|
|
Post by vjaska on Jan 22, 2023 15:14:18 GMT
I think TfL have perhaps missed a trick with the 23, with RATP pulling out of the current contract the route could be withdrawn.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. Wouldn’t it be better to just extend the 414 over the 23 from Marble Arch to Westbourne Park? |
|
|
|
Post by greg on Jan 22, 2023 16:03:15 GMT
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. Wouldn’t it be better to just extend the 414 over the 23 from Marble Arch to Westbourne Park? I mean yes, but also no. I don't think it needs a whole other route when most in the area duplicate each other or have individual routings. The 70 would do just fine being rerouted between Queensway and Ladbroke Grove Station as it would still retain the Queensway-Ladbroke Grove link that the 23 is used for and would remove duplication with route 7. And as often diverted 452 to the garage, this could be made permanent and remove it from Kensal Rise, which if i believe is having its stand shortened anyway. Marble Arch to Paddington would be fine with just the 7 and 36. The 23 is observationally the least used in Queensway and everyone alights at Chepstow Road which is just infront of the Westbourne Grove junction so the single deck 70 shouldn't be an issue. Most people aim for either P&G Market or Ladbroke Grove Sainsburys. |
|
|
|
Post by georgboy on Aug 14, 2024 23:12:39 GMT
I don't know if this has come up but it's relatively local to me but the 200. Apart from serving Copse Hill I don't see the point of it. If you want to get to Wimbledon from Raynes Park you have three other better routes. Like I know the 200 serves Wimbledon Village. If you want to get to Mitcham from Wimbledon I would take the tram and walk. And finally if you want Mitcham from Raynes Park the 152 is quicker.
|
|
|
|
Post by BL15HCD on Aug 15, 2024 1:14:32 GMT
I don't know if this has come up but it's relatively local to me but the 200. Apart from serving Copse Hill I don't see the point of it. If you want to get to Wimbledon from Raynes Park you have three other better routes. Like I know the 200 serves Wimbledon Village. If you want to get to Mitcham from Wimbledon I would take the tram and walk. And finally if you want Mitcham from Raynes Park the 152 is quicker. 70% of the route has no other buses serving it. It's a handy estate link as well, it very much has a purpose |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Aug 15, 2024 2:33:16 GMT
I don't know if this has come up but it's relatively local to me but the 200. Apart from serving Copse Hill I don't see the point of it. If you want to get to Wimbledon from Raynes Park you have three other better routes. Like I know the 200 serves Wimbledon Village. If you want to get to Mitcham from Wimbledon I would take the tram and walk. And finally if you want Mitcham from Raynes Park the 152 is quicker. 70% of the route has no other buses serving it. It's a handy estate link as well, it very much has a purpose Completely agree, it could be replaced but TfL would have to divert quite a few routes to adequately ensure it was covered. |
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Aug 15, 2024 5:46:54 GMT
I don't know if this has come up but it's relatively local to me but the 200. Apart from serving Copse Hill I don't see the point of it. If you want to get to Wimbledon from Raynes Park you have three other better routes. Like I know the 200 serves Wimbledon Village. If you want to get to Mitcham from Wimbledon I would take the tram and walk. And finally if you want Mitcham from Raynes Park the 152 is quicker. I could not disagree with a post on here more, it is very well used by local folks as it uniquely serves the Phipps Bridge, Haydons Road and Wimbledon-Raynes Park areas. it gets extremely quiet sometimes throughout the day but then again there are so many other DD routes where you could easily go out and nearly get a bus to yourself in the daytime anyway. it needs its double decks for school times and to and from from Colliers Wood and Wimbledon stations where it gets very busy. |
|
|
|
Post by greenboy on Aug 15, 2024 6:48:37 GMT
I don't know if this has come up but it's relatively local to me but the 200. Apart from serving Copse Hill I don't see the point of it. If you want to get to Wimbledon from Raynes Park you have three other better routes. Like I know the 200 serves Wimbledon Village. If you want to get to Mitcham from Wimbledon I would take the tram and walk. And finally if you want Mitcham from Raynes Park the 152 is quicker. I can see your thinking and it seemed to manage ok with single deckers other than at school times, there is the Queens/Haydons Road section and Phipps Bridge although I would imagine most people there use the tram. |
|
|
|
Post by georgboy on Aug 15, 2024 7:31:01 GMT
I don't know if this has come up but it's relatively local to me but the 200. Apart from serving Copse Hill I don't see the point of it. If you want to get to Wimbledon from Raynes Park you have three other better routes. Like I know the 200 serves Wimbledon Village. If you want to get to Mitcham from Wimbledon I would take the tram and walk. And finally if you want Mitcham from Raynes Park the 152 is quicker. I could not disagree with a post on here more, it is very well used by local folks as it uniquely serves the Phipps Bridge, Haydons Road and Wimbledon-Raynes Park areas. it gets extremely quiet sometimes throughout the day but then again there are so many other DD routes where you could easily go out and nearly get a bus to yourself in the daytime anyway. it needs its double decks for school times and to and from from Colliers Wood and Wimbledon stations where it gets very busy. Phipps Bridge has the tram, and that is ticketed like a bus. Haydons road I has the 493 and 156 however Queens road is probably quicker I admit. The Section from Wimbledon to Raynes Park Section of it I understand why people would use it because the area of it isn't served by any of other buses. |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Aug 15, 2024 9:39:32 GMT
I could not disagree with a post on here more, it is very well used by local folks as it uniquely serves the Phipps Bridge, Haydons Road and Wimbledon-Raynes Park areas. it gets extremely quiet sometimes throughout the day but then again there are so many other DD routes where you could easily go out and nearly get a bus to yourself in the daytime anyway. it needs its double decks for school times and to and from from Colliers Wood and Wimbledon stations where it gets very busy. Phipps Bridge has the tram, and that is ticketed like a bus. Haydons road I has the 493 and 156 however Queens road is probably quicker I admit. The Section from Wimbledon to Raynes Park Section of it I understand why people would use it because the area of it isn't served by any of other buses. The 156 and 493 don’t serve Haydons Road in the same way the 200 does. Neither get anywhere near the station unlike the 200 or the subsequent massively long road towards Colliers Wood. The 200 is also a major connector to the Tandem Centre for Mitcham and Phipps Bridge residents. The tram doesn’t stop anywhere near it. The 200 serves a huge purpose for its community. |
|
|
|
Post by georgboy on Aug 15, 2024 10:24:57 GMT
I am not doubting that really though I admit I could have explained it better. I am just saying as a whole route it is useless, certain sections are obviously very important and useful I just think it could be got rid of and other routes rerouted to fill the gaps mostly.
|
|
|
|
Post by abellion on Aug 15, 2024 10:44:43 GMT
I am not doubting that really though I admit I could have explained it better. I am just saying as a whole route it is useless, certain sections are obviously very important and useful I just think it could be got rid of and other routes rerouted to fill the gaps mostly. Then again you could say the same of any indirect route such as the 424 or G1, nobody is taking them end to end or for long distance but none of them are useless. Nobody is going from Mitcham to Raynes Park on the 152 or 200, the 200 brings people to trains/shops/school from various residential areas. |
|
|
|
Post by georgboy on Aug 15, 2024 10:51:27 GMT
I am not doubting that really though I admit I could have explained it better. I am just saying as a whole route it is useless, certain sections are obviously very important and useful I just think it could be got rid of and other routes rerouted to fill the gaps mostly. Then again you could say the same of any indirect route such as the 424 or G1, nobody is taking them end to end or for long distance but none of them are useless. Nobody is going from Mitcham to Raynes Park on the 152 or 200, the 200 brings people to trains/shops/school from various residential areas. I guess, but I do know many more elderly people do use the 152 to go to Mitcham all the way from Raynes Park |
|
|
|
Post by southlondon413 on Aug 15, 2024 11:16:05 GMT
Then again you could say the same of any indirect route such as the 424 or G1, nobody is taking them end to end or for long distance but none of them are useless. Nobody is going from Mitcham to Raynes Park on the 152 or 200, the 200 brings people to trains/shops/school from various residential areas. I guess, but I do know many more elderly people do use the 152 to go to Mitcham all the way from Raynes Park But that’s totally different. Nobody would take the 200 over the 152 from Raynes Park to Mitcham as it’s a much longer journey. Just like if I wanted to go from Wimbledon to Morden my first choice would be the 93 and then the 164, I wouldn’t choose the 163. Just another example, like if I wanted to go from Croydon to Brixton I’d never take the 250 as it takes an eternity. I’d take the much quicker 109. If your whole basis for withdrawing the 200 is based around the idea that it’s not direct and there is another route that appears on paper to be between the same destination then there are plenty of routes under TfL that are the same. |
|
|
|
Post by georgboy on Aug 15, 2024 11:59:22 GMT
I guess, but I do know many more elderly people do use the 152 to go to Mitcham all the way from Raynes Park But that’s totally different. Nobody would take the 200 over the 152 from Raynes Park to Mitcham as it’s a much longer journey. Just like if I wanted to go from Wimbledon to Morden my first choice would be the 93 and then the 164, I wouldn’t choose the 163. Just another example, like if I wanted to go from Croydon to Brixton I’d never take the 250 as it takes an eternity. I’d take the much quicker 109. If your whole basis for withdrawing the 200 is based around the idea that it’s not direct and there is another route that appears on paper to be between the same destination then there are plenty of routes under TfL that are the same. I will concede I hadn't thought it through |
|
18ARustee
Conductor
Security Supervisor
Posts: 80 
|
Post by 18ARustee on Aug 16, 2024 17:53:44 GMT
I read earlier about the 228. The only issue is where it terminates in the Chippenham Road area.
I would have it extended both ways via Elgin Avenue to terminate at Maida Vale station. I would still have it turn left at the Elgin Avenue/Chippenham Road junction to Harrow Road it does now.
|
|
