Lothian_Bus
Member
- Joined
- 29 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 382
Data looks a little weird on lvf.io as well.
A few examples :
Service 26 showing as Service 53
Service 44 showing as Service 98
Service 16 showing as Service 31
Service 31 showing as Service 65
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Lothian Group discussion (Lothian City, Lothian Country Bus and East Coast Buses)
- Thread starter GusB
- Start date
A few examples :
Service 26 showing as Service 53
Service 44 showing as Service 98
Service 16 showing as Service 31
Service 31 showing as Service 65
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
ScotRail158725
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 2,176
its showing those for the full history of vehicles too
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
I’ve had issues with LVF and Edinburgh Transport Visualiser (which I’ll refer to from here as ETV) - the former showing incorrect route numbers, the latter showing no vehicles. I did wonder if my issues with ETV were something to do with security restrictions on my devices.
Graham Alexand
Member
Yesterday there wasn't any tracking on the app either, that seems to be back to normal now.
The wesite won't even load for me.
Ian Cunningham
Member
Running any scheduled bus service via the bypass would be madness - transit time from end to end can vary from 15 minutes to well over an hour (at 1500 today google maps has it at 59 minutes from Old Craighall to Gogar)
You couldn't run anything like a reliable service with that variable,
The 400 out to Musselburgh / Wallyford P&R is interesting but once you've added the extra running time it's getting similar to just going into town and changing to a tram or the 100
It would however provide a useful local link from Musselburgh/Wallyford right along the south of Edinburgh - potentially saving a lot of trips having to go via the city centre
You also hit the same problem as the 30 - either you need to use single deckers to run through Newcraighall or go via QMU which entails a loop round Old Craighall roundabout on the way into town adding time and making it liable to delay
Website not loading is a separate issue, regarding the website's privacy.
It seems to be an odd route numbering system, the 1 is still 1, the 2 is the 3, 3 is the 5, etc... it jumps in twos up each route (note certain withdrawn routes follow this while others do not).
Lothiangem22
Member
- Joined
- 30 Jan 2019
- Messages
- 104
I wouldn’t be surprised if we did see a reallocation of XLB’s to other garages...
11/16 duplicate at Leith > Greenbank
7/31/37 duplicate Bridges > Cameron Toll
27 seems overkill?
Are there other city routes ie: 3/26 which could benefit from the increased capacity and spread XLB’s out onto other corridors?
11/16 duplicate at Leith > Greenbank
7/31/37 duplicate Bridges > Cameron Toll
27 seems overkill?
Are there other city routes ie: 3/26 which could benefit from the increased capacity and spread XLB’s out onto other corridors?
Last edited by a moderator:
Depends how many B5TLs Central are getting? I can't see the batch being split up so maybe another 10 to Marine and 30 to Central?.
The 3 certainly could do with the capacity judging by the buses I've seen recently.
ScotRail158725
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 2,176
The 3 has always been one for heavy usage. Seems strange to split those 600s up though. I might be right in saying the next batch will be on 71 plates considering SJ21 NDx plates are on other Volvos around the country
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
I suspect around another 10-15 could be registered from August 1st, there’s still a few NCx’s to be registered - possibly for Lothian? Rest on 71’s definitely.
Horsburgh currently run via the bypass on the X40 from the Royal Infirmary to St John's Hospital via all stops to Gilmerton, Hermiston P&R, and Livingston. It's a 7 day a week, hourly service. Does it have huge delay problems? I can't see that it has a tracker so can't check it. If you can't check live times then it's pretty useless to actual use the service if there are heavy delays on the bypass. Does anyone have any experience of how it works in practice?
Lothian_Bus
Member
- Joined
- 29 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 382
The 31 mainly running with XLB's today - including 1125.
Graham Alexand
Member
Wasn't the 31 pre-covid predominantly XLB operated?
Blindtraveler
Established Member
It was. We seem to have more Gemini 3 on the 37 on Saturdays now as well since the timetable change. Still quite a few xlb during the week. I wonder if the loadings are that wildly different?
Lothian_Bus
Member
- Joined
- 29 Jan 2018
- Messages
- 382
Yes it was. The 27 and 37 have been getting them instead recently.
Grumpyscot
Member
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2019
- Messages
- 24
If only Lothian Buses would extend the 400 a few extra yards to the Newcraighall Park and Ride, I would be quite happy leaving my car there since the Fire Station has CCTV all round. But you can't leave it at Fort Kinaird without a penalty charge kicking in.
Last edited by a moderator:
Quick trip on the 30 would get you there, they're every 10 minutes from around 6am if I recall correctly. Slight inconvenience but possible.
TheEastCoaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 1,220
I see no harm in extended the 400 or even the 48 to Newcraighall Station, to be fair unless it’s Boxing Day or New Years Day it’s a dead terminus.
The only other benefit would be to have either service run through Fort Kinnaird instead of have them terminating outside the entrance. have the 400/48 terminate opposite the 49 stop (106 terminus)
and also have one of the services run through the Wisp rather than greendykes but one change at a time
(I know the 118 does this already but who knows what the future holds when they get more houses up at Upper Greendykes!Although the 106 would be a good idea if the 48/400 dont run that way!
ScotRail158725
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 2,176
extending either or would decrease turnaround times to a few minutes there or decrease at both ends which could and most likely would affect punctuality which would make this an impractical decision.
Another route up there really isnt needed to be honest. The area is like Wester Inch with a high percentage of the demographic there owning cars so its another mostly impractical decisionand also have one of the services run through the Wisp rather than greendykes but one change at a time
Although the 106 would be a good idea if the 48/400 dont run that way!
stantheman
On Moderation
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 338
On the subject of Newcraighall station, do I recall a bus service from there years ago to Haddington - maybe mid 2000s? I worked in Haddington at the time and recall a bus sitting in High Street, but there were never any passengers. I think it was before the Tweedbank extension. Does anyone know who the operator was and what type of bus was used?
Last edited by a moderator:
ian1944
Member
First ran an X7 before the number was used for the Dunbar-Edinburgh "express", supposedly to connect with trains at Newcraighall. It had very few passengers, and as I recall there were complaints of non-connection when either bus or train was delayed arriving and the other didn't delay departure to suit.
The X7 was run by First, who also had the ScotRail franchise at the time, using a specially-branded B7R/Plaxton Profile. Non-connections at Newcraighall were quite a frequent occurrence and was the reason why the service flopped.
This was the era when First were good at coming up with ideas but hopeless when it came to seeing them through. Needless to say, the X7 joined a very long list of those First ideas which never quite worked out!
scotrail158713
Established Member
A similar service was tried some time around 2014 by Prentice Coaches between Haddington and Wallyford station (X1 I believe it was numbered) and was scheduled for three return peak time journeys each weekday. I can't find anything online, but I seem to recall it was withdrawn fairly soon after it started due to lack of use.
What’s the situation with the Traffic Commissioner on connecting services? If a train is delayed is a connecting bus allowed to wait for it or will they get penalised for late running the bus?
Just thinking of the 9 out in Livingston, it’s one bus running all day, if they ran late to catch one late train it could muck up the connections the rest of the day.
Just thinking of the 9 out in Livingston, it’s one bus running all day, if they ran late to catch one late train it could muck up the connections the rest of the day.
Last edited by a moderator:
Jordan Adam
Established Member
Some things don't change.
stantheman
On Moderation
- Joined
- 17 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 338
How often do drivers forget what route the6 are on ? On Saturday in Colinton I followed 292 marked Bonaly but instead of a left turn into Bonaly Road he went to Torphin and shortly after came back down and turned tight into Bonaly Road to get correct route . Could he have gone to Torphin for the toilet as I am sure Bonaly terminus has nothing . No passengers as far as I could see
Graham Alexand
Member
To be honest that seems that may be an easy mistake to make on that route (10) as it has 2 different terminus's (termini?) at that end of the route being Torphin and Bonaly
.Lothianbus703
Member
Have 921 - 924 now been withdrawn?
Yes, all gone from Longstone.
ScotRail158725
Established Member
- Joined
- 27 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 2,176
925 is the only Gemini remaining.
Last edited by a moderator: