|
Post by rif153 on May 7, 2020 16:56:23 GMT
I look at the consultation report and of the Suggestion is to Extend the 189 to North Finchley but that may copy the 460 from Cricklewood Interesting view but the way they are currently thinking to send it via the North Circular Because of its significance further into London - it would mean that if a fight broke out on the 189 from some school kids (I've had family in the Finchley Area and ik that children there can be quite violent) you would eventually lose time and this would completely mess up the route into areas like Marylebone & Marble Arch. The North circular also is very unreliable hence why the 112 & 232 are quite unreliable and even then Regents Park Road is quite busy in the peaks. The 189 gets crucified by enough congestion in its current state so extending it wouldn't help matters.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 7, 2020 17:13:47 GMT
Interesting view but the way they are currently thinking to send it via the North Circular Because of its significance further into London - it would mean that if a fight broke out on the 189 from some school kids (I've had family in the Finchley Area and ik that children there can be quite violent) you would eventually lose time and this would completely mess up the route into areas like Marylebone & Marble Arch. The North circular also is very unreliable hence why the 112 & 232 are quite unreliable and even then Regents Park Road is quite busy in the peaks. The 189 gets crucified by enough congestion in its current state so extending it wouldn't help matters. I find it inexplicable that it's even being spoken of.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on May 7, 2020 17:30:03 GMT
Interesting view but the way they are currently thinking to send it via the North Circular Because of its significance further into London - it would mean that if a fight broke out on the 189 from some school kids (I've had family in the Finchley Area and ik that children there can be quite violent) you would eventually lose time and this would completely mess up the route into areas like Marylebone & Marble Arch. The North circular also is very unreliable hence why the 112 & 232 are quite unreliable and even then Regents Park Road is quite busy in the peaks. The 189 gets crucified by enough congestion in its current state so extending it wouldn't help matters. I agree
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on May 7, 2020 17:30:13 GMT
The 189 gets crucified by enough congestion in its current state so extending it wouldn't help matters. I find it inexplicable that it's even being spoken of. also agree
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 7, 2020 17:36:00 GMT
The 189 gets crucified by enough congestion in its current state so extending it wouldn't help matters. I find it inexplicable that it's even being spoken of. Pretty much every consultation, you will find some wacky ideas suggested by respondents and usually, it's a sole response that suggests such an idea as was the case with the 189 to North Finchley where 1 person suggested it. 1 person also suggested the 46 or 168 be extended to North Finchley, 1 person suggested to extend a route to Friern Barnet (unclear but looks like either 112 or 189) and a staekholder suggested running the 112 from Kew Bridge to Brent Cross or North Finchley as part of a 4 route orbital loop scheme involving the 232 and an extended 337 - god knows how the fourth route would tie a loop up from Wood Green to Clapham Junction. The majority generally send in sensible proposals - 32 asked for bigger buses for the 112 to match demand whilst 16 asked for an increase frequency for the 112.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on May 9, 2020 8:11:39 GMT
The Madeley Road diversion must be a recent proposal. I have looked back at the original page and not seen it there.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 9, 2020 9:38:15 GMT
The Madeley Road diversion must be a recent proposal. I have looked back at the original page and not seen it there. The Madeley Road diversion is an old proposal - older than the North Finchley extension in fact.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on May 9, 2020 9:41:45 GMT
The Madeley Road diversion must be a recent proposal. I have looked back at the original page and not seen it there. The Madeley Road diversion is an old proposal - older than the North Finchley extension in fact. OK I must have missed it at the time. Odd too because I know the name Madeley from Richard & Judy. Embarrassing I know.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 9, 2020 12:02:02 GMT
The Madeley Road diversion must be a recent proposal. I have looked back at the original page and not seen it there. It was proposed back in 2016 but TfL have been dithering over it for years. Doesn't seem sensible to do something the residents don't want and prevents the route from being decked.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on May 9, 2020 14:10:02 GMT
The Madeley Road diversion must be a recent proposal. I have looked back at the original page and not seen it there. It was proposed back in 2016 but TfL have been dithering over it for years. Doesn't seem sensible to do something the residents don't want and prevents the route from being decked. It does therefore sound like it's for operational convenience rather than passenger benefit. Mind you, route 483 will still provide the traditional High Street routeing between Ealing Broadway and Hanger Lane, except that it does not serve Ealing Broadway Stn.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 9, 2020 14:15:00 GMT
It was proposed back in 2016 but TfL have been dithering over it for years. Doesn't seem sensible to do something the residents don't want and prevents the route from being decked. It does therefore sound like it's for operational convenience rather than passenger benefit. Mind you, route 483 will still provide the traditional High Street routeing between Ealing Broadway and Hanger Lane, except that it does not serve Ealing Broadway Stn. The westbound Ealing Broadway Station stop for the Uxbridge Road routes is in a ludicrous place. I understand it was moved there to accommodate the bendy buses for the 207 but now those are long gone I see no reason why the stop shouldn't return to its former position which was far closer to the station. On your point about operational convenience. I wonder if this will help TfL to save a bus. Of course the North Finchley extension will push the PVR up but the rerouting may save a bus so the PVR goes up one less than it otherwise would.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on May 9, 2020 14:22:30 GMT
It does therefore sound like it's for operational convenience rather than passenger benefit. Mind you, route 483 will still provide the traditional High Street routeing between Ealing Broadway and Hanger Lane, except that it does not serve Ealing Broadway Stn. The westbound Ealing Broadway Station stop for the Uxbridge Road routes is in a ludicrous place. I understand it was moved there to accommodate the bendy buses for the 207 but now those are long gone I see no reason why the stop shouldn't return to its former position which was far closer to the station. On your point about operational convenience. I wonder if this will help TfL to save a bus. Of course the North Finchley extension will push the PVR up but the rerouting may save a bus so the PVR goes up one less than it otherwise would. So, they provide a new link to North Finchley but cut the route from useful links in Ealing? It looks like a case of give with 1 hand and take with the other.
|
|
|
Post by uakari on May 9, 2020 14:59:00 GMT
The westbound Ealing Broadway Station stop for the Uxbridge Road routes is in a ludicrous place. I understand it was moved there to accommodate the bendy buses for the 207 but now those are long gone I see no reason why the stop shouldn't return to its former position which was far closer to the station. On your point about operational convenience. I wonder if this will help TfL to save a bus. Of course the North Finchley extension will push the PVR up but the rerouting may save a bus so the PVR goes up one less than it otherwise would. So, they provide a new link to North Finchley but cut the route from useful links in Ealing? It looks like a case of give with 1 hand and take with the other. Plus ça change - 384, 456 hail-and-ride, central London changes (that last one was pretty much all negative though). TfL is allergic to giving without taking back.
|
|
|
Post by mkay315 on Aug 28, 2020 23:07:32 GMT
And so today begins a new era of the 112 going to North Finchley. I still remember the days back in the early 90s when it went to Wood Green.
|
|
|
Post by thewintersoldier on Aug 29, 2020 9:32:41 GMT
This morning I ran from home to Neasden IKEA, with the intention of getting the 112 back to north Finchley and the 221 back home. I most of the 112’s I saw while running going between Henleys corner and Brent Cross were empty: the bus I eventually got from Ikea towards Finchley was full untill Brent Cross. Unfortunately the buses look to be changing over at the 324 changeover point so this will cause problems as the bay firs one bus and if both buses need to change it’s causing potential road hazards. Route is basically carrying air but there was a driver in casuals learning as he’s probably unsure about the route. Said driver jumped on at Brent Cross and was saying the 112 duties are not the best, but I think that’s a sign of the business now. It’s a nice run on an early Saturday morning but I fear for it in the peaks and when the A406 does what the A406 does best. We were discussing the Turns along the route. Henley’s corner, Finchley High Road, simple enough. Just looks weird seeing the 112 east of the my cross. On observations it looks like the westbound journeys the 112 and 232 are effective running within minutes of each other. But it feels a lot like a round the corner extensions when there’s no traffic, because it only took about 15 minutes, and I guess it frees up some stand space at Brent Cross. All bus stops had the 112 tile in but not many with timetables. Saw these signs along the Brent Cross area.
|
|