|
Post by LT 20181 on Dec 5, 2018 16:50:27 GMT
The problem I foresee with the 140 / X140 is that I'd guess (again no info from TfL) that a lot of people making shortish local trips will suffer a lower frequency because the 140 frequency is being cut. Some will gain if their trips perfectly coincide with the X140's stopping pattern *or* they are willing / able to walk a longer distance to reach a X140 stop rather than wait for a 140. I don't see how longer access times to / from stops are an upside unless the X140 is going to run at hyper speed to offset the longer walk time and longer average wait time (given we're told the planned X140 frequency has now been cut). The mess that is access to Heathrow if you are in or around Hayes under the new service arrangement is also a concern. If 140s were empty at Hayes and Harlington, rather than packed full, then I could understand turning them there. However decanting large numbers of people to crush inside X140s or having to wait for a 278 if you want to reach a stop the X140 won't serve is not the way you treat your existing passengers. I think TfL are secretly hoping people will take to Crossrail instead but they'd be mad to do that if they are using PAYG - £6 to go one stop into the airport! Exactly the problem I foresee. The loading patterns on the route are very clear. Each bus unloads at stations then fills up at the following stops before unloading at the next station.
I live on the 140 route and my local stop is one stop south of South Harrow Station. Between the hours of 0630 and 0830 I cannot board ANY 140s that arrive, with the majority of these people on-board having boarded SINCE Northolt Station. At the next stop at South Harrow Station, about half the bus alight to use the Piccadilly Line. Buses then fill up at the in-between stops in to Harrow, where almost all alight. Now to my continued surprise there are just as many people that then board in Harrow for Wealdstone and The Weald.
Yes, the X140 WILL be great use and will help the 140s overcrowding, especially in the evening peaks south from Harrow, however MOST will not break their habits and wait at further bus stops for the 140 down the line where they almost certainly will not be able to board.
These commuters probably would change their travel habits with the new X140 running alongside the original 140. Maybe it would just take some time to get used to the changes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2018 16:55:03 GMT
Exactly the problem I foresee. The loading patterns on the route are very clear. Each bus unloads at stations then fills up at the following stops before unloading at the next station.
I live on the 140 route and my local stop is one stop south of South Harrow Station. Between the hours of 0630 and 0830 I cannot board ANY 140s that arrive, with the majority of these people on-board having boarded SINCE Northolt Station. At the next stop at South Harrow Station, about half the bus alight to use the Piccadilly Line. Buses then fill up at the in-between stops in to Harrow, where almost all alight. Now to my continued surprise there are just as many people that then board in Harrow for Wealdstone and The Weald.
Yes, the X140 WILL be great use and will help the 140s overcrowding, especially in the evening peaks south from Harrow, however MOST will not break their habits and wait at further bus stops for the 140 down the line where they almost certainly will not be able to board.
These commuters probably would change their travel habits with the new X140 running alongside the original 140. Maybe it would just take some time to get used to the changes. They won't if the X140 doesn't take them to where they want to go. If you get off between anywhere between X140 stops, people are very unlikely to get off an X140 then wait for a less frequent 140, with the chance that they will not be able to board it. Very happy to eat humble pie, but I cannot see commuters being bothered to change buses, when they can get to their same destination without changing and waiting in the cold and wet. [Similar to users of the 25 NOT changing to the Central line at Stratford or Mile End]
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Feb 20, 2019 12:37:18 GMT
Will the West London changes be effected by the Crossrail start date? Will they go ahead from December 2019? Or will they be delayed by Crossrail?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 20, 2019 13:06:11 GMT
Will the West London changes be effected by the Crossrail start date? Will they go ahead from December 2019? Or will they be delayed by Crossrail? I think there is sufficient precedent to say that the changes will be delayed until such times as Crossrail offers the full intended service. Note that TfL Rail services may well run to Reading (from Paddington main line) from December 2019 but only at half hourly intervals. There will not be a high frequency service from places like Southall or Hayes until the western lines connect into the core. Only then can TfL justifiably adjust the bus network as planned. I would add that some changes (eg H32) are clearly dependent on the progress of housing developments and therefore are unlikely to run until site access is possible and people have moved into new homes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2019 14:40:05 GMT
Will the West London changes be effected by the Crossrail start date? Will they go ahead from December 2019? Or will they be delayed by Crossrail? I think there is sufficient precedent to say that the changes will be delayed until such times as Crossrail offers the full intended service. Note that TfL Rail services may well run to Reading (from Paddington main line) from December 2019 but only at half hourly intervals. There will not be a high frequency service from places like Southall or Hayes until the western lines connect into the core. Only then can TfL justifiably adjust the bus network as planned. I would add that some changes (eg H32) are clearly dependent on the progress of housing developments and therefore are unlikely to run until site access is possible and people have moved into new homes. On the flip side I'd actually go as far as saying that a number of changes could very well come into effect from December this year. One of those reasons being the routes such as the 266 and 427 are either coming up for tender or awaiting tender award. I can see both those routes being cut back on from the start of their new contracts. TfL have proved that there doesn't need to be any line running to initiate cuts e.g. the 25, albeit that it was tied up with another tender award.
The 140 I think will stay as it is until the full service is up and running as there is no bus/cost saving, and I don't think I've yet seen any mention of the 278 tender. The 95/H32 cannot happen until the infrastructure for the new housing site is actually open, so sort of unrelated to the Crossrail start date.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Feb 20, 2019 14:49:09 GMT
I think there is sufficient precedent to say that the changes will be delayed until such times as Crossrail offers the full intended service. Note that TfL Rail services may well run to Reading (from Paddington main line) from December 2019 but only at half hourly intervals. There will not be a high frequency service from places like Southall or Hayes until the western lines connect into the core. Only then can TfL justifiably adjust the bus network as planned. I would add that some changes (eg H32) are clearly dependent on the progress of housing developments and therefore are unlikely to run until site access is possible and people have moved into new homes. On the flip side I'd actually go as far as saying that a number of changes could very well come into effect from December this year. One of those reasons being the routes such as the 266 and 427 are either coming up for tender or awaiting tender award. I can see both those routes being cut back on from the start of their new contracts. TfL have proved that there doesn't need to be any line running to initiate cuts e.g. the 25, albeit that it was tied up with another tender award.
The 140 I think will stay as it is until the full service is up and running as there is no bus/cost saving, and I don't think I've yet seen any mention of the 278 tender. The 95/H32 cannot happen until the infrastructure for the new housing site is actually open, so sort of unrelated to the Crossrail start date.
When are the new houses open?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2019 15:27:44 GMT
On the flip side I'd actually go as far as saying that a number of changes could very well come into effect from December this year. One of those reasons being the routes such as the 266 and 427 are either coming up for tender or awaiting tender award. I can see both those routes being cut back on from the start of their new contracts. TfL have proved that there doesn't need to be any line running to initiate cuts e.g. the 25, albeit that it was tied up with another tender award.
The 140 I think will stay as it is until the full service is up and running as there is no bus/cost saving, and I don't think I've yet seen any mention of the 278 tender. The 95/H32 cannot happen until the infrastructure for the new housing site is actually open, so sort of unrelated to the Crossrail start date.
When are the new houses open? When they have been built. And as snoggle has said, probably when a few have been sold too...
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Feb 20, 2019 18:08:34 GMT
What's the likihood of the West London Crossrail routes to be altered again once Crossrail finally launches I.e the new routes scrapped?
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Feb 20, 2019 21:32:35 GMT
What's the likihood of the West London Crossrail routes to be altered again once Crossrail finally launches I.e the new routes scrapped? They won’t scrap them now they’ve announced they’re going ahead. That said I would like to see the 278 scrapped and just keep the 140 as is currently with the X140 stopping at major stops to compliment it, much like the Uxbridge Road 207/427 and 607 corridor.
|
|
|
Post by jordzjohn123 on Apr 18, 2019 17:24:29 GMT
It's been announced on the BBC that the opening of Crossrail will be 2 years late Wonder what happens now with the bus changes?
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 18, 2019 17:25:47 GMT
What's the likihood of the West London Crossrail routes to be altered again once Crossrail finally launches I.e the new routes scrapped? They won’t scrap them now they’ve announced they’re going ahead. That said I would like to see the 278 scrapped and just keep the 140 as is currently with the X140 stopping at major stops to compliment it, much like the Uxbridge Road 207/427 and 607 corridor. I wish they would rethink some there decisions like combining the 306 and 218 together. And leaving the 440 as it is.
|
|
|
Post by jordzjohn123 on Apr 18, 2019 17:40:36 GMT
It's been announced on the BBC that the opening of Crossrail will be 2 years late Wonder what happens now with the bus changes? Could*
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 19, 2019 14:40:35 GMT
They won’t scrap them now they’ve announced they’re going ahead. That said I would like to see the 278 scrapped and just keep the 140 as is currently with the X140 stopping at major stops to compliment it, much like the Uxbridge Road 207/427 and 607 corridor. I wish they would rethink some there decisions like combining the 306 and 218 together. And leaving the 440 as it is. I agree with combined the 218 and 306 but I think the reason they won’t is because the residential streets in the West Acton area prevent double deckers from going down those roads. I agree the 440 shouldn’t be tampered with in Acton, the route is fine as it is. When I went to a meeting about buses in Chiswick, the residents were attacking Geoff Hobbs about their loss of a link to Park Royal ASDA and Central Middlesex Hospital. They were also angry that they wouldn’t see the fruits of the Wembley extension and felt that was TFL trying to conceal they negative effects of the route extension. One resident one Bollo Lane was furious about the 440 no longer going over the level crossing. Whilst I think the 440 going over the level crossing would hamper the reliability of the route, no one wants to go to the Business Park. I think the only reason the 440 was sent into the Business Park is because of the route at least goes through the Business Park it is less of a waste. Having two Acton - Chiswick Business Park routes seems utterly pointless but for the 440 I don’t see what else one could do if you don’t want the route going over the level crossing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2019 15:31:45 GMT
I wish they would rethink some there decisions like combining the 306 and 218 together. And leaving the 440 as it is. I agree with combined the 218 and 306 but I think the reason they won’t is because the residential streets in the West Acton area prevent double deckers from going down those roads. I agree the 440 shouldn’t be tampered with in Acton, the route is fine as it is. When I went to a meeting about buses in Chiswick, the residents were attacking Geoff Hobbs about their loss of a link to Park Royal ASDA and Central Middlesex Hospital. They were also angry that they wouldn’t see the fruits of the Wembley extension and felt that was TFL trying to conceal they negative effects of the route extension. One resident one Bollo Lane was furious about the 440 no longer going over the level crossing. Whilst I think the 440 going over the level crossing would hamper the reliability of the route, no one wants to go to the Business Park. I think the only reason the 440 was sent into the Business Park is because of the route at least goes through the Business Park it is less of a waste. Having two Acton - Chiswick Business Park routes seems utterly pointless but for the 440 I don’t see what else one could do if you don’t want the route going over the level crossing. I remember reading the extension to the 27 to the Park was part funded by external stakeholders ( Hounslow Council). So the link has to be provided to/from at least Turnham Green. Yes, makes a mockery that it’s at expense of local residents (of Ealing borough !!)
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 19, 2019 17:02:07 GMT
I wish they would rethink some there decisions like combining the 306 and 218 together. And leaving the 440 as it is. I agree with combined the 218 and 306 but I think the reason they won’t is because the residential streets in the West Acton area prevent double deckers from going down those roads. I agree the 440 shouldn’t be tampered with in Acton, the route is fine as it is. When I went to a meeting about buses in Chiswick, the residents were attacking Geoff Hobbs about their loss of a link to Park Royal ASDA and Central Middlesex Hospital. They were also angry that they wouldn’t see the fruits of the Wembley extension and felt that was TFL trying to conceal they negative effects of the route extension. One resident one Bollo Lane was furious about the 440 no longer going over the level crossing. Whilst I think the 440 going over the level crossing would hamper the reliability of the route, no one wants to go to the Business Park. I think the only reason the 440 was sent into the Business Park is because of the route at least goes through the Business Park it is less of a waste. Having two Acton - Chiswick Business Park routes seems utterly pointless but for the 440 I don’t see what else one could do if you don’t want the route going over the level crossing. I think that the 218/306 combo should go up horn lane to North Acton not via the 440. I think that it’s a stupid idea replacing a single deck route to replace the 266. I’ve always seen 266s bursting when they leave Hammersmith. I have seen double decks in West Acton so I don’t think that West Acton is a problem. I’ve seen the 207 and 266 diverted via West Acton and rail replacement also goes via West Acton. But I think the residents might have a problem with double deckers.
|
|