Trivia: Unique London bus routes

[RJ]

Anything longer than 9m with a single door is rare nowadays - I think they're only found on Arriva's B routes around Bexleyheath, the 386 and X26. Less than 9m is common, lots of backstreet routes use them.

 

[PeterY]

Last week I was in the Ian Allan bookshop in Waterloo. At £4 I treated myself to a reprinted London bus map dated 11th June 1939. I don't confess to know many route numbers but looking at it for North West London, I recognised 222 Hounslow to Uxbridge, 607 (trolleybus then) Uxbridge to Shepherds Bush, now White City, and 142 Watford Junction to Kilburn, now Brent Cross, being very similar. Not forgetting the 24 which I read earlier, is the oldest route.

Now 76 years later, there must be still other similar route numbers.

Not bad they've survived all this time.

 

[Busaholic]

Last week I was in the Ian Allan bookshop in Waterloo. At £4 I treated myself to a reprinted London bus map dated 11th June 1939. I don't confess to know many route numbers but looking at it for North West London, I recognised 222 Hounslow to Uxbridge, 607 (trolleybus then) Uxbridge to Shepherds Bush, now White City, and 142 Watford Junction to Kilburn, now Brent Cross, being very similar. Not forgetting the 24 which I read earlier, is the oldest route.

Now 76 years later, there must be still other similar route numbers.

Not bad they've survived all this time.

The 24 is the oldest-surviving route between the same two termini, now 101 years old, but the 38 and 76 are about the same age and the ground they cover is the same as a century ago, albeit truncated a little at the outer end. The 267 bus is the same as the 667 trolleybus, except the Hampton Court bit seems to have gone for good recently. The 75 in S.E. London still runs Croydon to Catford as it did a century ago, but now on to Lewisham rather than Woolwich.

The 96 bus replaced the 696 trolleybus on your 1939 map, and this had been the 96 tram before that.Still Woolwich to Dartford: I would have loved to travel on the 696 to Bluewater, the speed those trolleys were capable of on a straight, open road was mindblowing.

 

[PeterY]

I'd of loved to have travelled on the trolley buses and trams around London.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

Last week I was in the Ian Allan bookshop in Waterloo. At £4 I treated myself to a reprinted London bus map dated 11th June 1939. I don't confess to know many route numbers but looking at it for North West London, I recognised 222 Hounslow to Uxbridge, 607 (trolleybus then) Uxbridge to Shepherds Bush, now White City, and 142 Watford Junction to Kilburn, now Brent Cross, being very similar. Not forgetting the 24 which I read earlier, is the oldest route.

Now 76 years later, there must be still other similar route numbers.

Not bad they've survived all this time.

The 16 is still pretty similar to what it was in horse bus days.

 

[Busaholic]

The 16 is still pretty similar to what it was in horse bus days.

The 16 was the last London route to have a frequency to have a frequency of one per minute, on the Victoria to Cricklewood (Crown) section back around 1960. Actually, that is not strictly true, the peak interval was shown as 1-2 minutes, so probably two buses every three minutes. In those days, some buses extended beyond Cricklewood to Neasden (Dog Lane) and a few more to Sudbury Town Station, these being later replaced by the 245.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Didn't the 38 have a bus every minute at peak times after conversion from bendies to double deckers?

 

[Busaholic]

Didn't the 38 have a bus every minute at peak times after conversion from bendies to double deckers?

Seem to remember it was basically every two minutes, with occasional one minute gaps, but it's certainly the most frequent we've seen in decades and likely to remain that way: the 25 might justify similar, but only until Crossrail steals some of its longer-distance passengers.

 

[PermitToTravel]

There are still plenty of people using the 25 today to make journeys that can be made by tube - I suspect that as long as it's charging half what Crossrail does, modal shift will be minimal.

 

[Busaholic]

There are still plenty of people using the 25 today to make journeys that can be made by tube - I suspect that as long as it's charging half what Crossrail does, modal shift will be minimal.

For those who have to count the pennies, also those for whom time is not a factor, I am sure the 25 will remain popular. For others, a train from Ilford and Manor Park to Tottenham Court Road or Bond Street every five minutes will be hard to resist. Whitechapel will also be a well-used station from the Ilford direction too. The 86 will also probably lose some custom, but not as much. Consider how frequent buses used to be from Leytonstone through to Aldgate, a corridor no longer traversed by any one route, and with no chance of ever regaining a through service in the daytime imo.

 

[PermitToTravel]

Perhaps! I'm not suggesting that that bit of Crossrail will be underused - on the contrary, I think both it, the 25, and the Central line will be very busy.

 

[RJ]

Seem to remember it was basically every two minutes, with occasional one minute gaps, but it's certainly the most frequent we've seen in decades and likely to remain that way: the 25 might justify similar, but only until Crossrail steals some of its longer-distance passengers.

The 521 is 30 bph during the 'super peak' at Holborn, so there are some one minute gaps at either termini. I've seen them at London Bridge, they just fill up and go, one after the other. Very efficient operation.

 

[Busaholic]

The 521 is 30 bph during the 'super peak' at Holborn, so there are some one minute gaps at either termini. I've seen them at London Bridge, they just fill up and go, one after the other. Very efficient operation.

I've always been a champion of the 'Red Arrow' concept - flat fare long before any others were, two or more doors etc. If only Central London garage space could be found at a reasonable price and, even more importantly, cheapish social housing for drivers, fitters and other employees, the concept could have been developed further, given the right political backing. Unlike the Waterloo base such garage space would need to be not on top of human habitation too.

Both the 507 and 521 needed sizeable increases in their respective PVRs when the political decision was made to withdraw the 'bendies' from them and replace with smaller buses, even though few had coherent criticisms of the artics on these two routes.

My first bus journey as a working man was made on a 500 Red Arrow to my first job in Brook Street,Mayfair via the American Embassy in Grosvenor Square, now busless for aeons, so fond memories.

 

[CatfordCat]

The 16 was the last London route to have a frequency to have a frequency of one per minute, on the Victoria to Cricklewood (Crown) section back around 1960. Actually, that is not strictly true, the peak interval was shown as 1-2 minutes, so probably two buses every three minutes. In those days, some buses extended beyond Cricklewood to Neasden (Dog Lane) and a few more to Sudbury Town Station, these being later replaced by the 245.

I have an October 1955 schedule book (repro) to hand which shows the peak frequency on the 16 as a mere 36 buses per hour between Cricklewood and Victoria in the am peak (10 per hour started at Sudbury, 10 bph started at Neasden)

The most frequent I can find are the 101 (53 buses per hour at peak times between East Ham Town Hall and Royal Albert Dock) and 109 (52 buses per hour at peak between Brixton and Kennington Park (where the route divided - some going via Blackfriars and some via Westminster)

I believe that both the 101 and 109 were at or slightly over 60 buses per hour at the absolute height of the post-war peak. The 101 had an allocation of 64 buses in 1954 but only 53 in Oct 1955, similarly the 109 had 88 buses allocated in 1951 but this was down to 82 by Oct 1955.

 

[Busaholic]

I have an October 1955 schedule book (repro) to hand which shows the peak frequency on the 16 as a mere 36 buses per hour between Cricklewood and Victoria in the am peak (10 per hour started at Sudbury, 10 bph started at Neasden)

The most frequent I can find are the 101 (53 buses per hour at peak times between East Ham Town Hall and Royal Albert Dock) and 109 (52 buses per hour at peak between Brixton and Kennington Park (where the route divided - some going via Blackfriars and some via Westminster)

I believe that both the 101 and 109 were at or slightly over 60 buses per hour at the absolute height of the post-war peak. The 101 had an allocation of 64 buses in 1954 but only 53 in Oct 1955, similarly the 109 had 88 buses allocated in 1951 but this was down to 82 by Oct 1955.

My own personal recollections would absolutely support what you are saying, although only from 1957/8 onwards.

When the Traffic Office (Buses) moved from 55 Broadway to Grosvenor Place in the early 1970s cupboards and filing cabinets full of timetable/schedule info and traffic notices were deemed surplus to requirements and this very lowly traffic management trainee took away as much stuff as I could carry, including 'red' books dating back to 1959. I started going through those timetables (basically first/last buses over each section of route on all days plus a summary of the service frequency on each section of route) quite assidiously, starting with 1971 and working backwards, and the first (and only) occasion a 1 minute frequency was shown for any route was the 16, either from 1959 or 1960. Now these weren't foolproof or the actual schedules, basically they were pieces of information for both the public and transport officials to gauge roughly how long to expect betwee buses, when everything was running perfectly, which of course it never did!

I've commented in threads before about all the 'shorts' on the 25 and 38/A between Victoria and Green Park in rush hours, but I don't think these ever appeared in the red book. possibly because they only operated for an hour or so in each peak. I believe if you could find an inspector's 'crib' for Victoria on those routes they would show plenty of one minute intervals right up to 1968.

I too was surprised to find the 16, but it was definitely there. Also, don't forget in the '50s there were other routes (60/260) which covered the Cricklewood to Marble Arch section, withdrawn later without direct replacement.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Just an addition to the post. On reflection 36bph is not so far different from 40bph: in L.T. parlance 40 bph evenly spread over an hour would equate to a headway of 1-2 minutes. With 60/260 withdrawal, and given they were also operated by Cricklewood Garage, an extra 4 bph could have been a sop to the union.

 

[Abpj17]

Seem to remember it was basically every two minutes, with occasional one minute gaps, but it's certainly the most frequent we've seen in decades and likely to remain that way: the 25 might justify similar, but only until Crossrail steals some of its longer-distance passengers.

Longer distance passengers may still prefer the bus. At certain hours it seems to be heavily used by e.g. cleaners at city firms where cost will be a major factor.

25 is an odd route as well - it terminates in quite a few places, so it's not unusual to need to change / wait for the next service which means that frequency varies across the route. I also find it quite clumpy - you'll get two or three buses together and then long gaps.

 

[Busaholic]

Longer distance passengers may still prefer the bus. At certain hours it seems to be heavily used by e.g. cleaners at city firms where cost will be a major factor.

25 is an odd route as well - it terminates in quite a few places, so it's not unusual to need to change / wait for the next service which means that frequency varies across the route. I also find it quite clumpy - you'll get two or three buses together and then long gaps.

Which of course means more than one fare needs to be paid, unless the bus is terminated short while in the course of travel, thus negating some of the savings over tube/rail. Extension of the 205 to Stratford, or a possible split in the route, seem from afar to be possible helps. The 205 as presently operated needs an allocation from a garage at the western end of the route - not enough buses get through to Paddington, a place which is becoming increasingly bereft of buses.

I'm well aware that under the current tendering system a western allocation is not possible - so alter the tendering system, get two operators in and compare their performance, the only way that operation by private companies can be justified.

 

[Deerfold]

I'm well aware that under the current tendering system a western allocation is not possible - so alter the tendering system, get two operators in and compare their performance, the only way that operation by private companies can be justified.

At the moment the companies are given a target and paid compared to whether they meet it or not. I'm not sure how having two companies running would improve that. They'd have difficulty sorting out headway between buses of different companies (who should alter their buses if there's a big gap?).

 

[Busaholic]

At the moment the companies are given a target and paid compared to whether they meet it or not. I'm not sure how having two companies running would improve that. They'd have difficulty sorting out headway between buses of different companies (who should alter their buses if there's a big gap?).

TfL

 

[CatfordCat]

At the moment the companies are given a target and paid compared to whether they meet it or not.

Indeed - London bus routes are now (mostly) on Quality Incentive Contracts - simple explanation from Go-Ahead corporate website -

"Performance targets are set by TfL through Quality Incentive Contracts (QICs) to encourage the provision of punctual and high quality service. Operators receive bonus payments when targets are met and are penalised for poor performance."

My understanding that this can be + or - 5 or 6 % of contract price, which is potentially big enough to be the profit margin.

Also, if an operator runs well, they will usually be offered a 2 year contract extension.

Past performance is (although to what extent I'm unsure) taken in to consideration when awarding contracts.

And if a London bus operator performs spectacularly badly then they can have that contract terminated early (I can only think of one or two examples of this though)

In terms of multi-garage routes, there are a very few within the current TfL network - often where there's a separate contract for (say) school journeys which are supplementary to the main service, and a few for operator's convenience where the night service is run from a different garage to the day service.

Operators aren't always keen on them, as it dilutes management responsibility for a route - and I've known one or two major foul-ups outside London with both depots A and B thinking that the other one runs a particular journey (although this reflects a particularly hands-off 'head office' structure that particular company had at the time - they even allowed depots to set their own policy about the days between xmas and new year - A ran a weekday service, B a saturday service, which on the same route caused some interesting situations...)

With some London bus groups, there might be potential for the old 'garage at each end' allocation on some routes - Go-Ahead, Tower Transit and Arriva have bases at opposite ends of some corridors...

 

[Tom B]

Are there not significant benefits to companies in garages at each end of the route? For example, it can remove a lot of dead mileage (although, for instance, if the garage is at the outer end of a route it's probably going to be the most rational place for buses to start/finish with respect to peak hours etc. The N91 is an example which is run 50/50 between PB and HT.

Lothian operated some services on a split depot basis but they tended to be one depot running the service most of the time and another running peak extras.

There was one case outwith London a few years ago where company A ran the Mon-Sat service and company B the Sunday service. On a particular holiday, company A declared it to be a Sunday and company B a Monday service, so no buses ran!

 

[Busaholic]

Are there not significant benefits to companies in garages at each end of the route? For example, it can remove a lot of dead mileage (although, for instance, if the garage is at the outer end of a route it's probably going to be the most rational place for buses to start/finish with respect to peak hours etc. The N91 is an example which is run 50/50 between PB and HT.

Lothian operated some services on a split depot basis but they tended to be one depot running the service most of the time and another running peak extras.

There was one case outwith London a few years ago where company A ran the Mon-Sat service and company B the Sunday service. On a particular holiday, company A declared it to be a Sunday and company B a Monday service, so no buses ran!

The problem in London is that, even with shorter routes than formerly, the company contracted to run a reasonably long route may not have a depot anywhere near one end of the route, or their structure might not lend itself easily so to do e.g.- Take the 47, worked by Catford since the year dot, and now under Stagecoach Selkent. If a northern garage was deemed to be useful, as used to happen when Dalston had workings, presumably Stagecoach East London could provide an allocation from Bow: some dead running required, but then twas ever thus. Of course it would be a public service if some of these dead runs could be 'live but bureaucracy and current thinking militates against this.'

 

[Mutant Lemming]

What is the longest distance one can travel from Central London on a through TfL service these days ? Would hazard a guess at the 113 as it takes you from Marble Arch to the edge of the green belt.

 

[Busaholic]

What is the longest distance one can travel from Central London on a through TfL service these days ? Would hazard a guess at the 113 as it takes you from Marble Arch to the edge of the green belt.

Not a straight answer to your question, but longest TIMEWISE is the 25 Oxford Circus to Ilford. Night services are another matter!

The Hendon Way is usually a tad quicker than the Mile End Road.

 

[RJ]

What is the longest distance one can travel from Central London on a through TfL service these days ? Would hazard a guess at the 113 as it takes you from Marble Arch to the edge of the green belt.

You can travel from Trafalgar Square out to Slade Green and Erith on the N89 and St Mary Cray on the N47.

Not a straight answer to your question, but longest TIMEWISE is the 25 Oxford Circus to Ilford. Night services are another matter!

The Hendon Way is usually a tad quicker than the Mile End Road.

Timetabled for 2 hours 1 minute at the height of the PM peak, but reportedly can take 15 minutes longer in normal conditions hock:

 

[Deerfold]

You can travel from Trafalgar Square out to Slade Green and Erith on the N89 and St Mary Cray on the N47.

You can leave London on the N279 from Trafalgar Square (only just - to Waltham Cross) every 20 minutes (12 at weekends).

 

[PermitToTravel]

Not a straight answer to your question, but longest TIMEWISE is the 25 Oxford Circus to Ilford. Night services are another matter!

The Hendon Way is usually a tad quicker than the Mile End Road.

Just a tad

 

[MotCO]

Which London bus route has the longest dead mileage from its garage to take up the route? I was thinking of something like the 181 or 284 from Grove Park which Metrobus run from their Orpington Garage which is around 7 miles, but I am sure there are others which are longer.

 

[CatfordCat]

Which London bus route has the longest dead mileage from its garage to take up the route? I was thinking of something like the 181 or 284 from Grove Park which Metrobus run from their Orpington Garage which is around 7 miles, but I am sure there are others which are longer.

For a start, some buses on the 181 / 284 start / finish at Lewisham which is further.

There seem to be a few 21s that appear / disappear at the Newington Green end of the route, and 36s from the Queens Park end.

There must be a few fairly hefty garage journeys on some night routes - N11s from Stockwell garage to / from Ealing might be a contender.

And some of the school bus routes have odd allocations - Camberwell now do the 624 (Avery Hill - Grove Park) - presumably this makes sense somewhere along the line, maybe if Camberwell have another peak working that can use the same bus?)

As to "why not run them in service" - it's a bit two edged. Would a few obscure and irregular journeys, in some cases off the normal line of routes at odd times of day (as used to happen - 13's in service from London Bridge to Rye Lane via bits of the 21 then 63 route is one extreme example) give that much benefit to passengers compared with the additional driver time cost (that would end up with more duties being needed somewhere along the line if duties went over the limit for a day's work) of running in service?

And dealing with the confusion / complaints / need to update timetables at bus stops each time a route changed operator and / or garage?

 

[PermitToTravel]

LT did run garage journeys in service