|
Post by londonbuses2018 on Sept 11, 2019 14:39:37 GMT
82
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on Sept 11, 2019 14:48:47 GMT
The loss of the 179's section between Barking and Ilford was a shame. I think Barking could do with another useful radial link which goes towards NE London, perhaps an express radial route which goes towards Walthamstow? Having sat in horrendous traffic along the section between Ilford & Barking on a 169 & EL2 pre diversion, I'd hazard a guess that reliability probably forced the 179 to be cut back? I'd probably say yes, even these days I'd find the Woodford area of the 179 alone is a reliability killer part of the route pretty much on most school days which is why the Woodford Wells curtailment are quite common on the route.
|
|
|
Post by 10121ddo on Sept 11, 2019 16:20:25 GMT
The loss of the 179's section between Barking and Ilford was a shame. I think Barking could do with another useful radial link which goes towards NE London, perhaps an express radial route which goes towards Walthamstow? Having sat in horrendous traffic along the section between Ilford & Barking on a 169 & EL2 pre diversion, I'd hazard a guess that reliability probably forced the 179 to be cut back? I would have thought it was planned, as EL2 came into service just 18 days before the 179 got cut. I reckon it was planned as the "179 replacement". I think someone in TfL missed a trick, by having it terminate at Ilford Station when replacing the 179 stop for stop, rather than starting it Hainault St. This is purely because of the better connection with Ilford routes from Central Lib. Of course, the 169 suffices at present in this role, but it's a shame it's just the one route.
|
|
|
Post by 10121ddo on Sept 11, 2019 16:21:28 GMT
Having sat in horrendous traffic along the section between Ilford & Barking on a 169 & EL2 pre diversion, I'd hazard a guess that reliability probably forced the 179 to be cut back? I'd probably say yes, even these days I'd find the Woodford area of the 179 alone is a reliability killer part of the route pretty much on most school days which is why the Woodford Wells curtailment are quite common on the route. I think its general reliability when under First was abysmal even on weekends....!
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 11, 2019 16:35:11 GMT
I'd probably say yes, even these days I'd find the Woodford area of the 179 alone is a reliability killer part of the route pretty much on most school days which is why the Woodford Wells curtailment are quite common on the route. I think its general reliability when under First was abysmal even on weekends....! It was going to be the lesser of the two evils removing the 179 from Barking, it was either the Barking end or Chingford end. The Chingford end is far more dependant on the 179 while at the Barking end you'd have an extra route added if the 179 had remained so the choice was easy. Although something ridiculous that's since not been fixed is the lack of a link from Barking to Gants Hill. You do still technically have the link up Cranbrook Road in the form of the 366 even though it does go down the Drive although ideally something is done about the Gants Hill link.
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Sept 12, 2019 10:26:01 GMT
I would have loved to have ridden the N81 all the way to Gillingham.
I miss the X72 and of course the one route I will always advocate for its return is the X53,
|
|
|
Post by 10121ddo on Sept 12, 2019 21:42:51 GMT
I think its general reliability when under First was abysmal even on weekends....! It was going to be the lesser of the two evils removing the 179 from Barking, it was either the Barking end or Chingford end. The Chingford end is far more dependant on the 179 while at the Barking end you'd have an extra route added if the 179 had remained so the choice was easy. Although something ridiculous that's since not been fixed is the lack of a link from Barking to Gants Hill. You do still technically have the link up Cranbrook Road in the form of the 366 even though it does go down the Drive although ideally something is done about the Gants Hill link. Alas, the noble hopper fare suffices for now
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 12, 2019 21:47:04 GMT
I think its general reliability when under First was abysmal even on weekends....! Although something ridiculous that's since not been fixed is the lack of a link from Barking to Gants Hill. You do still technically have the link up Cranbrook Road in the form of the 366 even though it does go down the Drive although ideally something is done about the Gants Hill link. An extension of the 396?
|
|
|
Post by LT 20181 on Sept 13, 2019 15:46:40 GMT
I too miss the old 10. It’s the first and only route I rode through Oxford Street under the Christmas lights at night.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 13, 2019 16:11:51 GMT
I too miss the old 10. It’s the first and only route I rode through Oxford Street under the Christmas lights at night. I honestly think the 10 should have been kept on Oxford Street over the 390. With rationalisation on Oxford Street, I guess at least one of the 10/73/390 was going to purged, but its such a shame the 390 was kept on Oxford Street West with the 10 butchered. I would have sent either the 73/390 through Mayfair.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Sept 13, 2019 17:31:32 GMT
I too miss the old 10. It’s the first and only route I rode through Oxford Street under the Christmas lights at night. I honestly think the 10 should have been kept on Oxford Street over the 390. With rationalisation on Oxford Street, I guess at least one of the 10/73/390 was going to purged, but its such a shame the 390 was kept on Oxford Street West with the 10 butchered. I would have sent either the 73/390 through Mayfair. I think the reason the 10 was chosen was that way they could get rid of the 23 as well by merging both of them, something which wouldn't have been possible with any other route. However I do agree the link from the Kensington area is certainly missed, not to mention the link from Oxford Street via the British Museum to Russell Square. The 14 is just coming from an area where people can take the Piccadilly Line. Something else I'd have done is cut the 98 to Oxford Circus while keeping the 25 on there, or at least extending the 8 to Oxford Circus because the lack of a link from the City to the West End is pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 13, 2019 17:38:51 GMT
I honestly think the 10 should have been kept on Oxford Street over the 390. With rationalisation on Oxford Street, I guess at least one of the 10/73/390 was going to purged, but its such a shame the 390 was kept on Oxford Street West with the 10 butchered. I would have sent either the 73/390 through Mayfair. I think the reason the 10 was chosen was that way they could get rid of the 23 as well by merging both of them, something which wouldn't have been possible with any other route. However I do agree the link from the Kensington area is certainly missed, not to mention the link from Oxford Street via the British Museum to Russell Square. The 14 is just coming from an area where people can take the Piccadilly Line. Something else I'd have done is cut the 98 to Oxford Circus while keeping the 25 on there, or at least extending the 8 to Oxford Circus because the lack of a link from the City to the West End is pathetic. Fusing the 10 and 23 solved a stand space issue at Marble Arch. There's no point in having the 73 and 390 paralleling one another between TCR and Warren Street, the 73 should've been removed from TCR instead of the 134. Really a through route would benefit the British Museum more than the 14 which doesn't have anything going for it when going east, at least the 10 offered easy connections to other buses at Euston/King's Cross. I agree with you about the lack of a City-West End link. The 23 shouldn't have been meddled with, and is should've been the 11 that was pulled out of the City instead. I'm a big advocate of rextending the 15 to Oxford Circus to restore links between the City and Oxford Circus, it seems hard to believe it was only about ten years ago we had two bus routes linking St Paul's to Paddington, but I think the 15 and 23 should still be on Regent Street to this day.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Sept 13, 2019 22:20:11 GMT
I think the reason the 10 was chosen was that way they could get rid of the 23 as well by merging both of them, something which wouldn't have been possible with any other route. However I do agree the link from the Kensington area is certainly missed, not to mention the link from Oxford Street via the British Museum to Russell Square. The 14 is just coming from an area where people can take the Piccadilly Line. Something else I'd have done is cut the 98 to Oxford Circus while keeping the 25 on there, or at least extending the 8 to Oxford Circus because the lack of a link from the City to the West End is pathetic. , but I think the 153 and 23 should still be on Regent Street to this day. Typo for 15 and 23? Some would like the 53 there still, of course!
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Sept 13, 2019 22:21:19 GMT
, but I think the 153 and 23 should still be on Regent Street to this day. Typo for 15 and 23? Some would like the 53 there still, of course! Yes it was, thanks for the correction. Of course the 53 on there too would be great
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 13, 2019 22:37:53 GMT
, but I think the 153 and 23 should still be on Regent Street to this day. Typo for 15 and 23? Some would like the 53 there still, of course! I'd like the 3 back there myself
|
|