|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Mar 12, 2022 22:30:54 GMT
Looking at road structure X16 from Edgware- Marble Arch/ Victoria X13 Barnet to Victoria/Marble Arch You could also do something with the 113 corridor as that is relatively straight, and connect it with the 112 part of the NCR. Willesden/Neasden - Edgware/ Barnet via the NCR and Watford way. Even something with A40 or Great West Road could have an express route linking Heathrow or Hounslow to somewhere central. There are alot of roads that could facilitate an xpress route if needed. And this compounded with bus priority would be a powerful way in increasing bus speeds and journey times. An X13 might be okay although I'd worry about overbussing the Golders Green to Barnet section, especially north of North Finchley. Perhaps if you wished to achieve something semi-similar you could extend the 460 to Barnet Church, although TFL might deem the A1000 overbussed with the 125 from Finchley Central & the 263 from Barnet to North Finchley? I suspect that's why there is no GG to Barnet link. Ive always been a advocate of extending the 460 up there, and when having an express route, you would probably reduce the frequency of 263 past North Finchley, however the 125 would be more complicated to do. Plus you could also reduce the frequency of the standard 13 as well. Between GG and NF. I think the 13 could do with a frequency reduction or a timetable jig, there way too many convoys of 3 buses, carrying fresh air. Thats if an xpress bus were to be implemented. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Mar 12, 2022 22:33:21 GMT
An X13 might be okay although I'd worry about overbussing the Golders Green to Barnet section, especially north of North Finchley. Perhaps if you wished to achieve something semi-similar you could extend the 460 to Barnet Church, although TFL might deem the A1000 overbussed with the 125 from Finchley Central & the 263 from Barnet to North Finchley? I suspect that's why there is no GG to Barnet link. Ive always been a advocate of extending the 460 up there, and when having an express route, you would probably reduce the frequency of 263 past North Finchley, however the 125 would be more complicated to do. Plus you could also reduce the frequency of the standard 13 as well. Between GG and NF. I think the 13 could do with a frequency reduction or a timetable jig, there way too many convoys of 3 buses, carrying fresh air. Thats if an xpress bus were to be implemented. I would definitely not be reducing the frequency of the 263 especially south of North Finchley. The queues outside East Finchley Station at the northbound stop are ridiculous and I think are a good indication of why reducing the 263 in frequency only to extend the 460 over it would be a terrible idea, not to mention the loss of capacity down the Holloway Road with reductions on the 17, 43, and soon the removal of the 271 from Archway. |
|
|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Mar 12, 2022 22:35:08 GMT
Ive always been a advocate of extending the 460 up there, and when having an express route, you would probably reduce the frequency of 263 past North Finchley, however the 125 would be more complicated to do. Plus you could also reduce the frequency of the standard 13 as well. Between GG and NF. I think the 13 could do with a frequency reduction or a timetable jig, there way too many convoys of 3 buses, carrying fresh air. Thats if an xpress bus were to be implemented. I would definitely not be reducing the frequency of the 263 especially south of North Finchley. The queues outside East Finchley Station at the northbound stop are ridiculous and I think are a good indication of why reducing the 263 in frequency only to extend the 460 over it would be a terrible idea, not to mention the loss of capacity down the Holloway Road with reductions on the 17, 43, and soon the removal of the 271 from Archway. I meant north of north Finchley if you would implement an express route. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 12, 2022 22:35:34 GMT
But it’s a gateway and would open the floodgates for TfL to cut routes left, right and centre. There is a place for express routes but they shouldn’t be at the expense of parallel routes that are serving intermediary passengers. The X140 worked but it doesn’t mean it’s success could be easily replicated, particularly in an area of south London so dependent on buses. But the 278 was also introduced as the southern part for the 140 which was a benefit to the route as a whole as it made new connections and utilised Long lane. So tbf they could just restrucutre the 53 like they did with the 436 creating new links. I just think the introduction of express routes should be a careful endeavour and should, in a ideal world, supplement the existing network with new fast links between towns. It shouldn’t result in poorer journeys and knowing TfL it would be an exercise in reducing existing frequencies further to compensate for express routes without considering passengers outside of those stops. It would be wise for TfL to use data to tell them where these passengers with registered Oyster cards are going and how they are using the network but they probably won’t. An express route shouldn’t detract from the parallel routes on the same corridor but merely enhance what exists. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Mar 12, 2022 22:38:23 GMT
I would definitely not be reducing the frequency of the 263 especially south of North Finchley. The queues outside East Finchley Station at the northbound stop are ridiculous and I think are a good indication of why reducing the 263 in frequency only to extend the 460 over it would be a terrible idea, not to mention the loss of capacity down the Holloway Road with reductions on the 17, 43, and soon the removal of the 271 from Archway. I meant north of north Finchley if you would implement an express route. But then there are quite a lot of cross North Finchley journeys done on the 263 despite the tube being there. I am a regular user of the 263 and I just cannot see that being a good idea, I'd keep the service pattern as is throughout the whole route. If you were to do an every other bus basis which would be the simplest way of doing it the 263 would end up with a 20 minute frequency north of North Finchley.
I don't agree that GG to North Finchley is overbussed, I think it has adequate capacity & you can regularly see during peak hours large numbers of passengers on board 13s, 102s & 460s leaving Golders Green. The convoys of 13s stopped since the PVR reduction.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 12, 2022 22:40:23 GMT
But the 278 was also introduced as the southern part for the 140 which was a benefit to the route as a whole as it made new connections and utilised Long lane. So tbf they could just restrucutre the 53 like they did with the 436 creating new links. The 436 didn't really create links of value in 2016, I understand the situation where property developers wanted it to be diverted to Battersea Power Station & I imagine there are going to be staff when the development eventually opens working there travelling in on the 436 although it is undeniable the 436 was far busier when it reached the West End & I don't think the 53 should be messed with personally, if the 53/453 were going to have an X53 introduced alongside it surely both could drop in freq rather than have stuff diverted away?
Not to mention this plan with the OKR could very well be a stop gap measure perhaps co-inciding with the cancellation of something like the Bakerloo Line Extension temporarily. A bit like how Ken introduced services as a short term measure to allow capacity upgrades to the tube (I imagine the 205 & 414 fall into this category)
If there was an X53 dropping the frequency on the 53/453 would not serve the intermediary passengers who would end up with a worse service which would be busier. An express route should either create links not possible on a stopping service, a la X26 or provide additional capacity, a la 607, without affecting the stopping counterpart, a la 207. |
|
|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Mar 12, 2022 22:43:18 GMT
But the 278 was also introduced as the southern part for the 140 which was a benefit to the route as a whole as it made new connections and utilised Long lane. So tbf they could just restrucutre the 53 like they did with the 436 creating new links. I just think the introduction of express routes should be a careful endeavour and should, in a ideal world, supplement the existing network with new fast links between towns. It shouldn’t result in poorer journeys and knowing TfL it would be an exercise in reducing existing frequencies further to compensate for express routes without considering passengers outside of those stops. It would be wise for TfL to use data to tell them where these passengers with registered Oyster cards are going and how they are using the network but they probably won’t. An express route shouldn’t detract from the parallel routes on the same corridor but merely enhance what exists. The thing is an express route would naturally takes passengers that use the existing bus services, and this can be used to justify an frequency reduction. As if you look at the 207, 427 and 607. If your going from Ealing to Southall. Even though all 3 do the route. Majority would rather wait for a rammed 607 than a higher frequency 207 or 427. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 12, 2022 22:46:03 GMT
I’d love an X119 or an X269 Bexleyheath, Clock Tower Bexley, War Memorial Albany Park, Foots Cray Lane Sidcup Station Sidcup, Carlton Road Sidcup, Queen Mary’s Hospital Chislehurst, War Memorial Chislehurst Station Bickley Station Bromley, High Street/The Mall Bromley South Station Hayes Station Coney Hall, Addington Road/Glebe Way West Wickham, High Street Shirley, Library Sandilands Tram Stop East Croydon Station Croydon, Park Street South Croydon, Swan & Sugar Loaf Waddon, Leisure Centre Purley Way, The Collanades There’s probably enough frequency between Bexleyheath and Sidcup for that end of the route not to be required. I mentioned elsewhere an X25, that is definitely in the category of ‘nice to have’ rather than essential, to serve (only) West Croydon, East Croydon Station, West Wickham town centre, Locksbottom Princess Royal Hospital, Orpington Station and War Memorial, Sevenoaks Way down the bottom of the hill from the station, Bexley Library, Crayford town centre and Dartford Station. A few new links there, and also a bit of relief for other services without slavishly duplicating vast chunks of existing routes. |
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Mar 12, 2022 22:46:57 GMT
X9 running between Victoria (or Aldwych) and Heathrow Terminal 5 via route 52 to Kensington, route 9 to Hammersmith, 267 to Brentford, 237 to Hounslow, 222 to Harlington Corner and 423 to Heathrow Terminal 5. To assist the 237 and to link Heathrow with Central London.
X12 running between White City and Dulwich via 148 to Camberwell and 12 to Dulwich. To assist the 12 and 148.
X13 running between Barnet Hospital and Victoria via route 263 to North Finchley and 13 to Victoria. To link Barnet with Victoria and to assist the 13.
X16 running between Edgware and Victoria via route 32 to Kilburn and 16 to Victoria to assist the 16 and link Edgware with Victoria
X18 running between Euston and Harrow Bus Station via 18 to Sudbury and 182 to Harrow Bus Station. To assist the 18 and 182.
X65 running between Ealing Broadway and Kingston via route 65 to Kingston. To assist the 65.
|
|
|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Mar 12, 2022 22:52:02 GMT
I meant north of north Finchley if you would implement an express route. But then there are quite a lot of cross North Finchley journeys done on the 263 despite the tube being there. I am a regular user of the 263 and I just cannot see that being a good idea, I'd keep the service pattern as is throughout the whole route. If you were to do an every other bus basis which would be the simplest way of doing it the 263 would end up with a 20 minute frequency north of North Finchley.
I don't agree that GG to North Finchley is overbussed, I think it has adequate capacity & you can regularly see during peak hours large numbers of passengers on board 13s, 102s & 460s leaving Golders Green. The convoys of 13s stopped since the PVR reduction.
Naturally an express service would take passengers from the standard services, if your going from town centre to town centre. This can be used to justify a frequency reduction. So the southern end of the 140 got a reduction in frequency to 5bph from 7.5-8bph (i believe) in the form of the 278, and the standard 140 routing also got a reduction from Harrow weald to H&H. |
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Mar 12, 2022 22:53:49 GMT
X65 running between Ealing Broadway and Kingston via route 65 to Kingston. To assist the 65. Can’t comment on most of your ideas, but an X65 I think would just get stuck in the same jams as the current 65. I’d much rather have more regular 65s. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Mar 12, 2022 22:56:49 GMT
I just think the introduction of express routes should be a careful endeavour and should, in a ideal world, supplement the existing network with new fast links between towns. It shouldn’t result in poorer journeys and knowing TfL it would be an exercise in reducing existing frequencies further to compensate for express routes without considering passengers outside of those stops. It would be wise for TfL to use data to tell them where these passengers with registered Oyster cards are going and how they are using the network but they probably won’t. An express route shouldn’t detract from the parallel routes on the same corridor but merely enhance what exists. The thing is an express route would naturally takes passengers that use the existing bus services, and this can be used to justify an frequency reduction. As if you look at the 207, 427 and 607. If your going from Ealing to Southall. Even though all 3 do the route. Majority would rather wait for a rammed 607 than a higher frequency 207 or 427. So those passengers who either don’t want to go to the express stops or don’t live on it are meant to just lump worse services? The thing with the 607 is that it is very frequent and by definition is a limited stop service, not express. Unless TfL is planning limited stop services that are stopping every three or four stops rather than every few miles like the X26 than okay. But if they are planning genuine express routes like the x26 or x68 TfL shouldn’t lump and in effect abandon intermediary passengers with a worse service to only benefit those long distance passengers. Could you imagine if TfL cut every route the x26 parallels to every 20 minutes and cut the 481 to hourly and used the x26 to justify it? It would be a crisis to all the passengers who aren’t lucky enough to live within its scope. |
|
|
|
Post by LondonNorthern on Mar 12, 2022 22:58:36 GMT
But then there are quite a lot of cross North Finchley journeys done on the 263 despite the tube being there. I am a regular user of the 263 and I just cannot see that being a good idea, I'd keep the service pattern as is throughout the whole route. If you were to do an every other bus basis which would be the simplest way of doing it the 263 would end up with a 20 minute frequency north of North Finchley.
I don't agree that GG to North Finchley is overbussed, I think it has adequate capacity & you can regularly see during peak hours large numbers of passengers on board 13s, 102s & 460s leaving Golders Green. The convoys of 13s stopped since the PVR reduction.
Naturally an express service would take passengers from the standard services, if your going from town centre to town centre. This can be used to justify a frequency reduction. So the southern end of the 140 got a reduction in frequency to 5bph from 7.5-8bph (i believe) in the form of the 278, and the standard 140 routing also got a reduction from Harrow weald to H&H. They could but in this case I don't think an express service is needed. I think a 460 extension would be far better because it is a cheaper alternative without adding more buses onto corridors.
I do wonder whether 5bph extra might be excessive between NF & Barnet though, especially north of Whetstone.
|
|
|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Mar 12, 2022 22:58:45 GMT
X9 running between Victoria (or Aldwych) and Heathrow Terminal 5 via route 52 to Kensington, route 9 to Hammersmith, 267 to Brentford, 237 to Hounslow, 222 to Harlington Corner and 423 to Heathrow Terminal 5. To assist the 237 and to link Heathrow with Central London. X12 running between White City and Dulwich via 148 to Camberwell and 12 to Dulwich. To assist the 12 and 148. X13 running between Barnet Hospital and Victoria via route 263 to North Finchley and 13 to Victoria. To link Barnet with Victoria and to assist the 13. X16 running between Edgware and Victoria via route 32 to Kilburn and 16 to Victoria to assist the 16 and link Edgware with Victoria X18 running between Euston and Harrow Bus Station via 18 to Sudbury and 182 to Harrow Bus Station. To assist the 18 and 182. X65 running between Ealing Broadway and Kingston via route 65 to Kingston. To assist the 65. If there was an X18 i would have it go via the 92 and H17 so it goes the full length of harrow road, but i following the N18 and 182, is also fine. The 18 would also have to have a frequency reduction to implement this xpress route. Would X65 go to Chessington, or you could extend further north via Hanger and NCR. I like the X9 as well. |
|
|
|
Post by CircleLineofLife on Mar 12, 2022 23:02:00 GMT
The thing is an express route would naturally takes passengers that use the existing bus services, and this can be used to justify an frequency reduction. As if you look at the 207, 427 and 607. If your going from Ealing to Southall. Even though all 3 do the route. Majority would rather wait for a rammed 607 than a higher frequency 207 or 427. So those passengers who either don’t want to go to the express stops or don’t live on it are meant to just lump worse services? The thing with the 607 is that it is very frequent and by definition is a limited stop service, not express. Unless TfL is planning limited stop services that are stopping every three or four stops rather than every few miles like the X26 than okay. But if they are planning genuine express routes like the x26 or x68 TfL shouldn’t lump and in effect abandon intermediary passengers with a worse service to only benefit those long distance passengers. Could you imagine if TfL cut every route the x26 parallels to every 20 minutes and cut the 481 to hourly and used the x26 to justify it? It would be a crisis to all the passengers who aren’t lucky enough to live within its scope. If they has limited stop styled express routes like a 607 that would be good. X140 really act like a limited stop aswell more than a geniune express. X68 stypled express routes would be bad imo. |
|
