|
Post by met120 on May 22, 2019 20:33:29 GMT
The 607 is overloaded most of the day and seems to struggle. It would not be ideal to add any additional stops. I personally think they should cut some stops and let passengers use the 207/427 instead. It seems crazy the 207 has just gotten a PVR cut and is set to lose the 427's support. Off peak I strongly believe the 427 is superflous and not needed. At peak times however, both routes are very well used. I was walking along the Uxbridge Road at around 8am this morning. I saw a fully loaded 207 pull at the stop. There were several people waiting at the stop but alas there was not enough room on the 207 for them. The 427 behind was well used but did have some surplus capacity to pick up these passengers. TFL are taking all the resillience out of the bus network. I don't buy that people will magically transfer to Crossrail and furthermore, many like having a direct service from A to B which will be lost when the 427 is cut. Ealing Broadway, West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall stations are not too far from the Uxbridge Road and perhaps some will use Crossrail to travel between them. However, consider the people on the 427 who live west of Hayes-By-Pass, many of whom use the 427 to reach the tube at Ealing Broadway. Who would want to have to get the 427 then a Crossrail train just to reach Ealing Broadway. I believe the solution is to create a 207A which runs peak hours only Uxbridge-Ealing Broadway all stops The last few days both routes have been packed head to toe particularly in the peaks although the 427 seems to be a popular choice over the 207. All three routes are popular still so I don’t see how people will abandon it for the train.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 22, 2019 22:14:08 GMT
The 607 is overloaded most of the day and seems to struggle. It would not be ideal to add any additional stops. I personally think they should cut some stops and let passengers use the 207/427 instead. It seems crazy the 207 has just gotten a PVR cut and is set to lose the 427's support. Off peak I strongly believe the 427 is superflous and not needed. At peak times however, both routes are very well used. I was walking along the Uxbridge Road at around 8am this morning. I saw a fully loaded 207 pull at the stop. There were several people waiting at the stop but alas there was not enough room on the 207 for them. The 427 behind was well used but did have some surplus capacity to pick up these passengers. TFL are taking all the resillience out of the bus network. I don't buy that people will magically transfer to Crossrail and furthermore, many like having a direct service from A to B which will be lost when the 427 is cut. Ealing Broadway, West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall stations are not too far from the Uxbridge Road and perhaps some will use Crossrail to travel between them. However, consider the people on the 427 who live west of Hayes-By-Pass, many of whom use the 427 to reach the tube at Ealing Broadway. Who would want to have to get the 427 then a Crossrail train just to reach Ealing Broadway. I believe the solution is to create a 207A which runs peak hours only Uxbridge-Ealing Broadway all stops Personally, I don't see too many empty 427's when I've been over that way over the years and it's usually on a Saturday - for me, the current situation works fine rather than introducing a peak hours working. In fact, there seems to be an obsession with peak hour workings & bifurcations on here of late as if they are the be all & end all and will fix everything. People in London get confused with the standardised set of current routes without introducing peak hour extensions & bifurcations
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 22, 2019 22:28:16 GMT
It seems crazy the 207 has just gotten a PVR cut and is set to lose the 427's support. Off peak I strongly believe the 427 is superflous and not needed. At peak times however, both routes are very well used. I was walking along the Uxbridge Road at around 8am this morning. I saw a fully loaded 207 pull at the stop. There were several people waiting at the stop but alas there was not enough room on the 207 for them. The 427 behind was well used but did have some surplus capacity to pick up these passengers. TFL are taking all the resillience out of the bus network. I don't buy that people will magically transfer to Crossrail and furthermore, many like having a direct service from A to B which will be lost when the 427 is cut. Ealing Broadway, West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall stations are not too far from the Uxbridge Road and perhaps some will use Crossrail to travel between them. However, consider the people on the 427 who live west of Hayes-By-Pass, many of whom use the 427 to reach the tube at Ealing Broadway. Who would want to have to get the 427 then a Crossrail train just to reach Ealing Broadway. I believe the solution is to create a 207A which runs peak hours only Uxbridge-Ealing Broadway all stops Personally, I don't see too many empty 427's when I've been over that way over the years and it's usually on a Saturday - for me, the current situation works fine rather than introducing a peak hours working. In fact, there seems to be an obsession with peak hour workings & bifurcations on here of late as if they are the be all & end all and will fix everything. People in London get confused with the standardised set of current routes without introducing peak hour extensions & bifurcations It depends on the circumstances on if 427's are well used or not. Obviously if there is a 207 directly infront off a 427 then that 427 is carrying fresh air. Having said that that 427 is also providing useful links that the 207 does not provide going westbound. The 427 puts some resillience in the bus network which is good for a busy corridor like the Uxbridge Road, on second thoughts I agree that the current situtation is fine
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 22, 2019 22:30:53 GMT
Personally, I don't see too many empty 427's when I've been over that way over the years and it's usually on a Saturday - for me, the current situation works fine rather than introducing a peak hours working. In fact, there seems to be an obsession with peak hour workings & bifurcations on here of late as if they are the be all & end all and will fix everything. People in London get confused with the standardised set of current routes without introducing peak hour extensions & bifurcations It depends on the circumstances on if 427's are well used or not. Obviously if there is a 207 directly infront off a 427 then that 427 is carrying fresh air. Having said that that 427 is also providing useful links that the 207 does not provide going westbound. The 427 puts some resillience in the bus network which is good for a busy corridor like the Uxbridge Road, on second thoughts I agree that the current situtation is fine You do raise a good point though in regards to if the 207 is directly in front of a 427 - that sounds like an issue that is on many corridors where buses aren't timed correctly between each other - for example, it's not rare to find on Tulse Hill the 2, 415 & 432 all running together and then a big gap before the next bus shows whereas if everything was spaced out more evenly, then gaps wouldn't appear and buses don't look like they're carrying fresh air.
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on May 23, 2019 2:30:21 GMT
The driver's going to be mega busy glancing at all these screens, plus the main mirror for the lower saloon I guess it stops passengers getting hit upside the head if the bus swings into a stop too close Let's see if other E200's will have this feature going forward (such as new buses for the 192 at Arriva)... or if in future it's rolled out to high-end cars Erm... surely each screen just replaces one mirror, so the driver shouldn't be any busier than he/she is now. Then carry on, drive!
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on May 23, 2019 2:37:23 GMT
I wish I was a driver years ago when the good stuff was around. Alot of this modern stuff I'm not digging it at all. For me it makes the job less enjoyable. Could be worse... you could be a 329 driver with a Streetdeck I guess there's too many safety systems, crap gearbox settings, restrictions on buses which must be annoying, but to us the passengers, the buses are just as lousy as ever No creature comforts like Wifi... a USB charging port is not a luxury, it's almost like they don't want to compete with trains or cars to encourage people to switch. Some bus rides aren't too bad, drivers tend to rag the DWs on the 123 more often, but that could be just to get them moving
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on May 23, 2019 11:42:47 GMT
It seems crazy the 207 has just gotten a PVR cut and is set to lose the 427's support. Off peak I strongly believe the 427 is superflous and not needed. At peak times however, both routes are very well used. I was walking along the Uxbridge Road at around 8am this morning. I saw a fully loaded 207 pull at the stop. There were several people waiting at the stop but alas there was not enough room on the 207 for them. The 427 behind was well used but did have some surplus capacity to pick up these passengers. TFL are taking all the resillience out of the bus network. I don't buy that people will magically transfer to Crossrail and furthermore, many like having a direct service from A to B which will be lost when the 427 is cut. Ealing Broadway, West Ealing, Hanwell and Southall stations are not too far from the Uxbridge Road and perhaps some will use Crossrail to travel between them. However, consider the people on the 427 who live west of Hayes-By-Pass, many of whom use the 427 to reach the tube at Ealing Broadway. Who would want to have to get the 427 then a Crossrail train just to reach Ealing Broadway. I believe the solution is to create a 207A which runs peak hours only Uxbridge-Ealing Broadway all stops Personally, I don't see too many empty 427's when I've been over that way over the years and it's usually on a Saturday - for me, the current situation works fine rather than introducing a peak hours working. In fact, there seems to be an obsession with peak hour workings & bifurcations on here of late as if they are the be all & end all and will fix everything. People in London get confused with the standardised set of current routes without introducing peak hour extensions & bifurcations Is that because of a lack of clear, concise and correct publicity, be it paper or online, showing what goes where and when?
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on May 23, 2019 11:44:45 GMT
It depends on the circumstances on if 427's are well used or not. Obviously if there is a 207 directly infront off a 427 then that 427 is carrying fresh air. Having said that that 427 is also providing useful links that the 207 does not provide going westbound. The 427 puts some resillience in the bus network which is good for a busy corridor like the Uxbridge Road, on second thoughts I agree that the current situtation is fine You do raise a good point though in regards to if the 207 is directly in front of a 427 - that sounds like an issue that is on many corridors where buses aren't timed correctly between each other - for example, it's not rare to find on Tulse Hill the 2, 415 & 432 all running together and then a big gap before the next bus shows whereas if everything was spaced out more evenly, then gaps wouldn't appear and buses don't look like they're carrying fresh air. Lack of joined up planning. You cannot possibly expect to inter-work services run by different operators who could adjust their times whenever. All three routes probably have different scheduled running times between the same points in Tulse Hill too.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on May 23, 2019 12:04:32 GMT
You do raise a good point though in regards to if the 207 is directly in front of a 427 - that sounds like an issue that is on many corridors where buses aren't timed correctly between each other - for example, it's not rare to find on Tulse Hill the 2, 415 & 432 all running together and then a big gap before the next bus shows whereas if everything was spaced out more evenly, then gaps wouldn't appear and buses don't look like they're carrying fresh air. Lack of joined up planning. You cannot possibly expect to inter-work services run by different operators who could adjust their times whenever. All three routes probably have different scheduled running times between the same points in Tulse Hill too. Using 13 and N113 as an example, you would expect for a 30 minute night bus service to have some level of coordination along the common section between Finchley Road and Oxford Street to maybe provide a 15-minute frequency but definitely not. They are timetabled to arrive at the common section in both directions either at the same time or within 5 minutes of each other.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 23, 2019 12:06:08 GMT
Personally, I don't see too many empty 427's when I've been over that way over the years and it's usually on a Saturday - for me, the current situation works fine rather than introducing a peak hours working. In fact, there seems to be an obsession with peak hour workings & bifurcations on here of late as if they are the be all & end all and will fix everything. People in London get confused with the standardised set of current routes without introducing peak hour extensions & bifurcations Is that because of a lack of clear, concise and correct publicity, be it paper or online, showing what goes where and when? I’d say no because even before TfL’s issues started, people would be often confused so to introduce things that would be 10 times confusing make little sense.
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on May 23, 2019 12:08:06 GMT
Lack of joined up planning. You cannot possibly expect to inter-work services run by different operators who could adjust their times whenever. All three routes probably have different scheduled running times between the same points in Tulse Hill too. Using 13 and N113 as an example, you would expect for a 30 minute night bus service to have some level of coordination along the common section between Finchley Road and Oxford Street to maybe provide a 15-minute frequency but definitely not. They are timetabled to arrive at the common section in both directions either at the same time or within 5 minutes of each other. Could that be down to how TfL specifies the timetable to the operators? If so then it is another good example of un-joined up thinking inside Palestra.
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on May 23, 2019 12:09:34 GMT
Is that because of a lack of clear, concise and correct publicity, be it paper or online, showing what goes where and when? I’d say no because even before TfL’s issues started, people would be often confused so to introduce things that would be 10 times confusing make little sense. So I wonder what changed then, unless people were still confused with the peak extensions and service prefix/suffixes
|
|
|
Metroline
May 23, 2019 12:14:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on May 23, 2019 12:14:27 GMT
I’d say no because even before TfL’s issues started, people would be often confused so to introduce things that would be 10 times confusing make little sense. So I wonder what changed then, unless people were still confused with the peak extensions and service prefix/suffixes I’m only guessing but society in London probably changed and became more hectic, more impatient and maybe that meant having a standard network made more sense. I’ve made no secret before that I prefer a standardised network over implementing bifurcations & peak workings but that’s just because I think making it simple cuts out some confusion at the least.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 23, 2019 12:49:41 GMT
I’d say no because even before TfL’s issues started, people would be often confused so to introduce things that would be 10 times confusing make little sense. So I wonder what changed then, unless people were still confused with the peak extensions and service prefix/suffixes I suspect that a range of things came in to play. One of those will be watching what happened as LT cut / repeatedly changed routes in the 80s alongside those it left alone. I'd not be shocked if the more stable routes did better at retaining or growing patronage. Secondly the move towards competitive tendering will have forced LT / LRT to consider what it was asking the market place to operate. Simpler route structures are easier for new entrants to take on. The move to greater "freedom" for the LBSL subsidiaries in the 1990s with use of local networks, minibuses / small Darts also taught LRT and the bus companies about the benefits of simpler networks and service propositions. Over and above all of this I'd not be surprised if market research was also undertaken to find out what passengers' issues were. I suspect wanting the same route to run each day with broadly similar times and frequencies (allowing for lower demand on Sundays) was a key preference. Deregulation outside London, after a few years of skirmish and experimentation, also pointed towards simpler route structures - LRT and TfL will not have been immune to this although the bus network design principles in London have prevented the mass adandonment of smaller, local routes. The final aspect, much less relevant these days, is that simpler routes and timetables are easier to market and promote. Obviously TfL don't bother to market the bus network these days but LT / LRT did. If you accept the private car is the competitor then you don't get people out of cars into buses if the bus service / network is too complicated for people to understand. Many people have no idea where buses go, how to use them or what the fare is - more of an issue outside London to be fair but I still reckon that there are plenty of people in London who find the bus network very complex. It is worth noting that some routes do retain slightly more complex timetables for operational and cost reasons. The 38 and 166 are two examples but are clearly the exception these days.
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on May 23, 2019 14:21:57 GMT
Metroline's new electric E400s are now in the LVF system
|
|