|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 7, 2018 14:19:10 GMT
I’m not sure I understand your point as your original post sounded like it was suggesting a single deck conversion - single deckers have indeed gone out many times on the 142, 258 & 340 with deckers likewise on the 288, 303 & 305 but this isn’t the only situation in London where this has happened. The H18/H19 has been allocated a decker for some time now. My fault if I wasn't clear, I was suggesting that Arriva may be thinking about SD's on 340, and for evenings anyway it probably wouldn't matter. Peak times of course is a different matter. Ahh I understand now - in any case, it wouldn't be up to Arriva as TfL set what routes are specified decker or single decker operation. |
|
|
|
Post by chazzboi on Feb 20, 2018 18:46:19 GMT
396 definitely doesn’t need deckers, from time to time it gets them and the whole bus is just empty. I do admit that the bus can get busy but nothing a single decker can’t handle.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Feb 20, 2018 18:48:07 GMT
396 definitely doesn’t need deckers, from time to time it gets them and the whole bus is just empty. I do admit that the bus can get busy but nothing a single decker can’t handle. I think the 396 only ends up getting them because of the Versas unreliability, as well as being the only Single Decker route at the garage which can take Double Deckers and is blinded on Deckers, so they can pluck off spare Single Deckers off the route and throw Double Deckers onto it. |
|
|
|
Post by RandomBusesGirl on Feb 21, 2018 18:00:20 GMT
Yes, 396 is literally only using deckers because there aren't other buses available.
I wonder when is it up for renewal? Also disappointing the single SN17 MMC ordered for the 549 went to NS for the 296, which does benefit from deckers, rather than BK for the 396 which always carries air
|
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Feb 21, 2018 18:08:12 GMT
Yes, 396 is literally only using deckers because there aren't other buses available. I wonder when is it up for renewal? Also disappointing the single SN17 MMC ordered for the 549 went to NS for the 296, which does benefit from deckers, rather than BK for the 396 which always carries air 396 contract is up for renewal in March 2019. |
|
|
|
Post by chazzboi on Feb 21, 2018 22:06:12 GMT
396 definitely doesn’t need deckers, from time to time it gets them and the whole bus is just empty. I do admit that the bus can get busy but nothing a single decker can’t handle. I think the 396 only ends up getting them because of the Versas unreliability, as well as being the only Single Decker route at the garage which can take Double Deckers and is blinded on Deckers, so they can pluck off spare Single Deckers off the route and throw Double Deckers onto it. . To be honest the easy fix is to extend the route. Could be extended up to Becontree Heath or down to Barking. But to be honest it would be better to discontinue the route and instead have a route from Ilford to Clayhall. From Hainault Street to Seven Kings via 86 and then down Alborough South and left onto Eastern Avenue before turning right and going to Clayhall via route 169. This would be great at a frequency of 20 mins with double deckers, as it would finally connect Ilford,Seven Kings and Newbury Park. Not to mention the amount of schools along the way. |
|
|
|
Post by 15002 on Feb 21, 2018 22:12:19 GMT
I think the 396 only ends up getting them because of the Versas unreliability, as well as being the only Single Decker route at the garage which can take Double Deckers and is blinded on Deckers, so they can pluck off spare Single Deckers off the route and throw Double Deckers onto it. . To be honest the easy fix is to extend the route. Could be extended up to Becontree Heath or down to Barking. But to be honest it would be better to discontinue the route and instead have a route from Ilford to Clayhall. From Hainault Street to Seven Kings via 86 and then down Alborough South and left onto Eastern Avenue before turning right and going to Clayhall via route 169. This would be great at a frequency of 20 mins with double deckers, as it would finally connect Ilford,Seven Kings and Newbury Park. Not to mention the amount of schools along the way. That’s actually a good shout. It returns a link between Barking and Gants Hill since the 179 no longer goes to Barking as well as providing a more direct link to Newbury Park station and even Ilford Station too. |
|
|
|
Post by londonbusexplorer on Feb 24, 2018 6:58:41 GMT
The U5: Probably a worser DD conversion than what the 350 was. You lot will probably come up with an argument against my point but I have to disagree. The rerouting was unnecessary but the swap was. As a local to the area, I know the U5 can get quite busy. The 350 on the other hand is fine as a single decker. Only one time, the peaks, was I unable to get a seat on the 350. I guess we should see if TFLs awful branding attracts people to ride it then we will see passenger numbers. The U5 is an awful route overall. And as I'm talking about the U5, I'll say this, for the enthusiasts who ride the bus and look out the front window, good luck doing that on a U5 branded MMC, it has been positioned so you can't see a thing. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 24, 2018 13:27:24 GMT
The U5: Probably a worser DD conversion than what the 350 was. You lot will probably come up with an argument against my point but I have to disagree. The rerouting was unnecessary but the swap was. As a local to the area, I know the U5 can get quite busy. The 350 on the other hand is fine as a single decker. Only one time, the peaks, was I unable to get a seat on the 350. I guess we should see if TFLs awful branding attracts people to ride it then we will see passenger numbers. The U5 is an awful route overall. And as I'm talking about the U5, I'll say this, for the enthusiasts who ride the bus and look out the front window, good luck doing that on a U5 branded MMC, it has been positioned so you can't see a thing. I don't understand your point about the U5 being awful overall - what's the reason behind that statement for those of us who don't use it as much? Surely, if any routes should be going double deck in that part of the world, the U1 & U3 would be ahead of the U5 as these get very busy having done those more than any other U route whereas the times I've rode and seen the U5, they've never been particularly busy enough to warrant double deckers. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Feb 24, 2018 14:18:54 GMT
You lot will probably come up with an argument against my point but I have to disagree. The rerouting was unnecessary but the swap was. As a local to the area, I know the U5 can get quite busy. The 350 on the other hand is fine as a single decker. Only one time, the peaks, was I unable to get a seat on the 350. I guess we should see if TFLs awful branding attracts people to ride it then we will see passenger numbers. The U5 is an awful route overall. And as I'm talking about the U5, I'll say this, for the enthusiasts who ride the bus and look out the front window, good luck doing that on a U5 branded MMC, it has been positioned so you can't see a thing. I don't understand your point about the U5 being awful overall - what's the reason behind that statement for those of us who don't use it as much? Surely, if any routes should be going double deck in that part of the world, the U1 & U3 would be ahead of the U5 as these get very busy having done those more than any other U route whereas the times I've rode and seen the U5, they've never been particularly busy enough to warrant double deckers. I suspect there are a couple of reasons - to retain double deck capacity on the shorter link to Stockley Park from Hayes and Harlington and to add double deck capacity into Uxbridge. Remember it's about flows not individual routes. I've only done the U5 once, before the route swap, but several of the buses I saw mid afternoon were full so on that very limited sample (usual caveats apply) I wasn't too surprised to see the conversion. |
|
|
|
Post by RandomBusesGirl on Feb 24, 2018 15:53:05 GMT
Yep U5 is all about Stockley Park - Hayes and Harlington station. It's a tricky one as otherwise both 350 and U5 ended up empty outside the peak. I suppose TfL thought the extra capacity was needed more in Uxbridge than Harmonsworth... and Heathrow O.o
|
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Mar 2, 2018 15:07:36 GMT
Not suggesting these routes should be put forward as single deck routes but how well are the 430, 194 and 77 loaded in the peak times? Outside of the peaks they just seem to be carrying fresh air and can’t imagine them being rammed full with passengers. (Except for when the SWT was doing its works at Waterloo last summer and the 77 had its PVR nearly doubled to 33. Could imagine there was a big demand for it then!)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2018 15:09:53 GMT
Not suggesting these routes should be put forward as single deck routes but how well are the 430, 194 and 77 loaded in the peak times? Outside of the peaks they just seem to be carrying fresh air and can’t imagine them being rammed full with passengers. (Except for when the SWT was doing its works at Waterloo last summer and the 77 had its PVR nearly doubled to 33. Could imagine there was a big demand for it then!) The 194 can get busy Croydon to Shirley/West Wickham at peak times but pretty much fresh air beyond there. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Mar 2, 2018 15:23:30 GMT
Not suggesting these routes should be put forward as single deck routes but how well are the 430, 194 and 77 loaded in the peak times? Outside of the peaks they just seem to be carrying fresh air and can’t imagine them being rammed full with passengers. (Except for when the SWT was doing its works at Waterloo last summer and the 77 had its PVR nearly doubled to 33. Could imagine there was a big demand for it then!) The 194 can get busy Croydon to Shirley/West Wickham at peak times but pretty much fresh air beyond there. Ah so only one section then, it’s usage figures certainly doesn’t make it seem like a route that’s bursting at the seems  One route I’m now raising serious questions over about needing DDs is the C2. Me and a friend were shopping on Oxford Street not so long ago and got the C2 up to around Kentish Town at about 5:30pm, right in the height of the peaks and couldnt believe that it was just us two and two others upstairs, and every other C2 coming the other way was also carrying air. I think the cutback from Victoria has really sucked away it’s loadings. It’s having its 24 hour service withdrawn upon renewal next year so TfL are clearly raising question marks over its demand. Sticking with the C2 TfL really has screwed over Abellio by curtailing it to Oxford Circus, they withdrew the part of the route nearest to its garage so now it has a somewhat large dead run to Oxford Circus, now having to battle its way through the traffic from QB! |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 2, 2018 15:38:47 GMT
Not suggesting these routes should be put forward as single deck routes but how well are the 430, 194 and 77 loaded in the peak times? Outside of the peaks they just seem to be carrying fresh air and can’t imagine them being rammed full with passengers. (Except for when the SWT was doing its works at Waterloo last summer and the 77 had its PVR nearly doubled to 33. Could imagine there was a big demand for it then!) The 194 can get busy Croydon to Shirley/West Wickham at peak times but pretty much fresh air beyond there. The 194 gets busy at the Lower Sydenham, Penge & Elmers End areas as well. |
|
