Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 29, 2018 12:01:14 GMT 1
First are holding a “Consultation” of such about service 42 it would appear to be a bit of a hobsons choice as neither way is a great improvement.
One option is to have less buses by widening headway’s the other is to curtail the service from Old Farnley at Leeds with passengers having to find other ways to reach other destinations towards Fearnville.
Option 1: Split the route. Service 42 would operate between Old Farnley and Leeds. That way any delays between Leeds and Fearnville would not affect the service between Old Farnley & Leeds. If this option went ahead service 42 would run to Park Row where customers travelling towards Fearnville could interchange with other services.
Option 2: Frequency change. Keep the same route service 42 but because the journey time is taking longer, the frequency would change from 6 buses per hour to 5 buses per hour. This would provide more time to complete the journey and improve reliability.
Quite what the people on the section between Ledds and Fearnville do is anyone’s guess,this appears to me to be a busy section serving the hospital and parts other routes from the centre don’t get to.
|
|
|
Post by rider5521 on Nov 29, 2018 21:53:25 GMT 1
First are holding a “Consultation” of such about service 42 it would appear to be a bit of a hobsons choice as neither way is a great improvement. One option is to have less buses by widening headway’s the other is to curtail the service from Old Farnley at Leeds with passengers having to find other ways to reach other destinations towards Fearnville. Option 1: Split the route. Service 42 would operate between Old Farnley and Leeds. That way any delays between Leeds and Fearnville would not affect the service between Old Farnley & Leeds. If this option went ahead service 42 would run to Park Row where customers travelling towards Fearnville could interchange with other services. Option 2: Frequency change. Keep the same route service 42 but because the journey time is taking longer, the frequency would change from 6 buses per hour to 5 buses per hour. This would provide more time to complete the journey and improve reliability. Quite what the people on the section between Ledds and Fearnville do is anyone’s guess,this appears to me to be a busy section serving the hospital and parts other routes from the centre don’t get to. Is this "wyguy" for real?? So a company present 2 options for a perceived issue with the Old Farnley end of the service to address these. 1 split to prevent the issues that manifest around Jimmys that hurt the service occasionally. 2. Go from a 10 min to a 12 and give a 140 min round trip vs a 120 min round trip to build in resilience. They have provided possible soultions and consulted on them, no point have they said it's a fait accompli. So now good old First Basher "wyguy" is having a go at First for responding to issues raised by a local MP and First canvassing solutions and soliciting feedback. So, the question is...what would "wyguy" do apart from say "throw more buses in". To quote "WYGUY", the incompetence of these posts are staggering..
|
|
|
Post by jdodger08 on Nov 30, 2018 0:47:49 GMT 1
I'm sure there is many options. They could look at another route that ends in the city centre that isn't particularly effected by rush hour traffic.
Off the top of my head this is my suggestion:
1. Keep the Leeds-Fearnville section of the 42 as it does go parts of East Leeds that no other service goes to.
2. Extend service 40 Seacroft-Leeds-Old Farnley
They have the resources already there they just need to think a bit harder.
My opinion is that First will reduce frequency and increase the time
|
|
kendall17
Forum Member
Justice for the 96!
Posts: 4,505
|
Post by kendall17 on Nov 30, 2018 7:39:00 GMT 1
They have the resources already there they just need to think a bit harder. My opinion is that First will reduce frequency and increase the time Resources in terms of vehicles, but not people to put behind the wheel. Curtailing 1 route & extending another just puts the issue elsewhere. Part of the Farnley-Leeds issue is it's lack of bus priority, time will be lost there too. I think all routes struggle in the peaks & I don't think there's a simple answer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2018 8:16:39 GMT 1
First are holding a “Consultation” of such about service 42 it would appear to be a bit of a hobsons choice as neither way is a great improvement. One option is to have less buses by widening headway’s the other is to curtail the service from Old Farnley at Leeds with passengers having to find other ways to reach other destinations towards Fearnville. Option 1: Split the route. Service 42 would operate between Old Farnley and Leeds. That way any delays between Leeds and Fearnville would not affect the service between Old Farnley & Leeds. If this option went ahead service 42 would run to Park Row where customers travelling towards Fearnville could interchange with other services. Option 2: Frequency change. Keep the same route service 42 but because the journey time is taking longer, the frequency would change from 6 buses per hour to 5 buses per hour. This would provide more time to complete the journey and improve reliability. Quite what the people on the section between Ledds and Fearnville do is anyone’s guess,this appears to me to be a busy section serving the hospital and parts other routes from the centre don’t get to. Is this "wyguy" for real?? So a company present 2 options for a perceived issue with the Old Farnley end of the service to address these. 1 split to prevent the issues that manifest around Jimmys that hurt the service occasionally. 2. Go from a 10 min to a 12 and give a 140 min round trip vs a 120 min round trip to build in resilience. They have provided possible soultions and consulted on them, no point have they said it's a fait accompli. So now good old First Basher "wyguy" is having a go at First for responding to issues raised by a local MP and First canvassing solutions and soliciting feedback. So, the question is...what would "wyguy" do apart from say "throw more buses in". To quote "WYGUY", the incompetence of these posts are staggering.. I think you conveniently missed the point, neither of the two choices would provide a better service one reduced the frequency on an already heavily used route the other splits it in Leeds with passengers having to find their onward connections themselves as there is no second route for the missing section and as has been pointed out above there are sections of route that have no other services to reach them by. I wait your response with interest to spin that into an improvement!
|
|
|
Post by chas on Nov 30, 2018 8:55:12 GMT 1
Is this "wyguy" for real?? So a company present 2 options for a perceived issue with the Old Farnley end of the service to address these. 1 split to prevent the issues that manifest around Jimmys that hurt the service occasionally. 2. Go from a 10 min to a 12 and give a 140 min round trip vs a 120 min round trip to build in resilience. They have provided possible soultions and consulted on them, no point have they said it's a fait accompli. So now good old First Basher "wyguy" is having a go at First for responding to issues raised by a local MP and First canvassing solutions and soliciting feedback. So, the question is...what would "wyguy" do apart from say "throw more buses in". To quote "WYGUY", the incompetence of these posts are staggering.. I think you conveniently missed the point, neither of the two choices would provide a better service one reduced the frequency on an already heavily used route the other splits it in Leeds with passengers having to find their onward connections themselves as there is no second route for the missing section and as has been pointed out above there are sections of route that have no other services to reach them by. I wait your response with interest to spin that into an improvement! If First 'split' the route then the two halves would become separate services. The bad side of that is that passengers wishing to travel across the city centre would need to change buses, but presumably the reliability would improve. This seems a reasonable option. And I might even call it an improvement. i think wyguy misunderstands the meaning of the word 'split'.
|
|
|
Post by leeds rider on Nov 30, 2018 10:23:14 GMT 1
I think you conveniently missed the point, neither of the two choices would provide a better service one reduced the frequency on an already heavily used route the other splits it in Leeds with passengers having to find their onward connections themselves as there is no second route for the missing section and as has been pointed out above there are sections of route that have no other services to reach them by. I wait your response with interest to spin that into an improvement! If First 'split' the route then the two halves would become separate services. The bad side of that is that passengers wishing to travel across the city centre would need to change buses, but presumably the reliability would improve. This seems a reasonable option. And I might even call it an improvement. i think wyguy misunderstands the meaning of the word 'split'. Actually, i think it's whoever wrote the consultation proposal that misunderstands the meaning of 'split'. The 'split' option does indeed say that 42 would run Old Farnley - Leeds, but makes no mention of a replacement for the Fearnville end, merely saying "customers travelling towards Fearnville could interchange with other services". H'mmmm!
|
|
|
Post by Arriva Wakefield on Nov 30, 2018 12:08:55 GMT 1
I'm sure there is many options. They could look at another route that ends in the city centre that isn't particularly effected by rush hour traffic. Off the top of my head this is my suggestion: 1. Keep the Leeds-Fearnville section of the 42 as it does go parts of East Leeds that no other service goes to. 2. Extend service 40 Seacroft-Leeds-Old Farnley They have the resources already there they just need to think a bit harder. My opinion is that First will reduce frequency and increase the time Wasn’t one of the reasons why the 40 & 50/A were split a few years back, was due to the traffic problems around Easterly Road on 50s affecting the 40s - now you suggest recreating the same problems. Best solition would be a slight decrease in frequency and increased running times. Traffic and passenger numbers are increasing all the time - 15 years ago the 42 was 10 Striders on a 10 minute service, now its 12 Geminis on the same frequency.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 1, 2018 0:33:25 GMT 1
My apologies split was the wrong word curtail would have been better, I would have thought that two overlapping routes providing an interchange possibility would have been better having seen a 42 towards fearnville this afternoon it was fully loaded towards Fearnville so where will all these people go?
I would have thought that after 670 change when a last minute hurried revamp of the plans had to be put in place a bit more thought might have gone into this.
The 42 seems from when I see it pass my office to have fairly heavy loadings so will a reduced level of capacity cope across the day?
|
|
|
Post by westyorkshirebus on Dec 1, 2018 0:38:23 GMT 1
They haven’t said that the Leeds to Fearnville section will be withdrawn.
They probably haven’t focussed on that part as residents on the Old Farnley half will travel to/from St James, but it won’t happen in the opposite direction.
|
|
Steve Macz403
Forum Member
Waits at the bus stop for his bus, 2 days later bus turns up :D
Posts: 1,673
|
Post by Steve Macz403 on Dec 1, 2018 22:03:42 GMT 1
The 42 is a heavily used bus. I dont think splitting the route, would do it justice.
The bus gets stuck in bottle necks, Armley Gyratory, Regent Street, Beckett Street. Are the 3 main areas to review.
|
|
|
Post by Dom on Dec 2, 2018 19:04:22 GMT 1
The 42 is a heavily used bus. I dont think splitting the route, would do it justice. The bus gets stuck in bottle necks, Armley Gyratory, Regent Street, Beckett Street. Are the 3 main areas to review. The main thing that causes congestion for the 42, is that outside the city centre, it has no bus lanes to use, so it’s constantly sat in the same traffic as the cars.
|
|