Connexions Buses (Harrogate Coach Travel)

[YorkRailFan]

Meant the former referring to the Enviros so Y100HOB.

That would be a downgrade in terms of capacity, I believe the largest ADL 200 has a seated capacity of 46, compared to 58 that the Wright Solars have (which are usually operated on the 13) and significantly less than the OmniDekkas have (which also operate on the 13.)

 

[Trainman40083]

That would be a downgrade in terms of capacity, I believe the largest ADL 200 has a seated capacity of 46, compared to 58 that the Wright Solars have (which are usually operated on the 13) and significantly less than the OmniDekkas have (which also operate on the 13.)

Y100HOB is a Volvo B8RLE/MCV EvoRa not an Enviro 200.

 

[Leedsbusman]

That would be a downgrade in terms of capacity, I believe the largest ADL 200 has a seated capacity of 46, compared to 58 that the Wright Solars have (which are usually operated on the 13) and significantly less than the OmniDekkas have (which also operate on the 13.)

58 seats in a Wright Solar?

 

[SCH117X]

That would be a downgrade in terms of capacity, I believe the largest ADL 200 has a seated capacity of 46, compared to 58 that the Wright Solars have (which are usually operated on the 13) and significantly less than the OmniDekkas have (which also operate on the 13.)

Sorry meant Evora

 

[Andyh82]

58 seats in a Wright Solar?

The only way there would be 58 seats in a Wright Solar is if it had 3+2 school bus specification!

 

[M60lad]

Do Connexionbuses have any coaches in their fleet? I'm pretty sure the other weekend when the big rail replacement job was on in York I saw a number of coaches with ConnexionCoaches names but I can't seem to find a fleet list anywhere that lists the coaches owned unless they were just leased for the weekend.

 

[YorkRailFan]

Sorry meant Evora

So they're getting 2 extra Evoras for the 13 and unrelated to that they've received an ADL 200?

 

[SCH117X]

So they're getting 2 extra Evoras for the 13 and unrelated to that they've received an ADL 200?

Yes they have a ADL200, which so far has been used on the Seacroft services, and two Evoras from Hulleys - the older of the Evoras is apparently being painted for 13, time will tell whether the other one will be. It will be Y100HOBs thrid different livery in a year having only been repainted last autumn to the Go Coach based livery Hulleys adoped. It looks like the newer one, BV23NVH, was never painted in the old Hulleys livery being in dealership white for a year until receiving the Go Coach based livery.

 

[Pyewipecarshed]

Do Connexionbuses have any coaches in their fleet? I'm pretty sure the other weekend when the big rail replacement job was on in York I saw a number of coaches with ConnexionCoaches names but I can't seem to find a fleet list anywhere that lists the coaches owned unless they were just leased for the weekend.

The website says that they have coaches for hire up to 55 seats, complete with photos of a coach. However they haven't added it/them to the fleet list page as yet.
YT09 FLZ is the coach in the photo, link to the page below;

Coach and bus hire - Connexions

www.connexionsbuses.com

 

[Jimmi]

The website says that they have coaches for hire up to 55 seats, complete with photos of a coach. However they haven't added it/them to the fleet list page as yet.
YT09 FLZ is the coach in the photo, link to the page below;

Coach and bus hire - Connexions

www.connexionsbuses.com

That was the one running in York on Rail Replacement duties the other week, now with 'ConnexionsCoach' vinyls and re-registered as 5385WX

Connexionsbuses: 5385WX

Connexionsbuses - 5385 WX seen in York operating Rail Replacement services on March 23rd 2025

www.flickr.com

 

[citybus2500]

The website says that they have coaches for hire up to 55 seats, complete with photos of a coach. However they haven't added it/them to the fleet list page as yet.
YT09 FLZ is the coach in the photo, link to the page below;

Coach and bus hire - Connexions

www.connexionsbuses.com

They've had it since last summer, allegedly.

 

[SCH117X]

Niot exactly foolproof but YT09 FLZ is the only Connexions Coach that comes up on Flickr when you search for that.

A photo has appeared on Facebook of ex Hulleys Enviro YX12DHN working the 22 in full Hulleys livery including Hulley fleetnames.

 

[Pyewipecarshed]

That was the one running in York on Rail Replacement duties the other week, now with 'ConnexionsCoach' vinyls and re-registered as 5385WX

Connexionsbuses: 5385WX

Connexionsbuses - 5385 WX seen in York operating Rail Replacement services on March 23rd 2025

www.flickr.com

Yes, DVLA are showing it was re-registered on the 27th February, or at least that's when its latest V5C was issued.

 

[Seehof]

I happen to be in York yesterday and was surprised to see York Pullman had taken over the 16s! It did seem to running quite late though. That had been kept quiet in the local media or have I missed something? Is it likely that they or Transdev will be after the 13s now as well?!

 

[Leedsbusman]

I happen to be in York yesterday and was surprised to see York Pullman had taken over the 16s! It did seem to running quite late though. That had been kept quiet in the local media or have I missed something? Is it likely that they or Transdev will be after the 13s now as well?!

I suppose it depends on what media you read but I’ve seen plenty on line about it. If the 13 is ever put out to tender I’m sure all local operators would consider it - but as Connexions have just bought an Evora for it, I doubt they are planning to pull it!

 

[SCH117X]

I happen to be in York yesterday and was surprised to see York Pullman had taken over the 16s! It did seem to running quite late though. That had been kept quiet in the local media or have I missed something? Is it likely that they or Transdev will be after the 13s now as well?!

itravel york says the 16 has a new timetable but unhelpfully opens up one headed Connexions. Their is one on York Pullmans web site with journyes running upto 20 later - https://www.yorkpullmanbus.co.uk/local-bus/my16/

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 8 Apr 2025 ==

The 13 is tendered on Saturdays and some sections are Mon-Fri

 

[stevieinselby]

I happen to be in York yesterday and was surprised to see York Pullman had taken over the 16s! It did seem to running quite late though. That had been kept quiet in the local media or have I missed something? Is it likely that they or Transdev will be after the 13s now as well?!

It isn't unusual to find routes run a little bit late on their first few days in service, as drivers are getting used to them and passengers may have questions about the new timetable. The roadworks around the station aren't helping either. Looks like they've had some slight delays earlier today around Acomb but are getting back on track now.

I doubt Connexions voluntarily relinquished this service – the contract was up for renewal and Pullman won the bid.
Most of the weekday 13 is commercial, so a tender for Saturday journeys only may not be as attractive. I'm not even sure if that one goes through a full tender or if it's just a de minimis payment for the extra bits.
If anyone was likely to go for 13, my money would be on Go-Ahead, because it ties in quite nicely with the 12/14 that they already run, but I doubt anyone will go head-to-head with Connexions for it because it isn't that valuable!

 

[YorkRailFan]

It isn't unusual to find routes run a little bit late on their first few days in service, as drivers are getting used to them and passengers may have questions about the new timetable. The roadworks around the station aren't helping either. Looks like they've had some slight delays earlier today around Acomb but are getting back on track now.

The roads around Holly Bank and Ascot Way are known for being tight with lots of parked cars, a problem faced by any operator for the 16.

 

[stevieinselby]

The roads around Holly Bank and Ascot Way are known for being tight with lots of parked cars, a problem faced by any operator for the 16.

Quite. Although Holly Bank at least has in the past had bigger buses used on it regularly in various previous incarnations as part of the 5, 13A and 44. (Not that that means it's a good idea!)

 

[YorkRailFan]

Y100 HOB (fleet number 100), formerly Hulley's, now wears the 'Super13' livery and entered service on the route yesterday.
Edit: Today. BV23 NVH (fleet number NVH), ex Hulley's, has also entered service on the 'Super13' as of today, also wearing the route branded livery. BZT (Wright Solar) has now been sent off for preservation.

Quite. Although Holly Bank at least has in the past had bigger buses used on it regularly in various previous incarnations as part of the 5, 13A and 44. (Not that that means it's a good idea!)

Prior to the adjustments of the 16 in September 2024, Connexions did sometimes use a Solar on the route. No idea how that managed Holly Bank!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 May 2025 ==

From 19 May, Connexions have announced minor timing changes to the 64:

We've got some slight changes to the64 times to try and improve the reliability. These are from 19th may and affect the journeys listed on the notice above

Timetable changes to the64 - Connexions

www.connexionsbuses.com

The 412 timetable is changing from 2nd June:

412 times are changing from 2nd June.

We are doing this to try and improve the timekeeping, and it also makes the times easier to remember.

New timetables will be available to pick up from on the bus from 27th May.

Most times are changing so please check the timetable

Timetable changes to 412 service from 2nd June - Connexions

www.connexionsbuses.com

No sign of a return for the Saturday service unfortunately.

NLD has been removed and UJY has been repainted from Nottingham City Transport livery into Connexions' green & white livery. Connexions has gained another Scania OmniDekka, registered YN04 GJY, formerly of Cango Travel, still in Go North East livery.

 

[tigerdoyen]

The raw data is probably of no use at all to an 'ordinary person off the streets', it's what companies do with that data which brings significant benefits for passengers. Ie you say about passengers caring if the bus runs to time, thanks to bus open data making vehicle tracking more open, people can see how on time their bus is on sites such as bustimes.org and a few other sites. Just 1 example but there are far more examples of bus open data benefitting passengers, they just don't know about it.

There are significant flaws in BODS, which along with CPT, other SME, ALBUM operators and KPMG, I am trying to get rectified.
Other issues - such as you quote with X4 arose because the bus stops in Wedderburn were not on NAPTAN they didn't exist as stops, so the service couldn't be input. When the stops were put on the system, no-one tells us they have, we have to accidentally find out by ourselves by looking on Google maps randomly. GPS drift affected service on time performance, which is what the TC looks at when assessing on time performance of operators. For example, if our X12 sits on a stop in Harrogate Bus Station for 12 minutes, it leaves the bus station up to 5 times despite the bus not moving, This registers as an early departure despite the bus having not moved. Nu-venture in Kent have run two ticket machines on the same bus and both have generated totally different GPS results -so whilst this is still occurring and not cured, BODS is not a reliable source of info. We use mytrip - which is far more reliable for tracking than BODS and ticketer even though it uses the same data. I'm also on a board that's trying to work with previous KPMG employees who are trying to set up a more logical and easy to use tool instead of BODS (which after 3 years plus is still not working correctly- and however many tens on millions of our tax money used).
I had KPMG, DFT and DVSA to my office about a year ago to show them flaws in the BODS system. The chief designer at KPMG didn't even understand how timetables were made up, how it interacted with ticketer and why only certain stops were timing points. This shows what we are trying to work with.
Regarding non upload of timetables to BODS - we have to input every single stop onto ticketer for new routes such as 21/22, make them into a route and then add the times for every stop for every journey. For people such as yourself, who clearly have plenty of time to look daily at BODS data, this is fine. For operators such as us, driving a school am/pm and working 6 days a week 70 plus hours just to do what is needed daily, its more of a challenge. We always have these available on BODS before services start - we even try to get non-registered school buses on there so that they show on our app (which is more challenging than you may realise without them exporting to BODS and skewing the on-time data).
I presume you've been an operator? Its the only way you could possibly comment with the full information before taking to this forum with such accusations,
We get (presumably from you, although there is no way to reply when its done anonymously) comments from the BODS users about bus stops. One such comment is always that we don't have Christ Church on the X70 on our BODS data - stop missing it says. I can't reply to anonymous to say we don't stop there outbound -Wetherby buses didn't going back to Harrogate & District days and we still don't for safety reasons due to having to cross the queuing traffic to turn right at the roundabout, so every time I publish BODS, it gets repeated, I've even been back to BODS and asked them to get in touch with the sender, but they can't as its anonymous!
Please feel free to brush off your passport and come to Yorkshire - come to our office and see how often we sit doing nothing when we could be playing with BODS data.

 

[markymark2000]

Other issues - such as you quote with X4 arose because the bus stops in Wedderburn were not on NAPTAN they didn't exist as stops, so the service couldn't be input. When the stops were put on the system, no-one tells us they have, we have to accidentally find out by ourselves by looking on Google maps randomly.

Agreed there were issues on the X4 and I'm glad that the council sorted these in Naptan. It may be worth you trying Elydiums Naptan viewer which has a full map showing all of the stops in Naptan, both active and inactive. This may help you going forward to find stops which aren't present on google maps. In relation to this and your KPMG comments, I agree there are external issues and where this is the case, I don't make any criticisms of the operator as it's things not within their control.

GPS drift affected service on time performance, which is what the TC looks at when assessing on time performance of operators. For example, if our X12 sits on a stop in Harrogate Bus Station for 12 minutes, it leaves the bus station up to 5 times despite the bus not moving, This registers as an early departure despite the bus having not moved. Nu-venture in Kent have run two ticket machines on the same bus and both have generated totally different GPS results -so whilst this is still occurring and not cured, BODS is not a reliable source of info. We use mytrip - which is far more reliable for tracking than BODS and ticketer even though it uses the same data. I'm also on a board that's trying to work with previous KPMG employees who are trying to set up a more logical and easy to use tool instead of BODS (which after 3 years plus is still not working correctly- and however many tens on millions of our tax money used).

I had seen the NuVenture experiment thing that was done and publicised by Busandtrainuser, it was quite informative. It is rather interesting how the GPS drifts so much depending on who is consuming the data. Worth noting though for the purposes of clarity, I acknowledge and appreciate the fact that GPS drift doesn't seem to be within operators control and so I haven't made any criticisms against the operator for this issue.
Some AVL issues are within the operators control though such as not adding a route to their AVL feed and so I can make comments on that.

Regarding non upload of timetables to BODS - we have to input every single stop onto ticketer for new routes such as 21/22, make them into a route and then add the times for every stop for every journey. For people such as yourself, who clearly have plenty of time to look daily at BODS data, this is fine. For operators such as us, driving a school am/pm and working 6 days a week 70 plus hours just to do what is needed daily, its more of a challenge.

Even without BODS, you should be adding all of the stops into Ticketer for new routes and adding all of the times, because that is what would be required for revenue protection or data collection purposes. Any incorrect data, irrespective of BODS would have a negative impact on the company as well as contractors (local authorities or schools) who the company works on behalf of. It's also worth noting that incorrect data in the Ticketer portal also affects drivers because their machine stop lists will be incorrect.

I presume you've been an operator? Its the only way you could possibly comment with the full information before taking to this forum with such accusations,

If it was one or two things it wouldn't be so bad, but every single normal service route on Connexions open data is either missing stops, or claiming to serve stops that aren't served, or stops are in the wrong order. For example, route 21 towards Halton you have the buses going the wrong way around Colton loop. That won't bode well for any statistics as you aren't serving stops in the right order, or operating the route that your own timetable data claims the route goes. On route 21 towards Halton alone, you have 12 stops missing, and 10 stops in the data which you don't serve. That's one single route.
And if you are going to bring up about on time performance stats from BODS, it's worth noting that the better your timetable data is, the better your on time performance figures will be on BODS. While yes there are things that you can't help (GPS drift), you can help your timetable data.



For clarity and balance, many companies comply with bus open data, including but not limited to those using Ticketer for their open data needs. I fully acknowledge and appreciate there are some things not within an operators control and it would of course be unwise of me to criticise on those those things. Criticisms I have are where issues are within an operators control, and even then that is only when operators who have a large number of issues (ie Connexions where almost every (if not all) routes in the BODS dataset are missing stops, linking to stops on the wrong side of the road or simply stops which aren't served, stops in the wrong order or various other 'basic' issues).

 

[Leedsbusman]

Agreed there were issues on the X4 and I'm glad that the council sorted these in Naptan. It may be worth you trying Elydiums Naptan viewer which has a full map showing all of the stops in Naptan, both active and inactive. This may help you going forward to find stops which aren't present on google maps. In relation to this and your KPMG comments, I agree there are external issues and where this is the case, I don't make any criticisms of the operator as it's things not within their control.


I had seen the NuVenture experiment thing that was done and publicised by Busandtrainuser, it was quite informative. It is rather interesting how the GPS drifts so much depending on who is consuming the data. Worth noting though for the purposes of clarity, I acknowledge and appreciate the fact that GPS drift doesn't seem to be within operators control and so I haven't made any criticisms against the operator for this issue.
Some AVL issues are within the operators control though such as not adding a route to their AVL feed and so I can make comments on that.


Even without BODS, you should be adding all of the stops into Ticketer for new routes and adding all of the times, because that is what would be required for revenue protection or data collection purposes. Any incorrect data, irrespective of BODS would have a negative impact on the company as well as contractors (local authorities or schools) who the company works on behalf of. It's also worth noting that incorrect data in the Ticketer portal also affects drivers because their machine stop lists will be incorrect.


If it was one or two things it wouldn't be so bad, but every single normal service route on Connexions open data is either missing stops, or claiming to serve stops that aren't served, or stops are in the wrong order. For example, route 21 towards Halton you have the buses going the wrong way around Colton loop. That won't bode well for any statistics as you aren't serving stops in the right order, or operating the route that your own timetable data claims the route goes. On route 21 towards Halton alone, you have 12 stops missing, and 10 stops in the data which you don't serve. That's one single route.
And if you are going to bring up about on time performance stats from BODS, it's worth noting that the better your timetable data is, the better your on time performance figures will be on BODS. While yes there are things that you can't help (GPS drift), you can help your timetable data.



For clarity and balance, many companies comply with bus open data, including but not limited to those using Ticketer for their open data needs. I fully acknowledge and appreciate there are some things not within an operators control and it would of course be unwise of me to criticise on those those things. Criticisms I have are where issues are within an operators control, and even then that is only when operators who have a large number of issues (ie Connexions where almost every (if not all) routes in the BODS dataset are missing stops, linking to stops on the wrong side of the road or simply stops which aren't served, stops in the wrong order or various other 'basic' issues).

The general consensus amongst operators (and acknowledged in a couple of PIs) is that BODS punctuality stats are not accurate enough compared to other packages. For some time they counted the first observation at a time point geofence not the last which created issues at bus stations and other locations where a bus may loop round onto a stop and/or drift applies. It has been built from scratch by consultants whereas existing systems have years of perfecting.

Craig’s point about the ability of small operators to resource the data input is very real. It’s often the owner who has to do this plus a myriad of other tasks. It is neither easy or quick to do.

 

[markymark2000]

The general consensus amongst operators (and acknowledged in a couple of PIs) is that BODS punctuality stats are not accurate enough compared to other packages. For some time they counted the first observation at a time point geofence not the last which created issues at bus stations and other locations where a bus may loop round onto a stop and/or drift applies. It has been built from scratch by consultants whereas existing systems have years of perfecting.

I don't dispute that there are issues with BODS. However the worse data that you give it, it will only make it worse. IF you provide perfect data to BODS and it's punctuality stats raise issues, fair play. You can't however provide the system with sub standard data and claim it's an unreliable system, you haven't got a leg to stand on so to speak.
ALL systems can only provide punctuality stats by comparing the timetable data provided to it, and the AVL data provided to it.

Craig’s point about the ability of small operators to resource the data input is very real. It’s often the owner who has to do this plus a myriad of other tasks. It is neither easy or quick to do.

Irrespective of BODS, these tasks should be being done anyway as it affects a lot of systems and data collection. That's before you look at the fact BODS compliance is the law. Or do we just let operators get away with anything now because the owner has other tasks to do? "Oh sorry Mr Traffic Commissioner, I failed to register all of my routes because I had other tasks to do". "Oh sorry Mr DVSA, I didn't maintain the buses this week because I had other tasks to do." It just wouldn't cut it. BODS should be no different. And dare it be said, if it was done right the first time, no one would have to spend time keep going back and editing said data.

 

[Leedsbusman]

I don't dispute that there are issues with BODS. However the worse data that you give it, it will only make it worse. IF you provide perfect data to BODS and it's punctuality stats raise issues, fair play. You can't however provide the system with sub standard data and claim it's an unreliable system, you haven't got a leg to stand on so to speak.
ALL systems can only provide punctuality stats by comparing the timetable data provided to it, and the AVL data provided to it.


Irrespective of BODS, these tasks should be being done anyway as it affects a lot of systems and data collection. That's before you look at the fact BODS compliance is the law. Or do we just let operators get away with anything now because the owner has other tasks to do? "Oh sorry Mr Traffic Commissioner, I failed to register all of my routes because I had other tasks to do". "Oh sorry Mr DVSA, I didn't maintain the buses this week because I had other tasks to do." It just wouldn't cut it. BODS should be no different. And dare it be said, if it was done right the first time, no one would have to spend time keep going back and editing said data.

From my experience problems arise regardless of data quality. It regularly rejects uploads on spurious grounds.

Unfortunately you look a little black and white at this. I get the right first time logic, I get the legal requirement point but should there not be an equal expectation on all parties? If an operator is expected to upload data right first time on time the surely there should be a legal requirement on local authorities to provide NAPTAN codes in time. And a requirement on the TC to process a new reg on time (they are weeks behind) and on authorities to award contracts in good time. The operator has no control over these and you can’t upload without NAPTAN or reg numbers.

Unfortunately it is becoming more and more admin heavy and eventually something has to give if a SME owner cannot cram more work into the day. They either pay someone to do it or cut work.

 

[markymark2000]

From my experience problems arise regardless of data quality. It regularly rejects uploads on spurious grounds.

Connexions data is done via a Ticketer link and it automatically refreshes upto twice pre day (depending on any changes). They aren't sat there doing manual uploads each week.

Unfortunately you look a little black and white at this. I get the right first time logic, I get the legal requirement point but should there not be an equal expectation on all parties? If an operator is expected to upload data right first time on time the surely there should be a legal requirement on local authorities to provide NAPTAN codes in time. And a requirement on the TC to process a new reg on time (they are weeks behind) and on authorities to award contracts in good time. The operator has no control over these and you can’t upload without NAPTAN or reg numbers.

Local authorities now have a statutory obligation to maintain Naptan. That came into force at the same time as BODS regulations came in. Enforcement of it is nil but the obligation is there in the hope that one day someone will enforce it. In extreme cases, you can work around this and use 'non naptan stops'. The rights of wrongs of using these is up for debate but it is something that happens.

OTC I agree there are issues there, you can however upload unregistered services to BODS while you await registration numbers. Centrebus/D&G group do this regularly then update the details on Ticketer quickly when the details are known. I don't think the OTC, Naptan nor tenders can be blamed though for the fact Connexions X12 has been registered since Feb 2023 and still doesn't send timetable data to BODS. Not even bodged data, just simply no data. That's 2.5 years late in complying. Can I ask who is to blame for this one BODS, tenders, naptan? I just want to make sure because the jist I am getting is it can't ever possibly be Connexions fault that their data is poor.

 

[Leedsbusman]

. Can I ask who is to blame for this one BODS, tenders, naptan? I just want to make sure because the jist I am getting is it can't ever possibly be Connexions fault that their data is poor.

lol - that’s a rather extreme interpretation. Sometimes there are mitigations, sometimes not.

 

[Trainman40083]

Connexions data is done via a Ticketer link and it automatically refreshes upto twice pre day (depending on any changes). They aren't sat there doing manual uploads each week.


Local authorities now have a statutory obligation to maintain Naptan. That came into force at the same time as BODS regulations came in. Enforcement of it is nil but the obligation is there in the hope that one day someone will enforce it. In extreme cases, you can work around this and use 'non naptan stops'. The rights of wrongs of using these is up for debate but it is something that happens.

OTC I agree there are issues there, you can however upload unregistered services to BODS while you await registration numbers. Centrebus/D&G group do this regularly then update the details on Ticketer quickly when the details are known. I don't think the OTC, Naptan nor tenders can be blamed though for the fact Connexions X12 has been registered since Feb 2023 and still doesn't send timetable data to BODS. Not even bodged data, just simply no data. That's 2.5 years late in complying. Can I ask who is to blame for this one BODS, tenders, naptan? I just want to make sure because the jist I am getting is it can't ever possibly be Connexions fault that their data is poor.

Sorry, if I missed it. What does Naptan mean?

 

[WibbleWobble]

Sorry, if I missed it. What does Naptan mean?

Naptan means National Public Transport Access Nodes, but is effectively the national bus stop database.

Every bus stop in Great Britain has a pair of unique identifiers, a Naptan code and an ATCO (Association of Transport Co-ordinators) code.

The Naptan identifier is the code that looks like a load of random letters (the one you can text to 82468 for next bus info), whereas the ATCO code is the alphanumeric code more commonly referred to. The two are often mixed up, so don't be surprised if you see an ATCO code referred to as the Naptan reference.

 

[Trainman40083]

Naptan means National Public Transport Access Nodes, but is effectively the national bus stop database.

Every bus stop in Great Britain has a pair of unique identifiers, a Naptan code and an ATCO (Association of Transport Co-ordinators) code.

The Naptan identifier is the code that looks like a load of random numbers (the one you can text to 82468 for next bus info), whereas the ATCO code is the alphanumeric code more commonly referred to. The two are often mixed up, so don't be surprised if you see an ATCO code referred to as the Naptan reference.

Lovely answer, thank you