|
|
Post by DT 11 on Aug 13, 2013 10:50:53 GMT
75 to Blackheath via the 202 and withdraw the 202, possibly the worst idea ever. The 75 is a well used like between Lewisham & Croydon. 417 to Lewisham, I had to laugh at this, this is possibly the worst extension idea. Via Catford well tbh the route would be even worse than the 202, coming from Clapham Common as far as that. The 202 can just about cope at times, but the 417. Well hang on, first you say the 202 was the worst idea ever but then the 417 is, do you have to be so dismissive of what people put forward? The Mid Kent line to Elmers End and Tramlink is a far quicker route from Lewisham to Croydon, oh I'd also extend the 54 back to Croydon if thats ok with you? There is clearly a need for more east/west links, extending the 249 to Lewisham instead would be another option...........or would that be an even worse idea? The 249 to Lewisham is a bad idea, will make the service unreliable and the service currently is not all that easy to operate. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Aug 13, 2013 10:51:59 GMT
Well hang on, first you say the 202 was the worst idea ever but then the 417 is, do you have to be so dismissive of what people put forward? The Mid Kent line to Elmers End and Tramlink is a far quicker route from Lewisham to Croydon, oh I'd also extend the 54 back to Croydon if thats ok with you? There is clearly a need for more east/west links, extending the 249 to Lewisham instead would be another option...........or would that be an even worse idea? If the desire is for better east-west links then wouldn't first step be better links to the hubs that link to these places - i.e. Brixton and Elephant. Something from Lewisham to Elephant would be useful, and a better link from Lewisham to Brixton (that isn't so overloaded) would be another good start - maybe a double decking of the P4 somehow. The 75 over the Lewisham - Blackheath section wouldn't be a terrible idea if it weren't for the large amount of traffic the 75 runs into and the high frequency that would probably be needed to cope with the extra loadings. A link from Blackheath to Croydon again would be probably a good thing, as would better links from Lee and Hither Green. Another problem would be how you would replace the southern section of the 202 - I don't think there are many through journeys from south of Catford to north of Catford though I may be wrong. I wouldn't think the 417 would be the best way to achieve that - you'd probably need a new route entirely which would rather defeat the point of the whole exercise. The 54 back to Croydon would not be a bad idea, maybe with the 289 withdrawn on that section to compensate. Actually of people use the 202 from Lee - Sydenham.. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 11:23:23 GMT
40 to Crystal Palace Or 12 to Crystal Palace using more or less the same pvr but with reduced frequency (route appearantly is over bussed anyway) Either route would create a direct link between Crystal Palace and Camberwell Green I think the 40 would be a better candidate to be extended to Palace rather than the 12, would like to see the 12 return to it's Notting Hill Gate to Dulwich Plough routing to relieve the 148 of some of the strain it gets in Central London with the 390 cut back to Oxford Circus. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Aug 13, 2013 11:24:34 GMT
Since the withdrawal of the Kidbrooke loop I've noticed the 178 has a lot of running time. It is now a common to see two 178s standing at Lewisham & Woolwich, previously used to be one arrives another leaves. 178 on average now takes about half an hour end to end.
I personally think it could be extended to Thamesmead via the 244 as this would provide new links and some more assistance for the 244 and I think the 244 could be altered and diverted to Eltham Station instead of QEH as the 178 would be a more direct link.
Reason I've suggested this is because the 244 in the peaks does become overcrowded and I think the 178 to Thamesmead would be better than extending the 380 which is quite long due to the many back streets it serves.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 11:34:01 GMT
Besides the 202 is quite pouplar so there is no need to withdraw it It would obviously be replaced by other routes In my own view, if a route is popular, which seems to be the case regarding the 202, then it should be left as it is, unless for example, slight tweaks in frequencies or deckers being in introduced are being proposed. The 249 or 417 being extended to Lewisham would be good because, as you said and what I've said in the past, more east to west links across South London are needed, but it would need a hell of a lot of resources chucked at them including a sizeable PVR increase. A 249 extension to Lower Sydenham could work though with the 417 slotting in to Anerley Station. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Aug 13, 2013 11:35:46 GMT
It would obviously be replaced by other routes In my own view, if a route is popular, which seems to be the case regarding the 202, then it should be left as it is, unless for example, slight tweaks in frequencies or deckers being in introduced are being proposed. The 249 or 417 being extended to Lewisham would be good because, as you said and what I've said in the past, more east to west links across South London are needed, but it would need a hell of a lot of resources chucked at them including a sizeable PVR increase. A 249 extension to Lower Sydenham could work though with the 417 slotting in to Anerley Station. The 417 is a better route to extend. IMO the 249 serves too many traffic hot spots. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 11:38:09 GMT
I was thinking of a new school route to help the 417 which serves so many schools despite not being a seriously long route end to end. The route gets very overcrowded during school times and I think a new 677 routing via the 417 could relieve the numbers of school kids away from the 417. Two journeys in the mornings with two in the afternoons. N can use their VLA's  |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 11:40:30 GMT
In my own view, if a route is popular, which seems to be the case regarding the 202, then it should be left as it is, unless for example, slight tweaks in frequencies or deckers being in introduced are being proposed. The 249 or 417 being extended to Lewisham would be good because, as you said and what I've said in the past, more east to west links across South London are needed, but it would need a hell of a lot of resources chucked at them including a sizeable PVR increase. A 249 extension to Lower Sydenham could work though with the 417 slotting in to Anerley Station. The 417 is a better route to extend. IMO the 249 serves too many traffic hot spots. True and it's longer of the two routes as well. That said, only Streatham & Balham are the two main traffic hotspots as it misses the Tooting Broadway & Clapham High Street areas. |
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Aug 13, 2013 12:07:17 GMT
New route 306, Norwood Junction Station to Kingston Vale, Robin Hood Lane
Via: Park Road Thornton Heath Station Thornton Heath Pond/ Croydon University Hospital Canterbury Road Mitcham Road/Croydon Road Mitcham, Cricket Green Church Road/Merantum Way South Wimbledon Station Hartfield Road Wimbledon Station Parkside Roehampton Vale, AsdaKingston Vale, Robin Hood LaneEvery 13 minutes, operated by Arriva London with spare Euro 3 DLAs from route 34.  |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 12:17:48 GMT
New route 306, Norwood Junction Station to Kingston Vale, Robin Hood Lane
Via: Park Road Thornton Heath Station Thornton Heath Pond/ Croydon University Hospital Canterbury Road Mitcham Road/Croydon Road Mitcham, Cricket Green Church Road/Merantum Way South Wimbledon Station Hartfield Road Wimbledon Station Parkside Roehampton Vale, AsdaKingston Vale, Robin Hood LaneEvery 13 minutes, operated by Arriva London with spare Euro 3 DLAs from route 34. I do like the basic idea of this route, seems very workable & provides an east to west link - myself, I'd slightly alter the routing in places but I'd keep it serving the main places such as Norwood Junction, Kingston & Roehampton Vales, Wimbledon & Mitcham. |
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on Aug 13, 2013 12:21:23 GMT
New route 306, Norwood Junction Station to Kingston Vale, Robin Hood Lane
Via: Park Road Thornton Heath Station Thornton Heath Pond/ Croydon University Hospital Canterbury Road Mitcham Road/Croydon Road Mitcham, Cricket Green Church Road/Merantum Way South Wimbledon Station Hartfield Road Wimbledon Station Parkside Roehampton Vale, AsdaKingston Vale, Robin Hood LaneEvery 13 minutes, operated by Arriva London with spare Euro 3 DLAs from route 34. Those DLAs are too old for anither contract. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 12:22:37 GMT
New route 306, Norwood Junction Station to Kingston Vale, Robin Hood Lane
Via: Park Road Thornton Heath Station Thornton Heath Pond/ Croydon University Hospital Canterbury Road Mitcham Road/Croydon Road Mitcham, Cricket Green Church Road/Merantum Way South Wimbledon Station Hartfield Road Wimbledon Station Parkside Roehampton Vale, AsdaKingston Vale, Robin Hood LaneEvery 13 minutes, operated by Arriva London with spare Euro 3 DLAs from route 34. Those DLAs are too old for anither contract. The DLA's could do 2 years of the contract, then new buses take over  |
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Aug 13, 2013 12:22:37 GMT
I'd slightly alter the routing in places... How so? Those DLAs are too old for anither contract. Couldn't they be used for another 2 years (the 412's 03 reg buses are being used till 2015)? |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Aug 13, 2013 12:29:26 GMT
I'd slightly alter the routing in places... How so? For me, it wouldn't run via Park Road - I'd run it via South Norwood Hill & Whitehorse Lane which would help the 468 along that section at busy times. Canterbury Road - could it not run via the 289's routing which would help it out along Thornton Road rather than another bus along that section of London Road even if Canterbury Road is not far down. Merantum Way - pretty dead road where very few people even board the 470 along there. Other than that, I think the rest of the routing is good. |
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Aug 13, 2013 13:17:24 GMT
For me, it wouldn't run via Park Road - I'd run it via South Norwood Hill & Whitehorse Lane which would help the 468 along that section at busy times. That section of the 468/X68 very quiet most of the time. The only time it's busy is in the mornings when people wait for the X68. Running via Park Road has the advantage of providing buses to that road and being more direct. Canterbury Road - could it not run via the 289's routing which would help it out along Thornton Road rather than another bus along that section of London Road even if Canterbury Road is not far down. It would provide better interchange with other routes at Thornton Heath Pond(60, 64, 109), run via Mayday Hospital (useful link) and provide a bus route to the currently 'unbused' Canterbury Road. Again, Thornton Road isn't busy enough to warrant anoher route running along here. Better to up the frequency on the 289 IMO. Merantum Way - pretty dead road where very few people even board the 470 along there. Ideally it would run via Colliers Wood Station and Merton High Street, but running via Merantun Way would mean it skips much of the traffic. |
|
