|
Post by vjaska on May 17, 2018 22:13:56 GMT
Yeh so unfortunately the 2 would either have to run every 4-5 mins throughout which would be excessive between CP and N. One remedy possibly would be the 415 extended to N but that would give a s reduction between Brixton and Tulse Hill. It’s fine as it is on the whole - the only thing that needs to change is a frequency increase to the 432 and an extension to Elmers End via Birkbeck.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 17, 2018 22:41:21 GMT
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. I wasn't making excuses, just making an observation that drivers with intimate knowledge of a local area are a mite less likely to run a decker under a low bridge than ones who, if they strayed offroute, would not be familiar with the topography and thus more likely to get flustered.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on May 17, 2018 22:54:15 GMT
The proposed 13 & 82 would continue links along the 113 route as far as Childs Hill. The 189 would continue a link from central London to Brent Cross. The few travelling further out than Brent Cross to/from central London can either use the hopper fare, or use the Northern Line or ThamesLink. I think that It’s best that the 113 is left the way it is because the 113 can go to places that the Northern Line and Thameslink can’t like Apex Corner and Mill Hill Retail Park. As I have said before people should not be forced onto trains. When I first knew the 113, it only ever operated as a through route on evenings and Sundays. RMLs out of Hendon, Edgware to Hendon Central and Mill Hill to Oxford Circus. I was working in the Central Line 'bunker' at Oxford Circus and spent lunchtimes in the sandwich bar and pub overlooking the offside terminating bus stop the 113 always had at Oxford Circus in the street whose name escapes me.
|
|
|
Post by Hassaan on May 18, 2018 11:00:22 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? Because of that stupid downstairs layout caused by the B5LH chassis the engine takes up so much room, which moves the rear axle forward and in turn the exit door further forward than ideal. All that leaves only 6 fully accessible seats compared to 8-10 in all other buses of the same length. And the high floor (therefore low headroom) in the aisle past the door discourages people from moving further than there, which is especially annoying when the exit door is further forward than in pretty much all other buses these days. Best comparison is on the 472 with the B5LH version of the MMC and the standard E400H version, where the difference is obvious (using same body type to remove any differences between manufacturers, but EvoSeti and Gemini 3 B5LHs are the same).
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on May 18, 2018 11:43:56 GMT
Care to explain why they are unsuitable? Because of that stupid downstairs layout caused by the B5LH chassis the engine takes up so much room, which moves the rear axle forward and in turn the exit door further forward than ideal. All that leaves only 6 fully accessible seats compared to 8-10 in all other buses of the same length. And the high floor (therefore low headroom) in the aisle past the door discourages people from moving further than there, which is especially annoying when the exit door is further forward than in pretty much all other buses these days. Best comparison is on the 472 with the B5LH version of the MMC and the standard E400H version, where the difference is obvious (using same body type to remove any differences between manufacturers, but EvoSeti and Gemini 3 B5LHs are the same). There is a difference in the lower deck layout between the B5LH and Integral chassis due to the way they're chassis' are designed, which is prominent with the position of the rear axle and the large rear overhang of the former, as opposed to the Integral Hybrid chassis which is much more symmetrical and conventional in its design. This is the main reason why I'm not a fan of the B5LH chassis Though I wouldn't go as far as deeming them unsuitable for any route because of this reason. Having said that, with some clever engineering there must be a way of configuring and repositioning some components crammed in the rear towards the centre of the chassis allowing the rear axle to be positioned further back, eradicating the rear overhang thus placing the rear doors further back.
|
|
|
Post by redexpress on May 18, 2018 12:17:05 GMT
Care to explain why they are unsuitable? Because of that stupid downstairs layout caused by the B5LH chassis the engine takes up so much room, which moves the rear axle forward and in turn the exit door further forward than ideal. All that leaves only 6 fully accessible seats compared to 8-10 in all other buses of the same length. And the high floor (therefore low headroom) in the aisle past the door discourages people from moving further than there, which is especially annoying when the exit door is further forward than in pretty much all other buses these days. Best comparison is on the 472 with the B5LH version of the MMC and the standard E400H version, where the difference is obvious (using same body type to remove any differences between manufacturers, but EvoSeti and Gemini 3 B5LHs are the same). The MMC body on B5LH chassis does have the small advantage of a couple of seats over the front n/s wheelarch - granted these aren't truly "accessible" but it's better than nothing (which is what you get on the MCV and Wright examples). I agree the E40H has a much better internal layout than the B5LH.
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on May 18, 2018 16:02:12 GMT
The proposed 13 & 82 would continue links along the 113 route as far as Childs Hill. The 189 would continue a link from central London to Brent Cross. The few travelling further out than Brent Cross to/from central London can either use the hopper fare, or use the Northern Line or ThamesLink. I think that It’s best that the 113 is left the way it is because the 113 can go to places that the Northern Line and Thameslink can’t like Apex Corner and Mill Hill Retail Park. As I have said before people should not be forced onto trains. This wouldn't be forcing people onto trains. It is likely that very few passengers will be travelling by bus from Edgware, Mill Hill or Hendon to get to central London. Most journeys would still be continued by the 113 between Edgware and Swiss Cottage, and other routes from Childs Hill to St John's Wood, Baker Street and Oxford Street. The 189 would still link Brent Cross to the areas south of Swiss Cottage. As the train is far quicker for such longer journeys, it is an option available, but a minority who prefer to use the bus for very long journeys can still use the hopper fare. The 113 will only link to Baker Street and Oxford Street anyway - passengers for central London will often need to change buses anyway to get to/from specific destinations.
|
|
|
Post by COBO on May 18, 2018 17:14:14 GMT
I think that It’s best that the 113 is left the way it is because the 113 can go to places that the Northern Line and Thameslink can’t like Apex Corner and Mill Hill Retail Park. As I have said before people should not be forced onto trains. This wouldn't be forcing people onto trains. It is likely that very few passengers will be travelling by bus from Edgware, Mill Hill or Hendon to get to central London. Most journeys would still be continued by the 113 between Edgware and Swiss Cottage, and other routes from Childs Hill to St John's Wood, Baker Street and Oxford Street. The 189 would still link Brent Cross to the areas south of Swiss Cottage. As the train is far quicker for such longer journeys, it is an option available, but a minority who prefer to use the bus for very long journeys can still use the hopper fare. The 113 will only link to Baker Street and Oxford Street anyway - passengers for central London will often need to change buses anyway to get to/from specific destinations. The 113 is a very route busy route so more than a few people will use the 113 between Central London and Edgware. I been on the 113 quite a few times between Marble Arch and Edgware the buses were very packed all the way. I wouldn’t remove the 113 from Central London in my opinion. Finchley Road and Swiss Cottage are not suitable places for the 113 terminate. The 113 also helps relieves the 13. Should TfL just ignore those people who can’t afford Trains or don’t like going on trains. Let me ask you something, should TfL use the Hopper ticket to start breaking long standing routes and break links?
|
|
|
Post by MetrolineGA1511 on Jun 2, 2018 5:50:25 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. It will be a case of careful what you wish for. Next time, route 13 will be awarded to Metroline but using their own EvoSetis.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Jun 18, 2018 0:12:21 GMT
And Mr Dismore is STILL complaining to the Mayor about route 13!
|
|
|
Post by First Hayes on Jun 18, 2018 2:10:34 GMT
The Route13 Has Made Great Progress Since The Start Of The New Contract.
BakerStreet RoadWorks Are Killing Most Routes.......
113’s Bunching Extremely Often, Multiple BakerStreet & Selfridges Curtailments
139’s Bunching Occasionally, But Forever Seeing Piccadilly Circus Curtailments And Buses Terminating At BakerStreet And Running Light Along FinchleyRoad.
All This Negative 13 Talk Is Boring (My Opinion)
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Jun 18, 2018 9:45:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 18, 2018 10:16:58 GMT
If there is genuine concerns from residents about the impact of the cycle superhighway, then I think Westminster are absolutely right to launch a challenge against TfL and I think it's disgraceful that TfL are still set to start the works regardless. I notice the Mayors office has thrown their toys out of the pram again citing Westminster as holding the rest of London to ransom - what a ludicrous comment to make just because they're not getting their own way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2018 12:22:20 GMT
The Route13 Has Made Great Progress Since The Start Of The New Contract. BakerStreet RoadWorks Are Killing Most Routes.......113’s Bunching Extremely Often, Multiple BakerStreet & Selfridges Curtailments139’s Bunching Occasionally, But Forever Seeing Piccadilly Circus Curtailments And Buses Terminating At BakerStreet And Running Light Along FinchleyRoad. All This Negative 13 Talk Is Boring (My Opinion) It looks like you've answered your own question in regards to the 113 and 139s.
All the negative talk about the 13 is rightly justified Tower Transit have attempted to "fix" the route three times in the space of a year and it still doesn't run very well. The 460 performance has visibly worsened over the past year. Coincidence?!
I do wonder how many times people complained about a poor service on the 82 ...
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Jun 18, 2018 13:26:16 GMT
The Route13 Has Made Great Progress Since The Start Of The New Contract. BakerStreet RoadWorks Are Killing Most Routes.......113’s Bunching Extremely Often, Multiple BakerStreet & Selfridges Curtailments139’s Bunching Occasionally, But Forever Seeing Piccadilly Circus Curtailments And Buses Terminating At BakerStreet And Running Light Along FinchleyRoad. All This Negative 13 Talk Is Boring (My Opinion) It looks like you've answered your own question in regards to the 113 and 139s.
All the negative talk about the 13 is rightly justified Tower Transit have attempted to "fix" the route three times in the space of a year and it still doesn't run very well. The 460 performance has visibly worsened over the past year. Coincidence?!
I do wonder how many times people complained about a poor service on the 82 ...
However, the stats show that it has slowly improved as previously mentioned by others.
|
|