|
Post by enviroPB on Sept 23, 2019 13:50:02 GMT
Well the N242 extension I'd argue is a very slight of hand reversal. Did 2 end-to-ends as I fell asleep on the first attempt. What's interesting on my second attempt was there were only 20 passengers throughout the trip from TCR; what was more interesting is that 3 passengers boarded before St Paul's with the magical breakeven number of 17 passengers east of that point. Clearly they're trying to justify the N242 (so different to what it was 5 or 10 years ago) as the passenger numbers aren't as strong.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 23, 2019 16:40:52 GMT
And the (N)271 and 434 divserion away from Rickman Hill. And the 315's extension to Peabody Hill
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 23, 2019 18:36:52 GMT
And the 312/412 and a freq reduction on the D7. There are a few examples of climb Downs
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 23, 2019 20:14:49 GMT
TfL u-turned on extending the 112 to Osterley.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 23, 2019 21:35:49 GMT
The 94 may also be a climbdown as the last consultation response was that the 94,113 and 159 would all be pulled back to either Oxford Circus or Marble Arch respectively but 29 new buses have been bought for it.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 24, 2019 18:01:13 GMT
The 94 may also be a climbdown as the last consultation response was that the 94,113 and 159 would all be pulled back to either Oxford Circus or Marble Arch respectively but 29 new buses have been bought for it. I really hope so, as I'm sure george does.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Dec 18, 2019 19:08:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Dec 18, 2019 19:31:44 GMT
Not surprised that this change isn't happening anymore thankfully, great to see many people including the Romford based stakeholders fighting to keep the 128 as it as and I even put myself a lot of effort sending many reasons to TfL for in order to keep the 128 as it as.
|
|