Expressa 2 - Bus Upgrade Plan
I'd recommend you don't click this before reading the previous post Expressa, or this will be propaganda material no different to East Germany.
As you'd have seen in the Expressa post, you'd have seen the express wonders of the world whilst London has little to offer despite it's grand size and population number, much so in comparison to other cities doing better jobs at catering for flows but nonetheless, I'll keep the history side of routes that are/were express brief by not mentioning them but instead giving you a link to the spreadsheet that I've harvested data into.
In the spreadsheet I've omitted Toshiba-sponsored Airbuses A1/A2/A3 though they've had an decent life through the 80s and 90s anyway with the Piccadilly Line existing and commercial coaches taking up the slack after the Airbuses died. There's also instances of London Country routes [at the time] with express variants, the 403 for example which I only noticed when searching for 726's timetable.
I admit as I looked through what I've drawn that indeed the 177's express section and 609 didn't coexist simultaneously though one ended at the start of the year and the latter started in the latter half of the year.
 |
| An end to end on 726 would've set you back 2 hrs 45 mins |
To have a faster checkout or an express lane usually entails a higher fare paid to get a jump in the queue in other walks of life, meaning better business at little cost for the service provider to those who have extra dosh.
That's not to say that doesn't apply, one can catch a National Express A3 coach from Mitcham to Victoria for an exorbitant price or put up with other modes, in bus format that would be 270 > 170.
The benefit under a London Transport standpoint is then, albeit under the flat fare system where no one bus journey is possibly different in price to another, is to entice people into using a service that is faster than comparable services. There would be the case of people switching from the slower services, but there isn't a guarantee that no new ones won't be picked, but a very high chance dependant on how it's set up.
You'd have read on the previous post about what select cities in the world have to offer so here's a brief flashback of London again to bring us down to earth:
Orbital express routes: X26 X140
Radial express routes: 607 X68, then Carnival only 2X 36X
For argument's sake I'll include limited stop so no shouting about 607.
So what we've learnt about the rest of the world is that there's more than Monday-Sunday operations, Sunday/holiday-only services if you're keen but reminiscent of trunk routes that were cross-London once-upon-a-time, and if you're from a once-empire nation the notion of designating an express route is a weak mindset. Though if you're big brain as the kids say, using the corridors to exploit untapped experience points and money along the way.
Then peak-hour only as we already have X68 though this would've been a viable option pre-pandemic as crowd busters though X68 has fared the test of time as buses parked is money not being made... though consequently money not expended from fuel/electricity.
Therefore using this knowledge...having already read on other countries and their applications so let's split this in to two approaches. The study case for a peak hour only service especially just a year after the pandemic is a little unsteady.
Orbital and Radial.
Both fulfil the same objective but in different forms. Here's an example, X68 is radial going from Central to South. X140 on the other hand goes from a town in North West to the airport which is still in West, almost like traversing the circumference of a circle in an orbit.
So in short: Routes that leave central into outer London, and routes that stay within outer London.
Radial
We could do arteries out of Central into Stratford, Barking, Streatham, Wood Green, Lewisham and Wembley as a solid place to start from.
Essentially the 25/86, 5/15/115, 59/109/159, 29/141, 36/436, 18.
Funnily enough those arteries have night routes who'd do the perfect length for our express artery route subjects, though I'll take it personally to nerf the X18 at Northwick Park Hospital in the same vein as outcries to extend 18 there as well presumably being superfluous past Harrow to Harrow Weald.
I've chipped in a route whose due a frequency reduction as well but otherwise these routes tick the mark for covering corridors of the top 21 busiest routes.
 |
| From the centre to the suburbs |
If a success rate had to be gauged it'd be a success for sure, in relieving corridors whilst encouraging the use of that faster bus over the slower one. Between the 53X, X72, 177 and X68, the Croydon terminator lives still even though the former two were more Jubilee Line victims. If I list any more this post would drag on so to the next model without further ado.
Orbital
Taking a look at X26's success is a case study in and of itself. A coach route turned bus route and one of the few survivors of the Green Line brand that had more routes to it's name, only 724 and X26 are buses deliberately later on through choices made and overall the past shaping the present. Both routes, a non-TfL route and a TfL route, do have one thing in common.
Heathrow.
The spawn for the newest express route X140, a campaign to deal with crowded and busy 140s that slowed down over the years eventually had it's prayers answered... by cutting 140 to Hayes & Harlington thus removing the option of convenience and the forced need to change, either onto X140 or 278. The route may have more issues of it's own but it's immediately reaped it's own success despite being under resourced at worst or tightly budgeted at best.
X140 isn't the only study, an X222 was an idea put up in order to speed up times from Heathrow to Uxbridge, one idea that enthusiasts collectively frown upon, without even mentioning A10's speed TfL make note of, as a benefit of it's stops not all being populated with humans as well as having a speedy M4 section.
Instead of the focus on Heathrow notion, how about a focus on increasing speeds everywhere?
I can show you the map later but heed the table first my dear.
 |
| Not shabby, the 10 means something, nothing and everything. |
With the exception of X108 and X227 I picked these with the intent of cross-axis travel so to speak, like how on the A23 corridor there's few routes that go far east which is namely the P13 until you reach Brixton if you haven't considered 75 from Croydon yet. To phrase it better, getting from one corner of London to another.
East to North: X58
South West to North West: X93
East to South East: X108
South East to South West: X227
North West to North: X182
My original idea for the X227 was Chislehurst to Streatham, even though I've made it only Bromley to Streatham in my TfL consulation-esque post of Lambeth/Southwark, but I couldn't ignore the former link of Clapham Junction to Crystal Palace previously linked directly by 49 and it's successor 249 until replaced by 319 and thus cut at Tooting Bec but pastures anew to Common since. In 2008 the same year 249 was extended from Balham, the 417 was meant to get extended to Clapham Junction but that silently fizzled. You won't find a consultation but the blinds on the VLAs was evidence enough with "417 via Clapham Common" as well as 'Clapham Common' replacing 'Streatham Hill' of which I don't have photos of my own, instead photos of white on black blinds well past several years since the intention died in it's pre-creation stage.
With the right provisions it might not be absurd for a Chislehurst to Clapham Junction route, that supports 162/269 whilst also bringing back broken links, Balham to Clapham Junction another link previously lost from withdrawn 115 whose sections can be seen in current 315/G1/P13. An easier solution to the 162 problem is have 269 terminate at Bromley South using 126's vacant stand. Either way, a Chislehurst-Clapham Junction X227 isn't resource efficient I suspect.
Since I've exceeded my job at selling you why X227 is a good idea, I'll save you time with the X108 part.
It's not that 108 is particularly slow, though it's beneficial and successful diversion via Langdon Park giving the area a 24-hour service to the IKEA has slowed it down without a shadow of a doubt. On top of that 108 was already a busy route, so the point I make falls back to the analogy I raised earlier on about queue and an express queue. Splitting up flows to achieve better efficiency.
I can't sell you on an X182 that bullies the 112 and 102 somewhat but an X58 brings home the benefit of an oh-so-close Walthamstow to Beckton route in spitting distance of a place in East Ham whilst also linking it with Tottenham because why not, it can relieve the unfortunately low frequency 230 whose performance worsened with that change.
As for X93 much like most ideas I get behind isn't even mine, I'd be lying if I didn't find it interesting and thus it's my pick of a west route that crosses South to North. The 220 isn't known for it's best reliability but it's equally not a slouch either. It deals with traffic and what better way than to paste an express route which would shine outside of the traffic-ridden sections in theory anyway so that the 220 is relieved, it needs it.
Besides, the new links long-distance express routes can bring is thought provoking. Morden to Harleseden? Tottenham to Upton Park? Clapham Junction to Beckenham? Crystal Palace to Stratford? Wait a minute.
Since I've made no mention of it at all until now yes I've snuck that bit in. The Fridays 931 was a luxury to someone who didn't rely on it for daily necessities but a missed opportunity to aid the 122 who deals with Forest Hill and Brockley thus allowing 122 to focus on the more local travel with the Crystal Palace to Lewisham leg accounted for separately, benefitting someone who wants to get from A to B quicker. Prospect of capitalising on that?
 |
| Orbital, Radial London |
Orbital, again
Here's one final form from me, the X26-style case, still orbital routes.
 |
| Colourful For the most part routes would preferably be more frequent than half hourly, so every 15 or 20. |
Without a shadow of a doubt some moments had sparkling ideas, such as combining the Enfield leg of 121 with the Edgware leg of 221 as I scuppered to think of orbital links across London, both routes bearing 21 in their numbers.
Slowly my train of thought shifted from parallels to just meeting them, in the case of X27, starting from 227's terminus of Crystal Palace, linking Thornton Heath with Mitcham meeting the 127, then beelining through West London to meet 27 at Hammersmith but going the little bit further to Shepherd's Bush which is a useful destination.
The X29 is the lost leg of X26 that was slightly compensated with a boost in frequency on the 229 which was paralleled between Sidcup and Bexleyheath, as well 269 from there on to Bromley. The 726 then went to Dartford, though it'd be amiss not to include the popular shopping centre Bluewater even if it comes from the same Bexleyheath direction as the 96. Ebbsfleet is surprisingly close and could offer a smither of what X26 achieves with Heathrow for onward connection; domestically inside the country into deeper Kent.
Admittedly with X28 I couldn't shake the notion of avoiding 28/328 but I've had a last minute decision of giving Alexandra Palace attention and love. The X25, it would be a crime to ignore the 25 but I've given it a variation as punishment, using the District Line rail replacement as a guide, or the 238 as we know.
Last and least is the X30. Getting from South West to North West. At first I highlighted that Morden to Kingston not having a direct link (K5 going through Mexico and South Korea) until gradually shifting from serving Twickenham to landing at Wembley because why not, Wembley Stadium's there. Would've been a ticket to nightmares if England brought it home, eh?
I was surprised by how quick my X24 idea was but it's not surprising if you realise it takes up the A40 and A406 as it's routeing, as troublesome either carriageways could be whilst the X23 is the same in it relying on the A406 thus it's estimated running time being under an hour, helped by being shorter in length compared to the rest of Xs I've conjured up.
 |
| Me repeating the London-wide map has gotten repetitive so here's something slightly different |
Semi-express routes and/or turning existing routes into express routes
Routes with express section(s), see routes 96/428, 132 and A10.
In this case, you could get routes like 115 which support their corridors and turn them into an express route, with a little touch, say reroute at East Ham to Barking and call it a day, give it a new number, X15. That'd do the trick. Not every route can get this treatment, but perhaps it's easier than creating one from scratch. Though I haven't made one mention of my earlier X15 replacing the 115, it'd probably be better with a reroute of 15 to Canning Town to link 5 and 15 together and speed '115' up.
In the same vein, it's possible to keep routes as they are on their current sections as all-stops but on extension making them non-stop similar to 96/428 initially, in this case I'll use a new example. Extending 116 from Ashford Hospital to terminate at Staines Bus Station and not having a stop in between. Significantly reducing travel time from London to Staines and onward travel to Thorpe Park or other areas as well as significantly improving frequency by consequence of 116 being high frequency at every 12 compared to 203's low frequent every 20.
I won't reiterate my X20 plan earlier in detail but it entailed killing 320 as we know it, extending 199 over to Bromley South taking 126's 'temporary' stand.
Initially upon development of this post I've planned a 58X but as you'd seen earlier, I've turned that into a full fledged X58 of it's own. However, there's one last example of my own that I'll pitch.
Orpington to Croydon's broken link once held tight by 353, once again come back to life with a 353X. Turning it into an express route from Hayes directly to East Croydon and terminating it at West Croydon. Replacing the 353 section can go about two ways here for our low frequency route.
a) Double run 433 in Forestdale and extend to Hayes Station. 353X is every 15 or 20
b) Keep 353 as-is but have an every 30 353X.
Option a) has the bizarre identity of having two extra options from Croydon to Hayes alongside 119 whilst offering a frequency improvement on the full length of Courtwood Lane with a direct Croydon link lost by 433(T33)'s predecessor 354 (Croydon-Hayes).
Whereas b) keeps the unfortunate status-quo of the Addington changes but throws an improvement on the side only for Orpington-Croydon travellers, the caveat being the frequency.
Perhaps there could be a different way but ideally I'd have a shot at a), given the combination of T31 and T33 both every 7-8 gave the Forestdale and Selsdon Vale areas a lavish frequency now reduced to a large shadow barren in the past, something that doesn't make public transport a first or secondary option but rather an alternative.
This slowly delved into reversing the 353/354 changes TfL and predecessors took with the introduction of tramlink, which frankly was a mistake given the Orpington-Croydon link was well used, now the 353 is pretty quiet on it's own outside of the typical school rush hour.
 |
| Logistics |
Extra notes:
Along with 116X/237X; 94 would be extended to Turnham Green Church. 237 cut to Hounslow Bus Station but freq increase to x7-8
Furthermore on 58X thing, I've cited a 262 extension non-stop from Beckton to Barking to Ilford.
A 205X purely for fun that goes from Harlesden then as per normal Carnival 205X to Aldgate then non-stop to Stratford. A Sunday and holidays only route that uses two flyovers, the A40 and the one over the A12.
I've originally suggested 271 alongside 115 and 332 for support routes turned express routes but forgot about 271 and didn't feel needs to, helps I've never touched the route.
Perhaps, now that I look at it objectively, there could've been an X307 that solves the 384 crisis. Irregardless, the way I would personally go about it is a mix of all three that I've suggested. Of course I'd litter the map with express routes, plus it'd be bias if I pick one over the other, so I'll pick these with the intent of realistically possible but beneficial enough to be a priority, since you've seen the maps above, would be like this:
116X
X15, X18, X36, X59
X21, X23, X29
X108, X227
........................................................................................................................................
 |
| All of London's express and limited stop routes, regional and commercial |
In order for this to truly be more successful than just a plug and play route selection test that relies on it's core, more needs to be done to appeal to those who had no vested interest in the bus modem whatsoever. Well, this is hearsay if you haven't taken your first step but valuable knowledge when you do take the first step and envision the next step.
The way I envision below could go about differently depending on how you'd go about it, but the bases we should be able to agree on.
Bus Priority Measures:
Bus Lanes hours extended: In a trial period
New bus lanes (where there is space to do so): ...
Convert less used cycle lanes to bus lanes: ...
Provide cycle lanes on quieter roads nearby
Traffic lights that prioritise buses.
Europe's got that sorted. Oh wait.
Addition of shortcuts (bus-only if need be) for existing bus routes
Example: Brixton Road to Acre Lane for 35/355 and Coldharbour Lane to Acre Lane (P5) in place of circling Effra Road, St Matthews Road and Brixton Hill to turn right directly (35/355) straight directly (P5) into Acre Lane.
Small reroutes to speed up route
Example: Creating a new stop on the A1009 in place of the westbound stop on Hatch Lane for 212/357/657. Needs creating a footpath but saves time for passengers.
Buses using flyovers/underpasses
25 over Bow Flyover (now that 425 goes Ilford), 18 (preferably express equivalent or supporting route) on the A40 over Marylebone.
The 53/363 have had their speeds increased albeit only southbound.
.....
Increase in vehicle sizes
Double Deckers for the longest time have been one size only, I say as if 2006 was a hundred years ago, 61's Enviro400s. Long wheelbase still exists within single deckers out of necessity and that's only to routes that have upgraded to the extra capacity.
The bus upgrade plan will see an uplift in bus sizes.
 |
| Current sizes, roughly |
New express routes to assist busy corridors and new orbital express routes for vastly quicker travel.
- Double Deckers will be a minimum of 12m long, maximum 13.4m long.
- Single Deckers minimum length 12m (bi-axle) preferably tri-axle, maximum 21m long.
These buses will all be three-door with double deckers having two staircases. This is to reduce dwell times as much as possible, which would be further reduced with the reintroduction of open-boarding which vacuumed people with the articulated single deckers and the NBfL until open-boarding was unfortunately removed.
In this scenario for the interest of holding speed to the highest priority, open-boarding will be on specially branded 'Express' three-door operated routes.
Existing normal bus routes will have vehicle sizes upgraded as well as a general uplift in standard vehicle size for double deckers to the 11m range from the existing nearer-10m range. Of course for routes that can take the size.
Can't help but think of E10's promised 10.5m vehicle allocation on consultation gone to waste with 9m YX19s.
 |
| Newer larger bigger sizes |
The X68 when introduced had new Leyland Olympians bodied by ECW (L166-171) with a coach interior, high-back seating so to speak together with 177's express variant (using L260-264), whereas the next new vehicles for X68 that followed left that legacy behind even if VLA1-55 were ordered against 253/254's contracts and ended up on 68/X68 after 2's mid-contract low-floor conversion was prioritised. Whilst 177's express variant faded away into the wind...
So bringing back that legacy, high-back seating would be a plus. Admittedly for the perception of it as much as it does bring passenger benefit, especially if like in tri-axle TA1's case it has a phone holder which is an even bigger passenger plus, if people find that appealing.
Another point of contention is the blind specifications. Originally it was fine with all express routes having blue blinds, usually standard routes with express versions, so a 161 and a 161 "express route" would be on the top blinds until the Addington and Kingston routes popped up with yellow blinds of their own, these being C or K-prefix where the former bunch turned into 130/B finalising into X30. Kingston's shopper express routes died a silent death.
Thus with Cowie operating both X30 and X68, the latter adopted the yellow background with black text, it was refined under the VLA blinds looking neater until 2006 when Go-Ahead took over with WVLs that had less detailed more simplified blinds, so off with the colours altogether unfortunately. Meanwhile First have upkept it on the 607 through such a specification by just turning the blinds blue anyway, the 'Limited Stop' qualifier being enough suffice.
Cross-border upgrades
Whilst inner London suffers the plague of low passenger numbers and outer London continues to sprawl, one advent for ideas is outside of London, though the issue with crossing said borders and having the other county pay for your route in their jurisdiction is a hassle such as 167 being cut as a result of Essex dropping their end of support, meanwhile Surrey have a catalogue of routes to the extent some aren't - mostly on the Croydon side.
I've given 116 a little bit of spotlight but withdrawing 116 from Staines wasn't a change that should've happened but a lesser evil to other TfL routes into Staines especially with the similarity to the crowded and infrequent 203.
Extend 215 non-stop from Lee Valley Campsite serving Waltham Abbey to terminate at Waltham Cross to interchange with other TfL services at the bus station that head to Turkey Street, Enfield Highway as well as non-TfL services to Cheshunt, Hammond Street, Potters Bar and more.
Whilst 215 does it's job as a support route to 97 well, it only really offers Yardley Lane Estate a service that doesn't end up in Chingford and serves Lee Valley Campsite even if half the time it wouldn't be used.
Potentially look into converting either 142 or 258 (parallels Overground) into express to increase speed and combat traffic into Watford from outer London as well as provide better crossing by Bushey Station to necessitate removal of double run at the station.
Making connections and onward travel connections easier and more convenient will help to make the bus a more appealing form of transport.
I've tried to prepare a radical idea for a cross-border route but, I don't know, Bromley to Sevenoaks 402X anybody? No? Okay, back to the drawing board.
-----------------------------------
All in all, I've presented three theories. I'm just proud I'm done with delaying this as I've destroyed my workflow, creativity and boosted perfectionism until I've decided enough was enough and sack it all off and do a job only a cowboy would take one look at and think is perfectly fine. There won't be an Expressa 3. I've originally intended for the vehicle increase portion of the post to have a post of it's own but for now I won't revisit that idea and instead churn out small posts until I'm a madman enough to do a mega-post like this again.
I have been Unorm. I have done what I could, expressing my thoughts. You've read them, you're inspired by it in some shape, I thank you for reading it, and if you're from Transport for London. Hi. X59 please thanks. If not, still appreciate you for sticking with me.
I'll look forward to whatever becomes of the future bus trial on 63 when Abellio take over with enhanced visual information and new bus shelters which somewhat falls in line with the improvements I've tried to list earlier. All that said and done, stay safe. One last image for you to see:
 |
| Overlaps like X27/X93 and X25/X25 would preferably be one route Blue: X20-X25/X27-X30 Black: X13 X15 X18 X25 X29 X36 X59 X85 X185 Orange: X93 X108 X182 X227 Red: 607 X26 X68 X140 Green: 116X 237X 332X 353X Standalone Pinkish: 2X 36X |
 |
| You'd want to open this image up |
....
Bless you
No comments:
Post a Comment