|
|
Post by DT 11 on Jan 12, 2013 23:48:06 GMT
Gents there is nothing wrong with the 345 in my opinion. Travel on this bus early in the morning & it moves like a rocket & it is a very well used route. Travelling on any bus early In the morning like at 6-7am Is fast depending on the Route. During the day the 345 is quite slow. |
|
|
|
Post by mre81 on Jan 13, 2013 0:02:46 GMT
Streatham High Road is hugely congested which certainly doesn't help with reliability issues on the 319. Whereas the road from Streatham to the Palace is relatively and generally free flowing. I'd imagine it wouldn't take any longer than Streatham to Telford Avenue. It would also reduce bus-gestion on Sreatham High Road itself, and create a more direct link between Streatham and CP than the 249. Iv used the 249 over that section many times and it is not very busy. To extend the 319 to Palace would have to be at the cost of the 249 which if withdrawn would cut capacity on the Streatham to Tooting bec section and Tooting Bec to Clapham common section of road. I don't see why you'd need to withdraw the 249. What I suggested was running the 319 to Crystal Palace direct, whereas the 249 runs via Upper Norwood. |
|
|
|
Post by LX09FBJ on Jan 13, 2013 1:02:21 GMT
Anything that serves Kingston, particulaly the 111 and 213 and the mostly the 216, which serves Sunbury too. Also the 25, for the fact its an uber-frequent (the timetable is 'Midnight to Midnight every 4-8 minutes'), 24 hour route connecting a major hub in EAST London to the centre of London, where as Hounslow (similar in role to Ilford in West London) has only got the 237 (which is not 24-hour and runs every 10 minutes) which only goes up to Shepherd's Bush/White City as opposed to Marble Arch/Oxford Street and it's night 'counterpart' the N9 which runs every 20 minutes on weeknights and a measley 10 minutes on Saturday Night (as opposed to the (N)25s 8 and 6 minutes respecitvely)  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2013 1:26:43 GMT
Streatham High Road is hugely congested which certainly doesn't help with reliability issues on the 319. Whereas the road from Streatham to the Palace is relatively and generally free flowing. I'd imagine it wouldn't take any longer than Streatham to Telford Avenue. It would also reduce bus-gestion on Sreatham High Road itself, and create a more direct link between Streatham and CP than the 249. Iv used the 249 over that section many times and it is not very busy. To extend the 319 to Palace would have to be at the cost of the 249 which if withdrawn would cut capacity on the Streatham to Tooting bec section and Tooting Bec to Clapham common section of road. I was more thinking of extending the 319 to Streatham, Green Lane or Thornton Heath, Clock Tower... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2013 2:41:29 GMT
Streatham High Road is hugely congested which certainly doesn't help with reliability issues on the 319. Whereas the road from Streatham to the Palace is relatively and generally free flowing. I'd imagine it wouldn't take any longer than Streatham to Telford Avenue. It would also reduce bus-gestion on Sreatham High Road itself, and create a more direct link between Streatham and CP than the 249. At its worst from congestion, I have never know it to take longer to get to Telford Avenue from St Leonard's than it does to get to Crystal Palace. And the congestion around Westow Hill can be pretty bad at busy times too because it is just a single lane. I have been on buses that have taken several minutes just to get along that short stretch of road. And when traffic is slow on Streatham High Road, unless it is because of an accident it usually means all the way along the A23, not just north of St Leonard's. So in many cases, by the time it would take a bus to just get to Streatham Common North it could already be at Streatham Hill station. There is also the problem of which garage would the service run from, as it would need a lot of dead running which would only add more risk of delays to what is already a long route. Going to Telford Avenue avoids this problem as it doubles up its terminus with a return to the garage. Belle Vue Road and Trinity Road are far more significant causes of delay than Streatham High Road that even if the route to Crystal Palace was always trouble free it would do nothing to make the route more reliable. The 319 is a route I use regularly and I cannot see any benefit in sending it to Crystal Palace. It destroys links, duplicates routes that have spare capacity, extends an unreliable route by a few miles and adds dead running. |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 13, 2013 3:48:29 GMT
I like the 417 in general, but because of the number of schools it passes it is practically unusable in the early evening period as each bus becomes multiple school ones. The P13 is wholly unsuited towards longer journeys, to Peckham or New Cross, because of the low frequency, risk of turns, and long journey times as it goes around residential streets and gets caught in traffic on Dulwich Common, but is the only route connecting Streatham with south east London. It is like using a hail and ride type service to run a trunk route. As bad as the G1 may be, almost all the major places it links are also connected by high frequency routes. If the 319 is poorly used Telford Avenue-Streatham then it could be diverted from St Leonards Church to Crystal Palace via the 249. Thus adding an extra service on those roads where the dead runs of the 133 caused consternation. It could be tied in with an extension of the 432 to Elmers End, freeing up stand space at Anerley to extend, say, the 417 there to make more stand space at the Palace. The 319 is already unreliable enough because of congestion that to add such any extension, let alone one so long, would make no sense. If any change were to be made it would make more sense to curtail it at St Leonard's where it could use the stand space vacated by the 133 extension, and can then still make the simple run back to the depot when required. Not that I would agree with that, the route is as well used as you would expect of any at the outer end. Telford Avenue is not like Brixton where you have people transferring from the tube so it fills up at the first stop. The 417 is still relatively quick even when school kicking out times begin - I should know as I was a pupil of St. Joseph's College and used the 417 many times. Don't get me wrong though, it isn't perfect and an extension at both ends to Clapham Junction via the 35, 37 & to Anerley via the 157, 249, 358 & 432 (432 extended to Elmers End) & a new timetable would greatly improve the route. I don't agree about the 319 being unreliable, buses seem to arrive quite quicker than I expect. |
|
|
|
Post by ilovelondonbuses on Jan 13, 2013 7:54:53 GMT
The whole reason why 319 stops at Telford Avenue is that where BN is and it is where drivers can change. If 319 gets extend to Crystal Palace (I think it is not a viable idea) it increase dead mileage, increase the costs of driver ferrying because the route would not will have BN as its southern terminus. Also the 319 is unreliable. It usually on time according to it's timetable when I use it.
However, 249 is such a problem route come 8' O Clock it is a mayhem 40+ from Streatham mostly school kids push others to get into the bus because they know the bus is not frequent as it should be. On the plus side, the route is better under Go Ahead than Arriva.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2013 8:22:12 GMT
I can't see how the 249 and 319 to Crystal Palace can be justified, surely its either one or the other?
|
|
|
|
Post by mre81 on Jan 13, 2013 14:53:33 GMT
The whole reason why 319 stops at Telford Avenue is that where BN is and it is where drivers can change. If 319 gets extend to Crystal Palace (I think it is not a viable idea) it increase dead mileage, increase the costs of driver ferrying because the route would not will have BN as its southern terminus. Also the 319 is unreliable. It usually on time according to it's timetable when I use it. However, 249 is such a problem route come 8' O Clock it is a mayhem 40+ from Streatham mostly school kids push others to get into the bus because they know the bus is not frequent as it should be. On the plus side, the route is better under Go Ahead than Arriva. Is there still space at N after the 249 went to AL? If so the 319 could fill that, negating the need to run dead to BN. When the 133 went to N, there was quite a lot of local opinion requesting it run in service along Streatham Common, suggesting there might be some untapped usage along that stretch. As said before the 249 is not direct CP-Streatham, and as you've stated above "the service is not as frequent as it should be". I agree the Crystal Palace traingle is a bit of a traffic nightmare, that needs to and should be resolved anyway. Improved traffic light frequencies and some minor re-working of the road layout and parking areas could go a long way to solve the problems. (Or a Tramlink extension to CP, please Boris  ) Anyway it was just a suggestion  |
|
|
|
Post by mre81 on Jan 13, 2013 14:55:55 GMT
Streatham High Road is hugely congested which certainly doesn't help with reliability issues on the 319. Whereas the road from Streatham to the Palace is relatively and generally free flowing. I'd imagine it wouldn't take any longer than Streatham to Telford Avenue. It would also reduce bus-gestion on Sreatham High Road itself, and create a more direct link between Streatham and CP than the 249. At its worst from congestion, I have never know it to take longer to get to Telford Avenue from St Leonard's than it does to get to Crystal Palace. And the congestion around Westow Hill can be pretty bad at busy times too because it is just a single lane. I have been on buses that have taken several minutes just to get along that short stretch of road. And when traffic is slow on Streatham High Road, unless it is because of an accident it usually means all the way along the A23, not just north of St Leonard's. So in many cases, by the time it would take a bus to just get to Streatham Common North it could already be at Streatham Hill station. There is also the problem of which garage would the service run from, as it would need a lot of dead running which would only add more risk of delays to what is already a long route. Going to Telford Avenue avoids this problem as it doubles up its terminus with a return to the garage. Belle Vue Road and Trinity Road are far more significant causes of delay than Streatham High Road that even if the route to Crystal Palace was always trouble free it would do nothing to make the route more reliable. The 319 is a route I use regularly and I cannot see any benefit in sending it to Crystal Palace. It destroys links, duplicates routes that have spare capacity, extends an unreliable route by a few miles and adds dead running. Extends the route by 1 mile exactly on mainly free-running roads. If it went to N there would be less dead-running, and creates new links, whereas there are plenty of routes serving Streathm High Rd (although admittedly not from Tooting Common).... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 13, 2013 14:59:37 GMT
The 11 at weekends between Trafalgar Square and Liverpool Street - tourist hell.
And any route the performs double runs , particulary the 265 Tolworth bound going around Bessborough Road. De ja vu when you end up back at the Earl Spencer , with more people getting on.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 13, 2013 15:52:41 GMT
The whole reason why 319 stops at Telford Avenue is that where BN is and it is where drivers can change. If 319 gets extend to Crystal Palace (I think it is not a viable idea) it increase dead mileage, increase the costs of driver ferrying because the route would not will have BN as its southern terminus. Also the 319 is unreliable. It usually on time according to it's timetable when I use it. However, 249 is such a problem route come 8' O Clock it is a mayhem 40+ from Streatham mostly school kids push others to get into the bus because they know the bus is not frequent as it should be. On the plus side, the route is better under Go Ahead than Arriva. Is there still space at N after the 249 went to AL? If so the 319 could fill that, negating the need to run dead to BN. When the 133 went to N, there was quite a lot of local opinion requesting it run in service along Streatham Common, suggesting there might be some untapped usage along that stretch. As said before the 249 is not direct CP-Streatham, and as you've stated above "the service is not as frequent as it should be". I agree the Crystal Palace traingle is a bit of a traffic nightmare, that needs to and should be resolved anyway. Improved traffic light frequencies and some minor re-working of the road layout and parking areas could go a long way to solve the problems. (Or a Tramlink extension to CP, please Boris ) Anyway it was just a suggestion The only problem with the one way system that I can see is the traffic lights at the Westow Hill/Westow Street/Gypsy Hill/Central Hill junction which are inadequatly timed heading into Crystal Palace as traffic usually stretches down Central Hill as far as Rockmount Road. The one way system is a good thing as it allows all routes to interchange with each other. |
|
|
|
Post by marlon101 on Jan 13, 2013 16:10:04 GMT
The 11 at weekends between Trafalgar Square and Liverpool Street - tourist hell. And any route the performs double runs , particulary the 265 Tolworth bound going around Bessborough Road. De ja vu when you end up back at the Earl Spencer , with more people getting on. Are you familiar with the 11 in weekdays/mornings? I'm considering applying for a job on the King's Road which would require early morning arrival (i.e. 0800 from SE London), via a train to CHX and then the 11 down but unfamiliar with peak time journey times |
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Aug 21, 2013 11:45:07 GMT
I have to add routes 29, 38, 41, 67, 73, 76, 106, 121, 141, 144, 149, 230, 243 and 279 to the list of routes I detest. Mostly due to the buses they use. Very, very boring, generic buses I strongly dislike. I literally yawn when chat on here turns to HVs, DWs, DW590-DW614 transferring from E to AD, ALN orders 769 HVs for route **...etc. Same thing regarding E400s and E200. I do wish Arriva would stop replacing 9+ year old buses at any given chance with Ts or DWs or HVs or ENXs (though I understand their reasons for doing so), and if they are to buy new buses, then order something different and interesting, such as some DD103s or Citaros...  I'll have to also add route 202 to the list. It's a very useful route connecting many areas, with the excellent MCV Evolutions, however all of my recent journeys on it haven't been that pleasant. By that I mean terribly overcrowded buses and worst of all, very slow half-asleep drivers who have no problem in being many minutes behind the timetable times for no apparent reason  (meaning I miss other buses/trains I was scheduled to catch!). |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Aug 21, 2013 12:18:43 GMT
I have to add routes 29, 38, 41, 67, 73, 76, 106, 121, 141, 144, 149, 230, 243 and 279 to the list of routes I detest. Mostly due to the buses they use. Very, very boring, generic buses I strongly dislike. I literally yawn when chat on here turns to HVs, DWs, DW590-DW614 transferring from E to AD, ALN orders 769 HVs for route **...etc. Same thing regarding E400s and E200. I do wish Arriva would stop replacing 9+ year old buses at any given chance with Ts or DWs or HVs or ENXs (though I understand their reasons for doing so), and if they are to buy new buses, then order something different and interesting, such as some DD103s or Citaros... I'll have to also add route 202 to the list. It's a very useful route connecting many areas, with the excellent MCV Evolutions, however all of my recent journeys on it haven't been that pleasant. By that I mean terribly overcrowded buses and worst of all, very slow half-asleep drivers who have no problem in being many minutes behind the timetable times for no apparent reason (meaning I miss other buses/trains I was scheduled to catch!). That's probably ibus telling them to hold back as they are too close to their leader. |
|
)
(meaning I miss other buses/trains I was scheduled to catch!).
