Local routes - more or less?

The less philosophy seems to have won by TfL; the 346 and 497 have been fused into one Harold Hill-Upminster route - the 346 serving locally from Upminster to Upminster Park Estate with minimal stand time. Likewise the 497 used to serve Harold Hill to Harold Wood with only up to 2 minutes of relief time at the Elizabeth Line station bus stop.

R6, as part of the recent Orpington bus consultation whose report has been concluded, suggests R6 may still be on the cutting line for withdrawal, with the other changes to routes R1/R2/R3 not happening as initially planned.

Is our traditional "circular" services, up to 60 minutes of round-trip time, a failed model?

Could we do with more?

Could we do with less, such as the withdrawal of 497 and R6?

Should the 291 be changed?

Let's explore.

You can support me by donating to me, buying from my store, or perhaps order from my Fiverr!

No the 291 shouldn't be changed, works well, even better now with double deckers (with dual doors) as opposed to the single deckers (with single doors) that it was previously allocated.

Our traditional example is 291 (used to be numbered 192)

Other examples include 138 (local from Bromley to Coney Hall), 389/399 Barnet circulars (to Western Way and Hadley Wood respectively); B13 at New Eltham, R70 at Nurserylands

Another route with small stand time at an estate is route 288, 0 minutes stand time at Broadfields Estate. Buses completing 53 minutes round trip in the off-peak from Queensbury to Queensbury.

The 499 also hesitates at Heath Park Estate for 2 mins. A round trip taking 2 hours!

If you know me by now you'd assume I'd somehow include 322 into this, correct you are!

A local from Brixton to Gipsy Hill (diverted to use Clive Road, then terminating on Clive Road) setting off immediately towards Brixton from the Oaks Avenue stop as per normal route. The one-way circular use of Clive Road and St Gothard Road - instead of two-way along St Gothard Road - will allow larger and longer vehicles to be used without worry for buses in oncoming directions to impact one another.

This way 322 can mimic 291 and convert to double deckers with ease, operating in a loop much like how 291 does with similarly narrow roads.

This 322 loop (Clapham Common-Gipsy Hill-Clapham Common) would take a total of 98 minutes journey time in rush hour (+ 2 mins hesitation at Gipsy Hill = 100 minutes!)

Currently is roughly 119 minutes in rush hour round-trip.

To replace 322 between Gipsy Hill and Crystal Palace, the 315 would be extended via Park Hall Road (sharing common stops with 3), then Gipsy Hill and the one-way system in Crystal Palace.

Alternatively I'd actually suggest the likes of 450 or G1

450: West Croydon - Crystal Palace - clockwise loop via Kingswood Drive - Crystal Palace - West Croydon (94 mins round trip + 10 mins stand time, PVR 13 at every 8 minutes)

Instead of 141 minutes round trip, a PVR 15 at every 10 minutes

New 451: Lower Sydenham - High Level Drive - anticlockwise loop via Kingswood Drive including inner loop Seeley Drive Shops last served by 931 - High Level Drive - Lower Sydenham (45 minutes round trip + 15 mins stand time = PVR 4 at every 15 minutes)

As for G1, applying the same logic at Shaftesbury Estate is possible but I've done my point illustrating 450/451 example above which works well enough.

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

Another upside is relieving stand space, which could be needed.

The biggest downside to this is losing 1/2 the ability to have recovery time.

Bus routes tend to be timetabled to have a round trip that is divisible by their frequency (e.g an evening 68 takes 102 minutes round trip, has 18 minutes total stand time = 120 minutes. The 68 is every 10 in evenings so 120/10=12. Requires 12 buses roughly)

Losing stand time on one end would be worth the cost on routes that are very localised, like with routes 138 and 288. Losing stand time on routes like 322 499 is not ideal, being long distance or going through areas with traffic.

End of the day we do need services that provide a local function, no matter how they're structured.

This is so as many people as possible have access to public transport, this means more efficient use of road space for able people and thus less traffic - getting people to where they want quicker (hopefully), whilst for less-abled and disabled people this means a critical role of serving people that would otherwise have no feasible transport alternative. To use dial-a-ride you need to be quite old, or have a proven disability.

As always, thanks for reading, until the next one stay safe, bless you.

You can support me by donating to me, buying from my store, or perhaps order from my Fiverr!