|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 12, 2024 16:38:01 GMT
Yeah I would agree with the 178 extension to Abbey Wood via the 244, not sure the 469 needs to be increased in length as previously stated. The 469 also has a lower frequency than the 244. The 178 stand isn't suitable for the 301 as it loops the ferry roundabout and returns to pick up at Elizabeth line stop. If the 99 used the 178 stand it would miss 2 stops including a well used one in Hare Street. The simple solution for the 244 is to put deckers on the route as originally intended (and trim a few trees). The TfL scheme believes the 99 and 386 can stand in Hare Street. The 54 will have a floating bus stand in the current section of road. The two stops opposite the Elizabeth line station used by multiple routes will have to float. Will Norman madness. The 301 could simply just serve the same stops that the 96 serves between Woolwich & Thomas St, then go & stand on the 178 stand. Would also serve the same stops in reverse as the 96 as well & would still serve the Elizabeth line stop in both directions, only difference is that it would now stop at stop Z instead of U at Woolwich Station. I agree with not sending the 99 to the 178’s stand thinking about it now though if the Hare St stop is well used. I do however think Stop C should be removed & the 51/99/386’s first stop is Hare St instead. That bus stop is very awkwardly placed & cars are always parked in front of it. I do think the 178 extension Abbey Wood would be incredibly useful, & keeping the 244 as a short QE Hospital-Woolwich via Shooters Hill route is more useful, with the 244 eventually being extended to serve the Woolwich developments as previously stated. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Mar 12, 2024 16:51:25 GMT
The 178 stand isn't suitable for the 301 as it loops the ferry roundabout and returns to pick up at Elizabeth line stop. If the 99 used the 178 stand it would miss 2 stops including a well used one in Hare Street. The simple solution for the 244 is to put deckers on the route as originally intended (and trim a few trees). The TfL scheme believes the 99 and 386 can stand in Hare Street. The 54 will have a floating bus stand in the current section of road. The two stops opposite the Elizabeth line station used by multiple routes will have to float. Will Norman madness. The 301 could simply just serve the same stops that the 96 serves between Woolwich & Thomas St, then go & stand on the 178 stand. Would also serve the same stops in reverse as the 96 as well & would still serve the Elizabeth line stop in both directions, only difference is that it would now stop at stop Z instead of U at Woolwich Station. I agree with not sending the 99 to the 178’s stand thinking about it now though if the Hare St stop is well used. I do however think Stop C should be removed & the 51/99/386’s first stop is Hare St instead. That bus stop is very awkwardly placed & cars are always parked in front of it. I do think the 178 extension Abbey Wood would be incredibly useful, & keeping the 244 as a short QE Hospital-Woolwich via Shooters Hill route is more useful, with the 244 eventually being extended to serve the Woolwich developments as previously stated. The 301 current arrangements in Woolwich is fine. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 12, 2024 17:03:52 GMT
The 54 is already quite long & also isn’t allocated to Plumstead garage. I do however think there could be merit in extending the 178 towards Thamesmead/Abbey Wood to create some new links. Either the 99 or 301 could move to the 178’s current stand. Woolwich to Plumstead Station is timed as 5 minutes give or take on the 122's timetable, roughly 2-3 stops from memory & the 122's max running time is 90 minutes compared to 80 for the 54 so I don't see it causing any issues to the 54 should it be necessary to implement. It also would depend on whether PD would allow the 54 to stand in there, it’s the only Stagecoach route left in Woolwich that isn’t operated out of PD after PD got the 380. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 12, 2024 17:19:01 GMT
The two stops opposite the Elizabeth line station used by multiple routes will have to float. Will Norman madness. Oh god. Is that the eastbound stop outside M&S Food? If it is, that’s a serious accident waiting to happen. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 12, 2024 17:46:55 GMT
Could the 178 perhaps extend over the 244 to Abbey Wood? Then divert the 469 via Shooters Hill to replace the rest of the 244? I think Broadwaters would benefit from the 178’s double decks. Not sure further lengthening the 469 would be to its benefit however. Maybe keep the QEH end of the 244 and extend it to the new developments in Woolwich Arsenal, if stand space can be found. That's an interesting idea, but the issue is it's difficult to access the redevelopment from Woolwich Town Centre without any road layout changes - currently buses would have to head east from Woolwich Arsenal to Plumstead Garage, then back west along Plumstead Road to get to the town centre. So might not be a very appealing link to passengers here, when it's a relatively short walk from the redevelopment to the bus stops by the Crossrail station. But the QE Hospital end of the 244 might work well as a shorter shuttle route as you say, assuming the low trees (which prevent DDs) won't be dealt with anytime soon. I wonder if a combined 244/291 route might work, providing high frequency local links around Woolwich? It's been mentioned before that the 244 can get quite overcrowded around the Shooters Hill area, so maybe every 10 minutes still isn't enough? Meanwhile the 291's tight roads mean that most DD types can't fit, even WVLs which are only slightly longer than Es, and so could be a problem when the 291's Es need to be replaced by new electrics. Therefore, could SDs at every 7-8 minutes be a better solution here, and using 10.2m examples (longer than the 9.3m SDs previously used under Stagecoach). The 178 could then divert between QE Hospital and Woolwich via the current 291 to replace that section. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 12, 2024 18:35:39 GMT
I think Broadwaters would benefit from the 178’s double decks. Not sure further lengthening the 469 would be to its benefit however. Maybe keep the QEH end of the 244 and extend it to the new developments in Woolwich Arsenal, if stand space can be found. That's an interesting idea, but the issue is it's difficult to access the redevelopment from Woolwich Town Centre without any road layout changes - currently buses would have to head east from Woolwich Arsenal to Plumstead Garage, then back west along Plumstead Road to get to the town centre. So might not be a very appealing link to passengers here, when it's a relatively short walk from the redevelopment to the bus stops by the Crossrail station. But the QE Hospital end of the 244 might work well as a shorter shuttle route as you say, assuming the low trees (which prevent DDs) won't be dealt with anytime soon. I wonder if a combined 244/291 route might work, providing high frequency local links around Woolwich? It's been mentioned before that the 244 can get quite overcrowded around the Shooters Hill area, so maybe every 10 minutes still isn't enough? Meanwhile the 291's tight roads mean that most DD types can't fit, even WVLs which are only slightly longer than Es, and so could be a problem when the 291's Es need to be replaced by new electrics. Therefore, could SDs at every 7-8 minutes be a better solution here, and using 10.2m examples (longer than the 9.3m SDs previously used under Stagecoach). The 178 could then divert between QE Hospital and Woolwich via the current 291 to replace that section. Why should 291 passengers lose a route that probably sees little delays to a combined 244/291 route that could have less reliability and offer a worse service overall? Like the R9, the 291 is the type of route that is common with town centres outside London linking one particular community with their nearest town centre |
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Mar 12, 2024 18:49:09 GMT
Yeah I would agree with the 178 extension to Abbey Wood via the 244, not sure the 469 needs to be increased in length as previously stated. The 469 also has a lower frequency than the 244. The 178 stand isn't suitable for the 301 as it loops the ferry roundabout and returns to pick up at Elizabeth line stop. If the 99 used the 178 stand it would miss 2 stops including a well used one in Hare Street. The simple solution for the 244 is to put deckers on the route as originally intended (and trim a few trees). The TfL scheme believes the 99 and 386 can stand in Hare Street. The 54 will have a floating bus stand in the current section of road. The two stops opposite the Elizabeth line station used by multiple routes will have to float. Will Norman madness. How floating bus stops ever passed health and safety or equality assessments I will never know. Better for cyclist though. Total egotist Will Norman ... But do you expect anyone involved in politics to be any different ... especially those unelected! |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 12, 2024 18:56:08 GMT
That's an interesting idea, but the issue is it's difficult to access the redevelopment from Woolwich Town Centre without any road layout changes - currently buses would have to head east from Woolwich Arsenal to Plumstead Garage, then back west along Plumstead Road to get to the town centre. So might not be a very appealing link to passengers here, when it's a relatively short walk from the redevelopment to the bus stops by the Crossrail station. But the QE Hospital end of the 244 might work well as a shorter shuttle route as you say, assuming the low trees (which prevent DDs) won't be dealt with anytime soon. I wonder if a combined 244/291 route might work, providing high frequency local links around Woolwich? It's been mentioned before that the 244 can get quite overcrowded around the Shooters Hill area, so maybe every 10 minutes still isn't enough? Meanwhile the 291's tight roads mean that most DD types can't fit, even WVLs which are only slightly longer than Es, and so could be a problem when the 291's Es need to be replaced by new electrics. Therefore, could SDs at every 7-8 minutes be a better solution here, and using 10.2m examples (longer than the 9.3m SDs previously used under Stagecoach). The 178 could then divert between QE Hospital and Woolwich via the current 291 to replace that section. Why should 291 passengers lose a route that probably sees little delays to a combined 244/291 route that could have less reliability and offer a worse service overall? Like the R9, the 291 is the type of route that is common with town centres outside London linking one particular community with their nearest town centre The revised 291 wouldn't be much longer, just diverted via Shooters Hill (instead of going direct between Woolwich and QE Hospital). If it wasn't clear, I was suggesting extending the 178 to Abbey Wood to replace most of the 244. |
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Mar 12, 2024 19:26:48 GMT
The two stops opposite the Elizabeth line station used by multiple routes will have to float. Will Norman madness. Oh god. Is that the eastbound stop outside M&S Food? If it is, that’s a serious accident waiting to happen. It's the westbound stops opposite M&S. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 12, 2024 19:35:21 GMT
Why should 291 passengers lose a route that probably sees little delays to a combined 244/291 route that could have less reliability and offer a worse service overall? Like the R9, the 291 is the type of route that is common with town centres outside London linking one particular community with their nearest town centre The revised 291 wouldn't be much longer, just diverted via Shooters Hill (instead of going direct between Woolwich and QE Hospital). If it wasn't clear, I was suggesting extending the 178 to Abbey Wood to replace most of the 244. Ok, thanks for clearing it up but even then, why the need to mess with a route that works? |
|
|
|
Post by mb171 on Mar 12, 2024 20:16:23 GMT
The revised 291 wouldn't be much longer, just diverted via Shooters Hill (instead of going direct between Woolwich and QE Hospital). If it wasn't clear, I was suggesting extending the 178 to Abbey Wood to replace most of the 244. Ok, thanks for clearing it up but even then, why the need to mess with a route that works? I mentioned a couple of posts ago that the 291 is quite an essential route - it's short but very beneficial. Routes like these are not meant to be tampered with as their main purpose is to connect major town centres with housing estates. 244 is a route that seriously needs deckers - I'm a local to it and the cause of it is low trees around Shrewsbury Lane. it would be easier to introduce another route alongside the 244 between Herbert Road and Shooters Hill - although 244 is a route that warrants deckers, it "supposedly can't take them" - so I think it needs some extra support from a new route. It already has support from the 380 between Woolwich and West Thamesmead, but the Western part of the route does need that support (maybe a 451 between Woolwich and Foots Cray via Herbert Road, Shooters Hill, Welling, Blackfen, Bexley and Ruxley), with the 244 rerouted via Sandy Hill Road. 178 to Abbey Wood via Broadwaters - this would reinstate a link that was lost from the 180 ever since it got diverted to North Greenwich. Id leave the 178 be simply because 1) there are already enough buses from Woolwich that go to Abbey Wood from Woolwich + you have the lizzie and Southeastern). It doesnt seem like a bad idea but im not sure if it'd be viable. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 12, 2024 20:17:25 GMT
The revised 291 wouldn't be much longer, just diverted via Shooters Hill (instead of going direct between Woolwich and QE Hospital). If it wasn't clear, I was suggesting extending the 178 to Abbey Wood to replace most of the 244. Ok, thanks for clearing it up but even then, why the need to mess with a route that works? Considering that the 291 only gets stand time at QE hospital, I would prefer not to extend it or make it longer. The 244 takes a more indirect route to Woolwich from QE Hospital which is also why I wouldn’t merge it onto another route like the 291 or 469. As I have said already though the 178 extension over the 244 would be very beneficial as it would reduce overcrowding on the 244. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 12, 2024 20:53:38 GMT
Ok, thanks for clearing it up but even then, why the need to mess with a route that works? I mentioned a couple of posts ago that the 291 is quite an essential route - it's short but very beneficial. Routes like these are not meant to be tampered with as their main purpose is to connect major town centres with housing estates. 244 is a route that seriously needs deckers - I'm a local to it and the cause of it is low trees around Shrewsbury Lane. it would be easier to introduce another route alongside the 244 between Herbert Road and Shooters Hill - although 244 is a route that warrants deckers, it "supposedly can't take them" - so I think it needs some extra support from a new route. It already has support from the 380 between Woolwich and West Thamesmead, but the Western part of the route does need that support (maybe a 451 between Woolwich and Foots Cray via Herbert Road, Shooters Hill, Welling, Blackfen, Bexley and Ruxley), with the 244 rerouted via Sandy Hill Road. 178 to Abbey Wood via Broadwaters - this would reinstate a link that was lost from the 180 ever since it got diverted to North Greenwich. Id leave the 178 be simply because 1) there are already enough buses from Woolwich that go to Abbey Wood from Woolwich + you have the lizzie and Southeastern). It doesnt seem like a bad idea but im not sure if it'd be viable. If I'm understanding @adh45258 correctly the 244/291 would still operate between QEH and Woodlands Estate but by a different route and a higher frequency? It seems a reasonable suggestion to me unless I'm missing something? I might be wrong but I think trees in Broadwaters would also prevent double deckers on the 244? I'm not sure double deckers are the best option anyway, with many people making fairly short journeys I'm not sure many would go upstairs? |
|
|
|
Post by mb171 on Mar 12, 2024 21:22:30 GMT
I mentioned a couple of posts ago that the 291 is quite an essential route - it's short but very beneficial. Routes like these are not meant to be tampered with as their main purpose is to connect major town centres with housing estates. 244 is a route that seriously needs deckers - I'm a local to it and the cause of it is low trees around Shrewsbury Lane. it would be easier to introduce another route alongside the 244 between Herbert Road and Shooters Hill - although 244 is a route that warrants deckers, it "supposedly can't take them" - so I think it needs some extra support from a new route. It already has support from the 380 between Woolwich and West Thamesmead, but the Western part of the route does need that support (maybe a 451 between Woolwich and Foots Cray via Herbert Road, Shooters Hill, Welling, Blackfen, Bexley and Ruxley), with the 244 rerouted via Sandy Hill Road. 178 to Abbey Wood via Broadwaters - this would reinstate a link that was lost from the 180 ever since it got diverted to North Greenwich. Id leave the 178 be simply because 1) there are already enough buses from Woolwich that go to Abbey Wood from Woolwich + you have the lizzie and Southeastern). It doesnt seem like a bad idea but im not sure if it'd be viable. If I'm understanding @adh45258 correctly the 244/291 would still operate between QEH and Woodlands Estate but by a different route and a higher frequency? It seems a reasonable suggestion to me unless I'm missing something? I might be wrong but I think trees in Broadwaters would also prevent double deckers on the 244? I'm not sure double deckers are the best option anyway, with many people making fairly short journeys I'm not sure many would go upstairs? With the combined 244/291 the problem is that the 291 will become useless - 291 is meant to be a shuttle from the hospital/Woolwich to Woodlands Estate- changing the route will only make things worse. Also, 291 already has a decent frequency anyway so increasing the frequency won't really make a difference. Yes with the 244 there are restrictions around Broadwaters but also low trees in Shooters Hill. Like I said before, it would benefit from deckers, but it "supposedly can't take them". So even if you wanted to reroute 291 around Shooters Hill, or 178 around Broadwaters, it just wouldn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Mar 12, 2024 21:52:10 GMT
If I'm understanding @adh45258 correctly the 244/291 would still operate between QEH and Woodlands Estate but by a different route and a higher frequency? It seems a reasonable suggestion to me unless I'm missing something? I might be wrong but I think trees in Broadwaters would also prevent double deckers on the 244? I'm not sure double deckers are the best option anyway, with many people making fairly short journeys I'm not sure many would go upstairs? With the combined 244/291 the problem is that the 291 will become useless - 291 is meant to be a shuttle from the hospital/Woolwich to Woodlands Estate- changing the route will only make things worse. Also, 291 already has a decent frequency anyway so increasing the frequency won't really make a difference. Yes with the 244 there are restrictions around Broadwaters but also low trees in Shooters Hill. Like I said before, it would benefit from deckers, but it "supposedly can't take them". So even if you wanted to reroute 291 around Shooters Hill, or 178 around Broadwaters, it just wouldn't work. I think as a general rule with routes that only get stand time on one end shouldn’t be extended or take a longer route. The 138, 291 & R70 are the only routes I’m aware of that do this, I would be interested to know if there are anymore. |
|
