|
Post by vjaska on Oct 27, 2021 21:27:44 GMT
Not really, that was quite poorly used. There's not much in New Addington to attract people from outside the estate. I think most people walked down the road and got the T33/433 to Croydon. Is there not much in New Addington? Whenever I've done e2es I've seen shops on the parade but perhaps they aren't of demand.
Well I suppose if the demand was there the 433 could be rerouted round Forestdale (would attract a PVR of +1 from what I've calculated) however if the 353 were to be cutback to Addington it would drop by 1 as well. So pretty cost neutral then and Forestdale gets double the service. The shops on Central Parade are there for residents of the estate of which most are local shops - there wouldn't be any point in travelling there specifically to shop at the Iceland there for example when you'll highly likely pass one or any other supermarket in a much more larger shopping area along the way.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Oct 27, 2021 21:29:30 GMT
Not really, that was quite poorly used. There's not much in New Addington to attract people from outside the estate. I think most people walked down the road and got the T33/433 to Croydon. Is there not much in New Addington? Whenever I've done e2es I've seen shops on the parade but perhaps they aren't of demand.
Well I suppose if the demand was there the 433 could be rerouted round Forestdale (would attract a PVR of +1 from what I've calculated) however if the 353 were to be cutback to Addington it would drop by 1 as well. So pretty cost neutral then and Forestdale gets double the service. That would be a lot better, a direct bus to Croydon rather than expecting people to get a bus to Addington Village and then a tram which will probably be standing room only at busy times.
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Oct 27, 2021 21:53:00 GMT
Not really, that was quite poorly used. There's not much in New Addington to attract people from outside the estate. I think most people walked down the road and got the T33/433 to Croydon. Is there not much in New Addington? Whenever I've done e2es I've seen shops on the parade but perhaps they aren't of demand.
Well I suppose if the demand was there the 433 could be rerouted round Forestdale (would attract a PVR of +1 from what I've calculated) however if the 353 were to be cutback to Addington it would drop by 1 as well. So pretty cost neutral then and Forestdale gets double the service. New Addington is overwhelmingly residential, and I suppose it primarily acts as almost a dormitory town for Croydon. As has been already said, you wouldn’t go for a day out in New Addington!
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Oct 28, 2021 10:26:26 GMT
Oh and BTW, one of the things that is certainly making buses more frustrating to use is the unnecessary extended pavements at some bus stops. For example there's one very stupid bit of extended pavement by the East Finchley Station Stop E that I've noticed is just there and in the worst possible place, being in front of the bus stop shelter where the advertisements are,. Absolutely worthless IMO. Absolutely no need and haven't seen anyone using it apart from trying to last minute hail down a bus.
Despite how busy the 263 stop gets, it doesn't need it either! Again this now causes tailbacks between The Bishops Avenue & the Station Forecourt traffic lights which can delay buses by a fair bit (mainly the 143/234/263, the 102 seems to cope fine). I'd love it if TFL could just remove it, because it wasn't needed and when it was installed most were WFH so how could you measure up demand?
I also wonder why N/B between Finchley Lido & Granville Road why the 112/263 couldn't have used the cycle lane when southbound it does and the lanes are pretty much the same width. Things like this would just help the 263 cut out the nasty traffic that can sometimes build up near the Granville Road traffic lights. Perhaps even further up to Christchurch Avenue the 112/263/382 could always use those cycle lanes and convert them into bus and cycle lanes but the width of them I'd be a tad bit concerned about.
I think if TFL are re-scheduling services now, the 263 should absolutely be one. I don't think it justifies an 80 minute running time, after 2 traffic hotspots got killed off due to TFLs sensible bus lane installations (E Finc H Rd & the A406/A1000 junction) I think you could easily drop it to a 70 minute running time, which would drop 2 buses off the PVR.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 28, 2021 12:29:16 GMT
Oh and BTW, one of the things that is certainly making buses more frustrating to use is the unnecessary extended pavements at some bus stops. For example there's one very stupid bit of extended pavement by the East Finchley Station Stop E that I've noticed is just there and in the worst possible place, being in front of the bus stop shelter where the advertisements are,. Absolutely worthless IMO. Absolutely no need and haven't seen anyone using it apart from trying to last minute hail down a bus. Despite how busy the 263 stop gets, it doesn't need it either! Again this now causes tailbacks between The Bishops Avenue & the Station Forecourt traffic lights which can delay buses by a fair bit (mainly the 143/234/263, the 102 seems to cope fine). I'd love it if TFL could just remove it, because it wasn't needed and when it was installed most were WFH so how could you measure up demand? I also wonder why N/B between Finchley Lido & Granville Road why the 112/263 couldn't have used the cycle lane when southbound it does and the lanes are pretty much the same width. Things like this would just help the 263 cut out the nasty traffic that can sometimes build up near the Granville Road traffic lights. Perhaps even further up to Christchurch Avenue the 112/263/382 could always use those cycle lanes and convert them into bus and cycle lanes but the width of them I'd be a tad bit concerned about. I think if TFL are re-scheduling services now, the 263 should absolutely be one. I don't think it justifies an 80 minute running time, after 2 traffic hotspots got killed off due to TFLs sensible bus lane installations (E Finc H Rd & the A406/A1000 junction) I think you could easily drop it to a 70 minute running time, which would drop 2 buses off the PVR. What kind of extended pavement are you referring to as there is the kind fitted due to social distancing and the kind fitted over the years to aid level boarding
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Oct 28, 2021 12:30:34 GMT
Oh and BTW, one of the things that is certainly making buses more frustrating to use is the unnecessary extended pavements at some bus stops. For example there's one very stupid bit of extended pavement by the East Finchley Station Stop E that I've noticed is just there and in the worst possible place, being in front of the bus stop shelter where the advertisements are,. Absolutely worthless IMO. Absolutely no need and haven't seen anyone using it apart from trying to last minute hail down a bus. Despite how busy the 263 stop gets, it doesn't need it either! Again this now causes tailbacks between The Bishops Avenue & the Station Forecourt traffic lights which can delay buses by a fair bit (mainly the 143/234/263, the 102 seems to cope fine). I'd love it if TFL could just remove it, because it wasn't needed and when it was installed most were WFH so how could you measure up demand? I also wonder why N/B between Finchley Lido & Granville Road why the 112/263 couldn't have used the cycle lane when southbound it does and the lanes are pretty much the same width. Things like this would just help the 263 cut out the nasty traffic that can sometimes build up near the Granville Road traffic lights. Perhaps even further up to Christchurch Avenue the 112/263/382 could always use those cycle lanes and convert them into bus and cycle lanes but the width of them I'd be a tad bit concerned about. I think if TFL are re-scheduling services now, the 263 should absolutely be one. I don't think it justifies an 80 minute running time, after 2 traffic hotspots got killed off due to TFLs sensible bus lane installations (E Finc H Rd & the A406/A1000 junction) I think you could easily drop it to a 70 minute running time, which would drop 2 buses off the PVR. What kind of extended pavement are you referring to as there is the kind fitted due to social distancing and the kind fitted over the years to aid level boarding Social distancing, boarding was fine beforehand if anything it's got worse.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Nov 18, 2021 9:59:03 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Nov 18, 2021 10:09:13 GMT
No mode electric buses is a big one. Will operators go back to ordering new hybrids or will diesels stick around for a little longer? Also it will be interesting to see what are the 100 routes to be axed. Will be an interesting discussion on here
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 18, 2021 10:21:57 GMT
No mode electric buses is a big one. Will operators go back to ordering new hybrids or will diesels stick around for a little longer? Also it will be interesting to see what are the 100 routes to be axed. Will be an interesting discussion on here The key paragraph to pull out is “ The dire warning came from Sadiq Khan as he laid bare the unprecedented financial crisis facing Transport for London in a high-risk attempt to force the Government to commit long-term support.” It’s all political hyperbole designed to force the governments hand into a long hand funding deal for TfL. It’s like when someone says the NHS is days away from collapse every few months to get extra funding when in reality like TfL it needs to sort its house out first before asking for more.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 18, 2021 10:26:02 GMT
Not a surprise, but see some of it as scaremongering. This is showing as though they are never going to make a comeback and to me presents serious questions. One thing I agree with is the delay of introducing new trains on the Central and Bakerloo. I would say the Central should be last in line. The 92 stock are near the age when the 62 stock got replaced, but are now way as battered. Also it would then be a waste of the planned refurb for the central line trains. That angers me as a waste that TfL have done over the years. On the District line, around 2003 they replaced the moquette to a new design, then around 6 years later they start refurbishing the entire interior of the stock only for them to be withdrawn around 6 years later! The TfL rail 315's got refurbished around 2015 only for them to be started to get withdrawn 3 years later!!! Talk of the Jubilee line train replacement already seems like a sick joke. No more electric buses, bahaha. I really cannot see that happening. It is laughable that they expected to make £2m from the ULEZ charges, people are not mugs. They would either end up selling their car or replacing it, moving out of London or use UBER. It is also funny the old pictures of stations being battered on the Underground Evening Standard are using.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Nov 18, 2021 10:26:51 GMT
No mode electric buses is a big one. Will operators go back to ordering new hybrids or will diesels stick around for a little longer? Also it will be interesting to see what are the 100 routes to be axed. Will be an interesting discussion on here They can make a start with axing 357
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Nov 18, 2021 10:40:09 GMT
Not a surprise, but see some of it as scaremongering. This is showing as though they are never going to make a comeback and to me presents serious questions. One thing I agree with is the delay of introducing new trains on the Central and Bakerloo. I would say the Central should be last in line. The 92 stock are near the age when the 62 stock got replaced, but are now way as battered. Also it would then be a waste of the planned refurb for the central line trains. That angers me as a waste that TfL have done over the years. On the District line, around 2003 they replaced the moquette to a new design, then around 6 years later they start refurbishing the entire interior of the stock only for them to be withdrawn around 6 years later! The TfL rail 315's got refurbished around 2015 only for them to be started to get withdrawn 3 years later!!! Talk of the Jubilee line train replacement already seems like a sick joke. No more electric buses, bahaha. I really cannot see that happening. It is laughable that they expected to make £2m from the ULEZ charges, people are not mugs. They would either end up selling their car or replacing it, moving out of London or use UBER. It is also funny the old pictures of stations being battered on the Underground Evening Standard are using. I still get annoyed about the District Line I found it so wasteful! The same with the Jubilee Line how many sets of new seating have the trains had in the last 20 years? The Central Line has never had a proper refurbishment like the Northern and Jubilee Lines and don't even think the upcoming planned refresh a full refurbishment?
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 18, 2021 11:11:57 GMT
Not a surprise, but see some of it as scaremongering. This is showing as though they are never going to make a comeback and to me presents serious questions. One thing I agree with is the delay of introducing new trains on the Central and Bakerloo. I would say the Central should be last in line. The 92 stock are near the age when the 62 stock got replaced, but are now way as battered. Also it would then be a waste of the planned refurb for the central line trains. That angers me as a waste that TfL have done over the years. On the District line, around 2003 they replaced the moquette to a new design, then around 6 years later they start refurbishing the entire interior of the stock only for them to be withdrawn around 6 years later! The TfL rail 315's got refurbished around 2015 only for them to be started to get withdrawn 3 years later!!! Talk of the Jubilee line train replacement already seems like a sick joke. No more electric buses, bahaha. I really cannot see that happening. It is laughable that they expected to make £2m from the ULEZ charges, people are not mugs. They would either end up selling their car or replacing it, moving out of London or use UBER. It is also funny the old pictures of stations being battered on the Underground Evening Standard are using. I think there is some scaremongering and no more electric buses is existing hybrids being reused on other routes if big cuts in services did happen. Either way there is certainly scope for some sensible reductions like the 357 that you mentioned and of course the 414.
|
|
|
Post by rj131 on Nov 18, 2021 13:39:36 GMT
Not a surprise, but see some of it as scaremongering. This is showing as though they are never going to make a comeback and to me presents serious questions. One thing I agree with is the delay of introducing new trains on the Central and Bakerloo. I would say the Central should be last in line. The 92 stock are near the age when the 62 stock got replaced, but are now way as battered. Also it would then be a waste of the planned refurb for the central line trains. That angers me as a waste that TfL have done over the years. On the District line, around 2003 they replaced the moquette to a new design, then around 6 years later they start refurbishing the entire interior of the stock only for them to be withdrawn around 6 years later! The TfL rail 315's got refurbished around 2015 only for them to be started to get withdrawn 3 years later!!! Talk of the Jubilee line train replacement already seems like a sick joke. No more electric buses, bahaha. I really cannot see that happening. It is laughable that they expected to make £2m from the ULEZ charges, people are not mugs. They would either end up selling their car or replacing it, moving out of London or use UBER. It is also funny the old pictures of stations being battered on the Underground Evening Standard are using. Glad I’m not the only person who thought there was massive sensationalism in this article. Scaremongering from the evening standard?? Would never have guessed the phrase ‘I’ll believe it when I see it’ comes to mind with this article, same as pretty much every other sensationalist article that comes from these gutter press newspapers just to grab headlines.
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 18, 2021 13:57:30 GMT
Not a surprise, but see some of it as scaremongering. This is showing as though they are never going to make a comeback and to me presents serious questions. One thing I agree with is the delay of introducing new trains on the Central and Bakerloo. I would say the Central should be last in line. The 92 stock are near the age when the 62 stock got replaced, but are now way as battered. Also it would then be a waste of the planned refurb for the central line trains. That angers me as a waste that TfL have done over the years. On the District line, around 2003 they replaced the moquette to a new design, then around 6 years later they start refurbishing the entire interior of the stock only for them to be withdrawn around 6 years later! The TfL rail 315's got refurbished around 2015 only for them to be started to get withdrawn 3 years later!!! Talk of the Jubilee line train replacement already seems like a sick joke. No more electric buses, bahaha. I really cannot see that happening. It is laughable that they expected to make £2m from the ULEZ charges, people are not mugs. They would either end up selling their car or replacing it, moving out of London or use UBER. It is also funny the old pictures of stations being battered on the Underground Evening Standard are using. Glad I’m not the only person who thought there was massive sensationalism in this article. Scaremongering from the evening standard?? Would never have guessed the phrase ‘I’ll believe it when I see it’ comes to mind with this article, same as pretty much every other sensationalist article that comes from these gutter press newspapers just to grab headlines. To be fair to the Standard I don’t think the sensationalism is coming from them but rather Sadiq himself. He is trying to stoke the fire to get what he wants, but yet he won’t take the same line on knife crime or assaults on women or even with the unions. As the Standard points out he is playing a dangerous game, the best thing the government can do is call his bluff. Realistically TfL can’t withdraw bus routes without consultation and that takes months, yes they can cut them to within an inch and suspend others but that won’t look good with councils or the GLA. London might have the highest population in the UK but there are many areas across the country that would love the passenger numbers and budgets TfL have commanded in recent history.
|
|