|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Dec 16, 2021 16:10:03 GMT
I could possibly see something like this happening....... 3 Extended from Whitehall to Hampstead Heath. Withdrawn between Brixton and Crystal Palace and rerouted via the 45 route to Clapham Park. 11 Withdrawn between Victoria and Fulham Broadway and rerouted via the 24 route to Pimlico. 45 Rerouted from Streatham Hill via 333 route to Tooting Broadway. 59 Withdrawn between Brixton and BN and rerouted via the 3 to Crystal Palace. Possibly reallocated to N. 118 Extended from Brixton via 333 route to Kennington. 311 New route, Fulham Broadway to Victoria via the 11 route and then via the 507 route to Waterloo. Routes 24,333 and 507 withdrawn. The 3/59/333 all come up in tender together so very much reasonable, also the 311 could take on the 24 contract. I'd say could the 118 become too long?
|
|
frank
Conductor
Posts: 68
|
Post by frank on Dec 16, 2021 16:53:01 GMT
barrypotter. You are correct, the W8 was single deck for little while (not sure of the year). Although it was the road underneath the railway that was lowered, enabling double deck bus operation. The height of the railway was not interfered with as this is nearly always the significantly more expensive option in a road v railway scenario.
I believe that this may have been a real sign of the times for the road to be lowered to accomodate a bus service (although there may have been other reasons) with agreement from TfL and Local Authorities. I wonder how many single deck routes which could do with double deck operation are constrained by bridges whereby a combination of will and funding from TfL and/or the Local Authorities could enable double deck services.
Clearly in the current financial climate this is unlikely to happen, but I do not recall many other cases of road being lowered to enable double deck operation since route W8 in the 2000s?
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 16, 2021 17:28:31 GMT
barrypotter . You are correct, the W8 was single deck for little while (not sure of the year). Although it was the road underneath the railway that was lowered, enabling double deck bus operation. The height of the railway was not interfered with as this is nearly always the significantly more expensive option in a road v railway scenario.
I believe that this may have been a real sign of the times for the road to be lowered to accomodate a bus service (although there may have been other reasons) with agreement from TfL and Local Authorities. I wonder how many single deck routes which could do with double deck operation are constrained by bridges whereby a combination of will and funding from TfL and/or the Local Authorities could enable double deck services.
Clearly in the current financial climate this is unlikely to happen, but I do not recall many other cases of road being lowered to enable double deck operation since route W8 in the 2000s?
I think Snaresbrook was one?
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Dec 16, 2021 17:43:41 GMT
I could possibly see something like this happening....... 3 Extended from Whitehall to Hampstead Heath. Withdrawn between Brixton and Crystal Palace and rerouted via the 45 route to Clapham Park. 11 Withdrawn between Victoria and Fulham Broadway and rerouted via the 24 route to Pimlico. 45 Rerouted from Streatham Hill via 333 route to Tooting Broadway. 59 Withdrawn between Brixton and BN and rerouted via the 3 to Crystal Palace. Possibly reallocated to N. 118 Extended from Brixton via 333 route to Kennington. 311 New route, Fulham Broadway to Victoria via the 11 route and then via the 507 route to Waterloo. Routes 24,333 and 507 withdrawn. Kennington isn't really a proper destination so wouldn't be an effective terminus. You may as well run it all the way to Elephant, which would be far too long for the 118. Not saying I'd support this but a solution to replacing the 333 would be to have the 415 run via Stockwell.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Dec 16, 2021 17:52:43 GMT
I could possibly see something like this happening....... 3 Extended from Whitehall to Hampstead Heath. Withdrawn between Brixton and Crystal Palace and rerouted via the 45 route to Clapham Park. 11 Withdrawn between Victoria and Fulham Broadway and rerouted via the 24 route to Pimlico. 45 Rerouted from Streatham Hill via 333 route to Tooting Broadway. 59 Withdrawn between Brixton and BN and rerouted via the 3 to Crystal Palace. Possibly reallocated to N. 118 Extended from Brixton via 333 route to Kennington. 311 New route, Fulham Broadway to Victoria via the 11 route and then via the 507 route to Waterloo. Routes 24,333 and 507 withdrawn. Kennington isn't really a proper destination so wouldn't be an effective terminus. You may as well run it all the way to Elephant, which would be far too long for the 118. Not saying I'd support this but a solution to replacing the 333 would be to have the 415 run via Stockwell. Problem with the 415 idea is that the Streatham/Stockwell link is lost. If a suitable stand can be found at Kennington that should be enough, retains that link and Brixton/Clapham Road link.
|
|
|
Post by YX10FFN on Dec 16, 2021 17:54:32 GMT
Kennington isn't really a proper destination so wouldn't be an effective terminus. You may as well run it all the way to Elephant, which would be far too long for the 118. Not saying I'd support this but a solution to replacing the 333 would be to have the 415 run via Stockwell. Problem with the 415 idea is that the Streatham/Stockwell link is lost. If a suitable stand can be found at Kennington that should be enough, retains that link and Brixton/Clapham Road link. The 50 would maintain the Streatham-Stockwell link.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Dec 16, 2021 18:00:21 GMT
Problem with the 415 idea is that the Streatham/Stockwell link is lost. If a suitable stand can be found at Kennington that should be enough, retains that link and Brixton/Clapham Road link. The 50 would maintain the Streatham-Stockwell link. I meant to say Streatham Hill and Brixton Hill which isn't covered by the 50.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Dec 16, 2021 18:17:00 GMT
barrypotter . You are correct, the W8 was single deck for little while (not sure of the year). Although it was the road underneath the railway that was lowered, enabling double deck bus operation. The height of the railway was not interfered with as this is nearly always the significantly more expensive option in a road v railway scenario. I believe that this may have been a real sign of the times for the road to be lowered to accomodate a bus service (although there may have been other reasons) with agreement from TfL and Local Authorities. I wonder how many single deck routes which could do with double deck operation are constrained by bridges whereby a combination of will and funding from TfL and/or the Local Authorities could enable double deck services. Clearly in the current financial climate this is unlikely to happen, but I do not recall many other cases of road being lowered to enable double deck operation since route W8 in the 2000s?
I think Snaresbrook was one? South Grove in Walthamstow used to have much smaller bridge which couldn’t take buses, but the current lowered road and new bridge was probably done in 1980s
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 16, 2021 18:38:11 GMT
Kennington isn't really a proper destination so wouldn't be an effective terminus. You may as well run it all the way to Elephant, which would be far too long for the 118. Not saying I'd support this but a solution to replacing the 333 would be to have the 415 run via Stockwell. Problem with the 415 idea is that the Streatham/Stockwell link is lost. If a suitable stand can be found at Kennington that should be enough, retains that link and Brixton/Clapham Road link. Also Elephant & Castle to Kennington is pretty overbussed so I'm sure the 133, 155 & 415 would be able to cope.
Would be concerned about the loss of capacity between Brixton & Streatham thou especially as the 59, 133 and 159 have already seen reductions.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Dec 16, 2021 18:51:23 GMT
Problem with the 415 idea is that the Streatham/Stockwell link is lost. If a suitable stand can be found at Kennington that should be enough, retains that link and Brixton/Clapham Road link. Also Elephant & Castle to Kennington is pretty overbussed so I'm sure the 133, 155 & 415 would be able to cope.
Would be concerned about the loss of capacity between Brixton & Streatham thou especially as the 59, 133 and 159 have already seen reductions.
I agree Elephant & Castle to Kennington is overbussed, the reduced capacity would only be as far as BN although the 57 could be extended to Brixton if necessary?
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Dec 16, 2021 18:54:46 GMT
Also Elephant & Castle to Kennington is pretty overbussed so I'm sure the 133, 155 & 415 would be able to cope.
Would be concerned about the loss of capacity between Brixton & Streatham thou especially as the 59, 133 and 159 have already seen reductions.
I agree Elephant & Castle to Kennington is overbussed, the reduced capacity would only be as far as BN although the 57 could be extended to Brixton if necessary? Only if there was some sort of split imo, it would be too long
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Dec 16, 2021 19:02:11 GMT
I agree Elephant & Castle to Kennington is overbussed, the reduced capacity would only be as far as BN although the 57 could be extended to Brixton if necessary? Only if there was some sort of split imo, it would be too long I think providing congestion is reduced throughout the route it's not unreasonable and would create a link between Wimbledon & Raynes Park with Brixton
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Dec 16, 2021 19:06:35 GMT
Only if there was some sort of split imo, it would be too long I think providing congestion is reduced throughout the route it's not unreasonable and would create a link between Wimbledon & Raynes Park with Brixton Why do Wimbledon and Raynes Park need a link with Brixton when it’s easy enough to switch buses in Streatham. Extending to Brixton would leave a poorer service on the Kingston end. There are too many hotspots even with reduced congestion to make it viable.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Dec 16, 2021 19:54:25 GMT
Only if there was some sort of split imo, it would be too long I think providing congestion is reduced throughout the route it's not unreasonable and would create a link between Wimbledon & Raynes Park with Brixton Yes it is a new link but would be a pointless one. Why would anybody go from Wimbledon to Brixton? The 57 shouldn't be changed at all although congestion reduction would be nice with bus lanes in Colliers Wood
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Dec 16, 2021 20:06:45 GMT
I think providing congestion is reduced throughout the route it's not unreasonable and would create a link between Wimbledon & Raynes Park with Brixton Yes it is a new link but would be a pointless one. Why would anybody go from Wimbledon to Brixton? The 57 shouldn't be changed at all although congestion reduction would be nice with bus lanes in Colliers Wood Sadly there is no space for bus lanes in Colliers Wood anymore, there is now cycle lanes instead.
|
|