(22 Sep 2024, 1:27 pm)Andreos1 wrote 500 houses, a supermarket and a pub. 
I'd hazard a guess there's 2000 people on the estate and at £2 a pop, it doesn't take long to hit the £200k you mention, even if only a quarter of the residents use a bus.

Assuming (here I go again), the bus takes them where they need to be.

I'd love to know the cost of the delays if they didn't use the bus and stuck with the car. Herrington Burn and Shiney Row roundabouts will be absolute chaos and there's no amount of bus priorities going to fix it.

---

Now there was a place!
Spent many an hour in there back in the day.

See I think the short service above is pointless, I know I posted this before (but I amended it) I'd look at changing the 4 into a loop running every 20 minute in every direction. The core of the route gaining a 10 minute service from the new punters being gained from the new estates doing something like:



There's arguably destinations at all the white X's where people might want to travel across the route for creating a useful loop for the local area. This is the sort of stuff where BSIP should be spent, since the extra passengers gained from the new estates could boost the rest of the route to make it commercially viable at an enhanced frequency.

It's not as if they can say it duplicates other services as none of that corridor has a decent service North to Washington/Tyneside.

Obviously the road needs to be built first though.

(22 Sep 2024, 7:00 am)Andreos1 wrote Yeah, there's those ones. But I was referring to the huge site being built on the old bus depot/pit.
Right where this proposed 164 passes.

500 homes and a pub/supermarket and all the footfall that brings.

Ah, sorry! That development had completely slipped my mind!

Yes, I'd agree there's significant potential there. The X1 and 35 is a decent start, but hopefully it has enough potential to reform the 35A into a useful service again, rather than one that simply plugs the gap of GNE cuts over the years. The main missing gap for me is a stopping link, what once existed with the 194/294. 

Given that Kepier, like most secondary schools, is at capacity, you'll continue to have kids of that age group that are educated and socialise in Washington. A problem that was of course raised and fell on deaf ears when the M1 was axed.

(22 Sep 2024, 11:24 am)DeltaMan wrote I suppose the question is.....will an operator recoup the extra 200k a year needed to stick an extra bus in the cycle to serve that area alone I don't think they would.

I dunno how much the 79  contract costs,  but how would people feel if the local authority used the money for the 79 on sticking an extra bus on the 4 instead?

Well, this is the golden question, isn't it? Operators always want to be seen as part of the solution, but never prepared to be part of the solution.

I'm not sure the 79 is the answer in it's current format. Let's remember that this is a service, cobbled together by Nexus, in order to service as many abandoned areas as possible. From my observations, most of the people served by the service are quite elderly, so I've no doubt it acts as a lifeline to those people to at least change to/from other services, but it doesn't actually go anywhere apart from that.

If we're serious about getting people out of cars, then we have to be serious in providing them a bus service to do so. Someone happy driving to/from Philly into town is going to continue to do so, if the alternative is a change at Houghton or Shiney Row for a second bus, or the direct bus goes on a grand tour of the Sunderland estates.

Authorities haven't got the cash to continue to throw money at operators to plug gaps, because they've zero idea how to develop business. It'll eventually dry up, as is the situation when they rely on Section 106 monies. If operators aren't prepared to play the game and act as a hinderance to regeneration, then it's no wonder so many areas are looking into other options.

(22 Sep 2024, 1:27 pm)Andreos1 wrote 500 houses, a supermarket and a pub. 
I'd hazard a guess there's 2000 people on the estate and at £2 a pop, it doesn't take long to hit the £200k you mention, even if only a quarter of the residents use a bus.

Assuming (here I go again), the bus takes them where they need to be.

I'd love to know the cost of the delays if they didn't use the bus and stuck with the car. Herrington Burn and Shiney Row roundabouts will be absolute chaos and there's no amount of bus priorities going to fix it.

---

Now there was a place!
Spent many an hour in there back in the day.

One estate with 500 homes is not going to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of even one extra bus to serve it, nevermind multiple buses to other different locations. Great Park has been built for over a decade and not a single service is fully commercial.

(22 Sep 2024, 7:17 pm)DeltaMan wrote One estate with 500 homes is not going to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of even one extra bus to serve it, nevermind multiple buses to other different locations. Great Park has been built for over a decade and not a single service is fully commercial.

What's the bar set at before a commercial operator will show interest; a small city?

I don't blame you for dismissing it as a revenue stream, despite doing so at a time when not a single plot has been sold, because that's largely the attitude that most operators have gone with for years. Maybe we can look at their accounts and how their business has shrank during that time, as a barometer of how successful that approach has been.

Like I say, it's no wonder so many areas are looking at other options than to rely on these operators.

(22 Sep 2024, 8:07 pm)Adrian wrote What's the bar set at before a commercial operator will show interest; a small city?

I don't blame you for dismissing it as a revenue stream, despite doing so at a time when not a single plot has been sold, because that's largely the attitude that most operators have gone with for years. Maybe we can look at their accounts and how their business has shrank during that time, as a barometer of how successful that approach has been.

Like I say, it's no wonder so many areas are looking at other options than to rely on these operators.

I agree, what is the bar? if after a good few years the Great Park as an example is not generating enough money for services to be fully commercial - Its obviously a time for a massive rethink in terms of overall planning. It is true to say that not always is public transport user friendly but these need to be overcome with innovation from the industry operators. 30-60 mn frequencies will not entice people out of a car.

(22 Sep 2024, 7:17 pm)DeltaMan wrote One estate with 500 homes is not going to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of even one extra bus to serve it, nevermind multiple buses to other different locations. Great Park has been built for over a decade and not a single service is fully commercial.

Not sure the Great Park is a good comparison mind as it's a dead end with no sensible route to go through it and nothing really of note inbetween it and Newcastle which isn't already served by existing services on a very high frequency.

Personally I wouldn't be surprised if the 35 is redirected through it as soon as the link road opens, if we're talking about the Philidelphia development, it's quicker and has more potential for demand as there's next to nothing on the current route around there.

(22 Sep 2024, 7:17 pm)DeltaMan wrote One estate with 500 homes is not going to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of even one extra bus to serve it, nevermind multiple buses to other different locations. Great Park has been built for over a decade and not a single service is fully commercial.

If they can't make a go of it commercially, then that's on the operator. 

500 homes and approx 2000 people living there, 250 of them using public transport and adding to the numbers travelling elsewhere en-route should be viable.

I'd hazard a guess Great Park could also be viable with the right service and some creativity within the route designing teams. 

Alas, it seems we will see Nexus step in AND/OR we see delays, hold ups and inconveniences for the existing network. And for those who have the option, an inevitable change in modal transport, seeing an even greater decline in people using the X1 or 35.

(23 Sep 2024, 7:02 am)Storx wrote Not sure the Great Park is a good comparison mind as it's a dead end with no sensible route to go through it and nothing really of note inbetween it and Newcastle which isn't already served by existing services on a very high frequency.

Personally I wouldn't be surprised if the 35 is redirected through it as soon as the link road opens, if we're talking about the Philidelphia development, it's quicker and has more potential for demand as there's next to nothing on the current route around there.

How do you see Great Park as a dead end? There's ample routes for buses to go in and around the development. The X47 is even using the new spine road that was opened recently, providing connectivity to Kingston Park. 

Yes, I tend to agree on the 35. The turning at Herrington Burn is a bit of an awkward position for a stop (on both sides).

Ah back to this old chestnut. 500 homes to 2000 people etc etc. Except the homes are ally 300k or more and the properties all have double or treble garages. There been multiple now homes built in hazelrigg and dinington. My mate who works in town who cant aford to run a car uses the 44 every morning. There are LESS PEOPLE USING IT NOW he says then before the houses are built. Even worse the club in hazlerigg is losing money as it cant attract new member from these new house,. They are not the type to drink in a WMC and they are no t the type to get the bus when there x5 BMW is sitting on the drive

Build social/council housing estate then you might have a point in increasing service!

(23 Sep 2024, 4:19 pm)Adrian wrote How do you see Great Park as a dead end? There's ample routes for buses to go in and around the development. The X47 is even using the new spine road that was opened recently, providing connectivity to Kingston Park. 

Yes, I tend to agree on the 35. The turning at Herrington Burn is a bit of an awkward position for a stop (on both sides).

Sorry wasn't very clear, I meant more in a sense that it can't really travel through then connect to somewhere else rather than hitting a physical dead end. The better performing routes are generally those which go from two main destinations serving a few places in between, rather than those which go from a main destination to a housing estate. The Sage closing was a massive blow for the corridor aswell as it was a good flow going against the peak. The 43/44/45 has the Gosforth corridor covered going that way aswell.

The X47 is definitely the best chance for it though to actually work, always thought it was the right service to serve it personally, since it doesn't duplicate any services and is just a short extension to an existing well used service.

(23 Sep 2024, 4:21 pm)Rob44 wrote Ah back to this old chestnut. 500 homes  to 2000 people etc etc.  Except the homes are ally 300k or more and the properties all have double or treble garages.  There been multiple now homes built in hazelrigg and dinington. My mate who works in town who cant aford to run a car uses the 44 every morning.  There are LESS PEOPLE USING IT NOW he says then before the houses are built.  Even worse the club in hazlerigg is losing money as it cant attract new member from these new house,.  They are not the type to drink in a WMC and they are no t the type to get the bus when there x5 BMW is sitting on the drive

Build social/council housing estate then you might have a point in increasing service!

What is the alternative? Maintain the status quo and just let the roads fill up with cars and impact on bus users/reliability or actually try and be proactive, encouraging bus use?

The status quo hasn't worked (just look at your mates anecdotal evidence re the 44) and people are switching away from public transport. So clearly an alternative is needed.

As has been pointed out previously, if you attract people on to public transport when they're younger, there's a greater chance they will use it when they get older.
It goes without saying the basics need to be right and it needs to suit changing travel patterns.

(24 Sep 2024, 10:55 am)Andreos1 wrote What is the alternative? Maintain the status quo and just let the roads fill up with cars and impact on bus users/reliability or actually try and be proactive, encouraging bus use?

The status quo hasn't worked (just look at your mates anecdotal evidence re the 44) and people are switching away from public transport. So clearly an alternative is needed.

As has been pointed out previously, if you attract people on to public transport when they're younger, there's a greater chance they will use it when they get older.
It goes without saying the basics need to be right and it needs to suit changing travel patterns.

Imagine if we had joined up thinking between planning, local authorities and transport, instead of all working against each other?

As much as comparisons with London are slated by some within the industry, their ongoing research and development is second to none. Constantly assessing 'external' factors in advance of them happening, and coming up with well-thought out options as potential solutions. I was specifically looking at the Southall Bus Study: https://content.tfl.gov.uk/southall-deve...study-.pdf

There's many others here: https://tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publication...ent-papers

(24 Sep 2024, 10:55 am)Andreos1 wrote What is the alternative? Maintain the status quo and just let the roads fill up with cars and impact on bus users/reliability or actually try and be proactive, encouraging bus use?

The status quo hasn't worked (just look at your mates anecdotal evidence re the 44) and people are switching away from public transport. So clearly an alternative is needed.

As has been pointed out previously, if you attract people on to public transport when they're younger, there's a greater chance they will use it when they get older.
It goes without saying the basics need to be right and it needs to suit changing travel patterns.

Quite interesting in your last point. Before covid, Uber, Blueline and Nearby were gathering pace and making private hire far more attractive to complicated bus fares (before MG's bargain bonanzs or the national £2 max fare) and infrequent services at anti social times.

The problem with new builds unless heavily populated, is that if the bus provision is poor during anti social hours (evenings & Sundays)......people who are p***ing hundereds per month on car finance for cars sitting on the drives of their £300k+ new builds will happily just open the private hire apps, or suck up parking / fuel bills during peak times.

The only way to address the new builds, is either more frequent bus services during anti social hours, or where not exactly viable, better bus & metro integration for estates such as Holystone Park using minibuses & other local routes.

Just started getting the bus regularly to save me £7-10 per day parking and over both days, buses have been late and rammed, as a returning bus passenger it's not making me want to say, I'll be getting a parking permit soon and I won't have to pay for it if the 60 was run on time and with the specified larger vehicles they needed due to capacity issues then it wouldn't be that big of a problem. I get delays happen but I want to keep getting the bus if it's going to be cold, cramped, or late then I'm not going to continue to use it, I'd rather pay for fuel/parking if necessary than get stuck on a rammed, cold and late bus.

Services 16/A have been absolutely abysmal with delays for the past few weeks. To my knowledge there are no roadworks causing this, so there definitely needs to be some timetable changes. It doesn't help that the E400s continuously break down + can hardly go over 5mph on any hill at all whether the bus is rammed or not.

These issues aren't making people stay on the bus, there's a reason why I only get the 60 to Sunderland and not home, I remember how bad they were when I was in college, waiting an hour for a bus which is supposed to be every 15 minutes was a joke. I had to take the bus home on Monday because I finished earlier. It was 12 minutes late, rammed standing and it was a joke on one of the smaller Ex-Saltwell Park buses. It was so bad. Going to Sunderland is bad enough but I get on early enough to at least usually guarantee me a seat. If I lived further on the route I would be more likely to get Arrivas 22/23 as they're generally quieter in both directions, if they run on time too.

Just been looking and noticed Marsden and Horsley Hill dont have a direct GNE service so 3 questions really rather than suggestions
1) is the 26 really needed
2) could the 5/5A not cover the 26
And
3) could the 5A not be utilised and sent via Marsden and Horsley Hill or a new 5B service introduced

(02 Oct 2024, 6:19 pm)V514DFT wrote Just been looking and noticed Marsden and Horsley Hill dont have a direct GNE service so 3 questions really rather than suggestions
1) is the 26 really needed
2) could the 5/5A not cover the 26
And
3) could the 5A not be utilised and sent via Marsden and Horsley Hill or a new 5B service introduced

Considering, thye can't run the current services, not sure it'd be a good idea to expand elsewhere.

To be fair though those services would just be duplicating the 10/11/E's/X34. There's nothing unique about the 5 serving it aswell bar it would be less frequent or at best the same.

(18 Nov 2024, 9:11 pm)Andreos1 wrote Was on the X10 once post-covid and it there were people having to sit on the stairs.

I can only imagine it's going to be like it most weekends in the lead up to Christmas.

If that's true, very dangerous indeed!

GoNE seriously need to sort this during the usual January changes which happen!

Fleet:
- All B5TL's to Consett for X32/X45/X73.

- Ex GAG / London stock temporarily allocated on X20 until something better from Angel StreetDeck cascade chain becomes available (either some of the 51/52/93/94, TVT or Cobalt B9TL's).

- 6349-51 to Riverside, 6349-55 form PVR of 7x on X9/X10 with 6377 spare.

- 12x E400MMC (not counting temperamental 6337) remain at Consett. 4x allocated to X30/X71, always minimum 2x low height spare with remaining 6x allocated to X32/X45/X73 alongside 7x B5TL. Any further low height VOR = ex London / GAG stock used on X32/X45/X73 with E400MMC prioritised on X30/X71


Routes:
- X31 dropped and X32 2bph omitting Lobley Hill Estate.

- X70 via Lobley Hill Estate.

- X32(1bph)/X70 interworking, X32(1bph)/X45/X73 interworking

- X30/X71 interworking and provide half-hourly Sunniside > Whickham > Dusnton > Newcastle service.

- X30/X32 every 20 mins Stanley > Sunniside > Newcastle.

- X9 re-instated and X10 (except evenings & Sundays) back via old route.

(22 Sep 2024, 1:50 pm)Storx wrote See I think the short service above is pointless, I know I posted this before (but I amended it) I'd look at changing the 4 into a loop running every 20 minute in every direction. The core of the route gaining a 10 minute service from the new punters being gained from the new estates doing something like:



There's arguably destinations at all the white X's where people might want to travel across the route for creating a useful loop for the local area. This is the sort of stuff where BSIP should be spent, since the extra passengers gained from the new estates could boost the rest of the route to make it commercially viable at an enhanced frequency.

It's not as if they can say it duplicates other services as none of that corridor has a decent service North to Washington/Tyneside.

Obviously the road needs to be built first though.

So a 4 and 4A or just the 4 on its own?

(20 Nov 2024, 1:20 pm)V514DFT wrote So a 4 and 4A or just the 4 on its own?

That's a old post ha. Probably say 3/4 don't believe there's a GNE 3 nowadays. One going one way, the other the opposite way. Similar to the X87/X88 etc in the West End.

(20 Nov 2024, 1:24 pm)Storx wrote That's a old post ha. Probably say 3/4 don't believe there's a GNE 3 nowadays. One going one way, the other the opposite way. Similar to the X87/X88 etc in the West End.

Interesting

Something needs to be done about these 39/39A's, passed one today a solo, rammed, and I mean absolutely rammed to the brim, all seats taken, people standing all the way up the bus, like there was literally someone leaning against the doors once it left, they're always really busy, something needs to be done.

I think that is common on most services now, services have reduced so much since covid, but haven't returned now passengers have. I think most buses leave full and standing out of Durham between around 3 and 5pm on weekdays, and if not then they for sure are by the time they reach new college.

road Sorry if this is a bit off topic but the q3 is absolutely awful it takes so long and ends up so late at this point i think it should just remove all routes via jesmond and make them go through Newgate street(because the traffic through John Dobson street is mad) and then into the quayside as currently it is absolutely awful and make most of the buses from Mon-Fri go to wallsend.I get on the q3 everyday and the same thing keeps happening ut has never ever been on time it is always 10-15 mins late.there needs to be something done about it!!

I was just thinking, would anyone use a link between Kibblesworth and Washington.

The idea involves a service numbered 72. The route would be Kibblesworth, Northside Estate, Blackfell Way, Birtley Shops, South Portobello, Barley Mow, Vigo Shops, Ayton, Lambton, The Galleries, Washington Village, Barmston (Waskerley Road), Peel, then via A19 & Chester Road to Sunderland

There would also be a 73 between Coach Road, Sulgrave (Waterloo Road), Concord, Donwell (London Avenue), Blackfell (Knoulberry Road), Oxclose, The Galleries, Biddick, Barmston Court, Teal Farm, Waterview Park, Castletown, Enterprise Park (East & West) then via Queen Alex Bridge & Trimdon Street to Sunderland.

An alternative would be to run the 8A all day half hourly but via Lambton & Ayton and maybe Vigo/Barley Mow.

(Yesterday, 11:59 am)ASX_Terranova wrote I was just thinking, would anyone use a link between Kibblesworth and Washington. 

The idea involves a service numbered 72. The route would be Kibblesworth, Northside Estate, Blackfell Way, Birtley Shops, South Portobello, Barley Mow, Vigo Shops, Ayton, Lambton, The Galleries, Washington Village, Barmston (Waskerley Road), Peel, then via A19 & Chester Road to Sunderland

There would also be a 73 between Coach Road, Sulgrave (Waterloo Road), Concord, Donwell (London Avenue), Blackfell (Knoulberry Road), Oxclose, The Galleries, Biddick, Barmston Court, Teal Farm, Waterview Park, Castletown, Enterprise Park (East & West) then via Queen Alex Bridge & Trimdon Street to Sunderland.

An alternative would be to run the 8A all day half hourly but via Lambton & Ayton and maybe Vigo/Barley Mow.

I'd have it extend to/from TVTE. Might help the numbers and would open up a link to key employment sites.

(Yesterday, 11:59 am)ASX_Terranova wrote I was just thinking, would anyone use a link between Kibblesworth and Washington.

The idea involves a service numbered 72. The route would be Kibblesworth, Northside Estate, Blackfell Way, Birtley Shops, South Portobello, Barley Mow, Vigo Shops, Ayton, Lambton, The Galleries, Washington Village, Barmston (Waskerley Road), Peel, then via A19 & Chester Road to Sunderland

There would also be a 73 between Coach Road, Sulgrave (Waterloo Road), Concord, Donwell (London Avenue), Blackfell (Knoulberry Road), Oxclose, The Galleries, Biddick, Barmston Court, Teal Farm, Waterview Park, Castletown, Enterprise Park (East & West) then via Queen Alex Bridge & Trimdon Street to Sunderland.

An alternative would be to run the 8A all day half hourly but via Lambton & Ayton and maybe Vigo/Barley Mow.

Personally wouldn't do that.

I'd do this instead and changing everything as nothing really works around there:



25: Washington - Ayton - Barley Mow - Portobello - Birtley - Wrekenton - QE Hospital - Gateshead - Newcastle (Every 30 Minutes M-S Day, Hourly Eve / Sun)

28: Chester Le Street - Pelton - Ouston - Birtley - Eighton Banks - Wrekenton - QE Hospital - Gateshead - Newcastle (Hourly M-S Day)

29: Chester Le Street - Pelton - Ouston - Kibblesworth - Low Fell - Gateshead - Newcastle (Hourly, All Times)

30: Wrekenton - Low Fell - Saltwell - Bensham - Gateshead - Newcastle (Every 30 Minutes M-S Day, Hourly Evenings)

702: Chester Le Street - North Lodge - Barley Mow - Portobello - Birtley - Kibblesworth - Team Valley Retail Park (Hourly M-S Day)

82/TB14: Withdrawn

It means everything service has a terminus point where people might actually want or is a useful place to interchange for another service (Wrekenton) with frequencies which are acceptable, being mostly every 30 minutes. The PVR being 12 Midi / Saloons and 2 Breadvans. It would've been much better use of BSIP money than just throwing it on the 21 as it's all good if you want to go to Newcastle or CLS from Birtley but going anywhere else is a chore atm.

(Yesterday, 1:45 pm)Storx wrote Personally wouldn't do that.

I'd do this instead and changing everything as nothing really works around there:



25: Washington - Ayton - Barley Mow - Portobello - Birtley - Wrekenton - QE Hospital - Gateshead - Newcastle (Every 30 Minutes M-S Day, Hourly Eve / Sun)

28: Chester Le Street - Pelton - Ouston - Birtley - Eighton Banks - Wrekenton - QE Hospital - Gateshead - Newcastle (Hourly M-S Day)

29: Chester Le Street - Pelton - Ouston - Kibblesworth - Low Fell - Gateshead - Newcastle (Hourly, All Times)

30: Wrekenton - Low Fell - Saltwell - Bensham - Gateshead - Newcastle (Every 30 Minutes M-S Day, Hourly Evenings)

702: Chester Le Street - North Lodge - Barley Mow - Portobello - Birtley - Kibblesworth - Team Valley Retail Park (Hourly M-S Day)

82/TB14: Withdrawn

It means everything service has a terminus point where people might actually want or is a useful place to interchange for another service (Wrekenton) with frequencies which are acceptable, being mostly every 30 minutes. The PVR being 12 Midi / Saloons and 2 Breadvans. It would've been much better use of BSIP money than just throwing it on the 21 as it's all good if you want to go to Newcastle or CLS from Birtley but going anywhere else is a chore atm.

This wasnt a Birtley Local's idea, it was a Washington/Sunderland one, hence the Sunderland bits. The 50 is a joke sometimes, the little pinks network is mostly useless and Chester Road needs more buses.

(Yesterday, 3:58 pm)ASX_Terranova wrote This wasnt a Birtley Local's idea, it was a Washington/Sunderland one, hence the Sunderland bits. The 50 is a joke sometimes, the little pinks network is mostly useless and Chester Road needs more buses.

I know this is starting to mix up subsidised and commercial routes now so it's a bit more complicated but for the stuff you mentioned I'd do something like:



X2 (Was 25) - 8 - 50

Reasons for changes:

• Faster 50 route into Washington not around the world.
  
• New link from Washington, CLS and South Birtley to Stadium of Light on the 8
  
• Extension of 82 so it actually goes somewhere rather than terminating in a business park.
  
• Quicker X2 from Washington to Sunderland, should help reduce some loads on Chester Road
  
• New direct links to Newcastle in South Washington without changing
  
• New direct links from Birtley to Sunderland
  
• New direct links to the East from North Chester Le Street and Vigo Lane
  
• Sorts out the absolute mess of the 81/82.
  
• 4 BPH between Castletown, Southwick and Sunderland (combined with 35).
  
• More express buses between Newcastle / QE / Wrekenton and another express route for Birtley avoiding Low Fell.
  

Negatives

• Very small section of Washington loses direct link to Chester Le Street
  
• Picktree loses 2 buses an hour, but there's nothing there anyway
  

This is the sort of stuff where BSIP should be going imo. For the rest of the stuff you mentioned you've got the 2/2A to play around with as they don't really need to do the route they do into Washington anymore as they're covered by the X2 or 8 so there's flexibility to play with them.