|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 11, 2021 22:05:33 GMT
The frequency reduction is stupid because it will obviously lead to demand falling again but you wouldn't understand this especially as you go on to suggest another is highly likely without any actual evidence as per usual. Clearly tfl have data for these sort of things. Again huge investment in creating the Overground probably took a bit of demand off a route that links Croydon to zone 2 and 3. And clearly, everyone knows TfL has data for all sorts of things but once again, doesn't mean it's the correct way to go about things. The Overground has nothing to do with the 468 especially as they don't run along the same corridor - if your going from Tulse Hill to Croydon for example, you'd likely get the bus as the only other way by public transport is via Southern |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 11, 2021 22:36:27 GMT
Clearly tfl have data for these sort of things. Again huge investment in creating the Overground probably took a bit of demand off a route that links Croydon to zone 2 and 3. And clearly, everyone knows TfL has data for all sorts of things but once again, doesn't mean it's the correct way to go about things. The Overground has nothing to do with the 468 especially as they don't run along the same corridor - if your going from Tulse Hill to Croydon for example, you'd likely get the bus as the only other way by public transport is via Southern Perhaps people just don't go from Tulse Hill to Croydon to shop anymore, maybe from west Norwood take a train to west Croydon, maybe people don't travel by bus to Elephant and Camberwell as there are less families in Croydon have connections with the area then 15 years. There are many reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before and it's difficult for TFL to try and address them all. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 11, 2021 23:24:01 GMT
And clearly, everyone knows TfL has data for all sorts of things but once again, doesn't mean it's the correct way to go about things. The Overground has nothing to do with the 468 especially as they don't run along the same corridor - if your going from Tulse Hill to Croydon for example, you'd likely get the bus as the only other way by public transport is via Southern Perhaps people just don't go from Tulse Hill to Croydon to shop anymore, maybe from west Norwood take a train to west Croydon, maybe people don't travel by bus to Elephant and Camberwell as there are less families in Croydon have connections with the area then 15 years. There are many reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before and it's difficult for TFL to try and address them all. People just don't travel into Croydon anymore in the numbers that they used to mainly due to the onset of online shopping and remote working, the number of office blocks that have gone in recent years and the fact that the proposed Westfield development has been dropped bears testament to that. |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Nov 11, 2021 23:33:01 GMT
Perhaps people just don't go from Tulse Hill to Croydon to shop anymore, maybe from west Norwood take a train to west Croydon, maybe people don't travel by bus to Elephant and Camberwell as there are less families in Croydon have connections with the area then 15 years. There are many reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before and it's difficult for TFL to try and address them all. People just don't travel into Croydon anymore in the numbers that they used to mainly due to the onset of online shopping and remote working, the number of office blocks that have gone in recent years and the fact that the proposed Westfield development has been dropped bears testament to that. Agree, live in South Norwood and Central Croydon should be my major shopping and socialising centre. That said I have only been to Central Croydon once this year, that was to a pub. Just think it is a horrible place these days. For shops, much rather go to Bromley, but tend to get most clothes online these days. |
|
|
|
Post by Unorm on Nov 12, 2021 0:15:50 GMT
Why was the frequency reduction stupid? It was only in line with falling demand and another frequency reduction looks highly likely. You could say it was stupid if buses were full and people were being left behind like on the N9. Interestingly it was only after the frequency reduction that 468's demand has notably decreased. In 2016/17 it carried 8.4 million. In 2017/18 it carried 8.3 million. In 2018/19 it carried 8.2 million. The 2019/20 data says 7.1 million. Coincidentally a sharp decline, about 15% which correlates with the give or take 20% capacity cut in it's frequency cut from every 7-8 (+ journeys) to every 9 and Sunday cut from every 12 to every 15. I certainly remember some worry from members about loss of capacity south of West Norwood, perhaps the freq reduction was okay north of West Norwood because it has the support of the multitude of routes up to Tulse Hill, the support of the 68 to E&C and the many routes between Camberwell & E&C. Looking at the short section of Tulse Hill and West Norwood is only around 5 stops and is null in practice as a vast majority go further regardless of route. Whilst the 68 has received two frequency cuts in the span of a few years I'd say the reduction wasn't fine. Perhaps if it was only 68 to receive cuts (in 2019 and 2021) then a different argument would be made, but the combination of 68 and 468 being cut only resulted in a reduction of capacity that only 68/468 (in more cases the 468 alone) provide whether directly or quickly or even conveniently. Clearly tfl have data for these sort of things. Again huge investment in creating the Overground probably took a bit of demand off a route that links Croydon to zone 2 and 3. Ever since the Overground the 468's demand has been steadily increasing to it's peak of above 8 million with a decrease in 2015/6 which I believe was during Elephant & Castle gryatory works. Unfortunately the Overground doesn't cover the parts of Upper Norwood without rail and doesn't provide a link to Camberwell that the 468 valuably does. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 12, 2021 2:14:59 GMT
And clearly, everyone knows TfL has data for all sorts of things but once again, doesn't mean it's the correct way to go about things. The Overground has nothing to do with the 468 especially as they don't run along the same corridor - if your going from Tulse Hill to Croydon for example, you'd likely get the bus as the only other way by public transport is via Southern Perhaps people just don't go from Tulse Hill to Croydon to shop anymore, maybe from west Norwood take a train to west Croydon, maybe people don't travel by bus to Elephant and Camberwell as there are less families in Croydon have connections with the area then 15 years. There are many reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before and it's difficult for TFL to try and address them all. I was giving you an example of why the Overground has nothing to do with the 468 yet your somehow taking it and turning it into a full blown analysis. There are some reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before but it isn't difficult at all to address them when they are so obvious and staring people in the face. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 12, 2021 6:39:41 GMT
Why was the frequency reduction stupid? It was only in line with falling demand and another frequency reduction looks highly likely. You could say it was stupid if buses were full and people were being left behind like on the N9. Interestingly it was only after the frequency reduction that 468's demand has notably decreased. In 2016/17 it carried 8.4 million. In 2017/18 it carried 8.3 million. In 2018/19 it carried 8.2 million. The 2019/20 data says 7.1 million. Coincidentally a sharp decline, about 15% which correlates with the give or take 20% capacity cut in it's frequency cut from every 7-8 (+ journeys) to every 9 and Sunday cut from every 12 to every 15. I certainly remember some worry from members about loss of capacity south of West Norwood, perhaps the freq reduction was okay north of West Norwood because it has the support of the multitude of routes up to Tulse Hill, the support of the 68 to E&C and the many routes between Camberwell & E&C. Looking at the short section of Tulse Hill and West Norwood is only around 5 stops and is null in practice as a vast majority go further regardless of route. Whilst the 68 has received two frequency cuts in the span of a few years I'd say the reduction wasn't fine. Perhaps if it was only 68 to receive cuts (in 2019 and 2021) then a different argument would be made, but the combination of 68 and 468 being cut only resulted in a reduction of capacity that only 68/468 (in more cases the 468 alone) provide whether directly or quickly or even conveniently. Clearly tfl have data for these sort of things. Again huge investment in creating the Overground probably took a bit of demand off a route that links Croydon to zone 2 and 3. Ever since the Overground the 468's demand has been steadily increasing to it's peak of above 8 million with a decrease in 2015/6 which I believe was during Elephant & Castle gryatory works. Unfortunately the Overground doesn't cover the parts of Upper Norwood without rail and doesn't provide a link to Camberwell that the 468 valuably does. Data like that can be interpreted however you want, TfL would no doubt say that it vindicates their decision. The fall in usage would have probably happened anyway and with fewer 468s running some people will use the 68 instead or various other routes north of Camberwell. By all means criticise TfL when they get it wrong like they have with the N9 but I don't see how they can be criticised about the 468 reduction Mon-Sat, although I do think it should have remained x12minutes on Sunday. It's probably a case of being careful what you wish for, any further look at the 68 corridor will probably see further reductions and probably the end of the X68, the usage of which has perhaps not surprisingly fallen off a cliff since the start of the pandemic. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 12, 2021 8:18:13 GMT
Perhaps people just don't go from Tulse Hill to Croydon to shop anymore, maybe from west Norwood take a train to west Croydon, maybe people don't travel by bus to Elephant and Camberwell as there are less families in Croydon have connections with the area then 15 years. There are many reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before and it's difficult for TFL to try and address them all. I was giving you an example of why the Overground has nothing to do with the 468 yet your somehow taking it and turning it into a full blown analysis. There are some reasons why some routes aren't as busy as before but it isn't difficult at all to address them when they are so obvious and staring people in the face. Basically I'm giving examples of what is probably happening all over London. Which may go some way to explain the decline. That was all. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 12, 2021 12:09:15 GMT
Interestingly it was only after the frequency reduction that 468's demand has notably decreased. In 2016/17 it carried 8.4 million. In 2017/18 it carried 8.3 million. In 2018/19 it carried 8.2 million. The 2019/20 data says 7.1 million. Coincidentally a sharp decline, about 15% which correlates with the give or take 20% capacity cut in it's frequency cut from every 7-8 (+ journeys) to every 9 and Sunday cut from every 12 to every 15. Looking at the short section of Tulse Hill and West Norwood is only around 5 stops and is null in practice as a vast majority go further regardless of route. Whilst the 68 has received two frequency cuts in the span of a few years I'd say the reduction wasn't fine. Perhaps if it was only 68 to receive cuts (in 2019 and 2021) then a different argument would be made, but the combination of 68 and 468 being cut only resulted in a reduction of capacity that only 68/468 (in more cases the 468 alone) provide whether directly or quickly or even conveniently. Ever since the Overground the 468's demand has been steadily increasing to it's peak of above 8 million with a decrease in 2015/6 which I believe was during Elephant & Castle gryatory works. Unfortunately the Overground doesn't cover the parts of Upper Norwood without rail and doesn't provide a link to Camberwell that the 468 valuably does. Data like that can be interpreted however you want, TfL would no doubt say that it vindicates their decision. The fall in usage would have probably happened anyway and with fewer 468s running some people will use the 68 instead or various other routes north of Camberwell. By all means criticise TfL when they get it wrong like they have with the N9 but I don't see how they can be criticised about the 468 reduction Mon-Sat, although I do think it should have remained x12minutes on Sunday. It's probably a case of being careful what you wish for, any further look at the 68 corridor will probably see further reductions and probably the end of the X68, the usage of which has perhaps not surprisingly fallen off a cliff since the start of the pandemic. Where do you get this from - the X68 loadings have increased after lockdown to a level where they might not be rammed solid like before but are still busy so to say usage has fallen off a cliff either shows you have a clear agenda against buses or posting nonsense for the sake of it. You need to seriously understand that cutting things just deepens decline - your on here telling TfL they need to promote travel yet your constantly also praising their cuts which is a complete contradiction. Your obsession with the N9 is equally laughable as I bet there is strong chance you neither ride or see that route often. Unlike yourself, Unorm has provided evidence and as per usual, you find ways to discredit it just like 2 certain former accounts on here did the same |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 12, 2021 14:18:12 GMT
Has the X68 always run that same structure, ie to Central in the mornings, from in the evenings with the fast section or has it ever stopped that Tulse Hill, Herne Hill, Camberwell?
|
|
|
|
Post by someone on Nov 17, 2021 18:36:55 GMT
The 211 is a bit too long for my liking... here is an idea of shortening it:
211: curtailed to Sloane Square and diverted to Hyde Park Corner via Knightsbridge 48: New route between London Bridge and East Acton via the 341 to Waterloo, the old 211 to Chelsea, the 360 along Sloane Avenue, the 49 up to Shepherd's Bush, the 260 up to the Westway, then the 7/72/283 up to East Acton.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2021 18:43:21 GMT
The 211 is a bit too long for my liking... here is an idea of shortening it:
211: curtailed to Sloane Square and diverted to Hyde Park Corner via Knightsbridge 48: New route between London Bridge and East Acton via the 341 to Waterloo, the old 211 to Chelsea, the 360 along Sloane Avenue, the 49 up to Shepherd's Bush, the 260 up to the Westway, then the 7/72/283 up to East Acton.
The new route proposed is longer than the existing 211 ! The 211 is quite a nice length as is. |
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Nov 17, 2021 19:05:27 GMT
New Route 494- Bromley, Plaistow Green to New Addington, Homestead Way.
A medium frequency single deck route to provide new links and improve efficiency and reliability for a few key trunk routes.
Route: Plaistow Green, Bromley North, Shortlands, Shortlands Road, Chinese Garage, South Eden Park Road, West Wickham, Bridle Road, Shrublands double run, Shirley Way, Shirley Church Road, Village of Addington, Addington Village Interchange, Fieldway Estate, Goldcrest Way, King Henry's Drive, New Addington Tram Stop, Central Parade, Homestead Way
Further Route Alterations:
Route 358 rerouted direct via Bromley Road and Route 227
Route 194 rerouted direct via Wickham Road instead of Shrublands
Route 198 rerouted via Shirley Way and West Way (existing route 194)
Route 64 rerouted direct via Lodge Lane instead of Fieldway
Benefits:
- New links between Shrublands/West Wickham and Fieldway/New Addington
- New link between Shrublands and Bromley
- New service for Village of Addington
- More efficient and reliable service for major trunk routes (64, 358)
- Relief for 119 and 314 into Bromley from West Wickham and New Addington respectively
- New round the corner link from Plaistow to Shortlands.
Frequency: 10-11 minutes peak, 12 minutes daytimes, 20 minutes evenings. PVR= 12
Length restriction: 10.2m
|
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Nov 17, 2021 19:16:05 GMT
The 211 is a bit too long for my liking... here is an idea of shortening it:
211: curtailed to Sloane Square and diverted to Hyde Park Corner via Knightsbridge 48: New route between London Bridge and East Acton via the 341 to Waterloo, the old 211 to Chelsea, the 360 along Sloane Avenue, the 49 up to Shepherd's Bush, the 260 up to the Westway, then the 7/72/283 up to East Acton.
If the 211 is considered long then I hate to imagine what other routes are considered... eg 25, 57, 36, 157 (also, I'm guessing its 381 and not 341?) |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 17, 2021 19:26:05 GMT
The 211 is a bit too long for my liking... here is an idea of shortening it: 211: curtailed to Sloane Square and diverted to Hyde Park Corner via Knightsbridge 48: New route between London Bridge and East Acton via the 341 to Waterloo, the old 211 to Chelsea, the 360 along Sloane Avenue, the 49 up to Shepherd's Bush, the 260 up to the Westway, then the 7/72/283 up to East Acton.
I noticed you still not grasped the difference between this thread and the fantasy one? The 211 tops in at 7 miles and max running time of 71 minutes - that is pretty reasonable especially when you consider your 48 proposal is not only much longer but follows the 49 to Shepherds Bush which means it will sit in awful traffic between High Street Kensington & the Shepherds Bush Roundabout. Simply looking at it's length is the wrong way to go about - other factors like traffic hotspots come into it. Some of the remaining longer routes that survive do so because their conditions are much more favourable than others that ended up being shortened |
|
