|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 13, 2014 20:59:28 GMT
And here folks is the official consultation on extending the 136 to E&C. Consultation Linkbasically it extends the 136 as predicted with Peckham Bus Station not being served. 1 bus will be removed from the 343's peak service. When I read the TFL report last year and saw that picture of people at a 343 bus stop I was shocked. I really like the idea and I'm glad that is will only serve the North Peckham section of the 343 and not the 343 via Brockley & Peckhham Rye. Elephant & Castle to Lewisham link has been needed for a long while no matter how long it takes to get there. Plus the residents of North Peckham will now have another route, Grove Park & Downham will once again be linked with Central London during the day and Catford will have the 136 & 171 both serving Elephant & Castle. This extension should increase the usage of the 136 as it is currently overcrowded AM / PM and would probably be even busier if running as far as Elephant, I personally think It will be well used by people in Lewisham as well as people who live along the 343 in North Peckham. My only concern is the reliability of the 136, the proposed extension is actually not very long so it should not been too bad for the route. What I'm afraid of witnessing is 136s with new terminus at Downham, Bromley Road every time I'm in Catford or Lewisham or even 136 to Peckham the old terminus, because if this does happen then the 181 will end up getting all of the strain from Turned 136s and so will the 343 from turned 136s. Turns will obviously happen, but frequent turns will not really help the 181 & 343 if buses on the 136s are missed out. Although a good advantage from this is if a 136 is so Late leaving Grove Park it can be turned at New Cross and run light to Elephant & Castle to be on time to return to Grove Park, but still a bus will be missed meaning one or two struggling 343s. I just hope a good amount of running time is added to the route, and that the current cross-linked buses (214) from the 47 & (230) from the 621 are kept on the route in the PM Peaks as they really help the route at the moment turns have really reduced ever since (230) was added to the PM peaks. The worst thing that could happen for this is an inadequate timetable, like what happened with the 320 when is was first extended to Catford on a PVR of 11 which were running late and turned at Downham, Bromley Road & Biggin Hill Airport day in day out. Someone stated an extra 6 buses on the PVR meaning the PVR will be 19 which sounds alright but I doubt all 19 will cope in the peaks as the 136 sometimes has gaps in the service, (214 & 230) crosslinks will make 21 buses on the 136 in the PM peaks which should be alright, that is if they stay on the route. Overall I think the 136 is the best candidate. I wouldn't extend the 40 or 521 via the 343. The 40 provides an important link to Dulwich and the 521 is Single decker. I'm not a fan of having the 136 terminate at Borough. Also I doubt the 8s & 472s Tridents will be used as it has already been stated they are leased and will be returned to the Leaser. 10 of the 53s Enviro 400s are going to East London. I very much doubt Scanias would be introduced at Catford if any were made surplus, which has been confirmed for the 277, 28 are at BW for a PVR of 21 leaving a few redundant Scanias, I could be wrong for assuming this. My assumption is new buses will be ordered for this extension if it goes ahead.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 13, 2014 21:31:11 GMT
or send some of the ex 205 Scania's to Rainham for the 372 then use the 6-7 E40Ds that are intended for the 372 to TL.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 13, 2014 21:32:10 GMT
My only concern is the reliability of the 136, the proposed extension is actually not very long so it should not been too bad for the route. What I'm afraid of witnessing is 136s with new terminus at Downham, Bromley Road every time I'm in Catford or Lewisham or even 136 to Peckham the old terminus, because if this does happen then the 181 will end up getting all of the strain from Turned 136s and so will the 343 from turned 136s. Turns will obviously happen, but frequent turns will not really help the 181 & 343 if buses on the 136s are missed out. Although a good advantage from this is if a 136 is so Late leaving Grove Park it can be turned at New Cross and run light to Elephant & Castle to be on time to return to Grove Park, but still a bus will be missed meaning one or two struggling 343s. I just hope a good amount of running time is added to the route, and that the current cross-linked buses (214) from the 47 & (230) from the 621 are kept on the route in the PM Peaks as they really help the route at the moment turns have really reduced ever since (230) was added to the PM peaks. The worst thing that could happen for this is an inadequate timetable, like what happened with the 320 when is was first extended to Catford on a PVR of 11 which were running late and turned at Downham, Bromley Road & Biggin Hill Airport day in day out. Someone stated an extra 6 buses on the PVR meaning the PVR will be 19 which sounds alright but I doubt all 19 will cope in the peaks as the 136 sometimes has gaps in the service, (214 & 230) crosslinks will make 21 buses on the 136 in the PM peaks which should be alright, that is if they stay on the route. Overall I think the 136 is the best candidate. Something tells me that Stagecoach and TfL will be careful about this extension. Given the huge political profile it has it's got to work properly or else the criticism will be never ending. I therefore suspect that Stagecoach will have spent or are spending some time to observe just what happens in North Peckham in the AM peak and from Elephant southwards in the PM peak. Clearly it's their decision how they time / schedule it and the imminent works in Lewisham don't make it an easy decision. I'm sure Mr Nicholass is giving the contract variation due attention.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Jan 13, 2014 21:36:46 GMT
My only concern is the reliability of the 136, the proposed extension is actually not very long so it should not been too bad for the route. What I'm afraid of witnessing is 136s with new terminus at Downham, Bromley Road every time I'm in Catford or Lewisham or even 136 to Peckham the old terminus, because if this does happen then the 181 will end up getting all of the strain from Turned 136s and so will the 343 from turned 136s. Turns will obviously happen, but frequent turns will not really help the 181 & 343 if buses on the 136s are missed out. Although a good advantage from this is if a 136 is so Late leaving Grove Park it can be turned at New Cross and run light to Elephant & Castle to be on time to return to Grove Park, but still a bus will be missed meaning one or two struggling 343s. I just hope a good amount of running time is added to the route, and that the current cross-linked buses (214) from the 47 & (230) from the 621 are kept on the route in the PM Peaks as they really help the route at the moment turns have really reduced ever since (230) was added to the PM peaks. The worst thing that could happen for this is an inadequate timetable, like what happened with the 320 when is was first extended to Catford on a PVR of 11 which were running late and turned at Downham, Bromley Road & Biggin Hill Airport day in day out. Someone stated an extra 6 buses on the PVR meaning the PVR will be 19 which sounds alright but I doubt all 19 will cope in the peaks as the 136 sometimes has gaps in the service, (214 & 230) crosslinks will make 21 buses on the 136 in the PM peaks which should be alright, that is if they stay on the route. Overall I think the 136 is the best candidate. Something tells me that Stagecoach and TfL will be careful about this extension. Given the huge political profile it has it's got to work properly or else the criticism will be never ending. I therefore suspect that Stagecoach will have spent or are spending some time to observe just what happens in North Peckham in the AM peak and from Elephant southwards in the PM peak. Clearly it's their decision how they time / schedule it and the imminent works in Lewisham don't make it an easy decision. I'm sure Mr Nicholass is giving the contract variation due attention. I'm just thinking, if this does go through then wouldn't the route be available to more companies upon tender? GAL could potentially have a better chance of winning the route. Or even Abellio.
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Jan 13, 2014 21:56:34 GMT
Why aren't you supportive? It's a minor miracle, given the funding situation, that this change has actually made it to the consultation stage. It's not exactly cheap given the additional frequency that is being provided over a fair distance. It's an extra six buses or so at peak times which is the sort of resource that could be used on other routes elsewhere to bolster services. I'm not denying the seriousness of the North Peckham issue but it's not the only place suffering overcrowding which is why I'm surprised TfL have gone for this rather than sticking another decker on the 343 and hoping it's enough. That's been the tactic for years. I agree with all of what you said but I'm just not sure if 136 is the right candidate for this extension. The route is already long enough and I think that 453 could have been extended to Lewisham via Brookmill Road to provide a link between Lewisham and Elephant & Castle. Probably at least 1 or 2 extra buses would be required. As for the North Peckham situation, I feel that the 521 should have been extended to Peckham via East Street and route 343 as it uses long buses and could ease overcrowding on the 343. But then again, there might be some roads around the East Street area that could be tight for Citaros. Extending the 521 to Peckham is just a step too far.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 13, 2014 22:12:32 GMT
I'm just thinking, if this does go through then wouldn't the route be available to more companies upon tender? GAL could potentially have a better chance of winning the route. Or even Abellio. In theory every route is available to any company that is on TfL's supplier list. Of course companies are constrained by where their depots are or if they could set one up (if it was financially worthwhile). I take your point that a longer route on the 136 puts more garages "in scope" of being able to run the route when it comes up for retender in a few years time. I'd guess that many SE London routes have several bids because there is a reasonable spread of garages with different companies but several of time are at or close to capacity. The last tender round for the 136 had three bids but who they were, other than Stagecoach, are not listed but Go Ahead London and Abellio London would be my guess. Arriva are a bit too far out of the range but could bid from Ash Grove (as for the 78) when the 136 runs to Elephant. Still it's all a fair few years away and goodness knows what might have happened by then.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Jan 13, 2014 22:34:34 GMT
I'm just thinking, if this does go through then wouldn't the route be available to more companies upon tender? GAL could potentially have a better chance of winning the route. Or even Abellio. In theory every route is available to any company that is on TfL's supplier list. Of course companies are constrained by where their depots are or if they could set one up (if it was financially worthwhile). I take your point that a longer route on the 136 puts more garages "in scope" of being able to run the route when it comes up for retender in a few years time. I'd guess that many SE London routes have several bids because there is a reasonable spread of garages with different companies but several of time are at or close to capacity. The last tender round for the 136 had three bids but who they were, other than Stagecoach, are not listed but Go Ahead London and Abellio London would be my guess. Arriva are a bit too far out of the range but could bid from Ash Grove (as for the 78) when the 136 runs to Elephant. Still it's all a fair few years away and goodness knows what might have happened by then. Yes, that's exactly my point. Extending the route would bring it closer to other garages (e.g. WL). As the route is right now, it would be very hard for Abellio or Arriva for example to run the route. From my guess, given that PD retained the 53 I wouldn't be too surprised if TL did the same with the 136 (assuming the extension goes ahead)
|
|
|
Post by titan1mike on Jan 13, 2014 22:49:16 GMT
Has Gnicholass stated that about 12 diesel e400s are on order with 1 going to TB,so perhaps 6 of these are going to TL for the 136 extension?
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 13, 2014 22:57:38 GMT
Something tells me that Stagecoach and TfL will be careful about this extension. Given the huge political profile it has it's got to work properly or else the criticism will be never ending. I therefore suspect that Stagecoach will have spent or are spending some time to observe just what happens in North Peckham in the AM peak and from Elephant southwards in the PM peak. Clearly it's their decision how they time / schedule it and the imminent works in Lewisham don't make it an easy decision. I'm sure Mr Nicholass is giving the contract variation due attention. I'm just thinking, if this does go through then wouldn't the route be available to more companies upon tender? GAL could potentially have a better chance of winning the route. Or even Abellio. Judging from how the 136 runs now most buses start and finish in Grove Park which is just 8 minutes from TL. A few start in Peckham, but I would imagine if it goes to Elephant & Castle Stagecoach would attempt to keep costs to a minimum by cross-linking Night work with any 136s starting from Elephant & Castle, which is currently done with the last & first 47/199s. NX do have a good chance at running the route imo, but I would imagine it would cost much more to run as well as WL. Sounds like lots of light running from NX/WL to Grove Park. Catford is and always has been the most logical place to run the 136 imo and has been successfully retained many times, and hopefully it will continue. On another note, The 136 has had a good history at TL and has never been changed since it was introduced in 1994 and will be 20 years of operation this March. I personally would like to see it continue at Catford.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 13, 2014 23:22:21 GMT
or send some of the ex 205 Scania's to Rainham for the 372 then use the 6-7 E40Ds that are intended for the 372 to TL. 6-7 Scanias will not be available as the 277 will be converted to Scania. The 277s PVR is 21 & there are 28 Scanias. 15097-15119 = 23 Scania for the 277 This Leaves 15120-15124 which will only release which only releases 5 buses. So I doubt that would happen at all, when it's been confirmed that the 372 is getting the Enviros from the 53. Reading on another thread that 12 Diesels are on order, so it wouldn't surprise me if this 136 extension has already going ahead, but not yet official, but throw into a consultation, like the R5/R10. The R5/R10 went ahead regardless what people wanted in the consultation, I saw it as TFL telling people what they are going to do and ignoring the responses to the consultation.
|
|
|
Route 136
Jan 13, 2014 23:49:03 GMT
via mobile
Post by Ice Prxnce on Jan 13, 2014 23:49:03 GMT
Does anybody know how many extra buses is required for the extension? I'm thinking between Peckham and Elephant, at least 4-6 buses should be enough.
|
|
|
Route 136
Jan 13, 2014 23:59:27 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Jan 13, 2014 23:59:27 GMT
Does anybody know how many extra buses is required for the extension? I'm thinking between Peckham and Elephant, at least 4-6 buses should be enough. 'Snoggle' stated above that 6 should be needed for the extension.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 14, 2014 0:14:17 GMT
I think this is a fantastic change and I hope it goes ahead. Aswell as supporting route 343 it will give a new link from Lewisham to Elephant. Im guessing the ex 472 TAs which are from early 2014 will be used as the E40Hs would have been delivered by then. I don't think I'd quite go that far, it's a step in the right direction but that's about it. The link between Lewisham and Elephant is too indirect to be of any great use, it would be quicker to change at NX onto a 53,172 or 453. North Peckham really needs a link into the West End anyway. The 199 when it went to Elephant was also indirect. The proposed routing for the 136 is just like taking a 171 to Elephant & Castle from Catford. The 171 takes about a 6-8 minutes longer between New Cross - Elephant & Castle, than taking the 53, 172 & 453. 136 from New Cross to Elephant via North Peckham should take roughly 15-20 mins, a 53 takes 12-15 mins which is not that far off.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 14, 2014 3:36:50 GMT
I like the proposal - not only does it help out the 343 over its troublesome section but it also gives new links like Lewisham, Downham & Grove Park with Elephant & Castle. The 136 was pretty much the only suitable candidate to be chosen for the extension as the other terminating routes at Peckham are unsuitable due to the length & traffic they encounter - imagine a 37, 177 or 345 extended up to Elephant via North Peckham, it just wouldn't work.
An extended 521 would simply not work - the 521's role is basically a short commuter route between two mainline stations. Personally, that & the 507 should of retained their Artics as they suited to the two routes. When the old estates in North Peckham and further up by the Old Kent Road have their construction completed, their will be even more demand for both the 136 & 343 along that section. The Citaros could also possibly encounter tight turns too.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 14, 2014 8:39:10 GMT
It is good they finally addressing the capacity in North Peckham properly. The only thing about these proposals that may get an objection is the stand for the 136 in Borough Road. There is space but when the 333 was first put in there, complaints were common from at least a local resident. If that is still the case, and support from that road could be gained to object, a different stand may be needed. The 136 could possibly go along London Road and stand with the 155 and 468, assuming there is enough space for an additional route to park there. It would also benefit in creating a minor yet effective round-the-corner link from that part of the Elephant into the southbound 343 routing. Alternatively the 136 could terminate at Borough Station and stand where I've seen the 17 presently stand (i'm assuming the latter stands there on a temporary basis due to work in London Bridge bus station). A question? Why terminate the 136 at London Road? Surely Newington Causeway is the best and most logical terminus as the first stop of the 136 will be the same as the 343, both routes sharing a common bus stops all the way to Rye Lane, no point in it serving 1 bus stop in London Road as the 53, 171, 172 & 453 all provide links to New Cross at that point, the 136 is there to address the overcrowding issues along the 343, not to provide a non-required 1 stop link to London Road, which people can easily walk once the bus has arrived at Newington Causeway, returning to Peckham would be difficult to anyone if one bus stopped in Newington Causeway and the other in London Road, most people will of course be used to Causeway and continue using it and ignoring the London Road stop for the 136, also the 343 is more frequent than the 136 so many will obviously choose Newington Causway over London Road. The 136 will support the 343 so no point in the terminus being London Road. Elephant & Castle is not really an easy crossing area either imo, so it is more logical to have Like for like routes serving the same stops that terminate at Elephant & Castle, so the second bus stop is not flooded with people who want either bus to turn up instead of Picking and choosing to wait at London Road or Newington Causeway. You may notice the 333 & 468 both start at common bus stops with the 68/133, this allows people in Elephant to board either route without having to go to another bus stop in the other side of Elephant & Castle. I doubt having the 136 starting from London Road will benefit anyone from that stop apart from pickers and choosers of the 136 & 343, the second stop Elephant & Castle Station may even become busier. Say if the 333 & 468 swapped terminal, there would be a increase of people waiting at Elephant & Castle Station.
|
|