May 2024 service changes (Read 4,862 times)

[alemaster]

Principally Derbyshire services this time. Registered so far

Stagecoach Yorkshire
bustimes.org/licences/PC1118599

65 Meadowhall to Buxton via Tideswell
X17 Barnsley to Wirksworth via Sheffield and Matlock
Peak Sightseer Blue route and Red Route

Hulleys of Baslow
bustimes.org/licences/PC0003407

257 Sheffield to Bakewell
272 Sheffield to Castleton

[ady1977]

not heard anything about the 80 yet anywhere or whos taking it over or what route it will take..there will be an extra 90b on a sunday morning...dont know when the new time tables will be out

[kayden11]

Whoever gets the 80 next I do hope they sort the running times out, at the moment the running times are unachievable, I don't blame.hulleys for trying g the venture to Crystal.peaks but its failed because of the running times and hardly any buffer time in peaks

[rothlad]

Following on from the DCC contracted service changes around Killamarsh, this was provisionally awarded to Stagecoach Yorkshire. However, now concerns have been raised about the running times and not wanting to operate via Calow Hospital - I believe this is now up for retender again on a new service pattern. Most likely the service will have a gap in provision after the 12th May for a number of weeks.

The good news from this, is that DCC will be pump priming the 120 service on a hourly extension from Crystal Peaks to Norwood via Sothall (Hartland Avenue) and Killamarsh (Rowan Tree Road). This will be in operation Monday to Saturday between approx. 06:00 and 21:00. Will be operated by First SY.

[ady1977]

i thought chesterfield had put in for all 7 tenders of the route i read the other day that they had been told they had got it

[teapot42]

From what I'd read the tender that was awarded was for only two buses. As Hulleys only used three and extended out to Holymoorside it doesn't sound like much more running time can have been allowed for so I'm not that surprised by this.

Not wanting to operate via Calow seems odd though, as part of the provision of the 80 is to serve Brimington Common, and to do so it has to operate via the hospital, or at least via Hady Hill, and if it's going that way it might as well call in to the Hospital.

I did wonder if Hulleys could be persuaded to extend either the 55 or 84 (as I assume it will become) as far as Brimington to serve this bit. If they did, then an extension of the 80 to serve Renishaw and Killamarsh would seem to make more sense. Indeed, they could probably increase the 74 to running every 20 minutes with one an hour extending to Halfway which would overall give a better service without much extra resource.

What is the main flow on the 80 from Killamarsh and Renishaw? Is it towards Crystal Peaks or towards Chesterfield, as the 120 extension only seems to serve the former, leaving the latter cut off until something is worked out.

[gricehead]

Apr 22, 2024 11:21:53 GMT teapot42 said:

From what I'd read the tender that was awarded was for only two buses. As Hulleys only used three and extended out to Holymoorside it doesn't sound like much more running time can have been allowed for so I'm not that surprised by this.

Not wanting to operate via Calow seems odd though, as part of the provision of the 80 is to serve Brimington Common, and to do so it has to operate via the hospital, or at least via Hady Hill, and if it's going that way it might as well call in to the Hospital.

I did wonder if Hulleys could be persuaded to extend either the 55 or 84 (as I assume it will become) as far as Brimington to serve this bit. If they did, then an extension of the 80 to serve Renishaw and Killamarsh would seem to make more sense. Indeed, they could probably increase the 74 to running every 20 minutes with one an hour extending to Halfway which would overall give a better service without much extra resource.

What is the main flow on the 80 from Killamarsh and Renishaw? Is it towards Crystal Peaks or towards Chesterfield, as the 120 extension only seems to serve the former, leaving the latter cut off until something is worked out.

Killamarsh/Norwood residents have been up in arms about the 80 (or lack of) since Hulley's took over. It's a key link from the 'marsh to Crystal Peaks as well as to the supertram to access Sheffield.

[kayden11]

Tbh spinkhill no.one ever gets on there and high Moor no one ever gets on there I didn't understand why renishaw got served by the 80 when the 73 from clowne has got a direct route to peak, the 80 could habe gone straight from Eckington up.to halfway thrn loop.round killamarsh, and back, the 26 and 26a serve norwood, between Chesterfield and hospital multiple services serve that and for brim common no one catches it through to.peaks it is hit and miss really with the passenger numbers, however the 80 could have done with been rerouted cos some.of the route is a waste of time but then certain parts are worth something

[ady1977]

so arent stagecoach having the 80 back then or they still sorting things out

[teapot42]

Apr 22, 2024 19:46:17 GMT kayden11 said:

Tbh spinkhill no.one ever gets on there and high Moor no one ever gets on there I didn't understand why renishaw got served by the 80 when the 73 from clowne has got a direct route to peak, the 80 could habe gone straight from Eckington up.to halfway thrn loop.round killamarsh, and back, the 26 and 26a serve norwood, between Chesterfield and hospital multiple services serve that and for brim common no one catches it through to.peaks it is hit and miss really with the passenger numbers, however the 80 could have done with been rerouted cos some.of the route is a waste of time but then certain parts are worth something

I think merging the Brimington Common service with the Renishaw / Killamarsh one was a bit of a mistake, but it's Stagecoach Modus Operandi to link as many bits as possible to make services that are of little use to anyone...

I reckon Hulleys could serve Brimington Common by extending either the 55 or 84, and sort out the Killamarsh end by extending something that already goes to Staveley.

Only disadvantage of the 80 not serving Renishaw is it then won't have a direct link to Chesterfield, but how much does that matter if the usage isn't there? You can connect at either Barlborough or Eckington. Would be nice to make the 73/74 hourly though if the 80 wasn't to serve there.

[kayden11]

I totally agree you could route the 84 as a circular round brim common one goes from the hospital up to brim then down to Chesterfield like a 77 then the opposite way round the opposite direction

[kayden11]

You could have a 73 that does a circuit so when it gets to clowne goes through renishaw back to peaks direct then 74 opposite way round, I'm not obsessed with circulars by the way lol I'm just thinking of ways they could link the bits up that may be needed most and scrap the bits that aren't used if that makes sense

[kayden11]

TM did that with the 26 and 26a and diverted it through Swallownest clockwise and anti clockwise

[ady1977]

when will the new times be out for chesterfield as theres nothing showing yet..or are stagecoach deciding what to do with the 80

[The Captain]

Apr 22, 2024 21:31:18 GMT kayden11 said:

You could have a 73 that does a circuit so when it gets to clowne goes through renishaw back to peaks direct then 74 opposite way round, I'm not obsessed with circulars by the way lol I'm just thinking of ways they could link the bits up that may be needed most and scrap the bits that aren't used if that makes sense

Too much obsession with what the 73 and 74 does it's set in stone 1 bus stand alone Monday to Saturday with its regulars and Renishaw gets well covered.
The link that needs putting back in place is Killamarsh and Norwood which would have fitted in seamlessly with an hourly 7 extended from the Peaks.
Firsts going to do it with the 120 instead which is ironic how they abandoned Killamarsh after decades of stability be it X52, 264, 21 95 etc.