FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
Which to be fair was expected. Let’s see if it’s temporary though
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both 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
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I hope not, much easier to stay onboard than switch service as it gets me home.Which to be fair was expected. Let’s see if it’s temporary though
alexf380
Established Member
The 124 being moved from Portobello made my day! I can't stand driving through there, and I'm not the only one
Overall some decent looking changes, even in WL tidying up the 275 and 276.
Certainly in the morning on the 113s the mass exodus of passengers happens at the Western, with just single figures staying on to Granton. Even then, most of those people will have boarded at Waverley Steps or Queensferry Street so there are alternative buses for West Granton.
computerSaysNo
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,440
Some big changes here!
Some of my initial thoughts are below:
Lothian
3: Removal of Dalkeith Campus journeys is an interesting development, I'm not sure how that is going to affect usage, just have to wait and see I guess!
10: My initial thoughts are that the removal of the Torphin branch is disappointing, although that's only from a personal perspective! It removes the fast link from the Bonaly West/Torphin area into Edinburgh, but then I'm not sure how much usage that section even gets so it might be well justified.
16: Revision to run to Torphin all day is interesting, will need to wait and see how that goes.
22: I'm sort of surprised that they've chosen to remove the City to Ocean section of the route already, before the trams have even started, but I can definitely see why they've done it. As it says on the article, there are plenty of other services go down that way. I am sort of surprised though that they appear to be decreasing the frequency on the rest of the route?
26: Increase to every 10 minutes is welcome as it can get very busy at times. I'm still not sure that every 10 minutes will be enough though, taking into account the complete removal of the 124 from the Portobello area.
41: I think the slight change of route to serve Cammo is a good idea, it will be interesting to see what sort of usage the Cammo Village part of the route gets.
47/47B/X47: I'm sort of surprised that the X47 hasn't seen a comeback yet, I wonder if that is planned for the future or if they're finding that running it as 47B is fine on its own.
East Coast
The revision to make all City journeys limited stop and via Milton Road is surprising!
X5: Good to see its return finally! Hopefully it will be allocated to run with the B8RLEs, as I remember finding them far more suited to that sort of journey than the B7RLEs; there should be enough B8RLEs to run both the X5 and X7?
X6 (ex-104): I'm glad this is finally becoming an express route. In my opinion it should have been limited-stop from the beginning but it's good that they're doing it now.
124: Good that it is being made limited stop and very surprising that it is being re-routed too! Hopefully that will go a long way in making it more attractive to use. I am surprised that the number is being kept in the local (1xx, i.e. 124) series though rather than being changed to the limited-stop (Xxx, i.e. X24) series though? I think this will just confuse customers to be honest. I also wonder how much journey time will be saved by the above changes. If not much time is to be saved, I would question whether it is even worth making all the above changes. If a lot of time is saved, I would question whether it is even worth running the X5 now, if it's only going to be saving 5-10 minutes.
113: Good that it too is being made limited stop, my only concern again is with the route number not being changed to X13. I'm also wondering why they're permanently truncating it to the Western General; does this save a bus/driver in comparison to running all the way to Granton?
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
There’s no fast daytime link from Princes Street to West Granton now, that’s the problem. The X29 and X37 offer a very limited number of journeys during the peak hours and then there’s the 16 which takes usually at least double the time, the 24 is also another option but again is very slow in comparison to a route via Orchard Brae/Crewe Road South/North.
The flaw with the 113 always was giving it about 5 mins layover at West Granton then nearly 25 mins at Pencaitland. The PVR will probably stay the same that’s the annoying thing! It may save a bus when you factor in limited stop running too but that’s then offering no room for delays at all.
I’d be in favour of reducing the 19 and 47 to retain what the 113 offers, it’s such a useful link. Not to mention the college are planning all classes to go back into campus full time in August so buses will start to get busier. I’m sure the Penicuik residents would even suggest running the X37 all day, that could work. The 113 also relieves a headache with Broughton High School which frequently fills up every bus to/from Crewe Road North, this will make this situation a complete mess.
Seems likely ECB will bring back 195/6 and let go of a few doubles as the depot PVR (is that even a thing, but you know what I mean) will be more or less the same.
The lack of a change to have X for all city bound routes is a strange one. All I can imagine is that X reflects via A1 and then non X reflects via Musselburgh - even though they’re now all limited stop. Not having the X on the 113 and 124 will no doubt catch people out at first.
I’m going to be controversial and disagree about making the 113 and 124 limited stop, I don’t think it’s pointless but I don’t think it’s worth it. I would’ve left the 124 as it is now if the 15 wasn’t brought back (which it hasn’t been), and I’ve said my thing on the 113 which I would’ve left as it is now too - but change the turnaround times at each end.
alexf380
Established Member
The 8 was my go-to fast bus when I was studying up at the college, but I appreciate that the York Place diversion on that route may be slowing it down a bit these days.
The reduction in journey time by running limited stop, along with terminating at the hospital will mean one less bus on the route. I probably wouldn't have made it limited stop as it does well passenger wise along Willowbrae but operationally I can understand it. No stop at the college at Milton Road is an odd decision, though.
You might also save a bus on the 124 if the running time allows but I don't know. Either way, any vehicles saved here would go onto the X5 so the PVR of the garage is only going to increase, if only by 1 or 2 a day.
With the 10 reduced to every 20 minutes, Bonaly was down to hourly and Torphin had an irregular 20/40 pattern. Extending the 16 is an expensive way of solving the problem for tiny numbers of passengers. Off-peak the 10 is very quiet all the way into town.
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
I think the 113 and 124 are going to be doing all stops east of Christian Crescent/Magdalene Drive so it should still stop at the college stop on Milton Road East. Hopefully to keep things simple this is done as a combined every 15 mins service.
The 8 (along with most/all North Bridge routes) is extremely unreliable and just generally slow whenever I use it during the day. I use it a lot first thing in the morning though and unsurprisingly it’s fine. Before all these road closures the 8 was a very busy route to and from the college. Nowadays most appear to try and avoid that side of the tram works, not to mention the still reduced numbers anyway.
Darklord8899
Member
- Joined
- 6 Jul 2018
- Messages
- 690
Thank you, I knew X50 was used for something before it was used for the Cruiselink
Link to the Cruiselink X50 page below for anyone interested...
Cruiselink X50
TheEastCoaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 1,391
Right! I got some thoughts on this.. everyone beware
The 16 going to Torphin makes sense and leaves Bonaly with a more frequent service. The worst case scenario is folk on the 10 route that actually want to go to Torphin can switch over in Colinton for a 16.
No news on the 15 is concerning, maybe they missed it out? With the 124 withdrawn from Portobello (will get to that in a minute..) I figured they would now extend it back to Eastfield or even Musselburgh
The 22 withdrawal from Leith is brave. I get that it’s temporary, probably due to the tram works, but love how Lothian have to push the fact that there are 100 other options down that way anyway. Folk will still complain regardless!
41 reroute is a nice touch, giving Cramond a more direct bus and connecting it to Cammo!
Really glad the X5 is back, it was long overdue..
And here we go.. controversial opinion incoming. For the record, I can understand from both ends why ECB decided to change the 124 route, but after 6 years straight, why would you now do it and not sooner? In fact, why take it out from Portobello to begin with? For one it made for a nice alternative down at Portobello compared to the 26 and helped connect Portobello with the East Lothian seaside towns! It’s a baffling decision in my opinion and definitely not my favourite, but before I get told that the route through Portobello was too slow etc.. I get it, and I know the 26 is getting an increase to no doubt compensate, but it just makes me sad as the 124 was my favourite route down that way, so it feels like an end of an era.
Also on that note, I like how they changed the 104 to the X6. It makes sense but why not renumber the 113/124? Have we not learnt anything from the 107?
Im glad the 43 is back to every 20 minutes, and I guess the X43 really is gone for good!
I've got no comment on the 275 withdrawal other than I guess the West Lothian - Gyle link is now officially dead! Looks like LCB are putting everything on the 276, hopefully it’ll pay off.
And the 300 is still not withdrawn, maybe this will be a sign for things to come?
Anyway not a bad service change minus the 124 change!
Last edited by a moderator:
I guess it'd be because the 113/124 don't go via the A1?
Otherwise I do agree with you on all the opinions you have given!
alexf380
Established Member
I've had another look at the map and I think you're right. Crisis averted!
The 275/276 change is baffling. The 276 in it’s current form has been becoming increasingly popular and busy between Livingston Centre and Broxburn as it is a fairly quick link, going directly from Craigshill to Uphall Station. Sending it round half of Livingston and into Pumpherston makes no sense to me. And cutting the frequency of buses between Livingston and Broxburn by half. At the other end, the map shows it following the existing route to Bathgate Morrisons, going up by Whiteside and then terminating at Simpson Avenue, which misses out most of Wester Inch. Why not just route it via the current 275 road between Blackburn and Bathgate Railway Station? There is no benefit whatsoever to it going up past Tesco to Kaim Park and along Edinburgh Road (which is already served by the 280, X18 and X28) at the expense of going into Wester Inch.
TheEastCoaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 1,391
I thought that but it’ll just make it confusing for folk who will expect it to stop at every stop, unless they have it say Limited Stop underneath the destination.
The 124 was very popular when I used to live in Portobello and always my preferred bus to the city as it was faster! Even heading out East it was well used, I know the residents out in East Lothian will not mind this change in the long run and can easily change over to a 26 in Musselburgh but it still feels disheartening, at least they could of kept the route and removed a few stops!
Who knows, maybe in a few years ECB will come to their senses and return the 124 to it’s better route!
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
I know in the past they’ve undone changes that haven’t worked. I’m hoping the 113 and 124 changes are undone in the long term, I do feel this is somewhat unlikely though. It’s probably worth a try, but I’m just not sure it’ll work better than what being offered on each route just now. There’s no doubt though a few regulars will probably get caught out by the new limited stop nature of both routes so here’s hoping the displays have something like ‘Limited stop via Milton Road’ on them. Could an X24 via Portobello/King’s Road (matching old X15 stops and the same as the former peak only service) have been a better compromise?Right! I got some thoughts on this.. everyone beware
The 16 going to Torphin makes sense and leaves Bonaly with a more frequent service. The worst case scenario is folk on the 10 route that actually want to go to Torphin can switch over in Colinton for a 16.
No news on the 15 is concerning, maybe they missed it out? With the 124 withdrawn from Portobello (will get to that in a minute..) I figured they would now extend it back to Eastfield or even Musselburgh
The 22 withdrawal from Leith is brave. I get that it’s temporary, probably due to the tram works, but love how Lothian have to push the fact that there are 100 other options down that way anyway. Folk will still complain regardless!
41 reroute is a nice touch, giving Cramond a more direct bus and connecting it to Cammo!
Really glad the X5 is back, it was long overdue..
And here we go.. controversial opinion incoming. For the record, I can understand from both ends why ECB decided to change the 124 route, but after 6 years straight, why would you now do it and not sooner? In fact, why take it out from Portobello to begin with? For one it made for a nice alternative down at Portobello compared to the 26 and helped connect Portobello with the East Lothian seaside towns! It’s a baffling decision in my opinion and definitely not my favourite, but before I get told that the route through Portobello was too slow etc.. I get it, and I know the 26 is getting an increase to no doubt compensate, but it just makes me sad as the 124 was my favourite route down that way, so it feels like an end of an era.
Also on that note, I like how they changed the 104 to the X6. It makes sense but why not renumber the 113/124? Have we not learnt anything from the 107?
Im glad the 43 is back to every 20 minutes, and I guess the X43 really is gone for good!
I've got no comment on the 275 withdrawal other than I guess the West Lothian - Gyle link is now officially dead! Looks like LCB are putting everything on the 276, hopefully it’ll pay off.
And the 300 is still not withdrawn, maybe this will be a sign for things to come?
Anyway not a bad service change minus the 124 change!
The fact the 300 lives on does make you think it’s possible that it could improve as time goes on, who knows though?
I’ve seen a few complaints about the X5 now stopping at Frederick Street, it’s a strange place to terminate a bus but it surely has to be because of the longer journey in and out of the city. Ultimately it’s back so I guess if you’re a user of it at this point it’s worth taking that route than having no bus at all.
And lastly given the fact the 41 isn’t serving Queensferry Road after Blackhall I do agree the X43 is long gone too, this may have been the plan all along long before a pandemic came along.
EastCoast have stated on twitter that "Terminating at Frederick Street will help with the overall reliability of the service whilst allowing us to maintain frequency levels and ensure services have enough layover time to depart on time should they be delayed on the previous journey." (as seen here https://twitter.com/EastCoastBuses/status/1518619558617268224 ) which does make sense.
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
Yea I noticed that one, it made sense to me as I understood the whole short layover situ. It’s the same with the 113, I don’t agree with it at all but I see the reasons and logic as to why they came to it. The 113 though would be a 7 or 8 min extension each way and would only require an extra bus on a half hourly frequency, far more reasonable. Who knows it might come back in the future anyway?
Ultimately I think extending the X5 10 mins each way to/from Semple Street on an hourly frequency would be a tad ridiculous to say the least! I’m sure ECB who are as short on drivers as they are at the minute would love to have a 45 minute layover at one end…
computerSaysNo
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,440
Maybe you could have "Limited Stop via Musselburgh" on some and "Express via A1" on the others?
If only there was space on the front of the bus to display the above, on the nice coloured background, without having to make the destination font size smaller...
Perhaps if the current destination screen were to be moved upwards slightly there might be room for a second screen underneath...?
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
Going back to the 41 extension, I hope this bus stop on Barnton Gardens comes back into use again, can’t think of many bus stops still like this now. I’ve attached a link to it below:
Should be 4 stops on each side of Barnton Gardens/Cramond Road South that are brought back into use again, I believe all were last used by the Horsburgh 64 which was withdrawn some years ago now.
Should be 4 stops on each side of Barnton Gardens/Cramond Road South that are brought back into use again, I believe all were last used by the Horsburgh 64 which was withdrawn some years ago now.
Last edited:
stevenedin
Established Member
I think that ECB and LC really need to start specifying where they go. Edinburgh just isn’t good enough.
Edinburgh
Waterloo Place or
Edinburgh
Semple Street
Etc should be used. They can use it for:
Haddington
Amisfield Park
So it can be done.
Edinburgh
Waterloo Place or
Edinburgh
Semple Street
Etc should be used. They can use it for:
Haddington
Amisfield Park
So it can be done.
TheEastCoaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 1,391
Thats what I thought! Although when the 43 first got rerouted to Waterloo Place it had the subtitle underneath stating “Edinburgh, Waterloo Place” and then a few weeks later they scrapped it! Made it extra confusing as Queensferry is technically within Edinburgh so it made no sense! So they can do it, they just choose not too!
I’m just happy that Cramond Road South has a direct bus link again, this could make things easier for residents in the area
stevenedin
Established Member
I know what you mean with the 43. It makes no sense at all to say Edinburgh on the destination as it never leaves Edinburgh
I say the 11. It's only a 4 minute difference to Lothian Road.
FlybeDash8Q400
Established Member
The 11 would be the best choice now. I always try to avoid the fastest bus to/from Ocean Terminal though as it’s usually much busier with tourists than the others - which at the minute probably is the 22 but can depend on the traffic. If you can get the 10 and walk the last short bit that’s what I would do.
34 is generally quite slow at the journey and the 35 and 36 serve other parts of the city centre so wouldn’t be a realistic option for most.
stevenedin
Established Member
The 11, 34, 35 and 36 will be the only left from the city centre. The 11 probably the most direct.
Blindtraveler
Established Member
I can tell you for nothing that the 26 will simply not cope. Standby for an emergency registration for something to run eastfield terminous West end for example to assist along the Portobello corridor
If they were going to kill something then they should have killed the 300 rather than starting with the slow painful death of the 22 which ultimately will not exist at all in my opinion. I wonder if if both dalkeith and Edinburgh college campuses have been consulted about the removal of the 3 and the 113 respectively especially if classes are indeed to resume 100% on campus after the summer
I assume any of the timetable changes are simply running time alterations. Glad to see the 30 returning to its long accustomed frequency, I knew they have to fix that eventually. Hopefully the twenty one alterations albeit minor are sensible and conform to the feedback we've been giving them ever since they broke it a few months ago. I sincerely hope that the uses of the northern end of the 16 have been thought of in its alterations, we already seen far too many buses spun round well short of the terminous due to hopeless late running.
The removal of the 22 is going to compound this problem I fear
As long as the social media teams start posting about the fact that in East Lothian x means via the A1 and the the classic 1 prefix means via musselburgh or slower route then I see no reason for confusion
Any idea why they are introducing more journeys on the 12? It's always been empty when I've used in the evenings
Overall it's not transformational and about what I was expecting but can't help wondering if there's been a few tricks missed. Will certainly be nice to see frequency increases on quite a few roots by the looks of it
If they were going to kill something then they should have killed the 300 rather than starting with the slow painful death of the 22 which ultimately will not exist at all in my opinion. I wonder if if both dalkeith and Edinburgh college campuses have been consulted about the removal of the 3 and the 113 respectively especially if classes are indeed to resume 100% on campus after the summer
I assume any of the timetable changes are simply running time alterations. Glad to see the 30 returning to its long accustomed frequency, I knew they have to fix that eventually. Hopefully the twenty one alterations albeit minor are sensible and conform to the feedback we've been giving them ever since they broke it a few months ago. I sincerely hope that the uses of the northern end of the 16 have been thought of in its alterations, we already seen far too many buses spun round well short of the terminous due to hopeless late running.
The removal of the 22 is going to compound this problem I fear
As long as the social media teams start posting about the fact that in East Lothian x means via the A1 and the the classic 1 prefix means via musselburgh or slower route then I see no reason for confusion
Any idea why they are introducing more journeys on the 12? It's always been empty when I've used in the evenings
Overall it's not transformational and about what I was expecting but can't help wondering if there's been a few tricks missed. Will certainly be nice to see frequency increases on quite a few roots by the looks of it
Siemens Trains
Member
- Joined
- 29 Nov 2018
- Messages
- 703
Yes, time for a change. Given that the 43 will become the sole city centre bus on the A90 west of Blackhall, just offering Edinburgh as the destination isn't great. Also, I believe the Country livery is being merged with East Coast routes so you can't rely on a rule like all green & cream vehicles going to Waterloo Place.
computerSaysNo
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Dec 2018
- Messages
- 1,440
Regarding the 26, could a possibility be extending the 12 to the Joppa Pans layby via Portobello? If I remember correctly both Corstorphine and Portobello are areas which have poor air quality so at least you'd be benefiting two areas by extending the 12 and using lower-emission vehicles.
TheEastCoaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Jun 2018
- Messages
- 1,391
It would make sense as since the 1 now runs to Seafield there is no reason for the 12 to be extended back down also, unless they extend the 1 to Eastfield via Fillyside and Portobello in the future
Its interesting to note that on the service changes link both the 14 and 15 are omitted on the list, so there is a good chance both the routes may have changes also but just forgot to add them, I’m only saying this because the 100 was added on the Airport buses section with “No Changes”