|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 21, 2022 17:16:28 GMT
The only increase would be the 271 to East Finchley, the 21 is curtailed at Moorgate and there is no need to change the 263 or extend the 234 to Archway. Am I missing something? The 271 would need 2 extra buses. The 21 would lose 5 buses. That's your plan. The TfL plan is the 271 losing all 13 buses, the 234 gaining 2 buses, and the 21 getting 1 extra bus? I believe. Increasing the 76 and the 141 in the morning peak may also add one bus (or more, but probably just one) to each route's PVR. Unless the increase can be covered with clever scheduling. Still, eight buses is still a bigger saving than three.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 21, 2022 18:51:32 GMT
As expected, all proposals going ahead other than minor changes around Archway. However, with TFL making cuts, I'm still surprised with the N271 proposal.
I'm not convinced there is much demand for a night service along Finchley High Road. If anything, the N20 could possibly have diverted there instead of East End Road. Most of the area around East End Road is in walking distance to Finchley High Road, Regents Park Road (N13) or Falloden Way (102N), and the N13 is probably sufficient at Finchley Central to/from Central London.
And on the rest of the N271 section between Highgate and Moorgate, the 43 covers most links, only omitting Highgate Village and New North Road. There's also the 76 & 214's night services covering some sections.
Or similar to some suggestions with the 1/168 changes, another possibility might have been to make the revised 21 a 24-hour route between Lewisham and Holloway, then provide a new night service to replace the N21. This could also operate more directly towards the West End rather than going via the City. As the N89 also links Bexleyheath to Central London, perhaps the 321's night service could instead extend from New Cross Gate to Central London, then increase the 132's night service to every night if there is demand in the Bexley area?
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Mar 21, 2022 19:04:45 GMT
Early 2023 would suggest the 91 or 263 taking on the contract (263 probably more logical as it could use the current 271 buses). The 263 could perhaps also incorporate the N271 into the same contract?
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 21, 2022 19:14:50 GMT
The only increase would be the 271 to East Finchley, the 21 is curtailed at Moorgate and there is no need to change the 263 or extend the 234 to Archway. Am I missing something? The 271 would need 2 extra buses. The 21 would lose 5 buses. That's your plan. The TfL plan is the 271 losing all 13 buses, the 234 gaining 2 buses, and the 21 getting 1 extra bus? I believe. On top of that, terminating a route at East Finchley that’s coming from the south is far from ideal given the most suitable stand is located a stop before the station.
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Mar 21, 2022 19:19:48 GMT
Fantastic news regarding the 143. That change was so worrying to me, I’d have thought usage would’ve dropped like a rock south of Highgate Wood, and finally it receives support between Archway & East Finchley!
The 234 is an interesting change and should now mean Fortis Green is linked to Archway.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Mar 21, 2022 19:55:53 GMT
The 271 would need 2 extra buses. The 21 would lose 5 buses. That's your plan. The TfL plan is the 271 losing all 13 buses, the 234 gaining 2 buses, and the 21 getting 1 extra bus? I believe. Increasing the 76 and the 141 in the morning peak may also add one bus (or more, but probably just one) to each route's PVR. Unless the increase can be covered with clever scheduling. Still, eight buses is still a bigger saving than three. As there is a possibility the 141 increase could just be shorts south of Newington Green, it could use LT's. Could CT156, which is a N38 duty that ends on the 38 at CT at 0651, spend some time in the garage then fulfil the 141 short(s)?
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Mar 22, 2022 2:13:15 GMT
As expected, all proposals going ahead other than minor changes around Archway. However, with TFL making cuts, I'm still surprised with the N271 proposal. I'm not convinced there is much demand for a night service along Finchley High Road. If anything, the N20 could possibly have diverted there instead of East End Road. Most of the area around East End Road is in walking distance to Finchley High Road, Regents Park Road (N13) or Falloden Way (102N), and the N13 is probably sufficient at Finchley Central to/from Central London. And on the rest of the N271 section between Highgate and Moorgate, the 43 covers most links, only omitting Highgate Village and New North Road. There's also the 76 & 214's night services covering some sections. Or similar to some suggestions with the 1/168 changes, another possibility might have been to make the revised 21 a 24-hour route between Lewisham and Holloway, then provide a new night service to replace the N21. This could also operate more directly towards the West End rather than going via the City. As the N89 also links Bexleyheath to Central London, perhaps the 321's night service could instead extend from New Cross Gate to Central London, then increase the 132's night service to every night if there is demand in the Bexley area? The N271 going all the way to North Finchley with the N20 already on East End Road and the 13 and 134 going to North Finchley too, so that it has four night buses, is really excessive. I reckon someone at TfL lives in North Finchley what with the 112, 125 and 383 recent extensions as well. They should at least make the N271 go to East/New Barnet or Mill Hill East, which have zero night buses, if they are going to run it as far north as North Finchley. This is why I take their moaning about having no money with a pinch of salt. They still have enough to spend where and when they want to.
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Mar 22, 2022 6:16:31 GMT
As expected, all proposals going ahead other than minor changes around Archway. However, with TFL making cuts, I'm still surprised with the N271 proposal. I'm not convinced there is much demand for a night service along Finchley High Road. If anything, the N20 could possibly have diverted there instead of East End Road. Most of the area around East End Road is in walking distance to Finchley High Road, Regents Park Road (N13) or Falloden Way (102N), and the N13 is probably sufficient at Finchley Central to/from Central London. And on the rest of the N271 section between Highgate and Moorgate, the 43 covers most links, only omitting Highgate Village and New North Road. There's also the 76 & 214's night services covering some sections. Or similar to some suggestions with the 1/168 changes, another possibility might have been to make the revised 21 a 24-hour route between Lewisham and Holloway, then provide a new night service to replace the N21. This could also operate more directly towards the West End rather than going via the City. As the N89 also links Bexleyheath to Central London, perhaps the 321's night service could instead extend from New Cross Gate to Central London, then increase the 132's night service to every night if there is demand in the Bexley area? The N271 going all the way to North Finchley with the N20 already on East End Road and the 13 and 134 going to North Finchley too, so that it has four night buses, is really excessive. I reckon someone at TfL lives in North Finchley what with the 112, 125 and 383 recent extensions as well. They should at least make the N271 go to East/New Barnet or Mill Hill East, which have zero night buses, if they are going to run it as far north as North Finchley. This is why I take their moaning about having no money with a pinch of salt. They still have enough to spend where and when they want to. It's been mentioned in the consultation report that extending the N271 will create "excess capacity" north of North Finchley. The only cost effective way if we are serve New Barnet is rerouting the N20.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Mar 22, 2022 11:44:49 GMT
All this change to ultimately save 10 buses. Does make you wonder how they are ever going to make savings in the region of £300m a year. I imagine there are pretty big savings even with 10 buses being cut! TfL are never going to please everyone especially bus enthusiasts! Peak vehicle requirement is costed around £250,000 per bus per year. Axing the 271 would save TfL 2.5 million a year
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 22, 2022 12:20:09 GMT
I imagine there are pretty big savings even with 10 buses being cut! TfL are never going to please everyone especially bus enthusiasts! Peak vehicle requirement is costed around £250,000 per bus per year. Axing the 271 would save TfL 2.5 million a year That is quite a saving really. I can see why they have pushed on with it
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Mar 22, 2022 12:55:46 GMT
As expected, all proposals going ahead other than minor changes around Archway. However, with TFL making cuts, I'm still surprised with the N271 proposal. I'm not convinced there is much demand for a night service along Finchley High Road. If anything, the N20 could possibly have diverted there instead of East End Road. Most of the area around East End Road is in walking distance to Finchley High Road, Regents Park Road (N13) or Falloden Way (102N), and the N13 is probably sufficient at Finchley Central to/from Central London. And on the rest of the N271 section between Highgate and Moorgate, the 43 covers most links, only omitting Highgate Village and New North Road. There's also the 76 & 214's night services covering some sections. Or similar to some suggestions with the 1/168 changes, another possibility might have been to make the revised 21 a 24-hour route between Lewisham and Holloway, then provide a new night service to replace the N21. This could also operate more directly towards the West End rather than going via the City. As the N89 also links Bexleyheath to Central London, perhaps the 321's night service could instead extend from New Cross Gate to Central London, then increase the 132's night service to every night if there is demand in the Bexley area? There might not be demand along Finchley High Road, but there will be demand by users to head to North Finchley. It's quite a significant interchange with the 13, 134 and N20. If TfL has seen fit to send a night bus from Archway to North Finchley, then so be it. I mention Archway as it's a travel objective to/from the other branch of the Northern line. The 210 gets good custom from there to Golders Green, the N271 will now provide that link at night. Because you clearly have no idea how busy Holloway Road can get during the [weekend] nights, I'll ignore that bit. Do you think Barnes Common needs the N22 at 2/3bph? No. Is the frequency justified across the whole route? Course it is! Though I haven't looked at journey figures yet, the N271 would almost certainly require another bus onto its PVR. However night bus costs are drastically lower than daytime services, so the N271 extension is for the benefit of passengers despite the additional cost.
|
|
|
Post by lundnah on Mar 22, 2022 13:59:25 GMT
As part of the consultation we have
- a map of the affected routes as they are now
- a map of routes following the proposed changes
...but because plans have changed we don't have
- a map of how these routes will actually operate
...and probably never will, which is a shame.
|
|
|
Post by uakari on Mar 22, 2022 15:43:26 GMT
The N271 going all the way to North Finchley with the N20 already on East End Road and the 13 and 134 going to North Finchley too, so that it has four night buses, is really excessive. I reckon someone at TfL lives in North Finchley what with the 112, 125 and 383 recent extensions as well. They should at least make the N271 go to East/New Barnet or Mill Hill East, which have zero night buses, if they are going to run it as far north as North Finchley. This is why I take their moaning about having no money with a pinch of salt. They still have enough to spend where and when they want to. It's been mentioned in the consultation report that extending the N271 will create "excess capacity" north of North Finchley. The only cost effective way if we are serve New Barnet is rerouting the N20. Not necessarily: You could route the N271 from North Finchley via Friern Barnet and then route 184. I don't imagine this new N271 is actually going to be 'cost effective' in terms of bringing in enough money by fares to cover the cost of operation (recovery percentage), so TfL will likely be net spending more money that they supposedly don't have, on a night route on a road where they have never seen the need for one before, and to give North Finchley four night routes. And before someone mentions the South Grove terminus, TfL previously proposed extending the 271 slightly up the hill in Highgate Village to terminate where the 214 does, so they could have done that with the N271 if they were serious about saving money. It does stick in my craw that TfL sees fit to create this brand new fourth night route for North Finchley when they are withdrawing day routes such as the 384 roads and refusing to fund any route at all between Barnet and Hadley Highstone/Potters Bar.
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Mar 22, 2022 18:23:48 GMT
Those on here who know more about timetabling than me may know the answer to this, but I was wondering whether the N271 running to North Finchley had anything to do with the most effective use of the allocated vehicles.
To elaborate, the N271 can't turn in Highgate Village anymore so has to be extended. If this required extra vehicles to reach the next logical stand anyway, might it be a better use to continue to North Finchley rather than giving a longer layover?
(Not sure about using the N271 number as it inhibits the reuse of 271 but there we are.)
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Mar 22, 2022 19:11:02 GMT
Those on here who know more about timetabling than me may know the answer to this, but I was wondering whether the N271 running to North Finchley had anything to do with the most effective use of the allocated vehicles. To elaborate, the N271 can't turn in Highgate Village anymore so has to be extended. If this required extra vehicles to reach the next logical stand anyway, might it be a better use to continue to North Finchley rather than giving a longer layover? (Not sure about using the N271 number as it inhibits the reuse of 271 but there we are.) N571 may be better following on from the N550/551 for routes that don't follow a day route. I see to recall there were plans once for the N5 and N20 to be re numbered into a N5xx series. As for the N271 I do agree that it could have used the stand the 214 uses as I'm sure at night there wouldn't be more then one N214 at anytime.
|
|