(28 Sep 2014, 8:31 pm)Kuyoyo wrote The Norton-end of the 37/38 doesn't justify an increased frequency however - the busiest section of the 36/37/38 is Park End to Norton, with the extremely busiest section being Norton to Middlesbrough. Going non-stop between Middlesbrough and Thornaby would then leave Middlesbrough without any true link to Teesside Park (the 36/37/38 are the only link they have - even if it's a 10 minutes walk to the Park) as well as abandoning the Wilderness Road. Reliability of the services is down to external factors (36 has the level crossing in Billingham, then add any roadworks on top of that).

I meant only the 36 would run non stop the 37 and 38 would continue as normal under a 10 minuate frequency

(28 Sep 2014, 8:43 pm)col87 wrote I meant only the 36 would run non stop the 37 and 38 would continue as normal under a 10 minuate frequency

So part of the busiest sections of the route and you want the frequency cut just to improve reliability that is caused by outside factors that they try to plan the timetables round? Things don't need to change just for the sake of changing - leave that to Go North East 

(28 Sep 2014, 8:48 pm)Kuyoyo wrote So part of the busiest sections of the route and you want the frequency cut just to improve reliability that is caused by outside factors that they try to plan the timetables round? Things don't need to change just for the sake of changing - leave that to Go North East 

Well my point was that this would be a good time to look at the network and see what improvements can be made. Smaller buses is not going to help though so something must be happening with the routes.

(28 Sep 2014, 8:57 pm)col87 wrote Well my point was that this would be a good time to look at the network and see what improvements can be made. Smaller buses is not going to help though so something must be happening with the routes.

Why would a company make changes to a successful route anyway?

(28 Sep 2014, 9:01 pm)Robert wrote Why would a company make changes to a successful route anyway?

To make more profit and cut jorney times

(28 Sep 2014, 9:06 pm)col87 wrote To make more profit and cut jorney times

But if its already successful it must be making a good enough profit for Stagecoach, which they could lose by changing it.

(28 Sep 2014, 9:08 pm)Robert wrote But if its already successful it must be making a good enough profit for Stagecoach, which they could lose by changing it.

Well why would you buy buses with less seats when you know the bus gets full

(28 Sep 2014, 9:13 pm)col87 wrote Well why would you buy buses with less seats when you know the bus gets full

Because not all journeys require buses with loads of seats like a decker.

(29 Sep 2014, 4:06 pm)Robert wrote Because not all journeys require buses with loads of seats like a decker.

You could argue the same about Go North East's X1 or 56.

Generally speaking, I'd suggest that Go North East is good at buying vehicles with higher running costs, especially double decker vehicles, even if it sometimes cannot be justified immediately. The fact that some journeys do require the capacity of a double decker should mean that these operators should be thinking about investing into appropriate vehicles - that way, should the services grow any more (which is expected in the majority of cases with investment), they won't face capacity issues whereby certain journeys have to be duplicated.

Again, generally speaking, Arriva and Stagecoach are seemingly a lot more reluctant to do this. Despite services 16 and 20 in Sunderland justifying double deckers for a lot of journeys (even journeys at approximately 12 o'clock are so full where you can see every seat full PLUS standees), Stagecoach opted for single deckers. It's a shame, and seems really short sighted in my opinion.

(29 Sep 2014, 4:10 pm)Dan wrote You could argue the same about Go North East's X1 or 56.

Generally speaking, I'd suggest that Go North East is good at buying vehicles with higher running costs, especially double decker vehicles, even if it sometimes cannot be justified immediately. The fact that some journeys do require the capacity of a double decker should mean that these operators should be thinking about investing into appropriate vehicles - that way, should the services grow any more (which is expected in the majority of cases with investment), they won't face capacity issues whereby certain journeys have to be duplicated.

Again, generally speaking, Arriva and Stagecoach are seemingly a lot more reluctant to do this. Despite services 16 and 20 in Sunderland justifying double deckers for a lot of journeys (even journeys at approximately 12 o'clock are so full where you can see every seat full PLUS standees), Stagecoach opted for single deckers. It's a shame, and seems really short sighted in my opinion.

Maybe because those 2 particular routes are part of the small few that can be classed as their 'flagship' routes? Obviously, the single deckers must have been getting full enough to get an upgrade (and in the X1s case, a full upgrade rather than partially but the Citaros do only have 40 seats).

(29 Sep 2014, 9:14 pm)Robert wrote Maybe because those 2 particular routes are part of the small few that can be classed as their 'flagship' routes? Obviously, the single deckers must have been getting full enough to get an upgrade (and in the X1s case, a full upgrade rather than partially but the Citaros do only have 40 seats).

But the point is, if any service is having standing loads on multiple journeys, double deckers should be considered over single deckers when investment is being planned.

As someone who has no idea of the official figures, I'd argue Sunderland's 'flagship' routes are indeed services 16 and 20 - where's the double deckers?

(28 Sep 2014, 9:13 pm)col87 wrote Well why would you buy buses with less seats when you know the bus gets full

well, not to be rude but at least Teesside is getting new buses! The heaviest loading of the 37/38 i've seen are 6 people standing, with one or two seats free at the back. I have seen more on the 36 and it will suffer without them extra few seats but I'm not so sure on it needing deckers, if it was the principle route between Stockton and Middlesbrough then yes, but more people seem to opt for the X1/X66 now.

(30 Sep 2014, 5:50 am)Dan wrote But the point is, if any service is having standing loads on multiple journeys, double deckers should be considered over single deckers when investment is being planned.

As someone who has no idea of the official figures, I'd argue Sunderland's 'flagship' routes are indeed services 16 and 20 - where's the double deckers?

Maybe they might get the gas decker on demo when its complete... that would be good! 

I was on the 16 yesterday at 5pm and it was packed, same as the one behind it to..

I think most of the SC Sunderland routes are busy...

I would still merge the 8 and 20 together! 

(30 Sep 2014, 6:47 am)Michael wrote Maybe they might get the gas decker on demo when its complete... that would be good! 

I was on the 16 yesterday at 5pm and it was packed, same as the one behind it to..

I think most of the SC Sunderland routes are busy...

I would still merge the 8 and 20 together! 

I've been on buses on both at around midday with standees.

Me too.
I gave my suggestion for merging services 8 and 20 previously. It shouldn't be too difficult to re-route the 20 to include the little estate next to the Round Robin (this would add 3 mins to journey), and then after doing the Prestbury Road loop, the 20 could easily call into South Hylton - adding about 10 mins to the route (at a guess)... You'd then have 7 mins to play around with, as the resources (two buses) would go into the revised 20.

Singles on the 20 are cheaper than singles on the 8, so this would potentially allow the 20 to incorporate the 8's fares - or simply lower the fares for those using the 8 by retaining the 20's fares!

(30 Sep 2014, 7:00 am)Dan wrote I've been on buses on both at around midday with standees.

Me too.
I gave my suggestion for merging services 8 and 20 previously. It shouldn't be too difficult to re-route the 20 to include the little estate next to the Round Robin (this would add 3 mins to journey), and then after doing the Prestbury Road loop, the 20 could easily call into South Hylton - adding about 10 mins to the route (at a guess)... You'd then have 7 mins to play around with, as the resources (two buses) would go into the revised 20.

Singles on the 20 are cheaper than singles on the 8, so this would potentially allow the 20 to incorporate the 8's fares - or simply lower the fares for those using the 8 by retaining the 20's fares!

Email SC with your suggestion, see what they say.

(30 Sep 2014, 7:10 am)Michael wrote Email SC with your suggestion, see what they say.

I can't remember if I did before or not... I'm sure I did, and didn't get a reply.

(30 Sep 2014, 7:00 am)Dan wrote I've been on buses on both at around midday with standees.

Me too.
I gave my suggestion for merging services 8 and 20 previously. It shouldn't be too difficult to re-route the 20 to include the little estate next to the Round Robin (this would add 3 mins to journey), and then after doing the Prestbury Road loop, the 20 could easily call into South Hylton - adding about 10 mins to the route (at a guess)... You'd then have 7 mins to play around with, as the resources (two buses) would go into the revised 20.

Singles on the 20 are cheaper than singles on the 8, so this would potentially allow the 20 to incorporate the 8's fares - or simply lower the fares for those using the 8 by retaining the 20's fares!

What would be the point though?  It wouldn't save any resources as the two buses from the 8 would go onto the 20 and it would make the 20 journey 10 mins longer.   The only benefit would be anyone wanting to travel from Prestbury Rd to South Hylton, which can't be huge in number.   Would it call into South Hylton both to and from Prestbury Road?  If not, those people could get to South Hylton but not back again.

(30 Sep 2014, 4:49 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote What would be the point though?  It wouldn't save any resources as the two buses from the 8 would go onto the 20 and it would make the 20 journey 10 mins longer.   The only benefit would be anyone wanting to travel from Prestbury Rd to South Hylton, which can't be huge in number.   Would it call into South Hylton both to and from Prestbury Road?  If not, those people could get to South Hylton but not back again.

Not all changes have to save resources? Bus operators do, albeit less regularly, add more resources into services. In this case, you're adding the resources from the 8 into a revised 20 by merging the two and providing a 10 min freq as per the latter, on the former.

It would achieve a 10 minute frequency from South Hylton to the City Centre, opposed to the current 30 minute frequency. Whilst that perhaps in part suggests there isn't a great demand for a 30 minute frequency, it could create more of a demand, taking passengers away from the Metro service.

It would only add about four minutes on to the current 20 timetable (assuming it calls into Prestbury Rd first opposed to South Hylton - it certainly doesn't take 10 mins to get round Hadleigh Rd), and the re-routing via Prestbury Rd for service 8 would only add a few minutes too.

(30 Sep 2014, 4:55 pm)Dan wrote Not all changes have to save resources? Bus operators do, albeit less regularly, add more resources into services. In this case, you're adding the resources from the 8 into a revised 20 by merging the two and providing a 10 min freq as per the latter, on the former.

It would achieve a 10 minute frequency from South Hylton to the City Centre, opposed to the current 30 minute frequency. Whilst that perhaps in part suggests there isn't a great demand for a 30 minute frequency, it could create more of a demand, taking passengers away from the Metro service.

It would only add about four minutes on to the current 20 timetable (assuming it calls into Prestbury Rd first opposed to South Hylton - it certainly doesn't take 10 mins to get round Hadleigh Rd), and the re-routing via Prestbury Rd for service 8 would only add a few minutes too.

The reference to 10 mins was quoting the figure you gave for diverting via South Hylton, not the Hylton Lane Estate diversion.  10 mins is an underestimate though - currently from St Annes to Claxheugh Road on the 8 is 8 mins in each direction, so diverting the 20 along the existing route would add 16 mins to the length of the current 20 journey.  Plus the extra 3 mins to go via Hylton Lane Est  = about 20 mins extra onto the journey time from Prestbury Rd to City Centre on the proposed new 20. 

As for the 8 attracting passengers from the Metro, the service used to exist as the 8/9/9A which combined provided a South Hylton – City Centre service every 15 mins.  This was scaled back to just the 8 every 30 mins in 2003 as the Metro took passengers from the service (being a quicker option).  So seems unlikely that by increasing the journey time by going via Prestbury Road, potential service 8 passengers would be tempted back off the Metro.

Based on the above discussion, I've put together something a bit more visually comprehensive... Provisionally numbered '208' for simplicity, the route is shown on the map below (hopefully it'll work):
http://goo.gl/maps/JzR0g

Service 208 is based to change in-line with the completion of the works in Sunderland. Commencing on Fawcett Street at the bus stop previously used by service 20 (outside of the former Primark building), the service runs via High Street West, Bedford Street and St. Mary's Way. A new bus stop has been created on St. Mary's Way, and this will allow links to local shops such as Argos and Marks & Spencers, as well as the Sunderland Empire. After calling at St. Mary's Way, the service runs up Silksworth Row, before proceeding via the usual route of services 8/20 to Bishopwearmouth Cemetery. From here, the service runs via Hadleigh Road, Helmsdale Road and Holborn Road (as per the current 8 route), continuing the usual route of services 8/20 to St. Anne's Primary School. From here, service 208 runs via Hylton Road and Prestbury Road (as per the current 20 route), returning to St. Anne's, and then turning into South Hylton. The service then continues the current 8 route to Claxheugh Road.

On the return journey from Claxheugh Road, service 208 runs direct up Hylton Bank, opposed to calling at the estate in South Hylton as per journey to Claxheugh Road (similar to the final 8 journey of the day to City Centre). The "Hail & Ride" style service used in this estate can be used in conjunction with the 10 minute frequency to compensate for the lack of a journey via the estate in this direction. From here, the service continues via route taken to South Hylton. At Silksworth Row, the service continues via St. Michael's Way, Albion Place, Holmeside, before reaching the terminus of Fawcett Street.

The PVR would be seven (service 8's PVR of 2 plus service 20's PVR of 5). Provisional times given on the PDF document below, loosely based on current timings of services 8/20...
The journey time of the current service 20 (City Centre to Prestbury Road) increases by 3 minutes, while the return journey (Prestbury Road to City Centre) does significantly increase (40 minutes opposed to current 19 - I did indeed underestimate the timings), though users from Prestbury Rd are in the minority, and those within walking distance of St. Anne's could easily avoid the extra journey time.
11 minutes layover time in total with service 208, compared to the current 10 minutes which service 20 has and 4 minutes which service 8 has - timings are also actually quite loose, so reliability should be less of an issue.

Thoughts/opinions?

(30 Sep 2014, 6:07 pm)Dan wrote Based on the above discussion, I've put together something a bit more visually comprehensive... Provisionally numbered '208' for simplicity, the route is shown on the map below (hopefully it'll work):
http://goo.gl/maps/JzR0g

Service 208 is based to change in-line with the completion of the works in Sunderland. Commencing on Fawcett Street at the bus stop previously used by service 20 (outside of the former Primark building), the service runs via High Street West, Bedford Street and St. Mary's Way. A new bus stop has been created on St. Mary's Way, and this will allow links to local shops such as Argos and Marks & Spencers, as well as the Sunderland Empire. After calling at St. Mary's Way, the service runs up Silksworth Row, before proceeding via the usual route of services 8/20 to Bishopwearmouth Cemetery. From here, the service runs via Hadleigh Road, Helmsdale Road and Holborn Road (as per the current 8 route), continuing the usual route of services 8/20 to St. Anne's Primary School. From here, service 208 runs via Hylton Road and Prestbury Road (as per the current 20 route), returning to St. Anne's, and then turning into South Hylton. The service then continues the current 8 route to Claxheugh Road.

On the return journey from Claxheugh Road, service 208 runs direct up Hylton Bank, opposed to calling at the estate in South Hylton as per journey to Claxheugh Road (similar to the final 8 journey of the day to City Centre). The "Hail & Ride" style service used in this estate can be used in conjunction with the 10 minute frequency to compensate for the lack of a journey via the estate in this direction. From here, the service continues via route taken to South Hylton. At Silksworth Row, the service continues via St. Michael's Way, Albion Place, Holmeside, before reaching the terminus of Fawcett Street.

The PVR would be seven (service 8's PVR of 2 plus service 20's PVR of 5). Provisional times given on the PDF document below, loosely based on current timings of services 8/20...
The journey time of the current service 20 (City Centre to Prestbury Road) increases by 3 minutes, while the return journey (Prestbury Road to City Centre) does significantly increase (40 minutes opposed to current 19 - I did indeed underestimate the timings), though users from Prestbury Rd are in the minority, and those within walking distance of St. Anne's could easily avoid the extra journey time.
11 minutes layover time in total with service 208, compared to the current 10 minutes which service 20 has and 4 minutes which service 8 has - timings are also actually quite loose, so reliability should be less of an issue.

Thoughts/opinions?

The only benefits I can see are (i) a direct link Prestbury Road – South Hylton (in one direction only) and (ii) an increased frequency South Hylton – City Centre.

The negatives are (i) significantly increased journey time for anyone who lives West of St Annes to get into town - which is a decent chunk of Hylton Rd as well as Prestbury Road, which is admittedly presumably quiet given they knocked most of the houses down round there! (ii) slightly longer journey time for those who live in South Hylton to get out of town, (iii) longer journey time for those living in Greenbank Drive estate heading into town (presumably they would board as the bus heads through northbound to Claxheugh Road).

Doesn’t stack up for me, especially given that the frequency in South Hylton used to be higher but was curtailed to the current 30 mins, and the buses still run virtually empty most of the day.  I would think this would risk damaging the successful and busy service 20, as those passengers who use the existing 20 would not benefit from this at all and on the inbound would be significantly worse off.

If there really was a need to increase the frequency South Hylton – City Centre (and I doubt there is) I'd say it would be less disruptive to revise Service 8 to run Claxheugh Road – St Annes only (but every 10 mins, using the same 2 buses as now) with guaranteed connections to the 20 (using the same route and same 5 buses as now).  The Greenbank Drive estate would retain it’s service in both directions, inbound service 20 would remain 19 mins (or maybe a couple more mins to guarantee the connection, but still doable given the current layover time) instead of 40 mins long, and the journey time from South Hylton to City Centre would be roughly the same, but more frequent.

Be interesting to hear what others think.

(30 Sep 2014, 6:42 am)benambro wrote well, not to be rude but at least Teesside is getting new buses! The heaviest loading of the 37/38 i've seen are 6 people standing, with one or two seats free at the back. I have seen more on the 36 and it will suffer without them extra few seats but I'm not so sure on it needing deckers, if it was the principle route between Stockton and Middlesbrough then yes, but more people seem to opt for the X1/X66 now.

Which is fine if your in Stockton going to Middlesbrough but let me remind you the 36 is the only service between Stockton and Hartlepool and the closer you get to Christmas the more people use it same during the hollidays and on weekends it gets full. Also peak time journeys the 36 gets full before it leaves Middlesbrough bus station

Looking at the branding it looks like the 36 could be getting split into two journeys with a change at North Tees Hospital it just what lt looks like on the branding I know the Hartlepool - North Tees service is definate

(30 Sep 2014, 9:02 pm)col87 wrote Looking at the branding it looks like the 36 could be getting split into two journeys with a change at North Tees Hospital it just what lt looks like on the branding  I know the Hartlepool - North Tees service is definate

Well, unless there's further registrations to be cleared by the traffic commissioner, then there is no Hartlepool to North Tees Hospital commercial service being introduced by Stagecoach.

(05 Oct 2014, 7:58 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Well, unless there's further registrations to be cleared by the traffic commissioner, then there is no Hartlepool to North Tees Hospital commercial service being introduced by Stagecoach.

It could be done as a variation of an existing service. If they can get away with doing that for the new 10...

(18 Oct 2014, 10:20 am)Cock Robin wrote It could be done as a variation of an existing service. If they can get away with doing that for the new 10...

I've seen the changes and there isn't one. There is an existing shuttle bus between the hospitals to cater for any direct demand.

(18 Oct 2014, 8:17 pm)tyresmoke wrote I've seen the changes and there isn't one. There is an existing shuttle bus between the hospitals to cater for any direct demand.

You cant have seen the changes as the office staff and drivers dont seem to even know that much apart from the shuttle service between Park End and the bus station so there is still a small chance that they may be some sort of service between the North Tees Hospital and Hartlepool all it says on VOSA is that there were changes so it dont mean a lot at the min. That shuttle service is mostley for staff public seem to be expected to make there own way there.

(29 Oct 2014, 9:57 pm)col87 wrote You cant have seen the changes as the office staff and drivers dont seem to even know that much apart from the shuttle service between Park End and the bus station so there is still a small chance that they may be some sort of service between the North Tees Hospital and Hartlepool all it says on VOSA is that there were changes so it dont mean a lot at the min.  That shuttle service is mostley for staff public seem to be expected to make there own way there.

He has - we all now have seen the revised map, and there's no North Tees Hospital to Hartlepool service.

(29 Oct 2014, 10:03 pm)Kuyoyo wrote He has - we all now have seen the revised map, and there's no North Tees Hospital to Hartlepool service.

Yes i have seen it now i posted that before i saw however when I asked in the Stockton High Street office on Monday they dident seem to know what the changes were so all it seems to be is that the 36 37 38 is not serving park end anymore in my view a missed opportunity and gives another company a chance. I hope the branding does not cause any confusing to members of the public then

If there's going to be no direct service between North Tees and Hartlepool then Stagecoach may want to look at their Hartlepool network map as it looks like they are advertising one there.