|
Post by Nathan on May 26, 2014 19:04:04 GMT
When will this route go up for tender? Or has it already been granted an extension?
I personally would find it interesting to see London General (BV) take over the route. Or even London Central (NX).
|
|
|
Route 177
May 26, 2014 19:28:49 GMT
via mobile
Post by Mokujin on May 26, 2014 19:28:49 GMT
The 177 is already up for tender and the new contract starts in May 2015. I personally expect Stagecoach to retain it but then again GAL could possibly get it and run it from either BV or NX. I think 2015 could even be a year for GAL.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on May 26, 2014 20:30:52 GMT
I always tend to see 2 177s running together throughout the day. Is this a normal thing? There's always one busy bus then another empty one behind it. The 177 is already up for tender and the new contract starts in May 2015. I personally expect Stagecoach to retain it but then again GAL could possibly get it and run it from either BV or NX. I think 2015 could even be a year for GAL. I'm just wondering whether NX or BV would have enough space to accommodate the route. If not, then Stagecoach will most likely retain it. There's also dead milage to consider too.
|
|
|
Route 177
May 26, 2014 21:52:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by Mokujin on May 26, 2014 21:52:34 GMT
I always tend to see 2 177s running together throughout the day. Is this a normal thing? There's always one busy bus then another empty one behind it. The 177 is already up for tender and the new contract starts in May 2015. I personally expect Stagecoach to retain it but then again GAL could possibly get it and run it from either BV or NX. I think 2015 could even be a year for GAL. I'm just wondering whether NX or BV would have enough space to accommodate the route. If not, then Stagecoach will most likely retain it. There's also dead milage to consider too. I've never noticed two 177s running together before and Stagecoach seems more likely for 177 to stay with especially as it runs past the garage.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 26, 2014 22:20:11 GMT
I always tend to see 2 177s running together throughout the day. Is this a normal thing? There's always one busy bus then another empty one behind it. The 177 is already up for tender and the new contract starts in May 2015. I personally expect Stagecoach to retain it but then again GAL could possibly get it and run it from either BV or NX. I think 2015 could even be a year for GAL. I'm just wondering whether NX or BV would have enough space to accommodate the route. If not, then Stagecoach will most likely retain it. There's also dead milage to consider too. Two 177s running together does not mean it should change operator... tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/uploads/forms/boroughreports/routes/performance-route-177.pdf I always see the 36, 21, 171, 422, 436 & 453 regularly run in bunches and are all high frequency Go Ahead London routes on average the majority every 6-10 mins... I always see the 47, 53, 136 run in bunches & and the majority of time it is the AM / PM peaks.... If you visit Elephant & Castle around 3-5 PM you will see quite a bit of bus routes running in pairs. It's not rare to see two 68s arriving or two 171s, or two 133s and if you waiting enough sometimes you can get the 343 running in 3s... TFL or operators, don't plan to have buses running in bunches, but it does happen, and in South London I've seen it occur on every single bus route in the borough of Lewisham & Bromley and certain parts of Bexley & Southwark including Low Frequency Routes in the Christmas Period as well as high frequency. More people use roads in South London simply due to the fact train links and river crossings are limited down here so roads are often busier. If the 177 is running in twos it normally happens in the peaks mainly in New Cross because of traffic in Greenwich & Deptford in both directions, sometimes queues can build up near the Woolwich ferry...
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on May 26, 2014 22:48:45 GMT
I always tend to see 2 177s running together throughout the day. Is this a normal thing? There's always one busy bus then another empty one behind it. Two 177s running together does not mean it should change operator... tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/uploads/forms/boroughreports/routes/performance-route-177.pdf I always see the 36, 21, 171, 422, 436 & 453 regularly run in bunches and are all high frequency Go Ahead London routes on average the majority every 6-10 mins... I always see the 47, 53, 136 run in bunches & and the majority of time it is the AM / PM peaks.... If you visit Elephant & Castle around 3-5 PM you will see quite a bit of bus routes running in pairs. It's not rare to see two 68s arriving or two 171s, or two 133s and if you waiting enough sometimes you can get the 343 running in 3s... TFL or operators, don't plan to have buses running in bunches, but it does happen, and in South London I've seen it occur on every single bus route in the borough of Lewisham & Bromley and certain parts of Bexley & Southwark including Low Frequency Routes in the Christmas Period as well as high frequency. More people use roads in South London simply due to the fact train links and river crossings are limited down here so roads are often busier. If the 177 is running in twos it normally happens in the peaks mainly in New Cross because of traffic in Greenwich & Deptford in both directions, sometimes queues can build up near the Woolwich ferry... Firstly, no one said that ANY buses running in twos should change operator... Secondly, I understand the fact that this kind of thing happens on other routes too. But as you mentioned, it usually happens during the peak hours. But what I see is 177s running in twos outside of peak hours, which can't be a good thing. If you have one populated bus, then another bus behind carrying empty air, then what's the point? The only reason I asked this question was to see whether the 177 has been MADE so that this happens on purpose. I read somewhere a similar thing happens with the 25 and that TFL has made a timetable for short-turns, etc. Although I don't know if this is true or not.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 26, 2014 23:02:44 GMT
Two 177s running together does not mean it should change operator... tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/uploads/forms/boroughreports/routes/performance-route-177.pdf I always see the 36, 21, 171, 422, 436 & 453 regularly run in bunches and are all high frequency Go Ahead London routes on average the majority every 6-10 mins... I always see the 47, 53, 136 run in bunches & and the majority of time it is the AM / PM peaks.... If you visit Elephant & Castle around 3-5 PM you will see quite a bit of bus routes running in pairs. It's not rare to see two 68s arriving or two 171s, or two 133s and if you waiting enough sometimes you can get the 343 running in 3s... TFL or operators, don't plan to have buses running in bunches, but it does happen, and in South London I've seen it occur on every single bus route in the borough of Lewisham & Bromley and certain parts of Bexley & Southwark including Low Frequency Routes in the Christmas Period as well as high frequency. More people use roads in South London simply due to the fact train links and river crossings are limited down here so roads are often busier. If the 177 is running in twos it normally happens in the peaks mainly in New Cross because of traffic in Greenwich & Deptford in both directions, sometimes queues can build up near the Woolwich ferry... Firstly, no one said that ANY buses running in twos should change operator... Secondly, I understand the fact that this kind of thing happens on other routes too. But as you mentioned, it usually happens during the peak hours. But what I see is 177s running in twos outside of peak hours, which can't be a good thing. If you have one populated bus, then another bus behind carrying empty air, then what's the point? The only reason I asked this question was to see whether the 177 has been MADE so that this happens on purpose. I read somewhere a similar thing happens with the 25 and that TFL has made a timetable for short-turns, etc. Although I don't know if this is true or not. It indeed happens outside of peak hours, but not just the 177. Well I cannot answer that question and neither can you. I do not mean to be harsh, but the only way you will know the answer is if you sit in the cab of a bus behind another and you can find out exactly why its happens. You can continue asking, What is the point, but then what is the point of asking what is the point? May as well ask why isn't the service perfectly run with the correct gap in between each bus. It's pretty much impossible. Personally I would be more delighted to see two buses running in pairs both terminating at the last stop and arrive in time for the return journey, instead of having 1 curtail, e.g. The 160 sometimes even 2 curtails... If it is near the end of the route does it really doesn't matter, I have seen numerous 177s in New Cross running in pairs one full the other empty running into Peckham & the 177 does have a bit of standing time per bus. I would be more concerned if I saw two 177s departing Peckham Bus Station towards Thamesmead at once outside of the peaks. The only thing I will suggest is the milage needs to be covered, regardless if buses are in twos.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 26, 2014 23:34:36 GMT
Firstly, no one said that ANY buses running in twos should change operator... Secondly, I understand the fact that this kind of thing happens on other routes too. But as you mentioned, it usually happens during the peak hours. But what I see is 177s running in twos outside of peak hours, which can't be a good thing. If you have one populated bus, then another bus behind carrying empty air, then what's the point? The only reason I asked this question was to see whether the 177 has been MADE so that this happens on purpose. I read somewhere a similar thing happens with the 25 and that TFL has made a timetable for short-turns, etc. Although I don't know if this is true or not. The point is that the second bus is probably the one on time and the one in front is the one that is late and likely to be curtailed depending on how things go. I know we would all love a perfect bus service but it doesn't happen. My two locals routes are run by Arriva. One is a little shuttle route with about 25-30 mins run time each way and it regularly goes bezerk. The main reason is the ludicrous road works in Walthamstow which means it can take 8 minutes to go one stop from the bus station so the bus has lost its stand time at the other end before it's even got going. When you couple this with non existent parking enforcement it takes next to nothing for the service to collapse. Those causal factors are outside the control of the operator and TfL. The operator ends up having to curtail buses or run them oos empty to take up the route elsewhere. My other service is a longish orbital route that has to battle its way through different traffic conditions which are very volatile. There are days when it runs fine and others when it's a disaster from early morning to late at night - I've seen early buses 20 minutes late or curtailments at 2300. I do sometimes wonder quite what the controllers are up to on this route but that's just me surmising. I do know that it takes very little to tip a bus from being on time to being 10-15 minutes late. As we are having a great debate, route by route seemingly, as to how useless every operator in London is I wonder what we think the result is going to be? Real life is unpredictable and TfL does not and cannot afford to fund a 100% performance level as it would involve having spare resources sitting around to leap into action when some unexpected event happens. Do we really want buses and drivers sitting around costing money just to pop out when needs be to provide the perfect service or is it more sensible to give the "risk" to the operator who has to use their skill to manage the service to be best overall effect? This means buses get cancelled or curtailed while they try to put things right. Sometimes buses break down and the operator loses money for those trips that don't run. I would love a perfect bus service and I get cross when things go wrong but I am rational enough to appreciate that there will be glitches and I'd rather not have TfL waste money on spare resources if that money could be spent on running more services to everyone's overall benefit. We do need to understand that overall buses are very, very reliable these days and we don't suffer the nonsenses of the old LT of the 1970s and early 1980s. The 177 is a frequent service so having buses bunch off peak is hardly the end of the world. If buses were scheduled to run every 30 minutes and were running in pairs on a regular basis then people would be entitled to be very cross. If routes suffer from endemic failures with no improvements then there might be cause for complaint but the 177's performance stats do not give me the sense that it is in a mess. It's on my list to ride on so perhaps I'll and see for myself.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 177
May 27, 2014 1:28:06 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 1:28:06 GMT
I always tend to see 2 177s running together throughout the day. Is this a normal thing? There's always one busy bus then another empty one behind it. I'm just wondering whether NX or BV would have enough space to accommodate the route. If not, then Stagecoach will most likely retain it. There's also dead milage to consider too. and in South London I've seen it occur on every single bus route in the borough of Lewisham & Bromley and certain parts of Bexley & Southwark .. Every route you say? Does that include hmmmm....the 146? 352?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 27, 2014 8:20:12 GMT
and in South London I've seen it occur on every single bus route in the borough of Lewisham & Bromley and certain parts of Bexley & Southwark .. Every route you say? Does that include hmmmm....the 146? 352? The 146, R5 and R8 might be a bit of a stretch!
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 27, 2014 8:35:19 GMT
and in South London I've seen it occur on every single bus route in the borough of Lewisham & Bromley and certain parts of Bexley & Southwark .. Every route you say? Does that include hmmmm....the 146? 352? The 352 no, but I've seen late running. The 146 I've seen a whole trip missed on this route during the Christmas period. It's 1 bus so bunching isn't possible. I've seen the R7 running 30 minutes late with no service regulation. Bromley Borough Low Freq: I've seen bunching on the 61, 138, 160, 162, 246, 354, 356, 367. The only route I've never seen bunching is the 464.
|
|
|
Post by southeastlondonbus on May 27, 2014 8:53:51 GMT
As TL1 has stated SE London is a difficult place to run buses, all it takes is say a accident and closure to say the A2 or Blackwall Tunnel and traffic chaos will ensue often many miles from the source of the problem I have lived in the area all my life and have to seen bunching on every single bus route in the area including the 30 min service 492 so it does happen and some people need to accept this and not use that as an excuse just to call for an operator to loose a route on that basis, it is starting to sound like they have got a problem with the operator and this is not the group for that kind of thing.
As an extra point I hate talking about the possibility of an operator losing a route because at the end of the day it is the staff that are affected by it and that to me should always be kept in mind on this topic.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 27, 2014 9:11:56 GMT
The only route I've never seen bunching is the 464. Lucky you. The one time I went to use it was a complete disaster with a wait of over 30 minutes at New Addington with I-Bus / LVF giving out rubbish and then I had to abandon the route at the north end of Biggin Hill in order to get the R8. The original plan was to go to Tatsfield, come back and get the R8 at its terminal. Roadworks near the airfield caused the melt down so I'll have to go back and try again at some point. The regulars on the 464 were *not* happy with the delays.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 27, 2014 9:31:02 GMT
The only route I've never seen bunching is the 464. Lucky you. The one time I went to use it was a complete disaster with a wait of over 30 minutes at New Addington with I-Bus / LVF giving out rubbish and then I had to abandon the route at the north end of Biggin Hill in order to get the R8. The original plan was to go to Tatsfield, come back and get the R8 at its terminal. Roadworks near the airfield caused the melt down so I'll have to go back and try again at some point. The regulars on the 464 were *not* happy with the delays. Sorry for your unfortunate experience. I personally have never come across any servers delays on the 464, the only delay I've had which was earlier This year was a on a bus to New Addington where the other bus toward Tatsfield had not left Saltbox Hill yet.
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 27, 2014 11:53:44 GMT
As TL1 has stated SE London is a difficult place to run buses, all it takes is say a accident and closure to say the A2 or Blackwall Tunnel and traffic chaos will ensue often many miles from the source of the problem I have lived in the area all my life and have to seen bunching on every single bus route in the area including the 30 min service 492 so it does happen and some people need to accept this and not use that as an excuse just to call for an operator to loose a route on that basis, it is starting to sound like they have got a problem with the operator and this is not the group for that kind of thing. As an extra point I hate talking about the possibility of an operator losing a route because at the end of the day it is the staff that are affected by it and that to me should always be kept in mind on this topic. Well that's a fair point and any problem at the Dartford Crossing in particular can have massive knock on effects throughout SE London. Whether we like it or not operators losing routes is part and parcel of London bus operations nowadays and I can't see why it shouldn't be discussed. Every bus garage I've worked at has had a lively rumour mill and nobody is going to be shocked at anything that appears on here.
|
|