• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Cheshire Bus News (was East Cheshire Bus News)

Status
Not open for further replies.

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
That first paragraph is a prime example of comparing apples and fish. The town of Crewe is just that, whereas the borough of Macc has large swathes of not much between the towns

In reality each place is unique and even two almost identical towns in size and population don't necessarily require the same public transport levels. However, the other poster was arguing that of course Crewe deserves almost the entire budget the council has for supporting evening bus services because it's the biggest town, which is why I made the comparison with the former borough of Macc.

If the only evening bus service in Cheshire East was a shuttle between Crewe town centre and Leighton Hospital then I could understand that but Crewe and plenty of villages near it get some form of an evening bus service while most of the council areas gets nothing.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

martinsh

Established Member
Joined
27 Jan 2011
Messages
1,743
Location
Considering a move to Memphis
Due to passengers now being forced to exit Crewe station by the Weston Road exit exactly the same argument should be used to justify a bus service from the Weston Road exit to the Nantwich Road entrance to Crewe station.
Whenever I alight at Crewe station I always seem be alighting after having had a reservation in Coach B. While I used to be able to change this on Virgins website, following the change of TOC there seems to be no provision to change it on Avanti's. Normally I arrive on platform 11 where from coach B almost at platforms extreme Northern end it takes me 7 minutes to walk to a point opposite the station entrance on Nantwich Road. In other words about 7 minutes to go upward about 20 feet.
Three complaints in writing have not produced a response. Verbal complaints to station staff produce a response like its nothing to do with me, or we don't run the station etc. Typical 21st century complaint response where every thing is always somebody else's problem. These days in my late 70's I do not have good legs and this extra 7 minutes walk means some journeys I may have made are not done. On essential journeys I have sometimes had take a taxi home instead of walking at an extra cost of around £5.
Sorry as this post is mainly rail related and it is in a bus thread but I think appropriate in view of previous comments.
If you want to raise a petition about this, I'll definitely sign it !!
 

PaulWC

Member
Joined
15 May 2017
Messages
59
Precisely. That's because you argued the population of Crewe was higher than any other town. The population of the former Macclesfield borough is significantly higher than the population of the town of Crewe but the number of evening bus services in Crewe is significantly higher. You can't argue Crewe deserves more because it's population is higher than Macclesfield and then argue it's not fair when Crewe is compared to a larger population area.



While the 88/89 contract is subsided, the level of subsidy is very low compared to the 42, which is the most heavily subsided bus service in Cheshire, not just Cheshire East. I also understand the commercial 88A, which part duplicated the 88 for a short period, broke even but financial problems at D&G caused by other routes losing money prevented them from keeping the 88A running for longer in the hope it would return a profit. Taking that into consideration I would be surprised if the Knutsford to Wilmslow section of the 88/89 contract doesn't usually return a profit, given there is now only 1 bus per hour which runs via Longridge. It's also only recently Cheshire East started funding the 130, until a few weeks ago there was no council funding for that service which resulted in the service not running at all during the first lockdown.

It also be argued Knutsford and Wilmslow do very badly as the amount of council tax collected in those two towns is much higher per head than in places like Crewe, Sandbach or Congleton.



Yes which is why I specifically referred to essential journeys and those unable to walk longer distances being more likely to travel for essential purposes in the daytime than the evening. Bus subsides aren't generally available for evening buses for people to go to the pub or other social events, unless the lack of a bus service would have a significant effect on local businesses.
And I'll make the point again, that maybe the demand for evening bus services in Crewe just happens to be greater than that in a borough council area that ceased to exist 11 years ago!

And maybe there's some sort of correlation between the apparently low demand for bus services in Knutsford and Wilmslow and the amount of council tax collected. I wouldn't like to say.

As for evening buses not being available for going to the pub or for social events - who says so? The night time economy is very important in many places (during normal times obviously) and plenty of local businesses rely on this.
 

Contains Nuts

Member
Joined
16 Jul 2019
Messages
105
I also understand the commercial 88A, which part duplicated the 88 for a short period, broke even but financial problems at D&G caused by other routes losing money prevented them from keeping the 88A running for longer in the hope it would return a profit.
And what ‘financial problems’ are these? I’d be interested to see what evidence you have before making comments like that.
 

PaulWC

Member
Joined
15 May 2017
Messages
59
In reality each place is unique and even two almost identical towns in size and population don't necessarily require the same public transport levels. However, the other poster was arguing that of course Crewe deserves almost the entire budget the council has for supporting evening bus services because it's the biggest town, which is why I made the comparison with the former borough of Macc.

If the only evening bus service in Cheshire East was a shuttle between Crewe town centre and Leighton Hospital then I could understand that but Crewe and plenty of villages near it get some form of an evening bus service while most of the council areas gets nothing.
Assuming you mean me, where was I claiming that Crewe deserves 'almost the entire budget the council has'?

And Macclesfield, Sandbach, Congleton, Middlewich, Nantwich all get supported evening services - not just 'Crewe and plenty of villages near it'. Saying most of the council area 'gets nothing' is total nonsense.
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
And what ‘financial problems’ are these? I’d be interested to see what evidence you have before making comments like that.
D&G's own website said at one point they cut the 130 Macclesfield to Manchester Airport service due to losing money on the service. They also mentioned other services which they were losing money on but when it came to the 88A they referred to not making a profit on it.
 

Contains Nuts

Member
Joined
16 Jul 2019
Messages
105
Allegedly, the 130 extension to Manchester Airport via Styal lost that much money that it needed to be recouped somehow and that was done by cutting the break even 88A.
For a company as large as D&G a two bus route like the 130 couldn’t lose so much money that it has such an effect. I’m not sure where these rumours come from but it appears that if they get mentioned often enough they become the truth!

In reality the 130 to the Airport didn’t work out due to the significant traffic congestion caused by the remodelling of roads to the north of Styal which caused unreliability and therefore significantly fewer passengers. The 88A was withdrawn as it wasn’t busy enough and the areas it covered were still left with an adequate level of service. Pretty logical when you think about it!
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
For a company as large as D&G a two bus route like the 130 couldn’t lose so much money that it has such an effect. I’m not sure where these rumours come from but it appears that if they get mentioned often enough they become the truth!

In reality the 130 to the Airport didn’t work out due to the significant traffic congestion caused by the remodelling of roads to the north of Styal which caused unreliability and therefore significantly fewer passengers. The 88A was withdrawn as it wasn’t busy enough and the areas it covered were still left with an adequate level of service. Pretty logical when you think about it!

The 130 wasn't a 2 bus route when it included the airport and there were 39 seater buses running the Manchester Airport to Wilmslow section (25 minutes) without picking up a single passenger. How much did that cost the company considering there wasn't even 1p of council funding for doing it and considering they had to continue to run it for the mandatory 8 weeks notice even after they realised they weren't getting any noticeable loadings?

Actually Longridge (the main source of revenue from the old 300) was not covered by the 88 and as the 88 was contracted did not include Longridge D&G could not re-route it unless the council told them to. The council did ask for quotes for upgrading the service to 39 seater vehicles when they did decide to re-route the 88 via Longridge instead of reintroducing the 300 but in the end they opted to keep the contract with 2 X 28 seater and 2 X 35 seater buses and to turn a blind eye when the 35 seaters fail to get used even when the 07:00 Altrincham to Knutsford carried it's maximum capacity (seating and standing) on arrival in Knutsford.
 
Last edited:

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
and to turn a blind eye when the 35 seaters fail to get used even when the 07:00 Altrincham to Knutsford carried it's maximum capacity (seating and standing) on arrival in Knutsford.
Turn a blind eye? More like just being plain blind to it. Failing to use 35 seaters is a common occurrence.
 

Contains Nuts

Member
Joined
16 Jul 2019
Messages
105
I find it fascinating that when a fact gets mentioned it gets a lengthy rumour thrown back at it. I’ve tried to discuss the facts but it appears that conspiracy theories are more welcome so I’ll just sit back and laugh at them and not bother joining in the discussion.

I do wonder what qualifies some members of this forum to be so blindingly convinced of their own opinion to the point that they are not willing to take on board any information from someone who may actually know about the subject in hand!
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
I find it fascinating that when a fact gets mentioned it gets a lengthy rumour thrown back at it. I’ve tried to discuss the facts but it appears that conspiracy theories are more welcome so I’ll just sit back and laugh at them and not bother joining in the discussion.

I do wonder what qualifies some members of this forum to be so blindingly convinced of their own opinion to the point that they are not willing to take on board any information from someone who may actually know about the subject in hand!
You're coming up with theories which contradict what D&G said on their own website. Also were you at the meeting when Chris Almond from D&G Bus presented to the council? Just because you didn't read the D&G website at the appropriate time or attend the council meeting doesn't mean you can present your own theories as if they are facts and claim the real facts are opinions.
 
Last edited:

markymark2000

On Moderation
Joined
11 May 2015
Messages
3,538
Location
Western Part of the UK
I find it fascinating that when a fact gets mentioned it gets a lengthy rumour thrown back at it. I’ve tried to discuss the facts but it appears that conspiracy theories are more welcome so I’ll just sit back and laugh at them and not bother joining in the discussion.

I do wonder what qualifies some members of this forum to be so blindingly convinced of their own opinion to the point that they are not willing to take on board any information from someone who may actually know about the subject in hand!
I can only say what has been alleged. At the risk of sounding rude (which isn't his it's meant), are you employed by D&G or are you a council transport employee? If not, do you have anything to back up your side of it?

Not backing up any side but I'm interested to know what backs up your points.

Please don't take this as me being nasty, I am just trying to establish the facts.
 

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
The 188 gets a 39 seater but something larger than 28 on the 88 is a rare as the government admitting their incompetence.
The question is, is the 188 busier than the 88? I also don't think d&g have the number of sufficiently sized vehicles that they're required of and they know it. However to stop a flame war, this is my personal opinion and may not be fact.
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
The question is, is the 188 busier than the 88? I also don't think d&g have the number of sufficiently sized vehicles that they're required of and they know it.

Under what went out to tender originally the intention was both the 188 journeys would be covered by one of the 35+ seater vehicles required, so that was a council requirement rather than something D&G decided on. I notice they now say the 188 is only for schoolchildren and those with passes for the 188 get priority, which suggests to me there may not be room for normal passengers.

The thing I never got about the 88 was when D&G first took it over they usually used 5 x 35 seater Optare Solos to run a half-hourly service and initially stuck very strictly to the 35 seater requirement and used one of the slightly bigger Evolutions to fill in for the Solos. Then they decided to use the 33 seater Streetlites instead with the smaller Solos making occasional appearances, then when the frequency got reduced the 28 seater Solos became a regular site. It doesn't make any sense that a less frequent services gets a smaller bus, if the frequency reduction results in fewer passengers on the remaining services then it must be false economy.

I think the big Enviros ended up on the 188, 288 and occasionally 88 by accident. They were branded for the 82 route but it's been claimed they struggled with Kelsall Hill, which is why they sent the Versas up from Stoke for the 82 (someone can ask D&G if they want to verify the claim, I'm not stating it's a fact) and I understand Stoke got the nice 35 seater Solos which used to run the 88 as part of the fleet swap.
 

LOL The Irony

On Moderation
Joined
29 Jul 2017
Messages
5,335
Location
Chinatown, New York
Under what went out to tender originally the intention was both the 188 journeys would be covered by one of the 35+ seater vehicles required, so that was a council requirement rather than something D&G decided on. I notice they now say the 188 is only for schoolchildren and those with passes for the 188 get priority, which suggests to me there may not be room for normal passengers.
I just remembered the 188 is the school run :lol:. Yeah, there never was room on that to begin with. (they also used to put small Enviros on it but shhhhhhhh)
The thing I never got about the 88 was when D&G first took it over they usually used 5 x 35 seater Optare Solos to run a half-hourly service and initially stuck very strictly to the 35 seater requirement and used one of the slightly bigger Evolutions to fill in for the Solos. Then they decided to use the 33 seater Streetlites instead with the smaller Solos making occasional appearances, then when the frequency got reduced the 28 seater Solos became a regular site. It doesn't make any sense that a less frequent services gets a smaller bus, if the frequency reduction results in fewer passengers on the remaining services then it must be false economy.
Yeah but try telling d&g and Cheshire East it's a false economy. It's why I use the train to Altrincham were possible, I refuse to support this venture.
I understand Stoke got the nice 35 seater Solos which used to run the 88 as part of the fleet swap.
Oh joy. That very much strikes me as a 'Stouter having the first Stagecoach Gold route be the one that conveniently passes his house' move.
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
Also just something I've had in mind, what has happened to the 3 Streetlites D&G had route branded for the 38?

They are all being used on the 85 route today.

3 additional Streetlites have also recently arrived at D&G's Crewe depot, former Preston Bus vehicles.
 
Last edited:

ShaunyFlynn

Member
Joined
17 Mar 2020
Messages
127
Location
Macclesfield
They are all being used on the 85 route today.

3 additional Streetlites have also recently arrived at D&G's Crewe depot, former Preston Bus vehicles.
I wonder why they allocated them to 85 if they were branded for the 38? The 38 mainly gets 35 seater solos with sometimes an Enviro 200 on one of the three allocated buses.
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
I wonder why they allocated them to 85 if they were branded for the 38? The 38 mainly gets 35 seater solos with sometimes an Enviro 200 on one of the three allocated buses.

I get the impression D&G brand buses to highlight that they are running a new route. They also branded some buses for the 82 Northwich-Chester, which ended up being used on other Cheshire and Greater Manchester routes a few months later, with the branding getting removed. They seem to like changing what type of vehicles are used on different routes at regular intervals and adding some branding for a particular route doesn't make those routes immune to the vehicles getting swapped at a later date.
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
Very happy to see D&G buses are now trackable, I'm not sure if this is every bus, but I saw trackable buses on route 88.

Not 100% reliable but if anyone's interested to see what kind of buses are being used on a particular route it can be useful.


Reportedly bus 40 broke down in the Macclesfield Hospital grounds last night, which is why that one currently has an unusual 'last reported' entry.
 

jtuk

Member
Joined
4 Jun 2018
Messages
423
Two unrelated updates:

1. Normally Cheshire East bus services operate to a weekday timetable for the 3 working days between Boxing Day and New Year, this year most services will instead operate to a Saturday timetable.

2. Cheshire East are currently undertaking a survey on transport proposals. Details can be found below

Thanks for posting this, the suggestions listed for Poynton are completely nuts and continue to miss the point, which having worked in the council for a while doesn't surprise me in the slightest
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
Thanks for posting this, the suggestions listed for Poynton are completely nuts and continue to miss the point, which having worked in the council for a while doesn't surprise me in the slightest

I had a look at the Wilmslow ones yesterday when I had some spare time and couldn't make sense of the Wilmslow to Manchester Airport provision options. They mention a bus option but do not mention that as an option for improving public transport in Styal and also talk about a tram-train trial between Wilmslow and the airport but don't mention anything about an enhanced frequency or running the tram-trains to anywhere on the Metrolink network, such as Airport City. Consequently my response was an airport bus is only useful if it runs to either Knutsford or Macclesfield and if they're going to look at tram-trains then use them to introduce a new route creating new direct journey opportunities, not replacement for an existing electric train service.
 

ShaunyFlynn

Member
Joined
17 Mar 2020
Messages
127
Location
Macclesfield
Macclesfield is one of few towns in Cheshire East where all bus services that run in the town are trackable (Arriva, Go Goodwins, High Peak and D&G Bus) other towns include Alsager, Holmes Chapel, Handforth, Wilmslow (Expection for T2, T3 services) Middlewich and Poynton
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
Due to driver shortages D&G have taken over the 14, 19 and 58 services from High Peak. All three routes will operate to a reduced 2 hourly timetable, which is on the High Peak website: https://www.highpeakbuses.com/service-changes/

Regarding fares they say:
"A £2.20 Adult single flat fare and £1.50 Under 18 flat fares will be available to buy on bus. "

Cheshire East are currently undertaking a survey on transport proposals. Details can be found below

************************************************************************************************

Bus proposals include:
- Improve bus connectivity to Manchester Airport, Jodrell Bank, Tatton Park and Alderley Park.
- Assess the feasibility of providing a bus service from High Legh to Altrincham encompassing neighbouring Agden Brow and Little Bollington.
- Improved bus connections from Knutsford to Altrincham, Chelford, Macclesfield and Warrington.
- Working to restore bus services in Macclesfield which they say was one of the best connected places in the borough. In particular improved services to the Tytherington Business Park, Hurdsfield Industrial Estate and the hospital.
- Offering Flexilink services in rural parts of Macclesfield in the evenings and expanding Flexilink in Crewe.
- Improved connections between trains and buses including better service from Crewe station to Crewe town centre.
- Look at buses serving Grand Junction Retail Park.
- Improve bus connectivity for Middlewich services to allow journeys to Warrington, Knutsford and the Potteries. (Note they don't actually say they are proposing direct services, just ensuring it's possible to reach those places using public transport.)
- Connect Poynton with Disley and Woodley.
- Working with TfGM on Bus Rapid Transit schemes which could benefit Handforth and Poynton.

The survey closes on 31 January 2021.
************************************************************************************************

Consultation has been extended until March. The council believes with libraries being closed, that people without the internet may not have had chance to read the consultation and respond to it.
 
Last edited:

miami

Established Member
Joined
3 Oct 2015
Messages
3,164
Location
UK
Everyone's favourte parish council considering subsidising 1/12th of the cost (£10k/£120k) of the 130 from Handforth-Wilmslow-Alderley-Macclesfield

Concern that without funding this, Handforth would be left with no transport other than the train, and "that would be terrible"
 

peters

On Moderation
Joined
28 Jul 2020
Messages
916
Location
Cheshire
Everyone's favourte parish council considering subsidising 1/12th of the cost (£10k/£120k) of the 130 from Handforth-Wilmslow-Alderley-Macclesfield

Concern that without funding this, Handforth would be left with no transport other than the train, and "that would be terrible"

Do they have the authority for that? ;)

More seriously, the 130 route and the Wilmslow-Knutsford-Macclesfield part of the 88 are two of the most essential routes in Cheshire East due to them meeting employment, education and healthcare needs of local residents, so they shouldn't be any doubt that a decent service level should get funding if no operator is willing to operate them commercially. However, it seems the routes that were once commercial get a bad deal because they only get the little bit of emergency funding, while less important routes get higher levels of funding.

There is no guarantee a new contract will cost £120k. It might be if Arriva are the only interested party then it's a lot more than that, while if D&G and Go Goodwins both bid and are both expecting the other party to bid then they'll bid as low as possible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top