|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Apr 6, 2021 15:47:42 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. 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? I'm sorry but it's very likely going to be via Victoria. They wouldn't suddenly route something from the general area of Camberwell & Brixton Hill to somewhere like Oxford Circus as their justification would be the 12 & 159 are there. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 6, 2021 15:47:54 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. Like I said, should certain corridors need a little extra added back on, you'd have wriggle room of 150 PVR to do so. I'd rather a frequency be cut than entire routes and merging illogical routes together. TfL have already shown they have no interest in the needs of Inner London passengers. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 6, 2021 15:50:03 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. If the changes do take place, it will be via the 148's current route. TfL doesn't want extra routes on Oxford Street - I don't think we've seen the last of more routes being removed from the street |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 16:12:01 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. Like I said, should certain corridors need a little extra added back on, you'd have wriggle room of 150 PVR to do so. I'd rather a frequency be cut than entire routes and merging illogical routes together. TfL have already shown they have no interest in the needs of Inner London passengers. But surely thou it would be better for lets say the 3, 59 and 159 to keep their current freqs but for the 3 to be restructured into a more local route from say CP to Elephant. Yes CP and Herne Hill loose the link to the west end but the they would still have a good local freq and would the 59 and 159. Surely that is better for inner london rather then sacrificing the local freqs just to reduce the number of zone 1 buses. Thats just my feeling. Sorry if its wrong but I feel the 3 now has dropped north of Brixton yet it is still massively popular from Kennington down the Brixton Road out to Crystal Palace. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 6, 2021 16:45:23 GMT
Like I said, should certain corridors need a little extra added back on, you'd have wriggle room of 150 PVR to do so. I'd rather a frequency be cut than entire routes and merging illogical routes together. TfL have already shown they have no interest in the needs of Inner London passengers. But surely thou it would be better for lets say the 3, 59 and 159 to keep their current freqs but for the 3 to be restructured into a more local route from say CP to Elephant. Yes CP and Herne Hill loose the link to the west end but the they would still have a good local freq and would the 59 and 159. Surely that is better for inner london rather then sacrificing the local freqs just to reduce the number of zone 1 buses. Thats just my feeling. Sorry if its wrong but I feel the 3 now has dropped north of Brixton yet it is still massively popular from Kennington down the Brixton Road out to Crystal Palace. But there is no point sticking the 3 into Elephant because it is no benefit to anyone as Kennington already has the 360 and Palace not only has the 363 (albeit a long way) but has interchange with the 68, 415 & 468 in nearby West Norwood. You could keep the 3 at it's current frequency and drop the 59 & 159 for example without needlessly causing too much hassle if patronage has dropped so much to what many keep saying. You could even have a situation where so many 3's turn at Brixton with these short workings taking all their stand time at Palace for example - yes, it goes against my keeping the network simple stance but I'd rather that than slicing up routes and putting them into areas with no benefit. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2021 16:49:22 GMT
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. Where is this listed? or are you assuming because it had a heritage service? To be honest the route might as well be cut back to Aldwch as most weekends in normal times it is curtailed because of one demo or another.
From a rather selfish point of view I would extend on the eastern end to maybe Canning Town if cut back or merge with the 115 bringing the 15 back to East Ham!
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 16:58:18 GMT
But surely thou it would be better for lets say the 3, 59 and 159 to keep their current freqs but for the 3 to be restructured into a more local route from say CP to Elephant. Yes CP and Herne Hill loose the link to the west end but the they would still have a good local freq and would the 59 and 159. Surely that is better for inner london rather then sacrificing the local freqs just to reduce the number of zone 1 buses. Thats just my feeling. Sorry if its wrong but I feel the 3 now has dropped north of Brixton yet it is still massively popular from Kennington down the Brixton Road out to Crystal Palace. But there is no point sticking the 3 into Elephant because it is no benefit to anyone as Kennington already has the 360 and Palace not only has the 363 (albeit a long way) but has interchange with the 68, 415 & 468 in nearby West Norwood. You could keep the 3 at it's current frequency and drop the 59 & 159 for example without needlessly causing too much hassle if patronage has dropped so much to what many keep saying. You could even have a situation where so many 3's turn at Brixton with these short workings taking all their stand time at Palace for example - yes, it goes against my keeping the network simple stance but I'd rather that than slicing up routes and putting them into areas with no benefit. If you feel Brixton Hill can loose 4 to 5 bph then fair enough but I'd imagine there would be overcrowding on the approach to Brixton Station. |
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Apr 6, 2021 17:55:53 GMT
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. Where is this listed? or are you assuming because it had a heritage service? To be honest the route might as well be cut back to Aldwch as most weekends in normal times it is curtailed because of one demo or another.
From a rather selfish point of view I would extend on the eastern end to maybe Canning Town if cut back or merge with the 115 bringing the 15 back to East Ham!
I don't think that's as selfish as it sounds. The 15 is identical to the 11 after Bank/Monument, as a result I could very well see it completely truncated at St Paul's with passengers then told to use the 11 up until Trafalgar Square where the 15 would terminate anyway. By this point you might as well just send the 115 to St Paul's instead, it's a relatively short route so could quite easily take the extension, especially with Bank Junction now being bus only. TfL have a habit of ignoring poor people so they might just keep the 115 number, even if the 15 number is what's more recognised and give it a frequency increase so that too much capacity isn't lost down Commercial Road and you could save yourself a really large handful of buses. This would allow all links to be maintained, and allow easy change onto the 11 for people who wish to go further into Central London. I know it's a bummer with another route potentially being lost heading East, but I think the 15 beyond Mansion House wasn't that well used, it's not far off Aldwych anyway, and passengers going there also have the option of the 76 and 26 to Aldwych should they require it. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 6, 2021 18:01:36 GMT
But there is no point sticking the 3 into Elephant because it is no benefit to anyone as Kennington already has the 360 and Palace not only has the 363 (albeit a long way) but has interchange with the 68, 415 & 468 in nearby West Norwood. You could keep the 3 at it's current frequency and drop the 59 & 159 for example without needlessly causing too much hassle if patronage has dropped so much to what many keep saying. You could even have a situation where so many 3's turn at Brixton with these short workings taking all their stand time at Palace for example - yes, it goes against my keeping the network simple stance but I'd rather that than slicing up routes and putting them into areas with no benefit. If you feel Brixton Hill can loose 4 to 5 bph then fair enough but I'd imagine there would be overcrowding on the approach to Brixton Station. It's not about what I feel (my feeling is we should be investing in general and not cutting seeing as public transport needs to be at the heart of a post pandemic London) but that it's better having the routes remaining but at a lower frequency which can be altered much easier than cutting stuff or curtailing routes to where no one wants them or where there is zero benefit. The way thinsg are going with TfL's thinking, there will be further patronage loss so any overcrowding would disappear anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Apr 6, 2021 18:28:52 GMT
But demand has already dropped in central London but hasn't anywhere near as much in zones 2 to 4.
|
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Apr 6, 2021 18:37:38 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. If the changes do take place, it will be via the 148's current route. TfL doesn't want extra routes on Oxford Street - I don't think we've seen the last of more routes being removed from the street With the 139 being withdrawn. I forgot to specify that. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Apr 6, 2021 18:41:20 GMT
Where is this listed? or are you assuming because it had a heritage service? To be honest the route might as well be cut back to Aldwch as most weekends in normal times it is curtailed because of one demo or another.
From a rather selfish point of view I would extend on the eastern end to maybe Canning Town if cut back or merge with the 115 bringing the 15 back to East Ham!
I don't think that's as selfish as it sounds. The 15 is identical to the 11 after Bank/Monument, as a result I could very well see it completely truncated at St Paul's with passengers then told to use the 11 up until Trafalgar Square where the 15 would terminate anyway. By this point you might as well just send the 115 to St Paul's instead, it's a relatively short route so could quite easily take the extension, especially with Bank Junction now being bus only. TfL have a habit of ignoring poor people so they might just keep the 115 number, even if the 15 number is what's more recognised and give it a frequency increase so that too much capacity isn't lost down Commercial Road and you could save yourself a really large handful of buses. This would allow all links to be maintained, and allow easy change onto the 11 for people who wish to go further into Central London. I know it's a bummer with another route potentially being lost heading East, but I think the 15 beyond Mansion House wasn't that well used, it's not far off Aldwych anyway, and passengers going there also have the option of the 76 and 26 to Aldwych should they require it. Or....if the 133 ends up cut back, that leaves a space at Liverpool Street Station. A 26 sized space. Divert the 15 at Aldwych to go to Waterloo and withdraw the 26 between Liverpool Street and Waterloo. Now excuse me while I go away and feel very sick indeed... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2021 18:58:11 GMT
If the changes do take place, it will be via the 148's current route. TfL doesn't want extra routes on Oxford Street - I don't think we've seen the last of more routes being removed from the street With the 139 being withdrawn. I forgot to specify that. I wouldn't put any money on that personally. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2021 19:04:43 GMT
Where is this listed? or are you assuming because it had a heritage service? To be honest the route might as well be cut back to Aldwch as most weekends in normal times it is curtailed because of one demo or another.
From a rather selfish point of view I would extend on the eastern end to maybe Canning Town if cut back or merge with the 115 bringing the 15 back to East Ham!
I don't think that's as selfish as it sounds. The 15 is identical to the 11 after Bank/Monument, as a result I could very well see it completely truncated at St Paul's with passengers then told to use the 11 up until Trafalgar Square where the 15 would terminate anyway. By this point you might as well just send the 115 to St Paul's instead, it's a relatively short route so could quite easily take the extension, especially with Bank Junction now being bus only. TfL have a habit of ignoring poor people so they might just keep the 115 number, even if the 15 number is what's more recognised and give it a frequency increase so that too much capacity isn't lost down Commercial Road and you could save yourself a really large handful of buses. This would allow all links to be maintained, and allow easy change onto the 11 for people who wish to go further into Central London. I know it's a bummer with another route potentially being lost heading East, but I think the 15 beyond Mansion House wasn't that well used, it's not far off Aldwych anyway, and passengers going there also have the option of the 76 and 26 to Aldwych should they require it. I like the idea but think TfL could do a "13" and keep the 15 number for Historic /Tourism reasons and so too much upset is not caused. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 6, 2021 19:09:39 GMT
I don't think that's as selfish as it sounds. The 15 is identical to the 11 after Bank/Monument, as a result I could very well see it completely truncated at St Paul's with passengers then told to use the 11 up until Trafalgar Square where the 15 would terminate anyway. By this point you might as well just send the 115 to St Paul's instead, it's a relatively short route so could quite easily take the extension, especially with Bank Junction now being bus only. TfL have a habit of ignoring poor people so they might just keep the 115 number, even if the 15 number is what's more recognised and give it a frequency increase so that too much capacity isn't lost down Commercial Road and you could save yourself a really large handful of buses. This would allow all links to be maintained, and allow easy change onto the 11 for people who wish to go further into Central London. I know it's a bummer with another route potentially being lost heading East, but I think the 15 beyond Mansion House wasn't that well used, it's not far off Aldwych anyway, and passengers going there also have the option of the 76 and 26 to Aldwych should they require it. Or....if the 133 ends up cut back, that leaves a space at Liverpool Street Station. A 26 sized space. Divert the 15 at Aldwych to go to Waterloo and withdraw the 26 between Liverpool Street and Waterloo. Now excuse me while I go away and feel very sick indeed... That would make the 26 a very short route from Hackney to Liverpool Street! I know the takes a slightly different route but would both be needed to cover that section? |
|
