|
Post by vjaska on Jan 29, 2018 1:57:45 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) 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. An extension to the 196 to Russell Square isn't particularly workable in today's climate - it can take a age just to get from Norwood Junction to Elephant & Castle. Personally, the saying, "if it isn't broke, don't fix it" applies to the 68, 196 & 468. The 196 provides excellent links in it's current form, the 68 is well used despite what some may think whilst the 468 is fine as it is though the Waterloo extension is a good suggestion - not sure about stand space though
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 29, 2018 2:01:15 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. Even here there are solutions if a bit far-fetched. Extend route 201 to Peckham, extend route 337 to Clapham Common or Brixton, and withdraw route 37. All three suggestions there wouldn't work well - the 201 is already lengthy and suffers from heavy traffic in places and extending it via the 37 leaves Dulwich with less capacity. The 337 could go to Clapham Common but it would miss the main shopping area & station and stand space is slightly less since the works at Old Town whilst Brixton might be a step too far. The 37 is an extremely important route offering one of the very east to west links across South London and one that suffers from heavy loads and unreliability - it really needs extra help as apposed to withdrawing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 29, 2018 4:22:30 GMT
Even here there are solutions if a bit far-fetched. Extend route 201 to Peckham, extend route 337 to Clapham Common or Brixton, and withdraw route 37. All three suggestions there wouldn't work well - the 201 is already lengthy and suffers from heavy traffic in places and extending it via the 37 leaves Dulwich with less capacity. The 337 could go to Clapham Common but it would miss the main shopping area & station and stand space is slightly less since the works at Old Town whilst Brixton might be a step too far. The 37 is an extremely important route offering one of the very east to west links across South London and one that suffers from heavy loads and unreliability - it really needs extra help as apposed to withdrawing. I was thinking about suggesting some tinkering with the 37 corridor, Of the three 37 variations between Hounslow and Peckham , the 337 is the least busy, the least frequent and arguably duplicated apart from between Barnes and Putney, Most Richmond dwellers won’t use the 337 to Putney onwards because of the train links which shadow its entire length, So, is there scope for TfL to withdraw the 337 , put some of the resources saved onto the 37 to increase the frequency and \ or divert it to run via the 337 down to Barnes, over the bridge to Barnes Station and terminate it at Barnes Pond. You may need a school day route from East Sheen towards Putney as well depending on how far towards Putneythe kids travel. Alternately reinstate double deck school day trips on the 33 between Richmond and Barnes Red Lion. If the 33 ever gets double decks, this would further increase capacity along the East Sheen stretch of the A205 as well , plus you already have the 493 which is also busier than the 337, which suggests it’s links are more popular than the 337’s. Another alternative would be send the H37 down into East Sheen, perhaps as far as Barnes Common instead of the “ Theres nowhere else to stand the buses “ situation at Manor Circus, combined with the 37 deviation to Barnes Pond.
|
|
|
Post by fg49 on Jan 29, 2018 5:48:53 GMT
All three suggestions there wouldn't work well - the 201 is already lengthy and suffers from heavy traffic in places and extending it via the 37 leaves Dulwich with less capacity. The 337 could go to Clapham Common but it would miss the main shopping area & station and stand space is slightly less since the works at Old Town whilst Brixton might be a step too far. The 37 is an extremely important route offering one of the very east to west links across South London and one that suffers from heavy loads and unreliability - it really needs extra help as apposed to withdrawing. I was thinking about suggesting some tinkering with the 37 corridor, Of the three 37 variations between Hounslow and Peckham , the 337 is the least busy, the least frequent and arguably duplicated apart from between Barnes and Putney, Most Richmond dwellers won’t use the 337 to Putney onwards because of the train links which shadow its entire length, So, is there scope for TfL to withdraw the 337 , put some of the resources saved onto the 37 to increase the frequency and \ or divert it to run via the 337 down to Barnes, over the bridge to Barnes Station and terminate it at Barnes Pond. You may need a school day route from East Sheen towards Putney as well depending on how far towards Putneythe kids travel. Alternately reinstate double deck school day trips on the 33 between Richmond and Barnes Red Lion. If the 33 ever gets double decks, this would further increase capacity along the East Sheen stretch of the A205 as well , plus you already have the 493 which is also busier than the 337, which suggests it’s links are more popular than the 337’s. Another alternative would be send the H37 down into East Sheen, perhaps as far as Barnes Common instead of the “ Theres nowhere else to stand the buses “ situation at Manor Circus, combined with the 37 deviation to Barnes Pond. The 37 barely copes now, removing the 337 would only make things worse. Maybe extending the 337 to Clapham North using Lendall Terrace as a stand whilst cutting the 37 back to Wandsworth can help balance things out.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 29, 2018 8:33:02 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. I don't doubt that dolly stops have been stolen or moved by pranksters but that's not a reason to just not to bother anymore nor is vague health and safety criteria, of course there's no consideration for the health and safety of people who have to walk to or from the next stop especially elderly and disabled people. It seems with any roadworks bus stops in the vicinity are routinely closed regardless of whether they actually need to be or not.
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 29, 2018 10:10:40 GMT
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” It's not quite random, they tend to do them at roughly similar times as part of their daily schedule although of course they have to shake it up every so often. They report any drivers 4 mph (I think) over the limit. It's only carried out for a short amount of time before the drivers realise and phone up their mates. As soon as the controllers have finished the buses speed right back up again. That is correct, if the speed limit in the bus station is 10 mph and you are caught doing 15mph and over by the speed gun it would be a report, 14mph you would get away with it and probably a slap on the wrist.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 29, 2018 11:21:35 GMT
All three suggestions there wouldn't work well - the 201 is already lengthy and suffers from heavy traffic in places and extending it via the 37 leaves Dulwich with less capacity. The 337 could go to Clapham Common but it would miss the main shopping area & station and stand space is slightly less since the works at Old Town whilst Brixton might be a step too far. The 37 is an extremely important route offering one of the very east to west links across South London and one that suffers from heavy loads and unreliability - it really needs extra help as apposed to withdrawing. I was thinking about suggesting some tinkering with the 37 corridor, Of the three 37 variations between Hounslow and Peckham , the 337 is the least busy, the least frequent and arguably duplicated apart from between Barnes and Putney, Most Richmond dwellers won’t use the 337 to Putney onwards because of the train links which shadow its entire length, So, is there scope for TfL to withdraw the 337 , put some of the resources saved onto the 37 to increase the frequency and \ or divert it to run via the 337 down to Barnes, over the bridge to Barnes Station and terminate it at Barnes Pond. You may need a school day route from East Sheen towards Putney as well depending on how far towards Putneythe kids travel. Alternately reinstate double deck school day trips on the 33 between Richmond and Barnes Red Lion. If the 33 ever gets double decks, this would further increase capacity along the East Sheen stretch of the A205 as well , plus you already have the 493 which is also busier than the 337, which suggests it’s links are more popular than the 337’s. Another alternative would be send the H37 down into East Sheen, perhaps as far as Barnes Common instead of the “ Theres nowhere else to stand the buses “ situation at Manor Circus, combined with the 37 deviation to Barnes Pond. The 337 is the quietest out of the 37, 337 & H37 but that's no big surprise given where it operates. How good is the trainline through Mortlake & Sheen? The H37 would probably be too frequent personally to run down to Barnes but an interesting idea that one. That said, there are still decent loadings on the 337 and I'm not sure I agree that the 493 is busier out of the two. One thing is for sure, I certainly wouldn't divert the 37 over to Barnes as it's just asking for trouble personally and I wouldn't want an even more unreliable route given how unpredictable the South Circular is. I'd leave it for now until we see if the 33 get double decked which I'm doubtful it will but if it does, then a review should be done along Upper Richmond Road but I'd still like to see the retention of the 337 in some form.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 29, 2018 11:27:22 GMT
I was thinking about suggesting some tinkering with the 37 corridor, Of the three 37 variations between Hounslow and Peckham , the 337 is the least busy, the least frequent and arguably duplicated apart from between Barnes and Putney, Most Richmond dwellers won’t use the 337 to Putney onwards because of the train links which shadow its entire length, So, is there scope for TfL to withdraw the 337 , put some of the resources saved onto the 37 to increase the frequency and \ or divert it to run via the 337 down to Barnes, over the bridge to Barnes Station and terminate it at Barnes Pond. You may need a school day route from East Sheen towards Putney as well depending on how far towards Putneythe kids travel. Alternately reinstate double deck school day trips on the 33 between Richmond and Barnes Red Lion. If the 33 ever gets double decks, this would further increase capacity along the East Sheen stretch of the A205 as well , plus you already have the 493 which is also busier than the 337, which suggests it’s links are more popular than the 337’s. Another alternative would be send the H37 down into East Sheen, perhaps as far as Barnes Common instead of the “ Theres nowhere else to stand the buses “ situation at Manor Circus, combined with the 37 deviation to Barnes Pond. The 37 barely copes now, removing the 337 would only make things worse. Maybe extending the 337 to Clapham North using Lendall Terrace as a stand whilst cutting the 37 back to Wandsworth can help balance things out. Lendal Terrace suffers from parked cars due to the businesses under the railway arches and is also used by the 322 but if you can make room by removing the parking spaces, then it's possible. If the old road layout at the Clapham Park Road junction with Park Hill & Abbeville Road was still in place (it's been gone since the early 00's), you could run buses to there and allow them to turn around and stand there otherwise Brixton is the next option which would stretch the 337 a tad.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 29, 2018 15:37:13 GMT
All three suggestions there wouldn't work well - the 201 is already lengthy and suffers from heavy traffic in places and extending it via the 37 leaves Dulwich with less capacity. The 337 could go to Clapham Common but it would miss the main shopping area & station and stand space is slightly less since the works at Old Town whilst Brixton might be a step too far. The 37 is an extremely important route offering one of the very east to west links across South London and one that suffers from heavy loads and unreliability - it really needs extra help as apposed to withdrawing. I was thinking about suggesting some tinkering with the 37 corridor, Of the three 37 variations between Hounslow and Peckham , the 337 is the least busy, the least frequent and arguably duplicated apart from between Barnes and Putney, Most Richmond dwellers won’t use the 337 to Putney onwards because of the train links which shadow its entire length, So, is there scope for TfL to withdraw the 337 , put some of the resources saved onto the 37 to increase the frequency and \ or divert it to run via the 337 down to Barnes, over the bridge to Barnes Station and terminate it at Barnes Pond. You may need a school day route from East Sheen towards Putney as well depending on how far towards Putneythe kids travel. Alternately reinstate double deck school day trips on the 33 between Richmond and Barnes Red Lion. If the 33 ever gets double decks, this would further increase capacity along the East Sheen stretch of the A205 as well , plus you already have the 493 which is also busier than the 337, which suggests it’s links are more popular than the 337’s. Another alternative would be send the H37 down into East Sheen, perhaps as far as Barnes Common instead of the “ Theres nowhere else to stand the buses “ situation at Manor Circus, combined with the 37 deviation to Barnes Pond. Interesting idea about extending the H37, presumably if it wasn't for the low bridge at Isleworth the 337 would be Hounslow to Clapham Junction like the western end of the 37 used to be?
|
|
|
Post by twobellstogo on Jan 29, 2018 23:16:23 GMT
Not expecting replies, but oh gosh the front upstairs seat on Wright Gemini 2s is a great place to rest orchestral scores while you’re practicing conducting, while listening to the score on my phone (via earbuds of course!). Apologies to passengers on WVL224 on the 161 this afternoon 😂
|
|
|
Post by beaver14uk on Jan 29, 2018 23:40:41 GMT
It is random and not similar times and it's 14mph and above you are reported. uote author=" capitalomnibus" source="/post/415036/thread" timestamp="1517220640"] It's not quite random, they tend to do them at roughly similar times as part of their daily schedule although of course they have to shake it up every so often. They report any drivers 4 mph (I think) over the limit. It's only carried out for a short amount of time before the drivers realise and phone up their mates. As soon as the controllers have finished the buses speed right back up again. That is correct, if the speed limit in the bus station is 10 mph and you are caught doing 15mph and over by the speed gun it would be a report, 14mph you would get away with it and probably a slap on the wrist. [/quote]
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Jan 30, 2018 7:28:10 GMT
Is the 453 currently cut to Baker Street station? I feel I haven’t seen a 453 to Marylebone for ages...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 30, 2018 7:43:16 GMT
Is the 453 currently cut to Baker Street station? I feel I haven’t seen a 453 to Marylebone for ages... Temporarily cut back for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Jan 30, 2018 8:00:50 GMT
Is the 453 currently cut to Baker Street station? I feel I haven’t seen a 453 to Marylebone for ages... It's been cut back until May, so you won't see a Marylebone working for a good while.
|
|
|
Post by northken on Jan 30, 2018 10:00:03 GMT
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. I don't doubt that dolly stops have been stolen or moved by pranksters but that's not a reason to just not to bother anymore nor is vague health and safety criteria, of course there's no consideration for the health and safety of people who have to walk to or from the next stop especially elderly and disabled people. It seems with any roadworks bus stops in the vicinity are routinely closed regardless of whether they actually need to be or not. You'll notice that in some parts of London there are (permanent) stops without any E tiles (the little plates with the route numbers on them). They're the easiest part of a stop to break off and in places where they are nicked very frequently they're just permanently removed by TfL. One of the most subtle ways of finding out if an area is dodgy.
|
|