|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 6, 2023 18:34:23 GMT
Didn't the late snoggle champion how useful the 357 was at assisting the other routes along the corridor as well as providing more of a link to the hospital that parts of Chingford Mount wouldn't have given the W16 doesn't serve as much? I do give credit to the 357 for being the only hospital link between Chingford Mount and Walthamstow, otherwise it's just duplication of a lot of local routes Could divert the 212 at Walthamstow Central to run to Whipps Cross for the hospital. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Jan 6, 2023 19:36:57 GMT
I do give credit to the 357 for being the only hospital link between Chingford Mount and Walthamstow, otherwise it's just duplication of a lot of local routes Could divert the 212 at Walthamstow Central to run to Whipps Cross for the hospital. From what I heard TfL have recently been developing options for improving services to Whipps Cross hospital and one of them in consideration was re-routing the W16 via the stand to allow a direct hospital service from Chingford Mount and Hingham Hill. Whilst the 357 already provides the link. I think the idea may be the pushing point to withdraw it on the lines it will "simply the network". The least I can personally see in compensation for capacity lost of the withdrawal is increasing the 215's frequency. |
|
|
|
Post by northlondon83 on Jan 6, 2023 19:37:47 GMT
I do give credit to the 357 for being the only hospital link between Chingford Mount and Walthamstow, otherwise it's just duplication of a lot of local routes Could divert the 212 at Walthamstow Central to run to Whipps Cross for the hospital. The 212 doesn't serve the same areas between Chingford Hatch and Walthamstow as the 357, and a w16 rerouting between Wood Street and Leytonstone via Whipps Cross would be a quicker alternative |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jan 6, 2023 22:04:33 GMT
I agree and it is a shame the Review of Buses in Waltham Forest that TfL did, didn’t have much to say about doing anything with the 357. Outside of withdrawing the route completely It would have been good to see them propose something like withdrawn from Whipps Cross and instead diverted via the W19 to Argall Avenue continuing onto Lea Bridge Station, Leyton Mills, then Ruckholt Road, Temple Mills Lane, and terminating at Stratford City. Didn't the late snoggle champion how useful the 357 was at assisting the other routes along the corridor as well as providing more of a link to the hospital that parts of Chingford Mount wouldn't have given the W16 doesn't serve as much? I believe he did. I agree that it serves the function of assisting others routes along the Chingford Road corridor (north of Walthamstow) however south of this point not so much. Most passengers (especially those less mobile) are more likely I think to change to the W15/19 as the main services of the hospital (Outpatients, A&E, most inpatients wards) are on the west half of the site, over a 10 min walk from the bus stand. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Jan 6, 2023 22:26:05 GMT
Didn't the late snoggle champion how useful the 357 was at assisting the other routes along the corridor as well as providing more of a link to the hospital that parts of Chingford Mount wouldn't have given the W16 doesn't serve as much? I believe he did. I agree that it serves the function of assisting others routes along the Chingford Road corridor (north of Walthamstow) however south of this point not so much. Most passengers (especially those less mobile) are more likely I think to change to the W15/19 as the main services of the hospital (Outpatients, A&E, most inpatients wards) are on the west half of the site, over a 10 min walk from the bus stand. Is there any reason why the route can't be SD all week and run to Whipps Cross Hospital at all times. As said the route has alot of support from the 97/212/W16 plus the Hoe Street routes. |
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Jan 6, 2023 22:43:43 GMT
I believe he did. I agree that it serves the function of assisting others routes along the Chingford Road corridor (north of Walthamstow) however south of this point not so much. Most passengers (especially those less mobile) are more likely I think to change to the W15/19 as the main services of the hospital (Outpatients, A&E, most inpatients wards) are on the west half of the site, over a 10 min walk from the bus stand. Is there any reason why the route can't be SD all week and run to Whipps Cross Hospital at all times. As said the route has alot of support from the 97/212/W16 plus the Hoe Street routes. Potential crowding on a SD should there be big gaps in the 97/215 would be my guess… |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 7, 2023 13:26:12 GMT
That is about one of the best posts you have said. I cannot stand the 357, ever since its inception and cutting back from Chingford Station to Chingford Hatch and losing the 97A number I agree and it is a shame the Review of Buses in Waltham Forest that TfL did, didn’t have much to say about doing anything with the 357. Outside of withdrawing the route completely It would have been good to see them propose something like withdrawn from Whipps Cross and instead diverted via the W19 to Argall Avenue continuing onto Lea Bridge Station, Leyton Mills, then Ruckholt Road, Temple Mills Lane, and terminating at Stratford City. It was earmarked for withdrawal, there was a few protests and also a campaign from Ian Duncan Smith to not axe it, as well as LBWF council was rallying behind it. There excuse that it was Chingford's only route that served Whipps Cross hospital and as usual that Chingford was being cut off from the rest of the borough and parking charges at the hospital etc it would be encouraging people to drive. |
|
|
|
Post by VMH2537 on Jan 7, 2023 13:29:58 GMT
I agree and it is a shame the Review of Buses in Waltham Forest that TfL did, didn’t have much to say about doing anything with the 357. Outside of withdrawing the route completely It would have been good to see them propose something like withdrawn from Whipps Cross and instead diverted via the W19 to Argall Avenue continuing onto Lea Bridge Station, Leyton Mills, then Ruckholt Road, Temple Mills Lane, and terminating at Stratford City. It was earmarked for withdrawal, there was a few protests and also a campaign from Ian Duncan Smith to not axe it, as well as LBWF council was rallying behind it. There excuse that it was Chingford's only route that served Whipps Cross hospital and as usual that Chingford was being cut off from the rest of the borough and parking charges at the hospital etc it would be encouraging people to drive. Chingford also has another hospital link to North Middlesex provided by the 444... |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 7, 2023 13:30:46 GMT
I agree and it is a shame the Review of Buses in Waltham Forest that TfL did, didn’t have much to say about doing anything with the 357. Outside of withdrawing the route completely It would have been good to see them propose something like withdrawn from Whipps Cross and instead diverted via the W19 to Argall Avenue continuing onto Lea Bridge Station, Leyton Mills, then Ruckholt Road, Temple Mills Lane, and terminating at Stratford City. Didn't the late snoggle champion how useful the 357 was at assisting the other routes along the corridor as well as providing more of a link to the hospital that parts of Chingford Mount wouldn't have given the W16 doesn't serve as much? He was saying that it helped when there was a gap in the 97, but then I said that was not a valid excuse, because many other routes had that problem and still were cut. Then the other main excuse was when Walthamstow dog staduim was in operation and the masses that got the buses between Walthamstow Central and Crooked Billet to go to the stadium. The majority of the times the 357 was also scratching a 97 and behind it. A lot of people are bus route prone and would let a empty 357 go by to sit on a packed 97 and would not travel the distance. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 7, 2023 13:33:39 GMT
Could divert the 212 at Walthamstow Central to run to Whipps Cross for the hospital. From what I heard TfL have recently been developing options for improving services to Whipps Cross hospital and one of them in consideration was re-routing the W16 via the stand to allow a direct hospital service from Chingford Mount and Hingham Hill. Whilst the 357 already provides the link. I think the idea may be the pushing point to withdraw it on the lines it will "simply the network". The least I can personally see in compensation for capacity lost of the withdrawal is increasing the 215's frequency. The W16 does not serve Higham Hill, it serves Highams Park, two different areas. |
|
|
|
Post by capitalomnibus on Jan 7, 2023 13:36:25 GMT
Is there any reason why the route can't be SD all week and run to Whipps Cross Hospital at all times. As said the route has alot of support from the 97/212/W16 plus the Hoe Street routes. Potential crowding on a SD should there be big gaps in the 97/215 would be my guess… It's loads does not warrant being double deck for years. It can easily be long single deck and not have any problems. Plus the 97/357/215/34 is way over-bussed. When you look at it 20 years ago, the 97 was every 10 mins, 215 was 20 minutes, 34 was 8 minutes and 357 was 15 minutes. Now it is currently 97 being 8 minutes with the others remaining the same. |
|
|
|
Post by gwiwer on Jan 20, 2023 22:18:51 GMT
The 481 is a waste of resources. Convert the school trips into a 600-series route and divert the 285 via Park Road (X26 non-stop and 481 currently) as the section through Lower Teddington Road is over-bussed by that and the 281 both running 24/7 and everywhere else is covered.
A linked opinion is the relatively recent change to the 110 which sees it taken out of Twickenham town centre in favour of an odd route between Whitton and Richmond used by very few people. The former route was much more popular; the related change to the H22 (covering the Twickenham - West Middlesex Hospital leg) has not covered the Powder Mill Lane - Twickenham / WMH facility which has been lost. I understand the diversion of the 110 was to have been linked with a withdrawal of the 969 but it was discovered - as anyone living locally could have told TfL - that the critical sections of that around the houses in Whitton can only be served in one direction as it is impossible to turn right onto and off Chertsey Road. The 969 remains quite well used and mostly end-to-end as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by greg on Jan 22, 2023 4:14:43 GMT
Biased opinion but the current 23. Glad to see its changing but pre-change the 23 has been nothing but extra coverage.
The 9 is the busier route and completely duplicates from Hammersmith to Hyde Park Corner.
The 36 then duplicates from Hyde Park Corner to Queensway and yet again is the far busier route, you also have the 6 as far as Edgware Road, and the 7 from Marble Arch.
Using the route often, the travel patterns seem to be
Hammersmith to High Street Kensington
High Street Kensington to Knightsbridge / Hyde Park Corner
Hyde Park Corner to Edgware Road
Queensway to Westbourne Park
3/4 of these travel patterns were duplicated by other routes and it was a waste of resources. Could have been a good resource to reroute the 31 between Westbourne Park and Westbourne Grove via the 23 instead serving Ladbroke Grove area (station and Sainsburys) albeit a longer routing
|
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Jan 22, 2023 14:28:36 GMT
Biased opinion but the current 23. Glad to see its changing but pre-change the 23 has been nothing but extra coverage. The 9 is the busier route and completely duplicates from Hammersmith to Hyde Park Corner. The 36 then duplicates from Hyde Park Corner to Queensway and yet again is the far busier route, you also have the 6 as far as Edgware Road, and the 7 from Marble Arch. Using the route often, the travel patterns seem to be Hammersmith to High Street Kensington High Street Kensington to Knightsbridge / Hyde Park Corner Hyde Park Corner to Edgware Road Queensway to Westbourne Park 3/4 of these travel patterns were duplicated by other routes and it was a waste of resources. Could have been a good resource to reroute the 31 between Westbourne Park and Westbourne Grove via the 23 instead serving Ladbroke Grove area (station and Sainsburys) albeit a longer routing I think TfL have perhaps missed a trick with the 23, with RATP pulling out of the current contract the route could be withdrawn. The 6,16 and 98 could stay as they are and all that's needed then is a minor rerouting as you suggested with the 31 or maybe extend the 295 to Westbourne Park Station? |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Jan 22, 2023 14:39:04 GMT
Biased opinion but the current 23. Glad to see its changing but pre-change the 23 has been nothing but extra coverage. The 9 is the busier route and completely duplicates from Hammersmith to Hyde Park Corner. The 36 then duplicates from Hyde Park Corner to Queensway and yet again is the far busier route, you also have the 6 as far as Edgware Road, and the 7 from Marble Arch. Using the route often, the travel patterns seem to be Hammersmith to High Street Kensington High Street Kensington to Knightsbridge / Hyde Park Corner Hyde Park Corner to Edgware Road Queensway to Westbourne Park 3/4 of these travel patterns were duplicated by other routes and it was a waste of resources. Could have been a good resource to reroute the 31 between Westbourne Park and Westbourne Grove via the 23 instead serving Ladbroke Grove area (station and Sainsburys) albeit a longer routing I think TfL have perhaps missed a trick with the 23, with RATP pulling out of the current contract the route could be withdrawn. The 6,16 and 98 could stay as they are and all that's needed then is a minor rerouting as you suggested with the 31 or maybe extend the 295 to Westbourne Park Station? 100%. To cover the Queensway-WP link I think the best choice would be to reroute the 70 between Queensway and Sainsburys via the 23 instead and would still serve Ladbroke Grove station, the 7 retains the existing link, and then as you said could extend the 295 to Westbourne Park or permanently divert the 452 from Sainsburys to cover the 23 up to Westbourne Park Bus Garage. |
|
