|
Post by routew15 on Oct 12, 2016 7:41:19 GMT
TfL are consulting on diverting the 112 via Madeley Road instead of The Mall. Simple enough but potentially disputable. Route 112 Consultation page
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 8:15:13 GMT
Thanks for sharing routew15 I'm a bit miffed that the busy section of the 483 via Ealing Common would no longer have assistance, although it could be argued that patronage would switch to the now quicker 112. This would therefore be the opportunity to deck the 112 (or increase the frequency if as likely the trees would be too bothersome) I have wondered why Madeley Road didn't have a bus route but would've thought an eastern extension of one of the Ealing Broadway terminating routes like the E10 might be more useful. I suppose TfL will cite cost in their responses to issues raised.
|
|
|
Post by routew15 on Oct 12, 2016 8:27:49 GMT
Thanks for sharing routew15 I'm a bit miffed that the busy section of the 483 via Ealing Common would no longer have assistance, although it could be argued that patronage would switch to the now quicker 112. This would therefore be the opportunity to deck the 112 (or increase the frequency if as likely the trees would be too bothersome) I have wondered why Madeley Road didn't have a bus route but would've thought an eastern extension of one of the Ealing Broadway terminating routes like the E10 might be more useful. I suppose TfL will cite cost in their responses to issues raised. Just be glad TfL got the right number and didn't put 83 or forget the number all together like the rest of the website has done for weeks. Double decking seems like something that would be grumbled about along a road like this so single deckers seem to be around indefinitely. The benefit of the 112 diversion is not just for North Ealing residents as TfL is trying to emphasise, it is for 112 passengers further along the route. The construction of Brent Cross expansion is imminent and this is could potentially cause a lot of problems for the 112 so saving 8 mins may be of a lot of help to the route. Before (and eventually after) the shopping centre changes this diversion will be good for a more resilient 112. Extending or diverting another route would not change the time saving. The Ealing Common stop on Uxbridge Road can be quite busy for the 112 and 483 so diverting this may not have a positive effect for the 483.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Oct 12, 2016 9:11:17 GMT
And they didn't even mention the Hopper ticket!
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Oct 12, 2016 12:05:46 GMT
I'm not sure diverting the 112 is the right thing to do as it will hardly save much time given the heavy traffic jams start much further back so it's still going to be stuck. Personally, I think the E11 would of been better serving Madeley Road and then run on to Ealing Common.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 13:02:00 GMT
I'm not sure diverting the 112 is the right thing to do as it will hardly save much time given the heavy traffic jams start much further back so it's still going to be stuck. Personally, I think the E11 would of been better serving Madeley Road and then run on to Ealing Common. Like the thinking. Problem with the 112 is the inevitable rise in passenger numbers from Ealing for journeys towards Hanger Lane (no direct tube) Keeping the same frequency on this single deck Route is a mistake in my view, although that may only serve to appease the residents. I can see a frequency consultation within a few years if this goes ahead.
|
|
|
Post by thewintersoldier on Oct 12, 2016 13:40:13 GMT
I'm not sure diverting the 112 is the right thing to do as it will hardly save much time given the heavy traffic jams start much further back so it's still going to be stuck. Personally, I think the E11 would of been better serving Madeley Road and then run on to Ealing Common. I agree with the Vjaska vernacular. From my years on this route, the traffic towards starts way back, and actually starts to become clearer at the junction where the 112 turns right. So it's probably not going to shave that much time off the route. Also, There's no priority given for vehicles turning right. So you'll end up queuing for ages to make the right turn. May aswell just keep the current routing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 12:01:37 GMT
Disgraceful that it’s now over a year since the consultation closed and still nothing about the outcome of this one.
The fact that there is a separate consultation on this route (Ealing - Osterley) should have no bearing on this one, and even if it did they should have updated the page to reflect that instead of STILL saying they hope to implement any changes by summer of THIS YEAR.
Absolute shambles.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 20, 2017 12:34:57 GMT
Disgraceful that it’s now over a year since the consultation closed and still nothing about the outcome of this one. The fact that there is a separate consultation on this route (Ealing - Osterley) should have no bearing on this one, and even if it did they should have updated the page to reflect that instead of STILL saying they hope to implement any changes by summer of THIS YEAR. Absolute shambles. I suspect it has run into all sorts of problems. On the face of it it's a decent idea but I expect there will be the usual residents' grumbles about vibration, collapsing houses and their cars being damaged by "evil" buses plus the mass crime wave that a bus service *always* brings (rolls eyes). There is also the not insignificant issue of the junction works on the A406 and I suspect there is no funding for this at all. Therefore the proposal is most likely dead. The Crossrail related extension is fine in concept but TfL would, as said many times in another thread, be better served by extending an E route (E1?) across Ealing to cover the link than extending the 112.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 12:50:40 GMT
Disgraceful that it’s now over a year since the consultation closed and still nothing about the outcome of this one. The fact that there is a separate consultation on this route (Ealing - Osterley) should have no bearing on this one, and even if it did they should have updated the page to reflect that instead of STILL saying they hope to implement any changes by summer of THIS YEAR. Absolute shambles. I suspect it has run into all sorts of problems. On the face of it it's a decent idea but I expect there will be the usual residents' grumbles about vibration, collapsing houses and their cars being damaged by "evil" buses plus the mass crime wave that a bus service *always* brings (rolls eyes). There is also the not insignificant issue of the junction works on the A406 and I suspect there is no funding for this at all. Therefore the proposal is most likely dead. The Crossrail related extension is fine in concept but TfL would, as said many times in another thread, be better served by extending an E route (E1?) across Ealing to cover the link than extending the 112. Agreed with everything except the rolling of the eyes about the crime wave in this case... the bus already runs through thewintersoldier territory 😂
|
|
|
Post by thewintersoldier on Dec 20, 2017 12:56:17 GMT
I suspect it has run into all sorts of problems. On the face of it it's a decent idea but I expect there will be the usual residents' grumbles about vibration, collapsing houses and their cars being damaged by "evil" buses plus the mass crime wave that a bus service *always* brings (rolls eyes). There is also the not insignificant issue of the junction works on the A406 and I suspect there is no funding for this at all. Therefore the proposal is most likely dead. The Crossrail related extension is fine in concept but TfL would, as said many times in another thread, be better served by extending an E route (E1?) across Ealing to cover the link than extending the 112. Agreed with everything except the rolling of the eyes about the crime wave in this case... the bus already runs through thewintersoldier territory 😂 I’ll have you know the crime syndicate of Neasden only ventures as far as Stonebridge Park on the 112....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 13:34:24 GMT
Agreed with everything except the rolling of the eyes about the crime wave in this case... the bus already runs through thewintersoldier territory 😂 I’ll have you know the crime syndicate of Neasden only ventures as far as Stonebridge Park on the 112.... 😂 I feel sorry for the 18 drivers who will no doubt become the black sheep of the LU/RATP family when they’ve snapped because of the Stonebridge Park and Harlesden ‘massive’ hoodlums
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 20, 2017 13:35:53 GMT
112 is also suffering from a loading crisis that TfL are now picking up on. As far as I'm aware, the re-routing would not be suitable for deckers. With the 112 getting ever nearer and nearer to needing deckers (without thinking about the proposed XR extension, which SHOULD be decked anyway), one wonders whether there are in fact other issues at play here as to why there is a wall of silence ... cost issues apart.
|
|
|
Post by vjaska on Dec 20, 2017 14:10:42 GMT
112 is also suffering from a loading crisis that TfL are now picking up on. As far as I'm aware, the re-routing would not be suitable for deckers. With the 112 getting ever nearer and nearer to needing deckers (without thinking about the proposed XR extension, which SHOULD be decked anyway), one wonders whether there are in fact other issues at play here as to why there is a wall of silence ... cost issues apart. I agree with decking the 112 as it's been getting rammed solid for years now - it was happening under Travel London when there was actually money to do something about it so why they're only realising now is remarkable quite frankly. It must of been irritating for Travel London, Abellio & now Metroline to try and get this route to run well given the ridiculous amounts of traffic it encounters plus the heavy loadings. I still think the Madeley Road is diversion is a bad idea for the 112 along with the extension to Osterley. The E11 could be diverted along Madeley Road on its way to Ealing Common whilst the E1 or E9 could do the extension to Osterley.
|
|
|
Post by snoggle on Dec 20, 2017 15:29:06 GMT
112 is also suffering from a loading crisis that TfL are now picking up on. As far as I'm aware, the re-routing would not be suitable for deckers. With the 112 getting ever nearer and nearer to needing deckers (without thinking about the proposed XR extension, which SHOULD be decked anyway), one wonders whether there are in fact other issues at play here as to why there is a wall of silence ... cost issues apart. "Only picking up now" What have they been doing? Ridership's gone up 144% in 18 years and 24% in the last 4. This has been driven by frequency increases that TfL themselves have instituted and they have tons of evidence as to what frequency increases typically do to patronage. I can remember the dire days of the much longer 112 under Pan Atlas when you had to be desperate to use the route. It is quite startling how usage of the 112 and 232 have picked up in recent years given that not very much has changed in terms of faster journeys or extra journey generators along the route. There's really only IKEA at Neasden that's a big change and they've been there for a long while. Brent Cross hasn't changed much nor have many of the other spots along the route. I can't see it being double decked because that's another thing that's clearly off the agenda now not that it was ever much on TfL's agenda. I think Madeley Road could be served by extending the E10 along there and across to North Ealing and up to Park Royal shops (near the station). It may even be possible to serve West Acton tube too with a couple of bus gates at the width restrictions. This would provide a small bus link into an area devoid of buses unless you schlep to the A406.
|
|