|
Route 192
Nov 14, 2015 8:04:08 GMT
via mobile
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Nov 14, 2015 8:04:08 GMT
So I sent a feedback/suggestion to tfl regarding the problems the 192 faces. As recently as last night there was a 35 minute gap at 9pm. This was their response I guess I should give up my job to help them out!
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 14, 2015 9:19:54 GMT
Dear TfL, Get off your backsides and come and stand at Tottenham hale bus station in any rush hour period, Saturday and Sunday daytimes and you will see how (expletive deleted) full the 192 is. In addition please go for a few rides on the bus from Edmonton Green and see how busy the route is. Quite frankly if you "regularly monitor" routes you would know this anyway. The fact you seem not to suggests your monitoring is deficient. I would also point out that your I-Bus system plus reports from the operator and Centrecomm and the TSCC should provide plenty of information about road works, traffic condition and the route's operational performance. Therefore do the job you're paid to do and put some more buses on the 192. Love and kisses, Snoggle How's that for a reply?
|
|
|
Post by Tangy on Nov 14, 2015 9:38:36 GMT
I have always thought the W8 and 192 should swap southern termini. The W8 run Chase Farm, Enfield, Edmonton Green, Bounces Road then via 192 to Tottenham Hale (with double deckers, no issues on Montagu Road).
The 192 would then be left as a more local route between Enfield Town via Bush Hill Park and Bury Street (as now) to Edmonton Green then Town Road to Pickett's Lock.
|
|
|
Route 192
Nov 14, 2015 13:20:02 GMT
via mobile
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Nov 14, 2015 13:20:02 GMT
I have always thought the W8 and 192 should swap southern termini. The W8 run Chase Farm, Enfield, Edmonton Green, Bounces Road then via 192 to Tottenham Hale (with double deckers, no issues on Montagu Road). The 192 would then be left as a more local route between Enfield Town via Bush Hill Park and Bury Street (as now) to Edmonton Green then Town Road to Pickett's Lock. That's exactly what I suggested to tfl but got the above reply
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Nov 14, 2015 13:31:27 GMT
Dear TfL, Get off your backsides and come and stand at Tottenham hale bus station in any rush hour period, Saturday and Sunday daytimes and you will see how (expletive deleted) full the 192 is. In addition please go for a few rides on the bus from Edmonton Green and see how busy the route is. Quite frankly if you "regularly monitor" routes you would know this anyway. The fact you seem not to suggests your monitoring is deficient. I would also point out that your I-Bus system plus reports from the operator and Centrecomm and the TSCC should provide plenty of information about road works, traffic condition and the route's operational performance. Therefore do the job you're paid to do and put some more buses on the 192. Love and kisses, Snoggle How's that for a reply? Yes their response baffled me too! What do they expect me to do, stand at Tottenham Hale from first until last bus recording exactly what is going on! Last night was just a comedy. I get to Tottenham Hale about 845 (as my train from Stratford arrives about then) and there was the usual waiting crowd (1 whole bus full with one or two standing). So I waited and waited. The 192 normally leaves Tottenham Hale at 850 (this depends if the driver leaves early ). There was a bus parked up by the drop off stop on watermead way, enfield destination, lights off. Sat there for about 15 minutes. Then 2 buses turned up behind it, one with lights off and another terminating. So this suggests there was an issue with the first bus. So the replacement bus drives and you would assume was going to head round the Hale Road and into the bus station, delighting 50+ passengers. WRONG! After this bus drove away it never turned up and there was no sign of it when we all squeezed in the bus that had terminated. This was around 915 when this bus left Tottenham Hale. Did the other bus drive OOS to Edmonton Green? I didn't check LVF But it's a glimpse into the sh*t that goes on day in day out on the 192! And tfl don't seem to give 2 sh*ts about it. Snoggle do you mind if I send your reply! Obviously with a few edits
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 14, 2015 13:58:01 GMT
Dear TfL, Get off your backsides and come and stand at Tottenham hale bus station in any rush hour period, Saturday and Sunday daytimes and you will see how (expletive deleted) full the 192 is. In addition please go for a few rides on the bus from Edmonton Green and see how busy the route is. Quite frankly if you "regularly monitor" routes you would know this anyway. The fact you seem not to suggests your monitoring is deficient. I would also point out that your I-Bus system plus reports from the operator and Centrecomm and the TSCC should provide plenty of information about road works, traffic condition and the route's operational performance. Therefore do the job you're paid to do and put some more buses on the 192. Love and kisses, Snoggle How's that for a reply? Yes their response baffled me too! What do they expect me to do, stand at Tottenham Hale from first until last bus recording exactly what is going on! Last night was just a comedy. I get to Tottenham Hale about 845 (as my train from Stratford arrives about then) and there was the usual waiting crowd (1 whole bus full with one or two standing). So I waited and waited. The 192 normally leaves Tottenham Hale at 850 (this depends if the driver leaves early ). There was a bus parked up by the drop off stop on watermead way, enfield destination, lights off. Sat there for about 15 minutes. Then 2 buses turned up behind it, one with lights off and another terminating. So this suggests there was an issue with the first bus. So the replacement bus drives and you would assume was going to head round the Hale Road and into the bus station, delighting 50+ passengers. WRONG! After this bus drove away it never turned up and there was no sign of it when we all squeezed in the bus that had terminated. This was around 915 when this bus left Tottenham Hale. Did the other bus drive OOS to Edmonton Green? I didn't check LVF But it's a glimpse into the sh*t that goes on day in day out on the 192! And tfl don't seem to give 2 sh*ts about it. Snoggle do you mind if I send your reply! Obviously with a few edits Might need more than a *few* edits!! If you want to use their factual bits then fine but obviously it needs to be in your hand overall. Nothing worse than composite letters that read as if they're written by several people. EDIT - one thing that's come to mind is that TfL also get Oyster / CPC validation data for every journey with the stop location automatically recorded. If they bothered to do a route level analysis of this data they'd see how many people are boarding at each stop. They'd also be able to spot gaps in the service if the data was referenced to I-Bus info. I assume TfL have the ability to do this type of analysis as it's just one of many logical bits of analysis you could perform. I think the request for examples of poor journeys is caused by the way the TfL correspondence system is set up. Staff expect to be tracing specific failings / vehicles / drivers so they can tailor a response. Anything more general or strategic tends to throw the process "off kilter" in my experience.
|
|
|
Post by Eastlondoner62 on Nov 14, 2015 14:06:54 GMT
I had a similar response when I wrote to TfL about being constantly left behind on the 86. They wanted me to provide examples of overcrowded buses including times. I don't really have time to note down every single crowded bus on quite a large route.
|
|
|
Route 192
Nov 14, 2015 22:22:41 GMT
via mobile
Post by vjaska on Nov 14, 2015 22:22:41 GMT
I had a similar response when I wrote to TfL about being constantly left behind on the 86. They wanted me to provide examples of overcrowded buses including times. I don't really have time to note down every single crowded bus on quite a large route. I had a similar response when asking about decking the 289, 355 & P4 a few years ago - they even started talking about the 81 which baffled me as I never even mentioned it.
|
|
|
Route 192
Nov 15, 2015 16:10:17 GMT
via mobile
Post by sid on Nov 15, 2015 16:10:17 GMT
I had a similar response when I wrote to TfL about being constantly left behind on the 86. They wanted me to provide examples of overcrowded buses including times. I don't really have time to note down every single crowded bus on quite a large route. I had a similar response when asking about decking the 289, 355 & P4 a few years ago - they even started talking about the 81 which baffled me as I never even mentioned it. I had something similar when I contacted TfL about the poor service on the 160 and got a reply relating to the 212!!
|
|
|
Post by sid on Nov 15, 2015 16:12:50 GMT
I have always thought the W8 and 192 should swap southern termini. The W8 run Chase Farm, Enfield, Edmonton Green, Bounces Road then via 192 to Tottenham Hale (with double deckers, no issues on Montagu Road). The 192 would then be left as a more local route between Enfield Town via Bush Hill Park and Bury Street (as now) to Edmonton Green then Town Road to Pickett's Lock. That sounds like the perfect solution to me!
|
|
|
Route 192
Nov 15, 2015 23:26:26 GMT
via mobile
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Nov 15, 2015 23:26:26 GMT
Yes their response baffled me too! What do they expect me to do, stand at Tottenham Hale from first until last bus recording exactly what is going on! Last night was just a comedy. I get to Tottenham Hale about 845 (as my train from Stratford arrives about then) and there was the usual waiting crowd (1 whole bus full with one or two standing). So I waited and waited. The 192 normally leaves Tottenham Hale at 850 (this depends if the driver leaves early ). There was a bus parked up by the drop off stop on watermead way, enfield destination, lights off. Sat there for about 15 minutes. Then 2 buses turned up behind it, one with lights off and another terminating. So this suggests there was an issue with the first bus. So the replacement bus drives and you would assume was going to head round the Hale Road and into the bus station, delighting 50+ passengers. WRONG! After this bus drove away it never turned up and there was no sign of it when we all squeezed in the bus that had terminated. This was around 915 when this bus left Tottenham Hale. Did the other bus drive OOS to Edmonton Green? I didn't check LVF But it's a glimpse into the sh*t that goes on day in day out on the 192! And tfl don't seem to give 2 sh*ts about it. Snoggle do you mind if I send your reply! Obviously with a few edits Might need more than a *few* edits!! If you want to use their factual bits then fine but obviously it needs to be in your hand overall. Nothing worse than composite letters that read as if they're written by several people. EDIT - one thing that's come to mind is that TfL also get Oyster / CPC validation data for every journey with the stop location automatically recorded. If they bothered to do a route level analysis of this data they'd see how many people are boarding at each stop. They'd also be able to spot gaps in the service if the data was referenced to I-Bus info. I assume TfL have the ability to do this type of analysis as it's just one of many logical bits of analysis you could perform. I think the request for examples of poor journeys is caused by the way the TfL correspondence system is set up. Staff expect to be tracing specific failings / vehicles / drivers so they can tailor a response. Anything more general or strategic tends to throw the process "off kilter" in my experience. I've only just seen your edit. I had also thought about the Oyster data. I've sent off an email. Will post it shortly!
|
|
|
Post by bigbaddom1981 on Nov 15, 2015 23:28:55 GMT
So I sent a reply back to tfl saying their reply wasn't good enough.
This is what I sent
Couldn't include the picture in this post at this point, maybe later
|
|
|
Post by ServerKing on Nov 16, 2015 7:32:37 GMT
I don't think they will ever resolve the issue with the 192 unless they increase the PVR, or introduce variable PVRs on certain routes according to demand. Might seem like a crazy idea but if larger vehicles cannot cope with the route, but yet passenger demand outstrips supply, then something has to be done. It wasn't great when I was using the 192 in 2013, still cannot believe nothing's been done aside from a change of operator and vehicles
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Nov 16, 2015 10:29:00 GMT
I don't think they will ever resolve the issue with the 192 unless they increase the PVR, or introduce variable PVRs on certain routes according to demand. Might seem like a crazy idea but if larger vehicles cannot cope with the route, but yet passenger demand outstrips supply, then something has to be done. It wasn't great when I was using the 192 in 2013, still cannot believe nothing's been done aside from a change of operator and vehicles My sense of things is that TfL have long felt that the overcrowding is the result of unreliable operation. This is why the timetable was tweaked umpteen times under Arriva operation. They eventually conceded that some AM peak extras were needed south of Edmonton Green. Then the route was retendered with no peak extras and buses that are marginally larger. I assume the belief was that a new operator would concentrate on reliable operation and the overcrowding would magically vanish. Unfortunately it hasn't because Go Ahead struggle with the route just like Arriva did. Some of that is traffic volumes, some is growing demand, some is down to the ridiculous road layout at Tottenham Hale that makes the 192 take minutes to go virtually nowhere. Why there was no provision for quick access into the bus station for the 192 I just don't understand. I think TfL have to face facts and just accept that demand on the 192 is above capacity at certain times - peaks because of the commuter flows, weekends because of shopping and IKEA flows, evenings because the peak has spread and later night opening with some shops. Sundays are particulary irksome because if you can't board a bus it's 15 mins wait and there's no guarantee you can get on the next bus. Although not as bad as the 343 episode I think we're in the same place - something more radical than timetable tinkering is needed. Maybe the 192 / W8 swapover as already suggested or at least 1 extra bph or some extra short workings.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Nov 16, 2015 12:34:40 GMT
I'm not sure about the layout of the roads along the 192 route, the last time I've used it was a few years back between Angel Road Superstores and Enfield a few times and I recall it was slightly busy back then, although not overcrowded as it was around noon. Can the route accommodate 9.6m/10.2m SDs? If so then that coupled with a frequency increase to x8-10 mins could solve the overcrowding situation and it's good riddance to those hideous 8.8m Streetlites. Extending the W8 from Picketts Lock to Tottenham Hale via Meridian Way and the 192 could also help, however this may not make a considerable difference to the 192 situation alone so it might be a welcoming addition to the 192 receiving either a capacity or frequency increase, having both (if possible) might be excessive.
|
|