|
Post by greenboy on Nov 23, 2021 6:07:45 GMT
337! Short! There is a hell of a lot of traffic in the Wandsworth and Sheen areas, often resulting in Queens Road turns. I'm not fussed about the 1/168 and 21/271 mergers, they're not too bad and don't affect me, but I'm sorry to say, if the 37 and 337 were merged, I'd be livid. The 337 is in my opinion easily able to be withdrawn. Personally I would actually withdraw the H37 number and have the 337 as a DXE sized route Hounslow to Wandsworth. But as for this actual topic, I’m not surprised but would echo concerns about lengthy cross river route reliability. They are the first to go wrong with incidents in Central London and do not suit any particular operator. You do have to wonder whether the 33,337 and 493 are all justified between Barnes and Richmond in addition to the parallel railway line.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 23, 2021 6:54:49 GMT
Another route that can be withdrawn with out replace meant is the 460 as it mirror 13 and 260 The U5 could be withdrawn with modifications in the local area. Though Tfl aren't going to focus on changing the outer London areas as much I feel Probably tfl will think that the 94 and 148 can be merged to eradicate the 148 The 94 and 148 would seem quite likely particularly when Crossrail opens freeing up capacity on the Central Line.
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 23, 2021 7:09:03 GMT
The U5 could be withdrawn with modifications in the local area. Though Tfl aren't going to focus on changing the outer London areas as much I feel Probably tfl will think that the 94 and 148 can be merged to eradicate the 148 The 94 and 148 would seem quite likely particularly when Crossrail opens freeing up capacity on the Central Line. You would have to extend the 274 to NHG for support and more likely the 31 to Acton Green as that section can't take LTs.
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Nov 23, 2021 7:46:01 GMT
The 94 and 148 would seem quite likely particularly when Crossrail opens freeing up capacity on the Central Line. You would have to extend the 274 to NHG for support and more likely the 31 to Acton Green as that section can't take LTs. I would think the BCE's from the 94 would be the mainstay of any merged route.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 23, 2021 7:47:07 GMT
37 and 337 a candidate perhaps. Likewise the 71 and 371 although that involves mixing SDs and DDs. Can't really see either of these, the 337 and 71 are on the short side but combining them with another entire route is a different story. If the 71 were to be extended anywhere I would extend it to Ham, Dukes Avenue via the 65. Remember TfL were going to alter the 371 by rerouting it away from Richmond Hill and direct to Richmond town centre until Hammersmith Bridge ruined their plans.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 23, 2021 7:55:59 GMT
The U5 could be withdrawn with modifications in the local area. Though Tfl aren't going to focus on changing the outer London areas as much I feel Probably tfl will think that the 94 and 148 can be merged to eradicate the 148 The Putney area rumours have the 14 standing at Piccadilly Circus so that does suggest the 94 is going to be cut to Marble Arch as planned. Wonder what would happen to the Russell Square section.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 23, 2021 7:58:29 GMT
Only reason I said it is because Tfl come up with silly ideas like the 110/391 merger Although I do agree with you, when you say about TFL coming up with silly ideas. The 110/391 merger, my only concern is the traffic conditions on the A316. I haven't been on the merge route yet but I felt that there could be reliability issues mainly as it passes the A316. Not unusual for two buses to bunch on a service that is meant to run every 15mins. Rugby match days are a disaster.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 23, 2021 8:01:13 GMT
Not only are the frequencies of the 337 & H37 very different but I don't think the 337 running with single deckers is wise at all. The 337's current frequency is reasonable and would be overkill if it matched the higher frequency of the H37 You could in turn reduce the 33 frequency to even out the imbalance. Also reroute the N33 via Putney Station. I don’t think the 33 will be crossing Hammersmith Bridge anytime soon. I suspect a wider review of the Hammersmith Bridge routes won’t be far away. A review of the Barnes/Putney area routes is planned and has been quoted by TfL as a reason why they will not reinstate stops on route 533 between Hammersmith and Chiswick Bridge.
|
|
|
Post by aaron1 on Nov 23, 2021 8:02:43 GMT
One of the change that I would do is 1 and N1 extend to Marylebone via Warren Street then via 18 and 205 68 Extend to Chalk Farm via 27 New route N188 Chalk Farm to North Greenwich via the extended 68
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Nov 23, 2021 8:04:40 GMT
One of the change that I would do is 1 and N1 extend to Marylebone via Warren Street then via 18 and 205 68 Extend to Chalk Farm via 27 New route N188 Chalk Farm to North Greenwich via the extended 68 That doesn’t solve any of the issues that the current proposals are trying to address. There is no money.
|
|
|
Post by TB123 on Nov 23, 2021 8:27:50 GMT
You could in turn reduce the 33 frequency to even out the imbalance. Also reroute the N33 via Putney Station. I don’t think the 33 will be crossing Hammersmith Bridge anytime soon. I suspect a wider review of the Hammersmith Bridge routes won’t be far away. A review of the Barnes/Putney are routes is planned and has been quoted by TfL as a reason why they will not reinstate stops on route 533 between Hammersmith and Chiswick Bridge. I'd expect that's when we'll hear about the 14/74/414/430 corridor amongst other changes, I would expect to see a consultation pop up before the year end....The rumour mill is absolutely rife at the minute regarding changes, you wouldn't believe the things that have been said. The 1/168, 88/C2, 110/391 appear to have set a number of precedents, merging routes and taking out overlaps in duplicate sections with excess capacity, and that 3.5 hour trip cycles are acceptable though the upper limit....So expect more such thing in inner and outer London
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Nov 23, 2021 9:42:27 GMT
A review of the Barnes/Putney are routes is planned and has been quoted by TfL as a reason why they will not reinstate stops on route 533 between Hammersmith and Chiswick Bridge. I'd expect that's when we'll hear about the 14/74/414/430 corridor amongst other changes, I would expect to see a consultation pop up before the year end....The rumour mill is absolutely rife at the minute regarding changes, you wouldn't believe the things that have been said. The 1/168, 88/C2, 110/391 appear to have set a number of precedents, merging routes and taking out overlaps in duplicate sections with excess capacity, and that 3.5 hour trip cycles are acceptable though the upper limit....So expect more such thing in inner and outer London Barnes I would say has quite an inefficient bus network now. Obviously it's hard to set it in stone as it depends on the weather and whether the bridge is open (ie in a warm season and with the bridge open then the 209 has a use up to it. If the bridge is closed and the nights are dark early the 209 carries very little as people have to head to Putney Bridge or on the 533). Personally I would put the 419 back to Lonsdale Road, keep the 33 and 209 as they are and have the 72 between S Bush and Roehampton via Chiswick. The 220, 272 and 283 can carry the last part of the 72 now. I'd also axe the 485 and create a Mortlake to Wandsworth 378 every 12 to 15 mins.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2021 10:19:27 GMT
Another route that can be withdrawn with out replace meant is the 460 as it mirror 13 and 260 The 460 serves a different purpose its a good NW-N route which there is not a lot of, and how would you replace it? As the 260 and 13 overlap isnt very big. If anything the 460 has potential for more. It has been suggested in the past to extend the 460 to the retail park near Colney Hatch/Friern Barnet, I think that would provide new links. Otherwise the 460 could be extended to Barnet to provide a link between Barnet and Golders Green
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2021 10:38:01 GMT
I'd expect that's when we'll hear about the 14/74/414/430 corridor amongst other changes, I would expect to see a consultation pop up before the year end....The rumour mill is absolutely rife at the minute regarding changes, you wouldn't believe the things that have been said. The 1/168, 88/C2, 110/391 appear to have set a number of precedents, merging routes and taking out overlaps in duplicate sections with excess capacity, and that 3.5 hour trip cycles are acceptable though the upper limit....So expect more such thing in inner and outer London Barnes I would say has quite an inefficient bus network now. Obviously it's hard to set it in stone as it depends on the weather and whether the bridge is open (ie in a warm season and with the bridge open then the 209 has a use up to it. If the bridge is closed and the nights are dark early the 209 carries very little as people have to head to Putney Bridge or on the 533). Personally I would put the 419 back to Lonsdale Road, keep the 33 and 209 as they are and have the 72 between S Bush and Roehampton via Chiswick. The 220, 272 and 283 can carry the last part of the 72 now. I'd also axe the 485 and create a Mortlake to Wandsworth 378 every 12 to 15 mins. That area is a dilemma. The issue is the 72 is quite heavily used Hammersmith Hospital to Shepherds Bush and Hammersmith. The 283 goes around the houses. I think the 190 will be dragged into this particular mess.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 23, 2021 10:57:50 GMT
Barnes I would say has quite an inefficient bus network now. Obviously it's hard to set it in stone as it depends on the weather and whether the bridge is open (ie in a warm season and with the bridge open then the 209 has a use up to it. If the bridge is closed and the nights are dark early the 209 carries very little as people have to head to Putney Bridge or on the 533). Personally I would put the 419 back to Lonsdale Road, keep the 33 and 209 as they are and have the 72 between S Bush and Roehampton via Chiswick. The 220, 272 and 283 can carry the last part of the 72 now. I'd also axe the 485 and create a Mortlake to Wandsworth 378 every 12 to 15 mins. That area is a dilemma. The issue is the 72 is quite heavily used Hammersmith Hospital to Shepherds Bush and Hammersmith. The 283 goes around the houses. I think the 190 will be dragged into this particular mess. Perhaps the 72 could operate between Shepherd's Bush/Hammersmith and Roehampton, via 220 to Putney Bridge, 265 to Roehampton. The 272 would be extended to Hammersmith Bridge via 72. The 419 wouldn't have much purpose just operating between Hammersmith Bridge and Richmond but I would say it still has use if the bridge is open for pedestrians. One thing I would say is that a Hammersmith to Putney Heath link would be good, though via Barnes and Roehampton to avoid overbussing Putney High Street. I'd have the 485 taking over the 419 section between Castlenau and Barnes Bridge, then via Barnes High Street, Barnes Pond, 419 to Roehampton, 85 to Putney Heath.This also provides a link between Barnes and Putney Heath. The 378 would be rerouted to Wandsworth via the proposed 485. This would only take place once Hammersmith Bridge is open to buses (hence passengers at Mortlake would have a link to the tube at Hammersmith, or East Putney in this scenario). The 419 would be withdrawn and the 209 would be extended to Richmond via 419.
|
|