|
|
Post by danorak on Jan 13, 2020 13:56:52 GMT
|
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 13, 2020 13:59:31 GMT
via mobile
Post by DE20106 on Jan 13, 2020 13:59:31 GMT
Would be well deserved. God knows how this route must have coped with single deckers when nowadays you get double deckers packed to the door to and from NG in the peaks. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jan 13, 2020 17:53:30 GMT
Would be well deserved. God knows how this route must have coped with single deckers when nowadays you get double deckers packed to the door to and from NG in the peaks. 132 has been a massive success story in recent years. Was ok with single deckers when it only ran as far west as Eltham, but since the extension patronage has heavily risen. |
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 13, 2020 17:55:34 GMT
via mobile
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 13, 2020 17:55:34 GMT
Can't help but feel it would be more efficient just to add 4 extra shorts (maybe all day monday to Friday) as opposed to increasing the freq throughout. Ultimately it's from Eltham to North Greenwich that has really been successful.
|
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 13, 2020 18:27:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by greenboy on Jan 13, 2020 18:27:40 GMT
Can't help but feel it would be more efficient just to add 4 extra shorts (maybe all day monday to Friday) as opposed to increasing the freq throughout. Ultimately it's from Eltham to North Greenwich that has really been successful. I agree extra capacity between Eltham and North Greenwich is all that's needed, the Bexleyheath end of the route is pretty dead by comparison. |
|
|
|
Post by buspete on Dec 1, 2020 17:35:48 GMT
Not only was it single decker. It only had four buses an hour as opposed the old circular 132 that had six buses an hour between Blendon and Eltham.
Is it also possible that the 335 have picked up some of the 132 traffic?
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Jan 12, 2021 16:39:04 GMT
Shame this option doesn't appear to have been actioned in the recent tender. I'm presuming this money would have allowed a frequency increase from 6bph to 7.5bph.
Interestingly enough, pre-Covid the 132 was one of few TfL services where revenue covered virtually all operating costs.
|
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 12, 2021 23:02:45 GMT
via mobile
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 12, 2021 23:02:45 GMT
Shame this option doesn't appear to have been actioned in the recent tender. I'm presuming this money would have allowed a frequency increase from 6bph to 7.5bph. Interestingly enough, pre-Covid the 132 was one of few TfL services where revenue covered virtually all operating costs. What are the others? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 132
Jan 14, 2021 23:19:14 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2021 23:19:14 GMT
Trying to get a seat on the 132 from North Greenwich during evening rush hour has always been a battle when I’ve used it.
|
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Jan 15, 2021 10:46:26 GMT
When I started at London Transport as a trainee in July 1972 I very soon learned that railheading was a bad thing.
This was the description for commuters using buses to get closer to Central London to then ride a train to finish their journey and save money.
North Greenwich being a prime example of this. It is in Zone 2. Anyone who pays for a Zone 1/2 Travelcard gets all their bus travel free.
The nearby National Rail stations (Charlton, Westcombe Park and Maze Hill) are in Zone 3.
Routes 132, 161 and 486 are carrying lots of people to and from North Greenwich and losing the rail operators money.
There is a very strong case for moving North Greenwich to Zone 3 and raising much needed revenue for TfL.
|
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 15, 2021 11:36:28 GMT
via mobile
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 15, 2021 11:36:28 GMT
Generally a station gets re zoned to bring the costs down and not put them up as it helps attract more custom and can save people travelling further to a station.
|
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jan 15, 2021 11:52:38 GMT
When I started at London Transport as a trainee in July 1972 I very soon learned that railheading was a bad thing. This was the description for commuters using buses to get closer to Central London to then ride a train to finish their journey and save money. North Greenwich being a prime example of this. It is in Zone 2. Anyone who pays for a Zone 1/2 Travelcard gets all their bus travel free. The nearby National Rail stations (Charlton, Westcombe Park and Maze Hill) are in Zone 3. Routes 132, 161 and 486 are carrying lots of people to and from North Greenwich and losing the rail operators money. There is a very strong case for moving North Greenwich to Zone 3 and raising much needed revenue for TfL. When zones were first introduced they also applied to buses, with an outer zone equivalent to rail zones 3a/b/c as they were at the time. So anyone catching a bus from North Greenwich would have needed at least one of the outer rail zones, or an outer zone bus pass. It was when flat fares were introduced on buses that zones were abolished and any travelcard was accepted on any bus regardless of the zones. Railheading also works in reverse; travelling by train to a zone 2 station then travelling into zone 1 by bus. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jan 15, 2021 12:30:28 GMT
Generally a station gets re zoned to bring the costs down and not put them up as it helps attract more custom and can save people travelling further to a station. Agreed, but think TfL is currently more revenue focused than it has been for a long, long time. Whilst the decision by those travelling into London will be unpopular, it will be popular with albeit a smaller number, travelling in the opposite direction. With regard to revenue, it is trying to establish whether revenue gained by people paying more, out ways the costs of fares from lost custom. Not condoning rezoning the station or keeping status quo in this post. |
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 15, 2021 12:51:31 GMT
via mobile
Post by greenboy on Jan 15, 2021 12:51:31 GMT
The Bexleyheath end is pretty quiet, alternate buses just doing NG to Eltham would seem the obvious solution although it goes against TfL dogma. |
|
|
|
Route 132
Jan 15, 2021 13:21:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 15, 2021 13:21:10 GMT
Generally a station gets re zoned to bring the costs down and not put them up as it helps attract more custom and can save people travelling further to a station. Agreed, but think TfL is currently more revenue focused than it has been for a long, long time. Whilst the decision by those travelling into London will be unpopular, it will be popular with albeit a smaller number, travelling in the opposite direction. With regard to revenue, it is trying to establish whether revenue gained by people paying more, out ways the costs of fares from lost custom. Not condoning rezoning the station or keeping status quo in this post. I think we need to up the fares a tiny bit, but not a lot. To public transport more of an interesting option we need to invest more in it. The way you do that is obviously put more money into the system but not only that - into bus lanes and priority and getting rid of Low Traffic Neighborhoods and start making the roads more efficient. With the amount of job losses, I can see a move over to public transport |
|
