Transdev Blazefield

[Bayum]

Lots of grumbles and angry Wetherby/Collingham/Bardsey residents this evening complaining about the drop in standards of vehicles on the X99/X98 routes. Lack of availability of double deckers on the busiest services meaning people are being left behind or the bus is being delayed later and later along the route. Cancellations still continuing by the sounds of things.

Is this a route Transdev actually give any care about?

 

[Andyh82]

Lots of grumbles and angry Wetherby/Collingham/Bardsey residents this evening complaining about the drop in standards of vehicles on the X99/X98 routes. Lack of availability of double deckers on the busiest services meaning people are being left behind or the bus is being delayed later and later along the route. Cancellations still continuing by the sounds of things.

Is this a route Transdev actually give any care about?

At this time of year it’s probably due to Christmas traffic in Leeds, the traffic can be horrendous

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Lots of grumbles and angry Wetherby/Collingham/Bardsey residents this evening complaining about the drop in standards of vehicles on the X99/X98 routes. Lack of availability of double deckers on the busiest services meaning people are being left behind or the bus is being delayed later and later along the route. Cancellations still continuing by the sounds of things.

Is this a route Transdev actually give any care about?

Evidently a poor day for the Harrogate BusCo. From bustimes it's clear there was a morning shortage of double-decks leading to shuffles to ensure proper coverage of school runs. This was compounded by the complete cancellation of the inward X99 at 0755. Not to mention the 1645 ex Leeds X98 failing to run after (what looks like) a breakdown. Much worse was the traffic situation in the afternoon. An accident on the A61 in the Alwoodley area led to all traffic being diverted through East Keswick totally stuffing both X98 and X99 routes. The 36 never recovered the rest of the day, the diversion was costing up to 20 minutes extra running time. Other than keeping a live spare at Leeds not sure what else can be done in such circumstances.

And yes, in general terms this is easily the worst time of year for both traffic conditions and heavy passenger loads.

 

[SCH117X]

They are "buying" two Merc hybrids for the X98 and X99. albeit single deckers
Bit more than 20 minutes delay on the 36 - the 1515 to Ripon for example was only 9 late starting from Leeds but arrived Ripon 50 late.

 

[theblackwatch]

Lots of grumbles and angry Wetherby/Collingham/Bardsey residents this evening complaining about the drop in standards of vehicles on the X99/X98 routes. Lack of availability of double deckers on the busiest services meaning people are being left behind or the bus is being delayed later and later along the route. Cancellations still continuing by the sounds of things.

Is this a route Transdev actually give any care about?

It seems to me that after a nice flashy start with the former Leeds-York CityZap double deckers, the X98/X99 has more recently operated with a bunch of cast-offs, basically whatever Transdev have been able to find for the interim period before the rest of the electrics enter service. I'm not sure a couple of hybrid single deckers for the route is the right solution though, and I'm unsure what they will work alongside.

 

[Bayum]

At this time of year it’s probably due to Christmas traffic in Leeds, the traffic can be horrendous

It was the same when I had my hip replacement in April and needed public transport ongoing through to July and August.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2024 ==

Evidently a poor day for the Harrogate BusCo. From bustimes it's clear there was a morning shortage of double-decks leading to shuffles to ensure proper coverage of school runs. This was compounded by the complete cancellation of the inward X99 at 0755. Not to mention the 1645 ex Leeds X98 failing to run after (what looks like) a breakdown. Much worse was the traffic situation in the afternoon. An accident on the A61 in the Alwoodley area led to all traffic being diverted through East Keswick totally stuffing both X98 and X99 routes. The 36 never recovered the rest of the day, the diversion was costing up to 20 minutes extra running time. Other than keeping a live spare at Leeds not sure what else can be done in such circumstances.

And yes, in general terms this is easily the worst time of year for both traffic conditions and heavy passenger loads.

If it was an isolated incident, I’d understand but this was happening in the last six months too.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Dec 2024 ==

It seems to me that after a nice flashy start with the former Leeds-York CityZap double deckers, the X98/X99 has more recently operated with a bunch of cast-offs, basically whatever Transdev have been able to find for the interim period before the rest of the electrics enter service. I'm not sure a couple of hybrid single deckers for the route is the right solution though, and I'm unsure what they will work alongside.

100% I think they’ve decided we are outliers and it and we are not a priority or in need of support.

 

[SCH117X]

Geminis 2427 and 2428 are for the X98 and X99, currently along with a couple of B7RLEs until the Merc hybvrids arrive. All the B7RLEs are being transferred elsewhere. Those two Geminis are apart from the Scania Starbuses will be the only diesel buses at Starbeck once all the Enviro & Merc electrics arrive. Two of those will be in fleet livery so could turn up on those services,

 

[LucyP]

The X98/99 is the Cinderella service. Have a look at the East Keswick Parish Council website for the details of the criticism from the Council. The Citaros are too wide for the X99. The pinch points in Linton and East Keswick will damage them, just like they did with the ADLs, which were wider than the Geminis and Streetdecks that First used.

The type of bus isn't the problem though, it's the unreliability, the constant late running, and the constantly changing route after Harehills, which does nothing to avoid the traffic. It should use the 36 route from Sheepscar, which has an uninterrupted bus lane along North Street, whereas Regent Street doesn't and is always jammed. First worked that out years ago at peak times. Transdev still haven't done so. It's also the speed of the service. It's just so slow. It isn't even a limited stop anymore, as it used to be under First.

It will probably return to First as part of a package of routes under franchising which is for the best. It was clearly a route that Alex Hornby wanted, at least as something to use the redundant CityZaps buses on, but he went, the Zaps went and it must be problem route for Transdev. Dead running, drivers to be shuttled to and from Wetherby on the just as unreliable 7, that basically only runs once per hour. There are no proper facilities in either Wetherby or Leeds Boar Lane for the drivers. The public lavatories close early in Wetherby. I have seen drivers use those in the bar by the stop at Boar Lane.

It's a service that is packed only in the evening peak from Leeds, and by the time it reaches Redhall, it is virtually empty. Few people use it regularly along the entirety of the route, because it is so slow, and because they are likely to own a car or several, because of the lack of alternatives and because after Redhall, the areas are very affluent. Linton has the most expensive house prices in the whole of Yorkshire.

 

[SCH117X]

The X98/99 is the Cinderella service. Have a look at the East Keswick Parish Council website for the details of the criticism from the Council. The Citaros are too wide for the X99. #

The electric Citaros they have are 2.55m wide as they have cameras instead of wing mirrors which otherwise make them 2.95m wide. Most likely the hybrids will be alo be camera fitted

 

[Mollman]

It will probably return to First as part of a package of routes under franchising which is for the best. It was clearly a route that Alex Hornby wanted, at least as something to use the redundant CityZaps buses on, but he went, the Zaps went and it must be problem route for Transdev. Dead running, drivers to be shuttled to and from Wetherby on the just as unreliable 7, that basically only runs once per hour. There are no proper facilities in either Wetherby or Leeds Boar Lane for the drivers. The public lavatories close early in Wetherby. I have seen drivers use those in the bar by the stop at Boar Lane.

I presume you mean it will return to join other First routes, unless you already know who has won before the franchise process has started?

The 7 did used to be every 30 minutes which might have helped but it is on WYCA to provide adequate facilities at Wetherby bus station not Transdev.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The X98/99 is the Cinderella service. Have a look at the East Keswick Parish Council website for the details of the criticism from the Council. The Citaros are too wide for the X99. The pinch points in Linton and East Keswick will damage them, just like they did with the ADLs, which were wider than the Geminis and Streetdecks that First used.

Eh? Geminis and Streetdecks are not appreciably different to Citaros/e400mmc in terms of width; they're all about 2.52/2.55m (excl mirrors) wide as determined by the maximum construction and use regulations.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The X98/99 is the Cinderella service. Have a look at the East Keswick Parish Council website for the details of the criticism from the Council. The Citaros are too wide for the X99. The pinch points in Linton and East Keswick will damage them, just like they did with the ADLs, which were wider than the Geminis and Streetdecks that First used.

The type of bus isn't the problem though, it's the unreliability, the constant late running, and the constantly changing route after Harehills, which does nothing to avoid the traffic. It should use the 36 route from Sheepscar, which has an uninterrupted bus lane along North Street, whereas Regent Street doesn't and is always jammed. First worked that out years ago at peak times. Transdev still haven't done so. It's also the speed of the service. It's just so slow. It isn't even a limited stop anymore, as it used to be under First.

It will probably return to First as part of a package of routes under franchising which is for the best. It was clearly a route that Alex Hornby wanted, at least as something to use the redundant CityZaps buses on, but he went, the Zaps went and it must be problem route for Transdev. Dead running, drivers to be shuttled to and from Wetherby on the just as unreliable 7, that basically only runs once per hour. There are no proper facilities in either Wetherby or Leeds Boar Lane for the drivers. The public lavatories close early in Wetherby. I have seen drivers use those in the bar by the stop at Boar Lane.

It's a service that is packed only in the evening peak from Leeds, and by the time it reaches Redhall, it is virtually empty. Few people use it regularly along the entirety of the route, because it is so slow, and because they are likely to own a car or several, because of the lack of alternatives and because after Redhall, the areas are very affluent. Linton has the most expensive house prices in the whole of Yorkshire.

Of course it will nearly always be the case that where an operator is somewhat remote from any part of a route it will tend to struggle to deal with operational problems. As such it is reasonable to suggest that Transdev Harrogate is not well suited to running these routes. On the other hand who is? Return them to Leeds based operation and they become even more of a cinderella, just a tiny part of a much bigger operation. Perhaps someone more local, like Connexions, would be a better bet. Why doesn't that company compete on these routes? Could it be that the demographics you describe prevent the route generating sufficient profit for a small operator? Will WYCA even be prepared to continue the current level of service under franchising?

As for that future franchising remember that the system in no way guarantees work for current incumbents. There's no reason why Arriva couldn't become a major player on the north side of Leeds. But equally any other operator prepared to commit the appropriate management resources could win the work given that franchising is intended to include use of appropriate current depots. So nothing to exclude Stagecoach. Or Go Ahead. Or even Transdev!

 

[Steve440]

It's no good replying to LucyP she doesn't take any notice of anyone except herself.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

It's no good replying to LucyP she doesn't take any notice of anyone except herself.

I have noticed that her communication style, both here and elsewhere, is somewhat antagonistic. Nevertheless she does sometimes raise points worth discussing even if she chooses to not join in.

 

[Tetchytyke]

The Citaros are too wide for the X99.

Yet Citaro hybrids run perfectly well on the Isle of Man where the roads are quite a lot narrower than in West Yorkshire.

As such it is reasonable to suggest that Transdev Harrogate is not well suited to running these routes. On the other hand who is?

I think a lot of people forget that First withdrew from these routes for a reason.

 

[RELL6L]

If Stagecoach ran Transdev Harrogate solving the X98/X99 would be very simple. They would run to Leeds bus station and interwork with the 36 - every half hour an incoming 36 would go off as an X98 or X99 and be replaced on the 36 by an incoming X98/X99. Roughly 4 hours Harrogate to Leeds to Wetherby and return - ideal. But the marketing tail is wagging the operational dog so Transdev would never do that.

If First Potteries were running the X98/X99 the X99 would run roughly every hour and 5 minutes and the X98 every hour and 11 minutes to give more recovery time… and watch the passengers disappear!

If its that bad then just withdraw it and wait for a tender.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

If Stagecoach ran Transdev Harrogate solving the X98/X99 would be very simple. They would run to Leeds bus station and interwork with the 36 - every half hour an incoming 36 would go off as an X98 or X99 and be replaced on the 36 by an incoming X98/X99. Roughly 4 hours Harrogate to Leeds to Wetherby and return - ideal. But the marketing tail is wagging the operational dog so Transdev would never do that.

If First Potteries were running the X98/X99 the X99 would run roughly every hour and 5 minutes and the X98 every hour and 11 minutes to give more recovery time… and watch the passengers disappear!

If its that bad then just withdraw it and wait for a tender.

A valid point. But casting a wider view it is clear that the deregulated part of the industry is very much in favour of all-in route branding, certainly for the more profitable services. Even to the extent that individual operators appear not to have a unified "corporate" image: look at Reading. Even Stagecoach buses come in many different colours, a massive departure from the Souter way. Perhaps Wetherby-Leeds is destined to always be a cinderella route, sufficient demand to justify a regular service but demographics unlikely to generate the sorts of passenger numbers that make an operator pay close attention.

 

[Leedsbusman]

If Stagecoach ran Transdev Harrogate solving the X98/X99 would be very simple. They would run to Leeds bus station and interwork with the 36 - every half hour an incoming 36 would go off as an X98 or X99 and be replaced on the 36 by an incoming X98/X99. Roughly 4 hours Harrogate to Leeds to Wetherby and return - ideal. But the marketing tail is wagging the operational dog so Transdev would never do that.

Would they though? Arriva don't tend to interwork interurban services in Leeds, and that must only be for operational reasons as they don't really do marketing!

 

[LucyP]

Many mirrors were knocked off the ADL's along Linton Lane when Transdev took over the X98/99. It is why they cancelled services. You used to see the broken bits at the side of the road. Imagine the cost of replacing cameras. The Citaros are wider, even if it is not much, that little is important, because when you get to the pinch point in Linton, between the Windmill Pub and the bridge over the Wharfe, especially when you mee a vehicle coming the other way, and the bus is in the hedge, covering the wall or next to the house wall, millimeters count! The same applies in East Keswick on the bend where Main Street becomes Whitegate. There is nowhere on an IOM bus route that is as narrow as those two points. Guernsey is a better comparison and what is the Guernsey fleet? Wright Street Vibes and Mercedes Sprinters for that reason.

As to the facilities at either end of the route, that fact remains that there are no proper facilities, proximate to either terminus at all times that buses operate and that must be off-putting to drivers and thus make recruitment and retention of driver difficult.

As to the future franchising, it is patently obvious that routes are not going to be offered on an individual basis as that would take too long to deal with and create too much "paperwork", and therefore they will be packaged together as a bundle of routes and that only First have the depot and resources to bid for such a package in that part of West Yorkshire.

Combining a 36 with an X98/99 would not solve anything as both as persistently late. Yesterday lunchtime, I noticed 2 of the new BEV buses one behind the other on Leeds Road, Harrogate, heading to Leeds. The latter one still had display problems. On the rear display it said "Next Stop: Oatlands School". It should be Oatlands Corner. The school is nowhere near the bus route, and why have the next stop on the back of the bus? What use is that outside the bus to the car driver behind! Leeds Bus Station is in the wrong place. It is basically "out of town". At least the X98/99 go into the centre and the terminus is proximate to the railway station, which is much more useful than the bus station. In the early days of operation, Transdev carried out a survey. They asked if people wanted the bus to go to the bus station. The answer was no.

 

[RELL6L]

Would they though? Arriva don't tend to interwork interurban services in Leeds, and that must only be for operational reasons as they don't really do marketing!

They do - the 164 from Leeds to Selby is run entirely by Castleford buses on interworked services as Selby buses are not compliant to go to Leeds. Also the 571 at Halifax is interworked at Halifax with the 255. The only other services which don't go that near to their out-of-Leeds depots are the 254 and 255 which go to Cleckheaton but not Heckmondwike. Yes these could be interworked with the 229 but probably not worth it. Agreed on the marketing!

If Arriva ran the X98/X99 then the first and last journeys would be chopped at each timetable change...

 

[stevieinselby]

If Stagecoach ran Transdev Harrogate solving the X98/X99 would be very simple. They would run to Leeds bus station and interwork with the 36 - every half hour an incoming 36 would go off as an X98 or X99 and be replaced on the 36 by an incoming X98/X99. Roughly 4 hours Harrogate to Leeds to Wetherby and return - ideal. But the marketing tail is wagging the operational dog so Transdev would never do that.

Simple? That would solve nothing, and would make a whole host of other issues worse.

Interworking for any reason other than providing an effective through service for passengers or where buses run infrequently and the route doesn't offer an efficient use of a whole number of diagrams is pointless and does nothing but restrict your deployment of staff and vehicles, increase the risk of poor reliability and delays spreading across the network, and set you up for problems in the future if you need to vary one or other of the services.

The X98/X99 are an efficient use of 4 vehicles, running a half-hourly service.
The 36 (at the Leeds end of the route) runs a 10-minute service.
Those frequencies are different, which makes interworking less efficient.
And if the 36 is going for luxury spec buses and you would want to interwork them then you would have to get luxury spec for the X98/X99 as well, when we've seen that the ridership doesn't merit that extra outlay.

 

[Towers]

It more than likely won't, but Transdev publicly stating that the reason they're withdrawing the service is the behaviour of the pupils won't reflect very well on the school and hopefully force them to do something about it.

They should have done something about it a long time ago if the situation is that bad. One would expect a member of school staff or two to be riding on the bus daily. One would hope that the operator would be utilising only vehicles with working CCTV, ideally including audio recording in the cab area, so that the perpetrators are easily identified.

Sounds a pretty “challenging” school.

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

The X98/X99 are an efficient use of 4 vehicles, running a half-hourly service.
The 36 (at the Leeds end of the route) runs a 10-minute service.

Well at least the X98/X99 are actually running albeit with delays starting to build. The 36 is in a mess. If bustimes is to be believed (usual caveats) then it would appear that during the course of the morning all the electric Volvos have been pulled off the road. This led to the off-peak 6-bus local service being provided by an eCitaro, a Versa and 4 OmniDekkas. Of course come schools finish time something had to give and it would appear the 36 is missing a lot of Harrogate shorts. Oh dear. I'm sure @LucyP will be filled with schadenfreude.

 

[YorkRailFan]

1871 has entered service on Coastliner, as of today. How long until another Versa goes off lease from Rawcliffe?

 

[JWalker127]

Well at least the X98/X99 are actually running albeit with delays starting to build. The 36 is in a mess. If bustimes is to be believed (usual caveats) then it would appear that during the course of the morning all the electric Volvos have been pulled off the road. This led to the off-peak 6-bus local service being provided by an eCitaro, a Versa and 4 OmniDekkas. Of course come schools finish time something had to give and it would appear the 36 is missing a lot of Harrogate shorts. Oh dear. I'm sure @LucyP will be filled with schadenfreude.

The volvos seemed to have been taken off after a 36 decker hit the pantograph in the bus station. Could have stopped the other pantographs from working.

 

[RELL6L]

Simple? That would solve nothing, and would make a whole host of other issues worse.

Interworking for any reason other than providing an effective through service for passengers or where buses run infrequently and the route doesn't offer an efficient use of a whole number of diagrams is pointless and does nothing but restrict your deployment of staff and vehicles, increase the risk of poor reliability and delays spreading across the network, and set you up for problems in the future if you need to vary one or other of the services.

The X98/X99 are an efficient use of 4 vehicles, running a half-hourly service.
The 36 (at the Leeds end of the route) runs a 10-minute service.
Those frequencies are different, which makes interworking less efficient.
And if the 36 is going for luxury spec buses and you would want to interwork them then you would have to get luxury spec for the X98/X99 as well, when we've seen that the ridership doesn't merit that extra outlay.

There are other reasons for interworking not least the efficient use of drivers. Yes the X98/X99 is an efficient use of buses but not drivers if there is lots of ferrying between Harrogate and Wetherby.

The frequencies are different- it would only be one 36 in three that became an X98/X99. Yes delays could be spread more widely but that might mean more thinly, still some 36s off Leeds even if none coming in. The point about the high profile 36 route and marketing is of course why it would never happen.

A couple of Stagecoach examples: the 151 in South Wales from Blackwood to Newport used to be run from Blackwood depot. When that closed the 151 is now run by Cwmbran and linked to the X24. Each X24 coming into Newport leaves as a 151, every 15 minutes, and vice versa. Also in East Midlands the 29 and 99 between Retford and Doncaster are run by Gainsborough depot with interworking at both ends.

And, as I mentioned, Arriva 164 is all interworked with other Castleford routes

 

[Andyh82]

There are other reasons for interworking not least the efficient use of drivers. Yes the X98/X99 is an efficient use of buses but not drivers if there is lots of ferrying between Harrogate and Wetherby.

The frequencies are different- it would only be one 36 in three that became an X98/X99. Yes delays could be spread more widely but that might mean more thinly, still some 36s off Leeds even if none coming in. The point about the high profile 36 route and marketing is of course why it would never happen.

A couple of Stagecoach examples: the 151 in South Wales from Blackwood to Newport used to be run from Blackwood depot. When that closed the 151 is now run by Cwmbran and linked to the X24. Each X24 coming into Newport leaves as a 151, every 15 minutes, and vice versa. Also in East Midlands the 29 and 99 between Retford and Doncaster are run by Gainsborough depot with interworking at both ends.

And, as I mentioned, Arriva 164 is all interworked with other Castleford routes

So you are suggesting the high profile 36 branding that they’ve used for two decades and is widely seen as one of the most successful in the country, should be binned so they can interwork the 36 with the X98/X99 to solve a problem that doesn’t exist?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

So you are suggesting the high profile 36 branding that they’ve used for two decades and is widely seen as one of the most successful in the country, should be binned so they can interwork the 36 with the X98/X99 to solve a problem that doesn’t exist?

I think he's suggesting the opposite, hence the line "The point about the high profile 36 route and marketing is of course why it would never happen."

It's not an easy solution with a relatively tightly timed service, and I'd certainly not be advocating interworking of it with the 36 given the issues of both services in managing service reliability. I assume (sure @SCH117X knows the operational method) that drivers are crew ferried or travel on 7 from Harrogate at various times of the day and rolling breaks taken in Wetherby?

I can fully understand why Transdev took it on - what should be a profitable route is surrendered by First because they don't have the drivers and want to concentrate on their prime Leeds city routes - so made sense. It's just difficult running an intensive service that far from the home depot.

 

[Andyh82]

But the marketing tail is wagging the operational dog so Transdev would never do that.

Sounds to me that they were throwing disdain at the concept of marketing and branding a route

 

[SCH117X]

Craig Temple the other weeks lambasted North Yorkshire Council for the poor time keeping of his X70 blaming it on the traffic on Wetherby Road, Not strictly correct as one of the Wetherby bound X70s works off an X52 from Otley which hits Harrogate at the start of the evening grid lock and in turn works off an Otley schools service which seems to run very late some days. Hence that X70 can be way late starting. So if Connexions were running the X98 X99 there would no doubt be more crazy interworking by them with negligable dwell time between workings. Also if Wetherby Road is causing such chaos to the X70 it must be affecting the 7. At least with the reduced service their is longer dwell time at Harrogate between a number of workings and IME if a 7 is very late arriving they typcially come up wit a vehilce for the outbound working even if means cancelling a Route 1 working .