|
Post by riverside on Oct 6, 2015 12:18:20 GMT
Visiting the Scottish island of Islay recently, I was interested to see a notice posted inside the buses, advising passengers that photography was prohibited, and that anyone taking a photograph would be 'denied transport' and reported to the police. The photography ban is strange enough, especially as Islay is a tourist destination. But the police bit seems even stranger. I suppose that if for some reason a bus company wants to ban photography, then they have a right to do. But surely it isn't illegal, so what offence would the police be investigating? This seems very over the top. The only thing I can think of that would call for such a notice is the peculiarities of island life. Small islands by their nature are insular places. When arguments/feuds between locals break out they can fester and all sense of proportion goes out of the window. Maybe disaffected locals have been harassing one another. I can't believe anyone could object to a tourist taking photographs on a bus. I have not been to the Isle of Arran for 7 years, but certainly on my last visit Stagecoach did not have any such notices.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 6, 2015 11:07:50 GMT
Leave the 430 alone its by far the quickest way up town even with changing at South Kensington for people living off the Fulham Palace and Lillie Roads. The 74 is too slow and often gets stuck in traffic in Earls Court or in Cromwell roads. If you want an extra bus to Hammersmith along Fulham Palace road may I suggest diverting the 414 at Fulham High Street to Hammersmith The 430 appears to be an example of a route that has an uneven distribution of passengers. The main loadings are experienced on the Roehampton - Putney section with the Putney - South Kensington section relatively underused. This does not mean that on occasions the latter section does not have healthy loads but this will usually happen because there has been a gap on the 74. At a time when TfL are under financial pressure this does not seem to be the best use of resources. Two solutions spring to mind. To address the overprovision only alternate 430 journeys could be scheduled to cover the Putney - South Kensington section. TfL however appear averse to short workings. The second proposal could be if people from the Fulham Palace Road area want to access destinations past South Kensington then maybe the 430 needs to be extended to Hyde Park Corner or Green Park. The costs of such an extension would probably be prohibitive at this time of financial constraints. Years ago the 30 did provide the only service along Old Brompton Road. On its eastbound route it was taking people to where they wanted to go in central London. An extended 430 could once again provide this facility. Travel patterns change and certainly westbound the loadings on the C1 suggest that demand is more skewed towards Earls Court and Westfield nowadays. This does not mean that there is no demand for a Putney connection but it is probably not as strong as in former times, especially when you factor in the availability of the 74 as a partial alternative.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 6, 2015 9:29:00 GMT
There is a stand on the right side of Kew Green which I have never ever seen used by a bus and I have lived in Kew for 14 and a half years. What is it for? Could it be the 65 or the 391 or even maybe a short extension for the R68? Both this one and Norwood Green I have not seen used for a long time. The Sunday extension of route 7 used the Kew Green stand. I think there were scheduled 65's turning here in RM days. Odd really because if I was controller of the 65 I'd use this stand instead of Brentford County Court , avoids traffic over the Kew Bridge. Duties 1, 2 and 4 on the 27 from Stamford Brook Garage all used to be scheduled to Kew Green first thing in the morning well into the 1980s. The buses would leave V garage and head for Kew Green take a little stand time and then head for Archway. The journeys were designed to cater for people going to the old Brentford Market that was a West London equivalent of the old Covent Garden Market, however by the 1980s the market had long closed but the journeys on the 27 continued for many years.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 4, 2015 18:45:17 GMT
Just a few points.I don't think it necessary to extend the 22 from putney to mortlake as the 485 goes right into Barnes where you can connect with the 209 at Barnes pond,also I know in Barnes /Roehampton area there was a campaign to extend the 22 to Roehampton but again is it required cause the 85 430 link putney bridge and putney to Roehampton also via putney common the 265 goes to Roehampton then a couple of stops ahead at Barnes station the very frequent 72 then one stop further at Barnes common rosslyn park the 493.I still believe the 72 should b extended to asda,cause it seems strange it stopping short of the superstore. I think the 209 should b diverted to omit avondale Rd in mortlake and extend a couple of stops further down mortlake high street to sheen lane,bringing the service closer to east sheen could turn around and park outside the brewery-maybe a consideration once the brewery is redeveloped.I believe the latest target date to close hammersmith bridge for a year for strengthening is next spring.for those not aware it was tfl who requested the strengthening of the bridge to enable double deck buses to return to the bridge. If this does happen I guess the 33 72 609 and possibly 283 would convert to double deck buses. But I reckon the 209 419 485 have sufficient capacity to remain single Decker. There is a significant problem in extending the 72 to the Asda at Roehampton Vale. To get there, like the 265 the 72 would have to do a circuit of the Alton East estate, then go back to Roehampton Lane, turn left and return to the centre of Roehampton Village(where it would have been many minutes before), circle the monument in the middle of the road, then serve a stop for the second time before proceeding to Asda. The 265 shares a common route with the 72 from the middle of Barnes Common and provides more than enough capacity for potential shoppers. North of Barnes Common there are many routes to take shoppers to the retail outlets of Hammersmith. The 72 and 283 pass the large Tesco at Brook Green. The wealthy residents of Castelnau are probably going to take their car to shop and are more likely to shop at Waitrose or M and S Food than Asda. There does not appear to be any pent up demand to extend the 72. I am unaware of capacity issues on this section of the 265.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 2, 2015 15:34:30 GMT
I'm sure that I read somewhere that one garage never had RMs as by the time it's RTs were due to be scrapped DMSs & SMSs were arriving.Can't for the life of me remember which one it was. Edgware and Loughton garages also never received Routemasters. After the trolleybuses had been replaced in May 1962 Edgware and Harrow Weald were both scheduled to receive Routemasters. As Routemasters had capacity for 64 seated passengers and the RTs they were replacing seated 56, the proposed schedules contained a commensurate drop in vehicle allocation. The Unions objected and in the end London Transport decided to focus the introduction of Routemasters on Central London routes.LT quite rightly surmised that if they were going to have to do the replacement programme on a one for one basis then this might as well happen on the busiest routes. In the end Edgware never received RMs. It became the second all OPO garage(after Hornchurch) upon the conversion of the 292. Harrow Weald had to wait until 1978 when the 140 finally gained an RM allocation. Loughton's location meant that its allocation consisted of suburban routes that were never likely to be candidates for RMs at a time of increasing OPO. Its last trunk route had been the 38A but that was withdrawn in September 1968 when it was still RT operated.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Oct 1, 2015 9:29:50 GMT
An extension of the 22 to Mortlake would give more choice to residents of Barnes. If TfL would be less stringent about running all bus route journeys end to end costs would reduce. Every other 22 running to Mortlake and terminating by the side of the brewery should be sufficient. It would be good to reintroduce a Barnes - Kensington link but one problem would be the location of the bus stations at Hammersmith. All buses travelling back to Barnes/Mortlake would from Hammermith Road have to do a complete circuit of the Broadway gyratory system to serve the common bus stops in the Lower Bus Station. The amount of time lost when the Broadway clogs up would be unacceptable. Along Castelnau the route that does not seem to fully play its part is the 283. It often seems to have plenty of spare capacity. Maybe the planners need to see if this route could be used to help meet perceived needs in the area. The route could be extended via Church Road, Barnes High Street, The Terrace, White Hart Lane, Priests Bridge, Upper Richmond Road West, Priory Lane, Clarence Lane, Roehampton Lane to terminate at what used to be the old Earl Spencer stand. Useful new links would be created and it would provide more support for the 209. Drawbacks would be that I don't think you would need the whole service on the extension and as I said earlier TfL are loath to have short working buses. Another issue would be the Wetlands Centre. Would that be served as a bifurcation in both directions or could the 485 assume the responsibility for serving that attraction? It does not appear to generate anything like the number of passengers that justify the current frequency of the 283. Extending the 485 to Shepherds Bush via Blythe or Sinclair Roads should be considered. In the Minder TV programme Arthur Daley's car lot was situated on the corner of Augustine Road and Dewhurst Road where they meet Blythe Road. As far as I'm aware not everybody in the area bought one of his motors and so people round there still have public transport needs despite what the newer cash rich residents might think!
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 30, 2015 13:16:47 GMT
Many people have described the 11 as the most famous London bus route. It is a London sightseeing tour in its own right but at the same time serves the needs of Londoners going about their daily business. Why would you want to mess with its routing?
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 20, 2015 20:03:52 GMT
Like most people I can only base my opinions on what I see and as my observations of the 430 are only occasional they may be atypical. It seems to me that between Putney Bridge and South Kensington the 430 does not carry large loads and on this section a single decker could cope as long as there was not an extended gap on the 74.
I would consider withdrawing the 430 between Putney Bridge and South Kensington. When the Alton West Estate at Roehampton got its first bus service in the 85A it ran between Danebury Avenue and Putney Bridge, although via Putney Heath. I would definitely keep the 430 running along Dover House Road. This road is a long established bus route serving many residents who depend on the bus. Putney is the main destination for passengers so I do not think many would object to a truncated route.
I would support the suggestion of extending the 190 from West Brompton to South Kensington to compensate for the withdrawal of the 430 over this section. I would also support Vjaska's suggestion of diverting the 265 via Putney Bridge Road to Wandsworth. This would free up some stand space for the 430 at Putney Bridge Station and would also maintain a connection between the Putney Common area and Wandsworth which could be severed if the 485 does get diverted to Putney Heath via the current 424.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 20, 2015 19:22:04 GMT
Everyone I think you are missing the trick is for the 485, let me start with the 485 new route proposal. Wandsworth same route to Putney, over Putney Bridge, turn at Bus Station then follow the 424 route to Green Man, then 85 route to Asda, turn at Asda, 265 route to Roehampton Lane, left and then serve Clarence Lane Roehampton, where no bus serve, right into upper Richmond road, left Barnes station, left into mill hill road then same route to Hammersmith. This will give the route a lifeline to the elderly and will serve many useful links, any suggestions? Is this the actual proposal for the 485 or is this your own suggestion? I thought that we are still waiting to see what TfL actually want to do to the 424 and 485.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 20, 2015 19:17:06 GMT
This area has a good history of having toffs who own very large " Chelsea Cruisers" objecting to buses. The 272 routing between Acton Green and Acton Vale springs to mind with idiots laying in the road in front of buses. Didn't the 228 have issues as well amongst the higher classes of Ladbroke Grove ? I believe bus stops outside ones houses dents their rather large equities. Wasn't it Holland Park being used by the 228 that caused Sir Malcolm "I'm not really a crook because other MPs said so" Rifkind to get somewhat annoyed? It's the hypocrisy I can't stand. Posh people with loud gobs shout and moan because they can while people who aren't so well off and need to use buses to get around are deprived of decent services closer to their homes. That's what struck me forcibly about the C1 extension issue - whole estates of people having to traipse to the main road in order to get anywhere. I well remember the campaign got up along Emlyn Road to stop the introduction of the 272. Loads of houses had posters and stickers saying '272 No Thank You'. Despite their opposition the route was introduced and thrives. Similarly with the 228. Among the notables actively opposing the running of buses along the southern section of Ladbroke Grove was the author Sebastian Faulks. Such people might not want to use buses and that is their choice but what is totally unacceptable is them attempting to deny others legitimate convenient access to public transport. Hopefully TfL will revive plans for a bus route to serve the Blythe Road area at some time in the future. The C1 is well established along Holland Road now, so maybe one of Snoggle's suggested extensions could be explored. Over 40 years ago some local political activists did help to establish new bus links. The Edward Woods Estate has always been isolated by the West London Railway Line from the rest of the borough of Hammersmith and Fulham to which it belongs. In the early 1970s the local Young Liberals used to hire a coach on Saturday mornings to take residents of the estate to the shops in Shepherds Bush. As a result LT eventually diverted the 295 over new roads to Ladbroke Grove to give a regular service to the area. Ironically by doing this the 295 no longer went to East Acton. The route had only been introduced in June 1967 between Hammersmith and East Acton as a result of pressure from the local council and residents of Westway, when on the withdrawal of the 71 north of Brook Green and the subsequent diversion of the 72 via Du Cane Road, Westway lost its long established direct connection to Hammersmith. The residents of Royal Crescent have always been well heeled and have a long history of opposing buses that started in 1966 and continues to this day. In 1966 the full length of Holland Road was made one way. As a result of this buses on routes 49 and 207A heading towards Kensington were rerouted via Holland Park Avenue and Addison Road. However there was a banned right turn from Holland Park Avenue into Addison Road except in the evenings and all day Sunday, as a result of which the 49 and 207A had to use Royal Crescent for the bulk of the week. The 207A always went via Royal Crescent as it did not operate over this section in the evenings or at all on Sundays. Even in those days Royal Crescent residents had political clout because by 1970 Holland Road was returned to two way working except at its southern ending. This was some victory as unlike today when one way schemes are being scrapped, this was still a time where they were seen as the future of traffic management. Having got rid of the 49 and 207A you can imagine their annoyance at the appearance of the 295 especially as it would enable people from the Edward Woods council estate to travel on double deckers on THEIR road. As time has shown the 295 came to stay and in recent years has been joined by the 316. The battles of Royal Crescent have been an interesting sport to watch over the years and it looks like the buses have won!
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 8, 2015 15:47:50 GMT
We all know that often when the media report on bus related matters they often get a lot of the detail wrong. It was a surprise therefore to come across a novel that has all its London buses in the right places.
The book is called Black Day At The Bosphorus Cafe and is written by M.H.Bayliss. It is set in North London in the imaginary borough of 'Harringay and Tottenham', but the rest of its geography is based in reality. It starts with a dramatic death at Wood Green Shopping City, that is investigated by Rex Tracey, a local newspaper reporter. Many locations in the surrounding area are mentioned and Rex travels mainly by bus. The 123, 144 and W5 to name a few feature and all going to and from correct destinations.
The W5 is referred to as a 'hopper' rather than 'hoppa'. '............the little buses soared up and down the hills like some Hebridean community outreach service.'
If you think you would enjoy a murder mystery set against the background of North London and the many different communities that live there, with the added bonus of all the bus routes being authentic, then I recommend this book to forum members.
Apparently there are two earlier books in the series: The Tottenham Outrage and A Death At The Palace(Alexandra Palace). I look forward to reading these in the future and anticipate that within their pages all the buses will be just where they should be!
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Sept 1, 2015 16:03:05 GMT
Work has already started on phase 2 of Westfield. When I visited White City Bus Station last week the alighting stops were all inaccessible. Passengers could still board buses at White City, but incoming buses, although displaying White City seemed to be depositing passengers at Shepherds Bush. From what I could see there is no present provision to alight(or board in the case of route 228)at White City Bus Station. Well yes I saw the hoardings because I had to walk all the way from Shepherds Bush. Bits of the bus station were fenced off but I couldn't really see why an alighting point could be created even if it meant buses had to circulate round the bus station and use what would normally be a departure stand. Let's be honest the bus station at White City is not what you could term overworked or short of capacity. It is totally unacceptable for TfL to provide NO information on its website about this change and to run buses showing White City as a destination when you will not be transported there. I'm grateful for your insight but how on earth TfL has decided to inconvenience passengers and NOT tell them I fail to understand. This change may potentially last for many months while construction work takes place and if it does it MUST be properly advertised. I fully agree with your sentiments. Space could be easily secured within the present stands at White City to accommodate an alighting point. While the present situation persists buses should display Shepherds Bush rather than White City. Hopefully TfL will take some action to rectify the present situation.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Aug 31, 2015 17:15:23 GMT
97 123 Tube 36 - surprised at how relatively lightly loaded buses on the Carnival routes were. I know Sunday isn't the main day but buses were going slowly and trying to lose time because they were early. Loads of empty NB4Ls heading south to take up duties on the 148. 52 49 - as we don't have many E40 hybrids in NE London I am always shocked by the rocket like noises and surges you get on these buses. Thrown off at Shepherds Bush as TfL had decreed no one was allowed to travel from S Bush Bus Stn to White City bus station for some insane reason. You could travel in the opposite direction but I was left to walk to White City as was everyone else. Pretty appalling and ridiculous if you ask me given there was no advance notice, no web information about this and all buses were blinded for White City. Overground 123 Work has already started on phase 2 of Westfield. When I visited White City Bus Station last week the alighting stops were all inaccessible. Passengers could still board buses at White City, but incoming buses, although displaying White City seemed to be depositing passengers at Shepherds Bush. From what I could see there is no present provision to alight(or board in the case of route 228)at White City Bus Station.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Aug 2, 2015 9:11:11 GMT
The politicians in Hammersmith and Fulham do not appear to take a principled stand with regard to public transport. The completely opposite reactions to the 424 and C1 proposals do not show them in a good light and indeed help to breed cynicism towards local/national representatives.
There is still a need for a service along Blythe Road. There is nothing in the configuration of the roads that would present problems to Enviro 200s. A particular hotbed of opposition to the C1 proposals came from the residents of Dewhurst Road. This is a one way street that the C1 would have had to use to access Shepherds Bush Road on the way to White City.
The really annoying thing about the wholesale cancellation of the proposals was that there existed an alternative that would have given residents in the Addison Ward area a much improved access to the bus system. If the residents of Blythe Road could not be convinced that the passing of buses on the C1 was not really the end of the world, then instead the C1 could have been routed via Sinclair Road, Sinclair Gardens, Richmond Way, Charecroft Way and Rockley Road to reach Shepherds Bush Green.
It is going to be interesting to watch the reactions by local politicians to the 424/485 proposals over the coming months.
|
|
|
Post by riverside on Aug 1, 2015 18:28:00 GMT
The leaks about the proposals for the 424/485 do not initially appear to provide any benefits compared to the existing route patterns. We will have to wait for the formal proposals to see whether this is the case or not. What is of interest is the stance of the politicians. As the threatened section of the 424 along residential streets is obviously already in existence then local representatives demand the routing is retained so that all sections of society can access public transport. It is not so far back in time that TfL proposed to divert the C1 at the Commonwealth Institute so that it could be extended to White City via the unserved Blythe Road. The new roads it would have served are similar to those traversed by the 424, but on this occasion local political representatives of all persuasions were up in arms. The C1 was eventually extended via Holland Road, a routing that it retains to this day, whilst the elderly, disabled, vulnerable, young and those without public transport in the Blythe Road area have to this day remained isolated from the London bus network. Whatever the weather they still face a long walk to and from bus stops.. Obviously in the case of the C1 the politicians calculated that the opponents of the scheme were more likely to vote than the residents who would have used the new bus service. Hopefully one day in the future Blythe Road will gain a bus service.
|
|