|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Jan 21, 2018 11:01:26 GMT
I certainly agree about the padding out of timetables, I was talking to someone this evening who without any prompting from me said how he rarely uses buses anymore as they are "just too d*mn slow, either crawling along at a snails pace holding other traffic up or stopping at every single bus stop and sitting there for ages". I suspect a lot of people would express similar sentiments? Though I agree with that it is certainly a contributing factor, we also have to remember that too much running time isn't the only contributing factor. Congestion also plays it part and I know I sound like a broken record on this  but if congestion was significantly reduced, you would start seeing people return to the bus network as well. oh absolutely, if Tfl were to stop reducing road space and pointless junction changed, bus services would also be sped up a bit. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jan 21, 2018 11:57:50 GMT
The former I'm afraid - though the 401 would definitely need a school double deck element. It does have the 601. Only if the 601 is diverted into Bexleyheath town centre. Most kids will use the 401 rather than 601 if they can, even letting the 601 go at common stops. |
|
|
|
Post by john on Jan 21, 2018 12:06:36 GMT
Only if the 601 is diverted into Bexleyheath town centre. Most kids will use the 401 rather than 601 if they can, even letting the 601 go at common stops. Sounds similar to the 287/687 at times 😡 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2018 12:35:49 GMT
Only if the 601 is diverted into Bexleyheath town centre. Most kids will use the 401 rather than 601 if they can, even letting the 601 go at common stops. From what I remember, the 601 was diverted away from Bexleyheath Town Centre to reduce overcrowding and to reduce antisocial behaviour in the town centre. If the 401 becomes SD, it will discourage kids from using the 401 |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 21, 2018 21:57:50 GMT
Well, rgd976, if you can do Kingston, I’ll do Bexley.... N21 withdrawn nightly Eltham Southend Crescent-Bexleyheath 51 no change 89/N89 withdrawn Bexleyheath Garage - Slade Green. 96 no change 99 daily evening (after 20:00) frequency down to 30 min 132 no change 160 withdrawn Eltham Church - Sidcup and extended to Welling Corner via current B16. Edgebury area left to the 162. 161 not Bexley, but related - withdrawn Woolwich - North Greenwich 177 no change 180 no change, assuming extension to Erith Quarry happens. Woolwich - North Greenwich via New Charlton left entirely to this route 229 no change 233 withdrawn Eltham Church - Eltham Station and diverted to Kidbrooke via current B16. 244 no double deck conversion and evening service thinned to x30 min after 20:00 daily 269 evening frequency down to x30 min daily 286 no change 301 withdrawn or not introduced between Thamesmead and Woolwich. 321 no change 401 no change 422 no change 428 withdrawn east of Dartford 469 withdrawn east of Belvedere Station 472 rerouted via or left to go via Nathan Way between Thamesmead and Plumstead 486 general daytime frequency reduction - no better than x10 min daily 492 withdrawn east of Dartford, and entirely after 20:00 and on Sundays. B11 no change B12 no change B13 circle in New Eltham broken, withdrawn from southeast part of Footscray Road, revised to run opposite way around remainder of circle and extended to Eltham Station via 314. Also extended to Slade Green via current 89. B14 withdrawn south of Crittals Corner and diverted to Tesco Foots Cray B15 Sunday service withdrawn B16 completely withdrawn Not that any of that is good...
I'd certainly agree about the N21 between Eltham and Bexleyheath, does anybody ever travel on that section? I'm sure somebody must do but every bus I see on that section is empty. There is also the Friday/Saturday night 132 night service so a section that barely justifies one night route has two! I'd leave the Friday/Saturday night 132 with it's useful North Greenwich link but the N21 really has to go, it can be rerouted to Foots Cray replacing the 24 hour service on the 321.
I did suggest previously withdrawing the 89 between Bexleyheath and Slade Green allowing it to focus on the Lewisham end, I suggested extending the 401 to Slade Green, would the single deck B13 be adequate? I would think a half hourly evening service on the 99 and 269 would be adequate? In fact I've only just realised that the 99 is x15mins in the evening  , I would think x20mins was generous.
I'd be inclined to leave the 486 frequency as it is but reduce or even withdraw the Welling to Bexleyheath section. |
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jan 21, 2018 23:03:39 GMT
Read a post earlier on the 166 and it got me thinking , if you were in charge of Tfl what Bus routes would you cut or get rid of ? or even Tube or Overground lines , Savings have to be made what routes would you give the chop or have a restricted service on and what ways do you think Tfl could increase profit ? I've suggest previously reducing the 466 to x20 minutes daytime and x30 minutes evening. Both outer ends are dead and capacity can be maintained on the middle section by extending the 197 to South Croydon Garage and the 312 to Purley. The 468 could probably be withdrawn between Camberwell Green and Elephant & Castle? Plenty of alternative routes along Walworth Road. The 349 has been suggested previously for the axe but some people got upset about that, alternatively the 149 or 259 could be withdrawn between Tottenham and Edmonton Green. The 21 could be withdrawn in the evening between Moorgate and Newington Green, the 141 is surely adequate? The 242 between Liverpool Street and St Pauls? Some night services could be bought forward to start in the evening, 65 to Chessington in place of the 71 and 137 to Crystal Palace in place of the 417 for example. But most importantly I'd be looking into why people are abandoning bus travel and looking at ways of luring them back. I would get rid of the 349 and bring back the original 149 route. Ditto with 207 / 427. And while discussing the 427, do proper branding like everyone outside the M25  Put SEe9 style LCD blinds on every bus to stop banditry and poor presentation of vehicles, put all bus fares at £1.50 contactless, scrap LTs as it costs a fortune to repair the front windscreen every time there's a bump / brake fail / driver error (delete as appropriate)  Advertise bus travel. Simplify bus routes, more express routes, there is nothing apart from X26, X68, 607 (which shouldn't have a school route number) But as sid says, try to lure them back in the first place. And scrap the cycle lanes, ban pedicabs, reduce the excessive number of Private Hire vehicles plus make crtieria for getting a Private Hire disc a bit tougher. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 21, 2018 23:51:56 GMT
Read a post earlier on the 166 and it got me thinking , if you were in charge of Tfl what Bus routes would you cut or get rid of ? or even Tube or Overground lines , Savings have to be made what routes would you give the chop or have a restricted service on and what ways do you think Tfl could increase profit ? I've suggest previously reducing the 466 to x20 minutes daytime and x30 minutes evening. Both outer ends are dead and capacity can be maintained on the middle section by extending the 197 to South Croydon Garage and the 312 to Purley. The 468 could probably be withdrawn between Camberwell Green and Elephant & Castle? Plenty of alternative routes along Walworth Road. The 349 has been suggested previously for the axe but some people got upset about that, alternatively the 149 or 259 could be withdrawn between Tottenham and Edmonton Green. The 21 could be withdrawn in the evening between Moorgate and Newington Green, the 141 is surely adequate? The 242 between Liverpool Street and St Pauls? Some night services could be bought forward to start in the evening, 65 to Chessington in place of the 71 and 137 to Crystal Palace in place of the 417 for example. But most importantly I'd be looking into why people are abandoning bus travel and looking at ways of luring them back. You seriously having a laugh? If that is the case the 242 may as well be cut completely if it was cut back to Liverpool St. The same goes for the 259 if it were cut back to Tottenham.
I would say get rid of the 357, the most pointless useless scratching f**ker route on the network.
Also one thing that needed to be done years ago is thinning out the frequency in the evening. On some routes I do not know what is the point in running the same headway during the day and the buses are virtually carrying no one in the evening.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2018 0:17:57 GMT
I've suggest previously reducing the 466 to x20 minutes daytime and x30 minutes evening. Both outer ends are dead and capacity can be maintained on the middle section by extending the 197 to South Croydon Garage and the 312 to Purley. The 468 could probably be withdrawn between Camberwell Green and Elephant & Castle? Plenty of alternative routes along Walworth Road. The 349 has been suggested previously for the axe but some people got upset about that, alternatively the 149 or 259 could be withdrawn between Tottenham and Edmonton Green. The 21 could be withdrawn in the evening between Moorgate and Newington Green, the 141 is surely adequate? The 242 between Liverpool Street and St Pauls? Some night services could be bought forward to start in the evening, 65 to Chessington in place of the 71 and 137 to Crystal Palace in place of the 417 for example. But most importantly I'd be looking into why people are abandoning bus travel and looking at ways of luring them back. I would get rid of the 349 and bring back the original 149 route. Ditto with 207 / 427. And while discussing the 427, do proper branding like everyone outside the M25 Put SEe9 style LCD blinds on every bus to stop banditry and poor presentation of vehicles, put all bus fares at £1.50 contactless, scrap LTs as it costs a fortune to repair the front windscreen every time there's a bump / brake fail / driver error (delete as appropriate) Advertise bus travel. Simplify bus routes, more express routes, there is nothing apart from X26, X68, 607 (which shouldn't have a school route number) But as sid says, try to lure them back in the first place. And scrap the cycle lanes, ban pedicabs, reduce the excessive number of Private Hire vehicles plus make crtieria for getting a Private Hire disc a bit tougher. And by bringing back the full 149 & 207 routes, you end up with services that would be very unreliable. I don't see the problem with the 349 - anytime I've used it or seen it myself, which granted isn't as much as yourself, it is always well loaded and it's the same with the 427. Only if you greatly reduce cars from the road could you then seriously re-introduce the old 149 & 207. I mean, I'd love if the 109 could go back to being a Purley to Trafalgar Square route but not if it meant I end up with a worse service over all especially given how busy the A23 is |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 22, 2018 0:29:48 GMT
I would get rid of the 349 and bring back the original 149 route. Ditto with 207 / 427. You seem to be forgetting that both services ran in sections anyway so what we have today with different route numbers is broadly what we had in the past under single route numbers. This is why I just don't understand the repeated "nostaliga trip" we keep getting on here to reinvent services which have the same service pattern that existed before. TfL will not turn the clock back because it means huge routes with high PVRs that few operators can compete to win. Splitting them into two is a way of ensuring more competition by lowering PVRs and making contracts more biddable. In the current financial climate TfL won't do anything that reduces competitive pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Jan 22, 2018 0:29:50 GMT
Route 40 - Reduce to every 10 mins, while keeping the 8 mins during peaks, increase the Sunday service to every 15 mins.
Route 176 - Withdrawn between Forest Hill and Penge to improve reliability. (Covered by Routes 122 and 197)
Route 185 - reduce to every 10 mins, but utilising the spare PVR to increase the 176 to every 8 minutes off-peak.
Route 12 - Reduced to every 6/7 minutes, however increase the 197 to every 10 minutes (except evenings) to replace some of the lost services between Peckham and Dulwich Library, along with my proposal to withdraw the 176 past Forest Hill.
Route 68 - revised to terminate at Herne Hill with the 468 taking the strain between Herne Hill and West Norwood.
Route 356 - Reduced to every 30 mins off-peak except during school open and close to every 20 mins as now.
Route 432 - revised to terminate at Crystal Palace. 157 and 358 would still be sufficient between Anerley and Crystal Palace.
Route 450 - Withdrawn between Lower Sydenham Sainsbury's and Sydenham Cobbs Corner. Route 202 from Cobbs and Route 194 from Sydenham Road (both deckers) would still provide a service towards Bell Green. New stand space would be required at Cobbs.
Route 42 - Withdrawn between East Dulwich Sainsbury's and Camberwell Green. Replaced by a re-routed 484 between Denmark Hill and East Dulwich Goose Green via North Dulwich which I'd increase to every 10 mins (cut recently to 12 mins). Even after a year of the 42, it still mainly carries air on the final part of the route. Another option would be to re-route the 40 between East Dulwich Goose Green and Denmark Hill via the 42 and having the 484 go into East Dulwich Sainsbury's alongside the P13 on it's way to Camberwell.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2018 1:17:56 GMT
Route 432 - revised to terminate at Crystal Palace. 157 and 358 would still be sufficient between Anerley and Crystal Palace. I'd be against this cut personally because the 432's extension to Anerley wasn't implemented to compliment the 157 & 358 but to partly remedy the problem that Crystal Palace has with it's bus network which is a sore lack of through routes. The 432 provides a nice cross link which is used by people so I'd leave as it is. |
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Jan 22, 2018 3:43:53 GMT
I would get rid of the 349 and bring back the original 149 route. Ditto with 207 / 427. You seem to be forgetting that both services ran in sections anyway so what we have today with different route numbers is broadly what we had in the past under single route numbers. This is why I just don't understand the repeated "nostaliga trip" we keep getting on here to reinvent services which have the same service pattern that existed before. TfL will not turn the clock back because it means huge routes with high PVRs that few operators can compete to win. Splitting them into two is a way of ensuring more competition by lowering PVRs and making contracts more biddable. In the current financial climate TfL won't do anything that reduces competitive pressure. It wasn't so much nostalgia as more the realisation routes will start disappearing at some point if we don't stop the rot. Either GAL, Arriva or Stagecoach at Bow could run the hypothetical Nostalgia 149 or, a Tenders curveball, get two different companies to run the route together... we know "inclusion" and "winning together" is the latest thing we have in school, why not the buses?  I know the 349 and 427 are well used. By the way, look out for any U5 branded buses on the 427 or vice versa in the coming days... it's bound to happen due to error or if there is a lack of spares |
|
|
|
Post by rhys on Jan 22, 2018 4:43:18 GMT
Route 68 - revised to terminate at Herne Hill with the 468 taking the strain between Herne Hill and West Norwood. As someone who lives in Herne Hill, I wouldn't cut the 68 back. Both routes (68/468) are already as busy as it gets during peak times, especially during school hours, where the 68 and 468 pass a large number of schools within the Herne Hill to Norwood areas. Taking away one route, along the Norwood Road corridor, will only cause a bigger strain. Especially considering how inconsistent other routes, such as the 196 or 322 can be, at times. Moreover, there is not enough stand space within Herne Hill, on Dulwich Road. To accomodate both the 68 and 201 terminating there simultaneously. It's already as tight as it is, not to mention, that stand partially blocks one side of Dulwich Road, which can be a bit of an annoyance during rush hour. Often, when a 68 is curtailed to Herne Hill, it rarely stands at the available bus stand. It usually heads back out towards Euston or West Norwood or back to Q. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 22, 2018 7:23:41 GMT
I've suggest previously reducing the 466 to x20 minutes daytime and x30 minutes evening. Both outer ends are dead and capacity can be maintained on the middle section by extending the 197 to South Croydon Garage and the 312 to Purley. The 468 could probably be withdrawn between Camberwell Green and Elephant & Castle? Plenty of alternative routes along Walworth Road. The 349 has been suggested previously for the axe but some people got upset about that, alternatively the 149 or 259 could be withdrawn between Tottenham and Edmonton Green. The 21 could be withdrawn in the evening between Moorgate and Newington Green, the 141 is surely adequate? The 242 between Liverpool Street and St Pauls? Some night services could be bought forward to start in the evening, 65 to Chessington in place of the 71 and 137 to Crystal Palace in place of the 417 for example. But most importantly I'd be looking into why people are abandoning bus travel and looking at ways of luring them back. You seriously having a laugh? If that is the case the 242 may as well be cut completely if it was cut back to Liverpool St. The same goes for the 259 if it were cut back to Tottenham.
I would say get rid of the 357, the most pointless useless scratching f**ker route on the network.
Also one thing that needed to be done years ago is thinning out the frequency in the evening. On some routes I do not know what is the point in running the same headway during the day and the buses are virtually carrying no one in the evening.
The 242 is ok Homerton to Liverpool Street, just seems to carry little more than fresh air between there and St Pauls. The 259 could be withdrawn completely but I'm not sure I'd go that far. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 22, 2018 7:46:52 GMT
Route 40 - Reduce to every 10 mins, while keeping the 8 mins during peaks, increase the Sunday service to every 15 mins. Route 176 - Withdrawn between Forest Hill and Penge to improve reliability. (Covered by Routes 122 and 197) Route 185 - reduce to every 10 mins, but utilising the spare PVR to increase the 176 to every 8 minutes off-peak. Route 12 - Reduced to every 6/7 minutes, however increase the 197 to every 10 minutes (except evenings) to replace some of the lost services between Peckham and Dulwich Library, along with my proposal to withdraw the 176 past Forest Hill. Route 68 - revised to terminate at Herne Hill with the 468 taking the strain between Herne Hill and West Norwood. Route 356 - Reduced to every 30 mins off-peak except during school open and close to every 20 mins as now. Route 432 - revised to terminate at Crystal Palace. 157 and 358 would still be sufficient between Anerley and Crystal Palace. Route 450 - Withdrawn between Lower Sydenham Sainsbury's and Sydenham Cobbs Corner. Route 202 from Cobbs and Route 194 from Sydenham Road (both deckers) would still provide a service towards Bell Green. New stand space would be required at Cobbs. Route 42 - Withdrawn between East Dulwich Sainsbury's and Camberwell Green. Replaced by a re-routed 484 between Denmark Hill and East Dulwich Goose Green via North Dulwich which I'd increase to every 10 mins (cut recently to 12 mins). Even after a year of the 42, it still mainly carries air on the final part of the route. Another option would be to re-route the 40 between East Dulwich Goose Green and Denmark Hill via the 42 and having the 484 go into East Dulwich Sainsbury's alongside the P13 on it's way to Camberwell. I wouldn't disagree with most of these although I'm not sure about reducing the 12 which still seems quite busy. The 249 and 432 were only extended to Anerley because of the lack of stand space at Crystal Palace rather than for any useful purpose and they now don't serve the bus station towards Clapham Common/Brixton making interchange more difficult. The 157 and 358 certainly are more than adequate to Anerley. Maybe a bit drastic but I think the 194 could be possibly withdrawn between Elmers End and Lower Sydenham, it's covered by the 358,75 and 202. The 68 was originally intended to be Euston to Herne Hill although it ended up going to Norwood Garage probably just for operational convenience? |
|
but if congestion was significantly reduced, you would start seeing people return to the bus network as well.
, I would think x20mins was generous.
Put SEe9 style LCD blinds on every bus to stop banditry and poor presentation of vehicles, put all bus fares at £1.50 contactless, scrap LTs as it costs a fortune to repair the front windscreen every time there's a bump / brake fail / driver error (delete as appropriate) 
