|
|
Post by Max B on Aug 23, 2019 23:54:12 GMT
Going off topic but some numbers are recycled quickly: 87 was reused within a few months 278 (East London) finished in 1993 and was used again from 1994 - 2004 and will be used again next year. The 87s re-use has a lot of cloudiness surrounding it. There's a lot of talk that the 87 in East London was only merged with the 5 so that the 77a could take the 87 number. "477" in my opinion would've been a better number to renumber the 77A with, but there was also talk of it being renumbered "437" which would have been a better number to renumber the 137A with rather than "417". |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Aug 24, 2019 8:12:47 GMT
If the 10, 23 73, & 390 changes all took place that would have been a good opportunity to replace the number 390 with 10.
|
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Aug 24, 2019 8:40:37 GMT
Too much effort and will cause lots of confusion. I’m sure a new route at some point will be numbered 10 (the 311 would have been a good shout to be numbered 10 if it went ahead). I hope 48, 82 and 84 will be filled in soon  I don’t think 84 will be reused anytime soon, due to the Barnet - St Albans 84 existing. TfL seem to have a policy where, wherever possible, numbers are not duplicated within Greater London - which is why we don’t have, for example, a TfL 458 or 461. (Yes - I’m aware there is more than one 8 😂 ) |
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Aug 24, 2019 9:41:59 GMT
Too much effort and will cause lots of confusion. I’m sure a new route at some point will be numbered 10 (the 311 would have been a good shout to be numbered 10 if it went ahead). I hope 48, 82 and 84 will be filled in soon I don’t think 84 will be reused anytime soon, due to the Barnet - St Albans 84 existing. TfL seem to have a policy where, wherever possible, numbers are not duplicated within Greater London - which is why we don’t have, for example, a TfL 458 or 461. (Yes - I’m aware there is more than one 8 😂 ) Route 456 is being proposed yet there is one that already runs into Staines |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Aug 24, 2019 13:45:43 GMT
I don’t think 84 will be reused anytime soon, due to the Barnet - St Albans 84 existing. TfL seem to have a policy where, wherever possible, numbers are not duplicated within Greater London - which is why we don’t have, for example, a TfL 458 or 461. (Yes - I’m aware there is more than one 8 😂 ) Route 456 is being proposed yet there is one that already runs into Staines The Surrey 456 doesn't enter the TfL area though, unlike the 458 and 461 which serve Kingston.
Having said that, there is a 10 in the TfL area (Courtney's route at Heathrow T5) so TfL will have to make an exception to the rule if they want to reuse the number!
|
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 24, 2019 13:54:39 GMT
Route 456 is being proposed yet there is one that already runs into Staines The Surrey 456 doesn't enter the TfL area though, unlike the 458 and 461 which serve Kingston.
Having said that, there is a 10 in the TfL area (Courtney's route at Heathrow T5) so TfL will have to make an exception to the rule if they want to reuse the number!
Staines is a TfL area. |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Aug 24, 2019 14:03:30 GMT
The Surrey 456 doesn't enter the TfL area though, unlike the 458 and 461 which serve Kingston.
Having said that, there is a 10 in the TfL area (Courtney's route at Heathrow T5) so TfL will have to make an exception to the rule if they want to reuse the number!
Staines is a TfL area. Staines is outside London. Yes it has a few TfL bus services, but that does not mean that it is part of London. |
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 24, 2019 14:15:38 GMT
Staines is outside London. Yes it has a few TfL bus services, but that does not mean that it is part of London. Yes sorry my aplogise some reason thought staines was in London. I am fully aware that just because a TfL bus service services an area it doesn't have to be in greater London, I'm sure most people know that Dorking isn't in London 😉. The odd thing about Kingston is despite it being in London, surrey county hall is located there. |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Aug 24, 2019 14:15:50 GMT
Staines is outside London. Yes it has a few TfL bus services, but that does not mean that it is part of London. Same could be said for Potters Bar |
|
|
|
Post by VWH1414 on Aug 24, 2019 14:28:15 GMT
Staines is outside London. Yes it has a few TfL bus services, but that does not mean that it is part of London. Same could be said for Potters Bar But the 84 goes as far as High Barnet, which is within London. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 24, 2019 14:32:53 GMT
Route 456 is being proposed yet there is one that already runs into Staines The Surrey 456 doesn't enter the TfL area though, unlike the 458 and 461 which serve Kingston. Having said that, there is a 10 in the TfL area (Courtney's route at Heathrow T5) so TfL will have to make an exception to the rule if they want to reuse the number!
There’s two 26’s in the London area - the one we all know and then one which runs from Upminster to somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Post by richard on Aug 24, 2019 14:36:39 GMT
Same could be said for Potters Bar But the 84 goes as far as High Barnet, which is within London. But it's not a TFL route |
|
|
|
Post by 15002 on Aug 24, 2019 14:39:19 GMT
The Surrey 456 doesn't enter the TfL area though, unlike the 458 and 461 which serve Kingston. Having said that, there is a 10 in the TfL area (Courtney's route at Heathrow T5) so TfL will have to make an exception to the rule if they want to reuse the number!
There’s two 26’s in the London area - the one we all know and then one which runs from Upminster to somewhere else. The 26 runs from Corbets Tey to Palmers College |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 24, 2019 15:22:08 GMT
Is it me.... Or is it just stupid how a number as low as the 10 doesn't exist anymore, I mean that in the easiest way possible being quiet a Hystorical number in its old and former newer version so.... I propuse this heheheh (here come the haters) Abandon the #390 and renumber the route to the #10 (IT'S ACTUAL FORMER NUMBER) The 390 was created as the cover for the chop to the original 10 so wouldn't it make sense to return it at least have the 10 lowest numbers in use (Please don't bother mentioning the 5 I KNOW VERY WELL IT DOESN'T ENTER CENTRAL LONDON Any thoughts people??? 10 historic? Its most recent incarnation was only created in 1988! The 23 which has now replaced much of it was itself only created in 1992. Nothing wrong with leaving the 390 as is. |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Aug 24, 2019 15:28:39 GMT
The Surrey 456 doesn't enter the TfL area though, unlike the 458 and 461 which serve Kingston. Having said that, there is a 10 in the TfL area (Courtney's route at Heathrow T5) so TfL will have to make an exception to the rule if they want to reuse the number!
There’s two 26’s in the London area - the one we all know and then one which runs from Upminster to somewhere else. There are also three route 8s - although to be fair, TfL's use of the number long pre-dates the other two! |
|
