|
Post by planesandtrains on Apr 10, 2019 20:45:24 GMT
33 should start using double deckers now. Might not be able to get as far as the south side of the bridge but they can terminate either at Barnes common or the red lion. Were would the double deckers be coming from? Does the 33 even need deckers? I use it daily during rush hour and always get a seat. I wouldn't mind the odd working but none of the SP's or VH's have blinds.
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on Apr 10, 2019 20:46:15 GMT
33 should start using double deckers now. Might not be able to get as far as the south side of the bridge but they can terminate either at Barnes common or the red lion. Were would the double deckers be coming from? 81 and/or 94
|
|
|
Post by george on Apr 10, 2019 20:47:32 GMT
Were would the double deckers be coming from? Does the 33 even need deckers? I use it daily during rush hour and always get a seat. I wouldn't mind the odd working but none of the SP's or VH's have blinds. That's interesting. I use it in the evening from Hammersmith and it always gets full at the first stop. So I would say it does.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 10, 2019 20:51:00 GMT
The reason for the closure was the discovery of a large crack in the bridge's structure on a regular safety check. As these checks are weekly, something has gone severely downhill since last week ... That’s worrying.. Not really, what would be worrying is not doing weekly checks and ending up with something like this happening! www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45193452
|
|
|
Post by rif153 on Apr 10, 2019 20:54:02 GMT
How do buses turn around on the south side of the bridge?
|
|
|
Post by george on Apr 10, 2019 20:58:11 GMT
How do buses turn around on the south side of the bridge? They turn around at lonsdale road which the 419 goes down.
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on Apr 10, 2019 21:01:04 GMT
I think what was meant is that the discovery of a large structural crack since that has developed since last week is what is worrying
|
|
|
Post by ADH45258 on Apr 10, 2019 21:04:10 GMT
Suggestions for the network if the bridge were to permanently close to traffic:
33 - To permanely terminate at Castelnau.
72 - Diverted away from Castelnau, but via Putney Bridge instead of Chiswick Bridge as it is more direct. Operating via the 220 to Putney Bridge, then via the 265 to line of route at Barnes Station. Possible DD conversion.
110 - Rerouted to Richmond and Hammersmith as per proposals, but instead taking over the shortened 391 via Kew Bridge and Chiswick High Street.
209 - Revised to operate between Hammersmith and Barnes (former 283 stand?) via Great West Road and Chiswick Bridge - to continue a link between Hammersmith and Mortlake.
265 - Cut back from Putney Bridge to Barnes Station (85 continues links between Putney and Kingston Vale), and instead extended to Castelnau via the 72.
419/485 - Merged to operate between Wandsworth and Richmond, via Castelnau, operating around every 20 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by sid on Apr 10, 2019 21:10:23 GMT
I think what was meant is that the discovery of a large structural crack since that has developed since last week is what is worrying And surely that's why weekly checks are done? It's quite reassuring that these "critical faults" have been discovered. Has it been confirmed as a large structural crack or is that just speculation?
|
|
|
Post by foxhat on Apr 10, 2019 21:13:29 GMT
I think what was meant is that the discovery of a large structural crack since that has developed since last week is what is worrying And surely that's why weekly checks are done? It's quite reassuring that these "critical faults" have been discovered. Has it been confirmed as a large structural crack or is that just speculation? Absolutely right, completely agree, and today's check has proved their worth!
Structural crack yes, confirmed 100% in an internal TfL briefing earlier this evening.
|
|
|
Post by busaholic on Apr 10, 2019 21:34:10 GMT
|
|
|
Post by LT 20181 on Apr 10, 2019 22:30:23 GMT
You're right. That's much much worse..
|
|
|
Post by richard on Apr 10, 2019 22:32:15 GMT
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Apr 10, 2019 22:32:39 GMT
I think what was meant is that the discovery of a large structural crack since that has developed since last week is what is worrying Cracks can occur at anytime ... better to have a process in place to detect them than not .. what is the better alternative?
|
|
|
Post by SILENCED on Apr 10, 2019 22:36:30 GMT
I wonder if TfL will step in or leave it as it is. I wonder TfL will now reconfigure the bus routes. Well who knows. TfL and H&F Council have been "discussing" [1] the work scope and funding for an eternity. The lack of money and lack of action always ran the risk that we would get to this position. I'd not be astonished if there is now another "discussion" over the test results with TfL arguing they're not as bad as H&F say they are. I would not be surprised if the leader of H&F Council has been on the phone haranguing Mayor Khan and Heidi Alexander over this mess. I suspect that Wandsworth and Richmond Councils may also have been on the blower too as the traffic fall out from this will be extensive. I fear the bridge will be closed for several years now because TfL doesn't have the financial capacity to just pluck £30m out of the air these days. I don't recall any money or reference to the bridge in the TfL Budget for the current financial year so that means a wait until at least next April. I expect bus operators will have to implement whatever reserve plans TfL have in place for coping with a prolonged closure. I am assuming here that TfL have such plans because the risk of a long closure has been present for a long period of time. [1] polite word for arguing like hell Just a quick question .. why are TfL expected to pay for this ... I did not think they owned the bridge ... or am I mistaken?
|
|