|
Post by snoggle on Dec 1, 2013 23:54:10 GMT
Could it be an indirect consequence of budget freeze & LT introduction ? Trimming down high pvr routes and redistribution amongst hard pressed inner / suburban routes is something i expect tfl would consider. The enhancements made by Red Ken in conjunction with the now defunct west London congestion charge could be vulnerable? Most have already commented about the bizarre route 452. I have commented about the 452 before. Must look at the annual patronage levels to see if it really is useful to people. Personally, I really can't see the point of it. And Wandsworth road station seems a bizarre terminus to me! I have had a look at the patronage numbers. What surprised me is that it carries nearly 5m a year and is 171st busiest service. It's busier than plenty of other long established high frequency services like the 78, 196, 161, 238 and 262. I agree that Wandsworth Rd Station is an odd terminus. Pity it can't run up to Stockwell Tube Station as it would give new links and connections.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 2, 2013 0:21:22 GMT
I have commented about the 452 before. Must look at the annual patronage levels to see if it really is useful to people. Personally, I really can't see the point of it. And Wandsworth road station seems a bizarre terminus to me! I have had a look at the patronage numbers. What surprised me is that it carries nearly 5m a year and is 171st busiest service. It's busier than plenty of other long established high frequency services like the 78, 196, 161, 238 and 262. I agree that Wandsworth Rd Station is an odd terminus. Pity it can't run up to Stockwell Tube Station as it would give new links and connections. It could stand on Stockwell Road alongside the 50 - the extension route could use Union Road to get from Wandsworth Road to Clapham Road. A lot of people seem to have an issue with the 452 actually existing - it does carry quite a number of passengers as the patronage figures show and has done since its creation. It also helps the 137 greatly between Cedars Road & Knightsbridge - can remember before the 452 how the 137 was extremely busy along that section.
|
|
|
Post by sw11simon on Dec 2, 2013 8:33:41 GMT
I have had a look at the patronage numbers. What surprised me is that it carries nearly 5m a year and is 171st busiest service. It's busier than plenty of other long established high frequency services like the 78, 196, 161, 238 and 262. I agree that Wandsworth Rd Station is an odd terminus. Pity it can't run up to Stockwell Tube Station as it would give new links and connections. It could stand on Stockwell Road alongside the 50 - the extension route could use Union Road to get from Wandsworth Road to Clapham Road. A lot of people seem to have an issue with the 452 actually existing - it does carry quite a number of passengers as the patronage figures show and has done since its creation. It also helps the 137 greatly between Cedars Road & Knightsbridge - can remember before the 452 how the 137 was extremely busy along that section. Personally I've always thought the 452 should terminate at Vauxhall... would relieve the 77/87 which are extremely busy in peaks and often leave people behind in that area.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 2, 2013 10:20:09 GMT
It could stand on Stockwell Road alongside the 50 - the extension route could use Union Road to get from Wandsworth Road to Clapham Road. A lot of people seem to have an issue with the 452 actually existing - it does carry quite a number of passengers as the patronage figures show and has done since its creation. It also helps the 137 greatly between Cedars Road & Knightsbridge - can remember before the 452 how the 137 was extremely busy along that section. Personally I've always thought the 452 should terminate at Vauxhall... would relieve the 77/87 which are extremely busy in peaks and often leave people behind in that area. Not a bad idea either, definitely could help both routes out.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Dec 2, 2013 13:59:02 GMT
Plus it help create a bit of a stronger link between South and West London. Should the route ever get a bit of a pvr reduction (or if the present operator gets a frequency reduction on another route) perhaps the relevant buses could be utilised for the extension.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 4, 2013 16:11:16 GMT
I have had a look at the patronage numbers. What surprised me is that it carries nearly 5m a year and is 171st busiest service. It's busier than plenty of other long established high frequency services like the 78, 196, 161, 238 and 262. I agree that Wandsworth Rd Station is an odd terminus. Pity it can't run up to Stockwell Tube Station as it would give new links and connections. It could stand on Stockwell Road alongside the 50 - the extension route could use Union Road to get from Wandsworth Road to Clapham Road. A lot of people seem to have an issue with the 452 actually existing - it does carry quite a number of passengers as the patronage figures show and has done since its creation. It also helps the 137 greatly between Cedars Road & Knightsbridge - can remember before the 452 how the 137 was extremely busy along that section. But it doesn't, the 137 frequency was reduced when the 452 was introduced which is why many people object. The question should be do people want the 452, and the only unique bit is the turn at Knightsbridge and the Wandsworth Road stand or do they want an increased service on the 52 between Victoria and Kensal Rise and on the 137 between Oxford Circus and Clapham Common. I suspect the latter would win hands down.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 4, 2013 18:28:49 GMT
It could stand on Stockwell Road alongside the 50 - the extension route could use Union Road to get from Wandsworth Road to Clapham Road. A lot of people seem to have an issue with the 452 actually existing - it does carry quite a number of passengers as the patronage figures show and has done since its creation. It also helps the 137 greatly between Cedars Road & Knightsbridge - can remember before the 452 how the 137 was extremely busy along that section. But it doesn't, the 137 frequency was reduced when the 452 was introduced which is why many people object. The question should be do people want the 452, and the only unique bit is the turn at Knightsbridge and the Wandsworth Road stand or do they want an increased service on the 52 between Victoria and Kensal Rise and on the 137 between Oxford Circus and Clapham Common. I suspect the latter would win hands down. Obviously the figures must be incorrect!!! I've seen and used the route on many occasions and it is well used.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 4, 2013 18:56:21 GMT
But it doesn't, the 137 frequency was reduced when the 452 was introduced which is why many people object. The question should be do people want the 452, and the only unique bit is the turn at Knightsbridge and the Wandsworth Road stand or do they want an increased service on the 52 between Victoria and Kensal Rise and on the 137 between Oxford Circus and Clapham Common. I suspect the latter would win hands down. Obviously the figures must be incorrect!!! I've seen and used the route on many occasions and it is well used. Obviously the figures are not wrong . Someone (the newest group member from what I can see) is just repeating the same argument, almost word for word, I have seen from three different identities on two different groups. It also somewhat misses the point that the 137's frequency was bolstered again after that initial reduction when the 452 was introduced. The 52's ridership is still well down on where it was a few years ago but I'm not aware it has seen any great reduction in its service level. Perhaps we should reduce the 52 to fund the suggested extension to the 452?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 5, 2013 13:00:52 GMT
But it doesn't, the 137 frequency was reduced when the 452 was introduced which is why many people object. The question should be do people want the 452, and the only unique bit is the turn at Knightsbridge and the Wandsworth Road stand or do they want an increased service on the 52 between Victoria and Kensal Rise and on the 137 between Oxford Circus and Clapham Common. I suspect the latter would win hands down. Obviously the figures must be incorrect!!! I've seen and used the route on many occasions and it is well used. You're missing the point. The significant issue is how well is the 452 used passing Knightsbridge, the only unique part of the route, and the answer is that it is poorly used compared to the 52 and 137 both of which struggle to cope with loadings at Oxford Street and Victoria respectively.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2014 14:29:44 GMT
The end of the shortly lived extension of the 159 is on the 29th of March. Source: consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/route-159 So what happenned to the promise of retaining the direct link for passengers on the 15? Anyway, the 15 no longer goes past Trafalgar Sqare so passengers only have the option of using 23 to Paddington.
|
|
|
Post by jrussa on Mar 4, 2014 15:41:55 GMT
Not in relation to the consultation, I honestly do believe Route N159 should be re-extended to New Addington. I still do not understand why the N109 had to be created.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 4, 2014 20:14:23 GMT
The end of the shortly lived extension of the 159 is on the 29th of March. Source: consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/route-159 So what happenned to the promise of retaining the direct link for passengers on the 15? Anyway, the 15 no longer goes past Trafalgar Sqare so passengers only have the option of using 23 to Paddington. I'm very skeptical about this consultation - the only reason I can see the withdrawal of the extension is to allow NBfL's to operate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2014 21:00:05 GMT
The end of the shortly lived extension of the 159 is on the 29th of March. Source: consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/route-159 So what happenned to the promise of retaining the direct link for passengers on the 15? Anyway, the 15 no longer goes past Trafalgar Sqare so passengers only have the option of using 23 to Paddington. I'm very skeptical about this consultation - the only reason I can see the withdrawal of the extension is to allow NBfL's to operate. I totally agree with you! There is definitely a need for this link especially with all the development that is happening at the basfin. Also, asides for LTs on the 159 could this also be an agenda to get people to use the underground/crossrail (when it opens). If Paddington is to lose the number 7 in 2018..this would mean the 23 would be the only link from Oxford Circus.
|
|
|
Post by John tuthill on Mar 4, 2014 21:11:38 GMT
I'm very skeptical about this consultation - the only reason I can see the withdrawal of the extension is to allow NBfL's to operate. I totally agree with you! There is definitely a need for this link especially with all the development that is happening at the basfin. Also, asides for LTs on the 159 could this also be an agenda to get people to use the underground/crossrail (when it opens). If Paddington is to lose the number 7 in 2018..this would mean the 23 would be the only link from Oxford Circus. The Bakerloo?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 4, 2014 21:20:38 GMT
If the 7 and 23 are busy or running slow I think most people might end up using the underground instead. Which means they would be spending more on travel.
|
|