TfGM-website, timetable updates and general news concerning TfGM bus stations.

[markymark2000]

There seem to be a significant number of Diamond buses trundling around Altrincham at the moment carrying fresh air, although I did see one passenger on route 282 to Oldfield Brow (currently running 2 hourly) the other day.

I would have thought that TfGM should stop funding all subsidised routes for the duration of the current Covid-19 crisis, and stop permanently all subsidies for evening bus services, as Cheshire East Council has done.

Right now, I think depsite the lower usage, bus operators and councils/PTEs don't want to withdraw any services. The most efficient way of doing all this is by reducing frequencies to 2 hourly. Elderly are still going out to shop.
As for evening buses, TFGMs issue here is a lot of routes interwork at nights so while 1 route might be dead, another might be busy and serve hospitals and other places which are still open which everyone wants to keep serving for key workers.
I would argue some changed to tendered buses should be made to make the network smarter or simpler at this time even if it means some people have longer journeys, if it means a route can be withdrawn but all areas served, I think that would be wise. For example, does Altrincham really need both the 283 and 284 every 2 hours? Just make one of the routes hourly. It's a 30 minute round trip, it's not life changing for people. (Or if it's that dead, just run 1 route every 2 hours to reduce the amount of buses out).

However, TfGM should be trying to reduce bus subsidies and scrap their stupid bus franchising proposals.

TFGM have been wasting bus subsidy money for years, I can't see that changing. Bus franchising is mainly being spearheaded by Andy Burnham and local councillors who tell TFGM what to do. TFGM are trying to put franchising in place as well but I wouldn't say they are the ones wasting money.

The joys of PTEs is wasting money on routes because a local councillor shouts loud enough (even if the buses aren't used) and the fact you have *Insert offensive word here* chiefs and mayors who have no clue transport works, dictating to others how it should be ran. Rather than leaving things to the professionals, they are too busy micromanaging and trying to shaft bus operators at any given opportunity (including the 5mph bus station speed limit which means it can take you a good few minutes just to get out of the bus stations. TFGM are the only place I know in the UK which has such a low speed limit and actively enforces it with fines).

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I am very much out of touch, so what is the position with the First Oldham operations at present and are there still plans afoot for a takeover?

My understanding was that there was a prospective purchaser at the same point as the other two sales but it, as we know, fell through. Arguably, Oldham was the weaker of the three depots having been disproportionately affected by the Metrolink extensions.

I believe that with the appointment of David Martin as Chairman, the whole idea of disposals is set aside. Instead, Oldham is simply hunkering down with service cuts having allowed some Streetlites to move on and weeding out of some of the other older fleet, and supporting Vantage until a suitable exit point.

 

[splashoutradio]

Right now, I think depsite the lower usage, bus operators and councils/PTEs don't want to withdraw any services. The most efficient way of doing all this is by reducing frequencies to 2 hourly. Elderly are still going out to shop.

I believe this may be starting to happen, or it appears to be with some newly tendered services, at least. The following has appeared on the Warrington's Own Buses website.

Services 583, 590 & 596

These contracted services are introduced in the Leigh area at a reduced 2 hourly frequency. Please download the timetables for more information.

Services 613, 630, 640, 641 & 715

These contracted services are introduced in the Wigan area at a reduced frequencies. Please download the timetables for more information.

 

[Volvodart]

My understanding was that there was a prospective purchaser at the same point as the other two sales but it, as we know, fell through. Arguably, Oldham was the weaker of the three depots having been disproportionately affected by the Metrolink extensions.

We should know what the remaining Manchester business did for 2019 financial year next month, as the Firstgroup 2020 accounts should enumerate the 2019 losses for the 2 businesses sold in the profit reconciliation.

 

[LOL The Irony]

One of Diamond's streetdeck's hit a bridge yesterday in Rochdale

Rochdale bus crash: Nine hurt in bridge crash

One of the five people taken to hospital has "a significant leg injury", the ambulance service says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Nine bus passengers were injured when a double-decker crashed into a bridge.

The crash happened in Richard Street, Rochdale, at about 14:10 BST, according to Greater Manchester Police.

North West Ambulance Service said five people have been taken to hospital, one with "a significant leg injury". None of the injuries are life-threatening.

Richard Street and Station Road were temporarily closed as emergency services dealt with the crash.


Diamond Bus said in a statement it had "immediately launched a full internal investigation" into the smash involving its 471 Bolton to Rochdale service.

The operator added: "Everyone at Diamond Bus North West is shocked by this incident and our thoughts are with the injured passengers."

Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service (GMFRS) station manager Carl Haslam said firefighters had worked alongside the ambulance service, adding: "This could have been a lot worse."

A GMFRS spokesman said crews from Rochdale and Ashton-under-Lyne helped rescue passengers and remove the bus from under the bridge.

Richard Street and Station Road have now reopened, Transport for Greater Manchester has said.

Seventeen people were injured in Rochdale in 2015 when a double-decker bus smashed into a bridge in nearby Milkstone Road.

 

[daodao]

I have just looked at the current TfGM website, and note that they have ceased publishing timetables on it in any shape or form. One can only search for times by looking for a route number, selecting a stop name and then selecting the date/time for one's proposed journey. The times of the next and a few later journeys from that stop are then shown. Only when one selects a particular journey are the subsequent times for later calling points on that journey only displayed.

IMO, this is extremely user unfriendly, as there is no way of looking at the overall service for a route. Is this a deliberate way of discouraging public transport use for now, or is it for the long-term? The impact of the current measures on public transport do not bode well for its long-term use (vis-a-vis private transport), and hindering provision of service information will not help. I do not understand why some public transport operators (whether for flights/ferries/trains/buses/trams) are so unwilling to display information in a way that their overall service for a route can be displayed. They have the information, and it is not difficult to display it in a pdf format.

Sadly, this is now unlikely to affect me personally, as following a recent injury while walking I shall now be unable to use public transport for a long time to come, irrespective of the Covid-19 situation.

 

[Ianno87]

I have just looked at the current TfGM website, and note that they have ceased publishing timetables on it in any shape or form. One can only search for times by looking for a route number, selecting a stop name and then selecting the date/time for one's proposed journey. The times of the next and a few later journeys from that stop are then shown. Only when one selects a particular journey are the subsequent times for later calling points on that journey only displayed.

IMO, this is extremely user unfriendly, as there is no way of looking at the overall service for a route. Is this a deliberate way of discouraging public transport use for now, or is it for the long-term? The impact of the current measures on public transport do not bode well for its long-term use (vis-a-vis private transport), and hindering provision of service information will not help. I do not understand why some public transport operators (whether for flights/ferries/trains/buses/trams) are so unwilling to display information in a way that their overall service for a route can be displayed. They have the information, and it is not difficult to display it in a pdf format.

Sadly, this is now unlikely to affect me personally, as following a recent injury while walking I shall now be unable to use public transport for a long time to come, irrespective of the Covid-19 situation.

Ugh, that's a shame - TfGM have to date been consistently one of the best in making timetable PDFs available online.

Hopefully just a temporary issue to help with managing frequently changing timetables so as not to have wrong information online.

 

[daodao]

Ugh, that's a shame - TfGM have to date been consistently one of the best in making timetable PDFs available online.

Hopefully just a temporary issue to help with managing frequently changing timetables so as not to have wrong information online.

The Diamond (Rotala) site does have the bus timetable that I was looking for displayed, with changes from 14/6/20 posted 12/6/20. The D&G site ditto.

 

[blindio]

The Diamond (Rotala) site does have the bus timetable that I was looking for displayed, with changes from 14/6/20 posted 12/6/20. The D&G site ditto.

stagecoach have been putting what looks like the timetables the drivers get for their services, long list of services timetables with links for 1-200, 201-299 etc, so compared to the usual pdf of the TFGM paper document it's a bit harder to parse but they are at least giving the info albeit in a chore of a list

 

[splashoutradio]

It's not the easiest thing to find (or use, for tha matter,) but TFGM have an online timetable viewer at: https://my.tfgm.com/#/timetables/

Personally, I prefer to use the services of bustimes.org, but hopefully TFGM will have their PDF timetables back online soon.

 

[spargazer]

I took a glance at this, everything is 60 plus minutes out of date https://bustimes.org/map#13/53.3951/-2.2413

 

[Alexbus12]

I have just looked at the current TfGM website, and note that they have ceased publishing timetables on it in any shape or form. One can only search for times by looking for a route number, selecting a stop name and then selecting the date/time for one's proposed journey. The times of the next and a few later journeys from that stop are then shown. Only when one selects a particular journey are the subsequent times for later calling points on that journey only displayed.

I enquired about this a few weeks ago, apparently it's only temporary until all services are back to their usual service levels.

 

[markymark2000]

I enquired about this a few weeks ago, apparently it's only temporary until all services are back to their usual service levels.

I guessed that would be the case. As routes are returned to normal timetables, the PDFs should be uploaded though (like the WOB 22)

 

[Blackpudding]

For those interested the agenda for the Greater Manchester transport Committee meeting on 10th July 2020 is now online with propose July/August changes: https://democracy.greatermanchester...rthcoming Changes to Bus Network - Part A.pdf

 

[markymark2000]

For those interested the agenda for the Greater Manchester transport Committee meeting on 10th July 2020 is now online with propose July/August changes: https://democracy.greatermanchester-ca.gov.uk/documents/s8357/20200710 Forthcoming Changes to Bus Network - Part A.pdf

Tha is for sharing

It seems the bus network is in for a right change. Quite a few of these changes are going to do nothing but support Burnham's franchising plans since there's a lot of withdrawn routes

 

[duncombec]

Tha is for sharing

It seems the bus network is in for a right change. Quite a few of these changes are going to do nothing but support Burnham's franchising plans since there's a lot of withdrawn routes

But if you read the summary, almost all of the withdrawn commercial routes are covered by other services, either current or through amendments. Some of the withdrawals are relatively recent introductions that clearly haven't worked out.
In fact, the most substantive changes appear to be TfGM's own tendered services, and in many cases those that were operated by the now defunct MCT.

I'm really not sure your assertion that these changes support Andy Burnham's plans really add up, when TfGM is the cause of most upheaval here.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Interesting to see new route 42C incorporates a reinstatement of the old 130 route section from Heald Green to the Handforth border.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Interesting to see new route 42C incorporates a reinstatement of the old 130 route section from Heald Green to the Handforth border.

I don't get why they don't extend it to Wilmslow, TfGM travelcards are still valid up to there IIRC.

 

[markymark2000]

I don't get why they don't extend it to Wilmslow, TfGM travelcards are still valid up to there IIRC.

Because why should TFGM fund services out of their area. It would be up to Cheshire East council to fund such an extension.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Because why should TFGM fund services out of their area. It would be up to Cheshire East council to fund such an extension.

Fair enough, but I don't see why anyone would want to go to the Handforth border.

 

[markymark2000]

Fair enough, but I don't see why anyone would want to go to the Handforth border.

Well, Handforth Dean does have a big tesco which could be the reason people use the bus. Otherwise, the service has no use but with CEC being stubborn and not willing to work with TFGM to subsidise buses means that buses either terminate on the border or you end up leaving loads of areas without a bus.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Well, Handforth Dean does have a big tesco which could be the reason people use the bus. Otherwise, the service has no use but with CEC being stubborn and not willing to work with TFGM to subsidise buses means that buses either terminate on the border or you end up leaving loads of areas without a bus.

I mean, they could at least extend it to the airport from the Tesco. CEC should also stop messing about and get their act together, but I digress.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I don't get why they don't extend it to Wilmslow, TfGM travelcards are still valid up to there IIRC.

Handforth is the border with Cheshire East Council and both the former 130 and 378 routes to Wilmslow seemed to be affected by that geographical and political matter.

 

[323235]

Interesting to see new route 42C incorporates a reinstatement of the old 130 route section from Heald Green to the Handforth border.

A very sensible approach to retain/reinstate a service between Cheadle, Heald Green and Handforth. I don't think the reduction in the 42B will have a big impact on Bramhall or Woodford.

 

[daodao]

A very sensible approach to retain/reinstate a service between Cheadle, Heald Green and Handforth. I don't think the reduction in the 42B will have a big impact on Bramhall or Woodford.

There are other cuts in the Bramhall/Woodford area. The new housing development on the site of the former Avro aerodrome there is virtually bereft of any public transport provision, being left with just an hourly service (not evenings) on route 42B (formerly NWRCC/MCT route 31).

The reduction in services from central Manchester to outer suburban destinations has been dramatic when looked at over a longer time period. A comparison with the NWRCC timetable from the early 1960s would show just how many services have been lost. For example, NWRCC service 32 (at one time half-hourly) from M/c LMS to Higher Poynton (which ran via Princess Road/Barlow Moor Rd close to my childhood home near Southern Cemetery) has long since gone. The virtual disappearance of route 130 (formerly NWRCC routes 29/30) over the last 15 years has been equally drastic.

I also understand from a neighbour, whose partner is about to be made redundant from his job as a manager for Stagecoach Manchester, that major staff cuts are about to be implemented across Stagecoach throughout GB as they are in serious financial difficulties.

 

[markymark2000]

I mean, they could at least extend it to the airport from the Tesco. CEC should also stop messing about and get their act together, but I digress.

I don't think that would be a wasted resource sending that then to the airport. Most people on the 42C route are close enough to another route to the airport or could get there by changing once.

But if you read the summary, almost all of the withdrawn commercial routes are covered by other services, either current or through amendments. Some of the withdrawals are relatively recent introductions that clearly haven't worked out.
In fact, the most substantive changes appear to be TfGM's own tendered services, and in many cases those that were operated by the now defunct MCT.

I'm really not sure your assertion that these changes support Andy Burnham's plans really add up, when TfGM is the cause of most upheaval here.

I have read through the whole document. Some changes are being made due to commercial changes though. I refer you mainly to the 202/4/5/6/7 changes which will result in some lost links as well as the 574 withdrawal with 516 replacement (lost links to Bolton) to name a few.
Some of the changes are really good, I think the 18 will be a nice route. Eccles to the Airport via Trafford Centre, Sale and Wythenshawe. That said, some aren't as good for example extending the 217 through Manchester to Wythenshawe (Ashton - Manchester - Wythenshawe I would argue is nonsensical and provides very little benefit. The routes should be split in Manchester since 'through' use is very limited and with congestion being so unreliable, the service will either be unreliable and split or a lot of recovery time will be built into the timetable.

Back when the 375 was due to be withdrawn (because of TFGM cost saving), the councillors in the transport committee were not happy and calling for franchising because then they can use the profits from the core routes to prop up the subsidised network. Many of the sheep who are supporting franchising believe strongly that TFGM can do no wrong and as some of the changes are due to bus operators changing commercial routes, all of the changes will be blamed on the bus operators.
Watch the committee meeting from 20:05 until around 21:20.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I wonder when TfGM will once again produce their printed timetables and update the timetables that are displayed on the display boards in the bus shelters.

 

[blindio]

I wonder when TfGM will once again produce their printed timetables and update the timetables that are displayed on the display boards in the bus shelters.

some of the stops have updated timetables, some have timetables from prior to lockdown with an a4 poster shoved in warning about the virus affecting timetables, at least that's my experience in the stockport area

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

On the TfGM "latest changes" that are due to come into effect on 30th August, quite a number of existing service number cancellations appear, with details of the services that will be replacing part or all of those routes.

 

[Alexbus12]

On the TfGM "latest changes" that are due to come into effect on 30th August, quite a number of existing service number cancellations appear, with details of the services that will be replacing part or all of those routes.

Looks like they've also given up providing timetables online, and at the travel shops. It's crazy to think people want them to have full control of the network when they can't even get the basics right.