TfGM Bee Network - fleet discussion

[GusB]

send more mx58, the better

Send more what? Could you explain what an MX58, please?

Definitely wouldn’t mind more lovely tridents at QR to go along with our lovely B9s!

Again, QR requires an explanation. Let's not use jargon, please.

 

[zuriblue]

Again, QR requires an explanation. Let's not use jargon, please.

QR is probably Queens Road although back in the days of GMT (Greater Manchester Transport) the depot code was QS.

 

[xitz2012@gmail]

Send more what? Could you explain what an MX58, please?


Again, QR requires an explanation. Let's not use jargon, please.

QR means Queens Road

 

[dodecahedron67]

Send more what? Could you explain what an MX58, please?


Again, QR requires an explanation. Let's not use jargon, please.

MX58 are the mass-ordered MX58 B9TLs bought by First Manchester when they were still huge. There's something stupid like hundreds of them distributed across various bits of Stagecoach, Go Ahead, and First

 

[xitz2012@gmail]

MX58 are the mass-ordered MX58 B9TLs bought by First Manchester when they were still huge. There's something stupid like hundreds of them distributed across various bits of Stagecoach, Go Ahead, and First

Could be those, or it could also be the MX58 reg Stagecoach Manchester E400 tridents.

 

[Class 466]

You would think that they'd at least send over enough MMCs to QR to replace the god awful unreliable Scanias instead of sending them to non-bee network depots.

Queens Road will be getting more new deckers to replace the tired GNW B9TLs and Scanias this Autumn.

 

[xitz2012@gmail]

Queens Road will be getting more new deckers to replace the tired GNW B9TLs and Scanias this Autumn.

Oh right, is that a new order coming in or buses coming from other depots such as Oldham/Stockport, as I’ve heard rumours that the rest of the SN17 batch of MMCs currently at Stockport will move to Queens Road to join 10859 once the new electrics arrive there. Shame about the B9s going, I’ll miss them as they’re great buses but I can’t wait to see the back of the scanias.

 

[Class 466]

Oh right, is that a new order coming in or buses coming from other depots such as Oldham/Stockport, as I’ve heard rumours that the rest of the SN17 batch of MMCs currently at Stockport will move to Queens Road to join 10859 once the new electrics arrive there. Shame about the B9s going, I’ll miss them as they’re great buses but I can’t wait to see the back of the scanias.

New order I believe as part of the additional funding secured (It was announced by TFGM at the time but cannot find it now) SN17 reg Enviro 400MMCs will all be transferring as well - 20 odd in total. First two refurb B5LHs should be back at Oldham soon.

 

[xitz2012@gmail]

New order I believe as part of the additional funding secured (It was announced by TFGM at the time but cannot find it now) SN17 reg Enviro 400MMCs will all be transferring as well - 20 odd in total. First two refurb B5LHs should be back at Oldham soon.

I assume this new order for Queens Road will be E400MMCs like the ones currently on order?

 

[mayneway]

send more mx58, the better

Th allocation of vehicles is down to TFGM. They want the pool vehicles used as much as possible as they cannot be used for commercial work.

 

[M60lad]

Is there anything being done to combat the current shortage of vehicles at Tranche 2 Depots? Can't additional vehicles be sourced from somewhere to combat the shortage?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Is there anything being done to combat the current shortage of vehicles at Tranche 2 Depots? Can't additional vehicles be sourced from somewhere to combat the shortage?

What is the legal view on this matter, now that franchising has as different dimension to former bus company operated services?

 

[TheSmiths82]

Is there anything being done to combat the current shortage of vehicles at Tranche 2 Depots? Can't additional vehicles be sourced from somewhere to combat the shortage?

There seems to be a national bus shortage in the UK, so I don't think they can just be sourced on the used market unless a big operator is getting rid of some decent stock. These days they seem to hang onto buses until the very end or operating circumstances change. The other issue is that operators like uniform fleets in order to make maintenance easier although that seems to be getting harder and harder to achieve.

 

[mayneway]

What is the legal view on this matter, now that franchising has as different dimension to former bus company operated services?

It’s effectively TFGM that set the maximum number of vehicles, vehicle types and spares etc to each depot. I’m told from colleagues the number of spares for one of the tranche 2 depots is 12, that includes vehicles off for inspection, MOT body work etc, where as at Hyde road it’s around 30.
When you factor in breakdowns, it’s not a big number to play with and that’s the issue.

 

[Leedsbusman]

It’s effectively TFGM that set the maximum number of vehicles, vehicle types and spares etc to each depot. I’m told from colleagues the number of spares for one of the tranche 2 depots is 12, that includes vehicles off for inspection, MOT body work etc, where as at Hyde road it’s around 30.
When you factor in breakdowns, it’s not a big number to play with and that’s the issue.

No - tfgm specify routes and frequencies and minimum capacity- operators propose timetables , inter working PVR and spare capacity. Other than buying electric buses and allocating out the initial transferring fleet (including temporary cover buses), TFGM is not forcing operators to cap their fleets.

 

[mayneway]

No - tfgm specify routes and frequencies and minimum capacity- operators propose timetables , inter working PVR and spare capacity. Other than buying electric buses and allocating out the initial transferring fleet (including temporary cover buses), TFGM is not forcing operators to cap their fleets.

Well the engineering management at the depot I’m at must be telling fibs then. There will be a significant change at one of the Tranche 2 depots in the next week or so, management have wanted it from the start, TFGM have finally agreed to it and it involves the vehicle allowance at one depot.

Hyde road has several brand new deckers stored in the rear yard some have been there for weeks. Why would they sit and watch three of their depots struggle if what your saying is correct?

 

[317 forever]

New order I believe as part of the additional funding secured (It was announced by TFGM at the time but cannot find it now) SN17 reg Enviro 400MMCs will all be transferring as well - 20 odd in total. First two refurb B5LHs should be back at Oldham soon.

That's encouraging if it means the ex Oxford Volvo B5LHs are being refurbed and retained for Bee Network operations.

 

[mayneway]

That's encouraging if it means the ex Oxford Volvo B5LHs are being refurbed and retained for Bee Network operations.

Not really. TFGM paid way over the odds for these buses. Two are currently off the road requiring major engine and hybrid work.
Go ahead themselves are short of buses so to sell off relatively young buses says it all.

It would be crazy for TFGM to sink any money into the B5’s wether it be the original Manchester batch or the ones from Oxford.

 

[Leedsbusman]

Well the engineering management at the depot I’m at must be telling fibs then. There will be a significant change at one of the Tranche 2 depots in the next week or so, management have wanted it from the start, TFGM have finally agreed to it and it involves the vehicle allowance at one depot.

Hyde road has several brand new deckers stored in the rear yard some have been there for weeks. Why would they sit and watch three of their depots struggle if what your saying is correct?

Either that or TfGM told the world fibs when it consulted on the scheme and told bidders fibs about the contracts.

First also had its new Evoras stored for a few weeks before entering service so it’s not uncommon. I somehow doubt TfGM are preventing them using brand new Bee Network spec buses.

It’s easy to blame TfGM for everything just like all the ills of the old world were the operators fault - both parties have responsibility but having enough buses to cover service is certainly that of the operator. The TC would certainly agree.

 

[mayneway]

Either that or TfGM told the world fibs when it consulted on the scheme and told bidders fibs about the contracts.

Of course you know better than most. I’m working at a depot where we are struggling for vehicles and suitable vehicles for certain routes. The question is constantly arising as to why we can’t have more spares and the answer we are given is the contract spec and VA for each depot is down to TFGM.

Can you please explain why stagecoach would be happy to loose mileage due to ‘no suitable vehicle’ when they have a yard full of fresh vehicles at Hyde road?? Maybe im missing something.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Of course you know better than most. I’m working at a depot where we are struggling for vehicles and suitable vehicles for certain routes. The question is constantly arising as to why we can’t have more spares and the answer we are given is the contract spec and VA for each depot is down to TFGM.

Can you please explain why stagecoach would be happy to loose mileage due to ‘no suitable vehicle’ when they have a yard full of fresh vehicles at Hyde road?? Maybe im missing something.

Somebody is feeding you a line or, more likely, they are confusing matters. This is from the tender spec...

Fleet: GMCA will introduce a residual value (RV) mechanism that establishes a fleet of RV mechanism buses which, in a franchise competition, may be provided to all bidders on equal terms with ownership transferring to the successful bidder at the operational commencement date of that franchise. Operators will be responsible for the maintenance and repair of fleet in the RV mechanism, and the RV mechanism will provide a guaranteed residual value at the end of a franchise term. Operators will also be responsible for both the provision, maintenance and repair of any additional fleet required to operate the franchise.

In short, you have a fleet that is either provided to you (directly by TfGM) or via the RV process or that you (as an operator) draft in. That is all part of your tender submission.

If you require additional fleet for whatever reason, then it's at YOUR cost (unless you can demonstrate that the fleet you've been given isn't fit for purpose). I suspect that the case is that fleet (provided by TfGM or via the RV pool) hasn't got the uptime expected. Operator says we need more fleet because of X, TfGM say it isn't their issue because of Y.

 

[mayneway]

Somebody is feeding you a line or, more likely, they are confusing matters. This is from the tender spec...


In short, you have a fleet that is either provided to you (directly by TfGM) or via the RV process or that you (as an operator) draft in. That is all part of your tender submission.

If you require additional fleet for whatever reason, then it's at YOUR cost (unless you can demonstrate that the fleet you've been given isn't fit for purpose). I suspect that the case is that fleet (provided by TfGM or via the RV pool) hasn't got the uptime expected. Operator says we need more fleet because of X, TfGM say it isn't their issue because of Y.

Yep get what you’re saying but as I’ve said above. Mileage is currently failing because depots are short of vehicles. If it’s down to the operator then why would the operator have a yard full of newly delivered vehicles sat doing nothing when 3 of their depots are desperate for vehicles.

 

[Leedsbusman]

Yep get what you’re saying but as I’ve said above. Mileage is currently failing because depots are short of vehicles. If it’s down to the operator then why would the operator have a yard full of newly delivered vehicles sat doing nothing when 3 of their depots are desperate for vehicles.

I heard one operator had vehicles awaiting use but lacked either radios or telematics or such like and there were delays getting them fitted. That was a few weeks back. Maybe they are short or engineers to do PDIs?

You could equally ask why TfGM is prepared to lose revenue by stopping their contractor putting extra buses into its fleet at is own expense to deliver its contract commitments.

 

[mayneway]

The contractor is at the depots each night fitting radios and telematics to vehicles - as they come in off the road for the night so it’s not really an issue buses being used without radios etc.

I would think it boils down to cost. If additional buses were allocated to depots as additional spares the operator would look to TFGM for more money.
They want everything done on a shoe string.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Yep get what you’re saying but as I’ve said above. Mileage is currently failing because depots are short of vehicles. If it’s down to the operator then why would the operator have a yard full of newly delivered vehicles sat doing nothing when 3 of their depots are desperate for vehicles.

Might be good to clarify which vehicles these are.

Who has supplied them (I.e. TfGM or Stagecoach)? Where are they destined for?

 

[mayneway]

Might be good to clarify which vehicles these are.

Who has supplied them (I.e. TfGM or Stagecoach)? Where are they destined for?

Stagecoach have several 24 plate MMC 400’s sat in the yard at the rear of Hyde road. Two further were delivered late last week.

 

[cnjb8]

Not really. TFGM paid way over the odds for these buses. Two are currently off the road requiring major engine and hybrid work.
Go ahead themselves are short of buses so to sell off relatively young buses says it all.

It would be crazy for TFGM to sink any money into the B5’s wether it be the original Manchester batch or the ones from Oxford.

The impression I get is that GoAhead received an offer from TfGM for the B5s that they couldn't refuse. They've just transferred a batch of E400Hs from Oxford to Plymouth and I'd argue the B5s are more reliable

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Stagecoach have several 24 plate MMC 400’s sat in the yard at the rear of Hyde road. Two further were delivered late last week.

Yes but who’s supplied them, and where are they destined? And why are they needed, which ultimately influences who picks up the additional cost!

 

[158756]

The contractor is at the depots each night fitting radios and telematics to vehicles - as they come in off the road for the night so it’s not really an issue buses being used without radios etc.

I would think it boils down to cost. If additional buses were allocated to depots as additional spares the operator would look to TFGM for more money.
They want everything done on a shoe string.

This just sounds Stagecoach have under-bid and are now finding they can't operate the service with the number of vehicles they priced in. In which case, tough, why should the taxpayer have to pay for their mistake. Stagecoach can either pay for more buses or they can pay the fines for lost mileage (though preferably the fines should be steep enough to discourage that option).

 

[stait.john]

If it’s the same as TfL tenders, then generally the operators usually have a higher spares percentage due to the penalties involved of lost mileage.

Can’t see how or why TFGM would specify the number of spare vehicles at each depot, as has been said I’d suggest it may have been under resourced by the operator.