|
Post by gwiwer on Jun 26, 2024 21:01:52 GMT
Can Oyster readers get corrupted? Ultimately any item can become corrupted. Software can be subject to malicious attack or other failure; hardware is like any machine and is not 100% reliable all the time - it can break down. Tf L would have stringently controlled security in place to counter any threat to their systems. Many employers have a policy of "no social media" in their contracts of employment. That refers to the posting of anything in the business name or of identifiable members of staff. They do not have the right to restrict their employee's use of social media when no reference is made to the employer. What can and cannot be done is often a grey area. My most recent (before retirement) employer had such a policy which said, in effect:- 1. Using an account in the company name, any other related name which might be interpreted as an official comment or "tagging" the company in a post including such - No. 2. Making reference to the employer by name or in general terms on a private account (as in "I work for .....") without specific detail - Yes. 3. Making specific comments about the employer / employment and / or naming colleagues on any account, private or otherwise - No. 4. Posting images taken whilst on duty - provided they are taken from public areas, do not include identifiable individuals and have not compromised safety or other tasks - Yes but not encouraged otherwise no. 5. "Live streaming" of any incident, event or action which, by definition, would mean the user was probably distracted from their duties - No. 6. Using any information about the company or its employees which is not in the public domain / is confidential to post on any account - No. 7. Using any form of masking or identity change to prevent detection when posting anything which is normally not permitted - No. Basically you are at work to work not to take pictures, discuss business performance or how poor your manager is in your opinion. Once off duty leave work at work and if you must talk about what a bad day you are having then keep it personal and don't involve others by name.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jun 27, 2024 9:07:14 GMT
Can Oyster readers get corrupted? There’s this man on TikTok who used to work GAL as driver and he’s says he got fired because he kept mentioning in his TikToks that the Oyster machine can get corrupted and TfL didn’t like him mentioning it so GAL had to let him go. Well I do not know if he got fired for that, but then if he put it on tiktok he deserves it, stupid imo. It is just like anything that gets corrupted. Sometimes it may not even be faulty and down to the internet connection that just needs the ETM shut down on and off. The days of when oyster first came out, many drivers would know this, that all you had to do was shut down and reset and 9 out of 10 times the connection for the RTD (reader) would come back and status light would be orange instead of red. They are far more reliable than years gone by, so it is just a load of rubbish for him to post that and merely a matter of gaining hits.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Jul 1, 2024 15:32:31 GMT
How many two-way bus lanes are there? I noticed one on Longwood Gardens for the 462. It is a short one to avoid width restrictions but I think there should be more and longer two-way bus lanes that can operate for whatever direction requires it.
|
|
|
Post by kmkcheng on Jul 1, 2024 16:13:03 GMT
How many two-way bus lanes are there? I noticed one on Longwood Gardens for the 462. It is a short one to avoid width restrictions but I think there should be more and longer two-way bus lanes that can operate for whatever direction requires it. Headstone Lane: H18/19 Capitol Way: 303 There’s also the bus and cycle only road connecting Longford roundabout and Wright Way/West Perimeter Road at Heathrow. This one is a single carriage road rather than a two-way bus lane. There’s 4 that I know just outside London in the Watford area at Bushey Mill Lane, Park Avenue, Woodmere Avenue and North Western Ave (bus only shoutcut to A41/A405 roundabout.
|
|
|
Post by matthieu1221 on Jul 1, 2024 17:00:58 GMT
How many two-way bus lanes are there? I noticed one on Longwood Gardens for the 462. It is a short one to avoid width restrictions but I think there should be more and longer two-way bus lanes that can operate for whatever direction requires it. Some parts of TCR would count. Other sections are simply filtered intelligently to make it as good as bus only.
|
|
|
Post by Catford94 on Jul 1, 2024 18:44:11 GMT
How many two-way bus lanes are there? I noticed one on Longwood Gardens for the 462. It is a short one to avoid width restrictions but I think there should be more and longer two-way bus lanes that can operate for whatever direction requires it.
There's a similar 'middle of the road round a width restriction' one on Manor Park, Hither Green (route 273), street view here - although the road markings / signs don't seem to have been complete / clear when Street View went round there.
Does Pepys Road, between New Cross and Brockley (route 343 / 484) - street view here - count? Or does that count as a bus gate? I have an idea it used to have a bus activated barrier at one time - might have dated from 1984 when the (old) 184 was extended from Brockley to New Cross Gate like the current 343.
I can see a limited use for this sort of thing, but would have thought that longer sections of 'single track section (to borrow a tramway expression) bus lane would cause more problems than it would solve in a lot of locations - if two buses happened to approach at the same time, then one would be delayed by the other.
|
|
|
Post by whiggism on Jul 3, 2024 20:19:27 GMT
Why has the route 388 since first introduced in 2003 been re-routed so many times?
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Jul 3, 2024 21:29:58 GMT
Why has the route 388 since first introduced in 2003 been re-routed so many times? It's an interesting case of a route, but the key is more so where it was rerouted as opposed to why it was rerouted. You examine one and you get the result to the other. Ignoring the Stratford extension, which was an extension and not a reroute the route itself has predmonantly remained stable between Hackney Wick and Liverpool Street constantly. Starting off at Embankment it slowly worked its way backwards to Blackfriars before it was rerouted through the London Wall to Elephant & Castle. The routing through to Embankment was unique, but it was unique for the reason in the fact nobody really needed it. The District and Circle Line keep that part of London covered well and most people are tourists on a walk towards Trafalgar Square anyway. It wasn't hugely popular heading into the city from Liverpool Street so I imagine the intention was to make some use of it by sending it via the 100 down the London Wall to combat the truncating of the 100 itself creating another unique link from East London to Elephant & Castle. But once again unique is unique for a reason, as a route it never took off. It was a double decker route replacing a 9.6m Enviro200 route and while the 100 would carry loads, you'd not see it rammed to the doors so it's not surprising to see the 388 not last. The Central London bus cuts then came after the 388 very quickly which resulted in the Liverpool St cut before it got sent to London Bridge, only as a mitigation to the 48 and notably it was never in the initial plans to send the 388 there. While I'd like to think the 388 carries decent loads down to London Bridge, its lack of inclusion in the initial plans suggests it was only sent down there to quieten uproar about the 48 withdrawal. I'd be surprised if the 388 in this form also lasts long term.
|
|
|
Post by ronnie on Jul 4, 2024 0:20:50 GMT
How many two-way bus lanes are there? I noticed one on Longwood Gardens for the 462. It is a short one to avoid width restrictions but I think there should be more and longer two-way bus lanes that can operate for whatever direction requires it. The 380 has one in Blackheath village while going on to / leaving tranquil vale
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on Jul 4, 2024 7:25:25 GMT
Why has the route 388 since first introduced in 2003 been re-routed so many times? It's an interesting case of a route, but the key is more so where it was rerouted as opposed to why it was rerouted. You examine one and you get the result to the other. Ignoring the Stratford extension, which was an extension and not a reroute the route itself has predmonantly remained stable between Hackney Wick and Liverpool Street constantly. Starting off at Embankment it slowly worked its way backwards to Blackfriars before it was rerouted through the London Wall to Elephant & Castle. The routing through to Embankment was unique, but it was unique for the reason in the fact nobody really needed it. The District and Circle Line keep that part of London covered well and most people are tourists on a walk towards Trafalgar Square anyway. It wasn't hugely popular heading into the city from Liverpool Street so I imagine the intention was to make some use of it by sending it via the 100 down the London Wall to combat the truncating of the 100 itself creating another unique link from East London to Elephant & Castle. But once again unique is unique for a reason, as a route it never took off. It was a double decker route replacing a 9.6m Enviro200 route and while the 100 would carry loads, you'd not see it rammed to the doors so it's not surprising to see the 388 not last. The Central London bus cuts then came after the 388 very quickly which resulted in the Liverpool St cut before it got sent to London Bridge, only as a mitigation to the 48 and notably it was never in the initial plans to send the 388 there. While I'd like to think the 388 carries decent loads down to London Bridge, its lack of inclusion in the initial plans suggests it was only sent down there to quieten uproar about the 48 withdrawal. I'd be surprised if the 388 in this form also lasts long term. Just to add that the extension to Temple / Embankment was only intended as a temporary measure during the closure of Blackfriars underground station (during rebuilding for the Thameslink programme). At first buses only ran in service to Temple, which was of course the next open station on the Circle/District lines, but as buses had to continue to Embankment to turn anyway, the opportunity was taken to extend in service to Embankment.
If it had been extended just a little bit further to Trafalgar Square it might have picked up more custom, but it would never have survived the more recent central London cuts anyway.
The route's first extension - from Mansion House to Blackfriars - was done mostly because the original schedule had been very pessimistic, and it was found that there was enough slack in the schedule to add a short extension without using any extra resources.
|
|
|
Post by wirewiper on Jul 4, 2024 9:06:46 GMT
It's an interesting case of a route, but the key is more so where it was rerouted as opposed to why it was rerouted. You examine one and you get the result to the other. Ignoring the Stratford extension, which was an extension and not a reroute the route itself has predmonantly remained stable between Hackney Wick and Liverpool Street constantly. Starting off at Embankment it slowly worked its way backwards to Blackfriars before it was rerouted through the London Wall to Elephant & Castle. The routing through to Embankment was unique, but it was unique for the reason in the fact nobody really needed it. The District and Circle Line keep that part of London covered well and most people are tourists on a walk towards Trafalgar Square anyway. It wasn't hugely popular heading into the city from Liverpool Street so I imagine the intention was to make some use of it by sending it via the 100 down the London Wall to combat the truncating of the 100 itself creating another unique link from East London to Elephant & Castle. But once again unique is unique for a reason, as a route it never took off. It was a double decker route replacing a 9.6m Enviro200 route and while the 100 would carry loads, you'd not see it rammed to the doors so it's not surprising to see the 388 not last. The Central London bus cuts then came after the 388 very quickly which resulted in the Liverpool St cut before it got sent to London Bridge, only as a mitigation to the 48 and notably it was never in the initial plans to send the 388 there. While I'd like to think the 388 carries decent loads down to London Bridge, its lack of inclusion in the initial plans suggests it was only sent down there to quieten uproar about the 48 withdrawal. I'd be surprised if the 388 in this form also lasts long term. Just to add that the extension to Temple / Embankment was only intended as a temporary measure during the closure of Blackfriars underground station (during rebuilding for the Thameslink programme). At first buses only ran in service to Temple, which was of course the next open station on the Circle/District lines, but as buses had to continue to Embankment to turn anyway, the opportunity was taken to extend in service to Embankment.
If it had been extended just a little bit further to Trafalgar Square it might have picked up more custom, but it would never have survived the more recent central London cuts anyway.
The route's first extension - from Mansion House to Blackfriars - was done mostly because the original schedule had been very pessimistic, and it was found that there was enough slack in the schedule to add a short extension without using any extra resources.
I believe that the extension to Blackfriars was suggested by CT Plus themselves. Also operating to Embankment in service during the temporary extension, although that may have come from passenger feedback.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jul 4, 2024 12:37:04 GMT
Why has the route 388 since first introduced in 2003 been re-routed so many times? It's an interesting case of a route, but the key is more so where it was rerouted as opposed to why it was rerouted. You examine one and you get the result to the other. Ignoring the Stratford extension, which was an extension and not a reroute the route itself has predmonantly remained stable between Hackney Wick and Liverpool Street constantly. Starting off at Embankment it slowly worked its way backwards to Blackfriars before it was rerouted through the London Wall to Elephant & Castle. The routing through to Embankment was unique, but it was unique for the reason in the fact nobody really needed it. The District and Circle Line keep that part of London covered well and most people are tourists on a walk towards Trafalgar Square anyway. It wasn't hugely popular heading into the city from Liverpool Street so I imagine the intention was to make some use of it by sending it via the 100 down the London Wall to combat the truncating of the 100 itself creating another unique link from East London to Elephant & Castle. But once again unique is unique for a reason, as a route it never took off. It was a double decker route replacing a 9.6m Enviro200 route and while the 100 would carry loads, you'd not see it rammed to the doors so it's not surprising to see the 388 not last. The Central London bus cuts then came after the 388 very quickly which resulted in the Liverpool St cut before it got sent to London Bridge, only as a mitigation to the 48 and notably it was never in the initial plans to send the 388 there. While I'd like to think the 388 carries decent loads down to London Bridge, its lack of inclusion in the initial plans suggests it was only sent down there to quieten uproar about the 48 withdrawal. I'd be surprised if the 388 in this form also lasts long term. I just wanted to say that the 388 to Elephant came about due to junction works at Ludgate Circus which would've prevented buses turning right from Blackfriars Bridge, i.e. the 100's old routing. The delays in the City (predominantly Aldgate's gyratory removal) ultimately saw TfL come up with the idea of using the 388 to replace the 100, so was rerouted via London Wall to retain as many links as possible. At the same time, the 172 was removed from St Paul's and the 388 was advertised as the quicker alternative from Elephant & Castle. Of the many forms of the 388 that existed, it was most popular heading to Embankment first and Elephant second. I used the route late at night and on weekends for cross City journeys, it was very popular indeed. I will argue that regardless of whether it was popular or not going to Elephant (it was), TfL have and likely will continue to meddle with the 388 however they see fit. It's not like the 25 wasn't popular between Oxford Circus and City Thameslink when it was cut, TfL still cut it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by mondraker275 on Jul 4, 2024 17:13:29 GMT
Why has the route 388 since first introduced in 2003 been re-routed so many times? While I'd like to think the 388 carries decent loads down to London Bridge, its lack of inclusion in the initial plans suggests it was only sent down there to quieten uproar about the 48 withdrawal. I'd be surprised if the 388 in this form also lasts long term. To think it was in-line for a further extension to Peckham as well
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jul 7, 2024 22:42:09 GMT
Would TfL foi know what routes are cross linked to each other?
|
|
|
Post by lj61nwc on Jul 7, 2024 23:20:06 GMT
Would TfL foi know what routes are cross linked to each other? probably but would be waste of resources to ask when you can find online using their website
|
|