|
Post by vjaska on Apr 17, 2014 11:56:44 GMT
It is Easter school break, so no school kids. Roadworks galore, traffic bad pretty much everywhere. The A222 yesterday was blocked back to Bickley from Sidcup for no other reason than sheer weight of traffic. I hate it when a single decker turns up and it should be double deck, but if the single decks are actually coping and not leaving people behind, what is the big problem ( other than alleged contract breaks ) ? Although DT does seem to have an image problem , looking at the most recent data , the b12,b13 and b15 are run very well. The 286 as well, reliability wise there was nothing wrong according to the data. The 160 is a low frequency route which traverses ultra congested parts of Catford and Eltham on the South Circular. It is odd in as much I rarely see a very busy 160. I think it must be quite a hard route to keep to time, would another operator be able to do any better given the same resources as Arriva ? Stagecoach did a better job before Arriva won the route - the complaints have only started since Arriva took it on.
|
|
|
Route 160
Apr 17, 2014 12:07:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by Ice Prxnce on Apr 17, 2014 12:07:39 GMT
Yesterday when I used the 160 (for the second time), I noticed a lot of half-empty 160s and especially two in a row along Centre Common Road where the first bus only had up to 6 passengers and the second bus was completely empty with no passengers in it.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 17, 2014 12:25:20 GMT
Having been in Catford and the surrounding areas a lot over the last few months, I have to agree with @rgd976, I have never actually seen an extremely busy 160 even in the peak periods. All the SD workings I've seen on the 160 have been in the off-peak and there are probably economic reasons behind why Arriva KT choose to allocate the route SDs as opposed to DDs in this period. It isn't up to Arriva KT as to what they should allocate to the route, TfL specify that in the contract and pay AKT accordingly. If the route is quiet it's probably because many people avoid using it because it is so unreliable.
|
|
|
Post by Ice Prxnce on Apr 17, 2014 12:50:40 GMT
TFL should just re-tender the 160 and give it back to Stagecoach (Don't think TL would have space for it so 273 would move to TB to make room at TL) and re-route the 160 back to Catford Garage. Then 492 gets the Enviro400s from 160.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2014 12:57:54 GMT
TFL should just re-tender the 160 and give it back to Stagecoach (Don't think TL would have space for it so 273 would move to TB to make room at TL) and re-route the 160 back to Catford Garage. Then 492 gets the Enviro400s from 160. with all this talk 're route 160 does TFL actually have issue with the route? I admit I have never uses the route so can't comment but get the impression there is a bit of a witch hunt towards Arriva DT. I really can't see the route being put out to tender.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 17, 2014 13:24:07 GMT
Having been in Catford and the surrounding areas a lot over the last few months, I have to agree with @rgd976, I have never actually seen an extremely busy 160 even in the peak periods. All the SD workings I've seen on the 160 have been in the off-peak and there are probably economic reasons behind why Arriva KT choose to allocate the route SDs as opposed to DDs in this period. It is normally busy between Eltham - Catford 7-9am and 3-6pm, mornings it is busier. You may have seen the 160 many times carrying light loads, but I believe I would certainly know a lot more about it than you and most people commenting on this thread, it is one of my local routes. Many times I've been on the 160 carrying a full load in the mornings on single Deckers as well as double Deckers. During the Holidays the 160 is normally quiet. Off peak the 160 carries thin air. There isn't a period for single decker workings. It just happens regardless.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Apr 17, 2014 13:40:26 GMT
TFL should just re-tender the 160 and give it back to Stagecoach (Don't think TL would have space for it so 273 would move to TB to make room at TL) and re-route the 160 back to Catford Garage. Then 492 gets the Enviro400s from 160. with all this talk 're route 160 does TFL actually have issue with the route? I admit I have never uses the route so can't comment but get the impression there is a bit of a witch hunt towards Arriva DT. I really can't see the route being put out to tender. Not really a witch hunt towards DT, but the 160 is just appalling and has been for 7.5 years and currently the most breeched double decker contract and was the same under the last one.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 17, 2014 16:25:17 GMT
TFL should just re-tender the 160 and give it back to Stagecoach (Don't think TL would have space for it so 273 would move to TB to make room at TL) and re-route the 160 back to Catford Garage. Then 492 gets the Enviro400s from 160. with all this talk 're route 160 does TFL actually have issue with the route? I admit I have never uses the route so can't comment but get the impression there is a bit of a witch hunt towards Arriva DT. I really can't see the route being put out to tender. I can only suggest that you give it a try and tell us what you think. I don't think there is any witch hunt, it's just the service is abysmal so who else do you blame other than the operator when other routes in the same area are performing reasonably well? Why can't you see the route being put out to tender? If Stagecoach did get it back then I think there would be room at TL for it even with the forthcoming addition of the 54 and 75
|
|
|
Route 160
Apr 17, 2014 16:28:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by Ice Prxnce on Apr 17, 2014 16:28:01 GMT
with all this talk 're route 160 does TFL actually have issue with the route? I admit I have never uses the route so can't comment but get the impression there is a bit of a witch hunt towards Arriva DT. I really can't see the route being put out to tender. I can only suggest that you give it a try and tell us what you think. I don't think there is any witch hunt, it's just the service is abysmal so who else do you blame other than the operator when other routes in the same area are performing reasonably well? Why can't you see the route being put out to tender? If Stagecoach did get it back then I think there would be room at TL for it even with the forthcoming addition of the 54 and 75 I highly doubt there would be space at TL for 160 unless one route moved out which could be 273 as TB is nearer to Petts Wood or 380 to PD as it is nearer to Belmarsh.
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Apr 17, 2014 16:51:59 GMT
No witch hunt. I'd suggest that the 286 is a really well run route and some of the B routes are run rather well, as in the 428. I just often take issue with the 492 (which is behaving itself at the moment) and the 160.
I'm sorry, but DT having a lot of DDs absent for days at a time does not become a legitimate reason for running SD buses on a DD route. Yes of course a SD is better than no bus at all but you have to remember that the fare payer and London Council Tax payers are giving their money to a private company, Arriva, in exchange for the service as set out. We've seen periods of effectively scheduled turns at Hither Green making it impossible to reach Catford at certain periods of the day using the 160 service and now a minimum of one SD is being seen a day on the route.
I would also say that I got on a relatively empty 23 yesterday. The one behind, on Oxford Street, also had only a few passengers on it at half-five in the afternoon. Halve the PVR and make it SD on the logic of some here.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2014 19:43:40 GMT
No witch hunt. I'd suggest that the 286 is a really well run route and some of the B routes are run rather well, as in the 428. I just often take issue with the 492 (which is behaving itself at the moment) and the 160. I'm sorry, but DT having a lot of DDs absent for days at a time does not become a legitimate reason for running SD buses on a DD route. Yes of course a SD is better than no bus at all but you have to remember that the fare payer and London Council Tax payers are giving their money to a private company, Arriva, in exchange for the service as set out. We've seen periods of effectively scheduled turns at Hither Green making it impossible to reach Catford at certain periods of the day using the 160 service and now a minimum of one SD is being seen a day on the route. I would also say that I got on a relatively empty 23 yesterday. The one behind, on Oxford Street, also had only a few passengers on it at half-five in the afternoon. Halve the PVR and make it SD on the logic of some here. I think there are issues with some routes double decker and over bussed like you say for route 23. Another route for example 241 hardly justifies double deckers and could easily be run by single deckers. It's a shame there can't be a major review of London routes and allocations adjusted, this is the downfall of tenders and privatisation I guess!!
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Apr 17, 2014 21:22:41 GMT
TFL should just re-tender the 160 and give it back to Stagecoach (Don't think TL would have space for it so 273 would move to TB to make room at TL) and re-route the 160 back to Catford Garage. Then 492 gets the Enviro400s from 160. Statements like this really annoy me. Why should route 160 be re tendered in this current timescale when it is nearly halfway through its current contract with Arriva? Do you know the opportunity costs, potential fallout costs for both TfL and Arriva as well as Stagecoach would have fork out for brand new buses they have not budgeted for. We don't even know if Stagecoach want the route! For we know Stagecoach if they win the route's next contract, they may run even worse than supposedly Arriva are with the route. All they run it well in the past doesn't automatically mean it will run better. Past glories are the past, the future is unknown. Also the drivers, now TUPE is gone, they are no guarantee of drivers moving with the route therefore causing redundancies, unemployment and also it may even more financially consuming for them if the drivers for travel all the way to TL. Didn't mean to have a rant neither is this a go at you. I just wish people would think before they make baseless comments which have so many implications.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 17, 2014 21:58:10 GMT
And statements like that above annoy me. How many more times........Arriva KT are not meeting their contractual obligations so of course the route should be retendered. Or would you rather carry on paying public money for a sub standard service?
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Apr 17, 2014 22:04:16 GMT
And statements like that above annoy me. How many more times........Arriva KT are not meeting their contractual obligations so of course the route should be retendered. Or would you rather carry on paying public money for a sub standard service? You know you could of quoted me intelligently to have a healthy debate than making a snide remark. A quarter or even more of the TfL bus network could be classed as unreliable. Should they all be re-tender mid contract too? The extra costs that would occur for TfL and us the public, is that really worth it? So how I see it accept the better of two evils to be honest.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Apr 17, 2014 22:18:23 GMT
The 160's always been a bit of an odd route. I remember it apparently being one of, if not the, most unremunerative routes in Selkent back in LRT days. The size of vehicles used has varied wildly over the years. The diversion via Sangley Road coincided with Arriva taking it on which I think is a factor in any performance difference with Stagecoach. I'm getting the feeling that loadings may be heavily peaked: would I be right in thinking there's significant school traffic between Chislehurst and Sidcup? Either way, I wonder if the structure of the route is quite right: is there much cross-Eltham traffic?
|
|