|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 28, 2020 15:32:53 GMT
Something like that is probably what would have happened and whilst Blackheath would have still have had the 202 to Catford the link from Belmont Hill to Lewisham Hospital and Catford would have been lost and wouldn't have been well received. The Woolwich to Catford Garage and Lewisham to Croydon I suggested previously would have overbussed the overlap section and not been cost effective. It would have been better to leave the 54 Woolwich to Croydon and added an extra bus or two as necessary to increase running time or stand time. The ideas from the early 80s suggest it was looked into but no satisfactory solution could be found. Another post above suggests that the split you suggested would adequately meet usage - it would be inconceivable to continue trying to provide the same route when congestion has significantly increased regardless of adding an extra bus or two rather than trying to keep a level of reliability across the entire routing in the form of a split. But it clearly wouldn't be cost effective, there is no point solving one problem and creating others such as the the matter of stand space at Lewisham. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 28, 2020 15:38:02 GMT
The only other thing they could have done back then is run the route in sections Monday to Friday or saturdays except evenings with a through service at the quieter times.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 28, 2020 15:41:42 GMT
Another post above suggests that the split you suggested would adequately meet usage - it would be inconceivable to continue trying to provide the same route when congestion has significantly increased regardless of adding an extra bus or two rather than trying to keep a level of reliability across the entire routing in the form of a split. But it clearly wouldn't be cost effective, there is no point solving one problem and creating others such as the the matter of stand space at Lewisham. Equally, good luck finding stand space for yet another route in Croydon so something has got to give one way or the other and it's better to protect as much as possible rather than just thinking about one particular end and if it can't be done, then leaving it as it is would have to suffice rather than trying to turn the clock back to pre 2000. Alternatively, move something out of Lewisham that wouldn't be affected by reliability issues - the 178 springs to mind straight away. If there is space, move it onto Molesworth Street giving a slot for the 54. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 28, 2020 15:41:48 GMT
The only other thing they could have done back then is run the route in sections Monday to Friday or saturdays except evenings with a through service at the quieter times. Or just withdraw the Blackheath to Woolwich section which is covered by the 53 but somebody won't be happy whatever is done. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 28, 2020 15:49:48 GMT
Either way we are only talking about how the 54 could have been shortened in 2000 rather then what should happen now. The 54 is perfectly fine as Elmers End to Woolwich.
Had it still been running to Croydon it probably would be terminating at Fairfield Halls like the 197 and 433 do now to save crossing Croydon.
|
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Mar 28, 2020 16:36:49 GMT
The changes to the 54 is still very controversial even after twenty years, even Tram enthusiasts were against the cutback to Elmers End, all it did was overload the 75 which on the Lewisham-Penge section is rather circuitous, unlike the more direct 54, the 54 was basically the SE London’s answer to the 140, linking major town centres. The Elmers End interchange was indeed very appalling for many years, and it still is even with the bus station there now, I recall many times the 54 dropping passengers off at Elmers End Green meaning people had to walk 7 mins to the tram crossing a couple of roads too, very disorganised. That said the 54 probably would’ve been cut back regardless of the tram, it was a very long (albeit very useful) route and TfL hates long bus routes I'm a tram enthusiast and was against the cutback to the 54, as it didn't meet the definition of a tram feeder route in any regard. In actual fact, Beckenham Junction tram stop was as good, if not better, for interchange with the 54 for those who wanted it. As for the 54 being too long a route, there'd have been other options over the years. The 75 used to parallel the Woolwich to Blackheath Village section for a start, and the 202 could be extended, with the 54 being cut back to the Standard. The 289's increase in importance and use over the years shows there's still need for buses over this axis. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 28, 2020 16:47:27 GMT
The 289 using DDs would be a help along long Lane and would provide a good West Croydon to Elmers end route.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 28, 2020 21:23:59 GMT
What I would suggest doing now is:
Extend the 289 to Lewisham but withdraw the TH to Purley section.
Extend the 64 to Thornton Heath High Street where the slight frequency increase will be useful.
Reroute the 198 at TH to Purley via Purley Way.
Alternatively just extend the 64 to Purley and leave the 198 as it is.
Withdraw the 54 between Southend Pond and Elmers End and reroute it to Bromley.
Withdraw the 320 between Bromley North and Catford.
Stand space in Bromley is scarce but I read somewhere that the old 126 stand will be available again shortly.
This maintains current links to Lewisham and Mayday hospitals.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 28, 2020 21:41:48 GMT
Whilst it would be maintained by the 54 I think withdrawing the long time 54 from Beckenham and Elmers End would be unpopular.
Extending the 289 to Beckenham Junction would be good but that section of the 54 is not the most used so would be near enough impossible for tfl to justify the extension.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 29, 2020 0:10:42 GMT
What I would suggest doing now is: Extend the 289 to Lewisham but withdraw the TH to Purley section. Extend the 64 to Thornton Heath High Street where the slight frequency increase will be useful. Reroute the 198 at TH to Purley via Purley Way. Alternatively just extend the 64 to Purley and leave the 198 as it is. Withdraw the 54 between Southend Pond and Elmers End and reroute it to Bromley. Withdraw the 320 between Bromley North and Catford. Stand space in Bromley is scarce but I read somewhere that the old 126 stand will be available again shortly. This maintains current links to Lewisham and Mayday hospitals. That's a lot of changes just to facilitate another Croydon to Lewisham link - far more logical just to split the 54 with moving one route out of Lewisham to facilitate one of the split routes having a stand. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 29, 2020 5:42:20 GMT
What I would suggest doing now is: Extend the 289 to Lewisham but withdraw the TH to Purley section. Extend the 64 to Thornton Heath High Street where the slight frequency increase will be useful. Reroute the 198 at TH to Purley via Purley Way. Alternatively just extend the 64 to Purley and leave the 198 as it is. Withdraw the 54 between Southend Pond and Elmers End and reroute it to Bromley. Withdraw the 320 between Bromley North and Catford. Stand space in Bromley is scarce but I read somewhere that the old 126 stand will be available again shortly. This maintains current links to Lewisham and Mayday hospitals. That's a lot of changes just to facilitate another Croydon to Lewisham link - far more logical just to split the 54 with moving one route out of Lewisham to facilitate one of the split routes having a stand. Not really, it would mean changing the 54,64,289 and 320 with an optional change to the 198. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 29, 2020 8:20:25 GMT
Does anybody remember the 494. Surprisingly during the boom years it was withdrawn. Had it survived it would almost certainly been withdrawn.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Mar 29, 2020 8:29:54 GMT
Does anybody remember the 494. Surprisingly during the boom years it was withdrawn. Had it survived it would almost certainly been withdrawn. Most of it was replaced by rerouting the 367. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 29, 2020 8:41:40 GMT
Yes except that the 367 runs via East Croydon and the 494 via Spurgeons Bridge. I think the 494 never really found a purpose being so short.
|
|
