Forum Topic

More triumphs from Operation Chis-Choke

Our campaign to reduce freedom of movement within the W4 area continues apace. Pavement piles of Santander and Lime bikes and scoooters impede pedestrians, especially those who are disabled or elderly. The cycle lane to Hammersmith is blocked in a few strategic locations, and is still also blocked by the occasional car chosing the wrong lane. Buses are admirably infrequent, with up to 30 minutes between 272 and E3 services. The bus stops on the High Road ensure that no-one can drive from one end to the other in less than 30 minutes. And the other night, it took 23 minutes to drive from Chiswick Town Hall down to the A4 along Sutton Court Road, surely a record?

Davey Harris ● 1264d96 Comments

The H91 from Ravenscourt Park to Power Road, so rather further than the length of the High Road, took an average of less than 15 minutes last year.You really should be taking the bus rather than driving if it's taking you double that time in your car, or at least get it serviced!

Tom Pike ● 1264d

Tom, what was the average journey time on that route from 6pm to 7pm during the week?

Francis Rowe ● 1264d

Just under 18 minutes for the peak evening period, 16:00 to 19:00, so about three minutes more than the weekday average for the slowest running time.

Tom Pike ● 1264d

Outside Waitrose travelling East on CHR the lights on the bike lane that crosses daigonally across the high road into the bike lane opposite give you 3 seconds before you are splattered by the traffic coming from behind you but invariably the box clearly marked with a large bicycle is blocked by cars who then yell at you when you make a point of pulling over in front of them so as to catch your 3 second window and not get splattered by them.

Chris Blackwell ● 1264d

I hope you reported that in the consultation as that’s exactly what it was there for.  In comparison those who responded with unsupported claims such that cycling has fallen or pollution is up on the High Road, or buses are taking more than half an hour to get along it much of the time, can expect their claims to be discounted. It certainly was counterproductive for those opposing C9 to encourage people to put such claims into the consultation.

Tom Pike ● 1264d

Quite astute of the Evil Cycling Lobby to wait until the consultation closed to explain their error.

Paul Campbell ● 1264d

Took me 2mins 13 seconds on my bike.@ Davey Harris: happy to teach you how to ride a bike if you're interested.

Simon Pedley ● 1264d

While claims of buses always being delayed by half an hour may be exaggerated and there are other contributory factors such as a reduction in provision along the High Road, I hope the consultation report doesn't reject concerns of bus users out of hand. Averages can be very misleading and a three minute average rise in bus journey time could represent a zero rise on most occasions and a 15 minute rise during a concentrated period each day. As the buses are more likely to be fully loaded during periods when they are delayed and may be half empty when they are running to schedule, the daily experience of the individual bus user could be significantly degraded even with such an apparently benign rise in average journey times.Any such cost, of which removal of bus lanes will have been material, should be acknowledged and not hidden with a statistical sleight of hand. To not do so, would reduce the chance of any mitigation. As it seems unlikely that TfL and the Council will decide to rip up the cycleway and restore the bus lanes, there still should be some compensation for bus users including perhaps reincrease in the regularity of services.

Francis Rowe ● 1264d

Even cab drivers say they try to avoid the Chiswick High Road due to congestion, something has gone seriously wrong, unfortunately TFL have no ears and don’t care that they have created one almighty mess for local residents

Jayne Thorburn ● 1264d

"And the other night, it took 23 minutes to drive from Chiswick Town Hall down to the A4 along Sutton Court Road.."I used to have an old car like that.

Richard Greenhough ● 1264d

Francis, TfL also reports the spread of times, that is the standard deviation, as well as the average. That’s been steady at around 3 mins in the 12 months till January on that route at peak evening times. Contrary to your speculation, the running time of the H91 has been pretty consistent over this period, with two thirds of trips taking between 14 and 21 minutes at peak times and all trips between 5 and 25 minutes at any time of day. You have just simply speculated a delay and blamed it on the removal of a short length of bus lane, when in fact such a delay does not exist and buses can now pull away from their stops into empty roadway without waiting for a gap in the traffic.As I said, unsubstantiated claims which conflict with reality will quite rightly be discounted in the consultation. 

Tom Pike ● 1264d

The  more enlightened taxi drivers I talk to realise that people ditching their cars plays into their hands as they can then provide a valuable role in concert with public transport on longer journeys.  I’ve spent more on taxis since I gave up my car, even though it’s cost me much less overall.  Taxi drivers took a huge hit as private cars became prevalent, but that perspective is admittedly now lost on a good proportion of them.

Tom Pike ● 1264d

I'm not speculating about the delays. Although I am not a daily bus user I use them enough to be confident that progress along CHR is slower than it used to be. These problems may not be all down to the Cycleway and the removal of bus lanes and never-ending roadworks and the reduction of service levels have clearly contributed.Even adding standard deviation shows that delays of seven minutes at peak are not unusual and delays of 11 minutes occur on a route I suspect you chose to focus on because it has the best numbers for your purpose.There is a logical fallacy in claiming that holding up traffic behind a stopped bus helps journey times because, as a short observation of the High Road will demonstrate to you, there will be buses in the queue behind so there is no net gain. Bus lanes, even the short hops that used to be available on this stretch unambiguously reduced journey times when roads were congested.As I tried to stress, the argument I am making is not that Cycleway 9 delays buses therefore it should be ripped up. Rather the interests of bus users should be protected and something should be done to mitigate the deterioration of service used by the largest number of people travelling along the High Road.

Francis Rowe ● 1264d

Interesting you chose 6-7pm as peak time for bus delays as the short stretch of bus lane outside The Old Marketplace was a car park at that time and the bus lane was unusable for buses.

Paul Campbell ● 1264d

Francis, I chose that route as the original claim was that it took at least 30 mins to travel the length of the High Road and the H91 times covered from Ravenscourt Park to Power Road, so at least as long a distance.I've previously shown the 267 times from Stamford Brook to Turnham Green Church did not show deterioration with the bike lane, although the effect of the A4 closure is evident. What you call a "delay" is not a new feature - you must be aware that buses travel more slowly at peak times. The point is that the 267 showed that the delay and its variation was not affected by the opening of C9.Buses tend to get held up by other buses - bunching will always be an issue. What is now different is that buses no longer need to wait for a gap to pull out and instead can take off into open roadway. Surely you have observed that! In addition they have priority at the new bus gate.But of course if buses have priority it comes at the cost of cars. Clearly anyone who mentioned in the consultation that their car travel along the High Road was now being held up by buses would have been making a valid point ( as long as they didn't claim it took them more than half an hour!). But TfL will only be able to provide rather limited sympathy given they are directed to protect bus users above car drivers.

Tom Pike ● 1264d

Paul, the bus lane was in fact open from 4 to 7 pm. And what a difference it made:

Tom Pike ● 1264d

No it wasn't — see picture below from 2019. The bus lane restriction applied until 7pm and, it possibly was made 24 hour during Covid, my recollection fails me. The bus times given earlier were from Ravenscourt Park to Power Road and most of the substantial bus lane loss has been west from King Street up to the junction with Chiswick Lane rather than in the centre of Chiswick. Buses on this section are now regularly stuck in queues of traffic which they used to be able to leapfrog before and the wait times at the Goldhawk Road and Chiswick Lane lights are much longer. At peak hours I get off at the Goldhawk Road junction and walk from there rather than continuing along the High Road because it is much quicker. Buses have been delayed and Cycleway 9 is the reason. It's a Suella Braverman level of denial to say this isn't so.

Andrew OSullivan ● 1264d

The actual 267 run times show that your experiences are not typical:

Tom Pike ● 1264d

Ah my mistake. Yes it clearly made a huge difference to congestion levels being open 4-7pm! Re. Chiswick Lane junction. It is pretty clearly working far better for traffic and especially westbound traffic that continues along CHR than it did in its previous incarnation. Whenever I am waiting at the lights on my bike it is obvious that the green phase for motor vehicles is far too long as all the traffic clears with many seconds left and an empty road. The light sequence needs to be recalibrated to give more time for the cycle lane. Naturally I have fed that to the consultation along with plenty of other suggestions to further deprioritise motor vehicles along the length of the cycle lane.

Paul Campbell ● 1264d

"And the other night, it took 23 minutes to drive from Chiswick Town Hall down to the A4 along Sutton Court Road.."During Friday afternoon rush hour during school term time it is not unusual for it to take 15+ minutes to get from Town Hall to the A4, but it has been that way for a long time - nothing to do with C9 or LTNs, it is just that the lights at SCR/A4 junction are on a short interval during that period

Justin Stephenson ● 1264d

Not sure that data for a bus I don't catch regularly, at times I don't travel regularly for a section of road which is only often only part of my journey is particularly relevant. I've caught the bus along the High Road for decades. It is only in the last year that I have started to get off at Goldhawk Road. Delays always happened but you develop a sense for the times when it is best to abandon ship. There is no question that this is to do with the loss of bus lane priority and longer phases at junctions which were introduced due to the cycleway. It is perhaps best to mention that the poor bus performance has made it far more likely I would choose to cycle on many trips so I am benefitting from the existence of the cycleway and get first hand confirmation of increased bus travel times by counting the number I overtake. The clear risk as I see it is that, given the numbers involved, it only takes a small number of bus users to abandon them in favour of private cars out of frustration. This risks a vicious cycle of decline which can only really be addressed at this stage by boosting the service. Unfortunately TfL probably don't have the money to invest in new buses.

Andrew OSullivan ● 1264d

Andrew, I gave the timings for the buses that travelled from Ravenscourt Park to Power Road and you responded they were not relevant because the delays were further east. I then showed that there has been no deterioration further east during the evening peak, and you respond that’s because you don’t travel then and you see bad delays at other times and on other buses on exactly the same route. You should be unsurprised to know that the evening peak has the slowest service, and the speeds of buses down the same road at the same time match closely.Your wriggling is certainly worthy of Suella Braverman!

Tom Pike ● 1264d

So the clear risk is that people will choose to use private cars to sit in the long queues that are formed by the loss of stretches of bus lane and behind the buses that are stopped in the single carriageway instead of using the buses? OK! I think this is a risk we can all live with.

Paul Campbell ● 1264d

Paul, according to the OP it takes at least 30 mins to drive down the High Road, twice as long as the known bus times, while according to Bill it’s the delays to cars that’s causing there to be less traffic and lower pollution, and now we have direct evidence from Andrew of uptake in active travel, whatever the stated reason, with all the health benefits that might bring.  I really hope these comments made it into the consultation.

Tom Pike ● 1264d

A switch from public transport to active travel isn't necessarily a win and any marginal benefits will be offset if some people switch from buses to cars. Arguing that a deterioration in bus services might be a good thing is a road we don't really want to go down.The problem going forward is TfL's financial position. Chiswick has hugely benefited in terms of air quality due to being made a Low Emission Bus corridor but the problem is the buses that run on these routes are more expensive and there is demand for them elsewhere. That is why have seen such a big reduction in the number of buses locally and this is something that predates Cycleway 9.I don't think there is any prospect of the fleet expanding in number as the Mayor will struggle to replace and retrofit aging parts of the fleet. Chiswick may lose out further as the Mayor tries to make good on his pledges to boost services in the parts of outer London that will be in the ULEZ later this year.I'm very sceptical of numbers that suggest improved bus performance in Chiswick as almost daily observation shows them being held up in queues. It is also hard to square a substantial loss in bus priority measures with improved journey times.The figures shown seem to suggest that bus journey times deteriorated in 2020 and 2021 when we had lockdown and improved in 2022 when we had a big rebound in traffic and problems associated with the A4 closures which seems really odd. It would be good to see the raw data on this - is there a way to access the iBus data online? 

Mark Evans ● 1263d

"I'm very sceptical of numbers that suggest improved bus performance in Chiswick as almost daily observation shows them being held up in queues."Of course this also requires selective amnesia to forget the buses being held up in queues prior to the installation of the cycle lane when Chiswick was a free-flowing traffic paradise and a bus was only held up when a good samaritan driver got out of their car to help an elderly or disabled passenger onto a bus.

Paul Campbell ● 1263d

Mark, iBus is a huge dataset and not publicly available. However excerpts of the data were originally requested to try to prove that the buses were running more slowly after C9:"I use this route from Hammersmith to Chiswick and it has become less reliable since the Cycle lane was installed on King Street. Do you have data to show the route is now much slower compared to say last November? It takes ages now and is so congested especially at peak times 4-6pm."The data rather showed the opposite. Go the the TfL FOI website and look for:FOI-1766-2122FOI-2664-2223and for the H91:FOI-2665-2223FOI-2615-2122FOI-1767-2122As Paul said, some people seem to have forgotten that there were plenty of holdups prior to C9, and that the "substantial loss in bus priority measures" amounts to the partial replacement of a fragmented set of part-time bus lanes with a new bus gate and in-lane priority at every westbound stop on King St and the High Road. As for the 267 figures, the 2020 period correspond to when C9 was being first installed with building works causing narrowing of the single lane. The 2022 running times correspond to when the left-turn lane was back in operation, at which point evening peak running times were a minute faster than in 2019.

Tom Pike ● 1263d

True.  Buses getting snarled up in traffic is nothing new.  20 years ago we lived in Isleworth, and I used to get the bus into Gunnersbury to get the Tube (before I started cycling again).It was quite a regular occurrence to walk as far as Brentford, and overtake a bus in front of me on foot, and get on the bus in Brentford.  When it was particularly bad, I walked all the way to Gunnersbury, and overtook 3 or 4 buses on foot.These days I cycle home down Sutton Court Road, and have down since 2012.  Traffic queueing back to the town hall, and beyond, is nothing new, especially on a Friday evening.  As you said, TFL do mess with the light phasing to priorise the A4.I've said before that the cycle lane is badly designed.  I'm not a fan of it, and I use the A4 shared path if I'm going anywhere East of Chiswick Lane.  However, blaming things on it that have been happening for years is just as bad as Tom and Michael and company claiming everything is wonderful.

Al Webber ● 1263d

You are quite right that rose-tinted nostalgia about how things used to be is misguided and hysterical statements of how bad things are or complacent views that there are no problems are not really helpful.What cannot be denied is that bus services substantially improved in the first fifteen or so years of this millennium. Regularity was increased and the network of bus priority schemes was expanded which was quite controversial here in Chiswick at the time.This improvement peaked probably when it was becoming apparent that the extra buses were causing a deterioration of air quality. I haven't seen numbers but I suspect the capital's fleet is no bigger than it was in 2017 and may even have been smaller. Low emission buses are expensive and so, even though investment in vehicles may be rising in real terms, the numbers are falling.The deterioration in the service was already apparent several years ago although it was a slow and steady decline. It is difficult to unpick what has been happening in the last three years because of Covid but my impression is very much that the service has continued to get worse.I would share the scepticism of some that the removal of bus priority measures has not delayed services significantly. In the King Street CHR corridor the loss of priority eastbound is material and the compensation seems only to be the westbound bus gate at Acton Lane, which even if it was equivalent would lead to an imbalanced service. The claim that 'in-lane' priority is a meaningful compensation is clearly preposterous. Buses were rarely delayed when pulling out at bus stops as nobody wants to tangle with one of their drivers in this situation and, has been pointed out, whatever benefit the bus ahead gets, is offset by the delays to the ones behind.It is a shame better data isn't readily available on this key service. Tom has the expertise beyond most of use to mine what is there but whenever I have done a deep dive myself on claims that he has made, it has been clear that he is carefully selecting what to show to make his case rather than seeking to demonstrate an objective truth. For the time being, I am more comfortable with my own observation and that of many others, including bus drivers, that travel times have increased since the bus priority measures were removed.This would be a less contentious claim if proper reporting was done on bus performance and made available to bus users. The last by route numbers I can find in a published report date to over a year ago. The iBus data is comprehensive and proper analysis would give us a good picture of how buses are doing. The strong suspicion has to be that TfL are being retentive with the data because it doesn't tell a particularly pretty story, not just in Chiswick but generally.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1263d

"It is a shame better data isn't readily available on this key service. Tom has the expertise beyond most of use to mine what is there but whenever I have done a deep dive myself on claims that he has made, it has been clear that he is carefully selecting what to show to make his case rather than seeking to demonstrate an objective truth."Your claim that I've picked the data on bus running times to prove a point is laughable. The data was in fact requested specifically to try to prove that the bus running times had increased, and TfL provided it! The idea that TfL is retaining the data because they don't like what it shows is demonstrably untrue. The "objective truth" is that none of the data on bus running times shows a deterioration after C9, however anyone might choose to slice it. But clearly you're more comfortable with your own prejudices until the arrival of some supposed "better data" that supports your unsubstantiated assertions.In-lane bus stops prioritise bus progress over other vehicles. This is well know in the design of mass transit around the world. That you regard it as "preposterous" simply reflects your inability to understand why, not that they have been proven to be effective. And of course if you understood why, you would also understand why bus times have not deteriorated. 

Tom Pike ● 1263d

"That you regard it as "preposterous" simply reflects your inability to understand why"Inability to understand is the source of 42% of the anti-cycle lane posts on social media.

Paul Campbell ● 1263d

King Street and Chiswick High Road have always had in-lane bus stops as far back as I can remember.

Paul Corcoran ● 1263d

Paul, traffic could previously move past a bus at a stop without having to use the opposing lane. Hence other traffic moving past pushed back the position of the bus at any subsequent queuing at signals or crossings.As traffic can no longer move past, or much less easily, the position of the bus in any queue is preserved, or the queue itself has time to clear, meaning less delay at subsequent signalling or crossing.This is a well-established principle of improving the speed of mass transit the world over, though for some reason many car drivers find it difficult to believe that their delay might also lead to a faster average transit: more people travel by bus on the High Road than travel by car. Similar erroneous reasoning has been applied to criticise holding a tube back to even the service, or signalising cars at entrance ramps to freeways to minimise congestion, but all three are proven ways to optimise transportation.

Tom Pike ● 1263d

Not surprising it was pretty choked before at times as was the same traffic engineering ideology defining  on how they manage said traffic. Now worse as a coterie of ‘on the right side of history’ academics stick their crayons in. Do the academics ever disagree with each other? Not seen any serious spats between them of late. Maybe I missed that, or we perhaps have to wait an age and then 3 of them all turn up a once.

Russell Pearson ● 1262d

Although I can find evidence of in-lane priority being adopted in other countries i.e. a consensus developing that lay-by stops for buses are not a good idea, every example is in the context of a multi-lane highway often with in a priority bus lane.There were no examples I could find of it being implemented as an alternative to the removal of an existing bus lane and the Chiswick/Hammersmith designs seems to be an innovation.The notion that delaying traffic behind gives an advantage to buses is self-evidently false. Even if you ignore that other vehicles were previously not allowed to use bus lanes so could not delay buses even when they got past, it takes five minutes observation on King Street or the High Road to see the flaw in your argument. Among the vehicles unable to proceed when a bus stops in an in lane bus stop in a single file road are other buses.Dedicated bus lanes speed up buses. There is a massive body of research and industry experience that tells us that they do. RATP, which operates some of the bus routes along the High Road, do not seem convinced by this new thinking that bus routes don't help buses. They have objected to the Brentford to Hounslow stretch of the cycleway on the basis that removing bus lanes will slow their services.

Paul Corcoran ● 1257d

Paul, how long was the vestigial westbound bus lane? And did you even notice when it was cut back to that length in 2016? Certainly nobody commented on it at the time.It’s simply untrue to state that the in-line bus stops replaced an existing bus lane: there was only a short stub what was less than 5% of the length of the High Road. Rather than proof by assertion, that it is “self-evidently false”, where’s the real evidence to back your claim? I’ve provided the iBus data that shows no evidence of delay which makes it self evident that you have no support for your claim except your own pronouncements.

Tom Pike ● 1257d

Sorry I don't recall the change in bus lane length in 2016. Looking at historic images I would guess there is about 500 metres of lost westbound bus lane on the route. I'm confused how you could come to a figure of less than 5% - perhaps by excluding King Street and including the whole of CHR down to Kew Bridge but that would be sophistry.I am making no claims about relative bus travel times on Chiswick High Road. I am saying that bus priority measures speed up buses. If the figures that you quote on bus travel times are accurate, you are confusing cause and effect, the removal of bus lanes will not have been the reason for a reduction in travel times.

Paul Corcoran ● 1257d

Paul,Prior to C9, westbound CHR had the following different layouts within a mile:- 2 lanes- bus lane + traffic lane- 2 lanes- bus lane + traffic lane- 2 lanes (1 lane left turn)- single lane- 2 lanes (1 lane right turn)- single lane- bus lane + traffic lane- single lane- 2 lanes- single lane- 2 lanes (1 lane left turn)A continuous bus lane would have helped bus journeys but the previous fragmented layout with buses needing to merge and change lanes with general traffic about half a dozen times within a mile could hardly have helped.

Michael Robinson ● 1257d

Buses westbound prior to the changes could stay in the inside lane from the junction with Cromwell Avenue all the way along King Street and CHR to Chiswick Lane where the road had two lanes and the bus lane was only interrupted by junctions and crossings. At Chiswick Lane, where the road narrows to a single lane with the left filter, buses could jump the queue.Further on when parking restrictions applied on CHR (i.e. during peak hours) the only time a bus would need to change lane is at the stop by Smile Care Dental.A continuous bus lane was never possible here but the loss of 411 metres (not around 500 as I said previously) as well as the bus gate must, all other things being equal, be having a negative effect on travel times. Any offset from no longer having to pull out into another lane at the stop near Chiswick Lane is negligible and far less than the delays to other buses behind which will be held up at the lights at the other side of the junction as traffic can't move forward due to the bus at the stop.

Paul Corcoran ● 1257d

"At Chiswick Lane, where the road narrows to a single lane with the left filter, buses could jump the queue."There isn't the ability to 'jump the queue' if the straight ahead lane is full of traffic and the bus needs to wait until it can change lanes.' the only time a bus would need to change lane is at the stop by Smile Care Dental.'At the other sections before a single lane section there were always drivers exhibiting the 'MGIF' (must get in front) mindset known to anyone who cycles.  If doesn't matter there was no need to change lanes with drivers overtaking, pulling in and preventing the bus progressing.' must, .... be having a negative effect on travel times.'The effect will be demonstrated by the iBus timings.Obviously another advantage of a separated cycle lane is that cyclists no longer delay buses in the bus lane.

Michael Robinson ● 1257d

The idea of the bus gate was that traffic was held to allow buses to cross over into a clear road. The tailbacks that occur now seem to have been less common so generally it worked as it should have done.Once again cause and effect are being confused. If it is indeed the case that numbers show bus journey times have fallen, this isn't because of the removal of bus priority schemes. There are scores of other factors at play which possibly could have offset the slowing of buses due to the removal of priority.

Paul Corcoran ● 1257d

If drivers know that their journey will be no faster than a bus along Chiswick High Rd then that may be a disincentive using CHR as a through route. So that may result in drivers taking a different route, different time, different mode of transport, alternative to travelling in the first place.  Fewer motor vehicles using CHR as a through route will be generally positive all around in terms of air quality, safety and reduced delays to traffic that has no other option but to use CHR.

Michael Robinson ● 1257d

Isn't the problem now that bus users know their journey will be no faster than a car and will tend to switch, particularly if, as you say, drivers can look for alternative faster routes that are not available to buses?What I don't understand is if, as is claimed, that bus journeys have sped up along the High Road, then necessarily other vehicles will be moving more quickly as it is a single lane highway. Why has the number of vehicles using the High Road fallen as generally traffic levels have returned to pre-pandemic levels if this is the case?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1257d

If you look at the measured journey times for buses and other traffic, buses were slower anyway (in documentation for 2019 C9 decision)Dwell times for buses at stops, particularly during the peak, means it is difficult for them to be faster than other traffic.

Michael Robinson ● 1257d

The stats that some people use may say the bus journeys are quicker, but they are definitely not the ones I have taken since the bus lanes were removed. Those journeys have slowed down - especially in rush hour where we could often sail down parts of King Street and Chiswick High Road. I only know this as i have taken the same route for about 10 years now - and only ever really got held up about 4 times a year when there are a serious problem on the roads before the bus lane removal. This is now a common occurrence on the buses - so it would be interesting to know which buses the people who say they are quicker have been taking for the last 10 years - must have been different ones to me every day and not in rush hour maybe? I can only go by what I have experienced and the stats don't marry up with lived experience.

J Morse ● 1257d

Lies, damn lies and statistics.They must be refering to the magical bus they get?

Basil Finnis ● 1257d

Indeed. Surprised they’ve not unfurled a sock puppet in this thread. Unless I’ve missed one.

Russell Pearson ● 1257d

You really must remember that real world experience counts for nothing in these debates.

Mark Talbot ● 1257d

Isn't the point though that bus lanes give the opportunity for buses to be faster particularly in the peak when there is heavy traffic, and more people on buses?There is a potential for them to be faster which is taken away if there is no bus lane and a single file of traffic.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1256d

So are the actual bus running times unreal experience?Obviously no individual can monitor the timings of every bus along the High Road, but those times are captured in the iBus data. Do you want to ignore these timings in preference to incomplete personal recollections? If so, why?I gave the references to the data above, so if anyone thinks the time I selected, the evening westbound peak period from 4 to 7 pm which gives the largest delays,  is not representative of their use, they can calculate different timings for themselves

Tom Pike ● 1256d

The real world measurements of buses along the route show they weren't faster than general traffic.Dwell times at stops can be significant during peak times given the time taken for lots of people to get on and off the bus.The other point is that the buses are timetabled. If they are ahead of timetable, the bus will wait at a stop 'to regulate the service'.  The timetables are used for driver rosters, driver change-overs, buses going in and out of service etc. so it isn't the case that a driver can do the journey much faster even if the roads are empty.

Michael Robinson ● 1256d

How can they do this Tom if they don't have ready access to the data?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1256d

I posted the FOI references above in response to Mark Evans request.

Tom Pike ● 1256d

This debate has being going on and on and on. When the temporary emergency lane was bulldozered through with no left filter to Chiswick Lane some people were saying then that buses journeys didn't take longer "proving" the "fact" from their desktops. First hand eye witness comments to the contrary were dismissed as anecdotal.At the time I put forward the suggestion that speaking to bus crews, as I had, may enlighten. I can tell you they were universally disgruntled all complaining about the rushed through changes. Desktop contributors saw this as a waste of time and would do nothing to change their view. Now improvements have been made, particularly the left turn into Chiswick Lane, it will be interesting to get bus crews feedback now.

Adrian Irving ● 1256d

Adrian, we have the actual bus running times - that's a fact, not a "fact". Are you really suggesting that the people who are trying to optimise the running of public transport should ignore such facts, and instead rely on anecdotal information?I can't remember anyone "proving" that buses didn't take longer because of the closure of the left-turn lane. I rather stated the opposite back in May 2020:"Taken together this suggests that rather than delays along the length of the High Road, the delays were mainly on the stretch between Goldhawk Road and TGT during the C9 construction times. The roadworks delayed the 267 but not the E3's route between TGT and Heathfield Terrace."As the subsequent data from the 267 showed, there were measurable delays in August to October 2020, just as I suggested.

Tom Pike ● 1256d

Thank's Tom , my mistake how can third party statistics ever be questioned or bus crews ever have real life insight eh?

Adrian Irving ● 1256d

Every evening, as I return home from work, there's a massive queue of cars turning Westward from Acton Lane towards Chiswick roundabout and the A4.The queue covers the entirety of Acton Lane, often going up South Parade towards the church. Bollo Lane is also affected, up to the Overground tracks. The vast majority of cars have single occupants. Most are private cars, no tradies, or delivery vans. Does this count as 'Chis-choke'?

Francis Sheehan ● 1256d

I like this, Adrian. I’ll ask people to use their “real-life insight” to tell me how old I look.  If that makes me younger, I’ll adopt their value.  If not I’ll use the “third-party” value based on “desktop counts” of circuits round the sun.  I can’t lose!

Tom Pike ● 1256d

Isn't it likely that the majority of people are like you returning home from work but don't have viable alternatives to driving? As you say they are sitting in a traffic queue which is endemic. This isn't something people would do if they had an alternative.We tend to forget that a lot of professions including particularly social care and teaching don't pay well enough to get a mortgage in central London or outer London with good transport links. They can however get credit to buy a car which means that poorly connected locations become practical for them. Many sat on Acton Lane will be looking to get to the A4/M4 westbound and out of town.There seems to be a tendency to talk about people sitting on their own in a car in the evening rush hour as a perpetrator but isn't the reality that they are victims?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1255d

Rather a lot of “victims” in 80 grand range rovers :-)

Ed Saper ● 1255d

I haven't seen the queues that Francis is referring to but it is certainly true that there are a significant number of these beasts around. However even in Chiswick they don't make up a significant proportion of traffic.I think it is important to remember that the way our credit system works, a person who can't borrow to get an expensive house, may be able to borrow to get an expensive car. The lease deals on some of these vehicles can be surprisingly inexpensive and, I'd have to admit, if I was obliged to travel into work by car every day, I'd spend a bit extra on the vehicle.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1255d

Tom,with your track record of unquestioning acceptance of desktop statistics the funny thing is I can almost believe that is exactly how you would go about it.

Adrian Irving ● 1255d

Jeremy, I haven't actually counted SUVs in traffic however in neighbouring H&F and Richmond, they make up a significant proportion of car registrations.

I suspect Chiswick ownership of SUVs will be similar to H&F and Richmond but Hounslow and Ealing don't feature on the list as they are pulled down by other areas in these boroughs where SUVs aren't as de rigueur. In addition to "obliged to travel into work every day by car" you might want to consider the scenario of "I don't want to mix with the hoi polloi using public transport or cycling, I will drive to show how important and successful I am" (even if the car is owned by the leasing company). I am sure that K&C is full of people who are obliged to travel to work every day by car.  Or maybe not.

Michael Robinson ● 1255d

Ed referred to £80,000 Range Rovers and 'large SUV' may also include something like a Kia Duster. I wouldn't quibble that the broader category could make up about a fifth of Chiswick traffic at certain times of day.You are also undoubtedly right that some people will drive regardless of the availability of public transport and some buy an over large car to project their wealth. However, it seems to me highly unlikely that a significant proportion of people sitting in their car in the evening rush are there despite there being a more practical  alternative available to them unless they have an inexplicable liking for drive time radio.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1255d

Adrian, you're confusing yourself! Most people know their age based on when they were born and the current date rather than interviewing other people to get their opinion on the matter, but maybe I'm wrong in your case.Similarly TfL know the running time of their buses based on when they are recorded to set off and when they arrived. They don't have to interview their drivers to find out their opinion on the matter.

Tom Pike ● 1255d

It is Imperial College you work at isn't it Tom? Just checking as their track record on interpretation of stats in recent times hasn't always been that great.

Mark Talbot ● 1255d

Careful now Jeremy, you’re talking far too much sense!

Mark Talbot ● 1255d

:)

Claire Moran ● 1255d

Jeremy, I think you may be making the mistake of thinking the reasons people drive are purely based upon rational reasons such as time taken for a journey.For a lot of people, it is simply habitual behaviour.  The possibility that another way of doing things may be better isn't enough to shake a habit - there needs to be something more significant to do that.This can happen during transport strikes which force people to use another route.  In a number of cases, people find that the new route is better and change their habit but they wouldn't have tried it without being forced to.

Michael Robinson ● 1255d

Mark, what interpretation were you looking for on the average running time of a bus?I have a suspicion that if the running times had increased you’d have no issue accepting that. Instead you seem to be questioning a simple average for no particular reason other than it’s not what you were expecting to see.

Tom Pike ● 1255d

Tom, what you are overlooking is that people's perception is another form of reality just as your statistics are real to you. This is something you can only grasp by talking to people.Hard to understand and possibly a little confusing for some of a certain mindset.

Adrian Irving ● 1255d

An aircraft will get all its passengers from A to B in the same time. Granted it is likely to be faster to get on the aircraft and off the aircraft if you pay for a premium cabin, but I doubt that the total journey time is the prime motivational factor in passengers choosing to spend sometimes £1000s of pounds more on the same flight.Yes, for some people total time may well be factor, but I'd imagine that the comfort and travelling experience is a more significant factor for the majority flying in premium cabins.If you accept that, surely it's not too difficult to accept the idea that some of those people in cars stuck in traffic are making a choice to continue to use their cars even when there are viable (and sometimes even quicker) alternatives, purely for the convenience, privacy and comfort a car offers them.Some people won't have a choice, but where there's congestion and delays, some of the blame for causing that congestion and delay has to land at the feet of those who could use alternative modes, but actively choose not too.I sometimes drive to work with my partner. If I left an hour earlier then I would miss the traffic and congestion that I encounter getting us in to work for our start time. But I don't leave earlier. I am choosing to sit in that extra traffic. There are alternatives. I can't be the only person in a car thinking that way.

Andrew Jones ● 1255d

Another form of reality.  That really sums up these threads.  Thanks for the quote Adrian,  I shall enjoy using that one in future,  and it certainly made me laugh. 

Nora Watkins ● 1255d

Tom, none at all as we all know that stats can be presented in several ways to suit the agenda of the person presenting them and quite frankly I get bored wading through overtly long posts.There you go again putting words in mouths as I haven’t questioned bus stats have I? Of course you know that but once again seek to twist what has been said.

Mark Talbot ● 1255d

Another example of this point is from cities where public transport has been made free.This has increased the usage of public transport but little of this increased use has come from drivers switching.Instead, people who previously walked/cycled because it was cheaper have switched to public transport because there was no longer any cost advantage walking/cycling.And people who already used public transport used it more, so it stimulated more discretionary trips.Indeed, greater numbers on public transport may have been a disincentive to many drivers because they valued privacy of their own space over sharing a crowded bus or metro with strangers, even if it was cheaper.So an objective to increase use of public transport is different from an objective to reduce numbers of people driving.

Michael Robinson ● 1255d

So Trump's perception that the election was stolen is real and the actual votes cast are just alternative facts. You've fallen into a deep pit just to avoid accepting that average bus running times on the High Road have not increased.

Tom Pike ● 1255d

Very helpful, Mark, to clarify your comments have nothing to do with anything that's being discussed.

Tom Pike ● 1255d

That's interesting but the chances are London could be different. We have gone the other way by increasing transport costs and that seems to have reversed a longer term decline in car commuting.The city may be unique in that there is an inverse correlation between salary and propensity to commute in that daily drivers are much less likely to live in the central areas with good public transport links but are prevalent in outer London areas and beyond the M25.The chances are that there are two types of driver stuck in a queue on Acton Lane in the evening rush hour. The relatively highly paid person who is so wedded to driving that no financial benefit from cheaper public transport would persuade them to quit (and for whom no conceivable policy option would work) and a less well paid person who would jump at the chance to ditch the car if the cost of an annual travel card fell to a rational level.London became the city in the UK where the highest proportion of people didn't drive to work because of its public transport provision and there is no reason to assume you couldn't further reduce traffic by improving it further.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1255d

Tom, your analogy is quite weird. I knew the concept wouldn't compute for you. Maybe the quote below will help. "Perception is reality. If you are perceived to be something, you might as well be it because that's the truth in people's minds." Steve Young.

Adrian Irving ● 1255d

Adrian, you are misapplying a reasonable observation, that what others think of us forms the reality of our relationships with them, to claiming physical measurements of our environment, such as the arrival times of buses, are somehow shaped by our perceptions. They cannot be treated as similar which is why we can form physical models of our environment that give robust predictions independent of people’s perception.

Tom Pike ● 1255d

>….we can form physical models of our environment that give robust predictions independent of people’s perception.Ripe for deconstruction. I’d love to give that statement to some 1st year students.

Russell Pearson ● 1255d

I don't know why you bother, Tom. Trying to bring the light of reason to this debate is a thankless task.

Robert Fish ● 1255d

Nor you Robert, but you keep on shining your light in murky caverns. But none can see.Every man needs a hobby.

Russell Pearson ● 1255d

Clearly hit a nerve Tom. To clarify your bus comments have nothing to do with the original post but that doesn’t stop you!

Mark Talbot ● 1254d

“….your bus comments have nothing to do with the original post…”which clearly you didn’t manage to read! Was it too long for you?

Tom Pike ● 1254d

Tom, in my original comment I was trying to make the point that without speaking to people you cannot begin to understand how bus crews perceived the changes. Statistically your third party numbers may be true but at the same time they aren't.They aren't because that is not how crew perceived things formed by their own first hand real life experience. Now there have been obvious improvements maybe their views will have been modified. Talking to them I don't see as a waste of anybody's time.In short perception is the true that matters in this case even if it may not align statically.Thinking more about your Trump analogy maybe it was a good one. Ask yourself that even if statically Trump lost fair an square that is not how a vast number of Americans see it and that perception is what will count in the end.

Adrian Irving ● 1254d

Adrian, the bus running times are real, independent of anybody’s perception, and just as real as the US presidential results however Trump’s supporters might perceive them.The perceptions of the bus drivers are also real, but that doesn’t mean those perceptions should take precedent over the actual bus running times, so asking their views on the times themselves only tells you something about the accuracy of their perceptions, not the actual times. I do wonder how far your line of argument would take you if you were stopped for speeding. “Officer, I understand you believe I was driving at 40 mph, but that’s not my perception and I implore you to consider my first-hand real-life experience behind the actual wheel of the vehicle in preference to just  a number on an screen.” Please let us all know how that works out!

Tom Pike ● 1254d

Convictions are greater enemies of truth than lies.                                                            Friedrich NietcheThe most common of all follies is to believe in the palpably untrue.                                                                                H. L. Mencken

Alastair Banton ● 1254d

Nietzsche, of course.

Alastair Banton ● 1254d

Good that you agree perceptions are real. What I didn't say is they should take precedent nor do I think so. Further more it's not helpful to further your point by invention. What I do think is they should be heard not ingnored.As to your penultimate paragraph, sorry to blunt but it's just nonsense.

Adrian Irving ● 1254d

Just to add, we agree perceptions should no take precedent but in the real world they can and do.e.g. Brexit.

Adrian Irving ● 1254d

Errr clearly I did and you didn’t Tom. Looks like your interpretation of the OP is a bit like Imperials recent track record - somewhat off the mark. The OP made no mention of BUS journey times did it? Absolutely none and that’s the point, you then turned it into a discussion on bus journey times. Perhaps you’ve spent so long since posting about bus journey times you’ve actually convinced yourself that’s how the post started. The OP was about hire bikes impeding pavements, the odd car choosing a wrong lane, infrequency of busses (not journey time), and individuals drive time along CHR. Cheers.

Mark Talbot ● 1254d

Mark, it might surprise you to know that it's generally slow-running buses that cause gaps in the service! What did you think it was? The OP claimed that no cars could travel the length of the High Road in less than 30 minutes because of the bus stops. Of course if buses are taking less than 30 minutes to get from Hammersmith to Gunnersbury, it's difficult to see how cars might be slower on a shorter stretch. Feel free to dismiss this as irrelevant, but here is the weekly average of the actual 267 bus running times from February 2020 to February 2022 during the slowest period of the day. As you can see there were only two weeks in those two years that bus running times were above 30 mins:

Tom Pike ● 1254d

I do dismiss that particular period as irrelevant for such stats.Once again other issues raised are ignored.

Mark Talbot ● 1254d

You have raised no specific point here , Mark!

Tom Pike ● 1254d

1. Not being baited into Covid lockdowns effects on stats discussion by someone from Imperial. 2. You’ve ignored the other issues listed in OP. Hopefully that’s clear enough for you.

Mark Talbot ● 1254d