Lothian Group discussion (Lothian City, Lothian Country Bus and East Coast Buses)

[GordonT]

The 400 (well 18 now) is very well used, although i'm sure like most other services, most of it's patrage is under 22's and over 60's who get free travel anyway, so it would be a loss for them to cut it completly, i was disapointed to hear they are cutting it back to every 40 minutes on a Saturday also, hope this won't end up turning into an hourly frequency in the future too.

An unmemorable 40-minute frequency sounds like a death-wish dogs breakfast timetable. Needs to be every 30-minutes if the demand justifies it or hourly if it doesn't. If a 40-minute frequency is merely a product of the round trip journey time then the service itself should be redesigned.

 

[Bus9120UK]

An unmemorable 40-minute frequency sounds like a death-wish dogs breakfast timetable. Needs to be every 30-minutes if the demand justifies it or hourly if it doesn't. If a 40-minute frequency is merely a product of the round trip journey time then the service itself should be redesigned.

The Sunday service is already 40 minutes, so I imagine they will have looked at that and seen that it performs fine.

In my opinion, if a 30 minute service is unachievable, a 40 minute one is always better than a 60 minute one. A lot of people use live time tracking these days, though I respect its not everyone.
When it comes to long term, established routes, I don't think links should be sacrificed just to achieve an every 30 minute frequency unless the demand genuinely shows such a cut would have little affect. They've done it before on routes so its not like they would be unwilling. It also would be odd to alter the route on weekends for this reason considering the weekday timetable is staying as is at every 30 minutes. The change could also be reflective of demand, in which case altering the route may drop it further!

Edit - I have looked at the timetable and as the layovers on both ends are around 20 minutes, a 30 minute service would be doable with a layover length decrease, but it creates risks of reliability issues if buses are running late.

 

[stevenedin]

The tracker is playing up again. The app is showing completely different times to the ones at the shops and there are still buses not on the tracker. I thought that they had almost fixed this?

 

[buslad1988]

The Sunday service is already 40 minutes, so I imagine they will have looked at that and seen that it performs fine.

In my opinion, if a 30 minute service is unachievable, a 40 minute one is always better than a 60 minute one. A lot of people use live time tracking these days, though I respect its not everyone.
When it comes to long term, established routes, I don't think links should be sacrificed just to achieve an every 30 minute frequency unless the demand genuinely shows such a cut would have little affect. They've done it before on routes so its not like they would be unwilling. It also would be odd to alter the route on weekends for this reason considering the weekday timetable is staying as is at every 30 minutes. The change could also be reflective of demand, in which case altering the route may drop it further!

Edit - I have looked at the timetable and as the layovers on both ends are around 20 minutes, a 30 minute service would be doable with a layover length decrease, but it creates risks of reliability issues if buses are running late.

Exactly this. The 400 needs sufficient layover it goes through just about every congested crossroads in Edinburgh often enduring multiple roadworks to boot.

A 40 minute timetable is fine. What would be more confusing is if they created variations for evenings, weekends etc just to maintain a 30 minute frequency.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

The tracker is playing up again. The app is showing completely different times to the ones at the shops and there are still buses not on the tracker. I thought that they had almost fixed this?

It’s been glitching constantly all day. I’ve counted at least three myself. In fairness today is the worst it has been by some distance for some time.

 

[Bus9120UK]

The tracker is playing up again. The app is showing completely different times to the ones at the shops and there are still buses not on the tracker. I thought that they had almost fixed this?

No nothing has changed. Control are still manually updating a spreadsheet for buses on the app and API services to track on routes. When I contacted the council about the new API they said the target is end of April!
It means that typos are still possible, buses are missed and replacement buses are not set.

 

[stevenedin]

No nothing has changed. Control are still manually updating a spreadsheet for buses on the app and API services to track on routes. When I contacted the council about the new API they said the target is end of April!
It means that typos are still possible, buses are missed and replacement buses are not set.

It’s been glitching constantly all day. I’ve counted at least three myself. In fairness today is the worst it has been by some distance for some time.

Thanks both. I hope that it gets fixed soon. It seems like such a manual way to do things.

 

[Bus9120UK]

Thanks both. I hope that it gets fixed soon. It seems like such a manual way to do things.

I've seen what you are referring to just now. Looks like the whole system itself has failed.

 

[Metal Mickey]

Exactly this. The 400 needs sufficient layover it goes through just about every congested crossroads in Edinburgh often enduring multiple roadworks to boot.

A 40 minute timetable is fine. What would be more confusing is if they created variations for evenings, weekends etc just to maintain a 30 minute frequency.

Operators running every 40 or 45 minute frequencies are becoming more common these days.

 

[GordonT]

Operators running every 40 or 45 minute frequencies are becoming more common these days.

Yes. A further disincentive for pax to use buses unless they have no other option.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

Yes. A further disincentive for pax to use buses unless they have no other option.

What do you expect the operator to do though? They’re not just going to run buses at a loss? If you make it hourly it would destroy it?

 

[GordonT]

What do you expect the operator to do though? They’re not just going to run buses at a loss? If you make it hourly it would destroy it?

I'd expect the operator to take action to increase use of the service by increasing the daytime frequency to clockface 30-minute, promotional fares, more extensive promotion and local route branding. Fielding unmemorable timetables reliant on apps/trackers is (in my opinion) just contributing to the pace of decline.

 

[JKP]

I'd expect the operator to take action to increase use of the service by increasing the daytime frequency to clockface 30-minute, promotional fares, more extensive promotion and local route branding. Fielding unmemorable timetables reliant on apps/trackers is (in my opinion) just contributing to the pace of decline.

Remember that this is a route that requires a massive subsidy of c£250k per annum. If I was a local Council taxpayer, I would be questioning whether this represented value for money. To increase the frequency on what is obviously a large loss maker would require additional resource of bus and driver at say another £250k. I doubt whether this could be made up in fares from passengers or additional monies from City of Edinburgh Council.

 

[Stan Drews]

I'd expect the operator to take action to increase use of the service by increasing the daytime frequency to clockface 30-minute, promotional fares, more extensive promotion and local route branding. Fielding unmemorable timetables reliant on apps/trackers is (in my opinion) just contributing to the pace of decline.

Ok, here's an imaginary scenario:
A route runs every 40 mins and has a PVR of 5 buses, taking 3h20m for a round trip.
Each bus runs for 12 hours per day and costs £50/hour to operate, so the operating costs are (5 x 12 x 50) £3,000.
The service brings in revenue of £3,150 so is making a small 5% contribution.

Let's apply your theory:
The route now runs every 30 mins requiring a PVR of 7 buses, now taking 3h30m for the round trip (as 3h would be impossible).
Each bus still runs for 12 hours/day, so costs have now increased to (7 x 12 x 50) = £4,200.
In order to just break-even you would need to see a 33% increase in revenue, or to maintain the small margin a 40% increase.
There are very few operators (if any) that would take that degree of risk, just to keep a clockface timetable, unless they were seeing substantial growth on the route when a frequency increase would be more easily justified.

It's very easy to say just do a wee bit of marketing, offer some cheap fares, and hey presto the revenue will just roll in to cover all your additional costs.
However, most operators are well aware that the reality is very, very different!!

 

[buslad1988]

It's very easy to say just do a wee bit of marketing, offer some cheap fares, and hey presto the revenue will just roll in to cover all your additional costs.
However, most operators are well aware that the reality is very, very different!!

Exactly. And this is Edinburgh, not some mid size provincial town. If a service like this running here (which even goes to an airport) cannot break even it’s quite surprising. No extra amount of promotion will really help - you could say having the Skylink brand/livery is marketing in itself (albeit it’s about to disappear).

You’d think with all the staff at each end (airport/fort kinnaird) and shoppers at the latter it’d be a good little earner.

 

[ScotRail158725]

Exactly. And this is Edinburgh, not some mid size provincial town. If a service like this running here (which even goes to an airport) cannot break even it’s quite surprising. No extra amount of promotion will really help - you could say having the Skylink brand/livery is marketing in itself (albeit it’s about to disappear).

You’d think with all the staff at each end (airport/fort kinnaird) and shoppers at the latter it’d be a good little earner.

Its more the fact that these majority of patronage on the 400 is concessions, especially under 22 ones. Without them it would be a commercially viable route

 

[GordonT]

It's very easy to say just do a wee bit of marketing, offer some cheap fares, and hey presto the revenue will just roll in to cover all your additional costs.
However, most operators are well aware that the reality is very, very different!!

I'll just have to accept that I am apparently unique in perceiving a 40 minute frequency timetable to be a terribly messy proposition for public consumption.

 

[buslad1988]

Its more the fact that these majority of patronage on the 400 is concessions, especially under 22 ones. Without them it would be a commercially viable route

Which then leads to the question of (in)sufficient re-imbursement. The government really do mess up bus operations some times, all well and good having these concessionary schemes but you need to fund it accordingly.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

Which then leads to the question of (in)sufficient re-imbursement. The government really do mess up bus operations some times, all well and good having these concessionary schemes but you need to fund it accordingly.

Exactly. Look at the 12 school run. Gone now because it’s no longer feasible.

 

[DunsBus]

Exactly. Look at the 12 school run. Gone now because it’s no longer feasible.

And the same reason why the Tranent leg of the 26 is about to disappear.

 

[Blindtraveler]

The whole thing is daft given that they want people to use public transport. Either fund it properly or don't operate schemes like this

 

[Stan Drews]

I'll just have to accept that I am apparently unique in perceiving a 40 minute frequency timetable to be a terribly messy proposition for public consumption.

You are certainly not unique. I (and I’m sure many others) fully agree with you, but sadly your suggested solution is simply impractical in a commercial sense, so compromises have to be found.
Ideally local authorities would install lots of great bus priority that would significantly improve bus speeds and you’d be able to operate higher frequencies but with the same level of resource, …but we all know that will never happen!

 

[Acfb]

Exactly. And this is Edinburgh, not some mid size provincial town. If a service like this running here (which even goes to an airport) cannot break even it’s quite surprising. No extra amount of promotion will really help - you could say having the Skylink brand/livery is marketing in itself (albeit it’s about to disappear).

You’d think with all the staff at each end (airport/fort kinnaird) and shoppers at the latter it’d be a good little earner.

It has been not particularly well used to the Airport, for example when I got it back from the airport once in 2019, me and a relative were the only people on it up to the Gyle. That said it has picked up some usage recently and even the 2325 service had a few people on it last year when I was going back to Oxgangs from the Airport. Shame that journey is being cut back to Westside Plaza but I hope the elimination of the airport fare will stimulate usage.

Given the 18's troubled history since 2004 I'm just grateful it's still there and it's still a lothian route unlike when off peak journeys were tendered to first. Main issue is the lack of coverage on the Wester Hailes to Colinton section late into the evening as that is the only part which is not duplicated by other services at that time.

 

[JKP]

Has anyone else noticed that the terminus for the 120 in North Berwick has been changed to the Seabird Centre on Mondays to Saturdays? There is 11 minutes stand time at this stop. I will be interested to see if the bus can draw into the stop especially on a sunny and warm day during the summer when there is often one or more cars parked in it. The ice cream van used to be often parked there too but last year was further back below the walkway.

Sundays the terminus continues to be Church Road.

 

[paul0762]

The whole thing is daft given that they want people to use public transport. Either fund it properly or don't operate schemes like this

I think a massive problem is traffic congestion slowing buses down meaning people choose to drive instead. All these cycle lanes ( which by the way hardly get used )that make lanes tighter slowing everyone down doesn’t help. The lack of enforcement with bus lanes, Lothian road to fountainbridge is a joke not a single attendant booking vehicles.

The council should prioritise buses if they want people to use them.

 

[CSB0241]

Lothian briefly published an article on their site announcing East Coast Buses have been awarded the 120, 121 and 123 with route and schedule alterations as part of this.

The article is back, here: https://www.lothianbuses.com/news/2025/03/east-coast-buses-awarded-services-120-121-and-123/


More on the article.

Will they briefly run Eclipse 3s on these routes whilst they repaint the other buses or might they just get new buses on the routes?

Somehow I also think the Eve service vehicles might be replaced by Lothian type stock.

The Enviro200MMCs would make sense to get painted into the ECB livery (since the interior is very Lothian-y, what with the maroon variant of the stock moquette being extremely similar to the Lothian one, the handlebars being the same cream Lothian use, etc.), though I’m rather unsure about the other buses.

It will be interesting to see if the transferred Eve network works as a circuit, ie starting at Dunbar then 120>121>123->121->120 and back to Dunbar. Seems possible.

On Sundays, this is the case.

120 is 2 buses and is self contained.

121 and 123 interwork generally in this circuit (Starting at North Berwick):
121 to Haddington>Short 123>Long 123>121 to North Berwick.

So it’ll be a peak vehicle requirement of 4 for these Mon-Sat, & 2 on Sundays.

Only time will tell, i assume this change was meant to take place along with the other changes in April?

I can only assume so.

Interesting to note the route changes to take out some of the tighter streets in and around haddington. i assume this could be a measure to cover any last minute substitutions incase any of the current east coast singles, specifically the b8rles, on these routes?

Not great still in the case of the 123, a lot of the roads around Glenkinchie are rather narrow. Entrance into the Museum of Flight will be hard for the 121 on Eclipse 3s.

Is the 120 is warranting of an hourly frequency? never used the route more than once or twice and never expected that demand to be there, good news if it is

I’ve taken it about a dozen times since the Eves acquisition, & I would say no, not at all. I assume that they’re doing every hour to be more appealing to tourists, though it could run at half the frequency, even on the E200MMCs normally seen on it. FlybeDash also raises a good point too;

I wonder if Lothian are hopeful that demand will rise with it being under their brand.

I took it on a Sunday a couple weeks back (it’s current allocation on Sundays is E29, which is the Rosero Connect Eves have) & there were still plenty seats free.

Will be interesting to see what happens with the buses. Might a fleet of 5 new buses be added? Would realistically have to be small Evora’s.

This could actually be plausible, I’d definitely be in favour of this. Only problem is that Lothian probably aren’t willing to make any further MCV orders after 751-98 since the situation with the current BZLs has been relatively unfortunate, for lack of a better term. New E200MMCs could also be somewhat plausible, but I’m not gonna get ahead of myself.

Saw one of the 64 plates on the Uni Shuttle this morning.

Demise of 905/6 imminent?

It’s common for them to throw a different bus on, though recently it’s been more likely to be one of 672-680.

Think the morning peak requires 3 vehicles?

Only 2 I believe, it’s only every half hour until about half 9.

130 cancelled

Can’t remember the last time I saw someone on it so not too baffling.

Prentice have a 115 to cover the 26 change. Prentice 122 going to North Berwick also

Looks like they’re trying to fix what Lothian broke & then some!

Didn't realise 124 cut back to princes street?

It hasn’t.

It's very unclear that the 113 and 124 will be cut back to Princes Street (Frederick Street?). The Lothian website is still advertising them as Haymarket and Semple Street as before.

It hasn’t.

122 going to North Berwick is a nice addition, Church Road will certainly be busy now!

I’m sure all the residents in Drem will be gutted that they’re losing a bus route that I can’t recall ever stopping there.

Is it clear whether the current EVE fleet will be repainted in time for the timetable change and will they finally get Lothian vehicle tracking?

Unlikely on the repaints as they’ll be needed until the day before.

I guess they could maybe put the Rosero on the 123 then the Solos on the 120/121 for a couple days, though I’m not fully sure.


Shortened repost since my last one got taken down for being too long & bringing up conversation topics from several weeks ago.

Has anyone else noticed that the terminus for the 120 in North Berwick has been changed to the Seabird Centre on Mondays to Saturdays? There is 11 minutes stand time at this stop. I will be interested to see if the bus can draw into the stop especially on a sunny and warm day during the summer when there is often one or more cars parked in it. The ice cream van used to be often parked there too but last year was further back below the walkway.

Sundays the terminus continues to be Church Road.

Sundays makes sense since the 121 doesn’t go to the seabird centre, & since it gets 11 minutes in North Berwick moving it to the seabird centre makes sense in my eyes due to the size of the stop at Church Road.

Also get the 121 terminating at Church Road which’d clash with the 120, then you get the 122 terminating there aswell, & then you have the 124 & X5 stopping there towards both the Tesco & Edinburgh to top it off.

 

[stevenedin]

Will they briefly run Eclipse 3s on these routes whilst they repaint the other buses or might they just get new buses on the routes?

I'm guessing that they could and put double deckers on the 12 until the repaints have finished. They also have 841 spare as well now which could be used temporarily.

 

[FlybeDash8Q400]

I'm guessing that they could and put double deckers on the 12 until the repaints have finished. They also have 841 spare as well now which could be used temporarily.

I think the most logical way to have 195-198 freed up would be Longstone regaining 15 and 23 for normal service with subsequent shuffles as a result.

 

[Auld reekie]

Will the 17/18 be double deckers?

 

[FP transport v]

Will the 17/18 be double deckers?

Yes, most likely B5TL ADL E400MMC's