|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 22, 2021 15:59:08 GMT
This is my theory on the 384 changes. The old 384 was actually doing well in usage, but the fact it did not gain revenue from the amount of freedom passers used on it meaning it had to be subsidised to keep the route running for the users of the route. My suspicion is that TFL wanted to cut down costs of subsidising and turn to the idea of making it self reliant by making it direct and extending it to Edgware so the route is self reliant where the revenues will cover the costs of the route. The eastern section of the route pretty much crashed but TFL could argue that and users from the roads lost are using alternative routes. I think TFL did have a look at the X307 idea, but I think they chose the 384 option because it was alot cheaper and they would've withdrawn the 384 entirely resulting in areas inaccessible to the bus network. Even if TFL chose the X307 option they must likely would've withdraw the 384 regardless. The 384 was not changed on its section West of Barnet except for its eastbound journey which weirdly goes down Salisbury Road when it could take 90 seconds just to serve The Spires. The 307 needs a better Sunday Service in my opinion, 30 minutes for a significant trunk route in North London is too poor
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Apr 22, 2021 16:53:31 GMT
This is my theory on the 384 changes. The old 384 was actually doing well in usage, but the fact it did not gain revenue from the amount of freedom passers used on it meaning it had to be subsidised to keep the route running for the users of the route. My suspicion is that TFL wanted to cut down costs of subsidising and turn to the idea of making it self reliant by making it direct and extending it to Edgware so the route is self reliant where the revenues will cover the costs of the route. The eastern section of the route pretty much crashed but TFL could argue that and users from the roads lost are using alternative routes. I think TFL did have a look at the X307 idea, but I think they chose the 384 option because it was alot cheaper and they would've withdrawn the 384 entirely resulting in areas inaccessible to the bus network. Even if TFL chose the X307 option they must likely would've withdraw the 384 regardless. The 384 was not changed on its section West of Barnet except for its eastbound journey which weirdly goes down Salisbury Road when it could take 90 seconds just to serve The Spires. The 307 needs a better Sunday Service in my opinion, 30 minutes for a significant trunk route in North London is too poor 307 is every 20 on Sunday. Clearly little demand to increase further sadly.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Apr 22, 2021 17:55:39 GMT
On purely anecdotal personal experience, I have used the 384 a fair number of times already between Edgware/Mill Hill and Barnet or Cockfosters. I don't think I have used the 107 for a similar journey for maybe 20 years *at least* so certainly no abstraction in my case, and I suspect that's true for many if not most.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2021 20:25:18 GMT
This scheme is currently being reviewed as part of TfL's promise to do so, before the new tender specification for the 384 is issued. The 383 is being looked at as well to see whether there would be any benefit in re-serving some of the roads previously served by the 384, and bundling this together with the formal consultation for the extension to Finchley Memorial Hospital later this year.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 28, 2021 20:27:31 GMT
This scheme is currently being reviewed as part of TfL's promise to do so, before the new tender specification for the 384 is issued. The 383 is being looked at as well to see whether there would be any benefit in re-serving some of the roads previously served by the 384, and bundling this together with the formal consultation for the extension to Finchley Memorial Hospital later this year. Any update on the 324's extension?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2021 20:39:23 GMT
This scheme is currently being reviewed as part of TfL's promise to do so, before the new tender specification for the 384 is issued. The 383 is being looked at as well to see whether there would be any benefit in re-serving some of the roads previously served by the 384, and bundling this together with the formal consultation for the extension to Finchley Memorial Hospital later this year. Any update on the 324's extension? Not aware of any updates on that.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Apr 28, 2021 20:39:42 GMT
This scheme is currently being reviewed as part of TfL's promise to do so, before the new tender specification for the 384 is issued. The 383 is being looked at as well to see whether there would be any benefit in re-serving some of the roads previously served by the 384, and bundling this together with the formal consultation for the extension to Finchley Memorial Hospital later this year. Any update on the 324's extension? I think all of those consultations such as the 324s extension and the 414 cut back updates has been halted until after the Mayor's Election.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Apr 28, 2021 22:03:35 GMT
Any update on the 324's extension? I think all of those consultations such as the 324s extension and the 414 cut back updates has been halted until after the Mayor's Election. Yes, we are currently in purdah. No announcements or new consultations allowed.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 29, 2021 18:36:47 GMT
I'd expect the results of the Sutton consultation aswell. I'd still expect some backlash from the backstreet sections removed from the S3 similar to the 384.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2021 19:06:59 GMT
This scheme is currently being reviewed as part of TfL's promise to do so, before the new tender specification for the 384 is issued. The 383 is being looked at as well to see whether there would be any benefit in re-serving some of the roads previously served by the 384, and bundling this together with the formal consultation for the extension to Finchley Memorial Hospital later this year. Any update on the 324's extension? Hearing end of August this year.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on May 31, 2021 16:27:05 GMT
Stupid question. As promised on the proposal, why hasn't the 384 been increased to every 10 minutes for the Edgware extension?
|
|
|
Post by ian on May 31, 2021 16:33:53 GMT
That was never proposed - only a x10 minute service between Stirling Corner and Edgware which comes from the combined revised frequencies of 292 and 384 which are both x 20 (Monday to Saturday daytimes).
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Jul 16, 2021 20:51:45 GMT
Does anyone have any thoughts on this proposal I came up with to restore a service to the Barnet roads that no longer have one, and also to give Hadley Wood a more frequent service and better connections? Potential also to create a Cockfosters to Enfield Town/Chase Farm link, although that might create some double-running issues along Cockfosters Road: Attachment Deleted
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Jul 16, 2021 21:47:02 GMT
Does anyone have any thoughts on this proposal I came up with to restore a service to the Barnet roads that no longer have one, and also to give Hadley Wood a more frequent service and better connections? Potential also to create a Cockfosters to Enfield Town/Chase Farm link, although that might create some double-running issues along Cockfosters Road: View AttachmentThe curcuitisation of routes are the reason why the 384 and eventually other routes will get restructured more directly. People want trips that can get you from A to B in the in the most direct way possible, curcuitisation will just hold journeys an possibly lose usage on the route, hence one of the main reasons why the 384 had to get restructured to create a more efficient route from its new direct routeings.
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Jul 16, 2021 22:00:00 GMT
Does anyone have any thoughts on this proposal I came up with to restore a service to the Barnet roads that no longer have one, and also to give Hadley Wood a more frequent service and better connections? Potential also to create a Cockfosters to Enfield Town/Chase Farm link, although that might create some double-running issues along Cockfosters Road: View AttachmentThe curcuitisation of routes are the reason why the 384 and eventually other routes will get restructured more directly. People want trips that can get you from A to B in the in the most direct way possible, curcuitisation will just hold journeys an possibly lose usage on the route, hence one of the main reasons why the 384 had to get restructured to create a more efficient route from its new direct routeings. I don't agree with your premise because I don't think that 'direct' means having to walk over 600m to your nearest bus or bypassing major stations, town centres and supermarkets.
|
|