|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2021 13:20:13 GMT
Wishful thinking the cuts aren’t happening. I’d love that to be the case. Perhaps passenger numbers are rebounding at pace ? ? It's clearly got nothing to with passenger numbers if they are cutting routes like the 2 & N9, just look for where they can save money regardless of the route involved it seems. I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Aug 21, 2021 13:32:50 GMT
It's clearly got nothing to with passenger numbers if they are cutting routes like the 2 & N9, just look for where they can save money regardless of the route involved it seems. I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters. I've suspected that for a while now and I wonder if the reason for the N9 reduction is that TfL have noticed a drop in usage caused by the Heathrow situation and rather than just curtail some journeys at Hounslow TfL just reduce the service along the entire route?
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Aug 21, 2021 13:49:12 GMT
It's clearly got nothing to with passenger numbers if they are cutting routes like the 2 & N9, just look for where they can save money regardless of the route involved it seems. I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters. I have seen many times busy 2s and 13s between Baker Street & Victoria so maybe the 2 could've just been kept at it's current frequency?
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Aug 21, 2021 14:14:46 GMT
It's clearly got nothing to with passenger numbers if they are cutting routes like the 2 & N9, just look for where they can save money regardless of the route involved it seems. I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters. I would probably have rerouted it to Paddington and reduced the 36 heftily to what the frequency was prior to the 436 cutback.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Aug 21, 2021 14:17:40 GMT
I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters. I have seen many times busy 2s and 13s between Baker Street & Victoria so maybe the 2 could've just been kept at it's current frequency? I don't think both the 2 and 13 are necessary between Victoria and Baker Street.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Aug 21, 2021 14:24:31 GMT
I have seen many times busy 2s and 13s between Baker Street & Victoria so maybe the 2 could've just been kept at it's current frequency? I don't think both the 2 and 13 are necessary between Victoria and Baker Street. I'd say they are but we can all have different opinions.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Aug 21, 2021 14:42:57 GMT
I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters. I have seen many times busy 2s and 13s between Baker Street & Victoria so maybe the 2 could've just been kept at it's current frequency? I've been spending a lot of time at Baker Street over the past couple of months and the 2 certainly has not been a busy route along there. I am very much against the slash it's receiving now as it is extremely popular heading South from Victoria and will almost certainly suffer now as a result, but when you have the 13, 74, 30 etc all heading a similar way there's not much crowd for the 2 to actually take with it. The 13 also receiving a cut suggests that the corridor is over-bussed, and I think it is.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Aug 21, 2021 14:59:29 GMT
I have seen many times busy 2s and 13s between Baker Street & Victoria so maybe the 2 could've just been kept at it's current frequency? I've been spending a lot of time at Baker Street over the past couple of months and the 2 certainly has not been a busy route along there. I am very much against the slash it's receiving now as it is extremely popular heading South from Victoria and will almost certainly suffer now as a result, but when you have the 13, 74, 30 etc all heading a similar way there's not much crowd for the 2 to actually take with it. The 13 also receiving a cut suggests that the corridor is over-bussed, and I think it is. Maybe it would have been better to cut the 30 back to Baker Street.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Aug 21, 2021 15:36:54 GMT
I've been spending a lot of time at Baker Street over the past couple of months and the 2 certainly has not been a busy route along there. I am very much against the slash it's receiving now as it is extremely popular heading South from Victoria and will almost certainly suffer now as a result, but when you have the 13, 74, 30 etc all heading a similar way there's not much crowd for the 2 to actually take with it. The 13 also receiving a cut suggests that the corridor is over-bussed, and I think it is. Maybe it would have been better to cut the 30 back to Baker Street. Links from the east aren't particularly great into Central London so cutting the 30 wouldn't be a good idea.
I think reductions are a better way of going about things than cuts.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Aug 22, 2021 9:05:49 GMT
It's clearly got nothing to with passenger numbers if they are cutting routes like the 2 & N9, just look for where they can save money regardless of the route involved it seems. I wonder whether TfL are using a weird averaging system for this, while the 2 is extremely well used south of Victoria, its use in Central London and especially around the Baker Street area is relatively light. The issue this presents is that the figures may show buses being moderately crowded throughout rather than extremely well loaded on one section and a bit lighter on the other section. With the 2 I think it's a very good example of how short workings could have been utilised to save money and not affecting passengers with every other bus turning short at Victoria instead while still continuing to provide the Baker Street link, which while not as intensively used still has its regular commuters. I think this is the best idea and it should happen Recently I would frequently use the 2 from Stockwell up to Victoria/Marble Arch, and it always arrived packed but by Victoria it was much emptier, if 2s were curtailed to Victoria more frequently the 13 shouldn't struggle in that direction. And then, from observations the 13 always gets very busy before Baker Street, so having a few 2s there would help relieve pressure around the corner to Park Lane and to Victoria. Its annoying how that could be a perfect compromise but instead of considering it TfL are just going to make it suffer more in the south
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Aug 22, 2021 9:14:29 GMT
From LOTS Sunday update :
Seems the cuts are still on (As expected)
Allocation of LTs to Hounslow for route 111 is due to be ramped up from next weekend using LTs off frequency cuts on routes 9, 27, 55, 148 and 159. RATP’s new BCE-class BYD/ADL E400EVs continue to arrive but all of the intended routes still cannot take them. 13 of them have been licensed for use, of which some are for driver training. However, 7 of them are due to be used on route 148 to replace a few more LTs, this to convert part of route H32 to the type.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 22, 2021 12:35:55 GMT
I have seen many times busy 2s and 13s between Baker Street & Victoria so maybe the 2 could've just been kept at it's current frequency? I've been spending a lot of time at Baker Street over the past couple of months and the 2 certainly has not been a busy route along there. I am very much against the slash it's receiving now as it is extremely popular heading South from Victoria and will almost certainly suffer now as a result, but when you have the 13, 74, 30 etc all heading a similar way there's not much crowd for the 2 to actually take with it. The 13 also receiving a cut suggests that the corridor is over-bussed, and I think it is. The Marylebone part will always be the quieter part but does it have use but it’s popular from Marble Arch southwards despite the other routes on offer.
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Sept 6, 2021 11:38:28 GMT
Anyone got up to date figures on the cuts
I am guessing the bus fleet must have shrunk to about 8800 vehicles and the PVR down to about 7900
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 6, 2021 15:24:00 GMT
Is there anymore news on the September review. Is it still going ahead. We seem to be up to around 100 PVr cut so far and not sure whether the 300 bus cut can be achieved just on PVR reductions. The consultation results for the 414 slightly suggests the route isn't entirely safe.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Sept 6, 2021 20:06:47 GMT
Is there anymore news on the September review. Is it still going ahead. We seem to be up to around 100 PVr cut so far and not sure whether the 300 bus cut can be achieved just on PVR reductions. The consultation results for the 414 slightly suggests the route isn't entirely safe. If the 414 were to be withdrawn, perhaps something up for tender at the time could take over the new contract at Tower Transit. Or, as a withdrawal would likely result in a substantial PVR increase for route 14, perhaps something like the 74 could move to the 414's contract, with Go Ahead's 14/74 contracts effectively merged?
|
|