|
Post by wirewiper on Dec 1, 2019 8:24:55 GMT
I always cling to the hope the 9 would be re extended to Mortlake if the bridge gets fixed. I do realise it's a long shot thou. I doubt the 9 would return to Mortlake. The old travel patterns have been well and truly broken now, once the bridge is restored I am sure the people of Barnes will want their frequent and reliable link to the Underground back, not a longish route that is subject to the vagaries of traffic conditions in Central London.
|
|
|
Post by kenmet on Dec 1, 2019 8:30:20 GMT
I always cling to the hope the 9 would be re extended to Mortlake if the bridge gets fixed. I do realise it's a long shot thou. I doubt very much if Hammersmith Bridge will ever be cleared for double deck buses.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Dec 1, 2019 8:50:25 GMT
I agree. Had the bridge been repaired let's say in 1997 then it would have been likely it would have re extended as people would have still been talking about the 9 in Barnes. Thou of course they may have struggled to find some RM/RMLs for it back then.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Dec 1, 2019 10:51:12 GMT
Is there scope for extending the 6 via Fleet Street and Ludgate Circus up to Holborn Circus, in such a way that it would be in striking distance at least of the 25? It might just alleviate some of the 'own goals' made by TfL in relation to the 8/25/242 over the last few years, culminating in the disastrously stupid (in view of no Crossrail) decision to cut back the 25.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Dec 1, 2019 11:15:48 GMT
The Strand. Its a permanent standstill. Its an overbused corridor. It has eight bus routes. The 6 is in my experienced the most lightly used of those routes. I see no need for the 6 to continue to Aldwych anymore. It is now paralleld by the 9 between HPC and Aldwych, however there is a stark dichotomy in the loadings each routes carries. The 6 should remain terminating at Aldwych as it's still a popular link to and from there, it also provides an alternative routing to the 139 towards the Marble Arch area so it's a useful assistance. Your comment regarding the 6 being 'the most lightly used' of the routes along the Strand isn't logical as it terminates at the eastern end of the corridor therefore it will naturally be less busy than the the through routes along there, the same can be said about the 87 too. My idea of extending the 6 to Blackfriars might be a radical one, but the 6 would provide a means of linking the station with the West End, this might prove popular just like its recent diversion via Piccadilly has. The 4 isn't a sensible comparison in this regard as there is relatively less demand amongst the public between Blackfriars station and the areas the 4 traverses through. Whereas the public would find a Blackfriars and West End connection more popular and attractive, especially commuters during the peaks. As mentioned previously, any 'lost patronage' since its diversion away from Oxford Circus has been partially regained because of its increasing popularity along Piccadilly. Regarding the 9, its current max running time is 56 mins. It does contend with congestion at times, but certainly not to the extent of it suffering from reliability issues. It's still a short route so an extension is possible. The proximity of London Bridge to Aldwych is tempting so the 9 is a fitting route for the extension, especially when factoring in the provision of new links. Having said that, extending an existing route within the Oxford Circus/TCR areas would be a more attractive idea. Your Blackfriars extension is an intersting idea, however there already are a number of routes linking to nearby Fleet Street (also connecting to Thameslink at City TL). However, what could be useful is to extend the 6 beyond Blackfriars Station, to go over Blackfriars Bridge then via the 381 to London Bridge Station. This would reintroduce some of the RV1's links (from London Bridge & Bankside to the West End), but much more directly that the RV1's loop via the London Eye, as well as new links west of Aldwych.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Dec 1, 2019 12:44:28 GMT
I always cling to the hope the 9 would be re extended to Mortlake if the bridge gets fixed. I do realise it's a long shot thou. I doubt the 9 would return to Mortlake. The old travel patterns have been well and truly broken now, once the bridge is restored I am sure the people of Barnes will want their frequent and reliable link to the Underground back, not a longish route that is subject to the vagaries of traffic conditions in Central London. Travel patterns change, often as a result of the available transport and links. If the 9 were to return to Mortlake (highly unlikely in my view even if DDs were allowed again on Hammersmith Bridge), then travel patterns would change again and I believe use made of the link into central London. Provide a good link to somewhere useful and the passengers will follow.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Dec 1, 2019 12:54:09 GMT
I always cling to the hope the 9 would be re extended to Mortlake if the bridge gets fixed. I do realise it's a long shot thou. Never mind. Here are a couple of photos to help you get over the pain (Not my photos) Attachment DeletedAttachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Dec 1, 2019 16:23:49 GMT
Is there scope for extending the 6 via Fleet Street and Ludgate Circus up to Holborn Circus, in such a way that it would be in striking distance at least of the 25? It might just alleviate some of the 'own goals' made by TfL in relation to the 8/25/242 over the last few years, culminating in the disastrously stupid (in view of no Crossrail) decision to cut back the 25. I love that idea so much, wish it happened, Another possiblity could be to send the 6 up Fetter Lane to restore a bus service there, but I realise this is more fantasy than a practical idea.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Dec 1, 2019 18:34:38 GMT
Is there scope for extending the 6 via Fleet Street and Ludgate Circus up to Holborn Circus, in such a way that it would be in striking distance at least of the 25? It might just alleviate some of the 'own goals' made by TfL in relation to the 8/25/242 over the last few years, culminating in the disastrously stupid (in view of no Crossrail) decision to cut back the 25. I love that idea so much, wish it happened, Another possiblity could be to send the 6 up Fetter Lane to restore a bus service there, but I realise this is more fantasy than a practical idea. Well, it could go via Fetter Lane, although if that thoroughfare were to have buses again they'd probably prefer the lost Waterloo link.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 1, 2019 20:34:13 GMT
The 6 should remain terminating at Aldwych as it's still a popular link to and from there, it also provides an alternative routing to the 139 towards the Marble Arch area so it's a useful assistance. Your comment regarding the 6 being 'the most lightly used' of the routes along the Strand isn't logical as it terminates at the eastern end of the corridor therefore it will naturally be less busy than the the through routes along there, the same can be said about the 87 too. My idea of extending the 6 to Blackfriars might be a radical one, but the 6 would provide a means of linking the station with the West End, this might prove popular just like its recent diversion via Piccadilly has. The 4 isn't a sensible comparison in this regard as there is relatively less demand amongst the public between Blackfriars station and the areas the 4 traverses through. Whereas the public would find a Blackfriars and West End connection more popular and attractive, especially commuters during the peaks. As mentioned previously, any 'lost patronage' since its diversion away from Oxford Circus has been partially regained because of its increasing popularity along Piccadilly. Regarding the 9, its current max running time is 56 mins. It does contend with congestion at times, but certainly not to the extent of it suffering from reliability issues. It's still a short route so an extension is possible. The proximity of London Bridge to Aldwych is tempting so the 9 is a fitting route for the extension, especially when factoring in the provision of new links. Having said that, extending an existing route within the Oxford Circus/TCR areas would be a more attractive idea. Your Blackfriars extension is an intersting idea, however there already are a number of routes linking to nearby Fleet Street (also connecting to Thameslink at City TL). However, what could be useful is to extend the 6 beyond Blackfriars Station, to go over Blackfriars Bridge then via the 381 to London Bridge Station. This would reintroduce some of the RV1's links (from London Bridge & Bankside to the West End), but much more directly that the RV1's loop via the London Eye, as well as new links west of Aldwych. Extending the 6 to London Bridge via the 381 seems interesting as there would be a case for it, but the reality is the 6 would struggle and extending it any further than Blackfriars would lead to reliability issues. The 9 is a more logical route to extend via your suggested routing. Just an idea, perhaps the 6 could be extended over the bridge to Waterloo? This would somewhat assist the 139 that solely provides the Waterloo - West End link and introduce new links in the process.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Dec 1, 2019 21:37:58 GMT
I love that idea so much, wish it happened, Another possiblity could be to send the 6 up Fetter Lane to restore a bus service there, but I realise this is more fantasy than a practical idea. Well, it could go via Fetter Lane, although if that thoroughfare were to have buses again they'd probably prefer the lost Waterloo link. Fetter Lane is problematic. The ideal thing to do would be to send the 341 back down there as I don't think the change has been sucessful, and I don't think its passengers enjoy sitting in traffic on Farringdon Road. Although the consultation suggesting the rerouting would be faster, I think it has, ironically, backfired. Another option to restore a bus service to Fetter Lane would have been to remove the 243 from Kingsway instead of the 171 with the 243 diverted at Holborn to Holborn Circus then down Fetter Lane. The issue is that slows down through travel on the 243, a route I love*, and the route is well used on Kingsway. It would be faster to cut Holborn out of it, but the 243 is very well used in Holborn. The best possible option would be not meddling with the 341 for no reason, I think Farringdon Road would be fine with just the 40 and 63.
*I work in Holborn, and the 243 has become my favourite route on Kingsway since the 171 cutback. The route in general is great, but its my preffered option to reach Waterloo now (other than walking if Kingsway is gridlocked).
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 2, 2019 2:11:31 GMT
Well, it could go via Fetter Lane, although if that thoroughfare were to have buses again they'd probably prefer the lost Waterloo link. Fetter Lane is problematic. The ideal thing to do would be to send the 341 back down there as I don't think the change has been sucessful, and I don't think its passengers enjoy sitting in traffic on Farringdon Road. Although the consultation suggesting the rerouting would be faster, I think it has, ironically, backfired. Another option to restore a bus service to Fetter Lane would have been to remove the 243 from Kingsway instead of the 171 with the 243 diverted at Holborn to Holborn Circus then down Fetter Lane. The issue is that slows down through travel on the 243, a route I love*, and the route is well used on Kingsway. It would be faster to cut Holborn out of it, but the 243 is very well used in Holborn. The best possible option would be not meddling with the 341 for no reason, I think Farringdon Road would be fine with just the 40 and 63.
*I work in Holborn, and the 243 has become my favourite route on Kingsway since the 171 cutback. The route in general is great, but its my preffered option to reach Waterloo now (other than walking if Kingsway is gridlocked).
The 171 should not have been cut back at all, one of many silly moves by TFL. The 171 was serving its puprose well and was often busy from the get go at Holborn in the peaks. Regarding Fetter Lane, it wouldn't be wise to modify the 243 as such as it gets busy at Holborn as you mention, also the 55 needs as much assistance as it can get between Holborn and Shoreditch. If anything the 243 should have a frequency increase in the peaks. I would re-extend the 45 to King's Cross albeit deviating slightly via Fetter Lane then to line of route like it has been. The 45 should never have been cut back to what is now a short and somewhat useless route, it was needlessly removed from Grays Inn Road where it saw regular use along that corridor. The 40 can then return to its previous destination at Aldgate, another popular link pointlessly destroyed, thus providing Fenchurch Street a bus service once again. I do agree with rerouting the 341 via Farringdon though as it speeds up journies on the route slightly.
|
|
|
Post by kenmet on Dec 2, 2019 6:45:43 GMT
Fetter Lane is problematic. The ideal thing to do would be to send the 341 back down there as I don't think the change has been sucessful, and I don't think its passengers enjoy sitting in traffic on Farringdon Road. Although the consultation suggesting the rerouting would be faster, I think it has, ironically, backfired. Another option to restore a bus service to Fetter Lane would have been to remove the 243 from Kingsway instead of the 171 with the 243 diverted at Holborn to Holborn Circus then down Fetter Lane. The issue is that slows down through travel on the 243, a route I love*, and the route is well used on Kingsway. It would be faster to cut Holborn out of it, but the 243 is very well used in Holborn. The best possible option would be not meddling with the 341 for no reason, I think Farringdon Road would be fine with just the 40 and 63.
*I work in Holborn, and the 243 has become my favourite route on Kingsway since the 171 cutback. The route in general is great, but its my preffered option to reach Waterloo now (other than walking if Kingsway is gridlocked).
The 171 should not have been cut back at all, one of many silly moves by TFL. The 171 was serving its puprose well and was often busy from the get go at Holborn in the peaks. Regarding Fetter Lane, it wouldn't be wise to modify the 243 as such as it gets busy at Holborn as you mention, also the 55 needs as much assistance as it can get between Holborn and Shoreditch. If anything the 243 should have a frequency increase in the peaks. I would re-extend the 45 to King's Cross albeit deviating slightly via Fetter Lane then to line of route like it has been. The 45 should never have been cut back to what is now a short and somewhat useless route, it was needlessly removed from Grays Inn Road where it saw regular use along that corridor. The 40 can then return to its previous destination at Aldgate, another popular link pointlessly destroyed, thus providing Fenchurch Street a bus service once again. I do agree with rerouting the 341 via Farringdon though as it speeds up journies on the route slightly. Reality is that there was no justification in both the 68 and 171 running in tandem between Holborn and Camberwell. During peak times buses across Waterloo Bridge are busy but reality is that there is a massive over provision off peak and I see little chance of the 40 or 45 ever being returned to their former destinations.
|
|
|
Post by kenmet on Dec 2, 2019 9:41:11 GMT
6 Withdrawn between Piccadilly Circus (94 stand) and Aldwych.
9 Extended from Aldwych to Waterloo.
15 Withdrawn between Aldgate and Trafalgar Square, rerouted via the former 40 to London Bridge.
94 Withdrawn Marble Arch/Portman Square and Piccadilly Circus, rumoured to be happening anyway.
139 Withdrawn Marble Arch and Waterloo.
NEW CENTRAL LINK ROUTES
CL1 Marble Arch via 139 to Aldwych then via the 15 to Aldgate.
CL2 Paddington via 36 to Marble Arch, then as the CL1 to Aldwych then Waterloo Bridge and 381 to London Bridge. Replaces much of the RV1 and provides a link between London Bridge and the west end.
10bph on both the CL1/2 giving a dedicated 20bph service with electric buses between Aldwych and Marble Arch.
The downside would obviously be more people having to change buses.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 2, 2019 13:25:02 GMT
6 Withdrawn between Piccadilly Circus (94 stand) and Aldwych. 9 Extended from Aldwych to Waterloo. 15 Withdrawn between Aldgate and Trafalgar Square, rerouted via the former 40 to London Bridge. 94 Withdrawn Marble Arch/Portman Square and Piccadilly Circus, rumoured to be happening anyway. 139 Withdrawn Marble Arch and Waterloo. NEW CENTRAL LINK ROUTES CL1 Marble Arch via 139 to Aldwych then via the 15 to Aldgate. CL2 Paddington via 36 to Marble Arch, then as the CL1 to Aldwych then Waterloo Bridge and 381 to London Bridge. Replaces much of the RV1 and provides a link between London Bridge and the west end. 10bph on both the CL1/2 giving a dedicated 20bph service with electric buses between Aldwych and Marble Arch. The downside would obviously be more people having to change buses. It seems like you're removing useful links just for the sake of it. Why resort to curtailing routes to only reintroduce new routes in their place? It's pointless when you can just enhance/modify existing services and avoid the inconvenience of people having to needlessly change buses in the process. All this would do is overcrowd the Underground even more so than it currently is. The bus network in Central London needs to be prioritised.
|
|