![]() |
Bus Route Numbering
Sheer curiosity following a conversation with someone as we drove through
Croydon last night. Is there a logic to the numbering of bus routes in the London area, such a 1-100 means one thing, 101-200 means something else, or are they random, maybe loosely based upon a logical system of long ago that has fallen into disuse? |
Bus Route Numbering
Is there a logic to the numbering of bus routes in the London area, such a
1-100 means one thing, 101-200 means something else, or are they random, maybe loosely based upon a logical system of long ago that has fallen into disuse? I defer to those who know what they are talking about but I think there were at least some basic rules. For example 1-99 were routes that orginated in central London, 2xx were once single deckers, 3xx were London Country routes north of the river, 4xx London Country south of the river and so on. |
Bus Route Numbering
"Graham J" wrote in message
... Is there a logic to the numbering of bus routes in the London area, such a 1-100 means one thing, 101-200 means something else, or are they random, maybe loosely based upon a logical system of long ago that has fallen into disuse? I defer to those who know what they are talking about but I think there were at least some basic rules. For example 1-99 were routes that orginated in central London, 2xx were once single deckers, 3xx were London Country routes north of the river, 4xx London Country south of the river and so on. Thanks, that is the sort of thing I was wondering. Will be interesting to see if anyone else comes up with anything agreeing or otherwise. |
Bus Route Numbering
Bus Route Numbering
good idea but to late |
Bus Route Numbering
"Proctor46" wrote in message
... Bus Route Numbering good idea but to late err?? |
Bus Route Numbering
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:59:31 -0000, "Graham J"
wrote: Is there a logic to the numbering of bus routes in the London area, such a 1-100 means one thing, 101-200 means something else, or are they random, maybe loosely based upon a logical system of long ago that has fallen into disuse? I defer to those who know what they are talking about but I think there were at least some basic rules. For example 1-99 were routes that orginated in central London, 2xx were once single deckers, 3xx were London Country routes north of the river, 4xx London Country south of the river and so on. Which was broadly true when London Country was part of the LT Network prior to 1970. Route development since that time plus the introduction of many lettered routes means the logic no longer applies in a coherent manner. Deregulation of services in surrounding counties has also had some effect on numbering convention on cross boundary services. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Bus Route Numbering
"Paul Corfield" wrote in message
... On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:59:31 -0000, "Graham J" wrote: Is there a logic to the numbering of bus routes in the London area, such a 1-100 means one thing, 101-200 means something else, or are they random, maybe loosely based upon a logical system of long ago that has fallen into disuse? I defer to those who know what they are talking about but I think there were at least some basic rules. For example 1-99 were routes that orginated in central London, 2xx were once single deckers, 3xx were London Country routes north of the river, 4xx London Country south of the river and so on. Which was broadly true when London Country was part of the LT Network prior to 1970. Route development since that time plus the introduction of many lettered routes means the logic no longer applies in a coherent manner. Deregulation of services in surrounding counties has also had some effect on numbering convention on cross boundary services. -- Thanks Paul, Any idea about 1xx? cheers Henry (Admits to remembering old-style trams and trolleybuses!) |
Bus Route Numbering
"Graham J" wrote in message ...
I defer to those who know what they are talking about but I think there were at least some basic rules. For example 1-99 were routes that orginated in central London, 2xx were once single deckers I'm not so sure about that. I don't think the 83 has ever gone anywhere near Central London, and the 207 wasn't a single decker - it was the old 607 trolley. Bob |
Bus Route Numbering
I defer to those who know what they are talking about but I think there
were at least some basic rules. For example 1-99 were routes that orginated in central London, 2xx were once single deckers I'm not so sure about that. I don't think the 83 has ever gone anywhere near Central London, Well perhaps I needed to say mostly or generally, and perhaps the range was perhaps more like 1 to 80 or thereabouts. As a very rough answer to the original question pending the arrival of an expert with detailed knowledge I think I was on the right lines though. and the 207 wasn't a single decker - it was the old 607 trolley. Yes and the 259 and the 279 were the 659 and 679 trolleys but trolley bus replacement was only 40 years or so ago and the 'once' I referred to goes back before then. The top fifteen or twenty numbers or thereabouts in the 2xx range were once night buses before the N prefix came in. |
Bus Route Numbering
"Henry" wrote in :
Is there a logic to the numbering of bus routes in the London area, such a 1-100 means one thing, 101-200 means something else, or are they random, maybe loosely based upon a logical system of long ago that has fallen into disuse? In recent history there are many examples of the first digit being used to distinguish similar routes, usually if one big route is split into a number of overlapping parts eg 68 - 68 , 168 , 468 12 - 12 , 312 -- Andrew Black andrewblack at despammed.com London |
All times are GMT. The time now is 12:16 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk