|
Post by sid on Jul 19, 2019 5:41:59 GMT
Today on the 227 towards Crystal Palace, I saw a 227 going the opposite direction curtailed to Shortlands Station? Since when was that place a curtailment point because it was never under Stagecoach. GAL must have been agreed this with TFL or something but in my opinion it is quite pointless. The bus has the option of running light to Bromley or Beckenham, both which a 5 mins away. Ive never seen that before and I can't think where a bus could be turned round at Shortlands. Unless it was going to run empty to Bromley North turning left into London Road and right into Tweedy Road? It would only save a few minutes at the most though.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 22:08:51 GMT
I've asked before and nobody seems to have a definite answer, aren't these changes dependant on the Westfield development actually happening? Aren't they just a money saving scheme ... was not aware of any dependency on Westfield ... although that may have progressed with the Council taking control of the former Allders building after being compulsorily purchased and locking out all the traders. I might be wrong but I thought it was to minimise disruption during construction work if indeed it goes ahead? I heard about the compulsory purchase of the former Allders building but the whole thing is reportedly still under review.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 21:59:02 GMT
Looks like the results of these proposed changes will be published soon as the consultation has been removed, so expect the results to be published soon I've asked before and nobody seems to have a definite answer, aren't these changes dependant on the Westfield development actually happening?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 19:31:01 GMT
This is certainly a good idea, its just a shame when TfL are looking at enhancing connections to the hospital they don't look at inceasing the frequency on the 166 I think the 166 deserves a half hourly service to Epsom for other reasons as well as the hospital. It could be funded by reducing the over bussed 466.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 19:20:06 GMT
London is crying out for another mayor who values buses as a key form of transport for tackling congestion, and pollution. I would love to think the 53 would one day return to Oxford Circus, its not impossible this could happen one day but I certainly don't see it happening in the current climate I'm sorry, not to get political, but I don't think it's the mayor's fault for all these route cuts. TfL lost their grant that was provided to them by the Tory government. I genuinely don't think the mayor even has a say in which routes get cut/which don't. The mayor has only introduced the hopper fare, which TfL themselves have used to their advantage to make many cuts, in order to save money. I agree, whilst there is a lot of criticism of Mr Khan for other reasons many people seem quite happy with his fares freeze and hopper fare. With bus usage declining for a number of reasons cuts to services are inevitable.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 19:16:08 GMT
Personally, I doubt we’ll ever get another mayor that will prioritise buses so I can’t see the 53 going any further. Extending the 53 to Waterloo makes little difference to those who require St. Thomas’s Hospital as its still awkward from County Hall. If you extended it to Lambeth Palace where the 53 has stood in the past, you then make interchange with the hospital much more accessible. Makes me wish for the days of Ken Livingstone, he did well for the buses. Yes the 53 terminating at Lambeth Palace would be better for those requiring the hospital If Ken Livingstone was in office now I really don't think things would be much different. I don't see any point in the 53 going to Lambeth Palace, there is very little there and anybody wanting the stop outside the hospital can get the 453 instead. Realistically I think the 53 is more likely to be cut back to Elephant & Castle than returned to the West End.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 15:35:33 GMT
Possibly a tad too much information? Possibly.
I am just somewhat upset because I was avoiding drinking water to stay hydrated in this already humid weather in the morning, and then still need in use of toilet and then there is no toilet, and next toilet is 1.5 hours away and on my way back I was already dying for toilet again, so best decision I ever made. Thanks TFL for providing drivers with toilets...I am a dude ok, what if it's a woman driver? We're literally messing with our health...sure if I called controller he could have shipped me light to garage or whatever but in reality no driver will be desperate enough to make a call like that.
There should be toilets at one end of every route at least but some drivers do themselves and their colleagues no favours at all. We had a discussion on here a while back and somebody mentioned a newsagent at the Grovelands terminus of the R1 kindly allowing drivers to use the toilet and it was often left filthy and the offer was withdrawn. Then of course there was the money wasted on the turdis fiasco at the Biggin Hill terminus of the R2, yet there are far busier termini with no facilities.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 15:18:31 GMT
Yes obviously the flyover is eastbound only and it would seem unlikely that the 53 will ever return to the West End. The current set down point of Lower Marsh, one stop short of County Hall on the blind, is awful. Shame stand arrangements weren't rejigged better at Waterloo, for example the 341 could have remained on the County Hall stand, the 243 use the Old Vic stand and the 53 stand in the bus interchange. Have the 53 rerouted to Waterloo you mean? Sounds like a good idea, I’m optimistic, I think with the right mayor the 53 could be restored but to either Victoria (unlikely) or Aldwych via Waterloo. Just extend it beyond County Hall and along York Road.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 15:17:02 GMT
First time I ever peed in bottle in a bus...that's my rant of the day. Possibly a tad too much information?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 11:50:21 GMT
The 53 already omits the Bricklayers Arms but I can't see any other stops being removed. That’s only eastbound it skips the roundabout at Tower Bridge Road and Bricklayers Arms, westbound it’s all stops still. Do you think the 53 will ever return to the West End in some form or do you think more cuts and restructuring of the route will occur in the future? Yes obviously the flyover is eastbound only and it would seem unlikely that the 53 will ever return to the West End. The current set down point of Lower Marsh, one stop short of County Hall on the blind, is awful. Shame stand arrangements weren't rejigged better at Waterloo, for example the 341 could have remained on the County Hall stand, the 243 use the Old Vic stand and the 53 stand in the bus interchange.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 18, 2019 8:35:52 GMT
These new bus deliveries for Croydon must be the first buses in London to have the cameras instead of mirrors would I be correct in saying so Yes I believe so, this might well mean they'll be restricted to the 197 until all drivers at C are suitably trained in using this feature which will presumably become standard in due course?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 17, 2019 12:11:34 GMT
The Bakerloo extension will happen but in the mid 2030s, howeverit won’t go much further south east than Lewisham. I hope you’re right about the Bakerloo to Lewisham, but I have a feeling TfL will cite financial issues and shelve the whole project. It's been talked about since the 1970s at least so who knows? I think it should go to Hayes/Beckenham Junction thus freeing up capacity for enhancements on other routes between Lewisham and London Bridge. The only downside is that the Mid Kent Line would no longer be available as a diversionary route.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 17, 2019 12:03:42 GMT
Commercial Street is v busy at night but has no night service. Surely N242 should be diverted to cover ? I totally agree, I don't know why TfL didn't think of that when the 242 was rerouted.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 17, 2019 12:01:16 GMT
All his other quotes were reasonable, apart from that sentence which is the headline grabber. He needs a lesson in what not to say to the press. What's wrong with the headline sentence?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 17, 2019 11:59:17 GMT
All his other quotes were reasonable, apart from that sentence which is the headline grabber. He needs a lesson in what not to say to the press. Reminds me of Selwyn Gummer when Agriculure Minister forcing his daughter to eat a burger for the cameras during the Mad Cow Disease episode: typical of the man that he wouldn't risk it himself, of course! That clip is still regularly shown. seen on TV only a couple of weeks ago. news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/may/16/newsid_2913000/2913807.stmSeems he did risk it himself! I've no idea how this is relevant but seeing as you brought it up.
|
|