London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 08:01:50 -0700 (PDT), chunky munky
wrote:

Possibly true Boltar. There are a number of reasons why regulating the
service may be needed, such as; the train behind has had an incident
or is going to slowly, the train in question is going to fast or even
on the odd occasion is early!

Indeed. If there are three trains and the gap between the first two is
2 minutes and between the second and third is 10 minutes, the longer
gap will keep getting longer as fewer people are getting on the second
train and more on the third train, causing longer dwell times for the
third train than the second.

Yes, it's irritating when you're on the train that gets delayed, but I
understand the need for it.

I just wish the Piccadilly line would get held at Green Park or
Piccadilly Circus rather than *always* at Hyde Park Corner!

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Mizter T wrote:

On 11 Apr, 13:44, Tom Anderson wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Railist wrote:

Just what is it with London Buses and ME?

This is why i get so furious when people on here tell me that buses are a
perfectly good way to travel, that they can get from Pinner to London
Bridge in ten minutes with cast-iron reliability, etc. It's not true. It's
just not true. Bus travel is a lottery, and nothing more.

I suspect in part that's me your getting furious with, though those
views aren't an accurate reflection of what I think.

Well, strawmen are a lot easier to get furious at!

There are a whole host of factors with regards to how good bus travel
will be, including when the journey is being made and the potential for
bus hopping along that route which can dramatically speed things up. Of
course to take advantage of this you need some local knowledge.

I think time of day might be the main thing that divides us. I mostly use
buses because the tube's closed, which means mostly late at night, when i
think the service tends to get a bit ragged. We should go out boozing one
night, and then try some test trips on the buses. In fact, we should have
a utl meet, and settle it once and for all!

My completely serious suggestion would be to buy a bike. I've got one,
and avoid all forms of public transport like the plague. As a result, i
get where i'm going faster and more reliably, and much more enjoyably,
than any travelcard monkey making the same trip. Yes, faster - door to
door, i can even beat the Victoria line to work!

Avoiding "all forms of public transport like the plague" and yet having
such an evidently great interest in it could strike one as slightly odd!

Heh! I avoid them where they're not necessary, but have a great personal
interest in them working well when they are necessary. Which, as you say,
is for any journey over 5-10 miles.

Also, to be honest, mostly i'm interested because it's a cool engineering
problem. I like space rockets too, and am even more unlikely to use those.

Regarding your comments about cycling, I would certainly agree - though
for longer journeys across the capital (e.g. Croydon - central London)
the scales would begin to tip the other way.

Yes, certainly. Although the bike can still play a role - to get to my
friend's house in Wallington, for example, i can either take the tube to
Victoria, then a slow train to Wallington, or cycle to Victoria, take a
fast train to East Croydon, and then cycle to his. It works out about the
same. Taking the fast train to Croydon and then changing to a bus or train
for the final leg is quite a bit slower. Ditto a fortiori for visiting
friends and relations outside London - cycle to Euston, express train to
Holyhead, cycle to Rhoscolyn beats any and all other transport strategies
for that trip!

And for various reasons it's not always convenient.

Also true. This depends to some extent on the traveller's state of mind,
though. If you're going shopping, do you rule out the bike, or do you get
a really big rucksack? If it's raining, do you take the bus, or a
waterproof and a change of clothes?

The only times i don't cycle shortish trips are when i'm ill (including
really hopelessly plastered), basically. Or if it's really severely wet.
Occasionally, i take the train into town for a night out because i don't
want the hassle of cycling, but i always pay for this in spades when it
comes to the hassle of getting home again.

But it is a seriously fast way of getting around town, no doubt.

It is. Particularly for orbital trips.

Not that anyone ever makes orbital trips, of course. Phew, almost slipped
up there ...

tom

--
Ed editor textorum probatissimus est -- Cicero, De officiis IV.7

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

In message , James Farrar
writes

Indeed. If there are three trains and the gap between the first two is
2 minutes and between the second and third is 10 minutes, the longer
gap will keep getting longer as fewer people are getting on the second
train and more on the third train, causing longer dwell times for the
third train than the second.

Yes, it's irritating when you're on the train that gets delayed, but I
understand the need for it.

I just wish the Piccadilly line would get held at Green Park or
Piccadilly Circus rather than *always* at Hyde Park Corner!

Sadly, HPC is where the special 'balanced headway' signal is located so
that's where it's done automatically.

It's irritating for drivers too if that's any help (no? I thought not!)
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On 11 Apr, 16:01, chunky munky wrote:
Headways are also a Key Performance Indicator so regulating the
service is quite important, especially if the train being held isn't
very full, but the one behind is packed. Holding very full trains is a
bit of a hot potato, do you work to achieve the best customer service,
by getting people where they want in a packed train, or hold it for
longer to meet targets, when no more people can get on!

I wouldn't mind so much if it wasn't for the fact its usually done
when the service is buggered and you've already had to wait ages for
the train to show up in the first place. So you end up doubly delayed.

B2003

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

In article ,
chunky munky wrote:

Sarah, the dot matrix there at Baker St can only display trains once
they leave Edgware Road, then the otherside of Edgware Road, nothing
at all can be seen!

I figured something like that was happening, as the first we knew
there was a train was when it said "1 min", and I could see it by
looking up the tunnel.

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:38:03 -0700 (PDT), Railist
wrote:

On Apr 11, 1:48*am, Nick W wrote:
Perhaps a combination of tube (tm), railway and walking might get you
home quicker than inferior bus travel.

I would normally get 38 to Victoria, Southern to Streatham Hill then
417 but the last train is at 2336 and the Victoria Line was closed
etc.

The thing I am slightly bemused about is that you didn't opt to try the
rail replacement bus for the Vic Line south of Victoria. It would at
least be reasonably quick as it's effectively limited stop and you might
have stood a bit more of a chance at Brixton in getting a connection.

Easy to wise after the event I know but perhaps an option to store away.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:44:29 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Railist wrote:

Just what is it with London Buses and ME?

It isn't. It's me as well!

And me - sometimes. However I don't believe it is the disaster area
that people are painting it as although the TfL Buses Customer Services
department might disagree given the complaints I make about my local
route. However I do expect perfection on that service ;-)

According to the Mobile Journey Planner, there is a 417 due at 0024. The
countdown timer at the stop shows that it will be there in "10 mins".
Again I do the county thing - 3 x Route 57, 2 x Route 333, 1 x Route 59,
2 x Route 137, etc. etc. At 0034, the 417 is 'Due', and a 133 is in '3
minutes'. The 133 arrives 3 minutes later. Still no sign of the 417. It
eventually arrives five minutes after being 'Due'. I get home at 0059.

Normal service, then.

That really is not normal service any more than normal service on the
tube is every single line having horrendous delays every day of the
week, every week of the year. As with everything to do with transport
in the UK you have good days, average days and bad days.

This is why i get so furious when people on here tell me that buses are a
perfectly good way to travel, that they can get from Pinner to London
Bridge in ten minutes with cast-iron reliability, etc. It's not true. It's
just not true. Bus travel is a lottery, and nothing more.

I accept you're taking an extreme position to make the point but I do
believe buses are a perfectly good way to travel. London's system is
very good indeed IMO and considerably better than almost anywhere else
in the country. London's bus operators have to contend with severe
traffic congestion, higher traffic volumes, higher volumes of traffic
incidents and higher volumes of people trying to use the system. All of
this places a strain on reliable operation no matter how well structured
the schedules are or how many bus lanes there are. General performance
levels are far higher these days than they were in the 1970s, 1980s or
1990s. The overall service level offered in terms of numbers of routes,
access times to stops, frequencies and hours of operation are also a
considerable improvement. I don't think Londoners know when they are
well off - we take all this for granted. Nowhere else in the UK has this
type of bus service.

I still would not describe the system as a lottery though - trying to
catch a once an hour bus in the suburbs of Manchester or Newcastle with
no timetable info, no stop numbers on the bus stop and the operator
probably being some small time bus company is what I call a lottery.

I use buses a great deal to get about London and in particular on
Sundays when the rail network impersonates a closing down sale half the
time. I have been particularly impressed at how well I've got about
although I'll readily concede it can be slow going.

I'd be far more worried about what happens if dear old Boris gets in -
he's made no real commitments at all about bus network development,
service levels or fares. Yes he'll provide a nonsensical low floor
Routemaster replacement for the hard of thinking and a trial of express
buses between South London Tory boroughs. At least we have some view
from Mssrs Livingstone and Paddick although the latter's ideas seem half
baked to me. I think the voters may well turn the bus system into a
lottery in the very near future and I think we'll all regret that
because the roads will fill up with more cars and more people will try
to squash on to the tubes. Who knows what it will be like to cycle
either.

My completely serious suggestion would be to buy a bike. I've got one, and
avoid all forms of public transport like the plague. As a result, i get
where i'm going faster and more reliably, and much more enjoyably, than
any travelcard monkey making the same trip. Yes, faster - door to door, i
can even beat the Victoria line to work!

I agree that for a reasonable proportion of trips then a bike is a good
option. I used to cycle commute and I once beat the public transport
time by bike (Walthamstow - St James Park) but then that is competing
with the Vic Line which is pretty fast. The big disadvantage was having
to park up, get showered and changed and then get to the desk. That adds
time and inconvenience. However the times that I travel my journey by
public transport is usually very predictable and that includes buses as
part of the overall trip.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:18:21 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

We should go out boozing one
night, and then try some test trips on the buses [1]. In fact, we should have
a utl meet, and settle it once and for all!

Well volunteered Mr Anderson. On what date is this grand event going to
occur? ;-)


[1] Back in those ancient times when I was a student I and 2 others
spent a night whizzing all over London by night bus. This was long
before night buses were every 10 - 20 minutes. It was great fun but a
tad chilly waiting at Friern Barnet at 3am!
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:44:29 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Railist wrote:

Just what is it with London Buses and ME?
It isn't. It's me as well!

And me - sometimes. However I don't believe it is the disaster area
that people are painting it as although the TfL Buses Customer Services
department might disagree given the complaints I make about my local
route. However I do expect perfection on that service ;-)

The trouble with TfL Surface Transport Customer Services (as it's the
same contact centre that deals with TfL Streets, LBL and the PCO) is
that they're not open when you're most likely to have a complaint (i.e.
early morning, late evening, or at the weekend) and they appear to have
an attitude of "the customer is always wrong".

I have complained about late evening *early* running on my local route
(the humble W6) on a number of occasions, where it's not unusual for
buses to run up to 5 minutes early. In fact, I once had the penultimate
bus of the night pass me five minute *BEFORE* it should have started its
journey, leaving me a 40 minute wait for the next, and last, one.

Customer Disservices response was to basically tell me I was imagining
things, and some rubbish about buses being sent out of garages to meet
demand, which had absolutely nothing to do with my original complaint!

LBL's response was to adjust the timetable so that the "early" running
became on time running!

Needless to say, when the inspectors are around the service runs like
clockwork, which surely defeats the entire purpose of doing the checks
as it gives a false impression that First London are competent.

Cheers,

Barry

London Buses - Why do I bother?
 

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 21:36:49 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote this gibberish:

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 00:38:03 -0700 (PDT), Railist
wrote:

On Apr 11, 1:48*am, Nick W wrote:
Perhaps a combination of tube (tm), railway and walking might get you
home quicker than inferior bus travel.

I would normally get 38 to Victoria, Southern to Streatham Hill then
417 but the last train is at 2336 and the Victoria Line was closed
etc.

The thing I am slightly bemused about is that you didn't opt to try the
rail replacement bus for the Vic Line south of Victoria. It would at
least be reasonably quick as it's effectively limited stop and you might
have stood a bit more of a chance at Brixton in getting a connection.

Easy to wise after the event I know but perhaps an option to store away.

My only experiences of replacement bus services is that they hang
around at each station on-route for what feels like forever making it
quicker to get a regular bus route to the station or more directly to
final destination. Maybe I've been unlucky.
--
Mark.
www.MarkVarleyPhoto.co.uk
www.TwistedPhotography.co.uk
www.TwistedArts.co.uk
www.FacelessLadies.com
www.BeautifulBondage.net