Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2019 14:59:13 GMT
Well according to a staff member that works at T, once the 48 is axed the 55s reliability will improve. It's handy that from Cambridge Heath and Hackney Road you will have the 388 to London Bridge I guess. I don't know if many will agree with this but time will tell... I would also say that the 55 will have a reduce in frequency to every 8 - 10 mins. Will be interesting to see what happens to the N55 as the duties on the route start off as a 55 before starting as a Night bus. So are you suggesting there will be a frequency reduction in addition to the 48 being axed? I hope not! That would be madness!
|
|
|
Post by dennistas on Apr 16, 2019 15:01:24 GMT
Possibly as stand space at Central could be limited unless extra buses will stand on the other side and the timings are planned so as one comes in, one goes out! Presumably there won't be any Baker's Arms shorts? Too early to say for 100%, I much doubt it and the union at the garage says that all will go through to Walthamstow Central.
|
|
|
Post by dennistas on Apr 16, 2019 15:02:51 GMT
Well according to a staff member that works at T, once the 48 is axed the 55s reliability will improve. It's handy that from Cambridge Heath and Hackney Road you will have the 388 to London Bridge I guess. I don't know if many will agree with this but time will tell... I would also say that the 55 will have a reduce in frequency to every 8 - 10 mins. Will be interesting to see what happens to the N55 as the duties on the route start off as a 55 before starting as a Night bus. So are you suggesting there will be a frequency reduction in addition to the 48 being axed? I hope not! That would be madness! Lol nope just a thought but if the timings are adjusted correctly stand space won't be too much of an issue. Some buses will stand on the other side as the N38s do. I guess the N55 will stay the same.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Apr 16, 2019 15:10:51 GMT
So are you suggesting there will be a frequency reduction in addition to the 48 being axed? I hope not! That would be madness! Lol nope just a thought but if the timings are adjusted correctly stand space won't be too much of an issue. Some buses will stand on the other side as the N38s do. I guess the N55 will stay the same. However you need to remember when the N38s stand there the day routes aren't operating. There isn't going to be enough space on the other side for the 55 unless one of those routes are removed.
|
|
|
Post by dennistas on Apr 16, 2019 15:12:19 GMT
Lol nope just a thought but if the timings are adjusted correctly stand space won't be too much of an issue. Some buses will stand on the other side as the N38s do. I guess the N55 will stay the same. However you need to remember when the N38s stand there the day routes aren't operating. There isn't going to be enough space on the other side for the 55 unless one of those routes are removed. Personally I don't see any other routes being removed so will be very interesting to see what happens.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 16, 2019 15:18:01 GMT
However you need to remember when the N38s stand there the day routes aren't operating. There isn't going to be enough space on the other side for the 55 unless one of those routes are removed. Personally I don't see any other routes being removed so will be very interesting to see what happens. W11 extension to St James's Street?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 16, 2019 20:38:40 GMT
Lol nope just a thought but if the timings are adjusted correctly stand space won't be too much of an issue. Some buses will stand on the other side as the N38s do. I guess the N55 will stay the same. However you need to remember when the N38s stand there the day routes aren't operating. There isn't going to be enough space on the other side for the 55 unless one of those routes are removed. All depends on how it is scheduled. There are two spaces on the west side for the 48 presently which I assume the 55 will use. If they work on the basis of a max of three buses standing then they only need one space on the east side which should be doable in normal circumstances. The only issue will be if a terminating service like the 34 or 257 gets seriously out of step and there are more of those buses needing stand space than normal. If push comes to shove a bus could just drive round and round the bus station until a space becomes available - that's a long standing tactic at Walthamstow. TfL do impose scheduling constraints at certain bus stations - the 41 has a limit on numbers standing at Tottenham Hale. Oddly, though, Go Ahead seem to have no such constraints on the 76 as they often have a spare vehicle occupying a stand beside the 41/W4 stop. That's in addition to the normal 2-3 76s parked up.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Apr 17, 2019 8:15:22 GMT
Just catching up on this. Who needs to read the consultation results when it is all summarised in the last 10 pages of this thread. Rarely are there so many changes to buses and I am not that excited to go out 15th June to see the changes.
I expected the 48 to go, but I do think that there is a link with the un-withdrawing of the 357. Whether it is political or not, I would not be surprised the 357 gets rerouted to turn right at Baker's Arms and go to Clapton. Probably stand space issues.
388 extension to London Bridge is a joke. It has been mentioned how many times the terminus of the route has changed in central London, but it has changed a few times at the other end of the route.
The hopper fare fix is a bit odd and confusing for passengers. Not sure if I understand it correctly but if I have to interchange at a certain place it would make little sense. I used to make the 48/55 journey to work regularly to get to LB from Leyton. I would make the dreaded interchange at Shoreditch if I was on a 55 because that would increase my options to get to LB. Also on another note, there quite a few passengers that make very long journeys into zone 1. You barely see movement on the top deck of buses.
Fascinated by why TfL have chosen to abandon some of the West London changes. Have not had a detailed look at the stats, but it seems a few petitions (which raised awareness and led to comments) and businesses getting involved helped.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Apr 17, 2019 9:17:44 GMT
Fascinated by why TfL have chosen to abandon some of the West London changes. Have not had a detailed look at the stats, but it seems a few petitions (which raised awareness and led to comments) and businesses getting involved helped. My own cynical view is TfL haven't totally abandoned Crossrail 2 (they are still funding planning) It makes it a lot easier to kill off the proposed Chelsea station wanted by many in the area, not building it allows the route to be marginally shortened and is estimated to save £1bn of construction costs. A few buses (which might get frequency reductions at some future date) are a lot cheaper than the extra Crossrail 2 station
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 17, 2019 12:18:46 GMT
Does anyone buy the theory that Q tactically lost the 45 to make space for the 176?
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Apr 17, 2019 12:21:41 GMT
Does anyone buy the theory that Q tactically lost the 45 to make space for the 176? No
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on Apr 17, 2019 12:55:59 GMT
Fascinated by why TfL have chosen to abandon some of the West London changes. Have not had a detailed look at the stats, but it seems a few petitions (which raised awareness and led to comments) and businesses getting involved helped. If you are referring to the Crossrail changes then they haven't. I would still expect some changes to come into effect from December should TfL take over some of the Reading stopper services. The 266 cut back is starting from the new contract, in December. Some changes may be delayed until the full Crossrail service is open.
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Apr 17, 2019 13:33:10 GMT
Does anyone buy the theory that Q tactically lost the 45 to make space for the 176? Why on earth would they need to do that? Both routes were tendered in the same tranche (along with the 188), so there would be no point in trying any such tactics. Just put in your best bid for each route, and if you don't have space for everything you'd just have to decline one of the routes. If the 45 had been tendered before the 176 there would have been a possibility of a tactical decision, but even then I don't think any operator goes out to deliberately lose a route (unless they can't make it run at a profit).
Note that the 176 and 188 were not awarded to the lowest bidder because of "insufficient garage space". So it's certainly not Go-Ahead who were hampered by a lack of garage space - on the contrary, they benefitted from their rivals' lack of garage space.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 17, 2019 14:24:29 GMT
Fascinated by why TfL have chosen to abandon some of the West London changes. Have not had a detailed look at the stats, but it seems a few petitions (which raised awareness and led to comments) and businesses getting involved helped. If you are referring to the Crossrail changes then they haven't. I would still expect some changes to come into effect from December should TfL take over some of the Reading stopper services. The 266 cut back is starting from the new contract, in December. Some changes may be delayed until the full Crossrail service is open. I think he is referring to the Kings Road routes which survived the cuts and had a local campaign going in particular to preserve the 19.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 21, 2019 21:39:44 GMT
Are destinations for the 113 and 159 still being swapped I.e the 113 terminating at Marble Arch and 159 terminating at Oxford Circus? When will this be happening?
|
|