(19 Aug 2021, 4:30 pm)ThomasBooth123 wrote 61 will be Sunderland and district blue I think

(27 Jul 2021, 6:21 pm)Storx wrote I know what your trying to say and can't really disagree but it sounds rather expensive building bridges etc to force a hub in a place which might not work. 

Imo you'd be better off spending the money on reopening the Leamside Line which means you can have quick efficient trains taking traffic away from the roads and also trains from the ECML so you could potentially run a railway service between Durham and Newcastle with stations at Newton Hall, CLS, Birtley, Team Valley (P&R), Lobley Hill (P&R), Newcastle. Then the same at Follingsby (P&R), Washington, Penshaw (Bus to Doxford Park), Fencehouses (Bus to Rainton) and just end it there. 

With a good bus service to the railway station and decent connections ticketing and timings in Birtley you'd take much more traffic away from the roads. 

Obviously neither will happen though since there's no money for them.

(19 Aug 2021, 11:13 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Good luck getting a train station reinstated in Newton Hall, too. The Nimbys in that part of town have objected to having phone masts put in because whittled trees are apparently ugly, meaning that some residents are having to resort to satellite broadband. They can't even take advantage of the fibre broadband that is being introduced, here.

(23 Aug 2021, 6:22 pm)V514DFT wrote 11-renumbered 43
19-renumbered 44
41A-renumbered 40
Would mean the Little Coaster network have numbering that makes sense,thats literally all i'd change

(23 Aug 2021, 6:47 pm)cbma06 wrote While ya there put the Peterlee numbers into the 60’s instead of the 200’s, and rebrand the Peterlee stupid purples into little purples


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(23 Aug 2021, 7:28 pm)Keeiajs wrote 201 - 63
206 - 64
204 - 66
209 - 67
210 - 68
239 - 67 
67 - 47
69 - 48

(23 Aug 2021, 7:32 pm)cbma06 wrote 239 will have to remain the same as it’s secured , it was a commercially service under United


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(23 Aug 2021, 8:14 pm)V514DFT wrote 61-59
201-61
203-63
204/204A-64/64A
206-66
209-67
210-68
239- discuss about renumbering it 69
67-76
69/69B-77/77A

(24 Aug 2021, 6:21 am)cbma06 wrote There’s already a 59 in East Durham. I would leave the existing 60/61 as is as there are well known to passengers, renumbering the 204/204A to 64/64A is just going to confuse passengers that use Arriva 64 from Sherburn.

I’m surprised that GNE hadn’t renumbered service 78 as a service 7, so you have the 6/7/8 out of Stanley area.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(24 Aug 2021, 6:26 am)Dan wrote It was considered but at that point it is change for the sake of change. Best to keep things as they are if it can be helped.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(19 Aug 2021, 11:13 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Good luck getting a train station reinstated in Newton Hall, too. The Nimbys in that part of town have objected to having phone masts put in because whittled trees are apparently ugly, meaning that some residents are having to resort to satellite broadband. They can't even take advantage of the fibre broadband that is being introduced, here.

(23 Aug 2021, 8:59 pm)GNE6312 wrote As a trial I'd suggest extending 1 run every hour on each of the Cobalt & coasts to metrocentre, these will create a bus every hour from Blyth, whitley Bay, Hadrian Park & North Shields to Metrocentre plus a bus every 15-25 minutes from battle hill & Coast road to Metrocentre. In Newcastle the Metrocentre journeys will not serve Haymaket towards Metrocentre however will serve Haymaket towards the coast road, from Newcastle buses towards Metrocentre will from St Mary's place will turn right onto barras Bridge, merge onto the A167 towards Gateshead St barras bridge, exit onto the exit for central station exit the roundabout onto the A186, turn left onto Dean Street and operate via quaysude ,Swing Bridge & The centre link serving all stops exept barras bridge. Buses will operate the same route towards Newcastle upto barras bridge in reverse serving all stops again before going straight at barras bridge into Haymaket then normal route from there.

(24 Aug 2021, 6:42 am)Andreos1 wrote You probably realise someone is going to jump in here and question some of the changes made over recent years.
So I'll jump in early. 

At what point does a change of number (265 - > 65 = increased frequency, but same route vs 78 - > 7 = same frequency, but route amendment) become change, for the sake of change?

(24 Aug 2021, 6:42 am)Andreos1 wrote You probably realise someone is going to jump in here and question some of the changes made over recent years.
So I'll jump in early. 

At what point does a change of number (265 - > 65 = increased frequency, but same route vs 78 - > 7 = same frequency, but route amendment) become change, for the sake of change?

(24 Aug 2021, 8:12 am)cbma06 wrote I think it’s because the 65 will have a new brand and not linked to Peterlee purples, saying that the 208 is being changed to the 62/62A but kept in (Peterlee purples?), I would of thought with the new rebrand of the 8/78 that there would change the 78 into 7.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(24 Aug 2021, 8:18 am)big mac wrote With the general trend of cutting the amount of services that cross the River Tyne, how come the 1 will still continue to Gateshead rather than terminating at Newcastle?  I thought this would have happened given there never seems to be many on that service between Newcastle and Gateshead anyway.

Sent from my moto g(8) power lite using Tapatalk

(24 Aug 2021, 6:42 am)Andreos1 wrote You probably realise someone is going to jump in here and question some of the changes made over recent years.
So I'll jump in early. 

At what point does a change of number (265 - > 65 = increased frequency, but same route vs 78 - > 7 = same frequency, but route amendment) become change, for the sake of change?

(24 Aug 2021, 8:45 pm)Drifter60 wrote I’ve long wondered why they didn’t renumber the 78 to the 7, considering it’s branded with the 8 and then the two routes are numbered together. Surely must have been considered at some point. 
I do understand not changing for changing sakes but in a way it’s probably easier to change numbers of a services when there isn’t major changes. 78 could have quite easily become the 7 years ago.

(24 Aug 2021, 8:45 pm)Drifter60 wrote I’ve long wondered why they didn’t renumber the 78 to the 7, considering it’s branded with the 8 and then the two routes are numbered together. Surely must have been considered at some point. 
I do understand not changing for changing sakes but in a way it’s probably easier to change numbers of a services when there isn’t major changes. 78 could have quite easily become the 7 years ago.

(25 Aug 2021, 11:14 am)Storx wrote See personally I'd do the following changes:

2 -> 70
39/39A -> 71/71A
71 -> 66
X6 -> X60
78 -> 7

Then you'd have some tidy corridors.

60's / 70's - Grangetown
7 / 70 - Chester Road to Washington
7 / 8 - Sunderland to Chester Le Street
7 / 70's - Chester Road
70's - Grangetown to Chester Road
70 / 71 / 71A - Tunstall / West Ryhope
X60 - Express 60 to Seaham
65 / 66 - Similar routes around parts of Seaham and both Houghton area to Seaham.

The 2, 39/39A, 60, 61, 62 isn't so easy to explain to someone imo going to Grangemouth for example or 2, 39/39A or 78 for Chester Road. Maybe confusing at first but it's easier for new customers and the old customers will easily get it soon enough as it all flows.

(25 Aug 2021, 4:09 pm)V514DFT wrote I do feel like the bus numbers should be grouped together sensibly

(25 Aug 2021, 4:09 pm)V514DFT wrote I do feel like the bus numbers should be grouped together sensibly