|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Apr 1, 2013 12:45:37 GMT 1
Four points: 1) Ripon: Liverpool - Newcastle trains always used to go this way prior to dieselisation in 1961 and it would be a sensible route for them today if it existed. There would still be more than enough trains north of York on the ECML and it would have offered an alternative route over that section; there is none between Colton Jnct and Northallerton at present. 2) Spen Valley: The Leeds New Line lost its passenger service in 1953 and was effectively shut long before Beeching. The Heavy Woollen towns were cut off the network by the closure of the Mirfield - Low Moor section (used by Huddersfield - Bradford trains) in 1965.3) The real mistake of Beeching was not closing lines and stations but creating a situation which made it so difficult to re-open them. 4) Without Beeching British steam would probably have lasted until about 1975. Personally, I think the Spen Valley line is a good candidate for reopening, the route is wholly intact aside from a small section at Cleckheaton which shouldn't pose a insurmountable problem for reopening, its used as a cycle track at the minute. The line could be fed into the Wakefield line in the Huddersfield direction with a new curve. Stations could be opened at Liversedge, Heckmondwike and Cleckheaton and the service could go onto Leeds with a call at Bradford Interchange and New Pudsey before terminating at Leeds. This would give 2 benefits, another service to Bradford from Huddersfield (which Metro have expressed a desire for) and the Spen Valley a connection to Bradford and Leeds. If the line were to reopen Ravensthorpe station could be redeveloped into a parkway station,renamed Ravensthorpe & Thornhill Parkway, with a big car park and bus services, there is plenty of land for a car park. Platforms built in the Wakefield direction giving it 4 platforms,a small manned part time ticket office. Get Grand Central to call there with its London trains. It would also serve Dewsbury for good connections to London from Wakefield on the East Coast mainline. This could also tie in with improvement in Wakefield services, when the Kirkgate refurb has been completed, a new service from Wakefield Kirkgate to Manchester Victoria via the Calder Valley, with a new station at Elland, could be introduced along with another new station at either Horbury or Ossett again another parkway type station could be built,as after Mirfield there are no more stops on the Wakefield service leaving a big chunk of population with a train that passes through where they live but doesn't stop. The Manchester to Huddersfield stopper could be sent through to Kirkgate instead of the proposed extension to Leeds outlined in the Northern Hub programme improving services to the whole area. The current Ravensthorpe station suffers from its remote position, I'll be honest, I wouldn't use it after nightfall, it could do with some kind of radical solution. I understand this could conflict with the increased service pattern on the Trans Pennine route when its increased to 5 tph instead of the current 4 tph. But I do think something radical could make the station a major junction for West Yorkshire travel without people having to travel to Leeds to get to where they want to be.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Apr 1, 2013 12:17:58 GMT 1
The timetable is set by GMT,as I would expect the ticket machines to be set by GMT plus any real time information to be as well.
I set my time pieces by GMT and I would expect everyone else too as well,that is standard time for Britain,so I would expect any timetables to run to GMT.
If your own personal time piece isn't set to GMT then,I'll side with the bus operator on this one,its your own fault if you miss the bus,but early running is just not acceptable.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Apr 1, 2013 10:40:31 GMT 1
Where as I agree with you to a certain extent, unfortunately (I don't know what you do), but if you work in the service industry it's inevitable that you will have to work over the holiday period. I work for my local NHS trust and we operate a service over the festive period aside from the Bank Holidays,it's, unfortunately the way it is, things don't grind to a halt just because its Christmas and nor should the public transport network.
Could you not come to some arrangement with a colleague to split time of over Christmas with or come to some arrangement with your employer?
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Apr 1, 2013 10:27:07 GMT 1
How can it be human error, that response is so insulting and patronising. The bus runs to a timetable, stick to it, its not rocket science. If your supposed to leave a timing point at 40 minutes past leave at 40 minutes past not 38 or 39!!! Its just another case of the operators doing their own thing and bugger the passengers. They should be hammering it into the drivers and taking disciplinary action against drivers who run early. The Bus leaving at 39 is classed as on-time, the VOSA define 'on time' as from 1 minute early upto 5 minutes late.Irrespective of that, passengers are not interested in VOSA specifications, if they read the timetable and it says it leaves at 40 minutes past and it leaves at 39 minutes past its early. Why publish timetables then, if buses have leeway to run early or a bit late? This is the kind of thing that annoys passengers and that's why passengers are deserting bus services and that's why Metro want to force the QC's on the area. Operators are their own worst enemies at times, they really are. Where as I agree the need for industry operating specifications. There should be no leeway on slack operating on timetables. Passengers come first,simple as that.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 31, 2013 18:16:57 GMT 1
Also you can have the situation of a driver sitting waiting for time even though he knows just around the corner there are major roadworks that will cause 10 mins of delays. Passengers will complain about that as well. It would still be unacceptable for a bus to leave early in those circumstances. I have emailed Transdev Keighley a few times about some of their services routinely running early to which their standard, probably pre-typed response is 'human error'. Whilst this may be the case on the odd occasion, it doesn't excuse why the service controllers aren't picking up on it and why the planners aren't rescheduling the services. The other week I was on a 760 service which arrived at a timing point 4 minutes before its due time so the driver pulled up, checked the running board, then departed 2 minutes early anyway and earlier this week I ended up walking as the driver on the half hourly service I was intending to travel on sped past the timing point 3 minutes early How can it be human error, that response is so insulting and patronising. The bus runs to a timetable, stick to it, its not rocket science. If your supposed to leave a timing point at 40 minutes past leave at 40 minutes past not 38 or 39!!! Its just another case of the operators doing their own thing and bugger the passengers. They should be hammering it into the drivers and taking disciplinary action against drivers who run early.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 31, 2013 18:04:22 GMT 1
To be honest and I must stress this isn't a racist comment, To keep the cost of running these services down surely they can find a group of employees who aren't that bothered about Xmas (for example those who celebrate other religous events or people who just hate Xmas) and would be willing to work for normal rates over the Xmas/New Year period? In return they would be guaranteed to be allowed to take those days off at any time of the year for what ever they need them for, i.e for other religous celebrations. On a personal note about attitude to working over Xmas/New Year, it's a family and friends time, I'm not a driver myself by the way but in my line of work I have had to work the last 4 Xmas or New Year periods and am sick to the back teeth of having to be forced to do so, I'm refusing to do so this year and beyond. They'll find someone from some agency somewhere! Unfortunately, its the nature of the beast I'm afraid. I don't see why people have a problem with working over Christmas, the drivers know that they are in the service business and will expect to work over the holiday period,if you don't want to work over the holidays don't apply for the job or find yourself a job where you can have Christmas off!!! Its not just bus drivers is it, shop workers,hospital workers,hospitality workers all have to keep their services and business' going over the festive period for some its their busiest time of the year. On your idea about paying plain time,Boxing Day is still a Bank Holiday,so its double time I'm afraid, religious or not,it's the law!!
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 31, 2013 11:00:50 GMT 1
I always thought the Boxing Day services were a decent success. Although I must say the £4 flat fare is just bonkers. I caught the 372 home after the football match last Boxing Day, a bloke got on, the bus driver told it was £4 and he said he was only "going to Moldgreen", in the end he just went and sat down without paying and the driver just drove the bus. Its hardly attracting people to use the service is it, the £4 fare? Is it any wonder patronage decreased at £4 a shot?
Personally, I really don't see why Boxing Day should be any different from any other operating day. Just because its Christmas and a bank holiday, people still need to get about,visiting relatives,hospital visits,the shops are open and not to mention West Yorkshire has 3 professional football clubs whose fans travel by public transport,football is a Boxing Day tradition. And I don't see why there can't be train services either on Boxing Day too, they operate on New Years Day so why not Boxing day?
As I've said many many times recently there needs to be a change of attitude to the operation of bus services in West Yorkshire. There is some fella in the Holmfirth area that operates a free service on Boxing Day off his own bat from Holmfirth to Huddersfield Royal Infirmary,maybe the bigger operators should take note!!!
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 30, 2013 22:05:52 GMT 1
As i said above, if it is BBN-TOD, then it will likely continue to MCV as a seperate service but with same unit and no need to change at TOD. And what's the point in that? They might as well just run it as one service straight through or is this some kind of quirky bizarre railway anomaly?
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 30, 2013 10:26:42 GMT 1
See this is the main problem, First ticket machines include the technology for real time info but non of the other operators do,making the whole system disjointed. Either no one has it or everyone has it, its just pointless one company operating with the technology and the others just doing their own thing. This is why customers and Metro are hacked off with the bus network and expressed a desire for change. Honestly, if a normal business acted like this they would've been put out of business months ago. Its so amateurish and is not good for the network. There is need for a strategy throughout West Yorkshire to set out some objectives to be achieved asap, so what needs to happen is Metro need to develop a plan get all operators round the table, tell them what is expected and needed and see if they can take it forward. Left to their own devices the operators will not quickly implement any changes in unison or quickly enough. The thing is, Metro have set out their expectations and objectives, they're called QC's.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 30, 2013 10:04:25 GMT 1
I don't think there is any capacity issues at Victoria or they won't be as isn't Victoria getting some new platforms in its refurb?
I'm still finding it hard to believe that it'll just be a Blackburn to Tod service,surely the reinstatement and cost deserves a little better than such a poor service.The good people of Burnley won't be happy.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 23:08:01 GMT 1
If it is a Blackburn to Tod service that,quite frankly, is utter pants.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 21:26:37 GMT 1
i understand that the new H service that serves hade edge was actually won on tender by tates and stotts have then actually told metro that they would run it commercially to keep tates out of there area, of course metro jumped for joy by saving tender money, how stotts can run this service with no known revenue suprises even metro.with tates winning further tenders with the 485 it looks that they are heading north from barnsley with west yorkshire clearly in sight even there own website states they are now looking for further commercial work in west yorkshire. I'm sure they could fill in some 'gaps' in the Huddersfield area.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 21:20:41 GMT 1
It depends on whether the bus has a working transponder, the ones which have will be shown as 123 Bus Station 3 minutes whereas the ones which do not will have their timetabled time shown as 123 Bus Station 1008. Some operators seem to better than others. This is the main problem, operators operate with a varying array of models of buses,with varying degrees of age. This is why an 'across the board' approach is needed to technology and fleet modernisation. There is no point the big 2, First and Arriva, adopting real time information then smaller operators like Centrebus,Stotts and Tates not using the technology, that's just not good for anyone. This is what's holding back the bus network, the lack of a co-ordinated response to operations, everyone needs to be 'singing form the same hymn sheet' and operating to the same standards set out by Metro. Again, whether this is achieved through a 'partnership' or the much maligned QC's.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 21:08:01 GMT 1
Apologies for my defensive response 'driver6540' mate as it seems we have got off on the wrong foot.
I understand the need for an easy method of fare payment for the casual user and I can see the removal of cashless fares may,initially, cause outrage but in the long term it could be good for the transport network. An Oyster style card where a casual user could top up with, say £10, and use at their leisure with no expiry date on, would be a reasonable solution to cashless fares for the infrequent user. Also the introduction of ticket machines at busy stops could be utilised to speed up boarding and improve punctuality. I'm not for one minute suggesting that bus usage becomes 'elitist' for people who buy weekly/monthly/annual tickets, I just think new ideas could be utilised to modernise the current service and network to such an extent that it does become more and more attractive to people to use, this in turn would see and upsurge in patronage, increasing profits, service improvements and everyone is happy. We live in a 24/7 society with modern technology permeating every strand of modern life so there is no reason the public transport network can't utilise modernity.
I too also remember the old correct fare 'traps' operated by Yorkshire Rider buses and I'm not for one minute suggesting that we go back to them days as that would be a step back rather than a step forward.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 18:59:26 GMT 1
The problem with the Ripon line is that does Ripon have a large enough population to sustain a modestly frequent service? Probably not. There isn't much in between in terms of population and the station would have to be well outside of the town because the by-pass sits on the old track bed. No one said it would be easy. As for having a modest population, it does granted but, it could help develop the town and area. Besides if it was operated as a through line and rejoined up with the line to the North East it could come under the TransPennine Express operations with trains starting in Liverpool/Manchester and terminating in Newcastle/Sunderland/Middlesbrough that would be a more than sensible approach. It could also be used as good diversionary route too. Ripon is no different to Thirsk, Northallerton or Malton in respect of population, in fact it has a larger population than all 3 and both Thirsk and Northallerton/Malton put together and all 3 see regular hourly services served by TransPennine. As I said the cost's are eyewatering at the minute and it's unlikely to get off the ground anytime in the future.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 14:11:28 GMT 1
Probably Blackburn will be a good starting point for the service as opposed to either Preston or Blackpool South which is probably a bit fanciful. Are there any east facing bays at Blackburn?
I assume you are referring to 'Noticers' comment, but he doesn't say it will be a Blackburn to Tod service. He says a Blackburn to Manchester service via Tod, think SF07 has the stopping pattern spot on.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 13:02:58 GMT 1
Tod to Blackburn, where have you heard this,do you have a source/link?
The main reason for the reinstatement of the curve was to link Burnley back to Manchester. I'll be honest I find it hard to believe that they would use it for such a second rate service.
I'd be hoping for more of a Preston to Manchester service or even Blackpool South to Manchester service.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 12:56:15 GMT 1
These lines cost millions to reopen as well, so it may have been a good idea at the time to close but in reality instead of total closure mothballing would have been a good idea and save for use later. There is a campaign to reopen the Ripon line, which for tourism it could be a boon but the cost's are so prohibitive its eyewatering.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 29, 2013 12:35:06 GMT 1
Communication, communication, communication! Some companies are much better at this than others. Some post regular updates on Facebook, Twitter and their websites – some post haphazardly and inconsistently – some don't do anything at all. Some don't even answer emails! While some people have been praising Arriva, and I know they have been doing a good job with the snow recently, the communications from the Selby depot in particular are uselessly non-existent most of the time. Most people are perfectly happy to accept that sometimes things go wrong ... what matters then is what the bus company does to mitigate those problems. Early tweets and Facebook updates are essential, it's no good saying "Sorry, the 1410 isn't running" at 1425 when people have been standing around waiting for it for ages, that message needs to go out as soon as the driver/depot knows there is a problem. Real-time information systems are theoretically great, but in practical terms are often less than worthless. Why? Because they are entirely automated with no manual input or override, and are too inconsistently operational. I've often been cutting it fine going out to get my bus, don't know if it was bang on time and I've just missed it or if it's a couple of minutes late ... check the live times and it's not shown ... more often than not, that's because it's only showing scheduled times and the bus hasn't passed yet, but if I can't rely on that, what good is it? None at all.
When services are disrupted, that's when real-time information is more important than ever, and that's also when it is most likely to fail completely and just fall back on scheduled times. NO! I know when the scheduled times are, I can read the bloody timetable, I want you to tell me what's actually happening right now! The system needs to link inbound and outbound workings so that if a bus is approaching its terminus 15 minutes late and was supposed to set off on the next journey 10 minutes ago, the system recognises that that journey is going to be late before the bus sets off. There also needs to be the facility for operators to say that a particular journey has been cancelled and for them to use that facility. The reason that the railway's live timing system works and is useful is because it doesn't just fall over at the first hint of trouble, but actually goes beyond and tells you as much information as it can. I know that level of detail is probably not realistically possible or necessary for buses, but we need something a hell of a lot better than what we're getting at the moment.Isn't real time information operated via satellite tracking? I thought that's what actually made it so useful. If the bus is being tracked by a satellite then surely the info is going to be correct?
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 28, 2013 13:45:25 GMT 1
My post yesterday at 9.24 was abt the effect of QCs on drivers conditions. Metro want to screw costs down and it will be the drivers who bear the brunt Do you think the operators give two hoots about their drivers, in all honesty, its a smokescreen any kind of concern operators shown over their employees in this instance, QC or not. A partnership would be probably a more sensible and suitable option than the QC's but I think their is a lot of mistrust on behalf of Metro of the operators that they wouldn't keep their side of the bargain and I can understand this if Arriva and First have been in collusion and fined in the past, they don't do themselves any favours some operators in that respect,do they?. I just wonder if there is something that Metro have kept quite about if they are to push on with the QC's as they do seem pretty confident they could get them up and running.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 28, 2013 10:40:55 GMT 1
I suppose the biggest and most strangest casualty in the West Yorkshire area, although it wasn't closed under any recommendation by Beeching, is the Leeds New Line. The closure of the line saw a huge swathe of the Spen Valley chopped clean straight off the railway network, it is indeed to this day the largest area, population wise, without access to the rail network. Unfortunately, there is no chance of it ever re-opening as a lot of the line has been built over. A line that could be reopened is the Spen Valley Line which was separate to the Leeds New Line although they ran close together through the Spen Valley. If the Spen Line was reopened Cleckheaton,Liversedge and Heckmondwike could be put back on the railway map, the track bed is intact, aside from a small section in Cleckheaton and would be a good candidate for reopening campaign.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 28, 2013 0:51:36 GMT 1
Its easy in hindsight to lay the blame at his door, no one knew that railway would enjoy such a renaissance, he was only doing a job he was set out by the government. Suppose they used him as the fall guy, for want of a better phrase, everyone blames him. Its probably Ernest Marples who is the biggest villan of the piece. Railway was old hat and the car and motorways were seen as modern clean and forward thinking, moving Britain into a new age, shaking off its grimy pre war image.
The thing is there were some lines that closed, which in hindsight, shouldn't have closed. The old Carlisle to Waverley route which is re-opening, although not all the way to Carlisle as yet. Ripon in Yorkshire lost its line and is still marooned well away from the rail network to this day. East Lancs was cut of from Yorkshire when its 11 mile chord into Yorkshire was severed. Again the line from York to Hull was cut and its no surprise that all these lines are being campaigned to be reopened as have some of the other lines elsewhere in the country have reopened. Its a shame that the man isn't still with us to defend his policy and see whether he himself thought what he was doing was correct or whether he was just following Whitehall orders.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 27, 2013 16:16:36 GMT 1
What is quite striking about the partnership offer is that all of a sudden the operators want to assist when there is threat to their business model in the shape of the Quality Contracts. Just proving that certain operators were happy to maintain the current status quo and had no real intention to take their services forward.
Things do need to change in West Yorkshire whether this is the answer or not remains to be seen. If fares are reduced and standardised across the board it would be interesting to see if bus patronage was increased with larger profits. Would operators be poo pooing the contracts then or will Metro get the credit they deserve for such a bold step? All hypothetical I know, but as I said something needs to change.
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 27, 2013 15:32:32 GMT 1
This is it Arriva mate, we need a uniform fare system, passengers don't give two hoots which company operates the bus. As I said previously they buy a day ticket and they just want to get on a bus regardless of who operates it. People do no want to stand shivering to death in the winter letting buses fly by that would take them to where they want to go just because they've got a operator specific ticket. Its total madness really. How can that be good for a transport network and the passenger? It isn't, simple. Now before anyone says its, what about advances on the trains isn't that the same principle? Well yes and no, rail tickets are far more expensive so its probably a good thing to buy an advance fare over long distance routes as they can be expensive.
As for the Waterloo drivers they are at least trying to be fair if someone has already bought a day ticket on that route, whether they make a rod for their own back or just shouldn't be doing it is another matter, but at least its reasonably fair.
Do we actually have anyone who works for Metro who contributes on here? Maybe they could shed some light on Quality Contracts, fares and the current lamentable situation of West Yorkshire buses?
|
|
|
Post by Kenton Schweppes on Mar 27, 2013 11:51:42 GMT 1
Think that is the main gripe for passengers, operator specific tickets, to most passengers a bus is a bus and most people just want to pay once for a day ticket and get on any bus rather than thinking "oohh can I get on this bus that's coming", operator specific tickets should not even be on sale. I know the Quality Contracts are coming in for a lot of stick, but passengers have reached the end of their tethers with the bus operators,Metro's consultation to the new contracts proves that and I think this is Metro's way of trying to tackle the issue. Metro said they would cover the financial risks over the introduction of the contracts, so they've got to be worth a shot.
As for a governing body to regulate and control fares, Metro should be able to do this. They do seem to want to take things forward regarding the bus network and make some innovations. The only way we would ever know if the Quality Contracts, a revolution in fares and ticketing will be a success is to give it a try. Left to their own devices the operators will just let the service dwindle to suit their own financial needs and never make any innovations or try and improve things. To be fair to some operators in the Huddersfield area, some of the Centrebus drivers who operate the same routes as First,maybe on a night, will take a ticket bought on the same service operated by First. It would seem a good idea for operators to collude on routes where Centrebus operate the day service and First the evening services and vice a versa. This does happen in the Huddersfield area, I know First operate some of the Wakefield services on a night where Centrebus operate during the day. Maybe I'm being a bit harsh on the operators in particular First, but it just seems they seem obsessed with their own problems rather than trying to innovate and take their business models forward. There is a lot of skepticism,negativity,apathy and stagnation in the West Yorkshire bus market by the operators at the minute and if things don't change things will only get worse.
|
|