|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 10, 2023 18:54:54 GMT 1
Transdev have admitted that the £2 cap has only resulted in a 10% in passenger numbers, and then, only on some routes. That is an absolute disaster. I hope that the Government and Councils take note. On some routes, a £2 fare has made no difference in business whatsoever. On the 36, where the former single journey price was about the same as a starter course in a restaurant, and on the Coastliner service where the single journey price from Leeds to the East Coast was about the same as a main course in a restaurant, trade is only up by 10%. If the majority of customers at your restaurant were already getting free meals, and every other restaurant had the same offer, you wouldn't expect to see queues like that. Pensioners – who are the majority of passengers on many routes – already get free travel, so a £2 fare cap makes no difference to them. What does a 10% increase in total ridership map to when you look at the number of fare-paying passengers? I don't have numbers, but it will be a lot higher than 10%!
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Feb 10, 2023 19:00:12 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 10, 2023 19:00:40 GMT 1
Update on the changes in Wharfedale from 19 February:
Connexions will be taking on the daytime services on the Wharfedale network, with evening and Sunday services on the Otley, Weston and Newall loop being run by Flyer. The Dash will be returning back to having a good old sensible number, back as the 965. The 948 Apperley Bridge commuter services and 966 Guiseley town services will be suspended until further notice.
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Feb 10, 2023 20:04:39 GMT 1
What is becoming clear is that subsidising bus services is a waste of money. Post-pandemic, buses are mainly used by old people and students. Certainly outside what used to be the "rush" hours, which aren't anymore. Transdev have admitted that the £2 cap has only resulted in a 10% in passenger numbers, and then, only on some routes. That is an absolute disaster. I hope that the Government and Councils take note. On some routes, a £2 fare has made no difference in business whatsoever. On the 36, where the former single journey price was about the same as a starter course in a restaurant, and on the Coastliner service where the single journey price from Leeds to the East Coast was about the same as a main course in a restaurant, trade is only up by 10%. Imagine putting a board outside your restaurants and saying that all starters and mains were now only £2 and there not being a massive queue round the block. Imagine it only increasing your trade by 10% in 2 restaurants and not at all in the others. If that was the effect, you would scrap the scheme on the same day. For the Wharfedale Links services, they should scrap them all, and say to old people with bus passes - just call a taxi and send the receipt to the Council for reimbursement. It would be more cost effective than tendering, and provide a better service for old people. It's now going to be impossible to justify anymore "pimp-my-ride" buses. Cheap fares and "pimped" buses don't attract passengers. It'd be more cost effective for ENCTS pass holders should get a taxi and send the receipt to the council for reimbursement? Quite literally the most ridiculous comment I've ever seen on this forum, and that's saying something. Would you be saying the same thing if it were First, Connexions or someone else? Let's face it, we already know the answer.
|
|
o539
Forum Member
Posts: 61
|
Post by o539 on Feb 10, 2023 20:28:36 GMT 1
Ah interesting, I wonder if a similar arrangement will be taking place for the 962 once it sees the extra funding in a year or two, when the Barratt DWH housing development in Burley-In-Wharfedale has progressed to the required stage
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 10, 2023 23:07:10 GMT 1
Ah interesting, I wonder if a similar arrangement will be taking place for the 962 once it sees the extra funding in a year or two, when the Barratt DWH housing development in Burley-In-Wharfedale has progressed to the required stage I'm puzzled by this. The new development is adjacent to the A65, and so is already served not only by the off-peak 962, but by the X84 that runs every half-hour during the day and every hour during the evening 7 days a week. It doesn't look like the plan is to run the enhanced 962 through the development, just to continue running it along the route it does now. Yes, I can absolutely see the need to extend the hours of operation to cover peak hours, in order to give a connection to the railway station for commuters, but are they really saying the X84 isn't sufficient apart from that? Not that I don't want to see better bus provision, but I can think of plenty of places that I would target first.
|
|
WYBS
Forum Member
Watch-o
Posts: 1,494
|
Post by WYBS on Feb 10, 2023 23:54:57 GMT 1
I'm not too familiar with the 962 route. Is it possible to allocate deckers to it? I know it would be a squeeze in some places.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2023 0:28:49 GMT 1
Ah interesting, I wonder if a similar arrangement will be taking place for the 962 once it sees the extra funding in a year or two, when the Barratt DWH housing development in Burley-In-Wharfedale has progressed to the required stage I'm puzzled by this. The new development is adjacent to the A65, and so is already served not only by the off-peak 962, but by the X84 that runs every half-hour during the day and every hour during the evening 7 days a week. It doesn't look like the plan is to run the enhanced 962 through the development, just to continue running it along the route it does now. Yes, I can absolutely see the need to extend the hours of operation to cover peak hours, in order to give a connection to the railway station for commuters, but are they really saying the X84 isn't sufficient apart from that? Not that I don't want to see better bus provision, but I can think of plenty of places that I would target first. The S106 Funding is to do with the amount of houses being built, rather than the existing services not being sufficient enough. At least common sense has applied here & they are improving an existing service rather than running it's own bus from the development to either Ilkley or Burley Stn duplicating the current services (as has been done before with S106 routes across the country). I'm not too familiar with the 962 route. Is it possible to allocate deckers to it? I know it would be a squeeze in some places. Low Bridge at Ben Rhydding Station, unless they used the X84 route via Valley Dr
|
|
joseph
Forum Member
Posts: 1,142
|
Post by joseph on Feb 11, 2023 7:14:05 GMT 1
If the A2 is funded by WYCA, in order to provide some cover for the soon to be lost 966 it would make more sense for them to divert that via part of the 966 route in the Yeadon area, say run round Warm Lane and Westfield loop first before coming back down to Henshaw Lane as it's quite a walk for some houses to the nearest bus stops up by Westfield terminus or Leeds Road by JCT/Sainsburys, and hilly depending on where you walk too. They could also have it do a loop on the Haw Lane estate before turning along Cemetery Road direct to the airport, both diversions would only add 5 to 10 minutes to the timetable and it'd take up a lot of the bits needing a bus due to distance from the nearest stop and/or terrain. On the flip side it wouldn't need to be hourly diversions, say both alternate to do 2 hourly each.
|
|
|
Post by stephen01 on Feb 11, 2023 8:39:59 GMT 1
If the A2 is funded by WYCA, in order to provide some cover for the soon to be lost 966 it would make more sense for them to divert that via part of the 966 route in the Yeadon area, say run round Warm Lane and Westfield loop first before coming back down to Henshaw Lane as it's quite a walk for some houses to the nearest bus stops up by Westfield terminus or Leeds Road by JCT/Sainsburys, and hilly depending on where you walk too. They could also have it do a loop on the Haw Lane estate before turning along Cemetery Road direct to the airport, both diversions would only add 5 to 10 minutes to the timetable and it'd take up a lot of the bits needing a bus due to distance from the nearest stop and/or terrain. On the flip side it wouldn't need to be hourly diversions, say both alternate to do 2 hourly each. The A3 would be the better bet for that idea as it could be built in to the 967's tender as that would only require 2 extra drivers per roster whereas if you to add it on to A2 you'll be looking at at least an additional 4 drivers per roster given how long the A2 is currently which in the current situation around Driver Shortages an additional 2 drivers per roster would be the realistic & practical option
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Feb 11, 2023 9:20:38 GMT 1
You'd struggle to get a Flyer Versa round the Haw Avenue bit of the 966. Solo's are bad enough.
|
|
|
Post by stephen01 on Feb 11, 2023 9:28:30 GMT 1
You'd struggle to get a Flyer Versa round the Haw Avenue bit of the 966. Solo's are bad enough. Would Mellors fit.
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Feb 11, 2023 9:48:15 GMT 1
The 948, 966 would be ideal for the Flyer depot to run, and then the same bus could then do the evening 967 trips that they’ve picked up. Could allocate one minibus in generic grey to that depot.
Presumably Transdev have just not bid at all for those routes as they don’t have the drivers
|
|
joseph
Forum Member
Posts: 1,142
|
Post by joseph on Feb 11, 2023 10:40:39 GMT 1
Another possibility could be for the new 965 to run to Guiseley every 2 hours (with alternative 2 hourly buses still serving Menston) via West Chevin, the road past the back of Guiseley station to Oxford Road and back along Otley Road to Ings Road back on itself to West Chevin. With no short cuts it's a bit of a walk otherwise to the main shopping area in Guiseley and new links to Otley are provided.
|
|
o539
Forum Member
Posts: 61
|
Post by o539 on Feb 11, 2023 12:19:22 GMT 1
Ah interesting, I wonder if a similar arrangement will be taking place for the 962 once it sees the extra funding in a year or two, when the Barratt DWH housing development in Burley-In-Wharfedale has progressed to the required stage I'm puzzled by this. The new development is adjacent to the A65, and so is already served not only by the off-peak 962, but by the X84 that runs every half-hour during the day and every hour during the evening 7 days a week. It doesn't look like the plan is to run the enhanced 962 through the development, just to continue running it along the route it does now. Yes, I can absolutely see the need to extend the hours of operation to cover peak hours, in order to give a connection to the railway station for commuters, but are they really saying the X84 isn't sufficient apart from that? Not that I don't want to see better bus provision, but I can think of plenty of places that I would target first. The enhanced 962 *will* be going through the new housing development, in a loop, it says as much on the plans and S106 agreement submitted to the council. Although the improvements will only happen once 100 houses have been occupied. The additional funds required to do this, and also extend the operating hours and frequency to every 30 minutes, is paid for by the developer themselves.
|
|
|
Post by SCH117X on Feb 11, 2023 12:45:21 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 11, 2023 19:14:06 GMT 1
I'm not too familiar with the 962 route. Is it possible to allocate deckers to it? I know it would be a squeeze in some places. Low Bridge at Ben Rhydding Station, unless they used the X84 route via Valley Dr The 962 doesn't run under the bridge at Ben Rhydding ... on the Otley-to-Ilkley section of the route, it runs along Leeds Road ... on the Ilkley-town-service section of the route, it loops around Ben Rhydding but stays south of the railway line. There aren't any other bridges over the route, although there are some pretty tight residential roads where a double decker might struggle – although not as much as a full-size saloon! From looking at Flickr, it doesn't look like either Transdev or Connexions before them have ever used anything bigger than a Solo or baby Dart on the route.
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Feb 11, 2023 19:20:22 GMT 1
I'm not too familiar with the 962 route. Is it possible to allocate deckers to it? I know it would be a squeeze in some places. Low Bridge at Ben Rhydding Station, unless they used the X84 route via Valley Dr 962 doesn't go under the low bridge at Ben Rhydding, but given the use of nothing bigger than a Solo for the majority of Keighley's operation of it (and Connexions before that), I would imagine low hanging tree branches would be a significant issue. Also sections of route such as Aireville Terrace and Rose Bank in Burley and parts of the Hebers Ghyll loop are tight for a Solo. A decker would be a real challenge.
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Feb 11, 2023 19:21:21 GMT 1
You'd struggle to get a Flyer Versa round the Haw Avenue bit of the 966. Solo's are bad enough. Would Mellors fit. Mellor's would be ok.
|
|
|
Post by Burnside on Feb 11, 2023 19:23:06 GMT 1
Low Bridge at Ben Rhydding Station, unless they used the X84 route via Valley Dr The 962 doesn't run under the bridge at Ben Rhydding ... on the Otley-to-Ilkley section of the route, it runs along Leeds Road ... on the Ilkley-town-service section of the route, it loops around Ben Rhydding but stays south of the railway line. There aren't any other bridges over the route, although there are some pretty tight residential roads where a double decker might struggle – although not as much as a full-size saloon! From looking at Flickr, it doesn't look like either Transdev or Connexions before them have ever used anything bigger than a Solo or baby Dart on the route. Apparently Connexions once or twice used a full length Scania single decker in place of a Solo, but I can't imagine any of their drivers wanting that to be a regular occurrence.
|
|
|
Post by stephen01 on Feb 11, 2023 20:40:30 GMT 1
The 962 doesn't run under the bridge at Ben Rhydding ... on the Otley-to-Ilkley section of the route, it runs along Leeds Road ... on the Ilkley-town-service section of the route, it loops around Ben Rhydding but stays south of the railway line. There aren't any other bridges over the route, although there are some pretty tight residential roads where a double decker might struggle – although not as much as a full-size saloon! From looking at Flickr, it doesn't look like either Transdev or Connexions before them have ever used anything bigger than a Solo or baby Dart on the route. Apparently Connexions once or twice used a full length Scania single decker in place of a Solo, but I can't imagine any of their drivers wanting that to be a regular occurrence. So they may get more Solos or a couple of e200s(MMCs). Could Evoultions or EvoRas. If not will have to be Stratas as a maximum.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 11, 2023 21:06:59 GMT 1
Low Bridge at Ben Rhydding Station, unless they used the X84 route via Valley Dr 962 doesn't go under the low bridge at Ben Rhydding, but given the use of nothing bigger than a Solo for the majority of Keighley's operation of it (and Connexions before that), I would imagine low hanging tree branches would be a significant issue. Also sections of route such as Aireville Terrace and Rose Bank in Burley and parts of the Hebers Ghyll loop are tight for a Solo. A decker would be a real challenge. My mistake, I remembered that it used Bolling Rd so assumed it went under the bridge forgetting that it's part of the loop it does after serving Ilkley Centre Apparently Connexions once or twice used a full length Scania single decker in place of a Solo, but I can't imagine any of their drivers wanting that to be a regular occurrence. So they may get more Solos or a couple of e200s(MMCs). Could Evoultions or EvoRas. If not will have to be Stratas as a maximum. The EvoRas that are due are around the same length as the Scania/Wright Single deckers,so if they fit the MCVs would also (but i think the MCVs have already been confirmed for route 13?).I Think it's most likely they'll get a couple of second hand Solos or SRs
|
|
|
Post by stevieinselby on Feb 11, 2023 21:15:19 GMT 1
I Think it's most likely they'll get a couple of second hand Solos or SRs Maybe they could see if P&O Lloyd will sell them back the Solo SRs they had last time they had the Wharfedale routes 😆
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Feb 11, 2023 22:27:46 GMT 1
Optare Solo SR NK61 DBZ and NK61 FMD have been acquired from Go North East, although they’ll need at least another two
I’m not sure why people keep suggesting full sized buses for what are obviously minibus routes
|
|
o539
Forum Member
Posts: 61
|
Post by o539 on Feb 12, 2023 11:15:18 GMT 1
Optare Solo SR NK61 DBZ and NK61 FMD have been acquired from Go North East, although they’ll need at least another two I’m not sure why people keep suggesting full sized buses for what are obviously minibus routes I second this, particularly with the 962 and the temporarily suspended 966, you can just about get a Solo or a Mini Dart around those routes, let alone anything larger. You could probably fit a Scania or similarly sized Evora round the 962 at a push but it's not necessarily ideal. The 965 (Otley Dash) won't have a problem with any larger vehicles as they used to run double deckers on the route in years gone by. From what I've heard, like some others have just said, Connexionsbuses have bought 4 or 5 Ex Go-Ahead North East Solo SR's for all the new routes, likewise I believe that the new MCV Evora is probably for the 11 route in Leeds city centre since that ideally requires Euro 6 vehicles.
|
|