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

Bus Route Numbering
 

good idea but to late

i think that were you to renumber the rutes now would cause a lot of
problems...had it been done from the early days....1910's..and stuck to .......

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article ,
(Bob WWood) wrote:

"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.

The 2xx for single deck routes was abandoned when the Trolleybus
conversion programme got into full swing and many replacement routes were
given 2xx numbers. This was when the number of single deck routes had
declined anyway.

AFAIK there never were any subdivisions within 1-199. Trolleybuses were
500-699 and Green Line 7xx. Many routes go back to re-LT numbers, with
trolleybus routes being previously xx tram routes, e.g. the (LUT) 7 tram
became the 607 trolley which became the 207 bus.

The biggest difference since the 1960s is the almost complete abolition of
routes with suffix letters, e.g. 77A, one of the few left. At one time
there was a 77C.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article , (Henry) wrote:

Will be interesting to see if anyone else comes up with anything
agreeing or otherwise.

Agree - and further to that 5xx and 6xx were trolleybuses, 7xx
Green Line coaches, latterly 8xx some New Town routes (Stevenage
etc.), I think.


--
Peter Beale

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article , (Bob WWood) wrote:

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think the 83 has ever gone
anywhere near Central London,

Similarly 51/A/B/C and 61 which ran from Eltham, and probably others.

and the 207 wasn't a single decker -
it was the old 607 trolley.

The 2** = single-decker system broke down around that time - first one
I remember was the 229, a new route in the 1950s.

--
Peter Beale

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article , (Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

AFAIK there never were any subdivisions within 1-199. Trolleybuses
were 500-699 and Green Line 7xx.

Was there ever a trolleybus lower than 513? 500 was the first Red Arrow,
but that was much later.

Many routes go back to re-LT
numbers, with trolleybus routes being previously xx tram routes, e.g.
the (LUT) 7 tram became the 607 trolley which became the 207 bus.

And the 96 tram became the 696 trolley which became the 96 bus.

--
Peter Beale

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article , (Graham J) wrote:

The top fifteen or twenty numbers or thereabouts in the
2xx range were once night buses before the N prefix came in.

285-292, 294-298 (also 168, and Inter-Station Buses and some
trolleybuses) in my 1959 map.

--
Peter Beale

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Proctor46" wrote in message
...
good idea but to late

i think that were you to renumber the rutes now would cause a lot of
problems...had it been done from the early days....1910's..and stuck to
........

I was not making any such suggestion, as my original post makes clear, it
was mere curiosity as to the origins of the system - nothing more than that.

Please do not imply things that are not there - I have no hidden agenda.

Bus Route Numbering
 

Please do not imply things that are not there - I have no hidden agenda.


no....i was thinking it though.....i think your right ....but this is not
Switzerland. sence...but

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Proctor46" wrote in message
...


Please do not imply things that are not there - I have no hidden agenda.


no....i was thinking it though.....i think your right ....but this is not
Switzerland. sence...but

Sorry, not following you. What have London bus route numbers got to do with
Switzerland?

Bus Route Numbering
 

In message , Peter
Beale writes
And the 96 tram became the 696 trolley which became the 96 bus.

One of the longest lived must be the 7 tram which begat the 607
trolleybus which begat the 207 motorbus which now has a 607 express
variant......

I read somewhere not too long ago (and I can't for the life of me
remember where) that the 24 is the oldest unaltered bus route in London,
which certainly seems pretty likely.

--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article , Henry writes
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?

Pulling together various comments here and elsewhere.

1-199: original Central London routes, later "red buses".

2xx: originally used for single-decker routes, then for trolleybus
replacement, then merged into a single 1-299 block.

3xx: originally "green buses" (London Country) north of the Thames.

4xx: originally "green buses" (London Country) south of the Thames.

5xx: trolleybuses, later reused for Red Arrow

6xx: trolleybuses

7xx: Green Line

8xx: various special services

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

Bus Route Numbering
 

) that the 24 is the oldest unaltered bus route in London,

it's the same today as it was in1937....

Bus Route Numbering
 

Sorry, not following you. What have London bus route numbers got to do with
Switzerland?

well ...they would have started a number sistem
and stuck to it.....we in the uk just mess every thing up........

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Proctor46" wrote in message
...

Sorry, not following you. What have London bus route numbers got to do
with
Switzerland?

well ...they would have started a number sistem
and stuck to it.....we in the uk just mess every thing up........


I see what you mean now :-)

Bus Route Numbering
 

I see what you mean now :-)



sorey it's me....sometimes i only write 1/2 of what i'm thinking...will try
harder!

Bus Route Numbering
 

In article , (Proctor46) wrote:

) that the 24 is the oldest unaltered bus route in London,

it's the same today as it was in1937....

Amazing. Presumably a slight variation at Trafalgar Square!

--
Peter Beale

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Peter Beale" wrote in message
o.uk...
In article ,
(Proctor46) wrote:

) that the 24 is the oldest unaltered bus route in London,

it's the same today as it was in1937....

Amazing. Presumably a slight variation at Trafalgar Square!

And I wouldn't have thought the Gower Street and Camden Town one-way-systems
are that old.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Many Thanks
 

Thanks everybody, I think you have covered the reply to my query very well.

Bus Route Numbering
 

And I wouldn't have thought the Gower Street and Camden Town one-way-systems
are that old.

we are talking point to point.

Bus Route Numbering
 

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 23:56 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Peter Beale) wrote:

In article , (Bob WWood) wrote:

I'm not so sure about that. I don't think the 83 has ever gone
anywhere near Central London,

Similarly 51/A/B/C and 61 which ran from Eltham, and probably others.

I have just made a longer post about this but pre-1970 "Central" was
anything covered by the red buses - roughly Greater London.
"Country" was the (doughnut shaped) area beyond this but still part
of the London Transport area - roughly, going clockwise from the
Thames, Gravesend, Hildenborough, Edenbridge, East Grinstead,
Crawley, Horsham. Guildford, Staines, Windsor, High Wycombe,
Aylesbury, Dunstable, Luton, Hitchin, Buntingford, Bishop's
Stortford, Harlow, Brentwood, Grays.

One of the advantages of being old is that I can remember all this
clearly as if it were yesterday. One of the disadvantages is that I
can't remember what actually did happen yesterday!
--
Bill Hayles

http://billnot.com

Bus Route Numbering
 

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:19:27 -0000, "Henry"
wrote:

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?

If you search Google, you will find various previous threads on this
subject, including contributions from myself - search for Bassom

In 1924 (for those with long memories) an act was passed which gave
regulatory powers to the Ministry of Transport within (very roughly)
25 miles if Charing Cross. One of the effects of this was to put
into place a system called the "Bassom" system after the
commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, A E Bassom.

This system required every route variation, however slight, to have
its own number (and not a suffix letter as previously and
subsequently). Only buses travelling the whole length of a route
would be carry the base number. Every short working would have a
suffix letter. This meant that, for example, the main service on
route 11 was numbered 11e as the full route was only served on
Sundays.

It also initiated a system whereby routes were as follows:

1 to 199 - London General Double Deck services in the Central Area
210 to 299 - London General Single Deck Services in the Central Area
301 to 399 - Country routes northern area
401 to 499 - Country routes - southern area
501 upwards - independents.

The Bassom system was found to be too complicated and the suffix
system was abandoned after a few years. My archives don't give me a
precise date, I'm afraid. But if Ken Glazier still reads this
group, I'm sure he can give chapter and verse and correct me if I
have anything else wrong.

In 1933 the LPTB was formed, and the system gradually modified, so
in the immediate post-war period you had:

1 to 199 - Central double deck
200 to 282(*) - Central single deck
283 to 299 - Night buses
301 to 399 - Country buses north
401 to 499 - Country buses south
501 to 699 - Trolleybuses
701 to 727 - Green Line Coaches

(*) I'm not sure what the highest numbered single deck service was
before the distinction became abolished.

Before long, LT ran out of numbers. The distinction between single
and double deck services was abolished and night buses allocated N83
to N99. The whole of the block from 1 to 299 became available for
Central buses. Also, in the country, additional blocks were
allocated - 801 to 849 Country bus north and 851 to 899 Country bus
south, although neither of these ever came close to being fully
filled. The highest ever numbered London Transport service under
this system was 854 (or 854a if you're a pedant). At this point, I
always have to point out that the appearance of route 864a in Green
Rover literature of the early 1960s was merely a misprint.

The system remained virtually intact for several years after the
country area was hived off on 1970, but has now almost completely
disappeared unless you know where to look (i.e. many routes in Kent
are still numbered in the 400s, and there is the single remaining
former Green Line route, 726).

--
Bill Hayles

http://billnot.com

Bus Route Numbering
 

Bus Route Numbering
From: Bill Hayles

great posting.

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Bill Hayles" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:19:27 -0000, "Henry"

1 to 199 - London General Double Deck services in the Central Area

How does this fit in with the 101 which I regularly rode in the early
1950s and possibly the late 40s (memory beginning to fail me here)?

Last time I looked,and not very long ago, it was still running from
The George Wanstead to Woolwich Ferry, although with route variations
at the southern end and served by a terrible low floored bone shaker
that I vowed never to go on again.

It wasn't listed on an enthusiast's web list of old route numbers but
I saw one subsequent to that.
--
Malcolm

Bus Route Numbering
 

enthusiast's web list of old route numbers but

Have you got the www please.

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Proctor46" wrote in message
...
enthusiast's web list of old route numbers but

Have you got the www please.

Putting 'London bus routes' into www.google.com will give you
several - and I found the one-oh-one this time.
--
Malcolm

Bus Route Numbering
 

On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:57:32 -0000, "Malcolm Knight"
wrote:

"Bill Hayles" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:19:27 -0000, "Henry"

1 to 199 - London General Double Deck services in the Central Area

How does this fit in with the 101 which I regularly rode in the early
1950s and possibly the late 40s (memory beginning to fail me here)?
How does it not? The 101 was double deck.

--
Bill Hayles

http://billnot.com

Bus Route Numbering
 

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:11 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:


The biggest difference since the 1960s is the almost complete abolition of
routes with suffix letters, e.g. 77A, one of the few left. At one time
there was a 77C.


There still is. It runs as a schools route. Probably the only schools
route not in the 6xx series.


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

Bus Route Numbering
 

On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 19:33:54 +0000, Robert Woolley
wrote:

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:11 +0000 (GMT Standard Time),
(Colin Rosenstiel) wrote:

The biggest difference since the 1960s is the almost complete abolition of
routes with suffix letters, e.g. 77A, one of the few left. At one time
there was a 77C.

There still is. It runs as a schools route. Probably the only schools
route not in the 6xx series.


77C was renumbered 670 fairly recently (within the last 18 months, I
think).

Bus Route Numbering
 

"Bill Hayles" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 20:57:32 -0000, "Malcolm Knight"
wrote:

"Bill Hayles" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 09:19:27 -0000, "Henry"

1 to 199 - London General Double Deck services in the Central
Area

How does this fit in with the 101 which I regularly rode in the
early
1950s and possibly the late 40s (memory beginning to fail me here)?
How does it not? The 101 was double deck.

Wanstead (Essex when the route was started) is the Central Area of
London. Really? You surprise me.
--
Malcolm

Bus Route Numbering
 

In message , Malcolm
Knight writes

Wanstead (Essex when the route was started) is the Central Area of
London. Really? You surprise me.

It was well inside London Transport's central area which, as Bill
pointed out earlier, covered much of what was to become Greater London.

My 1937 Central Area map shows that the 101 used to be extended even
beyond Wanstead (to Lambourne End, east of Chigwell) on Sundays. I don't
know when the route started, but it was in pre-London Transport days as
the 101 is shown on my 1922 London General Bus Map - at that time the
Sunday extension was numbered 101A.

Central area routes in that direction went out as far as Epping,
Chipping Ongar (123 from Romford) and Brentwood (86 from Mile End, now
cut back to Stratford-Romford only).

There was often considerable intermingling of central ("red") and
country ("green") buses in the outer fringes. Where I grew up, in
Belvedere, we had a choice of red buses (Woolwich-Erith) and green buses
(to Bexleyheath, Dartford and even Sevenoaks) passing the house.

We used to catch the 101 from North Woolwich when visiting relatives in
Essex - I can also remember it being a real bone-shaking service,
although I wonder if some of that was the state of the roads through the
docks in the 1950s.

--
Paul Terry