Hyebone
Member
I'm not entirely sure about Barnsley, but when I pulled a mirror off a Chesterfield MMC on Flat Street in Sheffield, they sent Chesterfield fitters
-
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!
Stagecoach Yorkshire and Chesterfield
- Thread starter JD2168
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
SkyeH
New Member
A real shame. I quite like the gold livery and the nice comfy seats.
What seats will the new ones have?
What seats will the new ones have?
Hyebone
Member
Boring grey leather high back lazzerinis for the Enviro400EVs and boring grey leather Yutong seats in the Yutongs
According to ukbuses, the Chesterfield Yutongs are as follows:
Yutong E10:
YC74 NYY 63128
YC74 NYX 63129
YC74 NZB 63130
YC74 NZG 63131
YC74 NZM 63132
YC74 NYU 63133
Yutong E12:
YC74 NYP 73077
YC74 NYV 73078
YC74 NYZ 73079
YC74 NZE 73080
YC74 NZJ 73081
YC74 NZO 73082
YC74 NYR 73083
YC74 NYW 73084
YC74 NZA 73085
YC74 NZF 73086
YC74 NZK 73087
YC74 NZP 73088
Last edited:
swinny1990
Member
YC74 NYR 73083 and YC74 NZK 73087 are the first two yutongs in Chesterfield that have entered service this morning on service 10
syjunkie
Member
So far looks like 3 e12's and 2 e10's are out
Looks like the original two E12s are back in the depot now, 73077 is now out on the 10. I wonder if the proper chargers are up and running yet? Maybe they aren't able to give them a full days charge at the moment so are having to swap them out? Or just playing it safe for the first few days.
It appears use of the Yutongs in Chesterfield has expanded today, with 9x E12s and 6x E10s out. The 10 and 39 appear to be all-electric today, with a decent proportion of the 1 and 74 also being electric. Good to see progress being made.
Two of the E12s appear to be at Rawmarsh currently.
Last edited:
swinny1990
Member
They have all in enterrd service now
The two at Rawmarsh are on loan to work shuttle services to the Great British Beer Festival Winter at Magna - one from Meadowhall and one from Rotherham. https://winter.gbbf.org.uk/getting-here
Granted it's a Sunday evening, but by my reckoning just a few days in to the start of EV ops from Stonegravels and all but four buses out are Yutongs.
Of the diesels out, two are X17 turns, and one is on the 90b which can't be an EV due to a low bridge.
The cold weather doesn't seem to have impacted range, and there are seemingly no concerns about reliability - impressive!
Of the diesels out, two are X17 turns, and one is on the 90b which can't be an EV due to a low bridge.
The cold weather doesn't seem to have impacted range, and there are seemingly no concerns about reliability - impressive!
mk1979
Member
All 18 Yutongs at Chesterfield have seen service over the past few days. They are superbly reliable vehicles, the 23 at Rawmarsh saw 100% availability again today - a regular occurence.
Llandudno
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 2,448
That’s great to hear, hopefully the electric double deckers due this summer will be equally reliable on the more challenging (and fantastic!) X17 service with its numerous hills en-route to Matlock, city traffic around Sheffield and M1 motorway running in South Yorkshire!
Split from the Zebra 2 thread:
That said, I wonder if the 25 could be split from that rota and take on both ends of the 90, so it ran from Staveley to Somersall via New/Old Whittington. I've suggested before that the 42 be run through to Chesterfield via Dunston rather than terminating at Lowedges - which already has plenty of buses. It would give a direct service for Newbold and Dunston to Sheffield, and would serve the new housing estate at the top of Dunston which currently only sees peak-time 44s. That might fill the gap in the rota created by removing the 25.
The 90 could then run via Inkersall Green, either allowing the 74 to skip it for a shorter journey, or serving the outer 'loop' (Bamford Road) which no longer seems to be served. It could then run via Inkersall itself to Staveley, with both the 90 and 90a running on to Markham Vale via Poolsbrook.
One other change I'd make would be to have the 90 running Chesterfield to Markham Vale only, and have a new service (the 3?) which follows the route of the 1/2 to Markham Vale then takes the 90 route to Creswell, extending to Whaley Thorns to interwork with the 1. Drop the short 1s to the hospital only and have a 20 minute frequency back as far as Markham Vale.
It's one of those services that for probably 75% of the time you could happily run with a converted Sprinter, but for some runs something bigger than an E200 would be better. I'd imagine it's also made harder by it interworking with some school services.
A quick glance at the existing timetable suggests you could extend the 25 to Staveley via Barrow Hill adding around 25 minutes to the round trip. I guess there are complications beyond the fact it would mean one extra bus being needed - the rotas seem crafted to suit driving hours with all the interworking with the 42/43/44/50.
That said, I wonder if the 25 could be split from that rota and take on both ends of the 90, so it ran from Staveley to Somersall via New/Old Whittington. I've suggested before that the 42 be run through to Chesterfield via Dunston rather than terminating at Lowedges - which already has plenty of buses. It would give a direct service for Newbold and Dunston to Sheffield, and would serve the new housing estate at the top of Dunston which currently only sees peak-time 44s. That might fill the gap in the rota created by removing the 25.
The 90 could then run via Inkersall Green, either allowing the 74 to skip it for a shorter journey, or serving the outer 'loop' (Bamford Road) which no longer seems to be served. It could then run via Inkersall itself to Staveley, with both the 90 and 90a running on to Markham Vale via Poolsbrook.
One other change I'd make would be to have the 90 running Chesterfield to Markham Vale only, and have a new service (the 3?) which follows the route of the 1/2 to Markham Vale then takes the 90 route to Creswell, extending to Whaley Thorns to interwork with the 1. Drop the short 1s to the hospital only and have a 20 minute frequency back as far as Markham Vale.
Hyebone
Member
Hold this thought
I think the 74/74a/77 is fine how it is; it works well.
Harsh take, but if this part of the route had custom, the 78 wouldn't have failed.
I absolutely agree that the 42 is pointless; sending more buses down into Lowedges is like taking coals to Newcastle! I saw it suggested that the 42 be extended to Coal Aston instead of Lowedges as it only gets the hourly 44.
On a couple of duties, the 42 has you sit at Lowedges for 20+ minutes between trips. Where's the sense in that?
How desperate are operators to electrify their networks? How bad would it be in the future to just leave a route operating with diesel buses? One Euro6 bus if used properly can take dozens of cars off the road. I'd say that's a good enough environmental trade-off. Whilst I am a huge fan of electric buses, I think the government should be funding other things like bus infrastructure and lower fares among other things to promote bus usage over cars. That's not to say EVs shouldn't be funded. The build quality of the newly delivered Yutongs is absolutely phenomenal. See attached some of my photos. (Interior shots are of 73081)
Oddly, they have two wheelchair bays despite the legals in the cab stating only one wheelchair can be carried.
Attachments
Upcoming changes? I did suggest something like this in the consultation last year, but was told as the 90 is tendered on that section they are unlikely to be able to change anything...Hold this thought
I'm not familiar with the area so can't really comment. I was thinking if the 74/74a just did Middlecroft then it would be closer in timing to the 77, giving a more even 4x hourly between Staveley and Chesterfield. Although that would increase journey times for Inkersall Green due to the longer route the 90 takes.
Nothing to do with the fact there were only three journeys a day each way?
Possibly. Running fast via Green Lane rather than round the houses wouldn't be much slower than going via the bypass to Sheepbridge, although it would lose some of the attraction to Dunston residents of the faster link (than currently) to Sheffield. Personally, I'd run both it and the 44 via Dunston and tweak the 5 and 10 to give more even coverage but only half-hourly. I'd probably also divert the 90 via Highfield Road, rather than the 5 going that way. We don't need that many buses past the depot!
Built in break I guess, but are there any facilities there? Surely in that time you could run to Dronfield Civic Centre if nothing else.
Electric buses should have lower operating costs, although as was mentioned on the Zebra2 thread if operators still have to cover 25% of the CapEx cost then the sums become more complicated. Whether operating costs dominate in terms of bus fares is something I'm not qualified to answer, but from other discussions I remember, I suspect not.
I think it was discussed on here a while back that most operators are looking to take £100/hr for a route to be viable. Just as a sample, the 44 takes 1h10 for a single journey of about 14 miles. If we say 12 miles and hour and estimate on the low end of fuel consumption, that's 7l of fuel needed, or around £10. I know the operator gets a rebate of duty for that fuel, I'm not sure how much. Either way, you are looking at under 10% of the per-hour revenue a route needs to make in fuel terms, going electric is at best going to reduce that by a couple of percent.
You then also get issues around the cost of electricity. I'd imagine most charging can be done overnight when they can get a better rate to stabilise the base load of the grid, but still things can vary a lot, while diesel isn't likely to suddenly spike.
EVs for urban routes I've got no trouble with - that's where you get the most positives. Rural routes? Nice if you can justify it, but the benefits are lower.
I must try and get out and sample them soon. As someone in engineering I'm torn - it's great we are getting well built buses, but it depresses me that this country and indeed Europe as a whole have dropped the ball and got so far behind in terms of design and build. We also seem to forget that even a more expensive bus that feeds in to the UK workforce and supply chain can be a lower cost investment for the country as a whole.
The main job the 42 does is to help provide four buses an hour Sheffield City Centre to Meadowhead via London Road in conjunction with the 43 and 44.Hold this thought
I think the 74/74a/77 is fine how it is; it works well.
Harsh take, but if this part of the route had custom, the 78 wouldn't have failed.
I absolutely agree that the 42 is pointless; sending more buses down into Lowedges is like taking coals to Newcastle! I saw it suggested that the 42 be extended to Coal Aston instead of Lowedges as it only gets the hourly 44.
On a couple of duties, the 42 has you sit at Lowedges for 20+ minutes between trips. Where's the sense in that?
How desperate are operators to electrify their networks? How bad would it be in the future to just leave a route operating with diesel buses? One Euro6 bus if used properly can take dozens of cars off the road. I'd say that's a good enough environmental trade-off. Whilst I am a huge fan of electric buses, I think the government should be funding other things like bus infrastructure and lower fares among other things to promote bus usage over cars. That's not to say EVs shouldn't be funded. The build quality of the newly delivered Yutongs is absolutely phenomenal. See attached some of my photos. (Interior shots are of 73081)
Oddly, they have two wheelchair bays despite the legals in the cab stating only one wheelchair can be carried.
The 42 going to Lowedges is just duplicating the 24 once an hour, other than the fact it serves the rail and bus stations in one direction, I agree that there could be something more useful for it to do.
However my preference would be to extend the 42 beyond Lowedges to Dronfield via Bradway, restoring the link lost when TM Travel ended the 293 after what is now the Stagecoach 86 was launched in competition on part of the route - the main road between Bradway and Dronfield Woodhouse has no bus service at all currently.
Hyebone
Member
Is this really necessary though?
I'm struggling to see much potential traffic between Dronfield and Bradway to be honest. If anything, extending via Prospect Road and Queen Victoria Road to Abbeydale road and running that way in to town would seem at least as useful. Cross links in this area are fairly poor.
Still, I'd hope my suggestion would be more likely to draw traffic. From Dunston you've currently got to go 20 minutes in the wrong direction to get an X17 to Sheffield, even a stopping service that goes via Sheepbridge will be faster and should encourage people to use the bus rather than drive.
probably not as the 24/25 also does City - Heeley - Meadowhead and the 75 links London Road and Woodseats/Meadowhead.
Dronfield town centre is a local centre for Bradway residents with shops, market, sports centre, pubs, restaurants etc. The two places are neighbours but with no public transport connection. There has also been patches of housing development in the bits inbetween that aren't protected by the green belt restrictions and the nearest bus services for them are either the 16 at the top of Carr Lane or M17 at the bottom of Mickley Lane, unless you count the demand responsive minibus!
Extending the 42 to Dronfield would also combine with the 43 to provide 3 buses per hour between Sheffield and Dronfield Woodhouse.
Last edited:
I don't know Bradway that well - although we did look at buying a house there at one point. From memory there is a decent small parade of shops. While it is a short walk, the 25 goes to Meadowhead where you have Aldi and M&S, Graves Sport Centre and various other shops and pubs.
Maybe a circular St James - Bradway - Dronfield Woodhouse - Coal Aston might be better way to serve this demand? It covers more needs and can be run by something more appropriate, like a Solo, rather than the usual E400 you get on the 42.
True, but the 43 used to be 3x hourly and that didn't work out. The frequency also wouldn't be very even.
The circular route suggestion would use more resource than a simple short extension of an existing service and also not have the biggest traffic generator - Sheffield City Centre. Parts of it would also duplicate bits of the 15, 16, M17 and 44.
The third bus an hour on the 43 only ran as far as Dronfield Civic Centre from Sheffield so didn't really serve much of Dronfield, certainly not the residential parts! The 42 doesn't even make it to the town of Dronfield at all, just carrying fresh air onto the Lowedges estate and clogging up the bus terminus there which is also served by buses 24, 25, 76, 86 and M17!
I do think the 42 could be doing something more useful than being a random once an hour bus that duplicates the 24. As a Bradway resident who regularly uses taxis to Dronfield in an evening because there aren't any buses I'd like to see an extension to Dronfield via Bradway, or the other option is to replace the 42 with a 44 from Sheffield to Coal Aston, an area with a very poor bus service.
I'm not sure there is enough slack in the timetable for that extension though - it would most likely mean adding an extra bus which you might as well use on a circular route.
As for getting in to Sheffield, there are plenty of good connections at Meadowhead. Buses don't have to go in to the centre, providing you can connect easily - and ideally buy through fares.
The 15/16/M17 could be redesigned as part of this. The parts of the 44 it duplicates you note below have a poor service.
No, the third bus was all the way through to Chesterfield. I can't remember exactly when, but at some point in the late 2010s the 43 was increased to running every 20 minutes over the full route. I believe there was also a shorter one as you mention - plenty of things have been tried and don't seem to work. I did once suggest to them having a 43/44 combination to double the frequency through that side of Dronfield and to give better links from Coal Aston to the shops.
But as the 42 doesn't run in the evening you still wouldn't get your service.
I do wonder actually if the evening X17s couldn't be routed through Dronfield - past the station, not around the houses - to at least give a bit better link.
Certainly agree the 42 as it stands is pointless and more could be done - maybe as we both have different opinions there is scope for even more services?
Hyebone
Member
I don't think dragging the X17 into this is a particularly good idea. It's a separate route that serves a separate purpose.
From my own selfish point of view, I wouldn't get to the pubs of Dronfield on a Friday night by extending the 42 - you are right there! Actually Bradway doesn't have an evening service to anywhere as the 25 packs up at 8pm! But a daytime link would be a good start.
An extension in terms of resources needed depends on where it is extended to, but I agree realistically one bus would probably need adding.
The circular suggestion would need two buses for an hourly frequency assuming you operated in both directions. Commercially though you are stringing together lots of small markets and it would require a subsidy, whereas an extension of the 42 would have the Sheffield customers bringing in good revenue with the smaller markets served both in a more attractive manner and more financially sustainable.
Extending the 15/16 beyond Dronfield Civic Centre down to Jordanthorpe then via the M17 route to Bradway and up back to Dronfield Civic Centre (or vice versa) is an interesting idea, although you'd have to get Derbyshire County Council and South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority to work together!
Indeed different things have been tried with the 43/44 over the years, probably fair to say that post covid demand is different now anyway - plus the train service is much improved. The County boundary continues to cause an issue with making buses attractive to locals as there is no multi operator ticket valid for Dronfield and all of Sheffield.
Different opinions? Id prefer to call it different ideas! I think we agree that the 42 doesn't achieve much and possibly also agree there is potential to increase bus use in Dronfield with the right network, promotion and ticketing.
Killingworth
Established Member
Although I know Bradway well I wasn't around in 1958 when both the 22 and 86 routes connected Bradway to both Dronfield and Dronfield Woodhouse, see scanned partial timetable extracts below.
A very large proportion of the housing in Bradway, Dronfield and Dronfield Woodhouse has been built since then with accompanying extra traffic. It would probably be hard for modern buses to keep to these timings today.
ah two versions of the 86!
The first a circular - Sheffield, Millhouses, Greenhill, Bradway, Holmesfield - Dronfield, Norton, Woodseats, Sheffield
The second a Sheffield to Holmesfield via Millhouses, Greenhill and Bradway service.
Current 86 I think follows the same route to Greenhill but then instead of going to Bradway and Holmesfield goes down to Lowedges and terminates there.
Not viable unfortunately. If you compare on bustimes, the 42 has 39 minutes between passing Woodseats (the last common point) on the way out of Sheffield and getting back on the way in. The 44 takes 24 minutes from there to Green Lane, the stop nearest the station, meaning at least 48 minutes running time there and back. You might be able to trim the route near the station in Dronfield but even if you get down to 39 minutes that leaves no recovery time.
Hyebone
Member
Brightsidio
New Member
I wonder if these are for the X17... ...you think?