|
|
Post by ThinLizzy on Aug 1, 2024 11:10:06 GMT
I don't understand the fascination with merging routes "just because they're short." There's plenty of short routes, like the 335 or the new 310, that serve their function perfectly well without having to be extended elsewhere. I agree short routes shouldn't be extended for the sake of it. But the length means there is usually more scope for extensions, if there is a need for additional links in the area. For example the E1 works well in its current form as a Greenford-Ealing shuttle, but if a new link to Osterley is needed, the E1 seems a logical route to extend. (Or in some cases it might just help a longer route to be made more reliable) Similarly with the 335, I think a short extension from Kidbrooke south to Grove Park could work well (in place of the SL4 proposal, which I'm not convinced by). Or the 335 could go through the Silvertown Tunnel to provide some new links north of the river. or keep the routes as they are. As mentioned by others, the 335 does its job linking Kidbrooke and North Greenwich. |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Aug 1, 2024 11:21:55 GMT
I agree short routes shouldn't be extended for the sake of it. But the length means there is usually more scope for extensions, if there is a need for additional links in the area. For example the E1 works well in its current form as a Greenford-Ealing shuttle, but if a new link to Osterley is needed, the E1 seems a logical route to extend. (Or in some cases it might just help a longer route to be made more reliable) Similarly with the 335, I think a short extension from Kidbrooke south to Grove Park could work well (in place of the SL4 proposal, which I'm not convinced by). Or the 335 could go through the Silvertown Tunnel to provide some new links north of the river. The 335 does not need an extension to Grove Park especially as the SL4 will start this link… My suggestion was instead of introducing the SL4. I'm not convinced a limited stop route to Canary Wharf will have the demand anticipated, particularly at such a high frequency and without stopping at North Greenwich or Canning Town. For many passengers around Lee/Grove Park/Blackheath, rail options changing at Lewisham may be preferable still. Maybe it could be popular with some commuters, but not sure how well used it will be outside of the peaks. And more generally seems a poor choice for a cross-river link, when TFL are only introducing two routes through the Silvertown Tunnel for now. Between the 108/129/SL4, there's still no direct links between Canary Wharf, Canning Town and/or North Greenwich. What I have suggested before is to fully make use of bus stations at Canning Town and North Greenwich as interchange hubs, where passengers can easily connect to another route to get to various destinations across the river. For example, could have a higher frequency local route connecting the Isle of Dogs, Canary Wharf, North Greenwich and Charlton - which would allow passengers from any route terminating at North Greenwich to have a simple transfer to get to Canary Wharf (not just those between Blackheath and Grove Park, but also Eltham, Woolwich etc). |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Aug 1, 2024 11:37:30 GMT
The 335 does not need an extension to Grove Park especially as the SL4 will start this link… My suggestion was instead of introducing the SL4. I'm not convinced a limited stop route to Canary Wharf will have the demand anticipated, particularly at such a high frequency and without stopping at North Greenwich or Canning Town. For many passengers around Lee/Grove Park/Blackheath, rail options changing at Lewisham may be preferable still. Maybe it could be popular with some commuters, but not sure how well used it will be outside of the peaks. And more generally seems a poor choice for a cross-river link, when TFL are only introducing two routes through the Silvertown Tunnel for now. Between the 108/129/SL4, there's still no direct links between Canary Wharf, Canning Town and/or North Greenwich. What I have suggested before is to fully make use of bus stations at Canning Town and North Greenwich as interchange hubs, where passengers can easily connect to another route to get to various destinations across the river. For example, could have a higher frequency local route connecting the Isle of Dogs, Canary Wharf, North Greenwich and Charlton - which would allow passengers from any route terminating at North Greenwich to have a simple transfer to get to Canary Wharf (not just those between Blackheath and Grove Park, but also Eltham, Woolwich etc). Plus i don't think it will be easily interchangeable at Blackheath to the 53/54/286 towards Charlton/Woolwich/Eltham. Stopping at North Greenwich would effectively provide an interchange with the 161/422/472/486 for those areas to hopper fare. |
|
|
|
Post by bustler on Aug 1, 2024 11:42:25 GMT
Are Camberwell reducing their LT fleet? I've heard that LT'S 41- 48 are heading to Metroline. Will they be left with enough to cope for the 12 and 176?
|
|
|
|
Post by LD71YLO (BE37054) on Aug 1, 2024 11:44:56 GMT
Are Camberwell reducing their LT fleet? I've heard that LT'S 41- 48 are heading to Metroline. Will they be left with enough to cope for the 12 and 176? I think Arriva used some of their existing LTs on route 76, so I think GAL have ample spares for the 15/12/21/453/176/67/87/11/EL, leaving more than enough to fully convert the 5. I'm not even sure any LTs transferred out when the 11 was shortened. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 1, 2024 11:45:29 GMT
Are Camberwell reducing their LT fleet? I've heard that LT'S 41- 48 are heading to Metroline. Will they be left with enough to cope for the 12 and 176? LT41-47 (minus LT45 which isn’t in the fleet) moved to HT replaced by spare LT’s that were mainly used previously as refurb floats. There is no shortage. LT48 hasn’t moved |
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Aug 1, 2024 12:02:03 GMT
Are Camberwell reducing their LT fleet? I've heard that LT'S 41- 48 are heading to Metroline. Will they be left with enough to cope for the 12 and 176? Should just about be enough at Q for the 12/176. However I don't think Go Ahead have enough spares left in their overall LT fleet to fully convert the 5. Might require a small number to transfer from another operator at some point, unless a Go Ahead LT route were to get a PVR cut? |
|
|
|
Post by bustler on Aug 1, 2024 12:08:30 GMT
ok
|
|
|
|
Post by bustler on Aug 1, 2024 12:17:13 GMT
Ok I did read that LT 48 was headed to Metroline for route 17 but maybe not.. Camberwell may have to increase the EH'S and WHV'S on the 176 to cover the LT losses
|
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Aug 1, 2024 12:24:04 GMT
Ok I did read that LT 48 was headed to Metroline for route 17 but maybe not.. Camberwell may have to increase the EH'S and WHV'S on the 176 to cover the LT losses They had replacements arrived beforehand in LT687/901/902 from NP the the former refurb float from East London LT875-8 |
|
|
|
Post by bustler on Aug 1, 2024 12:40:40 GMT
What about the LT spares from RATP Stamford Brook since the 9 and 211 went to different operators.. Could they be employed for the 5 and Camberwell shortfall ?
|
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Aug 1, 2024 12:56:54 GMT
What about the LT spares from RATP Stamford Brook since the 9 and 211 went to different operators.. Could they be employed for the 5 and Camberwell shortfall ? Q currently has LT48/119/189/443-452/454-7/687/845-47/875-78/886-902. So a total of 42 LTs. According to LBR 12 has a pvr of 15 and 176 pvr 22 ... so total of 37 ... so there is no real shortfall. Accepted there are 2 off road, but that is up to Q to get them back on the road. |
|
|
|
Post by bustler on Aug 1, 2024 13:37:49 GMT
Yeah I suppose that's enough to cover, although that only leaves 5 spares, thought you may need more than that especially for LT's
|
|
|
|
Post by paulo on Aug 1, 2024 13:39:48 GMT
What about the LT spares from RATP Stamford Brook since the 9 and 211 went to different operators.. Could they be employed for the 5 and Camberwell shortfall ? Moving to Hounslow for the H98. 3 have gone with the 211 to TUK. |
|
|
|
Post by MKAY315 on Aug 1, 2024 14:12:28 GMT
Are Camberwell reducing their LT fleet? I've heard that LT'S 41- 48 are heading to Metroline. Will they be left with enough to cope for the 12 and 176? I think Arriva used some of their existing LTs on route 76, so I think GAL have ample spares for the 15/12/21/453/176/67/87/11/EL, leaving more than enough to fully convert the 5. I'm not even sure any LTs transferred out when the 11 was shortened. Not quite so the 76 new allocation of buses occurred roughly a week before it went to Arriva by swapping the buses from NX and Q to send it to NP which in turn allowed it to go to Arriva in SF. So in a nutshell the 76 is using buses that came off the 12 and 453 as they were refurbished. |
|
