First Bus - Wyvern

[the trainbasher]

Only way to sort the problems out with the 147 and 17 clashing is to merge the two together

[winston]

14:50 147 from Halesowen pulled onto stand F way too early causing the 17 due out at 14:45 to wait ages behind him sounding his horn before having to go around him and load at stand G

Halesowen bus station isn't big enough for the number of services serving it.

Same just happened with a 231 blocking a 4H and 244 at stand D, they had to load at stand E. You're absolutely right Winston Halesowen bus station is not fit for purpose.

They gave too much of the former bus station land back to pedestrian in front of ASDA. The location of the lay over bay means most buses that park there would need to go & turn around the island & re-enter the bus station to access their stand. The stands are too close together, they could ideally do with another two stands & at least two layover bays in a more suitable location. It all falls apart when a bus breakdowns on a stand.

[Trident 4194]

14:50 147 from Halesowen pulled onto stand F way too early causing the 17 due out at 14:45 to wait ages behind him sounding his horn before having to go around him and load at stand G

Halesowen bus station isn't big enough for the number of services serving it.

Same just happened with a 231 blocking a 4H and 244 at stand D, they had to load at stand E. You're absolutely right Winston Halesowen bus station is not fit for purpose.

I also saw the 244 and 4H pull round
And the same thing happened with the 16:50 to worcester( midland red one)

[Trident 4194]

Am I right in thinking there hasn't been a double decker on the 147 yet?

[Ashley 60171]

Am I right in thinking there hasn't been a double decker on the 147 yet?

Low hanging trees I believe

[iamwilljh92]

60311 (M516 PNA) just passed Kidderminster Town Hall!!

[47609FireFly]

Solo 53040 is now on loan to Cornwall with musings that sister 53041 may follow suit.

[Ashley 60171]

32854 showing as withdrawn on the uk buses fleetlist for First Midlands with 33042 33043 nowshowing as Worcester buses. Can anyone confirm?

[DD12]

32854 showing as withdrawn on the uk buses fleetlist for First Midlands with 33042 33043 nowshowing as Worcester buses. Can anyone confirm?

32854 has been in regular use lately, and I'm pretty sure it was today. (It might have been de-licensed for a while recently).
33042+43 are frequently swopped with WR's other deckers - mainly to allow certain maintenance I think,  (and the repair of tree damage!)   
- to all intents + purposes, two WR deckers can be considered to be outstationed at HD (most often 33042+43).
(BUT what appears on official company paperwork is anyone's guess)

33042 was in WR use a week ago, and today,  - the offside of the bus being "more dirty diesel stain than paint" . :(

[Tony]

32854 has been in regular use lately, and I'm pretty sure it was today. (It might have been de-licensed for a while recently).
33042+43 are frequently swopped with WR's other deckers - mainly to allow certain maintenance I think,  (and the repair of tree damage!)   
- to all intents + purposes, two WR deckers can be considered to be outstationed at HD (most often 33042+43).
(BUT what appears on official company paperwork is anyone's guess)

33042 was in WR use a week ago, and today,  - the offside of the bus being "more dirty diesel stain than paint" . :(

The last official First fleetlist I have dated 23/2/15 still has 32854 allocated to Worcester & 33042/3 allocated to Hereford

[j789]

32854 has been in regular use lately, and I'm pretty sure it was today. (It might have been de-licensed for a while recently).
33042+43 are frequently swopped with WR's other deckers - mainly to allow certain maintenance I think,  (and the repair of tree damage!)   
- to all intents + purposes, two WR deckers can be considered to be outstationed at HD (most often 33042+43).
(BUT what appears on official company paperwork is anyone's guess)

33042 was in WR use a week ago, and today,  - the offside of the bus being "more dirty diesel stain than paint" . :(

32854 was withdrawn several months ago with roof damage sustained at Crowngate bus station but this was subsequently repaired so the vehicle re entered service. It is a nice bus to drive (32852 is the complete opposite!)
The Gemini from Leicester (32645) is still at Worcester too so there still must be a decker short somewhere but not sure what it is. The drivers would certainly like more Geminis to be transferred as they are lovely to drive.

[Ashley 60171]

32854 was withdrawn several months ago with roof damage sustained at Crowngate bus station but this was subsequently repaired so the vehicle re entered service. It is a nice bus to drive (32852 is the complete opposite!)
The Gemini from Leicester (32645) is still at Worcester too so there still must be a decker short somewhere but not sure what it is. The drivers would certainly like more Geminis to be transferred as they are lovely to drive.

The fleetlist I looked at was dated 21/3/15 but goodness knows where they get their info from, I just thought id ask

[47609FireFly]

The fleetlist I looked at was dated 21/3/15 but goodness knows where they get their info from, I just thought id ask

To be fair, it's quite difficult to keep such a list 100% accurate for 100% of the time. As has been stated, 32854 was withdrawn for a time, following roof damage sustained at Crowngate. It was half expected that the vehicle would be replaced but in the end it was decided to repair it. Assuming the person compiling the list isn't directly involved with the company, and gathers their information from an assortment of internet sources, it's going to be quite a task to get things spot on in real time. It's a bit like "Buses" magazine having a publication date of a month later than the date it actually appears on the shelf - by the time it's on sale all sorts of fleet changes could have taken place. At the end of the day all information is provided in good faith.

Personally, I wish all operators would take the time and put fleet information on their websites. It's so easy to do. It provides a bit of transparency and also stops enthusiasts getting the wrong end of the stick by preventing wagging tongues from gossiping in the manufacture of incorrect information.

[j789]

Personally, I wish all operators would take the time and put fleet information on their websites. It's so easy to do. It provides a bit of transparency and also stops enthusiasts getting the wrong end of the stick by preventing wagging tongues from gossiping in the manufacture of incorrect information.

I agree with this. Going back 5 or 6 years ago, the TWM fleetlist on their website was excellent as it showed the Metrobuses (and other types) still going in service and also what garage they were based at which was useful if you wanted to go for a day out Metro hunting! Shame this is not maintained any longer.

[Ashley 60171]

Gemini 32645 left Worcester a few minutes ago on the 144. Did not realise that was still here.

Also Tridents 32852 and 33401 are on the 30. Last time I was here that was a single deck route.

The times ive been to Worcester ive seen at least one decker on the 30, the SD's should be an E300 and a Streetlite which interworks with the 35 at night