London Buses Discussion

[Busaholic]

I’m sure the 388 changes it’s south/west terminus every time there are service changes. How many different terminals will it have had now?

A sure sign that TfL don't have a clue what to do with it, other than provide that new(ish) link through Olympic Park. Bring back the 178, hire a fleet of RLHs (there are plenty available) and run it as a heritage route. It'd be chocker

 

[NorthKent1989]

Some of these changes look like changes for the sake of change and are deliberately provoking to get the government to do something, most of the changes are too ridiculous to be taken seriously, who is going to travel on a 388 from Peckham to Stratford??

 

[Busaholic]

Some of these changes look like changes for the sake of change and are deliberately provoking to get the government to do something, most of the changes are too ridiculous to be taken seriously, who is going to travel on a 388 from Peckham to Stratford??

Not even me!

 

[NorthKent1989]

Not even me!

It makes no sense getting rid of the 11, 12, 14, 16, 24 routes.

Axe the 507 and 521 and merge it with the 11, have the 12 rerouted via the 148 and keep the 12 etc, there’s a way to cut routes but not ones that are historical and iconic, it’s sentimental I know but not all change is good.

 

[MotCO]

Some of these changes look like changes for the sake of change and are deliberately provoking to get the government to do something, most of the changes are too ridiculous to be taken seriously, who is going to travel on a 388 from Peckham to Stratford??

There may be a grain of truth in that. There was a rumour recently that Borismasters would not get refurbished since TfL did not have any money, and were trying to get money from the Government, led by one Boris (the Borismaster) Johnson. That obviously provoked a reaction.

It may be a negotiating stance to get more funding.

 

[johncrossley]

who is going to travel on a 388 from Peckham to Stratford??

It makes no difference to the end user where the bus goes after alighting. Someone's itinerary might be: get bus 388 from A to B, then tube from B to C, then bus x from C to D. The fact that bus 388 then goes from B to *somewhere far away* is of little importance.

 

[Busaholic]

It makes no sense getting rid of the 11, 12, 14, 16, 24 routes.

Axe the 507 and 521 and merge it with the 11, have the 12 rerouted via the 148 and keep the 12 etc, there’s a way to cut routes but not ones that are historical and iconic, it’s sentimental I know but not all change is good.

It's not just a question of sentiment. Passengers get used to where routes go, which roads are used by which routes etc. A passenger boarding a no 19 in Piccadilly that is blinded for Battersea, as it has been for decades, will expect it to be going via Sloane Square and Kings Road, where they are likely aiming for, not go sailing down Knightsbridge to South Kensington Station. It will only discourage bus use further by people caught out once in this way.

 

[johncrossley]

Despite the cuts to bus services in central/inner London in the last few years, that doesn't seem to have led to an increase in the car mode share

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-13.pdf

Table 2.5 Trip-based mode shares by type of transport, 2000-2019.

Year Public transport Private transport Cycle Walk

(2000) (27%) (48%) (1.2%) (24%)
2010 33% 40% 2.0% 24%
2011 34% 39% 1.9% 24%
2012 35% 39% 1.9% 24%
2013 36% 38% 1.9% 24%
2014 36% 38% 2.1% 24%
2015 36% 37% 2.2% 24%
2016 36% 37% 2.4% 25%
2017 35% 37% 2.4% 25%
2018 36% 37% 2.5% 25%
2019 36% 37% 2.4% 25%

In fact, the private transport mode share fell from 48% in 2000 to 37% in 2019. That's the key statistic that we should be watching in the next few years. It would be a triumph if TfL can get away with further cuts to central/inner London services without increasing the car mode share, especially if people have switched from buses to bikes. That would vindicate the considerable efforts made to improve cycling in the face of continual criticism from both bus and motoring lobbies.

 

[Deerfold]

Despite the cuts to bus services in central/inner London in the last few years, that doesn't seem to have led to an increase in the car mode share

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-report-13.pdf

In fact, the private transport mode share fell from 48% in 2000 to 37% in 2019. That's the key statistic that we should be watching in the next few years. It would be a triumph if TfL can get away with further cuts to central/inner London services without increasing the car mode share, especially if people have switched from buses to bikes. That would vindicate the considerable efforts made to improve cycling in the face of continual criticism from both bus and motoring lobbies.

There's been cuts over the last few years, but massive increases before that (especially 2003-6). In 2022 TfL are down to 50 more buses in the fleet than in 2012 with 8795, with a peak of 9616 in 2017.

Bus use dropped by 9% between 2014 and 2019. This could make a much bigger difference. Especially if some people are simply not making journeys any more because of accessibility problems.

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/fleet-annual-audit-report-31-march-2022.pdf

 

[Basher]

I use the bus services in London regularly (bus user), what I find annoying is the lack of direction/maps to the various bus stands at bus inter-changes. I have downloaded a couple of the area maps onto my mobile telephone.

 

[johncrossley]

Bus use dropped by 9% between 2014 and 2019. This could have make a big difference.

But that doesn't matter as long as the car mode share doesn't increase, which doesn't appear to have happened over that time span. If you confine the cuts primarily to central/inner London that shouldn't affect the car mode share very much. If we get substantial cuts in outer London in the future, that on the other hand could be problematic.

 

[Deerfold]

But that doesn't matter as long as the car mode share doesn't increase, which doesn't appear to have happened over that time span. If you confine the cuts primarily to central/inner London that shouldn't affect the car mode share very much. If we get substantial cuts in outer London in the future, that on the other hand could be problematic.

It does if people aren't travelling at all because they can't access the public transport.

 

[johncrossley]

It does if people aren't travelling at all because they can't access the public transport.

In what way will people be unable to access the network? Are you talking about overcrowding leaving people at the stop? That shouldn't be happening if the cuts are targeted at areas where demand is lower, meaning that overcrowding shouldn't occur. If you aren't talking about overcrowding then accessibility is still more than adequate, especially when compared to the pre-TfL days. There have been plenty of rail/Tube improvements in the last 20 years. There may be some 'edge' cases (which RailUK forums likes to specialise in) but in the vast majority of cases you will still be able to get around quite happily.

 

[Busaholic]

The fact is that the bus hopper fare at £1.65 is simply not sustainable without large amounts of public subsidy. That subsidy isn't there and the weight of that election bribe is beginning to drag the system down.

Then factor in the way in which London organises its bus services. They are so grossly inefficient that short workings are banned, timings are unbelievably slack. Resources could be better employed and utilised but instead, simply cutting services (and so depriving you of revenue generating capacity) is going to fuel a downward spiral whilst dead duck or vanity services in the 'burbs are provided.

As for iconic routes.... we will have to disagree. 99.9% of passengers have zero regard for their history or anything. It's something that is important for a few London-centric enthusiasts. I don't give a fig if the 11 disappears per se....I'm more bothered about the general approach to London about its transport policy.

I largely agree with two thirds of your post. I spent a lot of time on a London bus forum some time ago arguing vociferously for an increase in London's bus flat fare then, with annual increases thereafter, which by now would have seen it at the £2.30 to £2.40 level. To mitigate this I was proposing a cap at three fares per day, but with Hopper fare totally abandoned. I always opposed the Hopper fare, as I could foresaw the problems it would probably cause, with unnecessary disputes about times spent transferring to other buses, etc. It also gave TfL carte blanche to shorten routes both unnecessarily and unnaturally e.g. short of major traffic objectives, the 3 and 53 being very obvious examples. I had no support whatever for any of my proposals on the forum, but that was at a time when Sadiq Khan was being given the benefit of the doubt on his effectiveness.

I also expressed my disdain for the notion that scheduled short workings, except in very limited circumstances, couldn't be understood by the travelling public, given that London had been the short working capital of the world in bus terms for decades past. You'd probably disagree if I were to propose the idea that London in fact possibly gave this idea to the rest of the country! In fact, I'd go so far as to say if short working journeys are not introduced posthaste the system will go into an inexorable decline. Unfortunately the current tendering system will make it very hard to produce meaningful change though.

My comment about ' iconic' routes was meant to provoke a reaction, and I'm glad it has, both for and against. I'm not in the least suggesting it's the be-all-and-end-all, but this is a transport forum and I'm entitled to feel the way I do and to express it. The proposals show a deliberately cavalier and provocative disregard for the travelling habits of many habitual bus passengers imo, most of whom probably care little about the buses themselves and a fair few of whom probably loathe travelling by bus, but have no choice. If the no. 11 down the Kings Road is replaced by a single deck 507 with limited seating and strange boarding etiquette unique to that route, that will only alienate a proportion of the clientele, but maybe that's the intention. Incidentally, talking of Kings Road and Sloane Square, the previous bus every three or four minutes to Piccadilly Circus on the combined 19 and 22 of only a very few years ago will decline (and fall) to no service whatever.

 

[MotCO]

I largely agree with two thirds of your post. I spent a lot of time on a London bus forum some time ago arguing vociferously for an increase in London's bus flat fare then, with annual increases thereafter, which by now would have seen it at the £2.30 to £2.40 level. To mitigate this I was proposing a cap at three fares per day, but with Hopper fare totally abandoned. I always opposed the Hopper fare, as I could foresaw the problems it would probably cause, with unnecessary disputes about times spent transferring to other buses, etc. It also gave TfL carte blanche to shorten routes both unnecessarily and unnaturally e.g. short of major traffic objectives, the 3 and 53 being very obvious examples. I had no support whatever for any of my proposals on the forum, but that was at a time when Sadiq Khan was being given the benefit of the doubt on his effectiveness.

I also expressed my disdain for the notion that scheduled short workings, except in very limited circumstances, couldn't be understood by the travelling public, given that London had been the short working capital of the world in bus terms for decades past. You'd probably disagree if I were to propose the idea that London in fact possibly gave this idea to the rest of the country! In fact, I'd go so far as to say if short working journeys are not introduced posthaste the system will go into an inexorable decline. Unfortunately the current tendering system will make it very hard to produce meaningful change though.

My comment about ' iconic' routes was meant to provoke a reaction, and I'm glad it has, both for and against. I'm not in the least suggesting it's the be-all-and-end-all, but this is a transport forum and I'm entitled to feel the way I do and to express it. The proposals show a deliberately cavalier and provocative disregard for the travelling habits of many habitual bus passengers imo, most of whom probably care little about the buses themselves and a fair few of whom probably loathe travelling by bus, but have no choice. If the no. 11 down the Kings Road is replaced by a single deck 507 with limited seating and strange boarding etiquette unique to that route, that will only alienate a proportion of the clientele, but maybe that's the intention. Incidentally, talking of Kings Road and Sloane Square, the previous bus every three or four minutes to Piccadilly Circus on the combined 19 and 22 of only a very few years ago will decline (and fall) to no service whatever.

I think that the freezing of bus fares has led to funding issues. It was an election pledge, but was clearly unaffordable, but Londoners fell for it, so now they are reaping the seeds they have sown.

I'm not sure about scheduled short workings. I think there is a place for them, but one must not forget that the bus may need to get to the far terminal in order to start the next journey bringing people to the main traffic objective.

I am also surprised by the 507 extension. The 507 is essentially a station crowd shifter, completely different to the clientele in the Kings Road. As I said earlier, I think that these proposals are meant to create a reaction in order to secure more funding from the Government. Whether this ploy will work, or whether other route adjustments will be made instead remains to be seen.

 

[johncrossley]

I think that the freezing of bus fares has led to funding issues. It was an election pledge, but was clearly unaffordable, but Londoners fell for it, so now they are reaping the seeds they have sown.

The bus/tram only fare may sound cheap in isolation, but in general London probably has the highest big city fares in the world. A short bus/tube trip involving Zone 1 costs over £4.

 

[Busaholic]

I think that the freezing of bus fares has led to funding issues. It was an election pledge, but was clearly unaffordable, but Londoners fell for it, so now they are reaping the seeds they have sown.

I'm not sure about scheduled short workings. I think there is a place for them, but one must not forget that the bus may need to get to the far terminal in order to start the next journey bringing people to the main traffic objective.

I am also surprised by the 507 extension. The 507 is essentially a station crowd shifter, completely different to the clientele in the Kings Road. As I said earlier, I think that these proposals are meant to create a reaction in order to secure more funding from the Government. Whether this ploy will work, or whether other route adjustments will be made instead remains to be seen.

The more I think about it, the more utterly nonsensical the 507 diversion/extension appears to be. It only takes a tiny bit of the current route at the Waterloo end and another tiny bit further along at Victoria, whereas to number it 11 would be following that current route as far as Parliament Square before going to Waterloo Station via Westminster Bridge. Why would the 507 not continue to be routed via St Thomas's Hospital and Horseferry Road? Oh, I get it, a 12 minute frequency without added scheduled peak hour extras between Waterloo and Victoria would p*ss off Dept of Transport office workers, assuming some of them have returned to commuting to their office.

 

[MotCO]

Why would the 507 not continue to be routed via St Thomas's Hospital and Horseferry Road? Oh, I get it, a 12 minute frequency without added scheduled peak hour extras between Waterloo and Victoria would p*ss off Dept of Transport office workers, assuming some of them have returned to commuting to their office.

I'm surprised that the 88 has not been cancelled for the same reason (if it still goes down Marsham Street and the DfT is still there - it has been many years since I last worked in that vacinty).

 

[Busaholic]

I'm surprised that the 88 has not been cancelled for the same reason (if it still goes down Marsham Street and the DfT is still there - it has been many years since I last worked in that vacinty).

The 88 has become virtually the only route from the West End up north to the wilds deep into Camden borough, that's why. Given Sadiq Khan's Tooting connections I wouldn't be surprised to see it getting extended south and west too from Clapham Common in time, at the expense of another route.

 

[ScottGallagher]

I worked in the Oxford Circus vicinity for 22 years and something had to be done regarding congestion too often there was a standstill up Oxford St with the sheer number of buses. We as london taxpayers have been for some time now in a situation where if it doesn't pay it can't stay. I speak as someone who was put out by the loss of a link from Oxford St to Russell Square first with the 7 then the 98 and the 10. The current 14 is pretty irrelevant in comparison to what went before.

 

[miklcct]

I largely agree with two thirds of your post. I spent a lot of time on a London bus forum some time ago arguing vociferously for an increase in London's bus flat fare then, with annual increases thereafter, which by now would have seen it at the £2.30 to £2.40 level. To mitigate this I was proposing a cap at three fares per day, but with Hopper fare totally abandoned. I always opposed the Hopper fare, as I could foresaw the problems it would probably cause, with unnecessary disputes about times spent transferring to other buses, etc. It also gave TfL carte blanche to shorten routes both unnecessarily and unnaturally e.g. short of major traffic objectives, the 3 and 53 being very obvious examples. I had no support whatever for any of my proposals on the forum, but that was at a time when Sadiq Khan was being given the benefit of the doubt on his effectiveness.

The bus/tram only fare may sound cheap in isolation, but in general London probably has the highest big city fares in the world. A short bus/tube trip involving Zone 1 costs over £4.

The non-integration between bus and rail fares means I'm avoiding the use of short-haul bus to connect to the railway despite it's the most convenient option, and use another non-TfL railway line to connect to the railway instead unless I have intention to cap my Oyster. A simple bus / tube / tube / bus return journey will already cap my Railcard-discounted Oyster off-peak with the cheapest tube fare (£1.05 in zone 2 alone), but if I use the National Rail (charged at NR rate) instead for the connection I can save £1.7 for the return despite I'll need to go to zone 3 to take the train.

What I hope is to extend the hopper fare to be between bus / rail (the appropriate time at the station from rail touch-out to tram touch-in, 30 minutes from rail touch-out to bus touch-in, 60 minutes from bus/tram touch-in to rail touch in), and increase the caps and Travelcard prices to compensate for the revenue loss. For example, the bus / tram cap I think should be set at 4x bus price (£6.6) instead of 3, while the zonal caps should be set at 3x peak tube price for anytime cap or 4x off-peak tube price if it is currently lower (i.e. the 1-2 cap increases to £10, while the 1-6 anytime cap increases to £16.5 while off-peak cap remains at £14.1 since it's already more than 4x of the off-peak tube fare).

I also expressed my disdain for the notion that scheduled short workings, except in very limited circumstances, couldn't be understood by the travelling public, given that London had been the short working capital of the world
bus terms for decades past. You'd probably disagree if I were to propose the idea that London in fact possibly gave this idea to the rest of the country! In fact, I'd go so far as to say if short working journeys are not introduced posthaste the system will go into an inexorable decline. Unfortunately the current tendering system will make it very hard to produce meaningful change though.

There are many short workings in the Tube network in London. I can't see how's different on buses.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

My comment about ' iconic' routes was meant to provoke a reaction, and I'm glad it has, both for and against. I'm not in the least suggesting it's the be-all-and-end-all, but this is a transport forum and I'm entitled to feel the way I do and to express it. The proposals show a deliberately cavalier and provocative disregard for the travelling habits of many habitual bus passengers imo, most of whom probably care little about the buses themselves and a fair few of whom probably loathe travelling by bus, but have no choice. If the no. 11 down the Kings Road is replaced by a single deck 507 with limited seating and strange boarding etiquette unique to that route, that will only alienate a proportion of the clientele, but maybe that's the intention. Incidentally, talking of Kings Road and Sloane Square, the previous bus every three or four minutes to Piccadilly Circus on the combined 19 and 22 of only a very few years ago will decline (and fall) to no service whatever.

You are indeed entitled to feel that way, and I do understand the nostalgia aspect. In the same respect, I think it's fair to say that outside a few enthusiasts, the vast majority of people including those who use them do not see them as iconic. They are simply a means of getting from a to b and the fact they've a history of 100 years has no significance to them.

But that doesn't matter as long as the car mode share doesn't increase, which doesn't appear to have happened over that time span. If you confine the cuts primarily to central/inner London that shouldn't affect the car mode share very much. If we get substantial cuts in outer London in the future, that on the other hand could be problematic.

Modal share may be similar between private and public transport but in an increasing population, it still represents a substantial increase in actual miles driven; the number of miles driven on London's roads increased from 19.1bn miles in 2011 to 22.6bn miles by 2019.

The decline in bus patronage over the last 6 years has been notable and these changes won't help that. I'm a cyclist so I'm certainly not against the creation of cycle routes but the impact of these being introduced whilst removing bus lanes is frankly counterproductive. Add in painfully slow road speeds and variable quality of information provision, it's not a surprise that this trend is growing, not helped by the unrealistic and unsustainable Hopper fare. Meanwhile, the flights of fancy in the 'burbs continue.

 

[158756]

The bus/tram only fare may sound cheap in isolation, but in general London probably has the highest big city fares in the world. A short bus/tube trip involving Zone 1 costs over £4.

The bus fare is undeniably cheap if you're using it as a one-off. But how many people using the bus every day actually end up paying more than they would buying a monthly or longer ticket in another city? Going up to the £4.95 cap regularly will quickly add up.

 

[johncrossley]

The bus fare is undeniably cheap if you're using it as a one-off. But how many people using the bus every day actually end up paying more than they would buying a monthly or longer ticket in another city? Going up to the £4.95 cap regularly will quickly add up.

A one month pass in the Paris region costs from 65.20 to 75.20 EUR.

Navigo monthly and weekly travel passes | RATP

Navigo monthly and weekly travel passes : information and prices for RATP transport passes. Discover the advantages of RATP tickets and travel passes.

www.ratp.fr

So London Travelcard Seasons are extortionate compared to Paris. Even just Zones 1-2 is £147.50 a month.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

The bus fare is undeniably cheap if you're using it as a one-off. But how many people using the bus every day actually end up paying more than they would buying a monthly or longer ticket in another city? Going up to the £4.95 cap regularly will quickly add up.

Invariably, the cost is cheaper in other cities but then again, most costs are higher in London than in other similar cities whether that's food, accommodation or transport.

 

[miklcct]

A one month pass in the Paris region costs from 65.20 to 75.20 EUR.

Navigo monthly and weekly travel passes | RATP

Navigo monthly and weekly travel passes : information and prices for RATP transport passes. Discover the advantages of RATP tickets and travel passes.

www.ratp.fr

So London Travelcard Seasons are extortionate compared to Paris. Even just Zones 1-2 is £147.50 a month.

Zone 2-3 is £110.60 a month. Not too bad considering it having access to the area of best rail services in London and the whole London Buses network.

If I only use National Rail, a Hendon - Woodgrange Park monthly at £75.30 give access to the majority of the National Rail network in North East London.

 

[Busaholic]

It makes no difference to the end user where the bus goes after alighting. Someone's itinerary might be: get bus 388 from A to B, then tube from B to C, then bus x from C to D. The fact that bus 388 then goes from B to *somewhere far away* is of little importance.

You know, I know, Uncle Tom Cobleigh and all know that virtually nobody will travel between Peckham and Stratford. Then why does TfL proclaim this new link as a 'gain' from the proposed changes? It is pure propaganda: one of the worst examples of this is saying that extending the 272 from Shepherds Bush to Hammersmith increases journey opportunities between Chiswick and Hammersmith. This is only true if you wish to travel via Wormwood Scrubs, and particularly offensive when TfL have only relatively recently culled direct bus links between the two places.

 

[Deerfold]

In what way will people be unable to access the network? Are you talking about overcrowding leaving people at the stop? That shouldn't be happening if the cuts are targeted at areas where demand is lower, meaning that overcrowding shouldn't occur. If you aren't talking about overcrowding then accessibility is still more than adequate, especially when compared to the pre-TfL days. There have been plenty of rail/Tube improvements in the last 20 years. There may be some 'edge' cases (which RailUK forums likes to specialise in) but in the vast majority of cases you will still be able to get around quite happily.

I'm talking about those with access needs such as wheelchairs or those who need a seat. Both with more often find themselves not able to travel. There's still many rail and underground stations with limited disabled access. And many people who live a bus ride from a station.

 

[Statto]

Mike Harris has already published a map of the proposed service changes

https://www.busmap.co.uk/free-downloads/GLBM%20-%20Central%20London%20Consultation%20Bus%20Map.pdf

 

[Snow1964]

I'm talking about those with access needs such as wheelchairs or those who need a seat. Both with more often find themselves not able to travel. There's still many rail and underground stations with limited disabled access. And many people who live a bus ride from a station.

I believe TfL recently said only 91% (might have been 95% cannot find article at moment) of Bus stops are fully accessible

The others aren’t either because of vehicle crossovers, wrong height kerbs, grass verges, shared cycle spaces preventing deployment of ramps, or curves etc preventing buses stopping close enough to kerbs (most TfL ramps are in middle, not front, so buses need to stop parallel and close to kerb)

So the notion that buses are 100% accessible, but tube isn’t is, is misleading