|
Post by greenboy on Nov 29, 2022 17:29:43 GMT
Yes I think there was a case for keeping the 26 as it is for the Waterloo to Liverpool Street link although as mentioned TfL would rather people use the W&C for Bank. The 15 could have gone to Victoria as you say, another touristy route, and the 76 be rerouted to Trafalgar Square. Then you would lose the Trafalgar Square/Whitehall/Victoria Street to Liverpool Street link provided by route 11, which is what they were trying to replicate by extending the 26 to Victoria. True, whether that's more important than the Waterloo to Liverpool Street link now that CrossRail is up and running is debatable but I guess it's all swings and roundabouts.
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Nov 29, 2022 17:45:09 GMT
Then you would lose the Trafalgar Square/Whitehall/Victoria Street to Liverpool Street link provided by route 11, which is what they were trying to replicate by extending the 26 to Victoria. True, whether that's more important than the Waterloo to Liverpool Street link now that CrossRail is up and running is debatable but I guess it's all swings and roundabouts. I can't keep up with what you want half the time with the 26.
This is what I was saying elsewhere that some ideas are just changes for the sake of it. This is on topic BTW.
|
|
|
Post by jrussa on Nov 29, 2022 21:14:07 GMT
Route 26 will suffer same issues as Route 11 with Whitehall protests, traffic in Trafalgar Square and the city.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 29, 2022 21:37:45 GMT
True, whether that's more important than the Waterloo to Liverpool Street link now that CrossRail is up and running is debatable but I guess it's all swings and roundabouts. I can't keep up with what you want half the time with the 26.
This is what I was saying elsewhere that some ideas are just changes for the sake of it. This is open topic BTW.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who has spotted this from the same person, not the first time either...
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Nov 29, 2022 21:55:50 GMT
I can't keep up with what you want half the time with the 26.
This is what I was saying elsewhere that some ideas are just changes for the sake of it. This is open topic BTW.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who has spotted this from the same person, not the first time either... Sometimes it does feel like there are a couple of people using the same account with wildly differing opinions.
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Nov 30, 2022 17:49:42 GMT
I'm glad I'm not the only one who has spotted this from the same person, not the first time either... Sometimes it does feel like there are a couple of people using the same account with wildly differing opinions. Especially when you see posts from different users suspiciously always "timed" to conicide with each other
|
|
|
Post by gwiwer on Jan 20, 2023 22:43:46 GMT
507 is chalk and cheese; it can be very busy at peak times (not by any means confined to just a couple of hours morning and evening) and very quiet otherwise. The 521 has improved of late but is somewhat indirect - as indeed were its predecessors between Waterloo and the City. The public transport link through the Kingsway Tram Tunnel / Aldwych underpass finally ceases. To make best use of those vehicles It should have been possible to roster most drivers to peak-time duties and offer just a 20-minute headway mid-day. There is no need for evening / weekend services on those routes. Victoria - Waterloo is covered by the 211 (will be the 11) albeit not by exactly the same route.
There remain some curious decisions. It becomes harder to travel northwards from Victoria in the direction of the Edgware Road. I'm not sure of the all-day demand for such trips these days but I see 16s leaving Victoria quite well loaded. Demand patterns change over time so we have to expect change. Victoria has already lost the 25 and several other trunk routes over the past years. How many more?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 21, 2023 3:39:56 GMT
507 is chalk and cheese; it can be very busy at peak times (not by any means confined to just a couple of hours morning and evening) and very quiet otherwise. The 521 has improved of late but is somewhat indirect - as indeed were its predecessors between Waterloo and the City. The public transport link through the Kingsway Tram Tunnel / Aldwych underpass finally ceases. To make best use of those vehicles It should have been possible to roster most drivers to peak-time duties and offer just a 20-minute headway mid-day. There is no need for evening / weekend services on those routes. Victoria - Waterloo is covered by the 211 (will be the 11) albeit not by exactly the same route. There remain some curious decisions. It becomes harder to travel northwards from Victoria in the direction of the Edgware Road. I'm not sure of the all-day demand for such trips these days but I see 16s leaving Victoria quite well loaded. Demand patterns change over time so we have to expect change. Victoria has already lost the 25 and several other trunk routes over the past years. How many more? The 507 certainly has need to operate at weekends due to the fact it's not a full on commuter route like the 521 as it serves some residential areas between Vauxhall Bridge Road & Lambeth Bridge that require links to Tommie's & shops among other things. The 211 doesn't cater for these people at all.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jan 21, 2023 10:25:22 GMT
507 is chalk and cheese; it can be very busy at peak times (not by any means confined to just a couple of hours morning and evening) and very quiet otherwise. The 521 has improved of late but is somewhat indirect - as indeed were its predecessors between Waterloo and the City. The public transport link through the Kingsway Tram Tunnel / Aldwych underpass finally ceases. To make best use of those vehicles It should have been possible to roster most drivers to peak-time duties and offer just a 20-minute headway mid-day. There is no need for evening / weekend services on those routes. Victoria - Waterloo is covered by the 211 (will be the 11) albeit not by exactly the same route. There remain some curious decisions. It becomes harder to travel northwards from Victoria in the direction of the Edgware Road. I'm not sure of the all-day demand for such trips these days but I see 16s leaving Victoria quite well loaded. Demand patterns change over time so we have to expect change. Victoria has already lost the 25 and several other trunk routes over the past years. How many more? The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 21, 2023 11:26:15 GMT
507 is chalk and cheese; it can be very busy at peak times (not by any means confined to just a couple of hours morning and evening) and very quiet otherwise. The 521 has improved of late but is somewhat indirect - as indeed were its predecessors between Waterloo and the City. The public transport link through the Kingsway Tram Tunnel / Aldwych underpass finally ceases. To make best use of those vehicles It should have been possible to roster most drivers to peak-time duties and offer just a 20-minute headway mid-day. There is no need for evening / weekend services on those routes. Victoria - Waterloo is covered by the 211 (will be the 11) albeit not by exactly the same route. There remain some curious decisions. It becomes harder to travel northwards from Victoria in the direction of the Edgware Road. I'm not sure of the all-day demand for such trips these days but I see 16s leaving Victoria quite well loaded. Demand patterns change over time so we have to expect change. Victoria has already lost the 25 and several other trunk routes over the past years. How many more? The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. I was thinking the same really especially when removing the Kilburn/Maida Vale link wasn't technically consulted on as it was going to be maintained by 98. I'd have thought the 14 would have made more sense with the 74 remaining and the change being disguisted a bit by renumbering the 414 to 14 like with the 332. Or even do what was rumoured to be proposed early last year with the 14 becoming Putney to Piccadilly Circus and the 414 axed with the 74 remaining to Marble Arch/Baker Street and removing a Piccadilly to TCR route (left to just the 19 and 38). As I said with the fare increase there's little sustainability been announced with money just being found to prop things up which will slowly have to be increased again with higher tender costs and an ageing population.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 21, 2023 12:58:01 GMT
The changes to the 3 and C10 just about cover the 507 and a seven day a week service is justified serving a residential area, the 521 though has always been mainly a commuter service and with the move towards WFH I guess it's just no longer viable? It's strange how the 16 change is going ahead yet more obvious ones like the Putney routes have been deferred. Wouldn't it have been simpler for the 16 to be Victoria to Brent Park and withdraw the 332? The round the corner link to Paddington doesn't seem particularly well used and the 46 offers some alternative as well as the Bakerloo Line from Kilburn Park. I was thinking the same really especially when removing the Kilburn/Maida Vale link wasn't technically consulted on as it was going to be maintained by 98. I'd have thought the 14 would have made more sense with the 74 remaining and the change being disguisted a bit by renumbering the 414 to 14 like with the 332. Or even do what was rumoured to be proposed early last year with the 14 becoming Putney to Piccadilly Circus and the 414 axed with the 74 remaining to Marble Arch/Baker Street and removing a Piccadilly to TCR route (left to just the 19 and 38). As I said with the fare increase there's little sustainability been announced with money just being found to prop things up which will slowly have to be increased again with higher tender costs and an ageing population. If your solution is more cuts, than that isn’t really sustainable either. Really, the only solution is more investment in order to attract people back to the network.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 21, 2023 13:08:50 GMT
I was thinking the same really especially when removing the Kilburn/Maida Vale link wasn't technically consulted on as it was going to be maintained by 98. I'd have thought the 14 would have made more sense with the 74 remaining and the change being disguisted a bit by renumbering the 414 to 14 like with the 332. Or even do what was rumoured to be proposed early last year with the 14 becoming Putney to Piccadilly Circus and the 414 axed with the 74 remaining to Marble Arch/Baker Street and removing a Piccadilly to TCR route (left to just the 19 and 38). As I said with the fare increase there's little sustainability been announced with money just being found to prop things up which will slowly have to be increased again with higher tender costs and an ageing population. If your solution is more cuts, than that isn’t really sustainable either. Really, the only solution is more investment in order to attract people back to the network. Or do a go for broke situation with a fare reduction and see if bus fares for £1 tempts people back to the network. I'm not sure a daily cap of £5 and £1.75 single fares thou will challenge the idea that for 3 or 4 people its cheaper to get an Uber. Bit like the Fares Fair of the early 80s. I bet many don't even know that buses going forward will have high backed seats and enhanced features.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 21, 2023 13:15:01 GMT
If your solution is more cuts, than that isn’t really sustainable either. Really, the only solution is more investment in order to attract people back to the network. Or do a go for broke situation with a fare reduction and see if bus fares for £1 tempts people back to the network. I'm not sure a daily cap of £5 and £1.75 single fares thou will challenge the idea that for 3 or 4 people its cheaper to get an Uber. Bit like the Fares Fair of the early 80s. I bet many don't even know that buses going forward will have high backed seats and enhanced features. I don’t agree with the increase either and I agree this latest increase will probably see a small exodus of people leaving with the low paid, young & elderly left with no choice. The £1 idea would be interesting to see but if not advertised properly, would leave a big hole in the finances
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 21, 2023 13:21:38 GMT
Or do a go for broke situation with a fare reduction and see if bus fares for £1 tempts people back to the network. I'm not sure a daily cap of £5 and £1.75 single fares thou will challenge the idea that for 3 or 4 people its cheaper to get an Uber. Bit like the Fares Fair of the early 80s. I bet many don't even know that buses going forward will have high backed seats and enhanced features. I don’t agree with the increase either and I agree this latest increase will probably see a small exodus of people leaving with the low paid, young & elderly left with no choice. The £1 idea would be interesting to see but if not advertised properly, would leave a big hole in the finances Most the stories now picked up on from TFL by the media are the negative ones (mainly the clickbait ones). Yesterday top of Google news for an hour or so was "major cut happening to South London route" in reality it was the 213 dropping from every 10 to 12 mins.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jan 21, 2023 14:56:19 GMT
507 is chalk and cheese; it can be very busy at peak times (not by any means confined to just a couple of hours morning and evening) and very quiet otherwise. The 521 has improved of late but is somewhat indirect - as indeed were its predecessors between Waterloo and the City. The public transport link through the Kingsway Tram Tunnel / Aldwych underpass finally ceases. To make best use of those vehicles It should have been possible to roster most drivers to peak-time duties and offer just a 20-minute headway mid-day. There is no need for evening / weekend services on those routes. Victoria - Waterloo is covered by the 211 (will be the 11) albeit not by exactly the same route. There remain some curious decisions. It becomes harder to travel northwards from Victoria in the direction of the Edgware Road. I'm not sure of the all-day demand for such trips these days but I see 16s leaving Victoria quite well loaded. Demand patterns change over time so we have to expect change. Victoria has already lost the 25 and several other trunk routes over the past years. How many more? Just wanted to point out that the 521 doesn't run on weekends like the 507 does, and that the 521 is a more important route in the City for cross travel since the 25 was savagely chopped to City Thameslink.
|
|