|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 9, 2022 19:48:15 GMT
I’ve used the 51/89/486 trio quite a bit for the amazing BX driver + EN combination and the 51 is the only one of the three that I can never get a good downstairs seat on from Welling, mainly in the early morning. The 51 needs help for sure as the only link for pretty much it’s entire routing to and from Woolwich, with most buses between Sidcup and Woolwich being well loaded in both directions. I cant comment too much on Orpington however. Another option for the 51 would be 8bph Woolwich to Sidcup/Foots Cray and 4bph to Orpington which is similar to how it used to operate. That would be too sensible for TFL. Shorts can always have the advantage of having empty buses starting at the busiest part of the route. Particularly in rush hours. |
|
lb122
Driver
Posts: 257
Member is Online
|
Post by lb122 on Nov 9, 2022 19:55:20 GMT
As far as I've seen the 177 is coping well. What has happened is that the Elizabeth line at Woolwich has created much greater demand than expected on all routes serving it. Last night i walked away from the station and boarded a 51 in Hare Street. The bus was loaded in excess of capacity by the time we got to Thomas Street. Somebody pushed the bell to get off in Vincent Road which gave the driver a problem as another 10 or so people wanted to board despite there being passengers standing by the front doors. Last week buses were getting full loads outside the station. A thorough review is needed. There were long queues to on the two up escalators from the platform. Demand for buses will only increase. I’ve used the 51/89/486 trio quite a bit for the amazing BX driver + EN combination and the 51 is the only one of the three that I can never get a good downstairs seat on from Welling, mainly in the early morning. The 51 needs help for sure as the only link for pretty much it’s entire routing to and from Woolwich, with most buses between Sidcup and Woolwich being well loaded in both directions. I cant comment too much on Orpington however. As an almost regular user of the 51 i fully agree with this... finding a seat on a 51 regardless of the time has been very challenging recently and i really think a PVR increase would fix a lot of capacity problems especially from the Afternoon - Night... Was even hoping Back when the Orpington Bus Consultation was taking place that they would create another route to follow the 51 between Orpington-Sidcup Via Sevenoaks Way to relieve some sort of pressure off the route. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 9, 2022 20:08:22 GMT
I agree, the concerns expressed about the 177 seem to be unfounded, it's fine from what I've seen of it and from what others have reported. I've seen 51s passing Plumstead Common pretty full and I guess a lot of people from Welling are going to Woolwich for Crossrail into Central London rather than using Southeastern, by contrast the Orpington end of the 51 is pretty quiet so I don't think a frequency increase would be justified. Maybe reroute the 53 to Welling when it's cut back to Elephant & Castle? The PD section is only really for operational convenience and driver changeovers could be done in Woolwich town centre? The stretch between Plumstead Common and Plumstead Station is well used. Woolwich changeovers block stops far too often. The part of the 51 to Welling takes ages and would destroy the 53. It would be about the same running time as now if it's curtailed at Elephant & Castle although another 8bph to Welling would probably be a bit excessive. |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Nov 9, 2022 20:14:46 GMT
Another option for the 51 would be 8bph Woolwich to Sidcup/Foots Cray and 4bph to Orpington which is similar to how it used to operate. That would be too sensible for TFL. Shorts can always have the advantage of having empty buses starting at the busiest part of the route. Particularly in rush hours. Passengers don't read blinds so would likely just cause frustration when kicked off at a unexpected point. I used to see this lots on the 25 at City Thameslink when there was a split service to Oxford Circus.
The advantage you mention only works if buses are running to time. You could have a short working bus held up elsewhere and and another bus still ends up picking up the bulk of passengers and the short working bus is half empty running behind the busy bus. Personally can't see short workings returning despite another member keep suggesting them.
|
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Nov 12, 2022 19:46:36 GMT
A route that does need updating is the H37, it's a route that would definitely need decking but the low bridge of course restricts it. The route could be diverted via spur road and Twickenham road but that would result in the buses getting stuck in traffic. If they could drop that bridge by a few feet that would make a lot of difference, but the cost would be quite large... The route does benefit from its existing fleet and has a capacity of 70. Only 10 less than a double deck where demand should be met in most cases. |
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Nov 12, 2022 19:48:02 GMT
A route that does need updating is the H37, it's a route that would definitely need decking but the low bridge of course restricts it. The route could be diverted via spur road and Twickenham road but that would result in the buses getting stuck in traffic. If they could drop that bridge by a few feet that would make a lot of difference, but the cost would be quite large... I don't really see the benefit in doing so. It already uses long single deck vehicles which imo is often better than double decks. It's a relatively short route so not sure the upper deck would be heavily used. |
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Nov 12, 2022 21:09:31 GMT
A route that does need updating is the H37, it's a route that would definitely need decking but the low bridge of course restricts it. The route could be diverted via spur road and Twickenham road but that would result in the buses getting stuck in traffic. If they could drop that bridge by a few feet that would make a lot of difference, but the cost would be quite large... I guess you mean drop the road, dropping the bridge may have slightly disastrous effects … |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Nov 12, 2022 21:43:47 GMT
A route that does need updating is the H37, it's a route that would definitely need decking but the low bridge of course restricts it. The route could be diverted via spur road and Twickenham road but that would result in the buses getting stuck in traffic. If they could drop that bridge by a few feet that would make a lot of difference, but the cost would be quite large... I guess you mean drop the road, dropping the bridge may have slightly disastrous effects … How about rerouting the H37 via London Road and Twickenham Road to allow it to be DD. Lowering the road sounds like a fantasy idea |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 12, 2022 21:49:08 GMT
A route that does need updating is the H37, it's a route that would definitely need decking but the low bridge of course restricts it. The route could be diverted via spur road and Twickenham road but that would result in the buses getting stuck in traffic. If they could drop that bridge by a few feet that would make a lot of difference, but the cost would be quite large... I don't really see the benefit in doing so. It already uses long single deck vehicles which imo is often better than double decks. It's a relatively short route so not sure the upper deck would be heavily used. I agree that double deckers wouldn't be ideal for a short route like the H37, I seem to recall it having a frequency reduction a couple of years ago. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 12, 2022 21:59:05 GMT
I don't really see the benefit in doing so. It already uses long single deck vehicles which imo is often better than double decks. It's a relatively short route so not sure the upper deck would be heavily used. I agree that double deckers wouldn't be ideal for a short route like the H37, I seem to recall it having a frequency reduction a couple of years ago. had the road been lowered/not an issue back in 1991 its likely the 337 would have run every 10 mins from Hounslow to Clapham Junction. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 12, 2022 22:07:19 GMT
I agree that double deckers wouldn't be ideal for a short route like the H37, I seem to recall it having a frequency reduction a couple of years ago. had the road been lowered/not an issue back in 1991 its likely the 337 would have run every 10 mins from Hounslow to Clapham Junction. Yes I suspect the 337 would have gone to Hounslow if the low bridge wasn't there but lowering the road isn't really practical. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 12, 2022 22:17:42 GMT
had the road been lowered/not an issue back in 1991 its likely the 337 would have run every 10 mins from Hounslow to Clapham Junction. Yes I suspect the 337 would have gone to Hounslow if the low bridge wasn't there but lowering the road isn't really practical. Some bridges have successfully been lowered like Worcetser Park and Wallington but not all can probably be done without too much work. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 12, 2022 22:23:53 GMT
Yes I suspect the 337 would have gone to Hounslow if the low bridge wasn't there but lowering the road isn't really practical. Some bridges have successfully been lowered like Worcetser Park and Wallington but not all can probably be done without too much work. Often get flooded in heavy rain. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 12, 2022 22:26:53 GMT
Some bridges have successfully been lowered like Worcetser Park and Wallington but not all can probably be done without too much work. Often get flooded in heavy rain. I think Wallington actually had a car floating in it. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Nov 12, 2022 22:52:28 GMT
Often get flooded in heavy rain. I think Wallington actually had a car floating in it. Yes, there's a video of a Vauxhall Zafira doing that |
|
