|
Post by sid on Jan 1, 2016 13:48:17 GMT
Based on above, I suggest that there would be no need to up fares for every other day apart from Christmas day simply to provide a skeleton service on that day. Ditto the council tax arguement. I say that because sometimes you don't need surveys to see the bleedin obvious. Large parts of this city don't celebrate Christmas so would obviously use public transport if it were available. I find these suggestions somewhat baffling. They suggest to me that it actually encourages people to balk at the idea. Which is probably what TfL want. Running night services over routes currently with no associated night tube strikes me as a waste of money for negligible benefit. Or running evening frequencies at levels that are welcome but far in excess of demand is another waste If it was me I would either keep it as it is or On Christmas Day routesĀ 25,55,38,14,47,436,63,86,58,89,53,12,185,176,2,3,18,220,183,65,33,85,159,155,57,249,280,264,75,205,238,123,37,119,295,49,337,5,113,13,221,76,243,498,152,77,6,108,295,74,468,171,136,363,64 there are more routes I haven't added I'd have to have a think about exactly what routes to run but picking up one example that you suggested I don't think that you could justify both the 63 and 363, the former would have to go through to Crystal Palace.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 1, 2016 13:54:50 GMT
Based on above, I suggest that there would be no need to up fares for every other day apart from Christmas day simply to provide a skeleton service on that day. Ditto the council tax arguement. I say that because sometimes you don't need surveys to see the bleedin obvious. Large parts of this city don't celebrate Christmas so would obviously use public transport if it were available. I find these suggestions somewhat baffling. They suggest to me that it actually encourages people to balk at the idea. Which is probably what TfL want. Running night services over routes currently with no associated night tube strikes me as a waste of money for negligible benefit. Or running evening frequencies at levels that are welcome but far in excess of demand is another waste. All I am saying, badly clearly , is that nothing comes for free and there are choices that *have* to be made. If there was a bottomless pit of money then TfL could throw money at the issue and not care about the cost but no one has discovered the pit. The options are mine not what TfL have said. Again just trying to find how people weigh up their priorities and what they'd pay or sacrifice to have something else. That sort of decision making happens all the time for people because people don't have unlimited funds. I am afraid I simply don't see the connection that "not celebrating Christmas" instantly means demand for public transport. If you look at the list of journey purposes that TfL identified from its surveys the biggest purpose was "visiting friends and relatives" and second was "worship" which I interpret (possibly incorrectly) that it is people who *do* celebrate Christmas who would travel and not those who do not. If there is insufficient demand to generate enough benefits from those who do celebrate Christmas then there must be an issue somewhere. The way this topic is being argued is that it is a matter of "blind faith" that demand would materialise to justify the effort and spending. I'm just not convinced and especially not when the wider network's funding is imperiled. Whilst cost comes into anything we are obviously talking about a one day per year expense and the same argument for not running them could be used for not running night buses. Would anybody seriously suggest that there should be no buses running between midnight and 05.30 because of the expense and the fact that most people won't use them and the fact that taxi's are available?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 1, 2016 14:21:30 GMT
All I am saying, badly clearly , is that nothing comes for free and there are choices that *have* to be made. If there was a bottomless pit of money then TfL could throw money at the issue and not care about the cost but no one has discovered the pit. The options are mine not what TfL have said. Again just trying to find how people weigh up their priorities and what they'd pay or sacrifice to have something else. That sort of decision making happens all the time for people because people don't have unlimited funds. I am afraid I simply don't see the connection that "not celebrating Christmas" instantly means demand for public transport. If you look at the list of journey purposes that TfL identified from its surveys the biggest purpose was "visiting friends and relatives" and second was "worship" which I interpret (possibly incorrectly) that it is people who *do* celebrate Christmas who would travel and not those who do not. If there is insufficient demand to generate enough benefits from those who do celebrate Christmas then there must be an issue somewhere. The way this topic is being argued is that it is a matter of "blind faith" that demand would materialise to justify the effort and spending. I'm just not convinced and especially not when the wider network's funding is imperiled. Whilst cost comes into anything we are obviously talking about a one day per year expense and the same argument for not running them could be used for not running night buses. Would anybody seriously suggest that there should be no buses running between midnight and 05.30 because of the expense and the fact that most people won't use them and the fact that taxi's are available? Running night buses can't be compared because night routes have clear demand and in many cases, substantial demand as well.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 1, 2016 14:47:13 GMT
Whilst cost comes into anything we are obviously talking about a one day per year expense and the same argument for not running them could be used for not running night buses. Would anybody seriously suggest that there should be no buses running between midnight and 05.30 because of the expense and the fact that most people won't use them and the fact that taxi's are available? Running night buses can't be compared because night routes have clear demand and in many cases, substantial demand as well. Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious.
|
|
|
Post by ibus246 on Jan 1, 2016 16:11:07 GMT
Running night buses can't be compared because night routes have clear demand and in many cases, substantial demand as well. Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious. A question for forum members - obviously not designed to gain an outright view but how many of you would use a service on Christmas Day and for what purpose? (From a Non-Emthusiast POV)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2016 17:20:51 GMT
Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious. A question for forum members - obviously not designed to gain an outright view but how many of you would use a service on Christmas Day and for what purpose? (From a Non-Emthusiast POV) Work commute for me. No car, like many people..
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 1, 2016 17:37:53 GMT
Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious. A question for forum members - obviously not designed to gain an outright view but how many of you would use a service on Christmas Day and for what purpose? (From a Non-Emthusiast POV) I wouldn't because I always remain indoors on Christmas Day. Only one year have we gone elsewhere on Christmas Day and we got a lift.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 1, 2016 17:40:30 GMT
Running night buses can't be compared because night routes have clear demand and in many cases, substantial demand as well. Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious. Err, I never said there wasn't demand - all I said is don't compare it to night buses, nor did I mention about surveys so quote whoever did instead. I honestly don't know if there is demand for Christmas Day services and I'm not bothered because I wouldn't be using it.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 1, 2016 17:58:31 GMT
Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious. Err, I never said there wasn't demand - all I said is don't compare it to night buses, nor did I mention about surveys so quote whoever did instead. I honestly don't know if there is demand for Christmas Day services and I'm not bothered because I wouldn't be using it. I probably wouldn't be using it either but clearly there is a demand. Perhaps if TfL come up with something for next Christmas Day and publicise it a few months in advance then we'll know for sure. If hardly anybody uses them (most unlikely) then kick the idea into touch. It's incredible to think now that there were once very few night buses on a Saturday night, presumably somebody thought then that there was no demand?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 1, 2016 18:03:07 GMT
Just as there's a clear demand for buses on Christmas Day, 'rgd' summed it up very succinctly saying that we don't need surveys to tell us the bleedin' obvious. A question for forum members - obviously not designed to gain an outright view but how many of you would use a service on Christmas Day and for what purpose? (From a Non-Emthusiast POV) Probably not myself as I don't actually live in London anymore but I have family that do, some of whom are elderly and don't drive and have to rely on the goodwill of others to get anywhere. When I have been out and about there is plenty of traffic on the roads and it's not uncommon to see family groups laden with presents walking to wherever they're going.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 1, 2016 20:48:35 GMT
All I am saying, badly clearly , is that nothing comes for free and there are choices that *have* to be made. If there was a bottomless pit of money then TfL could throw money at the issue and not care about the cost but no one has discovered the pit. The options are mine not what TfL have said. Again just trying to find how people weigh up their priorities and what they'd pay or sacrifice to have something else. That sort of decision making happens all the time for people because people don't have unlimited funds. I am afraid I simply don't see the connection that "not celebrating Christmas" instantly means demand for public transport. If you look at the list of journey purposes that TfL identified from its surveys the biggest purpose was "visiting friends and relatives" and second was "worship" which I interpret (possibly incorrectly) that it is people who *do* celebrate Christmas who would travel and not those who do not. If there is insufficient demand to generate enough benefits from those who do celebrate Christmas then there must be an issue somewhere. The way this topic is being argued is that it is a matter of "blind faith" that demand would materialise to justify the effort and spending. I'm just not convinced and especially not when the wider network's funding is imperiled. Whilst cost comes into anything we are obviously talking about a one day per year expense and the same argument for not running them could be used for not running night buses. Would anybody seriously suggest that there should be no buses running between midnight and 05.30 because of the expense and the fact that most people won't use them and the fact that taxi's are available? Can I be crystal clear here? No one is saying there is no demand. Not even TfL is saying that. The question is whether you can make the case to spend scarce public funds on a service that may fall short of what people might need (i.e too infrequent, not offering good enough journey possibilities, too difficult to understand) or you lay on too much service with buses carrying fresh air for most of the day. There are endless comments on this forum about TfL being useless and wasteful and running buses carrying fresh air. There is also no consensus of opinion here as to what service would be "best" for a Christmas Day service. We can't have it both ways. I am afraid arguments about night buses are specious. Night bus demand has been established for many decades - it's just the level that has changed. LT, LRT and TfL have all carefully assessed the network at various times and have added to and taken away from the network. There is demonstrable evidence of strong employment flows and leisure travel on many night routes. However there are plenty of examples of poor performing night routes that been axed - 106, 236 and 274 being the most recent. As we have mentioned before there are night routes running now that have far poorer patronage levels than old night routes that were axed in Ken's era (e.g the N58 and N75). There are also large areas of London that have no night buses at all. TfL therefore already take the view that demand is insufficient or unproven and that they cannot justify spending the money to put in a service. People in those areas who may want to travel at night either don't or use private transport or take a taxi. Therefore your argument about night buses falls away because the choice you say no one would make quite clearly is made and has been made. If we ever get the Night Tube running with its attendant weekend night bus links then I expect we certainly will see more choices being made about whether to keep some of the new services going. I fully expect some will be withdrawn while others may be upped to a nightly service or we may get other routes gaining a weekend night service. Clearly some people take the view that the case is overwhelming and "obvious" and money should be "found" somehow and a service run. That's fine but that's not where TfL is at and I doubt the issue is anywhere in terms of importance with politicians. I am merely suggesting that people are going to be disappointed as the financial climate worsens considerably no matter how strongly they hold their views. I was also trying to see what choices or compromises others might make in order to get a Christmas Day bus service. So far all we've got is "spend the money, it's obvious, don't raise the extra money from other sources". I was hoping that we might get a more nuanced discussion. Anyway I think we've done it to death - there's no great agreement or consensus about what's needed.
|
|
|
Post by rambo on Jan 2, 2016 18:29:56 GMT
No buses run from my garage(basildon) on xmas/boxing day.
The sun still came up, the birds still sung and people still enjoyed christmas..........
|
|
|
Post by thesquirrels on Jan 2, 2016 21:29:14 GMT
Based on above, I suggest that there would be no need to up fares for every other day apart from Christmas day simply to provide a skeleton service on that day. Ditto the council tax arguement. I say that because sometimes you don't need surveys to see the bleedin obvious. Large parts of this city don't celebrate Christmas so would obviously use public transport if it were available. I find these suggestions somewhat baffling. They suggest to me that it actually encourages people to balk at the idea. Which is probably what TfL want. Running night services over routes currently with no associated night tube strikes me as a waste of money for negligible benefit. Or running evening frequencies at levels that are welcome but far in excess of demand is another waste If it was me I would either keep it as it is or On Christmas Day routes 25,55,38,14,47,436,63,86,58,89,53,12,185,176,2,3,18,220,183,65,33,85,159,155,57,249,280,264,75,205,238,123,37,119,295,49,337,5,113,13,221,76,243,498,152,77,6,108,295,74,468,171,136,363,64 there are more routes I haven't added Here's my 'back of a cigarette packet' take on what I would run on Christmas Day. This departs from the de facto Night Bus idea as I think the demand patterns would extend to certain day routes in areas with higher demand, and a big combination of day/night routes run in tandem is likely to be too confusing, though a few routes have been stapled together to enable travel into Central London for interchange purposes. Most routes would run on a half-hourly basis as a trial. I've concentrated on suburbs, routes linking into hospitals, and areas with lower than average christian/observant populations or less affluent areas where Christmas day travel for any general reason is more likely to be more appealing than booking a cab, plus routes serving hospitals. I'd go with 2 to CP via 432, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 to Shepherds Bush via Hammersmith, 12, 13 to North Finchley, 14/85 combined, 15/115 as one via Poplar High Street, 16 to Edgware via 32, 18 (x15 Baker Street to Wembley, then x30 onto Harrow Weald via rte 182), 19, 21/321 combined, 22, 23, 24, 25 to Romford via 86 (x15 to Ilford), 27, 28, 29/329 combined (x15 to Wood Green), 31, 33, 34, 35, 36/436 combined, 37/337 combined, 38 to Walthamstow via 48, 41, 43, 45, 47 extended via 208 south of Bellingham to Orpington, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53/453 combined, 55 to Loughton via the 20, 57, 58, 59 to Croydon via 250, 61, 63/363 combined, 64/264 combined, 65/71 combined, 68/168/468 combined and extended to Old Coulsdon via the 60, 69/97 combined, 70, 72, 73 to Northumberland Park via 476, 74/430 combined, 75, 79, 81, 83, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93 with hourly extensions to Epsom General, 94, 95, 96 Woolwich - Dartford, 98, 101, 102, 104, 105, 108, 109/159 combined, 111, 113, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 128, 133 to Tooting, 134, 136, 137/417 combined, 139, 140, 141, 142, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149 extended to Waltham Cross via 279, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 161, 164, 165, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176 to Thornton Heath via 197 and 198, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187/487 combined, 188, 192, 195, 196, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207 to Uxbridge (x15 to Hayes), 210, 212, 213, 214, 220, 221, 222, 224, 226, 229 to Bromley via 269, 235, 236, 237, 238, 241, 243, 245, 248 to Queens Hospital, 249/319 hybrid, 253/254 combined (x15), 257, 259, 260/460 combined, 262, 263 (Northern Line), 265 extended to Hammersmith via 72, 266, 270, 274, 276, 277, 280, 281, 282, 284, 285, 294, 295, 296 biurificated via KGH, 297, 300, 302, 308, 309, 316, 325, 328, 341, 343, 344, 345, 358, 364, 365, 366, 368, 376, 380, 381, 390, 391, 407, 410, 422, 423, 450, 466 extended into New Addington, 469, 472, 473, 474, 482, 490, A10, B16, C1, D3, D7, E1, E3, E7, E8, EL1/2, H9/10, H12, H18/H19, H25, K2, P4, U1, U4, W3, W7, W15, X26. The N9 would also run throughout the day, every 20 minutes. There are still holes with this proposed network, but this would make a good testbed. I've probably missed one or two important links though.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 2, 2016 22:29:50 GMT
Here's my 'back of a cigarette packet' take on what I would run on Christmas Day. This departs from the de facto Night Bus idea as I think the demand patterns would extend to certain day routes in areas with higher demand, and a big combination of day/night routes run in tandem is likely to be too confusing, though a few routes have been stapled together to enable travel into Central London for interchange purposes. Most routes would run on a half-hourly basis as a trial. I've concentrated on suburbs, routes linking into hospitals, and areas with lower than average christian/observant populations or less affluent areas where Christmas day travel for any general reason is more likely to be more appealing than booking a cab, plus routes serving hospitals. I'd go with 2 to CP via 432, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 to Shepherds Bush via Hammersmith, 12, 13 to North Finchley, 14/85 combined, 15/115 as one via Poplar High Street, 16 to Edgware via 32, 18 (x15 Baker Street to Wembley, then x30 onto Harrow Weald via rte 182), 19, 21/321 combined, 22, 23, 24, 25 to Romford via 86 (x15 to Ilford), 27, 28, 29/329 combined (x15 to Wood Green), 31, 33, 34, 35, 36/436 combined, 37/337 combined, 38 to Walthamstow via 48, 41, 43, 45, 47 extended via 208 south of Bellingham to Orpington, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53/453 combined, 55 to Loughton via the 20, 57, 58, 59 to Croydon via 250, 61, 63/363 combined, 64/264 combined, 65/71 combined, 68/168/468 combined and extended to Old Coulsdon via the 60, 69/97 combined, 70, 72, 73 to Northumberland Park via 476, 74/430 combined, 75, 79, 81, 83, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93 with hourly extensions to Epsom General, 94, 95, 96 Woolwich - Dartford, 98, 101, 102, 104, 105, 108, 109/159 combined, 111, 113, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 128, 133 to Tooting, 134, 136, 137/417 combined, 139, 140, 141, 142, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149 extended to Waltham Cross via 279, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 161, 164, 165, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176 to Thornton Heath via 197 and 198, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187/487 combined, 188, 192, 195, 196, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207 to Uxbridge (x15 to Hayes), 210, 212, 213, 214, 220, 221, 222, 224, 226, 229 to Bromley via 269, 235, 236, 237, 238, 241, 243, 245, 248 to Queens Hospital, 249/319 hybrid, 253/254 combined (x15), 257, 259, 260/460 combined, 262, 263 (Northern Line), 265 extended to Hammersmith via 72, 266, 270, 274, 276, 277, 280, 281, 282, 284, 285, 294, 295, 296 biurificated via KGH, 297, 300, 302, 308, 309, 316, 325, 328, 341, 343, 344, 345, 358, 364, 365, 366, 368, 376, 380, 381, 390, 391, 407, 410, 422, 423, 450, 466 extended into New Addington, 469, 472, 473, 474, 482, 490, A10, B16, C1, D3, D7, E1, E3, E7, E8, EL1/2, H9/10, H12, H18/H19, H25, K2, P4, U1, U4, W3, W7, W15, X26. The N9 would also run throughout the day, every 20 minutes. There are still holes with this proposed network, but this would make a good testbed. I've probably missed one or two important links though. Slightly surprised that's as comprehensive as it looks. Not gone through it in detail and I know it's just a "starter for 10" but here are a few remarks. 1. Surprised that you're only running the combined 149/279 half hourly throughout. I know you've got the 243 and 259 too but still quite surprised. 2. Can't see the point in running the 224 ! or the C1 to be honest. 3. Surprised you've left Garrett Lane to just the 270 but no 44 into Victoria. 4. Combining the 64 and 264 presumably loses the cross Croydon link to Croydon Hospital. Seems slightly odd. 5. Harrow looks rather well provided for with all the loop circles running. 6. Don't see the point of running the 55 on via the 20. Better to just do what the N55 does to Woodford Wells, gives more local coverage and serves Whipps Cross Hospital. 7. 176 looks tremendously long to me. 8. Perhaps run the U1 on to Heathrow over the U3 and not run the A10? 9. Surprised you haven't combined the 235 and 237. 10. Combine the 52 and 302?
|
|
|
Post by thesquirrels on Jan 2, 2016 23:52:31 GMT
Here's my 'back of a cigarette packet' take on what I would run on Christmas Day. This departs from the de facto Night Bus idea as I think the demand patterns would extend to certain day routes in areas with higher demand, and a big combination of day/night routes run in tandem is likely to be too confusing, though a few routes have been stapled together to enable travel into Central London for interchange purposes. Most routes would run on a half-hourly basis as a trial. I've concentrated on suburbs, routes linking into hospitals, and areas with lower than average christian/observant populations or less affluent areas where Christmas day travel for any general reason is more likely to be more appealing than booking a cab, plus routes serving hospitals. I'd go with 2 to CP via 432, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11 to Shepherds Bush via Hammersmith, 12, 13 to North Finchley, 14/85 combined, 15/115 as one via Poplar High Street, 16 to Edgware via 32, 18 (x15 Baker Street to Wembley, then x30 onto Harrow Weald via rte 182), 19, 21/321 combined, 22, 23, 24, 25 to Romford via 86 (x15 to Ilford), 27, 28, 29/329 combined (x15 to Wood Green), 31, 33, 34, 35, 36/436 combined, 37/337 combined, 38 to Walthamstow via 48, 41, 43, 45, 47 extended via 208 south of Bellingham to Orpington, 48, 49, 51, 52, 53/453 combined, 55 to Loughton via the 20, 57, 58, 59 to Croydon via 250, 61, 63/363 combined, 64/264 combined, 65/71 combined, 68/168/468 combined and extended to Old Coulsdon via the 60, 69/97 combined, 70, 72, 73 to Northumberland Park via 476, 74/430 combined, 75, 79, 81, 83, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93 with hourly extensions to Epsom General, 94, 95, 96 Woolwich - Dartford, 98, 101, 102, 104, 105, 108, 109/159 combined, 111, 113, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 128, 133 to Tooting, 134, 136, 137/417 combined, 139, 140, 141, 142, 144, 145, 147, 148, 149 extended to Waltham Cross via 279, 154, 155, 156, 157, 158, 161, 164, 165, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 176 to Thornton Heath via 197 and 198, 177, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 186, 187/487 combined, 188, 192, 195, 196, 202, 203, 204, 205, 207 to Uxbridge (x15 to Hayes), 210, 212, 213, 214, 220, 221, 222, 224, 226, 229 to Bromley via 269, 235, 236, 237, 238, 241, 243, 245, 248 to Queens Hospital, 249/319 hybrid, 253/254 combined (x15), 257, 259, 260/460 combined, 262, 263 (Northern Line), 265 extended to Hammersmith via 72, 266, 270, 274, 276, 277, 280, 281, 282, 284, 285, 294, 295, 296 biurificated via KGH, 297, 300, 302, 308, 309, 316, 325, 328, 341, 343, 344, 345, 358, 364, 365, 366, 368, 376, 380, 381, 390, 391, 407, 410, 422, 423, 450, 466 extended into New Addington, 469, 472, 473, 474, 482, 490, A10, B16, C1, D3, D7, E1, E3, E7, E8, EL1/2, H9/10, H12, H18/H19, H25, K2, P4, U1, U4, W3, W7, W15, X26. The N9 would also run throughout the day, every 20 minutes. There are still holes with this proposed network, but this would make a good testbed. I've probably missed one or two important links though. Slightly surprised that's as comprehensive as it looks. Not gone through it in detail and I know it's just a "starter for 10" but here are a few remarks. 1. Surprised that you're only running the combined 149/279 half hourly throughout. I know you've got the 243 and 259 too but still quite surprised. 2. Can't see the point in running the 224 ! or the C1 to be honest. 3. Surprised you've left Garrett Lane to just the 270 but no 44 into Victoria. 4. Combining the 64 and 264 presumably loses the cross Croydon link to Croydon Hospital. Seems slightly odd. 5. Harrow looks rather well provided for with all the loop circles running. 6. Don't see the point of running the 55 on via the 20. Better to just do what the N55 does to Woodford Wells, gives more local coverage and serves Whipps Cross Hospital. 7. 176 looks tremendously long to me. 8. Perhaps run the U1 on to Heathrow over the U3 and not run the A10? 9. Surprised you haven't combined the 235 and 237. 10. Combine the 52 and 302? 1. Granted, x30 might be pushing it on the northern freehold end, but I think anything more than x20 would be excessive. Ponders End through to Green Street also gets the 121 for links elsewhere so it isn't the last chopper out of Saigon. 2. I'm sure the local links to Central Middx Hospital and Wembley (or at least whatever retail facilities and Sikh/Hindu/Muslim religious observances are in place that day on Ealing Road) would be used on the 224. I think it could be surprisingly busy. I am less sure about the C1 myself to be honest. 3. I was wondering whether the 44 merited it, but I hadn't actually looked at a map when planning this all out. The 270 can go, the 44 comes in with an extension to Mitcham to compensate. 4. Fair point, these can run as separate routes. In fact, the 44 could conceivably take on the 264's role to Croydon (with a quick double run to St Georges), and the 64 can run standalone. Which does sound long but I think would cope with xmas day traffic levels. 5. This is a 'test' to see if the Harrow/Wealdstone/Kenton areas with a high non-Christian population would take up the usage provision. I agree it is generous, perhaps hourly each way round each loop would be sufficient. 6. I think this Christmas 55 needs to go 'somewhere' out that way to retain the link to town sans Central Line but it doesn't need to be Loughton. I forget that the N55 veers off down WCR and skirts Leytonstone so that link from points west would no doubt be well used too. 7. I've misfired a synapse here, my mental aim was to combine the 194 and 198 (not 197), so that can happen instead. I'd curtail the 176 to Penge, as the 75 and 157 between them would be more than enough heading towards Croydon. In two minds as to whether the 197 would be worth running standalone, but more likely not. 8. Yes, not much going on in Stockley Park on Christmas Day to merit an express link to it. Definitely need a Heathrow - Uxbridge link, your suggestion sounds like the best option. 9. Might need to send a tree pruner down to Sunbury Village in advance but, yes, this is a combination I overlooked. 10. Yes. Would add in the H37 at this point. Possibly one or two other local-ish routes in Hounslow too. Edit: also the 99 to put Erith on this map. I should actually look at a map and come back to this.
|
|