London Buses Discussion

[NorthKent1989]

Curtailing the 180 in Woolwich is probably the only other option to it going to North Greenwich? It's not going to be possible for buses to terminate in Greenwich town centre anymore so I can't really see much alternative to the 129 and 180 change.

Curtail in which direction though? To make it a Lewisham to Woolwich route or a Belvedere to Woolwich route?

They don’t have to extend the 129 to just Lewisham, it could go to Catford and keep the 180 as it is, there’s plenty alternatives it’s just TfL being stubborn and refusing to admit that this isn’t a good decision

 

[Edsmith]

Curtail in which direction though? To make it a Lewisham to Woolwich route or a Belvedere to Woolwich route?

They don’t have to extend the 129 to just Lewisham, it could go to Catford and keep the 180 as it is, there’s plenty alternatives it’s just TfL being stubborn and refusing to admit that this isn’t a good decision

Obviously I meant curtail the 180 from the Belvedere direction? Why would the 129 need to go to Catford when the 199 already does that? And three routes between Greenwich and Lewisham would just be a waste of resources.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Obviously I meant curtail the 180 from the Belvedere direction? Why would the 129 need to go to Catford when the 199 already does that? And three routes between Greenwich and Lewisham would just be a waste of resources.

Well it wasn’t made clear enough hence the question, why cut it back from Belvedere though?

You say that that’s a waste of resources but isn’t shoving the 180 to NG a waste of resources too? The 161 & 472 already cover that section from Woolwich in addition to the 486 from Charlton, that’ll be four routes, over bussing NG by duplicating existing links is a back step.

The main point is is that the 177 isn’t going to be able to handle the loads on its own, isn’t getting an increase in frequency, so if anything that’s creating a under resources.

 

[Busaholic]

Curtailing the 180 in Woolwich is probably the only other option to it going to North Greenwich? It's not going to be possible for buses to terminate in Greenwich town centre anymore so I can't really see much alternative to the 129 and 180 change.

The 180 doesn't terminate in Greenwich, and never has done! Just because the 129 will not be able to do so, apparently (which is a dereliction of duty by Greenwich Council in my opinion) is irrelevant. Extend the 453 to North Greenwich (every second bus, perhaps) to replace the 129, or even send the 129 down the Old Kent Road to help replace the 168 over that section - the Bakerloo extension isn't going to happen anytime soon, and housing in the area is set to increase dramatically. The 180 is needed in Lewisham to provide links to East Greenwich, Charlton and all points to Woolwich town centre, at the very least.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The 180 doesn't terminate in Greenwich, and never has done! Just because the 129 will not be able to do so, apparently (which is a dereliction of duty by Greenwich Council in my opinion) is irrelevant. Extend the 453 to North Greenwich (every second bus, perhaps) to replace the 129, or even send the 129 down the Old Kent Road to help replace the 168 over that section - the Bakerloo extension isn't going to happen anytime soon, and housing in the area is set to increase dramatically. The 180 is needed in Lewisham to provide links to East Greenwich, Charlton and all points to Woolwich town centre, at the very least.

Exactly, there’s plenty of options the extend the 129 to anywhere but Lewisham, I suggested extending it Catford as that area has no direct links to NG.

Better still, extend the 129 to E&C via Lewisham, New Cross and OKR, the Bakerloo extension isn’t happening this side of 2040, and TfL have been looking at other alternatives to link Lewisham with the Bakerloo line.

 

[Edsmith]

The 180 doesn't terminate in Greenwich, and never has done! Just because the 129 will not be able to do so, apparently (which is a dereliction of duty by Greenwich Council in my opinion) is irrelevant. Extend the 453 to North Greenwich (every second bus, perhaps) to replace the 129, or even send the 129 down the Old Kent Road to help replace the 168 over that section - the Bakerloo extension isn't going to happen anytime soon, and housing in the area is set to increase dramatically. The 180 is needed in Lewisham to provide links to East Greenwich, Charlton and all points to Woolwich town centre, at the very least.

I'm well aware of where the 180 terminates and the 453 to North Greenwich is just fantasy stuff.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Mar 2022 ==

Exactly, there’s plenty of options the extend the 129 to anywhere but Lewisham, I suggested extending it Catford as that area has no direct links to NG.

Better still, extend the 129 to E&C via Lewisham, New Cross and OKR, the Bakerloo extension isn’t happening this side of 2040, and TfL have been looking at other alternatives to link Lewisham with the Bakerloo line.

Again, just fantasy ideas.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I'm well aware of where the 180 terminates and the 453 to North Greenwich is just fantasy stuff.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Mar 2022 ==


Again, just fantasy ideas.

Fantasy you say? Sounds just like the 180 changes then doesn’t it? Doesn’t exactly respond to my point about the over excess of resources in the Woolwich-NG corridor now does it.

 

[Edsmith]

Fantasy you say? Sounds just like the 180 changes then doesn’t it? Doesn’t exactly respond to my point about the over excess of resources in the Woolwich-NG corridor now does it.

We're just going round in circles, if you think Woolwich to North Greenwich is over bussed then the alternative is to terminate the 180 in Woolwich.

 

[NorthKent1989]

We're just going round in circles, if you think Woolwich to North Greenwich is over bussed then the alternative is to terminate the 180 in Woolwich.

That’s just stupid and not an alternative at all especially since that doesn’t resolve the issue of the Woolwich to Greenwich corridor losing capacity it makes it worse

 

[Busaholic]

I'm well aware of where the 180 terminates and the 453 to North Greenwich is just fantasy stuff.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Mar 2022 ==

Extending the 1 to Hampstead Heath would have been considered a fantasy idea by some a few months ago! Anyway, I don't care about connections to North Greenwich in any direction, the 180 should ply its route as now and as demanded in the response to the public consultation.

 

[Edsmith]

Extending the 1 to Hampstead Heath would have been considered a fantasy idea by some a few months ago! Anyway, I don't care about connections to North Greenwich in any direction, the 180 should ply its route as now and as demanded in the response to the public consultation.

There will still be the 108 and 129 from Lewisham to East Greenwich and the 54 and 380 from Lewisham to Charlton as well as a train service.

The alternative would be to leave the 180 unchanged and withdraw the 129.

 

[NorthKent1989]

For all this talk of extending the 129 because buses won’t be able to terminate at Cutty Sark anymore, what about the 286? That terminates there and there’s been no talk of extending that route?

In conclusion it’s quite clear TfL wants people in SE London to use their cars if they’re breaking vital links in the area.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Changing tack slightly radically, who operates the x26 these days? Just wondering as I've been using that root a lot in the last 6 months and have found a wildly varied selection of vehicles on it, ranging from single door B9 with luggage racks to E400 mmc hybrids. I was just curious if this had more than one operator or if it was supposed to use a dedicated fleet

 

[Snow1964]

Changing tack slightly radically, who operates the x26 these days? Just wondering as I've been using that root a lot in the last 6 months and have found a wildly varied selection of vehicles on it, ranging from single door B9 with luggage racks to E400 mmc hybrids. I was just curious if this had more than one operator or if it was supposed to use a dedicated fleet

X26 is Go-Ahead Metrobus from Croydon garage.

The single door with luggage racks were converted for the route and are supposed to be a dedicated fleet, but as you have seen, Croydon doesn’t seem to be that tight with its fleet allocation.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Thanks very much. The conversions do seem highly suitable and can certainly shift when they get the chance, I note they have USB charging but have never actually found one that works.

 

[Busaholic]

For all this talk of extending the 129 because buses won’t be able to terminate at Cutty Sark anymore, what about the 286? That terminates there and there’s been no talk of extending that route?

I was wondering that, but didn't comment in case I'd missed something vital. In any case, why does the supershort route 129 need to terminate anywhere in Greenwich? Why can't it operate as a 'frying pan' circular from North Greenwich terminus looping round Greenwich town centre, or are Greenwich Council proposing to close all roads in the area apart from their favoured one taking the two-way traffic?

 

[Mikey C]

X26 is Go-Ahead Metrobus from Croydon garage.

The single door with luggage racks were converted for the route and are supposed to be a dedicated fleet, but as you have seen, Croydon doesn’t seem to be that tight with its fleet allocation.

A lot of routes these days seem to have "whatever's available" leading to a real hotchpotch. As an example a local Metroline route to me, the 210 will regularly see E400, E400H, B9TL Gemini 2 and B5LH Gemini 3, a so a mixture of ADL and Volvo/Wrights, and a mixture of diesel and hybrid.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I was wondering that, but didn't comment in case I'd missed something vital. In any case, why does the supershort route 129 need to terminate anywhere in Greenwich? Why can't it operate as a 'frying pan' circular from North Greenwich terminus looping round Greenwich town centre, or are Greenwich Council proposing to close all roads in the area apart from their favoured one taking the two-way traffic?

It’s a strange situation with the Greenwich proposal to make the northern and eastern sides of the Cutty Sark pedestrianised, it’s been vague these past few years as to whether it’s happening, personally I think it’s a bad idea, if it ain’t broke why fix it?

Thankfully the closing of residential roads that occurred during covid has now been done with.

But I think the 129 could have been a circular route or as you suggested extended to Elephant & Castle as a consolation prize for Lewisham not having the Bakerloo this side of 2040.

If TfL are prepared to provide wasteful capacity to North Greenwich, then I fail to see what the issue is in having two routes (129 & 180) going to Lewisham with the 129 carrying on further elsewhere.

Pretty soon you’ll start hearing that the 177 is leaving passengers behind because of this.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Mar 2022 ==

A lot of routes these days seem to have "whatever's available" leading to a real hotchpotch. As an example a local Metroline route to me, the 210 will regularly see E400, E400H, B9TL Gemini 2 and B5LH Gemini 3, a so a mixture of ADL and Volvo/Wrights, and a mixture of diesel and hybrid.

I was once on a bus in Croydon (can’t remember which number) but it was a bus that was clearly meant to be used for the X26, the shoppers found the luggage racks useful though

 

[Snow1964]

TfL Buses have become very unfriendly in their approach to giving customers easy information.
Another example is the cut in frequency of route 171 to every 12 minutes from today which TfL convolutedly describe as

Route 171 will have a new timetable from this date. Buses will be revised to run every 12 minutes on Monday to Fridays and during the daytime on Monday to Sundays and every 12 minutes during the evenings on all days.

Answers on a postcard of difference between Monday-Sunday and all days

Bus changes

Permanent changes to TfL bus routes including new routes and changes to first and last stops.

tfl.gov.uk

 

[Busaholic]

TfL Buses have become very unfriendly in their approach to giving customers easy information.
Another example is the cut in frequency of route 171 to every 12 minutes from today which TfL convolutedly describe as



Answers on a postcard of difference between Monday-Sunday and all days

Bus changes

Permanent changes to TfL bus routes including new routes and changes to first and last stops.

tfl.gov.uk

I can only conclude that TfL are in the process of giving up running bus services in Central and Inner London, even in areas without access to tube, Overground and National Rail services, like Clerkenwell and Walworth. The 171 is not the only route in the area now to have a 12 minute scheduled gap between buses, at the same time the 12 also goes to 5 bph at all times other than the night services. This was a route that not so long ago got cut back from a bus every 3 minutes to one every 4 minutes in the peak! Add to this the fact that with the 171 many passengers now have to change buses since the route got cut back recently.

 

[Goldfish62]

Re LED Destination displays

I’ve noticed that I’m near a few routes which have the latest LED displays.

On the front, it’s large route number and destination; on the side, a smaller version of the same; on the rear, just route number.

I was very impressed when they first arrived around 3-6 weeks ago, but there seems to be an issue with these that either

- the blind stops working completely and shows a blank display
- the LEDs are dimmed to what looks like ten per cent of brightness
- the displays begin to pixelate
- part of the display works, the rest is blank.

This is not a good look but also very disappointing because these blinds appeared to be the best solution yet in London.

I’m aware that so far most of the London bus network does not have these yet but has anyone else noticed this?

(For info, the buses I see are RATP from a couple of north west /south west London garages.)

Obviously a warranty issue that McKenna's need to sort out.

 

[GusB]

The issue of a lack of maps and other publicity isn't necessarily a London-only problem, so I've split the discussion into its own separate thread. You can find it here:

Printed publicity - still necessary in the era of digital technology?

Mod note: Posts 1-22 were originally in this thread: https://railforums.co.uk/threads/london-buses-discussion.146383/ I've moved the discussion into a separate thread because this isn't really a London-specific issue. Good evening, Not sure if this is the right place to ask but does anyone...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Snow1964]

A few of the new routemasters (LT class) have now had a repaint and partial refurbishment, and are re-entering service. It appears to be ones from first 200 buses (those built by mid 2014) that are being done.

The 10 buses (LT101-110) released by Metroline back to TfL few weeks ago haven’t been reused yet. Maybe they will reappear when 111 transfers to Abellio in 2 weeks time as RATP are using part of the 148 allocation to cover the 111

 

[Blindtraveler]

Refurbishment presumably being seat covers and grab rail repaints along with any other major repairs?

What is currently used on the 111?

 

[Snow1964]

Refurbishment presumably being seat covers and grab rail repaints along with any other major repairs?

What is currently used on the 111?

RATP used Scania Omnicity (SP class) until the gain of X140 and 49 last September, then as new electric buses weren’t ready they collected a number of LT (new routemaster) spare from cuts, put these on 111 and shuffled the fleet to cover the gained routes

111 is using LT 85-94, 132, 138, 140-148, 150-154, 461-463
but some of these are borrowed from RATP route 148
The 148 is using some of 49s electric buses (pending altering a kerb near South Kensington)

 

[Blindtraveler]

Thanks. I noticed there was an electric on the x 140 when I used it the other week, v rattly but more than compensated for by the the extremely good journey time from Hayes and harlington to Harrow Bus station

 

[Dstock7080]

Refurbishment presumably being seat covers and grab rail repaints along with any other major repairs?

Announcement to Staff today that all LTs will be refurbished:

As TfL own all 1,000 New Routemaster (NRM) buses, their mid-life refurbishment falls under the responsibility of TfL. The NRM refurbishment is customer focused to replace life expired elements.
The improvements include:
- New passenger seating and priority seat moquette
- External respray and interior repaint of seat frames and poles
- Securing saloon flooring and replacing damaged step edging.

Twenty-two refurbishments have been completed, with a target of 200 buses by the end of March 2023. The NRM refurbishment programme brings together several teams from across Bus Operations and Bus Engineering, along with external collaboration with our contracted Bus Operators and UK-wide refurbishment centres.

 

[Blindtraveler]

Thanks for that. Slightly disappointed that the spec does not include some USB charging points as found on all new standard spec TFL vehicles of whatever type but this work will indeed be welcome.

 

[Snow1964]

Announcement to Staff today that all LTs will be refurbished:

Although some are away for refurbishment, TfL seems to have considerable number not in use. Using LVF (London vehicle finder) following 77 of 1000 haven’t been in service for at least a fortnight.

Could easily convert another route or two using some of these spares

LT 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 20, 22, 70, 53, 58, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 85, 86, 91, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 174, 175, 177, 193, 195, 199, 209, 312, 316, 353, 361, 373, 376, 378, 403, 415, 421, 422, 490, 530, 547, 580, 584, 599, 661, 744, 757, 758, 778, 794, 805, 818, 825, 830, 864, 896, 918, 927, 935, 953, 954, 1000,

London Vehicle Finder

Search current and historic bus routes and locations in London, Reading, Edinburgh. Created to help photographers track down ellusive vehicles.

lvf.io

note have to register (free) to use LVF nowadays

 

[MotCO]

Although some are away for refurbishment, TfL seems to have considerable number not in use. Using LVF (London vehicle finder) following 77 of 1000 haven’t been in service for at least a fortnight.

Could easily convert another route or two using some of these spares

LT 1, 2, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 18, 20, 22, 70, 53, 58, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 85, 86, 91, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 174, 175, 177, 193, 195, 199, 209, 312, 316, 353, 361, 373, 376, 378, 403, 415, 421, 422, 490, 530, 547, 580, 584, 599, 661, 744, 757, 758, 778, 794, 805, 818, 825, 830, 864, 896, 918, 927, 935, 953, 954, 1000,

London Vehicle Finder

Search current and historic bus routes and locations in London, Reading, Edinburgh. Created to help photographers track down ellusive vehicles.

lvf.io

note have to register (free) to use LVF nowadays

LOTS (www.LOTS.org.uk) reports that route 15 is being partially converted to LT; if this number of LTs are not currently being used, why isn't the whole route being converted? Maybe the buses currently being used are not at the end of their lease, or the cost of returning these buses early to their lessor may be too high.