I know this has been discussed in the Hattons thread but as this involves all operators in the area, I felt it warranted a separate thread. Credit to mr t for alerting us to the Merseytravel update.
Changes are here:
https://www.merseytravel.gov.uk/customer...4wLjAuMA..
In a response to one question, I think the evening and Sunday 39 will follow the present 39A from St Helens to Parr Stocks Road, then the present 39 route. The 29 from the information given appears to serve Jackson Street, then round to Marshalls Cross Road to serve the Hospital, I'm presuming then past Sherdley Park to Clock Face Road, I'd be surprised if it serves the Four Acres estate given that already has the 17, 32/32A. Other highlights include the extension of the 152 to Southport (merging with the 315) - this will be popular in the summer, hopefully vehicles with higher capacity than at present will be used and evening journeys introduced on the 329 - are these commercial or is there some funding involved. That will be interesting to see how busy that gets as the route hasn't had an evening service for the just over 20 years.
Given the extended 152 starts and finishes in Merseyside but passes through Lancashire, how will that work in terms of ticketing?
(11/03/2023 20:51)Walton 46 Wrote: [ -> ]Given the extended 152 starts and finishes in Merseyside but passes through Lancashire, how will that work in terms of ticketing?
Merseytravel say if the route starts and finishes in Merseyside, then their passes are valid end to end.
The same applies to Arriva's 300 from Liverpool to Southport. Once the 300 leaves Lydiate it passes through Lancashire until it gets to the outskirts of Southport and passes back into Merseyside. Merseytravel passes are valid along the route through Lancashire, providing you don't get off and try and get back in Lancashire, obviously.
Some of the timetables are already up on Merseytravel's website. I have been closely looking at the 17 & 29. First thing to note is that they claimed the route goes to Rainford Station when it actually goes to Rainhill Station.
Looking more deeply into both timetables, it appears the 29 interworks with the "short" 17s on most journeys. Unfortunately, this means that the 2 routes leave St Helens within a few minutes of each other. Not good when they are heading in a similar direction. Also in the Evening, routes heading towards Marshalls Cross leave St Helens within a few minutes of each other ie 17 at xx34, 32 at xx35 and 29 (every 2 hours) at xx38. It is better space on a Sunday as the 17/29 leave at xx18/xx22 respectively which is around 15 minutes either side of the 32A/32.
Another strange quirk is later services on Sundays compared to evenings. Examples: last 17 from St Helens Mon - Sat evenings is 2234, Sundays it's 2318, more of a difference at the Widnes end, Mon - Sat 2206, Sundays it's 2351.
Having said all this, I do welcome the resumption of hourly 17's Evening & Sundays, only complaint is that it could have been timetabled better.
(12/03/2023 08:47)St Helens Rider Wrote: [ -> ]Having said all this, I do welcome the resumption of hourly 17's Evening & Sundays, only complaint is that it could have been timetabled better.
Seems to be a common thing at the minute with Merseytravel supported services. Timetables created by brain dead civil servants rather than people who can proper timetables.
(13/03/2023 20:34)iMarkeh Wrote: [ -> ]Seems to be a common thing at the minute with Merseytravel supported services. Timetables created by brain dead civil servants rather than people who can proper timetables.
Is there any need for such abuse? Also, I very much doubt that these timetables are created by members of the Civil Service, "brain dead" or otherwise. My understanding is that Merseytravel have their own people who liaise with the relevant operators when compiling them.
I was told that the 17 will interwork with the 60 rather than the 29.
(14/03/2023 01:29)CX06 EBK Wrote: [ -> ]I was told that the 17 will interwork with the 60 rather than the 29.
Thanks for the info. That would probably make it less prone to delays as there would be about a half hour layover.
(13/03/2023 21:35)Barney Wrote: [ -> ]Is there any need for such abuse? Also, I very much doubt that these timetables are created by members of the Civil Service, "brain dead" or otherwise. My understanding is that Merseytravel have their own people who liaise with the relevant operators when compiling them.
Yes, there is a need because these people need holding accountable. These prats want public control of the bus network but aren't even capable of creating a basic bus timetable. That was the more mild reply that I had as well!
Merseytravel create the tenders, with timetables. Operators then bid to run that timetable. Operators aren't blameless in this as they should also be correcting the timetables to make them passenger friendly but firms such as HTL understandably are just going to bid on what is infront of them. Revamping the timetable to make them passenger friendly wouldn't get them any thanks or brownie points in the tender phase so they wouldn't bother. It's down to Merseytravel to have the sense in the first place to compile proper timetables.
It has to link back to Merseytravel somehow as well because the same mess happened with the 61 and now it's happening with more tenders accross various operators. It doesn't link back to just Arriva or just HTL etc, the common denominator between them all is Merseytravel.