|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 6:41:03 GMT
I’m very unsure that it’s good to extend the 59, I just think it’s a distinct possibility. Re. the 11 - I think maybe sending the 9 to the City would be better. Fulham - Aldwych is actually timetabled to take longer than Hammersmith - Aldwych, plus the 9 doesn’t have to cope with Parliament Square when the invariable protests occur. I think that's fair regarding the 11 - my own idea would be to simply split it and reintroduce the 311 number they originally were going to use with the 11 running from Liverpool Street to Victoria & the 311 from Fulham Broadway to Trafalgar Square. Whilst I wouldn't be in favour of it, I could see a situation where this split becomes reality (subject to King's Road not flexing their muscles) but that the 311 runs over the 507 leaving it as a Fulham Broadway to Waterloo route. I would keep the 11 number though for the Fulham service as it would make the change bit less noticeable but also I wouldn't be surprised if the Victoria to Liverpool Street section didn't wither away in a few years and be replaced by something else. That was kind of my worry last time it was proposed that I could see the temptation to alter the 26 or something else to withdraw it. |
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Apr 6, 2021 14:04:10 GMT
I think that's fair regarding the 11 - my own idea would be to simply split it and reintroduce the 311 number they originally were going to use with the 11 running from Liverpool Street to Victoria & the 311 from Fulham Broadway to Trafalgar Square. Whilst I wouldn't be in favour of it, I could see a situation where this split becomes reality (subject to King's Road not flexing their muscles) but that the 311 runs over the 507 leaving it as a Fulham Broadway to Waterloo route. I would keep the 11 number though for the Fulham service as it would make the change bit less noticeable but also I wouldn't be surprised if the Victoria to Liverpool Street section didn't wither away in a few years and be replaced by something else. That was kind of my worry last time it was proposed that I could see the temptation to alter the 26 or something else to withdraw it. Given the restructuring of Aldwych I can sense a possibility of routes getting altered through the area (esp the aldwych - Trafalgar Square corridor). Tfl have long had the “vision” of having just 1 - 2 cross aldwych routes from the east. The 15 may get hacked back to aldwych; the 23 disappeared sometime back so one of 11/26 is under threat in one form or the other - maybe the 26 gets sent to Victoria (given it already shadows the 11 from Liverpool Street to aldwych) with a frequency boost: 388/241 gets merged or the 388 gets sent to OKR; new 311 gets introduced from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus / Whitehall / Piccadilly Circus / conduit street (take your pick); 6 gets punted back to Trafalgar Square and so on. The catch will be that there isn’t then any link left between most parts of the city and Waterloo (apart from the 76) but hopper / W&C line then will be touted as best fit |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 6, 2021 14:27:43 GMT
I would keep the 11 number though for the Fulham service as it would make the change bit less noticeable but also I wouldn't be surprised if the Victoria to Liverpool Street section didn't wither away in a few years and be replaced by something else. That was kind of my worry last time it was proposed that I could see the temptation to alter the 26 or something else to withdraw it. Given the restructuring of Aldwych I can sense a possibility of routes getting altered through the area (esp the aldwych - Trafalgar Square corridor). Tfl have long had the “vision” of having just 1 - 2 cross aldwych routes from the east. The 15 may get hacked back to aldwych; the 23 disappeared sometime back so one of 11/26 is under threat in one form or the other - maybe the 26 gets sent to Victoria (given it already shadows the 11 from Liverpool Street to aldwych) with a frequency boost: 388/241 gets merged or the 388 gets sent to OKR; new 311 gets introduced from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus / Whitehall / Piccadilly Circus / conduit street (take your pick); 6 gets punted back to Trafalgar Square and so on. The catch will be that there isn’t then any link left between most parts of the city and Waterloo (apart from the 76) but hopper / W&C line then will be touted as best fit I think the 388 would be better merged with the 241 rather than extended to Old Kent Road as at least that brings something new to the table that could genuinely be useful like a new cross Stratford link - Old Kent Road already has a link to London Bridge & Liverpool Street in the form of the 21 & 78. Start the 388 from Liverpool Street and then there is no need to pull anything else out of London Bridge. I'm still very surprised that TfL is potentially going this way about it to achieve savings - you could easily save money by cutting the frequency of every Zone 1 route to 6 bph which would roughly save 450 off total PVR which is 150 more than the 300 figure regularly quoted and then adjust it slightly should certain corridors need a little bit extra. Slicing routes up is a lot harder to resurrect when good times return compared to frequencies which are far easier to reinstate but not only that, it's hardly a way of getting people to return or to switch to public transport which is exactly what we should be doing as a restrictions ease. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 14:29:28 GMT
I wouldn't be surprised if the 6 got pulled back to Cockspur Street now it covers the 9. The only lost link thou would be Marble Arch/Edgware Road to Aldwych but I can still see the temptation of another route being able to utilise the stand space for another route (1/59/68/176/188).
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 14:36:17 GMT
Given the restructuring of Aldwych I can sense a possibility of routes getting altered through the area (esp the aldwych - Trafalgar Square corridor). Tfl have long had the “vision” of having just 1 - 2 cross aldwych routes from the east. The 15 may get hacked back to aldwych; the 23 disappeared sometime back so one of 11/26 is under threat in one form or the other - maybe the 26 gets sent to Victoria (given it already shadows the 11 from Liverpool Street to aldwych) with a frequency boost: 388/241 gets merged or the 388 gets sent to OKR; new 311 gets introduced from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus / Whitehall / Piccadilly Circus / conduit street (take your pick); 6 gets punted back to Trafalgar Square and so on. The catch will be that there isn’t then any link left between most parts of the city and Waterloo (apart from the 76) but hopper / W&C line then will be touted as best fit I think the 388 would be better merged with the 241 rather than extended to Old Kent Road as at least that brings something new to the table that could genuinely be useful like a new cross Stratford link - Old Kent Road already has a link to London Bridge & Liverpool Street in the form of the 21 & 78. Start the 388 from Liverpool Street and then there is no need to pull anything else out of London Bridge. I'm still very surprised that TfL is potentially going this way about it to achieve savings - you could easily save money by cutting the frequency of every Zone 1 route to 6 bph which would roughly save 450 off total PVR which is 150 more than the 300 figure regularly quoted and then adjust it slightly should certain corridors need a little bit extra. Slicing routes up is a lot harder to resurrect when good times return compared to frequencies which are far easier to reinstate but not only that, it's hardly a way of getting people to return or to switch to public transport which is exactly what we should be doing as a restrictions ease. What happens though on a route that needs say 8 to 10bph on the outer section. The 137 has dropped usage im sure through Knightbridge up to Marble Arch due to the Oxo withdrawal but in yhe peaks and alot of the day people going from the Atkins Road area to Clapham Common and Queenstown Road to Sloane Square need the high freqs. It is a difficult balance to find. I do agree with that. |
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Apr 6, 2021 14:51:03 GMT
I think the 388 would be better merged with the 241 rather than extended to Old Kent Road as at least that brings something new to the table that could genuinely be useful like a new cross Stratford link - Old Kent Road already has a link to London Bridge & Liverpool Street in the form of the 21 & 78. Start the 388 from Liverpool Street and then there is no need to pull anything else out of London Bridge. I'm still very surprised that TfL is potentially going this way about it to achieve savings - you could easily save money by cutting the frequency of every Zone 1 route to 6 bph which would roughly save 450 off total PVR which is 150 more than the 300 figure regularly quoted and then adjust it slightly should certain corridors need a little bit extra. Slicing routes up is a lot harder to resurrect when good times return compared to frequencies which are far easier to reinstate but not only that, it's hardly a way of getting people to return or to switch to public transport which is exactly what we should be doing as a restrictions ease. What happens though on a route that needs say 8 to 10bph on the outer section. The 137 has dropped usage im sure through Knightbridge up to Marble Arch due to the Oxo withdrawal but in yhe peaks and alot of the day people going from the Atkins Road area to Clapham Common and Queenstown Road to Sloane Square need the high freqs. It is a difficult balance to find. I do agree with that. It feels to me like we are seeing a reversal of the process we saw when the Congestion Charge was introduced. Routes like the 333 and 453 were introduced to provide additional capacity in inner areas without overbussing the extremities. But TfL now want people in inner areas to cycle those journeys (and you can probably guess what I think about that), reduce motorised journeys in the centre and add capacity as you go further out. So longer routes are in some ways a natural reaction to that if you're taking capacity out on the overlapping inner section. It wouldn't surprise me to see the 133 and 333 bolted back together as London Bridge to Tooting and the divergent routes between Brixton and Stockwell left to the hopper, or the 53 return to Whitehall to allow a more significant reduction on the 453. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Apr 6, 2021 15:02:12 GMT
I would keep the 11 number though for the Fulham service as it would make the change bit less noticeable but also I wouldn't be surprised if the Victoria to Liverpool Street section didn't wither away in a few years and be replaced by something else. That was kind of my worry last time it was proposed that I could see the temptation to alter the 26 or something else to withdraw it. Given the restructuring of Aldwych I can sense a possibility of routes getting altered through the area (esp the aldwych - Trafalgar Square corridor). Tfl have long had the “vision” of having just 1 - 2 cross aldwych routes from the east. The 15 may get hacked back to aldwych; the 23 disappeared sometime back so one of 11/26 is under threat in one form or the other - maybe the 26 gets sent to Victoria (given it already shadows the 11 from Liverpool Street to aldwych) with a frequency boost: 388/241 gets merged or the 388 gets sent to OKR; new 311 gets introduced from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus / Whitehall / Piccadilly Circus / conduit street (take your pick); 6 gets punted back to Trafalgar Square and so on. The catch will be that there isn’t then any link left between most parts of the city and Waterloo (apart from the 76) but hopper / W&C line then will be touted as best fit The 15 can't leave Trafalgar Square, it has historical reasons aswell 11 has a history. Towards Waterloo however, a 341 cut back to Aldwych could be possible. |
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Apr 6, 2021 15:05:39 GMT
What happens though on a route that needs say 8 to 10bph on the outer section. The 137 has dropped usage im sure through Knightbridge up to Marble Arch due to the Oxo withdrawal but in yhe peaks and alot of the day people going from the Atkins Road area to Clapham Common and Queenstown Road to Sloane Square need the high freqs. It is a difficult balance to find. I do agree with that. It feels to me like we are seeing a reversal of the process we saw when the Congestion Charge was introduced. Routes like the 333 and 453 were introduced to provide additional capacity in inner areas without overbussing the extremities. But TfL now want people in inner areas to cycle those journeys (and you can probably guess what I think about that), reduce motorised journeys in the centre and add capacity as you go further out. So longer routes are in some ways a natural reaction to that if you're taking capacity out on the overlapping inner section. It wouldn't surprise me to see the 133 and 333 bolted back together as London Bridge to Tooting and the divergent routes between Brixton and Stockwell left to the hopper, or the 53 return to Whitehall to allow a more significant reduction on the 453. I think the probability of 53 returning to Whitehall is less than 0 frankly. Making a route more useful is not something which tfl will do I also find it quite senseless to see inner London (essentially the part outside the central congestion zone) getting penalised. A lot of areas in this ring have high levels of poverty and see high bus usage (don’t see my average joe / Jenny living in forest gate / Stepney for example with a low-paid job in the city starting at 6am and supporting a family of 6 using a £2k+ mountain bike in full Lycra in February for example; that person will use the 25!). Such minor pedantics is lost however in the “walk or cycle” push |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Apr 6, 2021 15:07:43 GMT
The 15 can't leave Trafalgar Square, it has historical reasons Oh it can. History won’t save the 15 west of Aldwych. There was a whole film made about the longer route 9 in the 1970s - that didn’t save the City end of that route in the 1990s. |
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Apr 6, 2021 15:08:25 GMT
Given the restructuring of Aldwych I can sense a possibility of routes getting altered through the area (esp the aldwych - Trafalgar Square corridor). Tfl have long had the “vision” of having just 1 - 2 cross aldwych routes from the east. The 15 may get hacked back to aldwych; the 23 disappeared sometime back so one of 11/26 is under threat in one form or the other - maybe the 26 gets sent to Victoria (given it already shadows the 11 from Liverpool Street to aldwych) with a frequency boost: 388/241 gets merged or the 388 gets sent to OKR; new 311 gets introduced from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus / Whitehall / Piccadilly Circus / conduit street (take your pick); 6 gets punted back to Trafalgar Square and so on. The catch will be that there isn’t then any link left between most parts of the city and Waterloo (apart from the 76) but hopper / W&C line then will be touted as best fit The 15 can't leave Trafalgar Square, it has historical reasons aswell 11 has a history. Towards Waterloo however, a 341 cut back to Aldwych could be possible. Just re-number the 26 the 15, the 311 the 11 and make the 26 disappear  |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Apr 6, 2021 15:15:45 GMT
Given the restructuring of Aldwych I can sense a possibility of routes getting altered through the area (esp the aldwych - Trafalgar Square corridor). Tfl have long had the “vision” of having just 1 - 2 cross aldwych routes from the east. The 15 may get hacked back to aldwych; the 23 disappeared sometime back so one of 11/26 is under threat in one form or the other - maybe the 26 gets sent to Victoria (given it already shadows the 11 from Liverpool Street to aldwych) with a frequency boost: 388/241 gets merged or the 388 gets sent to OKR; new 311 gets introduced from Fulham Broadway to Oxford Circus / Whitehall / Piccadilly Circus / conduit street (take your pick); 6 gets punted back to Trafalgar Square and so on. The catch will be that there isn’t then any link left between most parts of the city and Waterloo (apart from the 76) but hopper / W&C line then will be touted as best fit The 15 can't leave Trafalgar Square, it has historical reasons aswell 11 has a history. Towards Waterloo however, a 341 cut back to Aldwych could be possible. The 15 had history in Paddington and Piccadilly Circus too |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Apr 6, 2021 15:40:07 GMT
The 15 can't leave Trafalgar Square, it has historical reasons aswell 11 has a history. Towards Waterloo however, a 341 cut back to Aldwych could be possible. The 15 had history in Paddington and Piccadilly Circus too Yes it did, 15 is listed as a heritage route as it passes historical sites across London. Trafalgar Square is almost the core of the 15 route which is used by tourists from Tower Bridge to Trafalgar Square. If its cut to Aldwych, the value will plumit. I would rather cut 87 to Whitehall than 15. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 6, 2021 15:40:41 GMT
It feels to me like we are seeing a reversal of the process we saw when the Congestion Charge was introduced. Routes like the 333 and 453 were introduced to provide additional capacity in inner areas without overbussing the extremities. But TfL now want people in inner areas to cycle those journeys (and you can probably guess what I think about that), reduce motorised journeys in the centre and add capacity as you go further out. So longer routes are in some ways a natural reaction to that if you're taking capacity out on the overlapping inner section. It wouldn't surprise me to see the 133 and 333 bolted back together as London Bridge to Tooting and the divergent routes between Brixton and Stockwell left to the hopper, or the 53 return to Whitehall to allow a more significant reduction on the 453. I think the probability of 53 returning to Whitehall is less than 0 frankly. Making a route more useful is not something which tfl will do I also find it quite senseless to see inner London (essentially the part outside the central congestion zone) getting penalised. A lot of areas in this ring have high levels of poverty and see high bus usage (don’t see my average joe / Jenny living in forest gate / Stepney for example with a low-paid job in the city starting at 6am and supporting a family of 6 using a £2k+ mountain bike in full Lycra in February for example; that person will use the 25!). Such minor pedantics is lost however in the “walk or cycle” push The whole cycle and walk agenda seems to be TFL trying to save money - the Bank pedestrianisation only reveals this more. TFL are using pedestrianisation to make an excuse to hack certain routes back, for example I am very worried for the 133 north of London Bridge but also I'd worry for the 333
I'm saying as more of a personal dig at certain people not necessarily in power but more just some of the general public, and this is those people who have been pushing for the LTNs and the ridiculous cycle schemes but not also that, but vote Labour on the basis that they are heavily devoted to helping out the working class yet I don't see any of them trying to back the working class (the tradespeople, bus users) in helping them fight against them being delayed on buses, needing to take longer to go deliver parcels, or even just get around because of these ridiculous cycle schemes and LTNs. Notice how a lot of them are now hiding away now they've got what they wanted. A lot of these people supporting the schemes were also the sort of people clapping for the NHS (I very much stress this is only the people who were massively behind the LTNs) but now they don't seem to be fighting against these schemes that are delaying NHS workers from seeing patients and saving lives because of all the congestion that has built up due to lanes being removed.
It is very interesting to see how people's attitudes change once they have got what they wanted.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 15:41:06 GMT
It feels to me like we are seeing a reversal of the process we saw when the Congestion Charge was introduced. Routes like the 333 and 453 were introduced to provide additional capacity in inner areas without overbussing the extremities. But TfL now want people in inner areas to cycle those journeys (and you can probably guess what I think about that), reduce motorised journeys in the centre and add capacity as you go further out. So longer routes are in some ways a natural reaction to that if you're taking capacity out on the overlapping inner section. It wouldn't surprise me to see the 133 and 333 bolted back together as London Bridge to Tooting and the divergent routes between Brixton and Stockwell left to the hopper, or the 53 return to Whitehall to allow a more significant reduction on the 453. I think the probability of 53 returning to Whitehall is less than 0 frankly. Making a route more useful is not something which tfl will do I also find it quite senseless to see inner London (essentially the part outside the central congestion zone) getting penalised. A lot of areas in this ring have high levels of poverty and see high bus usage (don’t see my average joe / Jenny living in forest gate / Stepney for example with a low-paid job in the city starting at 6am and supporting a family of 6 using a £2k+ mountain bike in full Lycra in February for example; that person will use the 25!). Such minor pedantics is lost however in the “walk or cycle” push I think the 53 could return. If the suggestion Vla6 made of the 21 diverting to Oxo then the 53 returning would be likely to atleast maintain a Deptford to Whitehall link if the 453 was altered. We could possibly see the 159 divert over Lambeth Bridge and the 53 maintain Lambeth North to Whitehall Capacity. |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Apr 6, 2021 15:43:43 GMT
I actually don't think the plan for the 45 is to be extended to Marble Arch via Victoria. I think it will take the 139 route via Piccadilly Circus with the 139 withdrawn.
Some further changes that I predict may take place if the 45 is extended via this route are:
414 (when cut back) extended to Kilburn High Road via current bus route 139 and would access the Quex Road stand via the map below.
189 reinstated to Oxford Circus. N189 introduced Brent Cross or North Cricklewood to Waterloo via 189 to Oxo and remainder via current 139.
74 cut back to Hyde Park Corner and then extended to Oxford Circus via route 22. Same goes for N74.
22 reinstated to Piccadilly Circus with 74 taking over Berkeley Square section. Same goes for N22.
N414 new half-hourly night service between Golders Green and Putney Heath via current 14 to South Kensington, current 74 to Portman Square and current 139 to Golders Green.
14 night service reduced to run every 30 minutes every night.
Potential next step if these go ahead: Reroute the 414/N414 via Gloucester Place both ways?
|
|
