|
|
Post by redbus on Aug 11, 2018 12:54:39 GMT
Interesting. There's no easy interchange between the 16 if diverted to Paddington and the 36. Perhaps re-route the 2 from Marylebone to use Edgware Road instead of Baker Street and get it to meet up with the 16.
Perhaps just combine the 32 and 316 and say it's time for DDs.
I am unsure how the interchange for the 139 and 189 will work. This would completely *())*(^ the poor passengers who today transfer between the 98 and 189 in Kilburn, and there are lots of them. The 139s would struggle to cope on today's patronage. It would be more sensible to keep the 189 going down Abbey Road as far as Church Street, a relatively small but important overlap. The problem would be where to turn the buses around Church Street.
Could terminate at Marylebone Station? It could terminate at Marylebome station or Baker Street, but both are in Z1. I was on the 189 this morning and the route only really started to get a flow of passengers on-board from Church Street. There was a 139 ahead, so everyone who boarded specifically wanted the 189.
Thinking about it further an alternative would be to continue the 189 down Abbey Road / Grove End Road as now, but for it turn to turn left down St John's Wood Road to the St John's Wood Roundabout when it could turn around, just need to find a stand in St John's Wood Road. That would provide alternative links to the 13 and 274 (assuming the 113 is hacked back) and at least be near Church Street. Keeps the 189 out of Z1 and would only need one extra bus at most over terminating at Kilburn Park.
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Aug 12, 2018 16:34:29 GMT
Withdraw the 253 between Holloway and Euston.
Discontinue the 254
Extend the 106 to Aldgate.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Aug 12, 2018 18:18:24 GMT
With the 254 from Whitechapel to Clapton Pond running at a pretty high frequency I came see the 106 in the firing line. Coupled with that with the slight over bussing from Hackney to Clapton with the 253/4 along proving a 4-5 mins service plus through in the still the 48, 55 and a every other bus on the 38 that section could easily cope without 106. And extension of something from Stoke Newington to Finsbury park could replace the solo section.
I think thou the 38 could face the chop with the 56 to Essex Road/Angel maintaining local links and the hopper for the rest.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 12, 2018 18:24:25 GMT
With the 254 from Whitechapel to Clapton Pond running at a pretty high frequency I came see the 106 in the firing line. Coupled with that with the slight over bussing from Hackney to Clapton with the 253/4 along proving a 4-5 mins service plus through in the still the 48, 55 and a every other bus on the 38 that section could easily cope without 106. And extension of something from Stoke Newington to Finsbury park could replace the solo section. I think thou the 38 could face the chop with the 56 to Essex Road/Angel maintaining local links and the hopper for the rest. Mr Capital Omnibus gave chapter and verse on why killing the 106 is an immensely stupid idea. He should know given he clearly works for Arriva at the garage that actually runs the 106. It is a busy and useful service and should be left alone. It's already had a frequency cut which has resulted in overcrowding and people being left behind. That is unacceptable. And as for lopping huge sections off the 253 and killing the 254 - sheesh! |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 12, 2018 18:35:52 GMT
With the 254 from Whitechapel to Clapton Pond running at a pretty high frequency I came see the 106 in the firing line. Coupled with that with the slight over bussing from Hackney to Clapton with the 253/4 along proving a 4-5 mins service plus through in the still the 48, 55 and a every other bus on the 38 that section could easily cope without 106. And extension of something from Stoke Newington to Finsbury park could replace the solo section. I think thou the 38 could face the chop with the 56 to Essex Road/Angel maintaining local links and the hopper for the rest. Mr Capital Omnibus gave chapter and verse on why killing the 106 is an immensely stupid idea. He should know given he clearly works for Arriva at the garage that actually runs the 106. It is a busy and useful service and should be left alone. It's already had a frequency cut which has resulted in overcrowding and people being left behind. That is unacceptable. And as for lopping huge sections off the 253 and killing the 254 - sheesh! I suggested curtailing the 106 at Cambridge Heath rather than a frequency reduction and Mr Capital Omnibus pointed out that it was used by hospital staff. Now whilst I'm not suggesting their travel needs should be totally ignored that alone might not be enough to justify the service, the 254 does stop nearby. And yes the 253/4 might well be next in the firing line. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 12, 2018 19:49:27 GMT
I suggested curtailing the 106 at Cambridge Heath rather than a frequency reduction and Mr Capital Omnibus pointed out that it was used by hospital staff. Now whilst I'm not suggesting their travel needs should be totally ignored that alone might not be enough to justify the service, the 254 does stop nearby. And yes the 253/4 might well be next in the firing line. So routes that carry a combined 25m pass jnys per year deserve to be chopped? (wanders off shaking head and muttering under my breath) |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Aug 12, 2018 20:01:21 GMT
With the 254 from Whitechapel to Clapton Pond running at a pretty high frequency I came see the 106 in the firing line. Coupled with that with the slight over bussing from Hackney to Clapton with the 253/4 along proving a 4-5 mins service plus through in the still the 48, 55 and a every other bus on the 38 that section could easily cope without 106. And extension of something from Stoke Newington to Finsbury park could replace the solo section. I think thou the 38 could face the chop with the 56 to Essex Road/Angel maintaining local links and the hopper for the rest. If the 38 'could face the chop' then bye bye London buses, it was good knowing you, in my case for seventy years (and still counting). Coming to an area near you, a TfL hit squad. Well, I was a marksman when younger and I'm prepared to offer resistance. So there! |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Aug 12, 2018 20:08:56 GMT
Oh God I didn't mean the 38 would be completely cut. Just that it would be cut back to Hackney Central.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Aug 12, 2018 20:12:17 GMT
I suggested curtailing the 106 at Cambridge Heath rather than a frequency reduction and Mr Capital Omnibus pointed out that it was used by hospital staff. Now whilst I'm not suggesting their travel needs should be totally ignored that alone might not be enough to justify the service, the 254 does stop nearby. And yes the 253/4 might well be next in the firing line. So routes that carry a combined 25m pass jnys per year deserve to be chopped? (wanders off shaking head and muttering under my breath) What's that got to do with it? *Another overly dramatic post! |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Aug 12, 2018 20:12:22 GMT
Oh God I didn't mean the 38 would be completely cut. Just that it would be cut back to Hackney Central. I wouldn’t say cut back to Hackney Central but my god it needs its PVR reduced, always maintained that and always will, the amount of countless times I’ve seen in-service 38s carrying no one whatsoever and I really don’t see why this route is being given such special treatment. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Aug 12, 2018 21:55:13 GMT
I’m not sure we will in the long term see both the 171 and 172 run beyond New Cross Gate (from Central London) : either the 172 will be severed or the 172 will extend from Brockley to Bellingham via the 171 and the 171 will be severed.
|
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Aug 12, 2018 22:21:38 GMT
I’m not sure we will in the long term see both the 171 and 172 run beyond New Cross Gate (from Central London) : either the 172 will be severed or the 172 will extend from Brockley to Bellingham via the 171 and the 171 will be severed. I still think of the 172 terminating at Catford Garage! |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Aug 12, 2018 22:32:40 GMT
That would make a faster route from Catford Garage anyways which wouldn't be a bad think. Linking the TL to Brockley Rise section of the 171 with the New Cross to Aldwych/Clerkenwell Green section of the 172 would create a quicker through route. Catford to Peckham would still have the 136.
|
|
|
|
Post by redbus on Aug 12, 2018 23:04:37 GMT
I suggested curtailing the 106 at Cambridge Heath rather than a frequency reduction and Mr Capital Omnibus pointed out that it was used by hospital staff. Now whilst I'm not suggesting their travel needs should be totally ignored that alone might not be enough to justify the service, the 254 does stop nearby. And yes the 253/4 might well be next in the firing line. So routes that carry a combined 25m pass jnys per year deserve to be chopped? (wanders off shaking head and muttering under my breath) I am not saying this is sensible or a good idea, or even that it would happen, but given what else is taking place little surprises me anymore. Many cuts are happening that I would have once thought unthinkable. It's a case of acting in relative haste, with plenty time to repent at leisure!!!! Many if the changes we are seeing and those being developed will be looked at in the years ahead as a disaster, but of course that will never be admitted. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Aug 12, 2018 23:33:34 GMT
So routes that carry a combined 25m pass jnys per year deserve to be chopped? (wanders off shaking head and muttering under my breath) What's that got to do with it? *Another overly dramatic post! No it was not an overly dramatic post. The "debate" on cuts is getting a tad tiresome and I take my share of the blame for that. The 106, 253 and 254 have all had frequency reductions - the first two more than one shot at reducing the service. My point is a simple one - all three are immensely busy services and also immensely valuable to those who use them. They provide a high level of mobility in areas and on links where rail is simply not an option. Looking at the 2016/17 numbers there is not exactly a lot of spare capacity to lop off the 253/4. The other factor is that demand on all three routes has been stable over a long period except a fall in 2014. I assume the recent reductions addressed that issue. If demand was tanking as it has on some radial routes into Central London then fair enough but these three routes do not fall into that category (with the caveat that we have not seen the 2017/18 numbers yet). People who suggest removing a route like the 253 beyond Holloway have clearly NEVER tried to get on a bus on the Seven Sisters Road or Camden Road at busy times. 29s are almost full by the time they get there so can only squeeze in 2-5 people per bus. Given you can easily have 20 odd people at a stop then it is clearly not going to work removing the 253 without replacement. In the other direction it is not unusual to have 20-40 people at Camden Town Sainsburys trying to squash on to 29s and 253s at busy times. The 29s can't absorb that demand. By all means let's debate route changes or cutbacks but a bit of rational thinking wouldn't go amiss (including at TfL Towers). In a sane world the entire 253/4 and 29 corridors would be run with trams. They could run at wider headways because of their vastly superior carrying capacity and thus would be vastly more cost efficient once you'd made the investment to put trams in place. Clearly that rational world is destined never to arrive in London. |
|
