|
Post by SILENCED on Jun 26, 2022 18:18:32 GMT
The Night service on the 159 is not pointless, you should see how busy buses are at Night coming from Oxford Circus... And what’s the N109 like? Could the N109 cope by itself if the night service of the 159 with a frequency increased to every 15 minutes? Seeing as the N109 and N159 combined are 4bph, then yes it would cope. It would cost more as the Streatham-Croydon section would see an increase from 2bph to 4bph. The N159 is basically there to save TfL money.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on Jun 26, 2022 18:23:51 GMT
And what’s the N109 like? Could the N109 cope by itself if the night service of the 159 with a frequency increased to every 15 minutes? Seeing as the N109 and N159 combined are 4bph, then yes it would cope. It would cost more as the Streatham-Croydon section would see an increase from 2bph to 4bph. The N159 is basically there to save TfL money. Oh I see.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Jun 26, 2022 19:21:06 GMT
I agree. To be honest, there can't be that many truly pointless routes in London because let's face it TFL wouldn't be funding them. Well it also Tfl who are funding the 600 NB4Ls and are they not pointless? The 13 and 139 have the same line of route with the same PVR expect for the 139 splits off and goes to Hampstead Heath near Marylebone Station. What I'm saying is cut the 13, therefore cutting costs, and use the cut costs to extend the 139 to Golders Green and increase the PVR. Also increase the PVR of the 82 to cope with the loss of the 13 between Finchley Road and Fortune Green. It would save a dam sight more money than running the 13. This increase would make the 139 journey time increase by about 15 minutes and that's stretching it. Predicted the future... but didn't predict how awful the new 13/82 would be!
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jun 26, 2022 20:03:35 GMT
And what’s the N109 like? Could the N109 cope by itself if the night service of the 159 with a frequency increased to every 15 minutes? Seeing as the N109 and N159 combined are 4bph, then yes it would cope. It would cost more as the Streatham-Croydon section would see an increase from 2bph to 4bph. The N159 is basically there to save TfL money. There's no need for all buses to be sent to Croydon. Have every alternative bus terminate at Streatham, preferably timed well so passengers can transfer to the N250. That screams the most logic instead of keeping both the N109 and 159N, but TfL is keen not to go back to the days of the old N159 with buses terminating at Streatham, Croydon and New Addington.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jun 26, 2022 20:05:00 GMT
Seeing as the N109 and N159 combined are 4bph, then yes it would cope. It would cost more as the Streatham-Croydon section would see an increase from 2bph to 4bph. The N159 is basically there to save TfL money. There's no need for all buses to be sent to Croydon. Have every alternative bus terminate at Streatham, preferably timed well so passengers can transfer to the N250. That screams the most logic instead of keeping both the N109 and 159N, but TfL is keen not to go back to the days of the old N159 with buses terminating at Streatham, Croydon and New Addington. How about extending the N250 over the 159?
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jun 26, 2022 20:13:08 GMT
There's no need for all buses to be sent to Croydon. Have every alternative bus terminate at Streatham, preferably timed well so passengers can transfer to the N250. That screams the most logic instead of keeping both the N109 and 159N, but TfL is keen not to go back to the days of the old N159 with buses terminating at Streatham, Croydon and New Addington. How about extending the N250 over the 159? In favour over the N109? Nope, it's the most direct way to Croydon from central London, so a tad pointless to swap for a slightly more indirect route. Due to Brixton being a hub for night life and having an extensive night bus network, there's no need to extend the N250 further north. No great unique links would be generated by doing so.
|
|
|
Post by BE37054 (quoll662) on Jun 26, 2022 20:15:42 GMT
How about extending the N250 over the 159? In favour over the N109? Nope, it's the most direct way to Croydon from central London, so a tad pointless to swap for a slightly more indirect route. Due to Brixton being a hub for night life and having an extensive night bus network, there's no need to extend the N250 further north. No great unique links would be generated by doing so. No instead of the 159 night service.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Jun 26, 2022 20:32:52 GMT
Seeing as the N109 and N159 combined are 4bph, then yes it would cope. It would cost more as the Streatham-Croydon section would see an increase from 2bph to 4bph. The N159 is basically there to save TfL money. There's no need for all buses to be sent to Croydon. Have every alternative bus terminate at Streatham, preferably timed well so passengers can transfer to the N250. That screams the most logic instead of keeping both the N109 and 159N, but TfL is keen not to go back to the days of the old N159 with buses terminating at Streatham, Croydon and New Addington. So just timetable the 159N to arrive a minute or two before an N250 at Brixton? I don't think it's neccesary to change anything else - the 159N is pretty much already the alternative bus terminating at Streatham. Withdrawing the 159N or replacing it with the N250 is just extra steps for the same result.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 26, 2022 21:35:49 GMT
Seeing as the N109 and N159 combined are 4bph, then yes it would cope. It would cost more as the Streatham-Croydon section would see an increase from 2bph to 4bph. The N159 is basically there to save TfL money. There's no need for all buses to be sent to Croydon. Have every alternative bus terminate at Streatham, preferably timed well so passengers can transfer to the N250. That screams the most logic instead of keeping both the N109 and 159N, but TfL is keen not to go back to the days of the old N159 with buses terminating at Streatham, Croydon and New Addington. Small correction - the N159 didn't terminate at Croydon, in the south it was just the old Streatham Garage (blinded as Streatham Station) and New Addington. The old N109 also had the same termini along with the extra terminus of Coulsdon, Red Lion as the old N109 had two journeys per hour beyond Streatham with one to New Addington & one to Coulsdon, Red Lion before the N68 came along and took over the Coulsdon section. The last two southbound N109's would terminate at Kennington Church. Personally, the N159 should of remained rather than how it is now - it worked in it's old form.
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jun 26, 2022 21:47:15 GMT
There's no need for all buses to be sent to Croydon. Have every alternative bus terminate at Streatham, preferably timed well so passengers can transfer to the N250. That screams the most logic instead of keeping both the N109 and 159N, but TfL is keen not to go back to the days of the old N159 with buses terminating at Streatham, Croydon and New Addington. Small correction - the N159 didn't terminate at Croydon, in the south it was just the old Streatham Garage (blinded as Streatham Station) and New Addington. The old N109 also had the same termini along with the extra terminus of Coulsdon, Red Lion as the old N109 had two journeys per hour beyond Streatham with one to New Addington & one to Coulsdon, Red Lion before the N68 came along and took over the Coulsdon section. The last two southbound N109's would terminate at Kennington Church. Personally, the N159 should of remained rather than how it is now - it worked in it's old form. Apologies, I knew the N159 was 6bph up to Streatham. It was a bit messy though with buses heading past Streatham southbound. I guess TfL couldn't stump up with the delays the New Addington buses had coming out of central London. I too was a bit sad to see the N159 go but even you can admit it wasn't the most reliable route. As abellion said the 159N kinda acts like the Streatham shorts, but there is an opportunity for synergy savings if the 159N were to be absorbed into the N109. Considering the 100% duplication of the 159 on the N109's northern section, I personally think it's worth considering.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Jun 27, 2022 10:06:49 GMT
Small correction - the N159 didn't terminate at Croydon, in the south it was just the old Streatham Garage (blinded as Streatham Station) and New Addington. The old N109 also had the same termini along with the extra terminus of Coulsdon, Red Lion as the old N109 had two journeys per hour beyond Streatham with one to New Addington & one to Coulsdon, Red Lion before the N68 came along and took over the Coulsdon section. The last two southbound N109's would terminate at Kennington Church. Personally, the N159 should of remained rather than how it is now - it worked in it's old form. Apologies, I knew the N159 was 6bph up to Streatham. It was a bit messy though with buses heading past Streatham southbound. I guess TfL couldn't stump up with the delays the New Addington buses had coming out of central London. I too was a bit sad to see the N159 go but even you can admit it wasn't the most reliable route. As abellion said the 159N kinda acts like the Streatham shorts, but there is an opportunity for synergy savings if the 159N were to be absorbed into the N109. Considering the 100% duplication of the 159 on the N109's northern section, I personally think it's worth considering. How about reducing on duplication by rerouting the N109 via Stockwell and Clapham Road?
|
|
|
Post by enviroPB on Jun 27, 2022 10:47:53 GMT
Apologies, I knew the N159 was 6bph up to Streatham. It was a bit messy though with buses heading past Streatham southbound. I guess TfL couldn't stump up with the delays the New Addington buses had coming out of central London. I too was a bit sad to see the N159 go but even you can admit it wasn't the most reliable route. As abellion said the 159N kinda acts like the Streatham shorts, but there is an opportunity for synergy savings if the 159N were to be absorbed into the N109. Considering the 100% duplication of the 159 on the N109's northern section, I personally think it's worth considering. How about reducing on duplication by rerouting the N109 via Stockwell and Clapham Road? Again not really necessary with 4bph combined (weeknights) from the N2 and 345N to Stockwell, and 4bph from the N155. Getting out of the realms of my knowledge of the night bus network in that area here, but to vastly minimise on duplication would see the N109 perhaps divert to Vauxhall up to County Hall or maybe over Lambeth Bridge to Parliament Square. It's a lot of faff for very little, if no benefit. Best to leave the N109 route structure alone in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by someone on Jun 27, 2022 16:11:48 GMT
The R9. Why can't the just extend it to Green Street Green via Chelsfield Lane, Warren Lane and the R1? Also, maybe there could be a possible northern extension to Perry Hall Road? The R9 isn't useless - see this is the issue with this thread. For something to be useless, it must have no use for existing at all and yet using the R9, the R9 exists by providing a direct link from Ramsden Estate to Oprington Station, the top of the high street & Walnuts Centre. Yes, but it's so short it could just serve as an extension of the R3.
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Jun 27, 2022 17:00:54 GMT
The R9 isn't useless - see this is the issue with this thread. For something to be useless, it must have no use for existing at all and yet using the R9, the R9 exists by providing a direct link from Ramsden Estate to Oprington Station, the top of the high street & Walnuts Centre. Yes, but it's so short it could just serve as an extension of the R3.
The R9 is more frequent, has slightly longer operational hours and uses higher capacity buses than the R3 through.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 27, 2022 17:51:06 GMT
The R9 isn't useless - see this is the issue with this thread. For something to be useless, it must have no use for existing at all and yet using the R9, the R9 exists by providing a direct link from Ramsden Estate to Oprington Station, the top of the high street & Walnuts Centre. Yes, but it's so short it could just serve as an extension of the R3.
No it can’t - even a driver who knows the area better than me has told you that the R9 does the job
|
|