|
Post by capitalomnibus on Feb 23, 2018 0:07:10 GMT
Interesting development. Will forever hinge on the definition of "major" change.
A little too late, she was so busy before looking boots to even notice.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Feb 24, 2018 8:18:01 GMT
|
|
|
Post by MoEnviro on Feb 27, 2018 12:54:16 GMT
Swallow/EOS have submitted an LSP registration for a new Route S1 running every 2 hrs between Harlow and Stratford City Bus Station running 7 days a week starting on 1st May.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 27, 2018 14:18:29 GMT
Swallow/EOS have submitted an LSP registration for a new Route S1 running every 2 hrs between Harlow and Stratford City Bus Station running 7 days a week starting on 1st May. Only stop in Greater London, other than Stratford City, will be at Redbridge Station. Looks like a single bus operation with fairly modest turnround turns so they'll have to hope they encounter no traffic congestion or else there will be problems. I note also that Ensignbus are boosting the number of X81 trips between Lakeside and Brentwood and adding an X21 from Ongar to Lakeside too. There will also be Ensign works services turning up at Barking / Canning Town (for an Amazon warehouse service).
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Feb 27, 2018 14:57:34 GMT
Swallow/EOS have submitted an LSP registration for a new Route S1 running every 2 hrs between Harlow and Stratford City Bus Station running 7 days a week starting on 1st May. Wasn’t there a similar kind of service around the time of the olympics? I want to say it was numbered E20?
|
|
|
Post by londontravel on Feb 27, 2018 15:19:39 GMT
I remember Green Line Route 711 that used to run between London and Harlow, with a stop at Redbridge Station.
|
|
|
Post by lonmark on Feb 27, 2018 15:21:36 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 27, 2018 15:39:49 GMT
Seems the 198 is next in line for a reduction along with the 161 on contract. The 53 gets rerouted over the flyover on the 17th of March.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Feb 27, 2018 19:56:31 GMT
Interesting development. Will forever hinge on the definition of "major" change. Well, in regards to timetables specifically, as mentioned in the tweet, there are not that many changes related to timetables. Timetable changes would be: 1) Frequency - Major 2) Changes to first and last bus times - Major 3) Temporary roadwork related changes - Minor 4) Slightly changed bus arrival times - Minor Am I missing something? If not, I would count this as a success, as really 'major' is limited and defined.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Feb 28, 2018 5:26:12 GMT
Good to see the 282 change implemented and removed from the list. I got sick of reading the justification for that change being linked to traffic in Sudbury Hill when the route goes nowhere near it. I think it was copied from the 92, but no one corrected it for months. The 161 change isn’t too bad if the reliability improves. You know that the standardisation freaks at TfL towers must be under considerable financial pressures when odd frequencies like every 11 minutes and every 21 minutes become normal. There must be savings in PVR associated with such small adjustments. Although it’s an old one, the change to the 224 still leaves me shaking my head. That route is very well used in the peak hours. I feel for passengers who have no alternative route to use.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 28, 2018 9:06:04 GMT
Good to see the 282 change implemented and removed from the list. I got sick of reading the justification for that change being linked to traffic in Sudbury Hill when the route goes nowhere near it. I think it was copied from the 92, but no one corrected it for months. The 161 change isn’t too bad if the reliability improves. You know that the standardisation freaks at TfL towers must be under considerable financial pressures when odd frequencies like every 11 minutes and every 21 minutes become normal. There must be savings in PVR associated with such small adjustments. Although it’s an old one, the change to the 224 still leaves me shaking my head. That route is very well used in the peak hours. I feel for passengers who have no alternative route to use. The use of odd frequencies is really about avoiding increases in PVRs. In more flush times TfL would have funded an extra bus to cope with increased running times. Now passengers take the brunt by getting longer trip times *and* longer wait times. It's the classic tactic of transferring the "cost" burden to passengers in terms of their time rather than TfL paying out money to the bus companies for more buses. It probably also means, on balance, that the bus companies avoid contract penalties by delivering a more reliable service than struggling on with the old frequency. Personally I am not a fan of non clockface headways - makes it needlessly difficult to remember when a bus is due.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Feb 28, 2018 18:20:38 GMT
Good to see the 282 change implemented and removed from the list. I got sick of reading the justification for that change being linked to traffic in Sudbury Hill when the route goes nowhere near it. I think it was copied from the 92, but no one corrected it for months. The 161 change isn’t too bad if the reliability improves. You know that the standardisation freaks at TfL towers must be under considerable financial pressures when odd frequencies like every 11 minutes and every 21 minutes become normal. There must be savings in PVR associated with such small adjustments. Although it’s an old one, the change to the 224 still leaves me shaking my head. That route is very well used in the peak hours. I feel for passengers who have no alternative route to use. The use of odd frequencies is really about avoiding increases in PVRs. In more flush times TfL would have funded an extra bus to cope with increased running times. Now passengers take the brunt by getting longer trip times *and* longer wait times. It's the classic tactic of transferring the "cost" burden to passengers in terms of their time rather than TfL paying out money to the bus companies for more buses. It probably also means, on balance, that the bus companies avoid contract penalties by delivering a more reliable service than struggling on with the old frequency. Personally I am not a fan of non clockface headways - makes it needlessly difficult to remember when a bus is due. No lessons learned, apparently, from the spiral of bus decline that, arguably, started in the late 1950s, continued through the 60s, intensified in the 70s and almost went out of control in the 80s. Irregular frequencies almost became the norm and passengers deserted in droves, some never to return. It almost makes me weep, because I see nobody at the top in TfL or with real influence in City Hall who both cares and, more importantly perhaps, understands about bus travel. The Hendy/Daniels days are not only over but may never return, or not until bus services are driven into the ground, and those days seem so long ago already: were they just a dream?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 28, 2018 21:18:48 GMT
No lessons learned, apparently, from the spiral of bus decline that, arguably, started in the late 1950s, continued through the 60s, intensified in the 70s and almost went out of control in the 80s. Irregular frequencies almost became the norm and passengers deserted in droves, some never to return. It almost makes me weep, because I see nobody at the top in TfL or with real influence in City Hall who both cares and, more importantly perhaps, understands about bus travel. The Hendy/Daniels days are not only over but may never return, or not until bus services are driven into the ground, and those days seem so long ago already: were they just a dream? I'm going to be a bit controversial here. I'm not sure I view Leon's tenure at Surface Transport as being one of great success. While he understands buses I think he was pulled in 50,000 different directions on a range of policy initiatives which were often in conflict. That reflects the chaotic policy agenda foisted on London by Boris where far too many things were in conflict and were never sorted out because there was no desire to fix them at City Hall level. I doubt there was any recognition of the inconsistencies at top level at City Hall but you can bet the senior people in TfL knew the mess they were being forced to create. Ironically I think the seeds to bus success were probably sown in the 1990s under LRT control. Not everyone favours privatisation because of what it meant for "old LT" but it did give a spur to the operators to be creative and try different things. OK some of those were not universal successes but at least someone tried. Higher frequencies / lower wait times and opening up areas with minibus based services started to get people back on the buses which provided the eventual basis for what came in the LRT era. As more and more money was being spent then processes and procedures had to be tightened up and inevitably this has built in rigidity to service and vehicle specifications that a core of forum members regularly "comment" upon . Where we are now is probably a temporary downward step but it may take a decade to sort out. We are seeing the "backwash" of the old policy regime which has had an effect on usage levels as has new technology. As I have said before TfL face some severe challenges from the new policy regime, from "brave new world" thinking based on thin experience plus the external pressures that they cannot control. I am sceptical they can handle these issues well without making serious short term mistakes that will then need "fixing" later. The Mayor has no real bus policy for his first term and will no doubt not be very bothered if not much good news happens by 2020. I doubt buses will gain much political traction given TfL have been making cuts for 5 years if anyone was paying attention. There's been no fall out at all. If he seeks a second term and wins then very considerable pressure will exist to see some delivery. I fear the Mayor is repeating the mistake Boris made which is that you say things, write a strategy, appoint a deputy and then everything just sails along doesn't it. Err wrong. Boris's bete noir was tube reliability and he had a mad panic in 2011 and forced TfL to throw £50m at the tube to "sort it out" before it became a serious electoral liability. I suspect TfL Rail / Crossrail and Overground reliability may become this Mayor's problem child. MTR Crossrail seem to be having horrendous problems on the Shenfield line and even a brief sample of social media commentary shows a lot of upset about the service. If any of this spreads to the western services and then the Crossrail core the Mayor will be in serious trouble. Arriva also seem to be struggling with some aspects of the Overground regime - far too many train faults and not just in the cold. It also faces the challenge, like MTR Crossrail, of getting a lot of new trains into service where it's clear Bombardier are struggling to stabilise the class 345s. If the Mayor has unreliable rail services right across London on this watch as we head through 2019 then he's in trouble politically and financially. Poor performing services won't attract people to use them and if Crossrail revenue is below target to any appreciable extent then that's hundreds of millions of pounds not in TfL coffers. If the Tories in London were even half awake on transport matters they would be putting stakes in the ground now to start pointing out the problems. The cycling lobby might also prove to be a problem for the Mayor but it's too early to tell how "fed up" they are. The other huge area of disappointment, but outwith the remit of this forum, is housing and the promises the Mayor made here that he has struggled to fulfill.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Feb 28, 2018 23:24:15 GMT
No lessons learned, apparently, from the spiral of bus decline that, arguably, started in the late 1950s, continued through the 60s, intensified in the 70s and almost went out of control in the 80s. Irregular frequencies almost became the norm and passengers deserted in droves, some never to return. It almost makes me weep, because I see nobody at the top in TfL or with real influence in City Hall who both cares and, more importantly perhaps, understands about bus travel. The Hendy/Daniels days are not only over but may never return, or not until bus services are driven into the ground, and those days seem so long ago already: were they just a dream? I'm going to be a bit controversial here. I'm not sure I view Leon's tenure at Surface Transport as being one of great success. While he understands buses I think he was pulled in 50,000 different directions on a range of policy initiatives which were often in conflict. That reflects the chaotic policy agenda foisted on London by Boris where far too many things were in conflict and were never sorted out because there was no desire to fix them at City Hall level. I doubt there was any recognition of the inconsistencies at top level at City Hall but you can bet the senior people in TfL knew the mess they were being forced to create. Ironically I think the seeds to bus success were probably sown in the 1990s under LRT control. Not everyone favours privatisation because of what it meant for "old LT" but it did give a spur to the operators to be creative and try different things. OK some of those were not universal successes but at least someone tried. Higher frequencies / lower wait times and opening up areas with minibus based services started to get people back on the buses which provided the eventual basis for what came in the LRT era. As more and more money was being spent then processes and procedures had to be tightened up and inevitably this has built in rigidity to service and vehicle specifications that a core of forum members regularly "comment" upon . Where we are now is probably a temporary downward step but it may take a decade to sort out. We are seeing the "backwash" of the old policy regime which has had an effect on usage levels as has new technology. As I have said before TfL face some severe challenges from the new policy regime, from "brave new world" thinking based on thin experience plus the external pressures that they cannot control. I am sceptical they can handle this issues well without making serious short term mistakes that will then need "fixing" later. The Mayor has no real bus policy for his first term and will no doubt not be very bothered if not much good news happens by 2020. I doubt buses will gain much political traction given TfL have been making cuts for 5 years if anyone was paying attention. There's been no fall out at all. If he seeks a second term and wins then very considerable pressure will exist to see some delivery. I fear the Mayor is repeating the mistake Boris made which is that you say things, write a strategy, appoint a deputy and then everything just sails along doesn't it. Err wrong. Boris's bete noir was tube reliability and he had a mad panic in 2011 and forced TfL to throw £50m at the tube to "sort it out" before it became a serious electoral liability. I suspect TfL Rail / Crossrail and Overground reliability may become this Mayor's problem child. MTR Crossrail seem to be having horrendous problems on the Shenfield line and even a brief sample of social media commentary shows a lot of upset about the service. If any of this spreads to the western services and then the Crossrail core the Mayor will be in serious trouble. Arriva also seem to be struggling with some aspects of the Overground regime - far too many train faults and not just in the cold. It also faces the challenge, like MTR Crossrail, of getting a lot of new trains into service where it's clear Bombardier are struggling to stabilise the class 345s. If the Mayor has unreliable rail services right across London on this watch as we head through 2019 then he's in trouble politically and financially. Poor performing services won't attract people to use them and if Crossrail revenue is below target to any appreciable extent then that's hundreds of millions of pounds not in TfL coffers. If the Tories in London were even half awake on transport matters they would be putting stakes in the ground now to start pointing out the problems. The cycling lobby might also prove to be a problem for the Mayor but it's too early to tell how "fed up" they are. The other huge area of disappointment, but outwith the remit of this forum, is housing and the promises the Mayor made here that he has struggled to fulfill. I think I'd go along with a lot of that. It's interesting that you point to problems with Overground/TfL Rail when it has been held up as the panacea for services such as Southeastern's metro. The early years of Overground were 'low hanging fruit' (bleurgh): Silverlink etc were so neglected it would have been hard not to do better. And much of the upswing was due to the extended East London Line. Now it gets trickier, but that is for another thread.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 1, 2018 0:04:41 GMT
I think I'd go along with a lot of that. It's interesting that you point to problems with Overground/TfL Rail when it has been held up as the panacea for services such as Southeastern's metro. The early years of Overground were 'low hanging fruit' (bleurgh): Silverlink etc were so neglected it would have been hard not to do better. And much of the upswing was due to the extended East London Line. Now it gets trickier, but that is for another thread. Apologies but this is going to be a tad off topic for this thread. To my eyes there are a couple of major issues with rail. TfL Rail had a reasonable start and got the 315s into shape. They have also managed as best as they can to cope with a huge increase in usage because of simpler, cheaper fares and the route being on the tube map. However they are suffering with the fall out from Crossrail works on the line plus the need to get the 345s into service. There are far too many infrastructure issues despite all the money that's been spent and station works are running late. They are also rapidly running out of time with the 345s because they are backing up at Derby as they are built and 315s are not being released because the delivered 345s are not reliable enough. This can't carry on for much longer given the need to get 345s into service in both east and west London. There are also signalling system issues on the Heathrow tunnel which are believed to be being caused by the 345s themselves. I have been sceptical for a long while about progress on the new CR stations and I can't see how many of them will be ready to be handed over to the operators in 2-4 months. The delayed start to testing in the core is another worry - they have to step up testing and quickly if they are to debug CBTC signalling in situ. On Overground the demand growth has stalled and it seems a year of closures on the GOBLIN has depressed usage (TfL are trying to get people using it again). The new contract is much more demanding on Arriva and Network Rail and I suspect that Arriva made some heroic assumptions to get costs down. To my "amateur eyes" the operation feels pressured with ongoing train reliability problems which seem to keep repeating themselves. This rarely happened under the joint Arriva / MTR operation. I can't see how a pressured train maintenance set up is going to cope with bringing in a lot of class 710s without letting class 172 and 378 reliability slip in the changeover period. If the 710s are unreliable initially (quite likely) then the potential for a lot of people to be delayed is there. I should just say I hope none of the above traumas happen but the danger signs are there. The risks have to be managed very well to keep disruption under control.
|
|