|
Post by MoEnviro on Jun 18, 2019 9:37:31 GMT
Departures are from Aldgate station Stop R
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 18, 2019 9:48:22 GMT
Wasn't the 343s extension thou to replace part of the RV1. Not sure how much demand there will be from the City Hall stand over Tower Bridge thou. Yes but it was arguably more important to have the 40 still serving its old routing via Fenchurch Street than the extended 343.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 18, 2019 9:50:42 GMT
A few tweets and Blog link
The problem is insufficient income ... the choice is either bus cuts or making some people/everybody pay more. Both seem unpalatable to the many on here that want neither! All those campaigning for noone pays more ... you have the cuts you deserve. I've said before a small increase is okay to myself though go too high and you price people off the network and lose revenue that way - it's a fine balance.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Jun 18, 2019 13:49:50 GMT
Given Elephant to Farringdon is also well connected by a very fast and frequent Thameslink service, one route is more than enough. Can see the 40 being tinkered with further, or perhaps the 63. I think it's worth having more than one route over Blackfriars Bridge, but the 40 rerouting seems pointless when it parallels the 63 - whereas previously the 45 & 388 provided more varied links. Perhaps re-extend route 4 to Waterloo, but instead via Blackfriars Bridge and Stamford Street. I certainly think that the Central London elements of routes such as the 4 and 40 are doomed to fail if they terminate at ‘dead ends’ in the City short of any big traffic destination. They may be busy for a few hours a day with commuters and empty off peak. That seems to have been the experience with routes 172 and 388 and look at them now, cut back to the edge of the City. At least route 388 will be extended to London Bridge to replace part of route 48 and will get decent loadings a a result. The reasonably low cost options for route 4 would be to: Extend to Waterloo via Stamford Street providing a quicker link from the City to Waterloo Station by avoiding congestion on Fleet Street and providing a new link for tourists between South Bank and St Paul’s Cathedral. Extend to Elephant via Blackfriars Road to provide direct link from Elephant to Angel. Route 40 could be extended to Holborn or diverted at Ludgate Circus to run to Aldwych. Both would provide better links into the West End from Stamford Street/Blackfriars Road following withdrawal of route RV1.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 18, 2019 15:13:40 GMT
Call me old fashioned if you will, but I was under the impression, perhaps now mistakenly, that the purpose of the bus service was to provide an attractive service for passengers that met their needs. If lots if people want to continue to take their bus down Oxford Street, that demand should be met. Likewise a major central London rail station such as Fenchurch should have a bus service.
Remember many of those using the bus in Oxford Street go shopping, spend money and help the local economy. They are just as likely to go and shop on the internet as to persist with less convenient transport once you remove the bus service.
An attractive bus service is a really important method of transport in London and this type of change will cause problems.
You are confusing London with a deregulated area ... In a deregulated area buses will be run for primarily for profit. An attractive service will only be provided if there are sufficient passengers to give that profit, not for social reasons.
It is only in a deregulated area such as London that you can provide an attractive service for passengers that meets their needs without worrying so much about profits.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jun 18, 2019 15:16:53 GMT
I think it's worth having more than one route over Blackfriars Bridge, but the 40 rerouting seems pointless when it parallels the 63 - whereas previously the 45 & 388 provided more varied links. Perhaps re-extend route 4 to Waterloo, but instead via Blackfriars Bridge and Stamford Street. I certainly think that the Central London elements of routes such as the 4 and 40 are doomed to fail if they terminate at ‘dead ends’ in the City short of any big traffic destination. They may be busy for a few hours a day with commuters and empty off peak. That seems to have been the experience with routes 172 and 388 and look at them now, cut back to the edge of the City. At least route 388 will be extended to London Bridge to replace part of route 48 and will get decent loadings a a result. The reasonably low cost options for route 4 would be to: Extend to Waterloo via Stamford Street providing a quicker link from the City to Waterloo Station by avoiding congestion on Fleet Street and providing a new link for tourists between South Bank and St Paul’s Cathedral. Extend to Elephant via Blackfriars Road to provide direct link from Elephant to Angel. Route 40 could be extended to Holborn or diverted at Ludgate Circus to run to Aldwych. Both would provide better links into the West End from Stamford Street/Blackfriars Road following withdrawal of route RV1. 4 to Elephant would be nice. It'd be an effective way to mitigate the 388 cut and retain links between the City and Elephant which have been lost. Furthemore, it would alleviate the need to send the 40 up Blackfriars Road
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jun 18, 2019 15:18:52 GMT
You are confusing London with a deregulated area ... In a deregulated area buses will be run for primarily for profit. An attractive service will only be provided if there are sufficient passengers to give that profit, not for social reasons.
It is only in a deregulated area such as London that you can provide an attractive service for passengers that meets their needs without worrying so much about profits.
TfL are clearly worried about the operating deficit ... which is why we are having all these service cuts!
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jun 18, 2019 16:14:02 GMT
In a deregulated area buses will be run for primarily for profit. An attractive service will only be provided if there are sufficient passengers to give that profit, not for social reasons.
It is only in a deregulated area such as London that you can provide an attractive service for passengers that meets their needs without worrying so much about profits.
TfL are clearly worried about the operating deficit ... which is why we are having all these service cuts! Sure, but is that the right solution to the problem, or can the service be made more attractive to passengers and meet their needs, which in turn would lead to higher patronage and a lower deficit?
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Jun 18, 2019 16:19:06 GMT
I think it's worth having more than one route over Blackfriars Bridge, but the 40 rerouting seems pointless when it parallels the 63 - whereas previously the 45 & 388 provided more varied links. Perhaps re-extend route 4 to Waterloo, but instead via Blackfriars Bridge and Stamford Street. I certainly think that the Central London elements of routes such as the 4 and 40 are doomed to fail if they terminate at ‘dead ends’ in the City short of any big traffic destination. They may be busy for a few hours a day with commuters and empty off peak. That seems to have been the experience with routes 172 and 388 and look at them now, cut back to the edge of the City. At least route 388 will be extended to London Bridge to replace part of route 48 and will get decent loadings a a result. The reasonably low cost options for route 4 would be to: Extend to Waterloo via Stamford Street providing a quicker link from the City to Waterloo Station by avoiding congestion on Fleet Street and providing a new link for tourists between South Bank and St Paul’s Cathedral. Extend to Elephant via Blackfriars Road to provide direct link from Elephant to Angel. Route 40 could be extended to Holborn or diverted at Ludgate Circus to run to Aldwych. Both would provide better links into the West End from Stamford Street/Blackfriars Road following withdrawal of route RV1. In any of these options, with the 40 no longer needed via Blackfriars Bridge, I would instead reroute it over Waterloo Bridge to Tottenham Court Road via the 176. Then cut the 176 back to Elephant & Castle, with the 40 continuing the same links as far as Dulwich. Only issue is stand space at Elephant. Or else enhance the 176 and withdraw the 40 due to the overlap.
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jun 18, 2019 16:25:30 GMT
TfL are clearly worried about the operating deficit ... which is why we are having all these service cuts! Sure, but is that the right solution to the problem, or can the service be made more attractive to passengers and meet their needs, which in turn would lead to higher patronage and a lower deficit? Maybe in a Corbynista world ...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2019 20:10:34 GMT
Standard done a feature on the RV1
|
|
|
Post by localet44 on Jun 19, 2019 17:27:36 GMT
I certainly think that the Central London elements of routes such as the 4 and 40 are doomed to fail if they terminate at ‘dead ends’ in the City short of any big traffic destination. They may be busy for a few hours a day with commuters and empty off peak. That seems to have been the experience with routes 172 and 388 and look at them now, cut back to the edge of the City. At least route 388 will be extended to London Bridge to replace part of route 48 and will get decent loadings a a result. The reasonably low cost options for route 4 would be to: Extend to Waterloo via Stamford Street providing a quicker link from the City to Waterloo Station by avoiding congestion on Fleet Street and providing a new link for tourists between South Bank and St Paul’s Cathedral. Extend to Elephant via Blackfriars Road to provide direct link from Elephant to Angel. Route 40 could be extended to Holborn or diverted at Ludgate Circus to run to Aldwych. Both would provide better links into the West End from Stamford Street/Blackfriars Road following withdrawal of route RV1. 4 to Elephant would be nice. It'd be an effective way to mitigate the 388 cut and retain links between the City and Elephant which have been lost. Furthemore, it would alleviate the need to send the 40 up Blackfriars Road If there is no space to terminate the 4 at the Elephant then further extend it to Camberwell. This would continue to provide a link between Camberwell and Blackfriars if the 40 was withdrawn.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 19, 2019 17:31:51 GMT
4 to Elephant would be nice. It'd be an effective way to mitigate the 388 cut and retain links between the City and Elephant which have been lost. Furthemore, it would alleviate the need to send the 40 up Blackfriars Road If there is no space to terminate the 4 at the Elephant then further extend it to Camberwell. This would continue to provide a link between Camberwell and Blackfriars if the 40 was withdrawn. There’s no space at Camberwell - the Orpheus Street stand just holds enough for the 148’s LT’s. The other stand is used by Q for changeovers.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jun 19, 2019 17:58:34 GMT
Bank/Monument Station is a complete disaster now, I paid a visit on Monday and Tuesday and even off peak it was severely overcrowded however recently they seem to have been closing it every peak. The DLR being suspended this evening seems to have taken matters to breaking point
I hope TfL are happy they've caused this, thankfully the Elizabeth Line has given the Central Line some added capacity. There's also been plenty of reports of people being left behind on the buses during the rush hour as well.
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jun 19, 2019 18:43:27 GMT
Bank/Monument Station is a complete disaster now, I paid a visit on Monday and Tuesday and even off peak it was severely overcrowded however recently they seem to have been closing it every peak. The DLR being suspended this evening seems to have taken matters to breaking point I hope TfL are happy they've caused this, thankfully the Elizabeth Line has given the Central Line some added capacity. There's also been plenty of reports of people being left behind on the buses during the rush hour as well. No surprise there it happened this morning the SWR 5 day strike isn't helping
|
|