|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 13, 2021 9:08:24 GMT
323: Canning Town > Canning Town Bus Station
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Oct 13, 2021 16:56:47 GMT
I was on the 123 and I am sure it has changed from Ilford to Ilford, Hainault Street. I say that but Hainault was spelt incorrectly as Haniault.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 16, 2021 10:16:23 GMT
287: Barking > Barking Station 9: Hammersmith > Hammersmith, Bus Station
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 16, 2021 18:03:47 GMT
I don't really see why making the destinations more specific is necessary, especially with the case of Hammersmith, where one would assume that the bus terminates at the bus station. The ones that don't terminate there but terminate somewhere else in Hammersmith specifically say so on the blinds
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Oct 17, 2021 20:50:00 GMT
I don't really see why making the destinations more specific is necessary, especially with the case of Hammersmith, where one would assume that the bus terminates at the bus station. The ones that don't terminate there but terminate somewhere else in Hammersmith specifically say so on the blinds The problem I have with all of this is that who actually stays on until the actual terminus, unless say it’s a major tube feeder destination like North Greenwich, Hammersmith, Brixton or Stratford? Very few people. The huge majority of people just need to see the destination to know the bus is going the right direction they need it to, so in the case of the 174’s complete change that’s likely to completely throw even a lot of experienced users of the route. And even in those examples because they’re such a major hub commuters know exactly where those routes are going to start from and finish. I mean honestly where else is a North Greenwich bus going to terminate, dump everyone off at Ikea and say ‘sorry mate cba to actually go to the station?’ And then don’t even get me started on the quite frankly deplorable inconsistencies. 123 having its destination spelt wrong. Not even putting commas separating the qualifier (ahem 25 I’m looking at you!). The awful gap in the iBus announcement (oh hello again 25! 117, X140). The most utterly shameful of all is that Heathrow Central has FOUR different wordings of the same destination! - 285 and others have the good old ‘Heathrow Central’ - 111 has ‘Heathrow Central Bus Station’ - 105 has ‘Heathrow Airport Central’ - X140 and others have ‘Heathrow Airport Central Bus Stn’ (Caveat: I am aware the destination shown on lvf may differ slightly to the ibus screen on the actual bus, but even on the screens some routes are displaying the comma in the wrong place) These are elementary things, you honestly can’t make this up.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 17, 2021 21:04:55 GMT
I don't really see why making the destinations more specific is necessary, especially with the case of Hammersmith, where one would assume that the bus terminates at the bus station. The ones that don't terminate there but terminate somewhere else in Hammersmith specifically say so on the blinds The problem I have with all of this is that who actually stays on until the actual terminus, unless say it’s a major tube feeder destination like North Greenwich, Hammersmith, Brixton or Stratford? Very few people. The huge majority of people just need to see the destination to know the bus is going the right direction they need it to, so in the case of the 174’s complete change that’s likely to completely throw even a lot of experienced users of the route. And even in those examples because they’re such a major hub commuters know exactly where those routes are going to start from and finish. I mean honestly where else is a North Greenwich bus going to terminate, dump everyone off at Ikea and say ‘sorry mate cba to actually go to the station? And then don’t even get me started on the quite frankly deplorable inconsistencies. 123 having its destination spelt wrong. Not even putting commas separating the qualifier (ahem 25 I’m looking at you!). The awful gap in the iBus announcement (oh hello again 25! 117, X140). The most utterly shameful of all is that Heathrow Central has FOUR different wordings of the same destination! - 285 and others have the good old ‘Heathrow Central’ - 111 has ‘Heathrow Central Bus Station’ - 105 has ‘Heathrow Airport Central’ - X140 and others have ‘Heathrow Airport Central Bus Stn’ (Caveat: I am aware the destination shown on iBus may differ slightly to the ibus screen on the actual bus, but even on the screens some routes are putting the comma in the wrong place) These are elementary things, you honestly can’t make this up. Specificity is good in a way, the 187, 173, 287 and 238 changes were ones I agree with. But what's happening on most routes now is just ridiculous. Ignoring the comma issue you already point out the over-specificity is now far too specific to a point it will actually create confusion in itself. Nobody knows the 174s terminus as Beam Park, as most of it is still unbuilt. Then City Thameslink is a train station, not an area. How exactly can a train station have a qualifier? The 15s absurd one a few weeks before, of "Charing Cross Station, Trafalgar Square" was just laughable as it was another that gave a station a qualifier. I think blanket changes can be imposed like adding the word station to a terminus point if the route actually terminates at the station, adding Bus Station if it's a bus station that the route terminates at (but being specific for areas with more than one bus station) and for Hospitals mentioning the location they're in. I'm just waiting to see what other changes start to pop up, "Bow Interchange, Bow Church" on the 8?
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Oct 17, 2021 21:23:07 GMT
The problem I have with all of this is that who actually stays on until the actual terminus, unless say it’s a major tube feeder destination like North Greenwich, Hammersmith, Brixton or Stratford? Very few people. The huge majority of people just need to see the destination to know the bus is going the right direction they need it to, so in the case of the 174’s complete change that’s likely to completely throw even a lot of experienced users of the route. And even in those examples because they’re such a major hub commuters know exactly where those routes are going to start from and finish. I mean honestly where else is a North Greenwich bus going to terminate, dump everyone off at Ikea and say ‘sorry mate cba to actually go to the station? And then don’t even get me started on the quite frankly deplorable inconsistencies. 123 having its destination spelt wrong. Not even putting commas separating the qualifier (ahem 25 I’m looking at you!). The awful gap in the iBus announcement (oh hello again 25! 117, X140). The most utterly shameful of all is that Heathrow Central has FOUR different wordings of the same destination! - 285 and others have the good old ‘Heathrow Central’ - 111 has ‘Heathrow Central Bus Station’ - 105 has ‘Heathrow Airport Central’ - X140 and others have ‘Heathrow Airport Central Bus Stn’ (Caveat: I am aware the destination shown on iBus may differ slightly to the ibus screen on the actual bus, but even on the screens some routes are putting the comma in the wrong place) These are elementary things, you honestly can’t make this up. Specificity is good in a way, the 187, 173, 287 and 238 changes were ones I agree with. But what's happening on most routes now is just ridiculous. Ignoring the comma issue you already point out the over-specificity is now far too specific to a point it will actually create confusion in itself. Nobody knows the 174s terminus as Beam Park, as most of it is still unbuilt. Then City Thameslink is a train station, not an area. How exactly can a train station have a qualifier? The 15s absurd one a few weeks before, of "Charing Cross Station, Trafalgar Square" was just laughable as it was another that gave a station a qualifier. I think blanket changes can be imposed like adding the word station to a terminus point if the route actually terminates at the station, adding Bus Station if it's a bus station that the route terminates at (but being specific for areas with more than one bus station) and for Hospitals mentioning the location they're in. I'm just waiting to see what other changes start to pop up, "Bow Interchange, Bow Church" on the 8? The 473 could be an interesting one I wouldn’t put it past them to do a 174 on it and change it to something like “473 to Pier Road, Woolwich Foot Tunnel North” The only glimmer of hope I have is that the ridiculous 15 one you pointed out was swiftly reverted back to its original so it makes me hope some of these will do the same. And yes you’re right very few are rather useful, the 117 one stating Isleworth is actually handy but again it needs to be consistent with the 481, which unsurprisingly it isn’t.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 17, 2021 21:46:51 GMT
Specificity is good in a way, the 187, 173, 287 and 238 changes were ones I agree with. But what's happening on most routes now is just ridiculous. Ignoring the comma issue you already point out the over-specificity is now far too specific to a point it will actually create confusion in itself. Nobody knows the 174s terminus as Beam Park, as most of it is still unbuilt. Then City Thameslink is a train station, not an area. How exactly can a train station have a qualifier? The 15s absurd one a few weeks before, of "Charing Cross Station, Trafalgar Square" was just laughable as it was another that gave a station a qualifier. I think blanket changes can be imposed like adding the word station to a terminus point if the route actually terminates at the station, adding Bus Station if it's a bus station that the route terminates at (but being specific for areas with more than one bus station) and for Hospitals mentioning the location they're in. I'm just waiting to see what other changes start to pop up, "Bow Interchange, Bow Church" on the 8? The 473 could be an interesting one I wouldn’t put it past them to do a 174 on it and change it to something like “473 to Pier Road, Woolwich Foot Tunnel North” The only glimmer of hope I have is that the ridiculous 15 one you pointed out was swiftly reverted back to its original so it makes me hope some of these will do the same. And yes you’re right very few are rather useful, the 117 one stating Isleworth is actually handy but again it needs to be consistent with the 481, which unsurprisingly it isn’t. I think that's the key - consistency is not happening. I believe some of the Brixton routes have Brixton Station as the destination on the I-Bus screen but others show plain Brixton just as another example
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Oct 18, 2021 12:31:55 GMT
The 473 could be an interesting one I wouldn’t put it past them to do a 174 on it and change it to something like “473 to Pier Road, Woolwich Foot Tunnel North” The only glimmer of hope I have is that the ridiculous 15 one you pointed out was swiftly reverted back to its original so it makes me hope some of these will do the same. And yes you’re right very few are rather useful, the 117 one stating Isleworth is actually handy but again it needs to be consistent with the 481, which unsurprisingly it isn’t. I think that's the key - consistency is not happening. I believe some of the Brixton routes have Brixton Station as the destination on the I-Bus screen but others show plain Brixton just as another example Funnily enough P4 reverted from "Brixton Station" back to plain "Brixton" a decent while back. The 118 also briefly joined P4 but now every route is plain "Brixton". A step backwards but everything is on a level playing field I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Oct 18, 2021 20:35:27 GMT
192: Tottenham Hale to Tottenham Hale Station
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Oct 18, 2021 20:52:17 GMT
I don't really see why making the destinations more specific is necessary, especially with the case of Hammersmith, where one would assume that the bus terminates at the bus station. The ones that don't terminate there but terminate somewhere else in Hammersmith specifically say so on the blinds The problem I have with all of this is that who actually stays on until the actual terminus, unless say it’s a major tube feeder destination like North Greenwich, Hammersmith, Brixton or Stratford? Very few people. The huge majority of people just need to see the destination to know the bus is going the right direction they need it to, so in the case of the 174’s complete change that’s likely to completely throw even a lot of experienced users of the route. And even in those examples because they’re such a major hub commuters know exactly where those routes are going to start from and finish. I mean honestly where else is a North Greenwich bus going to terminate, dump everyone off at Ikea and say ‘sorry mate cba to actually go to the station?’ And then don’t even get me started on the quite frankly deplorable inconsistencies. 123 having its destination spelt wrong. Not even putting commas separating the qualifier (ahem 25 I’m looking at you!). The awful gap in the iBus announcement (oh hello again 25! 117, X140). The most utterly shameful of all is that Heathrow Central has FOUR different wordings of the same destination! - 285 and others have the good old ‘Heathrow Central’ - 111 has ‘Heathrow Central Bus Station’ - 105 has ‘Heathrow Airport Central’ - X140 and others have ‘Heathrow Airport Central Bus Stn’ (Caveat: I am aware the destination shown on lvf may differ slightly to the ibus screen on the actual bus, but even on the screens some routes are displaying the comma in the wrong place) These are elementary things, you honestly can’t make this up. The 111 is actually "Heathrow Airport Central Bus Station".
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Oct 18, 2021 21:59:02 GMT
The 473 could be an interesting one I wouldn’t put it past them to do a 174 on it and change it to something like “473 to Pier Road, Woolwich Foot Tunnel North” The only glimmer of hope I have is that the ridiculous 15 one you pointed out was swiftly reverted back to its original so it makes me hope some of these will do the same. And yes you’re right very few are rather useful, the 117 one stating Isleworth is actually handy but again it needs to be consistent with the 481, which unsurprisingly it isn’t. I think that's the key - consistency is not happening. I believe some of the Brixton routes have Brixton Station as the destination on the I-Bus screen but others show plain Brixton just as another example I’m sure you probably know better but the only route I know of that had ‘Brixton Station’ was the P4, which LVF displayed too. But now that P4 just says plain old Brixton on LVF as well as all the others, so if LVF is correct all Brixton terminators *should* be consistent now. But that’s not a definite as the screen could say different and I don’t use the route
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 19, 2021 0:17:38 GMT
I think that's the key - consistency is not happening. I believe some of the Brixton routes have Brixton Station as the destination on the I-Bus screen but others show plain Brixton just as another example I’m sure you probably know better but the only route I know of that had ‘Brixton Station’ was the P4, which LVF displayed too. But now that P4 just says plain old Brixton on LVF as well as all the others, so if LVF is correct all Brixton terminators *should* be consistent now. But that’s not a definite as the screen could say different and I don’t use the route Unorm mentioned the 118 had it briefly too, something was telling me the 432 had it too but clearly my mind was playing tricks
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Oct 19, 2021 16:29:43 GMT
231: Enfield Chase> Enfield Would like to know the reasoning behind this
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Oct 21, 2021 21:30:44 GMT
123: Ilford Haniault Street > Ilford Hainault Street 99, 132, 486, B13: Bexleyheath, Shopping Centre > Bexleyheath, Town Centre
|
|