|
Post by thebusguy on Jan 9, 2019 15:47:28 GMT
Here we go, I’ve got another one - Route 65 but with shorter LTs
|
|
|
Post by thebusguy on Jan 9, 2019 15:49:06 GMT
Here we go, I’ve got another one - Route 65 but with shorter LTs I know about the Petersham corner and how that is quite tight, but if 10.8m Scania Omnicitys can fit, I think a short NRM can.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jan 9, 2019 16:06:08 GMT
Here we go, I’ve got another one - Route 65 but with shorter LTs There's only one shorter LT and it is almost certain that no more will be built.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Jan 9, 2019 19:32:36 GMT
You can't class a VHR as an LT. It is much closer to a Gemini 3, just with a different body. Most of the complaints against the Gemini 3 are just as applicable to the VHR, while most of the complaints levelled against the LT (except the window size) do not apply to the VHR.
So I'd go with Golders Green being an LT free zone.
The VHR’s & VHP’s do carry complaints over from LT’s such as uncomfortable seats, poor legroom & poor air cooling. I have not been on a VHP and the last time I travelled on a VHR was when they were at BT, and I would agree with some of what you say. The seats were not great, but to be fair no worse than most bus seats these days. Sadly the standards for bus seat comfort are not what they used to be.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jan 9, 2019 20:53:21 GMT
Here we go, I’ve got another one - Route 65 but with shorter LTs There's only one shorter LT and it is almost certain that no more will be built. What’s more, you can’t really change the length of existing LTs like you could with the original Routemaster!
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 9, 2019 23:53:26 GMT
If it's so called 'completely pointless' you wouldn't be suggesting to still keep it even in a shorter form? The 242 has clearly suffered and the cutbacks to it only that make that even worse but it isn't completely pointless - I'm sure the residents around the back roads near Homerton Hospital would testify to that. Someone suggested a while ago instead to divert it towards London Bridge instead, especially if the 48 gets withdrawn which I suspect will sadly still happen or even, if it would prove useful & feasible, extending the route beyond Homerton Hospital. The clever thing to do with the 242 would be to loop it round via Richmond Road, Queensbridge Road, Hackney Road and tack it onto the D6 making a Homerton Hospital - Dalston - Mile End - Isle of Dogs service using double deckers. That would give new links and double deck the D6. Clearly not going to happen because it's Inner London and the D6 has a newish contract with single deckers but a bit of foresight could have created something genuinely useful. The 242's former route 22A/B had did this IIRC in the 1980's using Queensbridge Road
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 9, 2019 23:55:20 GMT
Oh good grief. More fiddling and faffing. What's the point of going to consultation if you change your mind about what you want to do? Fine, if after the consultation results have been reviewed, that you *cancel* your consulted on plans but to continue optioneering is a bit ridiculous IMO. The logical thing to do really is probably to trim the 242 back to Dalston Junction or Shoreditch and leave the other routes alone. TfL have progressively ruined the 242 to the point where its access to Central London is pretty pointless. Do you know what I thought EXACTLY that yesterday when I happened to be looking at those proposals yesterday, when I mentioned about the Stamford Hill residents potentially getting the huff when they lose their Central London service in the form of the 67. The 242 is now completely pointless and absolutely dead now it’s got a completely parallel rail alternative, so just cut that back to Dalston instead (although the route would now be incredibly short) and have done with it. TfL saves money by cutting a route that no one actually uses anymore instead of a route that so many people do, and at the same time the 67 users are kept happy. Bingo!!! I hope they come to their senses and do that instead but I doubt it. I also hope what capitalomnibus means by what he said is that the 48 won’t go after all, which I hope it won’t as it’s nonsensical withdrawing a really really busy route, the 55 is already close to creaking at the seams as it is so no one can expect it to then take all the 48 passengers as well ... well except TfL. If it were to do that it would need a significant frequency increase. So I hope they’ve now realised that they do need to go back to the drawing board with that idea (as I don’t remember reading the 55 will get an increase in compensation). I did not say it wouldn't go after all, just there are now other options. I do not know if they would make the public domain, unless the original person who leaked them leaks it again. Either way, an announcement about many of the routes is due imminently.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 10, 2019 1:29:41 GMT
The 242's former route 22A/B had did this IIRC in the 1980's using Queensbridge Road Well I never knew that or had forgotten all about it. Kicked in in 1987 on the 22A. Seems to have only lasted until 1990 when Kentish Bus took over. What's mildly ironic with the current TfL proposals is that they are effectively taking us back to 1989 when the 22A ran Clapton Park to Aldgate albeit via a different route. Nothing new under the sun. From Ian Armstrong's site.
|
|
|
Post by dennistas on Jan 13, 2019 3:58:40 GMT
Just seen on londonbusroutes.net that route N9 is converting to LTs in 2 weeks Saturday, lol I thought this route already ran with LTs.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 13, 2019 4:26:41 GMT
Just seen on londonbusroutes.net that route N9 is converting to LTs in 2 weeks Saturday, lol I thought this route already ran with LTs. The N9 currently runs from AV using SP's but it seems there's a shake up of journeys between the 9 & N9 in conjunction with the N9 moving to V to take up an LT allocation. This was confirmed on here to happen at some point and looks like it's finally going ahead.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jan 15, 2019 10:49:10 GMT
Just seen on londonbusroutes.net that route N9 is converting to LTs in 2 weeks Saturday, lol I thought this route already ran with LTs. Although they have not yet been used on the night element I believe those LTs have had N9 on their blinds for a while (if not from new), in essence future-proofing their displays. It's somewhat similar to the LTs on the 68 which include N68 on the blinds yet not 'officially' spec'd with the type... presumably due to residential parking issues near the Old Coulsdon terminus. Would love to know whether the N87 will be converting to LTs with the 87, although I imagine if so the route may in practice be a mixed allocation like with the N11.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 15, 2019 12:39:43 GMT
Do any buses currently work from the 87 to the N44 as they share the Aldwych terminal. If so I wonder if the N44 will see some NB4Ls.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 15, 2019 13:10:55 GMT
Do any buses currently work from the 87 to the N44 as they share the Aldwych terminal. If so I wonder if the N44 will see some NB4Ls. The N44 uses the 87's current allocation on paper but I don't think there is any cross links so I'd imagine it would continue as EH allocated.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jan 15, 2019 14:35:35 GMT
Do any buses currently work from the 87 to the N44 as they share the Aldwych terminal. If so I wonder if the N44 will see some NB4Ls. When i was there many moons back we would do two combinations of routes on the same duty with the same bus. There was one particular duty where we we did three routes, each being one journey each
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Jan 15, 2019 15:00:26 GMT
Do any buses currently work from the 87 to the N44 as they share the Aldwych terminal. If so I wonder if the N44 will see some NB4Ls. As far as I can tell the only crosslinks on the N44 are from the 77, e.g. the first two northbound N44s are worked off the 77 with buses running empty from Tooting to Sutton. The Aldwych starters all seem to run empty from SW although I haven't checked all the schedules.
|
|