|
|
Post by greg on May 5, 2020 21:21:45 GMT
Whoever used to run route 13 did a better job of it than Tower Transit are doing with it (would it be possible to run it any worse?). Route 274 has been run by Metroline for as long as I can remember, but I want them to lose it because it's so unreliable and I think they're complacent about it, with buses always bunching and huge gaps, plus curtailments all the time short of the terminus. This has got even worse since the frequency was reduced from every 7-8 to every 12 minutes, which I had hoped would make it more reliable. Instead, you often find yourself waiting 24 or 36 minutes, and when one finally does turn up, it's only going as far Copenhagen Street or Baker Street. Metroline seem to run other routes reasonably well, so why not the 274? Since the Baker Street roadworks finished there is really far less of an excuse for this unreliability on the 274, and I think a lot of the responsibility does lie with the drivers, because I've seen two or sometimes three buses depart the Angel stand in quick succession - should be no reason for that, even if the controller is off the ball. Plus most of the drivers on that route are really surly, especially if any passenger has the temerity to point out just how long they've been waiting (sorry to anyone who drives the 274, but it's true). I agree I see 274 at Camden, Angel and Baker Street and sometimes Marble Arch and have to wait 20 minutes sometimes for a 274. The problem is there are not alot of nearby garages on the route. Maybe transferring it to HT could do better or even an award from TT (X). Not far from Lancaster Gate an can dead run to Angel (quite a bit of traffic however) |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 5, 2020 22:20:51 GMT
Whoever used to run route 13 did a better job of it than Tower Transit are doing with it (would it be possible to run it any worse?). Route 274 has been run by Metroline for as long as I can remember, but I want them to lose it because it's so unreliable and I think they're complacent about it, with buses always bunching and huge gaps, plus curtailments all the time short of the terminus. This has got even worse since the frequency was reduced from every 7-8 to every 12 minutes, which I had hoped would make it more reliable. Instead, you often find yourself waiting 24 or 36 minutes, and when one finally does turn up, it's only going as far Copenhagen Street or Baker Street. Metroline seem to run other routes reasonably well, so why not the 274? Since the Baker Street roadworks finished there is really far less of an excuse for this unreliability on the 274, and I think a lot of the responsibility does lie with the drivers, because I've seen two or sometimes three buses depart the Angel stand in quick succession - should be no reason for that, even if the controller is off the ball. Plus most of the drivers on that route are really surly, especially if any passenger has the temerity to point out just how long they've been waiting (sorry to anyone who drives the 274, but it's true). I agree I see 274 at Camden, Angel and Baker Street and sometimes Marble Arch and have to wait 20 minutes sometimes for a 274. The problem is there are not alot of nearby garages on the route. Maybe transferring it to HT could do better or even an award from TT (X). Not far from Lancaster Gate an can dead run to Angel (quite a bit of traffic however) RATP's S is also relatively close to Lancaster Gate. I also wonder if AE/HK might be close enough to the Angel terminus to run the 274? |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 6, 2020 9:54:30 GMT
I agree I see 274 at Camden, Angel and Baker Street and sometimes Marble Arch and have to wait 20 minutes sometimes for a 274. The problem is there are not alot of nearby garages on the route. Maybe transferring it to HT could do better or even an award from TT (X). Not far from Lancaster Gate an can dead run to Angel (quite a bit of traffic however) RATP's S is also relatively close to Lancaster Gate. I also wonder if AE/HK might be close enough to the Angel terminus to run the 274? HK already do dead runs to Angel for the 394 so I don't think its out of the question for AE or HK to potentially bid for the 274. Looking at the last time round the 274 was up for tender (contract began in June 2018) it had three bidders, the other two could potentially have been any two of Arriva, HCT, RATP, Tower Transit - if you go back and check how much space garages close to the route had you can probably narrow it down further. |
|
|
|
Post by VWH1414 on May 6, 2020 10:04:25 GMT
Whoever used to run route 13 did a better job of it than Tower Transit are doing with it (would it be possible to run it any worse?). Back when the now 13 was the 82 it was run by Metroline from PB - but yes I agree that under TT it is run pretty terribly, I've had to wait 25 minutes for the route before, with 4 buses arriving all together and instead of overtaking each other they all drive in a convoy together... As for the 274 it seems KC is letting the side down when it comes to Metroline - in general Metroline run their routes well, but KC with the 30 & 274 seem to not be doing so great service wise. Perhaps HT should take the 274 on instead. |
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on May 6, 2020 10:13:28 GMT
Whoever used to run route 13 did a better job of it than Tower Transit are doing with it (would it be possible to run it any worse?). Back when the now 13 was the 82 it was run by Metroline from PB - but yes I agree that under TT it is run pretty terribly, I've had to wait 25 minutes for the route before, with 4 buses arriving all together and instead of overtaking each other they all drive in a convoy together... As for the 274 it seems KC is letting the side down when it comes to Metroline - in general Metroline run their routes well, but KC with the 30 & 274 seem to not be doing so great service wise. Perhaps HT should take the 274 on instead. It could just be a one off with the 13. I don't use the 13 so can't comment. |
|
|
|
Post by VWH1414 on May 6, 2020 10:20:24 GMT
Back when the now 13 was the 82 it was run by Metroline from PB - but yes I agree that under TT it is run pretty terribly, I've had to wait 25 minutes for the route before, with 4 buses arriving all together and instead of overtaking each other they all drive in a convoy together... As for the 274 it seems KC is letting the side down when it comes to Metroline - in general Metroline run their routes well, but KC with the 30 & 274 seem to not be doing so great service wise. Perhaps HT should take the 274 on instead. It could just be a one off with the 13. I don't use the 13 so can't comment. I use the route fairly often... Its not just a one off, check its performance graph and that will show you its not a one off and it just isn't run well under TT. |
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on May 6, 2020 10:21:08 GMT
It could just be a one off with the 13. I don't use the 13 so can't comment. I use the route fairly often... Its not just a one off, check its performance graph and that will show you its not a one off and it just isn't run well under TT. Ok. My bad sorry. Would you say the 13 is better under London Sovereign? |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 6, 2020 10:23:27 GMT
I use the route fairly often... Its not just a one off, check its performance graph and that will show you its not a one off and it just isn't run well under TT. Ok. My bad sorry. Would you say the 13 is better under London Sovereign? You have to remember than when London Sovereign ran a route numbered 13 it was not the same as the current one as it was Aldywch-Golders Green - this contract later became the 139's contract. |
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on May 6, 2020 10:24:34 GMT
Ok. My bad sorry. Would you say the 13 is better under London Sovereign? You have to remember than when London Sovereign ran a route numbered 13 it was not the same as the current one as it was Aldywch-Golders Green - this contract later became the 139's contract. Is it something to do with the 82? |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on May 6, 2020 10:33:25 GMT
You have to remember than when London Sovereign ran a route numbered 13 it was not the same as the current one as it was Aldywch-Golders Green - this contract later became the 139's contract. Is it something to do with the 82? Ok I'll explain. The 82 ran from Victoria to North Finchley and was run by Metroline (PB). TfL stealthily in the Finchley Road changes consultation effectively made it look as if the 82 was being withdrawn with the 13 altered to run North Finchley-Victoria. The old 13 was effectively withdrawn and the 82 renumbered the 13. At the same time the 139 was extended from West Hampstead to Golders Green and the 113 was altered at the southern end to terminate at Oxford Circus instead of Marble Arch. However, when you look at the contracts is where things get more confusing. What happened is that the contract for the 13 became the contract for the 139, so the 139 transferred to RATP. The 82's contract was then put out for tender but overwritten as the 13 instead. This means that technically the 139 was withdrawn and the 13 was rerouted via West Hampstead and extended to Waterloo. Confusing I know. |
|
|
|
Post by VWH1414 on May 6, 2020 10:34:52 GMT
I use the route fairly often... Its not just a one off, check its performance graph and that will show you its not a one off and it just isn't run well under TT. Ok. My bad sorry. Would you say the 13 is better under London Sovereign? The current 13 was never operated by Sovereign - that 13 was withdrawn back in 2017 - only reason RATP currently run the 139 as its contract was swapped for the old 13 contract as the 139s contract with Metroline was up for tender anyway - though they have now gained it back anyway. The current 13 is a different route altogther. You have to remember than when London Sovereign ran a route numbered 13 it was not the same as the current one as it was Aldywch-Golders Green - this contract later became the 139's contract. Is it something to do with the 82? Yes the 82 was renumbered the 13 as there was opposition against getting rid of the number 13 - so in return upon re-tender in 2017 the 82 was numbered the 13 and also on re-tender the route was lost by Metroline and won by TT. TT really haven't given me a good impression though as its the only route of theirs I use and its run terribly as shown by the performance graph: bus.data.tfl.gov.uk/boroughreports/routes/performance-route-13.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by LK65EBO on Jun 18, 2022 15:28:02 GMT
111: Back to London United
235: Back to Metroline
X140: Back to Metroline
All routes for performance. The 111 was significantly better at AV than TF. The operation under AV wasn't exactly perfect but still better than TFs today. Quite a large gap between me missing the 111 once and the next being a 20 minute wait! The 235 has been a disaster under WK in my eyes, never seen that many bunchings on one route. AH operated it excellently and I rarely ever saw a bunching. Have been using the X140 more recently and there have been a lot of bunchings and curtailments under SO. Never had this issue with HD.
|
|
|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Jun 21, 2022 14:04:17 GMT
I would like the 266 back at Metroline. London United isnt doing it for me.
The 114 back at RATP.
E7 go back to metroline.
The 207 and 427 back at metroline
I also miss first, the livery and everything
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2022 11:34:25 GMT
269 back to Stagecoach please. I loathe them old banger DW buses they use on the route. They make my regular journeys from Sidcup to Bromley quite tedious.
|
|
|
|
Post by richard on Jun 22, 2022 14:56:47 GMT
W5 back to Metroline
|
|
