|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 7, 2020 12:14:20 GMT
Tbh most of TfL's standardisation iv never really seen the point of. People soon work it out like the 65 with blue squares was understandable as nights only. The same with overlapping sections. People soon worked out that some 2's only went to Brixton and that ones from CP only went to Brixton during the daytimes. As someone who has used the 2 constantly for a good 20 odd years, many people were confused by the overlapping sections and it made perfect sense to change the number of one of the sections. Having a standardised network makes it much easier for passengers to understand - I don’t understand how people can be against such a thing when it’s only a benefit. |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 7, 2020 12:20:40 GMT
H91 doesn't need a night route outside of peak times it carries v little traffic. And theres the tube direct from Hammersmith to Heathrow as discussed on another thread I agree, I'm also sceptical of the value of providing Terminal 4 with a night service, there are other means of connecting to it. Does the Heathrow terminal transfer bus run at night? |
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Apr 7, 2020 13:45:37 GMT
TfL can't preach simplification of the bus network and then have anomalies with night route numbering. Cases like the 47 and 148 are acceptable; in the case of the former when it gets curtailed to Liverpool Street, publicity both digital and otherwise is well advertised in lieu of blue tiles. The 65 to Chessington completely bucked that trend by placing blue tiles on stops that the day route didn't traverse. I don't know about simplification.........going back to the original point all numbering a night service on the H91 as N491 would do is cause unnecessary confusion and as somebody mentioned previously the blue 65 tiles at the Chessington end were self explanitary. Heavily disagree with that. I'm sure locals were fine with this arrangement, but that lack of a distinction did likely cause admin problems; like Tfl not stating what the last/first stop in Kingston. It could cause confusion for people not familiar with the area, which is exactly what happened to me when visiting Kingston with my family for the first time. I disagree, I don’t think 4 character route numbers are a good idea Even if you use smaller N they still end up squashed on blind display It also looks messy to have smaller N then a full size letter, and becomes hard to read It’s expensive to renumber a route (and shouldn’t be done for sake of it), but if NH91 doesn’t exist already, then same cost to add it, as adding a sensible alternative instead. If they were ever to add a 24 hour service to the H91 it will probably get renumbered. If the EL1 didn't get renumbered was created as a 24 hour route with that numbering, the H91 should certainly be fine as it is.  |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Apr 7, 2020 13:49:13 GMT
I don't know about simplification.........going back to the original point all numbering a night service on the H91 as N491 would do is cause unnecessary confusion and as somebody mentioned previously the blue 65 tiles at the Chessington end were self explanitary. Heavily disagree with that. I'm sure locals were fine with this arrangement, but that lack of a distinction did likely cause admin problems; like Tfl not stating what the last/first stop in Kingston. It could cause confusion for people not familiar with the area, which is exactly what happened to me when visiting Kingston with my family for the first time. If they were ever to add a 24 hour service to the H91 it will probably get renumbered. If the EL1 didn't get renumbered was created as a 24 hour route with that numbering, the H91 should certainly be fine as it is. Not if as originally proposed and they use another number for the night service |
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Apr 7, 2020 15:37:08 GMT
Heavily disagree with that. I'm sure locals were fine with this arrangement, but that lack of a distinction did likely cause admin problems; like Tfl not stating what the last/first stop in Kingston. It could cause confusion for people not familiar with the area, which is exactly what happened to me when visiting Kingston with my family for the first time. If the EL1 didn't get renumbered was created as a 24 hour route with that numbering, the H91 should certainly be fine as it is. Not if as originally proposed and they use another number for the night service I explained to you that with the original proposal as you put it, even an enthusiast not from the area got confused when having to purely rely on TfL info. If it happened to me, it definitely happened to Joe & Jenny Public who isn't local to the south west London area. If you were referring to a situation like the 102's where it was originally proposed & intentional to have a variance to a typical 24 hour route then I will accept your point. However to the best of my knowledge, the 65 when it gained 24 hour status didn't have this kind of gimmick outlined from onset. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 7, 2020 19:52:43 GMT
The funny think with the 2 was it did have separate numbers (2A/2B then 2 and 2A) before both sections having the same number. The 2 was a bad example to give for overlapping sections as it was almost a local route and a trunk route with the same number so two separate numbers are better.
I guess I just have a soft spot for the number 2 in Crystal Palace.
Wasnt it going to be the 332 or am I mistaken.
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 7, 2020 19:57:27 GMT
I don't know what the rationale was behind that? A 24hr 65 with a night extension to Chessington seemed fine to me and I can't imagine most people would even notice whether there was a N prefix. That's if the correct blind is displayed anyway. I would say the only routes that need the N prefix are routes like the N5 and N20 that don't have a daytime equivalent or routes like the N136 that go a different way than their daytime equivalent. TfL can't preach simplification of the bus network and then have anomalies with night route numbering. Cases like the 47 and 148 are acceptable; in the case of the former when it gets curtailed to Liverpool Street, publicity both digital and otherwise is well advertised in lieu of blue tiles. The 65 to Chessington completely bucked that trend by placing blue tiles on stops that the day route didn't traverse. Not everyone likes going on the Tube. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 7, 2020 20:22:02 GMT
The funny think with the 2 was it did have separate numbers (2A/2B then 2 and 2A) before both sections having the same number. The 2 was a bad example to give for overlapping sections as it was almost a local route and a trunk route with the same number so two separate numbers are better. I guess I just have a soft spot for the number 2 in Crystal Palace. Wasnt it going to be the 332 or am I mistaken. Yes it was going to be the 332 but there was the potential for confusion with the 322. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 7, 2020 20:42:14 GMT
That's good to know. Not helped that the 322 and 332 would have also have served similar points along their routes.
I wonder if the 2 would have been extended to Anerly or whether another route would have been chosen due to the length at certain times of day.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Apr 7, 2020 20:57:38 GMT
Whether you think that the 48 should have been withdrawn or not, it is fact that the usage on the 48 was on long decline since 2014 where the usage was before then was constantly around 7.4 million per year and since 2014 the usage was declining significantly every year to just 5.2 million a year in the latest stats of 2018/19, which by the way the usage has gone down by 30% in the last 5 years. Before anyone jumps on about being a LT route, the decline had already started when the 48 was at Stagecoach a good few years before it went to Arriva where it started to use LT's.
Year
| Usage Numbers
| | 2012/13 | 7 404 364
| | 2013/14 | 7 359 748
| | 2014/15 | 6 920 294
| | 2015/16 | 6 372 592
| | 2016/17 | 5 958 923
| | 2017/18 | 5 712 619
| | 2018/19 | 5 198 842
|
Whilst that is true, 5.2m is still not to be sniffed at. I remember someone posted that the 48 carried more people than the 26 and 388 put together! |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 7, 2020 21:01:44 GMT
The funny think with the 2 was it did have separate numbers (2A/2B then 2 and 2A) before both sections having the same number. The 2 was a bad example to give for overlapping sections as it was almost a local route and a trunk route with the same number so two separate numbers are better. I guess I just have a soft spot for the number 2 in Crystal Palace. Wasnt it going to be the 332 or am I mistaken. I get it as I too have a soft spot for the old overlapping sections from growing up but equally I recognise that these things belong as nostalgia and probably not fit for a 21st century network. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Apr 7, 2020 21:06:39 GMT
Whilst that is true, 5.2m is still not to be sniffed at. I remember someone posted that the 48 carried more people than the 26 and 388 put together! Pretty sure that was me 😂 |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 12, 2020 6:15:52 GMT
E6: extended permently from Greenford Station to Westway Cross via Greenford Road and Green Park Way. To link Westway Cross with Greenford Broadway. Westway Cross bound buses diverted via Uneeda Drive, Oldfield Lane North and Rockware Avenue. So that routes can still serve Greenford Station.
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 15, 2020 23:16:46 GMT
95: rerouted between White City and Shepherds Bush via Ariel Way, route 228 to Shepherds Bush Stations and Shepherds Bush Green. To reduce the amount of routes along Wood Lane between White City and Shepherds Bush.
107: extended from Edgware to Queensbury via Station Road, High Street, Edgware Community Hospital, Burnt Oak Broadway, Stag Lane and route 114 to Queensbury Station. To provide a round a corner link between Stag Lane and Mollison Way with Burnt Oak Broadway and Edgware Community Hospital.
288: to be extended from Queensbury to Long Elms via Westmoreland Road, Cumberland Road, Honeypot Lane, Streatfield Road, Christchurch Avenue, route H9 to Wealdstone High Street, The Bridge, Harrow & Wealdstone Station, George Gange Way, Wealdstone High Road, High Road and Long Elms. To link Long Elms with Harrow & Wealdstone Station and Wealdstone. To also link Wealdstone and Harrow & Wealdstone Station with Queensbury.
460: extended from Willesden Bus Garage to North Acton via route 226 to Harlesden, route 266 to North Acton and Victoria Road. To link North Acton with North Finchley and Finchley. To also to link Pound Lane, Robson Avenue and Park Parade with Willesden Junction and North Acton Stations.
H14: extended from Northwick Park Hospital to Willesden Junction via Watford Road, Kenton Road, route 183 to Kingsbury Circle, Honeypot Lane, route 79 to Queensbury Station, route 114 to Stag Lane, Burnt Oak Broadway, route 32 to Staples Corner, North Circular Road, Coles Green Road, Crest Road, Tanfield Avenue, Neasden, Neasden Lane, Neasden Station, High Road, Church Road, route 266 to Station Road and Station Approach. To link Harlesden with Neasden, West Hendon, Colindale, Queensbury, Kenton, Northwick Park Hospital and Harrow. To act as relief for route 183.
N105: extended from Greenford Station to Shepherds Bush via Rockware Avenue, Oldfield Lane North, Greenford Station, Western Avenue, route 95 to White City Station, route 228 to Shepherds Bush Stations and Shepherds Bush Green. To link Shepherds Bush with Heathrow and Southall at night.
N140: extended from Harrow Weald to Edgware via route 340 to Edgware. To link Edgware and Harrow at night.
N307: Extended from Barnet Hospital to Queensbury via route 107 to Edgware, Station Road, High Street, Edgware Community Hospital, Burnt Oak Broadway, Stag Lane and route 114 to Queensbury Station. To link Queensbury and Edgware at night. To also provide Borehamwood with a night service.
X18: a express route running between Harrow and Euston via route 182 to Wembley Central and route 18 to Euston. To link Harrow and Northwick Park Hospital with Harlesden, Stonebridge, Kensal Green and Central London.
X65: a express route running between Ealing Broadway and Chessington / Kingston via route 65 to Kingston (and maybe further to Chessington via route 281 to Chessington). To link Ealing Broadway and Chessington.
X83: Running between Windmill Lane and Golders Green via route 483 to Wembley and route 83 to Golders Green. To link Windmill Lane with Golders Green.
X105: a express running between Heathrow and Shepherds Bush via route 105 to South Road, Lady Margaret Road, Ruislip Road, Greenford Broadway, Greenford Road, Rockware Avenue, Greenford Station, Oldfield Lane North, Berkeley Avenue, Whitton Avenue East, Sudbury Town Station, Bridgewater Road, Alperton, Ealing Road, Hanger Lane, Hanger Lane Station, Western Avenue, route 95 to White City Station, route 228 to Shepherds Bush Stations and Shepherds Bush Green. To link Shepherds Bush and Alperton with Heathrow.
X140: extended from Harrow to Edgware via route 182 to Station Road and route 340 to Edgware. To link Edgware with Heathrow and Hayes.
|
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 16, 2020 8:20:12 GMT
X105: a express running between Heathrow and Shepherds Bush via route 105 to South Road, Lady Margaret Road, Ruislip Road, Greenford Broadway, Greenford Road, Rockware Avenue, Oldfield Lane North, Western Avenue, route 95 to White City Station, route 228 to Shepherds Bush Stations and Shepherds Bush Green. To link Shepherds Bush with Heathrow. Why would someone get an express bus route taking an indirect route from Shepherds Bush to Heathrow when it would be far quicker either to get the H&C/Circle lines/a bus to Hammersmith then the Piccadilly Line or get the Central Line to Ealing Broadway then change to TfL Rail? |
|
