydurhambuses wrote Arriva had the 84/85 and 95/96 contracts back in like 2011, it would be very odd to see them take over the problem mainly being that they all run into eachother and are rural routes, the only depot which could do it is darlington and they've already scrapped most the solos and the e200s will be needed on more profitable runs. It's also unlikely they would extend the 6 to barnard castle there likely wouldn't be much through travel to durham and most would get off in west auckland and bishop which is already provided by 85

---

it seems like an odd choice to go to ramshaw, the 104 bus sits in bishop quite a bit during the day the only fixes which would work would be going to newfield hourly which there wouldn't be demand for or pretty unlikely if they got the 9 contract and the 104 was weardale drive to newfield.

Arriva didn't have the contracts for the 84/85 and 95/96 - they used to operated them commercially. The council stepped in to replace them with the Scarlet Band offering, originally just an 85A from Barnard Castle to Darlington via Cockfield until Scarlet Band restored the 85 through to Bishop Auckland commercially I believe. My suggestion, in line with the extension to Ramshaw to replace duplication with the 104, was for the council to fund the extension further from Cockfield through to Barnard Castle and Darlington. Given they're already going to be providing 2 journeys per day in each direction to Barnard Castle it doesn't seem that unreasonable. Tbh I doubt there's much through traffic from Cockfield to Durham either.

Agree the 104 is an odd one, an hourly service to Ramshaw is overkill, back in the day it used to be the 8/8A/8B each running to West Auckland then Barnard Castle, Ramshaw and Darlington - the Ramshaw service was merged with the 86 operating as a loop via Toft Hill with the 8 and 8B becoming the 84/85. When the 84/85 were withdrawn, the 6 and 6A were introduced half hourly to Cockfield and half hourly to Ramshaw, until the Ramshaw extension was binned when the 6 went every 12 minutes and replaced with the 86 which itself was merged into the 50 and extended to Evenwood then eventually withdrawn altogether. Also agree it would make sense to be merged with the 9.

I see Ben Houchen having his say about the Arriva changes

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-65943261

(16 Jun 2023, 11:44 pm)peter wrote Arriva didn't have the contracts for the 84/85 and 95/96 - they used to operated them commercially. The council stepped in to replace them with the Scarlet Band offering, originally just an 85A from Barnard Castle to Darlington via Cockfield until Scarlet Band restored the 85 through to Bishop Auckland commercially I believe. My suggestion, in line with the extension to Ramshaw to replace duplication with the 104, was for the council to fund the extension further from Cockfield through to Barnard Castle and Darlington. Given they're already going to be providing 2 journeys per day in each direction to Barnard Castle it doesn't seem that unreasonable. Tbh I doubt there's much through traffic from Cockfield to Durham either.

Agree the 104 is an odd one, an hourly service to Ramshaw is overkill, back in the day it used to be the 8/8A/8B each running to West Auckland then Barnard Castle, Ramshaw and Darlington - the Ramshaw service was merged with the 86 operating as a loop via Toft Hill with the 8 and 8B becoming the 84/85. When the 84/85 were withdrawn, the 6 and 6A were introduced half hourly to Cockfield and half hourly to Ramshaw, until the Ramshaw extension was binned when the 6 went every 12 minutes and replaced with the 86 which itself was merged into the 50 and extended to Evenwood then eventually withdrawn altogether. Also agree it would make sense to be merged with the 9.

I think every hour to cockfield would be fine, there's not many people getting off, but same for west Auckland, it would be better for the 85 to be increased in frequency but that's hard as it's lumped in with the 84 and 95/96. It seems like most the demand is for tindale but that place was definitely not designed to be served by buses and i doubt there's even gonna be a bus stop in the new development they're making.

(19 Jun 2023, 5:43 pm)Countydurhambuses wrote I think every hour to cockfield would be fine, there's not many people getting off, but same for west Auckland, it would be better for the 85 to be increased in frequency but that's hard as it's lumped in with the 84 and 95/96. It seems like most the demand is for tindale but that place was definitely not designed to be served by buses and i doubt there's even gonna be a bus stop in the new development they're making.

I think the 85 running hourly would be a preferable travel option to many in Teesdale over having it 2 hourly combined with the 84 and instead have another service, possibly an extended 83 or revised 70 running to Darlington instead as although the 84 links with the 95/96 at Barnard Castle, it just seems a bit of pointless duplication at that end with the X75/X76 also running from Barnard Castle to Darlington.

(19 Jun 2023, 5:52 pm)Jimmi wrote I think the 85 running hourly would be a preferable travel option to many in Teesdale over having it 2 hourly combined with the 84 and instead have another service, possibly an extended 83 or revised 70 running to Darlington instead as although the 84 links with the 95/96 at Barnard Castle, it just seems a bit of pointless duplication at that end with the X75/X76 also running from Barnard Castle to Darlington.

Yeah the 84 seems very empty but that's cause if you don't live in ingleton or summerhouses you don't really need to get it, the 85 seems to get a few though, especially from cockfield