Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2019 19:44:36 GMT
Just about every 185 I see in Catford is quiet, that end of the route certainly doesn't need an 8 minute headway. Lewisham to Forest Hill area, the 122 or P4 are the better option and there is also the 171 from Catford along Stanstead Road. Could I ask what time of day you’ve seen empty 185s in Catford? I’ve seen the route very busy there during the peaks, decently loaded off peak. Rushey Green is a very busy bus corridor, and I’d rather it had too much bus capacity than an insufficient level. Various times of day, I'm in Catford regularly.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 17, 2019 19:46:58 GMT
The fact that the 185 provides a link from Lewisham Hospital to Stanstead Road and Forest Hill probably keeps it safe to Lewisham.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 17, 2019 19:52:33 GMT
The fact that the 185 provides a link from Lewisham Hospital to Stanstead Road and Forest Hill probably keeps it safe to Lewisham. I think if a route were to be cut from Rushey Green, it would probably be one of the 47/199.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2019 20:09:22 GMT
The fact that the 185 provides a link from Lewisham Hospital to Stanstead Road and Forest Hill probably keeps it safe to Lewisham. Yes I wasn't suggesting that the 185 should be altered, just that it's more likely to get a frequency reduction than an increase.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Sept 17, 2019 20:12:47 GMT
Probably a case of being careful what you wish for, the 185 is pretty quiet through Catford and I would think a frequency reduction is more likely than an increase. There are various rail options from Denmark Hill including the recently increased Thameslink service on the Catford loop line. A better use of resources might be a 6 minute headway Victoria to Forest Hill and a 12 minute headway to Lewisham? Can't remember the last time I've seen a quiet 185 in Catford, always fairly loaded when I've passed through. Lewisham Town Centre to Forest Hill is better done by a 122, but Lewisham Hospital being served by the 185 could be a consideration, and the direct connection to Kings Collage Hospital too, these being the two principal hospitals in S.E. London. My experience of seeing 185s in Catford was so long ago, but was on a six days a week basis over eight years, and Rushey Green up Stanstead Road saw full and fullish loads peak and offpeak, then aided by the irregular 176/A. By contrast, the other ex-tram route the 179, later 141, then 172, now 171 from Catford to Brockley Rise and beyond was never so popular, and I'd be surprised if that has changed. I'm not averse to split headways, for part day at least, and I certainly think they'll become necessary again if the network is to survive in a recognisable form, but that 6 minute headway would have to be as far as Rushey Green I'd have thought, so it would cost in terms of PVR. Buses starting from Forest Hill going up to Horniman were another necessity during peaks, and a boon outside those hours too, but I've no idea how feasible they'd be now.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Sept 18, 2019 13:40:19 GMT
The fact that the 185 provides a link from Lewisham Hospital to Stanstead Road and Forest Hill probably keeps it safe to Lewisham. Yes I wasn't suggesting that the 185 should be altered, just that it's more likely to get a frequency reduction than an increase. It should hopefully escape the cuts radar, it’s grown significantly over the last couple of years, the 436 rerouting cut probably helped. It’s now a smidge of 8 figures, which one could infer is already a lot for just 25 vehicles to handle. There are a lot of routes with bigger PVRs that carry less.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 18, 2019 20:07:23 GMT
Yes I wasn't suggesting that the 185 should be altered, just that it's more likely to get a frequency reduction than an increase. It should hopefully escape the cuts radar, it’s grown significantly over the last couple of years, the 436 rerouting cut probably helped. It’s now a smidge of 8 figures, which one could infer is already a lot for just 25 vehicles to handle. There are a lot of routes with bigger PVRs that carry less. The 185 is one on my growing list of Q routes which need frequency increases (alongside the 35 and 176). I wonder if increasing the route to every six minutes could work, although perhaps to upshot of that would be a frequency cut to another route along Rushey Green to prevent overbusing the corridor. Alternatively you could increase the 185 to 8.5bph as a compromise between insufficient 7.5bph and 10bph if that’s too generous.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 18, 2019 20:16:08 GMT
With Lewisham Town Hall to Bellingham (TL) quite heavily bussed (47/54/136/171/208/320) removing an entire TL to Lewisham route could be investigated by TFL. 54, 136 and 208 are probably safe as they provide plenty of unique links and whilst the 171 may be logical to pull back to the town centre it does provide a unique TL link that heads west at the town centre to Stanstead Road and Brockley I fear the 47 and 199 have a lot in common.
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Sept 18, 2019 20:29:01 GMT
With Lewisham Town Hall to Bellingham (TL) quite heavily bussed (47/54/136/171/208/320) removing an entire TL to Lewisham route could be investigated by TFL. 54, 136 and 208 are probably safe as they provide plenty of unique links and whilst the 171 may be logical to pull back to the town centre it does provide a unique TL link that heads west at the town centre to Stanstead Road and Brockley I fear the 47 and 199 have a lot in common. There is nowhere to stand the 171 in Catford Town Centre, hence why it stands at Catford Garage...
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 18, 2019 20:48:44 GMT
So potentially that's safe.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Sept 18, 2019 22:03:44 GMT
With Lewisham Town Hall to Bellingham (TL) quite heavily bussed (47/54/136/171/208/320) removing an entire TL to Lewisham route could be investigated by TFL. 54, 136 and 208 are probably safe as they provide plenty of unique links and whilst the 171 may be logical to pull back to the town centre it does provide a unique TL link that heads west at the town centre to Stanstead Road and Brockley I fear the 47 and 199 have a lot in common. There is nowhere to stand the 171 in Catford Town Centre, hence why it stands at Catford Garage... There's a long, complicated history to buses heading down Stanstead Road to Catford to terminate, dating right back to when RT family buses replaced trams on this corridor. Rushey Green was tried as a terminal on the 176 for a short while, outside peak hours when it never went further south than Forest Hill, but was later extended to Catford Garage and, even later when that arrangement was proving problematic, to Lewisham! Plenty of 185s theoretically terminated at Rushey Green, which was always shown on the blinds, but in practice they were sent to TL, except in the rarer event of an unscheduled immediate turnback. When TL gained an allocation on the 185, they suddenly got extended there in service! 179s, 141s etc were never, scheduled or unscheduled, turned at Rushey Green, always at TL. Having said all that, the peak hour only 176A had peak journeys from Cannon Street beyond Forest Hill to Catford and vice versa which never appeared on any bus map, although you can find them in Red Books if you search hard enough, the reason being the schedule interworking with the 176. In theory, a Willesden bus could appear on the 176A although I've never seen any evidence it happened.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 18, 2019 22:25:49 GMT
It should hopefully escape the cuts radar, it’s grown significantly over the last couple of years, the 436 rerouting cut probably helped. It’s now a smidge of 8 figures, which one could infer is already a lot for just 25 vehicles to handle. There are a lot of routes with bigger PVRs that carry less. The 185 is one on my growing list of Q routes which need frequency increases (alongside the 35 and 176). I wonder if increasing the route to every six minutes could work, although perhaps to upshot of that would be a frequency cut to another route along Rushey Green to prevent overbusing the corridor. Alternatively you could increase the 185 to 8.5bph as a compromise between insufficient 7.5bph and 10bph if that’s too generous. The 35's recent frequency increase seems to have backfired in the sense it seems to have strangely lost some of it's loadings and there is now quite a bit of bunching going on whilst the 45 has faired better than many wished for which is great for me. Certainly, I wouldn't increase the 35 anymore - instead, just reverse the 40 & 45 changes, obviously won't happen of course.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 19, 2019 6:01:05 GMT
The 185 is one on my growing list of Q routes which need frequency increases (alongside the 35 and 176). I wonder if increasing the route to every six minutes could work, although perhaps to upshot of that would be a frequency cut to another route along Rushey Green to prevent overbusing the corridor. Alternatively you could increase the 185 to 8.5bph as a compromise between insufficient 7.5bph and 10bph if that’s too generous. The 35's recent frequency increase seems to have backfired in the sense it seems to have strangely lost some of it's loadings and there is now quite a bit of bunching going on whilst the 45 has faired better than many wished for which is great for me. Certainly, I wouldn't increase the 35 anymore - instead, just reverse the 40 & 45 changes, obviously won't happen of course. Sorry I should have been more specific. From my observations, there is barely sufficient capacity between London Bridge and Camberwell, the 35 is struggling without the 40. Similarly, there is a lot of demand to go from the West End towards Waterloo and Elephant, so people waiiting at Lancaster Place for a 176 during the peaks are often left behind. For both routes, I would just add some additional journeys which only go as far as Q. Ideally though the 40's idiotic change would be reversed.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 19, 2019 16:06:38 GMT
The 35's recent frequency increase seems to have backfired in the sense it seems to have strangely lost some of it's loadings and there is now quite a bit of bunching going on whilst the 45 has faired better than many wished for which is great for me. Certainly, I wouldn't increase the 35 anymore - instead, just reverse the 40 & 45 changes, obviously won't happen of course. Sorry I should have been more specific. From my observations, there is barely sufficient capacity between London Bridge and Camberwell, the 35 is struggling without the 40. Similarly, there is a lot of demand to go from the West End towards Waterloo and Elephant, so people waiiting at Lancaster Place for a 176 during the peaks are often left behind. For both routes, I would just add some additional journeys which only go as far as Q. Ideally though the 40's idiotic change would be reversed. Although I am in favour of increasing the 35's frequency on Sundays to at least every 10 minutes
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jan 8, 2020 16:17:44 GMT
London Datastore has been updated with period 9
Period 9 Bus journeys 176.7m (last year 180.5m) down 2.1% Year to date 1519.1m (last year 1550.2m) down 2%
For comparison, tube is increasing Year to date 1384.3m journeys (last year 1361.9m) up 1.6%
|
|