The 49

[fg49]

Has anyone noticed how bunchy the 49 has become under Abellio? I used to think London United ran it bad; compared to Abellio, they were doing a good job!

Over the past week, I've seen 3 buses within 2 minutes of eachother more than t times, 5 buses within 5 minutes of eachother once and 5 buses bunched before 0730 on a Monday morning!

[Nathan]

What if the frequency is generally too high?

[snoggle]

Sept 12, 2014 19:29:12 GMT fg49 said:

Has anyone noticed how bunchy the 49 has become under Abellio? I used to think London United ran it bad; compared to Abellio, they were doing a good job!

Over the past week, I've seen 3 buses within 2 minutes of eachother more than t times, 5 buses within 5 minutes of eachother once and 5 buses bunched before 0730 on a Monday morning!

It's nearly always like this when a new operator takes over a high frequency route or when vehicle types change. It takes time for new controllers to become familiar with all the foibles of a new route. The Monday morning you are referring to would be the very first weekday peak that Abellio operated the route and the first Monday morning once the schools are back? Traffic is nearly always horrendous on that day because you've got new parents taking kids to primary school and other parents and kids going to new schools. Drivers and depot staff will be getting familiar with a new run out, new vehicles, a new route and a new schedule.

I think I would say "give Abellio a break". If it's still useless in another 10 days or so then something's not right but otherwise have some understanding. Is anyone perfect and at 100% performance on the first day of a new job? Nope.

[fg49]

Sept 12, 2014 19:38:05 GMT Nathan said:

What if the frequency is generally too high?

That might be it. (Focusing on journeys towards White City on weekdays) London United ran it every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0645 before the normal frequency of every 7-8 minutes. However, Abellio start with every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0647 before an every 6/7/8 minute frequency kicks in for the morning peak (then to the norm of 7-8).


Looking at this, it does look like Abellio are trying to help out the 345 more with the high demand of people using the route in the mornings to South Kensington, but I do think every 6/7/8 minutes is a bit too much (CLJ to SKN roughly every 2-4 mins (49/345)).

Let's hope this actually becomes effective though, instead of buses just leaving within seconds of eachother.

[fg49]

Sept 12, 2014 19:55:24 GMT snoggle said:

Sept 12, 2014 19:29:12 GMT fg49 said:

Has anyone noticed how bunchy the 49 has become under Abellio? I used to think London United ran it bad; compared to Abellio, they were doing a good job!

Over the past week, I've seen 3 buses within 2 minutes of eachother more than t times, 5 buses within 5 minutes of eachother once and 5 buses bunched before 0730 on a Monday morning!

It's nearly always like this when a new operator takes over a high frequency route or when vehicle types change. It takes time for new controllers to become familiar with all the foibles of a new route. The Monday morning you are referring to would be the very first weekday peak that Abellio operated the route and the first Monday morning once the schools are back? Traffic is nearly always horrendous on that day because you've got new parents taking kids to primary school and other parents and kids going to new schools. Drivers and depot staff will be getting familiar with a new run out, new vehicles, a new route and a new schedule.

I think I would say "give Abellio a break". If it's still useless in another 10 days or so then something's not right but otherwise have some understanding. Is anyone perfect and at 100% performance on the first day of a new job? Nope.

True, true. I've spent so much time on the route recently, I forgot this is still their first week.

[M1104]

Sept 12, 2014 20:07:20 GMT fg49 said:

Sept 12, 2014 19:38:05 GMT Nathan said:

What if the frequency is generally too high?

That might be it. (Focusing on journeys towards White City on weekdays) London United ran it every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0645 before the normal frequency of every 7-8 minutes. However, Abellio start with every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0647 before an every 6/7/8 minute frequency kicks in for the morning peak (then to the norm of 7-8).


Looking at this, it does look like Abellio are trying to help out the 345 more with the high demand of people using the route in the mornings to South Kensington, but I do think every 6/7/8 minutes is a bit too much (CLJ to SKN roughly every 2-4 mins (49/345)).

Let's hope this actually becomes effective though, instead of buses just leaving within seconds of eachother.

Perhaps in time if it is proven that the frequency is too high a reduction may commence where resources may then be utilised on another route.

[Nathan]

Sept 12, 2014 20:21:23 GMT M1104 said:

Sept 12, 2014 20:07:20 GMT fg49 said:

That might be it. (Focusing on journeys towards White City on weekdays) London United ran it every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0645 before the normal frequency of every 7-8 minutes. However, Abellio start with every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0647 before an every 6/7/8 minute frequency kicks in for the morning peak (then to the norm of 7-8).


Looking at this, it does look like Abellio are trying to help out the 345 more with the high demand of people using the route in the mornings to South Kensington, but I do think every 6/7/8 minutes is a bit too much (CLJ to SKN roughly every 2-4 mins (49/345)).

Let's hope this actually becomes effective though, instead of buses just leaving within seconds of eachother.

Perhaps in time if it is proven that the frequency is too high a reduction may commence where resources may then be utilised on another route.

Like the 172 / 188

But really...this kind of minute-gap between buses happens all the time. It probably will get better in time...

[Deleted]

I have observed the E3, 54 & 75 change overs , and they have all been slow to settle in.

[M1104]

Sept 12, 2014 22:02:01 GMT @rgd976 said:

I have observed the E3, 54 & 75 change overs , and they have all been slow to settle in.

As was the 68/468 into Go Ahead.

[sw11simon]

Sept 12, 2014 20:07:20 GMT fg49 said:

Sept 12, 2014 19:38:05 GMT Nathan said:

What if the frequency is generally too high?

That might be it. (Focusing on journeys towards White City on weekdays) London United ran it every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0645 before the normal frequency of every 7-8 minutes. However, Abellio start with every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0647 before an every 6/7/8 minute frequency kicks in for the morning peak (then to the norm of 7-8).


Looking at this, it does look like Abellio are trying to help out the 345 more with the high demand of people using the route in the mornings to South Kensington, but I do think every 6/7/8 minutes is a bit too much (CLJ to SKN roughly every 2-4 mins (49/345)).

Let's hope this actually becomes effective though, instead of buses just leaving within seconds of eachother.

Abellio has no interest in "helping out the 345." It will be running the frequencies dictated by the invitation to tender from TfL. South Kensington to Clapham Junction is a very busy section of both routes.

[sid]

Sept 13, 2014 2:34:17 GMT sw11simon said:

Sept 12, 2014 20:07:20 GMT fg49 said:

That might be it. (Focusing on journeys towards White City on weekdays) London United ran it every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0645 before the normal frequency of every 7-8 minutes. However, Abellio start with every 15 minutes for the first few journeys, then every 10 minutes up to 0647 before an every 6/7/8 minute frequency kicks in for the morning peak (then to the norm of 7-8).


Looking at this, it does look like Abellio are trying to help out the 345 more with the high demand of people using the route in the mornings to South Kensington, but I do think every 6/7/8 minutes is a bit too much (CLJ to SKN roughly every 2-4 mins (49/345)).

Let's hope this actually becomes effective though, instead of buses just leaving within seconds of eachother.

Abellio has no interest in "helping out the 345." It will be running the frequencies dictated by the invitation to tender from TfL. South Kensington to Clapham Junction is a very busy section of both routes.

Indeed the 345 is no concern of Abellio's. I think it varys from route to route for example the 68/468 has been poorer under GA than it was under Arriva but on the other hand the 286 is much better under GA than it ever was under AKT.

[l1group]

Sept 12, 2014 22:02:01 GMT @rgd976 said:

I have observed the E3, 54 & 75 change overs , and they have all been slow to settle in.

Well it didn't help that the E3 route was buggered from the word go! Every single curtailment on the blinds of the SPs of the E3 was used. The E3 was stuffed with excessive traffic, part of the route shut, more A4 traffic (Sutton Court Road), but the service was actually more reliable once it did settle in within the first week! And the running numbers displayed also mean I know when I'm (or it is) running late or not!

[Deleted]

One thing I have noticed is they seem dead set on only running the '64 plate Enviro's on the 49 and keeping the '14 reg ones on the 211, which seems odd considering they are exactly the same.

[M1104]

Sept 20, 2014 23:12:21 GMT @cstock said:

One thing I have noticed is they seem dead set on only running the '64 plate Enviro's on the 49 and keeping the '14 reg ones on the 211, which seems odd considering they are exactly the same.

I believe QB is so big a premises that they are able to park up the buses in such a way that the right vehicles are plated up for the routes they were ordered for.