TfGM Bus franchising

[pokemonsuper9]

Working on that basis, what we really need is a four or five digit, nationwide scheme so that no number is ever duplicated, anywhere, for fear that someone, somewhere, could be confused.

I don't see the problem there

 

[M803UYA]

X is used for cross country by some operators

Working on that basis, what we really need is a four or five digit, nationwide scheme so that no number is ever duplicated, anywhere, for fear that someone, somewhere, could be confused.

I feel sorry for all those people in West Yorkshire who had to struggle by for 30+ years with separate, duplicated schemes in Halifax, Bradford, Leeds and Huddersfield... let alone those in Todmorden who didn't even have numbers

Destinations were optional in rural Dorset and Somerset, let alone route numbers. People used to identify their bus by the colours or the time it showed up. So really you don't need all this information

 

[Andyh82]

I would say it’s best to have no duplication within the same ‘system’ - that being either the same operator, or the same PTE, basically anywhere where you will see a list of services on a website

The TfGM timetable listing having services 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 5, 5 etc if each town had low numbers would look a mess. This wasn’t an issue in the old corporation days as each area was treat differently, and would never be listed together.

 

[daodao]

I would say it’s best to have no duplication within the same ‘system’ - that being either the same operator, or the same PTE, basically anywhere where you will see a list of services on a website

The TfGM timetable listing having services 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 5, 5 etc if each town had low numbers would look a mess. This wasn’t an issue in the old corporation days as each area was treat differently, and would never be listed together.

One option to make numbers unique would be to add a "town-specific" prefix letter for local town routes, so for example all the existing low-numbered service numbers in the Wigan area would have a W prefix, W1 etc. This is already done in Bury and Rochdale, with some routes having B and R prefixes respectively. However, I note that in Rochdale there are both 6 and R6 routes, which is potentially even more confusing. The advent of bus franchising is an opportunity to sort out this mess.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I would say it’s best to have no duplication within the same ‘system’ - that being either the same operator, or the same PTE, basically anywhere where you will see a list of services on a website

The TfGM timetable listing having services 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 5, 5 etc if each town had low numbers would look a mess. This wasn’t an issue in the old corporation days as each area was treat differently, and would never be listed together.

Is this more about aesthetics? How much confusion is actually being experienced?

I didn't see the point of Stagecoach renumbering the Wigan routes in the first place, so another renumbering serves no real purpose except to potentially confuse folks.

Don't get me wrong. There shouldn't be two routes with similar numbers in the same town and the potential to confuse - there are two number 1s in Newcastle, for instance - but too many bus managers renumber routes for little good reason whilst too many enthusiasts want to renumber for a) nostalgia b) perceived confusion or c) OCD

There are many more pressing issues for TfGM to get stuck into than renumbering Wigan's routes for the sake of it.

 

[Redmike]

One option to make numbers unique would be to add a "town-specific" prefix letter for local town routes, so for example all the existing low-numbered service numbers in the Wigan area would have a W prefix, W1 etc. This is already done in Bury and Rochdale, with some routes having B and R prefixes respectively. However, I note that in Rochdale there are both 6 and R6 routes, which is potentially even more confusing. The advent of bus franchising is an opportunity to sort out this mess.

The other issue here is that towns like Bury and Bolton or Altrincham and Ashton would both have the same prefix. Also there would be potential confusion with a long established route like the 8 from Bolton to Manchester. SELNEC had the right idea 50 years ago.

 

[daodao]

The other issue here is that towns like Bury and Bolton or Altrincham and Ashton would both have the same prefix. Also there would be potential confusion with a long established route like the 8 from Bolton to Manchester. SELNEC had the right idea 50 years ago.

Renumbering would only be needed in certain areas such as Wigan, which was never part of SELNEC, and where low-numbered route numbers duplicated in other areas of Greater Manchester currently exist. In Altrincham/Sale, the SELNEC route numbering system concept has survived largely intact, apart from:

• route numbers 11/18/19, introduced post bus de-regulation in the late 1980s, possibly initially by the Bee Line Buzz Company.
• Warrington Buses routes CAT5 and X5, which developed from their original route 5 Warrington-Lymm-Warburton, but do have prefixes.
• D&G route 88 from Altrincham to Wilmslow (and beyond), which was 297 in the SELNEC scheme.

Of these routes, only numbers 18 and 19 currently have duplicates within Greater Manchester, but there are spare numbers in the range 260-299 that could be used to renumber them.

 

[johncrossley]

Presumably the only day tickets and season tickets valid on franchised buses will be the System One ones and singles are capped at £2. Presumably there is no change to Plusbus. But there are currently still some short distance fares under £2. Will TfGM use the same fares for these short distance journeys as those on the current Diamond/Stagecoach/Vision etc. services? Will short distance fares be publicised?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Renumbering would only be needed in certain areas such as Wigan, which was never part of SELNEC, and where low-numbered route numbers duplicated in other areas of Greater Manchester currently exist. In Altrincham/Sale, the SELNEC route numbering system concept has survived largely intact, apart from:

• route numbers 11/18/19, introduced post bus de-regulation in the late 1980s, possibly initially by the Bee Line Buzz Company.
• Warrington Buses routes CAT5 and X5, which developed from their original route 5 Warrington-Lymm-Warburton, but do have prefixes.
• D&G route 88 from Altrincham to Wilmslow (and beyond), which was 297 in the SELNEC scheme.

Of these routes, only numbers 18 and 19 currently have duplicates within Greater Manchester, but there are spare numbers in the range 260-299 that could be used to renumber them.

That's my point - is it needed? The renumbering from Stagecoach wasn't needed, so why compound the change by renumbering services again?

I mean, how much confusion is actually happening? If I go into the TfGM website and type in service 1, who is getting confused by the Manchester example vs the Wigan example, let alone the cross border example to Darwen? Or the two 19s?

I dislike it when operators change numbers for arbitrary reasons, and same for local authorities etc!

 

[WatcherZero]

They do crossover, for example you have the 8 Bolton to Manchester and the 8 Wigan to Leigh, they run only a couple of kilometres apart in places.

E.g. they run opposite sides of Tyldesley and if you asked for a map of the bus route by number you could be mistaken

 

[pokemonsuper9]

They do crossover, for example you have the 8 Bolton to Manchester and the 8 Wigan to Leigh, they run only a couple of kilometres apart in places

Almost 10km is a bit more than "a couple"

 

[daodao]

That's my point - is it needed? The renumbering from Stagecoach wasn't needed, so why compound the change by renumbering services again?

I mean, how much confusion is actually happening? If I go into the TfGM website and type in service 1, who is getting confused by the Manchester example vs the Wigan example, let alone the cross border example to Darwen? Or the two 19s?

I dislike it when operators change numbers for arbitrary reasons, and same for local authorities etc!

It causes confusion when there is more than 1 route in a local authority area, or run by the same local bus company, with exactly the same number. because it is no longer a unique identifier. Stagecoach appear particularly fond of doing this. One possible solution that I put forward in an earlier post is to use a prefix letter for local town services, so the low numbered routes in the Wigan area could simply be prefixed by W.

One option to make numbers unique would be to add a "town-specific" prefix letter for local town routes, so for example all the existing low-numbered service numbers in the Wigan area would have a W prefix, W1 etc.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

It causes confusion when there is more than 1 route in a local authority area, or run by the same local bus company, with exactly the same number. because it is no longer a unique identifier. Stagecoach appear particularly fond of doing this. One possible solution that I put forward in an earlier post is to use a prefix letter for local town services, so the low numbered routes in the Wigan area could simply be prefixed by W.

I'm getting the theoretical issue but does that actually cause confusion to unwary passengers?

It's not impacting people "on the ground" as the two 19 services are miles apart so people aren't unwittingly getting the wrong bus. If they're going onto the TfGM website, are people mistaking the 19 from Leigh to Warrington with the 19 from Wythenshawe to Altrincham? The difference seems really quite clear.

I fully appreciate it if there were two services with very similar numbers in the same town (such as the pair of differing Newcastle service Ones, and the two X21s in the same city) but getting back to TfGM, I just don't see how renumberings are required for the vast majority of duplications? Service renumberings should be minimised as, all too often, historical ones are confusingly left in places like tourist websites and the like.

 

[Djb1]

A better example to all of these would surely be the 312? Which has run stockport to handforth Dean for about 25 years.

But recent (seperate) changes see the 312 running:

Stockport to cheadle hulme, predominantly in a different way to the original 312.

And handforth Dean - wilmslow (new, mostly covering aspects of withdrawn/changed services 378/130 - the 312 didn’t cover this section apart from exiting handforth)

 

[WibbleWobble]

It causes confusion when there is more than 1 route in a local authority area, or run by the same local bus company, with exactly the same number. because it is no longer a unique identifier. Stagecoach appear particularly fond of doing this. One possible solution that I put forward in an earlier post is to use a prefix letter for local town services, so the low numbered routes in the Wigan area could simply be prefixed by W.

I doubt W prefixes would be used, as I'm pretty sure I read on here that the Bury and Rochdale local services are reverting back when the franchising takes effect.

 

[johncrossley]

I would have thought that there must be an administrative benefit for transport authorities to avoid duplicate route numbers. They will have spreadsheets, databases etc. containing vast amount of data about each route. If a member of the public or outside organisation make an enquiry about a particular route with TfGM/TfL etc. then having unique route numbers is probably useful. Anyone who has worked with databases knows how useful having a unique identifier is. If CentreComm or whatever it is now called send out an urgent message to drivers on route 43 then it helps if there is only one route 43.

 

[D9006]

Does anybody know when the small firms in Wigan (Finches, Vision etc.) find out what schools services they will get?

As at the end of July, Finches have closed the door due to no school routes been won in the franchise. Another small operator goes; they have been around since 1955, and have run many schools and college services commercially for over 20 years in the Wigan area.

Then I'll translate it myself, I find being able to search for text very valuable.

Didn’t the 613; 630, 639, 640 and 641 get awarded to Diamond initially. The college services 688 and 669 are new services which did not appear in any franchise lot

 

[M60lad]

Regarding Finches, they were quite a very friendly operation as well. The owner (Brian Finch) was also quite accommodating towards enthusiasts and is such a lovely bloke to get on with.

 

[leedslad82]

I would say it’s best to have no duplication within the same ‘system’ - that being either the same operator, or the same PTE, basically anywhere where you will see a list of services on a website

The TfGM timetable listing having services 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 4A, 5, 5, 5 etc if each town had low numbers would look a mess. This wasn’t an issue in the old corporation days as each area was treat differently, and would never be listed together.

Leeds now has 2 number 7's transdevs service to Harrogate via Wetherby and firsts service to primley park. They even both served same stop on new briggate at one point. I heard this caused all sorts of issues

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I would have thought that there must be an administrative benefit for transport authorities to avoid duplicate route numbers. They will have spreadsheets, databases etc. containing vast amount of data about each route. If a member of the public or outside organisation make an enquiry about a particular route with TfGM/TfL etc. then having unique route numbers is probably useful. Anyone who has worked with databases knows how useful having a unique identifier is. If CentreComm or whatever it is now called send out an urgent message to drivers on route 43 then it helps if there is only one route 43.

If there was such an administrative burden, do you honestly think commercial operators would do it?

I have worked with databases; you don't simply work off a unique identifier. The world has moved on since the 1960s computer systems that were, in many cases, the reason behind having three digit service numbers.

Leeds now has 2 number 7's transdevs service to Harrogate via Wetherby and firsts service to primley park. They even both served same stop on new briggate at one point. I heard this caused all sorts of issues

And that is the sort of issue that should be avoided, caused by a renumbering from Transdev.

There really are many more pressing issues that TfGM could be getting on with. Perhaps sorting out some of the worst traffic pinch points on the bus network that do actually cause passenger inconvenience, rather than a perceived one caused by two services with the same number in different parts of the conurbation, might be more worthwhile.

 

[andrewbowden]

As at the end of July, Finches have closed the door due to no school routes been won in the franchise. Another small operator goes; they have been around since 1955, and have run many schools and college services commercially for over 20 years in the Wigan area.

Says on their website

COMPANY CLOSURE​

It is now time to announce that sadly we will be closing on the 28th of July due to the retirement of Brian all the the staff and I'm sure our customers wish him and pauline well in there retirement the oldest independent bus company in Wigan will sadly be lost forever from all the staff at finches we sadly say goodbye all current bookings and commitments will be fulfilled up until the final operation day which will be the 31st of July​

https://finchesgarage.wixsite.com/web1 (scroll to the bottom)​

​

Maybe they are closing because they didn't win contracts and it's a good time to retire. Maybe they decided franchising coming in was a good time to retire. Maybe they just wanted to retire anyway and it's all a coincidence. It's not clear from the message.

 

[GusB]

I think we can park the debate regarding the closure of Finch's Coaches here. Let's stick with the topic of TfGM franchising and avoid the temptation to turn it into an anything-to-do-with-Manchester thread!

 

[baza585]

Apologies but having trawled all 74 pages of this thread, is there a summary anywhere of which operators have got what routes, and who is getting what garages and transferred buses from others?

 

[Tim33160]

Messages 2185 and 2186 show the routes for Area A - Wigan and Bolton, with North Salford operating from 24 September 2023.
There are also two schools franchises won by Stagecoach and Vision Bus due to be implemented from 1 September / start of school year. There are no published details of these routes as yet!

In Area B, (Bury, Rochdale and North Manchester areas) Stagecoach have won the three large franchises with routes currently operated by First from Oldham depot, Stagecoach from Middleton depot and Go North West from Queens Rd depot. On the Small franchises, First have won the most of the routes currently operated by Transdev in Bury and Rochdale (Some have been rolled up with the large franchise of routes from Queens Rd). Diamond have won 6 routes and will work these from Eccles. These are from 24 March 2024.

Area C being Tameside, Stockport and south Manchester will be announced next March for operation from January 2025.

There is very little published information coming from TfGM re these contracts.

 

[baza585]

Messages 2185 and 2186 show the routes for Area A - Wigan and Bolton, with North Salford operating from 24 September 2023.
There are also two schools franchises won by Stagecoach and Vision Bus due to be implemented from 1 September / start of school year. There are no published details of these routes as yet!

In Area B, (Bury, Rochdale and North Manchester areas) Stagecoach have won the three large franchises with routes currently operated by First from Oldham depot, Stagecoach from Middleton depot and Go North West from Queens Rd depot. On the Small franchises, First have won the most of the routes currently operated by Transdev in Bury and Rochdale (Some have been rolled up with the large franchise of routes from Queens Rd). Diamond have won 6 routes and will work these from Eccles. These are from 24 March 2024.

Area C being Tameside, Stockport and south Manchester will be announced next March for operation from January 2025.

There is very little published information coming from TfGM re these contracts.

Thank you. That is very helpful.

The lack of information from TfGM is puzzling given the Mayor's normal desire to be seen and heard. I wonder if they are keeping quiet in case it all goes pear shaped!

 

[WatcherZero]

Plenty of press releases and news coverage of the companies that have got the contracts, not saying who is going to operate which route is I think deliberate, it dilutes the idea that its an integrated system if you say route A, B, and C are operated by company X while routes D, E and F are operated by company Y.

 

[andrewbowden]

Plenty of press releases and news coverage of the companies that have got the contracts, not saying who is going to operate which route is I think deliberate, it dilutes the idea that its an integrated system if you say route A, B, and C are operated by company X while routes D, E and F are operated by company Y.

Yep. From the passenger's perspective, it simply doesn't matter. The point will be it's a Bee Network bus. That's all.

For people here, well going to find out soon enough.

 

[Tim33160]

Messages 2185 and 2186 show the routes for Area A - Wigan and Bolton, with North Salford operating from 24 September 2023.
There are also two schools franchises won by Stagecoach and Vision Bus due to be implemented from 1 September / start of school year. There are no published details of these routes as yet!

In Area B, (Bury, Rochdale and North Manchester areas) Stagecoach have won the three large franchises with routes currently operated by First from Oldham depot, Stagecoach from Middleton depot and Go North West from Queens Rd depot. On the Small franchises, First have won the most of the routes currently operated by Transdev in Bury and Rochdale (Some have been rolled up with the large franchise of routes from Queens Rd). Diamond have won 6 routes and will work these from Eccles. These are from 24 March 2024.

Area C being Tameside, Stockport and south Manchester will be announced next March for operation from January 2025.

There is very little published information coming from TfGM re these contracts.

The routes won by Diamond Bus NW in Area A are listed by Small group franchise at
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/tfgm-bus-franchising.184871/page-46#post-5991029

Salford: 29, 65, 66, 70, 74, 75, 79
Wigan East: 126, 132, 634, 980
Farnworth-Blackrod: 129, 521
Bolton North: 507, 525, 526, 527, 533, 535, 537, 541, 544, 907, 925
Bury-Farnworth: 511, 512, 513, 577, 916
Leigh-Atherton: 516, 583, 584, 588, 590, 594, 596, 597, 984
Bolton South: 559, 573, 574, 915

X50, 150, 254, 370 and 371 on tender to TfGM until 2025 on the same basis as today
All these will operate from Eccles depot

 

[mic]

The routes won by Diamond Bus NW in Area A are listed by Small group franchise at
https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/tfgm-bus-franchising.184871/page-46#post-5991029

Salford: 29, 65, 66, 70, 74, 75, 79
Wigan East: 126, 132, 634, 980
Farnworth-Blackrod: 129, 521
Bolton North: 507, 525, 526, 527, 533, 535, 537, 541, 544, 907, 925
Bury-Farnworth: 511, 512, 513, 577, 916
Leigh-Atherton: 516, 583, 584, 588, 590, 594, 596, 597, 984
Bolton South: 559, 573, 574, 915

X50, 150, 254, 370 and 371 on tender to TfGM until 2025 on the same basis as today
All these will operate from Eccles depot

I believe they have won some in the Oldham area from March 24th as well.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I believe they have won some in the Oldham area from March 24th as well.

As @Tim33160 said in msg 2214

In Area B, (Bury, Rochdale and North Manchester areas) Stagecoach have won the three large franchises with routes currently operated by First from Oldham depot, Stagecoach from Middleton depot and Go North West from Queens Rd depot. On the Small franchises, First have won the most of the routes currently operated by Transdev in Bury and Rochdale (Some have been rolled up with the large franchise of routes from Queens Rd). Diamond have won 6 routes and will work these from Eccles. These are from 24 March 2024.