(21 May 2022, 12:30 pm)L469 YVK wrote - Non standard type with difficult upkeep. Withdrawn ones could also make spares for the remaining 9.

- No mention of 16/16A, they'd remain unchanged. Volvo B5TLs on the 47 would be a decent upgrade over the B9TLs from a customer perspective, bringing it closer to the X45 standards but still keeping that spec difference to make the X45  stand out. Likewise, the B9TLs on there have been ragged to death on the X9/X10 and the Tyne Valley Ten. The X5/X15 would be easier lines of work for these not forgetting that Riverside will also need an extra 2x for spares and the PVR increase of the 58.

- Other than 6362 & 63 making up the PVR of the X1, why would GNE want 6x nearly new StreetDecks sitting in mostly 'spare' roles or working low key / secondary routes? 6356-61 alongside 6377 and 6331/32 would be a welcome change on the X21.

There's no chance any of those B5's are gonna get withdrawn at 10 years old, they're nowhere near the age of being 'uneconomical to repair.' 

Hasn't it already been established that the reliability of the B5's on the X21 isn't as bad as has been made out...6332/33 being allocated to Chester-le-Street so there are decent spares would be sufficient I'm sure. 

I think it could go either way at Consett. I think 6362/3 will go to Washington for the X1 like you say. As for 6356-6361, the paint is still fresh on those 47/47A B9's, doesn't mean it won't happen tho. Part of me does wonder if the new 24 could be a contender with a PVR of 5. Alternatively if 6356-61 stay for the X45, some of the MMC's could be released to Riverside for something like the 58.

(21 May 2022, 12:33 pm)Unber43 wrote Maybe try some brand new routes. They might aswell. Newcastle - Sunderland, Blyth to Newcastle V Follingsby.

But that would mean re-branding buses a ridiculous amount of times, which cost money. I would rather B5's over B9's however it costs thousands to repaint.

I can't see GNE taking the commercial risk of a new route when they can hardly run the routes they do have!