|
Post by galwhv69 on Mar 16, 2018 19:13:46 GMT
why are boris buses (🤢) not getting scrapped ? Why indeed. Truth be known.who would buy them? Not even Shri Lanka would have them or north korea
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 16, 2018 21:40:28 GMT
BorisBikes though, that's funny. I thought the cyclist lobby was still pulling TfL's strings 🤔 I predict a tantrum coming!!! Actually I don't predict a tantrum at all. The Cycle Hire scheme costs an utter fortune and has a massive subsidy. If you're making cuts to the bus network to cut costs but keeping the cycle hire scheme something is very seriously wrong. While Santander are a much better sponsor than Barclays ever were the entire scheme really is a waste of money. So much physical infrastructure and associated back room systems just so people can toddle on a bike from a station to near their offices or for tourists to ride willy nilly around Central London. I'm sorry but I've never seen the point of it. What the cycle lobby wants is safe infrastructure for people who own bikes to use. I've never seen any of them defend or even praise the cycle hire scheme. That's why I predict no tantrums. They may demand that whatever money was spent on the cycle hire scheme be retained in the cycling budget but that's a different issue to be honest. The other factor is the growth of alternative hire schemes where bikes are simply left on the pavement near transport hubs and the payment / "booking" process is all done online or via an app with no on street racks. I am sure TfL would not be averse to seeing such schemes (properly managed) to replace their current expensive scheme.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Mar 16, 2018 22:15:04 GMT
As always, I like to snatch a quote from the article to best remember it by. Today it's in the form of an online poster on the Evening Standard, who said: "London's buses have been round since 1933. Khan ruined them in less than three years." Oh my! What strikes me about this article is the lack of fight TfL have left in them, hugely connected to that cut government grant. At any sign of innovative competition (biggest indirect reference to Uber here), they fold their hands and bow over without challenging it. Shoreditch is not a big a mess it used to be with taxi traffic/congesiton, but Liverpool Street is still as bad as it was a year ago; and TfL still choose to do nothing about it! Not surprised they've rolled over and looking to give up on the Santander cycle scheme. As for the Emirates Air line; I've always said the day it is in line with normal oyster fares is the day I step foot on one. Now that it's looking to be sold off, I still have no ambition to be suspended in the air over the river Thames at a premium rate; when walking under the Thames or using the Tube & DLR to the same destinations will be just as quick and cost me less.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 16, 2018 22:54:41 GMT
As always, I like to snatch a quote from the article to best remember it by. Today it's in the form of an online poster on the Evening Standard, who said: "London's buses have been round since 1933. Khan ruined them in less than three years." Oh my! What strikes me about this article is the lack of fight TfL have left in them, hugely connected to that cut government grant. At any sign of innovative competition (biggest indirect reference to Uber here), they fold their hands and bow over without challenging it. Shoreditch is not a big a mess it used to be with taxi traffic/congesiton, but Liverpool Street is still as bad as it was a year ago; and TfL still choose to do nothing about it! Not surprised they've rolled over and looking to give up on the Santander cycle scheme. As for the Emirates Air line; I've always said the day it is in line with normal oyster fares is the day I step foot on one. Now that it's looking to be sold off, I still have no ambition to be suspended in the air over the river Thames at a premium rate; when walking under the Thames or using the Tube & DLR to the same destinations will be just as quick and cost me less. As I have said before an "informed source" told me a while back that TfL is strangled by City Hall. It can't be seen to have any fight. It must be subsurvient to the regime at City Hall which is stricter and more controlling than in the past. No independent views or comments are allowed. I'm actually astonished that Mike Brown made his remarks about the Dangleway and Cycle Hire but I assume that had been fully agreed with City Hall and he was considered the best person to "pitch" the ideas in the public arena and await a reaction. I dare say we will get a flurry of Mayor's Questions in May (no meetings in April) but, of course, it's not easy for the Mayor's opponents because all the Mayor will say is "and what would you do given the financial situation?". No easy answers - especially for the Tory AMs as a former Tory Mayor and former Tory Chancellor and current Tory Transport Secretary have their fingers all over the decisions that have helped create this mess.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 17, 2018 18:17:42 GMT
More temporary bus stop rantings. One of my local stops was closed two days ago for cycle lane works. A temporary stop was provided near the t >:Dop of my street. A temporary stop has been located here before *by TfL*. The stop was in use for two days without any apparent incident. I headed out today and thankfully gave myself a few minutes. Get to the top of the street - stop vanished. Get to the normal bus stop - notice from TfL saying use the Bell Corner or the preceding stop which is near 7 minute walk uphill for us older persons. Sigh! I had to dash at a fair pace to get to the Bell to avoid a 13 minutes wait in freezing conditions. What is it with TfL that means temporary stops are now an endangered species? The previous use of a temporary stop at the top of my road was agreed with TfL and Council reps - I know this because I saw them having a site meeting about it. Why on earth has this not been retained within TfL so that we can retain a bus stop rather than having to take much longer to get to and from a stop. Grrrrrr. In Ilford both stops are closed at Northbrook Road, again without replacement. Also in Ilford the paving works have resulted in the closure of one of the main stops at the station. There actually is a temporary stop located past the pedestrian crossing near a betting shop but there's no dolly stop just a temporary flag attached to a lamp post but no route numbers showing nor any other notice. Bizarrely not a single person was waiting at this stop but more than double the normal amount at Beal Road which is one heck of a trek from the station. Anyone who knows Ilford will know the station stops are very busy. In short what a mess.
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Mar 17, 2018 21:03:42 GMT
The 12 subsidiaries of LBL were sold off in 1992 (London Coaches) and 1994 (unless you count South London receiving its preferred bidder Cowie but completing the sale in January 1995). Anyway, with so much consolidation and a few operators pulling out, we effectively have only 10 London bus contractors now.
|
|
|
Post by Green Kitten on Mar 18, 2018 2:02:57 GMT
I hate the N91.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 18, 2018 2:29:13 GMT
More temporary bus stop rantings. One of my local stops was closed two days ago for cycle lane works. A temporary stop was provided near the t >:Dop of my street. A temporary stop has been located here before *by TfL*. The stop was in use for two days without any apparent incident. I headed out today and thankfully gave myself a few minutes. Get to the top of the street - stop vanished. Get to the normal bus stop - notice from TfL saying use the Bell Corner or the preceding stop which is near 7 minute walk uphill for us older persons. Sigh! I had to dash at a fair pace to get to the Bell to avoid a 13 minutes wait in freezing conditions. What is it with TfL that means temporary stops are now an endangered species? The previous use of a temporary stop at the top of my road was agreed with TfL and Council reps - I know this because I saw them having a site meeting about it. Why on earth has this not been retained within TfL so that we can retain a bus stop rather than having to take much longer to get to and from a stop. Grrrrrr. In Ilford both stops are closed at Northbrook Road, again without replacement. Also in Ilford the paving works have resulted in the closure of one of the main stops at the station. There actually is a temporary stop located past the pedestrian crossing near a betting shop but there's no dolly stop just a temporary flag attached to a lamp post but no route numbers showing nor any other notice. Bizarrely not a single person was waiting at this stop but more than double the normal amount at Beal Road which is one heck of a trek from the station. Anyone who knows Ilford will know the station stops are very busy. In short what a mess. Or you have this situation - I noticed yesterday that the northbound Blenheim Gardens bus stop on Brixton Hill has the yellow "Bus Stop not in use" flag yet there is nothing there or even nearby blocking the stop. A dolly stop has been erected a little way down the road and buses are stopping in both spots which is extremely bizarre.
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Mar 18, 2018 9:00:04 GMT
Lol, could you discuss with us why?
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on Mar 18, 2018 22:40:52 GMT
Goodbye 👋 Abellio 172 - Final buses Operated by Abellio London 😢 by DoubleDeckerAnton ft a special guest - youtu.be/SVafWvjzg90
|
|
|
Post by T.R. on Mar 19, 2018 20:58:02 GMT
It's 2055, on a 91 at Seven Sisters Road. And a sole RPI has boarded. I suspect there'll be a PF or two being given. Hmm, day route is worse! N91 has fast drivers and low running times (except the last Southbound journey)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 20, 2018 20:43:19 GMT
Wasn't sure where to put this but have a question about crosslinking. I assume it makes schedules more efficient but can't get my head around for example say a bus is used on the X68 in the peak then works onto the 188 is a bus not needed to cover on the 188 whilst the X68 is worked? The same with school buses when they go on to day routes. I am sure it makes sense but can't get my head around how they work
|
|
|
Post by galwhv69 on Mar 20, 2018 21:01:26 GMT
Todays Rant:Drivers opening the rear door for a too short amount and not everyone managing to get off,drivers refusing to open the rear doors again so queue builds up so boarding the bus cannot be done then passengers letting themselves off with the emergency exit button. Why can't drivers leave the door open long enough or at least reopen the doors.Its so bl**dy simple! *RANT OVER*
|
|
|
Post by lonmark on Mar 20, 2018 21:04:40 GMT
Todays Rant:Drivers opening the rear door for a too short amount and not everyone managing to get off,drivers refusing to open the rear doors again so queue builds up so boarding the bus cannot be done then passengers letting themselves off with the emergency exit button. Why can't drivers leave the door open long enough or at least reopen the doors.Its so bl**dy simple! *RANT OVER* Passengers do have right to get off if take ages to get up from seat and on the way though to the Rear door. It is bus driver's job to make sure that passengers wish to get off. If Passenger say oi or hey, i want to get off but not my fault for get time to get though the busy packed! Driver should open it unless passenger can press emergency button to allowed Rear door open at the risk.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 20, 2018 21:12:48 GMT
Todays Rant:Drivers opening the rear door for a too short amount and not everyone managing to get off,drivers refusing to open the rear doors again so queue builds up so boarding the bus cannot be done then passengers letting themselves off with the emergency exit button. Why can't drivers leave the door open long enough or at least reopen the doors.Its so bl**dy simple! *RANT OVER* In fairness it can be difficult for a driver to know who is and isn't getting off although they should reopen the doors if requested to do so.
|
|