Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 30, 2019 21:57:26 GMT
The worse thing to happen for London bus passengers?
65 Ealing Broadway to Chessington Fox and Hounds
71 Chessington to Richmond
105 Shepherds Bush to Heathrow
Just three examples with Comfortable long bus routes if required by bus passengers removed either for more fares back in the day or traffic congestion but surely drivers can be on the road three hours so do not get that.
I think cutting routes was a bad thing and although it enabled some areas to get a bus route for first time I to this day do not get why this path was gone down. Some routes are so short now.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 30, 2019 22:45:20 GMT
The worse thing to happen for London bus passengers? 65 Ealing Broadway to Chessington Fox and Hounds 71 Chessington to Richmond 105 Shepherds Bush to Heathrow Just three examples with Comfortable long bus routes if required by bus passengers removed either for more fares back in the day or traffic congestion but surely drivers can be on the road three hours so do not get that. I think cutting routes was a bad thing and although it enabled some areas to get a bus route for first time I to this day do not get why this path was gone down. Some routes are so short now. We regularly debate this issue but in the form of speculative route ideas. I understand why people hark back to the "old days" of long routes but there were good reasons why they were split. The major one was traffic congestion and all the attendant unreliability and poor service performance. There was far less bus priority back then and in some areas far, far more private car usage than now. It's only a micro example but when I moved to London in 1983 two of three routes on the main road near my digs were appallingly unreliable. Only one route could be relied upon to run anywhere near to time and it was the least frequent and had the shortest operating hours. To be fair to TfL the two appalling routes in 1983 are now rather better run and more reliable. Not brilliant because they run in busy bits of East London but a long way better than in 1983. Those self same routes are also *vastly* busier now than then so the routes are carrying more people and doing it more reliably and effectively. Operating requirements and driver regulations are different now as are TfL's (and passengers!) expectations of how services should run. A lot of people rely on public transport in London - more than anywhere else in the UK. It basically has to work and if that means shorter routes are required then that's what we get. I don't agree with everything TfL does and the last couple of years have been shambolic and there is worse to come. I think almost everything that has been done is either plain wrong or flawed. I understand why TfL believe it is necessary but there is a wider debate to be had there about cause and effect. That's not for this thread and it's been done to death before. As I have said before I would not want the bus network put back to the 1970s. From everything I've read and heard it was actually pretty awful even if you could ride on a Routemaster from Ealing to Chessington. I used to ride the 65 a fair bit back in the 80s so I know what it was like but I'm not a nostalgia fan forever longing for RMs and RTs. They both had an incredible innings - far longer than logic should have allowed. We should allow them their place in history and not keep wanting to have them in service. Today's network is pretty reliable, it is frequent for the most part, it has very good coverage every day of the week and early and late and it is very comprehensive barring a few "holes" that need filling (if only residents would allow). We are vastly better off than almost everywhere else in the country in terms of service scope and quality and fares are ludicrously cheap. And yet people *still* moan?! People should try living in a deregulated area with no evening buses, high fares and few if any Sunday services and then try to live a London lifestyle there. They can't do it unless they own a car with the possible exceptions of Brighton, Nottingham, Oxford and Edinburgh which have well run and well respected bus networks. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Apr 30, 2019 23:05:41 GMT
The worse thing to happen for London bus passengers? 65 Ealing Broadway to Chessington Fox and Hounds 71 Chessington to Richmond 105 Shepherds Bush to Heathrow Just three examples with Comfortable long bus routes if required by bus passengers removed either for more fares back in the day or traffic congestion but surely drivers can be on the road three hours so do not get that. I think cutting routes was a bad thing and although it enabled some areas to get a bus route for first time I to this day do not get why this path was gone down. Some routes are so short now. The 105 was split into sections for most of the day even fifty years ago because of the appalling traffic on Western Avenue in pre-M40 days. The buses from Shepherds Bush garage only worked to Southall, Brent Road from memory, with Heathrow buses starting from Greenford. Southall garage buses worked both sections. I have cause to particularly remember this because for a short while in my trainee management spell at LT I had to go and inspect a stop on Western Avenue and, stupidly, chose to catch a 105 from White City, I think, and waited about 45 minutes in the early afternoon. The last time I ever set foot on Western Avenue, and I hope that remains the case! |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 1, 2019 0:10:05 GMT
The worse thing to happen for London bus passengers? 65 Ealing Broadway to Chessington Fox and Hounds 71 Chessington to Richmond 105 Shepherds Bush to Heathrow Just three examples with Comfortable long bus routes if required by bus passengers removed either for more fares back in the day or traffic congestion but surely drivers can be on the road three hours so do not get that. I think cutting routes was a bad thing and although it enabled some areas to get a bus route for first time I to this day do not get why this path was gone down. Some routes are so short now. It's got nothing to do with drivers on the road for three hours - congestion was becoming a real pain in operating in these long routes and so they were split/chopped up in order to bring in a reliable service. The mistake people make is wanting every route to be long - some of the shortest routes in London are some of the most useful. Take the 507 & 521 for example - two short routes but are very well used. I'll give you one from my own are - the P5 is a not too long route that traverses many housing estates across Wandsworth, Lambeth & Southwark which are not near other routes and without this route, many would much longer journey times particularly the elderly. Length should only ever be a factor if there is a reliability problem or a potential reliability issue. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 1:22:57 GMT
Very interesting thoughts Thankyou.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 1, 2019 5:16:52 GMT
The worse thing to happen for London bus passengers? 65 Ealing Broadway to Chessington Fox and Hounds 71 Chessington to Richmond 105 Shepherds Bush to Heathrow Just three examples with Comfortable long bus routes if required by bus passengers removed either for more fares back in the day or traffic congestion but surely drivers can be on the road three hours so do not get that. I think cutting routes was a bad thing and although it enabled some areas to get a bus route for first time I to this day do not get why this path was gone down. Some routes are so short now. Some routes are a shadow of their former selves, the 19 for example which was proposed for withdrawl at its western end because it's become little more than a short working of the 22 and really is superfluous, if it still went to Tooting Bec it would undoubtedly be much busier. The possible return of the 53 to Oxford Circus is often mentioned on here, I'd regard its removal as akin to the Oxford Tube service being curtailed at Hillingdon, yes it would make it more reliable but you'd lose masses of customers. The 54 and 353 which were removed from Croydon when Tramlink opened are a shadow of their former selves in fact what's left of the 353 could probably be withdrawn completely. Obviously bus services needed to be amended when Tramlink opened but it could have been done differently. Every route that is shortened is more direct links lost and probably more customers lost. On the other hand it's perhaps surprising that the 36 hasn't been withdrawn north of Paddington and replaced by something else. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 1, 2019 12:04:30 GMT
The 52 from Mill Hill and the 16 from Neasden were very good routes once upon a time. I understand reliability issues but everyone coped and got on with their lives back in the day.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 1, 2019 13:24:35 GMT
I understand reliability issues but everyone coped and got on with their lives back in the day. There has been untold increases in congestion between 1975 & 2019 that has sadly resulted in routes needing to be cut back to maintain a decent level of service - whether everyone cope or not, that has no relevance at all. You need a balance of links & reliability and I believe today's routes on the whole achieve this balance as best as possible - I don't expect anyone to agree with me on that and no doubt I'll be shot down for it but as much as I love the old routes, the right decisions were ultimately taken in order to maintain a service. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 1, 2019 13:34:27 GMT
The worse thing to happen for London bus passengers? 65 Ealing Broadway to Chessington Fox and Hounds 71 Chessington to Richmond 105 Shepherds Bush to Heathrow Just three examples with Comfortable long bus routes if required by bus passengers removed either for more fares back in the day or traffic congestion but surely drivers can be on the road three hours so do not get that. I think cutting routes was a bad thing and although it enabled some areas to get a bus route for first time I to this day do not get why this path was gone down. Some routes are so short now. Some routes are a shadow of their former selves, the 19 for example which was proposed for withdrawl at its western end because it's become little more than a short working of the 22 and really is superfluous, if it still went to Tooting Bec it would undoubtedly be much busier. The possible return of the 53 to Oxford Circus is often mentioned on here, I'd regard its removal as akin to the Oxford Tube service being curtailed at Hillingdon, yes it would make it more reliable but you'd lose masses of customers. The 54 and 353 which were removed from Croydon when Tramlink opened are a shadow of their former selves in fact what's left of the 353 could probably be withdrawn completely. Obviously bus services needed to be amended when Tramlink opened but it could have been done differently. Every route that is shortened is more direct links lost and probably more customers lost. On the other hand it's perhaps surprising that the 36 hasn't been withdrawn north of Paddington and replaced by something else. Comparing the 53 & Oxford Tube isn't a fair comparison - one is a limited stopping route whilst the other is a regular bus route. The 53 also saw most of its massive increase in patronage after the cutback from Oxford Circus so I doubt it suffered too much. There is nothing wrong in being nostalgic but it shouldn't be confused with what is feasible nowadays nor we should make over exaggerations like the 54 being a shadow of it's former self just because it's shorter in length - the 54 clearly still provides very important roles in its current form and will no doubt continue to do so. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 1, 2019 13:42:39 GMT
Some routes are a shadow of their former selves, the 19 for example which was proposed for withdrawl at its western end because it's become little more than a short working of the 22 and really is superfluous, if it still went to Tooting Bec it would undoubtedly be much busier. The possible return of the 53 to Oxford Circus is often mentioned on here, I'd regard its removal as akin to the Oxford Tube service being curtailed at Hillingdon, yes it would make it more reliable but you'd lose masses of customers. The 54 and 353 which were removed from Croydon when Tramlink opened are a shadow of their former selves in fact what's left of the 353 could probably be withdrawn completely. Obviously bus services needed to be amended when Tramlink opened but it could have been done differently. Every route that is shortened is more direct links lost and probably more customers lost. On the other hand it's perhaps surprising that the 36 hasn't been withdrawn north of Paddington and replaced by something else. Comparing the 53 & Oxford Tube isn't a fair comparison - one is a limited stopping route whilst the other is a regular bus route. The 53 also saw most of its massive increase in patronage after the cutback from Oxford Circus so I doubt it suffered too much. There is nothing wrong in being nostalgic but it shouldn't be confused with what is feasible nowadays nor we should make over exaggerations like the 54 being a shadow of it's former self just because it's shorter in length - the 54 clearly still provides very important roles in its current form and will no doubt continue to do so. I thought the Oxford Tube was a perfectly reasonable comparison, the point I was making is that it wouldn't be withdrawn short of passenger objectives whatever the congestion problems. This has nothing to do with nostalgia as far as I'm concerned, it's about making the best use of resources and the fact is that the once busy 54 is often very lightly used south of Catford. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on May 1, 2019 13:45:13 GMT
Some routes are a shadow of their former selves, the 19 for example which was proposed for withdrawl at its western end because it's become little more than a short working of the 22 and really is superfluous, if it still went to Tooting Bec it would undoubtedly be much busier. The possible return of the 53 to Oxford Circus is often mentioned on here, I'd regard its removal as akin to the Oxford Tube service being curtailed at Hillingdon, yes it would make it more reliable but you'd lose masses of customers. The 54 and 353 which were removed from Croydon when Tramlink opened are a shadow of their former selves in fact what's left of the 353 could probably be withdrawn completely. Obviously bus services needed to be amended when Tramlink opened but it could have been done differently. Every route that is shortened is more direct links lost and probably more customers lost. On the other hand it's perhaps surprising that the 36 hasn't been withdrawn north of Paddington and replaced by something else. Comparing the 53 & Oxford Tube isn't a fair comparison - one is a limited stopping route whilst the other is a regular bus route. The 53 also saw most of its massive increase in patronage after the cutback from Oxford Circus so I doubt it suffered too much. There is nothing wrong in being nostalgic but it shouldn't be confused with what is feasible nowadays nor we should make over exaggerations like the 54 being a shadow of it's former self just because it's shorter in length - the 54 clearly still provides very important roles in its current form and will no doubt continue to do so. The 54 shows the limits of the interchange model - I have never managed to make what I would consider a successful interchange between a 54 and a tram. Elmers End is interchange in its loosest sense involving a schlep across a spartan windswept bus parking area, through a poorly signposted gate and over a footbridge. And in the reverse direction, it usually involves watching a 54 speed off as quickly as possible to avoid dealing with those pesky passengers. Beckenham is not much better. (I'd restore the 54 to Croydon, split it at Lewisham where there is a clear swapover of passengers with an overlap to Catford, and sell the Elmers End site for flats/housing. But that is for a different thread.) |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 1, 2019 13:55:15 GMT
The 52 from Mill Hill and the 16 from Neasden were very good routes once upon a time. I understand reliability issues but everyone coped and got on with their lives back in the day. The 52 went all the way to Borehamwood once but that was a bit before my time. I think this is probably one of the more reasonable splits but even then there are problems caused by too many buses on the short 52/302 overlap between Willesden Garage and Kensal Rise. The 16 could probably be returned to Neasden and Brent Park Tesco without too many problems, I'm not sure that the 332 is really needed nowadays but that's another subject. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 1, 2019 14:16:26 GMT
Comparing the 53 & Oxford Tube isn't a fair comparison - one is a limited stopping route whilst the other is a regular bus route. The 53 also saw most of its massive increase in patronage after the cutback from Oxford Circus so I doubt it suffered too much. There is nothing wrong in being nostalgic but it shouldn't be confused with what is feasible nowadays nor we should make over exaggerations like the 54 being a shadow of it's former self just because it's shorter in length - the 54 clearly still provides very important roles in its current form and will no doubt continue to do so. The 54 shows the limits of the interchange model - I have never managed to make what I would consider a successful interchange between a 54 and a tram. Elmers End is interchange in its loosest sense involving a schlep across a spartan windswept bus parking area, through a poorly signposted gate and over a footbridge. And in the reverse direction, it usually involves watching a 54 speed off as quickly as possible to avoid dealing with those pesky passengers. Beckenham is not much better. (I'd restore the 54 to Croydon, split it at Lewisham where there is a clear swapover of passengers with an overlap to Catford, and sell the Elmers End site for flats/housing. But that is for a different thread.) Indeed and whilst the bus interchange is a slight improvement on what went before, basically nothing when the 54 went on a dead run via Anerley just to turn around, it's still far from ideal. Anybody unable to use the footbridge has a long walk round which must be great fun in the pouring rain. The last 54 is about 01.00 from Elmers End and is supposed to connect with the last tram but would anybody dare chance it? Is there any guarantee that the bus will wait if the tram is late? Perhaps not surprising that former users of the 54 to Croydon seem to have found other ways of getting there. I'd have left the 54 as it was and altered the 289 but as you say that's for another thread. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 1, 2019 14:40:50 GMT
Comparing the 53 & Oxford Tube isn't a fair comparison - one is a limited stopping route whilst the other is a regular bus route. The 53 also saw most of its massive increase in patronage after the cutback from Oxford Circus so I doubt it suffered too much. There is nothing wrong in being nostalgic but it shouldn't be confused with what is feasible nowadays nor we should make over exaggerations like the 54 being a shadow of it's former self just because it's shorter in length - the 54 clearly still provides very important roles in its current form and will no doubt continue to do so. The 54 shows the limits of the interchange model - I have never managed to make what I would consider a successful interchange between a 54 and a tram. Elmers End is interchange in its loosest sense involving a schlep across a spartan windswept bus parking area, through a poorly signposted gate and over a footbridge. And in the reverse direction, it usually involves watching a 54 speed off as quickly as possible to avoid dealing with those pesky passengers. Beckenham is not much better. (I'd restore the 54 to Croydon, split it at Lewisham where there is a clear swapover of passengers with an overlap to Catford, and sell the Elmers End site for flats/housing. But that is for a different thread.) I understand that but my point was in general rather than particularly looking at Elmers End - my original point being that just because the 54 is shorter in length, doesn't mean it's instantly a shadow of its former self as it still provides many other important links. The same old comments are continually made about this route being empty & this should be returned here without accounting for today's conditions (btw, not referring to your above point about the 54 as I understand the case about returning it to West Croydon) nor understanding the reasons why many routes were shortened in the first place - people need to remove their nostalgia out of the debate first and look at practicalities instead. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on May 1, 2019 15:42:23 GMT
The 54 shows the limits of the interchange model - I have never managed to make what I would consider a successful interchange between a 54 and a tram. Elmers End is interchange in its loosest sense involving a schlep across a spartan windswept bus parking area, through a poorly signposted gate and over a footbridge. And in the reverse direction, it usually involves watching a 54 speed off as quickly as possible to avoid dealing with those pesky passengers. Beckenham is not much better. (I'd restore the 54 to Croydon, split it at Lewisham where there is a clear swapover of passengers with an overlap to Catford, and sell the Elmers End site for flats/housing. But that is for a different thread.) I understand that but my point was in general rather than particularly looking at Elmers End - my original point being that just because the 54 is shorter in length, doesn't mean it's instantly a shadow of its former self as it still provides many other important links. The same old comments are continually made about this route being empty & this should be returned here without accounting for today's conditions (btw, not referring to your above point about the 54 as I understand the case about returning it to West Croydon) nor understanding the reasons why many routes were shortened in the first place - people need to remove their nostalgia out of the debate first and look at practicalities instead. I think we pretty much agree on most of that - the 54 is a bit of a special case in that it was split in the wrong place for reasons that didn't have the passenger as a priority. No one seeing a 54 leaving Woolwich would doubt its importance (except maybe the consultants proposing the loss of the busy first two stops...). Until now, TfL has generally been quite good at limiting broken links with overlaps and so on, and matching them to the obvious break points. But the Hopper fare seems to be changing that - instead of the routes fitting the passenger, the passenger has to fit to the route. |
|
