|
Post by snowman on Apr 15, 2019 14:37:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Apr 18, 2019 5:13:11 GMT
TfL bus changes has been updated, many days late 29 March 2019 to 7 June 2019 Edition content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-permanent-bus-changes.pdf20 April re-routings in Tottenham Court Road area affecting routes 14, 19, 24, 29, 38, 73, 134, 390, N5, N19, N20, N29, N38, N41, N73, N253, N279, 22 April, small changes in Highbury corner area affecting routes 4, 19, 30, 43, 263, 271, 393, N19, N41, N277, 23 April, school day journeys on 207 withdrawn 27 April frequency change on 295 (8-9 mins instead of every 8 mins) For this edition, it has not been possible to list information on any changes between 4 May 2019 and 7 June 2019 as the details are currently still under discussion. More information will be provided in the next edition later in April 2019. Next edition due Friday 26 April 2019
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Apr 18, 2019 6:52:34 GMT
As well as being published hopelessly unreliably, the format of the document is increasingly unfit for purpose, completed to a slavishly impractical template.
Twelve pages of the latest document are essentially the same change repeated 17 times, followed by the same change repeated 10 times, in oversized tabular chunks.
At least it's not the unprofessional mess we got a few months ago, but this convoluted repetitive format cannot be the best way to present upcoming changes to the public.
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Apr 18, 2019 7:05:34 GMT
Also, the preamble makes a big fuss that this is the first document to include permanent changes "up to eight weeks after the planned publication date", rather then the previous four, then has to apologise that it isn't possible to include changes in the extra four weeks because they're not confirmed, and in fact only includes changes in the next fortnight. It's a jobsworth shambles.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 18, 2019 7:43:10 GMT
I wonder what the details currently under discussion between now and the 7th June. Can't be the central London ones as they are not 15th. Maybe final plans on the 125 date or maybe freq reductions in a few routes.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 18, 2019 10:14:04 GMT
Also, the preamble makes a big fuss that this is the first document to include permanent changes "up to eight weeks after the planned publication date", rather then the previous four, then has to apologise that it isn't possible to include changes in the extra four weeks because they're not confirmed, and in fact only includes changes in the next fortnight. It's a jobsworth shambles. I think that is a bit unfair. Whoever creates the report is at the end of a long convoluted process of service planning, negotiation, contract changes, schedule changes and infrastructure changes. A whole load of things have to come into line and be confirmed before that document can be put together with any certainty. I think it has been clear for a long time that TfL have been struggling to get things done in time plus external factors like court cases, Crossrail delays and council policy decisions have blown holes in finely crafted plans. All of that will have caused a dislocation of past plans for both TfL and the operators. Furthermore the main audience for that document is not knowledgeable bus enthusiasts it is the general public plus politicians in a variety of roles. I understand your remarks about the format but sometimes the same thing has to be said for each relevant route to make it clear for the reader. Many years ago I used to receive the bus service changes internal document. It also had the same approach of each route having to have the same change replicated. That simply reflects the fact that each stands on its own as an entity with its own specification, route record, schedule and performance data. Also the route network is complex and even in a common change one route may actually take a different way through a revised highway layout and that has to be spelt out. I believe we saw that with the recent Whipps Cross changes.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Apr 18, 2019 17:43:23 GMT
Also, the preamble makes a big fuss that this is the first document to include permanent changes "up to eight weeks after the planned publication date", rather then the previous four, then has to apologise that it isn't possible to include changes in the extra four weeks because they're not confirmed, and in fact only includes changes in the next fortnight. It's a jobsworth shambles. I think that is a bit unfair. Whoever creates the report is at the end of a long convoluted process of service planning, negotiation, contract changes, schedule changes and infrastructure changes. A whole load of things have to come into line and be confirmed before that document can be put together with any certainty. I think it has been clear for a long time that TfL have been struggling to get things done in time plus external factors like court cases, Crossrail delays and council policy decisions have blown holes in finely crafted plans. All of that will have caused a dislocation of past plans for both TfL and the operators. Furthermore the main audience for that document is not knowledgeable bus enthusiasts it is the general public plus politicians in a variety of roles. I understand your remarks about the format but sometimes the same thing has to be said for each relevant route to make it clear for the reader. Many years ago I used to receive the bus service changes internal document. It also had the same approach of each route having to have the same change replicated. That simply reflects the fact that each stands on its own as an entity with its own specification, route record, schedule and performance data. Also the route network is complex and even in a common change one route may actually take a different way through a revised highway layout and that has to be spelt out. I believe we saw that with the recent Whipps Cross changes. For once I disagree to an extent. As this document is aimed at the general public and is the only real conduit for service change information, it needs to be clear, accurate and timely. At the moment it's not really achieving that. The formatting could certainly be improved - make the route numbers more distinct, compress the two date/borough lists into double columns to make them appear shorter. I'm not sure what repeating the borough information alongside the main details adds, unless this aids some internal TfL process. Incidentally, I thought the recent stop publicity I saw for the 88 change in Westminster was hopeless. It just said that there will be changes to Central London routes during 2019 and that that stop would be affected. Hopeless.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 18, 2019 19:19:13 GMT
For once I disagree to an extent. As this document is aimed at the general public and is the only real conduit for service change information, it needs to be clear, accurate and timely. At the moment it's not really achieving that. The formatting could certainly be improved - make the route numbers more distinct, compress the two date/borough lists into double columns to make them appear shorter. I'm not sure what repeating the borough information alongside the main details adds, unless this aids some internal TfL process. Incidentally, I thought the recent stop publicity I saw for the 88 change in Westminster was hopeless. It just said that there will be changes to Central London routes during 2019 and that that stop would be affected. Hopeless. The point, though, is that it isn't for the public. It's for stakeholders and politicians. It just happens to be published on the TfL website - presumably to stop people making endless FOI requests for service change info. That's why there's all the borough emphasis - it provides an easy cross check for politicians. The problem with documents like this is that it will never be "right" given the wide audience. It'll certainly NEVER be right so far as enthusiasts are concerned because they all have their own preferences and want as much advance info as possible. I guess I am a little more sympathetic having been responsible for the production of minutes, official stats, reports etc at TfL and having had an endless battle with people all wanting "their" little indulgences indulged in the various documents. It can get to be almost impossible. To the credit of the people responsible for the Bus Changes Document that are at least trying to improve matters a bit - they're just not there yet. I saw the same stop notices in Camden Town and felt they were hopeless. I think TfL would rather not bother at all with any paper based publicity and would rather people use the web. Sadly their web based information is often hopeless too.
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Apr 23, 2019 11:11:36 GMT
Not sure if this has been mentioned already - the new timetable for Uno's 610 sees the route withdrawn between Cockfosters and Enfield during University vacations. The 611 will only run during Uni term time.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Apr 23, 2019 11:28:54 GMT
Not sure if this has been mentioned already - the new timetable for Uno's 610 sees the route withdrawn between Cockfosters and Enfield during University vacations. The 611 will only run during Uni term time. 614 and 644 also have a reduced M-F timetable during university holidays
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Apr 26, 2019 12:55:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 28, 2019 19:51:35 GMT
I would be more concerned if it came out on time!
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 1, 2019 2:30:28 GMT
I would be more concerned if it came out on time! Now 1st May, and an overdue Edition published before Easter with the words an update will be issued later in April is still the public document. Then there is the Richmond area consultation stating changes expected to take place in May, but no update (even if it is a simple update suggesting a delay) What is being issued to public (including passengers) is looking more amateurish than ever. Is there no Quality Control any more.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 1, 2019 9:42:47 GMT
What is being issued to public (including passengers) is looking more amateurish than ever. Is there no Quality Control any more. "There has been no reduction in the quality of service TfL provides to the public as a result of a smaller organisation" (Mike Brown, TfL Commissioner) He clearly has no idea what is actually going on in his own organisation or how it appears to the public.
|
|
|
Post by redbus on May 1, 2019 14:19:04 GMT
What is being issued to public (including passengers) is looking more amateurish than ever. Is there no Quality Control any more. "There has been no reduction in the quality of service TfL provides to the public as a result of a smaller organisation" (Mike Brown, TfL Commissioner) He clearly has no idea what is actually going on in his own organisation or how it appears to the public. Mmmmm I was at Marylebone station earlier today and the tiles for the 2 were still on the bus stop. iBus was still showing the 2 as stopping at the station when it hasn't stopped there for weeks. No reduction in the quality of service there at all!!!! NOT.
|
|