|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 2, 2016 15:33:15 GMT
]I suppose the 60 odd buses displaced is just a gamble TT took when they took on the route? I can't see TfL just leaving the 25 as it is when Crossrail starts in full, how could they justify the expense? I suspect there will be some coercion to get passengers off buses and onto the rails  ! The need to carry 20m+ pass jnys a year? The 25 is simply not going to lose 10-15m pass jnys a year just because of Crossrail. Obviously TfL will "do something" and no doubt upset a great many people in so doing. If we consider TfL backed off from sending the 25 over the Bow Flyover permanently due to a consultation how are they going to get a major restructuring past so many people other than by deliberately ignoring what is said? We also need to consider the timing here. Crossrail does not run into the tunnel from the east until May 2019. The full service does not commence until Dec 2019. Full length (9 car) Crossrail trains cannot run in East London until May 2019 as the platforms at Liv St Mainline are too short. Therefore the Shenfield service will have 7 car trains (broadly the same as an 8 car class 315). Therefore we are right on the doorstep of both a General Election and a Mayoral Election. I really don't think TfL are going to be allowed to start murdering the bus network's busiest route with an election looming and the need to retain Labour in seats in Redbridge / Ilford. Not going to happen. If TfL try to do it earlier then we will have an even bigger mess on our hands with no Crossrail through service and a lot of fed up people. Another political mess for the Mayor. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 16:11:23 GMT
]I suppose the 60 odd buses displaced is just a gamble TT took when they took on the route? I can't see TfL just leaving the 25 as it is when Crossrail starts in full, how could they justify the expense? I suspect there will be some coercion to get passengers off buses and onto the rails ! The need to carry 20m+ pass jnys a year? The 25 is simply not going to lose 10-15m pass jnys a year just because of Crossrail. Obviously TfL will "do something" and no doubt upset a great many people in so doing. If we consider TfL backed off from sending the 25 over the Bow Flyover permanently due to a consultation how are they going to get a major restructuring past so many people other than by deliberately ignoring what is said? We also need to consider the timing here. Crossrail does not run into the tunnel from the east until May 2019. The full service does not commence until Dec 2019. Full length (9 car) Crossrail trains cannot run in East London until May 2019 as the platforms at Liv St Mainline are too short. Therefore the Shenfield service will have 7 car trains (broadly the same as an 8 car class 315). Therefore we are right on the doorstep of both a General Election and a Mayoral Election. I really don't think TfL are going to be allowed to start murdering the bus network's busiest route with an election looming and the need to retain Labour in seats in Redbridge / Ilford. Not going to happen. If TfL try to do it earlier then we will have an even bigger mess on our hands with no Crossrail through service and a lot of fed up people. Another political mess for the Mayor. I can see both points in a way. I think they will do something to coerce people away from the 25 onto Crossrail and other rail networks (my guess is they'll actually hold off supporting the 25/86 along the Stratford - Ilford corridor with another service which without Crossrail they'd inevitably have to do considering growth etc. However they are never going to decimate it either, they may stop it short in the central London area citing rail Improvements but PVR wise I don't think we'll see a reduction. Crossrail may take some punters but things like cost which has also been mentioned is a factor. It won't take as many passengers off east end routes as it will west end routes considering a denser parallel tube network (eg central line) |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Sept 2, 2016 16:46:53 GMT
The need to carry 20m+ pass jnys a year? The 25 is simply not going to lose 10-15m pass jnys a year just because of Crossrail. Obviously TfL will "do something" and no doubt upset a great many people in so doing. If we consider TfL backed off from sending the 25 over the Bow Flyover permanently due to a consultation how are they going to get a major restructuring past so many people other than by deliberately ignoring what is said? We also need to consider the timing here. Crossrail does not run into the tunnel from the east until May 2019. The full service does not commence until Dec 2019. Full length (9 car) Crossrail trains cannot run in East London until May 2019 as the platforms at Liv St Mainline are too short. Therefore the Shenfield service will have 7 car trains (broadly the same as an 8 car class 315). Therefore we are right on the doorstep of both a General Election and a Mayoral Election. I really don't think TfL are going to be allowed to start murdering the bus network's busiest route with an election looming and the need to retain Labour in seats in Redbridge / Ilford. Not going to happen. If TfL try to do it earlier then we will have an even bigger mess on our hands with no Crossrail through service and a lot of fed up people. Another political mess for the Mayor. I can see both points in a way. I think they will do something to coerce people away from the 25 onto Crossrail and other rail networks (my guess is they'll actually hold off supporting the 25/86 along the Stratford - Ilford corridor with another service which without Crossrail they'd inevitably have to do considering growth etc. However they are never going to decimate it either, they may stop it short in the central London area citing rail Improvements but PVR wise I don't think we'll see a reduction. Crossrail may take some punters but things like cost which has also been mentioned is a factor. It won't take as many passengers off east end routes as it will west end routes considering a denser parallel tube network (eg central line) Any fool can get people to change travel modes, just make it unattractive, slow, inconvenient, expensive, overcrowded etc The consultation is simply a legal idea, no obligation to follow its results. Therefore a temporary change can be applied (without consultation) such as cutting it back to end somewhere useless, terminating alternative buses short, changing back to an old timetable (where improvements weren't consulted on). In fact there has been temporary changes for much of last few years, so another (long term) temporary change during phased introduction of crossrail is quite likely. Once you have one hour ticket running route in sections is an alternative to discourage use. Am I being negative, yes deliberately for the discussion to show it can be done. Let's be real here. TfL probably won't consult on the 25 as a single route, they might consult on bus changes following Crossrail and lump it in with about 50 other routes where changes go through as an overall package. Only an idiot would create a consultation with a single route if that was the one getting trashed, much better to lump it with routes that are highlighting faster through journeys. It's best part of 20 years since this type of consultation happened, when Jubilee line extension opened. If they had tried it on a route by route basis then Canning Town, North Greenwich and Canada Water bus stations service changes would never have been properly served. This will be a station feeder and faster journeys (by train) to Central Lonndon consultation, not loads of troublesome individual routes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 2, 2016 17:26:07 GMT
I can see both points in a way. I think they will do something to coerce people away from the 25 onto Crossrail and other rail networks (my guess is they'll actually hold off supporting the 25/86 along the Stratford - Ilford corridor with another service which without Crossrail they'd inevitably have to do considering growth etc. However they are never going to decimate it either, they may stop it short in the central London area citing rail Improvements but PVR wise I don't think we'll see a reduction. Crossrail may take some punters but things like cost which has also been mentioned is a factor. It won't take as many passengers off east end routes as it will west end routes considering a denser parallel tube network (eg central line) Any fool can get people to change travel modes, just make it unattractive, slow, inconvenient, expensive, overcrowded etc The consultation is simply a legal idea, no obligation to follow its results. Therefore a temporary change can be applied (without consultation) such as cutting it back to end somewhere useless, terminating alternative buses short, changing back to an old timetable (where improvements weren't consulted on). In fact there has been temporary changes for much of last few years, so another (long term) temporary change during phased introduction of crossrail is quite likely. Once you have one hour ticket running route in sections is an alternative to discourage use. Am I being negative, yes deliberately for the discussion to show it can be done. Let's be real here. TfL probably won't consult on the 25 as a single route, they might consult on bus changes following Crossrail and lump it in with about 50 other routes where changes go through as an overall package. Only an idiot would create a consultation with a single route if that was the one getting trashed, much better to lump it with routes that are highlighting faster through journeys. It's best part of 20 years since this type of consultation happened, when Jubilee line extension opened. If they had tried it on a route by route basis then Canning Town, North Greenwich and Canada Water bus stations service changes would never have been properly served. This will be a station feeder and faster journeys (by train) to Central Lonndon consultation, not loads of troublesome individual routes. I don't think anyone believes a single bus route consultation would happen with the 25, but I can't see them providing a route to supplement that and the 86 post Crossrail. Having the same frequencies as now with a shorter length of route sounds more likely to me |
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 2, 2016 18:00:14 GMT
I can see both points in a way. I think they will do something to coerce people away from the 25 onto Crossrail and other rail networks (my guess is they'll actually hold off supporting the 25/86 along the Stratford - Ilford corridor with another service which without Crossrail they'd inevitably have to do considering growth etc. However they are never going to decimate it either, they may stop it short in the central London area citing rail Improvements but PVR wise I don't think we'll see a reduction. Crossrail may take some punters but things like cost which has also been mentioned is a factor. It won't take as many passengers off east end routes as it will west end routes considering a denser parallel tube network (eg central line) Any fool can get people to change travel modes, just make it unattractive, slow, inconvenient, expensive, overcrowded etc The consultation is simply a legal idea, no obligation to follow its results. Therefore a temporary change can be applied (without consultation) such as cutting it back to end somewhere useless, terminating alternative buses short, changing back to an old timetable (where improvements weren't consulted on). In fact there has been temporary changes for much of last few years, so another (long term) temporary change during phased introduction of crossrail is quite likely. Once you have one hour ticket running route in sections is an alternative to discourage use. Am I being negative, yes deliberately for the discussion to show it can be done. Let's be real here. TfL probably won't consult on the 25 as a single route, they might consult on bus changes following Crossrail and lump it in with about 50 other routes where changes go through as an overall package. Only an idiot would create a consultation with a single route if that was the one getting trashed, much better to lump it with routes that are highlighting faster through journeys. It's best part of 20 years since this type of consultation happened, when Jubilee line extension opened. If they had tried it on a route by route basis then Canning Town, North Greenwich and Canada Water bus stations service changes would never have been properly served. This will be a station feeder and faster journeys (by train) to Central Lonndon consultation, not loads of troublesome individual routes. Exactly, the 25 will be hacked to bits just as various routes were when Tramlink opened. |
|
|
|
Post by thesquirrels on Sept 2, 2016 20:52:35 GMT
I've never really bought the idea that demand on the 25 is going to collapse in the face of the arrival of Crossrail, whether TfL try to incentivise/coerce people onto its new baby or not. It is a bus, Crossrail is a train, and in my eyes it is as simple as that. As other posters have already stated the whole route is paralleled by very high frequency rail services already - Crossrail will complement that but I don't see it being a 'silver bullet' that suddenly sparks a modal shift away from the route. I'm surprised given the scale and severity of works along the route that ridership numbers haven't fallen by as much as 20-30% in the last couple of years - witnessing it on the ground has been painful, especially at Aldgate - it is worth noting that the peak running time has gone up by something like 40 minutes since the turn of the millennium - a bus is scheduled to take two hours and twenty minutes to get from Oxford Circus to Ilford in the evening rush hour now, and that is before anything along the line of this very long route goes mammary-north. I'd be curious to see how many people actually do the full route at that time of day. Even TCR to Stratford, perhaps a more illustrative journey, takes the better part of 90 minutes. If ridership has remained strong in the face of that then I can only conclude that cost is a driving factor, or local (i.e. between-station) journeys provide a strong customer base on their own right.
What will have happened by the time of Crossrail's introduction is the conclusion of all the major civil engineering projects along the line of route. Bar possibly two - the removal of the Bow Flyover, and the pedestrianisation of Oxford Street, and mitigating against the latter is as simple as curtailing the route at TCR as in years previous. The route will have a degree of stability that it won't have had for nearly ten years, and that will give TfL a chance to seriously consider the best way to serve the corridor, whether the 25 is left to mop up the crowds or parallel routes are toyed with to further ease the burden and give an opportunity to reduce costs. I don't expect any sort of major overall reduction east of Aldgate unless rail fares are pared down/bus fares are raised to match local journeys (and that won't take too much either side: Manor Park to Whitechapel by rail is already £1.70 peak/£1.50 off peak) - the cost differential outside of zone 1 already isn't major for a lot of the route's catchment. There is also human behaviour to consider - it is a lot easier to wander out of the Stratford Centre and get on a 25 towards Mile End than to fight through the Shopping Centre and into the station to get a train. The stations, while parallell, aren't always *that* close - Maryland especially, but a 10 minute walk followed by a 6-10 minute wait for a train in somewhere like Forest Gate, when compared to seeing a 25 in the distance you can reasonably expect to be able to board, is an easy driver in behaviour. It will take more than a bit of convincing for TfL to alter.
I don't think cycling will feature heavily in a detraction in route ridership in the way it has in areas like Hackney. Demographic shifts have counted for a lot in the rise in cycling in NE London, and much of the driving force behind that is in the gentrification of those areas. And gentrifiers are not one and the same - the sort of person that lives in a houseshare in Dalston, Hackney or Clapton is not necessarily the sort of person who buys (or whose parents buy) a 2016-vintage rabbit hutch in Stratford, or a family house in Forest Gate. I don't see the rapid embrace of cycling being replicated in Newham in the way it has in Hackney - for a start, typical journeys would be much longer. I rather think Crossrail will mop up the E20 rabbit hutch brigade to the north of Stratford and the 25 (*corridor) will be left largely unchanged, much in the same way that the Stratford Centre has thrived in spite of the opening of Westfield. There will be growth, and the growth will continue to fuel demand for both.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 2, 2016 21:18:02 GMT
Whilst I'm sure there is always going to be some end to end demand on the 25, surely it's time the 25 was split like so many routes over the past 50 years. I think there is still alot of local traffic on the route yet maybe Crossrail will reduce any real need for a direct bus route to the west end and could the 25 continue to run as a high frequency as far as Aldgate/the city post 2019.
In the past I had always envisioned a Ilford to Aldgate and Stratford to Oxford circus set up thou I think with the changes in demographics around Stafford and the start of Crossrail full freq (ie every 4-5 mins) is still needs between Ilford and Aldgate with no need to for the Stratford to west end link.
|
|
|
|
Post by southlondonbus on Sept 2, 2016 21:37:56 GMT
It will be interesting to see what tfl do post crossrail in west London in regards to the 207/427. There will probably be spare capacity between shepherds Bush and ealing Broadway on the central line amd with crossrail stations at Acton,Ealing,Hanwell and West Ealing will tfl look at the corridor with maybe the loss of the 607.
|
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 2, 2016 22:39:20 GMT
Whilst I'm sure there is always going to be some end to end demand on the 25, surely it's time the 25 was split like so many routes over the past 50 years. I think there is still alot of local traffic on the route yet maybe Crossrail will reduce any real need for a direct bus route to the west end and could the 25 continue to run as a high frequency as far as Aldgate/the city post 2019. In the past I had always envisioned a Ilford to Aldgate and Stratford to Oxford circus set up thou I think with the changes in demographics around Stafford and the start of Crossrail full freq (ie every 4-5 mins) is still needs between Ilford and Aldgate with no need to for the Stratford to west end link. Crossrail will be every 5 mins in the peak in to the tunnel, every 7-8 mins off peak (if TfL can get the paths, original plan was every 10 mins off peak). We have been here before with all sorts of overlapping services on the 25's corridor - the 225 to Aldgate, the 86 to Limehouse, having no 205 / 425 and the route being unable to cope. People have been critical of there being 59 vehicles on the route but TfL specced the high service level in the aftermath of bendy conversion as an insurance policy against overcrowding (to be fair it was probably justified here if not elsewhere). |
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 2, 2016 23:14:06 GMT
As I've said before, just because a train line or cycle lanes runs alongside a bus route doesn't mean that demand will simply shift from mode of transport to the next. This is why I think it's laughable that routes like the 7 are being suggested to be axed in favour of Crossrail - buses don't exactly compete with the railway but actually assist from taking people from their home station to their front door or local shopping centre.
|
|
|
|
Post by sid on Sept 3, 2016 5:53:18 GMT
As I've said before, just because a train line or cycle lanes runs alongside a bus route doesn't mean that demand will simply shift from mode of transport to the next. This is why I think it's laughable that routes like the 7 are being suggested to be axed in favour of Crossrail - buses don't exactly compete with the railway but actually assist from taking people from their home station to their front door or local shopping centre. I think it will be more a case of passengers being forced onto Crossrail as 353 users were forced onto Tramlink for example and I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the 7 was withdrawn completely. There is obviously scope for improvement in other areas with Crossrail feeder services. |
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Sept 3, 2016 10:12:53 GMT
Any fool can get people to change travel modes, just make it unattractive, slow, inconvenient, expensive, overcrowded etc The consultation is simply a legal idea, no obligation to follow its results. Therefore a temporary change can be applied (without consultation) such as cutting it back to end somewhere useless, terminating alternative buses short, changing back to an old timetable (where improvements weren't consulted on). In fact there has been temporary changes for much of last few years, so another (long term) temporary change during phased introduction of crossrail is quite likely. Once you have one hour ticket running route in sections is an alternative to discourage use. Am I being negative, yes deliberately for the discussion to show it can be done. Let's be real here. TfL probably won't consult on the 25 as a single route, they might consult on bus changes following Crossrail and lump it in with about 50 other routes where changes go through as an overall package. Only an idiot would create a consultation with a single route if that was the one getting trashed, much better to lump it with routes that are highlighting faster through journeys. It's best part of 20 years since this type of consultation happened, when Jubilee line extension opened. If they had tried it on a route by route basis then Canning Town, North Greenwich and Canada Water bus stations service changes would never have been properly served. This will be a station feeder and faster journeys (by train) to Central Lonndon consultation, not loads of troublesome individual routes. I take your points but I think life has moved on since the JLE "non consultation". I am sure you are right that TfL "will do a bundle, all or nothing" form of consultation. It's also demonstrably clear that TfL are perfectly capable of implementing policies and doing works in a way that wreck the efficacy of the bus network - the last 8 years shows that all too well. However we are in a different era with people having the right to challenge the conduct of public consultations. We have social media that can whip a storm of protest in hours. We have people who live within spitting distance of route 25 who write blogs and cause never ending heartache for TfL and who now have the ear of the wider media [1]. It is also possible to contact politicians far more easily than in the past. In short the environment has changed from 1998/9 when TfL "consulted" stakeholders (not passengers) about the JLE related changes. To this day I still don't understand why the opening of the JLE meant the 172 had to terminate at St Pauls Stn. I can understand the diversion via Waterloo but that's about it. You may very well be proved 100% correct about what TfL decide to do and how determined they are to have their way. However if they come up with stuff which is demonstrably stupid I think there are a lot of people who can make their life very difficult. I also would not discount what I said about the electoral cycle. Obviously Mayor Khan will want to bask in the glory of opening Crossrail in 2018/19. He may not want to bask in a "shower of sh*t" as a result of botched bus service changes in Labour voting parts of the City nor hand his opponents a stick to beat him with. [1] heck even I'm followed on Twitter by journalists from railway publications, the BBC, railway trade unions and London politicians. Oh and Leon Daniels.  |
|
|
|
Post by snowman on Sept 3, 2016 15:06:30 GMT
You are correct, Jubilee line extension changes were in different era. No internet consultations.
Of course the Greater London Authority Act 1999 didn't exist either
Sections 183 and 184 are variation and discontinuing bus network, section 189 for discontinuing non network including school routes
Under section 184 (2) (c) Any other person that TfL considers it appropriate to consult (so basically doesn't have to be the public),
just need : the Local authorities 184 (2) (a) and London Transport Users' Committee 184 (2) (b) which is a shorter list than for a variation under section 183. The only stipulation is alternative transport should be provided (presumably Elizabeth line could be an alternative) as it is provided by TfL or its subsidiaries (or under an LSP, but that isn't relevant here)
So basically TfL will find it easier to consult to discontinue routes than vary them, as per the 1999 Act.
|
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Sept 3, 2016 19:02:01 GMT
As I've said before, just because a train line or cycle lanes runs alongside a bus route doesn't mean that demand will simply shift from mode of transport to the next. This is why I think it's laughable that routes like the 7 are being suggested to be axed in favour of Crossrail - buses don't exactly compete with the railway but actually assist from taking people from their home station to their front door or local shopping centre. I think it will be more a case of passengers being forced onto Crossrail as 353 users were forced onto Tramlink for example and I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the 7 was withdrawn completely. There is obviously scope for improvement in other areas with Crossrail feeder services. Neither would I be surprised TBH but they'd live to regret it personally. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 3, 2016 19:25:55 GMT
I think it will be more a case of passengers being forced onto Crossrail as 353 users were forced onto Tramlink for example and I certainly wouldn't be surprised if the 7 was withdrawn completely. There is obviously scope for improvement in other areas with Crossrail feeder services. Neither would I be surprised TBH but they'd live to regret it personally. Never underestimate what TfL are capable of, no one needs to look further than the determination regarding Finchley Road to see they WILL make changes if they really want to. (Yes the consultation isn't over, but this is the second one, essentially the same in the main as the first!) |
|
! 
