TfGM-website, timetable updates and general news concerning TfGM bus stations.

[323235]

The 313, 374, 378 and 379 were down for cancellation on VOSA. If it was just the evening services then it would be a variation to the existing service.

Are TfGM indicating that Stagecoach have backtracked already?

 

[33117]

The 237 going will leave a massive gap as quite a few people go between Ashton & Glossop on that.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The 237 going will leave a massive gap as quite a few people go between Ashton & Glossop on that.

Does the 237 service still serve Tintwhistle?

 

[M60lad]

Yes 237 it does so could be another area without a bus service shortly

 

[NorthernSpirit]

Does the 237 service still serve Tintwhistle?

Yes 237 it does so could be another area without a bus service shortly

Maybe South Pennine CT could step in and serve. All they'd need to do is introduce an enhanced 351 between Honley - Holmfirth - Tintwhistle and Glossop.

One thing that has got me thinking and that is what will happen to the 184 between Huddersfield and Oldham once Burnham's franchising comes into being?

 

[323235]

The operator of the 184 will be granted a licence to operate in Greater Manchester if they wish to continue running it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The Glossop end of GM strikes me as one where services to Manchester pointlessly duplicate the railway and require a very large number of vehicles to provide a very poor service, and one where integration would be a good plan, i.e. to run shuttles to/from the stations using minibuses, or even some form of single-point DRT - but that only works when you account the system as a whole. The layout there is basically "beads on a string" which is ideal for rail.

Even Tintwistle is only 1km from Hadfield station, though unfortunately up a massive hill so not great for cycling.

Gamesley could do with a station, but you could do a loop of Tintwistle, Hollingworth, Dinting station, Glossop station, round the obvious triangle of A roads then back the other way with a single minibus and it'd give you the connectivity as well as "a bus to town" fairly cheaply probably about once an hour, not massively different in concept from the two Ormskirk local services in a place of similar size and demographic. (Ormskirk does have the students unlike Glossop, but they don't generally live in the Scott Estate or Aughton, so those two local buses are irrelevant to them).

 

[daodao]

The Glossop end of GM strikes me as one where services to Manchester pointlessly duplicate the railway and require a very large number of vehicles to provide a very poor service, and one where integration would be a good plan, i.e. to run shuttles to/from the stations using minibuses, or even some form of single-point DRT - but that only works when you account the system as a whole. The layout there is basically "beads on a string" which is ideal for rail.

Even Tintwistle is only 1km from Hadfield station, though unfortunately up a massive hill so not great for cycling.

Gamesley could do with a station, but you could do a loop of Tintwistle, Hollingworth, Dinting station, Glossop station, round the obvious triangle of A roads then back the other way with a single minibus and it'd give you the connectivity as well as "a bus to town" fairly cheaply probably about once an hour, not massively different in concept from the two Ormskirk local services in a place of similar size and demographic. (Ormskirk does have the students unlike Glossop, but they don't generally live in the Scott Estate or Aughton, so those two local buses are irrelevant to them).

The key route 237 from Glossop to Ashton that seems to be at risk (and which used to extend to Manchester as route 6) does NOT parallel the railway. Route 125 from Glossop to Manchester via Hyde that did parallel the railway into Manchester was completely withdrawn quite a while ago. It is difficult to comment appropriately on bus services without detailed knowledge of the local area.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

The key route 237 from Glossop to Ashton that seems to be at risk (and which used to extend to Manchester as route 6) does NOT parallel the railway. Route 125 from Glossop to Manchester via Hyde that did parallel the railway into Manchester was completely withdrawn quite a while ago. It is difficult to comment appropriately on bus services without detailed knowledge of the local area..

There is also the 341 service to consider that runs:-
Glossop / Gamesley / Charlesworth / Broadbottom / Hattersley / Hyde
I think that Stotts were involved last time that I heard.

 

[Simon75]

The operator of the 184 will be granted a licence to operate in Greater Manchester if they wish to continue running it.

A bit like non TFL (Transport For London) routes entering London?

 

[Statto]

The key route 237 from Glossop to Ashton that seems to be at risk (and which used to extend to Manchester as route 6) does NOT parallel the railway. Route 125 from Glossop to Manchester via Hyde that did parallel the railway into Manchester was completely withdrawn quite a while ago. It is difficult to comment appropriately on bus services without detailed knowledge of the local area.

Did the 125, become 214, 215 after d,reg, i certainly remember a fast Manchester - Glossop route using GM Express branded buses, i'm not sure when they were withdrawn?

 

[daodao]

Did the 125, become 214, 215 after d,reg, i certainly remember a fast Manchester - Glossop route using GM Express branded buses, i'm not sure when they were withdrawn?

I lived in Cardiff from 1984-2005 and have little knowledge of bus service changes in Greater Manchester during this period. Others may be able to answer your question.

The bus network in 2005 was thinner than pre-deregulation, and has slimmed down much further since then, such that in many outer suburbs it is merely a skeleton service; I have no expectation that the expensive franchising system will reverse this long-term trend. Buses have become infrequent, unreliable and slow (due to traffic congestion, proliferation of traffic lights and withdrawal of limited stop services) and the loss of many routes means that some journeys can no longer be made easily (if at all) by bus.

I now rarely use them; the only journey that I have made anywhere by bus since Covid struck was from the Trafford Centre to RHS Bridgwater and back in April 2022 using Diamond (Rotala) service 126 to Leigh. It wasn't particularly convenient, with a 10 minute walk from the bus stop to the RHS garden and a 5 minute walk from the Metrolink stop to the bus station at the Trafford Centre; the bus was on time on the outward trip, but 20 minutes late on the return journey. However, there was a substantial discount on the pre-booked RHS entry fee for travelling there by bus rather than car.

 

[johncrossley]

(due to traffic congestion, proliferation of traffic lights and withdrawal of limited stop services)

The same could be said about much of outer London, which has a lot of similar characteristics to the more affluent areas of southern GM, but provision and usage is quite decent there. You can't run a proper bus service in suburbia without subsidy. Nowhere else in the developed world does it.

 

[RELL6L]

The key route 237 from Glossop to Ashton that seems to be at risk (and which used to extend to Manchester as route 6) does NOT parallel the railway. Route 125 from Glossop to Manchester via Hyde that did parallel the railway into Manchester was completely withdrawn quite a while ago. It is difficult to comment appropriately on bus services without detailed knowledge of the local area.

Absolutely. The 237 is a key route linking Glossop to communities in Tameside, particularly Ashton and Stalybridge. I used it in about April last year and it was very busy, passengers (admittedly in school times) being left behind. I can't believe there isn't more to it that we don't know yet.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely. The 237 is a key route linking Glossop to communities in Tameside, particularly Ashton and Stalybridge. I used it in about April last year and it was very busy, passengers (admittedly in school times) being left behind. I can't believe there isn't more to it that we don't know yet.

I'd not rule out, though I don't think that's happening here, that bus companies may maliciously withdraw services to discredit the concept of regulation.

 

[johncrossley]

If Stagecoach are playing silly games, that would contrast with Go North West who are putting a positive spin on things

Manchester is bouncing back – buses reach pre-pandemic passenger levels

Go North West’s buses are as busy as they were prior to COVID-19 Manchester operator is the first Go-Ahead company in the UK to reach pre-pandemic levels Recovery boosted by high reliability, sufficient drivers and strong local economy Plans in place to lay on more buses as demand grows further

newsroom.go-ahead.com

Mancunians are leaving the pandemic behind and re-embracing public transport. Go North West’s buses are as busy as they were before COVID-19 – and plans are in place to boost the number of buses on the network.

The company is now operating 9 out of every 10 buses that ran pre-Covid, and over the last few months it has seen a surge in customers getting on board; with passenger levels per bus now equalling 2019 figures.

Go North West is the first in The Go-Ahead Group’s UK-wide network to hit this level of passenger recovery. Across the UK as a whole, bus usage is at about 85% of pre-pandemic levels. Across Go-Ahead’s 11 regional bus companies, patronage varies between 80% and 100%, depending on demographics, the length and type of journeys and the strength of local economies.

 

[Djb1]

The Glossop end of GM strikes me as one where services to Manchester pointlessly duplicate the railway and require a very large number of vehicles to provide a very poor service, and one where integration would be a good plan, i.e. to run shuttles to/from the stations using minibuses, or even some form of single-point DRT - but that only works when you account the system as a whole. The layout there is basically "beads on a string" which is ideal for rail.

Even Tintwistle is only 1km from Hadfield station, though unfortunately up a massive hill so not great for cycling.

Gamesley could do with a station, but you could do a loop of Tintwistle, Hollingworth, Dinting station, Glossop station, round the obvious triangle of A roads then back the other way with a single minibus and it'd give you the connectivity as well as "a bus to town" fairly cheaply probably about once an hour, not massively different in concept from the two Ormskirk local services in a place of similar size and demographic. (Ormskirk does have the students unlike Glossop, but they don't generally live in the Scott Estate or Aughton, so those two local buses are irrelevant to them)

The Glossop end of GM strikes me as one where services to Manchester pointlessly duplicate the railway and require a very large number of vehicles to provide a very poor service, and one where integration would be a good plan, i.e. to run shuttles to/from the stations using minibuses, or even some form of single-point DRT - but that only works when you account the system as a whole. The layout there is basically "beads on a string" which is ideal for rail.

Even Tintwistle is only 1km from Hadfield station, though unfortunately up a massive hill so not great for cycling.

Gamesley could do with a station, but you could do a loop of Tintwistle, Hollingworth, Dinting station, Glossop station, round the obvious triangle of A roads then back the other way with a single minibus and it'd give you the connectivity as well as "a bus to town" fairly cheaply probably about once an hour, not massively different in concept from the two Ormskirk local services in a place of similar size and demographic. (Ormskirk does have the students unlike Glossop, but they don't generally live in the Scott Estate or Aughton, so those two local buses are irrelevant to them).

Whilst I’d agree that glossops bus provision could be organised better, I’d disagree that it pointlessly duplicates the railway between glossop and Manchester (maybe in the Not so recent past it did)

Only 3 services leave glossop for points GM currently:

The main service - 237, which duplicates between hadfield and glossop stations but that’s it. It’s primary destination is stalybridge/Ashton which a lot of locals would consider to be their primary out of town destination, and is the generally the destination for higher education if you don’t go to glossopdale college. However isn’t on the train line. Currently PVR 4, normally 6?

The 341 duplicates glossop, broadbottom and godley but ultimately is tendered, and is there to serve the places between. PVR 2?

The 394 goes to marple/ stepping hill. PVR 1.

Absolutely. The 237 is a key route linking Glossop to communities in Tameside, particularly Ashton and Stalybridge. I used it in about April last year and it was very busy, passengers (admittedly in school times) being left behind. I can't believe there isn't more to it that we don't know yet.

absolutely. I’d begun a reply then yours arrived. Whilst glossops bus offering could be a little more organised, imo there is currently no service that unnecessarily duplicates the glossop rail service. (Glossop having only 3 buses that currently enter GM).

I’ve not looked loads into franchising, but I wonder whether there could be an issue with cross border services (the 358 doesn’t carry much across the border, whereas the 237 does)

 

[Bletchleyite]

I had to be honest forgotten Hadfield/Glossop were outside the TfGM area. I guess they're analogous to the likes of Ormskirk, which is somewhat of a bus desert these days, or Skem, which is fairly bad too despite low car ownership.

Logic would bring them in, but UK boundary decisions are rarely logical. So I guess even after regulation it'll depend what Derbyshire want to pay for, or what an operator wants to do commercially with a cross border permit if applicable.

 

[LOL The Irony]

If Stagecoach are playing silly games, that would contrast with Go North West who are putting a positive spin on things

I think a lot of Stagecoach's issues come from no longer controlling fares and the fact they could completely lose the Wilmslow Road corridor.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I think a lot of Stagecoach's issues come from no longer controlling fares and the fact they could completely lose the Wilmslow Road corridor.

What will become of their Magic Bus fleet?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think a lot of Stagecoach's issues come from no longer controlling fares and the fact they could completely lose the Wilmslow Road corridor.

Wilmslow Road is one where I really hope TfGM puts some effort into a tram-like service with simplified routes, long bendy buses, tram like next bus displays and tap in/out contactless. It really does need a tram sticking down there, but absent that they could at least introduce a tram-like, ideally electric, high capacity bus service. Hamburg's Metrobus 5 is directly analogous, running city-uni-student accommodation and sharing the "busiest route" accolade (Wilmslow Road was the busiest corridor in Europe, the Metrobus 5, formerly the 102, the busiest single route).

The Magic Bus fleet isn't that old and is low floor, so I guess it'll either be used on a TfGM tender, moved to another bit of Stagecoach or sold to a smaller operator.

I doubt they'll overly care which actual routes they get provided they get enough to use their fleet - the funding situation is totally different.

 

[duncombec]

There was due to be a meeting of the Bus Services sub-Committee tomorrow, but that isn't appearing on the calendar now. The agenda for the main committee meeting next week is now published, and Appendix 1 includes a list of bus services at risk in October, and what will happen to them (pages 10-13 of the PDF):

https://democracy.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/documents/s22177/GMTC%2020220812%20Bus%20Network%20Review.pdf

(It's been pasted in as an image, rather than a plain table, so I can't copy it out easily and don't have time to retype from scratch)

Of those services I can see listed above, 237 is being tendered, final awarded option "subject to DCC" (I presume Derbyshire County Council, as there would be an expectation that they pay a portion), likewise 358. 322 is "direct award" (presumably a 'De Minimis type funding', whereby it's awarded direct to the/an operator pending further changes in October), 313, 328, 378/379 are all listed as "Tender".

Note that TfGM intend to tender or Direct Award everything other than some peak hour special withdrawals and some frequency reductions.

Is there an Arriva route that isn't on that list as due a frequency reduction? I'm a bit rusty as to what they are left with now.

 

[LOL The Irony]

What will become of their Magic Bus fleet?

Well since they're now hybrids and the liveries are basically the same, just put them into Stagecoach vinyls and send them elsewheres to replace euro 4/5 Enviro 400s.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There was due to be a meeting of the Bus Services sub-Committee tomorrow, but that isn't appearing on the calendar now. The agenda for the main committee meeting next week is now published, and Appendix 1 includes a list of bus services at risk in October, and what will happen to them (pages 10-13 of the PDF):

https://democracy.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/documents/s22177/GMTC%2020220812%20Bus%20Network%20Review.pdf

(It's been pasted in as an image, rather than a plain table, so I can't copy it out easily and don't have time to retype from scratch)

Of those services I can see listed above, 237 is being tendered, final awarded option "subject to DCC" (I presume Derbyshire County Council, as there would be an expectation that they pay a portion), likewise 358. 322 is "direct award" (presumably a 'De Minimis type funding', whereby it's awarded direct to the/an operator pending further changes in October), 313, 328, 378/379 are all listed as "Tender".

Note that TfGM intend to tender or Direct Award everything other than some peak hour special withdrawals and some frequency reductions.

Is there an Arriva route that isn't on that list as due a frequency reduction? I'm a bit rusty as to what they are left with now.

There are two services on the north side that I have in mind that start within the Greater Manchester area but terminate in a different area

How would you classify the service 1 that runs from Bolton to Blackburn or the 111 that runs from Wigan to Preston?

 

[RELL6L]

There was due to be a meeting of the Bus Services sub-Committee tomorrow, but that isn't appearing on the calendar now. The agenda for the main committee meeting next week is now published, and Appendix 1 includes a list of bus services at risk in October, and what will happen to them (pages 10-13 of the PDF):

https://democracy.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/documents/s22177/GMTC%2020220812%20Bus%20Network%20Review.pdf

(It's been pasted in as an image, rather than a plain table, so I can't copy it out easily and don't have time to retype from scratch)

Of those services I can see listed above, 237 is being tendered, final awarded option "subject to DCC" (I presume Derbyshire County Council, as there would be an expectation that they pay a portion), likewise 358. 322 is "direct award" (presumably a 'De Minimis type funding', whereby it's awarded direct to the/an operator pending further changes in October), 313, 328, 378/379 are all listed as "Tender".

Note that TfGM intend to tender or Direct Award everything other than some peak hour special withdrawals and some frequency reductions.

Is there an Arriva route that isn't on that list as due a frequency reduction? I'm a bit rusty as to what they are left with now.

These some chunky routes being deregistered on that list, including some fairly trunk routes! The whole of the 34, half hourly to Leigh? I suspect tender prices might be a bit high. Does the 322 include the 327 or is that separate? What is the 56 in Rochdale? Note also some Warrington routes, the 5 into Altrincham and the 28 into Leigh as well as Diamond and First. My list on the substantive withdrawals thread is in danger of getting a lot longer!

 

[johncrossley]

What is the 56 in Rochdale?

Probably a typo and should be 156.

 

[duncombec]

Probably a typo and should be 156.

For some reason the 56 doesn't come up in the search, but if you download the PDF timetable for the 156 the 56 is included - Manchester - North Manc Gen Hosp - Higher Blackley circular, every 30 minutes. Seems to be a short working of the 156, bumping the common section up to every 15 mins.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected, but is it the case that in the last few years, decisions taken by Derbyshire County Council had a detrimental effect on bus service provision in the area of Glossop and its surrounding areas that are part of Derbyshire?

These some chunky routes being deregistered on that list, including some fairly trunk routes! The whole of the 34, half hourly to Leigh? I suspect tender prices might be a bit high. Does the 322 include the 327 or is that separate? What is the 56 in Rochdale? Note also some Warrington routes, the 5 into Altrincham and the 28 into Leigh as well as Diamond and First. My list on the substantive withdrawals thread is in danger of getting a lot longer!

When the matter of bus franchising was first mooted, how much attention was paid to the matter of cross-border services and the number thereof?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If I am wrong, I stand to be corrected, but is it the case that in the last few years, decisions taken by Derbyshire County Council had a detrimental effect on bus service provision in the area of Glossop and its surrounding areas that are part of Derbyshire?

I expect it did, yes.

Hadfield and Glossop are just like Ormskirk and Skem being outside Liverpool (yet Southport, far further out, is in), or Watford being outside Greater London - they suffer from the UK's pathetic inability to design urban authority boundaries properly to encompass the de-facto urban area. Thus, politicians miles away in Derby (about whom the population of Hadfield/Glossop don't give two hoots, and the feeling is mutual) make decisions on things that don't affect them in the slightest.

It's happening here too - new estates that are part of Milton Keynes are being built in the Buckinghamshire Council area, and so the transport (roads and public) and bin emptying/tip situation is not optimal there either.

We really do need to sort this situation out, because it causes massive issues with public transport viability. All of the "sprawl" of our cities needs to be within the city authority so planning and funding can be arranged properly.

 

[Redmike]

I expect it did, yes.

Hadfield and Glossop are just like Ormskirk and Skem being outside Liverpool (yet Southport, far further out, is in), or Watford being outside Greater London - they suffer from the UK's pathetic inability to design urban authority boundaries properly to encompass the de-facto urban area. Thus, politicians miles away in Derby (about whom the population of Hadfield/Glossop don't give two hoots, and the feeling is mutual) make decisions on things that don't affect them in the slightest.

It's happening here too - new estates that are part of Milton Keynes are being built in the Buckinghamshire Council area, and so the transport (roads and public) and bin emptying/tip situation is not optimal there either.

We really do need to sort this situation out, because it causes massive issues with public transport viability. All of the "sprawl" of our cities needs to be within the city authority so planning and funding can be arranged properly.

If you go back far enough places like Glossop, Poynton, Wilmslow, New Mills, Handforth were to be part of the SELNEC area but I think some of the people there voted against joining what became Greater Manchester.