Unified bus numbering scheme?

[edwin_m]

The Kinchbus 9 is bright yellow an blue and a solo and says 'Loughborough' on the front and even says the route map on the side. It runs from Broadmarsh to Trent Bridge to lots of other places to Loughborough.

The Nottingham city transport 9 goes from Victoria Centre to train station to trent bridge to Compton acres and Rushcliffe. This bus is green and says 9, Compton Acres on it..

There not cross city routes.

The 2 services don't even start at the same place in the city and its only the small section between the train station and Trent Bridge that is being mimicked. As Trent Bridge to City sees services: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10 , 11, RC , CC, KC, BXP, Kinchbus 9 and numerous local ones, the chanches are sim of you getting on board the wrong bus.

The station is exactly the place where there are likely to be visitors to the city - I've had to explain it to people there myself. If you have been told to get the 5/6/7/8/9 and get off at say Central Avenue, you may not know where the bus is heading for but you might know that both Loughborough and Central Avenue are vaguely in the same direction so it would be quite easy to board the wrong bus. If you have also been told the fare to pay you might be none the wiser, as IIRC one of the stages of Kinchbus is £1.70 too. By the time you wonder where Central Avenue has got to, the Kinchbus is probably somewhere out in the wilds beyond Ruddington. It was even more confusing when there was an X9 on a similar route as well.

As far as I'm concerned there is no need to have bus route numbers unique across the country but operator and local council heads should be knocked together to ensure that all bus routes passing through a particular community have their own numbers. If that isn't the case then I see little point in buses carrying numbers at all.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hmm, should we also introduce different numbers in each direction, so that someone doesn't board a cross city route in the wrong direction?

Where does it end?

Routes that make circuits in opposite directions usually have different numbers, including the NCT 8 and 9. The difference between this and a cross city route is that the direction of travel should be made clear on the stops and it's unlikely that the same route will use the same stop (on the same side of the road) in both directions.

 

[Tetchytyke]

For a while there were two 22 services in Newcastle, one operated by Stagecoach and one by Go North East. One went to Wallsend or Throckley, the other went to Durham.

So far so simple, how can anyone get confused?

Both services went from the same bus stop. The number of people who got on the wrong 22 was surprisingly high, especially on weekends with people who were less familiar with the bus services.

Where it can be avoided, really you'd have to say that you should avoid having two different routes in the same city with the same number.

 

[dvboy]

So are NX Dundee services... :roll: (And NX Surrey before they sold up to Abellio.)

Not in the same way

If you search for the number 5 on the NX West Midlands website, it brings up the Coventry service also. It doesn't bring up any service in Dundee.

 

[Robertj21a]

The Kimes 24 stages out of Grantham Bus Station.
Additionally I have seen a single decker on the Stagecoach 'Interconnect' 1 before now, I think it was a last minute substitution.

Frankly having multiple identical route numbers is never a good idea and hardly helps the image of road transport as an easy to use alternative to cars et al.



Well deregulation hasn't really achieved much, since the only place where passenger numbers are increasing appears to be the only place that still has regulation.

Kimes doesn't exist - it's been part of Centrebus for years and has now been closed down/absorbed into the main Centrebus fleet. There is only one route 24 in Grantham. The Stagecoach 1 is allocated double deckers.

Robert
.

 

[HSTEd]

Kimes doesn't exist - it's been part of Centrebus for years and has now been closed down/absorbed into the main Centrebus fleet. There is only one route 24 in Grantham. The Stagecoach 1 is allocated double deckers.

Robert
.

And yet Kimes-livery busses operating the Melton Mowbray route still appear in Grantham bus station with 24 displayed.

Its Centrebus though so this is not unusual. Buses seem to exchange between the Melton-Bottesford '24' and the Bottesford-Grantham '6', often without changing the displayed numbers.

As to the Stagecoach 'Interconnect' 1 buses being allocated double deckers, this isn't much help if you have just been told to get the Number 1 bus.
And I have seen single decks on it before.


As to the 'extra cost and confusion' of adding a letter to the front of route numbers and so on, I think this is rather negligible and is just an example of people don't want to do something because they don't want to do it.
With dot matrix displays one extra character is not going to 'break the bank' or some such, indeed if a bus is in a route area all the time and never leaves it (as 95% of the buses in Lincolnshire, for example, would be) they could just paint the letter on.

If we want to give the impression of an integrated public transport system this is the sort of thing we need to do.
Having unique numbers also allows for the creation of a central timetable record for every single bus route in the same location.
Rather than trying to find timetables for the Stagecoach 42 in Manchester as opposed to the Finglands 42 in Manchester or a 42 in London.

This would be rather helpful for people making rail journeys with a bus link on the other end.

 

[Eire Sprinter]

There's an unified system being rolled out here in provincial Ireland.

Bus Éireann routes have been numbered since the 1990s but now route numbers are being applied to independently operated services (virtually all of these were un-numbered previously)

 

[Robertj21a]

And yet Kimes-livery busses operating the Melton Mowbray route still appear in Grantham bus station with 24 displayed.

Its Centrebus though so this is not unusual. Buses seem to exchange between the Melton-Bottesford '24' and the Bottesford-Grantham '6', often without changing the displayed numbers.

As to the Stagecoach 'Interconnect' 1 buses being allocated double deckers, this isn't much help if you have just been told to get the Number 1 bus.
And I have seen single decks on it before.


As to the 'extra cost and confusion' of adding a letter to the front of route numbers and so on, I think this is rather negligible and is just an example of people don't want to do something because they don't want to do it.
With dot matrix displays one extra character is not going to 'break the bank' or some such, indeed if a bus is in a route area all the time and never leaves it (as 95% of the buses in Lincolnshire, for example, would be) they could just paint the letter on.

If we want to give the impression of an integrated public transport system this is the sort of thing we need to do.
Having unique numbers also allows for the creation of a central timetable record for every single bus route in the same location.
Rather than trying to find timetables for the Stagecoach 42 in Manchester as opposed to the Finglands 42 in Manchester or a 42 in London.

This would be rather helpful for people making rail journeys with a bus link on the other end.

The 24 from Melton has nothing to do with Grantham. It does not go on to work the 6 and is operated by a different depot.

You seem to be determined to find a problem when one simply doesn't exist.

Robert

 

[Hyphen]

(Execpt the 2000 which used to pass my house in Nottingham by DUnnLine. Always made ma laugh. Dont' run any more!)

Better still (and seemingly staying on topic)... that route was officially numbered the D2000! And I remember regularly seeing it go through Stabbo as a double-decker, usually with less passengers than would fill a Solo.

 

[TheHovisKid]

Is there a difference between official and siaplayed routes? Stagecoach Lancaster routes appeared on tickets as "802a" not "2a" and in North Tyneside one operator dropped the hundreds from some routes (so "301" became "1")

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Is there a difference between official and siaplayed routes? Stagecoach Lancaster routes appeared on tickets as "802a" not "2a" and in North Tyneside one operator dropped the hundreds from some routes (so "301" became "1")

The North Tyneside ones were part of Go Ahead renumbering of virtually all their services away from 3 digits.

The Lancaster one looks for admin reasons if its just on tickets.

However, is this really a big problem? Most places don't have conflicts. Dare I say it, but I have a friend who worked for a major company who renumbered their services so that they had a route 4 in one place and 15 miles away, there was another service 4. The ONLY complaint they received was from a bus enthusiast who complained it affected the filing of his bus timetables...I kid you not!

Most passengers are a bit smarter than is often given credit

 

[bb21]

I can't see a unified numbering system being a good idea. As has already been pointed out, you are going to be defeating your objective by actually confusing people. Is the new M42 the same as the old 42? What about the new X7 in the area prefixed with X? Is that the old 7 or the old X7 (assuming both existed)? Grantedly this will settle after a while but this is going to be unnecessary hassle for bus users nationwide for very little gain.

I do however completely agree that operators should not be permitted to run two services with the same number where confusion can arise. It doesn't matter whether they use different liveries, whether they use different types of vehicle, or whether they are run by different operators. The one distinguishing feature of a bus route should be its number (or name in Trent-talk). This is a source of confusion because bus users do not only include those who are local, or familiar with the bus scene. There are people who dare not use the bus because they are so scared of getting things wrong (I kid you not). Everything that can be done to make bus travel as accessible as possible should be done.

The solution is easy, allow the area traffic commissioner the power to discipline a bus company for such a breach, and they will soon learn to think a little harder when they register their routes. Existing route numbers can be given a grace period to change. As to who does it, it requires cooperation and negotiation between the operators concerned. If no change by the deadline, all operators concerned can be disciplined.

 

[Eagle]

And additionally, having London as the area with no prefix letter wouldn't work, because outer London has several dozen routes that do have a prefix letter based on locality (e.g. W for Woodford, U for Uxbridge, K for Kingston). Plus a lot of N-prefixed night buses and some X-prefixed expresses.

 

[Robertj21a]

I can't see a unified numbering system being a good idea. As has already been pointed out, you are going to be defeating your objective by actually confusing people. Is the new M42 the same as the old 42? What about the new X7 in the area prefixed with X? Is that the old 7 or the old X7 (assuming both existed)? Grantedly this will settle after a while but this is going to be unnecessary hassle for bus users nationwide for very little gain.

I do however completely agree that operators should not be permitted to run two services with the same number where confusion can arise. It doesn't matter whether they use different liveries, whether they use different types of vehicle, or whether they are run by different operators. The one distinguishing feature of a bus route should be its number (or name in Trent-talk). This is a source of confusion because bus users do not only include those who are local, or familiar with the bus scene. There are people who dare not use the bus because they are so scared of getting things wrong (I kid you not). Everything that can be done to make bus travel as accessible as possible should be done.

The solution is easy, allow the area traffic commissioner the power to discipline a bus company for such a breach, and they will soon learn to think a little harder when they register their routes. Existing route numbers can be given a grace period to change. As to who does it, it requires cooperation and negotiation between the operators concerned. If no change by the deadline, all operators concerned can be disciplined.

Not much point in giving the TC more to administer - they struggle already. In any event, there's no real problem anyway.

It's a de-regulated industry (outside London) so don't try to re-regulate it !

Robert
.

 

[bb21]

I don't buy the deregulation argument. There will always need to be regulation in some aspects, otherwise we will not see the role of Area Traffic Commissioner exist. It's just what powers they should have that is the issue. Free market principles will otherwise dictate that no performance penalties need to be applied as customers will just desert companies with poor performances, but obviously we all know that it is not how it works. The bus industry will never be a true free market.

The question is: do we want to have a coherent transport network? If so, route number rationalisation should be part of it for the reason I stated in my earlier post. Whether the job of overseeing it should be given to the Area Traffic Commissioners is another question, although they are the most obvious people.

 

[Deerfold]

I do however completely agree that operators should not be permitted to run two services with the same number where confusion can arise. It doesn't matter whether they use different liveries, whether they use different types of vehicle, or whether they are run by different operators. The one distinguishing feature of a bus route should be its number (or name in Trent-talk). This is a source of confusion because bus users do not only include those who are local, or familiar with the bus scene. There are people who dare not use the bus because they are so scared of getting things wrong (I kid you not). Everything that can be done to make bus travel as accessible as possible should be done.

That seems reasonable.

I grew up in West Yorkshire.

When the PTE managed all the bus routes we managed to have an entire county with no duplications of route numbers (except for National Express and other coach operators).

All the former bus numbers in the areas they took over were moved into number schemes viz:

• 
  1-99 Leeds

• 
  100-199 Wakefield

• 
  200-299 North Kirklees (I think)

• 
  300-399 South Kirklees (Huddersfield and environs)

• 
  400-499 Pontefract/Castleford

• 
  500-599 Calderdale

• 
  600-699 Bradford

• 
  700-799 Keighley

• 
  800-899 Minibus services, usually frequent

• 
  900-999 Night Services Leeds and Bradford (only 9 numbers used!)

• 
  N1-N99 Night Services Halifax and Huddersfield (only 6 numbers used!)

• 
  X1-X99 Express services

• 
  Other Letters - Local services

Obviously some buses ran between areas so someone had to choose which 1st digit they got.

This worked well until privatisation (and held suprisingly well for quite a time afterwards).

First and Arriva tend to stick to this scheme even now except that minibuses are now rarely obvious from having an 8xx number. (though Metro keeps changing what it does when numbering local subsidised schemes - prefix letters for a while, 9xx for a bit, A-I (later A-E) for Hebden Bridge which were Hx for many years and are to become 595-599 later this month) but some of the smaller, newer companies don't - notably in Calderdale where TJ Walsh who traditionally just ran the daily 501 service started using 525, 555 then 300, 400, 600, 700 and 725 and HJC who used traditional (pre-70s) numbers for many of their services, 46A, 28A, 36 or, where competing with First on longer routes, replaced First's 5 with a 3 - so 376, 309 instead of 576 and 508.

Where I live now has the 25, 66(A), 712/762/765 and 903 which in the early 90s used to be 725, 666/7/8 (as they used to extend from Bradford) and 712/713/762/765 with the unique parts of the 713 now replaced by the 903.

In the 6 years I've lived there I've seen these numbers used on regular service buses past my house: 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 66, 66A, 67, 67A, 68, 70, 78A, 712, 713, 762, 765, 903 and I'd describe it as fairly uneventful as bus changes go (and with all but 3 buses a day provided by Transdev) - I can see how infrequent users could get confused easily by that.

I think they have managed to avoid having towns without duplication of numbers expect where both services are identical or near identical.

The only problems for those completely unfamiliar with buses tended to be just a couple of clashes between coach numbers and bus numbers. Halifax used to have 2 564s - but one was a National Express coach that ran to London 3 times a day and the other was a Yorkshire Rider minibus that ran a local service to Ripponden via Mill Bank every 2 hours. They did go from adjacent stands at one point though.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I do however completely agree that operators should not be permitted to run two services with the same number where confusion can arise. It doesn't matter whether they use different liveries, whether they use different types of vehicle, or whether they are run by different operators. The one distinguishing feature of a bus route should be its number (or name in Trent-talk). This is a source of confusion because bus users do not only include those who are local, or familiar with the bus scene. There are people who dare not use the bus because they are so scared of getting things wrong (I kid you not). Everything that can be done to make bus travel as accessible as possible should be done.

The solution is easy, allow the area traffic commissioner the power to discipline a bus company for such a breach, and they will soon learn to think a little harder when they register their routes. Existing route numbers can be given a grace period to change. As to who does it, it requires cooperation and negotiation between the operators concerned. If no change by the deadline, all operators concerned can be disciplined.

I think the current workload of the TC's is unmanageable. Giving them another role just isn't going to work.

As for the number being the one distinguishing feature, I don't agree. Otherwise you'd not have cross town services. The destination (and intermediates) are as important if not more so.

In Newcastle, you have two service 1's that happen to cross town, viz Stagecoach 1 Four Lane Ends or Slatyford in standard colours and Go Ahead Coaster 1 (Wrekenton to Whitley Bay). I'd venture there's more confusion as people work out which Stagecoach 1 (in which direction) they need than confusing it with the blue Go Ahead version with its strong route branding.

 

[bb21]

Perhaps I should have said route number/identity and direction of travel. The same issue you have raised does not exist only on cross-town/city routes, but also at intermediate stops of any route anywhere.

The direction of travel is an inevitable issue which cannot be resolved (unless you do what unilink does and have different route identities for each direction of operation, but is that OTT?). This is best distinguished in central areas by using different stops and good practice would be to group departures for similar destinations roughly together.

The issue with different routes sharing the same number is one that can be easily avoided. The reason route numbers came about was so that they can be used to distinguish one route from another (regardless of direction of travel) in a simple way, so having two routes departing from the same town/city centre which go nowhere near each other sharing the same number is complication that the industry does not need. We might as well otherwise abolish route numbers and go back to using destination indicators alone.

The role of the Area Traffic Commissioner obviously needs revamping, even in its current guise, but that is for another topic. I only mentioned them as they seem to be the most obvious person to assign the overall responsibility to.

 

[ECML180]

To me, the front display of a bus should consist of 2 or 3 items:
1) Route Number
2) Destination
3) Additional Information

The route number should not be duplicated anywhere along it's route, unless another service takes the exact same route and stopping pattern. (One with a different stopping pattern may use X for express for example)

The destination may well be duplicated by other services and each route number may have more than 2 corresponding destinations, for example short workings and school services.

The additional information would usually be 'Via Points' to give an indication of areas served along the route, but this could also be a variety of things such as 'Limited Stop', 'Day Tickets Accepted', 'Max Fare £2' or many more.

It works fine for cross-town services this way and I understand that it can be confusing if a person is just given a route number alone in this case. However, as long as the above is followed, in my opinion, there would not be any problems.

I think route branding and naming can be a good thing, as long as a town is not overloaded with it all.

Have a 999 service termingating at the hospital and it's easy to remember!
Advertise a service as catch 22 and it will gain a stronger brand.
Call your airport service the 'SkyLink' or 'AirExpress' and it's easier for people to spot.

Name every service for no real reason and then it does begin to get confusing.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Perhaps I should have said route number/identity and direction of travel. The same issue you have raised does not exist only on cross-town/city routes, but also at intermediate stops of any route anywhere.

The direction of travel is an inevitable issue which cannot be resolved (unless you do what unilink does and have different route identities for each direction of operation, but is that OTT?). This is best distinguished in central areas by using different stops and good practice would be to group departures for similar destinations roughly together.

The issue with different routes sharing the same number is one that can be easily avoided. The reason route numbers came about was so that they can be used to distinguish one route from another (regardless of direction of travel) in a simple way, so having two routes departing from the same town/city centre which go nowhere near each other sharing the same number is complication that the industry does not need. We might as well otherwise abolish route numbers and go back to using destination indicators alone.

The role of the Area Traffic Commissioner obviously needs revamping, even in its current guise, but that is for another topic. I only mentioned them as they seem to be the most obvious person to assign the overall responsibility to.

Or you could have different service numbers for different directions, as I believe Portsmouth City Transport used to have for cross town routes.

I think the question is proportionality. Having a national system, or getting the TC involved seems to be pretty heavy handed for the number of instances it actually happens and the number of passengers actually affected.

It is also horses for courses. In Darlington, there were always two service 1s for probably 40 years or more. One was the Corporation service across town (Harrowgate Hill to ?) and the other was the United service from the town to Bishop Auckland. They both went from the town centre (but different stops) but, and here's the rub......

Darlington is not a tourist town but a captive market. The vast majority of people get the same service (and actually the same actual journey) each day so they knew the difference between a red 1 and a blue 1. However, I accept that in some places, heaving metropolitan city centres or tourist areas, then it might be an issue but not in most places (and that's why most cross town services don't encounter it)

 

[Deerfold]

Darlington is not a tourist town but a captive market. The vast majority of people get the same service (and actually the same actual journey) each day so they knew the difference between a red 1 and a blue 1. However, I accept that in some places, heaving metropolitan city centres or tourist areas, then it might be an issue but not in most places (and that's why most cross town services don't encounter it)

Surely most towns (especially places the size of Darlington) have visitors, be they businessmen or people visiting family or coming to a specialist shop.

Having said that, I'm wondering if that's one of the reasons TrentBarton are going for names and numbers with dots in these days as many of their old numbers were duplicates of NCT's (based on mid-nineties experience) and other companies along their routes.

It is a complication which should be easy to avoid (and Trent got rid of a lot of them by just calling their routes R(ainbow) x instead of x.

 

[bb21]

I think the question is proportionality. Having a national system, or getting the TC involved seems to be pretty heavy handed for the number of instances it actually happens and the number of passengers actually affected.

Yes, I agree that a national system is unnecessary. My suggestion is more about what happens in each locality.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

Surely most towns (especially places the size of Darlington) have visitors, be they businessmen or people visiting family or coming to a specialist shop.

Granted, and I'm sure that even places like Bilston or Barrhead get visitors. However, as a percentage of passengers, it is infinitesimally small. I know that you can say that every passenger should be precious but getting TCs involved? I can't say I ever noticed anyone attempting to get the wrong 1 in Darlington

In fact, you can never rationalise for the lazy people who despite having a bus marked with the correct service number, and blind with via point, still asked if it was going to another location!!

I would say that the situation is improved with LED screens that allow for more than one intermediate point to be displayed; thinking of NBC style blinds rather than the more detailed examples of London, Edinburgh etc

 

[Statto]

It's up to the operator to choose what number they wish to use some areas like Merseyside & Bristol the number changes for services under tender, due to different normally cheaper fares, like in my area the one routes commercial number is 41-42 however the number when it's a tendered service becomes 141-142 operating over the same route. It may not be perfect, but I'd leave it as it is.

 

[alwaystouchout]

Call your airport service the 'SkyLink' or 'AirExpress' and it's easier for people to spot.

The shuttle bus connecting Dublin Airport to the city centre is numbered 747, which I found quite amusing..

 

[Deerfold]

Granted, and I'm sure that even places like Bilston or Barrhead get visitors. However, as a percentage of passengers, it is infinitesimally small. I know that you can say that every passenger should be precious but getting TCs involved? I can't say I ever noticed anyone attempting to get the wrong 1 in Darlington

I'm seeing some people more keen to use the bus at the other end of their journey - in many cases it's now easier to find out about journeys via the internet than it has been for many years - and I know I'm much happier about getting unfamiliar routes now I can follow where I am on my phone and at worst get off 1 bus stop too far.

Having said that I'm just planning a trip next month to somewhere with 3 buses a day (4 on Fridays, None on Sundays) - and that's a minor tourist destination (service is better in the summer).

In fact, you can never rationalise for the lazy people who despite having a bus marked with the correct service number, and blind with via point, still asked if it was going to another location!!

Not to mention the people who can't see very well and can't see the blind.

An example of the blind not leading the blind? (cue groans).

I would say that the situation is improved with LED screens that allow for more than one intermediate point to be displayed; thinking of NBC style blinds rather than the more detailed examples of London, Edinburgh etc

I'm all for more info on the front of the bus (so long as it doesn't obscure the main info) - and it can work as a bit of an advert to non-bus passengers who may not have realised where buses go via (I speak as someone whose father used to leave very early in the morning and sometimes followed the "First bus" service part of the way and assumed it said that because it was the first service of the day - wasn't long after they were renamed from Badgerline tbf).

The shuttle bus connecting Dublin Airport to the city centre is numbered 747, which I found quite amusing..

There's many aiport buses and coaches which are numbered 7x7, including

Local bsues -

737, 747 Bradford - Leeds/Bradford (737 continues to Harrogate)

757 Leeds - Leeds/Bradford

747 Fife - Edinburgh Airport

747 Glasgow - Glasgow Airport

757 Paisley - Glasgow Airport

NX -

707 Northampton - Milton Keynes - Luton - Heathrow - Gatwick

727 Norwich - Cambridge - Stansted - Heathrow - Gatwick - Brighton

737 Oxford - Luton - Stansted

747 Brighton - Gatwick - Heathrow

767 Nottingham - Leicester - Luton - Stansted

777 Birmingham (and Airport) - Luton - Stansted

787 Cambridge - Luton - Heathrow

797 Cambridge - Stansted - Heathrow - Gatwick

 

[ECML180]

We had a 707 in Doncaster, with very strong branding compared to the other buses at the time(last indepedants dieing out and everything suddenly becoming barbie).

http://www.flickr.com/photos/matthewburton28/11383229725/

A few years later it appeared in base white, that did nothing to confuse passengers though!

 

[Eagle]

There's also the 777 express Coleshill Parkway to Birmingham Airport (but then again there's also a 757 at Coleshill which is Sutton Coldfield to Whitacre, no airports involved)

Do any bus services use Airbus model numbers? :P

 

[Statto]

There's also the 777 express Coleshill Parkway to Birmingham Airport (but then again there's also a 757 at Coleshill which is Sutton Coldfield to Whitacre, no airports involved)

Do any bus services use Airbus model numbers? :P

300 Liverpool-Southport
319 Ormskirk-St Helens
320 St Helens-Wigan
350 Liverpool-Maghull
350 Oldham-Ashton Under Lyne
380 Stockport-Greave Circular

 

[ECML180]

There's also the 777 express Coleshill Parkway to Birmingham Airport (but then again there's also a 757 at Coleshill which is Sutton Coldfield to Whitacre, no airports involved)

Do any bus services use Airbus model numbers? :P

Must be easy to match up McDonnell Douglas aircraft too!

8
10
11
12

Go back before the merger and there's good numbers there too!

 

[edwin_m]

If it's route DC10 does the bus only have three wheels?