|
|
Post by greenboy on May 19, 2024 9:38:57 GMT
Quite possibly although I think the main reason it terminates at Lambeth North is to provide same stop interchange with other routes that cross Westminster Bridge. True but the 453 does parallel the 53 between Deptford & Lambeth North at a high frequency. Obviously that sort of capacity is needed for that sort of corridor but I do feel like having the 53 enabling interchange with trains at Waterloo is more useful in this case. Yes I agree that Waterloo or even Aldwych would be a more useful destination, I don't think it'll happen though because of the interchange facility. |
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses on May 19, 2024 9:42:06 GMT
The 226 route is puzzling. The 83 was cut back from Ealing Broadway & The Hospital respectively. Yet, the 226 runs from Golders Green to Ealing Broadway. I think it should be cut back to First Central Business Park. The Hanger lane to Ealing Broadway be part of a new SD local route, starting from Willesden Junction or North Acton, go via Park Royal Road and then via the 226 route to Ealing Broadway I'd suggest cutting the 226 back to Central Middlesex Hospital and having a new route from Ealing Broadway to St Raphael's via the 226 and 224. |
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on May 19, 2024 10:02:45 GMT
The 481 - the emptiest double deck I have ever seen. Even in rush hour. Why was it upgrades to a double deck. The 206 - Although I understand the logic of a double deck, where it passes, it's not feasible. Especially at the back of Willesden where it passes, and approaching Harlesden. The 112 - Really pleased with the extension to North Finchley, however, now it's practically screaming for a double deck upgrade methinks 481 empty? You clearly haven't been an a 467 then! The reason both these routes were double-decked was to cater for heavy schools traffic. It was more economical to operate the double-deckers in all-day service rather than have a separate fleet of single-deckers. The 112 may be helped out by the proposed second phase of Superloop, which includes a potential Ealing to Hendon route. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 19, 2024 11:15:30 GMT
The 481 - the emptiest double deck I have ever seen. Even in rush hour. Why was it upgrades to a double deck. The 206 - Although I understand the logic of a double deck, where it passes, it's not feasible. Especially at the back of Willesden where it passes, and approaching Harlesden. The 112 - Really pleased with the extension to North Finchley, however, now it's practically screaming for a double deck upgrade methinks As others mentioned, the 481 was converted for school traffic reasons. The low frequency is the biggest issue with this route rather than how many decks it has. Can you explain your point further about the 206 because I don’t follow? It has one decker allocated for school journeys and most days (even non school days), that decker stays out so why isn’t it supposedly feasible? Madeley Road prevents the 112 from being double decker hence the double decker appearances greatly reduced since it’s re-route |
|
18ARustee
Conductor
Security Supervisor
Posts: 80 
|
Post by 18ARustee on May 19, 2024 11:22:05 GMT
The 206 has a couple of double decks. They are not only used for school trips. Because of the narrow roads it passes at times. Brondesbury Road, heading up to Queens Park. Then Peter Avenue, Park Parade some of those roads are fairly narrow for a double deck bus. That's what I meant
|
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on May 19, 2024 12:06:30 GMT
True but the 453 does parallel the 53 between Deptford & Lambeth North at a high frequency. Obviously that sort of capacity is needed for that sort of corridor but I do feel like having the 53 enabling interchange with trains at Waterloo is more useful in this case. Yes I agree that Waterloo or even Aldwych would be a more useful destination, I don't think it'll happen though because of the interchange facility. The ideal win-win extension for the 53 would be to St Thomas hospital. Buses can then stand on the bus stand on Lambeth palace road The number of people who are referred to st thomas / evelina from all over South London (and especially on the 53 LOR roughly) isn’t small - would be useful to have that link. I have to go to evelina quite a few times with my son and honestly using public transport is a pain - I drive instead given 2 adults travelling would be £17 anyway and the congestion charge plus parking would probably get me to £18-21. First the bus to North Greenwich (20-25 min), then all those lifts to the train, then 3 lifts at Westminster, then the walk across the bridge honestly takes an hour plus. The 53 would be much quicker (probably still necessitates one change at Blackheath royal standard but not 2!) |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 19, 2024 12:51:43 GMT
Quite possibly although I think the main reason it terminates at Lambeth North is to provide same stop interchange with other routes that cross Westminster Bridge. True but the 453 does parallel the 53 between Deptford & Lambeth North at a high frequency. Obviously that sort of capacity is needed for that sort of corridor but I do feel like having the 53 enabling interchange with trains at Waterloo is more useful in this case. I would not be surprised if the 53 is eventually curtailed to Elephant & Castle. It would have been a good candidate to divert to Victoria instead of the 3 however I know they have no intention of extending it anywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 19, 2024 12:56:06 GMT
The 206 has a couple of double decks. They are not only used for school trips. Because of the narrow roads it passes at times. Brondesbury Road, heading up to Queens Park. Then Peter Avenue, Park Parade some of those roads are fairly narrow for a double deck bus. That's what I meant It is officially allocated 1 VMH (which will become 1 BDE once the electric conversion happens in the future) for school trips - any other double deckers on the route are stray workings instead of the usual DE/DEL allocation. If the roads were too narrow, they wouldn’t be used but thank you for explaining what you were originally referring to. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 19, 2024 12:59:52 GMT
True but the 453 does parallel the 53 between Deptford & Lambeth North at a high frequency. Obviously that sort of capacity is needed for that sort of corridor but I do feel like having the 53 enabling interchange with trains at Waterloo is more useful in this case. I would not be surprised if the 53 is eventually curtailed to Elephant & Castle. It would have been a good candidate to divert to Victoria instead of the 3 however I know they have no intention of extending it anywhere. But that would break the important hospital link with St Thomas’s Hospital - lots of people from the south east are referred there running to Victoria with a longer walk from Lambeth Bridge wouldn’t benefit them at all. As ronnie said, extend it to Lambeth Palace so it stops opposite the hospital and there is plenty of stand space at Lambeth Palace given that’s where the 53 previously stood when it was last cut back from Whitehall previously. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 19, 2024 13:09:24 GMT
I would not be surprised if the 53 is eventually curtailed to Elephant & Castle. It would have been a good candidate to divert to Victoria instead of the 3 however I know they have no intention of extending it anywhere. But that would break the important hospital link with St Thomas’s Hospital - lots of people from the south east are referred there running to Victoria with a longer walk from Lambeth Bridge wouldn’t benefit them at all. As ronnie said, extend it to Lambeth Palace so it stops opposite the hospital and there is plenty of stand space at Lambeth Palace given that’s where the 53 previously stood when it was last cut back from Whitehall previously. If it was to go to Victoria it would still go to Lambeth North then the entire old 507 route. I should have been more specific. Anyways the 12 & 453 also stop at St Thomas Hospital which in fact takes you closer to there than the 53 if it was to be curtailed overall if that alleged 45 & 118 thing goes ahead I wouldn’t be surprised if the 53 is curtailed. |
|
|
|
Post by MKAY315 on May 19, 2024 14:46:25 GMT
But that would break the important hospital link with St Thomas’s Hospital - lots of people from the south east are referred there running to Victoria with a longer walk from Lambeth Bridge wouldn’t benefit them at all. As ronnie said, extend it to Lambeth Palace so it stops opposite the hospital and there is plenty of stand space at Lambeth Palace given that’s where the 53 previously stood when it was last cut back from Whitehall previously. If it was to go to Victoria it would still go to Lambeth North then the entire old 507 route. I should have been more specific. Anyways the 12 & 453 also stop at St Thomas Hospital which in fact takes you closer to there than the 53 if it was to be curtailed overall if that alleged 45 & 118 thing goes ahead I wouldn’t be surprised if the 53 is curtailed. To be fair the transport towers have been looking for every excuse in the book since 1999 to cut it back to Elephant. They're probably one cut away from doing it. route53 and myself over the years have voiced our disagreement for them to possibly make that move but knowing them I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with an "interesting" excuse to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on May 19, 2024 19:39:15 GMT
If it was to go to Victoria it would still go to Lambeth North then the entire old 507 route. I should have been more specific. Anyways the 12 & 453 also stop at St Thomas Hospital which in fact takes you closer to there than the 53 if it was to be curtailed overall if that alleged 45 & 118 thing goes ahead I wouldn’t be surprised if the 53 is curtailed. To be fair the transport towers have been looking for every excuse in the book since 1999 to cut it back to Elephant. They're probably one cut away from doing it. route53 and myself over the years have voiced our disagreement for them to possibly make that move but knowing them I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with an "interesting" excuse to do it. I think TfL may want to curtail route 53 at Elephant & Castle but might lack stand space to terminate all those extra buses there. They could mitigate this by extending a less frequent route to Lambeth North, such as route P5, even this is pointless for passengers. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on May 19, 2024 19:43:12 GMT
To be fair the transport towers have been looking for every excuse in the book since 1999 to cut it back to Elephant. They're probably one cut away from doing it. route53 and myself over the years have voiced our disagreement for them to possibly make that move but knowing them I wouldn't be surprised if they come up with an "interesting" excuse to do it. I think TfL may want to curtail route 53 at Elephant & Castle but might lack stand space to terminate all those extra buses there. They could mitigate this by extending a less frequent route to Lambeth North, such as route P5, even this is pointless for passengers. Any stand space at Elephant would probably be needed by the Bakerloop route. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 19, 2024 20:58:58 GMT
True but the 453 does parallel the 53 between Deptford & Lambeth North at a high frequency. Obviously that sort of capacity is needed for that sort of corridor but I do feel like having the 53 enabling interchange with trains at Waterloo is more useful in this case. Yes I agree that Waterloo or even Aldwych would be a more useful destination, I don't think it'll happen though because of the interchange facility. I think Aldwych might be stretching the 53’s length a bit, tfl probably don’t want another bus going across Waterloo Bridge, especially a high frequency route & there isn’t really stand space available. Waterloo though is a good area to terminate the 53 for sure. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 19, 2024 21:49:14 GMT
True but the 453 does parallel the 53 between Deptford & Lambeth North at a high frequency. Obviously that sort of capacity is needed for that sort of corridor but I do feel like having the 53 enabling interchange with trains at Waterloo is more useful in this case. I would not be surprised if the 53 is eventually curtailed to Elephant & Castle. It would have been a good candidate to divert to Victoria instead of the 3 however I know they have no intention of extending it anywhere. Yeah this could happen perhaps if tfl wanted to make savings & it happens to free up stand space in E&C. The frequently suggested 171/172 merger is an example of this. I don’t think the 53 is really needed to run to Victoria tbh. The 3 having been sent there actually has given it a bit more use than when it was running to Whitehall. |
|
