|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on May 8, 2024 10:17:39 GMT
I wonder the 247 & 294 could be merged into one route to run between Noak Hill & Barkingside, which would remove some capacity between Romford & Collier Row. I would divert the 252 to Havering Park via the existing 294 & because there is now free stand space at Collier Row, the popular suggestion of extending the 62 there could be introduced. By rerouting the 252 you sever local links from Mawney Road and parts of Havering Park to Colliers Row, so you are really just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Is there not space simply to extend the 62 anyway? Maybe take out a few parking bays. As you say if you take away parking bays the job is done, issue is then you get to another case where people won't be happy as you've removed parking bays. That said it is annoying how close the 62 gets to Collier Row, but effectively terminates in the middle of nowhere. I still do think that my suggestion of sending the 368 to Marks Gate and rerouting the 62 down London Road to Romford would do good to help the 86, and give people deeper in Becontree a link to Romford. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 8, 2024 11:05:45 GMT
I wonder the 247 & 294 could be merged into one route to run between Noak Hill & Barkingside, which would remove some capacity between Romford & Collier Row. I would divert the 252 to Havering Park via the existing 294 & because there is now free stand space at Collier Row, the popular suggestion of extending the 62 there could be introduced. By rerouting the 252 you sever local links from Mawney Road and parts of Havering Park to Colliers Row, so you are really just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Is there not space simply to extend the 62 anyway? Maybe take out a few parking bays. You could also reroute the 365 via the 294’s LOR, then extend the 252 to Havering Park via the 365. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 8, 2024 11:27:41 GMT
I wonder the 247 & 294 could be merged into one route to run between Noak Hill & Barkingside, which would remove some capacity between Romford & Collier Row. I would divert the 252 to Havering Park via the existing 294 & because there is now free stand space at Collier Row, the popular suggestion of extending the 62 there could be introduced. Why do you want to remove capacity in the first place, just seems IMO you’re looking for a problem to solve that doesn’t exist. In any event, having a route like that crossing both the A12 & A127 at two junctions known for congestion issues is asking for trouble. |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on May 9, 2024 8:18:15 GMT
I wonder the 247 & 294 could be merged into one route to run between Noak Hill & Barkingside, which would remove some capacity between Romford & Collier Row. I would divert the 252 to Havering Park via the existing 294 & because there is now free stand space at Collier Row, the popular suggestion of extending the 62 there could be introduced. Why do you want to remove capacity in the first place, just seems IMO you’re looking for a problem to solve that doesn’t exist. In any event, having a route like that crossing both the A12 & A127 at two junctions known for congestion issues is asking for trouble. I use that corridor regularly & there is often excess capacity on it, so to me at least it makes sense to remove something & about half of the 294 route parallels the 247 & the extension would only add about 20 mins. |
|
|
|
Post by busoccultation on May 9, 2024 9:06:20 GMT
Why do you want to remove capacity in the first place, just seems IMO you’re looking for a problem to solve that doesn’t exist. In any event, having a route like that crossing both the A12 & A127 at two junctions known for congestion issues is asking for trouble. I use that corridor regularly & there is often excess capacity on it, so to me at least it makes sense to remove something & about half of the 294 route parallels the 247 & the extension would only add about 20 mins. All you're doing to do with that is make the route very long and less reliable in the process, the 247 & 294 in their current form are fine as it is and the capacity provided is just about right to what it needs on both of those routes from my regular usage along that corridor over the years.
|
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on May 9, 2024 17:04:51 GMT
By rerouting the 252 you sever local links from Mawney Road and parts of Havering Park to Colliers Row, so you are really just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Is there not space simply to extend the 62 anyway? Maybe take out a few parking bays. As you say if you take away parking bays the job is done, issue is then you get to another case where people won't be happy as you've removed parking bays. That said it is annoying how close the 62 gets to Collier Row, but effectively terminates in the middle of nowhere. I still do think that my suggestion of sending the 368 to Marks Gate and rerouting the 62 down London Road to Romford would do good to help the 86, and give people deeper in Becontree a link to Romford. The 62 did, once upon a time, go to Collier Row |
|
|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on May 9, 2024 17:06:19 GMT
By rerouting the 252 you sever local links from Mawney Road and parts of Havering Park to Colliers Row, so you are really just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Is there not space simply to extend the 62 anyway? Maybe take out a few parking bays. You could also reroute the 365 via the 294’s LOR, then extend the 252 to Havering Park via the 365. this is all starting to get a bit complicated. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on May 10, 2024 6:20:38 GMT
By rerouting the 252 you sever local links from Mawney Road and parts of Havering Park to Colliers Row, so you are really just robbing Peter to pay Paul. Is there not space simply to extend the 62 anyway? Maybe take out a few parking bays. You could also reroute the 365 via the 294’s LOR, then extend the 252 to Havering Park via the 365. That sounds like the best idea to me and extend the 62 to Collier Row, as you mentioned there is excess capacity on the 247/294 common section. |
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on May 10, 2024 8:42:19 GMT
63/363 could be merged but im guessing there split due to traffic reason ill edit this when i can think of some more The combined frequency of the two routes is very much needed to serve the section between Peckham and Old Kent Road in peak times. Merging would result in overbussing, which equates to a waste of money. When route changes are proposed, it’s not a simple case of looking at a map and moving things about - the analysis has to take passenger numbers, political objectives and appropriate use of funding into account. Many of the proposals in this thread would cause more problems than they would solve in reality. A good starting point is to identify what problem there is to be solved with a route change. |
|
|
|
Post by 365tohaveringpark on Jun 3, 2024 19:28:51 GMT
Could just get rid of the 365 by replacing it with a 248 from Cranham to Havering Park, a 175 to 'Beam Park', 165 sent back via Hornchurch Road and the 372 extended to Romford with a better frequency or merge the 365 with the 165 (Havering Park to Rainham) that follows the 365 route from Havering Park to Elm Park and then just do the standard 165 routing to Rainham this would bring faster journeys for those in Rainham and 24 hour service to them
|
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jun 12, 2024 21:41:38 GMT
I think that it was a failed opportunity to not merge the U1/3 together I think that they should have gone ahead with this merger.
|
|
|
|
Post by greg on Jun 12, 2024 23:26:45 GMT
N242 and N277. Crossharbour to Tottenham Court Road.
Send the N38 to Homerton Hosp and the N55 should be adequate IMO between Walthamstow and Clapton especially when you have the N26 and N73 also at Walthamstow to Central London
|
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 13, 2024 0:00:48 GMT
N242 and N277. Crossharbour to Tottenham Court Road. Send the N38 to Homerton Hosp and the N55 should be adequate IMO between Walthamstow and Clapton especially when you have the N26 and N73 also at Walthamstow to Central London Troouble is the N55 does NOT go to Walthamstow Central. N38 to Homerton is pointless and if it goes over the 242/N242 route then LT's are going to get into problems on Clapton Park estate as it is unsuitable. N242 and N277 hardly much to merge since they only share a few stops on Graham Rd |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 13, 2024 0:11:21 GMT
The W3 is also much more frequent than the 4. The W3 works well as it is, especially at the Finsbury Park end where it acts as a feeder for an area which doesn't have good rail links, and acts as a useful east-west route across Haringey. The more sensible merger would be the 73 and 476; although frequencies are a question mark. Has often been debated on this forum (not local so feel free to disagree!) I agree, the 476 is a wasteman route and the 73 pointless now since being cut back to Oxford Circus. These routes should be merged. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 13, 2024 0:18:36 GMT
That could work, though I'm unsure about leaving the 259 on a solo section from Seven Sisters to Amhurst Park, with the Seven Sisters to Stamford Hill corridor already having quite a high frequency without the 243. Traffic doesn't seem too bad North of Edmonton Green, and I think the 149 wasn't cut from Ponders End due to poor reliability (but that was 2004 and a new cycle lane has been built along the road) - I don't think the 149 would suffer too much, but it could sometimes as well, but would save a decent level of buses without stripping anywhere of too many buses I would also be in favour of removing the 279’s current stand at Manor House, due to the fact that it has to U-Turn on a busy main road when departing towards Waltham Cross. Stupid statement. It is NOT a u-turn in the normal fashion. 9 out of 10 times there would be a gap in the Westbound traffic that would allow the bus to get to the middle of the road then it only would need to wait for a gap in the eastbound to resume in the opposite direction. |
|
