|
Post by redexpress on Jan 30, 2018 2:37:52 GMT
X with the 13 and SW with the 24 are much closer to the respective routes than many other routes are to their garages. Regarding the 13, X to Baker Street is much closer than PB was to North Finchley. Similarly, SW to Pimlico is actually a shorter distance than HT to Hampstead Heath. As with size, distance isn't everything. Given that short workings are frowned upon, at the very least, it is often better to run a route from a garage whose nearest point is to one of the termini of that route. In my opinion, why no operator can get to grips with the 188, so it changes hands at every opportunity, is that the natural geography of the route has no garage within spitting distance, unless of course you electric single decked it and ran it from Waterloo! I also doubt an HT driver would have driven a 24 under a low bridge like an SW one did, because NW3 is not a 'foreign' area to them. Actually an HT driver did hit the same bridge at Kentish Town West with a TE. This was in the final few weeks before London General took over the 24 - and one of their drivers managed to hit the bridge within a matter of weeks! Of course this is one of those bridges which is fine for DDs providing you drive down the middle of the road. It is on the regular dead run between South End Green and HT so the Metroline driver should really have known better. I think the signage at the bridge was improved following those two incidents.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Jan 30, 2018 8:08:37 GMT
X with the 13 and SW with the 24 are much closer to the respective routes than many other routes are to their garages. Regarding the 13, X to Baker Street is much closer than PB was to North Finchley. Similarly, SW to Pimlico is actually a shorter distance than HT to Hampstead Heath. As with size, distance isn't everything. Given that short workings are frowned upon, at the very least, it is often better to run a route from a garage whose nearest point is to one of the termini of that route. In my opinion, why no operator can get to grips with the 188, so it changes hands at every opportunity, is that the natural geography of the route has no garage within spitting distance, unless of course you electric single decked it and ran it from Waterloo! I also doubt an HT driver would have driven a 24 under a low bridge like an SW one did, because NW3 is not a 'foreign' area to them. The 202 operates from a rather remote garage yet the service doesn't seem to suffer because of it, I agree about the nearest point being a terminus being an advantage and I think mid route driver changeovers are best avoided as far as possible. I'm afraid that being in a 'foreign area' is no excuse for a driver hitting a clearly sign posted low bridge.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 11, 2018 16:06:11 GMT
And still "The Dismore" keeps going about the performance of route 13 since Tower Transit took it over. Latest Mayor's Questions -
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2018 12:27:05 GMT
And still "The Dismore" keeps going about the performance of route 13 since Tower Transit took it over. Latest Mayor's Questions - To be fair they do have a point ... Every time I have used or been near the 13, mainly at off peak times, I have always seen bunching and curtailments. The 460 has been struggling due to a lack of 13s up to North Finchley.
|
|
|
Post by MoEnviro on May 16, 2018 13:19:18 GMT
And still "The Dismore" keeps going about the performance of route 13 since Tower Transit took it over. Latest Mayor's Questions - To be fair they do have a point ... Every time I have used or been near the 13, mainly at off peak times, I have always seen bunching and curtailments. The 460 has been struggling due to a lack of 13s up to North Finchley.
Data available on the TfL website shows, that in the first four periods/months of TT operation they had a EWT of over 2 mins. This has since improved but period 10 (the latest data available) showed an EWT of 1.46 against a target of 1.30.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on May 16, 2018 13:35:21 GMT
To be fair they do have a point ... Every time I have used or been near the 13, mainly at off peak times, I have always seen bunching and curtailments. The 460 has been struggling due to a lack of 13s up to North Finchley.
Data available on the TfL website shows, that in the first four periods/months of TT operation they had a EWT of over 2 mins. This has since improved but period 10 (the latest data available) showed an EWT of 1.46 against a target of 1.30. So in effect, the issues that were there in the beginning have actually decreased to an extent & the recent moaning about the 13 has been exaggerated to an extent?
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 16, 2018 14:46:02 GMT
Data available on the TfL website shows, that in the first four periods/months of TT operation they had a EWT of over 2 mins. This has since improved but period 10 (the latest data available) showed an EWT of 1.46 against a target of 1.30. So in effect, the issues that were there in the beginning have actually decreased to an extent & the recent moaning about the 13 has been exaggerated to an extent? To be honest I'm not sure you can draw that final conclusion with three periods worth of data missing (we're now in Period 2 of the following financial year). An EWT of 2 minutes against a target of 1.30 is awful and indicative of a service in disarray. Yes there has been an improvement but has it been sustained to year end and got close to or better than target? We won't know for a while but if not then that gives the context for Mr Dismore's repeated complaints. I've no experience of route 13 since TT took over so can't comment directly.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 16, 2018 15:37:32 GMT
It has been suggested that reliability on route 13 is due to the operator, when compared to Metroline's operation of route 82. However the frequency of the new 13 is significantly higher than the 82 due to the Finchley Road changes, plus any roadworks/traffic issues may not have been in place previously.
If there are reliability issues on route 13 due to the long length of the route (alongside traffic congestion issues), the following changes would shorten both routes 13 and 113 to create 3 routes in total. Frequencies to be adjusted as necessary to provide adequate capacity on each section.
Route 13 - Withdrawn to/from Finchley to operate between Golders Green and Victoria
Route 113 - Withdrawn to/from Central London to operate between Edgware and Finchley Road OR Swiss Cottage (depending on availability of stand space)
Route 82 - Reinstated, operating between North Finchley and Baker Street
These changes would still reflect much of the cuts made previously in the Finchley Road consultation, with continuation of 2 routes between Finchley Road and Baker Street, and withdrawal of the old route 13 towards Aldwych. The 113 cut back removes the need to modify the route around Oxford Street due to changes there. The current 13 is effectively being split into two routes, with the 113 being partly replaced by the overlap towards Baker Street (in effect also improving reliability of the very long 113).
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on May 16, 2018 16:55:44 GMT
It has been suggested that reliability on route 13 is due to the operator, when compared to Metroline's operation of route 82. However the frequency of the new 13 is significantly higher than the 82 due to the Finchley Road changes, plus any roadworks/traffic issues may not have been in place previously. If there are reliability issues on route 13 due to the long length of the route (alongside traffic congestion issues), the following changes would shorten both routes 13 and 113 to create 3 routes in total. Frequencies to be adjusted as necessary to provide adequate capacity on each section. Route 13 - Withdrawn to/from Finchley to operate between Golders Green and Victoria Route 113 - Withdrawn to/from Central London to operate between Edgware and Finchley Road OR Swiss Cottage (depending on availability of stand space) Route 82 - Reinstated, operating between North Finchley and Baker Street These changes would still reflect much of the cuts made previously in the Finchley Road consultation, with continuation of 2 routes between Finchley Road and Baker Street, and withdrawal of the old route 13 towards Aldwych. The 113 cut back removes the need to modify the route around Oxford Street due to changes there. The current 13 is effectively being split into two routes, with the 113 being partly replaced by the overlap towards Baker Street (in effect also improving reliability of the very long 113). I suspect those changes would be DEEPLY unpopular and would cause a torrent of complaints. There is no point turning buses at or around Swiss Cottage given works for CS11 are due to start within weeks. The quality of services in the area is going to worsen appreciably during the works if experience elsewhere in London is anything to go by. I am very sceptical that Golders Green bus station could take another terminating route. Therefore you would have to remove route 139 or another service. I doubt there is stand space in and around Baker St to take another high frequency service. There is no point in worsening services for everyone just because one operator is struggling. The solution is to resolve the problems with that operator. I suggest you take a look at the 113's performance stats - they are close to perfect which is one heck of an achievement for a long route. There is therefore no reason to muck around with that service - Metroline are doing an exemplary job.
|
|
|
Post by londonbuses2018 on May 16, 2018 17:59:29 GMT
Them MCV are unsuitable for the 13 I don’t know what Tower Transit was thinking I wish it was Retained by Metroline with the classic Enviros.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on May 16, 2018 18:16:20 GMT
Them MCV are unsuitable for the 13 I don’t know what Tower Transit was thinking I wish it was Retained by Metroline with the classic Enviros. Care to explain why they are unsuitable?
|
|
|
Post by LT 20181 on May 16, 2018 18:47:45 GMT
Them MCV are unsuitable for the 13 I don’t know what Tower Transit was thinking I wish it was Retained by Metroline with the classic Enviros. Well, a bus is more suitable than no bus
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on May 16, 2018 19:38:37 GMT
Them MCV are unsuitable for the 13 I don’t know what Tower Transit was thinking I wish it was Retained by Metroline with the classic Enviros. Care to explain why they are unsuitable? There is no need to ask why as no reason whatsoever can justify the op's statement other than personal preference
|
|
|
Post by DT 11 on May 17, 2018 1:00:11 GMT
X with the 13 and SW with the 24 are much closer to the respective routes than many other routes are to their garages. Regarding the 13, X to Baker Street is much closer than PB was to North Finchley. Similarly, SW to Pimlico is actually a shorter distance than HT to Hampstead Heath. As with size, distance isn't everything. Given that short workings are frowned upon, at the very least, it is often better to run a route from a garage whose nearest point is to one of the termini of that route. In my opinion, why no operator can get to grips with the 188, so it changes hands at every opportunity, is that the natural geography of the route has no garage within spitting distance, unless of course you electric single decked it and ran it from Waterloo! I also doubt an HT driver would have driven a 24 under a low bridge like an SW one did, because NW3 is not a 'foreign' area to them. Even if a driver is unfamiliar with a particular area it is not an excuse to take a double decker under a low bridge which will have plenty of warning signs nearby and vehicle dimensions are displayed inside the cab by Law.
|
|
|
Post by sid on May 17, 2018 5:59:21 GMT
Them MCV are unsuitable for the 13 I don’t know what Tower Transit was thinking I wish it was Retained by Metroline with the classic Enviros. I don't think the type of bus makes much difference but I suspect a lot of people wish it had been retained by Metroline, seems Tower Transit put in a rock bottom bid that just isn't viable.
|
|