|
Post by ronnie on Jun 20, 2018 9:58:27 GMT
This will ensure I would have done 277 end to end - although not in the fashion I would have liked ... the 277+341 was a useful way of getting from IoD to the Tottenham Asda using hopper with 1 change. No longer though Tottenham Asda? In Bruce Grove? Change to a 149 or 243 in Dalston, no? Would involve more than 1 change ... I can get a bit lazy at times!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2018 10:19:43 GMT
I don't get this! It says on the link that the 277 runs from Highbury Corner to "Leamouth", when it runs to Crossharbour. Can anyone confirm whether the new N277 will run to Leamouth or Crossharbour please?
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jun 20, 2018 10:26:23 GMT
Leamouth is an error (that was the terminus until last year when the D3 replaced it). The terminus for the N277 will be Crossharbour.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 20, 2018 11:19:59 GMT
Could the 337 not merge with the H37 then. I guess thou the intense freq on the H37 would not be required and it would be more costly to run a 6 mins SD service then an 11-12 min DD service. That would be overkill - in all honesty, it's better how it is especially with the H37 being the main link between Hounslow & Richmond and merging them together could cause reliability issues from the Clapham end.
|
|
|
Post by theorangeone on Jun 27, 2018 15:18:19 GMT
Has there been any sign of the N277 timetable? (And the revised 277)
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 28, 2018 10:18:44 GMT
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Jun 28, 2018 10:38:39 GMT
Luckily it does look like the 48 isn’t going anywhere then a bit like the Oxford Street pedestrianisation
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Jun 28, 2018 10:40:25 GMT
My thoughts exactly, it does unsurprisingly though get very busy when the District line is suspended / engineering works seeing as it pretty much parallels it, hence why I made that point. And I absolutely get the point about a route not needing to be rammed full to warrant a DD, a perfect example is the 316 and 72, if DD’ed I wouldn’t say the vehicles would be packed full seeing as they only fill singles, but my god it needs the relief of DDs for them to function properly. But that’s why I make the point, as it’s been said that capacity shouldn’t be there *in case* something goes wrong, but I think the 337 is a case of just that, it’s the only time it sees any real demand imho. The 493 carries more per annum than the 337 and that’s the SD route!! I've used the 337 many times and it does get busy outside of the District Line not running - not super busy but enough to warrant double deckers. Extra capacity does not get introduced so it can be a back up to a railway line - the predecessor to the 337 was the 37 which was double deck and the 337 since introduction has always been double deck and the first number of years was when the 33 was also double deck. The 493 would probably be a double decker route but most likely, it has obstacles preventing that such as residents, a tight turn or an overhead restriction. I personally would have thought the 337 would be much more busy than it is, it’s a mega direct route running in a straight line for its entirety, and *normally* that’s a good recipe for a route being very very busy indeed. But alas not the case with this route. (Not like 109/149/25 levels anyway)
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jun 28, 2018 11:42:57 GMT
I've used the 337 many times and it does get busy outside of the District Line not running - not super busy but enough to warrant double deckers. Extra capacity does not get introduced so it can be a back up to a railway line - the predecessor to the 337 was the 37 which was double deck and the 337 since introduction has always been double deck and the first number of years was when the 33 was also double deck. The 493 would probably be a double decker route but most likely, it has obstacles preventing that such as residents, a tight turn or an overhead restriction. I personally would have thought the 337 would be much more busy than it is, it’s a mega direct route running in a straight line for its entirety, and *normally* that’s a good recipe for a route being very very busy indeed. But alas not the case with this route. (Not like 109/149/25 levels anyway) The 337 is paralleled by a frequent train service and also largely by the 33 and 37. From what I can remember it was busier when it was part of the old 37 route and went to Hounslow.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jun 28, 2018 11:56:30 GMT
Luckily it does look like the 48 isn’t going anywhere then a bit like the Oxford Street pedestrianisation I wouldn't take anything for granted about either subject, TfL kept the 13 but only by renumbering the 82.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 28, 2018 13:00:04 GMT
Luckily it does look like the 48 isn’t going anywhere then a bit like the Oxford Street pedestrianisation That lovely phrase "no immediate changes". Yep absolutely correct that TfL are not changing route 48 today. However tomorrow or the next day all bets are off ..... Hackney Council are completely deluded if they believe there will be no more cuts to services in Hackney. A blood bath is on its way simply by virute of the 7% mileage cut. Hackney has a lot of buses so it is absolutely inevitable that they will be affected by cuts and by a greater extent than other areas. Odd how they haven't screamed about frequency cuts to the 26, D6, 236, W15 or the 38 which have all happened in the last year or so.
|
|