'Unnecessary' routes

[lundnah]

One of the reasons the 48 is to be withdrawn is because the entire route is shadowed by other buses.

From Walthamstow you can catch any number of other buses to Bakers Arms...

...then the 55 parallels the 48 as far as Shoreditch

...and from there it's exactly the same route as the 149 to London Bridge.

I wondered how many other London bus routes are entirely shadowed by two or three other routes, so are technically 'unnecessary'.

Assume frequencies of other buses can be adjusted as necessary, and that the Hopper fare is in effect.

[lundnah]

Aug 19, 2019 8:51:48 GMT lundnah said:

One of the reasons the 48 is to be withdrawn is because the entire route is shadowed by other buses.

From Walthamstow you can catch any number of other buses to Bakers Arms...

...then the 55 parallels the 48 as far as Shoreditch

...and from there it's exactly the same route as the 149 to London Bridge.

I wondered how many other London bus routes are entirely shadowed by two or three other routes, so are technically 'unnecessary'.

Assume frequencies of other buses can be adjusted as necessary, and that the Hopper fare is in effect.

For example the 130, 131, 132, 134 and 135 all have unique sections of route, so must be kept.

But the 133 is shadowed by the 35 from Liverpool Street to Elephant & Castle...
...then the 415 as far as Brixton
...then the 159 to Streatham
so is technically 'unnecessary'.

I'm particularly interested in any 'unnecessary' buses outside central London.

[southlondonbus]

Very few routes are unnecessary as they either provide a unique link or extra capacity where needed. The hopper fare has made it seem more acceptable not to provide direct links but they are still valued. Just an example for me would be that there probably is enough cacapcity between Tooting Broadway and Mitcham on the 127/264/270/280 not to have let's say the 355 but I feel there should be a direct link from Mitcham and Tooting Station to Balham and should always remain as it follows on from the 88 covering it for years.

[vjaska]

Aug 19, 2019 8:51:48 GMT lundnah said:

One of the reasons the 48 is to be withdrawn is because the entire route is shadowed by other buses.

From Walthamstow you can catch any number of other buses to Bakers Arms...

...then the 55 parallels the 48 as far as Shoreditch

...and from there it's exactly the same route as the 149 to London Bridge.

I wondered how many other London bus routes are entirely shadowed by two or three other routes, so are technically 'unnecessary'.

Assume frequencies of other buses can be adjusted as necessary, and that the Hopper fare is in effect.

Almost every route in London is necessary - just because some routes look like they are merely duplications doesn't mean that's the case as there are multiple purposes of having the network we have as southlondonbus mentioned.

The 48's idiotic withdrawal is down to TfL hypocritical agenda where it removes decent links on one hand whilst dreadfully overbussing Barnes on the other hand. The 48 is very much necessary and has provided a purpose for many years.

[rif153]

Aug 19, 2019 10:35:33 GMT vjaska said:

Aug 19, 2019 8:51:48 GMT lundnah said:

One of the reasons the 48 is to be withdrawn is because the entire route is shadowed by other buses.

From Walthamstow you can catch any number of other buses to Bakers Arms...

...then the 55 parallels the 48 as far as Shoreditch

...and from there it's exactly the same route as the 149 to London Bridge.

I wondered how many other London bus routes are entirely shadowed by two or three other routes, so are technically 'unnecessary'.

Assume frequencies of other buses can be adjusted as necessary, and that the Hopper fare is in effect.

Almost every route in London is necessary - just because some routes look like they are merely duplications doesn't mean that's the case as there are multiple purposes of having the network we have as southlondonbus mentioned.

The 48's idiotic withdrawal is down to TfL hypocritical agenda where it removes decent links on one hand whilst dreadfully overbussing Barnes on the other hand. The 48 is very much necessary and has provided a purpose for many years.

Moreover it’s a joke that TfL used over-busing between Shoreditch and London Bridge as their excuse to withdraw the 48 when they’re sending the 388 down that way instead now. We all know the real reason for the 48’s withdrawal is TfL claiming Lea Bridge Road is overbused., something which in my experience is true off peak but the 48 is a vital route to have during the peaks. I was getting the 48 back from Ash Grove towards Liverpool Street, and every 48/55 I saw coming the other way were packed to the rafters.

[lundnah]

Obviously no bus routes are unnecessary, obviously.

Hence why I'm asking which are technically 'unnecessary'.

[higthomas]

Ignoring the debate over the necessity or not of these sorts of routes, I always thought the 317 was a good example.

There are loads of buses between Enfield and Baird Road stop. From here there is the more frequent 217 to Waltham Cross.

The 231 is similar but without the convenient same stop interchange (although one only has to cross the road).

[Deleted]

The 414? If it didn't run one day just get the 6 or 14 instead, both have plenty of spare capacity.

I'd also question how necessary the recently introduced 378 is, why not just extend the 22 to Mortlake instead?

[george]

Aug 19, 2019 12:00:06 GMT @palacefan said:

The 414? If it didn't run one day just get the 6 or 14 instead, both have plenty of spare capacity.

I'd also question how necessary the recently introduced 378 is, why not just extend the 22 to Mortlake instead?

[br

The 14 doesn't have spare capacity. Tfl were against extending the 22 from early on

[Deleted]

Aug 19, 2019 12:14:29 GMT george said:

Aug 19, 2019 12:00:06 GMT @palacefan said:

The 414? If it didn't run one day just get the 6 or 14 instead, both have plenty of spare capacity.

I'd also question how necessary the recently introduced 378 is, why not just extend the 22 to Mortlake instead?

[br

The 14 doesn't have spare capacity. Tfl were against extending the 22 from early on

Loads of spare capacity on the 14 and 414 from what I've seen. I wonder if the fact that the 209 contract had just been awarded when the bridge closed had any bearing on things?

[Eastlondoner62]

Here are some routes which have routes paralleling them the whole way but are by no means useless.

238: 5 > 376 > 104
205: 25 > 135 > 43 > 73 > 18 > 27
48: 97 > 55 > 149
262: 366 > 376 > 300 > 376 > 473
5: 115 > 238 > EL2 > 175
9: 23 > 6

[george]

Aug 19, 2019 12:31:02 GMT @palacefan said:

Aug 19, 2019 12:14:29 GMT george said:

[br

The 14 doesn't have spare capacity. Tfl were against extending the 22 from early on

Loads of spare capacity on the 14 and 414 from what I've seen. I wonder if the fact that the 209 contract had just been awarded when the bridge closed had any bearing on things?

Nearly every 14 I see or go on is packed to the rafters. I think it could be a reason why the 378 was introudced as too many buses build to warrant a service on the 209.

[busaholic]

That's the 12,38 and 109 out of the window too, then, not to forget the 68, 521 and many other of the most necessary routes in London.

[southlondonbus]

The 378 isn't an illogical idea as it uses resource from the 209 award and provides a link to the Tube at Putney Bridge. Obviously it was proved wrong that everyone on the 209 would want Putney Bridge. Personally I would merge the 378 and 485 to up the freq to Wandsworth as planned and leave Castlenau to Barnes Pond to the 209 and 419.

[southlondonbus]

Aug 19, 2019 14:05:55 GMT busaholic said:

That's the 12,38 and 109 out of the window too, then, not to forget the 68, 521 and many other of the most necessary routes in London.

I did think at one point there may have been a bounty on the 68 due to the large overlap with the 468 and the large amounts of routes betwen Elephant and Aldwych/Holborn/Russell Square/Euston. Ultermately the 171 paid the price.