|
Post by Nathan on Nov 20, 2014 19:48:28 GMT
Growing number of questions about vehicle maintenance, crashes and TfL's oversight of operators. I'm beginning to spot a bit of a campaign emerging on this theme. The bus map functionality on the TfL website not working properly. *coughs* Abellio *coughs* And as I experienced this morning, the countdown site could do with some work. During the peak hours, I always get redirected to the "Express web" version which really annoys me.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 20, 2014 23:58:41 GMT
A question to the Mayor this week about route 5. Bus Overcrowding in Barking and Dagenham Question No: 2014/4327 John Biggs Route 5 in B & D is massively overcrowded. I appreciate that there have been service increases but travel patterns in the borough have massively changed. It seems clear to me that a more fundamental service review, with an understanding of travel patterns and consideration of additional or extended services on the route is needed. Can you arrange for TfL in consultation with the Borough to explore this? We'll see if TfL provide a response by the deadline of next Monday or whether this turns into a long wait for a response. There are also other moans about W4 bus being overcrowded W19 bus being overcrowded (not sure if the comment relates to post the recent frequency increase or not) the absence of shelters and seats at Wood Green (!!!! - one I commented about a few weeks ago) The lack of buses through the Blackwall Tunnel (prompted by comparisons in the Silvertown Tunnel consultation) Lack of buses from Wood Green to North Middlesex Hospital (seems the 444 apparently doesn't serve "Wood Green" and the 144 doesn't get close enough) Lack of direct buses from Sutton to Epsom General Hospital given changes to referral patterns to local hospitals. Growing number of questions about vehicle maintenance, crashes and TfL's oversight of operators. I'm beginning to spot a bit of a campaign emerging on this theme. The bus map functionality on the TfL website not working properly. The Epsom Hospital issue could be solved by extending the 470 to Epsom General Hospital. The problem with this though is the route is very lengthy - I've done it end to end and takes over an hour easily. It's also a low frequency route too. The bus map functionality problem seems to be with certain spider maps - I've had a few issues with some spider maps such as Southgate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 21, 2014 6:28:37 GMT
Okay, how about this. 5 Increase frequency with additional Becontree Heath to Canning Town journeys. 86 Increase frequency. 115 Extend to Barking Garage. 205 Extend to Stratford. 238 Extend from Barking to Romford. 369 New route Chadwell Heath to Mansion House via Ilford, Stratford, Aldgate, Bank. No, please don't extend the 205. It's already full of turns and Bow-Stratford isn't exactly traffic free.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Nov 21, 2014 9:36:44 GMT
A question to the Mayor this week about route 5. Bus Overcrowding in Barking and Dagenham Question No: 2014/4327 John Biggs Route 5 in B & D is massively overcrowded. I appreciate that there have been service increases but travel patterns in the borough have massively changed. It seems clear to me that a more fundamental service review, with an understanding of travel patterns and consideration of additional or extended services on the route is needed. Can you arrange for TfL in consultation with the Borough to explore this? We'll see if TfL provide a response by the deadline of next Monday or whether this turns into a long wait for a response. There are also other moans about W4 bus being overcrowded W19 bus being overcrowded (not sure if the comment relates to post the recent frequency increase or not) the absence of shelters and seats at Wood Green (!!!! - one I commented about a few weeks ago) The lack of buses through the Blackwall Tunnel (prompted by comparisons in the Silvertown Tunnel consultation) Lack of buses from Wood Green to North Middlesex Hospital (seems the 444 apparently doesn't serve "Wood Green" and the 144 doesn't get close enough) Lack of direct buses from Sutton to Epsom General Hospital given changes to referral patterns to local hospitals. Growing number of questions about vehicle maintenance, crashes and TfL's oversight of operators. I'm beginning to spot a bit of a campaign emerging on this theme. The bus map functionality on the TfL website not working properly. The Epsom Hospital issue could be solved by extending the 470 to Epsom General Hospital. The problem with this though is the route is very lengthy - I've done it end to end and takes over an hour easily. It's also a low frequency route too. The bus map functionality problem seems to be with certain spider maps - I've had a few issues with some spider maps such as Southgate. The Epsom Hospital issue is not really TfLs as it is not a London borough, having said that the NHS is based on hospital locations and doesn't follow the irregular boundaries that London has got. With the recent developments on the old asylum hospital sites in North Epsom might even be a case for diverting something from Hook area. In a funny kind of way the whole area could do with transport boundaries being redrawn (a political problem) as the current oddity where just south of Worcester Park station and Tolworth station is Surrey, but Chessington is included. Maybe a combined cross border is the answer, then a proper recast of routes to reflect the new estates that have been built since last review
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 21, 2014 12:37:28 GMT
The Epsom Hospital issue could be solved by extending the 470 to Epsom General Hospital. The problem with this though is the route is very lengthy - I've done it end to end and takes over an hour easily. It's also a low frequency route too. The bus map functionality problem seems to be with certain spider maps - I've had a few issues with some spider maps such as Southgate. The Epsom Hospital issue is not really TfLs as it is not a London borough, having said that the NHS is based on hospital locations and doesn't follow the irregular boundaries that London has got. With the recent developments on the old asylum hospital sites in North Epsom might even be a case for diverting something from Hook area. In a funny kind of way the whole area could do with transport boundaries being redrawn (a political problem) as the current oddity where just south of Worcester Park station and Tolworth station is Surrey, but Chessington is included. Maybe a combined cross border is the answer, then a proper recast of routes to reflect the new estates that have been built since last review The main issue is people from the TfL area wanting to get to Epsom Hospital, Darent Valley is another one that could be better served.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 25, 2014 19:21:43 GMT
Has the Mayor Issued a Response yet? about the 5?
It also seems the 86 is getting a PVR increase to 31 according to LBR.net to improve reliability
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 25, 2014 20:25:51 GMT
Has the Mayor Issued a Response yet? about the 5? It also seems the 86 is getting a PVR increase to 31 according to LBR.net to improve reliability this is the Mayor's Answer - looks moderately hopeful to me. "TfL is reviewing the most cost effective way to further increase capacity on the corridor served by route 5. They are working with Barking and Dagenham Council and other stakeholders to ensure this takes account of development plans and other local opportunities for bus service enhancements.They are also reviewing other potential service changes in the area, including taking into account new links in the area, such as to hospitals." They are also looking at extending route 470 to Epsom General Hospital to deal with one of the other questions. The other questions are either awaiting an answer or have been answered with the expected sort of response.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 25, 2014 21:08:08 GMT
Has the Mayor Issued a Response yet? about the 5? It also seems the 86 is getting a PVR increase to 31 according to LBR.net to improve reliability this is the Mayor's Answer - looks moderately hopeful to me. "TfL is reviewing the most cost effective way to further increase capacity on the corridor served by route 5. They are working with Barking and Dagenham Council and other stakeholders to ensure this takes account of development plans and other local opportunities for bus service enhancements.They are also reviewing other potential service changes in the area, including taking into account new links in the area, such as to hospitals." They are also looking at extending route 470 to Epsom General Hospital to deal with one of the other questions. The other questions are either awaiting an answer or have been answered with the expected sort of response. Hopefully they actually carry out these proposals and make the public and not keep them hidden in Archives for the next 20 years. But I hope they don't attempt rerouting the 5 to run via Queens Hospital, South Street allows it to escape quite a bit of Traffic in the area
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Nov 25, 2014 21:33:26 GMT
Has the Mayor Issued a Response yet? about the 5? It also seems the 86 is getting a PVR increase to 31 according to LBR.net to improve reliability this is the Mayor's Answer - looks moderately hopeful to me. "TfL is reviewing the most cost effective way to further increase capacity on the corridor served by route 5. They are working with Barking and Dagenham Council and other stakeholders to ensure this takes account of development plans and other local opportunities for bus service enhancements.They are also reviewing other potential service changes in the area, including taking into account new links in the area, such as to hospitals." They are also looking at extending route 470 to Epsom General Hospital to deal with one of the other questions. The other questions are either awaiting an answer or have been answered with the expected sort of response. Increasing the frequency by 1 bph might be the most cost effective (3ish additional buses), but sadly not the most effective way to combat the growing number of people using the 5 (I got left behind at 5.15 the other morning.) If the route is increased by 2 bph (7 buses) they might be better used on a new route creating some new links along Wood Lane/ Longbridge Road
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 2, 2014 13:57:31 GMT
A new rota started at Romford this week on 86 one extra bus during the day and 3 extra duties,6 min headway down to 5 mins,no change in evening headway stays at 10 mins,also no change in weekend duties
|
|
fl70500
Driver
Its me from BE
Posts: 217
|
Post by fl70500 on Jan 1, 2015 14:14:19 GMT
The main issue is that they provide unique links over a long distance. Therefore they attract both long, medium and short distance journies. Which bit of the 86 are you talking about? Is it east of Ilford because I rarely see overloaded 86s in Ilford or west thereof. The 25 tends to take more of a hit on this part of the corridor. If there was a view as to where the crowding is worst then you could perhaps consider extending something on from Ilford town centre part way towards Romford. Do you, for example, extend the 179 to Chadwell Heath? That would give another 5 bph in the peaks with empty buses starting part way along. The only issue is that the 179 is still not terribly reliable so it would need a full review of the schedule if it was to run a longer route. The only other option would be to extend the 147 east of Ilford. I would not recommend extending the already very long 123. Nearly all the other terminating routes in Ilford are single deckers. I couldn't see TfL wanting to run either the EL1 or EL2 across Ilford. d*mn, I was going to say extend either the EL1 or 2 west of Ilford as there is serious overcrowding between Stratford & Ilford on the 86. Even more daring but probably unwise would be to extend the EL1 to Stratford and the EL2 to either Becontree Heath or Chadwell Heath to help out the 86. EL1 and 2 do enough work as it is and we got loading issues ourselves at the other end which the ELT primarily serves. however EL3 & 4 are yet to make it to paper but are coming!(Maybe not EL4) 5 Would have been an ideal route for Bendy bus with conductor
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jan 1, 2015 14:54:02 GMT
d*mn, I was going to say extend either the EL1 or 2 west of Ilford as there is serious overcrowding between Stratford & Ilford on the 86. Even more daring but probably unwise would be to extend the EL1 to Stratford and the EL2 to either Becontree Heath or Chadwell Heath to help out the 86. EL1 and 2 do enough work as it is and we got loading issues ourselves at the other end which the ELT primarily serves. however EL3 & 4 are yet to make it to paper but are coming!(Maybe not EL4) 5 Would have been an ideal route for Bendy bus with conductor I was wondering if the route would ever make it out of the planning office Both the 5 and 86 would have been good Bendy Bus routes, but the fare evasion issue is there I think the EL1 and EL2 both could do with an extension from Ilford, currently they are just sitting at Ilford Hill causing a nuisance for buses that need to get around them. I don't see why the 238s Becontree Heath extension didn't go ahead, it would have provided some really convenient links. Another option would be a route running Like this... - Barking Town Centre
- Barking Station
- Longbridge Road/Wood Lane
- Valence Avenue
- Chadwell Heath High Road
- London Road
- Romford Market
- Romford Station
It would help out the section of the 5 between Valence Avenue and Barking, then move on to help the 86 between Chadwell Heath and Romford. Providing an Alternative link from Barking to Romford, and supporting the 86 from Chadwell Heath
|
|