On 19/08/2011 21:58, Ken wrote:
In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 19/08/2011 17:51, Ken wrote:
In article
,
Tristán White writes
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...dler-wins-lond

on-tramlink-tram-order/archiv/2011/08.html

Swiss company Stadler's won the £16.3m contract, towards which Croydon
Council contributes £3m.

So they're using them where they are least needed then.

Surely they wouldn't be much good anywhere else in London?


What I meant was that they are putting the extra trams where they
already have a frequent service, rather than using them where there is
no service, or the service is infrequent.

Where has no service? They even use the centre road at East Croydon in
everyday service now.

It is surely hardly a surprise that the busiest bit has the most
frequent service, and needs more capacity.


--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

It's perhaps worth mentioning that all travel on Tramlink is free today
and tomorrow (21st): a gesture intended to get people back on the
network after the recent closures due to damage during the riots.
--
Paul Terry

In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:58:59 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 19/08/2011 17:51, Ken wrote:
In article
,
Tristán White writes
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...dler-wins-lond
on-tramlink-tram-order/archiv/2011/08.html

Swiss company Stadler's won the £16.3m contract, towards which Croydon
Council contributes £3m.

So they're using them where they are least needed then.

Surely they wouldn't be much good anywhere else in London?


What I meant was that they are putting the extra trams where they
already have a frequent service, rather than using them where there is
no service, or the service is infrequent.

I am confused by your statement. Surely the plan is to put the trams
on the section where there is the greatest demand in order to provide
relief from overcrowding? I thought it was understood that the
Wimbledon line suffers some of the worst overcrowding so it makes
sense to add service there even if only on part of the route. The
single track sections are a bigger and more costly problem to solve.

What part of Tramlink has no service that, in your view, should have a
service? I am not aware that any part of the Tramlink network has an
infrequent service. Frequencies have been bolstered twice since TfL
took direct control of the service and the service has never really
been that infrequent - especially if you look at some of the rail
services on branches in and around South London. A number of them are
no better than every 30 minutes off peak although overlap sections do
better.

Before the tramlink was introduced there was a bus 726 between Bromley
and Croydon, the first bus on Sunday Morning leaving Bromley at 6.00. If
you have a look at the Tramlink timetable you will find the first tram
doesn't leave from Beckenham Junction until 07:20.

The laugh is that when they withdrew the bus service, instead of
providing any useful information, they put notices in the timetable
windows along the route saying "Your services are improving"

Transport services are planned by people in suits who drive cars, but
want to use the train service (or something that goes on rails) for
their commute to work, but use cars for weekend leisure activities. They
can't relate to anyone using public transport at weekends and take them
to be destitutes or losers with no money but infinite amounts of time,
and who deserve to be punished and humiliated.
--
Ken

In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 20:09:00 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:58:59 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 19/08/2011 17:51, Ken wrote:
In article
,
Tristán White writes
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...dler-wins-lond
on-tramlink-tram-order/archiv/2011/08.html

Swiss company Stadler's won the £16.3m contract, towards which Croydon
Council contributes £3m.

So they're using them where they are least needed then.

Surely they wouldn't be much good anywhere else in London?


What I meant was that they are putting the extra trams where they
already have a frequent service, rather than using them where there is
no service, or the service is infrequent.

I am confused by your statement. Surely the plan is to put the trams
on the section where there is the greatest demand in order to provide
relief from overcrowding? I thought it was understood that the
Wimbledon line suffers some of the worst overcrowding so it makes
sense to add service there even if only on part of the route. The
single track sections are a bigger and more costly problem to solve.

What part of Tramlink has no service that, in your view, should have a
service? I am not aware that any part of the Tramlink network has an
infrequent service. Frequencies have been bolstered twice since TfL
took direct control of the service and the service has never really
been that infrequent - especially if you look at some of the rail
services on branches in and around South London. A number of them are
no better than every 30 minutes off peak although overlap sections do
better.

Before the tramlink was introduced there was a bus 726 between Bromley
and Croydon, the first bus on Sunday Morning leaving Bromley at 6.00. If
you have a look at the Tramlink timetable you will find the first tram
doesn't leave from Beckenham Junction until 07:20.

The laugh is that when they withdrew the bus service, instead of
providing any useful information, they put notices in the timetable
windows along the route saying "Your services are improving"

Transport services are planned by people in suits who drive cars, but
want to use the train service (or something that goes on rails) for
their commute to work, but use cars for weekend leisure activities. They
can't relate to anyone using public transport at weekends and take them
to be destitutes or losers with no money but infinite amounts of time,
and who deserve to be punished and humiliated.

Now instead of making unsubstantiated rants perhaps you can answer the
questions I posed? Referring to a bus route that is long dead is of
no relevance to Tramlink where you said there were places where there
was no service on the Tramlink network.

Ranting about weekend service levels and the alleged motivations of
transport planners is not helpful. Please explain the allegations you
made about Tramlink rather than just going on a whinge about public
transport. If you live in London you are far, far better off than
many places where they're lucky to a single bus on a Sunday never mind
one at 0600!

00:20 - 07:20

The tram link was used as an excuse for cutting out 726 (and 54 but I
didn't personally use that) and in my view is very relevant.

That enabled them to kill a bus service whilst claiming "Your services
are improving".

You comments about other places are not germane to the issue.

My original point was that if they were getting some extra trams it
would be useful to extend the service. I'd be willing to put up with a
bit of overcrowding in the middle of the day.
--
Ken

On 20/08/2011 21:39, Ken wrote:
In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 20:09:00 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:58:59 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 19/08/2011 17:51, Ken wrote:
In article
,
Tristán White writes
http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...dler-wins-lond

on-tramlink-tram-order/archiv/2011/08.html

Swiss company Stadler's won the £16.3m contract, towards which
Croydon
Council contributes £3m.

So they're using them where they are least needed then.

Surely they wouldn't be much good anywhere else in London?


What I meant was that they are putting the extra trams where they
already have a frequent service, rather than using them where there is
no service, or the service is infrequent.

I am confused by your statement. Surely the plan is to put the trams
on the section where there is the greatest demand in order to provide
relief from overcrowding? I thought it was understood that the
Wimbledon line suffers some of the worst overcrowding so it makes
sense to add service there even if only on part of the route. The
single track sections are a bigger and more costly problem to solve.

What part of Tramlink has no service that, in your view, should have a
service? I am not aware that any part of the Tramlink network has an
infrequent service. Frequencies have been bolstered twice since TfL
took direct control of the service and the service has never really
been that infrequent - especially if you look at some of the rail
services on branches in and around South London. A number of them are
no better than every 30 minutes off peak although overlap sections do
better.

Before the tramlink was introduced there was a bus 726 between Bromley
and Croydon, the first bus on Sunday Morning leaving Bromley at 6.00. If
you have a look at the Tramlink timetable you will find the first tram
doesn't leave from Beckenham Junction until 07:20.

Bus 119 runs half-hourly all night, the 05:59 is timetabled at 25
minutes from Bromley South to East Croydon.

The laugh is that when they withdrew the bus service, instead of
providing any useful information, they put notices in the timetable
windows along the route saying "Your services are improving"

Transport services are planned by people in suits who drive cars, but
want to use the train service (or something that goes on rails) for
their commute to work, but use cars for weekend leisure activities. They
can't relate to anyone using public transport at weekends and take them
to be destitutes or losers with no money but infinite amounts of time,
and who deserve to be punished and humiliated.

Now try a bus service outside London (where, to be fair, many of the
passengers are indeed ....)

Now instead of making unsubstantiated rants perhaps you can answer the
questions I posed? Referring to a bus route that is long dead is of
no relevance to Tramlink where you said there were places where there
was no service on the Tramlink network.

Ranting about weekend service levels and the alleged motivations of
transport planners is not helpful. Please explain the allegations you
made about Tramlink rather than just going on a whinge about public
transport. If you live in London you are far, far better off than
many places where they're lucky to a single bus on a Sunday never mind
one at 0600!

00:20 - 07:20

The tram link was used as an excuse for cutting out 726 (and 54 but I
didn't personally use that) and in my view is very relevant.

Tramlink opened 2000, the 726 was cut back in April 2005 (according to
Wikipedia, and it must have been about then as I used it after coming to
London in late 2000).

Tramlink doesn't go central Bromley (it would nice if it did, but
difficult to arrange; Croydon to Bromley is one of those trips that
seems slower/more awkward than might be expected).

AIUI the problem was that the 726 timings were horribly unreliable by
the time it reached Sutton, never mind Kingston, and it only ran hourly.
This made it a bit dodgy to use for getting to to the airport and only
much use for other trips if you had a lot of time on your hands. It also
stopped everywhere, so people going one stop slowed it down even more.

That enabled them to kill a bus service whilst claiming "Your services
are improving".

It did improve west of Croydon - doubled in frequency, chopped some stops.

You comments about other places are not germane to the issue.

My original point was that if they were getting some extra trams it
would be useful to extend the service. I'd be willing to put up with a
bit of overcrowding in the middle of the day.

Perhaps they should relieve overcrowding during the day, and then bring
back night services to places which have lost them altogether....

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 20/08/2011 21:39, Ken wrote:
In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 20:09:00 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Paul Corfield
writes
On Fri, 19 Aug 2011 21:58:59 +0100, Ken wrote:

In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 19/08/2011 17:51, Ken wrote:
In article
,
Tristán White writes

http://www.railwaygazette.com/nc/new...dler-wins-lond

on-tramlink-tram-order/archiv/2011/08.html

Swiss company Stadler's won the £16.3m contract, towards which
Croydon
Council contributes £3m.

So they're using them where they are least needed then.

Surely they wouldn't be much good anywhere else in London?


What I meant was that they are putting the extra trams where they
already have a frequent service, rather than using them where there is
no service, or the service is infrequent.

I am confused by your statement. Surely the plan is to put the trams
on the section where there is the greatest demand in order to provide
relief from overcrowding? I thought it was understood that the
Wimbledon line suffers some of the worst overcrowding so it makes
sense to add service there even if only on part of the route. The
single track sections are a bigger and more costly problem to solve.

What part of Tramlink has no service that, in your view, should have a
service? I am not aware that any part of the Tramlink network has an
infrequent service. Frequencies have been bolstered twice since TfL
took direct control of the service and the service has never really
been that infrequent - especially if you look at some of the rail
services on branches in and around South London. A number of them are
no better than every 30 minutes off peak although overlap sections do
better.

Before the tramlink was introduced there was a bus 726 between Bromley
and Croydon, the first bus on Sunday Morning leaving Bromley at 6.00. If
you have a look at the Tramlink timetable you will find the first tram
doesn't leave from Beckenham Junction until 07:20.

Bus 119 runs half-hourly all night, the 05:59 is timetabled at 25
minutes from Bromley South to East Croydon.





It all depends on the point in Bromley you travel from. I would need to
walk over a mile in the wrong direction to pick up a 119 and it is too
risky. It does a grand tour of Hayes and West Wickam and finally has
great difficulty in entering Bromley at the southern end

But compared with the 367 one might think the route straightforward.

The laugh is that when they withdrew the bus service, instead of
providing any useful information, they put notices in the timetable
windows along the route saying "Your services are improving"

Transport services are planned by people in suits who drive cars, but
want to use the train service (or something that goes on rails) for
their commute to work, but use cars for weekend leisure activities. They
can't relate to anyone using public transport at weekends and take them
to be destitutes or losers with no money but infinite amounts of time,
and who deserve to be punished and humiliated.

Now try a bus service outside London (where, to be fair, many of the
passengers are indeed ....)

Now instead of making unsubstantiated rants perhaps you can answer the
questions I posed? Referring to a bus route that is long dead is of
no relevance to Tramlink where you said there were places where there
was no service on the Tramlink network.

Ranting about weekend service levels and the alleged motivations of
transport planners is not helpful. Please explain the allegations you
made about Tramlink rather than just going on a whinge about public
transport. If you live in London you are far, far better off than
many places where they're lucky to a single bus on a Sunday never mind
one at 0600!

00:20 - 07:20

The tram link was used as an excuse for cutting out 726 (and 54 but I
didn't personally use that) and in my view is very relevant.

Tramlink opened 2000, the 726 was cut back in April 2005 (according to
Wikipedia, and it must have been about then as I used it after coming
to London in late 2000).
The 726 was killed off in stages. The link between Bromley and Croydon
was cut after Tramlink opened.



Tramlink doesn't go central Bromley (it would nice if it did, but
difficult to arrange; Croydon to Bromley is one of those trips that
seems slower/more awkward than might be expected).

There is no direct bus service from Bromley to Croydon

AIUI the problem was that the 726 timings were horribly unreliable by
the time it reached Sutton, never mind Kingston, and it only ran
hourly. This made it a bit dodgy to use for getting to to the airport
and only much use for other trips if you had a lot of time on your
hands. It also stopped everywhere, so people going one stop slowed it
down even more.

The bus was originally premised on premium fare. That was abolished
leading to the difficulties in keeping to timetable. In any event that
was in my opinion never the main problem.

The major rail station is east Croydon bus the bus station is at West
Croydon. There is a bus terminal, of sorts, outside East Croydon station
bus the 726 didn't use it. Instead, it stopped in Dingwall Road. If you
know Croydon, it's not difficult to find, but for those in unfamiliar
surroundings, it was very confusing. Moreover, I wouldn't call Croydon
the safest of places and an ordinary person might feel rather vulnerable
waiting about in Dingwall Rd. The frustrated passenger would stand
outside East Croydon Station watching an empty 726 go roaring past.

Furthermore, they didn't, and don't today, haven't any information
concerning the whereabouts of buses at East Croydon. They have that
information for the trams, and for the buses at many other locations,
but not there. it makes it difficult for the passenger to make an
informed choice between tram or bus.

So assuming that the passenger could read the timetable through the
dirty timetable pane, if they arrived at 12:15 for a bus due at 12:00,
they would have no way of knowing whether they had missed it, or whether
it was running late and would appear any moment.



That enabled them to kill a bus service whilst claiming "Your services
are improving".

It did improve west of Croydon - doubled in frequency, chopped some stops.

You comments about other places are not germane to the issue.

My original point was that if they were getting some extra trams it
would be useful to extend the service. I'd be willing to put up with a
bit of overcrowding in the middle of the day.

Perhaps they should relieve overcrowding during the day, and then bring
back night services to places which have lost them altogether....

They should at least start the tram service from the time the replaced
bus service started, to give some honesty to the statement that services
are improving.

What I would really have liked to see was a train running from Orpington
via Birkbeck and Norwood Junction. Don't tell me, there is 27 chains of
missing rail.
--
Ken

On 20/08/2011 22:46, Paul Corfield wrote:

The only bus service that was really affected by Tramlink was the 54
which was explicity reduced in scope because the Tram provided the
onward link.

The 130 was also affected. Instead of a double-decker every 5 minutes or
so from West Croydon to New Addington it is now a single-decker from
Norwood Junction to New Addington, every 15-20 minutes.

--
John Ray

On 21/08/2011 13:14, Ken wrote:

The major rail station is east Croydon bus the bus station is at West
Croydon. There is a bus terminal, of sorts, outside East Croydon station

As in the bus station?

bus the 726 didn't use it. Instead, it stopped in Dingwall Road. If you
know Croydon, it's not difficult to find, but for those in unfamiliar
surroundings, it was very confusing.

I can't help thinking the market for people who don't know Croydon but
want to go there from Bromley at 6 in the morning must be somewhat limited.

There are very few places where buses are easy to use if you don't know
the area and don't check up where to go - at least London has lots of
maps and signs to help.

Moreover, I wouldn't call Croydon
the safest of places and an ordinary person might feel rather vulnerable
waiting about in Dingwall Rd.

If they had spent their entire life on one of those remote islands where
no-one bothers putting doors on their hovels, maybe. But if they have
been in any UK city centre in recent years it's OK - it's not even as if
there are any pubs round there. I've been there late at night plenty of
times (until Boris Ate My Bus), and not seen any trouble; it's right the
other side of the town centre from where people spend their time
incinerating furniture shops.

(BTW, the first time I went to Bromley I stepped out the station into a
BNP rally!)

The frustrated passenger would stand
outside East Croydon Station watching an empty 726 go roaring past.

There was an issue with signage, but that got fixed. And it wouldn't
affect arriving passengers.

Furthermore, they didn't, and don't today, haven't any information
concerning the whereabouts of buses at East Croydon. They have that
information for the trams, and for the buses at many other locations,
but not there. it makes it difficult for the passenger to make an
informed choice between tram or bus.

I'm sure there are maps on the west-bound bus stops on the bridge, at
least. A sighted person would have to try pretty hard to not find the trams.

So assuming that the passenger could read the timetable through the
dirty timetable pane, if they arrived at 12:15 for a bus due at 12:00,
they would have no way of knowing whether they had missed it, or whether
it was running late and would appear any moment.

Just like almost every other bus stop in the world. But it's London, so
if they have missed it by 15 min they probably don't have long to wait
for another one (no-one is going to be getting the 969 by accident).

That enabled them to kill a bus service whilst claiming "Your services
are improving".

It did improve west of Croydon - doubled in frequency, chopped some
stops.

You comments about other places are not germane to the issue.

My original point was that if they were getting some extra trams it
would be useful to extend the service. I'd be willing to put up with a
bit of overcrowding in the middle of the day.

Perhaps they should relieve overcrowding during the day, and then
bring back night services to places which have lost them altogether....

They should at least start the tram service from the time the replaced
bus service started, to give some honesty to the statement that services
are improving.

What I would really have liked to see was a train running from Orpington
via Birkbeck and Norwood Junction. Don't tell me, there is 27 chains of
missing rail.

Tram-train would need more than just some new off-the-shelf trams.

I did Wimbledon to West Croydon today (just because it was free). It was
full to Ampere Way, then full and standing to Croydon.

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

On Sun, 21 Aug 2011 09:22:41 +0100, Arthur Figgis
wrote:

AIUI the problem was that the 726 timings were horribly unreliable by
the time it reached Sutton, never mind Kingston, and it only ran hourly.
This made it a bit dodgy to use for getting to to the airport and only
much use for other trips if you had a lot of time on your hands. It also
stopped everywhere, so people going one stop slowed it down even more.
[...]
It did improve west of Croydon - doubled in frequency, chopped some stops.

From my westerly location I got the feeling that reliability improved
dramatically when it went to Metrobus... am I being unfair? Perhaps
it was cut back to Croydon on the same date.

The doubling in frequency of the X26 was, as you'll know, more recent
and a Boris-inspired trial of orbital express routes. I recall a
report saying that it hadn't really proved the point but they'd keep
the new frequency (to avoid the embarrassment of cutting it so soon?).
Still, at the new frequency it seems very well-used. Ken's point
elsewhere is a good one I think - it would have been a perfect route
for early Countdown 1.0 installation.

A pity that (your?) N213 had to suffer at around the same time.

Let's see what Quality Line make of the X26, new Citaros on the way I
think.

On the point of tram conversions without through fares, having through
fares between any bus routes on Oyster would, I think, address many
people's complaints in what is clearly one of the best bus networks in
the world. I'm not joking! But would people support the increase in
fares that would be necessary?

Richard.

In article , Arthur
Figgis writes
On 21/08/2011 13:14, Ken wrote:

The major rail station is east Croydon bus the bus station is at West
Croydon. There is a bus terminal, of sorts, outside East Croydon station

As in the bus station?

There is a set of bus stops. It is not exactly a station in the sense
that there is at West Croydon.

bus the 726 didn't use it. Instead, it stopped in Dingwall Road. If you
know Croydon, it's not difficult to find, but for those in unfamiliar
surroundings, it was very confusing.

I can't help thinking the market for people who don't know Croydon but
want to go there from Bromley at 6 in the morning must be somewhat
limited.

I'm not sure whether you've mis understood something, as you've put that
opinion below my comment about looking for the 726 stop, which a person
travelling from Bromley would not be doing. To try to clarify:

Typically, a journey has an outward component and an inward component.
Imagine a person from Bromley, Sidcup, Petts Wood or wherever travelling
to Croydon for an onward destination to Gatwick, Brighton, Worthing etc.
It is not part of my argument that the market is large, (though actually
the trains can often be quite full) but rather I would argue that we
travel to odd places at unsocial times from time to time, and a public
transport has to address that requirement, otherwise people give up and
get cars. In other words a public transport system means that some buses
will run empty, or almost empty.

It is the return journey where the person starts looking for the bus
stop and can't find it. This could be at any time of the day. A person
may be tempted to think it must stop somewhere and just make a run for
it when they see the bus coming. It wouldn't occur to them to think that
the bus doesn't stop there at all.


There are very few places where buses are easy to use if you don't know
the area and don't check up where to go - at least London has lots of
maps and signs to help.

Moreover, I wouldn't call Croydon
the safest of places and an ordinary person might feel rather vulnerable
waiting about in Dingwall Rd.

If they had spent their entire life on one of those remote islands
where no-one bothers putting doors on their hovels, maybe. But if they
have been in any UK city centre in recent years it's OK - it's not even
as if there are any pubs round there. I've been there late at night
plenty of times (until Boris Ate My Bus), and not seen any trouble;
it's right the other side of the town centre from where people spend
their time incinerating furniture shops.

(BTW, the first time I went to Bromley I stepped out the station into a
BNP rally!)

It wasn't part of my argument that Bromley is safer than Croydon, or
even that Croydon is unsafe. Merely that I felt people waiting about in
Dingwall Rd might feel a bit vulnerable. You seem to be wanting to
justify the indefensible - the bus passing the bus stand (or what you
call a station) without stopping

The frustrated passenger would stand
outside East Croydon Station watching an empty 726 go roaring past.

There was an issue with signage, but that got fixed. And it wouldn't
affect arriving passengers.

As discussed above, I was thinking of people leaving the station and
looking for the bus.

Furthermore, they didn't, and don't today, haven't any information
concerning the whereabouts of buses at East Croydon. They have that
information for the trams, and for the buses at many other locations,
but not there. it makes it difficult for the passenger to make an
informed choice between tram or bus.

I'm sure there are maps on the west-bound bus stops on the bridge, at
least. A sighted person would have to try pretty hard to not find the
trams.

What I meant was that there is no "bus do in 4 minutes" type of
information, which there is for the trams, and which there is at many
other bus stops of far less importance than East Croydon. I can't
remember what they do at West Croydon.

So assuming that the passenger could read the timetable through the
dirty timetable pane, if they arrived at 12:15 for a bus due at 12:00,
they would have no way of knowing whether they had missed it, or whether
it was running late and would appear any moment.

But it isn't like any other bus stop, because most bus stops do provide
that information.

Just like almost every other bus stop in the world. But it's London, so
if they have missed it by 15 min they probably don't have long to wait
for another one (no-one is going to be getting the 969 by accident).

I have no idea what the 969 is but the 726 was only an hourly service
at certain times of the day.

That enabled them to kill a bus service whilst claiming "Your services
are improving".

It did improve west of Croydon - doubled in frequency, chopped some
stops.


You comments about other places are not germane to the issue.

My original point was that if they were getting some extra trams it
would be useful to extend the service. I'd be willing to put up with a
bit of overcrowding in the middle of the day.

Perhaps they should relieve overcrowding during the day, and then
bring back night services to places which have lost them altogether....

They should at least start the tram service from the time the replaced
bus service started, to give some honesty to the statement that services
are improving.

What I would really have liked to see was a train running from Orpington
via Birkbeck and Norwood Junction. Don't tell me, there is 27 chains of
missing rail.

Tram-train would need more than just some new off-the-shelf trams.

I did Wimbledon to West Croydon today (just because it was free). It
was full to Ampere Way, then full and standing to Croydon.


--
Ken