Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 9:52:44 GMT
Of course the best solution to the H37 stand issues would be to severly lower the road at Isleworth and run the DD 337 through to Hounslow like the 37 did. Or clear the back street around the bridge of parked cars. Can't see it happening but hey. Rerouting via Busch Corner with something else serving St Johns Road is probably the only viable option, if it weren't for the low bridge the 337 would surely go to Hounslow? The H37 is a success so I don’t know why people would suggest extending a double deck route almost half the H37 existing frequency over (some) of it. I remember the old 37 serving that section. As lovely as it was having double deckers, the service was utterly unreliable. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 3, 2019 10:31:26 GMT
Rerouting via Busch Corner with something else serving St Johns Road is probably the only viable option, if it weren't for the low bridge the 337 would surely go to Hounslow? The H37 is a success so I don’t know why people would suggest extending a double deck route almost half the H37 existing frequency over (some) of it. I remember the old 37 serving that section. As lovely as it was having double deckers, the service was utterly unreliable. The point was that if the low bridge hadn't been there the 337 would surely have gone to Hounslow and the H37 wouldn't exist. Whether it should be changed now is debatable, the 337 doesn't really have much purpose as it stands. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 3, 2019 10:48:53 GMT
The H37 is a success so I don’t know why people would suggest extending a double deck route almost half the H37 existing frequency over (some) of it. I remember the old 37 serving that section. As lovely as it was having double deckers, the service was utterly unreliable. The point was that if the low bridge hadn't been there the 337 would surely have gone to Hounslow and the H37 wouldn't exist. Whether it should be changed now is debatable, the 337 doesn't really have much purpose as it stands. I'm afraid that's false - the 337 clearly has a purpose and if it didn't, it would of been axed years ago. The 337 is a useful link between the Wandsworth end and Sheen/Richmond and has decent usage. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 3, 2019 10:55:52 GMT
The point was that if the low bridge hadn't been there the 337 would surely have gone to Hounslow and the H37 wouldn't exist. Whether it should be changed now is debatable, the 337 doesn't really have much purpose as it stands. I'm afraid that's false - the 337 clearly has a purpose and if it didn't, it would of been axed years ago. The 337 is a useful link between the Wandsworth end and Sheen/Richmond and has decent usage. Seriously...............is there really any need for the 33,337 and 493 between Barnes and Richmond as well as the parallel railway line? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 11:03:58 GMT
The H37 is a success so I don’t know why people would suggest extending a double deck route almost half the H37 existing frequency over (some) of it. I remember the old 37 serving that section. As lovely as it was having double deckers, the service was utterly unreliable. The point was that if the low bridge hadn't been there the 337 would surely have gone to Hounslow and the H37 wouldn't exist. Whether it should be changed now is debatable, the 337 doesn't really have much purpose as it stands. Well the low bridge has always been there. That wasn’t the reason for cutting up the 37. It was all to do with improving reliability. London United at the time was seeing vastly increased patronage on its Harrier branded routes, A legacy that remains on routes the firm ironically no longer run ( eg R68 and R70) It also helped resolve a situation where more than one privatised LBL company was operating on one route. The 337 was the first of the new sections to be offered to tender. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 3, 2019 11:05:38 GMT
The point was that if the low bridge hadn't been there the 337 would surely have gone to Hounslow and the H37 wouldn't exist. Whether it should be changed now is debatable, the 337 doesn't really have much purpose as it stands. Well the low bridge has always been there. That wasn’t the reason for cutting up the 37. It was all to do with improving reliability. London United at the time was seeing vastly increased patronage on its Harrier branded routes, A legacy that remains on routes the firm ironically no longer run ( eg R68 and R70) It also helped resolve a situation where more than one privatised LBL company was operating on one route. The 337 was the first of the new sections to be offered to tender. The old 37 ran mostly in two sections anyway. The route around the offending bridge was deemed no longer suitable for buses. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 3, 2019 11:22:48 GMT
I'm afraid that's false - the 337 clearly has a purpose and if it didn't, it would of been axed years ago. The 337 is a useful link between the Wandsworth end and Sheen/Richmond and has decent usage. Seriously...............is there really any need for the 33,337 and 493 between Barnes and Richmond as well as the parallel railway line? Yes as they offer different links - the 33 links Sheen & Barnes together, the 493 provides a link from Roehampton & beyond & the 337 provides a link from Putney and all three routes have decent to good patronage regardless of the railway line. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 11:42:41 GMT
Well the low bridge has always been there. That wasn’t the reason for cutting up the 37. It was all to do with improving reliability. London United at the time was seeing vastly increased patronage on its Harrier branded routes, A legacy that remains on routes the firm ironically no longer run ( eg R68 and R70) It also helped resolve a situation where more than one privatised LBL company was operating on one route. The 337 was the first of the new sections to be offered to tender. The old 37 ran mostly in two sections anyway. The route around the offending bridge was deemed no longer suitable for buses. I remember the old 37 from Hounslow always being very busy, once the H 37 was introduced it had to be increased in frequency and capacity more than twice. From DR to DRL, to LS/LX then to DP |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 3, 2019 11:46:39 GMT
The old 37 ran mostly in two sections anyway. The route around the offending bridge was deemed no longer suitable for buses. I remember the old 37 from Hounslow always being very busy, once the H 37 was introduced it had to be increased in frequency and capacity more than twice. From DR to DRL, to LS/LX then to DP I remember the western end of the 37 being very busy throughout but the 337 is pretty dead nowadays. |
|
|
|
Post by thelondonthing on Jan 3, 2019 12:15:35 GMT
I'm afraid that's false - the 337 clearly has a purpose and if it didn't, it would of been axed years ago. The 337 is a useful link between the Wandsworth end and Sheen/Richmond and has decent usage. Seriously...............is there really any need for the 33,337 and 493 between Barnes and Richmond as well as the parallel railway line? Three frequent routes between Richmond and Barnes does seem excessive - probably because it is... - but these routes do offer very valuable connections to areas beyond that corridor. Connections to Putney, Southfields, Roehampton, Wimbledon, Tooting, and St George's Hospital are invaluable not just to those on the Richmond-Barnes stretch, but also for passengers travelling into Richmond from elsewhere (the Hamptons, Twickenham, Isleworth, etc) to connect to those destinations served by the 337 and 493. And for those who live or work between Richmond and Barnes, the 33 is a very handy connection to Hammersmith (and still a very busy one). Well the low bridge has always been there. That wasn’t the reason for cutting up the 37. It was all to do with improving reliability. London United at the time was seeing vastly increased patronage on its Harrier branded routes, A legacy that remains on routes the firm ironically no longer run ( eg R68 and R70) It also helped resolve a situation where more than one privatised LBL company was operating on one route. The 337 was the first of the new sections to be offered to tender. The old 37 ran mostly in two sections anyway. The route around the offending bridge was deemed no longer suitable for buses. I have a very, very distant memory of seeing 37s blinded for Peckham at Hounslow Bus Garage (I think during the time that the 37 used to stand at Bay A, which was later surrendered to the 120/222 for the LLW trials). That said, I also vaguely remember the route being operated in two sections - were they Hounslow-Clapham Junction and Richmond to Peckham? Were there perhaps a handful of 'through' journeys from Hounslow to Peckham as well? I was quite young when the 37 was still routed away from the St John's Road bridge, and yet I can still recall the whole setup being very far from suitable. The Ultimate Nightmare Scenario - which seemed to happen with painful regularity - was when two 37s would meet in opposite directions on Linkfield Road and attempt to pass each other. They would inch forward, trying to squeeze down the tight residential street between badly parked cars, before everyone in both directions eventually accepted the reality that these buses really weren't going to pass each other without drastic action, which often took the form of everyone beeping their horns until the local residents came out of their homes to move their cars. I remember one occasion on which the DMS that I was on had to reverse back down Linkfield Road and out onto London Road in order to let another bus pass in the opposite direction; this caused all sorts of traffic mayhem, shouting and horn-beeping, and being a kid at the time, I naturally delighted in the chaos of it all, while my fellow passengers grumbled. But grumble they should, because that section of the route really was awful. Indeed, there was much rejoicing from Hounslow to Richmond when that section finally switched to the single-deck H37 route we know and tolerate today. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 3, 2019 12:25:11 GMT
Seriously...............is there really any need for the 33,337 and 493 between Barnes and Richmond as well as the parallel railway line? Three frequent routes between Richmond and Barnes does seem excessive - probably because it is... - but these routes do offer very valuable connections to areas beyond that corridor. Connections to Putney, Southfields, Roehampton, Wimbledon, Tooting, and St George's Hospital are invaluable not just to those on the Richmond-Barnes stretch, but also for passengers travelling into Richmond from elsewhere (the Hamptons, Twickenham, Isleworth, etc) to connect to those destinations served by the 337 and 493. And for those who live or work between Richmond and Barnes, the 33 is a very handy connection to Hammersmith (and still a very busy one). The old 37 ran mostly in two sections anyway. The route around the offending bridge was deemed no longer suitable for buses. I have a very, very distant memory of seeing 37s blinded for Peckham at Hounslow Bus Garage (I think during the time that the 37 used to stand at Bay A, which was later surrendered to the 120/222 for the LLW trials). That said, I also vaguely remember the route being operated in two sections - were they Hounslow-Clapham Junction and Richmond to Peckham? Were there perhaps a handful of 'through' journeys from Hounslow to Peckham as well? I was quite young when the 37 was still routed away from the St John's Road bridge, and yet I can still recall the whole setup being very far from suitable. The Ultimate Nightmare Scenario - which seemed to happen with painful regularity - was when two 37s would meet in opposite directions on Linkfield Road and attempt to pass each other. They would inch forward, trying to squeeze down the tight residential street between badly parked cars, before everyone in both directions eventually accepted the reality that these buses really weren't going to pass each other without drastic action, which often took the form of everyone beeping their horns until the local residents came out of their homes to move their cars. I remember one occasion on which the DMS that I was on had to reverse back down Linkfield Road and out onto London Road in order to let another bus pass in the opposite direction; this caused all sorts of traffic mayhem, shouting and horn-beeping, and being a kid at the time, I naturally delighted in the chaos of it all, while my fellow passengers grumbled. But grumble they should, because that section of the route really was awful. Indeed, there was much rejoicing from Hounslow to Richmond when that section finally switched to the single-deck H37 route we know and tolerate today. There were a few end to end journeys, from memory I think they were early morning and I definitely remember travelling on an RML all the way from Peckham to Hounslow on a Sunday. That route around the low bridge certainly wasn't ideal especially for OPO buses and it did make sense to use single deckers for the H37. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2019 12:33:01 GMT
Three frequent routes between Richmond and Barnes does seem excessive - probably because it is... - but these routes do offer very valuable connections to areas beyond that corridor. Connections to Putney, Southfields, Roehampton, Wimbledon, Tooting, and St George's Hospital are invaluable not just to those on the Richmond-Barnes stretch, but also for passengers travelling into Richmond from elsewhere (the Hamptons, Twickenham, Isleworth, etc) to connect to those destinations served by the 337 and 493. And for those who live or work between Richmond and Barnes, the 33 is a very handy connection to Hammersmith (and still a very busy one). I have a very, very distant memory of seeing 37s blinded for Peckham at Hounslow Bus Garage (I think during the time that the 37 used to stand at Bay A, which was later surrendered to the 120/222 for the LLW trials). That said, I also vaguely remember the route being operated in two sections - were they Hounslow-Clapham Junction and Richmond to Peckham? Were there perhaps a handful of 'through' journeys from Hounslow to Peckham as well? I was quite young when the 37 was still routed away from the St John's Road bridge, and yet I can still recall the whole setup being very far from suitable. The Ultimate Nightmare Scenario - which seemed to happen with painful regularity - was when two 37s would meet in opposite directions on Linkfield Road and attempt to pass each other. They would inch forward, trying to squeeze down the tight residential street between badly parked cars, before everyone in both directions eventually accepted the reality that these buses really weren't going to pass each other without drastic action, which often took the form of everyone beeping their horns until the local residents came out of their homes to move their cars. I remember one occasion on which the DMS that I was on had to reverse back down Linkfield Road and out onto London Road in order to let another bus pass in the opposite direction; this caused all sorts of traffic mayhem, shouting and horn-beeping, and being a kid at the time, I naturally delighted in the chaos of it all, while my fellow passengers grumbled. But grumble they should, because that section of the route really was awful. Indeed, there was much rejoicing from Hounslow to Richmond when that section finally switched to the single-deck H37 route we know and tolerate today. There were a few end to end journeys, from memory I think they were early morning and I definitely remember travelling on an RML all the way from Peckham to Hounslow on a Sunday. That route around the low bridge certainly wasn't ideal especially for OPO buses and it did make sense to use single deckers for the H37. Back in the days more than one garage ran a route |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Mar 3, 2019 7:00:19 GMT
For a consultation expected to start in May, TfL are being slow producing results
I have heard that the merger of 110 and 419 has run into problems because H&F Council are not keen on the heavier 10.9m MMC buses running over Hammersmith Bridge. I suspect someone had to ask for weight exemption and it has not gone down well as H&F are trying to get more money from TfL for bridge strengthening
The alternative would be either to use DEs (not impossible as they could be swapped off routes like 371), but would require higher frequency to maintain capacity
I suspect these rumoured problems are linked to continued use of OVs on 465 and the apparent lack of a confirmed bus order for 272 new contract in May
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 3, 2019 7:15:00 GMT
For a consultation expected to start in May, TfL are being slow producing results I have heard that the merger of 110 and 419 has run into problems because H&F Council are not keen on the heavier 10.9m MMC buses running over Hammersmith Bridge. I suspect someone had to ask for weight exemption and it has not gone down well as H&F are trying to get more money from TfL for bridge strengthening The alternative would be either to use DEs (not impossible as they could be swapped off routes like 371), but would require higher frequency to maintain capacity I suspect these rumoured problems are linked to continued use of OVs on 465 and the apparent lack of a confirmed bus order for 272 new contract in May Leave the 419 alone,reroute the 110 as planned to Richmond and extend via the 190 to Hammersmith instead. It could go onto West Brompton, or divert the shortened 391 there instead. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Mar 3, 2019 10:51:14 GMT
For a consultation expected to start in May, TfL are being slow producing results I have heard that the merger of 110 and 419 has run into problems because H&F Council are not keen on the heavier 10.9m MMC buses running over Hammersmith Bridge. I suspect someone had to ask for weight exemption and it has not gone down well as H&F are trying to get more money from TfL for bridge strengthening The alternative would be either to use DEs (not impossible as they could be swapped off routes like 371), but would require higher frequency to maintain capacity I suspect these rumoured problems are linked to continued use of OVs on 465 and the apparent lack of a confirmed bus order for 272 new contract in May Mwahahah the green bridge strikes again  |
|
