City leaders move to axe York's ftr buses

TALKS are being held about how to replace York's controversial ftr buses, after the city's council leader confirmed they are to be axed.

The Labour group which controls City of York Council vowed, in the run-up to May's local elections, that if it won power it would end an agreement with First York to operate the distinctive purple bendy buses.

The party said it was now seeking alternatives to the ftr as part of a proposed wider package of public transport improvements, which will be discussed at a meeting next week.

The buses have been criticised in some quarters since their arrival more than five years ago, due to their size and claims that they cause problems for other motorists and damage the city's roads. Labour pledged in its election manifesto to work towards scrapping the services, describing them as "a costly disaster" which had absorbed £1.5 million of public money.

Cabinet member for city strategy Dave Merrett said: "In May, we decided not to renew the agreement between First and the council on the ftr.

"Discussions have been taking place about how to provide an acceptable replacement for users of the No. 4 services to the University of York and Acomb, and this is being discussed along with other possible public transport improvements."

Next week, Coun Dave Merrett, will also be asked to approve a study into ways of improving to the quality, reliability and punctuality of York's bus network.

Proposals include a city-wide survey to ask residents what they want from bus services, holding further surveys on buses and at key bus stops, consulting with parish councils, ward committees, residents' associations and the 11 companies which operate bus services around York, and involving organisations such as Visit York, York Youth Council and York Independent Living Network.

Coun Merrett said: "The council is committed to working with bus passengers, bus operators and key local stakeholders to develop and deliver a bus network which better meets the aspirations and needs of existing and potential new bus passengers,"

First York was unavailable for comment on the ftr issue.

Comments (60)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:29am Mon 26 Dec 11

Tom6187 says...

Great news but, will the conductors be out of a job?
Great news but, will the conductors be out of a job? Tom6187
  • Score: 0

11:48am Mon 26 Dec 11

RingoStarr says...

Tom6187 wrote:
Great news but, will the conductors be out of a job?
Good Riddance...but VERY good point!
[quote][p][bold]Tom6187[/bold] wrote: Great news but, will the conductors be out of a job?[/p][/quote]Good Riddance...but VERY good point! RingoStarr
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Buzz Light-year says...

Some good news at last!
Bye FTR, you won't be missed.
Some good news at last! Bye FTR, you won't be missed. Buzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Deety says...

At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.
At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs. Deety
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Von_Dutch says...

Read again Deety - they're wanting rid of the purple ftr (& good riddance i say), but not all types of bendy-bus. The no.3 route will still have them, and fair enough - as the Askham Bar P&R is usually heaving and needs as many seats as possible - plus it isn't really an issue on main roads like Tadcaster Rd. Whereas the ftr was always too big for the smaller residential streets of Acomb.
Read again Deety - they're wanting rid of the purple ftr (& good riddance i say), but not all types of bendy-bus. The no.3 route will still have them, and fair enough - as the Askham Bar P&R is usually heaving and needs as many seats as possible - plus it isn't really an issue on main roads like Tadcaster Rd. Whereas the ftr was always too big for the smaller residential streets of Acomb. Von_Dutch
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Mon 26 Dec 11

sheps lad says...

How many seats on a FTR, double decker or bendy bus? No44 use double deckers without a conductor.
How many seats on a FTR, double decker or bendy bus? No44 use double deckers without a conductor. sheps lad
  • Score: 0

12:50pm Mon 26 Dec 11

bolero says...

Yet another example of money squandered by the Lib Dems. How much have these useless people cost the City of York during the time that they were in power. There are too many instances like this one and Clifton Green junction to name but two. I am not a Labour supporter nor indeed a fanatical supporter of any particular party but I hope that the Lib Dems never ever get the chance to govern this City again. They are a time wasting, money wasting group of would-be politicians who do just not have a clue. They are intent only in persuing their own selfish ends purely for the sake of the party with no foresight whatsoever or intention to improve the lot of the people they purport to serve.
Yet another example of money squandered by the Lib Dems. How much have these useless people cost the City of York during the time that they were in power. There are too many instances like this one and Clifton Green junction to name but two. I am not a Labour supporter nor indeed a fanatical supporter of any particular party but I hope that the Lib Dems never ever get the chance to govern this City again. They are a time wasting, money wasting group of would-be politicians who do just not have a clue. They are intent only in persuing their own selfish ends purely for the sake of the party with no foresight whatsoever or intention to improve the lot of the people they purport to serve. bolero
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Mon 26 Dec 11

ndevr says...

Deety wrote:
At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.
how come the number 1, coastliner and EYMS services are mainly run using double deckers without conductors?
[quote][p][bold]Deety[/bold] wrote: At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.[/p][/quote]how come the number 1, coastliner and EYMS services are mainly run using double deckers without conductors? ndevr
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Mon 26 Dec 11

ouseswimmer says...

Double decker buses were introduced to save space on the roads while carrying more people. FTRs took up more space carried less and killed cyclists. Time to return to the good old faithful double decker bus.
Double decker buses were introduced to save space on the roads while carrying more people. FTRs took up more space carried less and killed cyclists. Time to return to the good old faithful double decker bus. ouseswimmer
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Mon 26 Dec 11

yawn.. says...

Just can't understand wtf was wrong with double decker buses. Who in their right mind would have considered the ftr's as a way of beating congestion in the city when they take up almost twice as much space? who, only a yoghurt!! Ah, but I guess we were living in Gallowayland at the time of their introduction.
Just can't understand wtf was wrong with double decker buses. Who in their right mind would have considered the ftr's as a way of beating congestion in the city when they take up almost twice as much space? who, only a yoghurt!! Ah, but I guess we were living in Gallowayland at the time of their introduction. yawn..
  • Score: 0

2:03pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Torycouncil2015 says...

Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant
Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant Torycouncil2015
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Woody Mellor says...

bolero wrote:
Yet another example of money squandered by the Lib Dems. How much have these useless people cost the City of York during the time that they were in power. There are too many instances like this one and Clifton Green junction to name but two. I am not a Labour supporter nor indeed a fanatical supporter of any particular party but I hope that the Lib Dems never ever get the chance to govern this City again. They are a time wasting, money wasting group of would-be politicians who do just not have a clue. They are intent only in persuing their own selfish ends purely for the sake of the party with no foresight whatsoever or intention to improve the lot of the people they purport to serve.
Dont forget The Barbican Center and the swimming pool.
[quote][p][bold]bolero[/bold] wrote: Yet another example of money squandered by the Lib Dems. How much have these useless people cost the City of York during the time that they were in power. There are too many instances like this one and Clifton Green junction to name but two. I am not a Labour supporter nor indeed a fanatical supporter of any particular party but I hope that the Lib Dems never ever get the chance to govern this City again. They are a time wasting, money wasting group of would-be politicians who do just not have a clue. They are intent only in persuing their own selfish ends purely for the sake of the party with no foresight whatsoever or intention to improve the lot of the people they purport to serve.[/p][/quote]Dont forget The Barbican Center and the swimming pool. Woody Mellor
  • Score: 0

2:25pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Glenyork says...

To be honest, customer service host is quite the very opposite,far as I was aware a host is someone who welcomes you upon entrance, and customer service is something which they lack in abundance,no harm in a double decker which hav been used before,
To be honest, customer service host is quite the very opposite,far as I was aware a host is someone who welcomes you upon entrance, and customer service is something which they lack in abundance,no harm in a double decker which hav been used before, Glenyork
  • Score: 0

2:55pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Geoffers says...

Torycouncil2015 wrote:
Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant
It is up to the customer to set the service requirements and that should include the vehicles to be used.
Wouldn't want open topped buses would we?
[quote][p][bold]Torycouncil2015[/bold] wrote: Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant[/p][/quote]It is up to the customer to set the service requirements and that should include the vehicles to be used. Wouldn't want open topped buses would we? Geoffers
  • Score: 0

3:02pm Mon 26 Dec 11

CynicaloldGit says...

Torycouncil2015 wrote:
Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant
That's the same kind of stupid argument the Tories used at the beginning of WW2, that the RAF couldn't bomb German industry as they were private property.

No Torycouncil, the proper council simply tells the operator to change their busses or look elsewhere for a contract......Oh, and your Boris has just done similar in London
[quote][p][bold]Torycouncil2015[/bold] wrote: Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant[/p][/quote]That's the same kind of stupid argument the Tories used at the beginning of WW2, that the RAF couldn't bomb German industry as they were private property. No Torycouncil, the proper council simply tells the operator to change their busses or look elsewhere for a contract......Oh, and your Boris has just done similar in London CynicaloldGit
  • Score: 0

3:41pm Mon 26 Dec 11

jibber jabber says...

Council house tenants on the n°4 route should be grateful for the driveways installed during the introduction of ftr. At least they have something to show for the millions of pounds wasted on the fangled-dangled idea!
Council house tenants on the n°4 route should be grateful for the driveways installed during the introduction of ftr. At least they have something to show for the millions of pounds wasted on the fangled-dangled idea! jibber jabber
  • Score: 0

4:13pm Mon 26 Dec 11

CynicaloldGit says...

jibber jabber wrote:
Council house tenants on the n°4 route should be grateful for the driveways installed during the introduction of ftr. At least they have something to show for the millions of pounds wasted on the fangled-dangled idea!
Very true JJ but, it is simply more money wasted on these stupid things. I don't begrudge council tennants getting something out of this at the time (didn't home owners on the bus route get the same deal) however, who why and how did these stupid leviathans ever get the go ahead in York?
[quote][p][bold]jibber jabber[/bold] wrote: Council house tenants on the n°4 route should be grateful for the driveways installed during the introduction of ftr. At least they have something to show for the millions of pounds wasted on the fangled-dangled idea![/p][/quote]Very true JJ but, it is simply more money wasted on these stupid things. I don't begrudge council tennants getting something out of this at the time (didn't home owners on the bus route get the same deal) however, who why and how did these stupid leviathans ever get the go ahead in York? CynicaloldGit
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Mon 26 Dec 11

againstthecuts says...

BRING BACK DOUBLE DECKER BUSSES!!!
BRING BACK DOUBLE DECKER BUSSES!!! againstthecuts
  • Score: 0

5:16pm Mon 26 Dec 11

TERRIER3 says...

great news them purple monsters are a pain in the rear end. however i have it on good authority that First wanted rid of these things ages ago because they use too much fuel and are unreliable. so i wonder who really decided to not renew the contract, are the council trying to score points by pretending it was them or did First tell the council they werent renewing?
great news them purple monsters are a pain in the rear end. however i have it on good authority that First wanted rid of these things ages ago because they use too much fuel and are unreliable. so i wonder who really decided to not renew the contract, are the council trying to score points by pretending it was them or did First tell the council they werent renewing? TERRIER3
  • Score: 0

5:40pm Mon 26 Dec 11

yorkie39 says...

The FTR was introduced to be like a tram,the driver wasn't supposed to collect money but passengers were supposed to buy tickets to ride the bus prior to the journey or on the bus,however the public found it to hard to work the machines and there was a lot of fare dodging.Hence the introduction of conductors.I would say that this has cost first a lot of money as they now have to pay two people to run each FTR whilst all none FTR buses run with the driver only.The idea was to run less buses but speed up each journey,the experiment failed.I think first york would be happy to be rid of the FTR however i'm sure this will mean job losses for the conductors as double deckers can be run with the driver only.
The FTR was introduced to be like a tram,the driver wasn't supposed to collect money but passengers were supposed to buy tickets to ride the bus prior to the journey or on the bus,however the public found it to hard to work the machines and there was a lot of fare dodging.Hence the introduction of conductors.I would say that this has cost first a lot of money as they now have to pay two people to run each FTR whilst all none FTR buses run with the driver only.The idea was to run less buses but speed up each journey,the experiment failed.I think first york would be happy to be rid of the FTR however i'm sure this will mean job losses for the conductors as double deckers can be run with the driver only. yorkie39
  • Score: 0

6:15pm Mon 26 Dec 11

tommyinyork says...

Some very selfish people on here.

Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in.

And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all !

I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs.
Some very selfish people on here. Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in. And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all ! I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs. tommyinyork
  • Score: 0

6:16pm Mon 26 Dec 11

tommyinyork says...

Some very selfish people on here.

Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in.

And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all !

I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs.
Some very selfish people on here. Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in. And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all ! I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs. tommyinyork
  • Score: 0

6:27pm Mon 26 Dec 11

bloodaxe says...

ndevr wrote:
Deety wrote:
At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.
how come the number 1, coastliner and EYMS services are mainly run using double deckers without conductors?
The DD buses on the 1 route would be fine if they were modern. The current fleet is about ten or eleven years old and looks it. I've seen modern DDs run by First in Edinburgh and Leeds but York seems to be the dumping ground for the old ones. Couple that with the awful state of some bus stops -( how on earth can any city be proud of that ghastly shack on Haxby Road by the St John halls ?)- and there's little wonder that public transport in York is slipping from the good service which was once provided. I speak as a frequent bus rider.
[quote][p][bold]ndevr[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Deety[/bold] wrote: At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.[/p][/quote]how come the number 1, coastliner and EYMS services are mainly run using double deckers without conductors?[/p][/quote]The DD buses on the 1 route would be fine if they were modern. The current fleet is about ten or eleven years old and looks it. I've seen modern DDs run by First in Edinburgh and Leeds but York seems to be the dumping ground for the old ones. Couple that with the awful state of some bus stops -( how on earth can any city be proud of that ghastly shack on Haxby Road by the St John halls ?)- and there's little wonder that public transport in York is slipping from the good service which was once provided. I speak as a frequent bus rider. bloodaxe
  • Score: 0

6:30pm Mon 26 Dec 11

bloodaxe says...

againstthecuts wrote:
BRING BACK DOUBLE DECKER BUSSES!!!
AND CORRECT SPELLING !
[quote][p][bold]againstthecuts[/bold] wrote: BRING BACK DOUBLE DECKER BUSSES!!![/p][/quote]AND CORRECT SPELLING ! bloodaxe
  • Score: 0

6:37pm Mon 26 Dec 11

the butler says...

I think that the double Decker needed to be modernized, ie type of material used in its construction and seating quality improved, they were a great advantage in the city center!.
I think that the double Decker needed to be modernized, ie type of material used in its construction and seating quality improved, they were a great advantage in the city center!. the butler
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Mon 26 Dec 11

marvell says...

How much is this move going to cost or save. Forget political point scoring and aimless rants like bolero. The funds are tight at the moment.

If scrapping them saves money then great - if it costs money then Labour should not go ahead and do it. I'm sick of this "it was in our manifesto" claptrap from Labour and their brain donor of a leader.

They should only go ahead with this if thier if proven cost savings by such a move.
How much is this move going to cost or save. Forget political point scoring and aimless rants like bolero. The funds are tight at the moment. If scrapping them saves money then great - if it costs money then Labour should not go ahead and do it. I'm sick of this "it was in our manifesto" claptrap from Labour and their brain donor of a leader. They should only go ahead with this if thier if proven cost savings by such a move. marvell
  • Score: 0

6:53pm Mon 26 Dec 11

pedalling paul says...

I've not been killed by an ftr so far........perhaps that's because I treat their presence ahead of me with great care.
I've not been killed by an ftr so far........perhaps that's because I treat their presence ahead of me with great care. pedalling paul
  • Score: 0

7:04pm Mon 26 Dec 11

was york now rotherham says...

bloodaxe wrote:
ndevr wrote:
Deety wrote: At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.
how come the number 1, coastliner and EYMS services are mainly run using double deckers without conductors?
The DD buses on the 1 route would be fine if they were modern. The current fleet is about ten or eleven years old and looks it. I've seen modern DDs run by First in Edinburgh and Leeds but York seems to be the dumping ground for the old ones. Couple that with the awful state of some bus stops -( how on earth can any city be proud of that ghastly shack on Haxby Road by the St John halls ?)- and there's little wonder that public transport in York is slipping from the good service which was once provided. I speak as a frequent bus rider.
if you think york is a dumping ground for the old first fleet then i think you had better spend a day in south yorkshire looking at all the first buses around hear they are mostley on the old plates with singular letter in front off the numbers before the final 3 letters forinstace in stead of the plate been like ys 140 nny we have them like s 140 yyh now how old is that style.
[quote][p][bold]bloodaxe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ndevr[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Deety[/bold] wrote: At last someone is going to do what they promised and we are going to get rid of the bendy buses, regarding replacements , bring back double deckers and the conductors will be needed and not lose their jobs.[/p][/quote]how come the number 1, coastliner and EYMS services are mainly run using double deckers without conductors?[/p][/quote]The DD buses on the 1 route would be fine if they were modern. The current fleet is about ten or eleven years old and looks it. I've seen modern DDs run by First in Edinburgh and Leeds but York seems to be the dumping ground for the old ones. Couple that with the awful state of some bus stops -( how on earth can any city be proud of that ghastly shack on Haxby Road by the St John halls ?)- and there's little wonder that public transport in York is slipping from the good service which was once provided. I speak as a frequent bus rider.[/p][/quote]if you think york is a dumping ground for the old first fleet then i think you had better spend a day in south yorkshire looking at all the first buses around hear they are mostley on the old plates with singular letter in front off the numbers before the final 3 letters forinstace in stead of the plate been like ys 140 nny we have them like s 140 yyh now how old is that style. was york now rotherham
  • Score: 0

7:33pm Mon 26 Dec 11

James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter says...

It's doesn't matter if it's the FTR or a double decker - it's utterly disgraceful the way FIRST operate the bus services in this city. The VAST majority of staff are miserable clever and rude. The buses are constantly late and on many occasions they dont turn up. And if you ever make a complaint you end up talking to somebody in Bradford with no Knowledge of this city. York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same.
It's doesn't matter if it's the FTR or a double decker - it's utterly disgraceful the way FIRST operate the bus services in this city. The VAST majority of staff are miserable clever and rude. The buses are constantly late and on many occasions they dont turn up. And if you ever make a complaint you end up talking to somebody in Bradford with no Knowledge of this city. York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same. James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter
  • Score: 0

7:34pm Mon 26 Dec 11

James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter says...

It's doesn't matter if it's the FTR or a double decker - it's utterly disgraceful the way FIRST operate the bus services in this city. The VAST majority of staff are miserable clever and rude. The buses are constantly late and on many occasions they dont turn up. And if you ever make a complaint you end up talking to somebody in Bradford with no Knowledge of this city. York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same.
It's doesn't matter if it's the FTR or a double decker - it's utterly disgraceful the way FIRST operate the bus services in this city. The VAST majority of staff are miserable clever and rude. The buses are constantly late and on many occasions they dont turn up. And if you ever make a complaint you end up talking to somebody in Bradford with no Knowledge of this city. York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same. James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter
  • Score: 0

7:35pm Mon 26 Dec 11

James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter says...

tommyinyork wrote:
Some very selfish people on here.

Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in.

And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all !

I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs.
It's doesn't matter if it's the FTR or a double decker - it's utterly disgraceful the way FIRST operate the bus services in this city. The VAST majority of staff are miserable clever and rude. The buses are constantly late and on many occasions they dont turn up. And if you ever make a complaint you end up talking to somebody in Bradford with no Knowledge of this city. York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same.
[quote][p][bold]tommyinyork[/bold] wrote: Some very selfish people on here. Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in. And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all ! I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs.[/p][/quote]It's doesn't matter if it's the FTR or a double decker - it's utterly disgraceful the way FIRST operate the bus services in this city. The VAST majority of staff are miserable clever and rude. The buses are constantly late and on many occasions they dont turn up. And if you ever make a complaint you end up talking to somebody in Bradford with no Knowledge of this city. York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same. James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter
  • Score: 0

7:37pm Mon 26 Dec 11

bolero says...

Whilst it is true that the DDs; not only on the No1 route; are past their sell by date they can hardly be described as having been dumped on York. These buses were brand spanking new when they were introduced but are now well past it.
`marvel` is obviously either a Lib Dem Councillor, a hopeless hopeful or a misguided supporter of that sad party. As I pointed out in my previous posting I do not support any political party so, therefore, have no political axe to grind. I just feel it is an absolute disgrace the money that was wasted by this incompetent band of useless actors. I have no need to elaborate on the various money wasting schemes because they are gradually being brought to light on here. The decisions now being taken are not necessarily politically motivated, but because most of those schemes have proved to be not worth the paper they were written on, have proved unworkable or like ftr, the contract is drawing to a close and totally unsatisfactory and the opportunity can be taken to adopt something better. Unfortunately the money has already been spent and wasted by the aforesaid party.
Whilst it is true that the DDs; not only on the No1 route; are past their sell by date they can hardly be described as having been dumped on York. These buses were brand spanking new when they were introduced but are now well past it. `marvel` is obviously either a Lib Dem Councillor, a hopeless hopeful or a misguided supporter of that sad party. As I pointed out in my previous posting I do not support any political party so, therefore, have no political axe to grind. I just feel it is an absolute disgrace the money that was wasted by this incompetent band of useless actors. I have no need to elaborate on the various money wasting schemes because they are gradually being brought to light on here. The decisions now being taken are not necessarily politically motivated, but because most of those schemes have proved to be not worth the paper they were written on, have proved unworkable or like ftr, the contract is drawing to a close and totally unsatisfactory and the opportunity can be taken to adopt something better. Unfortunately the money has already been spent and wasted by the aforesaid party. bolero
  • Score: 0

7:44pm Mon 26 Dec 11

James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter says...

Who is the York transport leader, it used to be Tracey Simpson Laing.
Who is the York transport leader, it used to be Tracey Simpson Laing. James Street Bare Knuckle Gypsy Fighter
  • Score: 0

8:29pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Sillybillies says...

The problem with deregulation is that it never really happened, and market forces were never allowed to operate as long as selected bus companies were subsidised by some councils. The tax payers' money the York LibDem regime put into First York was beyond belief.

Hardly an open market for bus companies to compete in was it? What we got was the poor service of what amounted to a monopoly, and "purple slugs" running around empty most of the day.
The problem with deregulation is that it never really happened, and market forces were never allowed to operate as long as selected bus companies were subsidised by some councils. The tax payers' money the York LibDem regime put into First York was beyond belief. Hardly an open market for bus companies to compete in was it? What we got was the poor service of what amounted to a monopoly, and "purple slugs" running around empty most of the day. Sillybillies
  • Score: 0

8:32pm Mon 26 Dec 11

pedalling paul says...

Be aware that Local Authorities have few regulatory powers regarding buses, since Thatcher's lot deregulated them. The principal local power lies with VOSA, who can eg order badly maintained vehicles off the road.
CoYC have created a voluntary partnership with York's bus operators, and have powers (but not always the cash) to subsidise non-commercial services.
FTR is a dream for mobility restricted passengers and I doubt that a conventional bus can offer like flexibility.
Be aware that Local Authorities have few regulatory powers regarding buses, since Thatcher's lot deregulated them. The principal local power lies with VOSA, who can eg order badly maintained vehicles off the road. CoYC have created a voluntary partnership with York's bus operators, and have powers (but not always the cash) to subsidise non-commercial services. FTR is a dream for mobility restricted passengers and I doubt that a conventional bus can offer like flexibility. pedalling paul
  • Score: 0

8:40pm Mon 26 Dec 11

magic cat says...

I am a regular user of the FTR. The service is good, reliable and the hosts are very very helpful to those people who are less able to get around. I am appalled at some of the posts on here which are obviously not from bus users. I live in hope that some of the posters on here will remember that there are other people in the city who do not share their views. Judging by some of the comments it would appear that councillofrs have nothing to do on Boxing Day - sad folk! and no I am not a councillor.
I am a regular user of the FTR. The service is good, reliable and the hosts are very very helpful to those people who are less able to get around. I am appalled at some of the posts on here which are obviously not from bus users. I live in hope that some of the posters on here will remember that there are other people in the city who do not share their views. Judging by some of the comments it would appear that councillofrs have nothing to do on Boxing Day - sad folk! and no I am not a councillor. magic cat
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Sillybillies says...

CoYC have created a voluntary partnership with York's bus operators, and have powers (but not always the cash) to subsidise non-commercial services.

Not voted for by me, and the sooner it stops the better so as to courage real competition.
[quote]CoYC have created a voluntary partnership with York's bus operators, and have powers (but not always the cash) to subsidise non-commercial services. [/quote] Not voted for by me, and the sooner it stops the better so as to courage real competition. Sillybillies
  • Score: 0

9:13pm Mon 26 Dec 11

Sarah York says...

tommyinyork wrote:
Some very selfish people on here. Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in. And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all ! I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs.
Alright, calm down Mugsy.

Firstly, as pointed out above, the FTR's were never intended on having conductors so they were 'lucky' to get the job in the first place.

Secondly, you talk about being selfish yet a new service (which could still need said conductors working for them) which will benefit the people of York in a number of ways should not go ahead because of a few conductors. Applying a new breed of service is hardly a new concept, I don't see why they shouldn't try and make things better. People lose there jobs or get moved on all the time. That's life sadly.

I think some people are up their own arses about the number 4 'customer sevice' though to be fair. I use it a lot and a number, most indeed, are quite pleasant. Granted some of the drivers on other buses are knobs but that's a different story. These lot specifically are ok.
[quote][p][bold]tommyinyork[/bold] wrote: Some very selfish people on here. Some conductors lives depend on the ftr, they have families to feed, bills to pay, homes to live in. And as for the council they purely have no say in the matter at all ! I suggest people actually read into these things more rather than celebrate the fact conductors will lose their jobs.[/p][/quote]Alright, calm down Mugsy. Firstly, as pointed out above, the FTR's were never intended on having conductors so they were 'lucky' to get the job in the first place. Secondly, you talk about being selfish yet a new service (which could still need said conductors working for them) which will benefit the people of York in a number of ways should not go ahead because of a few conductors. Applying a new breed of service is hardly a new concept, I don't see why they shouldn't try and make things better. People lose there jobs or get moved on all the time. That's life sadly. I think some people are up their own arses about the number 4 'customer sevice' though to be fair. I use it a lot and a number, most indeed, are quite pleasant. Granted some of the drivers on other buses are knobs but that's a different story. These lot specifically are ok. Sarah York
  • Score: 0

10:49pm Mon 26 Dec 11

TERRIER3 says...

the butler wrote:
I think that the double Decker needed to be modernized, ie type of material used in its construction and seating quality improved, they were a great advantage in the city center!.
some more spelling checks needed....center is american, this is old york not new york, so please use the correct ENGLISH version...CENTRE
[quote][p][bold]the butler[/bold] wrote: I think that the double Decker needed to be modernized, ie type of material used in its construction and seating quality improved, they were a great advantage in the city center!.[/p][/quote]some more spelling checks needed....center is american, this is old york not new york, so please use the correct ENGLISH version...CENTRE TERRIER3
  • Score: 0

10:56pm Mon 26 Dec 11

TERRIER3 says...

Sillybillies wrote:
CoYC have created a voluntary partnership with York's bus operators, and have powers (but not always the cash) to subsidise non-commercial services.

Not voted for by me, and the sooner it stops the better so as to courage real competition.
First run most of their services commercially so you are not putting much of your cash into them, so if you really have a beef with tax payers money going to bus companys i suggest you turn your attentions to that french lot TRANSDEV and local company PULLMAN....
[quote][p][bold]Sillybillies[/bold] wrote: [quote]CoYC have created a voluntary partnership with York's bus operators, and have powers (but not always the cash) to subsidise non-commercial services. [/quote] Not voted for by me, and the sooner it stops the better so as to courage real competition.[/p][/quote]First run most of their services commercially so you are not putting much of your cash into them, so if you really have a beef with tax payers money going to bus companys i suggest you turn your attentions to that french lot TRANSDEV and local company PULLMAN.... TERRIER3
  • Score: 0

10:56pm Mon 26 Dec 11

gmc_1963 says...

Oh please they are bloody awful
Oh please they are bloody awful gmc_1963
  • Score: 0

11:18pm Mon 26 Dec 11

skipsea says...

It just means First will buy buses to replace them from Poland as they usually do.
It just means First will buy buses to replace them from Poland as they usually do. skipsea
  • Score: 0

1:29am Tue 27 Dec 11

Magicman! says...

sheps lad wrote:
How many seats on a FTR, double decker or bendy bus? No44 use double deckers without a conductor.
37, 65 (wright eclipse gemini, as used by Coastliner), and 49 seated for the Mercedes Citaro bendys used on the P&R's. The smallest buses that Transdev York/Coastliner run (Optare Versa - the buses with the huge overhang and pointy nose at the front - that say tadcaster on the side but are used on the 24 and 26) seat 40 people. An FTR is over twice the size, probably twice and heavy, twice as polluting, yet seats less.
If the will was there to keep jobs for the conductors and to keep services running quickly, double deckers could be purchased which were dual door, and passengers could board at either door like they do on a tram.

As for how to improve the experience of people using buses, there are good examples in PTE areas like Newcastle and Manchester as to what information to display at bus stops, how real-time information SHOULD work, and the waiting environment provided for passengers.

And if you want to see how good the inside of a double decker can look, then see Autocar's pictures of the Borismaster - http://www.autocar.c
o.uk/News/NewsArticl
e/AllCars/260508/

If you can get hold of the correct facts and figures, and not the distorted ones sent out by the council, you will find that bus useage on First routes went down over the last 2 years on pretty much every route - with one of the worst affected being the absolutely terrible number 5 service, easily the least reliable service in the city. And then we get jokes of services like the 13, that end at 5pm! If Stagecoach in Cumbria can run a 20 mile service from Keswick to Kendal after 5.30pm then why can't first york run a 2 mile route from monks cross into york?

All the FTR has been is a Fake Tram Route, a Poor Mans Tram, and a result of talks that Alistair Darling had with First just before schemes like the Leeds Metrotram was axed, because the tram would have run in direct competition with First's biggest moneyspinners. The FTRs were trialled in York (a) to keep the heat off Leeds who had just lost their tram idea, so people didn't realise the purple slugs were what they were getting instead of trams, (b) because york is a bit less significant in terms of passenger numbers compared to Leeds, so if something went wrong it'd be less of a disaster in York than it would have been in Leeds.
[quote][p][bold]sheps lad[/bold] wrote: How many seats on a FTR, double decker or bendy bus? No44 use double deckers without a conductor.[/p][/quote]37, 65 (wright eclipse gemini, as used by Coastliner), and 49 seated for the Mercedes Citaro bendys used on the P&R's. The smallest buses that Transdev York/Coastliner run (Optare Versa - the buses with the huge overhang and pointy nose at the front - that say tadcaster on the side but are used on the 24 and 26) seat 40 people. An FTR is over twice the size, probably twice and heavy, twice as polluting, yet seats less. If the will was there to keep jobs for the conductors and to keep services running quickly, double deckers could be purchased which were dual door, and passengers could board at either door like they do on a tram. As for how to improve the experience of people using buses, there are good examples in PTE areas like Newcastle and Manchester as to what information to display at bus stops, how real-time information SHOULD work, and the waiting environment provided for passengers. And if you want to see how good the inside of a double decker can look, then see Autocar's pictures of the Borismaster - http://www.autocar.c o.uk/News/NewsArticl e/AllCars/260508/ If you can get hold of the correct facts and figures, and not the distorted ones sent out by the council, you will find that bus useage on First routes went down over the last 2 years on pretty much every route - with one of the worst affected being the absolutely terrible number 5 service, easily the least reliable service in the city. And then we get jokes of services like the 13, that end at 5pm! If Stagecoach in Cumbria can run a 20 mile service from Keswick to Kendal after 5.30pm then why can't first york run a 2 mile route from monks cross into york? All the FTR has been is a Fake Tram Route, a Poor Mans Tram, and a result of talks that Alistair Darling had with First just before schemes like the Leeds Metrotram was axed, because the tram would have run in direct competition with First's biggest moneyspinners. The FTRs were trialled in York (a) to keep the heat off Leeds who had just lost their tram idea, so people didn't realise the purple slugs were what they were getting instead of trams, (b) because york is a bit less significant in terms of passenger numbers compared to Leeds, so if something went wrong it'd be less of a disaster in York than it would have been in Leeds. Magicman!
  • Score: 0

9:02am Tue 27 Dec 11

thefutureis says...

CynicaloldGit wrote:
Torycouncil2015 wrote:
Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant
That's the same kind of stupid argument the Tories used at the beginning of WW2, that the RAF couldn't bomb German industry as they were private property.

No Torycouncil, the proper council simply tells the operator to change their busses or look elsewhere for a contract......Oh, and your Boris has just done similar in London
oh dear oh dear you dont understand do you. There is no contract between the council and the operators. Operators set routes. the council can choose to subsidise in them in areas where the bus company do not want to go. Under this system you may be able to specify bus types but it would be horrendously expensive. Basically you are saying to First - we would like you to operate a loss making service. We will therefore provide you with financial compensation. Thats what happens now. You are now suggesting the council does the same and asks First to buy new buses to do it. Of course they'll oblige!!!!!! Please take time to understand the system befiore trying to insult me
[quote][p][bold]CynicaloldGit[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torycouncil2015[/bold] wrote: Sorry as I understand it First are a private company. Surely they can use whatever buses they want to use. Only in communist countries do governments dictate what transportation will be used. That renders Coun Merret and all other posts on here irrelevant[/p][/quote]That's the same kind of stupid argument the Tories used at the beginning of WW2, that the RAF couldn't bomb German industry as they were private property. No Torycouncil, the proper council simply tells the operator to change their busses or look elsewhere for a contract......Oh, and your Boris has just done similar in London[/p][/quote]oh dear oh dear you dont understand do you. There is no contract between the council and the operators. Operators set routes. the council can choose to subsidise in them in areas where the bus company do not want to go. Under this system you may be able to specify bus types but it would be horrendously expensive. Basically you are saying to First - we would like you to operate a loss making service. We will therefore provide you with financial compensation. Thats what happens now. You are now suggesting the council does the same and asks First to buy new buses to do it. Of course they'll oblige!!!!!! Please take time to understand the system befiore trying to insult me thefutureis
  • Score: 0

9:06am Tue 27 Dec 11

thefutureis says...

with spurious arguments. Much as I hate Tory Council hes right. Though he should have pointed out it was Miss Maggie that took the powers away from councils when it comes to running local bus services
with spurious arguments. Much as I hate Tory Council hes right. Though he should have pointed out it was Miss Maggie that took the powers away from councils when it comes to running local bus services thefutureis
  • Score: 0

9:07am Tue 27 Dec 11

thefutureis says...

with spurious arguments. Much as I hate Tory Council hes right. Though he should have pointed out it was Miss Maggie that took the powers away from councils when it comes to running local bus services
with spurious arguments. Much as I hate Tory Council hes right. Though he should have pointed out it was Miss Maggie that took the powers away from councils when it comes to running local bus services thefutureis
  • Score: 0

9:07am Tue 27 Dec 11

LibDem says...

There is a lot of misinformation here and in the article.
1. The £1 million expenditure undertaken in 2004 was spent on road repairs and the provision of off-street parking on the number 4 route. Some was spent on easing the radii at junctions to the benefit of all road users. None was spent on the ftr vehicles which were procured by First.
2. The agreement referred to in the article expired last June (2011). The agreement required First to continue to run the ftr for at least 5 years. After that First were free either to continue the service or change the way that the number 4 is provided. That was their choice and the Council cannot force them to change. They have chosen to continue the ftr service.
3. First could choose now to switch the ftr buses onto one of the new Park and Ride services and then backfill the number 4 route with new buses. Or they could cascade old buses into the City from elsewhere in the country.
4. Surveys of passengers that actually use the number 4 service have produced higher satisfaction levels than with comparable services elsewhere in York (and indeed the country).
5. Double deckers have a role to play. But they have negative points. These include lower capacity on short journeys (no standing upstairs), slower access, and limited facilities for people with disabilities. They cannot be used on routes where there are low bridges.
6. The new Routemaster style double deckers being provided in London cost 4 times more than an ftr. Extra costs would be passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares.
7. Far from implementing their manifesto promises on public transport, all Labour are now doing is stalling by staging yet another "public consultation". They promised a franchised system where the network, frequency and pricing of public transport would have been set by the Council and operators would have tendered to run all or part of it. Labour now realise that the Council Taxpayer cannot afford to subsidise such a system.
8. Labour are trying their old tactic of playing up a populist policy in the hope that it will divert attention away from the real issue (how to sustain an affordable and reliable bus service in the City)
There is a lot of misinformation here and in the article. 1. The £1 million expenditure undertaken in 2004 was spent on road repairs and the provision of off-street parking on the number 4 route. Some was spent on easing the radii at junctions to the benefit of all road users. None was spent on the ftr vehicles which were procured by First. 2. The agreement referred to in the article expired last June (2011). The agreement required First to continue to run the ftr for at least 5 years. After that First were free either to continue the service or change the way that the number 4 is provided. That was their choice and the Council cannot force them to change. They have chosen to continue the ftr service. 3. First could choose now to switch the ftr buses onto one of the new Park and Ride services and then backfill the number 4 route with new buses. Or they could cascade old buses into the City from elsewhere in the country. 4. Surveys of passengers that actually use the number 4 service have produced higher satisfaction levels than with comparable services elsewhere in York (and indeed the country). 5. Double deckers have a role to play. But they have negative points. These include lower capacity on short journeys (no standing upstairs), slower access, and limited facilities for people with disabilities. They cannot be used on routes where there are low bridges. 6. The new Routemaster style double deckers being provided in London cost 4 times more than an ftr. Extra costs would be passed on to passengers in the form of higher fares. 7. Far from implementing their manifesto promises on public transport, all Labour are now doing is stalling by staging yet another "public consultation". They promised a franchised system where the network, frequency and pricing of public transport would have been set by the Council and operators would have tendered to run all or part of it. Labour now realise that the Council Taxpayer cannot afford to subsidise such a system. 8. Labour are trying their old tactic of playing up a populist policy in the hope that it will divert attention away from the real issue (how to sustain an affordable and reliable bus service in the City) LibDem
  • Score: 0

9:08am Tue 27 Dec 11

thefutureis says...

apologies for multiple and split posting. I typed one message and got three! Christmas bonus?
apologies for multiple and split posting. I typed one message and got three! Christmas bonus? thefutureis
  • Score: 0

9:51am Tue 27 Dec 11

tommyinyork says...

skipsea wrote:
It just means First will buy buses to replace them from Poland as they usually do.
That is the most stupidest and dumbest comment i have ever heard.
[quote][p][bold]skipsea[/bold] wrote: It just means First will buy buses to replace them from Poland as they usually do.[/p][/quote]That is the most stupidest and dumbest comment i have ever heard. tommyinyork
  • Score: 0

6:19pm Tue 27 Dec 11

WDYWAC says...

I wonder how many people slating the FTR actually use it. I do so twice a day, every weekday. As a disabled person I find them much easier to use than either a regular bendy bus or a double decker. I find the hosts almost all of the time to be pleasant and courteous above and beyond the call. I find paying a conductor fara easier than paying the driver and it cuts travel time as the driver can drive while fares are taken. On an evening I do find they run late (although to be fair the timetable does say 'at frequent intervals') but that is the fault of the other people sitting in cars, not the FTR. I love it. I'd be annoyed if it was scrapped, as it has been paid for and works well.
I wonder how many people slating the FTR actually use it. I do so twice a day, every weekday. As a disabled person I find them much easier to use than either a regular bendy bus or a double decker. I find the hosts almost all of the time to be pleasant and courteous above and beyond the call. I find paying a conductor fara easier than paying the driver and it cuts travel time as the driver can drive while fares are taken. On an evening I do find they run late (although to be fair the timetable does say 'at frequent intervals') but that is the fault of the other people sitting in cars, not the FTR. I love it. I'd be annoyed if it was scrapped, as it has been paid for and works well. WDYWAC
  • Score: 0

6:52pm Tue 27 Dec 11

brummiebob says...

TERRIER3 wrote:
the butler wrote:
I think that the double Decker needed to be modernized, ie type of material used in its construction and seating quality improved, they were a great advantage in the city center!.
some more spelling checks needed....center is american, this is old york not new york, so please use the correct ENGLISH version...CENTRE
York not york, New York not new york, American not american surely? Pedant.
[quote][p][bold]TERRIER3[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the butler[/bold] wrote: I think that the double Decker needed to be modernized, ie type of material used in its construction and seating quality improved, they were a great advantage in the city center!.[/p][/quote]some more spelling checks needed....center is american, this is old york not new york, so please use the correct ENGLISH version...CENTRE[/p][/quote]York not york, New York not new york, American not american surely? Pedant. brummiebob
  • Score: 0

8:53pm Tue 27 Dec 11

skipsea says...

tommyinyork wrote:
skipsea wrote:
It just means First will buy buses to replace them from Poland as they usually do.
That is the most stupidest and dumbest comment i have ever heard.
Then tommyinyork you must be brain dead as most, if not all, of the non FTR buses operated by First in York are on Polish built Volvo chassis with Wright bodywork from NI.
A great help to our economy considering Wright is showered with taxpayers money as the NI economy is considered in need of help for some reason the I want to forget about.
[quote][p][bold]tommyinyork[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]skipsea[/bold] wrote: It just means First will buy buses to replace them from Poland as they usually do.[/p][/quote]That is the most stupidest and dumbest comment i have ever heard.[/p][/quote]Then tommyinyork you must be brain dead as most, if not all, of the non FTR buses operated by First in York are on Polish built Volvo chassis with Wright bodywork from NI. A great help to our economy considering Wright is showered with taxpayers money as the NI economy is considered in need of help for some reason the I want to forget about. skipsea
  • Score: 0

12:27am Wed 28 Dec 11

greenmonkey says...

I have to say Lib dem and Terrier3 are right - this whole story is fabricated by Labour to make it look like they have more control over First than they do. First must be making massive losses on the ftrs that were supposed to pilot PBB (pay before boarding) on all their buses with the 'pilot' just driving the thing around with less dwell time at stops. The useless on board ticket machines led to having to employ the second member of staff. As for fuel, they do 6 miles to the gallon!! The only contracts the council has real influence over are the park and rides, which is how we have secured such modern vehicles and kept the inflated ticket prices lower than comparable First routes in the city (hence they have the cheek to charge 50p more if you get a return out to a park and ride site rather than starting off at one!) Labour should get on with the manifesto pledge to bring in a quality contract and really address the fact that a good efficient system with reasonable fares would be used by most people in York. As James St...said: "York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same."
I have to say Lib dem and Terrier3 are right - this whole story is fabricated by Labour to make it look like they have more control over First than they do. First must be making massive losses on the ftrs that were supposed to pilot PBB (pay before boarding) on all their buses with the 'pilot' just driving the thing around with less dwell time at stops. The useless on board ticket machines led to having to employ the second member of staff. As for fuel, they do 6 miles to the gallon!! The only contracts the council has real influence over are the park and rides, which is how we have secured such modern vehicles and kept the inflated ticket prices lower than comparable First routes in the city (hence they have the cheek to charge 50p more if you get a return out to a park and ride site rather than starting off at one!) Labour should get on with the manifesto pledge to bring in a quality contract and really address the fact that a good efficient system with reasonable fares would be used by most people in York. As James St...said: "York city council should step in here and regulate the buses for this city. From next year I will be travelling by car instead of bus, and if the FIRST doesnt have a major overhaul then many people will be doing the same." greenmonkey
  • Score: 0

12:51am Wed 28 Dec 11

daveyboy25 says...

york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus
york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus daveyboy25
  • Score: 0

12:51am Wed 28 Dec 11

daveyboy25 says...

york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus
york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus daveyboy25
  • Score: 0

8:33am Wed 28 Dec 11

yorkandproud says...

daveyboy25 wrote:
york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus
FTR buses a tourist attraction. Please! daveyboy25 comes in with a late entry for the most stupid comment of the year.
[quote][p][bold]daveyboy25[/bold] wrote: york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus[/p][/quote]FTR buses a tourist attraction. Please! daveyboy25 comes in with a late entry for the most stupid comment of the year. yorkandproud
  • Score: 0

5:55pm Wed 28 Dec 11

brummiebob says...

yorkandproud wrote:
daveyboy25 wrote:
york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus
FTR buses a tourist attraction. Please! daveyboy25 comes in with a late entry for the most stupid comment of the year.
FTR buses are safe for cyclists! I think I win the 2011 title thanks.
[quote][p][bold]yorkandproud[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]daveyboy25[/bold] wrote: york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction, also the hosts who make travelling by bus more enjoyable will be out of work so up goes unemployment. as for ftr drivers being miserable well they are not they are concentrating on 2 cameras that shows people getting on and off the bus[/p][/quote]FTR buses a tourist attraction. Please! daveyboy25 comes in with a late entry for the most stupid comment of the year.[/p][/quote]FTR buses are safe for cyclists! I think I win the 2011 title thanks. brummiebob
  • Score: 0

10:28am Thu 29 Dec 11

Dennis.Dart says...

so Labour want to see people out of jobs, and out on the streets when they can not afford to pay rent etc etc, as this is what will happen if first are forced to get rid of the Ftr, all hosts will be made redundent, there is no requierment for them on conventional buses, this will happen as anything CyC ask of first, first do, as first management have no back bone
so Labour want to see people out of jobs, and out on the streets when they can not afford to pay rent etc etc, as this is what will happen if first are forced to get rid of the Ftr, all hosts will be made redundent, there is no requierment for them on conventional buses, this will happen as anything CyC ask of first, first do, as first management have no back bone Dennis.Dart
  • Score: 0

1:43pm Thu 29 Dec 11

Stevie D says...

CynicaloldGit wrote:
the proper council simply tells the operator to change their busses or look elsewhere for a contract

First run the FTRs commercially, they do not have a contract with the council, and if they choose to run them then they can run them. The only way the council could stop them would be to put restrictions on the roads themselves, but these would also apply to lorries and other vehicles.

bloodaxe wrote:
I've seen modern DDs run by First in Edinburgh and Leeds but York seems to be the dumping ground for the old ones.

What short memories some people have. About 11 years ago, First York bought a fleet of entirely brand new buses, including the double deckers still in use. Since then, they've bought loads more brand new buses. The usual lifespan for a bus is 12–15 years, so it isn't surprising that they haven't been replaced yet.

LibDem wrote:
Double deckers ... cannot be used on routes where there are low bridges

The only routes First York run that go under low bridges are the 2 and 5, double-deckers can be (and are) used quite happily on all other routes.

daveyboy25 wrote:
york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction

Huh? The FTRs are used from the university and Acomb/Foxwood. They don't attract tourists, apart from maybe a handful of bus-spotters who don't want to go to Leeds!
[quote][bold]CynicaloldGit[/bold] wrote: the proper council simply tells the operator to change their busses or look elsewhere for a contract[/quote] First run the FTRs commercially, they do not have a contract with the council, and if they choose to run them then they can run them. The only way the council could stop them would be to put restrictions on the roads themselves, but these would also apply to lorries and other vehicles. [quote][bold]bloodaxe[/bold] wrote: I've seen modern DDs run by First in Edinburgh and Leeds but York seems to be the dumping ground for the old ones.[/quote] What short memories some people have. About 11 years ago, First York bought a fleet of entirely brand new buses, including the double deckers still in use. Since then, they've bought loads more brand new buses. The usual lifespan for a bus is 12–15 years, so it isn't surprising that they haven't been replaced yet. [quote][bold]LibDem[/bold] wrote: Double deckers ... cannot be used on routes where there are low bridges[/quote] The only routes First York run that go under low bridges are the 2 and 5, double-deckers can be (and are) used quite happily on all other routes. [quote][bold]daveyboy25[/bold] wrote: york will also lose by removing ftrs as they have become a tourist attraction[/quote] Huh? The FTRs are used from the university and Acomb/Foxwood. They don't attract tourists, apart from maybe a handful of bus-spotters who don't want to go to Leeds! Stevie D
  • Score: 0

8:06am Sat 31 Dec 11

SuperChris says...

@ Stevie D - finally someone with some sense on here!
@ Stevie D - finally someone with some sense on here! SuperChris
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree