April 28th Changes

[Discodave]

28th April 2013  Centro's outcome of tenders are now here...
http://www.centro.org.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.aspx?lID=11033&sID=4287
these are just renewals by the way.

Nothing to surprising, although Diamond have lost the 226 to Hansons!

Haven't Arriva also lost the 257 to NXWM?

Sorry Winston, your right. Interesting, will WN operate the evening service i wonder?

Possibly not interworking at Stourbridge 30 mins apart on departure times. Unless the timetables can be altered I was told tendered services could not have them changed (unless centro agree) maybe wrong though.

[Kevin]

I know from a business point of view it makes sense, but I find it sad that NXWM keep cancelling smaller local routes that serve local communities i.e. 651. I remember when there were a ton of these kinds of routes that zigzagged around and now they're all but gone or being operated by shoddy small bus companies that don't seem to operate to a timetable and use ancient vehicles.

651 is a bit different, only introduced to serve the Nether Hall estate when the houses were built, but no one really uses it beyond getting from Hamstead up to the Asda at Queslett

[don]

I know from a business point of view it makes sense, but I find it sad that NXWM keep cancelling smaller local routes that serve local communities i.e. 651. I remember when there were a ton of these kinds of routes that zigzagged around and now they're all but gone or being operated by shoddy small bus companies that don't seem to operate to a timetable and use ancient vehicles.

651 is a bit different, only introduced to serve the Nether Hall estate when the houses were built, but no one really uses it beyond getting from Hamstead up to the Asda at Queslett

Interesting - currently advertised as "Another phase of Nether Hall Park, a beautiful development on the outskirts of Birmingham, with excellent commuter links"  ;) I presume the 651 was meant to be a public transport link from the site (Great Barr Park) to other public transport links (railway at Hamstead - other buses to Bimingham. I guess you will have to walk across the development and get the improved 5 if you want a public transport option now. I wonder if it was a condition of the development, which has been relaxed/expired?

[Kevin]

I know from a business point of view it makes sense, but I find it sad that NXWM keep cancelling smaller local routes that serve local communities i.e. 651. I remember when there were a ton of these kinds of routes that zigzagged around and now they're all but gone or being operated by shoddy small bus companies that don't seem to operate to a timetable and use ancient vehicles.

651 is a bit different, only introduced to serve the Nether Hall estate when the houses were built, but no one really uses it beyond getting from Hamstead up to the Asda at Queslett

Interesting - currently advertised as "Another phase of Nether Hall Park, a beautiful development on the outskirts of Birmingham, with excellent commuter links"  ;) I presume the 651 was meant to be a public transport link from the site (Great Barr Park) to other public transport links (railway at Hamstead - other buses to Bimingham. I guess you will have to walk across the development and get the improved 5 if you want a public transport option now. I wonder if it was a condition of the development, which has been relaxed/expired?

It probably was, i seem to remember people who moved in got free bus passes for the first year or something like that

[JB93]

Thanks for the info guys!  :)

And maybe the 46 is being changed back to the 406 because it runs so close to PB's 46 service; Great Barr and Perry Barr aren't far from each other.
But what's with the "45 Sutton Coldfield to West Bromwich"? Do we think it's a number change for the 5, or a new service, or an alteration of the current 45 West Brom to Walsall?
I can't see it being a number change for the 5 if they've just applied branding to loads of buses.

[wbdriver]

Thanks for the info guys!  :)

And maybe the 46 is being changed back to the 406 because it runs so close to PB's 46 service; Great Barr and Perry Barr aren't far from each other.
But what's with the "45 Sutton Coldfield to West Bromwich"? Do we think it's a number change for the 5, or a new service, or an alteration of the current 45 West Brom to Walsall?
I can't see it being a number change for the 5 if they've just applied branding to loads of buses.

looking at it, the current 5 WB to Sutton looks to be changed to the 45, current 45 WB to Walsall will be the 47 and the current 47/A WB to Wednesbury will become the 43/A. But it doesn't say anything about the current 43 WB to Bilston.

it will be very confusing, as the current system only changed October in the Sandwell review and some passengers and drivers still refer to the old numbers, 451, 428 401 404 etc.

the only thing i can think of is that the 51 will change to the number 5.

as for the current branded buses on the 5, if that is the case, they will have to be rebranded as there is no room to put the 4 in front, look at the top picture here:

http://wmbusphotos.com/NXWM/4001-4224/4049.html

what a waste of money :) :)

[notepanel]

Thanks for the info guys!  :)

And maybe the 46 is being changed back to the 406 because it runs so close to PB's 46 service; Great Barr and Perry Barr aren't far from each other.
But what's with the "45 Sutton Coldfield to West Bromwich"? Do we think it's a number change for the 5, or a new service, or an alteration of the current 45 West Brom to Walsall?
I can't see it being a number change for the 5 if they've just applied branding to loads of buses.

looking at it, the current 5 WB to Sutton looks to be changed to the 45, current 45 WB to Walsall will be the 47 and the current 47/A WB to Wednesbury will become the 43/A. But it doesn't say anything about the current 43 WB to Bilston.

it will be very confusing, as the current system only changed October in the Sandwell review and some passengers and drivers still refer to the old numbers, 451, 428 401 404 etc.

the only thing i can think of is that the 51 will change to the number 5.

as for the current branded buses on the 5, if that is the case, they will have to be rebranded as there is no room to put the 4 in front, look at the top picture here:

http://wmbusphotos.com/NXWM/4001-4224/4049.html

what a waste of money :) :)

That may be the case, however I seem to remember when the services were initially registered for last October, they didn't match the service numbers that were eventually chosen.

[Ash]

These were going to b the initial numbers for the sandwell review the 404 was meant to be the 44 so very doubt they would be changing they just seem to have not changed the planned service numbers for the sandwell review to the actual ones that are used today

[JB93]

Thanks for the info guys!  :)

And maybe the 46 is being changed back to the 406 because it runs so close to PB's 46 service; Great Barr and Perry Barr aren't far from each other.
But what's with the "45 Sutton Coldfield to West Bromwich"? Do we think it's a number change for the 5, or a new service, or an alteration of the current 45 West Brom to Walsall?
I can't see it being a number change for the 5 if they've just applied branding to loads of buses.

looking at it, the current 5 WB to Sutton looks to be changed to the 45, current 45 WB to Walsall will be the 47 and the current 47/A WB to Wednesbury will become the 43/A. But it doesn't say anything about the current 43 WB to Bilston.

it will be very confusing, as the current system only changed October in the Sandwell review and some passengers and drivers still refer to the old numbers, 451, 428 401 404 etc.

the only thing i can think of is that the 51 will change to the number 5.

as for the current branded buses on the 5, if that is the case, they will have to be rebranded as there is no room to put the 4 in front, look at the top picture here:

http://wmbusphotos.com/NXWM/4001-4224/4049.html

what a waste of money :) :)

They can't renumber the 51 to 5 - as well as it being within the 0-199 number range, it crosses paths with the 5 Birmingham - Solihull route in the city centre. I still think they're gonna create a new West Brom - Sutton Coldfield route numbered 45; it just doesn't make sense to brand a load of buses for number 5 and then immediately change the number.

[Kevin]

Do the numbers given on the VOSA registrations actually matter? I only ask because , if I'm not mistaken, for the Sandwell review, the old section of the 123 (now covered by the bizzare 46 extension to Aston) is registered as 653? And the NX evening and sunday services on the 935A registered as 56A?

[jnl1984]

I can see that the 48 is to be altered? does anyone have any details of the changes, routes etc? I'm sure i have seen a 48 stop on Raddelbarn Road in Selly Oak.

[Kevin]

I can see that the 48 is to be altered? does anyone have any details of the changes, routes etc? I'm sure i have seen a 48 stop on Raddelbarn Road in Selly Oak.

Jesus, Raddlebarn road? Extended even further? That is going to be a weird convoluted route then

[danny]

PD0001111/106 - WEST MIDLANDS TRAVEL LTD T/A TRAVEL WEST MIDLANDS, 51 BORDESLEY GREEN, BIRMINGHAM, B9 4BZ
Variation Accepted: Operating between Birmingham, Corporation Street and Rubery Great Park, Parkway given service number 98 effective from 28-Apr-2013. To amend Route and Timetable.
PD0001111/383 - WEST MIDLANDS TRAVEL LTD T/A TRAVEL WEST MIDLANDS, 51 BORDESLEY GREEN, BIRMINGHAM, B9 4BZ
Variation Accepted: Operating between University Station, Queen Elizabeth Hospital and Rowley Regis Station(/Hagley Road Haley Green given service number 99/98 effective from 28-Apr-2013. To amend Route and Timetable.

Does anyone understand this registrations, won't their be a big crossover?

[the trainbasher]

I think the 99/98 registration is a hangover from the 636/637 days in that when the 637 ran to Rowley Regis station and the 636 ran to Hayley Green.

[D10]

I think the 99/98 registration is a hangover from the 636/637 days in that when the 637 ran to Rowley Regis station and the 636 ran to Hayley Green.

Spot on. As has been mentioned on other threads, VOSA do not amend the Start/Finish points on their Registration System, hence you get things like this that are a legacy of where a route ran in the past.