|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 1, 2019 15:47:00 GMT
I still think a solution would be to extend the 306 to Acton Town Hall to where the 427 used to stand before it was extended slightly to Acton High Street. Thay would give a DD option from Acton to Hammersmith.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 1, 2019 17:17:53 GMT
I still think a solution would be to extend the 306 to Acton Town Hall to where the 427 used to stand before it was extended slightly to Acton High Street. Thay would give a DD option from Acton to Hammersmith. Or better yet, extend it to the old 70 stand on Horn Lane in Acton allowing it to get as close to the shops as possible, plenty of space there as well.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 1, 2019 17:52:37 GMT
I would have left the 440 way it was between North Acton and Acton High Street via West Acton, had the 218 run via Horn Lane and Acton Mainline Station as a double decker route and had the 266 withdrawn between Acton Vale and Hammersmith. TfL have screwed up yet again.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 1, 2019 19:31:02 GMT
I would have left the 440 way it was between North Acton and Acton High Street via West Acton, had the 218 run via Horn Lane and Acton Mainline Station as a double decker route and had the 266 withdrawn between Acton Vale and Hammersmith. TfL have screwed up yet again. I agree that the 218 should have been sent up Horn Lane, I would have sent it all the way to Wembley. The tampering with the 440 is ridiculous, and the idea that the 440 changes link the Business Park with Crossrail is laughable when it would probably be faster to go to Ealing Broadway and get the District Line to Chiswick Park. I would send the 218 all the way up to Wembley, to ensure Hammersmith and Acton are linked to Wembley. There isn't a bus stand at Acton Mainline, although one could probably be created with buses turning around using the one way system, but then it stops tantalisingly short of the Central Line at North Acton.
|
|
|
Post by WSD3 on Nov 3, 2019 15:25:44 GMT
Will we see the rest of the changes of routes with regards to Crossrail in December. So far we now that routes 266/N266, 306, 391, 278, 218, 140,X140,N140 will all be seeing changes with in the next 2 months. what about the other routes such as: 104/304, 241, 300, 330, 428, 440, 474, B11 will there changes still be going ahead?
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Nov 3, 2019 16:50:00 GMT
Will we see the rest of the changes of routes with regards to Crossrail in December. So far we now that routes 266/N266, 306, 391, 278, 218, 140,X140,N140 will all be seeing changes with in the next 2 months. what about the other routes such as: 104/304, 241, 300, 330, 428, 440, 474, B11 will there changes still be going ahead? There is absolutely no sign of some sort of mega bus stand (IIRC for up to 7 buses?) at Custom House; was at Excel for an event last weekend and saw nothing done with the proposed land site. I think TfL are getting cold feet about the Custom House changes and are quickly trying to think of alternative plans. The main problems: -no stand at Custom House for the 241& 304, or a potential double run of the 300/473 -the 300 reroute will break lots of journeys between Barking Road and Tollgate Road -the 304 can run up to Prince Regent but defeats the whole purpose of its proposal if it doesn't link with Crossrail at Custom House -the 330/474 changes along Silvertown Way could see patronage fall along that corridor with the 330's proposed terminus -overbussing at night of the 474N and the N551 from Canning Town to Prince Regent. As a local, I genuinely see no easy fix to these solutions. All I know is the 304 would be a welcome addition to Lonsdale Avenue, which has cried out for an extra route along it for years now. Propping up the 104's frequency simply shifts the problem of onward travel to the Boleyn at Upton Park and at High Street South.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Nov 3, 2019 18:27:26 GMT
Now that the Elizabeth Line core won’t be open until 2021, does anyone else feel that it’s ridiculous that these changes are going ahead? I get the whole financial argument, but from a passenger perspective it feels like we are losing out. I think that once the delays were known about there should have been a pause on all these changes. Perhaps I’m being too simplistic in my thinking here.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 3, 2019 18:50:01 GMT
Now that the Elizabeth Line core won’t be open until 2021, does anyone else feel that it’s ridiculous that these changes are going ahead? I get the whole financial argument, but from a passenger perspective it feels like we are losing out. I think that once the delays were known about there should have been a pause on all these changes. Perhaps I’m being too simplistic in my thinking here. But they aren’t going ahead - they’ve all got a prospective date of December but it’s certainly far from guaranteed. The West London changes are going ahead as that part of the line is to operate from December.
|
|
|
Post by busman on Nov 3, 2019 19:12:39 GMT
Now that the Elizabeth Line core won’t be open until 2021, does anyone else feel that it’s ridiculous that these changes are going ahead? I get the whole financial argument, but from a passenger perspective it feels like we are losing out. I think that once the delays were known about there should have been a pause on all these changes. Perhaps I’m being too simplistic in my thinking here. But they aren’t going ahead - they’ve all got a prospective date of December but it’s certainly far from guaranteed. The West London changes are going ahead as that part of the line is to operate from December. My issue with the upcoming West London changes is that they are going ahead without the core section opening. What is the point? Passengers aren’t going to flock to Acton Mainline in great numbers to catch a train to Paddington simply because TfL run the service. The real shift in journeys will come when the core is opened. Of course, for TfL taking over the Paddington section is significant for revenue purposes. If I wear my cynical hat, it looks like some of these changes are going ahead so the mayor can make good on his promise about new services being created in the suburbs alongside buses being removed from zone 1. I hope I’m wrong, but I think the 266 related changes are going to be bad for passengers at the Hammersmith end. At least the proposed change to the 427 doesn’t appear to be happening in December.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2019 21:03:48 GMT
Will we see the rest of the changes of routes with regards to Crossrail in December. So far we now that routes 266/N266, 306, 391, 278, 218, 140,X140,N140 will all be seeing changes with in the next 2 months. what about the other routes such as: 104/304, 241, 300, 330, 428, 440, 474, B11 will there changes still be going ahead? There is absolutely no sign of some sort of mega bus stand (IIRC for up to 7 buses?) at Custom House; was at Excel for an event last weekend and saw nothing done with the proposed land site. I think TfL are getting cold feet about the Custom House changes and are quickly trying to think of alternative plans. The main problems: -no stand at Custom House for the 241& 304, or a potential double run of the 300/473 -the 300 reroute will break lots of journeys between Barking Road and Tollgate Road -the 304 can run up to Prince Regent but defeats the whole purpose of its proposal if it doesn't link with Crossrail at Custom House -the 330/474 changes along Silvertown Way could see patronage fall along that corridor with the 330's proposed terminus -overbussing at night of the 474N and the N551 from Canning Town to Prince Regent. As a local, I genuinely see no easy fix to these solutions. All I know is the 304 would be a welcome addition to Lonsdale Avenue, which has cried out for an extra route along it for years now. Propping up the 104's frequency simply shifts the problem of onward travel to the Boleyn at Upton Park and at High Street South. My favourite topic the east London changes! I didn't realise we were bus neighbours enviroPB
I don't think the stand will become available until the works are completely finished at Custom House. It was mentioned here there could be a possibility of a Abbey Wood - Canary Wharf service late next year so the space could be variable soon(Ish) for the 241 /304. I am not sure how much space is available at Prince Regent but could probably take one route so as you say perhaps they could introduce the 304 sooner rather than later.
I disagree about the 300 breaking links as passengers at Greengate can still use the 262 /473 along Prince Regent and any passengers travelling from Canning Town - Abbey Arms and onwards towards Beckton will still have the 300 but travelling in a different direction in Prince Regent and Via New Barn Street / Freemasons Road.
I agree about the N551 /474N and wonder what they could do about this? could always divert the N551 Via Freemasons Road and New Barn Street like it ran during the Crossrail works, I believe the service was popular when it ran this way.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 4, 2019 1:13:42 GMT
But they aren’t going ahead - they’ve all got a prospective date of December but it’s certainly far from guaranteed. The West London changes are going ahead as that part of the line is to operate from December. My issue with the upcoming West London changes is that they are going ahead without the core section opening. What is the point? Passengers aren’t going to flock to Acton Mainline in great numbers to catch a train to Paddington simply because TfL run the service. The real shift in journeys will come when the core is opened. Of course, for TfL taking over the Paddington section is significant for revenue purposes. If I wear my cynical hat, it looks like some of these changes are going ahead so the mayor can make good on his promise about new services being created in the suburbs alongside buses being removed from zone 1. I hope I’m wrong, but I think the 266 related changes are going to be bad for passengers at the Hammersmith end. At least the proposed change to the 427 doesn’t appear to be happening in December. Just to be clear, I wasn't saying they should happen, just merely pointing out why they are I agree with you in regards to the 266 though it's more to with the chosen proposal to replace that section of the 266 rather than the actual cutback of the 266.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Nov 4, 2019 13:16:33 GMT
@dannyb don't you think I'm more local to Barking when I make most observation posts from that area?! I don't want to clutter the west London thread with east London chatter but the round the corner links the 300 provides from Barking Road up to Prince Regent will be sorely lost. The 147 as an alternative on Prince Regent Lane isn't really good enough as the 147 terminates at Canning Town Station and doesn't serve the shops on Barking Road. The only change I'd advocate along Freemasons Road/New Barn Street would be the N551 as it was extremely popular when it ran down there for the Crossrail works.
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on Nov 6, 2019 13:35:44 GMT
Now that the Elizabeth Line core won’t be open until 2021, does anyone else feel that it’s ridiculous that these changes are going ahead? I get the whole financial argument, but from a passenger perspective it feels like we are losing out. I think that once the delays were known about there should have been a pause on all these changes. Perhaps I’m being too simplistic in my thinking here. But they aren’t going ahead - they’ve all got a prospective date of December but it’s certainly far from guaranteed. The West London changes are going ahead as that part of the line is to operate from December. Ah but they are going ahead, and a week before the line to Reading actually "opens" too!
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on Nov 6, 2019 13:52:08 GMT
But they aren’t going ahead - they’ve all got a prospective date of December but it’s certainly far from guaranteed. The West London changes are going ahead as that part of the line is to operate from December. My issue with the upcoming West London changes is that they are going ahead without the core section opening. What is the point? Passengers aren’t going to flock to Acton Mainline in great numbers to catch a train to Paddington simply because TfL run the service. The real shift in journeys will come when the core is opened. Of course, for TfL taking over the Paddington section is significant for revenue purposes. If I wear my cynical hat, it looks like some of these changes are going ahead so the mayor can make good on his promise about new services being created in the suburbs alongside buses being removed from zone 1. I hope I’m wrong, but I think the 266 related changes are going to be bad for passengers at the Hammersmith end. At least the proposed change to the 427 doesn’t appear to be happening in December. The best bit is that despite there being 4-5 new routes out of all this, the majority of the vehicles are being sourced from the cutbacks to other routes so there is a very marginal increase in PVR, if at all. The issue of where we have got to now is that the west London routes were awarded on short contracts, the 266 and 427. Ideally TfL would have wanted the contract end to tie in with the full Crossrail opening, which would have done if Crossrail opened on-time. Altering a route mid-contract is costly for TfL with compensatory payments, and could you feasibly get away with extending the 266 & 427 contracts by a further two years. This is a bit like the 25 change last year. Ideally you wouldn't make the route adjustments but the alternative [for TfL] is worse.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 6, 2019 15:14:32 GMT
Is the 224 being shortend to Alperton Sainsbury's going ahead in December of this year?
|
|