NEW PROPOSALS To Routes 52 & 452 EXPLAINED (Route 452 Will Be CUT) TfL London Bus Consultations

[@HampshireTransport007]

TFL has yet again done another pointless proposal… First the 452 was extended from Wandsworth Road to Vauxhall (good proposal) Then 452 was temporarily cut between Kensal Rise and Ladbroke Grove, Sainsburys And now they want the Route to be withdrawn to terminate at Notting Hill Gate. I just hope I doesn’t really happen

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah they've made some really bad ones recently (the 205 and 30 ones too) and hopefully they won't go ahead.

[@jaymarlon7460]

@@MostlyBuses1 the 205 is fine at Paddington

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@jaymarlon7460 agreed

[@PGATProductions]

one extra journey the whole day to compensate for a 5bph loss is such a pisstake

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@PGATProductions that's what I thought too. And they even admitted passenger numbers have increased

[@zfs.59]

agreed, TFL use to increase PVRs and frequencies heavily if a route is lost along one section. Now they won’t even bother doing that to compensate for their ludicrously useless proposals. The 52 should ideally at least get a +3-5 higher PVR rather than “one extra journey” smh. The 52 won’t be able to cope at all

[@AverageTrainz]

Icl this has to be one of the most pointless proposals they have come out with. Even for their standards😑

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@AverageTrainz Yeah the 452 is pretty well used and TfL needs to stop making stupid proposals like this one and the 205/30 one

[@zfs.59]

@@MostlyBuses1yeah the 52 won’t be able to cope at all. Currently the 52 can cope between Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury’s and Kensal Rise as it’s a short mere 3 stops that the 452 doesn’t serve anymore and the 316 also supports the 52 until Banister Road too which isn’t too bad either. Notting Hill Gate is very popular and busy and the 52 won’t be able to carry all the loads from there to Kensal Rise on its own. Even Kensington and Chelsea Borough have launched a campaign and press release to keep the 452 as it is too and Westminster Council have done the same to keep the 205 as it is which means that it is garnering publicity and a higher chance of the proposals not going ahead.

[@MostlyBuses1]

0:00 Intro 0:25 Map 1:06 Route 452 proposals 1:23 Timeline 1:38 Route 52 proposals 1:57 The justification 2:57 More information on route 52 4:25 More information on route 452 7:03 Stop info 7:15 Consultation

[@acebatlerx4841]

If they go ahead with this. This makes having the 310 trail pointless as they could just extend the 210 to Stamford Hill and increase frequency like they are suggesting with all the other routes in their consultations.

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@acebatlerx4841 The 210 can't be extended because if it went to Stamford Hill directly it would have to be made single deck as there's a low bridge in Finsbury Park. But yeah TfL are being very hypocritical with these recent changes

[@KazGee]

@@MostlyBuses1 imagine by a crazy chance 210 gets withdrawn and 310 extended to brent cross😂

[@MostlyBuses1]

@KazGee that would basically be what was originally proposed but with a different number

[@Jeff0069]

@@MostlyBuses1they could've introduced a Superloop running from Stamford Hill to Golders Green via Holloway Nag's Head, Upper Holloway and Archway Stations, even potentially extending to serve places like Brent Cross, Wembley and White City as well joining the SL8

[@MostlyBuses1]

@Jeff0069 Yeah that would be a lot better than the 310. They could've also rerouted the 310 so it provided more links instead of directly following the 210 and 254/253

[@shacarioking5149]

Tbh the 52 literally just follows the whole 452 route but from Victoria whilst the 452 starts from Vauxhall so I ain’t that worried about the change

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah that's true but it's still a pretty bad change imo. The 452 will be cut by half and there would be a decrease in frequency on the shared section. TfL have literally admitted that the passenger numbers on the 452 have increased since 2021 and they still want to cut it

[@shacarioking5149]

@ yeah just reextend it back to Kensal Rise man

[@iamaimbot45678]

@@shacarioking5149 it said it will go back to kensal rise on 30 november from route 452 fandom

[@MostlyBuses1]

You probably shouldn't believe fandom or TfL when it comes to stuff like this. The E6 was meant to be extended back in May but it's still terminating at Greenford Broadway. And if the consultation goes ahead it will never reach Kensal Rise again. ​@@iamaimbot45678

[@MostlyBuses1]

​@@iamaimbot45678the 30th of November 2025 is when the new contract for the 452 starts which is probably when the cut will happen if it goes ahead so I doubt they would reextend it

[@jaymarlon7460]

TFL needs to stop cutting busses back

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@jaymarlon7460 agreed

[@zfs.59]

Agreed, it wasn’t even that bad until 2017 when this fuckery started. The only good 2017 change was the 388 extended to Elephant & Castle but then they couldn’t even keep it there and had to cut and reroute it again. The 2019 changes was by far the worst, 67 to Dalston, 40 to Clerkenwell, 242 to Aldgate, 45/171 to E&C and 172 to Aldwych which I think were by far the worst. Not to mention the 48 withdrawal which was unnecessary and the 10 withdrawal a year prior which was unnecessary.

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@zfs.59 At least the outrageous 2022 proposals didn't go ahead. And it's also a shame how TfL seems to have forgotten about non Superloop routes. Was the SL1 really that needed when busy routes get cut? Slightly controversial opinion but I would rather have the original central London network than the express routes which parallel existing ones

[@JAmoahGranite58]

@@MostlyBuses1 Because It seem to have any reliability problems that affect TFL discuss key concerns of long suffering route branded absolutely necessary modifications to make changes are less is more attractive, Can cope with being shortened. A surprise will end amicably between the routing schemes a big failure to curb it, Passenger was more concerned about loss connections.

[@zfs.59]

@@MostlyBuses1yeah the 2022 proposals don’t even get me started on those. those were awful and it was just a publicity stunt for TFL to cry to the government but given that they spent money on the consultation, they did have to go ahead with some of them like the 3, 6, 23, 59 and 133 etc. the 59/133 were by far the worst but not that bad as they at least remain in central london though I’d rather keep the 59 running to Holborn at the least and the 133 remaining at Liverpool Street

[@LondonBusesForReviews]

What they should do is cut back the 452 to Notting Hill Gate and extend it from Vauxhall to somewhere

[@zfs.59]

Bad idea, the 452 doesn’t need to be extended from Vauxhall and it’s more important to retain the route in Ladbroke Grove and Kensal Town ideally

[@LondonBusesForReviews]

@zfs.59 ok

[@thewhetstonebusguy]

The 452 being cut is pointless, it always went to Kensal Rise - who’s with me going firmly against the cut?

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah it's stupid how "urban realm works" at Kensal Rise mean the 452 was cut. I don't think it will ever return there despite what TfL's website says. And yes I'm with you against the cut

[@thewhetstonebusguy]

@MostlyBuses1 yea, what even are “urban realm works”?

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@thewhetstonebusguy probably adding some benches or greenery or something. I would be for it if it didn't cause a whole bus route to be cut

[@MostlyBuses1]

​@@thewhetstonebusguythis explains it: www.brent.gov.uk/business/regeneration/revitalising-our-high-streets/kensal-corridor

[@thewhetstonebusguy]

@ that shouldn’t take 2 years, shouldn’t it?

[@Jeff0069]

Make the curtailment to Ladbroke Grove permanent it's already good enough

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@Jeff0069 Exactly. There's no point of cutting it to Notting Hill Gate. If they wanted to make cuts they could just cut the frequency of the 452 to every 12-14 minutes

[@zfs.59]

yeah the 452 isn’t that bad atm terminating at Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury’s as the 52 is able to cope between there and Kensal Rise with the 316 supporting it as far as Banister Road too for the past 2 years. I’d just create a new stand next to the Sainsbury’s for the 452 and curtail it to Ladbroke Grove permanently if there’s a lack of space at Kensal Rise for the 28/302/452 to all stand there but it’s not ideal taking the 452 away from Kensal Rise either as it loaded pretty well at Kensal Rise on the first stop. The 452 shouldn’t have any frequency cuts either it’s bad enough that it’s happened twice already with the PVR reduced from 20 to 16 in the last few years and that’s terrible for the 452 with increased passenger numbers since 2021

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@zfs.59 Oh ok. I was just suggesting the frequency cuts as I think they'd be better than a cut to Notting Hill Gate.

[@zfs.59]

@@MostlyBuses1yeah I agree with you it’s better either way then a cut to Notting Hill Gate and severing half the route in the process too.

[@idontknow12383]

Weird to see dd's going through the 360 route 😂

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@idontknow12383 it is! And probably the last time TfL diesel buses will run on the Exhibition Road

[@AbdirahmanMahamoud-b9e]

Is 452 gonna terminate at Notting hill Gate?

[@zfs.59]

If the consultation is allowed to go ahead then yes unfortunately

[@LondonBusesUK]

My opinion the route 31 should be withdrawn between White City and Notting Hill Gate to terminate at Notting Hill Gate. The route 452 should be re-routed to White City via current route 31. I sent it to TFL an email. Hopefully

[@MostlyBuses1]

You should respond to the consultation with that idea

[@zfs.59]

I mean that could work but the 31 would be extremely short and the loadings to White City are actually quite good and given the 31 was another former local of mine I don’t really agree with this change. The 31 was extended from Notting Hill Gate to White City for the Westfield opening in 2008 so that would defeat the whole purpose. Plus if they were to cut the 31 and replace it with the 452, they’d have to consult on the 31/452 and it’s lengthy. The 452 going down to Westfield wouldn’t be so bad though and could prove useful

[@MostlyBuses1]

Maybe they should've proposed rerouting the 452 to White City then. It would've been much better than what they're proposals are now

[@zfs.59]

@@MostlyBuses1yeah word the 452 would be a better alternative to the 49/295 of reaching south london.

[@muhammdhussainzainuddin]

After 6 days on 16th November make a video about 217 passed to go ahead london

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@muhammdhussainzainuddin you don't need to tell me to make it. I'm in Turnpike Lane right now filming for the last day video :)

[@zfs.59]

Use to be local to the 452 and I have to say this is ridiculous. The 452 should just remain at Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury’s at the very least if it’s impossible to return it to Kensal Rise as it seems that there’s no space for the 28/302/452 to all stand there as some of the new realm works have taken over old stand space. Currently, the 452 has to turn around by going to Westbourne Park Garage to stand and then it turns back to start journeys at Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury’s. I would just create a new stand next to the Sainsbury’s car park for the 452 and make the Ladbroke Grove Sainsbury’s cut permanent if it absolutely cannot return to Kensal Rise due to a lack of stand space thanks to the new pavement realm works meaning there might only be space for the 28/302 to stand there. The 452 being cut to Notting Hill Gate is disastrous, much rather keep the route at Ladbroke Grove as the cut to LG Sainsbury’s isn’t that bad and the 52/316 are adequate from there to Kilburn Lane before the 316 turns right into Queen’s Park and the 52 further down to Kensal Rise. The 52 will not absolutely be able to cope from Notting Hill Gate where both the 52/452 load heavily in both directions all the way to Kensal Rise and it is taking a bit of a mickey by only having 1 extra journey to compensate for the 452’s loss. Even Kensington & Chelsea Council have launched a whole campaign to keep the 452 as it is and stated that the 52 will become very busy, will not be able to cope and rush hour even worse. It was only in 2016 when Kensal Town and Ladbroke Grove gained a new link further south into Nine Elms and Vauxhall and now those links are being erased by cutting the 452 to Notting Hill Gate. The 452 is now also more vulnerable for GAL to try gain the route and run it south of the river but I hope RATP keep the 452 regardless as the EvoSetis and WHs are sufficient enough for a 5 year contract and the VNs should’ve been withdrawn a long time ago as there’s enough VMHs and WHs but I imagine they can keep the VNs and use them on the 31 temporarily and converting the 452 to a full VMH/WH allocation in the process

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah it's just so stupid that they're cutting a route which has seen passenger numbers increase. The planned starting point at Notting Hill Gate is also inconveniently located. And they're not even providing a good alternative with one journey on the 52 in peak times. It's ridiculous.

[@MostlyBuses1]

Tbh I think GAL would do a much better job on the 452 than RATP do. They've used so many curtailments (Wandsworth Road, Sloane Square and Notting Hill Gate). On a fairly average Saturday there were somehow three buses in a row curtailed to Sloane Square from Vauxhall!!! And I don't get how I saw so many bunchings yesterday (there was a diversion but it wasn't that bad). I would rather RATP keep it with hybrids though if GAL are just gonna put electrics on it (which they might not, in which case I would support them).

[@zfs.59]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@MostlyBuses1yeah exactly you can sort of tell TFL have lost their minds with this 452 cutback.

[@zfs.59]

@@MostlyBuses1If GAL do win the 452 tho, I can see MMCs from the 171 or 172’s being used. It’ll be a nice return of ADL vehicles to the route after it started off life in 2006 initially temporarily using spare ALX400s and then brand new 56 reg E400s later arrived for its allocation when QB won the new 452. Then the 452 continued with the 56 reg E400s until 2018 when TT won it on the basis of using 11 reg DNs from the 30. GAL then decided to buy some of the 30’s DNs for the 51 and 320 and TT then had an exodus amount of 11 reg VNs leftover from the 25’s huge PVR cut when it was cutback from Oxford Circus and those VNs were then reallocated to the 452 and D8 instead and the D8 was another route that was meant to get 11 reg DNs from the 30. The DNs that didn’t go to GAL for the 51 were sent off lease and withdrawn from TT’s fleet. As for those 56/07 reg E400s, I’m surprised Abellio even kept them after the 452’s loss as they were quite old for them to try use them again to retain it in 2018 being 11-12 years old. IIRC those ex-452 E400s went all over to WS (for the 278/350/U5), BC (for the 109/407 initially then the 270), TF (for the 285) and some stayed back at QB as spares and some went to WL for the 415 to free up MMCs for the 207 as there wasn’t enough LTs for the 415 at the time in April 2019. I do hope RATP retain the 452 as it’s nice seeing RATP down south around Vauxhall and Battersea and it’s just unique. I do like the EvoSetis on the 452 especially with refurbishment and the RATP maquette and I do like the VNs too but they will sadly go whether the 452 is kept by RATP or lost and the StreetDecks are alright but are quite boring and I much prefer G2/G3 VHs on the 452 over the StreetDecks. I hope RATP improve the 452’s service if they do retain it which is likely as they did keep the 49 despite QB attempting to bid for the route again

[@ms_1931]

If this does go ahead they should extend 295 to Kensal Rise. The 452 does parallel the 52 for some time tbh but that still shouldn’t be a reason to cut it. ​​⁠It’s like the 427 cut literally got sliced in half and the route still gets packed to the brim for basically its entire route. They didn’t even increase 207s PVR or SL8(607) after 427 was cut, that was one of TfLs worst decisions ever. If they wanted to cut the 427 they should’ve cut it to Ealing Broadway not Southall. 427 PVR is now 15, it should be at least 20 even if its route is short 427 is a very busy route.

[@T_vEg]

These go completely against what TfL had done for the 25 and 425 in 2018. There was no reason for TfL to do this proposal

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@T_vEg Exactly. They've also introduced the 310 which is contradictory to this proposal and it'll just make the 452 an irrelevant, short route.

[@jaymarlon7460]

@@T_vEg the 25 to Oxford Circus was fine

[@jaymarlon7460]

@@T_vEg TFL want to withdraw the 414 which is stupid first the cut it back to Marble Arch from maida hill the Chippenham now withdraw the whole route

[@zfs.59]

@@jaymarlon7460tbf the 25 was unreliable going to Oxford Circus, I would’ve just curtailed the route to Holborn and leave it there as it would still reach more of Central London and easy to change onto the 98 to get to Oxford Circus from Holborn

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@jaymarlon7460 The 414 should be rerouted along Oxford Street imo but TfL hate buses going there so it's obviously never going to happen

[@jasonbusred3297]

so you do Walthamstow close today

[@MostlyBuses1]

TfL said it closed yesterday and you already know I did a video on it anyway

[@jasonbusred3297]

@@MostlyBuses1 oh wait walthamstow open at 20th December 2024 at next month

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@jasonbusred3297 yes

[@Lets631]

Now the 52 will be extra busy Willesden drivers after this:💀

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah let's just hope the change doesn't go ahead since the extra journey on the 52 will barely help

[@Lx11awu]

If so I’d rather 452 keep serving Hyde park for compensation

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@Lx11awu I think it should just return to its normal route. Otherwise it would follow the 52 for more of its length

[@Lx11awu]

@ reduces 52 flow so I’m hapoy

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@Lx11awu The 52 should stay as it is

[@JAmoahGranite58]

@@MostlyBuses1 Somehow Sloane Street already been almost 2 years embracing all diversions to believe this is purposely fits scenarios can range from the utility works with local public morale by as road blockage and end on the 29th November needed due to loadings. 19/22/137/452 and C1 revitilize some infrastructure down Hyde Park once the sentiment gets better adjustments.

[@KazGee]

icl 452 seems useless when cut back it should jsut get withdrawn

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@KazGee Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if it would be proposed to be merged/withdrawn in the future like the 414 and 45

[@zfs.59]

even if the 452 is cut to Notting Hill, it won’t be withdrawn tbf as there’s no other routes to replace it and it’s required to support the 52 and 137 even if it’s cut. The 452 should just remain at Ladbroke Grove at the very least and create a new stand next to the Sainsbury’s car park as it’s clearly doing fine at Ladbroke Grove.

[@JAmoahGranite58]

@@MostlyBuses1 This isn't relevant to any of crucial to recognize the ongoing disparities are caused by Ladbroke Grove only got way too much attention was very poor and indecisive at the point load both 137/52 frequency, I don't see 452 withdrawn. However, there is an alternate possibility can show the different choices at Vauxhall that are relevant to 436 routings already strained from Paddington to Battersea Park. Kinda humurous Union Road with unserved areas liable to being further east than Stockwell old P5 or Brixton station entrance and bother to send down Morval Road stand, but not hard retaining some of the new link.

[@Abdul.M.]

This pointless from TFL again 52 PVR was cut to 18 now wants. PVR increase for 452 cut

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah the 52's PVR will only increase by 1 which is a shame. They need to add more journeys to compensate

[@McRailss]

lol i've seen this omw to school

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@McRailss nice

[@Mohammedlovestflforever]

52 bus

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@Mohammedlovestflforever and 452

[@Mohammedlovestflforever]

@@MostlyBuses1 yeh i know

[@Mohammedlovestflforever]

its 452 and 52, right? thats what im saying

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@Mohammedlovestflforever yes

[@cooldude12-q9b]

Yet another pointless and detrimental proposal alongside the 30/205,15/254/343 and 45/118 proposal It's like they want to make travel harder

[@MostlyBuses1]

Yeah it's just crazy how all these consultations have come out recently. Hopefully this one is the last of the bad ones

[@jaymarlon7460]

@@MostlyBuses1 TFL are probably doing it to get more money out of people the greedy bums

[@MostlyBuses1]

Probably yeah. I wouldn't call them greedy though

[@zfs.59]

⁠​⁠​⁠@@MostlyBuses1tbh they should be looking at routes that desperately need changes made rather than the ones that are already doing alright in their current form ie the 30/205/343/452. I think TFL should look at the 156 and 170 as both routes are unreliable in their current state and length. The 156 should become a Wimbledon to Clapham Junction route to maintain reliability and the 170 should be decked going from Roehampton to Clapham Junction then going via the current 156 to Vauxhall. A new route called the 435 should be created and should run between Victoria and Clapham Junction via the current 170 and then onwards to Wandsworth Common and Tooting Bec. Then the new 435 can turn left and then have the route terminate at Balham using the soon spare 315’s stand as the 315 will vacate and go to Springfield Hospital soon

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@zfs.59 That would be a great idea. I would support anything to get the 170 decked tbh (except cutting it obviously). I have to use the 156 a lot and I absolutely agree that it's just so unreliable. Same for the 170 although I think GAL do a fairly good job on that. They could also use the 239 number for the new route since the 170 was the 239 a few years ago.

[@eastlancsesteem]

😠🤦🏾‍♂️

[@MostlyBuses1]

@@eastlancsesteem exactly

[@mywaterneedstowalkme]

I wonder how many more useless changes tfl is going to propose

[@MostlyBuses1]

Hopefully this one will be the last bad one (I have a feeling the elections delayed these)

[@zfs.59]

I think the 259/349 will come up next. I mean they could try withdraw the 349 and extend the 149 to Ponders End and cutting the 149 to Liverpool Street to maintain reliability and increase the frequency on the 388 to compensate for the 149’s cut or reroute the 242 to London Bridge in the 149’s place