Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 9, 2013 11:51:53 GMT
The 474 doesn't seem particularly busy in the daytime so I'm not really suprised at your observations, I'd be dubious about any such figures although some people swear by them Here you go again. Why are you dubious about the numbers? You have not explained your reasons for saying this and I think we deserve to hear your wisdom on this matter. Well they are so often at odds with other peoples sightings
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Nov 9, 2013 12:10:51 GMT
I think the 157 is the worst candidate possible given its unreliability. Strange to hear the N2 is bad enough, never noticed any issues with it whenever I've seen it nor heard anyone complain about it either. travelling home from work at 2.30 sometimes waiting 40 mins at Brixton for bus up the hill and get 2 running together The 157 idea would work if contract was run by GoAhead as Sutton/Merton would be suitable garage to be allocated to with meal breaks taken at Morden. The 157 would work full stop if any operator got it to work to a reliable standard, at least since 2005, the route has been unreliable.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 9, 2013 12:16:21 GMT
Here you go again. Why are you dubious about the numbers? You have not explained your reasons for saying this and I think we deserve to hear your wisdom on this matter. Well they are so often at odds with other peoples sightings Hang on - no one individual or even a group of them on a forum like this have the ability or time to observe every single journey on a route all along its length and check the boardings. I do not see how you can compare TfL's annualised numbers with random observations on the odd day here and there. I am not saying TfL's numbers are 100% accurate but they have far more organisational capability to get numbers which are representative of what is happening. TfL and LT have decades of experience and competence in collecting usage statistics. On the 474 example I was saying TfL's numbers actually *support* Hassaan's view that he's seen empty buses. 60,000 jnys *a year* gives a low average loading per bus but an average is just that - there will be buses with no people on them and some with 40 on them. If the 474's annual ridership was something like the N29's (very high) then I would be asking where Hassaan had seen an empty bus as I would not expect a busy route to have buses with no people on them with the possible exception of starting off from a remote terminal stop. I very much doubt that the N29 has empty buses on it except perhaps when leaving Little Park Gardens in Enfield.
|
|
|
Post by M1104 on Nov 9, 2013 13:13:16 GMT
The best thing would be if N68 was re-routed along South Norwood Hill, through Norwood Junction on to Selhurst Road and Wellesey Road instead Whitehorse Road. I don't see why Whitehorse Lane & Whitehorse Road should lose its only night bus service when there are other viable alternatives that could be used. I believe a compromising solution would be to have the N68 rerouted along South Norwood Hill as mentioned, but then loop around the 196 bus stand and back up South Norwood Hill to turn left back onto line of route from Whitehorse Road towards Coulsdon (same routing in reverse towards Tottenham Court Road). With this re-routing none of the stops are missed out on the present N68 and perhaps could still be done with the same pvr with minor adjustments to the running time to cater for Norwood Junction. The added bonus is that there is a 24 hour bus service from Norwood Junction to Elephant and Castle, even if it's not the same routing throughout.
|
|
|
Post by sw11simon on Nov 13, 2013 18:42:43 GMT
I don't see why Whitehorse Lane & Whitehorse Road should lose its only night bus service when there are other viable alternatives that could be used. I believe a compromising solution would be to have the N68 rerouted along South Norwood Hill as mentioned, but then loop around the 196 bus stand and back up South Norwood Hill to turn left back onto line of route from Whitehorse Road towards Coulsdon (same routing in reverse towards Tottenham Court Road). With this re-routing none of the stops are missed out on the present N68 and perhaps could still be done with the same pvr with minor adjustments to the running time to cater for Norwood Junction. The added bonus is that there is a 24 hour bus service from Norwood Junction to Elephant and Castle, even if it's not the same routing throughout. I don't think you have to go this far. Bearing in mind I often used to drive the N68, Whitehorse Lane & Whitehorse Road could probably maintain capacity with an hourly service (as could Old Coulsdon), although it obviously would create some longer waits. Re-routing and re-numbering 50% of the N68 service to operate through South Norwood into Croydon would be feasible and at little cost, providing an hourly service. Problem with this is lack of hourly night services in London(I'm not sure there are any left), which would possibly cost in the future with frequency increases. In fact, even at Tottenham Court Road the route is very under used, and the main pick up points are Holborn, Aldwych, Elephant and Camberwell.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 13, 2013 19:14:48 GMT
I believe a compromising solution would be to have the N68 rerouted along South Norwood Hill as mentioned, but then loop around the 196 bus stand and back up South Norwood Hill to turn left back onto line of route from Whitehorse Road towards Coulsdon (same routing in reverse towards Tottenham Court Road). With this re-routing none of the stops are missed out on the present N68 and perhaps could still be done with the same pvr with minor adjustments to the running time to cater for Norwood Junction. The added bonus is that there is a 24 hour bus service from Norwood Junction to Elephant and Castle, even if it's not the same routing throughout. I don't think you have to go this far. Bearing in mind I often used to drive the N68, Whitehorse Lane & Whitehorse Road could probably maintain capacity with an hourly service (as could Old Coulsdon), although it obviously would create some longer waits. Re-routing and re-numbering 50% of the N68 service to operate through South Norwood into Croydon would be feasible and at little cost, providing an hourly service. Problem with this is lack of hourly night services in London(I'm not sure there are any left), which would possibly cost in the future with frequency increases. In fact, even at Tottenham Court Road the route is very under used, and the main pick up points are Holborn, Aldwych, Elephant and Camberwell. I'm completely unfamiliar with how these routes load in S London but I have seen the N68 a few times at TCR and have always been surprised how lightly it loads. However looking at the patronage stats it is quite a long way up the list so is clearly a long way from being under used. There are certainly plenty of other routes with much more resource and higher frequencies with lower annual ridership. An honourable compromise might be to extend the N2, not an overloaded route really, on from Crystal Palace to Norwood Junction via the 157. That would need 1 extra bus on a x20 headway (assuming no other scheduling efficiency is possible).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2013 20:09:58 GMT
No wonder all you guys are moaning about the 157 if it has to go via Norwood Garage these days on its' way to Crystal Palace ... so sorry snoggle.
|
|
|
Post by sw11simon on Nov 14, 2013 18:47:29 GMT
I don't think you have to go this far. Bearing in mind I often used to drive the N68, Whitehorse Lane & Whitehorse Road could probably maintain capacity with an hourly service (as could Old Coulsdon), although it obviously would create some longer waits. Re-routing and re-numbering 50% of the N68 service to operate through South Norwood into Croydon would be feasible and at little cost, providing an hourly service. Problem with this is lack of hourly night services in London(I'm not sure there are any left), which would possibly cost in the future with frequency increases. In fact, even at Tottenham Court Road the route is very under used, and the main pick up points are Holborn, Aldwych, Elephant and Camberwell. I'm completely unfamiliar with how these routes load in S London but I have seen the N68 a few times at TCR and have always been surprised how lightly it loads. However looking at the patronage stats it is quite a long way up the list so is clearly a long way from being under used. There are certainly plenty of other routes with much more resource and higher frequencies with lower annual ridership. An honourable compromise might be to extend the N2, not an overloaded route really, on from Crystal Palace to Norwood Junction via the 157. That would need 1 extra bus on a x20 headway (assuming no other scheduling efficiency is possible). The N68 is definitely not underused and I was not trying to suggest this referring to the whole route, (although midweek northbound journeys are relaxing until the early morning workers start travelling!)... it is very busy southbound, and overall lacking capacity on Fri/Sat nights, but not at TCR. It would probably better run to and from Euston as per the day route. My proposal, which is basically cost equal, only affects a short section of the route in South Norwood/ Thornton Heath. Extending the N2 would involve a lot of cost, which is unlikely to happen. Another alternative could be to do something with the N64, basically duplicated by N109/250 from Croydon to Thornton Heath. New Addington to West Norwood via Norwood Junction and South Norwood Hill could work and connect to N2/N68, again with little cost.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 14, 2013 20:38:17 GMT
I'm completely unfamiliar with how these routes load in S London but I have seen the N68 a few times at TCR and have always been surprised how lightly it loads. However looking at the patronage stats it is quite a long way up the list so is clearly a long way from being under used. There are certainly plenty of other routes with much more resource and higher frequencies with lower annual ridership. An honourable compromise might be to extend the N2, not an overloaded route really, on from Crystal Palace to Norwood Junction via the 157. That would need 1 extra bus on a x20 headway (assuming no other scheduling efficiency is possible). The N68 is definitely not underused and I was not trying to suggest this referring to the whole route, (although midweek northbound journeys are relaxing until the early morning workers start travelling!)... it is very busy southbound, and overall lacking capacity on Fri/Sat nights, but not at TCR. It would probably better run to and from Euston as per the day route. My proposal, which is basically cost equal, only affects a short section of the route in South Norwood/ Thornton Heath. Extending the N2 would involve a lot of cost, which is unlikely to happen. Another alternative could be to do something with the N64, basically duplicated by N109/250 from Croydon to Thornton Heath. New Addington to West Norwood via Norwood Junction and South Norwood Hill could work and connect to N2/N68, again with little cost. I must be missing something. My estimate of extending the N2 is one bus (20 mins running time on a x20 headway). A rough and ready calculation of extending the N64 as you suggest is an extra 40 minutes so 2 buses on a x30 headway. How would 2 buses be cheaper than 1 or am I missing something fundamental about night bus scheduling? I guess it depends on what you're trying to achieve. My idea gives a direct link from Brixton and Central London. The N64 anchors the link more on serving Croydon but obviously it would connect at West Norwood as you say.
|
|
|
Post by paulsw2 on Nov 15, 2013 1:17:48 GMT
The N68 is definitely not underused and I was not trying to suggest this referring to the whole route, (although midweek northbound journeys are relaxing until the early morning workers start travelling!)... it is very busy southbound, and overall lacking capacity on Fri/Sat nights, but not at TCR. It would probably better run to and from Euston as per the day route. My proposal, which is basically cost equal, only affects a short section of the route in South Norwood/ Thornton Heath. Extending the N2 would involve a lot of cost, which is unlikely to happen. Another alternative could be to do something with the N64, basically duplicated by N109/250 from Croydon to Thornton Heath. New Addington to West Norwood via Norwood Junction and South Norwood Hill could work and connect to N2/N68, again with little cost. I must be missing something. My estimate of extending the N2 is one bus (20 mins running time on a x20 headway). A rough and ready calculation of extending the N64 as you suggest is an extra 40 minutes so 2 buses on a x30 headway. How would 2 buses be cheaper than 1 or am I missing something fundamental about night bus scheduling? I guess it depends on what you're trying to achieve. My idea gives a direct link from Brixton and Central London. The N64 anchors the link more on serving Croydon but obviously it would connect at West Norwood as you say. The N2 is a 30 minute headway Sun-Thurs (20 mins for last 2 NB journeys and every 20 mins Fri-Sat the running times of a weekend are ridiculously tight any way pvr 4 Sun-Thurs 6 Fri 5 sat I regularly use this route to get to and from work at silly o'clock in the mornings and any extension would IMO make the route more unreliable then it already is.
|
|
|
Post by sw11simon on Nov 15, 2013 15:53:27 GMT
I must be missing something. My estimate of extending the N2 is one bus (20 mins running time on a x20 headway). A rough and ready calculation of extending the N64 as you suggest is an extra 40 minutes so 2 buses on a x30 headway. How would 2 buses be cheaper than 1 or am I missing something fundamental about night bus scheduling? I guess it depends on what you're trying to achieve. My idea gives a direct link from Brixton and Central London. The N64 anchors the link more on serving Croydon but obviously it would connect at West Norwood as you say. The N2 is a 30 minute headway Sun-Thurs (20 mins for last 2 NB journeys and every 20 mins Fri-Sat the running times of a weekend are ridiculously tight any way pvr 4 Sun-Thurs 6 Fri 5 sat I regularly use this route to get to and from work at silly o'clock in the mornings and any extension would IMO make the route more unreliable then it already is. If a night bus is unreliable it is a case of under resource. If reliability is addressed with the extension it could become better.
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on Nov 15, 2013 19:04:17 GMT
Thanks all for the comments. Still looking for any factors that would indicate an increase in potential demand over the last 5 years or so.
Should it be deemed worthwhile to run a night service through South Norwood, I'd look at either the N2 or doing something with the shorts trips on the N3. The N137 is an option but there would probably be less benefit in doing this as it passes through less areas with a significant night time economy. Plenty of research to be done before I can start the campaign!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 16, 2013 1:01:07 GMT
Thanks all for the comments. Still looking for any factors that would indicate an increase in potential demand over the last 5 years or so. Should it be deemed worthwhile to run a night service through South Norwood, I'd look at either the N2 or doing something with the shorts trips on the N3. The N137 is an option but there would probably be less benefit in doing this as it passes through less areas with a significant night time economy. Plenty of research to be done before I can start the campaign! I've had a look at the patronage numbers and year on year percentage changes for all the routes serving Norwood Junction. Unfortunately the nature of aggregated annual stats cannot give you a "killer" fact as to what is happening in and around Norwood Junction as there is no info on loadings at specific stops. There is a mixed story on all the services - day and night - with some doing very well over the years and others making much more modest progress. Routes like the 410 have done very well whereas the 157 and 196 are more modest performers. The N68 which gets closeish has seen strong growth in patronage as evidenced in other posts. 2012/13's numbers are a pain as total ridership in London fell for the first time in many, many years and this means many routes show a fall in patronage for last year. I know TfL say it was a blip partly caused by strike action and the Olympics but many routes showed a fall in patronage not just those near Games venues. I don't know the area or what has gone on there or is planned which might help any argument. Ditto for night time activities in Croydon or Brixton (or wherever) which might identify potential traffic. Are there night time trains at Norwood Junction which a night bus would connect to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2013 1:10:36 GMT
Thanks all for the comments. Still looking for any factors that would indicate an increase in potential demand over the last 5 years or so. Should it be deemed worthwhile to run a night service through South Norwood, I'd look at either the N2 or doing something with the shorts trips on the N3. The N137 is an option but there would probably be less benefit in doing this as it passes through less areas with a significant night time economy. Plenty of research to be done before I can start the campaign! I know it has already been discounted by some on here ... but if there is no additional money ... diverting the N68 via South Norwood Hill seems to me to be a far better value for money option than via Whitehorse Road/Lane - if it is a straight choice one or the other. Must admit though that even when I am in London these days I will not rely on the N68 after the numerous cocks up that I have experienced on the N68 under London Central ... sometimes it seems there is only 1 bus on the route ... at least at Aldwych ... though having said that not used it for past 2 years ... so MAY have improved
|
|