(11 hours ago)Ambassador wrote The Metro is the obvious answer here, Gateshead is incredibly well connected for what is a secondary town

NECA should follow some of the lessons of Manchester in terms of integration and focus on buses serving areas where the Metro doesn't go.

Burnham's bus network is losing millions because of the meandering routes like you've suggested - they aren't sustainable, we need to move away from this idea that everywhere needs a bus service - it doesn't - hub and spoke is a sustainable future

See I don't agree fully on the hub and spoke here. Gateshead is way too close to Newcastle and as a result it shouldn't be a hub at all - Newcastle is the hub. 

imo any bus which runs fully within Tyne and Wear should not be terminating in Gateshead or Newcastle and running through as a though service or be nowhere near either of them all, at all. 

Hub and spoke only works if it's connecting to a metro or train. No-one is swapping between buses.

If we're using your metric here then the X39 and 22X should be withdrawn from Cobalt to Newcastle with a bus linking to Northumberland Park instead.

They're literally duplicate services and doing nothing unique.

(11 hours ago)Ambassador wrote Burnham's bus network is losing millions because of the meandering routes like you've suggested - they aren't sustainable, we need to move away from this idea that everywhere needs a bus service - it doesn't - hub and spoke is a sustainable future

In principle there is nothing wrong with services being subsidised. Almost all bus networks have "lost millions" for many years, in some form or other, especially since Covid and subsequent reliability problems hit patronage so hard. (This region is still well down on pre-Covid volumes - DfT data shows 19% lower in the year to March 2025 than in the year to March 2019, despite quite radical fares initiatives like the £2 cap and 21&Under fares etc). Public funding has gone up (in various forms). The rail industry is basically in the same position. 

The different debate is about the choices being made in the use of funding, how much impact they have, and getting the balance right. Spending on services to an area of lower demand with no other service, or say adding Sunday services, or addressing access to employment like Andreos is seeking, extends the scope of the network, making a big difference to some people. Increasing frequencies on core corridors (eg "Kickstart" funding on GNE21 and 56) will usually generate more passengers per £ of subsidy, but the impact on the individual passengers is less transformative. That does not mean one is "wrong", but inevitably there are choices to be made, and limits - not every bus journey can be direct/ everwhere be within a short walk of a 2phr M-Sat bus/ have a Sunday service.  (IMO, most communities of any size should have all those at least, to at least the key local centre(s); inevitably some journeys will involve changes. That is not the same as imposing a radical "hub and spoke"  model. )

The millions being spent on TfGM are also maintaining a £2 fare cap. I think there is a lot to admire in the choice being made there. (Note: th extra funding is mostly devolved government funding, isn't it?)

(Yesterday, 9:42 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Strongly dislike the idea of diverting services to different places at different times of the day, it's just confusing for everyone - kind of like when Stagecoach in Sunderland inexplicably had the 3 running to two totally separate termini on alternating points in the hour.  Its not even great with the likes of the 21 where it has multiple versions but at least they all serve the same route just stopping short.  If services are going to run to different places, give them a different number.  

Problem with serving office parks and the like is that there's potential demand at shift changeovers and pretty much nothing in between.  I don't think taking resource from main services at those times is the answer (nor is it how they should release buses for scholars leaving holes in core routes but hey ho) though - for the reasons above and because of course that pre-supposes people want to go from TVTE to wherever the (21 in this example) happens to go.

It seems to work for the Teams - Newcastle services which divert via Centrelink on a morning peak.
Or the X24a, which diverts via Doxford International.

But, ultimately whatever the network is now, it's not working. Cutting/reducing and consolidating isn't working either. 

I'm not sure we need to go down the Moto hub route that was suggested a while back (although it was different and there were positives), but it's clear something different needs introducing. A peak time diversion, via key employment locations (to me), seems like a good starting point. 

• It won't need a dedicated resource. 
  
• It won't run once a day in either direction. 
  
• Through passengers would supplement those making shorter journeys. 
  
• It could complement the existing (but limited) services in the area. 
  
• A prefix P could be used to help identify those Peak services. 
  

---

(Today, 9:43 am)Ambassador wrote Team Valley is a difficult one as it's one of the few places in the network where the hub and spoke model works.

From Birtley/CLS you've got the 937 (for the peak) and outside of that the 21 to 93/4 connection works pretty well, even coming from the North the connection at Gateshead is pretty decent. 

If they worked that well, they would be full and people would be using them.
You'd not have the car park through Lamesley or the need to widen the A1 either. 

Using the 937 as an example, it would only be suitable for those very few people starting at 8am and finishing at 5pm and working Monday to Friday (guessing it would take people over the WTD as well). 
Start or finish later and you've got the delights of changing at Low Fell or the Interchange. Assuming there's room to get on a 21 and it isn't beset by delays.

On a personal level, I used to work at Team Valley. 
As a fan of public transport and as a driver fed up of the A1, I tried the bus on more than one occasion. 

The journey was approx 9 miles in the car. Took anything from 30mins to an hour.
The bus - well, it always meant 2 changes. Sometimes 3 (depending which way I went).
Took 90 minutes on average. 

Max roundtrip of 2 hours in the car. Often less.
Min roundtrip on the bus of 3 hours.

That's on top of an 8 hour day at work.
It shouldn't take that long and it shouldn't be that complicated.

(7 hours ago)Andreos1 wrote It seems to work for the Teams - Newcastle services which divert via Centrelink on a morning peak.
Or the X24a, which diverts via Doxford International.

But, ultimately whatever the network is now, it's not working. Cutting/reducing and consolidating isn't working either. 

I'm not sure we need to go down the Moto hub route that was suggested a while back (although it was different and there were positives), but it's clear something different needs introducing. A peak time diversion, via key employment locations (to me), seems like a good starting point. 

• It won't need a dedicated resource. 
  
• It won't run once a day in either direction. 
  
• Through passengers would supplement those making shorter journeys. 
  
• It could complement the existing (but limited) services in the area. 
  
• A prefix P could be used to help identify those Peak services. 
  

---

If they worked that well, they would be full and people would be using them.
You'd not have the car park through Lamesley or the need to widen the A1 either. 

Using the 937 as an example, it would only be suitable for those very few people starting at 8am and finishing at 5pm and working Monday to Friday (guessing it would take people over the WTD as well). 
Start or finish later and you've got the delights of changing at Low Fell or the Interchange. Assuming there's room to get on a 21 and it isn't beset by delays.

On a personal level, I used to work at Team Valley. 
As a fan of public transport and as a driver fed up of the A1, I tried the bus on more than one occasion. 

The journey was approx 9 miles in the car. Took anything from 30mins to an hour.
The bus - well, it always meant 2 changes. Sometimes 3 (depending which way I went).
Took 90 minutes on average. 

Max roundtrip of 2 hours in the car. Often less.
Min roundtrip on the bus of 3 hours.

That's on top of an 8 hour day at work.
It shouldn't take that long and it shouldn't be that complicated.

Realistically the full Gateshead and North Durham network needs a complete rejig from the hashed up remains of the 00’s network it currently is. A park and ride site at Team Valley for Newcastle wouldn’t go amiss either. Assuming there’s not other plans but the Site offices for the A1 Upgrades would make a suitable site.

We already have a "superloop"

But it must be done in stages and expanded gradually like a tube map?


Rebrand the the Metro rail replacement bus route as a "Superloop"

Basically a 15 or 20 minute service stops at every bus stop on the metro replacement route for example the north tyneside loop....

This is beneficial if you say live in between stops... too far to walk from Four Lane Ends to Forest Hall Metro but only 2 stops away and live in the middle type of thing....


If the metro is off ticket acceptcence is immediately applied with extra buses on route to provide capacity

Superloop buses can divert off say from South Gosforth do a loop to Freeman hospital and back on route to FLE creating a connection for hospital appointment patients even a cheeky before and after FLE a 3 min trip to qurorum creating links and making the superloop connect working areas


Over time you can then integrate superloops say from NBL PARK to whitley and North Tyneside hospital or Newsham station to Cramlington Hospital direct

Integration is the key but I think the rail replacement stopping at every stop is the foundation

This could even be the 24hr network idea too

(11 hours ago)Ambassador wrote The Metro is the obvious answer here, Gateshead is incredibly well connected for what is a secondary town

NECA should follow some of the lessons of Manchester in terms of integration and focus on buses serving areas where the Metro doesn't go.

Burnham's bus network is losing millions because of the meandering routes like you've suggested - they aren't sustainable, we need to move away from this idea that everywhere needs a bus service - it doesn't - hub and spoke is a sustainable future

And I think they will, where they can. Kim constantly makes reference to everything being joined up, and I think the move from Metro/Rail being the competition, to actually being part of the solution, will allow NECA to do more with their resources.

Clearly we have a deficit when it comes to rail compared to Greater Manchester, but there's certainly opportunities there to improve rail/Metro connectivity. It doesn't always have to be a 'think big' approach either, there's much simpler projects like extending rail to Team Valley & Birtley that could be acted on.

I disagree with the notion that not everywhere needs a bus service. Public transport should be seen as basic infrastructure, and whilst it doesn't mean everyone should have a 10 minute frequency, we really need to move away from so many places being cut-off altogether.

(2 hours ago)Adrian wrote And I think they will, where they can. Kim constantly makes reference to everything being joined up, and I think the move from Metro/Rail being the competition, to actually being part of the solution, will allow NECA to do more with their resources.

Clearly we have a deficit when it comes to rail compared to Greater Manchester, but there's certainly opportunities there to improve rail/Metro connectivity. It doesn't always have to be a 'think big' approach either, there's much simpler projects like extending rail to Team Valley & Birtley that could be acted on.

I disagree with the notion that not everywhere needs a bus service. Public transport should be seen as basic infrastructure, and whilst it doesn't mean everyone should have a 10 minute frequency, we really need to move away from so many places being cut-off altogether.

Totally agree I use a one a day bus service at 0500 £2.50 or 12.93 in an uber (currently £70  with diesel in a car) 

This service has 52-74 people on the service and NOT NEXUS funded.... (noticed the time  0500 ) 

We can make services profitable and I would be happy to make this service Nexus funded too  during the day even if its half hourly

(2 hours ago)Adrian wrote ... I disagree with the notion that not everywhere needs a bus service. Public transport should be seen as basic infrastructure, and whilst it doesn't mean everyone should have a 10 minute frequency, we really need to move away from so many places being cut-off altogether.

To move the conversation on, where are the "so many" places that are "cut off altogether" that you consider should have a bus service? 

In the part of the region I know pretty well, the only communities that literally have no regular services are a few very small rural hamlets, plus a few housing estates that are hard to serve well (but with v few exceptions, have a bus within a 10 minute walk). What both types have in common is the lifestyle of people living there generates a very low demand for buses (although obviously an element of chicken and egg - people reliant on bus services don't/can't live there). I'm not sure that doing a lot more in these sort of places is actually as important as other priorities. 
eg Andreos' better services to centres of employment? More circular services? Extra resources to make services more reliable? IMO, the latter is up there, as TfGM has done. Choices, choices...