|
|
Post by sid on May 19, 2018 13:30:35 GMT
Ironically yes, the other two go under the low bridge at Shortlands. The 194 was single decker for years, Leyland National, and it's only really the Croydon end that is busy. What made them double deck it then? I’ve never seen it busy, and I was the only person on the upper deck the whole journey I was on it. Was it struggling at Croydon with single deckers back in the day? Leyland Nationals generally managed ok from what I remember and it could be single decked now, the only time it's really busy is East Croydon at rush hour if there are gaps in the 119 or 198. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on May 19, 2018 13:42:26 GMT
What made them double deck it then? I’ve never seen it busy, and I was the only person on the upper deck the whole journey I was on it. Was it struggling at Croydon with single deckers back in the day? Leyland Nationals generally managed ok from what I remember and it could be single decked now, the only time it's really busy is East Croydon at rush hour if there are gaps in the 119 or 198. I can imagine that, the 119 just seems to be busy constantly, when I was last in Croydon I didn’t see a single 119 less than half full, and this was a Sunday. I’ve seen the 198 quite busy as well. EDIT: does it have heavy school loadings? |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 19, 2018 14:31:39 GMT
Leyland Nationals generally managed ok from what I remember and it could be single decked now, the only time it's really busy is East Croydon at rush hour if there are gaps in the 119 or 198. I can imagine that, the 119 just seems to be busy constantly, when I was last in Croydon I didn’t see a single 119 less than half full, and this was a Sunday. I’ve seen the 198 quite busy as well. EDIT: does it have heavy school loadings? Yes the 119 seems a lot busier and is the main Croydon to Bromley link. The 194 doesn't directly serve any other main objectives and anybody going from Croydon to Elmers End and Beckenham would use Tramlink and for Penge and Sydenham the 75 or 197. Actually there is some school traffic which might be a problem for single deckers. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 19, 2018 20:30:57 GMT
Ironically yes, the other two go under the low bridge at Shortlands. The 194 was single decker for years, Leyland National, and it's only really the Croydon end that is busy. What made them double deck it then? I’ve never seen it busy, and I was the only person on the upper deck the whole journey I was on it. Was it struggling at Croydon with single deckers back in the day? Croydon Tramlink (Elmers End and Beckenham Junction branches) had a great impact on the 194, especially with the fare structure being based on the same formula. The 54 obviously had previously taken the majority of the traffic from Beckenham and Elmers into Croydon, but as most journeys were scheduled through from Woolwich, the opportunities for traffic disruption were great and, so, the 194 had a useful 'through' capability. The 194A (later the 166) from Beckenham Junction was always a poor relation too (I should know, my first home after marriage was on Rectory Road, and I worked for LT in bus schedules at the time) and prone to staff cuts or late running cutbacks. Yes, the single decks could struggle at times. I still consider the 194 should go back to its old routeing past Birkbeck Station. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 19, 2018 20:42:51 GMT
What made them double deck it then? I’ve never seen it busy, and I was the only person on the upper deck the whole journey I was on it. Was it struggling at Croydon with single deckers back in the day? Croydon Tramlink (Elmers End and Beckenham Junction branches) had a great impact on the 194, especially with the fare structure being based on the same formula. The 54 obviously had previously taken the majority of the traffic from Beckenham and Elmers into Croydon, but as most journeys were scheduled through from Woolwich, the opportunities for traffic disruption were great and, so, the 194 had a useful 'through' capability. The 194A (later the 166) from Beckenham Junction was always a poor relation too (I should know, my first home after marriage was on Rectory Road, and I worked for LT in bus schedules at the time) and prone to staff cuts or late running cutbacks. Yes, the single decks could struggle at times. I still consider the 194 should go back to its old routeing past Birkbeck Station. The Beckenham Junction section of the 166 certainly was a poor relation, Monday to Friday only and every 40mins with alternate buses terminating at Shirley Monks Orchard Road. It seems strange that the 194 never returned to its old routing after the bridge at Elmers End station was rebuilt and it was downgraded a bit more when the Forest Hill section was lost. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 20, 2018 15:18:54 GMT
Leyland Nationals generally managed ok from what I remember and it could be single decked now, the only time it's really busy is East Croydon at rush hour if there are gaps in the 119 or 198. I can imagine that, the 119 just seems to be busy constantly, when I was last in Croydon I didn’t see a single 119 less than half full, and this was a Sunday. I’ve seen the 198 quite busy as well. EDIT: does it have heavy school loadings? Yes, the 194 can get very busy during schools particularly coming through Shrublands. Outside of peak hours, there is still enough patronage to justify double deckers. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on May 21, 2018 1:37:28 GMT
The 194 is similar to a single decker route in that you'd use it for short journeys, such as Penge to Lower Sydenham, Beckenham to West Wickham, Croydon to Shrublands, but you wouldn't in your right mind use it to go to Croydon from Lower Sydenham thanks to the long winded route.
It is however missed between Lower Sydenham and Forest Hill where the 356 brought a reduction in frequency along Perry Rise, where the 356 can be easily filled as a single decker between those two sections of the route.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 21, 2018 8:47:15 GMT
The 194 is similar to a single decker route in that you'd use it for short journeys, such as Penge to Lower Sydenham, Beckenham to West Wickham, Croydon to Shrublands, but you wouldn't in your right mind use it to go to Croydon from Lower Sydenham thanks to the long winded route. It is however missed between Lower Sydenham and Forest Hill where the 356 brought a reduction in frequency along Perry Rise, where the 356 can be easily filled as a single decker between those two sections of the route. Yes the removal of the Forest Hill section was a retrograde step and that end of the route doesn't really have much purpose now as it's duplicated by the 358 or 75 all the way from Eden Park to Sydenham. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2018 15:16:08 GMT
The 227 is busy, the 358 less so and the 194's are often near empty. Both the 227 & 358 are busy along there whilst the 194, although less busy than the other two, isn’t often near empty. The 194 is often near empty I'm down that way regularly |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 22, 2018 18:05:54 GMT
Both the 227 & 358 are busy along there whilst the 194, although less busy than the other two, isn’t often near empty. The 194 is often near empty I'm down that way regularly As am I so let’s agree to disagree. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2018 13:09:37 GMT
If TfL’s desire is to one day introduce night tube across the combine, one wonders what destruction may occur to night bus routes on weekends.
A reduction to match weekday night frequencies is the best case scenario I fear.
I can even see some night routes phased out of central London altogether, almost a bit like nothing hill carnival curtailments. Another way to make easy savings and force people into more expensive transport
|
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on May 28, 2018 17:07:10 GMT
If TfL’s desire is to one day introduce night tube across the combine, one wonders what destruction may occur to night bus routes on weekends. A reduction to match weekday night frequencies is the best case scenario I fear. I can even see some night routes phased out of central London altogether, almost a bit like nothing hill carnival curtailments. Another way to make easy savings and force people into more expensive transport It would seem likely that as track and signalling upgrades are completed on the remaining lines night Tube will follow. If you were to completely withdraw night bus routes you lose more than one paid journey - there is usually a trip in the other direction on a day route. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 28, 2018 19:24:16 GMT
If TfL’s desire is to one day introduce night tube across the combine, one wonders what destruction may occur to night bus routes on weekends. A reduction to match weekday night frequencies is the best case scenario I fear. I can even see some night routes phased out of central London altogether, almost a bit like nothing hill carnival curtailments. Another way to make easy savings and force people into more expensive transport I understand your argument and I think it's partly correct. However there are and always will be areas away from tube routes which, to give people a viable overall service, will always need bus access. We are many years away from all tube lines having a night service - may be 20 years before the Bakerloo has one simply because it has lowish ridership and needs a major upgrade. I also think we may lose parts of the Picc Line night service while that line is upgraded - the weekend engineering hours are needed. Similarly the Bank branch of the Northern is out of bounds until 2021/22 because of the rebuild of Bank station. I think we may lose some radial routes but if TfL's finances do ever recover then there may be more scope of extra weekend suburban routes and perhaps one or two of the current weekend routes going nightly. The main issues for TfL will be how it handles onward distribution from the Met Line to NW London, the District Line to Wimbledon and to Upminster via Barking. There are some obvious gaps in SW London and E London where some judicious extra night links would tie in a lot of people to the night transport network. Routes like the 103, 248, 163, 164, 493, 368 spring to mind as routes which link populous areas to key Tube Stations. You've got some similar issues in and around Harrow / Ruislip but perhaps only one or two extra routes would be needed as the weekend night routes added in the 114 and 183. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 29, 2018 5:28:42 GMT
If TfL’s desire is to one day introduce night tube across the combine, one wonders what destruction may occur to night bus routes on weekends. A reduction to match weekday night frequencies is the best case scenario I fear. I can even see some night routes phased out of central London altogether, almost a bit like nothing hill carnival curtailments. Another way to make easy savings and force people into more expensive transport There has also been talk of a 24 hour service on some NR metals which will obviously mean changes to the night bus network. There is certainly some room for improvements as well, the provision on the 36 corridor is clearly inadequate on Friday and Saturday nights and it's remarkable that South Norwood still hasn't got any night service. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2018 9:53:08 GMT
My suggestions for tube cuts, off peaks:
Bakerloo:
E&C - QPK every 5 minutes
E&C - H&W every 20 minutes
Provides a train every 10 minutes between QPK and H&W combined with LOROL. RR duties and spare trains required at QPK depot/SPK for contingency in case of LOROL disruption.
Central:
WER - EPP every 7-8 minutes
EAB - HAI via NEP every 15 minutes
EAB - WOO via HAI every 15 minutes
NOA - LOU every 15 minutes
Provides a train every 3 minutes between NOA and LES. WHC to be used for contingency only except early mornings/late evenings. To be monitored for possible future cut to 15tph (4 minute intervals in the central area post-Crossrail)
Circle and H&C:
Circle: Every 10 minutes
H&C: Every 10 minutes HAM - BKG
Frequencies as now despite upgrades
District:
EAB - UPM every 10 minutes
RMD - BKG every 10 minutes
WIM - THL every 10 minutes
WIM - ERD every 10 minutes
Frequencies ultimately maintained but the service between BKG - UPM reduced. Also service pattern altered to make best use of ACT depot (Ealing branch trains chosen over Richmond branch for Upminster runs). Combined with circle line, maintains 24tph ‘via Victoria’ and 12 tph ‘via HSK’
Jubilee:
STA - STR every 10 minutes
STA - NOG every 20 minutes
WPK - STR every 10 minutes
WIG - STR every 20 minutes
Provides a train every 3 - 3.5 minutes between WIG - NOG. WHD to be used as contingency. The low ‘tph’ reversing at WIG and NOG allows for more generous turn time for drivers and aid recovery times. Weekend services may need to be more frequent at the busiest times, and enhanced modified services for Wembley and O2 events
Metropolitan:
ALD - UXB every 7-8 minutes
ALD - C&L (alt to AME or CHE) every 15 minutes
BST - WAT every 15 minutes
I’ve retained service levels despite upgrade work, and retains a reversing platform at BST to aid contingency and service recovery
Northern:
MOR - EDG via BNK every 4 minutes
KEN - HIB via CHX every 5 minutes
FIC - MHE every 30 minutes
I rarely use the Northern so this is a standard based on guess usage levels
Piccadilly:
CFS - HT5 every 6 minutes
CFS - RYL every 24 minutes
CFS - HT4 every 12 minutes
AGR - UXB every 24 minutes
Provides a train every 3 minutes between AGR and ACT. It’s tough to know where to ‘cut’ services on the Picc due to the lack of viable reversing points on the northern end, and the requirement to service Heathrow. Suspending the Uxbridge section would cause too much public outrage so reducing the frequency slightly seems the better option.
Victoria:
BRI - WAC every 3 - 6 minutes
BRI - SVS every 12 minutes
Again it’s hard to find available cuts here due to the nature of the line. The upgrades allow for over 30 tph though, so these frequencies still represent cuts.
W&C:
Every 20 minutes
I think if TfL want to make savings they switch off the electricity altogether on this between the peaks, however since it’s an alternative you may as well make it as unattractive as possible with trains and drivers on standby in case of disruption elsewhere. I’d at least end the Saturday service.
|
|
