Bus Axe Scheme

I'll be sharing my opinions on this scheme. For those who have no knowledge on this, I advise going here. I've also devised a spreadsheet for simplicity's sake if you want to view.

Straight to the point and in my personal opinion:

Tottenham Court Road corridor:
14: A way to keep the Russell Square link lost by 10. But not to King's Cross. Disappointing.
134: If in line with 88/C2, I definitely see passengers spawning. Definitely.

King's Road - Shaftesbury Avenue corridor:
9: ...
11: Hilarious. The up and coming 15.
19: As 311 definitely covers even the slightest sliver of 19, it should be cut. Not like Battersea will retaliate.
22: Back to the days of London Buses where routes changed by the week.
311: Nice idea overall, but the route it kills off... it barely justifies it.

LT679 on South Croxted Road, curtailed due to events every now and then

Whitehall/Westminster Bridge:
3: Since it got cut from Oxford Circus due to "roadworks" and never got reinstated, I couldn't care less where 3 terminates in Central. As a local.
53: Oppose, the round the corner link from Lambeth North to Whitehall despite paralleling other routes is useful. Plus, you can't hopper from 53 to 453 from a place like Woolwich in rush hour, or am I wrong?

Waterloo - Fleet Street corridor:
4: I feel Barbican-Waterloo was a nice link. No knowledge on it's use there though.
15H: No comment. Inevitable, yet unfortunate. One step closer to complete withdrawal.
76: No comment. Don't have enough knowledge on it.
172: No comment. The route was only changed from St. Paul's to Farringdon and now getting replaced for 40. I won't go around saying withdraw 172 but now there's less in distinctuality between 171/172.
341: No comment. Don't have enough knowledge on it.

LT734 along Brixton Hill

Euston Road corridor:
59: Oppose, an established round the corner link now for dust along with 10's withdrawal. Hopper! Hopper! Hopper!
476: We all honestly expected 73 and 476 to be combined into one route. At this point they might as well.

Marylebone Road:
205: Oppose. Good for reliability, but Marylebone would only have 2/453 unless something is brought in. So longer walk it is, if from the Paddington end. (Hopper!)

Kingsway corridor:
171: Oppose. If anything it should've ended at Waterloo instead but still, a cut is a cut. I assume the game here is to hopper at New Cross but for 453? Which doesn't go Waterloo and don't say 172.

Kingsland Road corridor:
67: ...
149: Confused.com
242: *sigh* At least Aldgate gets a direct link to Homerton Hospital. A second link to Hackney too.

EH46 (YX16OCB) on Gresham Road, Brixton

City of London I:
35: Strongly support. Frequency increases are 100% welcome. Now that's 35/37 distinguished as they always run in pairs, having the same frequency.
40: Strongly oppose. How am I supposed to cross to East London now? Fenchurch Street now lose a direct bus too. 40 being swapped in for 45 and 172 doesn't work if you ask me.
45: Strongly oppose. Whilst I find 45 north of Elephant redundant in the off peak, it is valuable. I wouldn't want to force myself on to everyman's 63 considering I live closer to 45 than 63 for one. Two, that's another good Central London link from South London gone. Also, at this point 45 would just be a variation of 35 but to Clapham Park, said route getting a frequency increase over the loss of 40. I'm surprised they didn't see to withdraw 45 completely, but that's for the better.
100: Very funny.
343: I smell trouble
388: Back in 2014 Stratford to Elephant was a number 1 suggestion from me. 2016, link has been made. 2018, cut. £££.
RV1: Dies a slow, painful death I bet

City of London II:
26: I thought we were saving money here.
48: Strongly oppose. If whole routes are getting scrapped, then the end of the bus network is already 7 steps closer than we thought. I don't think 26 getting a frequency increase would cut it either. The 55 increase is welcome, though that'd get hammered ten times more than 26 from personal experience.
55: Strongly support. Frequency increases are 100% welcome. But at the cost of 48? No.

All in all, TfL would probably go with these changes so all I did was dish opinions irrelevant to them. I've only noticed after reading up that effectively multiple routes here swap stands. 134's to 14's, 100 to 242, so on so forth. Anyways, stay safe.

Note: Usage of any photos on this blog isn't permitted where no name is present (meaning it's mine, ©Unorm), or an All Rights Reserved symbol © is present. If you desire to use a photo, you must contact the original author. In my case, you should contact my Flickr.