|
London Buses - Why do I bother?
I'm about to have a whinge. An unreasonable one, which ignores 'stuff'
like operational problems and the like. Just what is it with London Buses and ME? Why can't they just get me home in a reasonable time? Take today. I sense my day is going to be bad when I get a 333 from Streatham to Brixton. I swear that the drivers of this bus, and the 133, are on a permanent 'go slow'. Today, we were overtaken by cyclists and six other buses whose drivers seemed to have a slight sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. On my way home, Regent Street - Streatham, I get to the bus stop on Regent Street, at 2315hrs, just as a 159 passes. I never run for buses, but a woman does. She runs all the way from Vigo Street to the bus, which has stopped at the bus stop near Air Street. The bus waits. And waits. She reaches the stop, and the driver closes the doors. He won't let her on. He then drives forward literally two feet, and stops at the traffic lights. He still won't let her on. He drives off. By 2335 I have counted 3 x Route 12s, 2 x Route 453's, 3 x Route 15s and 3 x Route 94s. No sign of an 88, 3 or 159 which most of the people waiting want. At 2337, another 159 appears. It waits at the stop until 2342, for some reason. By 2357, we have reached Whitehall. There are no obvious traffic problems, even with the roadworks at Haymarket. The bus trundles to Streatham, and at 0020, I get off. 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. And the most frustrating thing about it is that this is not the first time I've had these kind of journeys, and there is nothing anyone will do about it. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
Perhaps a combination of tube (tm), railway and walking might get you
home quicker than inferior bus travel. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
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. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
Railist wrote:
I swear that the drivers of this bus, and the 133, are on a permanent 'go slow'. Thanks for the reminder. I was on a half-full bus the other day which was driving slowly down an otherwise empty road. After a minute or two, curiosity and impatience made me shift seats so I could see what was immediately ahead of the bus - which was nothing. From my new vantage point I could also see the driver in his mirror and lo, he was chatting away on a mobile phone that was pressed to the side of his head. Nice. ESB |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote:
sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". B2003 |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Apr 11, 10:25 am, Ernst S Blofeld
wrote: point I could also see the driver in his mirror and lo, he was chatting away on a mobile phone that was pressed to the side of his head. Nice. You should have taken the bus number and reported him to the police. He was risking everyone on the bus and anyone in the nearby vicinity. B2003 |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
Ernst S Blofeld wrote:
Railist wrote: I swear that the drivers of this bus, and the 133, are on a permanent 'go slow'. Thanks for the reminder. I was on a half-full bus the other day which was driving slowly down an otherwise empty road. After a minute or two, curiosity and impatience made me shift seats so I could see what was immediately ahead of the bus - which was nothing. From my new vantage point I could also see the driver in his mirror and lo, he was chatting away on a mobile phone that was pressed to the side of his head. Nice. Did you tell the police? |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
Boltar wrote:
You should have taken the bus number and reported him to the police. He was risking everyone on the bus and anyone in the nearby vicinity. Quite. Had he not stopped and had I not been preoccupied, in a hurry and getting off the bus at the next stop, I would have. Perhaps someone else on the bus did. That said, experience suggests that 'doing the right thing' too often achieves nothing more than wasting my time and making me even more irate than I was about the original incident. ESB |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Railist wrote:
Just what is it with London Buses and ME? It isn't. It's me as well! 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. 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. 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! tom -- Ed editor textorum probatissimus est -- Cicero, De officiis IV.7 |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On 11 Apr, 13:44, 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! Most of the time it isn't me. 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. Well, no. Much of the time it works very well. I do broadly find the bus service in London to be pretty reliable. When I get a moment later I'll go over Railist's journey and look for ways of improving it - specifically I'd imagine that a bit of bus hopping might be an idea for this journey. 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. For longer journeys I wouldn't favour the bus if there's a rail alternative, but for some journeys taking the bus can be as good if not better than making a more convoluted rail journey. 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. Bus travel can be something of a lottery, but simply saying it is always a lottery and nothing more is blinkered. 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! 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. And for various reasons it's not always convenient. But it is a seriously fast way of getting around town, no doubt. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
In article ,
Boltar wrote: On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote: sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". It occured to me the other day, while standing on the eastbound circle platform at Baker Street, staring at the unchanging incidactor reading simply, "Circle and Whitechapel Lines" for *quarter of an hour*, that if I heard the phrase, "There is currently a good service on all London Underground lines" one more time, that no jury would convict if I went and did something unpleasant to the announcer with my Oyster card. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Apr 11, 2:30 pm, Sarah Brown
wrote: It occured to me the other day, while standing on the eastbound circle platform at Baker Street, staring at the unchanging incidactor reading simply, "Circle and Whitechapel Lines" for *quarter of an hour*, that if I heard the phrase, "There is currently a good service on all London Underground lines" one more time, that no jury would convict if I think one train every 15 mins does count as good service on the Circle Line :o) B2003 |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On 11 Apr, 14:30, Sarah Brown wrote: In article , Boltar wrote: On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote: sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". It occured to me the other day, while standing on the eastbound circle platform at Baker Street, staring at the unchanging incidactor reading simply, "Circle and Whitechapel Lines" for *quarter of an hour*, that if I heard the phrase, "There is currently a good service on all London Underground lines" one more time, that no jury would convict if I went and did something unpleasant to the announcer with my Oyster card. I quite agree it is most annoying! I take it that you weren't just waiting for a Circle line train - there were no H&C trains either? |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Apr 11, 3:00 pm, Boltar wrote:
On Apr 11, 2:30 pm, Sarah Brown wrote: It occured to me the other day, while standing on the eastbound circle platform at Baker Street, staring at the unchanging incidactor reading simply, "Circle and Whitechapel Lines" for *quarter of an hour*, that if I heard the phrase, "There is currently a good service on all London Underground lines" one more time, that no jury would convict if I think one train every 15 mins does count as good service on the Circle Line :o) B2003 It's actually a 20 minute wait is Minor delays and a 30 min wait is Severe delays. There have been many occasions where the line delivery staff have contacted the network operations centre to advise them, then they have refused. It's all political. Station staff then have to deal with the ****ed off passengers who have lanned their journey in accordance with the delays messages they have seen on route and have now been delayed. Luckily the more old school station staff, rather than the boil in the bag yes men and women actually use their common sense and turn off the PA system, until some manager complains (or Tim OToole gets accosted by passengers). 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! |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Apr 11, 10:48 am, Boltar wrote:
On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote: sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". B2003 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! 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! |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
In article ,
Mizter T wrote: [Baker Street] I take it that you weren't just waiting for a Circle line train - there were no H&C trains either? Indeed. Ity was an H&C I ended up catching. I'd come in on a terminating Met train, and the next through one wasn't for aeons, so I figured the circle platform would be a better bet. All I was trying to do was to get from Finchley Road to Moorgate. Next time I think I'll walk to Hampstead and take the Northern instead. At least they run trains on it. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On 11 Apr, 16:25, Sarah Brown wrote: In article , Mizter T wrote: [Baker Street] I take it that you weren't just waiting for a Circle line train - there were no H&C trains either? Indeed. It was an H&C I ended up catching. I'd come in on a terminating Met train, and the next through one wasn't for aeons, so I figured the circle platform would be a better bet. All I was trying to do was to get from Finchley Road to Moorgate. Next time I think I'll walk to Hampstead and take the Northern instead. At least they run trains on it. The reason I asked about the Circle line is because I think choosing any other route is normally a better idea! But given that you were just waiting for any eastbound train then that is pretty poor. The Circle line is always the first service to yield in the event of disruption on the sub-surface lines, but given that the Circle and H&C are operated together then this can then end up hitting the H&C service too. An alternative route from Finchley Rd to Moorgate could be Jubilee - change at Oxford Circus to the Central - Bank - short walk. However the obvious route via the Met/Circle/H&C would normally be the best way to go, unless one knew in advance of disruption ahead. And as you make quite clear you weren't being told of any such thing! |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:30:21 GMT, Sarah Brown
wrote: In article , Boltar wrote: On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote: sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". It occured to me the other day, while standing on the eastbound circle platform at Baker Street, staring at the unchanging incidactor reading simply, "Circle and Whitechapel Lines" for *quarter of an hour*, that if I heard the phrase, "There is currently a good service on all London Underground lines" one more time, that no jury would convict if I went and did something unpleasant to the announcer with my Oyster card. I suffered something similar on Monday having been carried through High St Ken to NHG due a fire alert arising as our train approached the platform. I bussed it back to High St Ken but there was no info at NHG for passengers as to what to do. On my return at HSK I waited 22 mins for a Circle Line and heard "good service" more times than I care to remember. If only they'd said "go via Earls Ct and change" it would have at least given people an option. The Line General Manager got an E Mail with some feedback later than afternoon! -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Apr 11, 4:01*pm, chunky munky
wrote: On Apr 11, 10:48 am, Boltar wrote: On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote: sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". B2003 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! 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! TfL will go for targets based on arrival of vehicles every time, regardless of arrival of people, that is absolutely clear. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Sarah Brown wrote:
In article , Boltar wrote: On Apr 11, 1:10 am, Railist wrote: sense of urgency. The tube was then held at Victoria to regulate the service, but more of that another time. Ah yes , the famous regulate the service phrase that LU so love. Which basically translates to "we can't run a decent service so to cover up our incompetence we're going to delay you even more". It occured to me the other day, while standing on the eastbound circle platform at Baker Street, staring at the unchanging incidactor reading simply, "Circle and Whitechapel Lines" for *quarter of an hour*, that if I heard the phrase, "There is currently a good service on all London Underground lines" one more time, that no jury would convict if I went and did something unpleasant to the announcer with my Oyster card. Which is probably why those announcements are generally made by machine! tom -- Ed editor textorum probatissimus est -- Cicero, De officiis IV.7 |
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 |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
MarkVarley - MVP wrote: 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. Were these mainline rail replacement bus services? If so I think they have to hang around more working to a timetable. I don't think you'd get the same problem with LU replacement buses, except perhaps late at night when they're running the last few services. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On 12 Apr, 02:12, Barry Salter wrote: 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. As Tom Anderson pointed out in another current utl thread " Bus Information Signs" the new iBus system with GPS tracking should hopefully ensure TfL are capable of keeping track of how buses are running all the time, rather than merely when the inspectors are out and about. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On 11 Apr, 01:10, Railist wrote:
I'm about to have a whinge. An unreasonable one, which ignores 'stuff' like operational problems and the like. Or design problems. Buses are a fundamentally flawed form of public transport. Just what is it with London Buses and ME? Why can't they just get me home in a reasonable time? Because they are crap. It's not ust you, it's only old people and scum that use them Take today. I sense my day is going to be bad when I get a 333 from Streatham to Brixton. I swear that the drivers of this bus, and the 133, are on a permanent 'go slow'. Today, we were overtaken by cyclists That's really not unusual. On a ride from Willesden Jn to Shepherds bush, it's not unusual for me to pass 3 buses on the same route. Even going from the Bush through Notting Hill I'm never beaten by a bus. It's not traffic that causes the problem, it's the fact they stop every 20 seconds. I got a bus from Hammersmith to Shepherds Bush the other day, it was late and cold and I'd been at the pub. It took twice as long as it takes me driving that route in the morning rush hour, and slightly longer than walking. There were only about 3 stops too. Every time I take a bus (once a year perhaps), I'm reminded how crap they are. On my way home, Regent Street - Streatham, I get to the bus stop on Regent Street, at 2315hrs, just as a 159 passes. I never run for buses, but a woman does. She runs all the way from Vigo Street to the bus, which has stopped at the bus stop near Air Street. The bus waits. And waits. She reaches the stop, and the driver closes the doors. He won't let her on. He then drives forward literally two feet, and stops at the traffic lights. He still won't let her on. He drives off. Yes, that's because the drivers are scum, who bully other road users, drive dangerously, but are immune from prosecution because Ken protects them all. By 2335 I have counted 3 x Route 12s, 2 x Route 453's, 3 x Route 15s and 3 x Route 94s. No sign of an 88, 3 or 159 which most of the people waiting want. Presumably people who want a 453 will not be waiting after one goes past. At 2337, another 159 appears. It waits at the stop until 2342, for some reason. By 2357, we have reached Whitehall. There are no obvious traffic problems, even with the roadworks at Haymarket. The bus trundles to Streatham, and at 0020, I get off. 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. 1h45 Regent St to Stretham. At least my 1h05 commute puts me 40 miles outside of London. Google maps puts it at about 7 miles, that's about 30-40 minutes on a bike depending on traffic and lights. Try the tube in future, it'd cost £2. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On 12 Apr, 13:33, Paul Weaver wrote: On 11 Apr, 01:10, Railist wrote: I'm about to have a whinge. An unreasonable one, which ignores 'stuff' like operational problems and the like. Or design problems. Buses are a fundamentally flawed form of public transport. Just what is it with London Buses and ME? Why can't they just get me home in a reasonable time? Because they are crap. It's not ust you, it's only old people and scum that use them OK, even though you're trolling, I'll bite - you're doing a very good job of making out to the world at large that you're a bit of a bell end. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:33:08 -0700 (PDT), Paul Weaver
wrote: Because they are crap. It's not ust you, it's only old people and scum that use them Ah, to be considered old at 28! |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
"James Farrar" wrote in message ... On Sat, 12 Apr 2008 05:33:08 -0700 (PDT), Paul Weaver wrote: Because they are crap. It's not ust you, it's only old people and scum that use them Ah, to be considered old at 28! Now you know how it feels to be a woman. |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 13:44:29 +0100, Tom Anderson wrote: On Thu, 10 Apr 2008, Railist wrote: 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. For buses late at night, it absolutely is. 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. You're quite right. On the occasions i have to use buses out in the provinces, i am reminded how good London's system can be. 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. Fair enough. There are railings i can lock up to right next to my building at work, and there's always a space there, which helps a lot. If i'm out on the town, i can always find a lamp-post or railings within a hundred metres of my destination; i can honestly that's very rarely a problem. As for showering and changing, i just don't do it; i may get a bbit sweaty, but in a T-shirt, i dry off quickly, and it's not sweat that smells, it's stale sweat that's had a chance to foster growth of bacteria. I'm not aware that i'm considered an aroma menace by my colleagues! tom -- The MAtrix had evarything in it: guns, a juimping off teh walls, flying guns, a bullet tiem, evil computar machenes, numbers that flew, flying gun bullets in slowar motian, juimping into a gun, dead police men, computar hackeing, Kevin Mitnick, oven trailers, a old womans kitchen, stairs, mature women in clotheing, head spark plugs, mechaanical squids, Japaneseses assasins, tiem traval, volcanos, a monstar, slow time at fastar speed, magic, wizzards, some dirty place, Kung Few, fighting, a lot of mess explodsians EVARYWHERE, and just about anything else yuo can names! |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
Paul Weaver wrote:
On 11 Apr, 01:10, Railist wrote: I'm about to have a whinge. An unreasonable one, which ignores 'stuff' like operational problems and the like. Because they are crap. It's not ust you, it's only old people and scum that use them I got a bus from Hammersmith to Shepherds Bush the other day, it was late and cold and I'd been at the pub. It took twice as long as it takes me driving that route in the morning rush hour, and slightly longer than walking. There were only about 3 stops too. Every time I take a bus (once a year perhaps), I'm reminded how crap they are. Please tell us are you an old person or scum? -- Tony the Dragon |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
In message , Paul Corfield
writes 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? ;-) I thought we were doing this sometime in Burton-on-Trent. :-)) (In which case you would **all** be seriously shocked about how elastic the term "public transport" can be....... -- Ian Jelf, MITG Birmingham, UK Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
London Buses - Why do I bother?
I hate London buses: you wait for 20 minutes then 2-3 come together
(because drivers chat together at the local terminus). And since most of the buses are bendy, you have all the undesirables sitting uncontrolled in the back (yobs, thugs, and other people without any personal hygiene). |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk