|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 2, 2020 15:06:17 GMT
I think your missing my point - for example, it was suggested by someone to completely withdraw the 47 which shows a complete disregard for anyone who uses links that the Overground can't cover or for people who can't use the Overground for various reasons. People continually make the mistake that everyone will simply jump onto the Overground when it's not true at all. I suggested that there is every likelihood of that happening.........fewer passengers inevitably means fewer buses are needed. Which is completely different to outright withdrawal - the 47 has already seen a savage cut and that has likely contributed to any further patronage loss so rather than continuously cutting things & exasperating problems, we should be finding solutions. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 2, 2020 15:40:10 GMT
I suggested that there is every likelihood of that happening.........fewer passengers inevitably means fewer buses are needed. Which is completely different to outright withdrawal - the 47 has already seen a savage cut and that has likely contributed to any further patronage loss so rather than continuously cutting things & exasperating problems, we should be finding solutions. It's not as if anybody is going to be left high and dry without a bus service....... they can just use the 188,199,381 or the various other alternatives instead. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 2, 2020 15:50:34 GMT
Which is completely different to outright withdrawal - the 47 has already seen a savage cut and that has likely contributed to any further patronage loss so rather than continuously cutting things & exasperating problems, we should be finding solutions. It's not as if anybody is going to be left high and dry without a bus service....... they can just use the 188,199,381 or the various other alternatives instead. Regardless of whether someone is left high & dry, this is exactly why people are finding other alternatives to public transport - when you take something away such as a bus service or make that journey longer by having to change, people generally decide with their feet and go elsewhere - the vulnerable and poor either end up with no such choice or if they really can make it work, find non public transport such as a mate or neighbour to give them a lift or plunge themselves into debt for private hire transport. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 2, 2020 15:59:19 GMT
It's not as if anybody is going to be left high and dry without a bus service....... they can just use the 188,199,381 or the various other alternatives instead. Regardless of whether someone is left high & dry, this is exactly why people are finding other alternatives to public transport - when you take something away such as a bus service or make that journey longer by having to change, people generally decide with their feet and go elsewhere - the vulnerable and poor either end up with no such choice or if they really can make it work, find non public transport such as a mate or neighbour to give them a lift or plunge themselves into debt for private hire transport. Everybody that's commented seems to agree that the 47 has had it's day, it's a shame but such is life. Large numbers of people have switched to the train. |
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Apr 2, 2020 16:44:33 GMT
Regardless of whether someone is left high & dry, this is exactly why people are finding other alternatives to public transport - when you take something away such as a bus service or make that journey longer by having to change, people generally decide with their feet and go elsewhere - the vulnerable and poor either end up with no such choice or if they really can make it work, find non public transport such as a mate or neighbour to give them a lift or plunge themselves into debt for private hire transport. Everybody that's commented seems to agree that the 47 has had it's day, it's a shame but such is life. Large numbers of people have switched to the train. That's funny, cause without a shadow of a doubt the 47 has been the most well used bus I've seen since the lockdown.  The peak time of between 4 and 6am has seen buses packed, even with the 188 trailing behind/kicking its heels at the front. Oh, btw yes I'm a key worker so I didn't go out my way for this observation. Not going to entertain useful routes being hacked passing as casual conversation.  |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 2, 2020 16:51:47 GMT
Everybody that's commented seems to agree that the 47 has had it's day, it's a shame but such is life. Large numbers of people have switched to the train. That's funny, cause without a shadow of a doubt the 47 has been the most well used bus I've seen since the lockdown. The peak time of between 4 and 6am has seen buses packed, even with the 188 trailing behind/kicking its heels at the front. Oh, btw yes I'm a key worker so I didn't go out my way for this observation. Not going to entertain useful routes being hacked passing as casual conversation. Yes but many people are probably avoiding the tube at the moment. As someone mentioned previously buses from the Lewisham direction near empty out at Canada Water in normal circumstances. Cuts are planned already such as the 101 and 262 which I don't agree with although I think the Bluewater cuts are more reasonable and I suspect that they will be exacerbated by this virus so it might well be a case of.... if you want to save the 47 what do you want to cut instead? |
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Apr 2, 2020 17:38:33 GMT
That's funny, cause without a shadow of a doubt the 47 has been the most well used bus I've seen since the lockdown. The peak time of between 4 and 6am has seen buses packed, even with the 188 trailing behind/kicking its heels at the front. Oh, btw yes I'm a key worker so I didn't go out my way for this observation. Not going to entertain useful routes being hacked passing as casual conversation. Yes but many people are probably avoiding the tube at the moment. As someone mentioned previously buses from the Lewisham direction near empty out at Canada Water in normal circumstances. Cuts are planned already such as the 101 and 262 which I don't agree with although I think the Bluewater cuts are more reasonable and I suspect that they will be exacerbated by this virus so it might well be a case of.... if you want to save the 47 what do you want to cut instead? I'm just trying to show you how vital the route is even in these dire times. Just cause train links are quicker doesn't always mean they're favoured by most- do you know how many fully accessible (step free) Overground stations there are on the network? Have to reach into the ether of my memory after citing Dlaston Junction and possibly Highbury & Islington. As others have said the 47 has already had savage cuts (it may be the only zone 1 route with 3bph on Sundays) so it doesn't need another hack of the axe. Even at nights, granted capacity is a little superfluous before 4am on weeknights but the 47N is definitely needed on weekends. I'm certain there are some punters at Shoreditch who will go for the bus not only for the price saving compared to the zone 1 station, but the fact that Shoreditch High Street Station has a very inconspicuous entrance means some likely don't bother for the Night Overground at all. Sometimes overbussing is a necessary evil, and I much rather that than the days prior to September 2015 where passengers were regularly left behind by full (old) N47 buses from London Bridge southbound. As for the day service, maybe a pruning somewhere north of Lodnon Bridge; Liverpool Street or possibly Monument with buses standing at Mansion House. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 2, 2020 19:12:58 GMT
It wasn't that alternatives were offered after the 47 was reduced but long before. The Jubilee line in 1999, the LO in 2010 and Southeastern about circa 2015. You can't offer these alternatives then be surprised a slower bus route with alot of its priorities removed and expect it to carry the same amount.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 2, 2020 19:13:01 GMT
Regardless of whether someone is left high & dry, this is exactly why people are finding other alternatives to public transport - when you take something away such as a bus service or make that journey longer by having to change, people generally decide with their feet and go elsewhere - the vulnerable and poor either end up with no such choice or if they really can make it work, find non public transport such as a mate or neighbour to give them a lift or plunge themselves into debt for private hire transport. Everybody that's commented seems to agree that the 47 has had it's day, it's a shame but such is life. Large numbers of people have switched to the train. You said in another thread there is no right or wrong answer when doing these debates which I agree with so why is this so much different? |
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 2, 2020 19:16:14 GMT
Throw in the 47 which often arrives at CW from Lewisham full then is fairly empty leaving. The jubilee has definetly taken usage from the 47 plus the LO. Of course the Jubilee Line and Overground have helped the demise of the 47 but would others also say the DLR has helped the demise too? As a non local thinking about this I was wondering how much Lewisham-City patronage the DLR has taken when you consider taking the DLR from Lewisham to Bank isn't too direct. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 2, 2020 19:33:45 GMT
No but the DLR to Canary Whalf and the Jubilee line is a popular link from Lewisham and Deptford.
|
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 2, 2020 19:36:23 GMT
No but the DLR to Canary Whalf and the Jubilee line is a popular link from Lewisham and Deptford. Suspected that would be the case, of course Canary Wharf's hub status will be bolstered by Crossrail too as more people may change from the DLR to Crossrail to reach the City |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 2, 2020 19:49:46 GMT
I wonder if the 129 was extended beyond Lewisham to TL to maintain a link to Greenwich and create a new one from Catford to the 02 then 199 could divert via Deptford and Brookmill Road replacing the 47.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 2, 2020 19:52:40 GMT
It wasn't that alternatives were offered after the 47 was reduced but long before. The Jubilee line in 1999, the LO in 2010 and Southeastern about circa 2015. You can't offer these alternatives then be surprised a slower bus route with alot of its priorities removed and expect it to carry the same amount. Again, never mentioned anything about it carrying the same amount but the comment about its withdrawal which personally is wholly unnecessary. As we see in numerous places in London, bus routes & railway lines operate in tandem with success. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Apr 2, 2020 19:54:26 GMT
Throw in the 47 which often arrives at CW from Lewisham full then is fairly empty leaving. The jubilee has definetly taken usage from the 47 plus the LO. Of course the Jubilee Line and Overground have helped the demise of the 47 but would others also say the DLR has helped the demise too? As a non local thinking about this I was wondering how much Lewisham-City patronage the DLR has taken when you consider taking the DLR from Lewisham to Bank isn't too direct. I think it's more improvements in the Southeastern service now that London Bridge has been rebuilt rather than DLR that has taken a lot of Lewisham-City patronage off the 47 and indeed the 21. |
|
The peak time of between 4 and 6am has seen buses packed, even with the 188 trailing behind/kicking its heels at the front.
