Service Changes August 29th 2021.

[2206]

I presume the CAZ makes operators think twice now about running routes in the City Centre

They'd have enough compliant buses surely, as the ones they currently use are compliant BC currently use the platinum buses on there and the entire fleet there is.
And 20 extra compliant into service in the next few months .

[Stu]

Not really. Its being split into 2?
98 always went into City Centre like the X20.
And what does it mean for the frequency as well between City and QE/Uni. They could have kept it going into City Centre even at a reduced 30 min frequency surely (and increase the X21/X22's), rather than split into 2.

Like I've said, at this point, there is an absence of 'full facts'. It does appear that something is going to happen with the X20, but what we don't yet know is other changes that could happen as a result of this.

Calm down, sit tight, and all will be revealed in due course.

[Steve3229vp]

Or, if you are old like me the 98 is Birmingham to Pheasey Limited Stop

Then there was 98 City (Bull Ring Bus Station) - Marston Green via Cattell Road, Lea Hall Station and Chelmsley Wood which was part of LINKWAY in November 1976

[Jack]

It's a strange one alright. When was the last time Rednal had no direct link to the City Centre?

Well the 62 was direct instead of the 98/X20 which have snaked round the QE and Edgbaston and thus increasing journey times and late running. I remember the 61, 62 and 63 all worked well, makes me wonder why bring out routes like the X62 and the infamous X64 to replace things that worked well, even the 21 was a popular service...

Calm down, sit tight, and all will be revealed in due course.

I'm sure thats when the South Brum users were saying in 2018 when there services were changed with no more than a few weeks notice... The fact is that the 55 is to have separate changes in no more than 4-6 weeks is silly (imagine the amount of timetables being changed, deforestation?) why not just wait till the stupid idea to renumber it, the 55 has been around for years, pretty sure it was to fit in with Kingshurst/Shard End (not Washwood Heath/Ward End) services...

[BBS]

58 extended to shared end isnt a bad idea

[Jack]

58 extended to shared end isnt a bad idea

It's not being extended? Its being rerouted, if it was extended it wouldn't be serving the Kingshurst terminus, unless it was completely rerouted around there.

[monkeyjoe]

Like I've said, at this point, there is an absence of 'full facts'. It does appear that something is going to happen with the X20, but what we don't yet know is other changes that could happen as a result of this.

Calm down, sit tight, and all will be revealed in due course.

I'm much more interested in reading in a sight speculation and arm chair insight than what bus was on the 97 last week, so keep it up peeps. Will be very interesting to see if is changes across whole network etc.

[2206]

Well the 62 was direct instead of the 98/X20 which have snaked round the QE and Edgbaston and thus increasing journey times and late running.

There are a lot of hospital patients/staff and university staff/students who use it on that route anyway, making it more viable, so I presume thats why they go that way. Better bus priority measures would be the answer if its reliability thats the problem I think, not splitting routes in 2. They did build the bus gate on George Road as an example of service improvement.
Would it be much quicker going via Bristol Road anyway?

the 55 has been around for years, pretty sure it was to fit in with Kingshurst/Shard End (not Washwood Heath/Ward End) services...

Not really a stupid idea to renumebr the 55 either. Why do you think it needs to fit in with the 58 when, it has nothing in common with it, thats the only 5X service about these days on this side of the city I can think of.
Makes sense for it to fit in with the 94 in Washwood Heath/Ward End, which makes up a large bulk of passengers and shares a large portion of its route with should have been done ages ago I think.

[Jack]

Not really a stupid idea to renumebr the 55 either. Why do you think it needs to fit in with the 58 when, it has nothing in common with it.
Makes sense for it to fit in with the 94 in Washwood Heath/Ward End, which makes up a large bulk of passengers and shares a large portion of its route with should have been done ages ago I think.

It's pointless, when the 72 was running to Birmingham alongside most of the 94 it was never renumbered to 92 was it? Theres nothing wrong with the numbers, people understand them and everyone gets from where they need to be... in your logic you may as well pointlessly renumber the other Saltley service... the 14. Oh it doesn't have much in common when the 55 and 58 run through the same areas... also in your logic the 71 should of been renumbered to 'fit in' with the other Kingshurst services... theres also the 53 through Shard End...

Washwood Heath Road has had 54, 55/A, 56, 72, 90 and 94 and in short distance away is the 14 and also there was a 26, and no one has ever been confused by them not being all in the same set... Never heard you complaining when there was more services along there than just the 55 and 94...

You clearly don't use the 55 past Ward End, half of the route is followed by the 94 not a large bulk, the 55 is a very popular service past the Fox and Goose, and if anything can be just as busy as the City to Ward End section, whereas the 94 past the Fox and Goose seems to drop in passengers in general...

One welcome change would be Claribels to come back onto the 55...

[2206]

It's pointless, when the 72 was running to Birmingham alongside most of the 94 it was never renumbered to 92 was it? Theres nothing wrong with the numbers, people understand them and everyone gets from where they need to be... in your logic you may as well pointlessly renumber the other Saltley service... the 14. Oh it doesn't have much in common when the 55 and 58 run through the same areas... also in your logic the 71 should of been renumbered to 'fit in' with the other Kingshurst services...

Washwood Heath Road has had 54, 55/A, 56, 72, 90 and 94 and in short distance away is the 14 and also there was a 26, and no one has ever been confused by them not being all in the same set...

You clearly don't use the 55 past Ward End, half of the route is followed by the 94 not a large bulk, the 55 is a very popular service past the Fox and Goose, and if anything can be just as busy as the City to Ward End section, whereas the 94 past the Fox and Goose seems to drop in passengers in general...

One welcome change would be Claribels to come back onto the 55...

I'm not sure what your point is none of the routes you mention even exist anymore, the 90, 72?
But it makes sense for it to be 94/95, which both run to Ward End/Washwood Heath which is a busy section and half the route. I'm not saying the 55 isn't busy beyond there though. The 55 has a joint frequency with the 94 as well on that section.
The 14 doesn't need to be renumbered when that goes to Alum Rock/Glebe Farm/Kitts Green does it and the 58 goes to Yardley and Solihull not Ward End and City so again has nothing to do with it.

Neither is there need for Claribels to come back on the 55. When there are double deckers running on this service.

Its what they've done in other areas 23/24 to Harborne, X20/X21/X22 to QE/Uni, X3/X4/X5 to Sutton and makes sense I think.

[Jack]

I'm not sure what your point is none of the routes you mention even exist anymore.
It is but it makes sense for it to be 55/94 which both run to Ward End/Washwood Heath which is a busy section. I'm not saying the 55 isn't busy beyond there though.
The 14 doesn't need to be renumbered when that goes to Alum Rock/Glebe Farm does it.

Its not exactly hard what I said, my point was Washwood Heath has had a range of numbers over the years and theres never been any confusion or need to pointlessly renumber them... If thats your opinion we may as well renumber pointlessly the 33 and 51 because they follow each other between Perry Barr and Birmingham which are busy sections of those routes and the numbers don't match, but further along the routes theres a reason why they fit in... Oh but the 14 goes to Chelmsley where for some reason every number must start with a '9_' digit...

Since you've edited your post... yes the 14 goes through those areas and also crosses the 17 at Tile Cross, and they use to when they both went to Marston Green... Yes the 58 has something to do with the 55... you may want to realise that the services that have operated through Shard End and Kingshurst have started in a '5' digit apart from the 71... Birchfield Road has had a mixed corridor back in the day like Washwood Heath Road: 33, 34, 51, 52, 56, 107...

To make it clear, if the 55 is going to 95 then may aswell change the 33 to 53 in that logic... because they have a joint frequency and follow each other on the busy sections of the route  ::)

[2206]

Since you've edited your post... yes the 14 goes through those areas and also crosses the 17 at Tile Cross, and they use to when they both went to Marston Green... Yes the 58 has something to do with the 55... you may want to realise that the services that have operated through Shard End and Kingshurst have started in a '5' digit apart from the 71... Birchfield Road has had a mixed corridor back in the day like Washwood Heath Road: 33, 34, 51, 52, 56, 107...

To make it clear, if the 55 is going to 95 then may aswell change the 33 to 53 in that logic...

Is there any particular reason why you think the services that serve Kingshurst & Shard End need to start with a 5? It may be historicly, but things change over time.
The 33 is probably to fit in with the 93X services north of Perry Barr so they'd probably want to change the whole set if they renumbered it.

[Jack]

Is there any paticular reason why you think the services that serve Kingshurst & Shard End need to start with a 5? It may be historicly, but times change.
The 33 is probably to fit in with the 93X services north of Perry Barr so they'd probably want to change the whole set if they renumbered it.

Its not what I think, its quite clear thats what has always been used for those areas and routes... Yes they may be but originally there was just the 33 and the 934, the rest was the 99* services until they was all changed again... Are you going to tell me that the X12 and X70 need to be more simple because they follow each other and have a joint frequency  ::)

[2206]

Its not what I think, its quite clear thats what has always been used for those areas and routes... Yes they may be but originally there was just the 33 and the 934, the rest was the 99* services until they was all changed again... Are you going to tell me that the X12 and X70 need to be more simple because they follow each other and have a joint frequency  ::)

I though they should have chosen better route numbers when they first introduced them. I understand X70 as it was 70 before, but not sure where X12 came from.
It should be the X90/X91 I think.

[Jack]

I though they should have chosen better route numbers when they first introduced them. I understand X70 as it was 70 before, but not sure where X12 came from.
It should be the X90/X91 I think.

Those quirks are what makes things unique... if anything the 70 should of went back to 90 when they cut it back to its old route and then X90...