(24 Aug 2025, 5:00 am)Ianthegoon wrote Knowing Tyresmoke and his situation, I think I'd be quite inclined to accept his statement as correct.....

He is - as I understand it, staff at the affected depots have now been informed and notices are up in their break rooms.

I can't see just how Arriva can rationalise (reduce) service levels here in East Cleveland. We are on the bare bones as it is even when all services operate correctly.

The 5/5a provides the principal connection, 3 times an hour. Once and hour Sundays. No 5a.
Given what I've seen, others wouldn't agree, its enough.

The 28 provides an additional service into Guisborough but it's a long journey from Middlesbrough.

The X2,3,4 provides the connection through Redcar and Saltburn to Loftus and beyond
Lingdale every hour with the 3 stepping in on a Sunday

Service 62 provides a Monday to Saturday service for New Marske and with the X3 and 81 provides a service through the various estates.

The 63 should be upgraded with better vehicles

The 81 is probably at maximum service level. Could use a Sunday provision but that's not going to happen.

That's my summary as I see it. So thoughts on how this can be made more effective, economic.

(24 Aug 2025, 11:00 am)Robisdave54 wrote I can't see just how Arriva can rationalise (reduce) service levels here in East Cleveland. We are on the bare bones as it is even when all services operate correctly.

The 5/5a provides the principal connection, 3 times an hour. Once and hour Sundays. No 5a.
Given what I've seen, others wouldn't agree, its enough.

The 28 provides an additional service into Guisborough but it's a long journey from Middlesbrough.

The X2,3,4 provides the connection through Redcar and Saltburn to Loftus and beyond
Lingdale every hour with the 3 stepping in on a Sunday

Service 62 provides a Monday to Saturday service for New Marske and with the X3 and 81 provides a service through the various estates.

The 63 should be upgraded with better vehicles

The 81 is probably at maximum service level. Could use a Sunday provision but that's not going to happen.

That's my summary as I see it. So thoughts on how this can be made more effective, economic.

We dont get a 62 service anymore for new marske. We are reduced to an x2 1 bus per hour. The 62 was better when it was every half hour to new marske. Remember growing up we had the 64 for a lot of years and they use to be every 20 minutes. Then slowly got reduced. Before that we had the 22, 62, 88 and 89. Now residents of new marske are stuck to 1 bus an hour (when it shows) and Sunday and bank holidays absolutely nothing.  

I fully get the working conditions like most sectors our conditions are not great and could be a whole lot better. And im not pointing blame but surely, management teams, head office, the transport sectorary should actually come and see what going on.

(24 Aug 2025, 8:47 am)Kuyoyo wrote He is - as I understand it, staff at the affected depots have now been informed and notices are up in their break rooms.

Thank you. Instead of smoke and mirrors, a simple explanation of how this information is available goes a long way.

Does anyone have a copy of the notice?

(24 Aug 2025, 3:16 pm)Superman wrote Thank you. Instead of smoke and mirrors, a simple explanation of how this information is available goes a long way.

Does anyone have a copy of the notice?

No - because nobody here is staff. The information is known to a handful of us by word of mouth from people who we know within the company who are in-the-know and nobody is going to leak the information.

When you think about it and given the area/catchment of places like New Marske 1 bus an hour is quite shameful. Dependency for people to go to work and do essential business must be high.

We are slowly being pushed into a situation in some parts of East Clevelabd where Ben Houchens buses - Stagecoach 1 & 2 will prove to be the only lifeline they have.

(24 Aug 2025, 5:01 pm)Robisdave54 wrote When you think about it and given the area/catchment of places like New Marske 1 bus an hour is quite shameful. Dependency for people to go to work and do essential business must be high.

We are slowly being pushed into a situation in some parts of East Clevelabd where Ben Houchens buses - Stagecoach 1 & 2 will prove to be the only lifeline they have.

Didn't someone say that Stagecoach were giving up the 1 and 2 soon? If anyone is going to win them, then Arriva is the sensible winner for them.

I don't know the changes, but if Arriva end up running the 1 and 2 (the need more buses), maybe it might be the X3 getting scrapped beyond Marske.

The 1 and 2 duplicate it anyway and the 5/5A, X2 and X4 already do the direct Middlesbrough links for all the villages the X3 serves (the consolidation part). Why bother running something commercial, the council is funding anyway for no reason?

You could also easily terminate the X3 at Marske Estate and extend the 28 through to Redcar and scrap the 81 aswell if you wanted to save another bus with that moving to Redcar (buses moving depots). 

I don't know though, just speculation, but none of those would be deal breakers really, arguably better the 81 change.

Do Darlo and Durham have the space to accommodate the vehicles that would possibly be displaced by closing Stockton? It would make no sense for what’s left of the X22 to come from Redcar, for example.

(24 Aug 2025, 7:01 pm)BusLoverMum wrote Do Darlo and Durham have the space to accommodate the vehicles that would possibly be displaced by closing Stockton? It would make no sense for what’s left of the X22 to come from Redcar, for example.

To be fair, wouldn't be surprised if the X22 is one of the routes moved. Could easily work within the 22/23/24 since some terminate there.

Means they can shot of the thing when franchising comes in as well as I can't imagine it being the world's most profitable route.

Don't think Redcar is anywhere near big enough for all of it anyway even if they wanted to merge them? I'd assume any merge would be a new super depot somewhere, if it ever happened.

(24 Aug 2025, 5:01 pm)Robisdave54 wrote When you think about it and given the area/catchment of places like New Marske 1 bus an hour is quite shameful. Dependency for people to go to work and do essential business must be high.

We are slowly being pushed into a situation in some parts of East Clevelabd where Ben Houchens buses - Stagecoach 1 & 2 will prove to be the only lifeline they have.

Ironic isn't it?

When the local authority tender not only a whole bus service, but also a DRT service on top of a bus network, then people wonder why the commerciality of the existing network is challenged.

Whatever the shortcomings are/were, any money would be better spent enhancing the existing network rather than duplicating vast chunks of it..

(24 Aug 2025, 5:01 pm)Robisdave54 wrote When you think about it and given the area/catchment of places like New Marske 1 bus an hour is quite shameful. Dependency for people to go to work and do essential business must be high.

We are slowly being pushed into a situation in some parts of East Clevelabd where Ben Houchens buses - Stagecoach 1 & 2 will prove to be the only lifeline they have.

Or maybe everybody stops jumping to conclusions before the changes are publicly announced!

I can say, without putting too much out there, everyone thinking these are major reductions are way off the mark. Reductions in work at one depot yes, but that's it. No depots are closing, nowhere is losing a service.

---

(24 Aug 2025, 6:43 pm)Storx wrote Didn't someone say that Stagecoach were giving up the 1 and 2 soon? If anyone is going to win them, then Arriva is the sensible winner for them.

Stagecoach aren't doing anything like that - the contract for operation of those routes is until next March.

(24 Aug 2025, 8:10 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Or maybe everybody stops jumping to conclusions before the changes are publicly announced!

I can say, without putting too much out there, everyone thinking these are major reductions are way off the mark. Reductions in work at one depot yes, but that's it. No depots are closing, nowhere is losing a service.

---

Stagecoach aren't doing anything like that - the contract for operation of those routes is until next March.

As a darlo driver Kuyoyo and tyresmoke are correct there is changes happening but not till November no depots are closing so  stop jumping to conclusions.

(24 Aug 2025, 8:10 pm)Kuyoyo wrote Stagecoach aren't doing anything like that - the contract for operation of those routes is until next March.

Yeah that's fair, remember it being mentioned but guess it wasn't true.

4707 has started tracking today again on the x4. Does anyone know which bus is actually out using 4707

X93 is currently lengthy delays as its been diverted away from the Moors fire

(25 Aug 2025, 11:52 am)Ryland wrote 4707 has started tracking today again on the x4. Does anyone know which bus is actually out using 4707

4507. A brand new Evora pretending to be a 15 year old Temsa.

(26 Aug 2025, 2:40 pm)Ryland wrote X93 is currently lengthy delays as its been diverted away from the Moors fire

Saw two deckers running in tandem yesterday evening not far from Scaling Dam. 

Didn't see anything else, other than a Pulsar heading south near Fylingdales a good hour or so later.

That timetable must have gone to pot. 

I'd have hoped they had reacted to it, by putting extra resources on.

(27 Aug 2025, 8:47 pm)Andreos1 wrote Saw two deckers running in tandem yesterday evening not far from Scaling Dam. 

Didn't see anything else, other than a Pulsar heading south near Fylingdales a good hour or so later.

That timetable must have gone to pot. 

I'd have hoped they had reacted to it, by putting extra resources on.

Just magically pull the extra drivers from nowhere

(27 Aug 2025, 8:47 pm)Andreos1 wrote Saw two deckers running in tandem yesterday evening not far from Scaling Dam. 

Didn't see anything else, other than a Pulsar heading south near Fylingdales a good hour or so later.

That timetable must have gone to pot. 

I'd have hoped they had reacted to it, by putting extra resources on.

Problem is, they don't have "extra resources" down there, they're supposedly already regularly having to send Redcar drivers over to Whitby to try and reduce the likelihood of cancellations over there (at the cost of Redcar services)

For the most part, it seemed for yesterday (Tuesday), they were typically diverting the X93 hourly between Whitby & Scarborough via Thornton-le-Dale, whilst the X94 was running hourly between Whitby and Robin Hoods Bay - for today (Wednesday), they seemingly ran the X93 and X94 half hourly combined between Whitby and Scarborough (given it wasn't possible to reach Robin Hoods Bay today). Naturally, given the delays and such, everything is all over the shop.

(27 Aug 2025, 9:23 pm)Superman wrote Just magically pull the extra drivers from nowhere

Who said anything about extra drivers? 

There's route management for a start.
Such as terminating the X93 Middlesbrough bound, at Guisborough and ensuring connections with the 5.

There's running shuttles between Whitby and Scarborough. 

There's working in partnership with Transdev and/EYMS, for cross-service ticketing between Whitby/Pickering and Pickering/Scarborough.

Howay man Superman.

---

(27 Aug 2025, 10:51 pm)Jimmi wrote Problem is, they don't have "extra resources" down there, they're supposedly already regularly having to send Redcar drivers over to Whitby to try and reduce the likelihood of cancellations over there (at the cost of Redcar services)

For the most part, it seemed for yesterday (Tuesday), they were typically diverting the X93 hourly between Whitby & Scarborough via Thornton-le-Dale, whilst the X94 was running hourly between Whitby and Robin Hoods Bay - for today (Wednesday), they seemingly ran the X93 and X94 half hourly combined between Whitby and Scarborough (given it wasn't possible to reach Robin Hoods Bay today). Naturally, given the delays and such, everything is all over the shop.

And it inevitably will be all over the shop. But there's ways and means, like you mentioned. Plus plenty of others.

(28 Aug 2025, 12:07 pm)Andreos1 wrote Who said anything about extra drivers? 
There's route management for a start.
Such as terminating the X93 Middlesbrough bound, at Guisborough and ensuring connections with the 5.
There's running shuttles between Whitby and Scarborough. 
There's working in partnership with Transdev and/EYMS, for cross-service ticketing between Whitby/Pickering and Pickering/Scarborough.
Howay man Superman.

I can see there may be some gaps in your understanding of how bus operators function, so I’ll take that into account.

While those points are noted, they do not address the practical challenges around drivers’ duties and working hours. Drivers reporting on or being in incorrect locations at key times within their normal duty allowance, some without sufficient time to cover the proposed split duties or unrelated services. Resolving this requires additional drivers and significant coordination, and it is not something that can be arranged at the last minute—or even within just a few days.

Very crude and basic example -: Turning the X93 at Guisborough simply places the driver arriving from Whitby onto the timings of the previous trip for the return journey. As a result, they would arrive back in Whitby an hour earlier than their scheduled duty. The question then arises: what is the driver expected to do with that time? Their duty (or first element of) still ends at the originally scheduled time, and there is no productive work to fill the gap. Imagine this 12 times per day just for this short suggested change.

This very simple and one-off example highlights how such an approach would, by default, require additional staff to cover the operation—ultimately leading to an inefficient and unsustainable arrangement.

Additionally, directly contacting a competitor to agree on a ticketing arrangement, while it may seem like common sense to some, is strictly prohibited under competition law. This is not something a single operator could initiate or manage unilaterally.

So, "howay man!" Think about it.

(28 Aug 2025, 4:15 pm)Superman wrote I can see there may be some gaps in your understanding of how bus operators function, so I’ll take that into account.

While those points are noted, they do not address the practical challenges around drivers’ duties and working hours. Drivers reporting on or being in incorrect locations at key times within their normal duty allowance, some without sufficient time to cover the proposed split duties or unrelated services. Resolving this requires additional drivers and significant coordination, and it is not something that can be arranged at the last minute—or even within just a few days.

Very crude and basic example -: Turning the X93 at Guisborough simply places the driver arriving from Whitby onto the timings of the previous trip for the return journey. As a result, they would arrive back in Whitby an hour earlier than their scheduled duty. The question then arises: what is the driver expected to do with that time? Their duty (or first element of) still ends at the originally scheduled time, and there is no productive work to fill the gap. Imagine this 12 times per day just for this short suggested change.

This very simple and one-off example highlights how such an approach would, by default, require additional staff to cover the operation—ultimately leading to an inefficient and unsustainable arrangement.

Additionally, directly contacting a competitor to agree on a ticketing arrangement, while it may seem like common sense to some, is strictly prohibited under competition law. This is not something a single operator could initiate or manage unilaterally.

So, "howay man!" Think about it.

They're running late. 
They're not going to get back an hour early...

The alternative being they drop off in Whitby because they're way over their driving hours after undertaking a massive diversion...

I'd also love you to share the piece of legislation where 'directly contacting a competitor to agree on a ticketing arrangement, is strictly prohibited under competition law'.

I respect it might cause some issues in the early morning / late evening, but surely just running the X93 outright every hour and binning off the X94, bar maybe a short to Robinhoods Bay would be the best idea?

You could just drop the X93's back an hour giving them an extra 30 minutes each way to Scarborough running '30 minutes' late out of Scarborough.

Should be the same PVR if I've worked it out right and I assume the driver changeovers are in Whitby so it would be just some tinkering of which bus the drivers are running.

(28 Aug 2025, 12:07 pm)Andreos1 wrote Who said anything about extra drivers? 

There's route management for a start.
Such as terminating the X93 Middlesbrough bound, at Guisborough and ensuring connections with the 5.

There's running shuttles between Whitby and Scarborough. 

There's working in partnership with Transdev and/EYMS, for cross-service ticketing between Whitby/Pickering and Pickering/Scarborough.

---

And it inevitably will be all over the shop. But there's ways and means, like you mentioned. Plus plenty of others.

(28 Aug 2025, 4:15 pm)Superman wrote I can see there may be some gaps in your understanding of how bus operators function, so I’ll take that into account.

While those points are noted, they do not address the practical challenges around drivers’ duties and working hours. Drivers reporting on or being in incorrect locations at key times within their normal duty allowance, some without sufficient time to cover the proposed split duties or unrelated services. Resolving this requires additional drivers and significant coordination, and it is not something that can be arranged at the last minute—or even within just a few days.

Very crude and basic example -: Turning the X93 at Guisborough simply places the driver arriving from Whitby onto the timings of the previous trip for the return journey. As a result, they would arrive back in Whitby an hour earlier than their scheduled duty. The question then arises: what is the driver expected to do with that time? Their duty (or first element of) still ends at the originally scheduled time, and there is no productive work to fill the gap. Imagine this 12 times per day just for this short suggested change.

This very simple and one-off example highlights how such an approach would, by default, require additional staff to cover the operation—ultimately leading to an inefficient and unsustainable arrangement.

Additionally, directly contacting a competitor to agree on a ticketing arrangement, while it may seem like common sense to some, is strictly prohibited under competition law. This is not something a single operator could initiate or manage unilaterally.

I imagine there's only so much that can be done/allowed, can't imagine dropping a section would go down well with the traffic commissioners or whoever else who overseas such matters, also can't imagine passengers would be happy with their journeys being made longer by having to get a bus with a longer journey time especially when anyone wanting to go all the way to/from Scarborough will have their journey made longer later when it has to divert between Whitby & Scarborough.

Don't know the ins and outs of allowing mutual ticketing agreements in these scenarios, but the 128 & 840 timetables/routes aren't really suitable for an alternative travel option given both routes only run every 2 hours presently and there's only so much capacity especially when both the X93/X94 and 840 can carry full loads without carrying another's passengers. If possible, the only worthwhile section to allow mutual ticketing acceptance would be the Cloughton to Scarborough stretch which is being omitted by Arriva as a result of the diversions but are covered by EY services, albeit Cloughton only has two buses per day, fortunately Arriva have the 95 to cover the stops between Whitby Town Centre and Sainsbury's.

Given the unpredictability and constantly changing situation with what's going on, it must be very difficult to plan for anything in advance, on Tuesday they had to plan to both divert to Scarborough but also still cover Robin Hoods Bay, but for the last two days they've not been able to get to Robins Hoods Bay, so have had to rethink things again.

A bit unrealistic to think with almost no notice they could reorganise routes, curtail the X93s to connect with 5's at Guisborough, never mind connect at Pickering with another companies infrequent and full buses.

Passengers just have to accept if they want to travel (and its not been recommended to travel near the areas affected unless necessary) buses will often be severely delayed or cancelled.

But once they are on a bus, it will eventually get them to the destination - hopefully! Although the driver shortages have been an issue all summer, and its been known for passengers to be kicked off a bus at Whitby because there is no driver available to continue the route.

(28 Aug 2025, 11:02 pm)Jimmi wrote I imagine there's only so much that can be done/allowed, can't imagine dropping a section would go down well with the traffic commissioners or whoever else who overseas such matters, also can't imagine passengers would be happy with their journeys being made longer by having to get a bus with a longer journey time especially when anyone wanting to go all the way to/from Scarborough will have their journey made longer later when it has to divert between Whitby & Scarborough. 

Don't know the ins and outs of allowing mutual ticketing agreements in these scenarios, but the 128 & 840 timetables/routes aren't really suitable for an alternative travel option given both routes only run every 2 hours presently and there's only so much capacity especially when both the X93/X94 and 840 can carry full loads without carrying another's passengers. If possible, the only worthwhile section to allow mutual ticketing acceptance would be the Cloughton to Scarborough stretch which is being omitted by Arriva as a result of the diversions but are covered by EY services, albeit Cloughton only has two buses per day, fortunately Arriva have the 95 to cover the stops between Whitby Town Centre and Sainsbury's.

Given the unpredictability and constantly changing situation with what's going on, it must be very difficult to plan for anything in advance, on Tuesday they had to plan to both divert to Scarborough but also still cover Robin Hoods Bay, but for the last two days they've not been able to get to Robins Hoods Bay, so have had to rethink things again.

The alternative being buses run over an hour late (like with the example I shared), passengers being unable to get to/from work and the inevitable complaints (to both the authorities and directly) that result.

It's about managing the situation fluidly and making things as effective as possible for passengers. 
Running an X93 to Guisborough and transferring to a 5, is much more beneficial for all parties, than running late, having to drop boards due to drivers hours etc. 

The TC aren't going to be happy when reliability goes off the cliff, as much as they won't be happy with buses running short. 
But if ANE can justify those decisions with demonstrable positive solutions and communicating it effectively (rather than tossing a coin in the air and seeing which way it lands), then I imagine the TC would be a lot more understanding.

I'll refer Arriva to the expert on here in future...

(29 Aug 2025, 11:04 am)Superman wrote I'll refer Arriva to the expert on here in future...

Still no sign of that legislation you mentioned...

Believe Superman is refering to the Competitions Act 1998.

It's the main reason the 685 had slightly different fares over the same sections when Arriva and Stagecoach ran it, as it could be seen as collusion!

There is an exemption to allow such schemes such as Network One and other cross ticketing. However, there must be formal arrangements in place which involves the local authority.

(29 Aug 2025, 9:01 am)Andreos1 wrote The alternative being buses run over an hour late (like with the example I shared), passengers being unable to get to/from work and the inevitable complaints (to both the authorities and directly) that result.

It's about managing the situation fluidly and making things as effective as possible for passengers. 
Running an X93 to Guisborough and transferring to a 5, is much more beneficial for all parties, than running late, having to drop boards due to drivers hours etc. 

The TC aren't going to be happy when reliability goes off the cliff, as much as they won't be happy with buses running short. 
But if ANE can justify those decisions with demonstrable positive solutions and communicating it effectively (rather than tossing a coin in the air and seeing which way it lands), then I imagine the TC would be a lot more understanding.

The fact that you think transferring X93 passengers onto a 5 is a suitable solution is, in itself, ridiculous - and that's leaving aside your other points (the TC is likely to be pretty understanding of the reasoning behind the service reliability over this week - it's not exactly within their control). Could you please detail how you expect the 90+ passengers which can be carried by an E400 MMC or B9TL onto a 44 seater Pulsar - which itself will likely already have passengers on it? 

Even if capacity wasn't an issue (which it is), what's your plan with the 5? Hold it until the X93 is due? Okay, so then what happens to the driver for the 5 if they're late off as a result? What do you tell all of the passengers on the 5 who are either delayed, or can't fit onto the bus down the road because you've filled it with an X93?

There are areas where operational teams at bus companies should be criticised, I've experienced some questionable decision making tonight by Stagecoach on my trip home, but if you're going to criticise at least have a better solution!