First Greater Glasgow

[PaulMc7]

Service 59 has also been contracted out, happened to notice it there on Thursday plodding along the Boulevard. Blind mentioning it was on hire to First Glasgow.

Thanks for confirming. I had seen a 59 at Bridge Street just over a week ago with that on the blind but I wasn't 100% sure it was contracted out or not.

 

[lastbus]

If you hand back SPT tenders before the end of the contract, they are entitled to charge you the difference between your contract rate and any replacement, that costs them more. Unless of course SPT have decided to cancel them all, which is unlikely.
Alternatively, they may have found an operator awash with drivers, and been able to subcontract them all!

Yes I’m aware of this and as you say either First are prepared to take the hit or have found someone to operate them on their behalf like they’ve done with a couple of routes in Glasgow.

 

[92002]

If you hand back SPT tenders before the end of the contract, they are entitled to charge you the difference between your contract rate and any replacement, that costs them more. Unless of course SPT have decided to cancel them all, which is unlikely.
Alternatively, they may have found an operator awash with drivers, and been able to subcontract them all!

The M4 has been run by Glasgpw Ciitybus for the last couple of Months now.

 

[PaulMc7]

The E200EV 64134 was tracking on the 5:48 2 this morning from Baillieston to Faifley. I know there has been a lot of tracking issues today though as there always is if even one service has a timetable change. Is that accurate though? Some of Caledonia's services still aren't tracking now.

 

[92002]

The E200EV 64134 was tracking on the 5:48 2 this morning from Baillieston to Faifley. I know there has been a lot of tracking issues today though as there always is if even one service has a timetable change. Is that accurate though? Some of Caledonia's services still aren't tracking now.

Bus Times information needs to be taken with a rather large spoonful of realism .

 

[JumpinTrainz]

Out of curiosity have First tested any E200EVs on the 2?

 

[92002]

Bus Times information needs to be taken with a rather large spoonful of realism .

It is after all an unofficial system. Rubbish in usually produce rubbish out.

 

[PaulMc7]

Bus Times information needs to be taken with a rather large spoonful of realism .

That's why I asked to be fair. It's deep in the "pinch of salt" territory and even more so with the tracking issues today. I do expect First to test E200EVs on Scotstoun services at some point though. It would make sense.

 

[duffers2324]

speaking of slightly unusual buses on certain routes, i did see Enviro 200 EV 64125 on the 75 earlier today, initially thought it was an M3 til i looked at the desty.

 

[route101]

speaking of slightly unusual buses on certain routes, i did see Enviro 200 EV 64125 on the 75 earlier today, initially thought it was an M3 til i looked at the desty.

The 75 is usually a decker route at all times. I did see an Eclipse on the 75 once.

 

[PaulMc7]

It would be good if First's app could show which bus is on a certain journey the same way Mcgills can just so you know what to expect when getting a bus. The E200EVs have popped up on a few routes recently that are different to where you'd previously find them. I had seen a couple on the 88 one Saturday when I was out and on a Sunday, the X8 gets them a lot now compared to being mostly double deckers on other days.

Bustimes.org isn't the most reliable of course and with the tracking issues still being a thing for most of Caledonia's services too, it's not ideal at the moment. I hope it doesn't happen with Scotstoun's services on Sunday due to the 11 changing timetable on a Sunday.

Also taking bustimes.org with a pinch of salt today, 2 Streetlites tracked on the 3 and one of the E400 MMCs branded for the 77 was on the 90 at one point.

 

[158715]

It would be good if First's app could show which bus is on a certain journey the same way Mcgills can just so you know what to expect when getting a bus. The E200EVs have popped up on a few routes recently that are different to where you'd previously find them. I had seen a couple on the 88 one Saturday when I was out and on a Sunday, the X8 gets them a lot now compared to being mostly double deckers on other days.

Bustimes.org isn't the most reliable of course and with the tracking issues still being a thing for most of Caledonia's services too, it's not ideal at the moment. I hope it doesn't happen with Scotstoun's services on Sunday due to the 11 changing timetable on a Sunday.

Also taking bustimes.org with a pinch of salt today, 2 Streetlites tracked on the 3 and one of the E400 MMCs branded for the 77 was on the 90 at one point.

I saw a StreetLite on the 3 this morning.

 

[PaulMc7]

I saw a StreetLite on the 3 this morning.

Thanks for confirming. They do tend to creep onto the 2 and 3 every so often. The E400s also appear on the 2, 3 and 77 a lot more now too.

To add to this, I've now seen a Streetlite on a 3 at Partick.

The 65 also seems to have a lot of double deckers today. I seen a 19 plate E400 MMC on one and now a double decker branded for the 61 on one now too and going by the capacities on the app there is another 2 double deckers.

 

[Jarcoed]

My those Enviro400EV's are really phasing in quickly, that's now 38406-38477 in service as of December 15. I really like them and I wonder if Scotstoun/Blantyre Depot will ever invest in them...

 

[voidwxrranty]

My those Enviro400EV's are really phasing in quickly, that's now 38406-38477 in service as of December 15. I really like them and I wonder if Scotstoun/Blantyre Depot will ever invest in them...

Scotstoun are receiving 200ev's, and unless ADL were to start production on a LH E400EV, route 6 would either be set to diesel, or 200ev allocation (Busby Bridge)

 

[PaulMc7]

Allocations at Scotstoun definitely seem to be changing a bit to anything can go anywhere like Caledonia has been in recent months. The E400s have been seeing the 2, 3, X4, 8, 16 and 90 and even the Streetlites are popping up on the 3 and 6 now and have been on the 2 occasionally too.

The 6 definitely does need double deckers from passenger loads in recent times and what I've experienced. The problem is that reliability with the 3 and 6 in particular have probably never been worse so you can end up with 3 or 4 together very easily with one being full and 2 much quieter ones or even 2 very full with 1 quiet.

As for the E400EVs, I don't mind them but sitting downstairs isn't fun as it's easy to hit your head sitting at the back when getting up to get off and the drop in capacity compared to the diesel buses we have means it's taking seats away in a time where we need buses to have more people on them to keep them viable.

 

[route101]

Allocations at Scotstoun definitely seem to be changing a bit to anything can go anywhere like Caledonia has been in recent months. The E400s have been seeing the 2, 3, X4, 8, 16 and 90 and even the Streetlites are popping up on the 3 and 6 now and have been on the 2 occasionally too.

The 6 definitely does need double deckers from passenger loads in recent times and what I've experienced. The problem is that reliability with the 3 and 6 in particular have probably never been worse so you can end up with 3 or 4 together very easily with one being full and 2 much quieter ones or even 2 very full with 1 quiet.

As for the E400EVs, I don't mind them but sitting downstairs isn't fun as it's easy to hit your head sitting at the back when getting up to get off and the drop in capacity compared to the diesel buses we have means it's taking seats away in a time where we need buses to have more people on them to keep them viable.

With the 6 not very reliable would be wise to have most of the E400s on that route.

 

[PaulMc7]

With the 6 not very reliable would be wise to have most of the E400s on that route.

I fully agree. There are some days there can be an hour between them very easily. The problem with the 6 is that it doesn't matter what time it is either, there is a good chance the 6 will be late. The 3 is as bad for that too though.

 

[route101]

I fully agree. There are some days there can be an hour between them very easily. The problem with the 6 is that it doesn't matter what time it is either, there is a good chance the 6 will be late. The 3 is as bad for that too though.

I waited nearly an hour once for a 6 few months ago. They are all operated by Scotstoun depot now, so quite far for a bus to run out to the Southside part of route.

 

[PaulMc7]

I waited nearly an hour once for a 6 few months ago. They are all operated by Scotstoun depot now, so quite far for a bus to run out to the Southside part of route.

I'm surprised they made Scotstoun cover all of it for that exact reason. The last 6 only gets to Calderwood at 1am and it's rarely on time either. There are a few changes that could be done with certain services to make things suitable by cutting dead mileage. The location of Scotstoun would be pretty handy for splitting the 4/4A, 6, 7/7A, 34, 60/60A, 61 and 77 between depots given their start points.

The main issues with that though are depot space at Scotstoun, number of drivers available and actually scheduling services to make that work wouldn't be an easy task especially as it would adjust a lot of driver changeover points.

 

[PaulMc7]

Out of the services I suggested that you could split, some of them would be easier to choose driver changeover spots than others. If anyone has any suggestions I'd appreciate them. I'd probably add the 1C and 1D to the list of what Scotstoun should cover but obviously that's another issue due to drivers having different pay rates at Dumbarton and Scotstoun.

4/4A- Broomhill by using the Partick office for breaks and the current spot

6- Pollokshaws Road and Anniesland

7/7A- Summerston and the current spot

34- Govan and the current spot

60- Clydebank and the current spot

60A- Maryhill and the current spot

61- Summerston or Maryhill and the current spot

77- Buchanan Bus Station and the current spot

 

[JumpinTrainz]

Scotstoun are receiving 200ev's, and unless ADL were to start production on a LH E400EV, route 6 would either be set to diesel, or 200ev allocation (Busby Bridge)

The 6 presents an interesting situation. The E400s are only about 11 years old so will be around for another good few years I’d imagine but depends if First decide to convert it to singles again.

 

[PaulMc7]

The 6 presents an interesting situation. The E400s are only about 11 years old so will be around for another good few years I’d imagine but depends if First decide to convert it to singles again.

It would be good if all of them at least got new seats as a lot of them are dirty, worn in messes to be quite honest. I think the fact the 6 hasn't ever been split either means it'll probably never happen too. If it was that would at least help on the west end of the route with having more double decker options.

I always forget if it would be possible to change the route at Busby to avoid that bridge too to be honest.

 

[EMU303]

It would be good if all of them at least got new seats as a lot of them are dirty, worn in messes to be quite honest. I think the fact the 6 hasn't ever been split either means it'll probably never happen too. If it was that would at least help on the west end of the route with having more double decker options.

I always forget if it would be possible to change the route at Busby to avoid that bridge too to be honest.

No alternative route, it simply must run under the bridge to serve Busby and onto/from East Kilbride.

 

[PaulMc7]

No alternative route, it simply must run under the bridge to serve Busby and onto/from EK

Thank you for confirming. The fact there isn't a road from any point of Clarkston onto the Carmunnock Bypass is the issue. It would be possible if that existed. It's a horrendous situation as the E400s really aren't great buses at all. The 6 just wouldn't work with all single deckers as they've got a lot busier again although the reliability is part of that.

 

[route101]

Thank you for confirming. The fact there isn't a road from any point of Clarkston onto the Carmunnock Bypass is the issue. It would be possible if that existed. It's a horrendous situation as the E400s really aren't great buses at all. The 6 just wouldn't work with all single deckers as they've got a lot busier again although the reliability is part of that.

There is no realistic diversion unless you go via Waterfoot. I would have thought they could have lowered the road ahead of the electrification of the East Kilbride branch.

 

[Bus Lightyear]

There is no realistic diversion unless you go via Waterfoot. I would have thought they could have lowered the road ahead of the electrification of the East Kilbride branch.

The road was already lowered to allow Central SMT to run Bristol Lodekkas under it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2022 ==

E400s really aren't great buses at all

I'd say personally they're much better than some of the buses that previously ran on the 66.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2022 ==

Out of the services I suggested that you could split, some of them would be easier to choose driver changeover spots than others. If anyone has any suggestions I'd appreciate them. I'd probably add the 1C and 1D to the list of what Scotstoun should cover but obviously that's another issue due to drivers having different pay rates at Dumbarton and Scotstoun.

4/4A- Broomhill by using the Partick office for breaks and the current spot

6- Pollokshaws Road and Anniesland

7/7A- Summerston and the current spot

34- Govan and the current spot

60- Clydebank and the current spot

60A- Maryhill and the current spot

61- Summerston or Maryhill and the current spot

77- Buchanan Bus Station and the current spot

I cannot see any benefits of doing this whatsoever.

 

[PaulMc7]

The road was already lowered to allow Central SMT to run Bristol Lodekkas under it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2022 ==


I'd say personally they're much better than some of the buses that previously ran on the 66.

I don't disagree with that but out of the buses we have here in the fleet, only Streetlites are worse IMO. It's like sitting on bricks in comparison to some of the newer buses.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 16 Dec 2022 ==

I cannot see any benefits of doing this whwhatsoever.

The 2 main reasons I suggested it was limiting dead mileage and balancing services between depots to take a bit of the load off of the management at Caledonia given what has been said previously about them.

Going by what has been posted previously and what I've heard drivers say about working there it sounds like a complete and utter mess. From what I've heard, even organising staff annual leave is an utter car crash and that's a very basic thing.

As I've said before on here, I don't have insider information like some but it's no surprise that a depot of that size coupled with what seems like the worst run depot of the lot by a mile is the one struggling the most for drivers and more importantly, retaining them.

Whilst not every employee in any company is perfect, you can usually work out why somewhere is struggling for staff pretty quickly just by listening to employees who are there or have just left. It's very telling. It's not all First's fault but they don't help themselves.

 

[GaryBrown156]

There is no realistic diversion unless you go via Waterfoot. I would have thought they could have lowered the road ahead of the electrification of the East Kilbride branch.

Is there really that much demand for buses between Sheddens roundabout and the Holiday inn that necessitates a 15 minute frequency on that section of the route? Clarkston is always busy, but after that there generally isn't a great deal of passenger demand until the bus reaches Westwood so, in my opinion, the Sheddens to Holiday Inn via Busby section of the route absolutely could manage fine with a half hourly service (especially as there are alternative Glasgow and East Kilbride transport options on that section with the railway station).

If First wanted to upgrade the 6 using newer vehicles I see no reason why they couldn't divert the current route via Waterfoot using newer Enviro 400 MMC's/EV's, and introduce a half hourly variation along the current route via Busby (perhaps number that a 6B) operated by Enviro 200 MMC's/EV's. Yes, this would still mean a reduction in capacity vs an all decker operated route, but still preferable to going all single. Obviously, the ideal solution would be lowering the road under the Busby bridge or new low height deckers, but as I'm not an engineer I genuinely do not know how much work would be involved in lowering the road, nor am aware wherever or not ADL offer a low height version of the E400EV?

If both of those options are not possible then sending a decker via Waterfoot every 30 minutes and reducing the Busby section to a half hourly frequency would probably be sufficient. Yes, you may have to rejig the timetable slightly and make the Waterfoot section limited stop, but that shouldn't be an issue since it's A and B roads. The most practical solution for the time being would just be to give the current low height E400's an internal refurb as they aren't that old and still in good condition, but whether or not that happens though remains to be seen as First Glasgow doesn't tend to give their vehicles an internal refurb all that often, and apart from the 61 branded B9's I can't think of any other refurbs in recent times.

 

[Tom Gallacher]

Is there really that much demand for buses between Sheddens roundabout and the Holiday inn that necessitates a 15 minute frequency on that section of the route?. Clarkston is always busy, but after that there generally isn't a great deal of passenger demand until the bus reaches Westwood, so imo the Sheddens to Holiday Inn via Busby section of the route absolutely could manage fine with a half hourly service (especially as there are alternative Glasgow and EK transport options on that section with the railway station). If First wanted to upgrade the 6 using newer vehicles I see no reason why they couldn't divert the current route via Waterfoot using newer Enviro 400 MMC's/EV's, and introduce a half hourly variation along the current route via Busby (perhaps number that a 6B) operated by Enviro 200 MMC's/EV's. Yes, this would still mean a reduction in capacity vs an all decker operated route, but still preferable to going all single. Obviously, the ideal solution would be lowering the road under the Busby bridge or new low height deckers, but as I'm not an engineer I genuinely do not know how much work would be involved in lowering the road, nor am aware wherever or not ADL offer a low height version of the E400EV???. If both of those options are not possible then sending a decker via Waterfoot every 30 minutes and reducing the Busby section to a half hourly frequency would probably be sufficient. Yes, you may have to rejig the timetable slightly and make the Waterfoot section limited stop, but that shouldn't be an issue since it's A and B roads. The most practical solution for the time being would just be to give the current low height E400's an internal refurb as they aren't that old and still in good condition, but whether or not that happens though remains to be seen as First Glasgow doesn't tend to give their vehicles an internal refurb all that often, and apart from the 61 branded B9's I can't think of any other refurbs in recent times.

You could always use open toppers

Seriously though I guess that the road has probably been lowered as far as it can be. The depth of the road sewer at that point may also be a factor.