(13 Feb 2026, 8:25 pm)L469 YVK wrote Surely Consett would rather have reliable less leggy native B9TLs over ex GAG / London classic E400s on the X5/X15 and 16/16A?

Also, GNE's route planners / schedulers need to reduce the low height decker dependency as it's far too high, and gives no flexibility.

All that is needed to solve this is for the X32 (re-routed via Shield Row) to interwork with the X73 (PVR 4) - and X31/X70/X71 (PVR 8) all interworking with X31 increased to 2bph.

Far better having only 8 boards affected by the Ellison Road bridge, as opposed to 12 which  causes a knock on effect on other services if no suitable spares available.

Assuming the Streetdeck's go onto the 301 and not the 307/309, guess it depends where you've got more of a case for investment in the future. It might be easier to convince someone that the 307/309 and Consett routes need new buses rather than other routes.

I have the feeling the 56 B9TL's might end up on the 51/52/93/94 which imo will be a hard sell. The last 2, in particular, haven't had new buses in ages. Honestly can't remember when they did tbh. The 16/17 year old vehicles need moved on though so I'd be very surprised if something doesn't end up there. Least they'll get a few years out of them on there.

So it's an effective 4 way swap.

New Buses Washington -> Streetdeck's Deptford -> 4x New Buses / B9TL Riverside -> 6x New Buses / E400 / E400 MMC Consett