|
Post by snowman on Nov 17, 2020 13:03:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 17, 2020 13:07:40 GMT
Can't say I'm too surprised at this, the routes didn't seem to be hugely used for quite some time.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 17, 2020 13:08:40 GMT
I know almost next to nothing about these routes but I do have one query: Both these routes currently have at least one school extra working as I understand it so wouldn’t it make more sense to have released this consultation a lot further down the line when things pandemic wise might have improved?
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 17, 2020 13:25:34 GMT
Effectively would save an operator on tender renewal having to find 3 compliant single deck buses as the total PVR of both would drop from 5 to 2.
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Nov 17, 2020 14:20:00 GMT
Effectively would save an operator on tender renewal having to find 3 compliant single deck buses as the total PVR of both would drop from 5 to 2. Stagecoach do now have the advantage under these proposals which they didn't have if there are no changes to the 646 & 648, as there are 3 spare 13 reg E200's from the 256 still to be reallocated assuming the 296's allocation is to stay as it is with 5 11 reg E200's, 3 13 regs that got transferred from RM recently and one 17 reg E200 MMC as the allocation and the 246 is still getting 5 13regs from the 256 as planned.
The 646's new PVR would be 2 which means Stagecoach do have enough existing buses that can be used if they do win the 646.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 17, 2020 18:45:14 GMT
Shame they don’t quantify their definition of low usage.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2020 18:53:25 GMT
Good to see TfL being sensible and looking at low usage routes instead of panicked changes in central London which hopefully will return to normal in 2021 with the progress on the vaccine.
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Nov 17, 2020 19:00:24 GMT
Shame they don’t quantify their definition of low usage. From the Usage Data Spreadsheet Notes
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 17, 2020 22:41:52 GMT
Shame they don’t quantify their definition of low usage. From the Usage Data Spreadsheet Notes Whilst locals on here have acknowledged these are low patronage routes, how can TfL reliably say they are when they also say that the data for school routes is not sufficiently reliable - maybe I'm looking at this wrong but it sounds like they're literally guessing?
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Nov 17, 2020 22:45:58 GMT
From the Usage Data Spreadsheet Notes Whilst locals on here have acknowledged these are low patronage routes, how can TfL reliably say they are when they also say that the data for school routes is not sufficiently reliable - maybe I'm looking at this wrong but it sounds like they're literally guessing? Now that you say that, that is strange! With TfL being TfL, it could just be down to guesswork. Or did they have a Bus Survey team out one day with not may schoolkids filling the info in. (Also find it strange that some teams literally only give the forms to adults, not very reliable data, is it)
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 17, 2020 22:49:56 GMT
Whilst locals on here have acknowledged these are low patronage routes, how can TfL reliably say they are when they also say that the data for school routes is not sufficiently reliable - maybe I'm looking at this wrong but it sounds like they're literally guessing? Now that you say that, that is strange! With TfL being TfL, it could just be down to guesswork. Or did they have a Bus Survey team out one day with not may schoolkids filling the info in. (Also find it strange that some teams literally only give the forms to adults, not very reliable data, is it) Exactly - they shouldn't be stating 'low patronage' as a reason whilst also saying the data is unreliable because that's a clear contradiction. They could of got away with it easily by saying we can reinvest this elsewhere. Those bus surveys are weird I have to say - I remember being on a 57 and the woman asked sat with me and said would I do one and I said yes. She then asked me do I use the route regularly to which I honestly replied no and soon as I said that, she never bothered continuing - not even asked why that was or anything which was a little odd.
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Nov 17, 2020 22:54:23 GMT
Now that you say that, that is strange! With TfL being TfL, it could just be down to guesswork. Or did they have a Bus Survey team out one day with not may schoolkids filling the info in. (Also find it strange that some teams literally only give the forms to adults, not very reliable data, is it) Exactly - they shouldn't be stating 'low patronage' as a reason whilst also saying the data is unreliable because that's a clear contradiction. They could of got away with it easily by saying we can reinvest this elsewhere. Those bus surveys are weird I have to say - I remember being on a 57 and the woman asked sat with me and said would I do one and I said yes. She then asked me do I use the route regularly to which I honestly replied no and soon as I said that, she never bothered continuing - not even asked why that was or anything which was a little odd. Having biased data to suit their agenda (Could that have had anything to do with that frequency decrease on the 57 just when it started to heavily pick up patronage?) Also, just realised that I haven't been on a route where these were being done in ages, even pre-Covid
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Nov 18, 2020 7:34:10 GMT
From the Usage Data Spreadsheet Notes Whilst locals on here have acknowledged these are low patronage routes, how can TfL reliably say they are when they also say that the data for school routes is not sufficiently reliable - maybe I'm looking at this wrong but it sounds like they're literally guessing? As the 648 mostly duplicates with the 248 and the 346 along St Mary's Lane, I guess that TfL are looking at the data of those two routes as a to determine whether if the 648 is needed seeing they mentioned the 248 & 346 as a alternative.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 19, 2020 7:48:56 GMT
I wonder if Route 692/699 will be consulted on
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 19, 2020 10:05:56 GMT
The DD conversion of the 80 may see a reduction to the 613 as there will be more capacity between Glenthorne School and Sutton now aswell. Perhaps just 1 journey from Sutton to Tolworth and leave the 80 to the rest.
|
|