JumpinTrainz
Established Member
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 1,663
Yutong 65101 spreading its wings on the 88 today. It would be nice to see them on the 60/60 and 61 before they move over to Scotstoun if that’s still the plan.
Excellent news, especially in light of the recent spike in LGBTQ attacks here. The vehicles in question will stand out from the rest of the fleet and will send a strong, but simple message: You're seen. You're not alone. We accept you for who you are and who you love. Full approval from me.
Oy, this old chestnut again...First Glasgow are a private company and are free to promote whatever ideological agenda they wish to. But I can think of no other instances, save the odd poppy for remembrance or the 'NHS' bus (both pretty non-controversial), where they have done that. In election time, are they going to display party-political liveries? Do they even support Ukraine? (I haven't seen a blue and yellow bus yet). Scottish independence?
What is it about this issue in particular that, as a company, they feel so strongly about? Or is it the workforce that are pushing for it?
New generation E400evs would also be a better choice for the 1s, 2s and 3s.Do First have a plan to keep a lot of vehicles spare at Scotstoun just in case the use of E200EVs is a bit of a disaster, given that most routes are too long and run for too long for them to last all day? Being realistic, it's only the M11, M60, 16 and 81 they're probably comfortable for in terms of a full service and maybe the 8 and 90 at a very close push.
Yutongs for the 2, 3 and 6 would still be a bit close in terms of lasting the full run. The new version of the E400EVs would be good for the 6A and 77.
Don't see why it would be an issue given McGill's seem to manage running theirs on the 23, 26 and 38 all day. I doubt the 2, 3 or 6 are much if any higher in terms of daily mileage. I reiterate the point, route length is irrelevant in all of this it's average speed and therefor daily mileage that is the deciding factor.Yutongs for the 2, 3 and 6 would still be a bit close in terms of lasting the full run.
The issue there though is that you're needing a significantly higher number of vehicles to provide the same level of service.If E200evs are running out of charge they can easily be changed over during their day. They regularly change over drivers at Scotstoun. A simple trial could be easily undertaken whilst E200evs and Yutongs are still in Glasgow
The main issue with 1s is that low bridge at the bottom of Kilbowie Road and I wouldn't make the routes any longer by diverting them up and along Second Avenue then down Duntocher Road. The 1D, even on a 20 minute frequency Monday to Saturday and now every 40 minute frequency on a Sunday, isn't exactly loaded with passengers between Mountblow and Clydebank outside of certain times.New generation E400evs would also be a better choice for the 1s, 2s and 3s.
If E200evs are running out of charge they can easily be changed over during their day. They regularly change over drivers at Scotstoun. A simple trial could be easily undertaken whilst E200evs and Yutongs are still in Glasgow
The big issue for the 2,3 and 6 is that the west end of Glasgow has roadworks for the next year at least due to the council installing a cycle lane up Byres Road. Dumbarton Road and Great Western Road aren't roads for getting decent speeds at the best of times due to the level of traffic too. There aren't many areas across all 3 routes where speed can be easily built up.Don't see why it would be an issue given McGill's seem to manage running theirs on the 23, 26 and 38 all day. I doubt the 2, 3 or 6 are much if any higher in terms of daily mileage. I reiterate the point, route length is irrelevant in all of this it's average speed and therefor daily mileage that is the deciding factor.
The issue there though is that you're needing a significantly higher number of vehicles to provide the same level of service.
There's no real reason for the 1s to serve Whitecrook and Clydebank Bus Station. With many other options using Whitecrook and Barns Street. The 1s can easily use Glasgow Road avoiding the Kilbowie Road bridge. Which would also serve the new Heakth Centre and Clydebank College.The main issue with 1s is that low bridge at the bottom of Kilbowie Road and I wouldn't make the routes any longer by diverting them up and along Second Avenue then down Duntocher Road. The 1D, even on a 20 minute frequency Monday to Saturday and now every 40 minute frequency on a Sunday, isn't exactly loaded with passengers between Mountblow and Clydebank outside of certain times.
It would certainly make a lot of sense for Scotstoun to trial the Yutongs while they're here. Hopefully, this current order of E200EVs is the last as the Yutongs are vastly superior in every way. E400EVs for the 1C and 1D would certainly be good for peak times especially the 1C in the morning as they can be full towards the City Centre before they've even got onto Dumbarton Road.
The 1D on its own through Whitecrook, especially at peak times, wouldn't work with how busy they get without extra buses running. I know that I've certainly seen buses close to full or busier leaving Clydebank at peak times in both directions. The 1/1A/1B also do get a decent amount of passengers from the City Centre to Clydebank Shopping Centre too. As much as they probably should be switched to be more direct, the idea of 2 buses anywhere would make people ditch the bus. It shouldn't do that but it always does here unfortunately.There's no real reason for the 1s to serve Whitecrook and Clydebank Bus Station. With many other options using Whitecrook and Barns Street. The 1s can easily use Glasgow Road avoiding the Kilbowie Road bridge. Which would also serve the new Heakth Centre and Clydebank College.
Using E400s on the 1s would provably mean less vehicles and scarce drivers
Yes there is, the 1s main custom is these areas and the buses that connect onto it to Faifley/Duntocher who use the fast option into townThere's no real reason for the 1s to serve Whitecrook and Clydebank Bus Station.
My theory is that after the success of the Yutongs in Glasgow - an order will be made in the very near future for more Yutongs (in Scotstoun at least) thus pushing some of the E200EVs out eventually. They just don’t have the range and it’s baffling the order was made in the first place especially given Aberdeen got Yutongs so it could have been just one big order. I imagine there will be a lot of swapping of buses in and out in the meantime which is no effective way to run services.Do First have a plan to keep a lot of vehicles spare at Scotstoun just in case the use of E200EVs is a bit of a disaster, given that most routes are too long and run for too long for them to last all day? Being realistic, it's only the M11, M60, 16 and 81 they're probably comfortable for in terms of a full service and maybe the 8 and 90 at a very close push.
Yutongs for the 2, 3 and 6 would still be a bit close in terms of lasting the full run. The new version of the E400EVs would be good for the 6A and 77.
Customers wanting to connect for Faifley can change in Yoker. Those for Duntocher can easily get off at Glasgow Road and walk the 100m of Alexander Street. So hardly life changing, Just habit changing. For that matter the Duntocher 81 could be routed from Kilbowie Road. to Glasgow Road and access its terminus from there, it could even terminate at Clydebank Collrge.Yes there is, the 1s main custom is these areas and the buses that connect onto it to Faifley/Duntocher who use the fast option into town
Clydebank really does need a proper bus station but it would need to be quite big with plenty of stances given the amount of buses in the area.Customers wanting to connect for Faifley can change in Yoker. Those for Duntocher can easily get off at Glasgow Road and walk the 100m of Alexander Street. So hardly life changing, Just habit changing. For that matter the Duntocher 81 could be routed from Kilbowie Road. to Glasgow Road and access its terminus from there, it could even terminate at Clydebank Collrge.
There are far too many services servng Chambers Street in any case causing congestion at the stop there.
Of course other options could be putting Faifley into the 1s options.
The 3 could really benefit from the 400ev’s at peak, and evenings (I was on one last night, and we were full and standing by Jamaica Street, i got on at Sauchiehall Street.)My theory is that after the success of the Yutongs in Glasgow - an order will be made in the very near future for more Yutongs (in Scotstoun at least) thus pushing some of the E200EVs out eventually. They just don’t have the range and it’s baffling the order was made in the first place especially given Aberdeen got Yutongs so it could have been just one big order. I imagine there will be a lot of swapping of buses in and out in the meantime which is no effective way to run services.
I’m just welcoming new stock on my local route the 2. It’s been over 10 years now since new buses were ordered for the route and now it can see anything on it. I’m also very interested in the drop in capacity. Since Covid the 2 has seen mainly deckers so to see it return to singles again will be interesting. I wonder if like Caledonia’s routes we’ll see a mixture of new E200EVs and E300s?
I’m thinking once the electric goes live at Scotstoun the 77 and 6A might be upgraded as they are busy routes. The current E400EVs could cope pretty well on those routes I’d imagine. The new generation buses would be very much welcomed, however, for routes like 2, 3 and 6 (if they came in low height form). The current low height E400s are ageing.
The 3 seems really inconsistent off peak but from around 3pm onwards especially from the City Centre to Drumchapel, it can be incredibly busy. The 3 I got earlier was an E400 and there was at least 2 or 3 more double deckers on the 3 today. The only way I don't see double deckers being required at any point of service is if the frequency is able to increase to every 10 or 12 minutes again. The 8, 16 and 90 seem to see the odd double decker here and there too and the X4 seems to have at least one a day now from what I've seen. There was also a day with 2 double deckers on the M60 too. I can't remember the exact day though. I also seen an E200 on the 1 earlier too.The 3 could really benefit from the 400ev’s at peak, and evenings (I was on one last night, and we were full and standing by Jamaica Street, i got on at Sauchiehall Street.)
Yutongs could also end up on 8’s and 16’s if bought, 90’s as well. I’m aware Scotstoun have a few 1 duty’s, Yutongs could do those too, that 300 mile range opens a lot of doors for First, I’d love to see First invest in them more.
I understand the pressures First face to order from local manufacturers and their good relationship with ADL but it begs the question why First have ordered so many BYD/ADL E200EVs.The 3 could really benefit from the 400ev’s at peak, and evenings (I was on one last night, and we were full and standing by Jamaica Street, i got on at Sauchiehall Street.)
Yutongs could also end up on 8’s and 16’s if bought, 90’s as well. I’m aware Scotstoun have a few 1 duty’s, Yutongs could do those too, that 300 mile range opens a lot of doors for First, I’d love to see First invest in them more.
Seems to be a bit hit and miss on individual buses. Some have had the software updated and don't play the outof date announcement. Other still have not been uodated many months after it is not necessary. Most passengers just tend to ignore the our of date information.Anyone travelled on the 77 recently? Every few minutes it plays out a ‘passenger information safety announcement’ where it (incorrectly) states that passengers are REQUIRED to wear masks whilst travelling. SPT seem to play the message at Buchanan Bus Station saying that masks are ‘recommended’ which I have no problem with, but the 77 message is happily ignored by most passengers these days, but why has this anomaly not been rectified on the 77’s?
Are First planning to have any other buses in the "drivers wanted" advertising livery to go with 33987? With the colour of it, it certainly stands out.
Chalmers St is the main issue here and has been for at least 20 years. Even a hypothetical switch back to the layover bays wouldn't be adequate given the amount of services passing through even nowadays (with or without chronic late-running and bunching which is when Chalmers St' issues are brought into the sharpest relief). The former Playdrome site is the only site I can really think of that would be suitable for building a replacement bus station between the railway line and the canal, but the chances of that happening, at least in the short/medium term, is slim at best.Customers wanting to connect for Faifley can change in Yoker. Those for Duntocher can easily get off at Glasgow Road and walk the 100m of Alexander Street. So hardly life changing, Just habit changing. For that matter the Duntocher 81 could be routed from Kilbowie Road. to Glasgow Road and access its terminus from there, it could even terminate at Clydebank Collrge.
There are far too many services servng Chambers Street in any case causing congestion at the stop there.
Of course other options could be putting Faifley into the 1s options.
Has effectively been done once before in the pre-The One era to my knowledge, that being the 217.Yes i agree the 2 can fit in a express at least every half hour using deckers following the one route , or even extend the 81 following the one route
I’ve managed a 100% success rate on the 77. That’s around 10 so far. The flip side is that if the incorrect messaging continues over a year since the rules changed, they’ll find punters will ignore all messaging for the same reason.Seems to be a bit hit and miss on individual buses
Not heard much of the passenger info voice on the E400MMCs, has it been disabled?I’ve managed a 100% success rate on the 77. That’s around 10 so far. The flip side is that if the incorrect messaging continues over a year since the rules changed, they’ll find punters will ignore all messaging for the same reason.
ALL the 77’s I’ve been on were 400MMC’s with the announcement - around 10 in total out to IKEA and the Kelvin Hall. The non-77 400’s are silent, so I think it’s a route specific issue!Not heard much of the passenger info voice on the E400MMCs, has it been disabled?
Hopefully this does become a thing in the next couple of years at worst because it's badly needed. The current bus station would be difficult to repurpose due it being used for driver breaks and due to the fact it's just nowhere near busy enough.There are plans in the pipeline for a new Clydebank bus station, taking in the car park behind the credit union using the big car park behind the market hall. The area at the old playdrome has been bough by Miller Homes.
Yep, 67713 goes up in its place, 713 received paint over the last week.Aberdeen 67086 seen coming off at Polmadie this morning; presumably heading to Caledonia