|
Post by marlon101 on Oct 26, 2013 19:37:46 GMT
After reading a lot of the above. Merging the R7 & R5/R10 would be quite difficult to run. I've taken the R5/R10 before and the bus can get delayed along Cudham Lane, the road is quite a tight one. Decreasing the frequency is probably the only thing that will improve the service, but will the locals like it that is the question. Means a bus every 75 minutes instead of every hour, an extra 15 minute wait should not be much of a problem, but for some it could be! I do suggest though that the PVR can be increased to 2 and have both routes running at the same time with running every 1HR 30 Mins giving the users a 45 minute waiting time for either route, Knockholt Pound being the meeting point, but this will probably make the overall service even worse, which could mean buses waiting on each other delaying the whole service. I certainly cannot see two buses serving Cudham Lane at the same time it is too narrow, which is why the buses would have to meet at Knockholt Pound before proceeding ahead. You say residents would be unimpressed with an extra 15 minutes but by all accounts they're all doing extra waiting as it is. Undoubtedly people with have a grumble but when presented with a choice between an unreliable more-frequent service and a slightly less frequent service where they can be sure of the timing of the bus I think people would chose the latter.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 26, 2013 20:48:44 GMT
On a wider note, I wonder whether it's time for Roundabout mkII. From what's being reported here, the buses on the country bits of the R3, R7 and R10 have grown too big for the job. We're back to the days of Nationals trundling about. Perhaps we need to find a smaller bus again, like the Dial-a-ride vehicles, to run these. There aren't really many options for smaller, accessible vehicles though. The only viable option seems to be the short, narrow Optare Solo and Metrobus already deploy those on the R5/10 when there's a spare. Are you suggesting that TfL mandates that operators only buy Optare Solos for certain routes? Mini E20Ds / Darts are already the main choice in Orpington and are the next viable size up the scale. Orpington and the surrounding area is actually very well provided for - it would never have the level of service that it does if it was in the deregulated part of Kent. Roundabout was clearly the building block for today's network. I suspect most of the "R" routes would not run in the evening or on Sundays and the trunk routes would be much less frequent at those times than they are under TfL control.
|
|
|
R5 / R10
Oct 26, 2013 21:21:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by Mokujin on Oct 26, 2013 21:21:49 GMT
According to LVF today, the R5/R10 only ran between 06:15 and 08:50 and not for the whole day or is this another LVF error?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 26, 2013 22:28:10 GMT
According to LVF today, the R5/R10 only ran between 06:15 and 08:50 and not for the whole day or is this another LVF error? Come on - there's more than one reason why I-Bus data may not be right. The bus may have defective I-Bus kit, it may not have been signed on, there may have been data loss between the bus and I-Bus, the data may not have made it to the external feed. We do need to realise that any "glitch" is not the sole responsibility of LVF. LVF is an optional tool courtesy of TfL deciding to share the data and Brian C and son creating the website. It is not there as a 100% guarantee of what happened on the ground. I would expect all operators are required to have some form of back up process to tell TfL, in the event of some sort of failure, what buses ran and when and where. It would be particularly important on low frequency routes where losing 1 or 2 trips is a disproportionate share of the service and therefore the contract payment.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Oct 26, 2013 23:02:36 GMT
According to LVF today, the R5/R10 only ran between 06:15 and 08:50 and not for the whole day or is this another LVF error? This has happened to the R8 as well before. A bus is still in use but the iBus switched off and not logged in.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2013 0:53:33 GMT
Danorak has made two very useful points. First, that Orpingtons network could perhaps benefit from an overhaul in general, and second, that busses are generally too wide for where country lanes remain.
It doesn't help that the communities are small, sparse, scattered. Nor that its all on the border. Does the 402 run hourly? It'll be interesting to see how a 60 min and 75 min frequency will mesh.
Its more than an extra 15 mins wait though, bear in mind - its an extra 15 for whatever number the return journey is. Some will have to catch a bus half an hour earlier/later, some a bus 15 mins earlier.
Unless a way around two buses meeting at the narrowest point can be overcome, the route involving that section would be best served by one vehicle. So you either shorten the route to stay within a set period, or decrease the frequency to keep the route the same length.
Or run narrower 'buses', or not serve that section, or make it buses only/one way/etc.
Its tricky but somethings got to give.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 27, 2013 9:39:46 GMT
Danorak has made two very useful points. First, that Orpingtons network could perhaps benefit from an overhaul in general, and second, that busses are generally too wide for where country lanes remain. It doesn't help that the communities are small, sparse, scattered. Nor that its all on the border. Does the 402 run hourly? It'll be interesting to see how a 60 min and 75 min frequency will mesh. Its more than an extra 15 mins wait though, bear in mind - its an extra 15 for whatever number the return journey is. Some will have to catch a bus half an hour earlier/later, some a bus 15 mins earlier. Unless a way around two buses meeting at the narrowest point can be overcome, the route involving that section would be best served by one vehicle. So you either shorten the route to stay within a set period, or decrease the frequency to keep the route the same length. Or run narrower 'buses', or not serve that section, or make it buses only/one way/etc. Its tricky but somethings got to give. There is only one bus used on the R5 and R10. The joint headway will move from x60 (each route x120) to x75 (each route x150). Therefore the bus cannot meet another bus of the same service group. Clearly it could meet the 402 on a couple of bits of route but not having used either service I don't know how wide or narrow the roads are at Pratts Bottom and Halstead.
|
|
|
R5 / R10
Oct 27, 2013 17:01:18 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Oct 27, 2013 17:01:18 GMT
Danorak has made two very useful points. First, that Orpingtons network could perhaps benefit from an overhaul in general, and second, that busses are generally too wide for where country lanes remain. It doesn't help that the communities are small, sparse, scattered. Nor that its all on the border. Does the 402 run hourly? It'll be interesting to see how a 60 min and 75 min frequency will mesh. Its more than an extra 15 mins wait though, bear in mind - its an extra 15 for whatever number the return journey is. Some will have to catch a bus half an hour earlier/later, some a bus 15 mins earlier. Unless a way around two buses meeting at the narrowest point can be overcome, the route involving that section would be best served by one vehicle. So you either shorten the route to stay within a set period, or decrease the frequency to keep the route the same length. Or run narrower 'buses', or not serve that section, or make it buses only/one way/etc. Its tricky but somethings got to give. There is only one bus used on the R5 and R10. The joint headway will move from x60 (each route x120) to x75 (each route x150). Therefore the bus cannot meet another bus of the same service group. Clearly it could meet the 402 on a couple of bits of route but not having used either service I don't know how wide or narrow the roads are at Pratts Bottom and Halstead. The roads at Halstead are very narrow but the narrowest part of the 402 is near Knockhoult where it uses a road which it can just about fit a bus into a single lane that runs in both directions.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2013 18:22:29 GMT
Snoggle: You've misunderstood me - I am aware that the R5 and R10 use only one bus between them. The 60 and 75 min frequencies meshing that I referred to were those of the R5/R10 (75) as proposed and that of the 402 (60).
Does anyone know how often the 471 managed to do the route back in Country Area days?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 27, 2013 20:56:28 GMT
Snoggle: You've misunderstood me - I am aware that the R5 and R10 use only one bus between them. The 60 and 75 min frequencies meshing that I referred to were those of the R5/R10 (75) as proposed and that of the 402 (60). Does anyone know how often the 471 managed to do the route back in Country Area days? Sorry
|
|
|
Post by Mokujin on Oct 28, 2013 13:16:09 GMT
Just had a look at R5/R10 routing from TFL South East London Bus Map using Google maps and the route is incredibly long, so many tight turns, narrow roads, bushes, old houses etc. At least the locals are happy they've at least got a connection between Orpington and Knockholt/Halstead rather than nothing!
|
|
|
Post by westhamgeezer on Oct 28, 2013 14:38:38 GMT
Quite Complex this, I'm sure that it could be made more simple somehow, just haven't worked it out yet! Incidentally, is there any reason why on the on-line TFL map of route R5/R10, it only shows them going as far as Green St. Green??
|
|
|
Post by Mokujin on Oct 28, 2013 15:08:36 GMT
Quite Complex this, I'm sure that it could be made more simple somehow, just haven't worked it out yet! Incidentally, is there any reason why on the on-line TFL map of route R5/R10, it only shows them going as far as Green St. Green?? Because Knockholt Pound isn't an exact terminus for R5/R10, it is only a turning point and the route is a loop route so it goes: Orpington Station - Orpington Station via Knockholt. AFAIK, It shows Green Street Green as the farest point of the route because it is kind of in the London Boundary ie. served by London bus routes where as Knockholt is part of the countryside boundary and more people get off or go as far as Green Street Green than Knockholt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2013 23:36:42 GMT
When did Knockholt succeed from London?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 29, 2013 20:09:55 GMT
Quite Complex this, I'm sure that it could be made more simple somehow, just haven't worked it out yet! Incidentally, is there any reason why on the on-line TFL map of route R5/R10, it only shows them going as far as Green St. Green?? Probably the simpler thing to do is to break the loop and create two separate out and back services. You could do something like Orpington - Cudham - Halstead as one service. The other could be Orpington - Pratts Bottom - Halstead. I've no idea at all how much or how little traffic there is around the current loop service which would be a crucial factor in deciding if you did break the loop. The other thing that might be possible given the short distance involved is to run the R3 on from Chelsfield and run down to Halstead up to, say, Green St Green or Orpington Hospital via either side of the loop. The link into Orpington could be made by changing buses at GSG or simply by travelling via Chelsfield. The key to that sort of change would be running time and if it required more buses than now. Restructuring the loop services might give options, as previously suggested, to link to other hourly routes like the R6, R7 or R8. I suspect the current R5/10 is the simplest and cheapest way of providing a service to that part of the rural London / Kent fringe. Let's be honest - a broadly hourly service round the loop is pretty good for fairly marginal territory. There are other routes, like the W10 or 399, which have far fewer journeys despite there being reasonable levels of housing on both routes. The only compensation is Crews Hill and Hadley Wood do have a reasonable train service instead.
|
|