• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

CT4N (Community Transport for Nottingham)

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
22,959
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
I think there needs to be a bit of clarity on "DRT isn't a viable business model". There are two parts...

  1. It isn't a commercially sustainable business model which is why they are all funded via various government funding streams. Having a driver sat in a Sprinter for 12 hours and carrying a handful of passengers is not a sustainable model. So funding comes from government...
  2. What most DRT schemes involve is a business (or sometimes a charity/volunteers) who are then paid to provide the service, whether that's Go Ahead, Stagecoach or CT4N. I can't see anyone accepting any revenue risk (as there's little revenue) so it boils down to whether any business has got their sums and costs right.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Teapot42

Member
Joined
12 Jan 2022
Messages
1,133
I think there needs to be a bit of clarity on "DRT isn't a viable business model". There are two parts...

  1. It isn't a commercially sustainable business model which is why they are all funded via various government funding streams. Having a driver sat in a Sprinter for 12 hours and carrying a handful of passengers is not a sustainable model. So funding comes from government...
  2. What most DRT schemes involve is a business (or sometimes a charity/volunteers) who are then paid to provide the service, whether that's Go Ahead, Stagecoach or CT4N. I can't see anyone accepting any revenue risk (as there's little revenue) so it boils down to whether any business has got their sums and costs right.
In some ways there is more pressure on the smaller operators to win or keep this business, and as such they are more likely to bid lower than they probably should. There are possibly some parallels to the Hulleys situation, although losing money on tendered services was probably one of their smaller problems.

A larger organisation can absorb a loss, move vehicles and staff around, and so on, much more easily than a smaller one can.

I'd imagine also that predicting demand is also one of the harder things to do with a DRT. I don't know how they are typically funded, but it's per journey then you've got that balance between having enough staff to cover the peaks while not having so many they are sitting around at quiet times. If, on the other hand, the funding covers a fixed number of staff then it becomes a balance between them leaving due to sitting around doing nothing, or being overworked.

With a charity of course it's even more difficult as it depends on enough turning up to run what has been booked.

In a way, it's not really a market that suits small operators. A larger operator could shuffle things more easily to resource it, being run in-house by the council is probably better still as you could have a pool of drivers across several departments who get called on as needed.

I also wonder if it being almost a taxi replacement service works, as you must get most journeys with only one or two users - being at the mercy of who books what. I almost wonder if a defined timetable would be better, but one that needs a minimum number of bookings to run.
 

Dwarfer1979

Member
Joined
24 Feb 2025
Messages
451
Location
Leicester
I'd imagine also that predicting demand is also one of the harder things to do with a DRT. I don't know how they are typically funded, but it's per journey then you've got that balance between having enough staff to cover the peaks while not having so many they are sitting around at quiet times. If, on the other hand, the funding covers a fixed number of staff then it becomes a balance between them leaving due to sitting around doing nothing, or being overworked.
Much of that is a problem for the council and app provider rather than the operator. All the DRT tenders I have dealt with request a specific number of buses for a specific operating period which is what the operators price against. The council and their appointed tech provider need to work out how much resource they think they will need and then manage demand against the resource they are paying for.

There is a pricing grey area around how you cover breaks (if you think it will quieter you may gamble on getting breaks in between bookings but you risk having to fund a relief driver out of pocket if it is busier and you don't get the breaks), though some schemes schedule that in so and don't take bookings for 30-mins whilst the driver takes a break, and mileage accrued (if it is busy you may use more fuel than expected but if it is quiet you may make more than expected).

DRT isn't commercial in this form, they all require external funding to run as I'm not sure you can ever get enough passengers in an hour to cover running costs when running as a demand responsive service where people are not automatically agglomerated by fixed times being offered. I have actually heard of some DRTs being awarded on minimum subsidy (where the operator keeps the revenue and so doesn't price for the council payments to fully cover the operating costs) rather than minimum cost (where the council keep the revenue and the operator just bids for how much they need to run) though I suspect the price difference was somewhat minimal so the practical savings to the council are not as much as they appear.

There is no reason why DRT is any more risky than any other type of tendered work, a business that heavily relies on tenders is less in control of their destiny if costs change than a commercial service based business (who can cut/increase, increase marketing and make other adjustments if costs change), as long as you get your sums & costings right and remain on top of your operations though as I said above you do need to take some judgements around the costs that if you get wrong can mount up quickly with DRT that regular services are lesser. The issue for smaller operators is that there is less depth when problems arise so it is harder to ride out the tough times. The more work you have the less exposed you are to the impacts of the loss of a single contract, the vagaries in any individual route or errors or issues around the pricing of any individual contract. Smaller operators are just less able to manage losses for the medium term needed to fix these issues, big groups often have subsidiaries running at a loss for many years propped up from stronger businesses so one issue won't take down a company quickly.
 

TheGrandWazoo

Veteran Member
Joined
18 Feb 2013
Messages
22,959
Location
Somerset with international travel (e.g. across th
Much of that is a problem for the council and app provider rather than the operator. All the DRT tenders I have dealt with request a specific number of buses for a specific operating period which is what the operators price against. The council and their appointed tech provider need to work out how much resource they think they will need and then manage demand against the resource they are paying for.

There is a pricing grey area around how you cover breaks (if you think it will quieter you may gamble on getting breaks in between bookings but you risk having to fund a relief driver out of pocket if it is busier and you don't get the breaks), though some schemes schedule that in so and don't take bookings for 30-mins whilst the driver takes a break, and mileage accrued (if it is busy you may use more fuel than expected but if it is quiet you may make more than expected).

DRT isn't commercial in this form, they all require external funding to run as I'm not sure you can ever get enough passengers in an hour to cover running costs when running as a demand responsive service where people are not automatically agglomerated by fixed times being offered. I have actually heard of some DRTs being awarded on minimum subsidy (where the operator keeps the revenue and so doesn't price for the council payments to fully cover the operating costs) rather than minimum cost (where the council keep the revenue and the operator just bids for how much they need to run) though I suspect the price difference was somewhat minimal so the practical savings to the council are not as much as they appear.

There is no reason why DRT is any more risky than any other type of tendered work, a business that heavily relies on tenders is less in control of their destiny if costs change than a commercial service based business (who can cut/increase, increase marketing and make other adjustments if costs change), as long as you get your sums & costings right and remain on top of your operations though as I said above you do need to take some judgements around the costs that if you get wrong can mount up quickly with DRT that regular services are lesser. The issue for smaller operators is that there is less depth when problems arise so it is harder to ride out the tough times. The more work you have the less exposed you are to the impacts of the loss of a single contract, the vagaries in any individual route or errors or issues around the pricing of any individual contract. Smaller operators are just less able to manage losses for the medium term needed to fix these issues, big groups often have subsidiaries running at a loss for many years propped up from stronger businesses so one issue won't take down a company quickly.
Exactly.

Operators are being paid to provide a fixed vehicle and driver resource so it's a Sprinter or two on a five or six day basis. How you cover breaks is a question, though that can be incorporated into the booking system so that no or fewer resource is available at certain times.

Little different to a regular tender, and you source a vehicle on that basis (e.g. a vehicle on a two year lease that is co-terminus with the DRT contract). So for the operator, it is about getting your fixed and running costs right. The number of passengers is incidental to the operator as they're not taking the revenue risk... That's the tendering authority and, even then, they're getting the funds from DfT or whatever other funding stream.

Where Stagecoach in particular have benefitted is that they had a number of redundant Mercs (ex Ashford) that have been redeployed on DRT schemes and can transfer fleet as and where required.
 

markymark2000

On Moderation
Joined
11 May 2015
Messages
5,117
Location
Great Britain
It was absolutely wonderful of CT4N to let everyone know about these changes ahead of time.... Oh hang on.....


Will be so glad then CT4N are off the service and it can then go to someone half reputable who can run the service.
 

MEC

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2025
Messages
71
Location
City of Glass
Today is the last day of the byd electrics in Nottingham as skills of Nottingham take over the medilink contract from Monday.
 

38291018

Member
Joined
31 Oct 2024
Messages
228
Location
England
Today is the last day of the byd electrics in Nottingham as skills of Nottingham take over the medilink contract from Monday.
Why have they confirmed that they are getting rid of the all the BYD's instead of redeployment on other services and school contracts or do you mean just because the contract is up you won't see them on medilink?
 

MEC

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2025
Messages
71
Location
City of Glass
Why have they confirmed that they are getting rid of the all the BYD's instead of redeployment on other services and school contracts or do you mean just because the contract is up you won't see them on medilink?
No the city council are selling them.they are not owned by CT4N. CT4N could buy them but I doubt that they are going to as they are moving back to the Sherwood depot
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
10,292
Speaking of council owned electric buses - did the Centrelink Solo EVs go to CT4N after the BYDs came in
 

Trainman40083

Established Member
Joined
29 Jan 2024
Messages
4,628
Location
Derby
Speaking of council owned electric buses - did the Centrelink Solo EVs go to CT4N after the BYDs came in
Do you mean the four that Trentbarton ran in red as 996 to 999? If so yes, they went on to CT4N painted blue for Medilink.
 

JollyGood02

Member
Joined
20 Jun 2021
Messages
29
Location
Nottingham
989 LJ16NNF being towed from Queens Drive this afternoon, no idea where it's going (Beeston sims hopefully)
 

Attachments

  • 20250908_131839.jpg
    20250908_131839.jpg
    2.6 MB · Views: 83

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
10,292
the beginning of the end of what was once Europe's largest electric bus fleet
Although that was mostly the Solo SR EVs so arguably the beginning of the end started a while ago when these were sold off and scrapped whilst CT4N continued with second hand diesel buses
 

JollyGood02

Member
Joined
20 Jun 2021
Messages
29
Location
Nottingham
Just passed through Queens Drive, it seems they're preparing to take the final BYD away, interestingly though there is a Redfern ALX400 there behind one of the Omnidekkas
 

MEC

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2025
Messages
71
Location
City of Glass
Just passed through Queens Drive, it seems they're preparing to take the final BYD away, interestingly though there is a Redfern ALX400 there behind one of the Omnidekkas
Does anyone know what the relationship between redfern and ct4n is? I've seen a redfern repair van driving round queen's drive before and it seems most of the byd's had their MOT's done at redfern
 

Trainman40083

Established Member
Joined
29 Jan 2024
Messages
4,628
Location
Derby
Does anyone know what the relationship between redfern and ct4n is? I've seen a redfern repair van driving round queen's drive before and it seems most of the byd's had their MOT's done at redfern
I thought Redferns used to do heavier maintenance and MOT work for CT4N. But no official relationship
 

TR673

Member
Joined
4 Oct 2019
Messages
119
Location
Nottingham
Does anyone know what the relationship between redfern and ct4n is? I've seen a redfern repair van driving round queen's drive before and it seems most of the byd's had their MOT's done at redfern
I have a feeling the Scania Omnidekkas run by CT4N could actually be owned by Redfern and and they have some kind of leasing/borrowing arrangement, although I've never seen anything official to back that up.

Years ago when the operation was named Nottingham Community Transport and running the Medilink with diesel Solos, around the early 2010s, there were a pair of ALX400s in full Medilink livery for peak services which actually turned out to be part of the Redfern fleet. So the association runs quite far back.

Additionally I've seen a Redfern engineering van attending a broken down CT4N Versa once.
 

MCR247

Established Member
Joined
7 Nov 2008
Messages
10,292
I went past Sherwood depot tonight and there was a blue and grey CT4N solo with its hazards on blocking the southbound bus stop on Mansfield Road. There were a few Redferns vans parked on the other side of the road. It seemed that a Silver Omnidekka might’ve been broken down blocking the entrance
 

reuwar

Member
Joined
17 Apr 2024
Messages
8
Location
Nottingham
CT4N are extending the 19 back to Bulwell and reintroducing an hourly frequency towards the end of October: https://www.ct4n.co.uk/october-service-changes
Service 19
Service 19 will operate Monday to Friday between 09:40 and 15:35
Service 19 will be extended to Bulwell Bus Station
Tesco Top Valley and Morrisons Bulwell are also served
Current route between Winchester Court and Mildenhall Crescent remains unchanged
In Bestwood & Top Valley, service 19 will operate via Queens Bower Road, Bestwood Park Drive, Bestwood Park Drive West, Top Valley Drive and Top Valley Way
In Bulwell, service 19 will operate via Morrisons then Hucknall Lane and Main Street to Bulwell Bus Station, terminating at Stand C
 

tram21

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2022
Messages
1,321
Location
Nottingham
I'm surprised there's no 18 changes as the managing director promised some improvements to local residents a few months ago.
 

reuwar

Member
Joined
17 Apr 2024
Messages
8
Location
Nottingham
I wonder if the 'improvements' were just more resources as a result of the loss of the medilink contract
 

MEC

Member
Joined
27 Apr 2025
Messages
71
Location
City of Glass
I'd imagine so, as they also support the 18a financially to an extent
Yeah I think they fund journeys between woolaton and beeston I could be wrong but I believe the 19 and 20 are fully subsidised by the council effectively still being locallink routes just without being part of the linkbus network.
 

Cesarcollie

Member
Joined
5 Jun 2016
Messages
831

Looks like CT4N's finances are not in a good shape. It wasn't too long ago that they avoided getting struck off the companies register

Indeed. And a CVA is likely to fall foul of the Traffic Commissioner’s financial standing rules. Buses are not like a corner shop!
 

Top