(05 Feb 2025, 8:24 pm)Storx wrote Not sure it'll be the leather, probably be mould growing somewhere from a window leaking. Ashington's Solo's are absolutely rank for it but the old Cityzens who are long gone were really really bad for it.

Mind carpets on the sides and leaking windows are not a good combination. Thank god the days of whoever thought carpeted walls was a good idea is long gone. Carpets don't belong on buses imo.

The Renowns were rank aswell, both at GNE and Arriva, the one that stuck out like a sore thumb at Arriva was 4511, it was liftin, likewise with GNEs 5155 dreaded either of them turning up, although carpeted the Metroriders weren't that bad

(06 Feb 2025, 12:02 am)V514DFT wrote The Renowns were rank aswell, both at GNE and Arriva, the one that stuck out like a sore thumb at Arriva was 4511, it was liftin, likewise with GNEs 5155 dreaded either of them turning up, although carpeted the Metroriders weren't that bad

Aye you're right there with the Renown's, probably didn't help that they used to be freezing all the time either. The early floor buses Ultraliners or whatever they were with GNE used to be bad aswell.

Same as the VxxxDNL MPD's with Arriva but they were never cleaned, the dust on the back shelf used to be disgusting. Just reminded me once where we wrote 'Clean Me' on one of them, got it again a few days later and they rubbed the writing off and left the rest of it. Laziness at the highest order.

Let's hope and pray that when services are franchised here in the North East that Go North East lose everything they operate within our region for the years of horrendous service they've given us.

Then wor Nigel and his toyboy Ben can Go-Ahead elsewhere never to heard from again, certainly don't want no "Devils" in our Kim's proposed "Angel Network" do we.

(06 Feb 2025, 4:20 pm)Malarkey wrote Let's hope and pray that when services are franchised here in the North East that Go North East lose everything they operate within our region for the years of horrendous service they've given us.

Then wor Nigel and his toyboy Ben can Go-Ahead elsewhere never to heard from again, certainly don't want no "Devils" in our Kim's  proposed "Angel Network" do we.

Worst case, they’ll win lots of routes on the basis of flannel bids and then run them like they’re running the 29, 25 and 34 at the moment. The rules around operating a service would have to be watertight and allow NECA to re-tender if operators don’t actually operate the services they’re being paid for.

(06 Feb 2025, 5:07 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Worst case, they’ll win lots of routes on the basis of flannel bids and then run them like they’re running the 29, 25 and 34 at the moment. The rules around operating a service would have to be watertight and allow NECA to re-tender if operators don’t actually operate the services they’re being paid for.

This is why I'm almost against the idea of franchising now, despite being very much in favour of it when Quality Contracts were being discussed as an option over ten years ago.

The rules around running a service probably won't be as robust as many in here would like to see. Indeed, when I've questioned aspiring mayors about the subject of fines and the withdrawal of contracts in the past, they've all given incredibly vague answers which skirt around the question rather than addressing it. 

Without such watertight safeguarding, then I suspect your worst-case scenario would probably be the norm, and the charitarians currently in charge of running bus services in the region will be laughing at the taxpayer whilst receiving hefty pats on the back by their paymasters and shareholders.

Not just Go North East within the Go Ahead Group having problems it seems! 
'Ghost buses' partly due to mechanics shortage - operator https://www.rte.ie/news/dublin/2025/0206...es-dublin/

I'd literally give any operator a month, at the end of that month i'd review, if it doesn't meet my expectations then they're for the chop, and the contract would be re-tendered, no time for bullshit in my book, and unlike most operators, i'd actually listen to what's being said, passengers are the bread and butter, without them, your company is nothing, easier said than done i know, or so they make out

(06 Feb 2025, 6:12 pm)MurdnunoC wrote This is why I'm almost against the idea of franchising now, despite being very much in favour of it when Quality Contracts were being discussed as an option over ten years ago.

The rules around running a service probably won't be as robust as many in here would like to see. Indeed, when I've questioned aspiring mayors about the subject of fines and the withdrawal of contracts in the past, they've all given incredibly vague answers which skirt around the question rather than addressing it. 

Without such watertight safeguarding, then I suspect your worst-case scenario would probably be the norm, and the charitarians currently in charge of running bus services in the region will be laughing at the taxpayer whilst receiving hefty pats on the back by their paymasters and shareholders.

They need to be watertight, but like you, I've very little confidence in that being the case. There needs to be a proper penalty/service credits system in place, otherwise this risks becoming a cash-cow for organisations led by people like NF, who don't give a stuff about getting passengers from A to B.

(07 Feb 2025, 10:21 am)Adrian wrote They need to be watertight, but like you, I've very little confidence in that being the case. There needs to be a proper penalty/service credits system in place, otherwise this risks becoming a cash-cow for organisations led by people like NF, who don't give a stuff about getting passengers from A to B.

Absolutely.

Quickly going back to Quality Contacts again, I can't believe how shortsighted and naive both sides were on the issue. 

Instead of clutching their pearls and making gesticulations like they've just been made eat shit, the likes of Kevin Carr, the twins, Tom and Tim Dodds, and the Stagecoach fella (Phil Something or other, I think), should have really grabbed the opportunity of making guaranteed, eezypeazy, cash for running services at little to no risk.

And, as for those, in favour of the scheme, they should have anticipated how it might be abused by unscrupulous operators, looking to make a fast buck for their shareholders.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, I guess.

It's kicking off in Hexham now

https://www.hexham-courant.co.uk/news/24...-services/

(31 Jan 2025, 10:22 pm)Ambassador wrote There was a non CAZ Citaro on the 29

Rather than do the right thing and pay the relatively small fee…Go Nowhere ran it short to Gateshead

Absolutely shameless

We must be getting the right form of salt/grit on the roads today as 5367 was on the 28/29 and made it to Newcastle on all trips without preemptively breaking down at Gateshead Interchange:  https://bustimes.org/vehicles/gnel-5367

Little Pinks 687 was on 28/28B/29 all day Thursday.

Ik this will probs be the wrong thread to ask this(I couldn’t find the correct thread lol) but why does GNE not trial out with ppl getting of the back door on dual door buses like what London does or is it for safety,bc i always walk past the dual door e400s and just wonder why not use both doors for ease lol?

(08 Feb 2025, 11:07 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote Ik this will probs be the wrong thread to ask this(I couldn’t find the correct thread lol) but why does GNE not trial out with ppl getting of the back door on dual door buses like what London does or is it for safety,bc i always walk past the dual door e400s and just wonder why not use both doors for ease lol?

I have always thought this as well, why not just save time at stops and let people off at the rear doors where possible...

(09 Feb 2025, 1:06 pm)d9817362 wrote I have always thought this as well, why not just save time at stops and let people off at the rear doors where possible...

North East infrastructure isn't really set-up for dual door operation, so you'd have passengers walking out of the rear doors directly into the side of shelters/fences/walls.

(09 Feb 2025, 4:07 pm)PH - BQA wrote North East infrastructure isn't really set-up for dual door operation, so you'd have passengers walking out of the rear doors directly into the side of shelters/fences/walls.

Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.

(09 Feb 2025, 4:46 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.

The operators could look to invest and support any changes to the infrastructure. 
After all, it's the kit they're choosing to buy...

(09 Feb 2025, 4:46 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.

There's loads of places where it wouldn't really work as the bus stops are in bays so you'd be stuck on the road. 

To be honest though I'm not sure they'd really benefit GoNorthEast services, they're not really busy enough to warrant it as they only really benefit places where there's a massive load of people leaving at the same time as boarding. 

Think the likes of the Stagecoach services in the centre of Newcastle near Monument etc. There's not really any GoNorthEast decker services where that happens. Not enough to benefit them as rear door boarding has bad fare evasion as people just sneak on the middle door.

(09 Feb 2025, 4:46 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote Couldn’t drivers just stop before the shelters tho?Just a genuine idea and I do understand that there might be obstructions but at least like a 1 week trial service with it.

Still wouldn't really work, at majority of stops there's a raised curb for accessibility which is generally only ever large enough to cover one entrance. 

Take the High Level Bridge stop in Newcastle, given there are lots of dual door vehicles on the 21:


The raised curb is in front of the shelter, so if the driver stopped short of the shelter not only is there no raised curb, but the rear of the vehicle would be blocking the junction. If the driver stopped at the raised curb, on a dual-door vehicle passengers couldn't alight from the rear entrance because there'd be a bus shelter blocking them. Appreciate that it's unlikely anyone would be alighting at that stop on a 21, but it's the same across multiple stops in the NE.

---

(09 Feb 2025, 4:55 pm)Andreos1 wrote The operators could look to invest and support any changes to the infrastructure. 
After all, it's the kit they're choosing to buy...

More chance of pigs flying than the operator in question spending a penny more than they need to on anything, let alone infrastructure.

(09 Feb 2025, 4:57 pm)PH - BQA wrote Still wouldn't really work, at majority of stops there's a raised curb for accessibility which is generally only ever large enough to cover one entrance. 

Take the High Level Bridge stop in Newcastle, given there are lots of dual door vehicles on the 21:


The raised curb is in front of the shelter, so if the driver stopped short of the shelter not only is there no raised curb, but the rear of the vehicle would be blocking the junction. If the driver stopped at the raised curb, on a dual-door vehicle passengers couldn't alight from the rear entrance because there'd be a bus shelter blocking them. Appreciate that it's unlikely anyone would be alighting at that stop on a 21, but it's the same across multiple stops in the NE.

Side discussion here, have they actually bothered to convert the vehicles? As far as I'm aware London deckers wheelchairs etc board on the middle door. 

I know there was a lot of moaning about it in the past which has quietly gone quiet lately, no doubt, because of the other bigger issues.

They trialled it when the pink angel was dual door operated

Passengers didn’t really use the middle door and the only certain stops could be used

Was quickly ditched

(08 Feb 2025, 11:07 pm)BusEnthusiast.com wrote Ik this will probs be the wrong thread to ask this(I couldn’t find the correct thread lol) but why does GNE not trial out with ppl getting of the back door on dual door buses like what London does or is it for safety,bc i always walk past the dual door e400s and just wonder why not use both doors for ease lol?

The dual door E400s should be nowhere near frontline use. If you're a wheelchair user, how do you get on at Eldon Square?

(09 Feb 2025, 4:57 pm)PH - BQA wrote Still wouldn't really work, at majority of stops there's a raised curb for accessibility which is generally only ever large enough to cover one entrance. 

Take the High Level Bridge stop in Newcastle, given there are lots of dual door vehicles on the 21:


The raised curb is in front of the shelter, so if the driver stopped short of the shelter not only is there no raised curb, but the rear of the vehicle would be blocking the junction. If the driver stopped at the raised curb, on a dual-door vehicle passengers couldn't alight from the rear entrance because there'd be a bus shelter blocking them. Appreciate that it's unlikely anyone would be alighting at that stop on a 21, but it's the same across multiple stops in the NE.

---

More chance of pigs flying than the operator in question spending a penny more than they need to on anything, let alone infrastructure. 

Oh aye, we all know that.

But from an operational and logistical perspective, it seems to be a no-brainer. 
Imagine the PR they would get too! 

It could work in their favour massively!

Nexus and the Local Highway Authorities need to start making allowances for dual door vehicles when installing or repositioning bus shelters and any other offending kerbside street furniture.
Otherwise we’ll continue being locked into using tedious single door vehicles.

(09 Feb 2025, 6:17 pm)ne14ne1 wrote Nexus and the Local Highway Authorities need to start making allowances for dual door vehicles when installing or repositioning bus shelters and any other offending kerbside street furniture.
Otherwise we’ll continue being locked into using tedious single door vehicles.

Not sure I agree personally. I don't see the need for dual door buses bar a very few select routes (1/22/39/40/62/63). There's no benefits to using them if there's not massive loads of people getting on and off at the same stop.

There is massive negatives though when it comes to fare loss with people evading paying and the loss of seats downstairs which pensioners need, something which isn't an issue in London as the average age is much younger or Europe where they only use single decker vehicles.

It's just a massive expense for little benefit imo.

(09 Feb 2025, 6:42 pm)Storx wrote Not sure I agree personally. I don't see the need for dual door buses bar a very few select routes (1/22/39/40/62/63). There's no benefits to using them if there's not massive loads of people getting on and off at the same stop.

There is massive negatives though when it comes to fare loss with people evading paying and the loss of seats downstairs which pensioners need, something which isn't an issue in London as the average age is much younger or Europe where they only use single decker vehicles.

It's just a massive expense for little benefit imo.

Even on the likes of the 10 & 21 when it’s full to capacity with standees right up the front doors at peak times, dual doors would make it so much easier for us to manouve around inside the bus and to alight from it.
I regularly find myself stepping off the bus to allow other passengers to squeeze off.

We used to have dual door buses here.
Numerous other cities in the UK utilise dual doors buses on at least some of their routes.
Countless cities across the world use dual (or more) doored buses.
Public transport should be quick & easy to use, and optimised for people, not profit. 

So frustrating here.

(09 Feb 2025, 6:17 pm)ne14ne1 wrote Nexus and the Local Highway Authorities need to start making allowances for dual door vehicles when installing or repositioning bus shelters and any other offending kerbside street furniture.
Otherwise we’ll continue being locked into using tedious single door vehicles.

Why? 
Assuming it's one operator using the dual doors and one operator only doing it because they're acquiring second hand tat from another division - then that's on them. Not Nexus or an LA.

(09 Feb 2025, 8:22 pm)ne14ne1 wrote Even on the likes of the 10 & 21 when it’s full to capacity with standees right up the front doors at peak times, dual doors would make it so much easier for us to manouve around inside the bus and to alight from it.
I regularly find myself stepping off the bus to allow other passengers to squeeze off.

We used to have dual door buses here.
Numerous other cities in the UK utilise dual doors buses on at least some of their routes.
Countless cities across the world use dual (or more) doored buses.
Public transport should be quick & easy to use, and optimised for people, not profit. 

So frustrating here.

See when stuff is full to capacity then it should be having a capacity increase if you ask me but when it's all about profits they don't care.

imo one of the biggest problems in the UK is the refusal to use bendy buses, on busy routes where people do generally short journeys so having a seat doesn't really matter they're much much better for capacity with multiple doors and the lack of time wasted with people trundling up and down stairs.

Sadly local government seem to be totally aware of it aswell since they're all pushing the 'Glider' buses which are just glorified bendy buses, let's be honest, but if anyone dared announced bendy buses then it'd be like WW3 with the media because of London.

It doesn't help that we use reversal bus stations either which are just generally crap for everything bar saving space which can't take dual door buses at all.

(09 Feb 2025, 8:28 pm)Andreos1 wrote Why? 
Assuming it's one operator using the dual doors and one operator only doing it because they're acquiring second hand tat from another division - then that's on them. Not Nexus or an LA.

No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system. 
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them.

---

(09 Feb 2025, 8:29 pm)Storx wrote It doesn't help that we use reversal bus stations either which are just generally crap for everything bar saving space which can't take dual door buses at all.

Dual door buses can use reversal bus stations. 
You can either spec from new or retrofit ramps to the front doors and move any offending internal grab poles. Don’t need to go to the expense of a full single door conversion.

Actually, Im pretty sure at Eldon Sq several of the stands could have longer boarding platforms put in if in future we wanted to accommodate rear doors, although as I mention above once we’re in control and setting the spec, front door boarding and alighting for wheelchair users could be stipulated.

(09 Feb 2025, 9:38 pm)ne14ne1 wrote No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system. 
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them. 

---

Dual door buses can use reversal bus stations. 
You can either spec from new or retrofit ramps to the front doors and move any offending internal grab poles. Don’t need to go to the expense of a full single door conversion.

Actually, Im pretty sure at Eldon Sq several of the stands could have longer boarding platforms put in if in future we wanted to accommodate rear doors, although as I mention above once we’re in control and setting the spec, front door boarding and alighting for wheelchair users could be stipulated.

I think the basic fundamentals need to be sorted, such as identifying passenger habits and fixing the network needs to be the initial priority. 
Those basic fundamentals are key to it working imo. 

Once that's done and the public start to use the system, a second stage process can look at options such as vehicle spec, dual door compliant stops etc.

It's patently obvious that ensuring contracts are watertight and penalties for not running services are introduced too mind.

(09 Feb 2025, 9:38 pm)ne14ne1 wrote No, think longer term. Think about creating a better transport system. 
With buses back in public control we’d be able to set the spec of vehicles so why hinder our choices when any new or replacement bus stop/shelters could be given an extra 5 minutes thought before installation. It’s not going to cost them.

---

Dual door buses can use reversal bus stations. 
You can either spec from new or retrofit ramps to the front doors and move any offending internal grab poles. Don’t need to go to the expense of a full single door conversion.

Actually, Im pretty sure at Eldon Sq several of the stands could have longer boarding platforms put in if in future we wanted to accommodate rear doors, although as I mention above once we’re in control and setting the spec, front door boarding and alighting for wheelchair users could be stipulated.

A comment on a local West Durham forum mentioned an issue with boarding a dual-door Enviro 400. The passenger was informed by the driver that they couldn’t be let off at Consett Bus Station and had to disembark at the previous stop due to the centre door. Even if it’s just one person, this situation is still unacceptable.