(17 Aug 2022, 1:48 pm)Unber43 wrote I hope the 8/60/65/20 never get solo's

The 60 already has them most of the time anyway due to the allocation disasters at deptford atm.

(17 Aug 2022, 8:12 am)Storx wrote Wasn't the 65 always every 30 minutes but by a merger of the Peterlee / Seaham / Durham triangle services, forgot the numbers off the top of my head albeit a slightly different route in some areas in particular Seaham.

No. The 154, 65 and 265 have always been hourly.

(17 Aug 2022, 2:34 pm)ALavery wrote The 60 already has them most of the time anyway due to the allocation disasters at deptford atm.

Well there is currently 3 solos on.

Only two branded Drifters are on the 60 atm.

and I saw a Drifter on the 24 earlier.

(17 Aug 2022, 3:03 pm)F114TML wrote and I saw a Drifter on the 24 earlier.

There is one on the 65, SouthSheilds Circuit, 2/2A

(17 Aug 2022, 2:38 pm)F114TML wrote No. The 154, 65 and 265 have always been hourly.

It combined with the 208 and 202 though to be half hourly between Low Moorsley and Durham / Seaham and Murton (despite a different route) though which are both withdrawn now (62 the replacement for 202/208 for a bit). Drifter explained it better after, I just wasn't 100% sure.

(17 Aug 2022, 3:46 pm)Storx wrote It combined with the 208 and 202 though to be half hourly between Low Moorsley and Durham / Seaham and Murton (despite a different route) though which are both withdrawn now (62 the replacement for 202/208 for a bit). Drifter explained it better after, I just wasn't 100% sure.

2 buses per hour would be more accurate - I don't remember the 202 and 265 leaving Murton half an hour away from each other - and they certainly didn't at Seaham.

(17 Aug 2022, 6:02 pm)F114TML wrote 2 buses per hour would be more accurate - I don't remember the 202 and 265 leaving Murton half an hour away from each other - and they certainly didn't at Seaham.

It was every 20/40 min wait from Seaham  I think 265/208 was like 20/40 min wait

Just checked. Does anyone know how they used to interwork? I know the 265/202 did but I don't know what else did?

Looking at the timetables;
March 2013: 202 Seaham > 265 Durham > 260 Peterlee OR 260 Durham > 265 Seaham > 202 Peterlee
January 2014: 202 Seaham > 265 Durham > 208 Peterlee > 208 Durham > 265 Seaham > 202 Peterlee (Station Town from December 2016).

Strangely though, the 260 could've been self-contained (51 mins end-to-end) and so could the revised (post-Jan 2014) 265 (56 mins end-to-end; 61-64 mins pre-Jan 2014). 202 post-Jan 2014 was 48 mins end-to-end (44 pre-Jan 2014)

Been trying to work out the new PVR's, not sure if anyone can confirm if I'm right

6 - 6 (becoming standalone from Consett?)
8 - 3
10/10A/10B - 12
12 - 3
20/20A - 12
39A/39B - 5
49/96 - 9
51/52 - 10
53/54 - 6
57 - 4
60 - 6
65 - 2
97 - 6

Some of these services have very long layovers as a result of the changes, the 39B for example will have 38 minutes at Washington. Also worth noting the 49 will now interwork with the 96 based on the stands at Gateshead interchange.

Also, I don't know Eldon Square that well, but can stands accommodate more than 1 bus? Unless the 21 and 10/10A/10B have layover times of 1 minute then there''s a slight overlap between 1 bus arriving and another departing - in reality I'd imagine they'd miss each other but still seems strange on the off chance. What complicates matters more is that the 10/10A/10B also overlap with the 12, which may suggest they're interworking, presumably for driver changeovers.

(17 Aug 2022, 11:48 pm)peter wrote Been trying to work out the new PVR's, not sure if anyone can confirm if I'm right

6 - 6 (becoming standalone from Consett?)
8 - 3
10/10A/10B - 12
12 - 3
20/20A - 12
39A/39B - 5
49/96 - 9
51/52 - 10
53/54 - 6
57 - 4
60 - 6
65 - 2
97 - 6

Some of these services have very long layovers as a result of the changes, the 39B for example will have 38 minutes at Washington. Also worth noting the 49 will now interwork with the 96 based on the stands at Gateshead interchange.

Also, I don't know Eldon Square that well, but can stands accommodate more than 1 bus? Unless the 21 and 10/10A/10B have layover times of 1 minute then there''s a slight overlap between 1 bus arriving and another departing - in reality I'd imagine they'd miss each other but still seems strange on the off chance. What complicates matters more is that the 10/10A/10B also overlap with the 12, which may suggest they're interworking, presumably for driver changeovers.

I think these are all correct, however I wouldn't mind the 8 & 65 have longer layovers than they will have as they seem to always be late, 65 are regularly 10/25 mins late

(17 Aug 2022, 11:48 pm)peter wrote Been trying to work out the new PVR's, not sure if anyone can confirm if I'm right

6 - 6 (becoming standalone from Consett?)
8 - 3
10/10A/10B - 12
12 - 3
20/20A - 12
39A/39B - 5
49/96 - 9
51/52 - 10
53/54 - 6
57 - 4
60 - 6
65 - 2
97 - 6

Some of these services have very long layovers as a result of the changes, the 39B for example will have 38 minutes at Washington. Also worth noting the 49 will now interwork with the 96 based on the stands at Gateshead interchange.

Also, I don't know Eldon Square that well, but can stands accommodate more than 1 bus? Unless the 21 and 10/10A/10B have layover times of 1 minute then there''s a slight overlap between 1 bus arriving and another departing - in reality I'd imagine they'd miss each other but still seems strange on the off chance. What complicates matters more is that the 10/10A/10B also overlap with the 12, which may suggest they're interworking, presumably for driver changeovers.

No they can’t accommodate more than 1 bus, but there are layover bays

You are probably taking the arrival bay too literally, they generally drop off at the end stand if other buses use the same bay first

(17 Aug 2022, 11:48 pm)peter wrote Been trying to work out the new PVR's, not sure if anyone can confirm if I'm right

6 - 6 (becoming standalone from Consett?)
8 - 3
10/10A/10B - 12
12 - 3
20/20A - 12
39A/39B - 5
49/96 - 9
51/52 - 10
53/54 - 6
57 - 4
60 - 6
65 - 2
97 - 6

Some of these services have very long layovers as a result of the changes, the 39B for example will have 38 minutes at Washington. Also worth noting the 49 will now interwork with the 96 based on the stands at Gateshead interchange.

Also, I don't know Eldon Square that well, but can stands accommodate more than 1 bus? Unless the 21 and 10/10A/10B have layover times of 1 minute then there''s a slight overlap between 1 bus arriving and another departing - in reality I'd imagine they'd miss each other but still seems strange on the off chance. What complicates matters more is that the 10/10A/10B also overlap with the 12, which may suggest they're interworking, presumably for driver changeovers.

This suggests a PVR reduction of around 27/28 from these temporary changes - plus 5 from contract losses (67/69, 434).

(18 Aug 2022, 8:52 pm)Wybus wrote No they can’t accommodate more than 1 bus, but there are layover bays

You are probably taking the arrival bay too literally, they generally drop off at the end stand if other buses use the same bay first

Ah okay thanks for clarifying!

Service 20A is having a 21 minute layover in Durham according to new timetable

Yay. More clutter.

So where is the 20A going to park exactly?

(23 Aug 2022, 1:46 pm)Unber43 wrote So where is the 20A going to park exactly?

Probably Sutton Street, just below the viaduct, down from the old United Depot, there's a bus stop there

(23 Aug 2022, 1:45 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Yay. More clutter.

It's literally the last thing we need more of with the current set up, there's already buses dumped all over the shop including on Sutton Street, other bits that don't help is stand clashes and the 20A isn't the only route with a lengthy layover as the 7 gets 14 minutes for much of the day typically having to pull in to set down behind another 7 that's boarding.

(23 Aug 2022, 1:18 pm)Retro Nero wrote Service 20A is having a 21 minute layover in Durham according to new timetable

Couldn't they have just ran it in service up to Dryburn instead?

(23 Aug 2022, 2:26 pm)DeltaMan wrote Couldn't they have just ran it in service up to Dryburn instead?

You should get in touch with Go north east and suggest it

(23 Aug 2022, 2:26 pm)DeltaMan wrote Couldn't they have just ran it in service up to Dryburn instead?

Couldn’t one of the 20A at Durham turn into a 65, it would stop driver changeovers at Hetton? And both services travel to the land of the prince bishops


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(23 Aug 2022, 4:22 pm)cbma06 wrote Couldn’t one of the 20A at Durham turn into a 65, it would stop driver changeovers at Hetton? And both services travel to the land of the prince bishops


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It could also help the reliability of the 65 as they could stretch out the running time with the layover at Durham. I suppose they would say its "temporary", so that would cause a problem if the full timetable is ever restored. 


That being said, I don't see how they couldn't have "temporarily" extended the 20A up to Dryburn or even the Rail Station to get it out the way and also earn a bit of revenue. Seeing a bus with up to 25 min in Durham should be triggering some sort of thought pattern, even on a temporary/experimental basis

(23 Aug 2022, 4:58 pm)DeltaMan wrote It could also help the reliability of the 65 as they could stretch out the running time with the layover at Durham. I suppose they would say its "temporary", so that would cause a problem if the full timetable is ever restored. 


That being said, I don't see how they couldn't have "temporarily" extended the 20A up to Dryburn or even the Rail Station to get it out the way and also earn a bit of revenue. Seeing a bus with up to 25 min in Durham should be triggering some sort of thought pattern, even on a temporary/experimental basis

Maybe the LA wouldn't give them any more money so they decided to just save the fuel and clutter the streets instead of providing a ... service?

(23 Aug 2022, 4:58 pm)DeltaMan wrote It could also help the reliability of the 65 as they could stretch out the running time with the layover at Durham. I suppose they would say its "temporary", so that would cause a problem if the full timetable is ever restored. 


That being said, I don't see how they couldn't have "temporarily" extended the 20A up to Dryburn or even the Rail Station to get it out the way and also earn a bit of revenue. Seeing a bus with up to 25 min in Durham should be triggering some sort of thought pattern, even on a temporary/experimental basis

65 will really suffer. There will be many 2 hour waits. There already a bunch of hour waits

(23 Aug 2022, 7:33 pm)Unber43 wrote 65 will really suffer. There will be many 2 hour waits. There already a bunch of hour waits

They could just change drivers and Seaham and bring a bus instead of a van just incase its late, so they can go without having to wait for the bus to arrive to transfer passengers like they have to do at Hetton. While it might not stop breakdowns from occurring mid-route they could at least try to improve the reliability when it comes to delays.

(23 Aug 2022, 7:50 pm)nova347 wrote They could just change drivers and Seaham and bring a bus instead of a van just incase its late, so they can go without having to wait for the bus to arrive to transfer passengers like they have to do at Hetton. While it might not stop breakdowns from occurring mid-route they could at least try to improve the reliability when it comes to delays.

To save the dead mileage the 65 could be extended to sunderland via the former 62 route

(23 Aug 2022, 5:14 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Maybe the LA wouldn't give them any more money so they decided to just save the fuel and clutter the streets instead of providing a ... service?

Was thinking the same. 
That or the NHS Trust running the hospital. Can picture the scene... 
"We've got a bus sitting around for the best part of half an hour, just down the road from you. Give us a few grand and we will run it up the hill for you. Couple of quid more and we will run it back down the hill too". 

They're getting quite the reputation for sticking out the begging bowl in front of the public purse and doing their best Oliver Twist impression.

(23 Aug 2022, 9:08 pm)Andreos1 wrote Was thinking the same. 
That or the NHS Trust running the hospital. Can picture the scene... 
"We've got a bus sitting around for the best part of half an hour, just down the road from you. Give us a few grand and we will run it up the hill for you. Couple of quid more and we will run it back down the hill too". 

They're getting quite the reputation for sticking out the begging bowl in front of the public purse and doing their best Oliver Twist impression.

NHS Trust: no ta,   we're cash strapped and them mackems have their own shiny hospital.

(23 Aug 2022, 5:14 pm)stagecoachbusdepot wrote Maybe the LA wouldn't give them any more money so they decided to just save the fuel and clutter the streets instead of providing a ... service?

All it requires is a bit of gumption from those at GNE towers to see they have a bus sat in Durham for nearly half an hour while still paying the driver to do sweet FA when they could just send it up the Station or the Hospital for next extra cost to them and potentially a bit of extra revenue. The fuel costs would be negligible as I assume they need to send the bus dead to and from somewhere in any case.

Maybe they will if the "temporary" changes become permanent