|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 24, 2022 15:33:42 GMT
In a better world the Trams were extended from Beckenham Junction to Bromley North years ago, and then again to Bexleyheath via Chislehurst & Sidcup and to Woolwich via Grove Park and Eltham. In the 22 years since Tramlink opened, the only expansion has been a dozen extra trams, a new station at Centrale and a second platform at Wimbledon. Contrast to Paris which has extended the two lines which were already in existence in 2000, opened nine more including one tram-train line operated by SNCF, and has two more tram-train routes under construction and a further tram line planned. There is also a bus rapid transit line, TVM (Trans Val-de-Marne) which although not a tram is numbered in the T-prefix tram series. Further BRT lines are proposed. A few express buses down the Old Kent Road doesn't even begin to come close. Hence why it's regarded as one of the best transport networks in the world, let alone Europe. Btw, does Paris have a subsidy? |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Mar 24, 2022 15:59:54 GMT
In the 22 years since Tramlink opened, the only expansion has been a dozen extra trams, a new station at Centrale and a second platform at Wimbledon. Contrast to Paris which has extended the two lines which were already in existence in 2000, opened nine more including one tram-train line operated by SNCF, and has two more tram-train routes under construction and a further tram line planned. There is also a bus rapid transit line, TVM (Trans Val-de-Marne) which although not a tram is numbered in the T-prefix tram series. Further BRT lines are proposed. A few express buses down the Old Kent Road doesn't even begin to come close. Hence why it's regarded as one of the best transport networks in the world, let alone Europe. Btw, does Paris have a subsidy? Yes, only 38% of its funding pre-covid came from fares compared to 72% in London. About two-fifths of Paris transport funding comes from a Versement Transport, a local payroll tax that is levied at a lower level in poorer départements. The VT also supports SNCF services in the region. |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 28, 2022 22:58:36 GMT
I think there’s room for radial express routes along corridors that have no direct train equivalent, so sadly that rules out the 25 as that parallels CrossRail and even the 89 couldn’t justify and express service since that runs more or less alongside the Bexleyheath line the 18 & 53 could have an express service, the 53 doesn’t really parallel the Woolwich line as such, the 109 comes into far too much traffic on the A23 so it wouldn’t work
I would definitely support a X177 running limited stops, maybe running to Elephant & Castle rather than Peckham?
As for cross boundary express routes, I guess the 96 is the nearest thing to such a service.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 29, 2022 6:21:03 GMT
I think there’s room for radial express routes along corridors that have no direct train equivalent, so sadly that rules out the 25 as that parallels CrossRail and even the 89 couldn’t justify and express service since that runs more or less alongside the Bexleyheath line the 18 & 53 could have an express service, the 53 doesn’t really parallel the Woolwich line as such, the 109 comes into far too much traffic on the A23 so it wouldn’t work I would definitely support a X177 running limited stops, maybe running to Elephant & Castle rather than Peckham? As for cross boundary express routes, I guess the 96 is the nearest thing to such a service. The 96 is already limited stop between Dartford and Bluewater, I’m just not sure how an express route would help here as it is often heaving with passengers in the intermediary stops. We don’t need express routes over routes like the 96 when improved frequencies would be a far better investment for passengers. |
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Mar 29, 2022 6:22:38 GMT
The idea is new routes that don't parallel existing services.
None of the suggestions so far meet the criteria.
|
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 29, 2022 6:47:46 GMT
I think there’s room for radial express routes along corridors that have no direct train equivalent, so sadly that rules out the 25 as that parallels CrossRail and even the 89 couldn’t justify and express service since that runs more or less alongside the Bexleyheath line the 18 & 53 could have an express service, the 53 doesn’t really parallel the Woolwich line as such, the 109 comes into far too much traffic on the A23 so it wouldn’t work I would definitely support a X177 running limited stops, maybe running to Elephant & Castle rather than Peckham? As for cross boundary express routes, I guess the 96 is the nearest thing to such a service. The 96 is already limited stop between Dartford and Bluewater, I’m just not sure how an express route would help here as it is often heaving with passengers in the intermediary stops. We don’t need express routes over routes like the 96 when improved frequencies would be a far better investment for passengers. That’s was what I was saying, that’s it’s express between Dartford and Bluewater, never said it needed and express version. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 29, 2022 7:20:32 GMT
The idea is new routes that don't parallel existing services. None of the suggestions so far meet the criteria. I don’t see how it’s possible to create any new express service that is viable without paralleling something over some distance for part of the way. If you are dismissing everything in the thread, what would you do differently? |
|
|
|
Post by busman on Mar 29, 2022 9:12:39 GMT
A little side Bar for all who want to take a stab is... 1) The route must be practical to remove loadings and congestion on very busy used route but doesn't have to be on a corridor that is already overbused. 1) The need to be fessable by todays traffic standards. 3) As an Express it needs to have an X and assist an already existing route. 4) Try to limit the stops to Town Centres and Bus Stations/Train/Tube unless a good reason is given (e.i schools or other) 5) Just have fun doing it |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 29, 2022 9:28:51 GMT
The idea is new routes that don't parallel existing services. None of the suggestions so far meet the criteria. Inevitably you’ll get that though, what are your ideas? |
|
|
|
Post by cl54 on Mar 29, 2022 11:08:46 GMT
The idea is new routes that don't parallel existing services. None of the suggestions so far meet the criteria. I don’t see how it’s possible to create any new express service that is viable without paralleling something over some distance for part of the way. If you are dismissing everything in the thread, what would you do differently? Better to wait for the TfL proposals as they will be based on travel data. By definition an express service needs to be faster than existing links. Missing a few stops doesn't achieve this given the delays on many roads nowadays. |
|
|
|
Post by route53 on Mar 29, 2022 11:30:50 GMT
I don’t see how it’s possible to create any new express service that is viable without paralleling something over some distance for part of the way. If you are dismissing everything in the thread, what would you do differently? Better to wait for the TfL proposals as they will be based on travel data. By definition an express service needs to be faster than existing links. Missing a few stops doesn't achieve this given the delays on many roads nowadays. TfL are basing this study on the X140 which is a parallel express route for the 140, I think a few of the proposals will involve existing routes having an express section where possible. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 29, 2022 11:51:37 GMT
Better to wait for the TfL proposals as they will be based on travel data. By definition an express service needs to be faster than existing links. Missing a few stops doesn't achieve this given the delays on many roads nowadays. TfL are basing this study on the X140 which is a parallel express route for the 140, I think a few of the proposals will involve existing routes having an express section where possible. Which is a terrible idea. Removing capacity to convert it to express sections doesn’t help resolve the problem of bus capacity, it just pushes the problem on to other routes. Unless TfL is putting structures in place to create new links like it did with the 278 this project will go nowhere. Removing capacity to benefit passengers between stop A and B, two or three miles apart, does nothing to help those people at the stops in between who will find themselves with less capacity than they had before all to service an ideology that skipping stops is beneficial to bus passenger revenues when TfL should just focus on speeding up routes they already offer. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 29, 2022 12:50:58 GMT
I don’t see how it’s possible to create any new express service that is viable without paralleling something over some distance for part of the way. If you are dismissing everything in the thread, what would you do differently? Better to wait for the TfL proposals as they will be based on travel data. By definition an express service needs to be faster than existing links. Missing a few stops doesn't achieve this given the delays on many roads nowadays. Got it. You are waiting for the TfL proposals, which you will then totally agree with. By that standard, every single route proposal in every single thread is also pointless. What’s wrong with letting people enjoy themselves proposing new stuff? |
|
|
|
Post by WH241 on Mar 29, 2022 13:01:15 GMT
Better to wait for the TfL proposals as they will be based on travel data. By definition an express service needs to be faster than existing links. Missing a few stops doesn't achieve this given the delays on many roads nowadays. Got it. You are waiting for the TfL proposals, which you will then totally agree with. By that standard, every single route proposal in every single thread is also pointless. What’s wrong with letting people enjoy themselves proposing new stuff? I know you was not replying to me but replying nonetheless. That’s fine about proposing new routes but don’t you think there is an awful lot of very wild fantasy stuff here. How many of the suggested routes here ever come to reality? Not many I bet. There is a very negative view towards anything TfL does here and no matter what is suggested an armchair viewer here will know better than the data as they see a bus on route x at 3pm everyday without even considering any other times. It’s a shame so many members with knowledge and experience have left this forum. I don’t see nowhere near as much fantasy anywhere else online. I’ll await the barrage of complaints at this post. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 29, 2022 13:35:19 GMT
Got it. You are waiting for the TfL proposals, which you will then totally agree with. By that standard, every single route proposal in every single thread is also pointless. What’s wrong with letting people enjoy themselves proposing new stuff? I know you was not replying to me but replying nonetheless. That’s fine about proposing new routes but don’t you think there is an awful lot of very wild fantasy stuff here. How many of the suggested routes here ever come to reality? Not many I bet. There is a very negative view towards anything TfL does here and no matter what is suggested an armchair viewer here will know better than the data as they see a bus on route x at 3pm everyday without even considering any other times. It’s a shame so many members with knowledge and experience have left this forum. I don’t see nowhere near as much fantasy anywhere else online. I’ll await the barrage of complaints at this post. Oh yes - plenty of fantasy and then some - which I will happily point out! Everyone has the right to post what fantasy they like as long as they don’t mind it being criticised. I think the problem I have with cl54’s post is that it is an attempt to shut down discussion, which I really have a problem with on what is a discussion forum. |
|
