|
Post by vjaska on Jul 14, 2019 12:28:45 GMT
Travelled on a 301 from Bexleyheath to Plumstead Station yesterday morning. It was lightly used and passengers waiting at stops did not know where it was going so the driver had to explain each time. Double deckers going down New Road was a bit strange and is a tight fit when two meet and parked cars at the junction of New Road and Woolwich Road. The only notices seen were on the shelter at Bexleyheath Market Place which was a line diagram with the main places indicated. It did not show which roads it took between the places. Why does it go via Nathan Way? The 472 can cope with the industrial estate traffic.
It goes via the routing that was laid out in the consultation which involved the 472 no longer serving Nathan Way and running direct to Thamesmead using Central Way instead. The Knee Hill section is the only section from the consultation that won't be served with buses running via New Road instead. The notice at Bexleyheath was created by an enthusiast and for someone doing one without any help, it's a good effort personally.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 14, 2019 12:36:56 GMT
Good to know. Expected the 99 to be the slowest similar to the 469 it replaced.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jul 14, 2019 13:18:22 GMT
Travelled on a 301 from Bexleyheath to Plumstead Station yesterday morning. It was lightly used and passengers waiting at stops did not know where it was going so the driver had to explain each time. Double deckers going down New Road was a bit strange and is a tight fit when two meet and parked cars at the junction of New Road and Woolwich Road. The only notices seen were on the shelter at Bexleyheath Market Place which was a line diagram with the main places indicated. It did not show which roads it took between the places. Why does it go via Nathan Way? The 472 can cope with the industrial estate traffic.
The notice at Bexleyheath was created by an enthusiast and for someone doing one without any help, it's a good effort personally. Bravo to the enthusiast and loud booing for TfL, which will fall on deaf ears. What possible excuse does that organisation have for not producing basic information on bus stops at least for this new route? It's not so long ago they were able to leaflet whole areas regarding cosmetic route-branding. Where's that extra 40% income from bus fares going to come from? Answers on a postcard to Sadiq Khan, though I wouldn't waste a stamp on it.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 14, 2019 13:59:57 GMT
Are all tiles/maps/stops/timetables along the 301 up to date?
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 14, 2019 14:04:40 GMT
I presume the notice at Bexleyheath has been put up by an enthusiast? It was pretty dead between Woolwich and Thamesmead when I used it yesterday but got a bit busier towards Bexleyheath picking up passengers who were probably waiting for a 401 or B11. It does seem a bit wasteful having two routes along Nathan Way, I think the 301 only needs to run between Bexleyheath and Thamesmead until the 472 is altered? In the long term maybe it should be extended to North Greenwich in place of the 161 enabling it to serve Woolwich town centre properly and avoid the awkward routing that the 161 has to take? Just to show that one journey proves nothing, it was pretty dead between Bexleyheath and Abbey Wood when I used it yesterday but got a bit busier towards Plumstead picking up passengers who were probably waiting for a 472. I think it's significant that you and sid appeared to be travelling in opposite directions. The 301, especially with minimal publicity, is likely to take time to build up leaving Woolwich because it doesn't serve the key stops in the town centre near the shops. If it picked up in Thomas Street or at Woolwich Arsenal Station, where most people board, then more 244/472 users might have been picked up. Coming into Woolwich, that's not an issue.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jul 14, 2019 15:05:40 GMT
Just to show that one journey proves nothing, it was pretty dead between Bexleyheath and Abbey Wood when I used it yesterday but got a bit busier towards Plumstead picking up passengers who were probably waiting for a 472. I think it's significant that you and sid appeared to be travelling in opposite directions. The 301, especially with minimal publicity, is likely to take time to build up leaving Woolwich because it doesn't serve the key stops in the town centre near the shops. If it picked up in Thomas Street or at Woolwich Arsenal Station, where most people board, then more 244/472 users might have been picked up. Coming into Woolwich, that's not an issue. Do we know why it doesn't serve Woolwich Arsenal? Would it add another bus to the PVR? Is it just a temporary arrangement? It's missing an awful lot of potential users at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 14, 2019 16:01:12 GMT
I think it's significant that you and sid appeared to be travelling in opposite directions. The 301, especially with minimal publicity, is likely to take time to build up leaving Woolwich because it doesn't serve the key stops in the town centre near the shops. If it picked up in Thomas Street or at Woolwich Arsenal Station, where most people board, then more 244/472 users might have been picked up. Coming into Woolwich, that's not an issue. Do we know why it doesn't serve Woolwich Arsenal? Would it add another bus to the PVR? Is it just a temporary arrangement? It's missing an awful lot of potential users at the moment. When I mentioned this before someone said it's because its purpose is to serve the Crossrail station - this ensures the bus will have space when it arrives there. Had I noticed this at consultation stage, I would have challenged the routeing in Woolwich. I think there's a general effort to get buses out of the town centre. There was a consultation by Greenwich Council recently that seemed to propose more consistent and direct routeings around Woolwich.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Jul 14, 2019 16:15:35 GMT
Do we know why it doesn't serve Woolwich Arsenal? Would it add another bus to the PVR? Is it just a temporary arrangement? It's missing an awful lot of potential users at the moment. When I mentioned this before someone said it's because its purpose is to serve the Crossrail station - this ensures the bus will have space when it arrives there. Had I noticed this at consultation stage, I would have challenged the routeing in Woolwich. I think there's a general effort to get buses out of the town centre. There was a consultation by Greenwich Council recently that seemed to propose more consistent and direct routeings around Woolwich. The 301 not serving General Gordon Square is complete nonesense. How is patronage supposed to pick up if the route doesn't even serve the msot popular part of the town centre in Woolwich. This idea that the route picks up at the market for the Crossrail passengers sends off the wrong message for me. It makes it seem as if the route exists for Crossrail passengers exclusively. I don't see what's wrong with the 301 picking up at Woolwich Arsenal, if the route is going to be full by the time it reaches the market then first of all that's good to see how popular the rotute has become, and secondly then that calls for a frequency increase. What a cynical move from TfL, and something which wasn't mentioned in the consultation
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jul 14, 2019 19:51:01 GMT
Just to show that one journey proves nothing, it was pretty dead between Bexleyheath and Abbey Wood when I used it yesterday but got a bit busier towards Plumstead picking up passengers who were probably waiting for a 472. I think it's significant that you and sid appeared to be travelling in opposite directions. The 301, especially with minimal publicity, is likely to take time to build up leaving Woolwich because it doesn't serve the key stops in the town centre near the shops. If it picked up in Thomas Street or at Woolwich Arsenal Station, where most people board, then more 244/472 users might have been picked up. Coming into Woolwich, that's not an issue. Having a look back at the original consultation, the map literally seems to suggest that the 301 runs to the Woolwich Ferry roundabout as the key on the map says proposed start/end of route so anyone would be rightly justified to argue that technically this isn't the case outside of running light. consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/83558683/user_uploads/301-map.pdf
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Jul 14, 2019 20:04:01 GMT
I think it's significant that you and sid appeared to be travelling in opposite directions. The 301, especially with minimal publicity, is likely to take time to build up leaving Woolwich because it doesn't serve the key stops in the town centre near the shops. If it picked up in Thomas Street or at Woolwich Arsenal Station, where most people board, then more 244/472 users might have been picked up. Coming into Woolwich, that's not an issue. Having a look back at the original consultation, the map literally seems to suggest that the 301 runs to the Woolwich Ferry roundabout as the key on the map says proposed start/end of route so anyone would be rightly justified to argue that technically this isn't the case outside of running light. consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/83558683/user_uploads/301-map.pdfI think the original service spec said it would pick up on the stand, which was initially planned to be right outside the Waterfront Leisure Centre. Even so, this is not particularly useful. I'll have a wander around tomorrow to see what's what - in the meantime I'm sure DT11 will put us straight!
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jul 15, 2019 5:58:08 GMT
The 301 the first stop in Woolwich is “Plumstead Road / Woolwich Public Market” the last stop is “Bereford Square / Woolwich Arsenal Station” a common alighting point with the 99. It shares the stand with the 99.
It doesn’t need to serve Woolwich Aresenal plenty of buses already doing that and leaving Woolwich Full Up. The point of it starting outside the Covered Market for the Crossrail Station Entrance.
When people realise an empty bus pulling up there Passenger Numbers will rise fast as people will wait at that stop for the 301 because they know its the first stop.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jul 16, 2019 6:52:24 GMT
The 301 the first stop in Woolwich is “Plumstead Road / Woolwich Public Market” the last stop is “Bereford Square / Woolwich Arsenal Station” a common alighting point with the 99. It shares the stand with the 99. It doesn’t need to serve Woolwich Aresenal plenty of buses already doing that and leaving Woolwich Full Up. The point of it starting outside the Covered Market for the Crossrail Station Entrance. When people realise an empty bus pulling up there Passenger Numbers will rise fast as people will wait at that stop for the 301 because they know its the first stop. I would, until the advent of the 301, never use the Covered Market bus stop in the evening peak - buses usually full and standing by that point - having one route arrive at that stop empty, and with Thamesmead, Abbey Wood and Bexleyheath as destinations, is undoubtedly useful, and even more so once Crossrail finally gets going.
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Sept 5, 2019 20:00:30 GMT
Strange that the 178 and 291 got double deckers and have a lot of empty seats whilst the 244 didn't and is very well loaded at peak times.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 5, 2019 21:30:06 GMT
Strange that the 178 and 291 got double deckers and have a lot of empty seats whilst the 244 didn't and is very well loaded at peak times. The 178's decker conversion is in part future proofing for growth with all the housing developments in Woolwich and Kidbrooke
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 5, 2019 22:32:48 GMT
Strange that the 178 and 291 got double deckers and have a lot of empty seats whilst the 244 didn't and is very well loaded at peak times. Not from local reports I’ve heard.
|
|