Tom Gallacher
Member
Last edited:
-
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!
First Greater Glasgow
- Thread starter KGGXXXY
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Even two smaller buses find it difficult to pass each other in Drumry Road East. With the amount of cars parked even on the pavement.
With the small uptake from there an Avondale every 10 minutes would be more than adequate Letting the 60 and M60 go via the Retail Park. There has been much time lost recently using Drumry Road East then trying to join Great Western Road only to cross to Drumry Road. Timekeeping has been more than poor.
The same could be said for Whitecrook where mostly all services serve Barns Street and East Barns Strett. The exit from Whitecrook Street is delayed by congestion from traffic heading for the Clydrbank Shopping centre. A simple fix would be to send the many 1s via Glashow/Dumbartpn Road. Leaving the 2s and 6s to serve Whitecrook. It's not really rocket science.
Tom Gallacher
Member
There might be a problem with routing more buses via Glasgow Rd rather than Whitecrook when they open the new bridge. This is bound to clog up with traffic whenever the bridge needs opened for shipping traffic which is predicted to be at least 4 times a day. Each opening and closing takes 45 minutes.
Having said that I guess that a lot of traffic will divert through Whitecrook when this happens anyway so lots more congestion ahead.
Believe the bridge will be at a high level with the acces roads clear of both East Barns Street and Glasgow Road. It has to clear the railway line at Yoker Station.
Tom Gallacher
Member
It's a swing bridge starting at ground level with the junction at Dock Street. They're putting in warning signs on all the roads telling motorist that there's likely to be congestion. I believe that some of the signs will be as far back as Dumbarton and Anniesland.
Take a look at plans for the first opening bridge on the river Clyde
If approved, the stunning new bridge could be in place by 2020
I wonder if any routes will cross this Bridge.It's a swing bridge starting at ground level with the junction at Dock Street. They're putting in warning signs on all the roads telling motorist that there's likely to be congestion. I believe that some of the signs will be as far back as Dumbarton and Anniesland.
Take a look at plans for the first opening bridge on the river Clyde
If approved, the stunning new bridge could be in place by 2020www.glasgowlive.co.uk
Tom Gallacher
Member
Possibly but there would need to be some sort of exemptions from the timetabling to mitigate against the delays whenever shipping traffic is needing the bridge opened. Unfortunately I think that Barns St will resemble the M25 at times.
Given the speed of river traffic it should be possible to provide a 10-15 minutes warning of the bridge opening.It's a swing bridge starting at ground level with the junction at Dock Street. They're putting in warning signs on all the roads telling motorist that there's likely to be congestion. I believe that some of the signs will be as far back as Dumbarton and Anniesland.
Take a look at plans for the first opening bridge on the river Clyde
If approved, the stunning new bridge could be in place by 2020
Doubt there will be that many openings in a Day.
Tom Gallacher
Member
It's not the advance notice of the bridge opening that's the problem, although that in itself will present issues, but the 45 minutes that it will be out of action for. When the first proposal was put out it was envisaged that the bridge would be out of commission for an average of 4 times a day. In an ideal world this would be co-ordinated to avoid closures taking place at peak periods. Unfortunately the tidal nature of the river prevents this. The opening of the new scrapyard at King George V dock now sees ships of up to 70,000 tonnes navigating upriver. If you've ever seen any of these ships you'll know how big they are and they need a high tide to reach their berth. There's also a speed restriction of 5 knots on the river so they're not exactly bombing up the river.
Vehicular traffic will play second fiddle to marine on these occasions.
Last edited:
Clydebank badly needs a bus conection to the south side, but a bridge that is going to close for shipping, cant see that happening through delays to timetabling
It could of course use the Erskine Bridge or tunnel. However nobody seems to be interested in one.
Tom Gallacher
Member
You could possibly run a bus service with a bit of co-ordination between the bus operator and whoever is control of the Clyde navigation these days.
Ships over a certain size (and that means pretty much everything that would require the bridge to open) need to keep the authorities informed of their arrivals and departures - you can't just turn up. With that in mind the bridge controllers will know to within a few minutes of when the closures will need to take place at least a couple of days before they happen. If, and that's a big if, they wanted to be helpful this information could be passed on to the bus operator(s) which would enable them to inform customers of the times to avoid. It's not a perfect solution but as far as I can see it's the only one. At least it would give some semblance of order to the timetabling of any such route(s) over the bridge.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
McGills run a service over the Erskine Bridge.
GusB
Established Member
We are drifting away from the main topic. If anyone wishes to discuss bridges over the Clyde, feel free to start a new thread in the relevant section of the forum.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Yes and it servesi Erskine the airport and Paiskey.
Could of course extend to Braehead or even QEUH too.Replacing their 17 service. However that woukd be joined up thinking no doubt. .
Last edited:
In other news, Have been hearing rumours that Overtown depot are losing their short E200mmcs, not sure on numbers and are supposedly getting ex London E200s as replacements 
Have heard that E200mmcs were leaving Glasgow to go south so could be these I guess. Anyone heard anything to confirm/deny? 
Have heard that E200mmcs were leaving Glasgow to go south so could be these I guess. Anyone heard anything to confirm/deny? JumpinTrainz
Established Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 1,930
It was posted on here about a month ago that Lanarkshire were losing all of their 68 plate E200MMCs including the longer examples to Manchester.In other news, Have been hearing rumours that Overtown depot are losing their short E200mmcs, not sure on numbers and are supposedly getting ex London E200s as replacements
I think it’s a really bad move considering how much First have modernised Blantyre and Overtown in recent years. Wiping out such a large number of new diesels seems wrong unless something newer is going to replace them. It would be good if some of the E200EVs could replace them at Blantyre/Overtown for Lanarkshire local services and Caledonia/Scotstoun could see some Yutongs but that’s just fantasy!
Busman84
Member
No EVs going to Lanarkshire either just now. It does appear older diesel going there which is a step back.
As for Yutongs none are coming to Glasgow. First Aberdeen are due to get these.
As for Yutongs none are coming to Glasgow. First Aberdeen are due to get these.
From what I heard there are only about 9 ex London E200s coming, so there would be enough for one route to lose E200 MMCs at Overtown, which I guess would be the 241 as they seem to have debranded a good few already. No 242s have been done yet and only 1-2 254s. I'm not sure how Overtown could lose them all as I thought Eurocentral required Euro 6 buses?
Last edited by a moderator:
They were going subject to First winning a franchise in Manchester which by all accounts they haven’t so these should be staying put.
Thanks for confirming
ScotRail158725
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 2,662
They were also subject to moving when the 50 E200 EVs to Scotstoun arrive
Tom Gallacher
Member
The problem with that, as I see it, is the travel time from Clydebank to Braehead. A service linking Braehead and QEUH could have potential though as long as the timetabling doesn't get screwed up on a daily basis because of the thing that can't be mentioned
There are plenty of other opportunities with other services like the First 16 that starts from Knightswood and heads to QUEH. It could easily go to Braehead too. For that matter, the Clyebank 81 could do the job too. It just needs somebody in First to have a lightbulb moment.The problem with that, as I see it, is the travel time from Clydebank to Braehead. A service linking Braehead and QEUH could have potential though as long as the timetabling doesn't get screwed up on a daily basis because of the thing that can't be mentioned
Last edited by a moderator:
Tom Gallacher
Member
The 81 would seem the natural choice for a service to Braehead via Yoker. Anytime I've seen the 16 between Partick and Anniesland it seemed to have good loadings so using this service for a new route would seem a backward step. Only my opinion obviously.
JumpinTrainz
Established Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 1,930
That’s why I said in my last message it was fantasy.
On a separate note I wonder what First’s overall plan would have been regarding a replacement for so many E200MMCs at Blantyre. Without a new order it could only mean a mix of the second hand E200s and possibly E300s from Scotstoun? Glad it’s not happening. Lanarkshire fleet is in a good place right now.
Lanarkshire fleet is really great just now, would be a shame for Blantyre or Overtown to lose any Euro 6 vehicles as Lanarkshire no doubt makes the company a good profit.
I tend to agree with this as the option to take regarding the 81. The only issue is the fact the route is circular in Duntocher so it would need to be incredibly well timed to keep it reliable. The 16 is such a weird service for me. I've seen it be too full to stop at peak times but in the off peak, I've been the only person on it on multiple occasions.
I'm surprised it wasn't cut to Partick to Blairdardie to save another bus when Scotstoun seemed to be really struggling for drivers.
I feel like the 77 going back to every 10 minutes when resources allow it will negate the need for the 8 and 16 going to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital if I'm honest although I'd probably cut the 8 first due to the length of the route.
The other thing for me that feels weird is the fact the 34 is the only Queen Elizabeth University Hospital bus from the southside that is fully on that side of the River Clyde. I'm surprised that nothing else was ever tried on top of the 34.
The network around every Glasgow hospital has remained very consistent and unchanged to be fair. Other than the 34A being renumbered recently, there hasn't really been any changes for a long time.
Last edited:
Tom Gallacher
Member
If you're going to send a bus over the forbidden subject then I think you need to accept that the timetable is just for show - and the traffic commissioners will need to go along with this as well. It's all very fine having a well constructed timetable that is achievable but when you are faced with the problems that any such service may encounter allowances, both logistically and administratively, will need to be made. Not ideal, but at least if the travelling public are aware of this then they can make a choice. What would be a must though is real time information at each stop, not just a notice saying that the timetable is subject to daily amendments. Be honest with your customers and they'll cut you some slack. Try and pull the wool over their eyes and they'll go elsewhere.
The problem is that the general public are very good at blaming First for what they cannot control. I've seen plenty of people say car congestion making buses late is just "excuses" and that they should be on time regardless of that and roadworks. From my point of view, if someone uses the bus especially for work on a weekly basis then there is no excuse for not understanding the issues any bus company can't control.
The electronic bus stop boards are a huge part of the problem too. SPT update them too early for all of the services listed as cancelled to definitely be cancelled. I was at a stop one day and all 3 buses mentioned were listed as cancelled yet all 3 turned up. The app is a whole other issue but I've previously discussed that and I never really expect it to change because it requires the depots to not be lazy and update cancellations as they occur regardless of how short notice it is.