Bus routes split in two

[jnjkerbin]

Today I travelled on Stagecoach South East's 100, which runs from Conquest Hospital, Hastings to Dover, a distance of about 45 miles.

In the timetable, it splits the journey at Lydd, with the phrase "Through route. A change of bus is not required." I notice this seems to be a common thing on long bus routes, like the X53 in Dorset and Devon.

What is the reason for showing the route like this, and does anyone have any idea what the longest route is (in terms of distance or time) in the UK?

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

The 53, 450, & Humber Flyer in Grimsby are split into two.
I recall hearing that the DfT suggest this for routes over 30miles long or something like that.

Longest bus route circles Coventry.
The number 360.

 

[GaryMcEwan]

Stagecoach Perth's has a route that goes from Perth to Stirling, and on the Hanover display it's 'Crieff for Stirling' as service 15, and when it gets to Crieff it changes to route 47 for the Crieff - Stirling portion.

It's the same bus and through fares are available on it as well...

 

[me123]

I've seen this a few times, and thinking about declining usage, nonsense like this can't be helping matters.

When I lived in sunny Elgin, I was looking at going to Inverness Airport on the bus to catch a flight. There was, seemingly, a bus direct to the airport. However, it had one of these bizarre "transfers" in it, that apparently wasn't a transfer. Like the scenario above, it claimed that you could stay on the bus and that through fares were available. But to me, it initially looked like a 2 minute connection in either Nairn or Forres, and that put me off using the bus. (In the end, I ended up flying from Aberdeen so this wasn't an issue!).

I cannot fathom who thought this to be a good idea. It's bonkers. It does the remarkable job of making bus travel even less attractive, and just adds to confusion.

 

[Andyh82]

It's to avoid running the service on European drivers hours rules isn't it?

Rules under X miles can be run on UK drivers hours. It's a nightmare having a mix of both, so depots slice long routes into parts, each part shorter than X miles.

 

[Bookd]

Someone more expert could confirm if I am right, but I believe that this is due to EC regulations. Up to a certain distance a route is considered to be local, and beyond that more stringent rules apply. A company could continue with a through service, but they would need tachograph fitted buses and may have to meet others requirements. If they run through, but change the route number half way, this is legally considered to be two separate routes, which gets round the rules. I agree that it is barmy!

 

[freetoview33]

There has been a lot of route splitting in Bristol in recent years a few of these has been down to length.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

but I believe that this is due to EC regulations.

It's a somewhat arbitrary rule as to what is a bus service and what is a coach service. The "guaranteed connection" loophole at least avoids the need to throw everyone off the bus, only to allow them to board again.

 

[martinsh]

Someone more expert could confirm if I am right, but I believe that this is due to EC regulations. Up to a certain distance a route is considered to be local, and beyond that more stringent rules apply. A company could continue with a through service, but they would need tachograph fitted buses and may have to meet others requirements. If they run through, but change the route number half way, this is legally considered to be two separate routes, which gets round the rules. I agree that it is barmy!

This is correct. I believe the cut-off distance is 50Km

 

[SteveHFC]

Stagecoach East's X5 between Cambridge and Oxford is split into four.

Cambridge to St Neots, St Neots to Milton Keynes Coachway, Milton Keynes Coachway to Buckingham and Buckingham to Oxford.

 

[455driver]

Someone more expert could confirm if I am right, but I believe that this is due to EC regulations. Up to a certain distance a route is considered to be local, and beyond that more stringent rules apply. A company could continue with a through service, but they would need tachograph fitted buses and may have to meet others requirements. If they run through, but change the route number half way, this is legally considered to be two separate routes, which gets round the rules. I agree that it is barmy!

Driving hours are also different between domestic and (stricter) EEC rules, if you do any driving over the week on EEC rules then the rest of the week has to comply with EEC rules, by splitting the route into parts less than 40 miles (or is it kilometres?) then all drivers will be working under domestic rules.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's to avoid running the service on European drivers hours rules isn't it?

Rules under X miles can be run on UK drivers hours. It's a nightmare having a mix of both, so depots slice long routes into parts, each part shorter than X miles.

Yes that's it in a nutshell.

 

[Statto]

Stagecoach X2/2X Liverpool-Preston changes number at Southport

Arriva have a couple in North Wales, 11 Rhyl-Chester, changes at Holywell, as does the 5 Caernarfon-Llandudno changes at Bangor in the Llandudno direction because of a double run in Dwygyfylchi

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Driving hours are also different between domestic and (stricter) EEC rules, if you do any driving over the week on EEC rules then the rest of the week has to comply with EEC rules, by splitting the route into parts less than 40 miles (or is it kilometres?) then all drivers will be working under domestic rules.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Yes that's it in a nutshell.

Correct.

The EU directive was aimed at long distance coach travel. In the law of unintended consequences, it also swept up long distance bus services - in the UK, a lack of rail services and so longer bus routes plus the use of UK Domestic rules meant we had many more issues.

There was a lot of debate. In many instances, long routes were simply severed to get under the 50km limit. However, the approved solution is the use of multiple registrations with guaranteed connections under one number; timetabling and destination displays reflect this.

In response to the OP and others, it may not be perfect but the alternatives were:

• to either split services or
• to move to EU driver regs

The latter is a significant on-cost anyway and especially as is pointed out that any driver that works EU is on it for the week, irrespective if they are then on town services for the remainder. That makes it very difficult to roster.

Whether UK Domestic rules should exist, or a wholesale move to EU regs should be enacted, is another question. However, the latter would be a substantial on-cost to ALL operators from the big 5 through to small firms.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Did the UK Government lobby to have the definition of a local bus service changed? Perhaps the UK definition of a service entitled to BSOG (or whatever it's called this week) would have provided a better differentiator? ISTR that is to do with the gap[1] between stops?

The confusing destination displays are not ideal, but better than actually splitting the service. But could the whole thing have been realistically avoided?

[1] This led to the then-Virgin-contacted 99 from MK to Luton Airport having a stop near the motorway junction at both ends which I doubt would have happened otherwise - the irony being that those two stops (Kingston, MK and the one in Luton just off the M1) are by far the busiest, with quite a lot of "kiss and ride" traffic from the Luton end to the large number of blue collar employers around the Kingston centre area.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Did the UK Government lobby to have the definition of a local bus service changed? Perhaps the UK definition of a service entitled to BSOG (or whatever it's called this week) would have provided a better differentiator? ISTR that is to do with the gap[1] between stops?

The confusing destination displays are not ideal, but better than actually splitting the service. But could the whole thing have been realistically avoided?

[1] This led to the then-Virgin-contacted 99 from MK to Luton Airport having a stop near the motorway junction at both ends which I doubt would have happened otherwise - the irony being that those two stops (Kingston, MK and the one in Luton just off the M1) are by far the busiest, with quite a lot of "kiss and ride" traffic from the Luton end to the large number of blue collar employers around the Kingston centre area.

As I said, it was a change that had ramifications that wasn't fully anticipated in Brussels (or Strasbourg or wherever). It was a law that we signed up to and then went "oh!"

As for BSOG, it wasn't mentioned in the EU law. Therefore, the easiest way was to interpret the regulations in the way they have been drafted, rather than spend years trying to amend it!

An earlier iteration of regulations (c.1984?) did have a stipulation that tachos had to be used for journeys over more than 15km (?) without a stop, even on UK domestic. Hence services suddenly had stops added to them.

 

[telstarbox]

More information here:

https://www.gov.uk/drivers-hours/passenger-carrying-vehicles

 

[ChathillMan]

I think the negative effects are overstated. By splitting the route ot keeps services viable by reducing costs and making it easier to roster

Its pretty much killed the X62 Leeds/Hull service yet others appear to thrive such as the X5 Cambridge/Oxford and Arriva Newcastle/Berwick

So long as its marketed correctly the people will still use the services

 

[Liam]

It's more confusing when the change in destination is not a major destination in itself. For example Stagecoach East Scotland's X42 operates Dundee-Ladybank and Ladybank-Kirkcaldy when Glenrothes or Cupar might be a better choice to change over.

A similar situation exists with the Edinburgh and Glasgow expresses, they leave Edinburgh and Glasgow with the destination Ferrytoll, Halbeath or Kincardine.

In the main though, people do understand.

 

[Stan Drews]

It's more confusing when the change in destination is not a major destination in itself. For example Stagecoach East Scotland's X42 operates Dundee-Ladybank and Ladybank-Kirkcaldy when Glenrothes or Cupar might be a better choice to change over.

A similar situation exists with the Edinburgh and Glasgow expresses, they leave Edinburgh and Glasgow with the destination Ferrytoll, Halbeath or Kincardine.

In the main though, people do understand.

Generally, the routes are split into the minimum number of sections, whilst complying with the guidelines. In the case of the X42, splitting at either Glenrothes or Cupar (instead of Ladybank), would require 3 sections rather than just 2.
With the Glasgow - Fife express services, Dunfermline is over 50km, so a split is required at either Cumbernauld or Kincardine. Using the latter helps to minimise the further sections required as the services travel through Fife.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the main though, people do understand.

Once it's explained. But maybe not if they've just let a bus go because it had the wrong destination on it.

FWIW, my view is that we should either be all domestic rules (and refuse to comply with the EU law) or we should operate fully on EU rules. The reason for that view is that it's either safe to drive constantly for a given period of time or it isn't. Driving a city bus route is potentially far more tiring than driving a coach up the slow lane of a motorway, yet it's the latter that is more heavily regulated in terms of driver's hours. To me this makes no sense.

 

[Hophead]

Some operators, though, will show the real final destination and use the same number throughout - to the passenger, it's just like any other route just with a short pause en-route.

Others, however, do seem to go in for this nonsense of using different numbers or obfuscating the real destination.

Does anybody here know why we have these alternative approaches? Different legal advice perhaps? Surely by now, the situation should be clear to the bus companies and a unified, simpler and (not least) passenger-friendly solution ought to be in place?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Some operators, though, will show the real final destination and use the same number throughout - to the passenger, it's just like any other route just with a short pause en-route.

Isn't it the case (I'm sure I heard it somewhere) that one of the following has to change:-
- The vehicle
- The driver
- The route number displayed
- The destination displayed

So if one of the other ones changes, the destination need not?

OTOH I have heard of drivers invoking the old "calling a spade a spade" and just putting the end destination up of their own accord.

 

[SWT444PORTS]

This seems to be quite common in the north east on longer route. Like others have said, I believe it is to get round European driving regulations.

There is one route local to me, X93 which splits twice on route. Middlesbrough-Guisborough-Whitby-Scarborough.
This is shown on the destination as Guisborough for Whitby & Scarborough or Whitby for Guisborough and Middlesbrough. Not sure how clear that is for potential passengers but advertising for the route is very good and the timetable advises that it is a through bus.

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

EYMS ran ME1 which was a replacement for M14, M14 was a serviced funded by the Parks Service which cut the funding for many of the summer time buses that ran to the North Yorks Moors... EYMS then decided to do a replacement service out of their own pocket which ran from Willerby via Hull to Denby and the route was well over 50km in length but the service ran as one without a split

 

[Ianno87]

Stagecoach East's X5 between Cambridge and Oxford is split into four.

Cambridge to St Neots, St Neots to Milton Keynes Coachway, Milton Keynes Coachway to Buckingham and Buckingham to Oxford.

...which Google Map's public transport journey planner insists that it is not possible to 'connect' onto the next leg at St Neots, despite being the same physical bus!

 

[455driver]

It's more confusing when the change in destination is not a major destination in itself. For example Stagecoach East Scotland's X42 operates Dundee-Ladybank and Ladybank-Kirkcaldy when Glenrothes or Cupar might be a better choice to change over.

A similar situation exists with the Edinburgh and Glasgow expresses, they leave Edinburgh and Glasgow with the destination Ferrytoll, Halbeath or Kincardine.

In the main though, people do understand.

The X38 has-
X38 Totnes for Exeter

On the blind, or something like that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

...which Google Map's public transport journey planner insists that it is not possible to 'connect' onto the next leg at St Neots, despite being the same physical bus!

And therein lies a problem with these faux "connections".

Would be OK splitting it at Bedford, it sits there 20-odd minutes...

Interestingly the X5 used to be operated on European rules with tachos - it was with the introduction of the new coaches (well after this issue came to light) that they switched to domestic rules.

 

[Busaholic]

The situation was just the opposite years ago i.e. a route might show as running through from A to B in the timetable, but would require a change of bus (and crew) somewhere midway: this might or might not be alluded to in the timetable. Through fares would be available and the final destination would be displayed. On rare occasions, two different companies would run the two buses, but then it would usually show as a 'joint service'. East Kent and Maidstone and District certainly used these arrangements.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Once it's explained. But maybe not if they've just let a bus go because it had the wrong destination on it.

FWIW, my view is that we should either be all domestic rules (and refuse to comply with the EU law) or we should operate fully on EU rules. The reason for that view is that it's either safe to drive constantly for a given period of time or it isn't. Driving a city bus route is potentially far more tiring than driving a coach up the slow lane of a motorway, yet it's the latter that is more heavily regulated in terms of driver's hours. To me this makes no sense.

They are two very different disciplines.

Also, we can't flout EU law. As for adopting EU drivers regs for all local bus services.... how much extra do you think fares would have to increase?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

And therein lies a problem with these faux "connections".

No, that's the problem with poor journey planners!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The situation was just the opposite years ago i.e. a route might show as running through from A to B in the timetable, but would require a change of bus (and crew) somewhere midway: this might or might not be alluded to in the timetable. Through fares would be available and the final destination would be displayed.

In the Yorkshire Dales, there were often cases of these hidden changes in the pre dereg days.

The Wensleydale services (as shown on the link - the Bristol LH with "26 Darlington") had a service from Hawes to Richmond but it was always shown as Darlington as it was supposed to connect with a service there

https://www.flickr.com/photos/jncar...Sjxy-aYmg2P-bvr3Ra-C7DCo-p7BNvY-vDiL7N-qDzStP

And here was the reverse - a bus leaving Darlington but only going to Richmond not Hawes

https://www.flickr.com/photos/96859...UXKb-axy7ki-czjHq9-9pRKEW-49mMvN-wWcH8r-BD6z6

It was ever thus!

 

[MedwayValiant]

Does anybody here know why we have these alternative approaches? Different legal advice perhaps? Surely by now, the situation should be clear to the bus companies and a unified, simpler and (not least) passenger-friendly solution ought to be in place?

I think it must be different legal advice.

When the regulations came in, Chambers of Sudbury (now a Go-Ahead Group company, but I think still independent at this time) split its main route from Colchester to Bury St Edmunds into two at Sudbury.

Although in practice the two sections were operated by the same bus - often but not always with the same driver - Chambers claimed that it was not allowed to sell through tickets, and that through passengers were required by law to get off the bus at Sudbury and then get back on and buy another ticket.

Those rules didn't last very long - presumably because Go-Ahead's corporate lawyers said that they were unnecessary - but someone must have advised the company thus.