First Bus Numbering System

[Arriva Fan]

Just wondering exactly what's in the title...

What is the First UK Bus Numbering System? I know it's 1XXXX for Articulated, 2XXXX for Coaches, 3XXXX for Double Deckers, 4 & 5XXXX for Midi/Light Weights, 6XXXX for Single Deckers & 9XXXX for Ancillary Vehicles. I'm not entirely sure what 7XXXX & 8XXXX are for, if anything yet, or are they yet to be released? When 3 & 6 are gone possible new Decker and Single Range.

However, my main question is this. Within these Ranges there seems to be sub-categories. Volvo B9TL seem to be regularly referred to as 37s, (37XXX), Enviro 300 as 67s (67XXX), Volvo B7RLE Wright Eclipses as 69s (69XXX) etc. But this doesn't entirely make sense to me. Enviro 200MMCs also seem to be in the 67XXX Series and they surely have very little in common with E300s? Some Volvo B7RLEs are numbered 66XXX? Did the 69 Range run out? 33XXX seems to have been in use through Dennis Tridents, Enviro 400s and now Enviro 400MMCs. Surely they can't all be simply referred to as 33s? I can't imagine an E400MMC has a great deal in common with a Dennis Trident? And Volvo B7TLs seem to be 32XXX, regardless of body type, though there are 31XXX B7TLS? I've never heard early Wright Geminis referred to as 31s or 32s despite B9TL Chassis ones being 37s.

I was just wondering if anyone could clear this up? Is there a clear sub-numbering system? Does the third number mean anything? I.e 323XX as a Plaxton President B7TL compared to 325XX as Wright Gemini bodied B7TLs?

Just curious to know if there is any sort of system in use?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Just wondering exactly what's in the title...

What is the First UK Bus Numbering System? I know it's 1XXXX for Articulated, 2XXXX for Coaches, 3XXXX for Double Deckers, 4 & 5XXXX for Midi/Light Weights, 6XXXX for Single Deckers & 9XXXX for Ancillary Vehicles. I'm not entirely sure what 7XXXX & 8XXXX are for, if anything yet, or are they yet to be released? When 3 & 6 are gone possible new Decker and Single Range.

However, my main question is this. Within these Ranges there seems to be sub-categories. Volvo B9TL seem to be regularly referred to as 37s, (37XXX), Enviro 300 as 67s (67XXX), Volvo B7RLE Wright Eclipses as 69s (69XXX) etc. But this doesn't entirely make sense to me. Enviro 200MMCs also seem to be in the 67XXX Series and they surely have very little in common with E300s? Some Volvo B7RLEs are numbered 66XXX? Did the 69 Range run out? 33XXX seems to have been in use through Dennis Tridents, Enviro 400s and now Enviro 400MMCs. Surely they can't all be simply referred to as 33s? I can't imagine an E400MMC has a great deal in common with a Dennis Trident? And Volvo B7TLs seem to be 32XXX, regardless of body type, though there are 31XXX B7TLS? I've never heard early Wright Geminis referred to as 31s or 32s despite B9TL Chassis ones being 37s.

I was just wondering if anyone could clear this up? Is there a clear sub-numbering system? Does the third number mean anything? I.e 323XX as a Plaxton President B7TL compared to 325XX as Wright Gemini bodied B7TLs?

Just curious to know if there is any sort of system in use?

Not really. Recently transferred to Kernow were 2005 B7TL/Geminis 32636-8 and 37001 etc but 2006 ones 32686 onwards, all delivered to what is now West of England. B7TLs were delivered as both Geminis and ALX and you have 32328-60 as Wright but 324** and even 326** ALXs from 2005. They just followed on.

 

[baza585]

It

Not really. Recently transferred to Kernow were 2005 B7TL/Geminis 32636-8 and 37001 etc but 2006 ones 32686 onwards, all delivered to what is now West of England. B7TLs were delivered as both Geminis and ALX and you have 32328-60 as Wright but 324** and even 326** ALXs from 2005. They just followed on.

It is a bit haphazard, at least in part because First started numbering within opcos rather than looking at the fleet overall, did a few and then realised this wasn't a good idea and changed their method. The early 32xxxs were Vo B7s, but the later ones were Dennis Trident's, which spilled over into the 33xxxs, hence the 37xxx series for both B7TLs and B9TLs.

Apparently the system they use does not allow numbers to be re-used, hence the infilling of gaps in the series from recent E400 purchases.

On the other hand, I think classifying long E200MMCs as 67*** is sensible because of their length, which matters to allocators in depots.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It
It is a bit haphazard, at least in part because First started numbering within opcos rather than looking at the fleet overall, did a few and then realised this wasn't a good idea and changed their method. The early 32xxxs were Vo B7s, but the later ones were Dennis Trident's, which spilled over into the 33xxxs, hence the 37xxx series for both B7TLs and B9TLs.

Apparently the system they use does not allow numbers to be re-used, hence the infilling of gaps in the series from recent E400 purchases.

On the other hand, I think classifying long E200MMCs as 67*** is sensible because of their length, which matters to allocators in depots.

Indeed - correct on many counts. Numbers aren’t reused so gaps in the recent gas bus order that were Routemasters.

Short e200mmc were numbered in 449** in Kernow but full length ones are 67***

 

[upasalmon]

Indeed - correct on many counts. Numbers aren’t reused so gaps in the recent gas bus order that were Routemasters.

Short e200mmc were numbered in 449** in Kernow but full length ones are 67***

Indeed - correct on many counts. Numbers aren’t reused so gaps in the recent gas bus order that were Routemasters.

Short e200mmc were numbered in 449** in Kernow but full length ones are 67***

First IMHO should recycle their fleet numbers as double deck numbers are running out. An alternative could be to adopt internally a 6-digit system, so 130000 would be a new DDs 30000. Likewise new single decks internally would be 160000 up, externally 60000 up.

Another idea would be to renumber the remaining artic's in the 689xx range. Coaches should move into the unused 13xxx series (Volvo) and 14xxx (other types) With some clearances double deckers could fill the 25000-29999 range.

But these changes only put off the day First will have to consider recycling as Stagecoach do.

 

[Andyh82]

They could do all that complicated stuff, or if they really did ‘run out’, they could just start using the 70000s

 

[carlberry]

Another idea would be to renumber the remaining artic's in the 689xx range. Coaches should move into the unused 13xxx series (Volvo) and 14xxx (other types) With some clearances double deckers could fill the 25000-29999 range.

But these changes only put off the day First will have to consider recycling as Stagecoach do.

How would renumbering vehicles (therefore using up two numbers) help with running out of numbers? With the current size of First's fleet they've still got 10s of thousands of numbers to get through before they need to worry about running out.

 

[carlberry]

Just wondering exactly what's in the title...

What is the First UK Bus Numbering System? I know it's 1XXXX for Articulated, 2XXXX for Coaches, 3XXXX for Double Deckers, 4 & 5XXXX for Midi/Light Weights, 6XXXX for Single Deckers & 9XXXX for Ancillary Vehicles. I'm not entirely sure what 7XXXX & 8XXXX are for, if anything yet, or are they yet to be released? When 3 & 6 are gone possible new Decker and Single Range.

However, my main question is this. Within these Ranges there seems to be sub-categories. Volvo B9TL seem to be regularly referred to as 37s, (37XXX), Enviro 300 as 67s (67XXX), Volvo B7RLE Wright Eclipses as 69s (69XXX) etc. But this doesn't entirely make sense to me. Enviro 200MMCs also seem to be in the 67XXX Series and they surely have very little in common with E300s? Some Volvo B7RLEs are numbered 66XXX? Did the 69 Range run out? 33XXX seems to have been in use through Dennis Tridents, Enviro 400s and now Enviro 400MMCs. Surely they can't all be simply referred to as 33s? I can't imagine an E400MMC has a great deal in common with a Dennis Trident? And Volvo B7TLs seem to be 32XXX, regardless of body type, though there are 31XXX B7TLS? I've never heard early Wright Geminis referred to as 31s or 32s despite B9TL Chassis ones being 37s.

I was just wondering if anyone could clear this up? Is there a clear sub-numbering system? Does the third number mean anything? I.e 323XX as a Plaxton President B7TL compared to 325XX as Wright Gemini bodied B7TLs?

Just curious to know if there is any sort of system in use?

First introduced their national numbering system because they'd bought a piece of software to manage their engineering records. Oddly (given that it was introduced by their engineering division) the first number were applied with no thought for the different vehicle makes, just split by overall types (coach/double deck/single deck). When Stagecoach introduced theirs (which I believe was led by their finance department) the numbering was much more led by vehicle makes!
After the first couple of First companies had been done (PMT and some of the Yorkshire ones) they realised how difficult the new numbers were for the engineering and operating departments and changed to the current system which is slightly more predictable.

 

[ffesti]

I was just wondering if anyone could clear this up? Is there a clear sub-numbering system? Does the third number mean anything? I.e 323XX as a Plaxton President B7TL compared to 325XX as Wright Gemini bodied B7TLs?

At Sheffield, there is some subdivision (not sure if its deliberate or coincidental)

For example:

351xx - 65 plate Streetdecks (Diesel)
353xx - 18 plate Streedecks (HEV)

630xx - 13 plate Streetlites
633xx - 16 plate Streelites
639xx - 18 plate Streetlites (HEV)

 

[cnjb8]

I have always found the First fleet numbering system very confusing. If you look at the FWE list on UK Buses site, there's two or three sections for E400MMCs just because they are numbered in different sequences as First don't recycle numbers.

 

[upasalmon]

How would renumbering vehicles (therefore using up two numbers) help with running out of numbers? With the current size of First's fleet they've still got 10s of thousands of numbers to get through before they need to worry about running out.

The 3xxxx, 4xxxx and 6xxxx series are running out of new numbers to allocate. Using the 7xxxx series for single decks is possible but it doesn't address the fact that new numbers are running out hence my suggestion of using , slightly altered from above 12020-12999 for Volvo and 13xxx for other coaches and 25000-29999 for DDs. Another idea would be to add a 1 prefix to all withdrawn vehicles, thus 30000 becomes 130000 and releasing 30000 for a new DD.

Recycle or run out !

 

[duncombec]

The 3xxxx, 4xxxx and 6xxxx series are running out of new numbers to allocate. Using the 7xxxx series for single decks is possible but it doesn't address the fact that new numbers are running out hence my suggestion of using , slightly altered from above 12020-12999 for Volvo and 13xxx for other coaches and 25000-29999 for DDs. Another idea would be to add a 1 prefix to all withdrawn vehicles, thus 30000 becomes 130000 and releasing 30000 for a new DD.

Recycle or run out !

Do you know numbers are running out, or are you presuming this because you've seen x9xxx numbers allocated?

Apparently the entire First fleet is currently 5,200, give or take (https://www.firstgroupplc.com/about-firstgroup/uk-bus.aspx), so surely a new series of 10000 numbers should be more than enough for single deckers?

 

[upasalmon]

Do you know numbers are running out, or are you presuming this because you've seen x9xxx numbers allocated?

Apparently the entire First fleet is currently 5,200, give or take (https://www.firstgroupplc.com/about-firstgroup/uk-bus.aspx), so surely a new series of 10000 numbers should be more than enough for single deckers?

There wouldn't be a problem if First RECYCLED used fleet numbers, the system would be adequate But they don't and herein lies the problem. Most of the 30000-34999 ,37xxx, 38xxx have been used. Also in 2003 when the "Sema Voyager" scheme was adopted the 1xxxx range was given to the then growing articulated bus fleet . Something which our present PM railed against and drove out of London when First had a presence there Now there's only under 100 remaining and would be better moved to the 689xx range.

 

[duncombec]

There wouldn't be a problem if First RECYCLED used fleet numbers, the system would be adequate But they don't and herein lies the problem. Most of the 30000-34999 ,37xxx, 38xxx have been used. Also in 2003 when the "Sema Voyager" scheme was adopted the 1xxxx range was given to the then growing articulated bus fleet . Something which our present PM railed against and drove out of London when First had a presence there Now there's only under 100 remaining and would be better moved to the 689xx range.

Given, if my understanding of above posts is correct, First don't use 7 or 8 prefixed numbers, they can't have used all 10000 1-prefix numbers (which would be the next logical slot for SD's), and by your own statement there are still something like 300 numbers in the 3-prefix series, I make that a good 25,000 numbers spare, or just under five times the current fleet.

Please explain how that is "inadequate"?

It does rather seem this is your personal dislike for First's fleetnumbering system rather than anything actually a problem for First, or indeed anyone else...

 

[D2007wsm]

I can remember when the fleet was renumbered in the West of England. A lot of the older fleet had fleet numbers which corresponded to the numbers on their old style number plates. Some attempt was made to try and do this with the new fleet numbers e.g. Volvo Olmpian 9690 (S690 AAE) became 34190 so the last 2 numbers were the same, likewise Pointer Dart SLF 264 (P264 PAE) became 46264, so its original fleet number with 46 added in front. I don’t know if this sort of attempt was made elsewhere.

 

[Man of Kent]

Apparently the entire First fleet is currently 5,200, give or take (https://www.firstgroupplc.com/about-firstgroup/uk-bus.aspx), so surely a new series of 10000 numbers should be more than enough for single deckers?

Somewhat smaller than the 9300 quoted in the 2005 Annual Report!

 

[Andyh82]

I can remember when the fleet was renumbered in the West of England. A lot of the older fleet had fleet numbers which corresponded to the numbers on their old style number plates. Some attempt was made to try and do this with the new fleet numbers e.g. Volvo Olmpian 9690 (S690 AAE) became 34190 so the last 2 numbers were the same, likewise Pointer Dart SLF 264 (P264 PAE) became 46264, so its original fleet number with 46 added in front. I don’t know if this sort of attempt was made elsewhere.

All the fleets done in ‘phase 2’ were done like this

Phase 1 was just numbered in numerical order starting at 30000 for double decks, one after another, one fleet at a time, with no gaps. A ridiculous method, although some defended it at the time saying it’s basically just an asset number, so who cares.

 

[upasalmon]

I approve of both First and Stagecoach schemes only the latter were better organized. I have schemes of my own for Arriva and Go-Ahead which I have on paper.
Occasionally I go through BBP and HB Publications books, plus the excellent UK buses on line fleet lists and laboriously tot up all the differentmakes and allocate blocks accordingly.
There may be a thousand unused double deck numbers but without recycling these will be used in about three years Remember in 1995 Ofcom added a 1 to all landline phone numbers As I have said First should alter their software to allow recycling. By adding a digit internally to all
withdrawn buses shouldn't tax the brains of some tech-wizz!

 

[carlberry]

I approve of both First and Stagecoach schemes only the latter were better organized. I have schemes of my own for Arriva and Go-Ahead which I have on paper.
Occasionally I go through BBP and HB Publications books, plus the excellent UK buses on line fleet lists and laboriously tot up all the differentmakes and allocate blocks accordingly.
There may be a thousand unused double deck numbers but without recycling these will be used in about three years Remember in 1995 Ofcom added a 1 to all landline phone numbers As I have said First should alter their software to allow recycling. By adding a digit internally to all
withdrawn buses shouldn't tax the brains of some tech-wizz!

In three years time after First have dealt with the fall out from the Coronovirus, the reduction in bus use, increasing conjestion, the introduction of more low emissiions zones, the seperation or not of the UK and USA business, possible sales or purchases in the UK and if their purchase levels are still the same (which appears unlikely) I'm sure it'll come up at one of their board meetings and they'll decide to change the system, or introduce a different one, or revert to separate company systems.

 

[GusB]

I approve of both First and Stagecoach schemes only the latter were better organized. I have schemes of my own for Arriva and Go-Ahead which I have on paper.
Occasionally I go through BBP and HB Publications books, plus the excellent UK buses on line fleet lists and laboriously tot up all the differentmakes and allocate blocks accordingly.
There may be a thousand unused double deck numbers but without recycling these will be used in about three years Remember in 1995 Ofcom added a 1 to all landline phone numbers As I have said First should alter their software to allow recycling. By adding a digit internally to all
withdrawn buses shouldn't tax the brains of some tech-wizz!

Have you ever considered getting out a bit more?

Seriously, though - does it really matter? Every now and again we see threads discussing the logic (or lack thereof) of UK train numbering. Even if First did reorganise things into a neat and tidy fashion to suit your own views, at some point in time someone else will come along and upset the apple cart again.

Sometimes you have to just resign yourself to the fact that sometimes there is a little bit of disorder in life!

 

[cnjb8]

Sometimes you have to just resign yourself to the fact that sometimes there is a little bit of disorder in life!

I think most bus enthusiasts don't want the disorder in fleetnumbering because it's easier when everything makes sense, but Firsts fleet numbers are very confusing, as I've already said here. But, you're right and thats life!

 

[upasalmon]

Have you ever considered getting out a bit more?

Seriously, though - does it really matter? Every now and again we see threads discussing the logic (or lack thereof) of UK train numbering. Even if First did reorganise things into a neat and tidy fashion to suit your own views, at some point in time someone else will come along and upset the apple cart again.

Sometimes you have to just resign yourself to the fact that sometimes there is a little bit of disorder in life!

The same could be said of ALL bus enthusiasts , GusB, my admissions to being a bus enthusiasts always lead to "get a life" or similar When all of the pre 2004 buses are gone the initial chaos of the Sema Voyager system will pass.

 

[DunsBus]

When the two fleets which made up First Edinburgh were renumbered in 2003 new numbers were allocated to two vehicles, a Prisma and a Scania, which had both been burnt out the previous year; the former caught fire whilst in service whilst the latter was as a result of joyriders.

By the time of the renumbering both buses' remains had been disposed of. However, the deprecation method used by First at the time listed them as still-current assets - albeit withdrawn ones - so they were renumbered on paper and remained on the asset lists until they were formally written off a few years later.