|
|
Post by sdaniel on Apr 24, 2024 23:45:54 GMT
No doubt, 349’s frequency should be increased if this change happens in the future. But I think there would be space on the 31 stand, because the service of 31 has been terrible ever since it changed to Metroline. Maybe, though the 279's stand can get quite full at times, with up to 3 buses (or more) occupying stand space at Manor House currently. It might just fit in, but would likely overflow at times (and relying on the operator running the route badly might not be the best way to guarantee stand space). Either the 279 or 31 using the 88 stand would be quite awkward without moving either bus away from the station, which would be less than ideal. A 349 frequency increase would be good, but might have to mean a decrease to the 279, and would further increase the frequency along the 149 corridor (though the 149's frequency was recently reduced, so an increased 349 might help). Yeah I agree with you about slightly reducing 279’s frequency and increasing 149’s frequency for this change. Another possibility for creating space for the 279’s termination at Bayham Street is extending the 31 to Mornington Crescent (just by Harrington Square Gardens) since the N28 and N31 serve the south of Camden High Street. |
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 118
|
Post by ZiyQ on Apr 25, 2024 15:52:27 GMT
Maybe, though the 279's stand can get quite full at times, with up to 3 buses (or more) occupying stand space at Manor House currently. It might just fit in, but would likely overflow at times (and relying on the operator running the route badly might not be the best way to guarantee stand space). Either the 279 or 31 using the 88 stand would be quite awkward without moving either bus away from the station, which would be less than ideal. A 349 frequency increase would be good, but might have to mean a decrease to the 279, and would further increase the frequency along the 149 corridor (though the 149's frequency was recently reduced, so an increased 349 might help). Yeah I agree with you about slightly reducing 279’s frequency and increasing 149’s frequency for this change. Another possibility for creating space for the 279’s termination at Bayham Street is extending the 31 to Mornington Crescent (just by Harrington Square Gardens) since the N28 and N31 serve the south of Camden High Street. A 31 extension to Mornington Crescent should be okay, though it might make the route slightly more unreliable (even if the extension is only 2 stops), and the Mornington Crescent stand is often used for curtailments (the last time I can remember it being used more long-term was for 253 curtailments due to HS2 works). I definitely support an extension of the 279 to somewhere more useful than Manor House, but only if it does not sacrifice the reliability of the route and cause too high extra costs for TfL. Extending any outer London route further towards the City can be risky, as Central London traffic can make or break the reliability of a route. |
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Apr 25, 2024 17:22:54 GMT
Yeah I agree with you about slightly reducing 279’s frequency and increasing 149’s frequency for this change. Another possibility for creating space for the 279’s termination at Bayham Street is extending the 31 to Mornington Crescent (just by Harrington Square Gardens) since the N28 and N31 serve the south of Camden High Street. A 31 extension to Mornington Crescent should be okay, though it might make the route slightly more unreliable (even if the extension is only 2 stops), and the Mornington Crescent stand is often used for curtailments (the last time I can remember it being used more long-term was for 253 curtailments due to HS2 works). I definitely support an extension of the 279 to somewhere more useful than Manor House, but only if it does not sacrifice the reliability of the route and cause too high extra costs for TfL. Extending any outer London route further towards the City can be risky, as Central London traffic can make or break the reliability of a route. If you wanted to extend the 279 to somewhere more useful, Newington Green is a shout. However it may overbus Green Lanes in TFLs eyes |
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Apr 25, 2024 18:18:55 GMT
A 31 extension to Mornington Crescent should be okay, though it might make the route slightly more unreliable (even if the extension is only 2 stops), and the Mornington Crescent stand is often used for curtailments (the last time I can remember it being used more long-term was for 253 curtailments due to HS2 works). I definitely support an extension of the 279 to somewhere more useful than Manor House, but only if it does not sacrifice the reliability of the route and cause too high extra costs for TfL. Extending any outer London route further towards the City can be risky, as Central London traffic can make or break the reliability of a route. If you wanted to extend the 279 to somewhere more useful, Newington Green is a shout. However it may overbus Green Lanes in TFLs eyes The right turn from Green Lanes onto Seven Sisters Road is banned, which pretty much removes the ability to send the route down there. The 341 & 476 are already sufficient in linking Newington Green to Tottenham. |
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 118
|
Post by ZiyQ on Apr 25, 2024 19:43:47 GMT
A 31 extension to Mornington Crescent should be okay, though it might make the route slightly more unreliable (even if the extension is only 2 stops), and the Mornington Crescent stand is often used for curtailments (the last time I can remember it being used more long-term was for 253 curtailments due to HS2 works). I definitely support an extension of the 279 to somewhere more useful than Manor House, but only if it does not sacrifice the reliability of the route and cause too high extra costs for TfL. Extending any outer London route further towards the City can be risky, as Central London traffic can make or break the reliability of a route. If you wanted to extend the 279 to somewhere more useful, Newington Green is a shout. However it may overbus Green Lanes in TFLs eyes A 279 extension to Newington Green would be good, but the 279's frequency along Green Lanes corridor would likely be excessive. It would extend the 279 in a direction that would avoid further duplication with the 259, but as bk10mfe had mentioned, the right turn is blocked to allow this route. |
|
|
|
Post by Busboy105 on Apr 25, 2024 21:47:50 GMT
If you wanted to extend the 279 to somewhere more useful, Newington Green is a shout. However it may overbus Green Lanes in TFLs eyes The right turn from Green Lanes onto Seven Sisters Road is banned, which pretty much removes the ability to send the route down there. The 341 & 476 are already sufficient in linking Newington Green to Tottenham. Didn't know that. Pretty much keeps it at Manor House unless it was rerouted to serve Woodberry Downs |
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 118
|
Post by ZiyQ on Apr 26, 2024 16:56:24 GMT
The right turn from Green Lanes onto Seven Sisters Road is banned, which pretty much removes the ability to send the route down there. The 341 & 476 are already sufficient in linking Newington Green to Tottenham. Didn't know that. Pretty much keeps it at Manor House unless it was rerouted to serve Woodberry Downs There isn't really anywhere to extend the 279 to, without making it parallel the 259 more than it already does, which was part of the reason why the 279 was cut from Holloway about 20 years back. Even paralleling the 259 to Finsbury Park may be sufficient for the route, though many may disagree that it parallels the 253, 254 and 259 too much. |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Apr 26, 2024 17:34:30 GMT
It won’t really over-bus the locations because 29 is already packed at Camden Town and most 29’s skips stop after Camden Town Station until it gets to Brecknock Road. That’s what I’ve observed. The 279 change will surely support both the 29 and 253 along that corrdior. Of course 253 is an alternative but it does get packed too as people that couldn’t get on 29, have to take the 253 to Manor House and change for the 29 or 141 at Manor House to get to either Harringay, Turnpike Lane or Wood Green. Though that corridor does get busy, I would be apprehensive of leaving North of Ponders End with the 349's frequency. I assume the 279 would use the 88's old stand in Camden, as I don't think there's any space left on the 31's stand. The roads at Camden are all one way and the 279 would have to double run Camden High Street and Kentish Town Road twice to get to the existing 88 stand and then return to Camden Road as the left turn at Camden Gardens is now banned. It would be easier to have the 31 moved to the existing 88 stand and have the 279 stand at the 31 stand instead |
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 118
|
Post by ZiyQ on Apr 27, 2024 15:20:29 GMT
Though that corridor does get busy, I would be apprehensive of leaving North of Ponders End with the 349's frequency. I assume the 279 would use the 88's old stand in Camden, as I don't think there's any space left on the 31's stand. The roads at Camden are all one way and the 279 would have to double run Camden High Street and Kentish Town Road twice to get to the existing 88 stand and then return to Camden Road as the left turn at Camden Gardens is now banned. It would be easier to have the 31 moved to the existing 88 stand and have the 279 stand at the 31 stand instead That is probably the best way to manage stand space from a 279 extension, though terminating the 31 at Camden Gardens would make the terminus slightly further from the station (which should not be a problem). Would the N28 and N31 move to the Camden Gardens stand or stay at their current stand? |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Apr 27, 2024 16:31:16 GMT
The roads at Camden are all one way and the 279 would have to double run Camden High Street and Kentish Town Road twice to get to the existing 88 stand and then return to Camden Road as the left turn at Camden Gardens is now banned. It would be easier to have the 31 moved to the existing 88 stand and have the 279 stand at the 31 stand instead That is probably the best way to manage stand space from a 279 extension, though terminating the 31 at Camden Gardens would make the terminus slightly further from the station (which should not be a problem). Would the N28 and N31 move to the Camden Gardens stand or stay at their current stand? As a local, I would highly oppose it, but in this scenario of a ‘279 extension’ it would be the most logical. The 31 fills up its lower and upper deck to the brim at the very first stop towards White City. It is the only bus that heads in the Swiss Cottage direction, and for it to be moved to Camden Gardens, it would probably be rerouted via Buck Street back to Hartland Road / Camden Market and therefore miss out Camden Town as a whole. Although, a new station entrance is being proposed at Buck Street. As for the N28/N31, I dont see anything affecting its current route as the N279 runs to Trafalgar Square, so nothing is there in the nights. |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Apr 27, 2024 20:19:26 GMT
Was the introduction of the 254 a part of why the 279 was fully cut from Holloway, or were the 2 events unrelated? I would by no means want to have the corridor between Seven Sisters and Manor House with the solo 259, which is why I suggested extending the 149, which could save some money whilst also providing a bit more capacity North of Edmonton Green (whilst I know money isn't too much of an issue on TfL's end now, it could help move the budget to more useful bus routes than the 349). Any of the 149 / 259 / 279 could take a slight frequency increase, if things were to get too busy, and if reliability is a concern, the 149 could be cut to Liverpool Street, which whilst it would require a change to continue to London Bridge for most journeys, most links are not broken through the 388 to London Bridge Bus Station and the 35 and 47 just outside it. On another point, the 279 would benefit a lot from an extension to Finsbury Park as greg had said, with the Manor House terminus not allowing easy interchange to other buses such as the 29, due to the approximately 200 metre walk to the nearest 29 bus stop, and the large U-turn required to turn the 279 around, with Manor House also not providing nearly enough onward connections as Finsbury Park. Though I have a question that I'm unsure of how others would react to - would the A10 corridor benefit from a parallel bus route along Watermead Way, once the Meridian Water development has been completed - say, from Edmonton Green, up the North Circular, through part of the Meridian Water development, down Watermead Way, through Tottenham Hale and onward to Seven Sisters and beyond? I think it might work if appropriate bus priority measures are installed along Watermead Way (especially Southbound), and could benefit from being a much higher-speed bus service through faster roads (avoiding a lot of 20mph speed limits). No the 254 was unrelated and took place in May 2003. In effect the 253 was already operated as two overlapping sections (Euston-Hackney and Holloway-Aldgate) and the introduction of the 254 merely formalised that arrangement. I'm not convinced extending the 279 to Finsbury Park would be worthwhile. Finsbury Park is congested and such an extension would be time-consuming, and when journeys operated to Holloway they were generally under-used beyond Manor House. The 259 provides an alternative for most journeys. It just would have been nicer had the Aldgate route kept the traditional number 253, with the newer route to Euston given the number 254. |
|
ZiyQ
Conductor
I always end up saying too much - beware of the waffle posts taking up an entire thread’s page…
Posts: 118
|
Post by ZiyQ on Apr 27, 2024 20:21:28 GMT
That is probably the best way to manage stand space from a 279 extension, though terminating the 31 at Camden Gardens would make the terminus slightly further from the station (which should not be a problem). Would the N28 and N31 move to the Camden Gardens stand or stay at their current stand? As a local, I would highly oppose it, but in this scenario of a ‘279 extension’ it would be the most logical. The 31 fills up its lower and upper deck to the brim at the very first stop towards White City. It is the only bus that heads in the Swiss Cottage direction, and for it to be moved to Camden Gardens, it would probably be rerouted via Buck Street back to Hartland Road / Camden Market and therefore miss out Camden Town as a whole. Although, a new station entrance is being proposed at Buck Street. As for the N28/N31, I dont see anything affecting its current route as the N279 runs to Trafalgar Square, so nothing is there in the nights. Even if the Camden - Holloway corridor is often overcrowded, any sort of extension of the 279 is highly unlikely in real life (possibly a small one to Finsbury Park may happen). I had thought Buck Street was closed to vehicles on the Kentish Town Road side, though it might have changed since the last Google Street View image, and Buck Street looks quite tight for the EvoSetis on the 31 (plus the one-way system does not seem to match the routing, though please correct me if I am wrong). |
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Apr 27, 2024 20:25:55 GMT
I think routes 380 & 469 could be merged into a single Lewisham - Woolwich - Erith route. The 469 section to QEH could be replaced by route 99.
|
|
|
|
Post by bk10mfe on Apr 27, 2024 20:55:37 GMT
I think routes 380 & 469 could be merged into a single Lewisham - Woolwich - Erith route. The 469 section to QEH could be replaced by route 99. The 244 wouldn’t be able to cope on its own in the Broadwaters area, it’s struggling as is right now. Unfortunately that area is restricted to single decks so it’s not an option to deck the route, or extend something like the 178 to cover that section. It’s best that the 380/469 are left as they are. |
|
|
|
Post by rift on Apr 27, 2024 22:45:25 GMT
I think routes 380 & 469 could be merged into a single Lewisham - Woolwich - Erith route. The 469 section to QEH could be replaced by route 99. One of the features of both routes is that they’re designed to serve back roads and estates (Maryon Park, Woolwich Dockyard, Gallions Reach, Abbey Estate) and a merger would likely wreck the reliability of both the Lewisham and Erith ends, especially on the 469. Not my timeline, but wasn’t the old 322 highly unreliable vjaska? A Lewisham to Erith route via every other street is a comparison I think is justified. |
|
