|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 23, 2024 18:16:03 GMT
392: new route running between Ealing Broadway and Northwick Park Hospital. Via: Route E1 to Drayton Bridge Road Greenford Avenue Church Road Uxbridge Road Route 483 to Ealing Hospital Route 92 to Greenford Road Whitton Avenue West Route 487 to South Harrow Route 395 to Harrow H9 to Northwick Park Hospital Extending the 487 to Harrow or extending an existing route down from NPH would work better. For e.g. if 487 was extending up, passengers could use it as an alternative to the 483 if they want to access Ealing and can switch at Hanger Lane for 112/226/483 to Ealing. It would also mean passengers of this potential "392" could change at Sudbury Hill with the 92 to access areas such as Greenford and Ealing. That can't happen though, there's no space at Harrow. No extending the 487 would not work better. The 487 doesn’t go to Ealing or Greenford. |
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Oct 23, 2024 19:06:31 GMT
Extending the 487 to Harrow or extending an existing route down from NPH would work better. For e.g. if 487 was extending up, passengers could use it as an alternative to the 483 if they want to access Ealing and can switch at Hanger Lane for 112/226/483 to Ealing. It would also mean passengers of this potential "392" could change at Sudbury Hill with the 92 to access areas such as Greenford and Ealing. That can't happen though, there's no space at Harrow. No extending the 487 would not work better. The 487 doesn’t go to Ealing or Greenford. Like I said the extension would allow for faster connections to these areas if the connections are needed. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 23, 2024 19:13:39 GMT
No extending the 487 would not work better. The 487 doesn’t go to Ealing or Greenford. Like I said the extension would allow for faster connections to these areas if the connections are needed. No it wouldn’t and it wouldn’t provide the links I want. |
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Oct 23, 2024 19:42:40 GMT
Like I said the extension would allow for faster connections to these areas if the connections are needed. No it wouldn’t and it wouldn’t provide the links I want. If it's Greenford and Ealing that your after, your 392 following the H9 onward from South Harrow wouldn't be the best route to follow. If offloading the passenger count on the H9/10 isn't your biggest concern and making links is, a much more faster alternative would be to run the route from Harrow Bus Station to Northwick Park and then to Sudbury where it stalks almost half the 92 to Ealing Hospital. I don't see why the route couldn't go via Uxbridge Road if it's to terminate at Ealing Broadway as E1 locals are probably used to going from their local stop to Greenford/Ealing Broadway and changing so I would just terminate it at Ealing Hospital for simplicity. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 23, 2024 19:45:43 GMT
No it wouldn’t and it wouldn’t provide the links I want. If it's Greenford and Ealing that your after, your 392 following the H9 onward from South Harrow wouldn't be the best route to follow. If offloading the passenger count on the H9/10 isn't your biggest concern and making links is, a much more faster alternative would be to run the route from Harrow Bus Station to Northwick Park and then to Sudbury where it stalks almost half the 92 to Ealing Hospital. I don't see why the route couldn't go via Uxbridge Road if it's to terminate at Ealing Broadway as E1 locals are probably used to going from their local stop to Greenford/Ealing Broadway and changing so I would just terminate it at Ealing Hospital for simplicity. It would the best route because it’s create new links like linking South Harrow with Greenford, Greenford Avenue with Ealing Hospital and Drayton Bridge Road with Greenford Avenue. Also helping out the 92, 487 and H9/H10. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Oct 23, 2024 19:56:00 GMT
This is the routing that I originally proposed:
92: withdrawn between Greenford Broadway and Ealing Hospital.
392: new route running between Ealing Broadway and Northwick Park Hospital.
Via:
Route E1 to Drayton Bridge Road
Greenford Avenue
Church Road
Uxbridge Road
Route 483 to Ealing Hospital
Route 92 to Greenford Road
Whitton Avenue West
Route 487 to South Harrow
Route 395 to Harrow
H9 to Northwick Park Hospital.
Purpose:
To provide a more direct link between Ealing and Harrow. To link South Harrow with Greenford, to link Drayton Bridge Road with Greenford Avenue and to provide round a corner between Greenford Avenue and Hanwell Broadway / Ealing Hospital. It will also help out the 92, 487 and H9.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Oct 24, 2024 17:45:32 GMT
7: Extended via current route 70 to Chiswick, Business Park.
70: Withdrawn.
452: Rerouted between Ladbroke Grove and Sloane Square via current routes 70 and 360
|
|
|
|
Post by YX18KVJ (DLE30221) on Oct 25, 2024 16:11:14 GMT
7: Extended via current route 70 to Chiswick, Business Park. 70: Withdrawn. 452: Rerouted between Ladbroke Grove and Sloane Square via current routes 70 and 360 I wouldn’t withdraw the 70. It is a very well used route. The Ladbroke Grove to Sloane Square section also loses the 452. Don’t think that would work well with only the already busy 52 holding together that section as far as Knightsbridge. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 26, 2024 19:40:10 GMT
Interested to hear locals thoughts on the following:
Extend the A10 from Heathrow Aiport Central Bus Station to Heathrow Terminal 5 - essentially, the A10 double runs via Central Bus Station and then runs non stop to Terminal 5. This would introduce a quick and direct link between Uxbridge & Terminal 5 that currently takes two buses or two tubes to complete as well as introducing a direct bus link between the two parts of Heathrow Airport.
The reason I specifically chose the A10 over several other options (which I'll briefly mention in a moment) is the A10 has a low max running time of just 34 minutes due to it's non stop section from Heathrow to Stockley Park as well as not having to battle too much traffic along the way so an extension to Terminal 5 shouldn't wreck the current status quo. It was also much easier to achieve the Uxbridge to Terminal 5 link than meddling with existing routes or having to create a brand new route that might just end up causing a lot of duplication. I did consider the following:
Splitting the 222 as per a former idea TfL once briefly looked at - this was an easy no as the intention was to cause as little hardship to existing users but also, the U3 overlaps a little with the 222 at West Drayton unlike the A10 which only meets the U3 at it's current terminals.
Merging the 350 & U5 - I'm no fan of merging routes but these two routes did actually seem to be a rare candidate where this could actually work however, a combined route would have a max running time of roughly 100 minutes and in order to cut that, I did end stumbling into removing at least two current sections (think one from each route) to achieve this so felt I was merely creating problems rather than potentially solving them.
Extending the 278 from Ruislip to Uxbridge - I ruled this out pretty quickly simply because in order to reach Uxbridge from Ruislip, it would have to double run via Ruislip & West Ruislip and then duplicate the U1 or follow the 331 to Breakspear Road via a double run at Ruislip Station and then head south into Uxbridge with both routes having various issues, especially the latter with a low arched bridge on Breakspear Road. The 278 also clocks in at nearly 80 minutes for running time as well.
Extending the U3 using my A10 idea - this is actually doable as the U3 clocks in at 59 minutes but I feel it would be a poorer fit compared to the much faster A10 even if the U3 is every 12 minutes compared to the A10's every 20 minutes frequency. The A10 would also be a cheaper extension to implement.
|
|
|
|
Post by borneobus on Oct 27, 2024 2:10:55 GMT
Interested to hear locals thoughts on the following: Extend the A10 from Heathrow Aiport Central Bus Station to Heathrow Terminal 5 - essentially, the A10 double runs via Central Bus Station and then runs non stop to Terminal 5. This would introduce a quick and direct link between Uxbridge & Terminal 5 that currently takes two buses or two tubes to complete as well as introducing a direct bus link between the two parts of Heathrow Airport. The reason I specifically chose the A10 over several other options (which I'll briefly mention in a moment) is the A10 has a low max running time of just 34 minutes due to it's non stop section from Heathrow to Stockley Park as well as not having to battle too much traffic along the way so an extension to Terminal 5 shouldn't wreck the current status quo. It was also much easier to achieve the Uxbridge to Terminal 5 link than meddling with existing routes or having to create a brand new route that might just end up causing a lot of duplication. I did consider the following: Splitting the 222 as per a former idea TfL once briefly looked at - this was an easy no as the intention was to cause as little hardship to existing users but also, the U3 overlaps a little with the 222 at West Drayton unlike the A10 which only meets the U3 at it's current terminals. Merging the 350 & U5 - I'm no fan of merging routes but these two routes did actually seem to be a rare candidate where this could actually work however, a combined route would have a max running time of roughly 100 minutes and in order to cut that, I did end stumbling into removing at least two current sections (think one from each route) to achieve this so felt I was merely creating problems rather than potentially solving them. Extending the 278 from Ruislip to Uxbridge - I ruled this out pretty quickly simply because in order to reach Uxbridge from Ruislip, it would have to double run via Ruislip & West Ruislip and then duplicate the U1 or follow the 331 to Breakspear Road via a double run at Ruislip Station and then head south into Uxbridge with both routes having various issues, especially the latter with a low arched bridge on Breakspear Road. The 278 also clocks in at nearly 80 minutes for running time as well. Extending the U3 using my A10 idea - this is actually doable as the U3 clocks in at 59 minutes but I feel it would be a poorer fit compared to the much faster A10 even if the U3 is every 12 minutes compared to the A10's every 20 minutes frequency. The A10 would also be a cheaper extension to implement. In full agreement that if this idea was to be trialed / implemented best to use the A10 as you suggest due a) existing routing of A10 b) 34 mins running time c) 20 minute frequency d) cost of implementation. Re ‘tinkering’ with local routes there may be conflicting views from other locals (which is fine) but I’m happy with the 222/350/U3/U5 in their current iteration. Yes, an interesting new link and as you say the revised A10 could run non-stop Heathrow Central Bus Station -> Terminal 5 using the perimeter road. However, I wonder how much support and sponsorship a revised A10 would receive from TfL and ‘Heathrow’ on the basis of LU/HEX/Elizabeth Line rail links Central Area – T5?? I’m trying to understand the potential demographics that would make use of the extended A10… 1) Heathrow PAX transferring between terminals: I think unlikely except in the case of rail disruption – pax that don’t transfer airside will probably prefer to remain in terminal and use rail. Additionally, transferring from Heathrow Central Bus Station to/from LHR ‘Central Area’ rail links is a mission involving lifts / long escalators and quite an amount of walking…and of course the train(s) are FOC 2) Uxbridge / Goulds Green residents flying from/to T5: Emphatic yes, even with bags as no bus change required – but low pax numbers…? 3) Uxbridge / Goulds Green T5 Workers (and Cargo Village Workers) – Qualified yes as some workers in Central Uxbridge may plump for a 222 and take a chance transferring to 350 in West Drayton…one benefit that the A10 extension offers is that some Cargo Village workers may use the A10 to T5 then transfer to 482/490 4) Stockley Park obviously has no residents but may attract a small amount of business related travel from / to Terminal 5. In conclusion worth a trial but would it attract significant numbers…? Please forgive me but aside form the termini the A10/U3 share two stops (St Andrew’s Church & Manor Waye – St Andrew’s Park) south-east of Uxbridge Town Centre where the routes briefly rejoin on Hillingdon Road but I appreciate and agree with the main point you were making. |
|
|
|
Post by mrhk on Oct 28, 2024 19:58:01 GMT
Hayes Bus Changes:
Routes 195, 278, H98 and U7
195: Withdrawn between Hayes and Harlington and Charville Lane and instead diverted to Hayes Sainsbury's. converted to DD operation. This is to increase it's reliability reliability as the 195's current routing is prone to severe congestion.
H98: Diverted at Uxbridge County Court to Charville Lane Estate via current route 195 LOR. This is to make sure no current links are lost between Hayes and Charville Lane. Frequency decreased to 5bph
278: Frequency increased to 6bph to match current H98 LOR. 278 already runs between Hayes End and Harlington Corner so H98 links won't be lost. (Wood End Green is not too far from Uxbridge Road where the 278 currently runs)
U7: Diverted between The Brook House and Hayes Grapes via routes 90/140 and extended from Hayes Sainsbury's to Bulls Bridge via route E6 to Asda and route 195 to Nestles Ave. This is to free up stand space for the 195 at Sainsbury's and also relieve the passenger loads on routes 195 and E6 by mirroring the two routes.
New route N278: running between Ruislip and Feltham via current routes 278 to Harlington Corner and 90 to Feltham. 2pbh roure. Change at Hayes and Harlington for N140 to Heathrow and Harlington Corner for routes N9/222N to Hounslow.
|
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Oct 31, 2024 1:03:29 GMT
Central London restructure idea:
133 - Removed from Holborn, either restored to Liverpool Street, or rerouted to Aldgate via Fenchurch Street.
17 - Diverted between Mansion House and Chancery Lane via the 133 (via St Pauls Station).
59 - Restored to Kings Cross. Capacity maintained via Russell Square by rerouteing the 68 away from Euston instead (the 1 continues to link to Elephant & Castle).
381 - Withdrawn between County Hall and Waterloo IMAX, instead extended to Holborn (133 stand). Continues to link Holborn to London Bridge, and also restores the former RV1 links from Aldwych to Southwark, London Bridge and City Hall. Could consider looping via Mepham Street and Tenison Way to better serve Waterloo Station.
68/172/176/188 - Termini swapped around. Route 188 cut back to Waterloo and the 176 to Aldwych, both to improve reliability. Route 68 rerouted to Tottenham Court Road via Trafalgar Square (replacing the 176), and the 172 extended from Aldwych to TCR via Holborn (replacing the 188).
Night services
N133 - Replaced by a 24-hour service on the 133 to/from Streatham.
N59 - New night route from Kings Cross to Morden.
159 - Night service withdrawn, replaced by the N59 and N109.
N381 - Rerouted to Holborn (West End served by Aldwych instead of Trafalgar Square).
N68 - diverted via Trafalgar Square.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 31, 2024 13:23:53 GMT
Central London restructure idea:133 - Removed from Holborn, either restored to Liverpool Street, or rerouted to Aldgate via Fenchurch Street. 17 - Diverted between Mansion House and Chancery Lane via the 133 (via St Pauls Station). 59 - Restored to Kings Cross. Capacity maintained via Russell Square by rerouteing the 68 away from Euston instead (the 1 continues to link to Elephant & Castle). 381 - Withdrawn between County Hall and Waterloo IMAX, instead extended to Holborn (133 stand). Continues to link Holborn to London Bridge, and also restores the former RV1 links from Aldwych to Southwark, London Bridge and City Hall. Could consider looping via Mepham Street and Tenison Way to better serve Waterloo Station. 68/172/176/188 - Termini swapped around. Route 188 cut back to Waterloo and the 176 to Aldwych, both to improve reliability. Route 68 rerouted to Tottenham Court Road via Trafalgar Square (replacing the 176), and the 172 extended from Aldwych to TCR via Holborn (replacing the 188). Night servicesN133 - Replaced by a 24-hour service on the 133 to/from Streatham. N59 - New night route from Kings Cross to Morden. 159 - Night service withdrawn, replaced by the N59 and N109. N381 - Rerouted to Holborn (West End served by Aldwych instead of Trafalgar Square). N68 - diverted via Trafalgar Square. I agree about the 17 and 133 but whether the 59 or 68 should serve Euston is swings and roundabouts, I'd prefer the 68 as it's the more established route and there are tube alternatives to the 59. The 381 routing is a bit indirect between London Bridge and Holborn and also takes it away from St Thomas's Hospital. |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Nov 2, 2024 9:13:09 GMT
Central London restructure idea:133 - Removed from Holborn, either restored to Liverpool Street, or rerouted to Aldgate via Fenchurch Street. 17 - Diverted between Mansion House and Chancery Lane via the 133 (via St Pauls Station). 59 - Restored to Kings Cross. Capacity maintained via Russell Square by rerouteing the 68 away from Euston instead (the 1 continues to link to Elephant & Castle). 381 - Withdrawn between County Hall and Waterloo IMAX, instead extended to Holborn (133 stand). Continues to link Holborn to London Bridge, and also restores the former RV1 links from Aldwych to Southwark, London Bridge and City Hall. Could consider looping via Mepham Street and Tenison Way to better serve Waterloo Station. 68/172/176/188 - Termini swapped around. Route 188 cut back to Waterloo and the 176 to Aldwych, both to improve reliability. Route 68 rerouted to Tottenham Court Road via Trafalgar Square (replacing the 176), and the 172 extended from Aldwych to TCR via Holborn (replacing the 188). Night servicesN133 - Replaced by a 24-hour service on the 133 to/from Streatham. N59 - New night route from Kings Cross to Morden. 159 - Night service withdrawn, replaced by the N59 and N109. N381 - Rerouted to Holborn (West End served by Aldwych instead of Trafalgar Square). N68 - diverted via Trafalgar Square. I agree about the 17 and 133 but whether the 59 or 68 should serve Euston is swings and roundabouts, I'd prefer the 68 as it's the more established route and there are tube alternatives to the 59. The 381 routing is a bit indirect between London Bridge and Holborn and also takes it away from St Thomas's Hospital. I think the 59 was the more established route. It was so much busier than the 68. It also doesn’t really follow the Tube, it shared common stops at Brixton, Kennington and Waterloo only. Now that is three major stops, but between the 68/168 at the time, they follow each other for a way longer journey and even now ita quite clear, people use the 1 more and the 68 occasionally is empty. |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Nov 2, 2024 10:20:34 GMT
I agree about the 17 and 133 but whether the 59 or 68 should serve Euston is swings and roundabouts, I'd prefer the 68 as it's the more established route and there are tube alternatives to the 59. The 381 routing is a bit indirect between London Bridge and Holborn and also takes it away from St Thomas's Hospital. I think the 59 was the more established route. It was so much busier than the 68. It also doesn’t really follow the Tube, it shared common stops at Brixton, Kennington and Waterloo only. Now that is three major stops, but between the 68/168 at the time, they follow each other for a way longer journey and even now ita quite clear, people use the 1 more and the 68 occasionally is empty. 59 "more established"? It might feel like it has always been there, but in its current incarnation it only dates back to September 1999 to coincide with opening of part of the Jubilee Line Extension. For many years the 59 was a Sunday-only route operating between West Hampstead and Chipstead Valley, or latterly Old Coulsdon, mainly conering the 109 and 159 neither of which ran on Sundays (apart from a couple of very early morning 109 journeys). This ceased in October 1978. The number then reappeared in February 1985 for a daily route that was mainly Brixton-Purley but had Sunday journeys to both Victoria Embankment and Chipstead Valley. This route ceased in January 1994 by which time it was running between Farrington Street and Streatham Hill (BN) during Monday to Friday peaks only. The 68 on the other hand has been remarkably consistent. The route existed before the creation of London Transport back in 1933, including the core Euston to West Norwood section that operates today. Indeed the route operated between Chalk Farm and South Croydon for many years, being cut back to Euston only in October 1986 when the route went driver-only, and to West Norwood in March 1994 when the 68A (now 468) was introduced. |
|
