|
Post by VPL630 on May 29, 2014 21:14:49 GMT
How can TFL save money and reduce overcrowding on the 25 Withdraw the 25, Problem solved. That is the worst idea anyone can suggest. I can think of worse
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on May 29, 2014 21:18:19 GMT
That is the worst idea anyone can suggest. I can think of worse What, get rid of ALL buses in London to fix one route?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 29, 2014 21:24:51 GMT
How can TFL save money and reduce overcrowding on the 25 Withdraw the 25, Problem solved. That is the worst idea anyone can suggest. Well it might be a bad idea but check where the Tour de France is going to run in early July when it arrives in London. Much of Stratford is going to be closed down for most of the day including where the 25 runs so a chunk of London will not have a through service on the 25 (or many other routes). TfL have updated their info to show the routes being affected but no detail yet as to exactly how things will run (or not run). Big, big impacts in East London and Central London on the day. link
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 29, 2014 21:39:27 GMT
The solution to solving the 25 issue seems like a difficult task.
Withdrawing it will affect a lot of people and the 86, 425 & 205 will end up taking the strain and become 3 different 25s altogether, a lot worse than now, it would certainly be a 343 and North Peckham Situation across the whole of that stretch of route, I reckon TFL would receive millions of complaints if the 25 was withdrawn.
Making cuts doesn't seem easy either. It's a popular service. What I find odd is the 38 has much higher PVR but carries a lot more thin air all day, I haven't used the 38 for a long time so I don't know what it is like now, the 149 could also do with some PVR cuts. The 25 would be better off with a PVR of 70 with buses every 2-4 minutes and would certainly benefit from it.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 29, 2014 22:14:30 GMT
This may sound silly but I think the 15 being extended to Barking could help out the 25 and the 5.
Also, I think the only reason that an express has not happened along this corridor is because of Crossrail. Introducing an express would not encourage people to use Crossrail services. However when Crossrail is in operation I see the 25/86 getting even busier as it will have to take people from Crossrail stations to their individual stops (kind of like a feeder bus). Although increasing the PVR sounds like it would help I don't think it would have much impact, there would so much bunching that no one would operate this route properly.
|
|
|
Post by 6HP502C on May 29, 2014 22:43:19 GMT
This may sound silly but I think the 15 being extended to Barking could help out the 25 and the 5. Why do you think that's a silly idea?
|
|
|
Post by Nathan on May 29, 2014 22:51:04 GMT
The main thing to consider is that even if you put more buses out (on the 25 or even playing about with other routes), more and more people will still use the service resulting in the problem still existing. The problem may even get worse in fact. If there is an increase of the amount of services available in the corridor, more and more people will realise this and start to take advantage even more as it would be most convenient for them as a customer.
But on the other hand, there are only so many people in the area that there will reach a point where there will be just enough or too many buses to meet the demand. Although the point where there will be enough of the service to meet demand will ultimately depend on the amount of people moving into London, or in the particular area that's struggling to meet demand.
Overall, with more and more people moving into London, I don't see the problem ever being solved. Unless of course, external factors come into play. For example, stopping people coming into London as much as possible. But the main point is that: The greater the amount of people coming into London is, the higher the rate of demand for transport there will be. If the rate of demand increases at an exponential rate, the harder it will be to provide the best service possible.
|
|
|
Route 25
May 29, 2014 22:53:44 GMT
via mobile
Post by Mokujin on May 29, 2014 22:53:44 GMT
This may sound silly but I think the 15 being extended to Barking could help out the 25 and the 5. Would it not be better if the 115 was extended to Barking instead as East Ham isn't too far from there?
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 29, 2014 22:55:17 GMT
This may sound silly but I think the 15 being extended to Barking could help out the 25 and the 5. Why do you think that's a silly idea? I think it's silly because there wouldn't be a direct change to the 25 and it may be seen as only benefiting the Barking Corridor. But my theory is the further buses can go from Central London into East London (and W S N London) the less stress there will be on the one route out of London ie the 25, 3, 149 & 18. It's a theory anyway.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 29, 2014 22:56:48 GMT
The solution to solving the 25 issue seems like a difficult task. Withdrawing it will affect a lot of people and the 86, 425 & 205 will end up taking the strain and become 3 different 25s altogether, a lot worse than now, it would certainly be a 343 and North Peckham Situation across the whole of that stretch of route, I reckon TFL would receive millions of complaints if the 25 was withdrawn. Making cuts doesn't seem easy either. It's a popular service. What I find odd is the 38 has much higher PVR but carries a lot more thin air all day, I haven't used the 38 for a long time so I don't know what it is like now, the 149 could also do with some PVR cuts. The 25 would be better off with a PVR of 70 with buses every 2-4 minutes and would certainly benefit from it. The 38 has declining patronage - it's lost 5m pax pa over the last few years. To be fair TfL have, as we know, reduced the PVR progressively. The conversion to NB4Ls loses a further 3% in capacity given the LTs only carry 84 people max. The 242 has also had declining patronage and its off peak frequency has been cut as a result. However the 149 and 243 are continuing to see growth so I really would not advocate touching them at the moment. Let's see what happens on the A10 corridor when TfL take over the West Anglia rail services and if there is any transfer from buses. At that point you can consider reducing the frequencies on trunk routes like the 149 and 243.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 29, 2014 23:03:14 GMT
This may sound silly but I think the 15 being extended to Barking could help out the 25 and the 5. Would it not be better if the 115 was extended to Barking instead as East Ham isn't too far from there? The 115 would be more likely to happen but I think the 15 would provide more benefits. But... Barking - Trafalgar Square is 11 miles apart (via route 15) Ilford - Oxford Circus is also 11 miles apart (via route 25) Same distance , probably similar amount of stops. I think it could work well.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on May 29, 2014 23:27:33 GMT
The 38 has declining patronage - it's lost 5m pax pa over the last few years. To be fair TfL have, as we know, reduced the PVR progressively. The conversion to NB4Ls loses a further 3% in capacity given the LTs only carry 84 people max. The 242 has also had declining patronage and its off peak frequency has been cut as a result. However the 149 and 243 are continuing to see growth so I really would not advocate touching them at the moment. Let's see what happens on the A10 corridor when TfL take over the West Anglia rail services and if there is any transfer from buses. At that point you can consider reducing the frequencies on trunk routes like the 149 and 243. The declining patronage on the 38 says a lot in my opinion • Is there a real demand/need for Crossrail 2? • Is London Overground more attractive to 38 & 242 bus passengers? • (like hinted above) Will patronage on the 149 & 243 decrease when London begins operation on the Lea Valley Lines - From my observation the 38 Is only really busy during peak hours M-F and is lightly used S-S
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 29, 2014 23:38:53 GMT
The 38 has declining patronage - it's lost 5m pax pa over the last few years. To be fair TfL have, as we know, reduced the PVR progressively. The conversion to NB4Ls loses a further 3% in capacity given the LTs only carry 84 people max. The 242 has also had declining patronage and its off peak frequency has been cut as a result. However the 149 and 243 are continuing to see growth so I really would not advocate touching them at the moment. Let's see what happens on the A10 corridor when TfL take over the West Anglia rail services and if there is any transfer from buses. At that point you can consider reducing the frequencies on trunk routes like the 149 and 243. The declining patronage on the 38 says a lot in my opinion • Is there a real demand/need for Crossrail 2? • Is London Overground more attractive to 38 & 242 bus passengers? • (like hinted above) Will patronage on the 149 & 243 decrease when London begins operation on the Lea Valley Lines - From my observation the 38 Is only really busy during peak hours M-F and is lightly used S-S I think the 38 and 242 have been affected by the Overground. Who would sit on a 242 for 45 minutes from Homerton to Dalston when a train takes 5 minutes and costs 5p or 15p (peak) more on PAYG? You just wouldn't use the bus unless you were incapable of coping with stairs on the rail network. Coupled with the very fast Victoria Line service you can see why people may have moved from bus to rail. The West Anglia lines exist today so any transfer will depend almost entirely on whether TfL increase off peak frequencies and possibly fiddle with the zone boundaries to make fares a bit more sensible. The travel patterns on the 149 and 243 are a mix of a lot of local traffic plus a decent slice of people heading into Zone 1. Given the demographics there will be people who remain with the bus because it's cheaper for travel into Zone 1. The premium on rail fares for Zone 1 is ludicrous even though it is the busiest part of the network. Crossrail 2 is not dependent on the traffic down Essex Road! It is designed to relieve the congested local lines into Waterloo freeing up space for more long distance services which are also overloaded. It also relieves part of the Northern, Victoria and Piccadilly Lines and relieves the overcrowding Lea Valley route and adds capacity to cope with the expected population growth in that part of North London. The Victoria Line is chock a block in the peaks despite increased service levels and even stretching to 36 tph will only bring temporary relief.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2014 22:10:52 GMT
The 38 route has also seen significant demographic change - a lot of cycling hippies about now!
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Jun 2, 2014 20:36:11 GMT
How about extending existing Central London - East London bus routes to help alleviate issues with the 25?. For example extend the 8 to Stratford (acknowledging Oxford Circus is the normal western Terminus and TCR is indeed temporary), extend the 115 to Bank, extend the 15 back to Oxford Circus, and reroute the 388 from Bank via the 25 to Oxford Circus. A new route could also be possibly introduced between Trafalgar Square and Stratford running via the existing 388 to Bank and alongside the 25 to Stratford. My idea of altering many existing routes to enhance one route may sound far fetched, just a thought
|
|