|
|
Post by route53 on May 12, 2019 12:52:54 GMT
As for a route along the A205, how about this?
402: Woolwich to Catford
404: Eltham to Forest Hill
411: Catford to Brixton
They should reintroduce the N75, and have it run from North Greenwich, they should also have the 227 made into a Weekend only 24 hour route, especially if it’s extended to Streatham, but even without that, Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace does have a night scene with plenty of bars, pubs and restaurants.
|
|
|
|
Post by rhys on May 12, 2019 13:02:02 GMT
As for a route along the A205, how about this? 402: Woolwich to Catford 404: Eltham to Forest Hill 411: Catford to Brixton They should reintroduce the N75, and have it run from North Greenwich, they should also have the 227 made into a Weekend only 24 hour route, especially if it’s extended to Streatham, but even without that, Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace does have a night scene with plenty of bars, pubs and restaurants. The 404 and 411 numbers are already in use  |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on May 12, 2019 13:30:08 GMT
As for a route along the A205, how about this? 402: Woolwich to Catford 404: Eltham to Forest Hill 411: Catford to Brixton They should reintroduce the N75, and have it run from North Greenwich, they should also have the 227 made into a Weekend only 24 hour route, especially if it’s extended to Streatham, but even without that, Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace does have a night scene with plenty of bars, pubs and restaurants. The 404 and 411 numbers are already in use Perhaps it’s time we started using 5xx range routes :-) |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 12, 2019 14:50:26 GMT
The 404 and 411 numbers are already in use Perhaps it’s time we started using 5xx range routes :-) There’s plenty of spare numbers in lower ranges. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 12, 2019 14:52:46 GMT
Just to clarify, I wasn't suggesting a link wouldn't be useful but just saying as an outsider, the 291 looks fine as it is - you would know better than me as I don't like to just wander into someone else's area and dictate to them about their local routes. Eltham to Tulse Hill is still too much personally but Forest Hill would probably just about be doable. The problem is the A205 has so many hotspots, buses would just sit in traffic for a period of time. Can I just point I also said extending the 291 a while back and someone pointed out to me that it dosent actually stop at the woodlands estate it just go back to the hospital don’t know if it’s true but a link would to Eltham would be useful maybe extend the 126 to North Greenwich and withdraw the 161 to Woolwich and reroute it to Plumstead common Yes, that’s how the 291 currently works though not sure what that has to do with my comment? |
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on May 12, 2019 17:19:50 GMT
Have to point out that the 185 plus connections allows travel between many of the points for routes suggested here.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 12, 2019 17:38:11 GMT
As for a route along the A205, how about this? 402: Woolwich to Catford 404: Eltham to Forest Hill 411: Catford to Brixton They should reintroduce the N75, and have it run from North Greenwich, they should also have the 227 made into a Weekend only 24 hour route, especially if it’s extended to Streatham, but even without that, Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace does have a night scene with plenty of bars, pubs and restaurants. I have to say I don't get this fixation for bus routes along the South Circular, if anybody wants to do Eltham to Forest Hill by bus it's an easy change of buses at Catford although the train with a change at London Bridge is probably quicker. I think the N47 should be rerouted to Croydon as per the 75, more cost effective and more links. The N3 already links Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace. |
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 12, 2019 17:49:36 GMT
Can I just point I also said extending the 291 a while back and someone pointed lol out to me that it dosent actually stop at the woodlands estate it just go back to the hospital don’t know if it’s true but a link would to Eltham would be useful maybe extend the 126 to North Greenwich and withdraw the 161 to Woolwich and reroute it to Plumstead common Personally I’d reroute the 161 to Thamesmead, the new 301 could replace the Woolwich to North Greenwich section of the 161. I’m not sure about extending the 291 to anywhere really, it serves a good purpose but being a feeder route from the Woodlands Estate into Woolwich town centre and QE Hospital, both of which have other onward connections to elsewhere. I would extend the 53 to Thamesmead, reroute it so it takes the quicker direct route o between Woolwich and Plumstead then onto Thamesmead, this area has no direct connection to Central London, yes it’s nearest station is Abbey Wood but that is still a bus ride away and it’s in zone 4, £1.50 from Thamesmead all the way to Zone 1 would be attractive to a Thamesmead resident, as for the section between Woolwich and Plumstead Common, maybe reroute the 380 to replace that section of the 53? I would extend either the 122 or 178 to Thamesmead giving a direct link to Lewisham. I think the 161 could replace the Woolwich to Belmarsh section of the 380 although I think there are problems about double deckers through Broadwaters? |
|
|
|
Post by rhys on May 12, 2019 17:52:00 GMT
Can I just point I also said extending the 291 a while back and someone pointed out to me that it dosent actually stop at the woodlands estate it just go back to the hospital don’t know if it’s true but a link would to Eltham would be useful maybe extend the 126 to North Greenwich and withdraw the 161 to Woolwich and reroute it to Plumstead common Personally I’d reroute the 161 to Thamesmead, the new 301 could replace the Woolwich to North Greenwich section of the 161. I’m not sure about extending the 291 to anywhere really, it serves a good purpose but being a feeder route from the Woodlands Estate into Woolwich town centre and QE Hospital, both of which have other onward connections to elsewhere. I would extend the 53 to Thamesmead, reroute it so it takes the quicker direct route between Woolwich and Plumstead then onto Thamesmead, this area has no direct connection to Central London, yes it’s nearest station is Abbey Wood but that is still a bus ride away and it’s in zone 4, £1.50 from Thamesmead all the way to Zone 1 would be attractive to a Thamesmead resident, as for the section between Woolwich and Plumstead Common, maybe reroute the 380 to replace that section of the 53? Personally, I think extending the 53 to Thamesmead may send unreliability through the roof. The 53 is already a route that’s quite lengthy and is subject to various traffic hotspots. With routes like the 177 serving quite a few of the same destinations as the 53, I personally don’t see the need for an extension. Just seems like a waste of resources. Then again, you may know more than me, with you being local to the 53. |
|
|
|
Post by LVF_Admin on May 12, 2019 18:55:45 GMT
Personally I’d reroute the 161 to Thamesmead, the new 301 could replace the Woolwich to North Greenwich section of the 161. I’m not sure about extending the 291 to anywhere really, it serves a good purpose but being a feeder route from the Woodlands Estate into Woolwich town centre and QE Hospital, both of which have other onward connections to elsewhere. I would extend the 53 to Thamesmead, reroute it so it takes the quicker direct route o between Woolwich and Plumstead then onto Thamesmead, this area has no direct connection to Central London, yes it’s nearest station is Abbey Wood but that is still a bus ride away and it’s in zone 4, £1.50 from Thamesmead all the way to Zone 1 would be attractive to a Thamesmead resident, as for the section between Woolwich and Plumstead Common, maybe reroute the 380 to replace that section of the 53? I would extend either the 122 or 178 to Thamesmead giving a direct link to Lewisham. I think the 161 could replace the Woolwich to Belmarsh section of the 380 although I think there are problems about double deckers through Broadwaters? The 178 used to run from Thamesmead to Lewisham albeit via the Shooters Hill part of the 244 and not the Hospital, as did the 291 which was originally the 192. |
|
|
|
Post by LVF_Admin on May 12, 2019 18:57:56 GMT
As for a route along the A205, how about this? 402: Woolwich to Catford 404: Eltham to Forest Hill 411: Catford to Brixton They should reintroduce the N75, and have it run from North Greenwich, they should also have the 227 made into a Weekend only 24 hour route, especially if it’s extended to Streatham, but even without that, Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace does have a night scene with plenty of bars, pubs and restaurants. I have to say I don't get this fixation for bus routes along the South Circular, if anybody wants to do Eltham to Forest Hill by bus it's an easy change of buses at Catford although the train with a change at London Bridge is probably quicker. I think the N47 should be rerouted to Croydon as per the 75, more cost effective and more links. The N3 already links Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace. Me neither, especially how slow some parts of the South Circular run now |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on May 12, 2019 19:40:24 GMT
Really the 324 was the last ambitions new route started. Meaning a route the operated across many different new links like the 493 in 2002. Most 'new' routes since then have simply been snipped off ends (333, 363, 390, 430, 432 etc) thou i guess the 483 was kind of snipped off with an additional new section.
|
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on May 12, 2019 19:48:14 GMT
As for a route along the A205, how about this? 402: Woolwich to Catford 404: Eltham to Forest Hill 411: Catford to Brixton They should reintroduce the N75, and have it run from North Greenwich, they should also have the 227 made into a Weekend only 24 hour route, especially if it’s extended to Streatham, but even without that, Bromley, Beckenham and Crystal Palace does have a night scene with plenty of bars, pubs and restaurants. I use the Molesey 411 regularly: don’t take it from me! 😛 Unsure that any of your South Circular routes add much to the bus network. The ‘404’ could be largely covered, I guess, by splitting off the Eltham-Sidcup part of the 160 as a separate service (terminating at Eltham Station), leaving the rump of the 160 to extend west, but even that I’m not sure about. |
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 12, 2019 20:13:06 GMT
This is a genuine question, which may be considered naive, but I'm asking on the basis that I no longer have any connections with the area where I was spawned and developed my fascination with London buses (and all other transport in London).It concerns the 161, because alone of the bus routes I grew up with in Eltham it retains its core structure (the 124 and 126 do too to a lesser extent). I am assumimg the extension to North Greenwich was mainly aimed at taking the existing 161 passengers to the Jubilee Line station: in which case, in which direction were the majority of these passengers expected to travel on the tube? Surely it wasn't in the westbound direction, given that London Bridge, Waterloo and, even, Charing Cross or its near environs were much quicker reached from Eltham and Mottingham stations on the SE network? So, if I'm right, it was Canary Wharf and other eastbound stations that were the attraction, even though trains in the morning rush hour would be pretty full by the time they reached North Greenwich. Since then, Canary Wharf has also been able to be accessed via DLR from Woolwich Arsenal, with a change at Poplar, while the 132 bus route eventually got extended to North Greenwich, giving those in the Eltham area another, theoretically quicker, bus route to NG. So, my question now concerns the 161, Crossrail and its Woolwich to Canary Wharf direct connection. I note that the 161 now only has a bus every 10 minutes during the day, which I find incredibly sad compared to what I remember, in peak hours at least. I would have thought that Crossrail at Woolwich would not only be a magnet to those Canary Wharf passengers but, given its frequency and the range of destinations eg. Whitechapel, Liverpool Street and Farringdon, perhaps less so further west than that, to those who might consider it an alternative to both the Jubilee and SE train services. So, on to my question at last: how near to Woolwich Arsenal Station does the 161 currently get, and how near could it get if re-directed at Woolwich to travel along the Plumstead Road? Fare zones obviously have some influence, but time is money and there are many better-heeled who'd go for extra convenience over the rock bottom fare.I can see the 161 gaining a lot of extra passengers, but TfL seem not to have allowed for this in their consultation on SE London bus services after Crossrail. A 161 Express, non-stop from Well Hall Roundabout or Shooters Hill, in peak hours to Woolwich Arsenal might even be called for, with echoes of the Second World War service of that number for the Arsenal munitions workers! Thoughts please and be scathing if you so wish.
|
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on May 12, 2019 20:25:09 GMT
This is a genuine question, which may be considered naive, but I'm asking on the basis that I no longer have any connections with the area where I was spawned and developed my fascination with London buses (and all other transport in London).It concerns the 161, because alone of the bus routes I grew up with in Eltham it retains its core structure (the 124 and 126 do too to a lesser extent). I am assumimg the extension to North Greenwich was mainly aimed at taking the existing 161 passengers to the Jubilee Line station: in which case, in which direction were the majority of these passengers expected to travel on the tube? Surely it wasn't in the westbound direction, given that London Bridge, Waterloo and, even, Charing Cross or its near environs were much quicker reached from Eltham and Mottingham stations on the SE network? So, if I'm right, it was Canary Wharf and other eastbound stations that were the attraction, even though trains in the morning rush hour would be pretty full by the time they reached North Greenwich. Since then, Canary Wharf has also been able to be accessed via DLR from Woolwich Arsenal, with a change at Poplar, while the 132 bus route eventually got extended to North Greenwich, giving those in the Eltham area another, theoretically quicker, bus route to NG. So, my question now concerns the 161, Crossrail and its Woolwich to Canary Wharf direct connection. I note that the 161 now only has a bus every 10 minutes during the day, which I find incredibly sad compared to what I remember, in peak hours at least. I would have thought that Crossrail at Woolwich would not only be a magnet to those Canary Wharf passengers but, given its frequency and the range of destinations eg. Whitechapel, Liverpool Street and Farringdon, perhaps less so further west than that, to those who might consider it an alternative to both the Jubilee and SE train services. So, on to my question at last: how near to Woolwich Arsenal Station does the 161 currently get, and how near could it get if re-directed at Woolwich to travel along the Plumstead Road? Fare zones obviously have some influence, but time is money and there are many better-heeled who'd go for extra convenience over the rock bottom fare.I can see the 161 gaining a lot of extra passengers, but TfL seem not to have allowed for this in their consultation on SE London bus services after Crossrail. A 161 Express, non-stop from Well Hall Roundabout or Shooters Hill, in peak hours to Woolwich Arsenal might even be called for, with echoes of the Second World War service of that number for the Arsenal munitions workers! Thoughts please and be scathing if you so wish. I think the main reason the 161 will continue to go to NG has nothing to do with the Jubilee line and everything to do with parts of Woolwich Dockyard having a direct link to the hospital. |
|
