Just passing the time. I am just wondering what people would consider as the biggest service change u turns / mistakes they can remember in recent history. Examples that come to mind would be:-
When TWM withdrew the 92/93 and extended the 26 to Kingshurst.
Tried to make the 49/69 routes in a circular with the 49 terminating @ Frankley.
35 becoming a circular service and encompassing the 27 route via Bournville.
More recently the 31 route in the Gospel Oak area.
56 route terminating in Olton (with residents protesting in the street to not let them pass).
Just passing the time anyone think of any others??
Well the constant changes in the Halesowen/Old Hill/Cradley area get a bit wearing, they seem to change things when nothing is wrong with the service running in the first place. Why withdraw the 297 between Merry Hill & Halesowen and instead extend the 241 instead when the 297 was well used?
Although a while ago now, I still think TWM withdrawing the 247/248 Dudley - Stourbridge circulars was a big mistake
Quote from: Winston on September 07, 2014, 10:14:30 PM
Although a while ago now, I still think TWM withdrawing the 247/248 Dudley - Stourbridge circulars was a big mistake
Quite right Winston, the saying "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" comes to mind.
Withdrawing the 99/138
With the previous 2 examples they have not u turned on them, so can they be glassed as a mistake or just personal opinions.
Some people would probably say the 46 extension to Aston, Six Ways
Latest change on 66/66A
Reducing city-Neachells to 20 mins
Withdrawing 66 from Sutton diverting to Kingstanding certainly
Know how to kill a route.
Withdrawing 68A/68C
Provided many useful links
Fort Shopping Park to Castle Vale Walmley Sutton
Erdington
Quote from: lynx1103 on September 07, 2014, 11:22:29 PM
Latest change on 66/66A
Reducing city-Neachells to 20 mins
Withdrawing 66 from Sutton diverting to Kingstanding certainly
Know how to kill a route.
Withdrawing 68A/68C
Provided many useful links
Fort Shopping Park to Castle Vale Walmley Sutton
Erdington
Are they ever likely to u turn on that, you reckon?
When NXWM extended the 222 to halesowen, that was a big mistake for reliability. Although we did get deckers on the Sunday merry hill 222 shorts as they interworked with the 141...
Extending the 241 to merry hill...
Withdrawing the 109 and letting diamond/Ludlows climb right in...
The 637...
What about examples when they have actually U turned?
They u turned after a year or 2 on the 222
The replaced the 637 with the tendered 231
Quote from: the trainbasher on September 07, 2014, 11:37:11 PM
They u turned after a year or 2 on the 222
The replaced the 637 with the tendered 231
The 222 was only extended to Halesowen to re-instate the direct link to Russells Hall Hospital which was lost when the 247/248 were withdrawn
Quote from: the trainbasher on September 07, 2014, 11:27:26 PM
Withdrawing the 109 and letting diamond/Ludlows climb right in...
Ludlows already had the Halesowen - Merry corridor sown up, I don't remember the 109 being that busy
Quote from: Winston on September 07, 2014, 11:40:40 PM
Quote from: the trainbasher on September 07, 2014, 11:37:11 PM
They u turned after a year or 2 on the 222
The replaced the 637 with the tendered 231
he 222 was only extended to Halesowen to re-instate the direct link to Russells Hall Hospital which was lost when the 247/248 were withdrawn
And don't forget the 138 doing halesowen to the hospital in the evening...
Quote from: monkeyjoe on September 07, 2014, 10:28:30 PM
With the previous 2 examples they have not u turned on them, so can they be glassed as a mistake or just personal opinions.
I would say the 138 withdrawal has been somewhat u-turned. The 141 is essentially a 138E
The change for the 46 to serve Galton Bridge station. I wouldn't say this was necessarily a bad decision, but this decision has now somewhat been u-turned, and the 46 now runs alongside St Paul's Road/Mallin St instead of Oldbury Road. I just wish they'd make their mind up, either reroute it to serve the station, or revert it to it's original route, Holly Lane then Mallin St
110 (City Centre - Blackheath?) and as mentioned above 637 which was renumbered to 626 and withdrawn 6 months later
The 30 in Solihull. It was withdrawn at the Solihull Review and incorporated into the new S3 service, to improve reliability. After a couple of months of unreliable operation, the S3 was revised to serve the original 30 route down Danford Lane. Then when the S3 was withdrawn and taken over by Diamond, as it was commercially unviable (mainly due to the reliability issues), the 30 service was restored. And then later withdrawn and taken over by Diamond, as it was commercially unviable...
i was always a fan of the 236/237 back in my school days, would pick up right outside of the school gates, but that soon went,
Biggest for me, not to sure nxwm would class it a cock up but I would, and that was withdrawing the 129 a few years back,
they made the 238 go every 20 mins which was fine at the time as it was every 10 mins for that or the 128, but they then put the 238 back to every jhalf hour which annoyed us locals, and to anger us even more, took the 128 of us and extened the 89 to Blackheath. Now to get to bearwood or get in to Birmingham quicker than an hour and a half, we have to walk over for the 126 or change in oldbury. again the 128 and 129 was great for us locals. Evening wise we just get the 89 every hour, the 289 is pretty much useless since it only goes oldhill
Back in 2004/5 ish, they withdrew the 44S (Birmingham - Great Park) and combined the 44T / 44 with the 46 to create the cross city link Turves Green - Pheasey. However due to reliable issues the route was split again only a few months later with all journeys to Turves Green being renumbered to the 44.
Also during the 2009 South Birmingham Review, the 21 was rerouted out of the city to run via the Vale and Edgbaston Park Road towards the QE Hospital. This was unpopular however and by January 2010 it had reverted back to running towards Harbone. As we all know, by July 2010 the 21 was replaced with the X64.
Quote from: sonic84 on September 08, 2014, 06:00:11 PM
Back in 2004/5 ish, they withdrew the 44S (Birmingham - Great Park) and combined the 44T / 44 with the 46 to create the cross city link Turves Green - Pheasey. However due to reliable issues the route was split again only a few months later with all journeys to Turves Green being renumbered to the 44.
Also during the 2009 South Birmingham Review, the 21 was rerouted out of the city to run via the Vale and Edgbaston Park Road towards the QE Hospital. This was unpopular however and by January 2010 it had reverted back to running towards Harbone. As we all know, by July 2010 the 21 was replaced with the X64.
Remember all the fuss about the 21, with MPs getting involved.
The 297 extension to Stickley Estate was withdrawn, re-instated due to public pressure and has now been withdrawn again
The 68 fiasco is without doubt the best example. And there was a u turn if you piece together the buggering about they did with the 638 (38), 966, 66 (111), 71A and finally the 71 itself to try and cover their tracks. The result being that 4 corridors were tampered with and made less efficient in order to plug gaps without actually creating the end product that the 68 offered.
68, 66, 966, 638 and 71 all messed about with to no useful effect and removing several well used links. Genius.
Quote from: andy on September 08, 2014, 07:14:17 PM
The 68 fiasco is without doubt the best example. And there was a u turn if you piece together the buggering about they did with the 638 (38), 966, 66 (111), 71A and finally the 71 itself to try and cover their tracks. The result being that 4 corridors were tampered with and made less efficient in order to plug gaps without actually creating the end product that the 68 offered.
68, 66, 966, 638 and 71 all messed about with to no useful effect and removing several well used links. Genius.
Service 68 has been serving Fort shopping park successfully for 13 years since October 1997 between
Hockley/Bordesley garages
Perry barr take over it in November 2009 and decide to withdrawal it due to reliability problems
Once thing they did was transfer it there maybe if it stayed with Bordesley might be still here today.
Quote from: andy on September 08, 2014, 07:14:17 PM
The 68 fiasco is without doubt the best example. And there was a u turn if you piece together the buggering about they did with the 638 (38), 966, 66 (111), 71A and finally the 71 itself to try and cover their tracks. The result being that 4 corridors were tampered with and made less efficient in order to plug gaps without actually creating the end product that the 68 offered.
68, 66, 966, 638 and 71 all messed about with to no useful effect and removing several well used links. Genius.
Was just about to mention this myself
The 68 made no money and could not be justified in continuing
Quote from: williamposh on September 08, 2014, 10:32:36 PM
The 68 made no money and could not be justified in continuing
Evidence?
Quote from: andy on September 08, 2014, 10:35:49 PM
Quote from: williamposh on September 08, 2014, 10:32:36 PM
The 68 made no money and could not be justified in continuing
Evidence?
I guess the accountants at nxwm HQ would know that and are unlikely to share that with people. If the route was so good why has no body else had a go with it.
the 126 in town had always served the markets, then it moved to Colmore Row with all the other hagley rd buses, now it's back to the markets
Quote from: andy on September 08, 2014, 10:35:49 PM
Quote from: williamposh on September 08, 2014, 10:32:36 PM
The 68 made no money and could not be justified in continuing
Evidence?
It was also a nightmare to regulate as an Inspector at Erdington. Another bus would have been needed to make the service as reliable as a bus service should be. Buses regularly got later & later and the only easy place to adjust them was when they got to Sutton, and then if you took one out to put back on correct time if the following bus was also late you would leave a big gap for the busiest stop on the route. The extra bus would have made the route a serious loss maker.
When the service was in trouble I used to hope that two would turn up at Erdington together, which did regularly happen, as that was the easiest way to put one right without causing more disruption to passengers as you could put all the passengers on one bus and send the other to where it should be.
Quote from: Tony on September 09, 2014, 09:15:12 AM
Quote from: andy on September 08, 2014, 10:35:49 PM
Quote from: williamposh on September 08, 2014, 10:32:36 PM
The 68 made no money and could not be justified in continuing
Evidence?
It was also a nightmare to regulate as an Inspector at Erdington. Another bus would have been needed to make the service as reliable as a bus service should be. Buses regularly got later & later and the only easy place to adjust them was when they got to Sutton, and then if you took one out to put back on correct time if the following bus was also late you would leave a big gap for the busiest stop on the route. The extra bus would have made the route a serious loss maker.
When the service was in trouble I used to hope that two would turn up at Erdington together, which did regularly happen, as that was the easiest way to put one right without causing more disruption to passengers as you could put all the passengers on one bus and send the other to where it should be.
Could the frequency not have been reduced but with the route maintaining the same number of buses, thereby sorting out this reliability problem but without the need for an extra bus. I am usually a big supporter of NXWM but I do think this was a mistake by them.
Quote from: monkeyjoe on September 08, 2014, 07:07:20 PM
Quote from: sonic84 on September 08, 2014, 06:00:11 PM
Back in 2004/5 ish, they withdrew the 44S (Birmingham - Great Park) and combined the 44T / 44 with the 46 to create the cross city link Turves Green - Pheasey. However due to reliable issues the route was split again only a few months later with all journeys to Turves Green being renumbered to the 44.
Also during the 2009 South Birmingham Review, the 21 was rerouted out of the city to run via the Vale and Edgbaston Park Road towards the QE Hospital. This was unpopular however and by January 2010 it had reverted back to running towards Harbone. As we all know, by July 2010 the 21 was replaced with the X64.
Remember all the fuss about the 21, with MPs getting involved.
Yes, Gisela Stuart the MP for Edgbaston is always vocal on these matters. You can guarantee that whenever the local paper carries an article on bus route changes, you'll find Gis on the pages.
I do still find it surprising that the 21, which I think at one stage ran every 12 mins (and was more frequent than the 29) in now no more.
The thing with the 68 was that there were so many individual "useful links" that would have been lost. For the most they have been covered, albeit by rerouting other previously reasonable bus routes (ie 66 and 966) - and some would say those services have been ruined as a result, .
The only link that has been truly lost I'd say is between the Perry Common / Kingstanding / New Oscott areas acorss Sutton to Good Hope. Surely at least one route (907? or maybe a new route covering some more areas of North Brum) could extend across from these areas to the hospital?
Quote from: Mike K on September 09, 2014, 07:14:21 PM
Yes, Gisela Stuart the MP for Edgbaston is always vocal on these matters. You can guarantee that whenever the local paper carries an article on bus route changes, you'll find Gis on the pages.
Oh dear......
On the subject of cock-ups, but not necessarily service change related, NX prepared two B10Ls to replace the two B6LEs that operated the S9 service. They were painted all-over purple/blue, just a couple of weeks before the decision to award this contract to Silverline was made. Were NX so confident they would be re-awarded this contract?
The irony is that the two B6LEs ended up getting repainted and survived in service for some time at West Brom and Pensnett, outliving the two B10Ls which ended up getting withdrawn still painted purple.
Another one is that following that following the Dudley Network Review the 244 was withdrawn from Hayley Green, with the loop only being served by the 006 and 417.
However following the loss of the 242 and the 636 being cut back to Halesowen -QE Hospital again, the 244 was reinstated!
The 2009 Solihull Network Review was a disaster in parts - most routes got changed the year after. The 40A and 40C (which worked perfectly) were messed with, forming an unreliable S2 and S3. NX then lost them the next year. The 41 was shortened, and then it was soon formed into the 58 and the 73. The S8 was withdrawn in 2010 (or 2011) and NX lost the 82 to Signature after the change from the 19W/19X (former 192). The 69 was changed as well in 2009 along with the 76 and then changed again soon after. AG operated the 76 for a while did they not? The reinstated 30 never worked for NX either.
The 4 changing into the 5 worked though - the Solihull bus system is working well though now - the 76, 49, 58 etc. all work well and the 957 is a very useful link to Birmingham. Miss NX on the 40A/40C route - use to work well and at least NX did not have constant reliability issues with the Wrights (never buy Optare Solos NX).
Quote from: andy on September 08, 2014, 10:35:49 PM
Quote from: williamposh on September 08, 2014, 10:32:36 PM
The 68 made no money and could not be justified in continuing
Evidence?
It is true.
It was expensive to run being remote from all garages - more so than nearly all others.
It had some very busy sections and what NX was not good at was keeping those and ditching the poor bits.
The 333 Wolverhampton-Walsall route could be argued as a potential cock-up.
At one stage, the 333 was re-routed in the Bentley Area to serve Churchill Road, Wolverhampton Road West, Shepwell Green and the new Tesco Willenhall/Darlaston.
This was re-routed back a year later due to public demand from residents along Bentley Road North & Queen Elizabeth Avenue, however with a slight loop around Morris Avenue in Bentley. The residents on Morris Avenue & Slim Road weren't happy about this and blocked a bus off on one occasion. This loop was quite quietly dropped not long after.
Obviously since the 333 has been completely withdrawn, however earlier this year the 40 was re-routed to replace the old 333 around Portobello in Willenhall.
The withdrawal itself has been argued about by many - we now have the 9 operating every 20 minutes (up from every 30) and Sandwell Travels half-hourly 333X covering part of the route - arguably an increase in frequency along that part of the route compared to 4 buses an hour before.
Quote from: notepanel on September 09, 2014, 08:56:46 PM
The 333 Wolverhampton-Walsall route could be argued as a potential cock-up.
At one stage, the 333 was re-routed in the Bentley Area to serve Churchill Road, Wolverhampton Road West, Shepwell Green and the new Tesco Willenhall/Darlaston.
This was re-routed back a year later due to public demand from residents along Bentley Road North & Queen Elizabeth Avenue, however with a slight loop around Morris Avenue in Bentley. The residents on Morris Avenue & Slim Road weren't happy about this and blocked a bus off on one occasion. This loop was quite quietly dropped not long after.
Obviously since the 333 has been completely withdrawn, however earlier this year the 40 was re-routed to replace the old 333 around Portobello in Willenhall.
The withdrawal itself has been argued about by many - we now have the 9 operating every 20 minutes (up from every 30) and Sandwell Travels half-hourly 333X covering part of the route - arguably an increase in frequency along that part of the route compared to 4 buses an hour before.
Does anything serve that Tesco apart from the 310 & 57?
Neither of those run evening & Sundays.
Quote from: Westy on September 09, 2014, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: notepanel on September 09, 2014, 08:56:46 PM
The 333 Wolverhampton-Walsall route could be argued as a potential cock-up.
At one stage, the 333 was re-routed in the Bentley Area to serve Churchill Road, Wolverhampton Road West, Shepwell Green and the new Tesco Willenhall/Darlaston.
This was re-routed back a year later due to public demand from residents along Bentley Road North & Queen Elizabeth Avenue, however with a slight loop around Morris Avenue in Bentley. The residents on Morris Avenue & Slim Road weren't happy about this and blocked a bus off on one occasion. This loop was quite quietly dropped not long after.
Obviously since the 333 has been completely withdrawn, however earlier this year the 40 was re-routed to replace the old 333 around Portobello in Willenhall.
The withdrawal itself has been argued about by many - we now have the 9 operating every 20 minutes (up from every 30) and Sandwell Travels half-hourly 333X covering part of the route - arguably an increase in frequency along that part of the route compared to 4 buses an hour before.
Does anything serve that Tesco apart from the 310 & 57?
Neither of those run evening & Sundays.
Due to the Bentley Road South closure the 9 & 333X are again going past Tesco. I guess the 34 is the nearest evening service which isn't that far away.
Quote from: Stu on September 09, 2014, 07:26:36 PM
On the subject of cock-ups, but not necessarily service change related, NX prepared two B10Ls to replace the two B6LEs that operated the S9 service. They were painted all-over purple/blue, just a couple of weeks before the decision to award this contract to Silverline was made. Were NX so confident they would be re-awarded this contract?
The irony is that the two B6LEs ended up getting repainted and survived in service for some time at West Brom and Pensnett, outliving the two B10Ls which ended up getting withdrawn still painted purple.
Wasn't 1430 one of them? I'm quite sure that it was repainted into the latest colours? Or was it 1415? It was one of the LED ones at AG.
Quote from: Michael on September 10, 2014, 12:40:13 AM
Quote from: Stu on September 09, 2014, 07:26:36 PM
On the subject of cock-ups, but not necessarily service change related, NX prepared two B10Ls to replace the two B6LEs that operated the S9 service. They were painted all-over purple/blue, just a couple of weeks before the decision to award this contract to Silverline was made. Were NX so confident they would be re-awarded this contract?
The irony is that the two B6LEs ended up getting repainted and survived in service for some time at West Brom and Pensnett, outliving the two B10Ls which ended up getting withdrawn still painted purple.
Wasn't 1430 one of them? I'm quite sure that it was repainted into the latest colours? Or was it 1415? It was one of the LED ones at AG.
Scratch that, you were right!
Quote from: Michael on September 10, 2014, 12:43:18 AM
Quote from: Michael on September 10, 2014, 12:40:13 AM
Quote from: Stu on September 09, 2014, 07:26:36 PM
On the subject of cock-ups, but not necessarily service change related, NX prepared two B10Ls to replace the two B6LEs that operated the S9 service. They were painted all-over purple/blue, just a couple of weeks before the decision to award this contract to Silverline was made. Were NX so confident they would be re-awarded this contract?
The irony is that the two B6LEs ended up getting repainted and survived in service for some time at West Brom and Pensnett, outliving the two B10Ls which ended up getting withdrawn still painted purple.
Wasn't 1430 one of them? I'm quite sure that it was repainted into the latest colours? Or was it 1415? It was one of the LED ones at AG.
Scratch that, you were right!
1415 & 1467 are the two purple ones
Quote from: Liberator9 on September 09, 2014, 08:43:20 PM
The 2009 Solihull Network Review was a disaster in parts - most routes got changed the year after. The 40A and 40C (which worked perfectly) were messed with, forming an unreliable S2 and S3. NX then lost them the next year. The 41 was shortened, and then it was soon formed into the 58 and the 73. The S8 was withdrawn in 2010 (or 2011) and NX lost the 82 to Signature after the change from the 19W/19X (former 192). The 69 was changed as well in 2009 along with the 76 and then changed again soon after. AG operated the 76 for a while did they not? The reinstated 30 never worked for NX either.
The 4 changing into the 5 worked though - the Solihull bus system is working well though now - the 76, 49, 58 etc. all work well and the 957 is a very useful link to Birmingham. Miss NX on the 40A/40C route - use to work well and at least NX did not have constant reliability issues with the Wrights (never buy Optare Solos NX).
Yup, AG operated the 76, and YW operated the 5. Then some point after the Solihull Review, the two routes switched garages. The 76 was tinkered with a fair bit, first shortened to Kings Heath, and then extended to the QE, when the 69 got withdrawn.
That 76 has been messed around with a fair times, I seem to remember at one point as Yourbus A6y/C6y it operated all the way from the Airport to Northfield, then Damsonwood to Northfield as TWM's A6, then the Kings Heath - Northfield section was dropped and it operated to Pool Farm to replace the 35S then shortened to Kings Heath and replaced with the short lived 85 and then finally to the QE while at some point along the way dropping the Solihull - Damsonwood section.
What about the 35 when buses were taken out of Corporation Street in July 2012. The original plan was to take buses out of Sherlock Street cutting off a useful link with the Pershore Road services and accessing Chinatown. Buses were to run into town from Gooch Street onto Barford Street, left onto MacDonald Street then right to Bishop Street back onto Barford Street, buses from town operating straight along Barford Street. At some point the first U-Turn occurred before the changes actually came into force it was decided Barford Street wasn't particularly a great plan and buses into town were to operate on the existing route via Sherlock Street and from town operating from Rea Street by the Coach Street straight down Rea Street onto Bissell Street to access Gooch Street. This was the route that buses started operating, not a problem on a Sunday but come Monday morning buses started getting stuck on Bissell Street behind unloading trucks, by the time I started work at 6:30ish the route had already reverted to Sherlock Street were it has stayed since! On top of this the original route in the City replaced the 50 operating via Moor Street and back via Park Street which made the service unreliable this was thankfully changed the January to U-turn in Moor St like the 50.
Quote from: spudnick on September 10, 2014, 12:22:43 PM
That 76 has been messed around with a fair times, I seem to remember at one point as Yourbus A6y/C6y it operated all the way from the Airport to Northfield, then Damsonwood to Northfield as TWM's A6, then the Kings Heath - Northfield section was dropped and it operated to Pool Farm to replace the 35S then shortened to Kings Heath and replaced with the short lived 85 and then finally to the QE while at some point along the way dropping the Solihull - Damsonwood section.
What about the 35 when buses were taken out of Corporation Street in July 2012. The original plan was to take buses out of Sherlock Street cutting off a useful link with the Pershore Road services and accessing Chinatown. Buses were to run into town from Gooch Street onto Barford Street, left onto MacDonald Street then right to Bishop Street back onto Barford Street, buses from town operating straight along Barford Street. At some point the first U-Turn occurred before the changes actually came into force it was decided Barford Street wasn't particularly a great plan and buses into town were to operate on the existing route via Sherlock Street and from town operating from Rea Street by the Coach Street straight down Rea Street onto Bissell Street to access Gooch Street. This was the route that buses started operating, not a problem on a Sunday but come Monday morning buses started getting stuck on Bissell Street behind unloading trucks, by the time I started work at 6:30ish the route had already reverted to Sherlock Street were it has stayed since! On top of this the original route in the City replaced the 50 operating via Moor Street and back via Park Street which made the service unreliable this was thankfully changed the January to U-turn in Moor St like the 50.
The 'U-turn' had a maximum number of vehicles that could use it per hour set when it first opened which was one reason for the 35 going out via Park Street. When the 82/87 stopped using it capacity was there for the 35 to be able to.
Quote from: Westy on September 09, 2014, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: notepanel on September 09, 2014, 08:56:46 PM
The 333 Wolverhampton-Walsall route could be argued as a potential cock-up.
At one stage, the 333 was re-routed in the Bentley Area to serve Churchill Road, Wolverhampton Road West, Shepwell Green and the new Tesco Willenhall/Darlaston.
This was re-routed back a year later due to public demand from residents along Bentley Road North & Queen Elizabeth Avenue, however with a slight loop around Morris Avenue in Bentley. The residents on Morris Avenue & Slim Road weren't happy about this and blocked a bus off on one occasion. This loop was quite quietly dropped not long after.
Obviously since the 333 has been completely withdrawn, however earlier this year the 40 was re-routed to replace the old 333 around Portobello in Willenhall.
The withdrawal itself has been argued about by many - we now have the 9 operating every 20 minutes (up from every 30) and Sandwell Travels half-hourly 333X covering part of the route - arguably an increase in frequency along that part of the route compared to 4 buses an hour before.
Does anything serve that Tesco apart from the 310 & 57?
Neither of those run evening & Sundays.
Umm, the Arriva service 9 from Lodge Farm to Walsall serves the TESCO every 20 minutes, although this has already been said
Quote from: ARJ2901 on September 10, 2014, 08:24:16 PM
Quote from: Westy on September 09, 2014, 09:08:48 PM
Quote from: notepanel on September 09, 2014, 08:56:46 PM
The 333 Wolverhampton-Walsall route could be argued as a potential cock-up.
At one stage, the 333 was re-routed in the Bentley Area to serve Churchill Road, Wolverhampton Road West, Shepwell Green and the new Tesco Willenhall/Darlaston.
This was re-routed back a year later due to public demand from residents along Bentley Road North & Queen Elizabeth Avenue, however with a slight loop around Morris Avenue in Bentley. The residents on Morris Avenue & Slim Road weren't happy about this and blocked a bus off on one occasion. This loop was quite quietly dropped not long after.
Obviously since the 333 has been completely withdrawn, however earlier this year the 40 was re-routed to replace the old 333 around Portobello in Willenhall.
The withdrawal itself has been argued about by many - we now have the 9 operating every 20 minutes (up from every 30) and Sandwell Travels half-hourly 333X covering part of the route - arguably an increase in frequency along that part of the route compared to 4 buses an hour before.
Does anything serve that Tesco apart from the 310 & 57?
Neither of those run evening & Sundays.
Umm, the Arriva service 9 from Lodge Farm to Walsall serves the TESCO every 20 minutes, although this has already been said
Surely that is only while Bentley Road South is having various work done, that new bridge for instance!
Is this a u turn for bradford place. A double decker on the number 4 from Walsall
Quote from: leewhayward29 on September 11, 2014, 09:45:57 AM
Is this a u turn for bradford place. A double decker on the number 4 from Walsall
On Boxing Day I believe the 4 was almost entirely double-deck operated.
I've just thought of one.
When the 73 stop was moved to Selfridges to share with the 126, and has now been moved back to share with the 17. Having two services that follow such a similar route at complete opposite ends of Moor St. and one of them being a 30 minute frequency, who is going to choose to stand and wait for a 73 other than someone who lives around the little roads in Sheldon and Yardley that are only served by that route? I have noticed better loadings since it moved.
Quote from: JB93 on September 11, 2014, 06:32:05 PM
I've just thought of one.
When the 73 stop was moved to Selfridges to share with the 126, and has now been moved back to share with the 17. Having two services that follow such a similar route at complete opposite ends of Moor St. and one of them being a 30 minute frequency, who is going to choose to stand and wait for a 73 other than someone who lives around the little roads in Sheldon and Yardley that are only served by that route? I have noticed better loadings since it moved.
Again, there are things behind the scenes, and it is not just daft decisions.
At the time of the split Diamond were also on the 17, so the 17 stop was 'full', remember Centro allocate time slots for bus departures on city centre stops. At the time as well Moor Street Queensway used to have a lot more hold ups than it does now, and it gave the 73 which was tightly timed chance to use the u-turn and save a few minutes. now it does do the full loop it misses Solihull Station at the other end
Quote from: leewhayward29 on September 11, 2014, 09:45:57 AM
Is this a u turn for bradford place. A double decker on the number 4 from Walsall
No it means the only bus available was a decker, so it was used, otherwise the running board would have gone uncovered.
Quote from: JB93 on September 11, 2014, 06:32:05 PM
I've just thought of one.
When the 73 stop was moved to Selfridges to share with the 126, and has now been moved back to share with the 17. Having two services that follow such a similar route at complete opposite ends of Moor St. and one of them being a 30 minute frequency, who is going to choose to stand and wait for a 73 other than someone who lives around the little roads in Sheldon and Yardley that are only served by that route? I have noticed better loadings since it moved.
I think they justified that at the time by saying the 73 was getting full up by passengers that live on the 17 route and people who wanted parts of route specific to the 73 were complaining etc.
Quote from: Stuharris 6360 on September 11, 2014, 06:37:13 PM
Quote from: leewhayward29 on September 11, 2014, 09:45:57 AM
Is this a u turn for bradford place. A double decker on the number 4 from Walsall
No it means the only bus available was a decker, so it was used, otherwise the running board would have gone uncovered.
Oh thank you
Quote from: Stu on September 11, 2014, 06:21:34 PM
Quote from: leewhayward29 on September 11, 2014, 09:45:57 AM
Is this a u turn for bradford place. A double decker on the number 4 from Walsall
On Boxing Day I believe the 4 was almost entirely double-deck operated.
Correct. Fully Trident operated on Boxing day
Dudley road services to Albert street a cock up most definitely. Dale end so not suitable for so many high frequency routes, definitely need your wits about you so much going in a tight space. Not many passengers even get on at Albert St granted early days ,ok those temp really don't help the situation at all.
Myself and my colleagues think going around hotel la tour and back up the priory would help greatly.
It would give us drivers half a chance staying on time, the evening 82 running time has got no chance on keeping to time if are driving correctly. It would seem to me most passengers get to either stops at the priory or old square by using the 16 or 98/99 service as these services stop close by, nobody would miss Albert St stop to be honest.
Quote from: 2900 on June 02, 2015, 09:47:48 AM
Dudley road services to Albert street a cock up most definitely. Dale end so not suitable for so many high frequency routes, definitely need your wits about you so much going in a tight space. Not many passengers even get on at Albert St granted early days ,ok those temp really don't help the situation at all.
Myself and my colleagues think going around hotel la tour and back up the priory would help greatly.
It would give us drivers half a chance staying on time, the evening 82 running time has got no chance on keeping to time if are driving correctly. It would seem to me most passengers get to either stops at the priory or old square by using the 16 or 98/99 service as these services stop close by, nobody would miss Albert St stop to be honest.
Unfortunately man this is probably going to remain, apparently that link is necessary
(I quote from central garage thread)
Quote from: Tony on May 10, 2015, 07:49:30 PM
The reason the 82/87 currently do the complete city loop is because of the number of passengers of other routes who change onto them to get to City Hospital, hence the need to get them as close to services coming in from Digbeth & Bristol/Pershore Roads as possible.
Quote from: 2900 on June 02, 2015, 09:47:48 AM
Dudley road services to Albert street a cock up most definitely. Dale end so not suitable for so many high frequency routes, definitely need your wits about you so much going in a tight space. Not many passengers even get on at Albert St granted early days ,ok those temp really don't help the situation at all.
Myself and my colleagues think going around hotel la tour and back up the priory would help greatly.
It would give us drivers half a chance staying on time, the evening 82 running time has got no chance on keeping to time if are driving correctly. It would seem to me most passengers get to either stops at the priory or old square by using the 16 or 98/99 service as these services stop close by, nobody would miss Albert St stop to be honest.
Just those bloody temporary lights. It's chaotic when one bus decides to let the back swing out whilst loading. If pulling in properly it's okay, but I suppose with multiple service stands, it just creates chaos.
Bristol rd buses parking on the 82/87 stop doesn't help either.
Maybe the re introduction of a centre bus could be an idea like the old 101, the city council and developers should really fund this as its there doing.
Or 82/87 could turn right into Cornwall St or Edmund St then on to Margaret St, left great Charles St then normal line of route a possibility or are there more planned works in the pipe line that we don't know about yet.