|
|
Post by busaholic on Nov 4, 2018 22:37:33 GMT
If you're not careful, you can end up with some nonsenses though by that approach. It's a question of both where people want to access in a town and where stand space is available. From the north, ending a route at Perry Hall Road, for instance, doesn't quite get people to the main shopping area, and is even further for those who require the station. Similarly, cutting the 208 back to Orpington Station would be madness, as there are probably very few from that direction who require the station as opposed to the commercial area. Such relatively short overlaps have to be accepted: in any case, the War Memorial is unacceptable as more than an occasional turn for late running. As for Bromley Common to Bromley High Street, the level of service now is much worse than even in the bad days of the 1980s/90s. You had 'working' garage journeys on many routes for much of that time, plus the late lamented 402 route. Cutting the 61 back to TB for instance would be an entirely retrograde step: I can remember when it was extended from there to Bromley North in the first place, to give Crofton Lane residents a direct Bromley service. It'd be a bit like saying all Turnpike Lane Station terminators that come through Wood Green should instead terminate at the latter point, and be replaced at TLS by routes cut back from WN like the 29, leaving the High Road to through routes like the 141. Hopper fare is absolutely irrelevant to this argument. I don't see how the 208 could possibly terminate at Orpington Station anyway, surely the turn into Station Approach would be too tight? I wouldn't be surprised if the 61 ended up being withdrawn completely and replaced by changes to other routes. Bromley Common to the High Street currently has the 61,208,261,320 and 358. An inability to terminate wouldn't necessarily put them off - run it down out of service to the War Memorial and back up would be their answer. How would you think the Chislehurst to Orpington section of the 61 would be replaced? I'm sure an extension of the 161 wouldn't be acceptable. I was a shopkeeper in the Walnuts Shopping Centre in Orpington when the Roundabout routes started, and i remember it being said then that it wasn't considered appropriate for an R minibus route over those roads, not least because there was considerable carry-over from Orpington's north west suburbs to Bromley and Locksbottom on the 61. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 4, 2018 22:42:58 GMT
Yes the 61 does provide some cross Orpington links to PRU Hospital.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Nov 4, 2018 22:52:28 GMT
I don't see how the 208 could possibly terminate at Orpington Station anyway, surely the turn into Station Approach would be too tight? I wouldn't be surprised if the 61 ended up being withdrawn completely and replaced by changes to other routes. Bromley Common to the High Street currently has the 61,208,261,320 and 358. An inability to terminate wouldn't necessarily put them off - run it down out of service to the War Memorial and back up would be their answer. How would you think the Chislehurst to Orpington section of the 61 would be replaced? I'm sure an extension of the 161 wouldn't be acceptable. I was a shopkeeper in the Walnuts Shopping Centre in Orpington when the Roundabout routes started, and i remember it being said then that it wasn't considered appropriate for an R minibus route over those roads, not least because there was considerable carry-over from Orpington's north west suburbs to Bromley and Locksbottom on the 61. If the 353 hadn't been reduced already, you might divert it over the 61 to Chislehurst to maintain the link to the PRU. Ramsden would still be linked to the PRU by the R4. It might also solve the toilet issue on the 353! |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 4, 2018 23:28:23 GMT
I don't see how the 208 could possibly terminate at Orpington Station anyway, surely the turn into Station Approach would be too tight? I wouldn't be surprised if the 61 ended up being withdrawn completely and replaced by changes to other routes. Bromley Common to the High Street currently has the 61,208,261,320 and 358. An inability to terminate wouldn't necessarily put them off - run it down out of service to the War Memorial and back up would be their answer. How would you think the Chislehurst to Orpington section of the 61 would be replaced? I'm sure an extension of the 161 wouldn't be acceptable. I was a shopkeeper in the Walnuts Shopping Centre in Orpington when the Roundabout routes started, and i remember it being said then that it wasn't considered appropriate for an R minibus route over those roads, not least because there was considerable carry-over from Orpington's north west suburbs to Bromley and Locksbottom on the 61. Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 5, 2018 0:02:23 GMT
An inability to terminate wouldn't necessarily put them off - run it down out of service to the War Memorial and back up would be their answer. How would you think the Chislehurst to Orpington section of the 61 would be replaced? I'm sure an extension of the 161 wouldn't be acceptable. I was a shopkeeper in the Walnuts Shopping Centre in Orpington when the Roundabout routes started, and i remember it being said then that it wasn't considered appropriate for an R minibus route over those roads, not least because there was considerable carry-over from Orpington's north west suburbs to Bromley and Locksbottom on the 61. Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. Two points: 1) Could they not decide to clear a number of routes from Orpington and plonk the 208 in there - not saying it should happen but you never know what the thinking is in these consultations? 2) That's a hell of an extension to the 161 especially given what it already has to pass through on the current route - I'd dread to think what would happen to reliability? |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Nov 5, 2018 0:16:11 GMT
Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. Two points: 1) Could they not decide to clear a number of routes from Orpington and plonk the 208 in there - not saying it should happen but you never know what the thinking is in these consultations? 2) That's a hell of an extension to the 161 especially given what it already has to pass through on the current route - I'd dread to think what would happen to reliability? The 161A down to Petts Wood was always a shocker for reliability and, apart from me, I doubt anyone ever did the full journey.  Scheduling issues meant Sidcup buses never covered the Chislehurst to Petts Wood section and Plumstead/Abbey Wood buses were always getting cut, the 161A being a favourite for 'staff cuts': this included last buses on occasion, as I know to my cost. Although I'd like to see an Orpington to Eltham link again in an ideal world, I don't honestly think now is the time to try and press it! |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Nov 5, 2018 0:24:09 GMT
An inability to terminate wouldn't necessarily put them off - run it down out of service to the War Memorial and back up would be their answer. How would you think the Chislehurst to Orpington section of the 61 would be replaced? I'm sure an extension of the 161 wouldn't be acceptable. I was a shopkeeper in the Walnuts Shopping Centre in Orpington when the Roundabout routes started, and i remember it being said then that it wasn't considered appropriate for an R minibus route over those roads, not least because there was considerable carry-over from Orpington's north west suburbs to Bromley and Locksbottom on the 61. Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. The Chislehurst - Orpington section would be overbussed and I strongly doubt TfL would want to introduce the effects of Blackwall Tunnel traffic that far south. A rerouting of the 160 might work, although something else might need to pick up the Sidcup - Chislehurst service. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 5, 2018 6:02:19 GMT
Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. The Chislehurst - Orpington section would be overbussed and I strongly doubt TfL would want to introduce the effects of Blackwall Tunnel traffic that far south. A rerouting of the 160 might work, although something else might need to pick up the Sidcup - Chislehurst service. Actually the 160 would probably be a better option and if the B14 was withdrawn between QMH and Orpington that could be rerouted to Chislehurst, it should be adequate the 160s aren't exactly busy on that section. I certainly think an Orpington to Eltham link would be useful. |
|
|
|
Post by Paul on Nov 5, 2018 6:13:11 GMT
The Chislehurst - Orpington section would be overbussed and I strongly doubt TfL would want to introduce the effects of Blackwall Tunnel traffic that far south. A rerouting of the 160 might work, although something else might need to pick up the Sidcup - Chislehurst service. Actually the 160 would probably be a better option and if the B14 was withdrawn between QMH and Orpington that could be rerouted to Chislehurst, it should be adequate the 160s aren't exactly busy on that section. I certainly think an Orpington to Eltham link would be useful. I don’t think the B14 is particularly needed through St Paul’s and St Mary Cray. It always goes through with an R11 and when I’ve seen it (I live in the area) neither bus is very full. So how about diverting the B14 at QMH, along Perry Street to Chislehurst War Memorial and along the 61 to Orpington. The B14’s more modest frequency is probably more suited to that section although Sunday operating hours may need to be extended I certainly agree with the sentiment that the 61 is vulnerable. I know it’s only a small snapshot but I got a 61 back to the garage from Orpington mid-Saturday afternoon and there was barely anyone on it and the drivers tell me that’s not rare |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 5, 2018 6:17:54 GMT
Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. Two points: 1) Could they not decide to clear a number of routes from Orpington and plonk the 208 in there - not saying it should happen but you never know what the thinking is in these consultations? 2) That's a hell of an extension to the 161 especially given what it already has to pass through on the current route - I'd dread to think what would happen to reliability? If the 208 was extended anywhere it would be better going to Ramsden replacing the 353 and giving a direct link to Bromley. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 5, 2018 6:29:34 GMT
Actually the 160 would probably be a better option and if the B14 was withdrawn between QMH and Orpington that could be rerouted to Chislehurst, it should be adequate the 160s aren't exactly busy on that section. I certainly think an Orpington to Eltham link would be useful. I don’t think the B14 is particularly needed through St Paul’s and St Mary Cray. It always goes through with an R11 and when I’ve seen it (I live in the area) neither bus is very full. So how about diverting the B14 at QMH, along Perry Street to Chislehurst War Memorial and along the 61 to Orpington. The B14’s more modest frequency is probably more suited to that section although Sunday operating hours may need to be extended I certainly agree with the sentiment that the 61 is vulnerable. I know it’s only a small snapshot but I got a 61 back to the garage from Orpington mid-Saturday afternoon and there was barely anyone on it and the drivers tell me that’s not rare Yes I've certainly noticed some very lightly loaded buses on both the 61 and 353. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2018 14:05:47 GMT
There will be a consultation for the Brent Cross redevelopment, which may or may not be tied into any Edgware Road changes.
I believe there is also due to be a Harrow "revamp", possibly to be aligned with a new bus station and potentially linked in with developments around the station and town centre.
I wouldn't be surprised if Wembley is on the radar either ...
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Nov 5, 2018 14:13:50 GMT
There will be a consultation for the Brent Cross redevelopment, which may or may not be tied into any Edgware Road changes. I believe there is also due to be a Harrow "revamp", possibly to be aligned with a new bus station and potentially linked in with developments around the station and town centre. I wouldn't be surprised if Wembley is on the radar either ... I wouldn’t be surprised if Greenford got a revamp. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 5, 2018 14:25:08 GMT
Looks like everywhere is due a revamp as Sutton (not the Sutton link) was also due a consultation as the S4's contact has been extended.
|
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Nov 5, 2018 15:19:29 GMT
Clearly the 208 is never going to terminate at Orpington Station. Extending the 161 to Orpington would be an option giving a link to Mottingham and Eltham. The Chislehurst - Orpington section would be overbussed and I strongly doubt TfL would want to introduce the effects of Blackwall Tunnel traffic that far south. A rerouting of the 160 might work, although something else might need to pick up the Sidcup - Chislehurst service. I know I introduced the notion, but I'm not for one minute advocating the 161 be extended to Orpington. I think it was a crying shame that the 161 got sucked into the North Greenwich peninsula in the first place; in my view it should have continued to terminate in Woolwich and concentrate on ferrying the considerable number of passengers who have always wanted to travel between there and Eltham/Mottingham. The long-delayed extension of the 132 from Eltham to North Greenwich compounded the situation. I wonder whether TfL in their Crossrail 'consultations' have underestimated the possible demand from those living on or close to the 161 who might wish to access Woolwich Arsenal station in future, perhaps as opposed to North Greenwich. I can scarcely believe the derisory level of service on the 161 now: what has happened? I won't go anywhere near either Eltham or Woolwich now for my own personal reasons, but I grew up in the area and knew it extremely well for twenty years and pretty well for another twenty. Get the 161 back Woolwich to Chislehurst at a 5 minute peak frequency, and max 10-12 at other times, and I'm sure they'll come again, if they ever sort out the mess I read about regarding the traffic/roads. |
|
Scheduling issues meant Sidcup buses never covered the Chislehurst to Petts Wood section and Plumstead/Abbey Wood buses were always getting cut, the 161A being a favourite for 'staff cuts': this included last buses on occasion, as I know to my cost. Although I'd like to see an Orpington to Eltham link again in an ideal world, I don't honestly think now is the time to try and press it!