Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 26, 2019 19:17:50 GMT
Maybe extend the E9 to Osterley instead? A short enough route to extend, greater capacity than the E10, and provides similar links towards Greenford and Yeading. Or the 112 as originally proposed, but with a DD conversion. I know someone who lives in the South Ealing area and was over the moon when TFL proposed extending the 112 to Osterley because it would have provided them with a direct link to Brent Cross. They are now annoyed that they are getting the E10 instead because they seldom go to Greenford. I really don't think there is much demand to go from South Ealing to Greenford to be honest and I grew up in a neighbourhood in that part of Ealing where people were very snobby about Greenford. Perhaps I'm wrong and the new link will be well utillised but I can see it hampering the E10 and as previously mentioned, the E10 adds very little bus capacity that section. Extending the 112 may be problematic though because of the North Circular traffic. I'm all for providing new radial links so I'll be happy if the E10 extension is a sucess (note that if the 112 is rerouted via Madeley Road then the E10 extension convinently creates some space in Haven Green). The E9 and 112 are both good candidates to send down to Osterley. I have previously tipped the E1 for extension to Osterley and would have thought it'd be the logical candidate but apparently not
I had an idea and I was thinking that if the E10 extension to Osterley goes ahead with the 112 standing at Stop D, perhaps the E1 could then stand at the current 297/E10 stand at Haven Green creating space at Stop D for the 112 |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 26, 2019 21:59:59 GMT
Maybe extend the E9 to Osterley instead? A short enough route to extend, greater capacity than the E10, and provides similar links towards Greenford and Yeading. Or the 112 as originally proposed, but with a DD conversion. I know someone who lives in the South Ealing area and was over the moon when TFL proposed extending the 112 to Osterley because it would have provided them with a direct link to Brent Cross. They are now annoyed that they are getting the E10 instead because they seldom go to Greenford. I really don't think there is much demand to go from South Ealing to Greenford to be honest and I grew up in a neighbourhood in that part of Ealing where people were very snobby about Greenford. Perhaps I'm wrong and the new link will be well utillised but I can see it hampering the E10 and as previously mentioned, the E10 adds very little bus capacity that section. Extending the 112 may be problematic though because of the North Circular traffic. I'm all for providing new radial links so I'll be happy if the E10 extension is a sucess (note that if the 112 is rerouted via Madeley Road then the E10 extension convinently creates some space in Haven Green). The E9 and 112 are both good candidates to send down to Osterley. I have previously tipped the E1 for extension to Osterley and would have thought it'd be the logical candidate but apparently not
The 112 was the worst route they could of chosen to extend because of the North Circular Road - it's proposed extension to North Finchley will likely make the route unbearable to use. Running via Madeley Road isn't particularly clever either and should be left to something like the E11. For the Osterley extension, if not the E10, the E9 was a good candidate - I feel the E1 is best left as it is providing the frequent link between Greenford & Ealing and the surrounding places. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 27, 2019 6:57:34 GMT
I know someone who lives in the South Ealing area and was over the moon when TFL proposed extending the 112 to Osterley because it would have provided them with a direct link to Brent Cross. They are now annoyed that they are getting the E10 instead because they seldom go to Greenford. I really don't think there is much demand to go from South Ealing to Greenford to be honest and I grew up in a neighbourhood in that part of Ealing where people were very snobby about Greenford. Perhaps I'm wrong and the new link will be well utillised but I can see it hampering the E10 and as previously mentioned, the E10 adds very little bus capacity that section. Extending the 112 may be problematic though because of the North Circular traffic. I'm all for providing new radial links so I'll be happy if the E10 extension is a sucess (note that if the 112 is rerouted via Madeley Road then the E10 extension convinently creates some space in Haven Green). The E9 and 112 are both good candidates to send down to Osterley. I have previously tipped the E1 for extension to Osterley and would have thought it'd be the logical candidate but apparently not
E1 is always a popular one for extensions as it is so short, but actually works so well in its current form. It's a slightly more low-key W7, the buses are rammed full in rush hour and you really need a frequent, reliable service to mop up the crowds at Ealing Broadway. Sadly, as an Ealing resident myself, many people still feel the same way about Greenford and Northolt. The E9 would link Pitshanger and South Ealing which could be well-used. I agree about the E1 and its similarity to the W7, wouldn't it be better to have have a new route (E4?) from Ealing Broadway to Osterley? |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 27, 2019 8:01:30 GMT
E1 is always a popular one for extensions as it is so short, but actually works so well in its current form. It's a slightly more low-key W7, the buses are rammed full in rush hour and you really need a frequent, reliable service to mop up the crowds at Ealing Broadway. Sadly, as an Ealing resident myself, many people still feel the same way about Greenford and Northolt. The E9 would link Pitshanger and South Ealing which could be well-used. I agree about the E1 and its similarity to the W7, wouldn't it be better to have have a new route (E4?) from Ealing Broadway to Osterley? That wouldn't be a bad idea although stand space would be the issue. I however favour extending an existing route to provide more new radial link, the E9 is a good candidate for that. If you were going to create a new E4, I would take it further than Ealing Broadway to create a new cross Ealing link, there are seldom North-South cross Ealing links. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 27, 2019 10:40:53 GMT
I agree about the E1 and its similarity to the W7, wouldn't it be better to have have a new route (E4?) from Ealing Broadway to Osterley? That wouldn't be a bad idea although stand space would be the issue. I however favour extending an existing route to provide more new radial link, the E9 is a good candidate for that. If you were going to create a new E4, I would take it further than Ealing Broadway to create a new cross Ealing link, there are seldom North-South cross Ealing links. I was mindful about stand space but such a shortish route could take most stand time at the Osterley end. It could of course be linked with the E9 to provide a cross Ealing service, pros and cons either way I guess. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on May 28, 2019 13:50:15 GMT
Finally updated... to say that the next edition is due on Friday 7 June. The document remains the wildly out of date one from mid April.
|
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on May 28, 2019 15:01:10 GMT
So for the next 10 days we're left with a document last published 41 days ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by redbus on May 28, 2019 15:53:16 GMT
Finally updated... to say that the next edition is due on Friday 7 June. The document remains the wildly out of date one from mid April. The updating of this document has now gone beyond a joke.
There is really no point in TfL suggesting that people look at this document if they can't keep it up to date. The current document only goes up until the end of April and we now the end of May. The current document says many of the changes for April 20 may be delayed due to road works, what possible excuse is there for not updating the document to confirm whether the changes on April 20 took place? Another example why could the Hammersmith Bridge changes that have happened not be included in a revised document?
I have great difficulty in understanding why this document cannot be updated regularly as promised. Surely with the exception of emergencies changes must have been agreed with the Operators weeks in advance and so can be published in this document in a timely manner. This document is now a terrible reflection on TfL, the Transport Commissioner and the Mayor. This is just so sad and I take no pleasure whatsoever in saying this.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on May 28, 2019 16:02:20 GMT
So for the next 10 days we're left with a document last published 41 days ago. That depends on whether you believe they'll manage an update on the 7th  Unless I'm missing it, I can't see a reference to the 125 extension on the webpage. You'd have thought this would be something they'd want to mention. Roger French has been trying the extension out and is unimpressed by the absence of blinds, stops and route information. |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on May 28, 2019 16:29:11 GMT
So for the next 10 days we're left with a document last published 41 days ago. That depends on whether you believe they'll manage an update on the 7th Unless I'm missing it, I can't see a reference to the 125 extension on the webpage. You'd have thought this would be something they'd want to mention. Roger French has been trying the extension out and is unimpressed by the absence of blinds, stops and route information. Has become more than useless. Wouldn't surprise me now if Central London changes happen before anyone can be bothered to update it. |
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on May 29, 2019 7:53:10 GMT
By the time the Permanent changes document is finally published on 7th June, I reckon it'll need to contain information on all of the following routes.
Tottenham Court Road two-way project: 14, 19, 24, 29, 38, 73, 134, 176, 390, N5, N19, N20, N29, N38, N41, N73, N253, N279
Highbury Corner changes: 4, 19, 30, 43, 263, 271, 393, N19, N41, N277
Old Street changes: 21, 43, 55, 76, 135, 141, 205, 214, 243, 271, 394, N55, N205
Hammersmith Bridge closure: 33, 72, 209, 265, 419, 485, 533, 609, N33, N72 Central London bus changes: 3, 4, 9, 14, 35, 40, 45, 46, 53, 59, 67, 76, 100, 134, 149, 171, 172, 205, 242, 341, 343, 388, 468, 476, RV1, N9, N205
Frequency changes: 124, 295, E3
Route extension: 125
Maybe that's why it's taking so long.
|
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 29, 2019 11:11:57 GMT
By the time the Permanent changes document is finally published on 7th June, I reckon it'll need to contain information on all of the following routes.
Tottenham Court Road two-way project: 14, 19, 24, 29, 38, 73, 134, 176, 390, N5, N19, N20, N29, N38, N41, N73, N253, N279
Highbury Corner changes: 4, 19, 30, 43, 263, 271, 393, N19, N41, N277
Old Street changes: 21, 43, 55, 76, 135, 141, 205, 214, 243, 271, 394, N55, N205
Hammersmith Bridge closure: 33, 72, 209, 265, 419, 485, 533, 609, N33, N72 Central London bus changes: 3, 4, 9, 14, 35, 40, 45, 46, 53, 59, 67, 76, 100, 134, 149, 171, 172, 205, 242, 341, 343, 388, 468, 476, RV1, N9, N205
Frequency changes: 124, 295, E3
Route extension: 125
Maybe that's why it's taking so long.
Kicking cans down roads seems to be catching on.  |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 29, 2019 17:04:09 GMT
By the time the Permanent changes document is finally published on 7th June, I reckon it'll need to contain information on all of the following routes.
Tottenham Court Road two-way project: 14, 19, 24, 29, 38, 73, 134, 176, 390, N5, N19, N20, N29, N38, N41, N73, N253, N279
Highbury Corner changes: 4, 19, 30, 43, 263, 271, 393, N19, N41, N277
Old Street changes: 21, 43, 55, 76, 135, 141, 205, 214, 243, 271, 394, N55, N205
Hammersmith Bridge closure: 33, 72, 209, 265, 419, 485, 533, 609, N33, N72 Central London bus changes: 3, 4, 9, 14, 35, 40, 45, 46, 53, 59, 67, 76, 100, 134, 149, 171, 172, 205, 242, 341, 343, 388, 468, 476, RV1, N9, N205
Frequency changes: 124, 295, E3
Route extension: 125
Maybe that's why it's taking so long.
The 295's frequency cut was in the last permanent bus changes document. Perhaps in the next one it'll be mentioned in the past tense |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 30, 2019 12:02:14 GMT
LBR mentions changes to routes 4, 9 and 46, and the withdrawal of the RV1, to be taking place on the 15th June.
Will any other central London changes take place at the same time? If so, are new PVRs announced yet?
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 30, 2019 12:21:26 GMT
LBR mentions changes to routes 4, 9 and 46, and the withdrawal of the RV1, to be taking place on the 15th June. Will any other central London changes take place at the same time? If so, are new PVRs announced yet? Almost all of the changes take place then. Only the 26 (increased freq), 48, 55 and 388 (to London Bridge) take place in October. We have already seen a GAL notice setting out their PVR changes - it's on the forum somewhere. As for the rest who knows? |
|
