"Harry G" wrote:

That's correct: in the 1990s there was a pair of circular services,
Stationlink SL1/2 (clockwise/anti), although there had been something
prior to that as well which failed (and ISTR a night-time service in
the early 1980s). These were pretty infrequent and because they served
virtually all stations could be terribly slow - it might take a couple
of hours from arriving at one terminal before you reached your
cross-London terminal. I think they disappeared around 4-5 years ago.

The need to create a robust timetable, over a relatively long route, at a
low frequency, meant an awful lot of slack was built into the timings. On
the 705 (the final incarnation of Stationlink), it was common to dwell at
Waterloo *and* London Bridge for up to ten minutes. Thus, these services
were largely shunned by 'ordinary Londoners'.

They were also fairly poorly publicised. During the last year of the 705, I
was working in Victoria and commuting into and out of Fenchurch Street. On a
Tube strike day (total shutdown), when 'normal' buses were jam packed,
fights breaking out etc, I was able to board the 705 at Victoria Station
with no difficulty, and had the company of about four other people on the
way to Fenchurch St via Waterloo, London Bridge etc.

Route 205 is a legacy of the Stationlink service, and there was also a
705 which seems to have withdrawn. Apart from the slow journey times,
taxi options and infrequency, the accessibility of all London buses to
the groups mentioned above probably put the final nail in the coffin of
dedicated Stationlink services or similar.

The Jubilee Line extension also provided a Tube alternative on the
Waterloo - London Bridge stretch.

Chris

Ian Jelf wrote in uk.transport.london on Thu, 11 Jan 2007 18:27:06
+0000 :
(to utl only)

Non-Londoners will often go to extreme lengths to avoid the Tube. In
my experience, most prefer taxis, even where a simple bus transfer (or
sometimes even a walk, depending on luggage, would suffice.

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

But I've known people new to London not to trust either, in one case
walking from Kings Cross to Knightsbridge and back...

--
hike
- a walking tour or outing, esp. of the self-conscious kind
Chambers 20th Century Dictionary

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:28:58 -0000, Dave Hillam ]
wrote:

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

But I've known people new to London not to trust either, in one case
walking from Kings Cross to Knightsbridge and back...

I'm suprised a stranger could *find their way* from Kings Cross to
Knightsbridge and back!

--
Fig

Dave Hillam wrote:

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

Regarding point (b), the bus spider maps with an index do help
considerably so long as there is a direct bus from where you are to
where you want to go.

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home Page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Dave Hillam wrote:
IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow and b) a fear of getting irretrievably
lost.

I'm a Londoner and have no problem using buses here - but if I'm in a
strange city I'll take the metro or a tram by preference. Something
psychlogical to do with the fact that metro or tram services can't
deviate from their tracks and (usually!) come back exactly the same way
they went, point (b) in Dave's post.

On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 09:28:58 +0000, Dave Hillam wrote:

IME more visitors to London appear to have a mortal fear of getting on
a London bus. The main reasons I've been able to establish are a)
perceived as being far too slow

It's in the guidebooks, so that's no surprise.

And route 15 really was slow.

and b) a fear of getting irretrievably lost.

What type of bus information is available to visitors?

--
jhk

Jarle H Knudsen wrote:

and b) a fear of getting irretrievably lost.

What type of bus information is available to visitors?

--
jhk

I've seen this map on a lot of leaflets for tourists...

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/pdfdocs/cen_bus.pdf

In article om,
(brixtonite) wrote:

Jarle H Knudsen wrote:

and b) a fear of getting irretrievably lost.

What type of bus information is available to visitors?

I've seen this map on a lot of leaflets for tourists...

http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/pdfdocs/cen_bus.pdf

Why isn't the 390 on it? Goes to similar destinations from King's Cross
as the 10 and 73. Or the 7 that serves the BM?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Harry G wrote:

Route 205 is a legacy of the Stationlink service, and there was also a
705 which seems to have withdrawn. Apart from the slow journey times,
taxi options and infrequency, the accessibility of all London buses to
the groups mentioned above probably put the final nail in the coffin of
dedicated Stationlink services or similar.

Route 205 is far more useful than Stationlink ever was, by virtue of
the 10-minute frequency instead of hourly. It's a shame nothing lasted
for the southern half, though.

Neil

Ian Jelf wrote:

Non-Londoners will often go to extreme lengths to avoid the Tube. In
my experience, most prefer taxis, even where a simple bus transfer (or
sometimes even a walk, depending on luggage, would suffice.

Interesting - and I guess you probably know best by your job - but my
experience is that people will use the Tube as it's relatively easy to
understand - indeed, the geographical knowledge of London by a lot of
people I know is largely based (inaccurately, of course) on the Tube
map.

Neil