|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 19, 2013 22:32:36 GMT
There is no way the (N)274 was underused, if you got a empty one even on a weekday you'd be lucky let alone a friday/saturday night. Even the section between Camden Town and Angel was very busy especially on friday/saturday night now people have to either use 29/253 to Holloway then N41/43 to Angel or 214 to Kings Cross and then 205/N73 to Angel Given the N75 was withdrawn with very little notice it does make you wonder what the criteria for "underused" were and how it was measured. It is interesting that everyone looks at patronage rather than cost. I may be misremembering but I think both the 75 and 274 changes (i.e. removal of night jnys) related to new contract terms starting. I therefore expect TfL asked for two sets of costs - 24 hour service and without the night time hours. I rather suspect the cost difference is bigger than we might imagine. In terms of measurement I would expect TfL to take an average loading per journey measured over a "typical" week. They then look at differences between weekdays and weekends. Even then it is very unlikely, on the grounds of consistency, that a weekend only night service would run. The only consultation I can find that covers these issues is the recent 236 one. You can see TfL's thinking in their comments. consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/236I'm of the view that TfL should have a small number of weekend only night routes - partly to "test the market" but also to recognise that some areas warrant additional resource and links due to higher levels of night time trade / activity - a classic example would be Romford or perhaps Bexleyheath given "weekend nightlife"? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 22:45:42 GMT
Given the N75 was withdrawn with very little notice it does make you wonder what the criteria for "underused" were and how it was measured. In my opinion an 'N' route in the Norwood Junction area would be far better patronized if it originated in, or near central London, say an extended 'N'176 or N2, or even N63. Although the N75 connected two hubs in Lewisham and Croydon, it made connections from central London rather long-winded. 'underused' is a term used by lazy good for nothing TfL staff that can be bothered to actually checked facts - in this case at least |
|
|
|
Post by Connor on Apr 19, 2013 23:12:42 GMT
I like the idea of an N176. Like the daytime 176 but extended to Croydon Town Centre via Anerley, South Norwood, Park Road, Thornton Heath & Pond, Mayday Hospital, West Croydon and Town Centre.
Also I'd like the 250 to get a night bus rather than being 24 hour route. Brixton to Croydon via the daytime 250 (but calling at East Croydon Station like the nighttime 250), then via the 157 to Carshalton, then via the 407 to Sutton.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2013 23:56:27 GMT
Given the N75 was withdrawn with very little notice it does make you wonder what the criteria for "underused" were and how it was measured. It is interesting that everyone looks at patronage rather than cost. I may be misremembering but I think both the 75 and 274 changes (i.e. removal of night jnys) related to new contract terms starting. I therefore expect TfL asked for two sets of costs - 24 hour service and without the night time hours. I rather suspect the cost difference is bigger than we might imagine. In terms of measurement I would expect TfL to take an average loading per journey measured over a "typical" week. They then look at differences between weekdays and weekends. Even then it is very unlikely, on the grounds of consistency, that a weekend only night service would run. The only consultation I can find that covers these issues is the recent 236 one. You can see TfL's thinking in their comments. consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/236I'm of the view that TfL should have a small number of weekend only night routes - partly to "test the market" but also to recognise that some areas warrant additional resource and links due to higher levels of night time trade / activity - a classic example would be Romford or perhaps Bexleyheath given "weekend nightlife"? Underused was the justification that was given to residents in Forest Hill when there were enquiries into why it was withdrawn - as far as I know cost was not mentioned. I also can't see particularly what the problem with a weekend-only night service would be - there is often talk of tailoring service to demand and this would seem like a reasonable solution. Standardisation shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of service provision - sometimes non-standard variations come with good reason! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2013 6:35:15 GMT
There did used to be a couple of Fri / Sat night only bus routes.
|
|
|
|
Post by mre81 on Apr 20, 2013 10:10:48 GMT
It is interesting that everyone looks at patronage rather than cost. I may be misremembering but I think both the 75 and 274 changes (i.e. removal of night jnys) related to new contract terms starting. I therefore expect TfL asked for two sets of costs - 24 hour service and without the night time hours. I rather suspect the cost difference is bigger than we might imagine. In terms of measurement I would expect TfL to take an average loading per journey measured over a "typical" week. They then look at differences between weekdays and weekends. Even then it is very unlikely, on the grounds of consistency, that a weekend only night service would run. The only consultation I can find that covers these issues is the recent 236 one. You can see TfL's thinking in their comments. consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/236I'm of the view that TfL should have a small number of weekend only night routes - partly to "test the market" but also to recognise that some areas warrant additional resource and links due to higher levels of night time trade / activity - a classic example would be Romford or perhaps Bexleyheath given "weekend nightlife"? Underused was the justification that was given to residents in Forest Hill when there were enquiries into why it was withdrawn - as far as I know cost was not mentioned. I also can't see particularly what the problem with a weekend-only night service would be - there is often talk of tailoring service to demand and this would seem like a reasonable solution. Standardisation shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of service provision - sometimes non-standard variations come with good reason! Agreed. The drive for standardization has in part removed useful service provision in certain areas. If a night service is not well used during the week, why not weekend only services? Alternatively on routes like the N75, why not fling a couple of Darts on it during the week when demand is low, instead of running huge, expensive (and empty) Scanias. |
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Apr 20, 2013 11:07:29 GMT
It is interesting that everyone looks at patronage rather than cost. I may be misremembering but I think both the 75 and 274 changes (i.e. removal of night jnys) related to new contract terms starting. I therefore expect TfL asked for two sets of costs - 24 hour service and without the night time hours. I rather suspect the cost difference is bigger than we might imagine. In terms of measurement I would expect TfL to take an average loading per journey measured over a "typical" week. They then look at differences between weekdays and weekends. Even then it is very unlikely, on the grounds of consistency, that a weekend only night service would run. The only consultation I can find that covers these issues is the recent 236 one. You can see TfL's thinking in their comments. consultations.tfl.gov.uk/buses/236I'm of the view that TfL should have a small number of weekend only night routes - partly to "test the market" but also to recognise that some areas warrant additional resource and links due to higher levels of night time trade / activity - a classic example would be Romford or perhaps Bexleyheath given "weekend nightlife"? Underused was the justification that was given to residents in Forest Hill when there were enquiries into why it was withdrawn - as far as I know cost was not mentioned. I also can't see particularly what the problem with a weekend-only night service would be - there is often talk of tailoring service to demand and this would seem like a reasonable solution. Standardisation shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of service provision - sometimes non-standard variations come with good reason! Some routes are still not quite 100% standardised, the N3 being one them with their additional short journeys to Crystal Palace on Friday and Saturday nights (leaving the Crystal Palace to Bromley North section with a lower weekend frequency). When the route was retendered last year I was half expecting them to follow the paths of the N77 (now N87), N155 and N159, those routes having their short journeys removed (Wimbledon, Colliers Wood and Streatham respectively). The fact that the N3 was not formatted in that way appears to prove that non-standard elements still serve their purposes within the TfL bus network. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2013 13:50:28 GMT
Underused was the justification that was given to residents in Forest Hill when there were enquiries into why it was withdrawn - as far as I know cost was not mentioned. I also can't see particularly what the problem with a weekend-only night service would be - there is often talk of tailoring service to demand and this would seem like a reasonable solution. Standardisation shouldn't be the be-all and end-all of service provision - sometimes non-standard variations come with good reason! Agreed. The drive for standardization has in part removed useful service provision in certain areas. If a night service is not well used during the week, why not weekend only services? Alternatively on routes like the N75, why not fling a couple of Darts on it during the week when demand is low, instead of running huge, expensive (and empty) Scanias. Not a bad idea, given there's quite a few single deckers at C. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 7:35:53 GMT
Route 96 Woolwich to Bluewater.
Route 161 North Greenwich to Chislehurst via Queen Elizabeth Hospital (no night buses currently serving the Hospital).
Route 185 Lewisham Station to Victoria via Forest Hill.
Route 229 Thamesmead to Queen Marys Hospital
Route 261 Lewisham to Princess Royal Hospital.
Route 269 Bexleyheath to Bromley.
Route 422 North Greenwich to Bexleyheath.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 8:53:36 GMT
Route 96 Woolwich to Bluewater. Route 161 North Greenwich to Chislehurst via Queen Elizabeth Hospital (no night buses currently serving the Hospital). Route 185 Lewisham Station to Victoria via Forest Hill. Route 229 Thamesmead to Queen Marys Hospital Route 261 Lewisham to Princess Royal Hospital. Route 269 Bexleyheath to Bromley. Route 422 North Greenwich to Bexleyheath. Agree about the lack of night service for QE Hospital, never understood that. The 161 probably provides the most links out of the routes serving the hospital so I agree with you on that. The 89 is only 10 mins walk for passengers from Bexleyheath and beyond. I agree about the need for a Lewisham - Forest Hill night service though I'd go for the 122 or P4. 122 links up Sydenham and Crystal Palace (the Sydenham gap being partly left by the cut on the N75) or the P4 links up Dulwich and Brixton to Lewisham. The last buses on the P4 are always quite popular. The 176 covers a lot of the routing of the 185 and the two together probably wouldn't be justified. |
|
|
|
Post by lonmark on Apr 21, 2013 17:50:40 GMT
I never understand why the last bus is quite popular? why can't TfL know about it or Bus driver from TL catford should know the problem or need the comments pass on to TfL about the 24 hours need for P4 ? Good Idea?
|
|
|
|
Post by lc1 on Apr 21, 2013 20:02:03 GMT
Route 96 Woolwich to Bluewater. Route 161 North Greenwich to Chislehurst via Queen Elizabeth Hospital (no night buses currently serving the Hospital). Route 185 Lewisham Station to Victoria via Forest Hill. Route 229 Thamesmead to Queen Marys Hospital Route 261 Lewisham to Princess Royal Hospital. Route 269 Bexleyheath to Bromley. Route 422 North Greenwich to Bexleyheath. Agree about the lack of night service for QE Hospital, never understood that. The 161 probably provides the most links out of the routes serving the hospital so I agree with you on that. The 89 is only 10 mins walk for passengers from Bexleyheath and beyond. I agree about the need for a Lewisham - Forest Hill night service though I'd go for the 122 or P4. 122 links up Sydenham and Crystal Palace (the Sydenham gap being partly left by the cut on the N75) or the P4 links up Dulwich and Brixton to Lewisham. The last buses on the P4 are always quite popular. I'm sure we've discussed the lack of night service for QE before  I'd personally divert the N89 to go down and then spin round in the bus stand. As for the 269/229 I would actually run a night route combining the 2 routes, 269 to Bexleyheath and then 229 to Thamesmead...don't think patronage would warrant the 2 routes running 24 hour. The 422 is almost 24 hour anyway, about 4 hours from last bus leaving BX to the fist bus leaving BX. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 20:07:42 GMT
I never understand why the last bus is quite popular? why can't TfL know about it or Bus driver from TL catford should know the problem or need the comments pass on to TfL about the 24 hours need for P4 ? Good Idea? I suppose it's because it's not popular enough. However, I'm sure there'd be some patronage for it - I can't be the only person wanting to use it especially as it provides a fairly quick link from Brixton to Lewisham. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 21:58:13 GMT
I agree LC1 a through night bus service from Thamemsead to Bromley via routes 229 and 269 would be a much better idea than running both routes 24 hours.
Upgrading the 122 or P4 to 24 hour services are also good ideas mredd.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 21, 2013 22:17:13 GMT
I agree LC1 a through night bus service from Thamemsead to Bromley via routes 229 and 269 would be a much better idea than running both routes 24 hours. Upgrading the 122 or P4 to 24 hour services are also good ideas mredd. Of course, I'm biased about it because I live on the route of both of them, but the last buses on the P4 get a fair few users - by night-time standards anyway. A half hourly service would probably justifiable and would link up Forest Hill to Lewisham again - would also provide links to night services in Brixton which would be a useful connection. The 122 is probably less used and given there are alternative links it's probably less justifiable, though I'd quite like to see one of the two get a night service. |
|
I'd personally divert the N89 to go down and then spin round in the bus stand.