First Greater Glasgow

Gingerbus1991 · 28 Sep 2019

PaulMc7 said:
That's what I was getting it but as for cutting over route length and reliability combined First do have a history of it yet seemed to have stopped with it lately. I definitely don't think Easterhouse needs anywhere near as many buses as it has going by being there quite a few times. They could easily have cut more than they have and the 60/60A would be the logical one given route length and unreliability. The 19 being extended on top of the frequency increase with the 60/60A being cut back too could have been a good option too. Would have been a bigger saving too. As for the interworking what I said was only speculation and it wouldn't work as it is currently because of the frequency difference

Stagecoach x19 will likely be playing a part in these reductions through easterhouse

RailUK Forums

PaulMc7 · 28 Sep 2019

CraigonGLESGA said:
In glasgow I always wondered who actually uses the extended routes beyond there boarding to city centre journey, would it not be more prudent to have the 60/60A going from Sandyhills to Clydebank/Milngavie and the 61 from Summerston to Easterhouse?

What I mean, would more people not travel from summerston to the fort/easterhouse on a 61 than from say milngavie to easterhouse on a 60?

What else in the way of removing the 38B from barlanark to rouken glen and replacing the barlanark side with a rerouting the 41 to cover that, surely the 38E could be rerouted to then cover warrington st?

The 41, 60, 2 and not sure what else all seem to bunch at Shettleston, The Forge and Parkhead.

I thought of that idea before. I've done the 60 from Drumchapel to the forge and that's bad enough plus I've done the 60A from Barlanark to Hillfoot and that was an hour and 25mins. Swapping them over would make sense say like this.

60-Sandyhills to Clydebank
60A-Sandyhills to Milngavie
61-Summerston to Easterhouse

The problem is with the city centre it's already congested so much that there's not really many areas of it left to terminate more buses. I think long routes are still a major issue here and it's not coincedence that the longest routes by far have the worst reliability. Only exception to that really is the 75. It's not massive but still horrific.

There's plenty of routes that could be cut down but the congestion in the city centre and loads of services stopping there already stops that plus the fact it costs to stop in Buchanan Bus Station

Shettleston is ridiculous for bunching up. The 46 only escapes it a bit because it turns off of the main road before the end of it. The 2 and 60/60A are always ridiculously busy through there though

PaulMc7 · 28 Sep 2019

CraigonGLESGA said:
Stagecoach x19 will likely be playing a part in these reductions through easterhouse

Definitely. It's done really well against First there plus it has a circular route in Easterhouse unlike anything First offer. The 40 and 41 back in the day both had circular routes there

JumpinTrainz · 28 Sep 2019

PaulMc7 said:
I thought of that idea before. I've done the 60 from Drumchapel to the forge and that's bad enough plus I've done the 60A from Barlanark to Hillfoot and that was an hour and 25mins. Swapping them over would make sense say like this.

60-Sandyhills to Clydebank
60A-Sandyhills to Milngavie
61-Summerston to Easterhouse

The problem is with the city centre it's already congested so much that there's not really many areas of it left to terminate more buses. I think long routes are still a major issue here and it's not coincedence that the longest routes by far have the worst reliability. Only exception to that really is the 75. It's not massive but still horrific.

There's plenty of routes that could be cut down but the congestion in the city centre and loads of services stopping there already stops that plus the fact it costs to stop in Buchanan Bus Station

Shettleston is ridiculous for bunching up. The 46 only escapes it a bit because it turns off of the main road before the end of it. The 2 and 60/60A are always ridiculously busy through there though

The 2 is a route which I think will always bunch together unless they really adjust the frequency quite considerably and start using deckers. Although given that it’s such a busy route, reverting to a lesser frequency may not be considered progress.

As for the 60/60A bunching I don’t tend to see that as much in Shettleston. A route I have noticed it in is the 77. What I would say is the 41 terminating in the City Centre is a wasted opportunity in my mind. Extending the 41 to the QEUH or Silverburn/Braehead may be an idea? That way you’re connecting the east end in that direction that they currently don’t have. I’ve also noticed how poor the transport links are from the east end to the QEUH. Other than the X19 from Easterhouse there’s nothing which goes directly over. An express from the east end would be ideal for us workers who live further away.

PaulMc7 · 28 Sep 2019

JumpinTrainz said:
The 2 is a route which I think will always bunch together unless they really adjust the frequency quite considerably and start using deckers. Although given that it’s such a busy route, reverting to a lesser frequency may not be considered progress.

As for the 60/60A bunching I don’t tend to see that as much in Shettleston. A route I have noticed it in is the 77. What I would say is the 41 terminating in the City Centre is a wasted opportunity in my mind. Extending the 41 to the QEUH or Silverburn/Braehead may be an idea? That way you’re connecting the east end in that direction that they currently don’t have. I’ve also noticed how poor the transport links are from the east end to the QEUH. Other than the X19 from Easterhouse there’s nothing which goes directly over. An express from the east end would be ideal for us workers who live further away.

I thought the cut of the Airdrie part and slight frequency adjustment would help the 2 but if anything they've bunch up more. Maryhill doesn't help the 60s either tbh. Can usually end up together by the time they're in the city centre. I'd have combined the 41 with the 10 for Silverburn tbh. Congestion probably stopped that though. The hospital links in general aren't really that great at all tbh. Only the 34A and 77 do reasonably well. I'd cut the 8 from there and the 16 and give new links from the north of Glasgow/Bishopbriggs way and from the east end. Can't imagine many people wanting to sit on a 90 from Parkhead to it tbh and they don't really run late enough to it and are horrific to rely on

Gingerbus1991 · 28 Sep 2019

PaulMc7 said:
I thought the cut of the Airdrie part and slight frequency adjustment would help the 2 but if anything they've bunch up more. Maryhill doesn't help the 60s either tbh. Can usually end up together by the time they're in the city centre. I'd have combined the 41 with the 10 for Silverburn tbh. Congestion probably stopped that though. The hospital links in general aren't really that great at all tbh. Only the 34A and 77 do reasonably well. I'd cut the 8 from there and the 16 and give new links from the north of Glasgow/Bishopbriggs way and from the east end. Can't imagine many people wanting to sit on a 90 from Parkhead to it tbh and they don't really run late enough to it and are horrific to rely on

Well being that it would reflect a retail-to-retail route if the 41 was extended onto the 10, coincidently whilst the 38 goes to Newton Mearns from easterhouse, would the 38 route not simply benefit from change from Easterhouse to Silverburn via Nitshill to replace the southern part of the 57? Again this would create another shopper type service.

The 57s as they are north of the city centre are also kept going all day, simply connecting that to the 77 to have a through route from Westerhill to Braehead via Partick?
Of course this negatively effects though perhaps looking for the bottom of Renfrew St.

Kelvingrove <> Partick is a particular busy place and popular place whether it be for university, Kelvingrove Park, Partick for business or work or QEUH and as said shopping at Braehead, does that reasonably indacate that more services should be connected directly to Partick?
COPIED TO: Ways to improve the first glasgow network.

PaulMc7 · 28 Sep 2019

CraigonGLESGA said:
Well being that it would reflect a retail-to-retail route if the 41 was extended onto the 10, coincidently whilst the 38 goes to Newton Mearns from easterhouse, would the 38 route not simply benefit from change from Easterhouse to Silverburn via Nitshill to replace the southern part of the 57? Again this would create another shopper type service.

The 57s as they are north of the city centre are also kept going all day, simply connecting that to the 77 to have a through route from Westerhill to Braehead via Partick?
Of course this negatively effects though perhaps looking for the bottom of Renfrew St.

Kelvingrove <> Partick is a particular busy place and popular place whether it be for university, Kelvingrove Park, Partick for business or work or QEUH and as said shopping at Braehead, does that reasonably indacate that more services should be connected directly to Partick?
COPIED TO: Ways to improve the first glasgow network.

With that 77 suggestion it could work because all the 77 would need to do to continue onto the 87 route would go Killermont St and then up by Caley Uni. Could even switch the 57 back over to Auchinairn Road as a terminus and keep its route with the 77 and 87 combining. The problem is that changing the 38 over would make that close to a 2 hour route again plus the congestion and reliability the 38s have is shocking. It's also such a great service so it's probably not worth tampering with it

PaulMc7 · 28 Sep 2019

Anyone think if First were to hold onto the Greater Glasgow operation we could do with a new refresh similar to that of Simplicity?

Feel like we could do with a bit of a change with some new ideas tried out. Financials are the biggest factor in it but we've had a fairly stale set of routes for nearly 6 and a half years now

awsnews · 28 Sep 2019

awsnews said:
Of note is that for the last week Dumbarton have been down to two B10BLEs in Barbie, it will be interesting to see if one of the remaining pair disappears tomorrow as that will make it one a week for the last 3 weeks.

Contrary to what I was expecting Dumbarton are back up to three Barbie liveried B10BLEs with 61609 noted back in service over the last few days joining 61604 and 61653. Despite this there have been a number of E300s on the 206 this week.

38A-Z · 28 Sep 2019

CraigonGLESGA said:
Well being that it would reflect a retail-to-retail route if the 41 was extended onto the 10, coincidently whilst the 38 goes to Newton Mearns from easterhouse, would the 38 route not simply benefit from change from Easterhouse to Silverburn via Nitshill to replace the southern part of the 57? Again this would create another shopper type service.

The 57s as they are north of the city centre are also kept going all day, simply connecting that to the 77 to have a through route from Westerhill to Braehead via Partick?
Of course this negatively effects though perhaps looking for the bottom of Renfrew St.

Kelvingrove <> Partick is a particular busy place and popular place whether it be for university, Kelvingrove Park, Partick for business or work or QEUH and as said shopping at Braehead, does that reasonably indacate that more services should be connected directly to Partick?
COPIED TO: Ways to improve the first glasgow network.

I like your ideas but I suppose the issues there would be the frequencies.

I think the 41 is every 10 mins. The 10 is every 15 mins I think.
The 38 is every 10 mins Easterhouse to Eastwood Toll (every 2nd bus going to Mearns), the 57 is every 15 mins.

I doubt they’ll increase the 10/57 to every 10 mins so means they’d need to cut the 77, 41 and 38 to every 15 mins to make it work.

I was surprised they cut the 57s from every 12 mins to 15 initially but I realise over a lot of these routes, a lot of the areas have had high rise flats flattened and changed to houses/ lower rise flats, or still being developed. (The ones I’m aware of are Priesthill, South Nitshill, Arden, Pollokshaws, Sighthill, Red Road etc).

I do agree that they would’ve great routes but don’t think they’ll do it unless they cut back the frequency of the 10 minute services.

PaulMc7 · 29 Sep 2019

awsnews said:
Contrary to what I was expecting Dumbarton are back up to three Barbie liveried B10BLEs with 61609 noted back in service over the last few days joining 61604 and 61653. Despite this there have been a number of E300s on the 206 this week.

There's a tendency for one of them at least to end up on a 1 or 1A at peaks. Even seen a 9 branded bus on a 1A last Monday at 5ish

overthewater · 1 Oct 2019

I see some of the new timetables are up on traveline.

PaulMc7 · 1 Oct 2019

On the subject of timetables, I saw a tweet to First earlier about how we supposedly don't get the new info quick enough regarding changes. What do you guys think?

I think the usual 2/3 weeks we get is okay tbh

GaryMcEwan · 1 Oct 2019

PaulMc7 said:
On the subject of timetables, I saw a tweet to First earlier about how we supposedly don't get the new info quick enough regarding changes. What do you guys think?

I think the usual 2/3 weeks we get is okay tbh

Notices on the buses themselves are only put up a few days before the changes are due to take place. I would agree with the person who tweeted them saying that as it has been getting worse as of late.

The latest price rise increase wasn't very well publicised and drivers had to keep on reminding passengers that the fares had gone up.

mde · 1 Oct 2019

PaulMc7 said:
On the subject of timetables, I saw a tweet to First earlier about how we supposedly don't get the new info quick enough regarding changes. What do you guys think?

I think the usual 2/3 weeks we get is okay tbh

It’d be better to quote or link to the tweet in question to allow some context… but, for decisions that have been taken some time in advance surely more notice is better than less when it could have a big impact on a persons daily routine? Obviously there are some instances where changes occur at short notice for reasons beyond First’s control, but, this isn’t one of them.

Conversely, it’d be useful if First made sure their shared services social media folk had access to that information as well… this reply to a customer isn’t particularly helpful when the reasons for discontinuance have been widely reported elsewhere and acknowledged by the local management in the media!

First Glasgow @FirstinGlasgow
Hi There Gary, The only information we have been given is that from the 26th of October the X1 route will no longer be active, We are awaiting further information in regards to reasons why, When we receive this we will update our feed, JR^

https://twitter.com/FirstinGlasgow/status/1178930245732311040

PaulMc7 · 1 Oct 2019

mde said:
It’d be better to quote or link to the tweet in question to allow some context… but, for decisions that have been taken some time in advance surely more notice is better than less when it could have a big impact on a persons daily routine? Obviously there are some instances where changes occur at short notice for reasons beyond First’s control, but, this isn’t one of them.

Conversely, it’d be useful if First made sure their shared services social media folk had access to that information as well… this reply to a customer isn’t particularly helpful when the reasons for discontinuance have been widely reported elsewhere and acknowledged by the local management in the media!

Yeah First should have people operate their social media here tbh. Could easily be done from Caley so the info is there first hand instead of finding it from the papers etc

PaulMc7 · 1 Oct 2019

GaryMcEwan said:
Notices on the buses themselves are only put up a few days before the changes are due to take place. I would agree with the person who tweeted them saying that as it has been getting worse as of late.

The latest price rise increase wasn't very well publicised and drivers had to keep on reminding passengers that the fares had gone up.

Yeah a lot of people still have to ask how much their fare is when I've been on the bus tbh. The 1s are particularly common because there's a lot of people who've not been in the area long or visit for the rugby etc

GaryMcEwan · 1 Oct 2019

PaulMc7 said:
Yeah First should have people operate their social media here tbh. Could easily be done from Caley so the info is there first hand instead of finding it from the papers etc

When the Twitter page was first set up, it was operated from Glasgow I believe. Unfortunately with it now being operated down south, the information they give out is absolutely appalling at time.

PaulMc7 · 1 Oct 2019

GaryMcEwan said:
When the Twitter page was first set up, it was operated from Glasgow I believe. Unfortunately with it now being operated down south, the information they give out is absolutely appalling at time.

Yeah it's ridiculous on a daily basis now and part of the reason some people stay away from buses

overthewater · 1 Oct 2019

It's Manchesters that covers every First twitter area? At least with Stagecoach it cover the company areas and depots have access to put stuff out. I think stagecoach Midlands is the biggest Cambridge - Warwick? has that changed?

mde · 2 Oct 2019

overthewater said:
It's Manchesters that covers every First twitter area?

Leeds, no?

christopherrfc · 2 Oct 2019

overthewater said:
I see some of the new timetables are up on traveline.

which ones are up I can’t see any on traveline

Bus Lightyear · 2 Oct 2019

christopherrfc said:
which ones are up I can’t see any on traveline

I'm glad I'm not the only one who's wondering that. I was looking for the new 19 and X2 but couldn't find them anywhere.

overthewater · 2 Oct 2019

Some does not mean all.

Edit. However it seems there gone walkies from last night again. Not the first time this has happened.

Bus Lightyear said:
I'm glad I'm not the only one who's wondering that. I was looking for the new 19 and X2 but couldn't find them anywhere.

PaulMc7 · 2 Oct 2019

mde said:
Leeds, no?

My understanding was Leeds too

PaulMc7 · 2 Oct 2019

Will be intriguing to see some of these new timetables to look at recovery time/journey time etc and if they've slipped in any other changes to the frequency with the services that only have timetable changes other than the 19

PaulMc7 · 2 Oct 2019

So people power does influence things sometimes after all. Petition was at 4500 signatures last time I seen too

tbtc · 2 Oct 2019

38A-Z said:
I was surprised they cut the 57s from every 12 mins to 15 initially but I realise over a lot of these routes, a lot of the areas have had high rise flats flattened and changed to houses/ lower rise flats, or still being developed. (The ones I’m aware of are Priesthill, South Nitshill, Arden, Pollokshaws, Sighthill, Red Road etc)

This is a point that I think needs repeating - there's been some huge shifts in population density around Glasgow over the past decade or so - certainly more so than most cities - as high rises reach the end of their lives.

Unfortunately in Sheffield, the Supertram was designed to serve some huge flats (Kelvin in the north of the city and Norfolk Park in the south) but by the time the lines had been approved/ built/ operational, the thousands of people living there had been shifted to other parts of town - at least with buses its easier to adapt!

mde said:
Conversely, it’d be useful if First made sure their shared services social media folk had access to that information as well… this reply to a customer isn’t particularly helpful when the reasons for discontinuance have been widely reported elsewhere and acknowledged by the local management in the media!

It's not as helpful as it could be, but really all that matters on Twitter is that the route is coming off - the reasons could be many (loss making, anti-social behaviour, changes in shift patterns, insufficient reimbursement from concessionary fares etc) but I don't think that the company need to justify the decision - it might be nice if they did but far from essential - we know the reason that they've given for the X1 coming off but it doesn't matter too much what the real reason is - all that matters is that they are scrapping it.

My only criticism would be that, if I were running the feed, I'd prefer to say something like "...but we'll still be running a range of services from Hamilton into Glasgow with the same fares" or something similar, highlight something positive rather than just put out a negative message with no good news whatsoever.

PaulMc7 said:
So people power does influence things sometimes after all. Petition was at 4500 signatures last time I seen too

They are "considering it" - which is exactly what a company I owned would probably say if faced by a petition signed by a large number of people who didn't use the specific service on a regular enough basis - that's a long way from "keeping it".

PaulMc7 · 2 Oct 2019

Just for it to even be reconsidered though says a lot about the pressure put on them. This never usually happens ever. It's usually just gone with no opportunity for pressure so it's different, to say the least

lastbus · 2 Oct 2019

tbtc said:
This is a point that I think needs repeating - there's been some huge shifts in population density around Glasgow over the past decade or so - certainly more so than most cities - as high rises reach the end of their lives.

Unfortunately in Sheffield, the Supertram was designed to serve some huge flats (Kelvin in the north of the city and Norfolk Park in the south) but by the time the lines had been approved/ built/ operational, the thousands of people living there had been shifted to other parts of town - at least with buses its easier to adapt!

It's not as helpful as it could be, but really all that matters on Twitter is that the route is coming off - the reasons could be many (loss making, anti-social behaviour, changes in shift patterns, insufficient reimbursement from concessionary fares etc) but I don't think that the company need to justify the decision - it might be nice if they did but far from essential - we know the reason that they've given for the X1 coming off but it doesn't matter too much what the real reason is - all that matters is that they are scrapping it.

My only criticism would be that, if I were running the feed, I'd prefer to say something like "...but we'll still be running a range of services from Hamilton into Glasgow with the same fares" or something similar, highlight something positive rather than just put out a negative message with no good news whatsoever.

They are "considering it" - which is exactly what a company I owned would probably say if faced by a petition signed by a large number of people who didn't use the specific service on a regular enough basis - that's a long way from "keeping it".

I believe they are considering continuing it under part subsidy from SPT.

First Greater Glasgow

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Member