Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2021 10:08:34 GMT
'has other links that wouldn’t exist if it’s outright withdrawn' ... this argument can be made for any route change/withdrawal. Hasn't stopped things happening in the past, and plenty sure there will be future route changes and withdrawals Doesn’t mean that it should just because it’s happened before Whether it should or not is down to TFL to make the final call |
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Nov 7, 2021 10:11:04 GMT
Does the 195 need relief or would converting it double decker just solve any capacity issues between Brentford & Hayes? Can the 195 be fully converted to double deck? It can, but residents will not make it happen |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 7, 2021 10:11:21 GMT
I don't think this would be worth it. If the 414 were to be extended to Camden Town it probably be in replacement of the 274 (if the job were to be done I'd even then imagine it would be the 74), with perhaps something like the 476 taking on the eastern section to Camden Town/London Zoo from Angel (BTW this is not something I'm encouraging I'd imagine this be more likely). I can't comment on much but I suppose if you were to route the route in a slightly more useful and effective way you'd probably be better extending it directly to Swiss Cottage via the Finchley Road, whatever your opinions are on the 13 are, there's no doubt the effects of the old 82 removal still effect the corridor and I don't think the 13 should've been bolstered up to as high as it was because North Finchley to Golders Green didn't require all that extra capacity. I think it would've been far better to have kept all 3 Finchley Road routes at adjusted frequencies. You would provide extra capacity between Swiss Cottage & Camden which is fair enough but demand continues further on from Swiss Cottage westwards, so you could perhaps increase the 31 in frequency to its pre frequency reduction levels (again a very random route to reduce) and this should be possible given the 28/148/228/328 have seen freq reductions over recent years without overbussing anything. Was hard to keep the 13 thou with what TFL had in mind for Oxford Street. It could had led to the 13 just being a Golders Green to Baker Street/Marble Arch short of the 82 as we know they really only had plans for the 7/98/139/390 along Oxford Street and only the 139/390 had the full pedestrianisation gone ahead. It could've always been something layered like the 82 restructured to run between Marble Arch & North Finchley, the 13 between Victoria & Golders Green & the 113 between Oxford Circus & Edgware. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 7, 2021 10:11:40 GMT
Can the 195 be fully converted to double deck? It can, but residents will not make it happen That's the 235 you're on about |
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Nov 7, 2021 10:15:19 GMT
It can, but residents will not make it happen That's the 235 you're on about I know about the 235, I thought the 195 has the same problem |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 7, 2021 10:28:28 GMT
That's the 235 you're on about I know about the 235, I thought the 195 has the same problem It doesn't |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2021 10:47:24 GMT
I know about the 235, I thought the 195 has the same problem It doesn't I thought it was the tight turns at Charville Lane Estate? |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 7, 2021 10:48:00 GMT
I thought it was the tight turns at Charville Lane Estate? The U7 was able to use double deckers down there so no problems there. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 7, 2021 11:04:05 GMT
Was hard to keep the 13 thou with what TFL had in mind for Oxford Street. It could had led to the 13 just being a Golders Green to Baker Street/Marble Arch short of the 82 as we know they really only had plans for the 7/98/139/390 along Oxford Street and only the 139/390 had the full pedestrianisation gone ahead. It could've always been something layered like the 82 restructured to run between Marble Arch & North Finchley, the 13 between Victoria & Golders Green & the 113 between Oxford Circus & Edgware. But then along with the 189 that would have added another 2 routes between Baker Street and Marble Arch, 3 now TFLs plan for the 113 had happened. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Nov 7, 2021 11:17:50 GMT
It could've always been something layered like the 82 restructured to run between Marble Arch & North Finchley, the 13 between Victoria & Golders Green & the 113 between Oxford Circus & Edgware. But then along with the 189 that would have added another 2 routes between Baker Street and Marble Arch, 3 now TFLs plan for the 113 had happened. I did also suggest reductions, there would be the 2, 13, 30, 74, 82, 113, 139, 189, 274 which sounds like a lot, perhaps the 74 could've replaced the 274 as far as Camden Town. I think Abbey Road would've been slightly better to have looked at over the Finchley Road though however some positive things came out of the Finchley Road changes, the 113 section between Fortune Green & Edgware received a higher frequency which was overdue IMO and there's now more capacity between West Hampstead & GG (whether a DD route was needed is another question) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2021 12:19:10 GMT
I thought it was the tight turns at Charville Lane Estate? The U7 was able to use double deckers down there so no problems there. No I meant for routes terminating there |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 7, 2021 13:19:11 GMT
The U7 was able to use double deckers down there so no problems there. No I meant for routes terminating there I don’t see deckers being an issue though the section where it runs to stand |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 7, 2021 13:20:50 GMT
Doesn’t mean that it should just because it’s happened before Whether it should or not is down to TFL to make the final call You don’t say - everyone is well aware of that. And in other news, the sky is blue…. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2021 13:44:17 GMT
Whether it should or not is down to TFL to make the final call You don’t say - everyone is well aware of that. And in other news, the sky is blue…. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day  |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Nov 7, 2021 16:23:57 GMT
Was hard to keep the 13 thou with what TFL had in mind for Oxford Street. It could had led to the 13 just being a Golders Green to Baker Street/Marble Arch short of the 82 as we know they really only had plans for the 7/98/139/390 along Oxford Street and only the 139/390 had the full pedestrianisation gone ahead. It could've always been something layered like the 82 restructured to run between Marble Arch & North Finchley, the 13 between Victoria & Golders Green & the 113 between Oxford Circus & Edgware. Something like this could have worked, keeping two shorter routes with an overlap, rather than the combined revised 13. I think I had previously suggested having one route from Golders Green to Victoria, and the other from North Finchley to Baker Street. Then maybe cut the 113 back out of central London to improve reliability. Or another option might have been something similar to the old 13 retained, possibly continuing to Waterloo, maintaining the link from the Finchley Road corridor to Oxford Circus and the West End, if needed. Then instead swap the 139 to go to Victoria in place of the 13/82. Even with the changes that went ahead, I think the renumberings could have been far less complicated, by going in line with the contract awards at the time. The 13 number might have been a better fit for the revised 139, still running between Golders Green and the West End, but simply diverted via West Hampstead, and a short extension to Waterloo. This could have continued on the existing 13 contract at the time without any number change - then retain the 82 number for the Tower Transit contract, and withdraw the 139. |
|
