|
Post by redexpress on Mar 30, 2019 21:30:39 GMT
I'm not surprised by the 1% figure. They're probably defining "Oxford Circus" as the Holles Street stop. Very few people went all the way to the last stop - most people got off at the previous 2-3 stops. If they'd been asked for the percentage of people getting off at TCR or the first stop on Oxford Street, the figure would have been a lot higher. Pretty sneaky to be using such misleading stats, but not surprising any more.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 30, 2019 23:32:38 GMT
Same with the journey time. Tfl gave it as 24 mins from Tottenham Court Road to Oxford Circus giving a massive journey time end to end. In reality it was probably less then 8 mins to Great Titchfield Street where most would alight for Oxo. The long journey time no doubt put people off the 25 from the east end.
I took the 25 from Aldgate the other day. Had to wait 8 mins for the 8 at City Thameslink then sat in traffic as it swung off along St Giles High Street them another 5 mins walk at least to the Plaza. Not sure I'd do it again.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Mar 30, 2019 23:41:27 GMT
Same with the journey time. Tfl gave it as 24 mins from Tottenham Court Road to Oxford Circus giving a massive journey time end to end. In reality it was probably less then 8 mins to Great Titchfield Street where most would alight for Oxo. The long journey time no doubt put people off the 25 from the east end. I took the 25 from Aldgate the other day. Had to wait 8 mins for the 8 at City Thameslink then sat in traffic as it swung off along St Giles High Street them another 5 mins walk at least to the Plaza. Not sure I'd do it again. Grist to TfL's mill, unfortunately.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2019 14:42:47 GMT
Getting annoyed with tfl again. How can they justify to thousands of passenger's who use the 94 east of Marble Arch, the curtailment planned. Utterly ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 4, 2019 16:11:03 GMT
Getting annoyed with tfl again. How can they justify to thousands of passenger's who use the 94 east of Marble Arch, the curtailment planned. Utterly ridiculous. Has anything been confirmed?
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 4, 2019 17:30:47 GMT
Getting annoyed with tfl again. How can they justify to thousands of passenger's who use the 94 east of Marble Arch, the curtailment planned. Utterly ridiculous. I completely agree. I'm a West Londoner who loves using the 94 to get to Central London. If I'm in no hurry then I favour the 94 over the Piccadilly Line. I'm not a Chiswick resident, but I forsee there being uproar when the 94 is pulled out of Oxford Street with Chiswick having lost the 27. Why TFL plan to keep the 7 on Oxford Street is beyond me when keeping the 98 running down Oxford Street maintains the Edgware Road-Oxford Circus link. I would imagine the residents of Ladbroke Grove kicked up a fuss when the 23 was pulled out of Oxford Street so that 7 is being maintain to 'soften the blow' as it were. To reduce the voulme of buses on Oxford Street, I would have kept the 10, 94, 98 and 139 running on Oxford Street
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Apr 4, 2019 20:00:50 GMT
I know someone who’s very angry about the 94 cut.
Since the Oxford Street pedestrainisation has been canned, why not leave it as it is.
|
|
|
Post by george on Apr 4, 2019 20:05:48 GMT
I know someone who’s very angry about the 94 cut. Since the Oxford Street pedestrainisation has been canned, why not leave it as it is. Agreed. cutting it back to marble arch would be pointless as you got a very high PVR route with the 148 between shepherds bush and marble arch, the shepherds bush to Acton green section could be replaced by something else.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 4, 2019 20:39:23 GMT
And the 274 that could be extended to Notting Hill Gate to add some cacapcity to that section.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 4, 2019 22:41:43 GMT
I know someone who’s very angry about the 94 cut. Since the Oxford Street pedestrainisation has been canned, why not leave it as it is. Agreed. cutting it back to marble arch would be pointless as you got a very high PVR route with the 148 between shepherds bush and marble arch, the shepherds bush to Acton green section could be replaced by something else. The 148 will still need assistance - that corridor is busy and is made worse by the 390 no longer running west of Marble Arch.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Apr 4, 2019 23:46:35 GMT
Agreed. cutting it back to marble arch would be pointless as you got a very high PVR route with the 148 between shepherds bush and marble arch, the shepherds bush to Acton green section could be replaced by something else. The 148 will still need assistance - that corridor is busy and is made worse by the 390 no longer running west of Marble Arch. If TfL cut back the 94 to Marble Arch, they may as well replace it with an extension of the cut back 113 to Acton Green. Frequencies are similar so capacity will be maintained whilst providing some new links. There would still be a net saving on PVR compared to the current 2 routes as they are now. Acton Green to Edgware via Hendon Way. That would be an epic route to ride.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 5, 2019 0:54:13 GMT
The 148 will still need assistance - that corridor is busy and is made worse by the 390 no longer running west of Marble Arch. If TfL cut back the 94 to Marble Arch, they may as well replace it with an extension of the cut back 113 to Acton Green. Frequencies are similar so capacity will be maintained whilst providing some new links. There would still be a net saving on PVR compared to the current 2 routes as they are now. Acton Green to Edgware via Hendon Way. That would be an epic route to ride. However, Acton Green ends up with a worse service due to the length of the route - I do agree it would epic to ride but if the 94 does get cut back, would rather see it retained even in the shorter form which an option to extend from Acton Green.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 5, 2019 5:04:06 GMT
The 148 will still need assistance - that corridor is busy and is made worse by the 390 no longer running west of Marble Arch. If TfL cut back the 94 to Marble Arch, they may as well replace it with an extension of the cut back 113 to Acton Green. Frequencies are similar so capacity will be maintained whilst providing some new links. There would still be a net saving on PVR compared to the current 2 routes as they are now. Acton Green to Edgware via Hendon Way. That would be an epic route to ride. Marble Arch would be an awful terminus for the 94 with the first/last stops in Bayswater Road. Another option would be to reroute the 94 to West Hampstead replacing the 139 and extend the 189 to Aldwych or Waterloo.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Apr 5, 2019 5:35:28 GMT
I have a feeling that some big news is going to break next week, hearing various rumours
Would seem that the news is officially about ULEZ (good excuse for a PR stunt / press conference Monday), but will also include update on electric buses (although if this will be recycled news or potential new routes like 94 is unclear)
Clearly some of this rumours are going to be interlinked to some route changes, but will they quietly get all the bad news out in one go, it is already known there is a plan to issue next week’s fortnightly bus changes on Friday 12th (rather than Monday 8th), and will cover upto 8 weeks forward instead of upto 4 weeks forward. Last week the TfL Board ratified the business plan / budget so got to get on and implement it, simply can’t keep kicking the expected cuts into the future.
My own cynical view is next week is Easter holidays so fewer people around to query it, is likely to be dominated by Brexit news which means bad news may slip under radar especially if quietly comes out on a Friday afternoon. Might turn out to be wrong, and I will look stupid, but just seems too many hints around now.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 5, 2019 7:17:10 GMT
The 274 could 'replace' the old 390 section to Notting Hill Gate and use its old at Porchester Place.
|
|