|
Post by greenboy on Feb 3, 2023 19:46:36 GMT
No but perhaps TfL should have been concerned about their customers? What have TfL got to do with this? Roadworks are planned by the council and the contractor. TfL can't randomly interject and ruin everyone's plan just because they want a bus to serve a stop for a day longer. So where is the explanation from TfL about the 271? How is it that Nottingham City Transport (probably the best bus operator in the country) have a full explanation on social media platforms about any disruption to their services? And maybe the council should have spoken to TfL about closing a bus stand?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 3, 2023 19:51:38 GMT
What have TfL got to do with this? Roadworks are planned by the council and the contractor. TfL can't randomly interject and ruin everyone's plan just because they want a bus to serve a stop for a day longer. So where is the explanation from TfL about the 271? How is it that Nottingham City Transport (probably the best bus operator in the country) have a full explanation on social media platforms about any disruption to their services? And maybe the council should have spoken to TfL about closing a bus stand? No they really don't have to speak to TfL about it. It's the council's road. TfL need to just deal with the closures which means closing bus stops and diverting routes if necessary.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Feb 3, 2023 19:53:44 GMT
So where is the explanation from TfL about the 271? How is it that Nottingham City Transport (probably the best bus operator in the country) have a full explanation on social media platforms about any disruption to their services? And maybe the council should have spoken to TfL about closing a bus stand? No they really don't have to speak to TfL about it. It's the council's road. TfL need to just deal with the closures which means closing bus stops and diverting routes if necessary. It's a complete and utter shambles.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Feb 3, 2023 19:55:59 GMT
No they really don't have to speak to TfL about it. It's the council's road. TfL need to just deal with the closures which means closing bus stops and diverting routes if necessary. It's a complete and utter shambles. It really isn’t. It isn’t like the 271 is the only route running up to the village from Archway. I think you and others are just more upset that you weren’t able to take pictures of the 271s on the last day on the stand. It’s really not a huge deal and the world keeps turning.
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Feb 3, 2023 20:00:25 GMT
Here's Roger French's take on the Highgate Village terminus which closes after tomorrow, it is one of his favourite terminals. busandtrainuser.com/2023/02/02/my-favourite-london-bus-terminus-terminates-tomorrow/===================================== And here is my tribute to the 271 and its predecessors: The terminus at Highgate Village came into use on 10th December 1939, when the no. 11 tram was replaced by the 611 trolleybus. The 271 is the direct successor of both these routes and remains pretty much unchanged until it is withdrawn completely after Friday 3rd February. The 611 trolleybus was a consistently high earner for London Transport's tram and trolleybus department, but was something of a headache to operate. Difficulties in securing a suitable terminus in Highgate Village, and opposition to plans to run along North Road and North Hill to North Finchley, delayed its introduction and the steepness of Highgate Hill meant the route had to be operated with specially-adapted trolleybuses. Tram 11 had terminated in a stub in Highgate High Street; while this was fine for the trams as the driver just changed ends and the tram went back the way it came, trolleybuses needed a turning circle! London Transport posited three plans: a loop via Southwood Lane, Castle Yard and North Road; extending the route along North Road and constructing a turning circle 60 yards north of the junction with Castle Yard; and extending the route to North Finchley via North Road and North Hill (with corresponding reductions on routes 517/617). However all these extensions took the route over the London County Council boundary, and were all objected to by Middlesex County Council, Hornsey Metropolitan Borough Council and Highgate School, the latter citing dangers to school children - all the proposals involved trolleybuses passing the school. Eventually London Transport managed to secure a site at the junction of Highgate High Street and The Grove, close to the tram terminus and just within the London County Council boundary (presumably this involved the expense of compulsory purchase and demolition of property on the corner), and built a terminus large enough to hold two trolleybuses. This terminus is still used by the 611's successor, the 271 bus, today. Having been planned for 4th September 1938, tram 11 was finally replaced on 10th December 1939; it was the last tram route to operate in North London aside from the three routes which used the Kingsway Subway in Holborn. As for North Road and North Hill, it would be February 1973 before they saw a bus service, when the 143 was diverted via Highgate Village instead of Archway Road. Parts of Highgate Hill are as steep as 1 in 10, so the Ministry of Transport required all trolleybuses using the hill to be fitted with run-back and coasting brakes. London Transport had to order a fleet of trolleybuses specifically for the route, the J3 and L1 classes. They were ordered before the extension to North Finchley was dropped so there were more than needed; however a related proposal to reduce routes 517/617 also had to be dropped, so the surplus buses were used on other routes at Highgate. Occasionally this meant that, when a 611 needed to be substituted at short notice, there was no J3 or L1 vehicle available and another type had to be used. When this happened the northbound journey would be curtailed at Archway Station and the vehicle would pick up its southbound time from there, and lost mileage would be incurred. Even at the end, London Transport seemed unsure about what to do with the route. In 1957 the route was considered for trial running of Routemaster buses, but this was dropped as it would have meant a long period of dual trolleybus and motor bus operation at Highgate Depot. From then on it was continually proposed for early conversion, but London Transport never seemed sure when to schedule it, or why it should be converted early; was it to remove the requirement for "special vehicles", to even out the number of buses required at each stage of the trolleybus-to-motor bus conversion, or because the route was "self-contained" - there was no working onto and off other routes, otherwise a very common feature of trolleybus operation? In the event the route was replaced by bus 271 after Tuesday 19th July 1960. Highgate's other routes were not converted until 31st January 1961, apart from the 627 which survived until 25th April 1961. Initially, HT only had sixteen Routemasters allocated for the 271 which had a PVR on weekdays of 15, and as an extra vehicle was required on Saturdays one Routemaster was borrowed from Shepherd's Bush and operated with running number HT 116. This practice was no longer necessary after January 1961. The 271 had an experimental allocation of crew-operated Atlanteans (the XA class) from 1st December 1966 until 9th July 1966, after which it reverted to Routemaster operation but this time with of the longer RML version. These lasted until 15th January 1971; the following day the routes was converted to driver-only operation with DMS vehicles, one of the first routes in London to be converted to One-Man (sic) Operation using double-deckers. HT was also renamed from Highgate to Holloway Garage at around this time, following the closure of the old Holloway (J) Bus Garage the previous year - the housing development Cornwallis Square now occupies most of the site. The 271 (and its tram and trolleybus predecessors) have always been operated by HT, apart from a couple of spells elsewhere. From 22nd September 1990 until 24th May 1991 it was operated from the now-closed Chalk Farm (CF) Garage; it also changed from M Metrobus to T Titan operation during this period. From 25th September 1993 until 26th April 1996 it was contracted out to London Suburban Bus and operated from a base in Edmonton - it returned to HT when London Suburban Bus was bought out by MTL London. The route's terminals have been pretty consistent too; it has never operated north of Highgate Village, except on Sundays from 6th June 1987 to 2nd February 1991 when it was extended on Sundays to Hendon Central Station, replacing the 143 on that day. The short extension from Finsbury Square to Liverpool Street first appeared only from 16th May 1992, initially at weekends only, and its history has been chequered since. The route was cut back to Finsbury Square at all times from 18th June 2011 when Liverpool Street Bus Station was closed for Crossrail construction work - this was expected to last five years but in the event, it would never return. Recalling the 271 and its Highgate Village Terminus: Metroline's TP51 (V751 HBY) on stand, 26th May 2011. Highgate Village by Julian Walker, on Flickr A small correction. XAs were introduced to the 271 on 1st December 1965 and were replaced by RMLs on 10th July 1966. Between April 1966 and July 1966 some Country Bus XFs were swapped with XAs for comparison.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Feb 3, 2023 20:02:30 GMT
It's a complete and utter shambles. It really isn’t. It isn’t like the 271 is the only route running up to the village from Archway. I think you and others are just more upset that you weren’t able to take pictures of the 271s on the last day on the stand. It’s really not a huge deal and the world keeps turning. I had no intention of going there to take photos.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Feb 3, 2023 20:06:52 GMT
It really isn’t. It isn’t like the 271 is the only route running up to the village from Archway. I think you and others are just more upset that you weren’t able to take pictures of the 271s on the last day on the stand. It’s really not a huge deal and the world keeps turning. I had no intention of going there to take photos. So why are you so bothered then?
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Feb 3, 2023 20:20:02 GMT
What have TfL got to do with this? Roadworks are planned by the council and the contractor. TfL can't randomly interject and ruin everyone's plan just because they want a bus to serve a stop for a day longer. So where is the explanation from TfL about the 271? How is it that Nottingham City Transport (probably the best bus operator in the country) have a full explanation on social media platforms about any disruption to their services? And maybe the council should have spoken to TfL about closing a bus stand? Here :
SOUTH GROVE, HIGHGATE: Route 271 is operating between Moorgate, Finsbury Square and Archway Station due to roadworks. There is NO SERVICE between Archway Station and Highgate Village. Buses towards Moorgate will depart from Archway Station/Holloway Road (Stop R on Sandridge Street).
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Feb 3, 2023 22:34:12 GMT
One thing I will say from my opinion is that a good riddance to the 271 Highgate Village stand, while it does have historical meaning to the stand over the years, I do think it isn't suited for modern-day low-floor buses that are generally longer than its predecessors and the stand isn't suitable for anyone in a wheelchair requiring the ramp or those have difficulty getting on the bus if more than one bus on the stand at a time. Not to mention the general dislike of the stand among the locals and it is something TfL tried to solve for a number of years with various solutions that ultimately didn't work out for them until now.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 3, 2023 23:08:44 GMT
It's a complete and utter shambles. It really isn’t. It isn’t like the 271 is the only route running up to the village from Archway. I think you and others are just more upset that you weren’t able to take pictures of the 271s on the last day on the stand. It’s really not a huge deal and the world keeps turning. Sorry but if you think that: 1) I’m upset over it & 2) That I commented on it for enthusiasts sakes, then you should go back and re-read my original post. My point was not to reschedule the works at all but merely provide the normal passengers with information regarding the fact buses are curtailed to Archway in the form of notices at stops whether it’s one day - this is one of a number of reasons why we have decline in the network, lack of publicity for passengers
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Feb 3, 2023 23:19:57 GMT
It really isn’t. It isn’t like the 271 is the only route running up to the village from Archway. I think you and others are just more upset that you weren’t able to take pictures of the 271s on the last day on the stand. It’s really not a huge deal and the world keeps turning. Sorry but if you think that: 1) I’m upset over it & 2) That I commented on it for enthusiasts sakes, then you should go back and re-read my original post. My point was not to reschedule the works at all but merely provide the normal passengers with information regarding the fact buses are curtailed to Archway in the form of notices at stops whether it’s one day - this is one of a number of reasons why we have decline in the network, lack of publicity for passengers We live in a digital age and TfL clearly had a notice on their website. I’d get it if the 271 was the only route to the village but it isn’t, most people would just take the first bus if going down to connect to the tube or other bus routes. It just isn’t feasible with the amount of roadworks taking place across London on a daily basis to provide short term length notices at every stop on every route. Does that mean TfL could display something on the countdown screens, probably, and yes their communication has been better in the past when they had those Twitter feeds but even they failed to capture every single event and set of roadworks, even major ones. Even NMCC doesn’t post about every diversion they do for a few hours. To do what you’re asking for would require more staff which takes more money out of the network for buses and routes which also doesn’t help. It simply cannot be both ways.
|
|
|
Post by T.R. on Feb 4, 2023 0:23:58 GMT
An ignominious end to a stand which has been in constant use since December 1939! Yes and aside from that how many people are going to be waiting for a 271 completely unaware that it's been curtailed at Archway? If the work had started tomorrow it wouldn't have mattered as there's the 263 instead. You really couldn't make this up. A few pep were at the stand before I took that shot — they promptly went to get a 143/210, though one person thought it had already been withdrawn…
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Feb 4, 2023 8:17:23 GMT
Tbh going to see the 271 at the Highgate stand on it's last day of service is like leaving a uni assignment to the last day before the deadline. We all knew the 271 was being withdrawn, so there were plenty of other days to ride the 271 and visit the stand. Not only that but delaying roadworks by 1 day just for enthusiasts reasons to visit a stand is silly, I'm sure that these roadworks were planned a long time ago but if they delayed then it gives them a longer backlog, just like if you delay completing an assignment you'll have more to complete in the coming days
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Feb 4, 2023 8:31:56 GMT
Tbh going to see the 271 at the Highgate stand on it's last day of service is like leaving a uni assignment to the last day before the deadline. We all knew the 271 was being withdrawn, so there were plenty of other days to ride the 271 and visit the stand. Not only that but delaying roadworks by 1 day just for enthusiasts reasons to visit a stand is silly, I'm sure that these roadworks were planned a long time ago but if they delayed then it gives them a longer backlog, just like if you delay completing an assignment you'll have more to complete in the coming days Any enthusiasts issues are by the by, it's fare paying passengers that should be the priority and if anyone thinks it's ok to withdraw services (or parts of) at the drop of a hat and with little or no explanation then hey ho!
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Feb 4, 2023 8:44:18 GMT
Tbh going to see the 271 at the Highgate stand on it's last day of service is like leaving a uni assignment to the last day before the deadline. We all knew the 271 was being withdrawn, so there were plenty of other days to ride the 271 and visit the stand. Not only that but delaying roadworks by 1 day just for enthusiasts reasons to visit a stand is silly, I'm sure that these roadworks were planned a long time ago but if they delayed then it gives them a longer backlog, just like if you delay completing an assignment you'll have more to complete in the coming days Any enthusiasts issues are by the by, it's fare paying passengers that should be the priority and if anyone thinks it's ok to withdraw services (or parts of) at the drop of a hat and with little or no explanation then hey ho! I agree that the explanation was insufficient but it's always been the case that's it's written on tfls long term diversions page. I doubt that they would include this because it's only affecting the 271 for one day. Even so passengers can change at Archway for the 271, not that much of an inconvenience, although admittedly yesterday all other bus routes there were only going as far as Archway bar the 210 which takes a different route after Archway
|
|