|
Post by vjaska on May 7, 2024 21:49:14 GMT
Agreed. In time it might be worth doing a swap. Though I suspect whatever gets sent to St. Bart's will never be very busy. Chancery Lane is not a very busy area for buses. Im going to say this with discretion as I know how busy the 8 can get at New Oxford Street, and how much it loves to cause collisions in Earnshaw Street particularly. However, better and resourceful would simply have been 8 rerouted to Waterloo via Aldwych and Waterloo Bridge 98 extended to S’t Paul’s Station (not Bart’s) 68 diverted to TCR like its night service 188 curtailed to Waterloo SL6 curtailed to Aldwych 1 changes go ahead 59 no changes 133 extended up to Smithfield only (not Holborn). Ive added SL6 to this, because I really do not think it picks up anything beyond Waterloo. Only have chosen Aldwych as I do notice the odd interchange towards TSQ or the City. Even, I could argue to chop it to Waterloo and run non-stop to West Norwood. Although, this would be more costly as it involves alot more than just the 59, 133 and 521 or 1, 68, 168 and 188. I wouldn't divert the 68 though I agree with cutting back the 188. I'd leave the SL6 as is and revert the 1, 59, 133 & 168 back to how they were - Smithfield isn't a useful objective for 59 & 133 passengers
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 8, 2024 20:18:24 GMT
The 59 was never very busy north of Holborn... though the 168 and 1 are. But I doubt that extending another route only as far as Euston would help... people want to go further north. I wonder if the 59 could have been extended to Camden Town to help out the 1 had it been kept going to Euston. Regarding the 521, personally I think the 8 could have diverted to Waterloo & the 25 extended back to TCR, the 25 terminating at City Thameslink is quite pointless. That was suggested at the time, 8 to Waterloo and 25 to TCR. I agree that City Thameslink isn't much good to anybody.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 8, 2024 20:23:48 GMT
Is anyone actually using the 59 though at Smithfield either? I expect former 521 passengers would now prefer to use the 76 or 341, since they both start empty at Waterloo. No one. I reckon you could get away using a 8.9m on this bit and it still would not be full. I wonder what if TFL had never amended the 59 and just withdrew it between Aldwych and Euston? The 8 would provide almost the same link along Chancery Lane up tp Holborn and anyone directly for Waterloo would use the 76/341 instead. The London Bridge-City Thameslink is fairly decent and the 133 does pick up often, however I do think a better route to have been changed was the 47, withdrawing it from Bishopsgate and Shoreditch. There seems to be excess capacity at Bishopsgate IMO especially towards London Bridge. I agree that the 47 would have been better than the 133 and I wouldn't be surprised if the 59 eventually gets withdrawn between Aldwych or Holborn and Barts.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 8, 2024 20:39:33 GMT
No one. I reckon you could get away using a 8.9m on this bit and it still would not be full. I wonder what if TFL had never amended the 59 and just withdrew it between Aldwych and Euston? The 8 would provide almost the same link along Chancery Lane up tp Holborn and anyone directly for Waterloo would use the 76/341 instead. The London Bridge-City Thameslink is fairly decent and the 133 does pick up often, however I do think a better route to have been changed was the 47, withdrawing it from Bishopsgate and Shoreditch. There seems to be excess capacity at Bishopsgate IMO especially towards London Bridge. I agree that the 47 would have been better than the 133 and I wouldn't be surprised if the 59 eventually gets withdrawn between Aldwych or Holborn and Barts. I remember when the 172 was rerouted to Clerkenwell no one was using the route between Aldwych & Clerkenwell hence it got cut back to Aldwych & I could see the same happening for the 59. Another option to somewhat similarly replicate the 521 would have been to extend the 100 to Waterloo, though I imagine this wouldn’t make a lot of savings for TfL.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on May 8, 2024 21:19:56 GMT
Not needed, no one would use the 172 between Aldwych & St Bartholomew's Hospital, like how no one was using the 172 between Aldwych & Clerkenwell. Is anyone actually using the 59 though at Smithfield either? I expect former 521 passengers would now prefer to use the 76 or 341, since they both start empty at Waterloo. I have seen the 59 on Saturday daytimes turning at Holborn and they have always had passengers onboard. Ok not huge numbers but probably about standard for a bus approaching the end of a route not serving a major station or interchange. I am curious why people think the 8 from Waterloo would be any busier as it would travel the same corridor! The 8 is well used to and from Tottenham Court Road and would be against removing this link.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on May 8, 2024 21:37:45 GMT
The 59 was never very busy north of Holborn... though the 168 and 1 are. But I doubt that extending another route only as far as Euston would help... people want to go further north. I beg to differ personally having used the 59 many times over the years - that link to Euston & King's Cross was used quite well whether it be the 59 or the 91. For me, the 188 should of been the route to be cut back from that corridor - it has enough on it's plate elsewhere without having Central London tagged onto it. I'd then reverse the 1, 59 & 168 changes myself. I think that now that what's done is done what can be salvaged is returning the 188 to Russell Square or Euston to provide some relief to the 1 which already comes in pretty packed by the time it reaches Euston and Southampton Row.
The 68 is now very busy too with the 59 gone despite only starting from Euston.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 8, 2024 22:01:04 GMT
Is anyone actually using the 59 though at Smithfield either? I expect former 521 passengers would now prefer to use the 76 or 341, since they both start empty at Waterloo. I have seen the 59 on Saturday daytimes turning at Holborn and they have always had passengers onboard. Ok not huge numbers but probably about standard for a bus approaching the end of a route not serving a major station or interchange. I am curious why people think the 8 from Waterloo would be any busier as it would travel the same corridor! The 8 is well used to and from Tottenham Court Road and would be against removing this link. The 8 being rerouted instead would enable buses to start more empty, as compared to the 59 when they are likely full. Many 521 users liked having the ability of getting on an empty bus on either the Waterloo or London Bridge ends was why the 521 was a relatively successful route to run. The London Bridge end could have achieved the same goal by rerouting the 17 instead, where buses would be empty outside London Bridge stand.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 8, 2024 22:02:50 GMT
I beg to differ personally having used the 59 many times over the years - that link to Euston & King's Cross was used quite well whether it be the 59 or the 91. For me, the 188 should of been the route to be cut back from that corridor - it has enough on it's plate elsewhere without having Central London tagged onto it. I'd then reverse the 1, 59 & 168 changes myself. I think that now that what's done is done what can be salvaged is returning the 188 to Russell Square or Euston to provide some relief to the 1 which already comes in pretty packed by the time it reaches Euston and Southampton Row.
The 68 is now very busy too with the 59 gone despite only starting from Euston.
There was the suggestion in the 1/168/188 changes to extend the 172 to Euston, which isn’t a bad idea on paper but tfl believed it was not needed as they believe the capacity being provided now is sufficient.
|
|
|
Post by greg on May 8, 2024 23:11:26 GMT
I think that now that what's done is done what can be salvaged is returning the 188 to Russell Square or Euston to provide some relief to the 1 which already comes in pretty packed by the time it reaches Euston and Southampton Row.
The 68 is now very busy too with the 59 gone despite only starting from Euston.
There was the suggestion in the 1/168/188 changes to extend the 172 to Euston, which isn’t a bad idea on paper but tfl believed it was not needed as they believe the capacity being provided now is sufficient. I would agree so the 1/68/91 is more than enough (why is the SL6, malarky). It woukd have just been more better with the 1/59/91 but each to their own. Im sure TFL have their reasonings.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 9, 2024 6:46:56 GMT
I have seen the 59 on Saturday daytimes turning at Holborn and they have always had passengers onboard. Ok not huge numbers but probably about standard for a bus approaching the end of a route not serving a major station or interchange. I am curious why people think the 8 from Waterloo would be any busier as it would travel the same corridor! The 8 is well used to and from Tottenham Court Road and would be against removing this link. The 8 being rerouted instead would enable buses to start more empty, as compared to the 59 when they are likely full. Many 521 users liked having the ability of getting on an empty bus on either the Waterloo or London Bridge ends was why the 521 was a relatively successful route to run. The London Bridge end could have achieved the same goal by rerouting the 17 instead, where buses would be empty outside London Bridge stand. The 8 would also reinstate the Waterloo to Liverpool Street link that was lost when the 26 was rerouted to Victoria.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 9, 2024 8:06:12 GMT
The 8 being rerouted instead would enable buses to start more empty, as compared to the 59 when they are likely full. Many 521 users liked having the ability of getting on an empty bus on either the Waterloo or London Bridge ends was why the 521 was a relatively successful route to run. The London Bridge end could have achieved the same goal by rerouting the 17 instead, where buses would be empty outside London Bridge stand. The 8 would also reinstate the Waterloo to Liverpool Street link that was lost when the 26 was rerouted to Victoria. It’s possible that TfL believed that the 76 linking Waterloo to not far away from Liverpool St (Moorgate) was sufficient.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on May 9, 2024 8:30:21 GMT
Is anyone actually using the 59 though at Smithfield either? I expect former 521 passengers would now prefer to use the 76 or 341, since they both start empty at Waterloo. I have seen the 59 on Saturday daytimes turning at Holborn and they have always had passengers onboard. Ok not huge numbers but probably about standard for a bus approaching the end of a route not serving a major station or interchange. I am curious why people think the 8 from Waterloo would be any busier as it would travel the same corridor! The 8 is well used to and from Tottenham Court Road and would be against removing this link. Although it was mentioned that if the 8 was to go Waterloo, the 25 would go to TCR which maintains this link. On the condition the 25 goes TCR there's probably no reason why the 8 can't go Waterloo, it would also provide a good link down Southampton Row.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on May 9, 2024 8:49:06 GMT
I have seen the 59 on Saturday daytimes turning at Holborn and they have always had passengers onboard. Ok not huge numbers but probably about standard for a bus approaching the end of a route not serving a major station or interchange. I am curious why people think the 8 from Waterloo would be any busier as it would travel the same corridor! The 8 is well used to and from Tottenham Court Road and would be against removing this link. Although it was mentioned that if the 8 was to go Waterloo, the 25 would go to TCR which maintains this link. On the condition the 25 goes TCR there's probably no reason why the 8 can't go Waterloo, it would also provide a good link down Southampton Row. But then that makes the 25 journey time long again and that was one reason it was cut back I believe? Not sure why a link would be needed along Southampton Row, never see huge numbers leaving buses at Holborn so can’t see the big demand for passengers heading in that direction. All irrelevant really as this is all fantasy and rare to TfL reverse changes. I really don’t get the big hoo-ha about the 59 and 133, no matter what routes were chosen for this corridor it would have been wrong in the eyes of the forum.
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 9, 2024 9:03:34 GMT
Although it was mentioned that if the 8 was to go Waterloo, the 25 would go to TCR which maintains this link. On the condition the 25 goes TCR there's probably no reason why the 8 can't go Waterloo, it would also provide a good link down Southampton Row. But then that makes the 25 journey time long again and that was one reason it was cut back I believe? Not sure why a link would be needed along Southampton Row, never see huge numbers leaving buses at Holborn so can’t see the big demand for passengers heading in that direction. All irrelevant really as this is all fantasy and rare to TfL reverse changes. I really don’t get the big hoo-ha about the 59 and 133, no matter what routes were chosen for this corridor it would have been wrong in the eyes of the forum. Most of the 25’s problems with reliability were between Oxford Circus & TCR, that section alone was about 20-30 mins of the route. The extension to only as far as TCR would have been more manageable however.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on May 9, 2024 18:09:30 GMT
There was the suggestion in the 1/168/188 changes to extend the 172 to Euston, which isn’t a bad idea on paper but tfl believed it was not needed as they believe the capacity being provided now is sufficient. I would agree so the 1/68/91 is more than enough (why is the SL6, malarky). It woukd have just been more better with the 1/59/91 but each to their own. Im sure TFL have their reasonings. If this were not TfL land what would be ideal is a handful of peak only journeys on the 188 continuing to Euston.
|
|