We’re planning timetable changes for a number of services across Newcastle, North Tyneside, Gateshead, and County Durham, due to come into effect on Sunday 20 July 2025.

https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/feedback-s...es-20-July

Sensible the 95 going around that part of Lobley Hill instead of the Consett express imo. Thought they might have renumbered the 1 to 301 last time round when they did the North Tyneside changes.

But more importantly, are the minor service changes going to mean GNE can revise interworkings to put the knackered Angel Streetdecks onto 307/309 to move the reliable B9TLs to Consett with the useless B5TLs from the X20 so the E400s can move to Riverside???????   This is what we really want to know!!! Is a constant battering of the suggestion going to come true on this round of changes???

(16 May 2025, 1:31 pm)Chris 1 wrote Sensible the 95 going around that part of Lobley Hill instead of the Consett express imo.  Thought they might have renumbered the 1 to 301 last time round when they did the North Tyneside changes.

Not sure I agree on the 95 personally, as it's coming to a cost of the Malvern Gardens area going down to hourly, which is useless for anyone. 

Personally I wish they'd just create an express from Whickham doing the 1 loop and then running to Newcastle direct via the X30/X71 (or whatever bus goes down there now) route through Dunston.

Means then you could slow down the 1 and send it via Malvern Gardens, while the 96 goes via Lobley Hill so the estates there can have a decent service and for the express you could have
X30/X31/X70/X71/X72 - Every 15 Minutes via Gateshead and Lobley Hill, 2 to Stanley and 2 to Consett as now
X32 - Withdrawn
X73 - Renumbered 7 since it's nothing to do with the expresses and is much closer to the 6 route instead. 

Means all the main towns around there get, at least, 30 minute services, excluding the 7 (could maybe increase the frequency?) to the places where they actually want to be rather than lots of hourly services going different routes causing confusion. Heck you could even up the 301 to every 15 minutes from Gateshead to Whitley Bay and then merge the 96 into it and have to 30 minute services doing the respective 96/301 routes.

(Jokingly you could also send the E400's to Riverside since they don't need low height buses anymore)

(16 May 2025, 9:17 pm)Storx wrote Not sure I agree on the 95 personally, as it's coming to a cost of the Malvern Gardens area going down to hourly, which is useless for anyone. 

Personally I wish they'd just create an express from Whickham doing the 1 loop and then running to Newcastle direct via the X30/X71 (or whatever bus goes down there now) route through Dunston.

Means then you could slow down the 1 and send it via Malvern Gardens, while the 96 goes via Lobley Hill so the estates there can have a decent service and for the express you could have
X30/X31/X70/X71/X72 - Every 15 Minutes via Gateshead and Lobley Hill, 2 to Stanley and 2 to Consett as now
X32 - Withdrawn
X73 - Renumbered 7 since it's nothing to do with the expresses and is much closer to the 6 route instead. 

Means all the main towns around there get, at least, 30 minute services, excluding the 7 (could maybe increase the frequency?) to the places where they actually want to be rather than lots of hourly services going different routes causing confusion. Heck you could even up the 301 to every 15 minutes from Gateshead to Whitley Bay and then merge the 96 into it and have to 30 minute services doing the respective 96/301 routes.

(Jokingly you could also send the E400's to Riverside since they don't need low height buses anymore)

On a serious note, there is a way that the X30/X31/X32 & X70/X71/X73 can be cleaned up and reduce low height requirement to only x4 vehicles.

I did have a previous idea including the X45, but I think that's better left alone as throwing in any interworking patterns involving the MetroCentre during normal Monday to Saturday timetables (with the exception of the X73) is a recipe for disaster.

Basically

• X32 with proposed route change omitting Lobley Hill Estate, is renumbered to service X30 and increased to two buses per hour.
  
• Current X30 renumbered to X31, serving the current X30 route with no frequency or route change.
  
• PVR unchanged for X30/X31/X70/X71/X73 - Still x12
  
• Still remote reliefs (or use of bait room) in Stanley from X30/X73, but these replace the current X30/X31/X32 remote reliefs. Reliefs as a whole more predictable with X30/X70 and X31/X71 boards which legally allow reliefs in Consett.
  

Frequencies would be

• X70 / X71 Consett and Burnopfield to Sunniside and Newcastle - x2 buses per hour with modest headway
  
• X70 / X73 Dipton to Newcastle - x2 buses per hour with modest headway
  
• X30/X31 Stanley to Sunnside and Newcastle - x3 buses per hour running approximately every 20 minutes
  
• X30/X70 Sunniside, Lobley Hill, Team Valley North and Gateahead - x3 buses per hour running approximately every 20 minutes
  
• X31/X71 Sunniside, Whickham, Dunston and Newcastle - x2 buses per hour running approximately every 30 minutes
  
• X30/X71/X70/X71 Sunniside to Newcastle - x5 buses per hour running approximately every 10-15 minutes
  

Only main caveat would be the fast link from Stanley to Whickham and Sunniside being reduced to hourly, although Whickham is still served by the 6 from Stanley.

As for vehicle changes, would be a straight swap of 6356-63 (to Consett) and 6344-51 (to Riverside). This would mean that Riverside would have x12 E400MMC for use on both the X10 & X21 and if any additional VOR where 6377 is already deployed / unavailable, then E400MMC is taken from X21 with a B9TL or something else standing in on the X21.

Consett would still have x8 E400MMC which should at least cover most bases including some of the Sunday interworkings.

(17 May 2025, 12:49 pm)L469 YVK wrote On a serious note, there is a way that the X30/X31/X32 & X70/X71/X73 can be cleaned up and reduce low height requirement to only x4 vehicles.

I did have a previous idea including the X45, but I think that's better left alone as throwing in any interworking patterns involving the MetroCentre during normal Monday to Saturday timetables (with the exception of the X73) is a recipe for disaster.

Basically

• X32 with proposed route change omitting Lobley Hill Estate, is renumbered to service X30 and increased to two buses per hour.
  
• Current X30 renumbered to X31, serving the current X30 route with no frequency or route change.
  
• PVR unchanged for X30/X31/X70/X71/X73 - Still x12
  

Frequencies would be

• X70 / X71 Consett and Burnopfield to Sunniside and Newcastle - x2 buses per hour with modest headway
  
• X70 / X73 Dipton to Newcastle - x2 buses per hour with modest headway
  
• X30/X31 Stanley to Sunnside and Newcastle - x3 buses per hour running approximately every 20 minutes
  
• X30/X70 Sunniside, Lobley Hill, Team Valley North and Gateahead - x3 buses per hour running approximately every 20 minutes
  
• X31/X71 Sunniside, Whickham, Dunston and Newcastle - x2 buses per hour running approximately every 30 minutes
  
• X30/X71/X70/X71 Sunniside to Newcastle - x5 buses per hour running approximately every 10-15 minutes
  

Only main caveat would be the fast link from Stanley to Whickham and Sunniside being reduced to hourly, although Whickham is still served by the 6 from Stanley.

As for vehicle changes, would be a straight swap of 6356-63 (to Consett) and 6344-51 (to Riverside). This would mean that Riverside would have x12 E400MMC for use on both the X10 & X21 and if any additional VOR where 6377 is already deployed / unavailable, then E400MMC is taken from X21 with a B9TL or something else standing in on the X21.

Consett would still have x8 E400MMC which should at least cover most bases including some of the Sunday interworkings.

Stop it. It's every thread. Submit these to gne everytime they do some service change

(17 May 2025, 12:50 pm)Aaron21 wrote Stop it. It's every thread. Submit these to gne everytime they do some service change

Well how about trying to come up with a timing & interworking pattern yourself? It's actually pretty difficult to create one given the variables and can't be created on the whim to speak.

(17 May 2025, 12:49 pm)L469 YVK wrote On a serious note, there is a way that the X30/X31/X32 & X70/X71/X73 can be cleaned up and reduce low height requirement to only x4 vehicles.

I did have a previous idea including the X45, but I think that's better left alone as throwing in any interworking patterns involving the MetroCentre during normal Monday to Saturday timetables (with the exception of the X73) is a recipe for disaster.

Basically

• X32 with proposed route change omitting Lobley Hill Estate, is renumbered to service X30 and increased to two buses per hour.
  
• Current X30 renumbered to X31, serving the current X30 route with no frequency or route change.
  
• PVR unchanged for X30/X31/X70/X71/X73 - Still x12
  
• Still remote reliefs (or use of bait room) in Stanley from X30/X73, but these replace the current X30/X31/X32 remote reliefs. Reliefs as a whole more predictable with X30/X70 and X31/X71 boards which legally allow reliefs in Consett.
  

Frequencies would be

• X70 / X71 Consett and Burnopfield to Sunniside and Newcastle - x2 buses per hour with modest headway
  
• X70 / X73 Dipton to Newcastle - x2 buses per hour with modest headway
  
• X30/X31 Stanley to Sunnside and Newcastle - x3 buses per hour running approximately every 20 minutes
  
• X30/X70 Sunniside, Lobley Hill, Team Valley North and Gateahead - x3 buses per hour running approximately every 20 minutes
  
• X31/X71 Sunniside, Whickham, Dunston and Newcastle - x2 buses per hour running approximately every 30 minutes
  
• X30/X71/X70/X71 Sunniside to Newcastle - x5 buses per hour running approximately every 10-15 minutes
  

Only main caveat would be the fast link from Stanley to Whickham and Sunniside being reduced to hourly, although Whickham is still served by the 6 from Stanley.

As for vehicle changes, would be a straight swap of 6356-63 (to Consett) and 6344-51 (to Riverside). This would mean that Riverside would have x12 E400MMC for use on both the X10 & X21 and if any additional VOR where 6377 is already deployed / unavailable, then E400MMC is taken from X21 with a B9TL or something else standing in on the X21.

Consett would still have x8 E400MMC which should at least cover most bases including some of the Sunday interworkings.

See if I done this I'd do

X97: Whickham Circular to Newcastle via Dunston (Every 20 Minutes) - PVR 4
X30/X31/X70/X71: All via Gateshead interworking - PVR Unsure
X32: Withdrawn
X73: Withdrawn (replaced by 7)
7: X73 from Newcastle to Annfield Plain only (Every Hour) - PVR 2
X40: Annfield Plain - Stanley - X31 Route to A1 - A1 - A184 Direct into Newcastle (Every Hour) - PVR 2

7/X40/X97: E200MMC from Riverside
X30/X31/X70/X71: E400MMC from Consett

The expresses via Whickham are not beneficial to the passengers and are there for operational benefits, people from Stanley and Consett want the route to Gateshead Interchange so they can actually interchange for other places. Hourly bus services are unacceptable.

Announcing the drop in sessions just days before they take place at times when most commuters or shift workers can’t attend…no doubt to fit in with the commercial teams 8-5 shift

Marvellous stuff again

Whilst I appreciate retiming a service by 5 or so minutes may affect some, it's hardly a major change in the grand scheme of things. After perusing the list of changes on GNE's website: I can only see one route change (X32), one new service (95), and one renumbering (1 to 301). I realise I may be in the minority here, but do these changes really merit a roadshow approach? Seems much ado about nothing for relatively minor changes.

(18 May 2025, 10:22 am)MurdnunoC wrote Whilst I appreciate retiming a service by 5 or so minutes may affect some, it's hardly a major change in the grand scheme of things. After perusing the list of changes on GNE's website: I can only see one route change (X32), one new service (95), and one renumbering (1 to 301). I realise I may be in the minority here, but do these changes really merit a roadshow approach?  Seems much ado about nothing for relatively minor changes.

I thought the same. Those in West Auckland might have something to say about the X21 change, which will probably be ignored anyhow but, from my POV, I see no significant difference in timing.

(18 May 2025, 12:00 pm)BusLoverMum wrote I thought the same. Those in West Auckland might have something to say about the X21 change, which will probably be ignored anyhow but, from my POV, I see no significant difference in timing.

It’ll be part of their engagement plan but also to show the Mayor what a good caring bunch of folk GNE are with passengers at the heart of it….

I entered that on a Sunday, every second daytime X72 should run as an X73 to give a Sunday Metrocentre link, with the Sunday X73(A) perhaps doing Burnopfield rather than Tanfield.

Combined frequency would still be hourly.

I agree, but would go further and say your suggested routing of X73 via Burnopfield and Metro centre should be permanent. This would revive link with Annfield Plain and serve Central Station
Tan field could get x70 or  split 6 and new 6A to serve Tanfield hourly , keeping a half hourly service on remaining parts of the route.
Lanchester to Newcastle takes almost 2 hours on #6 !  This would be more popular if an express service was introduced eg. X72 Lanchester, Annfield Plain, Flint Hill, Burnopfield, Newcastle

Easy solution, reinstate the 43/44/44A

(02 Jun 2025, 6:28 am)DH9 wrote I entered that on a Sunday, every second daytime X72 should run as an X73 to give a Sunday Metrocentre link, with the Sunday X73(A) perhaps doing Burnopfield rather than Tanfield.

Combined frequency would still be hourly.

Or even an hourly short X73 doing Stanley to MetroCentre only on Sundays?

Or Sunday X70 or X71 restored with X73 doing full route?

(02 Jun 2025, 2:33 pm)V514DFT wrote Easy solution, reinstate the 43/44/44A

I believe that is a subtle way of saying leave well alone.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

The 43 is basically the 6.   The 44 and 44A had you aged and retired before you got to your destination.

(02 Jun 2025, 5:15 pm)DH9 wrote
I believe that is a subtle way of saying leave well alone.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

The 43 is basically the 6.   The 44 and 44A had you aged and retired before you got to your destination.

In a nutshell yes, but I do have a question, why are GNE only reverting bact to old service numbers in North Tyneside, but nowhere else
Like the 1 becoming the 301 and stuff?

(02 Jun 2025, 5:50 pm)V514DFT wrote In a nutshell yes, but I do have a question, why are GNE only reverting bact to old service numbers in North Tyneside, but nowhere else
Like the 1 becoming the 301 and stuff?

Pretty much when September 2023 changes happened. Most if not everything in North Tyneside had a 3 in front of it

342,307,309,352,353,354,355,359,335

Then in March we got 356,340,341 so might as well add the 1 to become 301. Probs just at best to chuck the 3 in front of everything in North Tyneside. Wouldn't surprise me the 19 is renumber to 319 or something

Digressing slightly from the Gateshead and County Durham changes, I seem to recall the de-three-hundreding of the North Tyneside network around the mid 00s - with the inauguration of the 1 / 2 etc - was so single and double digit route numbers would be allegedly be easier to read from afar.

I may be mistaken here but such was the Go North East logic at the time I recollect they also introduced the 40C / 41C / 83A / 83C(!)

(02 Jun 2025, 5:50 pm)V514DFT wrote In a nutshell yes, but I do have a question, why are GNE only reverting bact to old service numbers in North Tyneside, but nowhere else
Like the 1 becoming the 301 and stuff?

Happy to be corrected here but I don't think GoNorthEast's backend could have duplicate numbers which is why there used to be stuff like the 40D on timetables. 

Obviously they already had the 53 etc in Gateshead hence the 3xx numbers coming into play. 

Once you've done most of them, might aswell do the rest and it would solve the 40D issue if they ever won back the Durham contract as a bonus aswell.

Edit: ie. the 700D now - https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/services/GNE/700D or 54N - https://www.gonortheast.co.uk/services/GNE/354

(02 Jun 2025, 5:15 pm)DH9 wrote I believe that is a subtle way of saying leave well alone.

If it ain't broke don't fix it.

The 43 is basically the 6.   The 44 and 44A had you aged and retired before you got to your destination.

Derwentside isn't a hard area to make money if passengers get a clean, simple, easy to use and where possible frequent service (at least every 30 minutes).

I've mentioned it in the suggestions, but the X45/47 PVR won't be far off what the PVR was of the 45/46/47 & V9.

If GNE scrapped the XLines / RKR nonsense and just the 45/46/47 either as they were or maybe the 45/46 every 20 minutes and the 47 every 20 minutes, there could be future opportunities for growth including electrification.

That's just one example.

Covid has been and gone. The Metrocentre although not what it was, is still ticking over. DWP are soon to move in on Pilgrim Street. BSIP is there to fund some quirky services.....something like the old 709/729 offering a few useful links.

GNE need to stop playing it safe and go a bit more radical in Derwentside (but sensible). Stop p****** the youth (students and young workers) off with unreliable services. There's still an issue with driving test lists not forgetting the costs of lessons and general motoring. Get out there and capitalise. No quirky MG gimmicks (other than any meaningful branding with a purpose such as Red Kite or Durham-Tyne Diamond) just clean, simple, reliable and easy to use services and GNE could be onto something.

Sorry for my long-winded rant, but here's what I mean 

Current:
X30/X31/X32/X70/X71/X73 - 12x
6 - 6x
47/X45 - 12x (from July 2025)
TOTAL = 30x

Potential (based on historical routes):
45/46/47 - 14x - 47 to Blackhall Mill only
V9 - 1x
43/44 (or similar) - 10x - to Stanley only!
X30/X31/X70/X71 - 10x* - all hourly (15/30 on common sections) and via Gateshead
X97 - Newcastle > Whickham Loop - 2x
TOTAL = 37x

** Note this would involve the X30/X31 restored to Lanchester, which could be justified using BSIP. So effectively, GNE would only be increasing PVR by 5x fully commercially.

For the sake of no more than 7x vehicles, GNE could offer a way better service. In fact, maybe only one of the 43/44 would only need to go to Newcastle, again saving another bus or 2x. Poss some way of withdrawing the 643 too and integrating that as part of the 43/44 (MetroCentre) and X97 (Whickham loop).

(02 Jun 2025, 9:36 pm)L469 YVK wrote Sorry for my long-winded rant, but here's what I mean 

Current:
X30/X31/X32/X70/X71/X73 - 12x
6 - 6x
47/X45 - 12x (from July 2025)
TOTAL = 30x

Potential (based on historical routes):
45/46/47 - 14x - 47 to Blackhall Mill only
V9 - 1x
43/44 (or similar) - 10x - to Stanley only!
X30/X31/X70/X71 - 10x* - all hourly (15/30 on common sections) and via Gateshead
X97 - Newcastle > Whickham Loop - 2x
TOTAL = 37x

** Note this would involve the X30/X31 restored to Lanchester, which could be justified using BSIP. So effectively, GNE would only be increasing PVR by 5x fully commercially.

For the sake of no more than 7x vehicles, GNE could offer a way better service. In fact, maybe only one of the 43/44 would only need to go to Newcastle, again saving another bus or 2x. Poss some way of withdrawing the 643 too and integrating that as part of the 43/44 (MetroCentre) and X97 (Whickham loop).

In fairness if you're gaining 7 buses I'm not sure that's the best use of them.

You might aswell do:
X30 | Extended to Lanchester instead of 6 (Every Hour)
X31 | No Changes (Every Hour)
X70 | Frequency Increase (Every 30 Minutes)
X71 | Replaced by X70/46 (Withdrawn)
X72 | Replaced by X70/7 (Withdrawn)
X73 | Renumbered 7 (Withdrawn)
6 | No Changes (Every 30 Minutes)
7 | Renumbered X73 and terminate short at Annfield Plain (Every 30 Minutes)
45 | Renumbered X45 (Every 30 Minutes)
46 | 45 from Newcastle to Hamsterly Mill, X71 from there to Consett (Every 30 Minutes)
47 | No Changes (Every 30 Minutes)

Hourly bus services are horrid and unusable for most people, the best thing you could ever do is get rid of all of them imo. 

Evenings:
X30 | Hourly
X31 | No Service
X70 | No Service
6 | Hourly
7 | Hourly
45 | Hourly 
46 | Hourly 
47 | Hourly

It means everywhere would have an evening service too which Leadgate and Meadomsley don't currently and other than the X71 change it's much of the same as it is now in County Durham.

(03 Jun 2025, 6:12 pm)Storx wrote In fairness if you're gaining 7 buses I'm not sure that's the best use of them.

You might aswell do:
X30 | Extended to Lanchester instead of 6 (Every Hour)
X31 | No Changes (Every Hour)
X70 | Frequency Increase (Every 30 Minutes)
X71 | Replaced by X70/46 (Withdrawn)
X72 | Replaced by X70/7 (Withdrawn)
X73 | Renumbered 7 (Withdrawn)
6 | No Changes (Every 30 Minutes)
7 | Renumbered X73 and terminate short at Annfield Plain (Every 30 Minutes)
45 | Renumbered X45 (Every 30 Minutes)
46 | 45 from Newcastle to Hamsterly Mill, X71 from there to Consett (Every 30 Minutes)
47 | No Changes (Every 30 Minutes)

Hourly bus services are horrid and unusable for most people, the best thing you could ever do is get rid of all of them imo. 

Evenings:
X30 | Hourly
X31 | No Service
X70 | No Service
6 | Hourly
7 | Hourly
45 | Hourly 
46 | Hourly 
47 | Hourly

It means everywhere would have an evening service too which Leadgate and Meadomsley don't currently and other than the X71 change it's much of the same as it is now in County Durham.

Great set of ideas and I genuinely mean that!

Only little changes I would suggest:

- X30/X31 both via Gateshead

- X21 curtailed back at Bishop Auckland (was PVR of 7 with long layover at Bishop Auckland).

- X7 Newcastle - Whickham loop via Dunston, interworks with X21, previous long layover time re-invested to make it workable......note that X21 would need low height deckers but this would be fine with X30/X31/X70 all via Gateshead.

- New Kyo would need a service. So possibly the 7 would either need to continue to Stanley......or do an Anti-Clockwise loop via Shield Row Lane and A693.


Other than that......a nice simple easy service with no major duplication (which has been a bit of an issue).

Only direct link lost would be Sunniside and Burnopfield to Meadomsley.

(03 Jun 2025, 6:36 pm)L469 YVK wrote Great set of ideas and I genuinely mean that!

Only little changes I would suggest:

- X30/X31 both via Gateshead

- X21 curtailed back at Bishop Auckland (was PVR of 7 with long layover at Bishop Auckland).

- X7 Newcastle - Whickham loop via Dunston, interworks with X21, previous long layover time re-invested to make it workable......note that X21 would need low height deckers but this would be fine with X30/X31/X70 all via Gateshead.

- New Kyo would need a service. So possibly the 7 would either need to continue to Stanley......or do an Anti-Clockwise loop via Shield Row Lane and A693.


Other than that......a nice simple easy service with no major duplication (which has been a bit of an issue).

Only direct link lost would be Sunniside and Burnopfield to Meadomsley.

Aye don't disagree with the short loop for Whickham. I wouldn't bother with New Kyo tbh, they've got the 16/78 and the traffic into Stanley is a nightmare lately, why bother affecting someone elsewhere to duplicate other services. They can just change, if need be. 

The Consett services are a bit of a mess lately imo especially the X70/X71/X71A/X72/X73 farce with some going via Gateshead, one going via Whickham and one going via the Metrocentre. How confusing for a set of numbers which are branded as 'common' when the only thing common is the number. It's almost as bad as the 8/25/81/82/83 farce in the Washington/Birtley area and to make it worse every set of change seems to flip them round to add confusion. 

This X71A running first in the morning and late at night via Gateshead just making things even worse.