|
Post by sid on Mar 19, 2018 21:51:44 GMT
The luxury of a bus isn't speed, it is the convenience of being carried where you want to go. For example, when travelling to Hammermsith on my local route the 33, I would never change at Richmond to use the District Line. Same with the 715, I could travel to Clapham then down to Guildford which might save me 10-20 mins. Or I could simply hop on the next bus to Kingston and change there. For me it would depend on the purpose of my journey, if I was in no rush I'd probably do the same but if I just wanted to get somewhere pronto I'd probably switch to rail.
|
|
|
Post by rhys on Mar 19, 2018 21:55:40 GMT
Goodness where to start with this. 1. The problem with Crossrail is that it is being used as an excuse for cuts. It is not even operating and TfL have culled buses between Paddington and Oxford St over several years with more cuts planned. It is now being used as both cover *and* justification for removing buses from Oxford St when the reason is an entirely different policy objective. If we look elsewhere no large scale cuts are (currently) planned for the 25 and 86 which you'd imagine where prime candidates if you use your Victoria Line analogy. I've no problem with TfL setting clear, rational objectives for doing things but none of that has emerged with the Crossrail bus changes. It's all a gigantic, illogical muddle. Most of the East London changes are nothing to do with Crossrail at all and far more to do with a stepping stone to a later recast for the Silvertown Tunnel. Most of the West London changes are to try to serve some new housing development and to create a new "Express" route to shut certain Assembly Members up. Things like the cut to the 427 and curtailing the 140 at Hayes and the shambles with the 95/105/E5 in North Southall are just stupid IMO. 2. Yes transport is dynamic but TfL are not making changes due to dynamism. They are making cuts in my area because the loss of road and junction capacity from cycle lane works has completely screwed over the bus network and there is no funding to maintain frequencies. I had that confirmed by someone from TfL! Bad, conflicting policy objectives that had not been properly assessed alongside one another. If we look elsewhere there are virtually no improvements being made at all even where demand genuinely warrants it. No extra money is flowing into Outer London services - some of the busiest most successful routes have had their frequencies taken back to levels from over 20 years ago. Central and Inner London are having their bus network unwound for reasons no one really understands as yet but finances dictate that changes have to be made. Again nothing wrong with change if it is properly planned and for understood reasons. None of this is clear - TfL's own London Travel Report 10 states that they don't know what is going on with trip rate reductions on public transport services. 3. I am afraid I get rather bored with the "fresh air" claims. This harks back to the ludicrous ramblings of Nicholas Ridley when he advocated that buses should only run in busy directions and should run out of service back out of town to reach the outer terminus to take up a busy trip back to the centre. As if demand only existed in one direction. Demand quite naturally varies by day, time and along a route. Any bus on a route can be seen with "fresh air" but within 10 minutes it could quite easily be full to the brim. That is the nature of things and people saying "cut that bus" just because they see buses *in the same place* being less than full are not assessing the full picture of how that route actually performs. To be frank enthusiasts are probably the least qualified people to comment because they come with their own set of biases as to how buses should work. I include myself in that remark just for the sake of clarity. Most enthusiasts will never see the full picture or appreciate the nuances and issues that TfL actually face day to day. 4. Yes we have been here before. And do you know what LT were still faffing around with Waltham Forest's buses in the 1980s and 1990s trying to cope with the aftermath of the 1968 changes. The bus reshaping plan was not really considered much of a success for a while variety of reasons - many of them down to poor vehicle and ticketing technology and an expectation that passengers would bend to LT's will. That basic expectation was wrong then and I think it's wrong now. If Auntie Val is dreaming up some mass bus route rationalisation exercise at City Hall she may find herself with a very poisoned legacy indeed. The fact that TfL are just ploughing ahead with cuts and cuts with no consultation, no engagement with stakeholders and no publically declared rationale makes the entire process extremely dubious. If they have a genuine and justified case then put it to the public with ideas for changes and see what they say about it. They might actually get a fright in that some sensibly put together plans for more coherent, reliable and effective bus services might actually get public support. At the moment all we get is a fait accompli and nothing else. You might be bored with the term fresh air but try standing on Waterloo bridge for example in the middle of the day and count how many half/completely empty buses you see. As for poking fun at the late Nicholas Ridley for something he allegedly said, well shock horror that is exactly what happens on the X68! Maybe that's the sort of service he was referring to? I don't think you could use the example of many routes during the "middle of the day". Most bus routes in London aren't that busy during those hours. Personally, I've not seen one person suggest a legitimate reason for altering those said routes apart from using the example of "fresh air" during the middle of the day and off peak hours.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 19, 2018 22:00:06 GMT
You might be bored with the term fresh air but try standing on Waterloo bridge for example in the middle of the day and count how many half/completely empty buses you see. As for poking fun at the late Nicholas Ridley for something he allegedly said, well shock horror that is exactly what happens on the X68! Maybe that's the sort of service he was referring to? I don't think you could use the example of many routes during the "middle of the day". Most bus routes in London aren't that busy during those hours. Personally, I've not seen one person suggest a legitimate reason for altering those said routes apart from using the example of "fresh air" during the middle of the day and off peak hours. I don't see your point? Obviously it's about matching supply and demand.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 31, 2018 6:26:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 31, 2018 8:17:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jun 26, 2018 20:12:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jun 26, 2018 20:58:12 GMT
The report states that bus journeys are down 2.5% down on last year at 346 million. The way TfL are chopping frequencies to “match demand” would lead one to believe that the 2.5% drop is concentrated on a few routes. Perhaps the ridership figures do not fully justify the scale of cuts being made 😏 The cat will need to get let out of the bag sooner or later now that the Oxford Street pedestrianisation won’t be around to sugar coat some of those cuts. Interesting that ridership across all modes of transport except TfL rail are down when compared to last year. What is going on? Are jobs or people leaving London? Are more people working from home? Curious as to what has caused this trend.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jun 26, 2018 21:16:45 GMT
The report states that bus journeys are down 2.5% down on last year at 346 million. The way TfL are chopping frequencies to “match demand” would lead one to believe that the 2.5% drop is concentrated on a few routes. Perhaps the ridership figures do not fully justify the scale of cuts being made 😏 The cat will need to get let out of the bag sooner or later now that the Oxford Street pedestrianisation won’t be around to sugar coat some of those cuts. Interesting that ridership across all modes of transport except TfL rail are down when compared to last year. What is going on? Are jobs or people leaving London? Are more people working from home? Curious as to what has caused this trend. I suspect it's largely due to more people working and shopping from home and fewer people going out in the evening.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 26, 2018 23:08:00 GMT
Just to add to this. The papers are not mega thrilling but cover - regular Finance update on revenue, costs, passenger numbers. - a rather complex paper on the future structure of Crossrail and TfL Rail Infrastructure subsidiaries to move money between businesses to cover access charges, maintenance of the railway and payment of Crossrail specific loans. I confess I don't understand the tax stuff here but the diagrams showing the relationships and monetary flows are interesting. - paper on future of Connect comms system / contract - paper on commercialisation of telecoms systems and use of TfL assets. Covers potential introduction of telephony and wifi on the Tube plus other initiatives. - update on TfL Consulting
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 26, 2018 23:20:56 GMT
The report states that bus journeys are down 2.5% down on last year at 346 million. The way TfL are chopping frequencies to “match demand” would lead one to believe that the 2.5% drop is concentrated on a few routes. Perhaps the ridership figures do not fully justify the scale of cuts being made 😏 The cat will need to get let out of the bag sooner or later now that the Oxford Street pedestrianisation won’t be around to sugar coat some of those cuts. Interesting that ridership across all modes of transport except TfL rail are down when compared to last year. What is going on? Are jobs or people leaving London? Are more people working from home? Curious as to what has caused this trend. TfL answered a long series of questions from the Assembly Budget sub committee last week. Two main things featured which partly answers your question. 1. There is a long term decline in trip rates per person. There is no great clarity as to what is causing this but it is there. 2. TfL stated that commuting demand and revenue is holding up at the moment. They cited this in the context of AMs asking if people cycling was creating space on the tube. They said that for every person who rides a bike or walks another one replaces them on the tube. The problem area is off peak travel where things like changes to leisure activity, shopping habits are an issue. The other thing they cited was the 10 years of austerity where real wages have not risen for a substantial proportion of the population. In such circumstances discretionary spend is reduced and that affects public transport use. There is a webcast of the Cttee meeting on the London.gov.uk if anyone has a free couple of hours. I have watched it sad person that I am. EDIT - you would expect TfL Rail numbers to increase for two reasons. One is the takeover of the Heathrow Connect service from May this year. That should bring the numbers up somewhat although the gain is not what you would call huge - up 200,000 on Period 2 last year. That's not massive but it's very early days for the western service and for people to get used to it being on the tube map etc. Service levels are also modest and the Class 360s keep breaking down all the time. Secondly there is a reduction in weekend closures on the eastern end of the route. This should bring in some more off peak numbers once people are assured they can rely on the trains again after months of rail replacement services.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 27, 2018 0:07:43 GMT
A bit more exciting this one - Programmes and Investment Cttee for next week. tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/programmes-and-investment-committee 3rd July 2018 Papers on the following - TfL Growth Fund. Confirms Met Line Extension is dead but we knew that. Outline some small additions to the programme re Walthamstow Central and Colindale extra entrances, Tramlink improvements and extra entrance at Ilford Station. - Update on Crossrail - LUL World Class Capacity Programme (i.e. the scraps after cancelling extra trains for Northern and Jubilee Lines) - LUL Power and Cooling and Energy programme - Silvertown Tunnel update - LUL Stations Renewals programme - Healthy Streets update - 4th Quarter 2017/18 Programmes and Investment Report I confess I have yet to read most of these but there should be plenty for Forum Members to get their teeth into.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jul 12, 2018 17:55:53 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jul 18, 2018 13:56:28 GMT
TfL Board papers 25th July (not had chance to skim them yet) tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/board-papersThere is a Quarterly report 1 April - 23 June claims there are 9550 buses (page 6) Bus income £338m vs £345m budget (page 10) Bus journeys 521m vs 532m budgeted (page 15) Q1 bus deficit is £151m (page 20) so buses losing about £1.8m per day Bus yield (fare income) 65p per passenger, but costs 94p per passenger (page 21) Bus staff fell from 878 to 494 in Q1 (page 34) a 15% reduction in staff content.tfl.gov.uk/board-20180725-item07-qpr-q1.pdf
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jul 18, 2018 14:47:35 GMT
TfL Board papers 25th July (not had chance to skim them yet) tfl.gov.uk/corporate/publications-and-reports/board-papersThere is a Quarterly report 1 April - 23 June claims there are 9550 buses (page 6) Bus income £338m vs £345m budget (page 10) Bus journeys 521m vs 532m budgeted (page 15) Q1 bus deficit is £151m (page 20) so buses losing about £1.8m per day Bus yield (fare income) 65p per passenger, but costs 94p per passenger (page 21) Bus staff fell from 878 to 494 in Q1 (page 34) a 15% reduction in staff content.tfl.gov.uk/board-20180725-item07-qpr-q1.pdf That reference to 878 people should be 578 otherwise your 15% cut makes no sense (I have checked the report). This is from the notes of the Finance Cttee held in early July where the Cttee looked at Period 2's Finance Report. Nice to see some "bleedin' obvious" questions being asked about analysis of modal transfer. Also of note is that Val Shawcross remains a member of TfL until September 2020 and sits on the Board and two of the sub committees. That's been kept a bit quiet. This is from the Commissioner's Report about Brent Cross.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2018 8:06:02 GMT
One thing I find interesting about TFL and its bus strategy is where is it taking into consideration the impact of road improvement schemes such as Mini Holland in LBWF, this makes bus journeys less appealing to the passenger as it is often quicker to walk. Its fine to have transport strategies but one strategy cannot be at a cost to other forms of public transport. LBWF is ruining the transport infrastructure in the borough. This is only one borough from 33 so if all are as bad that is why figures are down and the incumbent TFL gurus need to develop a scheme to reverse the decline in bus usage.
|
|