|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Apr 2, 2024 7:07:22 GMT
I thought we would have a look at some aberrations. These are basically short-term operations that somehow never felt completely right and have subsequently been reversed.
I would prefer us to keep to formally arranged operations rather than those that merely had to use unintended vehicles initially. I can think of the following :-
The operator changes in 2009 of routes 35/40 from GA to Abellio (actually Travel London initially) and routes 54/75 from Stagecoach to Metrobus. All returned to their original operator in 2014 or 2016.
Route 30 was diverted away from Baker Street & Marble Arch, to Russell Square & Aldwych, in 1991 but reversed a year later. Admittedly before 1991 it reached West Brompton, and hitherto Roehampton, but this seems very unlikely to happen again.
Route 142 with RATP (BT). It had been EW in London Transport days until 1986 and came back there last year. During its absence it had 32 years at GR through ownership by NBC London Country, NBC London Country North West, LCNW Ltd, Luton & District, British Bus, Cowie/Arriva and Deutsche Bahn. So its 5 year term with RATP seems an aberration.
Feel free to add any that you have noticed.
|
|
|
|
Post by lonmark on Apr 2, 2024 8:58:33 GMT
The Same for route 181/284 (181 start in 1984 / 284 start in 1989) when Selkent lost it to Kentish bus in 1994, then kentish bus ran into the problem, and lost it to Metrobus in 1996, then lost back to Selkent (stagecoach) in 2001 then lost to Metrobus (GA) in 2006 then lost again to Stagecoach Selkent in 2018.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Apr 2, 2024 17:39:38 GMT
Back in the 80s, the old 228 (Eltham - Chislehurst) was diverted to Sidcup Garage instead, with just a few peak journeys continuing to run to Chislehurst. On Sundays, it was - quite cleverly on the face of it - combined with the Sidcup - Green St Green remnant of the 229 as the 299.
This new arrangement was very unpopular, not least because it broke the link to Queen Marys Hospital. Within a matter of weeks, the off-peak service was restored as far as QMH and the 299 was discontinued after six months.
|
|
|
|
Post by someone on Apr 5, 2024 16:52:28 GMT
Apparently Transport UK (then known as Travel London) used to run the 129... even though they ran buses from somewhere like Battersea aka nowhere near Greenwich. I've no idea how this managed to stay the same for about 5 years.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Apr 5, 2024 17:03:00 GMT
Apparently Transport UK (then known as Travel London) used to run the 129... even though they ran buses from somewhere like Battersea aka nowhere near Greenwich. I've no idea how this managed to stay the same for about 5 years. They ran it from Walworth which wasn’t that far from the Greenwich end. |
|
|
|
Post by someone on Apr 5, 2024 19:04:01 GMT
Apparently Transport UK (then known as Travel London) used to run the 129... even though they ran buses from somewhere like Battersea aka nowhere near Greenwich. I've no idea how this managed to stay the same for about 5 years. They ran it from Walworth which wasn’t that far from the Greenwich end. Oh really? Never knew. Still baffling why they were given the first contract - a bit like running the 335 from (of all places) Dartford right now. |
|
|
|
Post by mb171 on Apr 5, 2024 19:32:50 GMT
A few aberrations I can think of- funnily enough a lot of these happen in Central London - these are more 'route based' rather than 'operational based' if that's okay.
1) didn't 113 get cut back between Oxford Circus and Marble Arch around 2017? - now it's back to the same old saga.
2) 16 and 332 is a recent aberration. 332 was introduced 2007 to replace 16 between Brent Park and Cricklewood, this was reversed in April 2023 when the
'332' was withdrawn altogether. I put '332' in quotation marks, because it was really the original 16 route between Victoria and Cricklewood that was withdrawn not the 332. oh how history repeats itself.
3) 23 rerouting between Hammersmith and Hyde Park Corner - was this needed? After all, the route was reinstated to terminate at Aldwych via its old route at the same time when 332 was withdrawn.
4) This one isn't really a route aberration but more of an allocation 'aberration' - 350 was single decker when first introduced, converted to double deckers at some point only for it to revert to single decker in 2017.
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Apr 5, 2024 19:47:09 GMT
A few aberrations I can think of- funnily enough a lot of these happen in Central London - these are more 'route based' rather than 'operational based' if that's okay. 1) didn't 113 get cut back between Oxford Circus and Marble Arch around 2017? - now it's back to the same old saga. 2) 16 and 332 is a recent aberration. 332 was introduced 2007 to replace 16 between Brent Park and Cricklewood, this was reversed in April 2023 when the '332' was withdrawn altogether. I put '332' in quotation marks, because it was really the original 16 route between Victoria and Cricklewood that was withdrawn not the 332. oh how history repeats itself. 3) 23 rerouting between Hammersmith and Hyde Park Corner - was this needed? After all, the route was reinstated to terminate at Aldwych via its old route at the same time when 332 was withdrawn. 4) This one isn't really a route aberration but more of an allocation 'aberration' - 350 was single decker when first introduced, converted to double deckers at some point only for it to revert to single decker in 2017. The 332 replaced the 316 between Brent Park and Cricklewood in 2007. The 316 was the route that replaced the the 16 between Brent Park and Cricklewood in 1997. |
|
|
|
Post by mb171 on Apr 5, 2024 19:56:13 GMT
A few aberrations I can think of- funnily enough a lot of these happen in Central London - these are more 'route based' rather than 'operational based' if that's okay. 1) didn't 113 get cut back between Oxford Circus and Marble Arch around 2017? - now it's back to the same old saga. 2) 16 and 332 is a recent aberration. 332 was introduced 2007 to replace 316 between Brent Park and Cricklewood, that being part of the 16 when it used to run to Brent Park this was reversed in April 2023 when the '332' was withdrawn altogether. I put '332' in quotation marks, because it was really the original 16 route between Victoria and Cricklewood that was withdrawn not the 332. oh how history repeats itself. 3) 23 rerouting between Hammersmith and Hyde Park Corner - was this needed? After all, the route was reinstated to terminate at Aldwych via its old route at the same time when 332 was withdrawn. 4) This one isn't really a route aberration but more of an allocation 'aberration' - 350 was single decker when first introduced, converted to double deckers at some point only for it to revert to single decker in 2017. The 332 replaced the 316 between Brent Park and Cricklewood in 2007. The 316 was the route that replaced the the 16 between Brent Park and Cricklewood in 1997. Oh my bad - i got confused with the 316  - has been edited now. |
|
|
|
Post by Catford94 on Apr 5, 2024 20:27:23 GMT
They ran it from Walworth which wasn’t that far from the Greenwich end. Oh really? Never knew. Still baffling why they were given the first contract - a bit like running the 335 from (of all places) Dartford right now.
Sometimes an unexpected bid will win a tender.
Go-Ahead running the 15 from River Road was a bit of a surprise when that happened in 2017.
Not suggesting any improper behaviour on the part of TFL or operators, but sometimes one operator will be more eager to win a particular contract to 'fill a gap' at a garage, and accept a lower profit margin on it than usual; sometimes another operator will think that nobody else is likely to bid and go a bit high on the price. (Or sometimes they might just get their sums wrong, but nobody is going to admit that.)
I think the age of 'loss leader' bids and an unspoken 'we would rather have the work even if we don't make any money out of it than have someone else get it' is largely in the past now, but there were some strange things both in London and elsewhere in the late 80s. Boro' Line Maidstone setting up an operation at Crayford (which at one point ran route 188 from the Greenwich end) and East Midland 'Frontrunner' setting up a base somewhere in the Romford direction (I can't remember where the depot was) might have been the extremes. The Frontrunner operation included drivers based at one or more of their Nottinghamshire depots doing alternate weeks at the London base.
For that matter, route 188 has had some strange allocations over the years - while it's a route that's rarely passed or been all that convenient for a garage (until Morden Wharf came along), as well as Boro' Line Crayford, it's operated from Selkent Plumstead, Arriva Norwood, Stamford Hill (both the ex LT and the ex Grey Green garages) and Tottenham, and London General Stockwell garages. And while as tram 68 it had run from New Cross, as one of the first of New Cross' tram routes to be converted to bus, it went to the (then) new Peckham Garage, and managed to avoid any tidying of garage allocations until the late 60s. |
|
|
|
Post by DE20106 on Apr 5, 2024 20:38:14 GMT
The shortest change I can think of before getting swiftly reversed would be the H12 frequency reduction, for it to get reinstated again a few months later!
|
|
|
|
Post by YY13VKP on Apr 5, 2024 21:15:39 GMT
One that springs to mind is the 434 when Metrobus lost it to Abellio for 5 years before they won it back again in 2013.
The 246 has had plenty too when it comes to operator changes!
|
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Apr 5, 2024 21:26:03 GMT
The 388 for routing changes and pre-2012 493 for operators.
|
|
|
|
Post by danorak on Apr 5, 2024 21:36:45 GMT
Oh really? Never knew. Still baffling why they were given the first contract - a bit like running the 335 from (of all places) Dartford right now. Sometimes an unexpected bid will win a tender.
Go-Ahead running the 15 from River Road was a bit of a surprise when that happened in 2017. Not suggesting any improper behaviour on the part of TFL or operators, but sometimes one operator will be more eager to win a particular contract to 'fill a gap' at a garage, and accept a lower profit margin on it than usual; sometimes another operator will think that nobody else is likely to bid and go a bit high on the price. (Or sometimes they might just get their sums wrong, but nobody is going to admit that.)
I think the age of 'loss leader' bids and an unspoken 'we would rather have the work even if we don't make any money out of it than have someone else get it' is largely in the past now, but there were some strange things both in London and elsewhere in the late 80s. Boro' Line Maidstone setting up an operation at Crayford (which at one point ran route 188 from the Greenwich end) and East Midland 'Frontrunner' setting up a base somewhere in the Romford direction (I can't remember where the depot was) might have been the extremes. The Frontrunner operation included drivers based at one or more of their Nottinghamshire depots doing alternate weeks at the London base.
For that matter, route 188 has had some strange allocations over the years - while it's a route that's rarely passed or been all that convenient for a garage (until Morden Wharf came along), as well as Boro' Line Crayford, it's operated from Selkent Plumstead, Arriva Norwood, Stamford Hill (both the ex LT and the ex Grey Green garages) and Tottenham, and London General Stockwell garages. And while as tram 68 it had run from New Cross, as one of the first of New Cross' tram routes to be converted to bus, it went to the (then) new Peckham Garage, and managed to avoid any tidying of garage allocations until the late 60s. I won't go through all the 188 allocations as they're easily accessed through the link, but it did also have a relatively long stint at Q. The bizarre Arriva allocations were connected to them trying to digest the British Bus London tendered operations (Londonlinks etc). I think the 78 and 225 suffered similarly. There's a bit in 'Privatising London's Buses' where someone from the Tendered Bus Division visited the yard Boroline were using in North Greenwich for the 188 when it was initially taken over. They were horrified by its condition and unsuitability. I've never quite nailed down exactly where that base was. |
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Apr 5, 2024 21:44:48 GMT
They ran it from Walworth which wasn’t that far from the Greenwich end. Oh really? Never knew. Still baffling why they were given the first contract - a bit like running the 335 from (of all places) Dartford right now. The Travel London 129 contract was awarded on the basis of the route being extended to Peckham via Convoys Wharf, which would have brought it much closer to Walworth. This was meant to happen during the first contract term but the planned development at Convoys Wharf didn't materialise, so the route extension didn't take place. That said, I don't think Walworth to Greenwich is that far. |
|
- has been edited now. 
