|
Post by someone on Jan 23, 2022 11:40:30 GMT
I'm back with a new route idea:
178: To be cut back by one stop from Thomas Street (W) to Woolwich Arsenal Station (L). The route would then go via the path of the current route 291 up to Heavitree Road. The route would then terminate at the 625 stand at Warwick Terrace/Plumstead Common Road (B). 291: to be rerouted between Plumstead Common and Queen Elizabeth Hospital via Plumstead Common Road and Nightingale Place. The route would also be extended from QE Hospital to Welling Corner via the 486, terminating at the stand on Nags Head Lane. The route would start in the opposite direction at Welling High Street/Upper Wickham Lane (R).
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jan 23, 2022 11:49:46 GMT
I'm back with a new route idea:
178: To be cut back by one stop from Thomas Street (W) to Woolwich Arsenal Station (L). The route would then go via the path of the current route 291 up to Heavitree Road. The route would then terminate at the 625 stand at Warwick Terrace/Plumstead Common Road (B). 291: to be rerouted between Plumstead Common and Queen Elizabeth Hospital via Plumstead Common Road and Nightingale Place. The route would also be extended from QE Hospital to Welling Corner via the 486, terminating at the stand on Nags Head Lane. The route would start in the opposite direction at Welling High Street/Upper Wickham Lane (R).
291 change defeats the whole object of the bus service - from Woodlands Estate most passengers want to go to Woolwich. The 178 could probably bear an extension to Plumstead Common, and I think extra capacity Woolwich to Plumstead Common direct would be quite useful, rather than your 291 replacement route path. I suppose there is also scope for it to continue to Welling via currently unserved Kings Highway, Wickham Lane and route 96, but whether that would get sufficient footfall I have my doubts. 178 to Plumstead Common directly though seems a good idea.
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Jan 23, 2022 12:28:09 GMT
Time to reverse Hammersmith change 23 withdrawn Between Park lane hilton hotel and Hammersmith 27 extend back to Chiswick Business Park 266 extend back to Hammersmith Bus Station 218 and 306 merge in to one route So it would be a Fulham, Sands End to North Acton route it could be extended a bit more like to Wembley via 440 I don't know how long a Wembley to Fulham route would be
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 23, 2022 12:33:09 GMT
Would a simpler way of solving the Highgate stand problem be to extend the 271 to Brent Cross and the 143 to Finsbury Park and withdraw the 210? Obviously it would restrict the Finsbury Park section to single deckers, although the 210 used to be single deckers and the 143 frequency could be increased. Seems a far simpler solution to me but I'm sure there must be arguments against it. I still think even with an increase the 143 through Hornsey Rise would struggle and I imagine even more with the reduction of the W3/W7. The 271 would be too frequent running every 8 minutes although perhaps if dropped to something like every 12 minutes the service would be okay. I do wonder though how many people do use the 210 between Golders Green/Brent X & Finsbury Park/Hornsey Rise, redexpress you might be able to give an opinion? I can't say they're that bad suggestions although links would be broken.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jan 23, 2022 12:34:11 GMT
Time to reverse Hammersmith change 23 withdrawn Between Park lane hilton hotel and Hammersmith 27 extend back to Chiswick Business Park 266 extend back to Hammersmith Bus Station 218 and 306 merge in to one route So it would be a Fulham, Sands End to North Acton route it could be extended a bit more like to Wembley via 440 I don't know how long a Wembley to Fulham route would be These are the sort of changes that infuriate me! What would replace the 23 to Hammersmith, the 9 needs support? I disagreed with the 27 change so fair enough but something else would need to come off the Chiswick corridor, TfL deemed it way overbussed so hence removed a route. The 266 was too long to Hammersmith and is much better now, I'm sure Cricklewood and Willesden are getting a better service. The 218 doesn't need deckers along it's current LoR and I'm sure West Acton would kick up a fuss. Wembley to Imperial Wharf is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too long. Next time you make changes, either pop them in the fantasy thread (despite some of them being as un-fantasy as possible) or give it a little more thought.
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Jan 23, 2022 12:43:57 GMT
Would a simpler way of solving the Highgate stand problem be to extend the 271 to Brent Cross and the 143 to Finsbury Park and withdraw the 210? Obviously it would restrict the Finsbury Park section to single deckers, although the 210 used to be single deckers and the 143 frequency could be increased. Seems a far simpler solution to me but I'm sure there must be arguments against it. 271 to Brent Cross might be a little too long. But I do agree that a better idea than withdrawing the 271 as a whole is maybe to reroute it. A cut to Archway could be a good idea if there's enough space
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 23, 2022 12:53:59 GMT
Would a simpler way of solving the Highgate stand problem be to extend the 271 to Brent Cross and the 143 to Finsbury Park and withdraw the 210? Obviously it would restrict the Finsbury Park section to single deckers, although the 210 used to be single deckers and the 143 frequency could be increased. Seems a far simpler solution to me but I'm sure there must be arguments against it. 271 to Brent Cross might be a little too long. But I do agree that a better idea than withdrawing the 271 as a whole is maybe to reroute it. A cut to Archway could be a good idea if there's enough space But then you break the link from Highgate Village to Holloway/Highbury of which the 263 is trying to replace.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Jan 23, 2022 13:11:20 GMT
Time to reverse Hammersmith change 23 withdrawn Between Park lane hilton hotel and Hammersmith 27 extend back to Chiswick Business Park 266 extend back to Hammersmith Bus Station 218 and 306 merge in to one route So it would be a Fulham, Sands End to North Acton route it could be extended a bit more like to Wembley via 440 I don't know how long a Wembley to Fulham route would be Despite how rich and upper class the W12 area can be the 266 when it ran to Hammersmith used to be packed from Hammersmith up to Acton. I had been on plenty that would be rammed leaving Hammersmith Bus Station and I'd say it was the busiest section of the route although not too surprising given it received no support from other routes like it did with the 260 on the core section. It needed a more reliable service between H'smith and Acton which the 218/306 provide although they seem to be very ineffective.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 23, 2022 13:29:42 GMT
Time to reverse Hammersmith change 23 withdrawn Between Park lane hilton hotel and Hammersmith 27 extend back to Chiswick Business Park 266 extend back to Hammersmith Bus Station 218 and 306 merge in to one route So it would be a Fulham, Sands End to North Acton route it could be extended a bit more like to Wembley via 440 I don't know how long a Wembley to Fulham route would be The 266 was cut back due to reliability hence why partly why the 218 & 306 exist so can forget that. Merging the 218 & 306 would increase 306 users journeys instead, though extending the 306 to Acton, High Street would be very useful given the current terminal doesn’t really help anyone. Not sure why the 23 is being withdrawn
|
|
|
Post by rift on Jan 23, 2022 13:49:57 GMT
I'm back with a new route idea:
178: To be cut back by one stop from Thomas Street (W) to Woolwich Arsenal Station (L). The route would then go via the path of the current route 291 up to Heavitree Road. The route would then terminate at the 625 stand at Warwick Terrace/Plumstead Common Road (B). 291: to be rerouted between Plumstead Common and Queen Elizabeth Hospital via Plumstead Common Road and Nightingale Place. The route would also be extended from QE Hospital to Welling Corner via the 486, terminating at the stand on Nags Head Lane. The route would start in the opposite direction at Welling High Street/Upper Wickham Lane (R).
291 change defeats the whole object of the bus service - from Woodlands Estate most passengers want to go to Woolwich. The 178 could probably bear an extension to Plumstead Common, and I think extra capacity Woolwich to Plumstead Common direct would be quite useful, rather than your 291 replacement route path. I suppose there is also scope for it to continue to Welling via currently unserved Kings Highway, Wickham Lane and route 96, but whether that would get sufficient footfall I have my doubts. 178 to Plumstead Common directly though seems a good idea. I don’t think there would be enough usage to justify a service on King’s Highway, as both ends are a short walk away from the 51 or 96/422 stops, and only the Wickham Lane end has houses, however an extension to Welling is probably justified in the fact that Wickham Lane is only connected to Plumstead High Street and not the Common.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jan 23, 2022 14:46:04 GMT
In the Metroline thread LondonNorthern suggested that the 383 be extended to PB amongst discussion regarding the 84. I thought, if this were to happen, as stand space would be freed in Barnet town centre, could the 377 be extended to Barnet via Cockfosters and the old 384 routeing? This would provide a service, albeit one every 30 minutes, along these now unserved routes.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jan 23, 2022 15:22:50 GMT
In the Metroline thread LondonNorthern suggested that the 383 be extended to PB amongst discussion regarding the 84. I thought, if this were to happen, as stand space would be freed in Barnet town centre, could the 377 be extended to Barnet via Cockfosters and the old 384 routeing? This would provide a service, albeit one every 30 minutes, along these now unserved routes. Just to be clear, there was some confusion about the 84 because the way that routes will be registered is changing going forth, with operators registering changes directly with the local authority/ies and no longer involving the Traffic Commissioner's office. This led some people to think the route is about to be withdrawn. It isn't.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Jan 23, 2022 15:40:37 GMT
In the Metroline thread LondonNorthern suggested that the 383 be extended to PB amongst discussion regarding the 84. I thought, if this were to happen, as stand space would be freed in Barnet town centre, could the 377 be extended to Barnet via Cockfosters and the old 384 routeing? This would provide a service, albeit one every 30 minutes, along these now unserved routes. The 377 was briefly mentioned in the recent post implementation review paper of the 384 changes. Like as all the options laid out, it wasn't shown to be good value for money
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jan 24, 2022 0:32:18 GMT
507: extended from Waterloo to London Bridge via route 521. Linking Victoria with London Bridge and to maintain links lost by the 521. 521: discontinued.
I wonder if the 507 or 521 or both be discontinued as a victim of TfL’s axing’s.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jan 24, 2022 6:21:52 GMT
507: extended from Waterloo to London Bridge via route 521. Linking Victoria with London Bridge and to maintain links lost by the 521. 521: discontinued. I wonder if the 507 or 521 or both be discontinued as a victim of TfL’s axing’s. I think combining the two Red Arrows may prove difficult, especially with possible loads outside Waterloo Station and actually working out a join that works properly, but you do raise a valid point about the future of the two routes. If, hypothetically, they were removed, they could I suppose be removed thus : 36 withdrawn north of Victoria, a new route I shall call 82 to combine the Queen’s Park end of the current 36 and the 507; 115 recast to be a Waterloo to Blackwall service, via 521 (but not the Strand underpass of course!) to Bank, then 25 to Aldgate and current route 15 to Blackwall. 15 extended to East Ham, 521 withdrawn. I suspect there’s enough capacity London Bridge to City to allow no replacement of the 521 across the bridge.
|
|