|
Post by greenboy on Jun 5, 2020 9:45:43 GMT
I think the 405 should be adequate for Pampisford Road, only gets busy at school times, and the 166 could remain unchanged. It would probably struggle with just one service. Hence why the 405 was diverted down there in the first place. The combined 166/405 frequency of 7bph is the right amount. I think the 405 was only rerouted that way because of school traffic.
|
|
|
Post by ibus246 on Jun 5, 2020 9:56:39 GMT
It would probably struggle with just one service. Hence why the 405 was diverted down there in the first place. The combined 166/405 frequency of 7bph is the right amount. I think the 405 was only rerouted that way because of school traffic. Yes it was re-routed in 2003 as there was a major issue with the 455 being suffice for the then Hailing Manor
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jun 5, 2020 10:29:44 GMT
My thinking is more where they will Reroute the 289. Cherry Orchard Road is already overbussed as it is. If I was TfL I’d reroute 312 up to Shirley Park and Addiscombe Road. But I know not everyone will agree with that. Also 689 goes via Cherry Orchard Road already. Why make changes to routes for what is weeks. According to the last network rail paper, they plan to build the new bridge next to the existing one, only then close the existing bridge to traffic, demolish the old bridge and slide the new one into it's correct position, then reopen bridge to traffic ... then 289 returns to original route. Suggesting wholesale changes to routes during this period is just complexing the issue. Thank you. Was unsure the route the 689 took, not a route I ever expect to use, hence the question mark, but given the x89 number thought a good possibility it followed 289 The 689 was a renumbering of route 189. This started as a tram replacement route in 1951 but was whittled away over the years and was latterly a schooldays-only route. Renumbering took place in September 1994. www.londonbuses.co.uk/_routes/withdrawn/189-1.html
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Jun 5, 2020 10:36:47 GMT
Why make changes to routes for what is weeks. According to the last network rail paper, they plan to build the new bridge next to the existing one, only then close the existing bridge to traffic, demolish the old bridge and slide the new one into it's correct position, then reopen bridge to traffic ... then 289 returns to original route. Suggesting wholesale changes to routes during this period is just complexing the issue. Thank you. Was unsure the route the 689 took, not a route I ever expect to use, hence the question mark, but given the x89 number thought a good possibility it followed 289 The 689 was a renumbering of route 189. This started as a tram replacement route in 1951 but was whittled away over the years and was latterly a schooldays-only route. Renumbering took place in September 1994. www.londonbuses.co.uk/_routes/withdrawn/189-1.htmlThat was for the previous incarnation of the 689, which now is more closely related to the current 690. The current 689 is a completely new route.
|
|