(08 Jun 2014, 10:30 am)Richard Smiles wrote Yes, that is correct, these vehicles are spares & can be allocated anywhere at very "Short Notice".

You can guarantee, that if I had allocated them to a Depot, some bright spark on here, would have no doubt made comment, that they were at x Depot, so that's why I have left them off.

On the Official Arriva Fleet Allocation Sheets, they are just down as Reserve with NO specific Depot Allocation. I can send you the Full Allocation Sheets, if you wish to PM me (your personal email address)
via the PM system, as I am NOT prepared to upload that particular file onto the forum.

ive been told 1712 1766 are at durham but 1712 is spare and 1711 is te replace one of darlo solo

(08 Jun 2014, 12:36 pm)jaimz13 wrote ive been told 1712 1766 are at durham but 1712 is spare and 1711 is te replace one of darlo solo

1711/2 have moved to Ashington - 1711 is covering for the damaged 1764. Both were meant to cover the short gap between Darlington losing 2827/8 to Whitby and the end of the H1/H2 but 1712 went to Durham instead due to Durham rejecting one of the X-GGO Darts.

(08 Jun 2014, 12:53 pm)Kuyoyo wrote 1711/2 have moved to Ashington - 1711 is covering for the damaged 1764. Both were meant to cover the short gap between Darlington losing 2827/8 to Whitby and the end of the H1/H2 but 1712 went to Durham instead due to Durham rejecting one of the X-GGO Darts.

See photo:
https://flic.kr/p/nRBMaU

(08 Jun 2014, 12:53 pm)Kuyoyo wrote 1711/2 have moved to Ashington - 1711 is covering for the damaged 1764. Both were meant to cover the short gap between Darlington losing 2827/8 to Whitby and the end of the H1/H2 but 1712 went to Durham instead due to Durham rejecting one of the X-GGO Darts.

I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

(08 Jun 2014, 3:59 pm)aureolin wrote I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

In some cases, the depots do arguably have a better idea of how things need to be ran, as they see the day to day running from first hand experience rather than from data presented to them via a spreadsheet, document, etc.

One of the Max Spec DB300's was spotted on the A1(M) this afternoon near Washington Services going north on suspended tow on way back from Bus & Coach World, Blackburn

(08 Jun 2014, 3:59 pm)aureolin wrote I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

They can refuse to accept the transfer on the grounds of the mechanical state of the vehicle - which is the case in this instance.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:12 pm)Kuyoyo wrote They can refuse to accept the transfer on the grounds of the mechanical state of the vehicle - which is the case in this instance.

Which is wrong. If Head Office says you are to take a bus, the depot shouldn take it.

The depot dictating what vehicles they want (or do not want) is totally unacceptable.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:12 pm)Kuyoyo wrote They can refuse to accept the transfer on the grounds of the mechanical state of the vehicle - which is the case in this instance.

I find it extremely concerning that Arriva would send a vehicle elsewhere, which has been refused by another depot, because of the mechanical state of the vehicle. I think the HSE would be just as concerned.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:06 pm)Dan wrote In some cases, the depots do arguably have a better idea of how things need to be ran, as they see the day to day running from first hand experience rather than from data presented to them via a spreadsheet, document, etc.

You'd argue that knowledge should be in head office.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:28 pm)aureolin wrote I find it extremely concerning that Arriva would send a vehicle elsewhere, which has been refused by another depot, because of the mechanical state of the vehicle. I think the HSE would be just as concerned.

Darlington sent it to Durham, Durham inspected it, refused it until Darlington had sorted it out, so it returned to Darlington with 1310 moving in its place until the repairs had been made. However, since that, the allocation had been revised and that swap has now become official.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:28 pm)aureolin wrote You'd argue that knowledge should be in head office.

Depots - One overall Manager, and an engineering manager
Head Office - 3 separate management teams (Commercial, Marketing and Engineering)

(08 Jun 2014, 4:28 pm)aureolin wrote I find it extremely concerning that Arriva would send a vehicle elsewhere, which has been refused by another depot, because of the mechanical state of the vehicle. I think the HSE would be just as concerned.


You'd argue that knowledge should be in head office.

I don't think it's as simple as that - I have known transport depots where the drivers have had the final say as to whether a vehicle was acceptable.

You might think that was unhealthy, but drivers have standards - and if those are allowed to slip then who knows what rubbish would be fended off onto the depot?

One transport manager said that his drivers would break the interior door handle resulting in an unsafe exit possibility if the vehicle didn't match up to their standards elsewhere.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:32 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Depots - One overall Manager, and an engineering manager
Head Office - 3 separate management teams (Commercial, Marketing and Engineering)

The engineering manager at Darlington should have informed the engineering management team in Head Office and informed them in advance that one of their vehicles which was due to move to another depot was under repair. Head Office could have then made the decision as to the action that should be taken.

It shouldn't be at the discretion of a depot to accept or turn away a specific vehicle. Accepting it obviously would have caused problems for Belmont (hence obvious rejection), and rejecting it means that they've gone against management (completely understand aureolin and citaro5284 from that perspective).

As an outsider (with little knowledge) looking in, it seems to me like Darlo may have been hoping they could palm it off onto Belmont so they could fix it instead.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:32 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Head Office - 3 separate management teams (Commercial, Marketing and Engineering)

No Operations or Payroll Management at Head Office Tony??

(08 Jun 2014, 5:22 pm)citaro5284 wrote No Operations or Payroll Management at Head Office Tony??

If Operations are in charge of driver duty management, then they are located at Stockton depot.

(08 Jun 2014, 4:56 pm)G-CPTN wrote I don't think it's as simple as that - I have known transport depots where the drivers have had the final say as to whether a vehicle was acceptable.

You might think that was unhealthy, but drivers have standards - and if those are allowed to slip then who knows what rubbish would be fended off onto the depot?

One transport manager said that his drivers would break the interior door handle resulting in an unsafe exit possibility if the vehicle didn't match up to their standards elsewhere.

I can completely understand a driver not wanting to drive a mechanically unfit vehicle, and I'd strongly urge them not to if I had any say. It's up to Arriva as a company to ensure that their engineering teams are maintaining vehicles to an acceptable standard in the first place. It doesn't matter if you have 4 depots or 50. You're part of one company and it should be fixed.

Drivers dictating to management what they're going and not going to do though is unhealthy, and shows a lack of organisational discipline. As for drivers deliberately vandalising company property... well... I thought we left that sort of thing in school?

Has 1500 moved to Ashington, just there's a photo on Flickr of it operating the X18?

(08 Jun 2014, 7:17 pm)mb134 wrote Has 1500 moved to Ashington, just there's a photo on Flickr of it operating the X18?

Can you actually link to the photo instead of just mentioning it!

(08 Jun 2014, 7:22 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Can you actually link to the photo instead of just mentioning it!

Sorry yeah here it is:
https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/bazza1990/14186838869/

(08 Jun 2014, 3:59 pm)aureolin wrote I find it baffling how a depot of a company can refuse an incoming transfer. Who's running the company? The head office or the individual depots?

Totally agree!

(08 Jun 2014, 4:21 pm)citaro5284 wrote Which is wrong. If Head Office says you are to take a bus, the depot shouldn take it.

The depot dictating what vehicles they want (or do not want) is totally unacceptable.

SHOULD you mean?!

(09 Jun 2014, 5:07 pm)Roland Pratt wrote SHOULD you mean?!

Aye, I do......

(08 Jun 2014, 7:25 pm)mb134 wrote Sorry yeah here it is:
https://m.flickr.com/#/photos/bazza1990/14186838869/

No need to apologise. I'm sure we could all imagine what 1500 looks like with X18 on the front without seeing a photo!

If anyone wants a photo, the first Max Gemini to return, 7611, is in service today on X10/X11

(10 Jun 2014, 10:29 am)tyresmoke wrote If anyone wants a photo, the first Max Gemini to return, 7611, is in service today on X10/X11

I seen one of them leaving Haymarket earlier, Sapphire like colours?

(10 Jun 2014, 10:29 am)tyresmoke wrote If anyone wants a photo, the first Max Gemini to return, 7611, is in service today on X10/X11

As seen here (photo @ Matt Williamson)

Wonder how long till its allocated on the 308 ?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nCB-YjxJRZ...Nuz4D9Bbxw

Ashington Depot Opening.

ANE seem to be really pushing their social media presence at the mo.
First Frankenbus and now youtube vids!

(10 Jun 2014, 3:53 pm)Wellsey18 wrote Wonder how long till its allocated on the 308 ?

Hahaha, It's on it heading uptowards Newcastle from Chilli Road @18:37!

(10 Jun 2014, 1:49 pm)northern156 wrote I seen one of them leaving Haymarket earlier, Sapphire like colours?

So not holding them back for a big launch then?!

Will the MAX vehicles recieve some kind of route sub-branding?