Devil's Descendant Discombobulated

ADH45048 (YX62FTP), Acton Old Town Hall

The 266 we know now is less than what it was, now in TfL's eyes it is more reliable and without doubt in the all-so-holy Crossrail works near Acton Main Line on Horn Lane, Cricklewood (W) proved less capable than Park Royal (RP), minus the obvious unfair differences.

Talks about cutting the route started way before the Tower Transit tenure, as during it's 60s/70s one end would generally suffer from lack of service. Notably the Hammersmith end on both 260/266. More detail on that later. Though, unlike it's predecessors whom tried, TfL took it into their own hands to finally sever the devil, the devil shall cause no more problems.

Since the increasing of traffic before the birth of TfL, routes have been split in two with decent overlap. Routes like 68 and 253. Later in the congestion charge era, routes like 2, 36, 63, you name it, for that reason or another.

Fast forward to July 2017, consultation for Crossrail changes were introduced for West, South East and East London. By this point in 2019, all the West changes not including Southall, the 301, have went ahead. Oh and 25's cut to City Thameslink. We all know the outcome of this, but TfL still went through to save pennies in their dire straits. Government funding cut, hopper fare, and fares freeze. The ultimate recipe for financial disaster.

WV46101 (SN64CVS), Acton Old Town Hall

TfL clearly didn't learn from themselves or the past, but no money means no kindness in some languages. So the 218 and 266 have an overlap and at least meet. The 218/306 do a good overlap. The 266/306 are a couple of stops apart...is there another explanation why?

Simple answer: Stand space issues and lack of desire to send 266 to Acton Vale and 306 to Acton High Street as that results in more buses. = -£££,£££.

It's only been over a week but; 

218: reliability is a bit iffy. It could provide good headways at some points and be the exact opposite at the other end.

306: I don't know if it's simply Fulham traffic but the route is also in it's learning stages.

266: Metroline did well, but time will tell if RATP can reach the same standards on a large route. Their operation of 220 does beg to differ though...

Stop shelters have poster ads about 218's introduction, to what avail they help. Seeing as some stops don't contain timetables of the new routes...

-------------------------------

Let's turn back to 2015...

What could've been a reality

239: Roehampton Bessborough Road - Castlenau - Hammersmith - Acton Vale

This was the precursor to the 218/306. A single deck route utilising 72's short runs between Hammersmith and Roehampton during Putney Bridge closure, then extended from Hammersmith to link with Acton Vale. At this point the 70 terminated at Acton, so there wasn't stand space to send it to the high street. It didn't come to fruition though it nearly, if it didn't, entered the tendering programme.

   The simple idea here is, to provide assistance to the cumbersome 266 along Askew Road, like the 306 is doing to the 218 now. To no avail, given majority want to get from Acton or beyond to Hammersmith. The short hop from Acton Vale along to Hammersmith is useful to a minority, a minority not sardined to a packed 218...

Likewise, the numbers 218 and 306 have already been in use, either for a plan or in reality.

The former 218 was a Surrey route, going from Kingston via Esher and Hersham to Staines. Absorbed into Surrey Council's tender schemes.

The former 306 was a cut and paste 202 (Crystal Palace to Blackheath) but direct between Crystal Palace and Sydenham via Westwood Hill, the minibus service replaced by 450. The route did see double decker Titans, of which as long as drivers took one out for a trip, get double decker's pay.

Another 306 was in the plans from Ilford to Woodford Bridge but never materialized.

-------------------------------

Turning back to the 266...

TE735 (LK57AZP), Brent Cross

I mentioned in the 60s/70s the 266 had reliability concerns, and 260 which went as per 266 between Harlesden to Hammersmith if not Acton Vale. Here's the story summed up to the best I could:

The routeings of both routes for the most part:

260: Barnet - N Finchley - Golders Grn - Willesden Jnc. (M-F/Sunday) - Acton - Hammersmith (M-F peak/Sat)

266: Colindale (peaks) - West Hendon (M-F) - Cricklewood (weekend) - Hammersmith

VH45316 (LF19FWK), Fulham Town Hall

One main issue for the reliability is this: Cricklewood (W), Willesden (AC), Finchley, Hendon, Stonebridge Park, have operated the lengthy routes. Spot the problem. They're all centrally focused or in the north. Admittedly routes like current 36 operate solely from one end and do well.

   Crew facilities being in the northern parts didn't help either, so naturally the operation would be to facilitate crew needs by turning them short of destination when needed.

Buses standing at Hammersmith Grove did send tailbacks to Hammersmith Broadway, which worsened matters even further.

In order to provide a service at Hammersmith, a chance was seen as they conveniently withdrew a 255 (Turnham Green - Hammersmith - Wandsworth - Clapham Junction). The 266 was partially given operation to Riverside (R) [a garage in Hammersmith] to compensate for the 255 loss and finally provide customers a service.

Or so that's meant to happen... Cricklewood (W) crew often went on strike, so on those days the Riverside (R) crew on 266 wouldn't go further north than Willesden Junction.

Fun fact: The 266 when diverted at Staples Corner to Brent Cross was to have it's Colindale peak journeys renumbered 266A, this was probably refused.

Add to that, if there was ever a very long gap at Hammersmith, passengers would be obviously frustrated, crews would take it upon themselves to get passengers to as far as Harlesden. To aid this horrible stance of circumstances, the 260 was extended back to Hammersmith with it's service standardised, and not some to-do-list of destinations. 266 lost it's Riverside (R) allocation.

   This lasted only for 7 years when 260 was cut back to Willesden Junction again.
-------------------------------

As for the history of the 266, I made a short clip. It started out as a tram, before converting to trolleybus in 1936, then converted to bus in 1962 when roads were being rebuilt and tram/trolleybus haters got their way, conveniently the mobility of buses played a factor.

Once privatisation happened, the 266 settled in at Willesden (AC) or Cricklewood (W) or both.

VN37975 (BG61SXK), Hammersmith Lower Bus Station

In the turn of the 21st century the main allocation was shunted to the centre of route where it's based now... Harlesden (HR), renamed to Park Royal (PK). Next 5 years back to Cricklewood (W) until loss to First on their winning-spree back from Park Royal, known as Atlas Road (AS) during Crossrail works where Westbourne Park (X) was partially sacrificed.
   Refreshing minds, the route was put in a 28-month contract so TfL have time to settle how they want to chop the route in relation to Crossrail. Metroline did win the route back as Metroline West, meaning Willesden Junction (WJ), though sent the route back to it's troublesome home at Cricklewood (W). Which could hint it may not be the best for the route to be there, even if it is truly home.

Hope you enjoyed reading this article, my year-round up is nearly ready so expect that before the end of the year!

-------------------------------

Sources if you thought I pulled stuff out of a hat:

Posters on The Bus Forum (TBF); for 239; for 266.

London Vehicle Finder (LVF), London Buses.co.uk, London Bus Routes.net.

Written on 19/12/2019.