Bee Network Service/Route Discussion

[mayneway]

Two minor rounds of timetable changes on the Bee Network available at https://tfgm.com/travel-updates/travel-alerts#bus

From this weekend there is some very minor tinkering with a handful of routes in the tranche 1 area. (Routes 471, 559, 573, 588, 596, 610) When I say very minor, the 610 change alters just one late evening journey to start five minutes later.

Then next weekend there are changes to the 52, 53 and 135. Like many changes since the Bee
Network came in these are extended running times and increased PVR to accommodate these. The biggest increase seems to be on the 53 journey that leaves Cheetham Hill at 15:10, getting an extra 19 minutes. From old timetables you can see this journey has now been extended by 32 minutes since 2017 (1h45 to 2h17). The traffic is just making bus services in Manchester unsustainable, and the 53 doesn't even touch the City Centre.

It's unlikely to matter to anyone in this case, but why not do all these changes on one day?

I believe it’s TFGM that set the review and change dates - think it’s still 4 a year.

It’s worth pointing out that most of the Queens road services are still running on the completely impossible pre Covid Go North west schedules.
The 52/53 are just completely unworkable and to be honest probably suffer worse for traffic than any of the city centre services.
The 53’s have more running times and much larger layover/recovery times at Salford shopping centre.

The 52 has more buses and additional running times.

The 135 likewise has additional buses, increased running times etc.

Also worth noting that the 95 service reliefs will move from Bury to Salford shopping centre. It’s become a real issue drivers getting to bury to take buses off when Salford is only 10 mins from depot.

 

[M60lad]

I can vouch for the problems with 52, quite a few times when I've been on 181 on my way home from work I've been going up St Mary's Road and spotted 2 52s within 5 minutes of each other both heading to Failsworth at about 18:30, gone are the days when if this sort of thing happened the most late running bus would have swapped passengers onto the other bus and spun round somewhere to get themselves back to on time as possible.

 

[mayneway]

I can vouch for the problems with 52, quite a few times when I've been on 181 on my way home from work I've been going up St Mary's Road and spotted 2 52s within 5 minutes of each other both heading to Failsworth at about 18:30, gone are the days when if this sort of thing happened the most late running bus would have swapped passengers onto the other bus and spun round somewhere to get themselves back to on time as possible.

Yep I’ve done it myself at Go North west. Got as far as moston lane and been told to transfer passengers and turn it round, now TFGM class the Failsworth’s as priority’s that have to run. So much for a London style system!

 

[Statto]

I wonder if it's worth cutting the 52 to Cheetham Hill, or North Manchester General, & replacing the Cheetham Hill/North Manchester General - Failsworth section with another route, or a new route from Oldham?

 

[Cavendish1]

Spotted a rarity today, a South Pennine CT Streetlite WF on the Tuesdays only Ashton to Holmfirth 357. Nice to see something thats escaped the yellow!

 

[47550]

Spotted a rarity today, a South Pennine CT Streetlite WF on the Tuesdays only Ashton to Holmfirth 357. Nice to see something thats escaped the yellow!

38 minutes end to end journey time - very impressive ! Especially with only a couple of minutes recovery time at either end. Blink and it’s gone !!

 

[Tim33160]

Spotted a rarity today, a South Pennine CT Streetlite WF on the Tuesdays only Ashton to Holmfirth 357. Nice to see something thats escaped the yellow!

Presume this runs under a TfGM Bee Network Cross Border Permit coming into the TfGM area??

Two minor rounds of timetable changes on the Bee Network available at https://tfgm.com/travel-updates/travel-alerts#bus

From this weekend there is some very minor tinkering with a handful of routes in the tranche 1 area. (Routes 471, 559, 573, 588, 596, 610) When I say very minor, the 610 change alters just one late evening journey to start five minutes later.

Then next weekend there are changes to the 52, 53 and 135. Like many changes since the Bee
Network came in these are extended running times and increased PVR to accommodate these. The biggest increase seems to be on the 53 journey that leaves Cheetham Hill at 15:10, getting an extra 19 minutes. From old timetables you can see this journey has now been extended by 32 minutes since 2017 (1h45 to 2h17). The traffic is just making bus services in Manchester unsustainable, and the 53 doesn't even touch the City Centre.

It's unlikely to matter to anyone in this case, but why not do all these changes on one day?

Further timetable changes published on line for services 17 18 84 181 182 409 587 from 23 Feb
available at https://tfgm.com/travel-updates/travel-alerts#bus then click on "tomorrow" and "route and timetable changes"

To add to changes on routes 52 53 135 from 2Feb and
471 559 573 588 596 610 from 26 Jan

Expected one change date rather than three close together ? - it used to be quarterly change dates?
Are there three teams of service change planners - one for each tranche?

Early d-reg saw change lists for nearly every weekend published

 

[158756]

Presume this runs under a TfGM Bee Network Cross Border Permit coming into the TfGM area??


Further timetable changes published on line for services 17 18 84 181 182 409 587 from 23 Feb
available at https://tfgm.com/travel-updates/travel-alerts#bus then click on "tomorrow" and "route and timetable changes"

To add to changes on routes 52 53 135 from 2Feb and
471 559 573 588 596 610 from 26 Jan

Expected one change date rather than three close together ? - it used to be quarterly change dates?
Are there three teams of service change planners - one for each tranche?

Early d-reg saw change lists for nearly every weekend published

The routes changing on 23 Feb are tranche 2 (except the 587 which is not franchised), same as those changing on the 2nd, so it's not one date for each. Why these couldn't all happen at the same time I really don't know.

 

[Steve440]

The routes changing on 23 Feb are tranche 2 (except the 587 which is not franchised), same as those changing on the 2nd, so it's not one date for each. Why these couldn't all happen at the same time I really don't know.

Could it be different depots/operators?

 

[geoffk]

"timetable changes to most journeys to improve reliability" I assume this phrase means, in effect, extra running time. There must be a limit to extending running times before the service becomes unsustainable. Does TfGM have a plan to reduce dwell times at bus stops?

 

[Andyh82]

It does seem the only lever they can pull to get the reliability stats up is to keep adding vehicles and running time

Soon every 135 will arrive in Manchester on time. Yes they’ll allow 2 hours to get from Bury, 30 mins layover at each end and have a PVR of 50 vehicles, but at least the reliability stats will look good!

I also note that if private bus companies were making service changes every week, the likes of TfGM would have kicked up a fuss

 

[M60lad]

I see their increasing evening peak running times for 181/182s again, only reason I can see them doing this is due to the inward journeys to Manchester running late, I catch 18:14 home from work and its a bit of an odd one to be honest most of the time it runs to time out of Manchester and can get to Newton Heath/Moston Metrolink Station (timing point) on a good day for about 18:23 or thereafter and then has to wait until 18:30 so doesn't really need the extra 2mins that's being added to the timetable from the end of the month, if anything it's the inward journey that needs tweaking not the outward journey.

Also for some reason despite 83/84 running the same route up Oldham Road as far as Dean lane as 181/182 they get less running time even at Peak Times for example 83 leaves Manchester at 18:12 and is timed to get to Newton Heath at 18:26 yet the 181 which leaves 2 minutes later for some reason is timed to get to Newton Heath at 18:30 (18:32 from new timetable), even drivers at Oldham Depot don't know why this is.

 

[johncrossley]

It does seem the only lever they can pull to get the reliability stats up is to keep adding vehicles and running time

Soon every 135 will arrive in Manchester on time. Yes they’ll allow 2 hours to get from Bury, 30 mins layover at each end and have a PVR of 50 vehicles, but at least the reliability stats will look good!

I also note that if private bus companies were making service changes every week, the likes of TfGM would have kicked up a fuss

The private companies couldn't justify adding the necessary additional running and recovery time so they had no choice but to be late. Extra running and recovery time is a good thing and is something that has been enabled by the move to franchising. This is also something TfL does and it means reduced chance of long waits at the bus stop. I'm glad TfL are prepared to lay on extra buses even if it is at the cost of reduced speed.

Delays due to traffic congestion are inevitable so it is necessary to mitigate that. We can't just pretend traffic congestion doesn't exist. Bus priority isn't going to be possible everywhere and even where it is possible local politicians will probably get in the way. London proves you can have a usable bus service even in severe traffic congestion.

 

[Steve440]

The private companies couldn't justify adding the necessary additional running and recovery time so they had no choice but to be late. Extra running and recovery time is a good thing and is something that has been enabled by the move to franchising. This is also something TfL does and it means reduced chance of long waits at the bus stop. I'm glad TfL are prepared to lay on extra buses even if it is at the cost of reduced speed.

Delays due to traffic congestion are inevitable so it is necessary to mitigate that. We can't just pretend traffic congestion doesn't exist. Bus priority isn't going to be possible everywhere and even where it is possible local politicians will probably get in the way. London proves you can have a usable bus service even in severe traffic congestion.

Unfortunately, whilst extra running time helps improve reliability, it is a double-edged sword. Yes, journeys will run on time, but some passengers may be put off by the ever increasing journey times. It seems to me that the overall regular frequency of a route is sometimes more important than every single journey running exactly to time.

 

[geoffk]

Unfortunately, whilst extra running time helps improve reliability, it is a double-edged sword. Yes, journeys will run on time, but some passengers may be put off by the ever increasing journey times. It seems to me that the overall regular frequency of a route is sometimes more important than every single journey running exactly to time.

and the taxpayer will ultimately end up paying for the extra resources (vehicles and drivers) so that the cars of Jo(e) Public can carry on causing congestion. I've seen somewhere an article describing how much slower bus routes have become since the 1960s or 70s but can't now find it.

 

[158756]

Looks like Metroline are having issues. There also appear to be a number of First vehicles operating on the 216

Due to operational issues, some bus services in Tameside will be unable to operate today.

We apologise for any inconvenience this may cause. The list of suspended services are as follows:

7 Service - 18:15 (Outbound), 19:25 (Inbound), 21:25 (Outbound), 22:25 (Inbound)

216 Service - 13:46 (Inbound), 14:28 (Outbound), 14:46 (Inbound), 15:10 (Inbound), 15:28 (Outbound), 15:52 (Outbound), 16:22 (Inbound), 16:34 (Inbound), 17:04 (Outbound), 17:16 (Outbound), 17:46 (Inbound), 17:58 (Inbound) 18:28 (Outbound) 18:40 (Outbound), 19:20 (Inbound), 19:56 (Inbound)

219 Service - 20:24 (Inbound), 21:01 (Outbound)

230 Service - 16:50 (Inbound), 17:00 (Outbound), 18:40 (Inbound), 19:30 (Outbound), 22:40 (Inbound), 23:30 (Outbound)

231 Service - 15:45 (Inbound), 17:45 (Outbound), 18:45 (Inbound)

237 Service - 16:22 (Outbound), 17:21 (Inbound), 17:52 (Outbound), 18:51 (Inbound)

336 Service - 17:40 (Outbound), 21:27 (Outbound)

337 Service - 20:55 (Outbound), 21:55 (Outbound)

346 Service - 16:25 (Outbound), 17:03 (Inbound), 22:25 (Outbound), 22:56 (Inbound), 23:25 (Outbound)

347 Service - 15:40 (Outbound), 16:40 (Outbound), 21:50 (Outbound)

389 Service - 17:35 (Outbound), 21:25 (Inbound)

 

[baza585]

Looks like Metroline are having issues. There also appear to be a number of First vehicles operating on the 216

Omnishambles.

Who is paying First to run these services, I wonder.

Metroline or TfGM?

 

[mayneway]

"timetable changes to most journeys to improve reliability" I assume this phrase means, in effect, extra running time. There must be a limit to extending running times before the service becomes unsustainable. Does TfGM have a plan to reduce dwell times at bus stops?

Sadly it’s a negative of franchising. Operators are fined for leaving the starting point more than 5 mins late, and then every timing point they pass more than 5 mins late. Running times have to be achievable and sadly in the case of Queens road most are the complete opposite.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Feb 2025 ==

Omnishambles.

Who is paying First to run these services, I wonder.

Metroline or TfGM?

TFGM are paying First to run some boards from Ashton on Saturdays as Metroline doesn’t have the staff.

 

[geoffk]

I've just found something I wrote back in 2017, as part of an e-mail discussion. "In the days of Corporation buses, the service 8 running time, Bolton to Manchester, was just 38 minutes. You would be hard put today to match that in a car following the same route. I was told that buses would sometimes reach 50 mph..... The 8 was partly limited stop back then and now it serves all stops. In addition the route is now to Manchester, Shude Hill via Deansgate so a longer route than in the days when the terminus was Victoria Bus Station (in Salford). Running time is now between 50 and 75 minutes, depending on the time of day. The Traffic Commissioner’s rules on punctuality mean adding extra buses to the schedules, so more cost but no extra revenue - less probably as passengers seek alternative ways of getting about."

A colleague replied "Just found my notes on the effects of the Salford (Pendleton) Precinct reorganisation of bus routes between Crescent and Irlam o' th' heights. When buses were removed from A6 and sent via the precinct, bus journey times increased by about 60%. Car journey times were reduced by about 40%."

So there are several factors at play here, in addition to congestion - loss of limited-stop running, the ending of picking/up setting down restrictions on longer routes, more convoluted (less direct) routes and, of course, longer dwell times at stops as a result of one-person operation, partly offset by the superior performance of modern buses.

 

[Pinus contorta]

I've just found something I wrote back in 2017, as part of an e-mail discussion. "In the days of Corporation buses, the service 8 running time, Bolton to Manchester, was just 38 minutes. You would be hard put today to match that in a car following the same route. I was told that buses would sometimes reach 50 mph..... The 8 was partly limited stop back then and now it serves all stops, in addition the route is now to Manchester, Shude Hill via Deansgate so a longer route than in the days when the terminus was Victoria Bus Station (in Salford). Running time is now between 50 and 75 minutes, depending on the time of day. The Traffic Commissioner’s rules on punctuality mean adding extra buses to the schedules, so more cost but no extra revenue - less probably as passengers seek alternative ways of getting about."

A colleague replied "Just found my notes on the effects of the Salford (Pendleton) Precinct reorganisation of bus routes between Crescent and Irlam o' th' heights. When buses were removed from A6 and sent via the precinct, bus journey times increased by about 60%. Car journey times were reduced by about 40%."

So there are several factors at play here, in addition to congestion - loss of limited-stop running, the ending of picking/up setting down restrictions on longer routes, more convoluted (less direct) routes and, of course, longer dwell times at stops as a result of one-person operation, partly offset by the superior performance of modern buses.

The running boards from years ago that you can look at back up that the buses are travelling much slower. Some of the buses would run dead from the depot to the town centre ( I'm using Wigan as an example) at speed in a couple of minutes.

The thing that I noticed using the live tracker on Friday afternoon following the 610 ( i was stood waiting for 35 mins )was that the school run traffic spike makes the roads grind to a halt and the buses bunch up as a consequence ( meant to be every 12 minutes frequency) so the number of folks waiting at the stops quickly doubles and then the bus dwell increases exponentially. The service pattern fell apart and 3 buses turned up within 6 mins of each other.

 

[Steve440]

Sadly it’s a negative of franchising. Operators are fined for leaving the starting point more than 5 mins late, and then every timing point they pass more than 5 mins late. Running times have to be achievable and sadly in the case of Queens road most are the complete opposite.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Feb 2025 ==


TFGM are paying First to run some boards from Ashton on Saturdays as Metroline doesn’t have the staff.

Presumably TfGM will be deducting the cost from Metroline's contract.

 

[mayneway]

Presumably TfGM will be deducting the cost from Metroline's contract.

Not so sure!
They get a three month grace period before fines kick in.
ultimately it’s not something Metroline can control. They took over a depot that was on paper fully staffed only for a large number to walk out in the first few days and return to Stagecoach leaving them incredibly short.

 

[TheSmiths82]

Not so sure!
They get a three month grace period before fines kick in.
ultimately it’s not something Metroline can control. They took over a depot that was on paper fully staffed only for a large number to walk out in the first few days and return to Stagecoach leaving them incredibly short.

If lots of staff walked out all at once is not that down to a management issue?

 

[geoffk]

The thing that I noticed using the live tracker on Friday afternoon following the 610 ( i was stood waiting for 35 mins )was that the school run traffic spike makes the roads grind to a halt and the buses bunch up as a consequence ( meant to be every 12 minutes frequency) so the number of folks waiting at the stops quickly doubles and then the bus dwell increases exponentially. The service pattern fell apart and 3 buses turned up within 6 mins of each other.

The school run seems to be a uniquely British institution. I remember that Stagecoach Manchester put in special schedules during the summer holidays, taking advantage of the lack of school traffic to speed up services and reduce the PVR (by how much I don't know). Perhaps First did the same. What's the answer to the school run - more school buses, getting kids to walk or cycle or just attend a school nearer home.......?

 

[Pinus contorta]

The school run seems to be a uniquely British institution. I remember that Stagecoach Manchester put in special schedules during the summer holidays, taking advantage of the lack of school traffic to speed up services and reduce the PVR (by how much I don't know). Perhaps First did the same. What's the answer to the school run - more school buses, getting kids to walk or cycle or just attend a school nearer home.......?

Not sure what the answer is TBH. Ashton- in- Makerfield is a paticularly odd place for the rush hour traffix because it has 2 secondary schools next to each other and another quite close nearby and a Motorway with a limited interchange on & off that acts as a quasi by pass of the town but doesn't. If you see what I mean. It funnels a lot of the traffic into ill equipped areas.

 

[Statto]

I've just found something I wrote back in 2017, as part of an e-mail discussion. "In the days of Corporation buses, the service 8 running time, Bolton to Manchester, was just 38 minutes. You would be hard put today to match that in a car following the same route. I was told that buses would sometimes reach 50 mph..... The 8 was partly limited stop back then and now it serves all stops. In addition the route is now to Manchester, Shude Hill via Deansgate so a longer route than in the days when the terminus was Victoria Bus Station (in Salford). Running time is now between 50 and 75 minutes, depending on the time of day. The Traffic Commissioner’s rules on punctuality mean adding extra buses to the schedules, so more cost but no extra revenue - less probably as passengers seek alternative ways of getting about."

A colleague replied "Just found my notes on the effects of the Salford (Pendleton) Precinct reorganisation of bus routes between Crescent and Irlam o' th' heights. When buses were removed from A6 and sent via the precinct, bus journey times increased by about 60%. Car journey times were reduced by about 40%."

So there are several factors at play here, in addition to congestion - loss of limited-stop running, the ending of picking/up setting down restrictions on longer routes, more convoluted (less direct) routes and, of course, longer dwell times at stops as a result of one-person operation, partly offset by the superior performance of modern buses.

Looking at the Bolton - Manchester routes, their was an express 9 Blackrod - Bolton - Manchester which was launched at deregulation along with an express 7 Egerton - Bolton - Manchester, the 7 didn't last long being withdrawn March 87, the 9 Bolton - Manchester section had a frequency increase to compensate, the 9 took 40 minutes Bolton - Manchester, the 9 stayed on Broad Street, using the underpass rather than calling at Pendleton Precinct or Pendleton Church.

Greater Manchester 1-29

RAILWAYMEDIA-British Railway Pictures

www.railwaymedia.co.uk

 

[mayneway]

If lots of staff walked out all at once is not that down to a management issue?

You’re never going to get two companies what run the same. I believe many walked due to changes to rosta’s etc but again it’s always going to change.

 

[Mwanesh]

If lots of staff walked out all at once is not that down to a management issue?

Some of the drivers were loan drivers from the Stagecoach empire.They did not fancy carrying on .Metroline is limited in where it can get extra drivers apart from London and Cardiff.

 

[baza585]

TFGM are paying First to run some boards from Ashton on Saturdays as Metroline doesn’t have the staff.

Thanks for confirming what I suspected.

The great unknown is how much public money will have been spent on this whole exercise (over and above what TfGM were paying the previous operators in terms of subsidy for non-commercial routes); only then will we be able to judge whether we got value for money. Will we ever be able to piece those figures together, because I can't see TfGM publishing them, particularly if they are not favourable to Andy Burnham's case.

I haven't come across any figures in the public domain as yet. Are there any, please?

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Unfortunately, whilst extra running time helps improve reliability, it is a double-edged sword. Yes, journeys will run on time, but some passengers may be put off by the ever increasing journey times. It seems to me that the overall regular frequency of a route is sometimes more important than every single journey running exactly to time.

and the taxpayer will ultimately end up paying for the extra resources (vehicles and drivers) so that the cars of Jo(e) Public can carry on causing congestion. I've seen somewhere an article describing how much slower bus routes have become since the 1960s or 70s but can't now find it.

Ain't this the problem. It's all very good TfGM throwing money at the problem in so far as adding additional resources. However, it doesn't fundamentally solve the problem. To blithely suggest that "delays due to traffic congestion are inevitable" and that "London proves you can have a usable bus service even in severe traffic congestion." is utterly pointless. There is no point in simply adding in further resources to existing routes, making them less time competitive. They are less attractive and so passenger figures fall as we've seen in London. Remember, London's bus subsidy has exploded on a cost per trip basis over the last ten years for this very reason.

Thanks for confirming what I suspected.

The great unknown is how much public money will have been spent on this whole exercise (over and above what TfGM were paying the previous operators in terms of subsidy for non-commercial routes); only then will we be able to judge whether we got value for money. Will we ever be able to piece those figures together, because I can't see TfGM publishing them, particularly if they are not favourable to Andy Burnham's case.

I haven't come across any figures in the public domain as yet. Are there any, please?

In fairness, it's probably too soon. However, I'd be keen to see how patronage has increased and the cost per journey including capturing the capital cost element of the new fleets.