|
Post by rmz19 on Jan 12, 2016 2:15:01 GMT
Here goes!
1 - 427/A10 2 - 149/259/279/349/W3 3 - 110/481/H22 4 - 65/371 5 - 41/230/341 6 - 72/220/283/295 7 - 248/252/365 8 - 73/476 9 - 370 10 - 251
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Jan 11, 2016 22:16:42 GMT
It Never Rains It Pours. There hasn't been an LT bus crash for several weeks and now three in one go. But tbf there were two LTs and presumably an Enviro in the crash, funnily enough the pictures only show the 11 and 148 but not the 211.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Jan 10, 2016 1:06:44 GMT
The cities I've been to are:
Dusseldorf Brussels Cairo Luxor Alexandria Sharm El Sheikh Hurghada Paris Zurich Nice Rome Dubai New York Castries Beirut Tripoli (Lebanon)
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 28, 2015 2:26:30 GMT
With the old face, like the 285? I assume new face like the 295... What's the deal with the 483? Is it still serving Ealing Hospital or has it been cut back to the Broadway? I can't see the 483 not terminating at Ealing Hospital, it's a popular link. It's pretty much a given for it to serve the hospital if it's replacing the withdrawn section of the 83.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 27, 2015 21:09:55 GMT
Good grief is there really much point in repetitive posts about which routes people are apparently never going to travel on again? Obviously that is their prerogative but I don't think it is of much interest to anybody else? I mean TfL aren't going to cancel a conversion because Bogmonster posted on here that he will never use route xx again if LT's take it over! Who's Bogmonster?
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 27, 2015 17:45:39 GMT
Like I thought regarding the shortened LT - it just a demonstrator. As for the 3 & 68, two more routes to not bother with - to be fair, the 432 is quicker to Crystal Palace and the 68 is a route I rarely need to use so I shouldn't be too affected by it I'm going to travel on one if only to see how fast (slow) it climbs up College Road or Knights Hill. ;D I on the other hand won't touch one with a barge pole Is there anything longer than a barge pole?
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 26, 2015 22:45:38 GMT
Personally, I think the 422's length is fine especially as there are plenty of places east of North Greenwich for it to make up time. The town centre to the garage in Bexleyheath only takes a few minutes at the most so the time saving would be extremely minimal. I do see quite a lot of 422s curtailed to East Wickham. The proposed swap with the B11 would take it back to the traditional 122 route pre 1988: the rerouting was made precisely to maintain the link into Woolwich from the West Heath area previously offered by the 122A. Would swapping with the 401 between Bedonwell Road and Bexleyheath achieve the effect desired by the OP? One obvious drawback of that is losing some links to Bexleyheath station. I did wonder whether there would be any merit to a service along Little Heath Road and Belmont Road (some kind of 'B17'). This could work, the time-saving may not be vast but it would be a start, however as you mentioned the link to and from Bexleyheath Station would be inconveniently lost. To be clear my issue with the 422 is not its length or running time, as a standalone route they're perfectly fine, it's when compared with sister route 486 I can't help but want differences to be evened out with little inconveniences caused. Perhaps I should just look at it from the perspective of a standalone route instead.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 26, 2015 18:57:48 GMT
Another alternative would be for the 422 and 486 to swap routes between NG and Charlton, this would introduce an additional route towards Woolwich/Plumstead from the Peninsula, enhance the 422's reliability and help relieve overcrowding on the 486. ...it would also be a welcoming addition to my idea of swapping the 422 and 486 routes between NG and Charlton. These ideas would shave off some minutes off the route and result in enhanced reliability. And *certain* people would be furious if their 486 was diverted and journey times extended hugely, serving irrelevant East Greenwich and the horrid traffic which accumulates near the roundabouts there. Leave the 486 alone! Lol fair enough, I understand why you would be concerned. This was just a suggestion as the 422 is longer than the 486 in all respects, so this modification would even out the differences so to speak. The 486 has a relatively shorter runing time and as a result of this modification it would still be reasonable, it would perhaps still be slightly shorter than the modified 422. While you can argue current 422 users have adapted to the longer journey times, they will also be happier as a result of the more direct 422.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 26, 2015 14:10:07 GMT
Good tidings to all! I thought it was the perfect time of the year to share my package of bus route idea/changes/etc. for South East London. I noticed this list in my notes section and thought if the thread is still open might as well share it... So here goes nothing... 129 Extended to Brixton via Creek Road, Deptford Church Street, New Cross Road, Queen's Road, Peckham Bus Station, Peckham High Street, Peckham Road, Camberwell Church Street, Camberwell Green, Denmark Hill, Coldharbour Lane, Gresham Road, Brixton Road, Effra Road, (Creates new E-W links) (7 bph) 161 Withdrawn between Woolwich and North Greenwich (see 472) (can allow for better reliability and service recovery) 161 Extended to Petts Wood via Bromley Road, Chislehurst Station, Bickley Park Road, Blackbrook Lane, Southborough Lane, Queensway. M-S Frequency reduced to every 12 mins. Evenings and Sunday reduced to every 15 mins. (Creates new links from Petts Wood to Woolwich and for Bromley High School students) (Potential for residential dispute on the 161 serving this section of road also possible weight restriction over railway) 196 Extended to London Bridge via Newington Causeway and Borough High Street. (Creates new links to Vauxhall and London Bridge/ Borough) New Bus route 278 introduced from Peckham to Clapham Junction via Rye Ln (return via Clayton Rd, Hanover Park), Blenheim Grove, Chadwick Road (return via Bellenden Road), Lyndhurst Way, Lyndhurst Grove, McNeil Rd, Camberwell Grove, Benhill Rd, Elmington Road, Brisbane St, Caspian St, Bowyer Pl, Wyndham Rd, Camberwell New Rd, Vassall Rd, Caldwell St, Clapham Rd, Union Rd, Wandsworth Rd, Silverthorne Rd, Queenstown Rd, Battersea Park Rd, Culvert Rd, Sheepcote Ln, Reform Street, Burns Rd, Latchmere Rd, Lavender Hill, Clapham Junction, St John's Hill, (stand at the 344 stand) (Brings a few unserved roads on to the map) (Mon-Sat: 4bph/ Sun & Eve: 3 bph/ Preferred operator: London Central (PM)/ Preferred vehicles: 9.3-9.9m SDs) 380 Curtailed to Woolwich (can allow for better reliability and service recovery) 386 Extended to Belmarsh Prison via 380. Peak frequency increased to every 12 mins. (Releases stand space for the 380) 422 Diverted away from Bedonwell Road and Hythe Avenue. Instead direct via Long Lane (See B11) (can allow for better reliability and service recovery with direct routing) New Bus route 471 between North Greenwich and Abbey Wood via the (existing) 472 until Bentham Road then via Carlyle Road, Harrow Manorway, Knee Hill, Wilton Road, (standalone M-S 7 bph/ combined 14bph with the 472) (Creates a high frequency link between Crossrail and Abbey Wood / Charlton and Plumstead) (Supports demand for North Greenwich - Woolwich corridor and Woolwich - Thamesmead corridor) 472 Diverted via (the 161) Peartree Way, Woolwich Road, then as existing (standalone M-S reduced to 7 bph/ combined 14bph with the 471)) B11 Diverted via Bedonwell Road and Hythe Avenue (replacing the 422) (retains Bexleyheath link) You too, hope you had a great Christmas I would support any extension for the 129. At the moment it serves its purpose well, but an extension to Brixton would create new links to and from NG. Although I would prefer if it runs as far as Peckham only, the 345 doesn't appear to need assistance between Peckham and Brixton so the 129 maybe superfluous along the overlap and Coldharbour Lane especially. I still support this idea though. I would leave the 161 as it is, the effort of introducing the 471 and tweaking the 161 just to serve Petts Wood seems unnecessary imo. I can see that no major links will be broken, however there doesn't seem to be that much demand between Woolwich and Petts Wood to carry out such major modifications so the 161 should probably be left alone. The 471 could still be introduced as an assistance to the 472, allowing the 472's frequency to be reduced and relieve overcrowding. Another alternative would be for the 422 and 486 to swap routes between NG and Charlton, this would introduce an additional route towards Woolwich/Plumstead from the Peninsula, enhance the 422's reliability and help relieve overcrowding on the 486. Extending the 196 further would lengthen the route considerably and its reliability would suffer. I can see the idea behind this extension but it is not the most direct route due to its nature and the connections it provides, which it does well. Also the corridor between London Bridge - E&C corridor would be overbussed so the latter is an appropriate terminus. I could see your proposed 278 being a useful route, it would make use of the popular Clapham Junction - Peckham route via unserved roads and would be a good alternative to the 37. I also have a new route idea using the 278 number but it's a completely different type of route The 380's reliability seems to be fine as far as I'm aware, I acknowledge it's quite a long route but its length is not reflected in its running time as most of the route traverses along smaller roads. In fact, funnily enough the 386 shares similar journey time with the 380 (max 62 & 66 mins respectively) therefore if anything, extending the 386 to Belmarsh would add more minutes to the route and have a higher running time than the 380 currently does. I agree with you regarding the 422 and B11 ideas, the 422 could do with a reduction of running time as turns can occur often on the route. Diverting the 422 via Long Lane and having the B11 replacing it via Hythe Avenue would be a good start, it would also be a welcoming addition to my idea of swapping the 422 and 486 routes between NG and Charlton. These ideas would shave off some minutes off the route and result in enhanced reliability.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 23, 2015 14:10:21 GMT
Changes to the final stop for Route 176 at TCR from Penge. It now terminates in Great Russell Street outside the YMCA instead of New Oxford Street. Ah right that explains the 176 I saw along Great Russell Street earlier, thought it was diverted or lost.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 20, 2015 21:26:22 GMT
Really??? I've been waiting with bated breath for the Metrodecker! Can't wait to see it on the 6 FTFY You put and 'E' by mistake and you're two numbers high! I've corrected it now
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 19, 2015 20:47:58 GMT
Metroline are due a Metrodecker around February 2016. Really??? I've been waiting with bated breath for the Metrodecker! Can't wait to see it
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 19, 2015 15:31:33 GMT
Perhaps Arriva were referring to the longitudinal length of the upper and lower decks inside rather than the overall length, either that or it's a monumental mistake
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 16, 2015 11:46:01 GMT
No Citaros? They are nice to travel on, I like variety of interior configurations and of course, mildly entertaining to listen to. And no electric single deckers (BYD, Irizar or Metrocity) nor the Metrocity diesel single decker. You beat me to it! I was thinking hold on, there are loads more Single deckers than the ones listed The Tempo, Electrocity, and the elusive VDL Pulsar Hydrogen bus are fairly new-ish as well. For me it would be the E200 MMC (LWB ones), followed by the BYD and Citaro.
|
|
|
Post by rmz19 on Dec 15, 2015 21:09:52 GMT
EvoSeti all the way!!!! Second place is the Gemini 3 old and new/StreetDeck, and third is the MMC
|
|