|
Post by george on Apr 12, 2019 10:15:23 GMT
If so only tower transit will not have LTs. Unless you count London sovereign but it's part of RAPT. Well unless CTP get some LTs to cover the 388 extension, another 2 cities will have to be bought for the 20 which is why I see this as the most likely outcome Yep that's what I was saying. So only london opperator without LTs will be TT. obviously not counting UNO lol
|
|
|
Post by bustavane on Apr 12, 2019 10:18:20 GMT
Sullivans (though my preferred destination for ALL LTs is school routes....)
|
|
|
Post by george on Apr 12, 2019 10:19:28 GMT
Sullivans (though my preferred destination for ALL LTs is school routes....) Forgot about Sullivan.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 12, 2019 10:40:43 GMT
If so only tower transit will not have LTs. Unless you count London sovereign but it's part of RAPT. Well unless CTP get some LTs to cover the 388 extension, another 2 cities will have to be bought for the 20 which is why I see this as the most likely outcome I don't see the 388 going LT or part-LT myself. The LTs for the 48 contract are older than the E400H Citys for the 388 contract. Cutting the 388 back to Liverpool Street was supposed to release six vehicles, four for the frequency increase on the 26 and two for the shortfall on the 20. Now that it has been decided the 388 will operate to London Bridge, the most likely solution now is that CT Plus will source two or three second-hand vehicles (most likely Enviro400H MMC hybrids) from another London operator - even with the reduced scope of the Central London cuts there will still be plenty available.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 12, 2019 10:42:25 GMT
Destinations for the 48's LTs: Some will obviously have to go to T for the 55's PVR increase and extension A few will probably go to HK for the 388's extension and in turn some buses will be released for the 20 so the E400s on loan from Stagecoach can go back Any remaining LTs will probably go to NX for the 343 extension, or if LTs will struggle in the residental streets of Brockley then another NX route so that TFL don't have to buy any new buses for the 343's extension
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 12, 2019 10:46:47 GMT
I'm surprised that the 19 has been reprieved, a lot of people have suggested the 38 should be reduced and this would be a back door method of achieving much the same thing whilst retaining current frequencies to and from Victoria. Playing devils advocate I don't get the outcry about the 48. I know it sounds extreme to withdraw an entire route but does Lea Bridge Road really need three routes and around about 24bph? The 55 will cover Walthamstow to Shoreditch, presumably at a higher frequency, and the 26 covers Hackney to Liverpool Street and the 388 is extended to London Bridge. Some people had assumed that the truncated 11 would go to Arriva to compensate for the 48 loss but clearly that won't happen now. I hope the last stop on the 53 isn't Lower Marsh, annoyingly short of numerous objectives. I would suggest it uses the current 77 stand with the 77 being extended to Blackfriars in part replacement for the RV1. I can't see what's left of the 45 lasting much longer, does the 40 really need to be extended to Clerkenwell 7 days a week? I'd have thought Monday to Friday was sufficient. Blackfriars area is pretty dead at weekends and the 63 is more than adequate. I suppose the 468 stand change makes sense presumably using the vacated 388 stand? Makes interchange to and from the shortened 171 easier. I think removing the 59 from Kings Cross is a very bad move, just cut the 476 back to Islington instead or just merge it with the 73. The 3 change is only really the removal of one stop but the 134 change will inconvenience a lot of people.
|
|
|
Post by george on Apr 12, 2019 10:48:27 GMT
Anyone else getting notifications on this thread even though the post isn't a direct reply to you?
EDIT. Sorted bookmarked the thread by accident.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 10:49:22 GMT
So will these cuts now release buses from the 26/388 to route 20?
Makes me laugh that St Paul's to Tottenham Court Road / Oxford Circus will now have a better bus service than the daytime with the N8,N25 and now the N242!
I think it was snoggle that mentioned people need to be more vocal during consultations and I agree! I wonder how many passengers realised that 48 was up for being cut. The publicity around the cuts was minimal. Edit : Just read about the 388 - you can't make it up they are shorting the route to then extend to a different location! I am guessing this means the PVR will stay the same so won't release buses in the long term for the 20.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2019 10:54:27 GMT
I think the Hopper refund should be extended to route 25 too.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Apr 12, 2019 10:57:21 GMT
So will these cuts now release buses from the 26/388 to route 20?
Makes me laugh that St Paul's to Tottenham Court Road / Oxford Circus will now have a better bus service than the daytime with the N8,N25 and now the N242!
I think it was snoggle that mentioned people need to be more vocal during consultations and I agree! I wonder how many passengers realised that 48 was up for being cut. The publicity around the cuts was minimal.
I've said above that I think CT Plus will source 2-3 second-hand buses from another operator (most likely Enviro400H MMC hybrids) to make up the shortfall now the 388 is to run to London Bridge*. There was a lot of awareness locally in the Hackney area when the 48 was proposed for withdrawal, so don't expect it to go down without a fight. * original proposal to curtail the 388 at Liverpool Street would have released six vehicles, four for the frequency increase on the 26 and two for route 20.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Apr 12, 2019 11:15:59 GMT
Very surprised that the 11/19/22/311 group is not going ahead. As pointed out above, if the 22 no longer needs its old stand back, you could leave the 3 and 53 alone. Lower Marsh is an awful last stop for the 53 but I've made my views on this clear many times so no point in going over it again.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Apr 12, 2019 11:17:56 GMT
So will these cuts now release buses from the 26/388 to route 20?
Makes me laugh that St Paul's to Tottenham Court Road / Oxford Circus will now have a better bus service than the daytime with the N8,N25 and now the N242!
I think it was snoggle that mentioned people need to be more vocal during consultations and I agree! I wonder how many passengers realised that 48 was up for being cut. The publicity around the cuts was minimal. Edit : Just read about the 388 - you can't make it up they are shorting the route to then extend to a different location! I am guessing this means the PVR will stay the same so won't release buses in the long term for the 20.
This is why I was suggested posters for the 48 thing. Most people won’t find out till the day before the change is implemented and it’s DOWNRIGHT WRONG!!!!😡
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 12, 2019 11:25:45 GMT
Very surprised that the 11/19/22/311 group is not going ahead. As pointed out above, if the 22 no longer needs its old stand back, you could leave the 3 and 53 alone. Lower Marsh is an awful last stop for the 53 but I've made my views on this clear many times so no point in going over it again. I think it was deemed, rightly or wrongly, that the 53 was no longer needed in Whitehall. I agree about Lower Marsh and I suggested it use the 77 stand with the 77 extended to Blackfriars in part replacement for the RV1.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 12, 2019 11:32:34 GMT
Not hugely surprised by these decisions. I look forward to the Mayor suffering the electoral consequences of this shambles. Perhaps he has a lot of voters who live on or near the Kings Road as clearly their voices count for much more than people elsewhere in London?
I think the Hopper Fare refund concept is doomed to fail - making the granting of the refund specific to interchanging at one defined point only on a route simply won't work. People don't comprehend these sorts of things in this level of detail. Also some of the interchange points are not exactly the nicest places on earth and certain groups of passengers may feel vulnerable and be unwilling to interchange at the point TfL have specified. What happens if road works or a demonstration close the specified interchange stop? How do people know where to change buses? I just don't think this has been thought through properly.
Astonished by the decision to effectively reintroduce the N242 back to TCR. What on earth has brought that on? This is yet another TfL U-turn.
Why is the 388 being extended to London Bridge? I thought there was more than adequate capacity on other routes? Does this mean TfL's analysis was wrong / flawed / a complete and utter lie? If you can justify withdrawing the 48 on the grounds stated in the consultation then why extend the 388? There can't be a justification for it if the 35 and 149 have enough capacity.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 12, 2019 11:38:37 GMT
Glad to know the 11, 19 & 22 are staying. I thought the 311 was pointless. The 388 extension to London Bridge is interesting. What I’m not a fan of is the withdrawn section of the 388 without a replacement.
I would say the 45 could be extended to Croydon Town Centre via the 109. To be honest it will be a waste of resources from Elephant & Castle to Clapham Park, punching the 35 all day long
|
|