|
Post by M1104 on Sept 28, 2018 13:22:35 GMT
Meanwhile the consultation has mysteriously vanished. It's still there
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 13:36:29 GMT
Some thoughts:
40 - Cuts bus connections between East Dulwich and London Bridge/City. Hopper fare relives the pain, but a change at Camberwell or Elephant will become the norm. East Dulwich has a direct train service to London Bridge. New connection to Blackfriars for the 'improved' Thameslink service may dull the pain.
53 - Considering this is an important trunk route into central London from Woolwich and Plumstead, this is a bad move. However, passengers can change at Deptford Bridge for the 453.
171 - Makes sense. The route is shadowed by 172 between New Cross and Brockley Rise which will ensure passengers still have connections to Waterloo and Aldwych. Reliability should be improved along the southern end of the route. Peckham loses a direct bus to Waterloo and Aldwych, which will require changing at Camberwell Green or the Elephant.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 28, 2018 13:37:34 GMT
Meanwhile the consultation has mysteriously vanished. It's still there It was certainly gone during the time I posted. I wonder if they made any changes.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 13:39:57 GMT
After having a careful think, these changes don't seem too bad tbh. It's actually true that buses are half empty at most times.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 28, 2018 14:12:41 GMT
Some thoughts: 40 - Cuts bus connections between East Dulwich and London Bridge/City. Hopper fare relives the pain, but a change at Camberwell or Elephant will become the norm. East Dulwich has a direct train service to London Bridge. New connection to Blackfriars for the 'improved' Thameslink service may dull the pain. 53 - Considering this is an important trunk route into central London from Woolwich and Plumstead, this is a bad move. However, passengers can change at Deptford Bridge for the 453. 171 - Makes sense. The route is shadowed by 172 between New Cross and Brockley Rise which will ensure passengers still have connections to Waterloo and Aldwych. Reliability should be improved along the southern end of the route. Peckham loses a direct bus to Waterloo and Aldwych, which will require changing at Camberwell Green or the Elephant. I think the 40 may as well stay as it is and reroute the 343 to Clerkenwell Green?
I can see both sides of the 53 argument, if it doesn't still serve St Thomas's Hospital it may as well be curtailed at Elephant & Castle.
There really is no need for the 68 and 171 between Holborn and Camberwell off peak but there may well be a case for the 171 still going to Holborn at peak times? Obviously goes against TfL' s standardisation policy.
One small change I don't agree with is curtailing the 59 at Euston, should still go to Kings Cross. By all means cut more of the 476 instead or even withdraw it completely and extend the 73 to Northumberland Park.
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Sept 28, 2018 14:58:02 GMT
Some thoughts: 40 - Cuts bus connections between East Dulwich and London Bridge/City. Hopper fare relives the pain, but a change at Camberwell or Elephant will become the norm. East Dulwich has a direct train service to London Bridge. New connection to Blackfriars for the 'improved' Thameslink service may dull the pain. 53 - Considering this is an important trunk route into central London from Woolwich and Plumstead, this is a bad move. However, passengers can change at Deptford Bridge for the 453. 171 - Makes sense. The route is shadowed by 172 between New Cross and Brockley Rise which will ensure passengers still have connections to Waterloo and Aldwych. Reliability should be improved along the southern end of the route. Peckham loses a direct bus to Waterloo and Aldwych, which will require changing at Camberwell Green or the Elephant. I think the 40 may as well stay as it is and reroute the 343 to Clerkenwell Green?
There really is no need for the 68 and 171 between Holborn and Camberwell off peak but there may well be a case for the 171 still going to Holborn at peak times? Obviously goes against TfL' s standardisation policy.
It'd make more sense for the 40 and 343 to swap. I don't fancy the reliability of the service once the 343 goes over Tower Bridge. However, it could be argued that the good people of the Aylesbury Estate will still have the 136 to relieve the 343 when it inevitably goes tits up. Camberwell to Aldwych should be fine with the 68 and 176 serving the corridor. There's also the 1, 168, 172 and 188 between Elephant and Holborn.
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Sept 28, 2018 15:23:03 GMT
Change route 388 so it no longer runs between Liverpool Street station and Elephant & Castle That make former 338 extension to Elephant & Castle pointless
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 28, 2018 15:32:45 GMT
Change route 388 so it no longer runs between Liverpool Street station and Elephant & Castle That make former 338 extension to Elephant & Castle pointless If it's pointless isn't that a good reason to withdraw it?
|
|
|
Post by Lukeo on Sept 28, 2018 15:34:19 GMT
Whilst some changes seem pretty drastic at first, e.g. 45 curtailed to Elephant & Castle, and the 48 completely withdrawn, I don't hold any strong disagreement with any of the changes really. The justification is there, i.e. falling passenger numbers, so it's only fair.
|
|
|
Post by zeldieralt on Sept 28, 2018 15:46:48 GMT
I’m sick and tired of Tfl with their poo ideas, they use the hopper fair as an excuse and by cutting some routes sometimes it just makes that route useless such as the route 73 being cut from Victoria to Oxford Circus and from seven sisters to Stoke Newington. They might as well remove the 73 because they can use the 476 then change the 390. That’s how useless the 73 is, Ed a lot may use it but Tfl could easily increase buses on the 476 and make some do part routes. Tfl Fix up.
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Sept 28, 2018 15:57:47 GMT
It was certainly gone during the time I posted. I wonder if they made any changes. There was a serious error. The original issue said the 11 would be withdrawn between Liverpool Street and Victoria. Now corrected.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 16:04:04 GMT
I still don't get this sentence. "... route N11 would be renumbered N311 to better reflect the day service, as it would not run to Oxford Circus."
Surely the last bit is the logic for keeping it N11 not N311?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 16:05:32 GMT
It was certainly gone during the time I posted. I wonder if they made any changes. There was a serious error. The original issue said the 11 would be withdrawn between Liverpool Street and Victoria. Now corrected. That was actually quite funny! Wonder if another head has rolled after that cock-up
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Sept 28, 2018 16:14:10 GMT
I avoid bus usage in Central London during the day time. The routes had them coming. Bit annoyed about the 67 though, used that all the way to Wood Green after an evening in Shoreditch/Liverpool Street.
Where are they going to find space to accommodate the 55 at Walthamstow Central?
And surely the renumbering is counter-intuitive. Why change a number just for the lulz (as I fail to see the reason for the change). The ‘N311’ follows the entirety of the reformed 11 but not the 311, as that route goes to Oxford Circus. So you’re changing tiles and blinds for literally nothing. Someone didn’t think this one through.
If only the changes brought about improvements to the outer areas, but I can only remember a small number of capacity and/or frequency improvements these past few years.
A dark era for buses...
EDIT: I think they’re missing an opportunity to use the 242 to their potential!
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Sept 28, 2018 16:35:59 GMT
Time to do a few end to ends
|
|