|
Route 108
Sept 11, 2014 1:14:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by Nathan on Sept 11, 2014 1:14:52 GMT
So I was thinking the other day about how crowded buses could be solved on this route. And I thought that if the 108 ran in two branches (like the 208 used to) from Stratford-Blackheath Village (or Blackheath, Royal Standard) and North Greenwich-Lewisham (like the night service 108D). This way the route still has the Blackwall Tunnel link, and crowds from Lewisham towards North Greenwich (and vise versa) would be eased a little. The only problem I can see with this is that SDs can still get crowded at North Greenwich during the PM peak, bit this would depend on the schedule in place. Perhaps it could be made so that a DD leaves at NG just before a SD arrives southbound.
I think this idea might be plausible, given that the Lewisham-NG section can use DDs and the fact that the route is crosslinked with the 321, another DD route (although I'm not entirely sure on this).
I know nothing like this would ever happen, but I'd like to hear people's views on this.
|
|
|
Post by eggmiester on Sept 11, 2014 1:35:51 GMT
The 108 is due a new schedule, which is due to be implemented in the next 12 weeks with the am PVR increasing by one bus.
The only real capacity issues are between NG and Stratford so reducing the service along this section with short workings is a lost cause.
Only the three 108D's are cross linked from the 321, no other 108's are cross linked.
|
|
|
Route 108
Sept 11, 2014 4:35:13 GMT
via mobile
Post by smoothcriminal on Sept 11, 2014 4:35:13 GMT
Any reason why this can't have big mercs on it?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 11, 2014 8:13:02 GMT
The 108 is due a new schedule, which is due to be implemented in the next 12 weeks with the am PVR increasing by one bus. The only real capacity issues are between NG and Stratford so reducing the service along this section with short workings is a lost cause. Only the three 108D's are cross linked from the 321, no other 108's are cross linked. That's unlikely to please Assembly Member Johnson who was asking, in written questions to the Mayor at yesterday's Plenary session, for a frequency increase on the 108 and a new route from Kidbrooke to North Greenwich. "TfL recently confirmed that capacity will be boosted on this severely overcrowded route, beginning in the autumn. Please provide the date from which additional buses will be brought into service on this route. Please also provide an update on the longer-term solution of running a new Kidbrooke Village to North Greenwich route." Note the reference to buses (plural).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 11, 2014 11:54:35 GMT
The 108 is due a new schedule, which is due to be implemented in the next 12 weeks with the am PVR increasing by one bus. The only real capacity issues are between NG and Stratford so reducing the service along this section with short workings is a lost cause. Only the three 108D's are cross linked from the 321, no other 108's are cross linked. Not sure I agree at all that the only capacity issues are between North Greenwich and Stratford, often it's hard to board a bus around North Greenwich towards Lewisham at peak times.
|
|
|
Route 108
Sept 11, 2014 17:30:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by londontravel on Sept 11, 2014 17:30:04 GMT
I would either divert route 129 via 188 to north Greenwich then extend it via 108 to blackheath royal standard or extend 202 via 108 to north greenwich
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Sept 11, 2014 23:51:32 GMT
I've never been keen on splitting the route in two, that would just cause confusion and make the route from Stratford to Blackwall Tunnell short and pointless. As mentioned in a previous thread concerning the 108, I think it would benefit from 12m Citaros and its frequency increased to every 8 mins during peaks.
|
|
|
Route 108
Sept 12, 2014 0:10:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Sept 12, 2014 0:10:26 GMT
I've never been keen on splitting the route in two, that would just cause confusion and make the route from Stratford to Blackwall Tunnell short and pointless. As mentioned in a previous thread concerning the 108, I think it would benefit from 12m Citaros and its frequency increased to every 8 mins during peaks. Second this, personally I think that's the best option.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 108
Sept 13, 2014 5:39:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 13, 2014 5:39:26 GMT
For starters, shouldn't the frequency be increased? What about every 5 mins during the peak times?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 13, 2014 10:42:02 GMT
For starters, shouldn't the frequency be increased? What about every 5 mins during the peak times? So you can have 10 buses stuck in traffic jams in and around the tunnel? The 108 is a nightmare route to operate because it is prone to severe traffic problems in three key places - Lewisham town centre, Blackwall Tunnel and approaches plus Bow Roundabout. I agree with those who advocate a modest frequency improvement to say every 8 minutes. Larger vehicles are really the key - 12m would be good but if we had rational control of the bus network I'd run bendy buses on it. They were used as emergency supplements during the Olympics. Demand has gone up meaning crush loaded buses but the irregular service also causes overloading. Bigger vehicles offer a chance of a more comfortable ride plus more resilience to cope with problems. I also think the 108 also needs a more robust schedule *plus* some funding in the contract to allow the operator to have some "stand by" buses available so in the event of the tunnel being shut some resource can be deployed to maintain an adequate service north and south of the blockage. I know this is difficult to achieve in a performance target, risk transfer form of contract because there's a risk the buses don't run and the operator pockets the money! There are ways round this but you don't want a ton of bureaucracy you just want a decent service provided in the event of nasty traffic problems.
|
|
|
Route 108
Sept 13, 2014 10:48:21 GMT
via mobile
Post by Nathan on Sept 13, 2014 10:48:21 GMT
For starters, shouldn't the frequency be increased? What about every 5 mins during the peak times? So you can have 10 buses stuck in traffic jams in and around the tunnel? The 108 is a nightmare route to operate because it is prone to severe traffic problems in three key places - Lewisham town centre, Blackwall Tunnel and approaches plus Bow Roundabout. I agree with those who advocate a modest frequency improvement to say every 8 minutes. Larger vehicles are really the key - 12m would be good but if we had rational control of the bus network I'd run bendy buses on it. They were used as emergency supplements during the Olympics. Demand has gone up meaning crush loaded buses but the irregular service also causes overloading. Bigger vehicles offer a chance of a more comfortable ride plus more resilience to cope with problems. I also think the 108 also needs a more robust schedule *plus* some funding in the contract to allow the operator to have some "stand by" buses available so in the event of the tunnel being shut some resource can be deployed to maintain an adequate service north and south of the blockage. I know this is difficult to achieve in a performance target, risk transfer form of contract because there's a risk the buses don't run and the operator pockets the money! There are ways round this but you don't want a ton of bureaucracy you just want a decent service provided in the event of nasty traffic problems. I don't know...I can still see full length buses being filled to the rim (or up to the front doors in this case). Would it really make that big a difference using longer buses as opposed to splitting the route like I suggested?
|
|
|
Route 108
Sept 13, 2014 10:50:52 GMT
via mobile
Post by smoothcriminal on Sept 13, 2014 10:50:52 GMT
Don't think bendies would be able to make the turn in bow church tbh.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 13, 2014 11:03:01 GMT
I don't know...I can still see full length buses being filled to the rim (or up to the front doors in this case). Would it really make that big a difference using longer buses as opposed to splitting the route like I suggested? From my limited use of the route, including at night, I think there are decent numbers of people making long journeys who would be disadvantaged by a split service. If you need to relieve s/b loadings from NOG in the peak then by all means run the odd double deck supplemental working. One of the problems with North Greenwich in the peak is that demand is voracious and as soon as you provide more room then it gets used up. You say that will happen with single deckers and I'm sure you're right. However I'd content that double decks would also fill up pretty quickly. The 132 shows us that. Split routes also take up more resource and more stand space than a through service. If we take a step back what is really needed is a thorough understanding of where people are travelling to. I think this is key to demand from Stratford and also from North Greenwich. It may well be that the real solution to the 108's woes are enhancements to other routes or a new route altogether (more likely on the south side of the river).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Route 108
Sept 14, 2014 8:01:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2014 8:01:01 GMT
Not a user of the 108, however I can see how 12m buses would be better to start with. North Greenwich is a major hub and I think needs a re-think with services, maybe it will what with cross rail etc.
Would a split allocation be easier with a frequency increase , SI allocation ?
What happens when the tunnel gets closed and NX drivers are stranded north of the river ?
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 14, 2014 10:16:45 GMT
Not a user of the 108, however I can see how 12m buses would be better to start with. North Greenwich is a major hub and I think needs a re-think with services, maybe it will what with cross rail etc. Would a split allocation be easier with a frequency increase , SI allocation ? What happens when the tunnel gets closed and NX drivers are stranded north of the river ? The tunnel doesn't close very often and if it does it is only for a short period of time whilst an RTA is cleared but Tower Bridge is the only other option. I think extending the 129 through the tunnel would be the best option.
|
|