|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 15, 2020 12:07:40 GMT
My view won't matter as I'm not local but overall not a fan of these changes - too many back street sections removed, too many broken links especially two cross Croydon links. At least the 80 gets a double decker conversion
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 15, 2020 12:29:32 GMT
I notice the 164 only goes ahead when the developments have advanced further so could be put off after the initial start date of the changes.
Seems TFl have felt a DD service every 8 mins is too much for Highdown/Downview (Surrey) hence the less frequent and less direct S2 change.
|
|
|
|
Post by overgroundcommuter on Oct 15, 2020 13:30:58 GMT
Ampere Way for Ikea loses the bus alternative to Croydon, so everyone from Croydon will have to use the already packed Tramlink into the town centre, being replaced by the S4 which only goes to Waddon Marsh.
The S4 doesn't even give passengers a direct connection to Sutton but retains the connection to Wallington lost with the 455's axing.
Splitting the 407 into two routes was inevitable sadly.
The 312 goes back to it's old 12A routing from Norwood Junction to Old Lodge Lane.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 15, 2020 13:46:24 GMT
Ampere Way for Ikea loses the bus alternative to Croydon, so everyone from Croydon will have to use the already packed Tramlink into the town centre, being replaced by the S4 which only goes to Waddon Marsh. The S4 doesn't even give passengers a direct connection to Sutton but retains the connection to Wallington lost with the 455's axing. Splitting the 407 into two routes was inevitable sadly. The 312 goes back to it's old 12A routing from Norwood Junction to Old Lodge Lane. The old 12A routing was via Selsdon. The 407 is a strange route anyway, far too indirect to be of much use for cross Croydon journeys, and splitting it allows the Caterham section to be rerouted via Old Town. I'm not sure about the 443 route number though, potential for confusion with the 433 although they won't actually come into contact they are in close proximity to each other. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 15, 2020 13:56:33 GMT
Also the Warren and Carshalton on the Hill area loose their direct services to Sutton and whilst it's more frequent the 413 is less direct from Sutton to the door of the Marsden and also
there will not be service from Sutton Station itself to the door of the Marsden. Obviously the 80, 164 and S1 will pass the side entrance (Cotsworld Road) which I guess is just as good
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 14:10:52 GMT
Also the Warren and Carshalton on the Hill area loose their direct services to Sutton and whilst it's more frequent the 413 is less direct from Sutton to the door of the Marsden and also there will not be service from Sutton Station itself to the door of the Marsden. Obviously the 80, 164 and S1 will pass the side entrance (Cotsworld Road) which I guess is just as good I’m curious to know what the frequency of the 413 will be as it will more or less double in length. Aren’t the 80 and 164 planned to terminate at the hospital. I remember in the hospital plans there were provisions for bus stands and stops within the hospital grounds. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 15, 2020 14:21:04 GMT
They are but arguably the 80 already runs past with metres of the proposed site so could have continued to Highdown.
The 413 will stay every 15 mins.
Again whilst its only a short walk from the town centre/Katherine Street area I do think the Old Town might have preferred a link past East Croydon station that a re extension of the 433 would have provided.
I wonder what the blinds for 80 and 164 will be. Maybe Sutton Hospital even thou it's gone or Belmont, Royal Marsden Hospital or just Royal Marsden Hospital.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Oct 15, 2020 14:21:19 GMT
I have forwarded this to some friends of mine in the Sutton/Banstead area who are regular bus users, but not 'interested' in buses like us. Problem is, once again, this is an atrociously structured and written document. It is very difficult for them to pick out and understand the changes that affect them so I am going to have to sit down with a very large cup of tea (no hardship to be fair) and fillet it for them. TfL really needs to make this stuff more readable: there's some good stuff in here I think that they would support but faced with this, the instinct is to kick back.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 15, 2020 14:43:44 GMT
They are but arguably the 80 already runs past with metres of the proposed site so could have continued to Highdown. The 413 will stay every 15 mins. Again whilst its only a short walk from the town centre/Katherine Street area I do think the Old Town might have preferred a link past East Croydon station that a re extension of the 433 would have provided. I wonder what the blinds for 80 and 164 will be. Maybe Sutton Hospital even thou it's gone or Bemont, Royal Marsden Hospital or just Royal Marsden Hospital. I think it will depend on whether they have settled on a name for the new NHS facility being built on the site to partially replace St Helier. It could be Belmont, Royal Marsden or London Cancer Centre. Then it could changed when the new NHS hospital is complete to whatever that name will be. There’s also a school there so maybe they’ll give the collective area a new name. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Oct 15, 2020 15:58:50 GMT
The S1 would be marginally quicker between Banstead and Sutton as it wont have to wait for passing cars on Downs Road and then turning onto the busy Brighton Road at times.
|
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Oct 15, 2020 16:41:11 GMT
Some "cigarette packet" calculations about possible PVR changes.
455 -11
S3 -2
80 -1
407 -5
443 +8
439 +3
434 +1
413 +2
S2 +5
312 +4
166 +1
405D(645)/470/S1 presumably no change.
Net there seems to be about 4 extra PVR involved in this exercise. Quite an affordable package based on that.
|
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Oct 15, 2020 17:19:13 GMT
Some "cigarette packet" calculations about possible PVR changes. 455 -11 S3 -2 80 -1 407 -5 443 +8 439 +3 434 +1 413 +2 S2 +5 312 +4 166 +1 405D(645)/470/S1 presumably no change. Net there seems to be about 4 extra PVR involved in this exercise. Quite an affordable package based on that. What about S4? Pretty sure it will need a PVR increase with these changes |
|
|
|
Post by LJ17THF on Oct 15, 2020 18:21:14 GMT
I wonder if all of these went ahead, who will get awarded the new contracts? For example, the 455 has a few more years to go on its contract, and the 413 has EXCELLENT buses, I do not want them to be withdrawn, hopefully they can get one of the new routes using those MCL's (could see the 439 getting those, at least I want them to, not hope  ). As someone suggested, I could see the 443 getting some of the 407's existing buses. Doesn't seem like a bad idea after all, but all I want is for the 2019 Croydon changes to be reverted, that was one of the worst ideas I've seen  . |
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Oct 15, 2020 18:33:23 GMT
I wonder if all of these went ahead, who will get awarded the new contracts? For example, the 455 has a few more years to go on its contract, and the 413 has EXCELLENT buses, I do not want them to be withdrawn, hopefully they can get one of the new routes using those MCL's (could see the 439 getting those, at least I want them to, not hope ). As someone suggested, I could see the 443 getting some of the 407's existing buses. Doesn't seem like a bad idea after all, but all I want is for the 2019 Croydon changes to be reverted, that was one of the worst ideas I've seen . 455 contract was due to be awarded in about 6 months time. Also, from what I understand, 439 has only been tested for 9m length buses sadly. Not to say a 10.5m bus couldn't be tried. |
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Oct 15, 2020 18:34:30 GMT
Some "cigarette packet" calculations about possible PVR changes. 455 -11 S3 -2 80 -1 407 -5 443 +8 439 +3 434 +1 413 +2 S2 +5 312 +4 166 +1 405D(645)/470/S1 presumably no change. Net there seems to be about 4 extra PVR involved in this exercise. Quite an affordable package based on that. What about S4? Pretty sure it will need a PVR increase with these changes It was awarded with a PVR of 6 - with the frequency increase and truncation that sounds like what would be the appropriate PVR based of existing S4/455 timings. Maybe even potential to chop a bus off. |
|
). As someone suggested, I could see the 443 getting some of the 407's existing buses.
.