Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2015 11:13:42 GMT
200 uses a fleet of majority single deckers with certain double deckers at times. I doubt will it actually help relieve stress on the 200 unless If the demand is so high like 285 except (metroline?) Dosen't convert it to DD which I guess it will be useful then.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 26, 2015 11:36:51 GMT
In terms of routeing, I would say 131. 90% of the route is overlapped by 57. Wimbledon --> Tooting Broadway was also overlapped by 219. If I were to modify the 131, I will either: 1. Kingston <--> Mitcham Via 200, and 200 is now going to tooting broadway instead. 219 will convert to DD and serve tooting high street. 2. 152 extends to Kingston (Fairfield) <--> Pollards hill through the original 131 route to colliers wood plus DD conversion. 131 will serve Tooting Broadway and Kingston through Wimbledon chase and Merton park. Another example is the 209. I would modify it by Either: 1. Extend to Acton Central 2. Extend to South Kensington 3. Extend to Kew Retail Park If you swap the 131 & 152's routings, you then heap way too much pressure onto the 131 and I can guarantee you'll have a far more unreliable 131 then at present. The traffic between Tooting Broadway and Colliers Wood is a nightmare as is the section between Wimbledon Chase and Merton Park. Personally, I'd do the following: Double deck the 152, 200 & 219. Divert the 131 via Tooting, St. George's Hospital towards Tooting Broadway only. This allows Kingston journeys to remain serving the same stop as the 57 at Tooting Broadway otherwise the 57 could become even more heavily loaded here. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jan 26, 2015 12:37:31 GMT
In terms of routeing, I would say 131. 90% of the route is overlapped by 57. Wimbledon --> Tooting Broadway was also overlapped by 219. If I were to modify the 131, I will either: 1. Kingston <--> Mitcham Via 200, and 200 is now going to tooting broadway instead. 219 will convert to DD and serve tooting high street. 2. 152 extends to Kingston (Fairfield) <--> Pollards hill through the original 131 route to colliers wood plus DD conversion. 131 will serve Tooting Broadway and Kingston through Wimbledon chase and Merton park. Another example is the 209. I would modify it by Either: 1. Extend to Acton Central 2. Extend to South Kensington 3. Extend to Kew Retail Park And yet yesterday there was a chap ranting at TfL on Twitter about waiting for an hour for a 57 during Sunday daytime to get from Wimbledon to Kingston. Don't know why a 131 was no good for him but if buses are that bad on a Sunday then something needs sorting either in terms of capacity or the traffic. It doesn't strike me as terribly sensible to scrap the 131 given it was put in place to relieve the completely overloaded 57 in the Tooting - Kingston corridor. I confess I am not overly familiar with that bit of SW London so may not be aware of some of the local traffic issues. |
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Jan 26, 2015 22:37:16 GMT
In terms of routeing, I would say 131. 90% of the route is overlapped by 57. Wimbledon --> Tooting Broadway was also overlapped by 219. If I were to modify the 131, I will either: 1. Kingston <--> Mitcham Via 200, and 200 is now going to tooting broadway instead. 219 will convert to DD and serve tooting high street. 2. 152 extends to Kingston (Fairfield) <--> Pollards hill through the original 131 route to colliers wood plus DD conversion. 131 will serve Tooting Broadway and Kingston through Wimbledon chase and Merton park. Another example is the 209. I would modify it by Either: 1. Extend to Acton Central 2. Extend to South Kensington 3. Extend to Kew Retail Park The 209 isn't useless - it links a very densely populated residential area with a major local town centre and transport interchange. Castelnau really needs double deck routes, but the Hammersmith Bridge constraints preclude them from running. Despite it being one of the most frequent routes in London, buses heading into Hammersmith in the mornings are still crowded. |
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Jan 26, 2015 22:46:18 GMT
Useless: Not fulfilling or not expected to achieve the intended purpose or desired outcome. I'd nominate the 40. Unreasonably slow running and extra long changeovers are irksome, but it's the high chance of the bus being curtailed at very short notice which makes it a bad service. It runs almost exclusively along corridors with parallel high frequency services. Given I usually end up on an alternative route after one is taken out of service mid route, it isn't terribly useful. It is an anomaly in a local network where most of the other services are very good and run well. But because of the way the 40 is operated, I actually let it go and wait for another bus in most circumstances. That said, my travel patterns are somewhat less routine than the average user - its a useful service to tens of thousands of people every day, especially with recent local issues with the East Dulwich to London Bridge rail service. People put up with being ejected mid route and accept it, probably because an alternative is never far behind. Unlike the denizens of the less radial C10, who revolt once they've had enough! I agree, the 40 isn't really useless it just shares its journey with several other bus routes, but what it does is connect Aldgate/London Bridge and Camberwell/Dulwich and provide relief for other parallel bus routes. I would extend the 40 to Lower Sydenham or Crystal Palace to give it more length and purpose. I'm not saying it's useless because it shares its journey with other bus routes. There is a lack of utility for me personally because of the operator's practice of indiscriminate, capricious curtailments! |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 26, 2015 23:11:53 GMT
In terms of routeing, I would say 131. 90% of the route is overlapped by 57. Wimbledon --> Tooting Broadway was also overlapped by 219. If I were to modify the 131, I will either: 1. Kingston <--> Mitcham Via 200, and 200 is now going to tooting broadway instead. 219 will convert to DD and serve tooting high street. 2. 152 extends to Kingston (Fairfield) <--> Pollards hill through the original 131 route to colliers wood plus DD conversion. 131 will serve Tooting Broadway and Kingston through Wimbledon chase and Merton park. Another example is the 209. I would modify it by Either: 1. Extend to Acton Central 2. Extend to South Kensington 3. Extend to Kew Retail Park The 209 isn't useless - it links a very densely populated residential area with a major local town centre and transport interchange. Castelnau really needs double deck routes, but the Hammersmith Bridge constraints preclude them from running. Despite it being one of the most frequent routes in London, buses heading into Hammersmith in the mornings are still crowded. It's a pity Hammersmith Bridge can't be sorted out and the 9 returned to Mortlake |
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Jan 28, 2015 2:27:16 GMT
I agree, the 40 isn't really useless it just shares its journey with several other bus routes, but what it does is connect Aldgate/London Bridge and Camberwell/Dulwich and provide relief for other parallel bus routes. I would extend the 40 to Lower Sydenham or Crystal Palace to give it more length and purpose. I'm not saying it's useless because it shares its journey with other bus routes. There is a lack of utility for me personally because of the operator's practice of indiscriminate, capricious curtailments! I generally agree with your statement about the fact that the 40 is unreasonably slow and is often curtailed. I stated as you have that the 40 shares its route with parallel high-frequency services as a reason for why I personally think it should be extended, just to give it more purpose and exclusivity. This could possibly end the curtailments as a result. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2015 2:16:47 GMT
I think the N63 is a useless night bus I've just waited 45 minutes for one I got to the bus stop at 01:05 waited for the 01:20 bus but it never turned up and waited until 01:51 when one turned up, either put a pvr increase for during the week or go back to the old night timetable or scrap route.
|
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Feb 19, 2015 8:37:05 GMT
I think the N63 is a useless night bus I've just waited 45 minutes for one I got to the bus stop at 01:05 waited for the 01:20 bus but it never turned up and waited until 01:51 when one turned up, either put a pvr increase for during the week or go back to the old night timetable or scrap route. Perhaps the 1:20 bus was mechanical or staff went sick on duty. |
|
|
|
Post by maximus23 on Feb 21, 2015 18:11:30 GMT
The 390.
Just extend the 10 back to archway and use the previous NB4Ls from the 390 to provide between kings cross and archway.
|
|
|
|
Post by thesquirrels on Feb 21, 2015 19:20:36 GMT
The 390. Just extend the 10 back to archway and use the previous NB4Ls from the 390 to provide between kings cross and archway. The old full length 10 had appalling reliability problems. You'd have to recycle most of the buses saved from the 390 just to have a robust enough schedule, then there's the matter of lost capacity down Bayswater Road. Not something I'd want to see happen. |
|
|
|
Post by maximus23 on Feb 21, 2015 23:25:58 GMT
The 390. Just extend the 10 back to archway and use the previous NB4Ls from the 390 to provide between kings cross and archway. The old full length 10 had appalling reliability problems. You'd have to recycle most of the buses saved from the 390 just to have a robust enough schedule, then there's the matter of lost capacity down Bayswater Road. Not something I'd want to see happen. Extend the 12 back to Notting hill from Oxford circus to solve the bayswater road issue. I miss that connection. I to have realised the sometimes faulty reliability along sections of both routes 10 & 390 but surely using the buses from both routes and combining them will make a more reliable and structured service? |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Feb 22, 2015 0:47:05 GMT
The old full length 10 had appalling reliability problems. You'd have to recycle most of the buses saved from the 390 just to have a robust enough schedule, then there's the matter of lost capacity down Bayswater Road. Not something I'd want to see happen. Extend the 12 back to Notting hill from Oxford circus to solve the bayswater road issue. I miss that connection. I to have realised the sometimes faulty reliability along sections of both routes 10 & 390 but surely using the buses from both routes and combining them will make a more reliable and structured service? The problem is traffic has dramatically increased to such an extent that merging routes back together could have a detrimental impact. The 12 idea is an idea I had a few years back that would give the 148 much needed assistance but could impact on the 12's reliability. |
|
|
|
Post by thesquirrels on Feb 22, 2015 8:05:57 GMT
Extend the 12 back to Notting hill from Oxford circus to solve the bayswater road issue. I miss that connection. I to have realised the sometimes faulty reliability along sections of both routes 10 & 390 but surely using the buses from both routes and combining them will make a more reliable and structured service? The problem is traffic has dramatically increased to such an extent that merging routes back together could have a detrimental impact. The 12 idea is an idea I had a few years back that would give the 148 much needed assistance but could impact on the 12's reliability. I suppose you could run the 12 in it's old sections again - would more or less match the lost capacity of the 390 west of Marble Arch and operationally you could contain the damage when Oxford Street goes into 'operation stack'. Though in the current TfL climate you would need a new number for one of the legs. I gather 392 is available..  |
|
|
|
Post by george on Aug 13, 2020 15:55:15 GMT
At this moment in time right now one of the most useless routes in London is the 209.
|
|
