Messages

Look at the date of the post you're replying to, it's from 2016!

Where's the fun in that?

It's like £25 for child

An adult advance single is £12.50...

Yesterday's first northbound 99 was 18 minutes late at Lea Hall station. It (831) had recovered to just 11 minutes late by 2pm. It made me feel all nostalgic for the Igo days!

Not sure what you mean by Pseudo proper means and we were not running registered bus routes in the 90's

At least one route was in operation. I was given a timetable for a (non school run) centro 6xx tendered route running in the Selly Oak area around 1994ish give or take a year. I went looking for it one day, one trip failed to show, the next was late. My centro pass was refused too...

Local bus services cannot run under section 19, perhaps you are confused with section 22.

You're correct, an error on my part whilst researching route registrations.

Finally read your original comment again as not once did you mention a specific route or service number, your comment was a general one aimed at igo.

Reading again, it's meaning is open to misinterpretation. "of their local service performance today, going out the way they started - running with no relation to the timetable" referred to a specific route & backed with two observations on that date - 14 minutes late & a no-show.

Guys we're losing sight of the fact several hundred people are about to lose their jobs. Our thoughts should be on those people at this time.

I've had my share, both at the hands of receivers, & the political mindset that leads to job losses (& had my fill of the ****s that make those decisions). It's not a nice place to be & I wish them well.

I too won't pursue this difference of opinion further. Arguing from different sides of the fence as to the merits or otherwise of a contractor is irrelevant against potential further job losses. (Although significant, 700 pales in comparison to the millions of job losses so far this decade). we should not propagate the situation further.

I am at a loss as to why Dave47549 should leap to the conclusion my suggestion that HCT might have stepped in was not serious

Nor me. This was taken on Friday*:


* Don't read anything into it.

Your original comment referred to when IGO started which was much more than 3 years ago. When it started it operated reliable and compliant services and as far as I am concerned did so until at least December 2015

No, it specifically referred to a local route operated by Igo/wmsnt, which commenced operation on that route sometime between April & July 2015*. If you still wish to misinterpret that, then:

- Igo (as a brand) came in by Autumn 2014
- 'Proper' wmsnt bus ops commenced by Feb 2012
- Pseudo-proper wmsnt routes were running by the mid 90's

Take your pick from those three, they all pre-date December 2015.

* I'd quote you the specific date, but, despite wmsnt holding a full op licence, it's apparently a section 19 registration, details not available online.

Sorry but that is a very misguided and ill informed comments which I think needs a response. Within only a few months of start up igo was seen to be one of the most reliable and punctual of all the small operators in the West Midlands. After only 2 years they were sat around the table with all of the larger operators discussing the long and short term future of local bus transport. What has happened over the last 3 years is to me a mystery, I wish I knew, but I am sure we will find out the real reason shortly

I'll quantify my 'ill informed' comments:

The 'local service' (& its predecessor/s) referred to is familiar to me & was something I had responsibility for compliance monitoring for under a previous operator. My job necessitated me having a working understanding of what is required to be 'compliant'.

After the transfer to WMSNT (over 3 years ago, BTW), communication was made regarding 'problems' to the depot concerned, perception of which was they were oblivious to the problems (& requirements of a commercial operation), wished to remain so, & preferably weren't to be troubled with further contact. I've seen considerable evidence of 'non-compliance' in the intervening years on the route concerned, none of which I've since 'bothered' anyone with (I've made just one journey on the route in that time - which, anecdotally, was neither compliant time-wise, nor on two other counts...).

Yesterday (Friday), I went for a walk which gave cause to observe two journeys on the service involved, this was at a quiet period with no known traffic problems:

One was 14 minutes late.

The other was a no-show.

Oh, the CT Plus reference was a light-hearted response to the equally light-hearted suggestion that Hackney CT might become interested - with some spurious basis in truth, as there has been a CT+ vehicle parked amongst withdrawn Igo vehicles for the last few months.

I'm slightly surprised Hackney Community Transport haven't stepped in.

CT Plus are 'present' in the area ;-)

If Saturday is to be their last day, then my lasting memory of them will be of their local service performance today, going out the way they started - running with no relation to the timetable.

Fair play, I wasn't sure if APH ran those or not, haven't been to the airport for a while.

Not a problem. APH still use MetroAtrocities on their run to Hams Hall & Airparks use King Wrongs & a Solo to Garrett's Green.

I assume due for APH, 6 x new Volvo 7900e due in November at Birmingham Airport:
http://www.route-one.net/magazines/emag/routeone782/page_10.html

I believe they're for BHX's own operation, covering on-site car park shuttles.

There is some truth in that, as spare paths are scarce to say the least.  The most effective way this will be tackled is when the WMR fleet grows in a couple of years.  There's no instant fix, as trains can't be spirited out of thin air overnight.

If only it were possible to quadruple that section...  :P

Moderators have anything to say about that incredibly snobbish attack?

You expected anything less from a tory?

Blah blah incomplete right-wing-wibble

Disappointing. You completely failed to include:

- Snowflake
- Anti-semite
- That was a party political broadcast by the Conservative party

Ignoring the risible comments from 'not-a-toryboy-honest!', I'll just put this up here (It's primarily dealing in monetary values, so the Thatcherites can understand) ;-)

Mike K stated that Labour's estimate for the annual cost of this is £1.4 billion, whilst the Conservatives say (based on 10 journeys per under 25 year old per week) it would be nearer £13 billion per year.

Both those figures are chicken feed in comparison with the £37bn+ estimated loss caused by congestion last year:

http://inrix.com/press-releases/scorecard-2017-uk/

So, shall we get people on sustainable public transport, or just wait your turn for your garden to be tarmacked as a car park & your house bulldozed for the next road widening scheme?

The problem here is the Labour party's understanding of the term "free". In modern Britain, "free" means somebody else pays instead of you.

Two huge problems blighting the country these days are congestion, & the Thatcherist attitude that the only commodity worthy of consideration is money.

I've just spent the last two weeks commuting in & out of Birmingham, something I've not done (by Bus at least) for over a decade. I'm a lifelong user & proponent of public transport. And do you know what? It's been absolute hell. The worst of which was a wait of almost an hour for a service that was alleged to run every 8 minutes, with the fun prospect of a trip through Saltley / Alum Rock to follow. No, actually, the worst of which is the knowledge I've got at least another 4 weeks of this torture to come.

Now, none of this pain has arisen from the Buses themselves (well, apart from 4177, a gutless knacker with a three bell load). No, the problem has been negotiating the sea of cars. The population's only going to rise & the congestion's only going to get worse - short of knocking down offices /houses etc to make room for more roads. So we HAVE to coerce potential new motorists to public transport, 18-25's are the key demographic here.

Yes, it will be expensive, but a bargain compared with any alternative.