Secret bus routes

[duncombec]

Their solution to more demand than supply is to supress demand to suit their levels rather than increase supply. The mind boggles!

Just a thought - are they operated with minibuses? Could it be that if they had more demand, they'd need bigger vehicles, which they don't have, would have to buy, higher insurance, etc etc? Bearing in mind both of these services were operated with full size vehicles and were presumably too expensive to tender to a standard operator, maybe it's less "reduce demand", but simply retaining the service using available resources? Not ideal, but perhaps not as "silly" as it may sound?

I wonder how many community bus-type schemes would provide some fodder for this. As far as I can make out, Stockbury Community Bus (in Kent) run a service from said and surrounding villages to Maidstone and Hempstead Valley. It doesn't appear on any journey planner, yet received Covid support money from the DfT, and seems to accept concessionary passes - at least a recent fare increase was labelled as being "for those without passes" and "for those who pay cash". It appears to have replaced the former Postbus service.

 

[AndyW33]

It's been a couple of years since I was there, but my understanding was the dedicated fleet were owned by the University but operated by one of the bus companies (maybe Kinch, I can't remember)
Free service, untimetabled, ran according to demand

I live in Loughborough and have done for many years. Kinchbus run a well-advertised and registered service named (well it is a Wellglade company) Sprint that runs all year round between the far west end of the University campus at Holywell Park and the railway station via the town centre. Travel within the campus is free, travel outside it is on the same fare structure as their other town services. During university term time there is also a free shuttle through the campus between Holywell Park and the Students Union building using the same fleet of buses and pool of drivers. As far as possible these drop in between the scheduled Sprint journeys, but they aren't secret at all, they're actually in the published timetable. https://www.kinchbus.co.uk/services/sprint
Who actually owns the fleet of 7 dedicated Solo slimlines used on Sprint and Campus Shuttle I don't know, but they are certainly registered to Kinchbus.

 

[RJ]

Can you specify where?

The service route is likely to be Ogmore Vale - Pontygwaith. It’s not intended to be an abstractive route, more to provide links that don’t currently exist.

With the rail replacement route, the bus keeps being taken off to bolster other services so probably best it remains unadvertised!

 

[Deerfold]

The service route is likely to be Ogmore Vale - Pontygwaith. It’s not intended to be an abstractive route, more to provide links that don’t currently exist.

With the rail replacement route, the bus keeps being taken off to bolster other services so probably best it remains unadvertised!

Not quite sure there seems much point running a route that's unadvertised.

 

[markymark2000]

Just a thought - are they operated with minibuses? Could it be that if they had more demand, they'd need bigger vehicles, which they don't have, would have to buy, higher insurance, etc etc? Bearing in mind both of these services were operated with full size vehicles and were presumably too expensive to tender to a standard operator, maybe it's less "reduce demand", but simply retaining the service using available resources? Not ideal, but perhaps not as "silly" as it may sound?

If they can't use larger vehicles due to the reasons that you mention, put another minibus on and charge fares so then you will reduce the demand slightly because of the fares but also help to pay for some of the costs of the two buses. I am sure that working with a local bus operator, they could work out the busy trips and then see if the local bus operator would run a round trip or two on the service or lend the council a bus (with the council providing the driver) between their other work. There's always workarounds but if people want to travel by bus, no taxpayer funded entity should deliberately suppress demand so that it fits within their vehicle fleet, they should be working with other firms to boost the capacity.

I wonder how many community bus-type schemes would provide some fodder for this. As far as I can make out, Stockbury Community Bus (in Kent) run a service from said and surrounding villages to Maidstone and Hempstead Valley. It doesn't appear on any journey planner, yet received Covid support money from the DfT, and seems to accept concessionary passes - at least a recent fare increase was labelled as being "for those without passes" and "for those who pay cash". It appears to have replaced the former Postbus service.

The Stockbury Community Bus looks like it's basically a DRT scheme but with a fixed end point which makes it rather difficult to advertise on bustimes or traveline as the stops are not set. I think a lot of community schemes do things this way. The other area which many community bus schemes wouldn't fit into this thread is that they demand a sign up/membership. It may be a free membership but still needs a membership. It's done so then they can run under Section 19 permits rather than Section 22 permit.

The service route is likely to be Ogmore Vale - Pontygwaith. It’s not intended to be an abstractive route, more to provide links that don’t currently exist.

With the rail replacement route, the bus keeps being taken off to bolster other services so probably best it remains unadvertised!

Wow, that's a route that I'd like to go on, very useful to get between the valleys. Always thought it was a missing link for the buses. Who is meant to be the operator as it's a bit odd that they are taking it off in favour of rail replacement.

 

[Flange Squeal]

Wow, that's a route that I'd like to go on, very useful to get between the valleys. Always thought it was a missing link for the buses. Who is meant to be the operator as it's a bit odd that they are taking it off in favour of rail replacement.

I would assume Replacement Bus Hire, who in the last few months had a licence (PG2062087) granted operating out of the Wentloog Corporate Park to the east of Cardiff, in addition to their existing London & South East licence (PK2024758).

A post in a thread on the Tangy Tango Bus Forum about the operator gives a bit of insight into the fleet and the new Welsh side:

General news

Replacement Bus Hire is now a multinational operation. The insurance policy only authorises one named driver to drive any of the vehicles, but that might change in the near future. A payscale is yet to be decided but will include hourly supplements for doing rail replacement and driving anything that has more than 2 axles, allowances for a mobile phone and subsistence as well as a scheme where hours worked accrue points that can be redeemed against paid CPC training.

A number of vehicles will be joining the fold in the near future and a few will have to leave.


Fleet updates

23065 - still a works in progress.

SPV1 - back on the road now. It passed MOT a couple of weeks ago, but further attention was required to address an overheating problem. This was caused by an issue with a cable and megafuse which prevented operation of the electronic fans. This has been repaired, but after a day or so on the road the front suspension system and a stray air connector are after attention!

SPV2 - VOR. It was initially taken off road in February due to a fuel supply issue. This was traced to a melted fuel shutoff valve - a component originally made out of plastic. Funnily enough SPV1 suffered with the same problem at the same time. If the part is ordered from Evobus it appears to have had an official redesign and now comes in aluminium.

SPV2 is after several components now - a brake chamber, handbrake valve, air dryer, multi-circuit protection value, main engine control unit and various other things. The front Hanover has been repaired at my cost - turns out the colour panel previously fitted to it in an unofficial manner caused all the problems.

Apart from the fuel shutoff valve, these issues were all pre-existing which explains why the previous owners wanted rid of it. These problems will cost thousands of pounds to repair, but if the result is a good bus at the end if it, this may be more cost effective than taking on another older vehicle and whatever problems it has, or getting a newer one. A decision is to be made on it.

SPV3 - Was VOR for 6 weeks. A replacement gear selector was fitted and shorted, causing the bus to not communicate with the transmission ECU and thus not select any gears, including neutral.

Sadly summoning help from the main dealer resulted in a bill of over £1k and the bus left in a worse condition than they found it in. They said they were only prepared to rewire the entire bus to manufacturer standards and were not prepared to do anything else, including look at the fuse unless I agreed to that. I declined and had my bus towed out of their workshop.

I called Volvo specialists who I know and trust, but are based far away. They still came and they fixed the problem in 5 minutes. It was a blown fuse protecting the transmission ECU. Replacing it solved the problem. They then repaired the wiring that was disturbed by the main dealer's technicians and put the relevant bits of the bus back together following the tow.

It it very important to find suppliers that can be trusted to do a job without turning it into something that costs a lot more than it needs to.

SPV4 - on loan to another operator.

SPV5 - has been running ok for a long time. However when boosting SPV3 while the above problem was being repaired, it developed an electrical fault. The bus thinks the ramp is out and won't release the halt brake or allow the doors to be operated. My suspicion is either the door ECU, or whatever powers the sensor has expired.

On the shopping list is a transmission performance setting change, a change of the gear ratios to make the gears more like SPV1's and a tuning down of the fuel pump. In the future, a repaint.

TA23 - stored unserviceable.

VLA170 - on loan to another operator.

VLA176 - stored unserviceable, engine rebuild pending.

VNW32423 - stored unserviceable.

That's all for now.

 

[duncombec]

If they can't use larger vehicles due to the reasons that you mention, put another minibus on and charge fares so then you will reduce the demand slightly because of the fares but also help to pay for some of the costs of the two buses. I am sure that working with a local bus operator, they could work out the busy trips and then see if the local bus operator would run a round trip or two on the service or lend the council a bus (with the council providing the driver) between their other work. There's always workarounds but if people want to travel by bus, no taxpayer funded entity should deliberately suppress demand so that it fits within their vehicle fleet, they should be working with other firms to boost the capacity.

I shall merely ask whether you know for certain that Rutland tried this or not already, and as I'm not a Rutland specialist, I'll assume you know more of the history of these routes than I do.

The Stockbury Community Bus looks like it's basically a DRT scheme but with a fixed end point which makes it rather difficult to advertise on bustimes or traveline as the stops are not set. I think a lot of community schemes do things this way. The other area which many community bus schemes wouldn't fit into this thread is that they demand a sign up/membership. It may be a free membership but still needs a membership. It's done so then they can run under Section 19 permits rather than Section 22 permit.

Just to be clear, the Stockbury Bus is neither DRT, nor does it require membership, although you were talking in general terms.

 

[markymark2000]

I shall merely ask whether you know for certain that Rutland tried this or not already, and as I'm not a Rutland specialist, I'll assume you know more of the history of these routes than I do.

They suggested that it's something that they may look into longer term but nothing confirmed. The response given to my friend gave no confidence that anything would be resolved and it was more an anti bus council just keeping the routes going to avoid uproar after Centrebus stopped doing the routes (not sure if it was lost at tender renewal or Centrebus threw back the tenders)

Just to be clear, the Stockbury Bus is neither DRT, nor does it require membership, although you were talking in general terms.

Their website implies that there is no set timetable and that the service will pick up close to peoples homes. That suggests a DRT style scheme with a fixed end point. picks up where people book and then runs to the end point.

- Stockbury Parish Council Chatham, Kent - Stockbury Parish Council, Chatham

information for Chatham, Kent, on the official site for Stockbury Parish Council

www.stockbury.org

Community Bus Weekly Schedule

Mondays – Sittingbourne

Tuesdays – Maidstone incl. Lockmeadow Market

Thursdays – Hempstead Valley Shopping Centre (Savacentre)

Pick ups from 9.30 a.m. close to where you live

Call 07551-454702 to book your seat and for all enquires.

 

[RJ]

Wow, that's a route that I'd like to go on, very useful to get between the valleys. Always thought it was a missing link for the buses. Who is meant to be the operator as it's a bit odd that they are taking it off in favour of rail replacement.

The bus is sometimes taken off the unadvertised rail replacement service by control staff to provide capacity on other rail replacement routes if it’s needed. As it’s set down only after the first stop it means if nobody is picked up then nobody is affected.

The other service isn’t up and running yet and would be unrelated to other work the buses do. The provisional route would be via Treorchy Coop, the Maindy and Penrhys.

Not quite sure there seems much point running a route that's unadvertised.

Examples given in this thread demonstrate there might be various reasons for running a service that’s not advertised in the way described in the first post, even if not immediately obvious to everyone!

 

[Deerfold]

The bus is sometimes taken off the unadvertised rail replacement service by control staff to provide capacity on other rail replacement routes if it’s needed. As it’s set down only after the first stop it means if nobody is picked up then nobody is affected.

The other service isn’t up and running yet and would be unrelated to other work the buses do.



Examples given in this thread demonstrate there might be various reasons for running a service that’s not advertised in the way described in the first post, even if not immediately obvious to everyone!

Might one of the reasons there can be few people affected by its withdrawal that it's unadvertised?

 

[RJ]

Might one of the reasons there can be few people affected by its withdrawal that it's unadvertised?

Nope

 

[markymark2000]

The bus is sometimes taken off the unadvertised rail replacement service by control staff to provide capacity on other rail replacement routes if it’s needed. As it’s set down only after the first stop it means if nobody is picked up then nobody is affected.

The other service isn’t up and running yet and would be unrelated to other work the buses do. The provisional route would be via Treorchy Coop, the Maindy and Penrhys.

I misread the earlier posts. I reread them all and looking at the other forum linked above, I have worked out who you are and it all makes sense (inc the unadvertised RRB). I couldn't think of a better person to look to start service work, I hope that your trials go well. Your fleet of buses would work perfectly for the mountainous missing links.

 

[Deerfold]

Nope

Is it worth adding to the post if you're not going to or can't tell us where the buses run?

 

[Typhoon]

Very good additions. I know someone who emailed Rutland Council a few months ago about this and they showed me the email reply and it was quite funny actually. The reason that they do not promote the service is due to the fact most trips are full and so they don't want to promote it as it would lead to people being left behind. Their solution to more demand than supply is to supress demand to suit their levels rather than increase supply. The mind boggles!

Even more bizarrely, they’re also completely free of charge!

Is it such a bad idea. especially for the local Oakham service? It is subsidised by Oakham council; I've never been there but if it is an old-fashioned type of shopping centre, running a smallish bus round the shops (I note it calls at Aldi, Tesco and the Co-Op) probably frees up the roads from car drivers desperately trying to find somewhere to park, it might actually encourage some residents to shop in the town, rather than going elsewhere.

More passengers would mean they would need to buy a bigger bus - and some of these may be outsiders who have just come to the town to say they have ridden on the free bus. It's a local bus, for local people!

Wow, that one is news to me. Then again, probably doesn't make much difference in Rutland, mostly passes anyway.

Precisely - it means that there are no old people trying to find where their pass is (I am an old man on my third or fourth pass so I think I can say that). Even better if it called at, say, (what was) Age Concern. I would rather money was spent on that than some councillor's vanity project.

 

[duncombec]

[...] and it was more an anti bus council [...]

I don't really think Rutland can be regarded as "anti-bus". One of barely a dozen councils to print a comprehensive timetable book post-Covid according to Barry Doe's list (or at least anything more than a map or just the occasional leaflet), regular public meetings about bus services (the answers to the questions posed at the latest meeting in January are on the website), running buses themselves rather than just withdrawing them when cost is too high... but much more than that is off topic.

Their website implies that there is no set timetable and that the service will pick up close to peoples homes. That suggests a DRT style scheme with a fixed end point. picks up where people book and then runs to the end point.

- Stockbury Parish Council Chatham, Kent - Stockbury Parish Council, Chatham

information for Chatham, Kent, on the official site for Stockbury Parish Council

www.stockbury.org

I know what the website suggests, and the website is also wrong, as a more detailed look of Parish council minutes and the Parish magazine would tell you. The four villages are within a 3 mile radius of each other, and the bus is a 16 seater - I've both seen and photographed the bus, and been to the villages it serves. Have you?

So with respect, I restate that it is neither DRT nor does it require membership in the same way, as for example, Kent Karrier. In fact, they themselves state they are much more like the former Meopham Community Bus (which did appear in journey planners), to the extent that when that folded, they received money from the Meopham trustees, as the "only similar operation in Kent".

 

[markymark2000]

Is it such a bad idea. especially for the local Oakham service? It is subsidised by Oakham council; I've never been there but if it is an old-fashioned type of shopping centre, running a smallish bus round the shops (I note it calls at Aldi, Tesco and the Co-Op) probably frees up the roads from car drivers desperately trying to find somewhere to park, it might actually encourage some residents to shop in the town, rather than going elsewhere.

The fact the service exists is a good idea, I do not dispute that one bit. I just think that it should be on Traveline. Given it snakes around the little estates, it's not likely to be useful to many other people but by having it online, people living along the hopper route can plan journeys with connections. Those from out of the area trying to access areas only along the hopper route, can't plan journeys either. Arguebly not promoting a service pushes more people into their cars because people don't know the routes exist.

More passengers would mean they would need to buy a bigger bus - and some of these may be outsiders who have just come to the town to say they have ridden on the free bus. It's a local bus, for local people!

Depends on the exact loadings. Plus how many people are really going out just to say that they have ridden the free bus? Very, very few. You're looking less than 1 person per week doing that sort of thing.

Plus by the logic of 'local bus for local people' why advertise most bus routes. Almost all little town buses are for local people, let's just rid all online promotion of buses and have done with it!

I don't really think Rutland can be regarded as "anti-bus". One of barely a dozen councils to print a comprehensive timetable book post-Covid according to Barry Doe's list (or at least anything more than a map or just the occasional leaflet), regular public meetings about bus services (the answers to the questions posed at the latest meeting in January are on the website), running buses themselves rather than just withdrawing them when cost is too high... but much more than that is off topic.

They aren't the worst but they aren't the best either. A Pro bus council would be doing the £2 cap on their tenders (which Rutland aren't as Blands are charging full fare) and where demand outstrips supply, they would be taking urgent steps to increase supply. Having too many passengers is an issue that many bus operations would love to have.

I know what the website suggests, and the website is also wrong, as a more detailed look of Parish council minutes and the Parish magazine would tell you. The four villages are within a 3 mile radius of each other, and the bus is a 16 seater - I've both seen and photographed the bus, and been to the villages it serves. Have you?

So with respect, I restate that it is neither DRT nor does it require membership in the same way, as for example, Kent Karrier. In fact, they themselves state they are much more like the former Meopham Community Bus (which did appear in journey planners), to the extent that when that folded, they received money from the Meopham trustees, as the "only similar operation in Kent".

I was purely going off the information which is publicly available. Other than you telling us, how is anyone meant to know that the online information is wrong.

 

[RJ]

I misread the earlier posts. I reread them all and looking at the other forum linked above, I have worked out who you are and it all makes sense (inc the unadvertised RRB). I couldn't think of a better person to look to start service work, I hope that your trials go well. Your fleet of buses would work perfectly for the mountainous missing links.

Thank you for your kind comments! Some of them are fine with mountains, others are best kept on the more gently graded valley routes.

 

[JKP]

Now this is something I’ve been wondering about recently!

I recently took a holiday in Berwick-upon-Tweed. I believe Berwick Buses service WT1 doesn’t appear on anywhere except bustimes.org.uk and Northumberland County Council bus timetables. Might be wrong though.

Also must be said this was the oddest public bus service I have ever been on.

You do not surprise me. This is a KLE Group operation which appears to have a new operator’s licence and trading name every year. In what way was it odd? Whenever I have seen their daytime Berwick town service it looked what I would have expected to see though passenger loadings are pitiful.

 

[Dai Corner]

You do not surprise me. This is a KLE Group operation which appears to have a new operator’s licence and trading name every year. In what way was it odd? Whenever I have seen their daytime Berwick town service it looked what I would have expected to see though passenger loadings are pitiful.

Looks as though the WT1 is tendered to complement the Borders Buses B1 daytime service?

 

[DunsBus]

Looks as though the WT1 is tendered to complement the Borders Buses B1 daytime service?

It is. It provides a Berwick town service after the Borders Buses B1 finishes for the day, and also provides a bus service for Prior Park after Borders Buses withdrew the B2 a few years ago.

 

[Fundee on Tay]

You do not surprise me. This is a KLE Group operation which appears to have a new operator’s licence and trading name every year. In what way was it odd? Whenever I have seen their daytime Berwick town service it looked what I would have expected to see though passenger loadings are pitiful.

The evening service that I was on was an 8 seater transit van, with 2 of the seats in the middle having been cut out. The service had a full compliment (well.. 6) passengers and the operation just felt weird, like, passengers sitting in the 2 front seats next to the driver and no tickets being issued after I handed over my £2.