|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Oct 15, 2024 21:42:55 GMT
The issue is not privatisation, but rather the DfT micromanaging everything and forcing cuts and savings to be made which led to the curtailment to East Croydon but this is probably getting off topic That's true. I'm highly doubtful that Southern themselves will restore the link, without the DfT asking them for a reversal, which adds to the case of using the 466 or 403 to replace the 157 between Croydon and Palace. I'd prefer the 466.
The routes that can most realistically replace the 466 between Croydon and Addington are the 157 or 264. Not the 250, as it is too long. It would be good to restore the 264 to Wellesley Road. I was strongly against the changes to the 250 / 264 / 405 / 412 / 433 that happened a few years ago.
If the 407 were to eventually be split, could the Sutton end perhaps take over the 466 to Addington? |
|
|
|
Post by omsar on Oct 15, 2024 21:44:01 GMT
The 264 would not be an appropriate route to extend to Addington, it works flawlessly as a short and vital route. I hated using it from WC because it was usually the busiest from the first stop with the 154/157 etc, it is similarly as busy in Mitcham and Tooting Broadway plus the hospital link. That being said the 264 should have never been cut back, there are no bus alternatives to the 264 for Croydon for 90% of the route and the tram hardly counts as the 264 doesn’t directly run into it outside of Croydon. The 250, 405, 412 and 433 are paralleled by other routes which go to their former destinations more so than the 264 which is why I think the 264 was the worst of those cuts Thanks for your input. Yes, I would reverse the cuts to those routes. They have only further contributed to the depressing decline of the town centre, in my opinion.
I do still worry about the idea of a 157 Addington to Morden but it would probably be just as manageable as the current 157.
It's a shame the redevelopment of East Croydon station fell through, as I believe there was going to be provision for extra space for buses, perhaps even to terminate.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 15, 2024 21:44:33 GMT
The issue is not privatisation, but rather the DfT micromanaging everything and forcing cuts and savings to be made which led to the curtailment to East Croydon but this is probably getting off topic That's true. I'm highly doubtful that Southern themselves will restore the link, without the DfT asking them for a reversal, which adds to the case of using the 466 or 403 to replace the 157 between Croydon and Palace. I'd prefer the 466.
The routes that can most realistically replace the 466 between Croydon and Addington are the 157 or 264. Not the 250, as it is too long. It would be good to restore the 264 to Wellesley Road. I was strongly against the changes to the 250 / 264 / 405 / 412 / 433 that happened a few years ago.
I can understand your opposition but the changes to the 250,264,405,412 and 433 did achieve the objective of reducing bus congestion on Wellesley Road, too many routes terminating in the town centre. If the 264 was merged with the 403 for example it would return to Wellesley Road without additional buses. |
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on Oct 15, 2024 21:45:07 GMT
The issue is not privatisation, but rather the DfT micromanaging everything and forcing cuts and savings to be made which led to the curtailment to East Croydon but this is probably getting off topic That's true. I'm highly doubtful that Southern themselves will restore the link, without the DfT asking them for a reversal, which adds to the case of using the 466 or 403 to replace the 157 between Croydon and Palace. I'd prefer the 466.
The routes that can most realistically replace the 466 between Croydon and Addington are the 157 or 264. Not the 250, as it is too long. It would be good to restore the 264 to Wellesley Road. I was strongly against the changes to the 250 / 264 / 405 / 412 / 433 that happened a few years ago.
In my opinion a few cuts were necessary due to overbussing on Wellesley Road, but the 264 and 405 cuts were unnecessary and shouldn't have happened. If the 405 still went to West Croydon, then they could have increased it up to 5bph and got rid of the 455 without diverting the 166 down Pampisford Road (a 5bph double deck route would be sufficient), with the 439 also diverted along there to provide new links. That would then mean the 466 could be reduced to 6bph (the route is overbussed at both outer ends) as Brighton Road would retain a similar frequency to now. With the 439, I have quite a few ideas of how to improve the route: > It should ideally run via Waddon Way, Pampisford Road, Christchurch Road and Brighton Road, instead of down the quiet part of Purley Way. This provides new links from Pampisford Road to Purley Way, and also a requested link to Purley High Street, which the 9.7m buses should be able to do without the junctions needing changes. > Instead of terminating at Whyteleafe South, it can go from Whyteleafe Station to Warlingham Sainsburys (sharing a stand with the 403) via Hillbury Road, Westhall Road and Limpsfield Road. > Instead of terminating at Waddon Marsh, it can go up to Valley Park via Purley Way, Ampere Way, Franklin Way and Hesterman Way, with a new stand installed on Hesterman Way. > The odd 35 minute headway should be removed, but I would suggest a frequency increase to 3bph. > All of this can be done with the addition of 1 bus to the PVR if the frequency remains at 2bph (with a standard 30 minute headway though), or needs 3 more buses if the frequency is increased to 3bph. |
|
|
|
Post by omsar on Oct 15, 2024 21:48:09 GMT
If the 407 were to eventually be split, could the Sutton end perhaps take over the 466 to Addington? Yes, that would be appropriate route, if there were the stand space available to make such a split. In general, I think the London bus network is feeling the squeeze of not enough stand space and Croydon is definitely no exception. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Oct 15, 2024 21:55:10 GMT
That's true. I'm highly doubtful that Southern themselves will restore the link, without the DfT asking them for a reversal, which adds to the case of using the 466 or 403 to replace the 157 between Croydon and Palace. I'd prefer the 466.
The routes that can most realistically replace the 466 between Croydon and Addington are the 157 or 264. Not the 250, as it is too long. It would be good to restore the 264 to Wellesley Road. I was strongly against the changes to the 250 / 264 / 405 / 412 / 433 that happened a few years ago.
In my opinion a few cuts were necessary due to overbussing on Wellesley Road, but the 264 and 405 cuts were unnecessary and shouldn't have happened. If the 405 still went to West Croydon, then they could have increased it up to 5bph and got rid of the 455 without diverting the 166 down Pampisford Road (a 5bph double deck route would be sufficient), with the 439 also diverted along there to provide new links. That would then mean the 466 could be reduced to 6bph (the route is overbussed at both outer ends) as Brighton Road would retain a similar frequency to now. With the 439, I have quite a few ideas of how to improve the route: > It should ideally run via Waddon Way, Pampisford Road, Christchurch Road and Brighton Road, instead of down the quiet part of Purley Way. This provides new links from Pampisford Road to Purley Way, and also a requested link to Purley High Street, which the 9.7m buses should be able to do without the junctions needing changes. > Instead of terminating at Whyteleafe South, it can go to Warlingham Sainsburys (sharing a stand with the 403) via Hillbury Road, Westhall Road and Limpsfield Road. > Instead of terminating at Waddon Marsh, it can go up to Valley Park via Purley Way, Ampere Way, Franklin Way and Hesterman Way, with a new stand installed on Hesterman Way. > The odd 35 minute headway should be removed, but I would suggest a frequency increase to 3bph. > All of this can be done with the addition of 1 bus to the PVR if the frequency remains at 2bph (with a standard 30 minute headway though), or needs 3 more buses if the frequency is increased to 3bph. People keep claiming the 466 is overbused. Obviously TfL feel the stats go against this as the tender has been regained with an unchanged pvr of 20. |
|
|
|
Post by omsar on Oct 15, 2024 22:10:27 GMT
People keep claiming the 466 is overbused. Obviously TfL feel the stats go against this as the tender has been regained with an unchanged pvr of 20. I think it's possible that the reason the 466 hasn't been changed this tender is because TfL has bigger fish to fry, and the 466 being overbussed between Croydon and Addington was not something they could spend their time on. They are presumably preparing for Superloop 2, other consultations and having to deal with the hack that has cost them a lot of time.
The 466 is busy between Coulsdon and Croydon so the PVR provides a frequency that is justified - for that section - in my opinion.
I think it's possible they've had to prioritise.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 16, 2024 1:55:25 GMT
In my opinion a few cuts were necessary due to overbussing on Wellesley Road, but the 264 and 405 cuts were unnecessary and shouldn't have happened. If the 405 still went to West Croydon, then they could have increased it up to 5bph and got rid of the 455 without diverting the 166 down Pampisford Road (a 5bph double deck route would be sufficient), with the 439 also diverted along there to provide new links. That would then mean the 466 could be reduced to 6bph (the route is overbussed at both outer ends) as Brighton Road would retain a similar frequency to now. With the 439, I have quite a few ideas of how to improve the route: > It should ideally run via Waddon Way, Pampisford Road, Christchurch Road and Brighton Road, instead of down the quiet part of Purley Way. This provides new links from Pampisford Road to Purley Way, and also a requested link to Purley High Street, which the 9.7m buses should be able to do without the junctions needing changes. > Instead of terminating at Whyteleafe South, it can go to Warlingham Sainsburys (sharing a stand with the 403) via Hillbury Road, Westhall Road and Limpsfield Road. > Instead of terminating at Waddon Marsh, it can go up to Valley Park via Purley Way, Ampere Way, Franklin Way and Hesterman Way, with a new stand installed on Hesterman Way. > The odd 35 minute headway should be removed, but I would suggest a frequency increase to 3bph. > All of this can be done with the addition of 1 bus to the PVR if the frequency remains at 2bph (with a standard 30 minute headway though), or needs 3 more buses if the frequency is increased to 3bph. People keep claiming the 466 is overbused. Obviously TfL feel the stats go against this as the tender has been regained with an unchanged pvr of 20. You'll know better than me but I've felt it should never have gone to every 8 minutes and that every 10 minutes was more reasonable especially when you factor in the multiple increases Brighton Road received such as the 60's increase, 312's higher frequency than the 166, 407 decking etc. Not even the 37 in my own area is at every 8 minutes (every 10-11 minutes) yet I believe it would more deserving of it due to the vastly bigger loads it shifts over the 466. Now admittedly, that's one example of it and ideally, you'd leave the 466 alone and increase the 37 but this sort of thing is where I feel TfL aren't as clued up on their stats as they once were - 118 is another example where it should every 10 minutes yet somehow at every 12 minutes with peaks every 12-13 minutes |
|
|
|
Post by omsar on Oct 16, 2024 6:50:28 GMT
With the 439, I have quite a few ideas of how to improve the route: > It should ideally run via Waddon Way, Pampisford Road, Christchurch Road and Brighton Road, instead of down the quiet part of Purley Way. This provides new links from Pampisford Road to Purley Way, and also a requested link to Purley High Street, which the 9.7m buses should be able to do without the junctions needing changes. > Instead of terminating at Whyteleafe South, it can go from Whyteleafe Station to Warlingham Sainsburys (sharing a stand with the 403) via Hillbury Road, Westhall Road and Limpsfield Road. > Instead of terminating at Waddon Marsh, it can go up to Valley Park via Purley Way, Ampere Way, Franklin Way and Hesterman Way, with a new stand installed on Hesterman Way. > The odd 35 minute headway should be removed, but I would suggest a frequency increase to 3bph. > All of this can be done with the addition of 1 bus to the PVR if the frequency remains at 2bph (with a standard 30 minute headway though), or needs 3 more buses if the frequency is increased to 3bph. I like your ideas for the 439, especially point 1 (the diversion by Pampisford Road) and point 3 (extension to Hestermann Way). I think both of those would increase loadings and make the route more useful and successful.
I assume that the extension to Hestermann Way means that the 439 would run in both directions via Trafalgar Way and Drury Crescent? In order to continue to directly serve the tram stop and shops there.
Regarding point 2, I do wonder how likely an extension to Warlingham Sainsbury's would be, given that those roads you mention are in Surrey, not London. TfL would possibly want a contribution from Surrey council to make that change. I am not sure if they did that for the 434's extension to Caterham. Such a proposal may also encounter NIMBYism along Hillbury Road and Westhall Road, although I have been pleasantly surprised by the campaign for the 434 along Higher Drive so it's not necessarily the case. I think TfL would also point to the fact that the 439 already links to the Sainsbury's at Waddon Marsh, although it's a bit further away for those in Kenley.
It also removes the 439 from 2 or 3 bus stops (depending on the direction) between Whyteleafe and Whyteleafe South but the 407 and 434 are probably sufficient along there.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 16, 2024 7:35:23 GMT
People keep claiming the 466 is overbused. Obviously TfL feel the stats go against this as the tender has been regained with an unchanged pvr of 20. You'll know better than me but I've felt it should never have gone to every 8 minutes and that every 10 minutes was more reasonable especially when you factor in the multiple increases Brighton Road received such as the 60's increase, 312's higher frequency than the 166, 407 decking etc. Not even the 37 in my own area is at every 8 minutes (every 10-11 minutes) yet I believe it would more deserving of it due to the vastly bigger loads it shifts over the 466. Now admittedly, that's one example of it and ideally, you'd leave the 466 alone and increase the 37 but this sort of thing is where I feel TfL aren't as clued up on their stats as they once were - 118 is another example where it should every 10 minutes yet somehow at every 12 minutes with peaks every 12-13 minutes 157 is arguably another route which has long missed out on an increase and even at the Morden end loadings can definitely make it feel like it should be every 10 mins. I wouldn't quite say the 466 was cracking a walnut with a sledge hammer but maybe a cracking an egg and bar maybe a bit a few issues with school capacity I don't think it really needed to go to every 8 mins in 2017. Like you said the DD 407 every 12 mins plus now 2 extra BPH on the 312 V the 166 should in effect have allowed a 10 mins 466 with a PVR of 16. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Oct 16, 2024 8:11:00 GMT
People keep claiming the 466 is overbused. Obviously TfL feel the stats go against this as the tender has been regained with an unchanged pvr of 20. You'll know better than me but I've felt it should never have gone to every 8 minutes and that every 10 minutes was more reasonable especially when you factor in the multiple increases Brighton Road received such as the 60's increase, 312's higher frequency than the 166, 407 decking etc. Not even the 37 in my own area is at every 8 minutes (every 10-11 minutes) yet I believe it would more deserving of it due to the vastly bigger loads it shifts over the 466. Now admittedly, that's one example of it and ideally, you'd leave the 466 alone and increase the 37 but this sort of thing is where I feel TfL aren't as clued up on their stats as they once were - 118 is another example where it should every 10 minutes yet somehow at every 12 minutes with peaks every 12-13 minutes Do be honest I probably do not know the route any better than you. When I normally see it, it is at a time of day you do not expect routes to be at their peak. With all the comment on here at the 466 being overbused, was expecting to see the route recently awarded with a reduced pvr. TfL are renowned for making cuts where they feel the data suggests it. In this case there was no reduction, so obviously TfL feels the current pvr is warranted. I generally trust, makbe foolishly, that TfL have accurate loading data and make frequency changes, both increases and reductions as the data suggests ... but then I love statistics. |
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Oct 16, 2024 8:14:37 GMT
That's true. I'm highly doubtful that Southern themselves will restore the link, without the DfT asking them for a reversal, which adds to the case of using the 466 or 403 to replace the 157 between Croydon and Palace. I'd prefer the 466.
The routes that can most realistically replace the 466 between Croydon and Addington are the 157 or 264. Not the 250, as it is too long. It would be good to restore the 264 to Wellesley Road. I was strongly against the changes to the 250 / 264 / 405 / 412 / 433 that happened a few years ago.
If the 407 were to eventually be split, could the Sutton end perhaps take over the 466 to Addington? I'd personally say it would make more sense to have the West Croydon end take over the route as the 407 itself wouldn't directly serve East Croydon Station and passengers would have to get another bus or tram before getting to West Croydon or the opposite headed to Addington, so it would be Addington -> Caterham, then if you cut the 407 somewhere between Croydon Town Centre or South Croydon / South End, you can keep the interchange along those roads so the routes still connect. Either that or we could just leave the 407 and 466 alone, in my opinion they're great for what they do and the only alternatives I can think of would be entirely new bus routes or heavy alterations which would just harm other routes. Some things aren't mean to be broken I suppose, the 407, 466 and as I see some people saying, the 157, are prime examples of that, especially for south london. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 16, 2024 8:28:04 GMT
If the 407 were to eventually be split, could the Sutton end perhaps take over the 466 to Addington? I'd personally say it would make more sense to have the West Croydon end take over the route as the 407 itself wouldn't directly serve East Croydon Station and passengers would have to get another bus or tram before getting to West Croydon or the opposite headed to Addington, so it would be Addington -> Caterham, then if you cut the 407 somewhere between Croydon Town Centre or South Croydon / South End, you can keep the interchange along those roads so the routes still connect. Either that or we could just leave the 407 and 466 alone, in my opinion they're great for what they do and the only alternatives I can think of would be entirely new bus routes or heavy alterations which would just harm other routes. Some things aren't mean to be broken I suppose, the 407, 466 and as I see some people saying, the 157, are prime examples of that, especially for south london. I could imagine the 407/443 didn't stack up too well financially for TFL even with the commitment to bring a bus to the Old Town and so it was canned. Potentially had it going ahead then the 407 would have looked tempting to do something else with maybe the 407 running to Shrublands and the 194 extended to Thornton Heath with the 198 withdrawn to create a space West Croydon and Croydon Town Centre. |
|
|
|
Post by bluepuffy on Oct 16, 2024 8:39:13 GMT
I'd personally say it would make more sense to have the West Croydon end take over the route as the 407 itself wouldn't directly serve East Croydon Station and passengers would have to get another bus or tram before getting to West Croydon or the opposite headed to Addington, so it would be Addington -> Caterham, then if you cut the 407 somewhere between Croydon Town Centre or South Croydon / South End, you can keep the interchange along those roads so the routes still connect. Either that or we could just leave the 407 and 466 alone, in my opinion they're great for what they do and the only alternatives I can think of would be entirely new bus routes or heavy alterations which would just harm other routes. Some things aren't mean to be broken I suppose, the 407, 466 and as I see some people saying, the 157, are prime examples of that, especially for south london. I could imagine the 407/443 didn't stack up too well financially for TFL even with the commitment to bring a bus to the Old Town and so it was canned. Potentially had it going ahead then the 407 would have looked tempting to do something else with maybe the 407 running to Shrublands and the 194 extended to Thornton Heath with the 198 withdrawn to create a space West Croydon and Croydon Town Centre. If any route should be sent to the Old Town, i'd do the 433 and then terminate it at Reeves. I think people from East Croydon, Selsdon, Addington ect ect, are going to get more use out of it. The 433 then could be send to terminate somewhere around Reeves Corner, maybe it takes the 264s stand at Church St Tram Stop, and the 264 is moved to the other stop with the 157/407/410. I also have another reasoning for why the 433, if the Trams even inevitably screw up again, Reeves is usually the cut-off point. If the 433 runs from Addington to Reeves Corner (though the ibus would probably be something like ' Croydon, Old Town ', though they might also choose Reeves Corner), then that means less people are cut off from the Tramlink being so volatile. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 16, 2024 10:29:47 GMT
You'll know better than me but I've felt it should never have gone to every 8 minutes and that every 10 minutes was more reasonable especially when you factor in the multiple increases Brighton Road received such as the 60's increase, 312's higher frequency than the 166, 407 decking etc. Not even the 37 in my own area is at every 8 minutes (every 10-11 minutes) yet I believe it would more deserving of it due to the vastly bigger loads it shifts over the 466. Now admittedly, that's one example of it and ideally, you'd leave the 466 alone and increase the 37 but this sort of thing is where I feel TfL aren't as clued up on their stats as they once were - 118 is another example where it should every 10 minutes yet somehow at every 12 minutes with peaks every 12-13 minutes 157 is arguably another route which has long missed out on an increase and even at the Morden end loadings can definitely make it feel like it should be every 10 mins. I wouldn't quite say the 466 was cracking a walnut with a sledge hammer but maybe a cracking an egg and bar maybe a bit a few issues with school capacity I don't think it really needed to go to every 8 mins in 2017. Like you said the DD 407 every 12 mins plus now 2 extra BPH on the 312 V the 166 should in effect have allowed a 10 mins 466 with a PVR of 16. Isn't it just the Morden end of the 157 that needs an increase? From what I see of the Crystal Palace end the current frequency looks about right and obviously it's largely supported by the 75. I remember years ago the 157 operating in two sections, Morden to Crystal Palace and Raynes Park to Carshalton Wrythe Green. I think the 466 is probably the most over bussed route in London, East Croydon to Purley can be busy but both outer ends don't need that sort of frequency. |
|
