|
Post by busman on Jan 31, 2024 20:49:48 GMT
Don’t like it one bit, for the reasons everyone else has stated. Given that this change is linked to the Silvertown tunnel opening, why not have one of the new Silvertown routes serve Tunnel Avenue in both directions?
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 22, 2024 14:46:44 GMT
Smart proposal in terms of how the N18 and N518 timetables will be coordinated over the common section. I’m not sure about the routing to Ruislip though. What TfL seem to be saying is that the 487/398 corridor has strong enough night bus demand for such a service. It’s been decades since I lived in that neck of the woods. Perhaps someone local like COBO can comment on 487 and 398 loadings in the very late evenings. I would have thought something mirroring a night tube routing to Ruislip would be better used: from Sudbury Town route 92 to Whitton Avenue, right turn into Whitton Avenue West, 487 LOR to South Harrow, 398 LOR to Ruislip. A slight tweak to the proposed LOR, but overall this helps to fill a huge gap in the night bus and tube network.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 20, 2024 19:11:51 GMT
A very defeatist attitude. I don't doubt it would be very disruptive but at the end of it would come the potential for a vastly improved town centre with not just better transport links but also more homes and a better retail offer. In fact it isn't just potential, it would be a nesscity to make the project something resembling economically viable, using the profits from commercial development on air rights. I think you only have to look at how disruptive Thameslink & the Elizabeth Line were to places like Tottenham Court Road or London Bridge with many retail outlets and such having to close but the end result being vastly improved destinations. 'tis true, just wish we got something better at TCR than 'Outernet'. I might be in the minority, but I’ve grown to love Outernet. It’s a great *free of charge* chill out space where you can rest, chat and eat. The massive visual shows keep the little ones entertained and there always seems to be free cultural events often with snacks and drinks. In the pouring rain it really comes into its own! Spaces like this can help Oxford street compete with the likes of Westfield. And whilst my raving days are long, long behind me, I also noticed that it hosts one or two night club rooms which is presumably beneficial for the night economy.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 20, 2024 11:13:52 GMT
Which bright sparks thought it would be fine to close the Abbey Wood branch of the Lizzie Line and the Woolwich branch of the DLR on the same weekend? Seriously, some joined up thinking would be nice for a change.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 20, 2024 9:45:01 GMT
Given that the Jubilee line goes from North Greenwich to Canary Wharf, I don’t see a case for having the SL4 stop at both North Greenwich and Canary Wharf. If it stops at North Greenwich, it may as well terminate there. It looks like TfL has seen demand for Blackheath and beyond to Canary Wharf and is catering for that. The SL4 idea was conceived before SuperLoop (x239!), so I wouldn’t be surprised to see a modification to make it limited stop throughout ahead of launch. Making the SL4 limited stop throughout may provide enough time to add an extra stop at North Greenwich and/or an extension at the southern end to connect with the SL3/5. The Silvertown tunnel looks like it’s progressing very well. Crazy to think it will be open next year, the time has flown by. I agree it seems pointless, for another reason too. Route 129 will also be extended from North Greenwich through Silverlink Tunnel. The 129 and SL4 will go in different directions north of the river: haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/19786/widgets/56145/documents/33785I would like to see the SL4 become limited stop throughout, skip North Greenwich and get extended south to Bromley if space can be created (can another route be squeezed in at Bromley North?). All stops services between North Greenwich and Lee are catered for via interchange with the 108 and 202. Canary Wharf is also a major destination in its own right for employment, leisure and interchange with the Lizzie line. At X239 frequencies, the SL4 will run every 8 minutes. That indicates heavy demand. TfL will have data from passengers travelling from the Grove Park and Lee area into Canary Wharf via rail into London Bridge then Jubilee Line. There will be data on journeys from that area using the 108 and Jubilee Line too. It will be interesting to see if the SL4 retains an 8 minute frequency. I think of it as a similar scenario with the old London Bridge bound 507 skipping Aldwych via the Kingsway underpass. Skipping that section saved 3-5 minutes on the journey time to Holborn. I reckon chopping out North Greenwich saves between 5-20 minutes of SL4 journey time depending on the time of day and the route taken in and out of North Greenwich Station.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 19, 2024 15:28:32 GMT
They could look at extending an existing route from North Greenwich through the tunnel and just run a regular all stop routes from say Kidbrooke to Canary Whalf. I'm not sure there is going to be huge bus demand from South london across to CW and neither do I really think the extra capacity between Grove Park and Blackheath is needed over the 202/261. I haven't heard anything that either route is particularly struggling. I think there has been a calling for a direct bus from Grove Park/Bromley to North Greenwich for some time. Most frustrating thing about the SL4 is that it won't call at North Greenwich, one thinks the business case for Canary Wharf will be weakened if there is interchange to the Jubilee line from there. Another member has quoted Leon Daniels saying he sees some of the Superloop routes being downgraded to regular routes over time. This is my wish for the SL4; it's basically a normal route with just a non-stop tunnel section pretty much. Given that the Jubilee line goes from North Greenwich to Canary Wharf, I don’t see a case for having the SL4 stop at both North Greenwich and Canary Wharf. If it stops at North Greenwich, it may as well terminate there. It looks like TfL has seen demand for Blackheath and beyond to Canary Wharf and is catering for that. The SL4 idea was conceived before SuperLoop (x239!), so I wouldn’t be surprised to see a modification to make it limited stop throughout ahead of launch. Making the SL4 limited stop throughout may provide enough time to add an extra stop at North Greenwich and/or an extension at the southern end to connect with the SL3/5. The Silvertown tunnel looks like it’s progressing very well. Crazy to think it will be open next year, the time has flown by.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 17, 2024 11:47:12 GMT
The 301 was devised to be a fast link from Bexleyheath to Thamesmead via the Elizabeth Line, that was the reason the route was created. But now a faster link is necessary the SL3 which is super express. Can I see why people would want a pacific fast link from Sidcup, then non stop to Bexleyheath orfrom Bexleyheath to Abbey Wood only stopping at the station, no bus stop is common with the 301. I too can see more bus stops being added. There is a common stop on the SL3 with the B11 and 301 at Abbey Wood station. Also there are additional common stops with the B11 in Bexleyheath. If I’m travelling from Abbey Wood to Sidcup and beyond, I don’t want the bus stopping every other stop. It defeats the purpose. The 301 is already very fast and direct. It is also very reliable - DT are to be applauded, they’ve done a solid job on the 301. My main concern about the SL3 and SL5 is that they will be over-bussed in the evenings. I’m surprised to see late evening services on some of these SuperLoop routes. It made sense in West London where demand had been built up by the 607 and the 140 was being chopped in two. Even the 607 for many years had limited operating times after it was first introduced. On the SL3 corridor, evening loadings on the 229 and 269 aren’t exactly bursting at the seams. I would have thought a more sensible approach would have been to run services until around 8pm each evening and review a later evening service based on acquired demand. I think there will be a lot of SL3 and SL5 buses running around at night carrying fresh air. Still, don’t want to seem like a negative Nelly, the SL3 will be a fantastic addition for my area. I was in central London earlier this week hopping about on New Routemasters and I’m excited at the prospect of seeing them in my area for the first time in regular service. I completely agree with the sentiments around the “X” prefix being more appropriate vs the non-intuitive “SL”. In saying that, the best thing that can be done to make these routes a success is to get rid of 20mph speed limits on large open roads and to improve bus prioritisation measures.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 16, 2024 22:30:16 GMT
Update 16 January 2024 Today we have published the results of this consultation. We received 863 responses to the consultation and would like to thank everyone that took part. Following careful consideration of the feedback we received from members of the public and other stakeholders, we have decided to implement the original proposals as follows: Route W12 – will be restructured to operate between Coppermill Lane and Woodford Bridge via Church Hill Road as proposed Route W13 – will be extended to Leyton, Asda as proposed Route W14 – will be restructured to operate between Loughton Station and Whipps Cross Interchange as proposed Route 549 – will be withdrawn and replaced with the extended route W14 as proposed It is expected that the restructuring of routes W12, W13 and W14 and withdrawal of route 549 will take place in September 2024. Details of the feedback we received, our response to the issues raised, and more information about next steps can be found in the consultation report. haveyoursay.tfl.gov.uk/25100/widgets/70986/documents/53532Well what do you know, bus services reduced in parts of outer London and in contrast to the improvements in Superloop and 346/347 consultation, these changes are not due to happen until after the mayoral election. Very cynical.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 12, 2024 13:30:21 GMT
The Daily Fail is an absolute joke: “The exact model of the bus involved in today's fire is not yet known - but MailOnline understands it was a hybrid. Hybrid buses, which run on diesel and electricity, are said to produce 40 per cent less carbon dioxide emissions than regular buses. The first one in London was introduced in 2007 on the 141 route between Palmers Green and London Bridge when Ken Livingstone was Mayor.” By inference, let’s pin this one on a Labour mayor shall we? 🤣🤣🤣 Correct me if I’m wrong, but it seems the two buses are not of the same model or batch. I’m not sure which is more worrying. A specific type of bus spontaneously catching fire (solved by rectifying the defect across the fleet or withdrawal of type) or different types of bus catching fire? What is the likelihood of this happening twice in such a short space of time across unrelated vehicles? Just glad no-one was hurt in either incident. It’s just occurred to me that rear fire exits don’t exist on buses anymore…or at least they are not as prominent as they used to be - I grew up in MCW Metrobus land. I guess with the engine at the rear, everyone will be running towards the front of the bus anyway.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 12, 2024 11:35:08 GMT
View Attachmentlook what the cat dragged in....a Volvo/MCV BZL for Go-Ahead London, fleet number seems to be MVB1. Either this is a demo bus or this is the "unannounced" order for the 262, 321, 333 etc If an Enviro MMC and a Gemini Eclipse had a baby it would look like this. That’s a really good looking bus…the black around the destination display and rear looks great. *Edit - looking again this looks like the child of an Enviro 400 MMC and a Scania OmniCity. The grandparents were Gemini Eclipses and an original Enviro 400. This is the nicest looking bus I‘ve seen in a long while.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 11, 2024 15:17:38 GMT
One of Susan Hall‘s policies is to get rid of 20mph speed limits on red routes and other major roads. Will be interesting to read her manifesto when it comes out. Khan and Hall are both awful, but I might just have to hold my nose and vote to reverse some of the stupidity that Khan has imposed on us. I don't think she will do it - don't get me wrong I absolutely detest her yet agree with removing 20mph limits from major roads, but she is likely all talk just like her promise to scrap the ULEZ extension but yet is ok with ULEZ covering Inner London. She is another politcian who wants pit people against people - in this case Inner vs Outer just like the government pits north vs south ULEZ for inner London was always on the agenda for Khan (and his predecessor I think) and he had a mandate to implement it up to the North Circular boundary. The bit that Khan did not have a mandate for was extension beyond the North Circular - which is the bit that Hall is planning to reverse and the one that hits Londoners and our neighbours the worst. I don’t think the proposal to get rid of ULEZ beyond the NCR is fanciful. It’s very feasible if she gets into City Hall.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 11, 2024 12:52:25 GMT
One of Susan Hall‘s policies is to get rid of 20mph speed limits on red routes and other major roads. Will be interesting to read her manifesto when it comes out. Khan and Hall are both awful, but I might just have to hold my nose and vote to reverse some of the stupidity that Khan has imposed on us.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 10, 2024 12:00:15 GMT
Update 10 January 2024 Today we have published the results of this consultation. We received 869 responses to the consultation and would like to thank everyone that took part. Following careful consideration of the consultation responses and a further review of what was proposed, we have decided to modify the original proposals and to proceed with a revised scheme as follows: Route 346 – will be restructured to operate between Upminster Park Estate, Waycross Road, and Dagnam Park Square via Upminster and Harold Hill. We will not now install bus driver facilities at Waycross Road. In response to feedback, the restructured route will operate at a higher frequency than that consulted upon and a new Sunday service will be introduced. The route will therefore operate every 20 minutes Monday-Sunday daytimes and evenings Route 347 – will continue to operate Route 497 – will be replaced in its entirety by the extended route 346, as described above Details of the feedback we received, our response to the issues raised, and more information about next steps can be found in the consultation report. Politically unviable right now to cut bus services in outer London boroughs whilst simultaneously imposing ULEZ. In the initial consultation, TfL suggested data did not support the existing frequency of the 346, but they are now retaining it. Now Khan can say that he has improved bus services in the area due to the frequency upgrade on the 497 section. It’s a great outcome for the local passengers.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 10, 2024 8:25:38 GMT
The explosion is a worrying development but not actually surprising. In general, depressingly ,there are people now allowing themselves to get so angry about policies and people in power that they are becoming extremists. Edit - i say allowing themselves , but it’s not helped by some politicians talking abhorrent nonsense about other human beings. Appealing to deep held views amongst some around ethnicity. There is a cross over between those who despise Sadiq Khan for example and EDL types. You can oppose Khan without being racist or becoming an extremist happy to blow up street furniture risking passers by A lot of this kind of thing is fuelled by the media, the stories and constant coverage they give them as it generates hits for them. Just look how organisations such as Just Stop Oil have thrived out of the media in the past few years. If none of their stories were published or given front page news they would have given up. To a certain extent, but with the rise of social media the power of mainstream media to control the narrative is not as absolute as it once was. Movements spread en masse through publicly generated digital content. The media has no choice but to report on these events, otherwise the public being affected would start to question why the issue was being overlooked and our free open press would be accused of not doing their job. Ultimately this whole episode shows a weakness in our democracy. We get to vote every 5 years and hand carte blanche power to our politicians even when the landscape has changed. Also this system gives political leaders room to pivot even against significant public opposition- which is likely to lead to social unrest if people feel there is no other way. Like it or not, the ULEZ expansion to all of London was not part of Khan’s 2021 manifesto. By not putting the expansion to a vote (either referendum or saving it for the 2024 election) the mayor has incurred the wrath of the public who see a mayor implementing a policy with absolutely zero mandate that increases costs of living and doing business at a time when many people are struggling financially. I don’t think we should put up and shut up when any politician abuses their power or authority. The sad thing about the future, is that the Conservatives have once again served up a really poor candidate. I can’t bring myself to vote for Sue Hall. Like the previous mayoral election, I will probably sit this one out unless another viable option becomes available.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Jan 9, 2024 21:50:24 GMT
PVR reduction to boot (obviously) Can’t see this route surviving to be honest. Not much of a loss though tbh, it’s a bloody awful route 😂 definitely one of two or three contenders for my least favourite London bus route Agree, never been a fan of the 228 since it was introduced. It’s a meandering mess that can be replaced by other existing connections. For a single decker in zone 1 to only run every 30 minutes indicates a failure in demand.
|
|