|
Post by bluepuffy on Jul 18, 2024 17:02:20 GMT
If there is stand space, potentially the 250 back to CTC, as for the 264 though, absolutely no idea, SC/SE wouldn't be able to handle a frequency of the 264 and 468s, Hogarth could be an idea but other than those, there's not much else they could feasibly go. I think the 264 should have priority over the 250 if something is extended into the town centre. The 50 and 109 cover a lot of the 250 into Croydon whereas the 264 only meets the 289 beyond Reeves Corner, they meet at an awkward point and the 289 only serves West Croydon anyway. Agreed honestly. The 2019 Croydon changes still baffle me, I'd personally swap the 264 and 405 if I could.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 18, 2024 17:02:55 GMT
The SL6 is limited service so I don't think it wouldn't help with stand space and I think extending a route from West Croydon isn't the best idea because it can cause traffic but I'm not exactly sure, I'm not a local to Croydon As a local, West Croydon has barely any stand space at the moment, the 367 has to stand at Delta Point half of the time and buses usually stand by the dropoff point at WC just besides Poplar Walk, not even an every hour service could fit in it's that bad. The main blame for this in my opinion is the 264/154 and 250, there's usually about 3 250s standing there and 2 264/154s too. Best idea would probably be to find a place to re-extend the 250 or 264 as cutting the 154 would be pointless and only worsen conditions for the 407/SL7. No wonder the idea of a new 443 standing where went out of favour and the through 407 retained.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2024 17:12:56 GMT
I think the 264 should have priority over the 250 if something is extended into the town centre. The 50 and 109 cover a lot of the 250 into Croydon whereas the 264 only meets the 289 beyond Reeves Corner, they meet at an awkward point and the 289 only serves West Croydon anyway. Agreed honestly. The 2019 Croydon changes still baffle me, I'd personally swap the 264 and 405 if I could. They reduced congestion in the bus station and Wellesley Road.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2024 17:15:31 GMT
If the SL5/7 proposal goes ahead surely that will solve the problem? SL5 really doesn’t need to stand at West Croydon. Some people seem to think it does and the simplest way would be for the 194 and SL5 to swap stands. I've no particular opinion either way.
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Jul 18, 2024 17:16:15 GMT
Agreed honestly. The 2019 Croydon changes still baffle me, I'd personally swap the 264 and 405 if I could. They reduced congestion in the bus station and Wellesley Road. Reducing congestion I understand, but the 405 being cut back is something I will always be against, it gave Redhill and surrounding Surrey towns a direct connection to the London Overground, and a selection of buses that go almost everywhere in the neighbouring boroughs.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2024 17:26:09 GMT
They reduced congestion in the bus station and Wellesley Road. Reducing congestion I understand, but the 405 being cut back is something I will always be against, it gave Redhill and surrounding Surrey towns a direct connection to the London Overground, and a selection of buses that go almost everywhere in the neighbouring boroughs. I appreciate that not everyone is going to be happy about it, it might be better if the 405 and 412 went to East Croydon but no stand space.
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Jul 18, 2024 17:29:57 GMT
Reducing congestion I understand, but the 405 being cut back is something I will always be against, it gave Redhill and surrounding Surrey towns a direct connection to the London Overground, and a selection of buses that go almost everywhere in the neighbouring boroughs. I appreciate that not everyone is going to be happy about it, it might be better if the 405 and 412 went to East Croydon but no stand space. Id agree but trains go to Redhill from EC, that's why WC would be the more desirable option for the 405 imo, gives them an entirely new rail connection and the Overground. 412 doesn't need to go EC either, the 433 and 64 cover the Selsdon connection more than enough, and I don't think residents of Riddlesdown and Sanderstead are dying to get to East Croydon, especially with the frequency of the 412.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2024 17:46:34 GMT
I appreciate that not everyone is going to be happy about it, it might be better if the 405 and 412 went to East Croydon but no stand space. Id agree but trains go to Redhill from EC, that's why WC would be the more desirable option for the 405 imo, gives them an entirely new rail connection and the Overground. 412 doesn't need to go EC either, the 433 and 64 cover the Selsdon connection more than enough, and I don't think residents of Riddlesdown and Sanderstead are dying to get to East Croydon, especially with the frequency of the 412. East Croydon would be more useful for the 412 than the current terminus and obviously anyone from Redhill can take a train and change at Norwood Junction for London Overground.
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Jul 18, 2024 18:10:21 GMT
Id agree but trains go to Redhill from EC, that's why WC would be the more desirable option for the 405 imo, gives them an entirely new rail connection and the Overground. 412 doesn't need to go EC either, the 433 and 64 cover the Selsdon connection more than enough, and I don't think residents of Riddlesdown and Sanderstead are dying to get to East Croydon, especially with the frequency of the 412. East Croydon would be more useful for the 412 than the current terminus and obviously anyone from Redhill can take a train and change at Norwood Junction for London Overground. It'd be more useful, but that's obvious, as it would terminate outside of one of the busiest stations south of the Thames. I just think that if the 412 can go around East Croydon then terminate round one of the backroads, the 405 has the same right to be extended just up to West Croydon, they'd probably be similar extensions length wise at the end of the day. (The 412 would have to go down a side road to terminate, which is where the added mileage comes from)
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2024 18:20:21 GMT
East Croydon would be more useful for the 412 than the current terminus and obviously anyone from Redhill can take a train and change at Norwood Junction for London Overground. It'd me more useful, but that's obvious, as it would terminate outside of one of the busiest stations south of the Thames. I just think that if the 412 can go around East Croydon then terminate round one of the backroads, the 405 has the same right to be extended just up to West Croydon, they'd probably be similar extensions length wise at the end of the day. (The 412 would have to go down a side road to terminate, which is where the added mileage comes from) It's a bit of a moot point anyway as there's no stand space at East Croydon but if the SL5/7 proposal goes ahead there may be a possibility of the 405 and 412 returning to West Croydon?
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Jul 18, 2024 18:29:28 GMT
It'd me more useful, but that's obvious, as it would terminate outside of one of the busiest stations south of the Thames. I just think that if the 412 can go around East Croydon then terminate round one of the backroads, the 405 has the same right to be extended just up to West Croydon, they'd probably be similar extensions length wise at the end of the day. (The 412 would have to go down a side road to terminate, which is where the added mileage comes from) It's a bit of a moot point anyway as there's no stand space at East Croydon but if the SL5/7 proposal goes ahead there may be a possibility of the 405 and 412 returning to West Croydon? Either that or the 457 could be looked at again.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 18, 2024 19:00:10 GMT
It's a bit of a moot point anyway as there's no stand space at East Croydon but if the SL5/7 proposal goes ahead there may be a possibility of the 405 and 412 returning to West Croydon? Either that or the 457 could be looked at again. What's the 457?
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Jul 18, 2024 19:05:12 GMT
Either that or the 457 could be looked at again. What's the 457? The 443, it was confirmed to be renumbered to the 457 a few months ago.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jul 18, 2024 19:19:43 GMT
The 443, it was confirmed to be renumbered to the 457 a few months ago. I always thought the number 443 was asking for problems with the 433 also in Croydon, remains to be seen whether it will ever happen.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jul 18, 2024 19:53:39 GMT
The 443, it was confirmed to be renumbered to the 457 a few months ago. I always thought the number 443 was asking for problems with the 433 also in Croydon, remains to be seen whether it will ever happen. Probably makes sense keeping the 4x7 part. Similar to have 322 and 332 was considered a bit close in Crystal Palace
|
|