|
Post by busaholic on Jan 28, 2018 20:46:44 GMT
Yes the 68 could be withdrawn completely, it's a pale shadow of the route it once was, although I think that is unlikely. I could see the overlap with the 468 reduced though with the 68 curtailed at Herne Hill and the 468 at Camberwell Green. Someone suggested something similar last week. Once again, I strongly disagree with your point, being someone who lives along both routes. The 68 and 468 are very busy during peak hours, especially between Camberwell and Norwood, where both routes serve a lot of schools. Taking away one link would only put a great strain on the other. Besides, as I said before. Herne Hill is not an adequate place to have both the 68 and 201 terminating there simulateonously. The current stand, on Dulwich Road is on a rather narrow road, in which, the stand can often block the northbound traffic during busy times. Plus the stand can only hold two buses, which often is occupied by two 201s. I totally agree with you. There is no room to terminate at Herne Hill, exacerbated by the changes to road layout over the last few years. In addition, the Herne Hill to Norwood corridor has included two problematic routes in the 196 (over many years) and the 322, with its small buses, both routes changing operator seemingly at every opportunity. There is, and has always been in my fifty years experience of the route, a desire by many from Upper Norwood, Crown Point, West Norwood and Tulse Hill to travel by bus through to Waterloo, Aldwych and points north thereof, and the X68 only caters for the outer limits. The 2 is only any good for the west of the West End and the 3s are rammed by Herne Hill. Please don't anyone say 'hopper fare' or I shall snort!
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 28, 2018 21:05:29 GMT
Someone suggested something similar last week. Once again, I strongly disagree with your point, being someone who lives along both routes. The 68 and 468 are very busy during peak hours, especially between Camberwell and Norwood, where both routes serve a lot of schools. Taking away one link would only put a great strain on the other. Besides, as I said before. Herne Hill is not an adequate place to have both the 68 and 201 terminating there simulateonously. The current stand, on Dulwich Road is on a rather narrow road, in which, the stand can often block the northbound traffic during busy times. Plus the stand can only hold two buses, which often is occupied by two 201s. I totally agree with you. There is no room to terminate at Herne Hill, exacerbated by the changes to road layout over the last few years. In addition, the Herne Hill to Norwood corridor has included two problematic routes in the 196 (over many years) and the 322, with its small buses, both routes changing operator seemingly at every opportunity. There is, and has always been in my fifty years experience of the route, a desire by many from Upper Norwood, Crown Point, West Norwood and Tulse Hill to travel by bus through to Waterloo, Aldwych and points north thereof, and the X68 only caters for the outer limits. The 2 is only any good for the west of the West End and the 3s are rammed by Herne Hill. Please don't anyone say 'hopper fare' or I shall snort! Well as you're probably aware there hasn't been a regular all day service from Upper Norwood to Central London for many years, just the peak hour X68 so nothing is going to change there and West Norwood and Tulse Hill have the option of the 2 of course. I think if it comes to the crunch you might have to do a bit better than that to save the 68 south of Herne Hill and stand space isn't an insurmountable problem.
|
|
|
Post by paulsw2 on Jan 28, 2018 22:00:24 GMT
I totally agree with you. There is no room to terminate at Herne Hill, exacerbated by the changes to road layout over the last few years. In addition, the Herne Hill to Norwood corridor has included two problematic routes in the 196 (over many years) and the 322, with its small buses, both routes changing operator seemingly at every opportunity. There is, and has always been in my fifty years experience of the route, a desire by many from Upper Norwood, Crown Point, West Norwood and Tulse Hill to travel by bus through to Waterloo, Aldwych and points north thereof, and the X68 only caters for the outer limits. The 2 is only any good for the west of the West End and the 3s are rammed by Herne Hill. Please don't anyone say 'hopper fare' or I shall snort! Well as you're probably aware there hasn't been a regular all day service from Upper Norwood to Central London for many years, just the peak hour X68 so nothing is going to change there and West Norwood and Tulse Hill have the option of the 2 of course. I think if it comes to the crunch you might have to do a bit better than that to save the 68 south of Herne Hill and stand space isn't an insurmountable problem. How about the fact that the 468 are heavily loaded BY West Norwood the 68 helps alleviate the overcrowding and give people choice (I live just off the route myself and know what I am talking about regarding peak off peak evenings and weekend loadings)
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 28, 2018 22:11:28 GMT
Well as you're probably aware there hasn't been a regular all day service from Upper Norwood to Central London for many years, just the peak hour X68 so nothing is going to change there and West Norwood and Tulse Hill have the option of the 2 of course. I think if it comes to the crunch you might have to do a bit better than that to save the 68 south of Herne Hill and stand space isn't an insurmountable problem. How about the fact that the 468 are heavily loaded BY West Norwood the 68 helps alleviate the overcrowding and give people choice (I live just off the route myself and know what I am talking about regarding peak off peak evenings and weekend loadings) Well that's not been my experience, plenty of spare capacity from my observations and I have family in the area, 468 much busier at the Croydon end.
|
|
|
Post by ak121 on Jan 28, 2018 22:24:30 GMT
Is there heavy demand for the N279 between Trafalgar Square and Manor House? I think it may be beneficial for TfL to axe route N279 and introduce a 24 hour service on route 279, if only there is demand for a night time service between Manor House and Waltham Cross? The N29 may need to be increased in frequency. The current N29 leaves Trafalgar Square every 8-10 mins and the current N279 leaves approx every 20 mins. The N29 may need to be increased to every 6-7 mins and the new 279N could operate at the same frequency as the current N279.
|
|
|
Post by beaver14uk on Jan 28, 2018 22:30:47 GMT
Yes all the staffed bus stations have regular speed checks carried out. uote author=" sid" source="/post/414887/thread" timestamp="1517166295"] Do the bus station controllers have to randomly observe bus speed in the relevant bus station? Was at Addingtom Village and noticed that on here computer she was filling a “speed gun report form” I've seen a controller at West Croydon with a speed gun on a few occasions.[/quote]
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jan 28, 2018 22:31:52 GMT
Is there heavy demand for the N279 between Trafalgar Square and Manor House? I think it may be beneficial for TfL to axe route N279 and introduce a 24 hour service on route 279, if only there is demand for a night time service between Manor House and Waltham Cross? The N29 may need to be increased in frequency. The current N29 leaves Trafalgar Square every 8-10 mins and the current N279 leaves approx every 20 mins. The N29 may need to be increased to every 6-7 mins and the new 279N could operate at the same frequency as the current N279. Yes to link Waltham Cross with Central London at Night.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jan 28, 2018 23:16:55 GMT
Is there heavy demand for the N279 between Trafalgar Square and Manor House? I think it may be beneficial for TfL to axe route N279 and introduce a 24 hour service on route 279, if only there is demand for a night time service between Manor House and Waltham Cross? The N29 may need to be increased in frequency. The current N29 leaves Trafalgar Square every 8-10 mins and the current N279 leaves approx every 20 mins. The N29 may need to be increased to every 6-7 mins and the new 279N could operate at the same frequency as the current N279. That would represent an INCREASE in bph between Trafalgar Square and Manor House, as well as increase on the rest of the N29 just after it's been cut!
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Jan 28, 2018 23:25:26 GMT
Well as you're probably aware there hasn't been a regular all day service from Upper Norwood to Central London for many years, just the peak hour X68 so nothing is going to change there and West Norwood and Tulse Hill have the option of the 2 of course. I think if it comes to the crunch you might have to do a bit better than that to save the 68 south of Herne Hill and stand space isn't an insurmountable problem. How about the fact that the 468 are heavily loaded BY West Norwood the 68 helps alleviate the overcrowding and give people choice (I live just off the route myself and know what I am talking about regarding peak off peak evenings and weekend loadings) Perhaps I'm a born optimist, but I could envisage a re-extension of the 196 to Russell Square, perhaps. I also remember in the early 1970s a regular p.m. peak 'short' service on the 68 from Waterloo to South Croydon. If the 468 got extended to Waterloo, then just maybe you could get rid of the 68, but you'd need peak extras from Euston southbound on the 168.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 28, 2018 23:30:18 GMT
Is there heavy demand for the N279 between Trafalgar Square and Manor House? I think it may be beneficial for TfL to axe route N279 and introduce a 24 hour service on route 279, if only there is demand for a night time service between Manor House and Waltham Cross? The N29 may need to be increased in frequency. The current N29 leaves Trafalgar Square every 8-10 mins and the current N279 leaves approx every 20 mins. The N29 may need to be increased to every 6-7 mins and the new 279N could operate at the same frequency as the current N279. Haven't used it recently but I have been a full N279 all the way from TCR to Seven Sisters. The Camden - Holloway - F Park - Tottenham corridor is busy all the time and it isn't all covered by the tube network. Remember there are a lot of student residences on this corridor which will partly explain the strong demand at night. Obviously I don't have any up to date number for the last year or so - demand may have dropped somewhat at weekends because of the wretched Night Tube.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 28, 2018 23:55:19 GMT
Is there heavy demand for the N279 between Trafalgar Square and Manor House? I think it may be beneficial for TfL to axe route N279 and introduce a 24 hour service on route 279, if only there is demand for a night time service between Manor House and Waltham Cross? The N29 may need to be increased in frequency. The current N29 leaves Trafalgar Square every 8-10 mins and the current N279 leaves approx every 20 mins. The N29 may need to be increased to every 6-7 mins and the new 279N could operate at the same frequency as the current N279. I think the N279 could be withdrawn between Camden Town and Trafalgar Square Friday and Saturday nights when the tube is running.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 29, 2018 0:08:03 GMT
Just heard about an incident in Catford where a passenger used the emergency door controls to force the driver to stop at the Beechfield Road stop coming out of Catford that is covered up apparently for no logical reason, there is some roadworks nearby but it does not necessitate closure of the stop. Whilst such behaviour cannot be condoned I do understand the frustration of passengers especially when the next stop is some distance away. And what's happened to dolly stops, have they been banned for some obscure H&S reason? I did hear something about them being stolen but surely they can be chained to a lamppost or something?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 29, 2018 0:56:42 GMT
Just heard about an incident in Catford where a passenger used the emergency door controls to force the driver to stop at the Beechfield Road stop coming out of Catford that is covered up apparently for no logical reason, there is some roadworks nearby but it does not necessitate closure of the stop. Whilst such behaviour cannot be condoned I do understand the frustration of passengers especially when the next stop is some distance away. And what's happened to dolly stops, have they been banned for some obscure H&S reason? I did hear something about them being stolen but surely they can be chained to a lamppost or something? Some dolly stops go get nicked in some areas. However the whole issue about adequate space away from hazards for buses to stop flush against the kerb and risk assessments has led to a huge reduction in temporary stop usage in recent years. I have noticed that Waltham Forest's main highway contractor actually has a stock of dolly stops and they send some out for works which are likely to affect bus stops. I also saw a load of them in a Thames Water depot off Lea Bridge Road - I assume for the same reason. I dread the appearance of road works as it usually means a ridiculous slog to the nearest stop. The last time we had major works affecting my local stop I got extremely stroppy with the local council and insisted they drag TfL back and find a place for a temporary stop as there was plenty of space for one if someone used a bit of brain power. Amazingly we got one put in which saved a slog up a hill or a walk back in the opposite direction.
|
|
|
Post by rhys on Jan 29, 2018 1:14:10 GMT
How about the fact that the 468 are heavily loaded BY West Norwood the 68 helps alleviate the overcrowding and give people choice (I live just off the route myself and know what I am talking about regarding peak off peak evenings and weekend loadings) Well that's not been my experience, plenty of spare capacity from my observations and I have family in the area, 468 much busier at the Croydon end. Not at all, during rush hour the 468 is always busy between E&C and West Norwood. Back in my school days, you'd often have 468's zoom past, as they were too full. Even of recent, you often see the 468 taking on a lot passengers at the first stop in E&C. I will agree that during off peak hours there is a lot of spare capacity.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 29, 2018 1:53:17 GMT
Someone suggested something similar last week. Once again, I strongly disagree with your point, being someone who lives along both routes. The 68 and 468 are very busy during peak hours, especially between Camberwell and Norwood, where both routes serve a lot of schools. Taking away one link would only put a great strain on the other. Besides, as I said before. Herne Hill is not an adequate place to have both the 68 and 201 terminating there simulateonously. The current stand, on Dulwich Road is on a rather narrow road, in which, the stand can often block the northbound traffic during busy times. Plus the stand can only hold two buses, which often is occupied by two 201s. I totally agree with you. There is no room to terminate at Herne Hill, exacerbated by the changes to road layout over the last few years. In addition, the Herne Hill to Norwood corridor has included two problematic routes in the 196 (over many years) and the 322, with its small buses, both routes changing operator seemingly at every opportunity. There is, and has always been in my fifty years experience of the route, a desire by many from Upper Norwood, Crown Point, West Norwood and Tulse Hill to travel by bus through to Waterloo, Aldwych and points north thereof, and the X68 only caters for the outer limits. The 2 is only any good for the west of the West End and the 3s are rammed by Herne Hill. Please don't anyone say 'hopper fare' or I shall snort! The 196 has not been inadequate since Connex began running it - before then, it was a shambles with buses regularly running very late & due to the staff shortages at London General, it was operated temporarily by London Central with some of the worn out members of the T class. When it went back to London General, the VC's continued for a couple of years before being replaced early by worn out M's. Once Connex took over, the route greatly improved and people flocked back to it and London General's 2nd spell has been miles better than their previous one. The 322 has also become a lot better since it was diverted at Stockwell Green to Clapham Common - the old routing with it's heavy demand coupled with having to run short single door buses was the reason why at one point, it was London's worst route. The short single door buses are inadequate at times as it gets very busy but otherwise, it's a lot better than what it was.
|
|