Pensnett Garage

[Tony]

Ok but it is a regular occurrence at that timing. Every week it happens. I guarantee it will next week too.

What about the other driver? Was he in the same boat?

Of course, do you really think drivers can just sit there thinking 'Oh I'll leave really late now and *** the public stood there waiting while under the watchful eye of both NXWM inspector and TfWM staff who also don't want buses parked up blocking their Bus Station?

[karl724223]

And gps tracking systems
And CCTV cameras on buses

Kermit

[Trident 4194]

And gps tracking systems
And CCTV cameras on buses

Kermit

That's another thing, the bus says due and then dissapearing of the boards when they go and park up???

[John]

Ok but it is a regular occurrence at that timing. Every week it happens. I guarantee it will next week too.

Because the same bus is sat in the same traffic at the same time every day. Some days, traffic might not be as bad as others but it will still affect the bus to some degree

[Trident 4194]

Because the same bus is sat in the same traffic at the same time every day. Some days, traffic might not be as bad as others but it will still affect the bus to some degree

Fair enough, I'll stop my rant, and let's face that's what the general public think when bus parks up.

[MW]

Fair enough, I'll stop my rant, and let's face that's what the general public think when bus parks up.

You're extremely narrow minded my friend

[karl724223]

A bus doesn't just think oh sod it I'll park up and have a rest
1 it's a timetabled break
2 driver got to have a legal Rta break
3 brokedown
4 no driver for whatever reason
5 driver needs to go to the bog


Gonzo

[the trainbasher]

Don't forget #6 - all of the above and #7 - it's a diamond bus having a burning desire to see what it's like Roasted

[don]

A bus doesn't just think oh sod it I'll park up and have a rest
1 it's a timetabled break
2 driver got to have a legal Rta break
3 brokedown
4 no driver for whatever reason
5 driver needs to go to the bog


Gonzo

I recall in the olden days it wasn't uncommon for Birmingham all night service drivers to pull there bus up at the City terminus shut the doors and read the paper or a book for ten minutes whilst the passengers froze outside in the rain and snow for ten mins until just before departure time when they'd dein to let those annoying passengers on!!

Are you suggesting this sort of thing still happens Trident 4194?

[GeminiFan1991]

Is garage space the reason why PN don't operate the 257 ?

I had a look at its map view and it's some distance from WN and PN is practically in the middle of the route So from a dead mileage standpoint, it seems the better candidate.

[the trainbasher]

On the other hand, interworking it with the 256 means that it makes for a more efficient service

[Roy]

Is garage space the reason why PN don't operate the 257 ?

I had a look at its map view and it's some distance from WN and PN is practically in the middle of the route So from a dead mileage standpoint, it seems the better candidate.

The 256 and 257 used to be two separate services, with the 256 operated by WN and 257 by PN.  They were both timed to take just under an hour in each direction meaning that each needed 4 buses for a 30 minute frequency.  However, both services were very unreliable and more than an hour was needed on each journey on both services.  Had they remained separate, they would have needed 5 buses each.  Interworking the 256 and 257 at Stourbridge means that the two services can be worked using 9 buses during the day.  Traffic delays in the evening have also been resolved by interworking the 255 and 256 at Wolverhampton after 4.20 pm, meaning that services 255, 256 and 257 need 17 buses for most of the day and 18 buses in the evening rush hour.

[Stuharris 6360]

The 256 and 257 used to be two separate services, with the 256 operated by WN and 257 by PN.  They were both timed to take just under an hour in each direction meaning that each needed 4 buses for a 30 minute frequency.  However, both services were very unreliable and more than an hour was needed on each journey on both services.  Had they remained separate, they would have needed 5 buses each.  Interworking the 256 and 257 at Stourbridge means that the two services can be worked using 9 buses during the day.  Traffic delays in the evening have also been resolved by interworking the 255 and 256 at Wolverhampton after 4.20 pm, meaning that services 255, 256 and 257 need 17 buses for most of the day and 18 buses in the evening rush hour.

Possibly the 256/7 should be operated by both WN and PN, how logistical that is though i don't know. Certainly in the late 70s, early 80s, the Stourbridge - Wolverhampton services (551, 555, 556) were operated jointly by SE and CR.

Certainly these days, NE don't seem keen on services being operated by more than one garage for some strange reason?

[Roy]

If you go back 30 to 50 years, most bus companies operated bus services from garages at either end of the route.  I grew up in Bristol where all cross city routes were shared by 2 garages.  In addition, all buses ran back to the depot by running in service until they reached the point on the route closest to the depot, thus cutting down on dead mileage.  This way of operating ended in Bristol 50 years ago when all routes became the responsibility of one depot and buses ran dead from the terminus, and this practice seems to be used by the majority of bus companies these days.  In some ways, it makes it easier for the passenger as they know who to contact if they have a complaint or have lost property.

There are probably a lot of NXWM routes in the West Midlands that could be shared between depots, - X1, 4/4H/4M, 9, X10, 51, X51, 81 (WN), 74, 87, 120, 126, 140, 529, etc. etc. etc.  However, most bus companies favour the current system, so why change it?  It works.

[Stuharris 6360]

If you go back 30 to 50 years, most bus companies operated bus services from garages at either end of the route.  I grew up in Bristol where all cross city routes were shared by 2 garages.  In addition, all buses ran back to the depot by running in service until they reached the point on the route closest to the depot, thus cutting down on dead mileage.  This way of operating ended in Bristol 50 years ago when all routes became the responsibility of one depot and buses ran dead from the terminus, and this practice seems to be used by the majority of bus companies these days.  In some ways, it makes it easier for the passenger as they know who to contact if they have a complaint or have lost property.

There are probably a lot of NXWM routes in the West Midlands that could be shared between depots, - X1, 4/4H/4M, 9, X10, 51, X51, 81 (WN), 74, 87, 120, 126, 140, 529, etc. etc. etc.  However, most bus companies favour the current system, so why change it?  It works.

I agree @Roy that it works, however I would have thought that cutting down on dead mileage will save fuel costs, therefore cutting fare increases.