|
Post by DT 11 on Mar 20, 2014 10:36:20 GMT
I agree with all of the above. ^^
Regarding shorter routes.
If there was more short bus routes in Zone 1, exactly what garages would they be operated from with what stand space.
I'm sure it would cost far more to run than current routes which start from or close to their operating areas then head into Central London. Just imagine if the network had silly routes like Whitehall - Paddington Basin replacing the 159 or Old Kent Road to Waterloo replacing the 168, would be introducing wasteful resources at like frequencies of every 15 minutes. Whereas short routes like the 129 actually serve a important purpose regardless of how short it is I have seen full double deckers on the 129 many times and people come from the Jubliee Line and full up every single bus route 5 pm onwards. The 132 extension to North Greenwich was so successful that double deckers are now required.
Lots of dead Milage I can see tbh as there are very few bus garages in or even near Central London, majority of bus services that go into Central London start near or even at their home garages. There are a few but they are fairly small such as MW & RA. I'm really surprised how the RV1 has been operated from LI for all these years.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 20, 2014 14:02:42 GMT
The 36/436 currently run at the same frequency plus, every 3 minutes is not needed as off peak between Lewisham & New Cross the 21/436 carries lighter loads. Tbh all that needs to be done is the frequency of the 436 during the peaks increased slightly to provide extra capacity, but then again with what stand space which is currently now taken by 108, 178 & 261 now standing in Molesworth Street. The Lewisham Gateway project has actually made it a lot worse for buses standing in the area. More buses to Lewisham are needed for reasons already given. Queens Park would be better with a more localised service rather than one operated from a garage on the other side of town. If more buses to Lewisham are really needed, there are better and more useful ways to do it than to start tinkering with the 36 & 436. South London is crying out for east to west links and one way to do that whilst increasing buses to Lewisham is to divert the 345 to Brixton Station and create a new 445 running from Clapham Junction to Lewisham via the current 345 to Peckham & then via the 136 & 436 to Lewisham. Could you explain how Queens Park would be better with a localised service given that there are currently no issues with the 36?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Mar 20, 2014 14:05:20 GMT
I agree with all of the above. ^^ Regarding shorter routes. If there was more short bus routes in Zone 1, exactly what garages would they be operated from with what stand space. I'm sure it would cost far more to run than current routes which start from or close to their operating areas then head into Central London. Just imagine if the network had silly routes like Whitehall - Paddington Basin replacing the 159 or Old Kent Road to Waterloo replacing the 168, would be introducing wasteful resources at like frequencies of every 15 minutes. Whereas short routes like the 129 actually serve a important purpose regardless of how short it is I have seen full double deckers on the 129 many times and people come from the Jubliee Line and full up every single bus route 5 pm onwards. The 132 extension to North Greenwich was so successful that double deckers are now required. Lots of dead Milage I can see tbh as there are very few bus garages in or even near Central London, majority of bus services that go into Central London start near or even at their home garages. There are a few but they are fairly small such as MW & RA. I'm really surprised how the RV1 has been operated from LI for all these years. The short routes idea seems to be harking back to the 1960s with Red Arrow "shuttle" routes in the central area. We all know well they worked! As you say there isn't the garage or stand space for oodles of little routes scuttling round Zone 1 instead of having through routes. The idea is linked to the daft concept of removing buses from Oxford Street and terminating radial routes at "Bus Stations" at the edge and forcing people to interchange. How to destroy the bus network in 1 easy lesson. Most big bus networks in cities have a mix of route types, route lengths, vehicle types. London is pretty devoid of express services but the dense tube and rail network explains that gap. It is absolutely sensible to have a varied structure given the wide range of demand levels and travel needs. I think the RV1 is the exception to every rule on TfL contracts. It's been extended and extended (4 times in total for a total of 8 years) - presumably because of the technology used on the vehicles and the supporting infrastructure. I can't see who else can run it given the expense of shifting the hydrogen fuelling plant. It's supposed to go out to tender in tranche 505 at the end of this year.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Mar 20, 2014 18:33:04 GMT
More buses to Lewisham are needed for reasons already given. Queens Park would be better with a more localised service rather than one operated from a garage on the other side of town. If more buses to Lewisham are really needed, there are better and more useful ways to do it than to start tinkering with the 36 & 436. South London is crying out for east to west links and one way to do that whilst increasing buses to Lewisham is to divert the 345 to Brixton Station and create a new 445 running from Clapham Junction to Lewisham via the current 345 to Peckham & then via the 136 & 436 to Lewisham. Could you explain how Queens Park would be better with a localised service given that there are currently no issues with the 36? I can see some merit in that idea but having both the 345 and 445 running between Brixton and Clapham Junction seems a bit extravagant, there is also not much stand space at CJ. Curtalments at Harrow Rd are not uncommon on the 36, it was for much the same reasons that the 159 was withdrawn from West Hampstead and replaced by a more localised 139
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Mar 20, 2014 19:16:13 GMT
If more buses to Lewisham are really needed, there are better and more useful ways to do it than to start tinkering with the 36 & 436. South London is crying out for east to west links and one way to do that whilst increasing buses to Lewisham is to divert the 345 to Brixton Station and create a new 445 running from Clapham Junction to Lewisham via the current 345 to Peckham & then via the 136 & 436 to Lewisham. Could you explain how Queens Park would be better with a localised service given that there are currently no issues with the 36? I can see some merit in that idea but having both the 345 and 445 running between Brixton and Clapham Junction seems a bit extravagant, there is also not much stand space at CJ. Curtalments at Harrow Rd are not uncommon on the 36, it was for much the same reasons that the 159 was withdrawn from West Hampstead and replaced by a more localised 139 The 345 is a very busy route just like the 36 is, and as such, the 36 is presently aided by the 436, the 345 would be aided by the 445 as well, easing the pressure of both routes. As for stand space at Clapham Junction, there is actually slightly more stand space than before the withdrawal of the 239. If you go to Google Maps and looked at both Strath Terrace & Bolingbroke Grove, you'll will see there is plenty of stand space there. The only terminating routes are the 49 & 337 with the 239 also terminating there before it's withdrawal. Personally, I've hardly seen Harrow Road turns on the 36 - as for the 159 being withdrawn from West Hampstead, it's more likely that is withdrawal was down to the rising congestion which over that length would of made it unreliable and you cant really call the 139 a more localised link - a localised link is a route confined to a particular area, like the 129 for example, which is confined to Greenwich & the peninsula whereas the 139 runs right through London to Waterloo.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Mar 20, 2014 23:49:26 GMT
Personally, I think the 36 is perfectly fine the way it is, there are no problems with it and it should remain the way it is. The 36 is well used throughout the route, and as a very regular user to and from Queens Park, I witness the route being well used, albeit with lighter usage during the later hours as every other route in London is.
Regarding its length and running time, there are other routes which are longer and similar (potentially longer) respectively, such as the 21, 25, 27, 53, 82, 176, 205, 341, 345 and even the supplementary 436, etc. They all cope fine the way they are, therefore its length and running time are deemed irrelevant in this matter.
So as Vjaska rightly says, there are no issues with the 36 at all so why fix it if it isn't broke?
|
|
|
Post by Mokujin on Apr 13, 2014 13:36:17 GMT
Axe route 359.
As for route 415, there is still hope. Apparently, Surrey Canal Road Station opens next year and the route is re-tendered next year so it woud be a good chance for it to finally get an extension.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 13, 2014 13:49:45 GMT
Axe route 359. As for route 415, there is still hope. Apparently, Surrey Canal Road Station opens next year and the route is re-tendered next year so it woud be a good chance for it to finally get an extension. Source please for the Surrey Canal Road opening date? I'm genuinely interested as the last I heard the development in the area was mired in legal problems between Lewisham Council and Millwall FC.
|
|
|
Post by Mokujin on Apr 13, 2014 14:06:28 GMT
Axe route 359. As for route 415, there is still hope. Apparently, Surrey Canal Road Station opens next year and the route is re-tendered next year so it woud be a good chance for it to finally get an extension. Source please for the Surrey Canal Road opening date? I'm genuinely interested as the last I heard the development in the area was mired in legal problems between Lewisham Council and Millwall FC. archive.is/Y2WFW
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 13, 2014 14:32:22 GMT
Source please for the Surrey Canal Road opening date? I'm genuinely interested as the last I heard the development in the area was mired in legal problems between Lewisham Council and Millwall FC. archive.is/Y2WFWThanks but that's an old page which has been superseded by one which has no dates on it. A hunt around various web pages shows that Millwall and the Council still seem to be at loggerheads. AIUI no construction can start until that problem is resolved. I'd therefore suggest that there's no valid date for the station being built or revised bus services being due. I suspect it could be years before we see any amended transport facilities in the area.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Apr 13, 2014 18:55:19 GMT
Axe route 359. As for route 415, there is still hope. Apparently, Surrey Canal Road Station opens next year and the route is re-tendered next year so it woud be a good chance for it to finally get an extension. Is the 359 well used?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2014 1:10:18 GMT
Axe route 359. As for route 415, there is still hope. Apparently, Surrey Canal Road Station opens next year and the route is re-tendered next year so it woud be a good chance for it to finally get an extension. Is the 359 well used? From what i've seen its not heaving but a steady load of all types of crowd from old people to mums with prams and shopping. Think the frequency suits the route. Reminds me of a 900 seris route only more frequent.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Apr 14, 2014 9:44:52 GMT
Axe route 359. As for route 415, there is still hope. Apparently, Surrey Canal Road Station opens next year and the route is re-tendered next year so it woud be a good chance for it to finally get an extension. Is the 359 well used? The 359 has around 28,000 passengers a year. It's pretty near the bottom of the list for regular (non schools) routes so if the axeman was to go wandering then it would be a likely candidate.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 14, 2014 12:40:24 GMT
I'd axe the 383 and just extend the 384 to loop from Cockfosters, Cat Hill to pick the route up at Netherlands Road that way ensuring it picks people up beyond 20:30 and on a Sunday. I've never really seen any of them full, scrap one and extend the other.
|
|