First Bus - Wyvern

[markcf83]

As has been said previously, the sensible thing would be to terminate at Rubery or Longbridge for transfer onto a 63 for onward travel. However, that is one extra bus on a 30 min frequency to what running only to Catshill would be.

 It isn't beyond the realms of possibility that First want that extra bus funded by the local authority in order to run to Rubery. That way it costs them no more than the current plan to terminate at Catshill.

I can see the local authority providing this funding if no other company is willing to takeover the route.

I guess we will have to see. If it only needs one bus to run it to either of Longbridge or Rubery then I guess it will happen. 

[Justin Tyme]

It isn't beyond the realms of possibility that First want that extra bus funded by the local authority in order to run to Rubery. That way it costs them no more than the current plan to terminate at Catshill.
I can see the local authority providing this funding if no other company is willing to takeover the route.

The local authority, in the form of Worcestershire County Council, ought to provide some funding if no other company is willing to takeover the route.

I can imagine the Council saying "but the 145 and 202, which we fund, provide links between Rubery and Bromsgrove" - in which case Rubery and Catshill residents could of course say to their local County Councillors "if you want our votes next time, sort this out."

[j789]

The Worcestershire part of the service is also busier I think, it has a greater frequency and I have seen it referred to that "its been like 2 different services for some time.
Also getting signatures down on paper isn't going to cover the cost of running the service, maybe if all these people used it, it wouldn't be cut.
https://twitter.com/Professor1036/status/1512887561525551106

The current timetable also showed the 144 would run every 20 minutes Worcester to Catshill. If they keep that timetable, there's no way it would run every 30 minutes to Rubery. The 144A will become the 144.

It could however operate every 40 minutes between Catshill and Rubery and still keep with in sync with the rest of the route. This extra time could also allow it to extend to the turning circle near Longbridge station so passengers could also switch to the train for a faster trip to town.

This would still only need the one extra bus too.

[igogeneral]

A commercial service for Kev's??

No chance the amount of passengers between Catshill and Rubery is exceptionally low. No advantage to another operator unless they run Bromsgrove/Rubery and as First have registered half hourly Catshill Worcester that is very unlikely

[Stu]

No chance the amount of passengers between Catshill and Rubery is exceptionally low. No advantage to another operator unless they run Bromsgrove/Rubery and as First have registered half hourly Catshill Worcester that is very unlikely

I guess that rules Kevs out as one of the two operators here:
144 LATEST - Discussions taking place with two operators to ensure Birmingham bus service
https://bromsgrovestandard.co.uk/news/144-latest-discussions-taking-place-with-two-operators-to-ensure-birmingham-bus-service/

I still can't help but feel that if this service was so well used as many people are claiming, then First wouldn't be curtailing it "due to low patronage".

[BK63 YWP]

Maybe linked to the two streetdecks that are rumoured coming down to diamond in May?

[Stu]

Maybe linked to the two streetdecks that are rumoured coming down to diamond in May?

I'd hazard a guess that Diamond could be one of the operators involved in discussions, but I doubt that would be the reason for the double-decks!

[Steveminor]

Julian peddle predicted in a recent online discussion that he felt interurban services would be most at risk with frequency being cut back & those that run hourly at risk of being withdrawn.
It looks like his prediction is coming true, the government need to re look at the way they support the industry & quickly or predictions of 20 - 30% service reductions will come true. The kick the can down the road method of funding is simply not sustainable operators need certainty if they are to invest in the future of bus.

People (including politicians) think that private bus companies have been raking in the money, but the truth is now plain to see. A lot of services were marginal at best but were retained for the good of the "network". 
So what do you when the network or large parts of it are no longer viable the answer is to start cutting parts off, this then leads to a downward spiral of decline.
We need more political buy in to what operators want after all it's the operators that will live or die by these decisions not politicians.

[2206]

I'd hazard a guess that Diamond could be one of the operators involved in discussions, but I doubt that would be the reason for the double-decks!

Double decks for rail reps perhaps? Are there any rail replacements in the West Midlands in May

And would the new operator run it all the way to Worcester or just to Bromsgrove?

[Kevin]

Julian peddle predicted in a recent online discussion that he felt interurban services would be most at risk with frequency being cut back & those that run hourly at risk of being withdrawn.
It looks like his prediction is coming true, the government need to re look at the way they support the industry & quickly or predictions of 20 - 30% service reductions will come true. The kick the can down the road method of funding is simply not sustainable operators need certainty if they are to invest in the future of bus.

People (including politicians) think that private bus companies have been raking in the money, but the truth is now plain to see. A lot of services were marginal at best but were retained for the good of the "network".
So what do you when the network or large parts of it are no longer viable the answer is to start cutting parts off, this then leads to a downward spiral of decline.
We need more political buy in to what operators want after all it's the operators that will live or die by these decisions not politicians.

The thing is, such interurban services are a vital part of the whole idea of having a "network" of services. The fact that, in the case of the 144, it's a different company which would require a different ticket makes it practically useless to most potential users. It makes it more akin to the train in that sense, which is obviously quicker so anyone wanting to do such interurban travel by public transport will travel further to the train and use that, or just use a car.

The only real way I see to save these interurban services (purely as a passenger, zero business sense here) is to fully integrate ticketing across all companies, and indeed all forms of public transport. But that's never gonna happen in this country because there's no incentive so we'll just lose these services.

[markcf83]

Double decks for rail reps perhaps? Are there any rail replacements in the West Midlands in May

And would the new operator run it all the way to Worcester or just to Bromsgrove?

Someone suggested the 94 would get the double deckers(the Diamond operated one that is)

[Tony]

Someone suggested the 94 would get the double deckers(the Diamond operated one that is)

See Winston's reply above.

[Stu]

It looks like his prediction is coming true, the government need to re look at the way they support the industry & quickly or predictions of 20 - 30% service reductions will come true. The kick the can down the road method of funding is simply not sustainable operators need certainty if they are to invest in the future of bus.

The Government need to be encouraging people back onto public transport again - we've had two years of 'messaging' telling people to 'avoid public transport to stay safe', as well as forcing people to work from home. It's time this attitude was reversed.

I agree, bus operators need paying passengers, rather than support funding.

The thing is, such interurban services are a vital part of the whole idea of having a "network" of services. The fact that, in the case of the 144, it's a different company which would require a different ticket makes it practically useless to most potential users. It makes it more akin to the train in that sense, which is obviously quicker so anyone wanting to do such interurban travel by public transport will travel further to the train and use that, or just use a car.

The only real way I see to save these interurban services (purely as a passenger, zero business sense here) is to fully integrate ticketing across all companies, and indeed all forms of public transport. But that's never gonna happen in this country because there's no incentive so we'll just lose these services.

With regards to 'inter-urban services', I guess it really depends on the area or region. It is perhaps the case that Worcester is too far from Birmingham for a frequent direct bus service to be viable (not taking into consideration places served on the way, of course), would passengers regularly endure a near four hour round trip to commute between Worcester and Birmingham city centre for example?

And yes, the ticketing side is the other issue, especially when buses cross between different local authority areas with their own schemes.

[j789]

Just seen a post on fb from a coach and Bus week saying NXWM will be running the Longbridge - Bromsgrove section with funding from Worcestershire County Council for 6 months. Starts 3rd May.

Good news.

[Stu]

Just seen a post on fb from a coach and Bus week saying NXWM will be running the Longbridge - Bromsgrove section with funding from Worcestershire County Council for 6 months. Starts 3rd May.

Good news.

https://wmbusphotos.com/forum/index.php?msg=300766

As I stated in my reply there, I imagine this is on a "use it or lose it" basis, so it will be interesting to see how many of these 2000+ petitioners end up using this service.