It Can Only Nean One Thing

Higher petrol prices that encourage motorists to use the bus (and train) have manifested themselves in Stagecoach’s profits up by a third. Revenues at its UK Bus businesses grew by 2.1 per cent (and train by double that figure).

Once again, it seems that higher fuel prices are beginning to alter people’s behaviour where altruistic environmental campaigns have failed. Such campaigns and surveys always get the backing of motorists—in principle. Rarely does this lead to action. There’s always some excuse like the bus is too infrequent, too far away or doesn’t run at times or days that suit. But increases in real pounds shillings & pence are having an impact. A case for increases in fuel duty, perhaps? Are we brave enough?

All this in spite of the hit and miss marketing about the advantages of the bus during a period of escalating fuel prices.

Time, then, to capitalise on the uncertainties in fuel prices and really publicise the alternative. Fuel at the pumps has increased by about 12 per cent in the last year alone.

One company promoting the bus as an alternative is Reading Transport. Its Try the Bus campaign may be a little too confrontational and even a little too stark but it does offer free travel, a pack with free tickets and, importantly, it features standard single fares writ large. It’s also good to see such advertising at the petrol station, on pump nozzles, directly where it has an impact.

Fuel, though, can be a double-edged sword. Operators can expect significant price increases over the coming 12 months. They’re budgeting (or re-budgeting) for significant rises. These are likely to be too high to pass directly onto the passenger, certainly not every penny of it. And that can only mean one thing… at the very time when the bus is winning custom at the expensive of higher petrol at the forecourt pump.

i Try the Bus Reading

Attitude

An article yesterday on Walesonline caught my attention. It stated that 12 per cent of young people and 18 per cent of adults in a Welsh public transport users’ committee survey felt that the way to improve bus use was for staff to change attitudes. They meant drivers. And surly ones at that.

Most of us most of the time invest large sums in staff training. It’s a budget that’s escalated dramatically over the last 25 years, especially over the last 15. Indeed, some of it’s now compulsory, DCPC wise. Yet, are we failing to make the right impression on the general public we serve?

I don’t think we are. I feel that training is one of our major successes. One problem is and always has been that a driver has a limited window in which to make a good impression. The job’s too intense to be other than perfunctory. It’s necessary for the job to be transactional and a short, sharp one at that. In the passengers’ eyes, this can translate into surliness, aloofness, unfriendliness, even antagonism.

If there was just that little bit more time to strike up a relationship then it might pay dividends. But there isn’t, accept on rural services where the pace is slower. Indeed, I bet if you ask passengers on a rural route for their impressions, they’d be more than content with their drivers and their attitudes, the very same drivers who next shift are hammered on an urban corridor and through necessity cannot spend any more time talking to the passenger than is absolutely necessary.

We know, for instance, that there are differences between more rural and more urban garages, with rural or small town depots doing better on relationships with the public. This doesn’t make drivers in larger garages hostile.

Though the report mentions problem passengers, it would seem that the survey didn’t ask passengers what they thought of themselves. For nine times out of 10, the reason the driver appears “surly” is because of an incident regarding a problem passenger (often a young passenger, it has to be said). It would be nice to think that the driver doesn’t over-react but sometimes, just sometimes, at the end of a hard shift of heavy traffic (passengers) and heavy traffic (congestion) some little thing becomes all too much for a driver. We shouldn’t accept this but we can understand it.

i Walesonline article by Buses writer Rhodri Clarke

Taking stock of the Dorset tender changes, today on the Dorset Bus Blog

Oxford Solution Reality

It may not be the first in the country (as the press releases state) but it probably is the most significant & all-embracing.

We’re referring to the Oxford Solution new deal that will come into operation in a month’s time. The 2008 Local Transport Act-inspired partnership sees:

• Combined timetables replacing competitive services along four main corridors
• Inter-availability of tickets on most (though not all) routes within the city boundary

The potential benefits are huge.

• For passengers, the network becomes open to all, with season & transfer tickets accepted by the Oxford Bus Company, Stagecoach & Thames Travel
• For operators, there’s a reduction in PVR along four corridors by as much as a third, something that improves the bottom line but offers no less a service since there’s now widespread inter-availability
• For the city centre, there will be reductions in buses, congestion and emissions. Larger buses and the use of double rather single decks maintain capacity while Oxford with its hybrids will see one of the most environmentally friendly systems in the country.

Indeed, the whole package has the possibility of generating passengers using fewer resources. An important key is the multi-operator smartcard. Though, since most passengers board the first bus that arrives, there’s also the possibility of fewer buses equating to slightly fewer passengers. Even so, the PVR-reduced network could easily shoulder such a loss.

So, everybody wins. And even the transport minister is excited by the results of using his predecessor’s Act. “This is exactly the sort of operation that I want to encourage more of. Oxford is leading the way in providing better local transport services by using a partnership approach and making good use of smart ticketing technology”.

This means deregulation’s dead in Oxford, then? Not really, it is just entering its fourth phase. Recently, Oxford is one of those few urban areas to which operators like to point to show the benefits of deregulation. Here, we have two main opponents whose competing services are both high frequency & high quality. And Oxford will continue to be under the spotlight because of its new partnership approach.

The only suburb that will suffer under the Oxford Solution is Barton. Currently served by Oxford Bus Co (8/hr) & Stagecoach (10/hr), the new service reduces to 10/hr along the Headington & London Roads but, after Headington, 2/hr head for Risinghurst, leaving two 12-minute gaps for Barton

It wasn’t always like this. The 1987 arrival in Blackbird Leys of Thames Transit’s high frequency 16-seaters signalled changes, gradual at first, that would eventually see the 1994 Go Ahead purchase of City of Oxford, replacing its tired vehicles and in 1995 an unsustainable 18-month bus war of epic proportions, along almost every available Oxford bus route. There followed some retrenchment as not all corridors could sustain such frequencies & fares reductions. In 1997, Transit Holdings promptly sold to Stagecoach and thereafter the two groups have competed on a virtuous upward spiral of quality improvements. Till now.

And to think, this could’ve all ended in tears. Recently, Oxfordshire council demanded buses terminate shy of the city centre, with passengers having to transfer onto local shuttles to reach their ultimate destination. Next month’s changes are as much a reaction to the shuttle proposal than anything.

And what might the Competition Commission make of this? It’s still difficult to understand exactly from where the CC is coming. It refuses, for example, to accept that the car is a competitor yet, in Oxford, the bicycle is often the main rival. Has it taken cycling into account?

The new deal does not restrict new entrants or the freedom of other operators, such as there are. One is Heyfordian, that operates buses at low frequency along several corridors including the busy Cowley Road. Heyfordian hardly represents much extra choice, though.

Indeed, with fewer Oxford Bus Co & Stagecoach buses, entrance into the market would be easier (in theory, though access to the new ticketing system would be key). And the Oxford Bus Company’s Brookes Bus network is not included.

To date, competition has incentivised Oxford’s operators. Under the new scheme, will the service loose its edge? Or will it grow and develop? And, if the latter, where else might it apply?

Following Thursday 16th’s oblique plea for guest articles, here’s the one response I received, postponed from three days ago:

Omnibuses *still* welcomes guest contributors. More information here

Straightening Out

One of London’s busiest bus routes converts today from bendy to conventional. That’ll be the 25, then, from Ilford to Oxford Street. As of yesterday, it required 44 buses in service, totalling nearly 800 yards of roadspace if laid out end-to-end. Today, it needs 59, an increase of a third and the resultant roadspace required actually now decreases, to just over 600 yards. Seating capacity improves, frequency improves (from 5-6 to 3-4 minutes) but overall capacity (including standees) does not. Neither will carbon emissions.

It’s no good saying that such a conversion is a political decision, for all of London’s transport decisions are such.

The thing that fascinates me is the publicity generated by TfL. On it, there’s a diagram of a double deck clearly showing passengers where they should board and alight. And when to go upstairs. Perhaps after almost exactly seven years on a bendy bus passengers’ve forgotten how to use conventional buses.

I wonder how the future publicity will describe how to board the New Bus for London, capable of operation in both three- and in two-door format.

What Goes Around...

“First Group will abandon its universal branding policy… and introduce local branding next year”

So reads the opening sentence of a whole page in today’s Passenger Transport dedicated to this new approach.

If you have a view on this, leave a comment and take part in our brief survey

In the sort of coverage you no longer find in New Transit, Passenger Transport reports on an answer given by First UK Bus managing director Giles Fearnley at the recent young bus managers’ network—an association I have to say is sadly out of my grasp these days : (

Fearnley cited the 1987 decision to split and re-brand West Yorkshire Road Car into local units that saw immediate benefits in customer satisfaction and staff morale.

Expect changes at First, therefore, from the middle of next year. The $64,000 question, though, is how exactly. Should First bring back traditional names from the past (e.g. Southern National, Provincial, Western National?). How many people remember them, fondly or not? Usually “not” it has to be said. Or invent new brands altogether? Or simply brand locally (e.g. Weymouth, Gosport, Cornwall)?

Fearnley was frank in his view. His long term goal was to reposition his operators to a place where they would be welcomed by local transport authorities. He’s offering an olive branch to those communities where there was once trust but now just scorn. In terms of welcome, said Fearnley, “I’m hugely conscious that this is not the case”. Not everywhere, certainly. Possible nowhere. But First is widely regarded by the City and, here, the corporate identity is a real strength (though Go Ahead sees no problem with positioning itself locally).

It will also be interesting to see how this new interest in localism sits within the seemingly reinforced grip of First’s fortified regional control. Local morale can only be strengthened if decision making becomes local, too. And, stakeholders like LTAs and PTEs will see through a veneer that simply puts local gloss on a corporate pitch. And, there’s more to turning businesses around than rebranding but it’s a good start.

And those who would wish to see a blossoming of local identities similar to the immediate post-deregulation era may be disappointed. For First will be “rolling out an identity that can be picked up locally”. This sounds a little like First retaining corporate control in some form. What that may be, only time will tell.

Finally, should others follow? Have a look at our easy to answer survey

Feeding Back

If my blog entries had feelings, I hope the guest post planned for today doesn’t mind but I thought instead I’d come back on some of the comments left here yesterday. It’s not something I tend to do, though I do know that bloggers should and I note it was appreciated recently over on Dorset Bus. For me, it’s simply a matter of time. Anyway, yesterday’s commenters left over 20 observations, under three posts, one original dating back to 2008.

Under Omnibuses2.0’s guide to safe photography (July 2008), on personal feelings about having your photo taken innocently while driving a bus, said Wolfgang Hoare-Spitall ,

“Unfortunately this whole discussion is symptomatic of the paranoia about personal areas that’s developed in recent years. When I was driving buses in UK (during the 70s and 80s), I often experienced somebody with a camera, strategically positioned, and clicking away, and… [I] would view this as a pointless but harmless activity, and those engaged in it also as harmless, and somewhat “other worldly”. I cannot remember it ever being a reason to get excited.”

And this brings me on to a comment or two on the post about Jersey’s E400s. Ade asked,

“I also do wonder sometimes how many [visitors to] these pages are bus enthusiasts—or not”

and David answered,

“It’s a combination of bus enthusiasts and industry insiders. I don’t know if Busing is an enthusiast or not, but he’s definitely in the industry. This blog is far more about the industry machinations rather than what type of bus goes where”

David is right. In the latest Omnibuses reader survey, as you might expect, many readers work in the industry. Nearly half of you (46 per cent) do so, whether enthusiasts or not, up from 34 per cent in 2009 and 43 per cent in 2010.There’s a little about me, here.

Now then, Simplicity. Said James and others,

“Oh, and you're wrong about Oyster. It is not a simple system”

Well, I feel it is for me at any rate (as a rare London traveller and someone who tends to use buses rather than the underground railway). And even on the railway, it’s simple because it irons out the complications. You see, the TfL bluff works: It’s simple because I don’t have to worry about it. Interested readers might care to read today’s PT Experience blog, brought forward by the F.B.B. following my comments yesterday. And James continued,

“And throwing a figure like £60m about is entirely meaningless unless you also add in the total fares take from Oyster”

The BBC failed to mention this point but, to me, £60mil is hardly a meaningless sum, even were that to be just one per cent of Oyster revenue. May be if I was one of the 120 serious rich on Jersey on the other hand… Some anonymous comments:

“Most Oyster problems stem from people not using it properly”

But the BBC and London Travelwatch state that this is only part of the problem.

“When we converted our first route to low-floor operation (the first whole route in the country to be so converted), I suggested that the roadside displays should each contain a poster saying what the fare to the city centre was from that stop”

So, was that in Liverpool? As an industry, we don’t publicise our standard fares nearly enough. In some cases, I sense that we’re just a little afraid to.

“Cash is still simple and easy to use for anyone, and the Treasury provide it free for bus operators and passengers alike!”

Cash comes at a cost, too: counting; passenger (and other) fraud; storage; shifting; floats…

“Even a relatively small operator like Thamesdown in Swindon now appears to have something close to Oyster, albeit the debit is made by the driver and a paper ticket is issued.”

Indeed, Thamesdown was the first operator in England to trial contactless debit cards, as part of a Swindon-wide project.

“Just keep your fares simple, and promote weeklies and monthlies to avoid delays on Mondays”

Well, if you offer weekly tickets from the driver, and most do, Monday morning peak running times can get somewhat extended.

“It annoys me when two singles comes to a shade more than a day ticket. Before the day ticket was introduced, the return was significantly cheaper. Cheap trick in my opinion. Simplification for the sake of the company’s bank balance. Amazing if you have to do multiple journeys, but IMO these people are very much in a minority”

Point taken, though not every urban operator offered return tickets and in some cases, only after 0900 or thereabouts. The marketing value of day tickets is immeasurable.

Simplicity

Within the West Yorkshire Integrated Transport Authority report of 17 June entitled “Bus Strategy” comes a number of interesting paragraphs, one of which is:

“The Department for Transport report ‘The Role of Soft Measures in Influencing Patronage Growth & Modal Shift in the Bus Market in England’ suggested that the introduction of simpler fixed fares could lead to an increase in patronage equivalent to that which would happen should fares be cut by 25 per cent, thus illustrating the value of simplicity rather than the current complicated and fragmented structures.”

Perhaps not the simplest sentence explaining the benefits of simplicity! So, putting it a little more plainly,

“The DfT believes that simplifying current confusing fares could lead to patronage increases as if fares reduced by a quarter”.

This is heady stuff. Fares don’t need to decrease to see more passengers on buses, they need to be simplified. Does anyone have any hard evidence to support this statement? In reality, an operator having simplified fares doesn’t stop there. He simplifies both fares and networks at the same time and it’s the interplay of both, plus any investment in vehicles & marketing, that results in ridership increases. In other words, the former Transdev Yellow Buses once trumpeted a ridership increase of 40 per cent. But it did everything in one hit—simplified routes, fares and introduced clockface frequencies, more low floor buses & introduced better publicity.

What does it mean to reduce fares by a quarter? Day tickets that are currently £4 would sell for £3. Season tickets that sell for £16 per week would become £12.

Conventional wisdom would suggest the elasticity of demand with regard to fares is —0.3. An increase in fares of 10 per cent results in a three per cent reduction in demand. If this is a true measure of price sensitivity, then it should work the other way. A 10 per cent cut in fares would lead to a three per cent ridership increase. It’s a brave busman who tests this particular proposition. But, imagine what the *equivalent* of a 25 per cent cut in fares would do. Without cutting a penny.

There are two flaws, though. One is free travel. The usual rules of elasticity don’t apply where there’s a zero fare. And the other is that the Competition Commission feels that car ownership has little effect on the degree to which bus demand is affected by changes in bus fares. Other than modal shift, from where else will any significant increase in patronage come?

The point that WYITA was trying to make was that, with four larger operators and four individual sets of transfer & season tickets plus Metro’s own, potential passengers and particular car users are put off to the extent that buses could be a quarter full again just by introducing an easily understood and common fares structure.

Meanwhile, the BBC reported yesterday that the simplest of all fares systems, the London Oyster, was managing to confuse passengers by over charging them £60mil p.a. This is not just as a result of failure to touch in or out. Technological problems apparently abound.

Blogger software playing up again, I’m afraid. 13 comments got stuck in the spam trap. Some date back to the end of May! I apologise that I’ve only just released them. Busing

They’re Back

After a considerable absence, today, double deck buses are on public display in Jersey. Tomorrow, we see the introduction of two former demonstrator ADL Enviro 400 double decks, one a 59-plate and the other a 60. To be used on the 15 between St Helier & the airport, the 15 is one of two routes given a derogation to use standard width buses. The other is the 1 between St Helier & Gorey. They replicate the successful E400 test vehicle previously used, given registration number J111111.

The 15s usually require four buses to operate but actually it has a PVR of six. Call me old fashioned but the old school in me always thinks it’s odd when an operator mixes capacities, especially so wildly as this. I know it’s a necessity these days. It’s undoubtedly a sign of getting on when you look back fondly at time when you’d find the uniformity of the same class of vehicle operating all journeys, all day, every day.

The double deck pair joins five Enviro 200 midibuses bought new in March. All five appear on the 1s and 15s, again owing to their standard width.

Typically, reaction to the double decks is mixed. The usual naysayers abound, even on the idyllic isle of Jersey where you might least expect them. Perhaps they’re English imports. Common views seems to be that:

• Such vehicles are a waste of money
• Connex can’t fill the buses they already have
• Roads are slow enough without double decks
• The taxpayer is shelling out… again

Fortunately, there are a few who understand that the vehicles’ extra capacity will reduce the PVR in time; prevent overloading on a corridor that can get very busy; and will actually save money.

As for the roads being slow enough without double decks, such comments beggar belief, the more so when you consider Jersey has a 40 mph car maximum speed limit.

Jersey’s fleet numbering is somewhat reminiscent of Red & White’s of old. The E200s have numbers 1178-82. The first one or two digits denote the year into service, and the other two numbers are sequential. Thus the original Slimbuses are 201-33; the next two or three Darts (second hand, ex-Armchair) are 334-7, etc. By rights the new deckers should become 1183 and 1184.

Franchised operator Connex didn’t enjoy an initially smooth ride on Jersey but has seen its contract extended. Tenders are apparently now in for a new seven-year term, to begin in 2012. Connex is now nevertheless a stronger operation than when they arrived and its image is no doubt enhanced by its new text service and its new vehicles. But who knows who might compete in terms of tendering. Among others, Norfolk Green had a stab, last time.

If the two E400s appear to be the most interesting buses on the island, there’s also an open topper. An entrepreneur has imported a former London Transport Bristol LH6L and converted it for tours and private hires, this in spite of some early vandalism that certainly disgusted many residents on the island.

Originally intended for the Isles of Scilly, that deal fell through and the world’s only open top LH is now on Jersey. On the strength of this, I still doubt that Jersey will replace Malta as a mecca for enthusiasts, though.

Temperatures are rising in Dorset re. tendering, today on the Dorset Bus Blog

Era about to End

Imagine taking an area with a population almost exactly the size of Dorset and or Bristol and completely wiping bus services away and starting again. The results probably wouldn’t be too different from the current set up. Now, do the same in Malta…

No matter how nostalgic we may feel about the typically iconic Maltese bus, why should the Maltese languish in the 1970s and 1980s? Why shouldn’t Malta benefit from the improvements that modern vehicles with low floor technology might bring?

It’s interesting that Malta is somewhat close to the original model envisaged by the late Nicholas Ridley MP during the passage of the Transport Act 1985. He felt that artisan busmen should own and operate their vehicles. It wouldn’t’ve worked in England and it has only done so to a degree in Malta. There’s been little investment beyond pimping up an owner’s individual ride. That doesn’t help older or disabled people and certainly not those with shopping & luggage.

At a stroke, in exactly a fortnight, Malta goes low floor. In one swoop, Arriva comes in with 264 buses, mostly new, some ex-London artics. Currently, there are 508 buses on Malta and such an unnecessarily high fleet total when compared to Arriva’s demonstrates the somewhat arcane and inefficient system on the island. The average age of the bus fleet mirrors almost exactly peak summer temperatures in degrees—35. That’s the *average* age. We know there are a handful of newer low floors to counter the ancients.

Arriva has been gradually populating its website with information. Timetables are now in place but this window on Arriva’s new network’s not been without controversy. The recently added journey planner, for example, has undergone modification to remove timings because, apparently, it distorts passengers’ perception—some transfer journeys not should by the planner might actually prove quicker than the longer-than-present through journeys shown. Arriva will get the kicking for this when, in fact, the routes result from the government’s consultants. This is also proving controversial, as some communities feel they are worse off than their neighbours. ’Twas ever thus but it focuses the mind when you are effectively starting from scratch.

Arriva’s main routes are numbered 1 to 91 and are usually 11, 21, 31, etc. They all radiate from the capital, Valletta, as nearly all currently do. Additionally, Arriva has a number of non-Valetta services, to avoid changes at the capital, and these are numbered from 101. Night buses are prefixed with “N” and airport expresses with “X”. Gozo routes are 3xx.

The mammoth project’s been overseen by former Hants & Dorset man Piers Marlow who, before moving to Arriva, was one time managing director of People’s Provincial, post-James Freeman.

“Satisfaction is second to none and we are committed to replicating this success and delivering great change in Malta.” Arriva Malta project director, Piers Marlow

But some will still shed a tear for the passing of what is the most unique system of transport in Europe. People will remember the gaily-painted yellows and oranges, the customisations, and the rebuilds, the lack of informed destination displays. They may even remember the Christian iconography often displayed on buses in the form of holy pictures. The country is overwhelmingly Roman Catholic. But this doesn’t appear to have helped the poor tourist, much disliked by surly Maltese bus drivers. Will Arriva really be able to retrain them? Actually to give change to tourists? And be nice?

And here’s a further controversy. Arriva’s training programme’s been on-going for much of the year, in preparing raw recruits. During the coming fortnight, a high proportion of existing drivers are now being re-trained to Arriva’s expectations and there are concerns that this will affect last two weeks-worth of bus service by reducing the pool of available staff.

As for the old buses, they continue to have a charm about them that many will definitely not find in the new generation of vehicles. But, they said that of the Routemaster, the Lodekka and the Bedford OB. And we survived, even grew our markets. Here’s to Arriva Malta.

A poor start for Giles Fearnley in his First UK Bus role, today on the Dorset Bus Blog

Empty Buses

Elsie left a comment yesterday on a post from March 2011, so far back that it probably would go unnoticed. Among other points, said Elsie, “I work at Falmer and most of the time when I see the buses going up there they are at least half empty. How does this help the planet?”

One thing that rather brasses me off is when people—generally non-bus users—complain that buses run around “empty all the time”. See one of my favourite posts that happens to be on this very subject, from August 2009, at just 140 words. Why would I ever want to run a bus empty? And why, apart from a dire need, would I want to thin a timetable to increase the average number of passengers per bus when I know that:

• Elasticity of demand means a fall in revenue


• Off-peak mileage in particular is at marginal cost.

It’s a complete fallacy that buses are “empty all the time”. They are empty some of the time and for good reason. I just wish people saw the complete picture. So:

• The mid-evening journeys from a town to an outer suburban terminus might never be packed but there should be enough at the start of the journey to make the bus look full. A mile or two, the bus will have thinned and look empty.


• The return trip will likely be empty(ish) but would anyone honestly suggest it shouldn’t operate.


• Culling the mid-evening bus after two miles or altogether may seem great but I bet the passengers who rely on it would then also find an alternative during the daytime.


• It’s still economic to operate off-peak double decks that are full at peak
  


• If a 40-seat single deck regularly bursts, there’s little alternative than a double deck which can appear more empty than it actually is!


• Inter-urban buses than can start poorly loaded but increase gradually or in jumps to the point where they are both full and sustainable. See them at the start of the route, or during the positioning workings, and they appear empty.


• And there are always sections of route that are less busy than others, even during the day, even at peak periods.

What does worry me is the state of our morning peak buses. Away from urban areas, it seems that we’ve lost the battle for commuters. There are exceptions but rural and even some inter-urbans now show no promise whatsoever, till after 0930 when free travel and shoppers kick in. Unless, of course, there happen to be rucks of school children around.

And what happens then? Fare payers complain the bus is too *full*.

Anyone Fancy Filling a Gap or Two?

D&G blames the uncertainty of free travel reimbursement reductions and Stoke council’s cuts as the reasons why it is selling to Arriva—to be branded as Wardle. But prospects must be much healthier in Cheshire, where D & G retains its Crewe operation, as seen here by a D&G Dart, seemingly going nowhere

Omnibuses welcomes guest contributors. More information here

The cost of inefficiency, or more tales from the Dorset retender, today on the Dorset Bus Blog

For much of yesterday, the link to the Sussex Bus Blog link didn’t work. If you missed the post, see it here

Don’t Knock It

Hooray! Just 52 days to the opening of the Cambridgeshire guided busway, the world’s longest. It’s been a bit of a trauma getting to this point, no thanks to busway’s contractor, BAM Nuttall. Indeed, it was due to open 2½ years ago. I recall no such problem with that slightly different animal, the Runcorn busway. Invariably, new ordinary road lengths & alignments open on time, though. As examples, since the 1960s, Bournemouth, Poole and south Dorset’s been full of new roads, all heavily trafficked, without problem.

But let’s not look back. Instead, we should look forward. For, although there remain detractors, especially from the informal rail community, the busway was the right decision at the right time. Yes, we could’ve potentially had a railway but that would’ve been a disaster:

• There’d be on frequent service. Buses will operate at 10-minute intervals during the day and will also operate up to midnight.



• The stopping patterns would be fixed to specific stations, with considerable gaps.



• The rail service would be inflexible, without “bending” through towns and developments, where people actually want to go.



• I’d like to see the railway deliver a project, any project really, without the built-in cost over-runs and delays we now seem not only to expect but accept.

No, the busway will revolutionise transport. Longer distance travellers will no doubt stick to the A14 (a railway making no significant impact, either). The A14 will continue with its jams and delays but smug locals will be able to chuckle to themselves as they whizz past on their busway.

It’s so sad that, for some, the busway has become akin to a laughing stock. It will take some time to shrug off this unfortunate start. But when residents weigh up and actually witness the real benefits, there’s no doubting that this will become a success and the laughter forgotten. It will demonstrate what the bus really can do, given the roadspace it deserves.

Strides to the east, today on the Sussex Bus Blog

Arise, Sir Brian

’Course, we’d all heard of this man Brian Souter, this interloper. He’d established himself as something of a maverick on Anglo-Scottish express routes. When we learned that he’d successfully purchased Hampshire Bus (with Pilgrim Coaches) from the National Bus Company, we were a little deprecating, a little condemnatory, even a little shocked. Surely, this man was just a flash in the pan. And purchasing first Hampshire Bus and then Cumberland Motor Services. Was he insane? Two NBC basket cases almost in one go.

And when he soon came south and we saw him for the first time, he with his stitched shoes, bright trousers and, what, no neck tie, should we, dare we, take him seriously?

Now, here is this upstart, this outsider, with a knighthood. He joins the not-so-serried ranks of the few betitled Men of the Industry, the rare, the exceptional, The Grandees. People like Sir J Frederick Heaton, Lord Ashfield, Scotland’s own Sir William J Thompson and, erm, Sir Moir.

So, what was her majesty thinking of? Can’t she remember the apple carts this Souter has overturned? Immediate asset stripping in Southampton to fund further purchases; Lancaster City Transport; sundry scuffles with the competition authorities; more recently Preston; and the infamous Darlington situation.

Or may be her majesty realised that having given Moir his knighthood, there were others more deserving. Me, for one. Not that I’m bitter, or anything : ) That aside, in Souter, we have a highwayman (geddit?) turned orthodox, establishment figure. He came good. He certainly put oomph back into Hampshire Bus, proving early sceptics wrong. He may be magnanimous to accept this honour on behalf of those at Stagecoach who’ve supported him. But, when it comes down to it, Souter has shown premier leadership and not inconsiderable talent, judgement & shrewdness. He’s not afraid to cut his losses where things don’t work out. He seems to know when it’s right to step in. He will speak his mind. He expects 110 per cent of his managers but he gives 110 per cent, too.

We at Omnibuses congratulate him on his achievement. Oh, and who says a chartered accountant can’t run a bus company? And, we do wonder what he will be wearing for the big day...

The Message

It does interest me how we present our case when it comes to both positive and negative change. I’m sure we’re all familiar with the euphemistic phrase “revised fares”. This, of course, doesn’t just mean that “fares have had to go up” but, if we’re honest, “we’ve had to *put* fares up”. A subtle difference.

The copywriter of the press release for today’s First Ugobus changes in Plymouth goes to great lengths to explain both positives and negatives. Attributable to the former MD, says he or she,

“Over the past few months we have seen our customers (sic) travel patterns change once again. We have noticed an increased demand for services around Barne Barton and St Budeaux and with this in mind we have adjusted the frequency of buses in this area.”

Is this the case? This is certainly a time honoured method of delivering this particular message. It certainly sounds so much better than “it’s time, folks, to up the ante against arch-rival Plymouth Citybus”.

May be the truth is somewhere in between these two poles. With both First and Citybus gunning for Barne Barton, the overall market will have grown.

It is from today that Ugobus 3 (Plymouth-Devonport-St Budeaux-Barne Barton) increases from six to eight buses an hour. Citybus’ parallel service 26 remains at six per hour.

There’s more. First is adding new service 7 to its existing 6, between Plymouth, Plymstock & Elburton, reintroducing quicker journey times. The pre-June 2011 service had proved less than popular with passengers but was tolerated till Citybus began its own reprisal as 5/5A at via the Broadway at Plymstock, at a combined six per hour. Said the copywriter,

“Furthermore customer feedback has indicated that people would prefer more direct links between key points in the city, so we have adjusted the route of Service 6 and brought in a new Service 7 to address that.”

And the price of these positive changes?

“The withdrawal of Service 12 is regrettable but not enough people have been using the service to make it commercially sustainable, so the route has been withdrawn to enable us to make improvements elsewhere.”

The withdrawal of the five per hour 12 leaves Plympton entirely in the hands of Citybus, save for the six a *day* 180 to Ivybridge. The 12s effectively pay for the 3 and 7 changes.

Plymothian Transit suggests that the revisions signal a change of strategy as regards First’s Ugobus. All enhancements at the time of the Citybus privatisation have now gone, bar the 20-minute service 15 to Estover & Mainstone. First, instead, is concentrating on its pre-competitive core routes. This means that Plymstock gets 11 buses an hour plus the hourly 93 to Kingsbridge.

“To celebrate the improved frequency on service 3 we’re also pleased to announce we’ll be extending our Plymouth city zone to include St Budeaux and Barne Barton so our First Week Plymouth City and First Month Plymouth City tickets will be valid anywhere on service 3.”

The snag with First’s weekly offering is that it only covers a decreasing number of corridors. But by changing its fares boundaries plus introducing special offers, First is cheaper in both the St Budeaux and Plymstock theatres. With better frequencies, this may cause some angst at Milehouse. Mind you, Citybus operates both earlier and later to Elburton. And the 5/5As arguably see better buses, especially as the Ugobuses imported by First have now all but gone, spread around in Southampton, south Wales and up north. More Ugonebus, really.

Remember, too, that First’s Devonian & Cornish business still isn’t profitable. The Plymouth change sees no reduction in PVR. There are no cost savings here. It’s therefore unrealistic to assume that these lower fares can last forever. Looking for market share with more buses on some corridors chasing modest passenger growth isn’t particularly sustainable, in spite of the positive press slant.

The ball now seems in Citybus’ court. Will it react? And how? And, most importantly, how will it spin the message?

During the pre-dereg Plymouth Joint Services days, Plymstock was always Western National-operated and successor First had always retained it, till First developed Ugobus, when Citybus came in. Interestingly, the 7s were traditionally the service from Plymouth via the Broadway to Hooe & RAF Mountbatten (now the 2).

i Plymothian Transit

Slightly Schizophrenic

One vehicle that will not feature anywhere near today’s washout of a Weymouth vintage bus running day will be MOD 571P, the former Weymouth open top bus now transferred from Portland Bill to Bracelet Bay.

For Swansea sees the welcome reintroduction from 22 May 2011 of the “new” First open top service, between Swansea city centre and the Mumbles, the first for many years. It also sees First’s last surviving Bristol VR soldiering on for another season, harking back to the day when conventional poppy red South Wales-named VRTs would scurry, congestion permitting, along the imposing sweep of Swansea Bay.

The novelty factor of the service on the day these photographs were taken meant that about a third of upper deck passengers actually stayed aboard at the outer terminus, to return to Swansea immediately. There were also plenty of car horns and waving at and from the bus.

The VR is suitably vinylled for the Mumbles service but look closely and you can still see just some cream and a little flaked red from its original Provincial open top incarnation.

This is not the only thing that means modern Swansea presents itself as slightly schizophrenic. Take the recently opened, ultra-modern bus station. This rarely sees anything quite as new as the terminus nosing in to it. Much of First’s minibuses and single decks are modern but not particularly young. Newer park & ride buses don’t enter.

And yet there’s the state-of-the-art Metro with its millions of pounds worth of investment in stock and infrastructure. Even here, it relies on good old fashioned customer hosts (conductors to you and me).

And the name “South Wales” lives on in the form of a couple of South Wales Transport services. What are understood as the former owners of 2Travel have even adopted a livery not dissimilar to post-privatisation South Wales.

Pictures and additional information by Omnibuses Northern Correspondent

Not so Innovative?

With the New Bus for London attracting much international press interest, the bus is perhaps not quite as innovative as TfL and Wrightbus would have us believe.

A handsome beast is the Monotral Viberti CV61. Note dual staircase, engine position and roof quarter lights

1960s Turin was famous for more than the Mini chase scene in The Italian Job. Indeed, mid-1960s Turin placed in service a dozen or so Viberti low frame (possibly even low floor), three door, dual staircase double deck. These six-leggers (to borrow a trucking term) were designated Monotral Viberti CV61 integrals, based on FIAT mechanicals, with engine located on the continental off-side, behind the front axle, nicely tucked under the stair well. They seated 70 passengers, a capacity that could double with standees.

The CV61 was six-cylinder diesel powered but Viberti offered electric traction options for its single decks. Also available were the usual three-door continental-type artics with low seating & high standing capacities but also the dual-door Monotral Viberti AV10M *four* axle articulated vehicle, seating 70.

At this point, we shouldn’t neglect the forward thinking Bristol VR. In its original form, the re-designated VRL offered a longitudinal engine located at the offside rear. Both Pretoria and Johannesburg bought a batch each, again with dual staircases. Because of the engine’s position, Bristol was able to perpetuate a low floor design throughout, as introduced on the Lodekka. And there was the opportunity for a high seating capacity as well.

Mind you, the VRL’s wheelbase at 222" was shorter than the Monotral’s only by about 15". The VR’s rear overhang was huge.

New Bus Grant that demanded a rear, transverse engine, effectively killed off the VRL. The government’s priority was the swift conversion of fleets to one-man operation. It’s interesting to speculate how thinks might’ve been had the government concentrated on easy access instead, not available on rear entrance double decks for another 20 years.

i It seems that bus preservation is not an entirely English passtime

You Chose

First has made a structural management change. What, another? It comes with the territory when you get a new big boss: it’s expected. But this one’s different. Beforehand, restructures appeared to come with every timetable change, as if those at the very top of First couldn’t quite sit still. This did little to foster good morale among managers & directors. It seemed to heighten institutional paranoia. Now, Giles Fearnley’s in charge and he’s had a chance to reflect upon First UK Bus, it’s business and its priorities. Hence, a business-focused change that everyone feels may be longer-lasting.

A year ago, when both Dave Kaye & Nicola Shaw left First, then managing director UK Bus & Rail Mary Grant reacted (over-reacted?) swiftly by inserting “regions” with their own over-arching regional MDs, above local company boards. The First regions were and are:

• South West & Wales


• Midlands & East Anglia


• North


• London


• Scotland

One year on, and in May 2011 came the current refinement. It affects all bar London & Scotland. In England (including Wales), therefore, Giles Fearnley has brought all company boards to an end and with it, the cessation of all local operating company directorships. Just the regional boards remain. It’s taken 25 years and here, finally, comes the very last nail in the coffin of proud companies set up in the 1910s and 1920s, although we believe legal entities of the former operating companies will remain, e.g. First Cymru Buses Ltd, and would be required for operator licencing.

What’s interesting is that no two English regional boards are the same. Is this an example of First recognising that different parts of its bus business need different solutions? Or, given that ultimately the end game everywhere is revenue & profit growth, is this just a short-sighted muddle where one size really would have fitted all?

Take South West & Wales as an example. There’s the same Bristol-based regional MD. New posts are two service delivery directors, one for Bristol, Somerset, south Gloucestershire & south Wales; and the other for Hampshire, Dorset, Devon & Cornwall. Their remit is, well, service delivery. To you and I this means “Operations”… or dare I call it “Traffic”?

Actually, it’s not quite “Traffic” because the commercial side for the whole region—from Premroke to Penzance to Portsmouth—is now in the hands of just one person, former Hampshire, Dorset, Devon & Cornwall man Marc Reddy. His patch is huge and varies from the Cornish graveyard to the buoyancy of Bristol. With him is the Swansea Metro, the Fareham-Gosport BRT, most of Greyhound and the Greater Bristol Bus Network. Not to mention smartcards. But most importantly, there’s the little matter of First’s branding.

But will it work? What became of the “local is better” mantra that initially came with Giles Fearnley’s tenure? Since each region operates as a whole, with regional engineering and finance directorships, how can this dove-tail into the promise of more local control for managers? Or has Fearnley et al managed to accomplish the aspiration of merging both? I guess only time will tell.

But for those who might’ve expected smaller operating companies with local MDs concentrating on developing their own markets and improving stakeholder management, perhaps a little like Go Ahead, there will be some disappointment. After all, some see this as a particularly First weakness. On the other hand, a formal regional approach will make the sharing of good practice and good ideas that much easier. You chose.

The final bit of news is that Reddy not only covers Premroke to Penzance to Portsmouth, he gets Portadown as well (sort of). His commercial sphere of activity also covers the Republic of Ireland and Northern Ireland. A little bit of a homecoming for a Bournemouth lad!

An old photo of the X4 shot in 2007 in Abergavenny, Wales on its way to Merthyr & Cardiff.

The direct way from Abergavenny to Cardiff : )

BFB

Remember the two-day Bristol free bus (BFB) service experiment? Not only did it succeed, the organisers have raised enough funding for its permanent introduction. Hooray for the BFB! i Freebus.org.uk

Today’s the day BFB inducts its volunteers. The free service will start on Saturday. Hooray for the BFB!

But, it runs on Saturdays only, between 1000 and 1800 and only till the end of December. And its shopping centre to rail station route operates technically nowhere (residential), at a frequency that just one hired-in bus can manage (half-hourly). Boo to the BFB!

Laudable though the scheme may be, put it this way, we doubt First will be losing too much sleep. The Saturday route is an example of a genre of typical town centre shuttles that quite frankly have always struggled to keep their heads above water, even with fares, even with subsidy. Not that BFB is entirely free—they do request donations!

Is this the start of the future of bus services in Bristol? In the future, BFB aspires to run free from the city centre to a number of suburbs and has even posted plans to do so along three residential routes, including a service likely to be of interest to students (who know a freebie when they see one).

If it were so easy to compete against incumbent First then, by now, others would’ve succeeded. And this in a city with high fares, making competition slightly easier, something as much a legacy of the Bristol Joint Services era than anything else.

The experiment featured an ex-Preston Bus step-entrance Olympian. The new service will offer an as yet unspecified single deck

So, in terms of expansion, where’s the investment coming from? If you join as a member and invest, will you be disappointed to see a lower frequency than you expected, a poorer vehicle quality and restricted times of operation? Currently, BFB is hiring-in so it has no fixed or semi-variable costs. What happens if it expands? How will it cover such costs, let alone invest? And if the service were to operate Mondays to Saturdays, including across the peaks, current funding wouldn’t last a fortnight.

The profit word may be offensive to some but even if operators returned zero profit and just hit break even, then the costs associated with a managed, 18-hour, seven day, frequent operation still comes at a price called a bus fare.

Nevertheless, BFB remains a noble concept but I can’t see it ever replacing the current model of revenue streams and subsidy.

I think I’ll start up an organisation called Bristol Free Food. I’ll open a supermarket next to Tesco on Victoria Street Bristol also on the BFB route. Meanwhile, I’ll ask for a minimum donation per member of £10 but open the shop to all, asking for voluntary donations for my limited range of groceries. I’ll open on a couple of days a week but not during the evening. Within the year, I’ll have closed Tesco and opened enough stores to rival Bristol’s 19 other Tesco’s.

Meanwhile,from left:
1. Like them or not, cars also enhance communities (I never thought I would say that).
2. And services for the public (as exemplified by comments on this Blog) are a different matter. Tesco offers such a service for the public and that’s why Tesco offers free food. Not.
3. A rapid transit system as shown will be coming to Bristol as BRT. Doubt it will be free.
4. Might going members-only plus donations stimulate traffic congestion, not alleviate it? Might people have to reach for their car keys more often?

i Freebus.org.uk

Third Wave

TrawsCambria is the Wales region-wide longer distance bus service improved in 2005 & 2007 following funding from the Welsh regional assembly. There’s a further transformation in progress. Though it has yet to part with its TrawsCambria title, the web address already refers to itself as TrawsCymru.info, ahead of further updates in early 2012. Indeed, the recent website upgrade provides much added useful information and detail.

The TrawsCambria name will soon die. In theory, it’s a strong brand of more than 30 years’ standing, but it’s also seen many iterations and route changes so, presumably, it’s time for a complete relaunch. In any case, the TrawsCambria name is purportedly owned not by the regional assembly but by Arriva, as successors to Crosville Motor Services.

By early 2012, the services will become more defined, particularly as accessible “dual purpose” vehicles (yet to be prescribed) should by then be on the X40 (Aberystwyth-Cardiff) and 704 (Newtown-Brecon). This has always been the dilemma for TrawsCambria service planners—should the services be coach-style, limited stop in nature, to enhance & bridge rail services? And, if so, how can it cater for more local markets that are just as important in keeping the services afloat.

Ahead of the spring 2012 relaunch, the 704 has already changed. The designation’s morphed from 704 to T4 (not TC4 as expected; and certainly not X44, as was once nearly possible). This 60-miler is the one that’s seen just over a 20 per cent increase in ridership since 2007, the highest of the Traws offerings. As from 31st May 2011, it’s now extended southwards to Merthy Tydfil, Powys council having reworked the contract, for connections to Cardiff on Stagecoach’s X4. Who knows, it may yet work through to Cardiff commercially. Now that would be a thing at nearly 100 miles and be a suitable reward for the numbers now travelling on the T4.

Former X43

Connections to Cardiff were once made by using Sixty Sixty’s X43 at the 704’s Brecon terminus. The X43 operated was an L-shaped route from Abergavenny to Brecon and thence Cardiff. For Abergavenny, this was indirect but it did give Crickhowell passengers a service to the regional capital, without a change of bus.

Upon the passing last month of the Brecon-Merthyr section to Stagecoach as T4, the old X43 is no more. The Cardiff-Brecon part was always commercial. The Abergavenny-Brecon is actually now improved, under contract to Stagecoach.

Sixty Sixty has therefore begun operating new commercial 470 (named after the A470 road along which it traverses) from Brecon to Cardiff. This keeps a Brecon-Cardiff through service, once the province of the old X43, and means Brecon passengers need not change, no doubt to their relief. It’s nevertheless hard cheese on former X43 Crickhowell (and Abergavenny) passengers, though, as they need to connect at Brecon and, if they miss the 470, at Merthyr. Passengers north of Brecon on the 704 would’ve changed at Brecon in any case, so Merthyr is no real impediment for them, just a further 40 minutes south.

The 470’s a “nicer” timetable, accept for the three-hour gap in an otherwise two-hourly pattern. But, can it last against the might of the T4? Especially as Sixty-Sixty’s base is Merthyr itself and requires considerable positioning mileage.

One downside is that connections from the T4 at Brecon on to the Veolia X63 Brecon-Swansea seem a little more fragile. Can’t have everything, I guess. But the 704 to X63 remains a useful facility that was even used by this blog’s author as a way of getting from mid-Powys to the South Wales metropolis. This was nigh impossible five years ago. And, presumably, while transfer tickets between Stagecoach services may smooth the way, those between the old Stagecoach 704 and Veolia X63 were only ever grudgingly accepted. That may still be the case, especially with commercial 470.

Interestingly, as at yesterday, Stagecoach was showing both the T4 and 704 on its website. Not like them.

Today’s Omnibuses post is about local authority tendering & risk, with examples from Powys & rural Dorset. And, talking of Dorset, 3rd June 2011 was “Black Thursday”, today on the Dorset Bus Blog

Taking the Risk

If you’re unfamiliar with straightforward local transport authority tendering, there’s basically two types of contract for supported bus services:

• Minimum subsidy: the operator keeps the revenue
• Minimum cost: revenue accrues to the LTA

Assuming the LTA can provide accurate estimates of likely revenue, it shouldn’t matter under which category a suite of services in tendered. Or does it?

There are some services that are more likely to work better under minimum cost than others. Daytime services where a little marketing effort could improve revenue, for example. Or where the service will in time pass through or near a new housing development. If, on the other hand, the LTA demands that journeys accept tickets issues by parallel or daytime commercial operators, then minimum cost is probably less attractive to the LTA (though more so to the operator).

I guess Dorset council is about to find out the benefits of one against the other. It’s reportedly let most of its local bus contracts as minimum cost. Revenue will therefore accrue to the council and not be retained by the operator.

This also means Dorset, not the operator, takes the revenue risk.

Is this something of a foolish decision? There are many questions to answer. Does it, for example, expose Dorset to potential problems should revenue fail to meet expectations? What happens on a seasonally-exaggerated network if the next few summers are all wash-outs? Will Dorset be able to market the services better than operators (for this will be Dorset’s responsibility)? What incentive does this leave the operator to run punctually and even try to grow their businesses? And will Dorset have the resource to ‘police’ the network and its revenue?

Dorset already produces some attractive publicity—but is this enough?

But it could work. Though most tendering authorities prefer minimum subsidy, that’s not true everywhere. Some PTEs in particular lean towards minimum subsidy.

One area where there’s been a wholesale change from minimum cost to minimum subsidy is in Powys. Here, four years ago, a mass retender saw significant network change. There were improvements never before thought possible. Powys basically recast its network such that it was unrecognisable. The result could go one of two ways. Initial lack of timetables might well have caused a revenue problem. In the event, though, it shows what a well-planned and thoughtful network can do.

There’s been significant revenue and passenger growth. It was no doubt Powys’ view that it would be difficult, under the new circumstances, to expect local operators to budget for likely revenue, hence Powys decided to take most of the risks. Many Powys contracts actually began bringing revenue to the county council to the extent that the contribution has been significant, perhaps even embarrassing when you compare now with then. All told, costs went down and revenue up. Win-win for Powys (though things may change should Veolia be toppled in 2012).

Rural though it is, Dorset is, of course, somewhat different. Powys controls more of its network. Yet, providing Dorset can market its bus services strongly and develop its publicity, it may actually pay off for them. After all, Dorset is no stranger to tourist-focused marketing. Smaller operators often haven’t the wherewithal to do this well (there are exceptions). With Dorset’s reported approach comes the opportunity to promote a unified product. Why shouldn’t a LTA get the payback it deserves if it’s prepared to invest? Why should this simply be syphoned off as additional profit for and by the operator?

Welcome Aboard

I’ve been trying to think back to the time when the industry first began to place “welcome” or “welcome aboard” stickers on the driver’s cab doors. I think it started with the Market Analysis Project when we collectively began to see the value of a local brand and a more personal service. The trouble is, they didn’t work then and they don’t work now. No one reads them and if they do, they really don’t believe that an anonymous transport undertaking can be anything like welcoming.

Indeed, often, we’re not. The driver has little time to spend with each customer. There’s a limited opportunity for interaction. In some cases, it’s almost zero. London particularly springs to mind, when most passengers touch in, the driver says nothing, and passengers leave via the central exit. Remember how it used to be with conductors? Their prime job was to collect fares but they were trained and expected to be polite and chatty.

Why persist with these meaningless “welcome” messages? Aside from the fact that it’s always been like that (for 30 years) so it’s almost imprinted as habit, these days the signs are but a sugaring for the storm of negative instructions also plastered over the bus, especially by the side or back of the cab. Don’t stand here, don’t smoke there, wait till the bus stops, tender the correct fare, always show your pass, revised fares apply, keep your music down, no eating, we’re watching you on CCTV…

I bet nobody looks at these notices either, but some have to be there by virtue of regulation. Indeed, I can guarantee that no one reads them. Angry passenger to driver, “No one said that my bus service was changing. You didn’t publicise it”. Oh yes we did, it was on a notice for two weeks inside this very bus. This, of course, indicates a general failing but it does illustrate the point.

Time to remove unnecessary fripperies like “welcome”? Or perhaps it just fills an empty space. Or perhaps it may even be aimed at the driver : )

Spiteful and Churlish

It’s churlish in the extreme. Passengers on Trent Barton’s Allestree bus route are complaining that Trent Barton has recently spent some £500,000 on four new vehicles for another service, the Spondon Flyer. This, they say, is “insulting” when, in a bid to save £100,000, the Allestree no longer terminates at Derby’s bus station, rather Osnabrück Square. It’s not that the square is somewhere in Lower Saxony or anywhere. It’s actually well suited for a variety of Derby’s facilities, arguably more so than the bus station itself.

I’m Mandy, fly me

The Allestree decision has nevertheless become something of a running sore for Trent Barton ever since some felt it was in retaliation for the proposed ending of one of the city’s bus lanes, including that along Kedlestone Road, used by the Allestree.

One of the embittered campaigners stated, “They told us they were taking our service out of the bus station because they wanted to save money and, yet, here they are putting brand new buses in Spondon and offering travel vouchers to people for free journeys”. Oh dear. Wouldn’t it be nice if for a change passengers actually understood the commercial bus industry. They don’t and probably never will.

The new Spondon Flyer buses are a modest fleet of four green Optare Versas, tastefully finished inside in black and lime leather.

Ironically, in spite of a (revenue) saving of £100,000, Trent Barton’s due to upgrade the Allestree (again) (with capital expenditure) later this year. Meanwhile, that doesn’t stop the spiteful comments. “It should have been the Allestree service which received new buses first.” It’s the age-old story. Those who find Osnabrück Square the better destination will hardly speak up. Not that the media wish to hear that side of things, anyway.

The shock news from Dorset is that none other than Veolia has won major six years worth of contracts, to commence September 2011, today on the Dorset Bus Blog

Head Turners

18 months ago, we asked Yellow Buses’ head of marketing whether we might in future see brand new double decks at Yeoman’s Way. The official view before the interview was that double decks weren’t a popular choice among increasing numbers of older people who had fewer lower deck seats from which to choose. And there was always the prospect of anti-social behavioural one floor up.

But Jenni Wilkinson did reply “never say never”. And so it is that, later today, Yellow Buses will officially launch its five brand new Volvo B9TL/Wrightbus Gemini 2s, on the road from Monday. And what a splendid line up they make, with their detail changes beneath the windscreen that mark the vehicles out from the six Geminis taken into stock between 2003/04. Indeed, not only do the 2s look less fussy, the yellow really brings out the black across the lamp cluster. But the original Geminis have dated not one bit.

It’s not just about the outside. Within, we see the now de rigueur Yellow Buses attention to detail, with leather seating and wood-effect flooring up and down.

The Gemini 2s will operate on the 1B/1Cs between Somerford, Christchurch, Boscombe, Bournemouth & Poole, alongside the newly refurbished Geminis and Myllenniums (Myllennia?) that also gain leather interiors. Expect Yellow Buses’ sole ALX400 to make up the quota on these services.

Note the absence of the leafy swirl first adopted by the former Transdev Yellow Buses in 2006 plus the new seashell motif on the bus’ side, as the new Route 1 sub-brand

From 15th May, with additional Mondays to Fridays morning journeys last month towards Poole at every 10 rather than every 15 minutes; and now with four buses an hour on the 1B/1Cs between Bournemouth & Poole during evenings & Sundays, Yellow Buses has upped the ante in its competition along the coastal strip. Twixt Poole & Bournemouth, Yellow Buses has the capacity and arguably the internal comfort but Wilts & Dorset outflanks on frequency. W&D also offers an admirable level of comfort with 2+1 seating and has refurbished, at least externally, its More Eclipses. And between Bournemouth & Boscombe including the 1A, Yellow Buses has a superb all-leather offer of double & single decks.

The Gemini order doesn’t, however, signal a return to the mainstream, as more Tempos (Tempi?) are expected. But by my calculations, with Geminis, Gemini 2s, Myllennia, Versas (Versæ?) & Tempi, Yellow Buses now has 46 leather-seated buses or nearly 40 per cent of its fleet. Unless you know differently.