More Bus Moves

[jajuan]

He really would have gotten his just desert if instead that had been a drag queen.

[Busjack]

Both buses had LED destinations since delivery #6441 was a pilot of the #6709's that were still coming at the time....

Not according to Kevin, who said it was an Aesys sign. That sign was visually different, in that the character font was taller and thinner than on the Twinvision signs on 6709 and up. The correct link to the gallery is here.

[garmon757]

6441 was attributed to a test of another manufacturer. There was also 6515, which had color LEDs for the longest time. See, for instance, starting around here.*

________

*With the change of forum software, unfortunately the links in old posts don't work.

Not according to Kevin, who said it was an Aesys sign. That sign was visually different, in that the character font was taller and thinner than on the Twinvision signs on 6709 and up. The correct link to the gallery is here.

I wonder why they didn't make the entire Nova fleet LED compatible?

[BusHunter]

Not according to Kevin, who said it was an Aesys sign. That sign was visually different, in that the character font was taller and thinner than on the Twinvision signs on 6709 and up. The correct link to the gallery is here.

Funny they look the same #6441 and the #6709's

[BusHunter]

I wonder why they didn't make the entire Nova fleet LED compatible?

I always believed it was because the pre 2002 models had flip dot signs and the 2002 models #6709- did

[Busjack]

Funny they look the same #6441 and the #6709's

Not if you look at the character forms--those on the Twinvisions were more rounded. Compare to picture of 6718.

[Busjack]

I wonder why they didn't make the entire Nova fleet LED compatible?

I always believed it was because the pre 2002 models had flip dot signs and the 2002 models #6709- did

Doesn't answer the question.

Probably it was an issue of money, either if the sign "ain't broke" or CTA wasn't experimenting with something, why bother?

The fronts of the 6000s got Luminator LED signs, but apparently because the flip dots had become unreadable. Those flip dot signs were the ones with a florescent tube in front of the sign, instead of the back lit LED flip dots in basically the 1999-2001 bus deliveries (both CTA and Pace).

If anything, If CTA wanted to standardize, it should have replaced all the TwinVisions with Luminators.

[BusHunter]

Doesn't answer the question.

Probably it was an issue of money, either if the sign "ain't broke" or CTA wasn't experimenting with something, why bother?

The fronts of the 6000s got Luminator LED signs, but apparently because the flip dots had become unreadable. Those flip dot signs were the ones with a florescent tube in front of the sign, instead of the back lit LED flip dots in basically the 1999-2001 bus deliveries (both CTA and Pace).

If anything, If CTA wanted to standardize, it should have replaced all the TwinVisions with Luminators.

Why not? Novabus is not entitled to change features of it's models from year to year. You know you can prove me wrong, just find a bus with amber LED destinations before the 2002 model year. That was when all bus manufacturers starting changing over to LED. Those flip-dot signs now are obsolete and quickly becoming antiques. I always wondered why they didn't use the signs from the #6000's when they retired those as the rehabbed model had LED's. In support of what I'm saying ask yourself why the #6000's were not rehabbed with flip dot signs? Probably because old flip dot ones on a grand scale (over 300 ordered) were harder to find than the newer LED signs that are easier to find.

[Busjack]

Why not? Novabus is not entitled to change features of it's models from year to year. You know you can prove me wrong, just find a bus with amber LED destinations before the 2002 model year. That was when all bus manufacturers starting changing over to LED. ...

This isn't coherent. Obviously, Novabus changed the model of sign in 2002, although not the manufacturer.

I took Garmon's question to be why CTA didn't swap flip dot signs for LEDs itself, like it did for the 6000s. Maybe that element of my response wasn't clear. Apparently, CTA didn't feel a need to do so, since this was a better illuminated example of flip dot sign than those that preceded it.

[garmon757]

Doesn't answer the question.

Probably it was an issue of money, either if the sign "ain't broke" or CTA wasn't experimenting with something, why bother?

The fronts of the 6000s got Luminator LED signs, but apparently because the flip dots had become unreadable. Those flip dot signs were the ones with a florescent tube in front of the sign, instead of the back lit LED flip dots in basically the 1999-2001 bus deliveries (both CTA and Pace).

If anything, If CTA wanted to standardize, it should have replaced all the TwinVisions with Luminators.

This isn't coherent. Obviously, Novabus changed the model of sign in 2002, although not the manufacturer.

I took Garmon's question to be why CTA didn't swap flip dot signs for LEDs itself, like it did for the 6000s. Maybe that element of my response wasn't clear. Apparently, CTA didn't feel a need to do so, since this was a better illuminated example of flip dot sign than those that preceded it.

And the fact that the 6000s' signs operates faster that the Novas'. Now look at the aftermath of the Novas' signs 6708-lower. Some aren't readable and some have their side signs stuck on just the route number and name i.e. 20 Madison but it doesn't change to the destination that the route is going. Even their back signs either doesn't show the route number or show some weird crap like the shot of #6487's back sign showing "79 MAX"! :lol:

[Busjack]

And the fact that the 6000s' signs operates faster that the Novas'. Now look at the aftermath of the Novas' signs 6708-lower. Some aren't readable and some have their side signs stuck on just the route number and name i.e. 20 Madison but it doesn't change to the destination that the route is going. Even their back signs either doesn't show the route number or show some weird crap like the shot of #6487's back sign showing "79 MAX"!

Appears to be a combination of bad programming and the buses are supposed to go to the scrap heap soon, but apparently not that soon.

The 5800s used to show some real weird garbage, such as the program date in characters twice as high as the sign itself.

On the flip dots, there was always the problem that the signs did not clear themselves (such as on the 5800s there would be something like "36 Broad evon"), while with LEDs, if the power is off, the sign is off.

Maybe BusHunter had the point that LED signs were not generally available until 2002.

[Kimball401]

No one I think would imagine the 4300's with flip dots. They would break roughly give it take ..........3 months lol

[TripleTransit1]

No one I think would imagine the 4300's with flip dots. They would break roughly give it take ..........3 months lol

I don't see flip dots. But to me, if that happened, that would be epic!!

[garmon757]

Appears to be a combination of bad programming and the buses are supposed to go to the scrap heap soon, but apparently not that soon.

The 5800s used to show some real weird garbage, such as the program date in characters twice as high as the sign itself.

On the flip dots, there was always the problem that the signs did not clear themselves (such as on the 5800s there would be something like "36 Broad evon"), while with LEDs, if the power is off, the sign is off.

Maybe BusHunter had the point that LED signs were not generally available until 2002.

Either bad programming or they didn't give a crap about fixing them consistently. At least Pace's Ikarus' and Orions signs wasn't that bad at all and they operate way faster than all Cta busses back then.

[BusHunter]

Saw a #4300 on western/warren nb. I couldn't tell if it was in service or not. But it was curbed like it was in service. Pullout's tend to stay in the middle of the road. I looked on bustracker and their is nothing there but there is a 20 minute gap in service nb so it could be a ghost. Also what kedzie artic run would pull out now. That's a strange one!!

[garmon757]

Saw a #4300 on western/warren nb. I couldn't tell if it was in service or not. But it was curbed like it was in service. Pullout's tend to stay in the middle of the road. I looked on bustracker and their is nothing there but there is a 20 minute gap in service nb so it could be a ghost. Also what kedzie artic run would pull out now. That's a strange one!!

I would assume that it's for the Blue Line Shuttle between Western and Logan Square.

[garmon757]

I know you're an error for #56 but get outta here!!! :lol:

[BusHunter]

I would assume that it's for the Blue Line Shuttle between Western and Logan Square.

yeah you're probably right. I forgot that was going on.

[garmon757]

yeah you're probably right. I forgot that was going on.

It's mostly NP but there are a couple of Kedzie's out there including #4324.

[jajuan]

I know you're an error for #56 but get outta here!!!

One thing your shot picked up is that some of those FG amber signed Novas have signs with the font that began with the NABIs and is now standard on all the NFs (40 foot and artics) and now the 7900s.

[garmon757]

One thing your shot picked up is that some of those FG amber signed Novas have signs with the font that began with the NABIs and is now standard on all the NFs (40 foot and artics) and now the 7900s.

You know what, you're absolutely right! I didn't think about that until you brought it up.

[jajuan]

You know what, you're absolutely right! I didn't think about that until you brought it up.

I hadn't really paid it much attention until I was looking at your picture and saw how the characters on that destination sign were less rounded and more blocky like on more recent CTA bus models.

[garmon757]

I hadn't really paid it much attention until I was looking at your picture and saw how the characters on that destination sign were less rounded and more blocky like on more recent CTA bus models.

Speaking of NABI's, it weird how the signage of #147 look when it's going to Devon because the font is so small and the whole entire route name positioned on the top of the board (enough room for a second row). I've seen that on all the the New Flyers also. I wonder if a LED Nova display the same format on #147?

[jajuan]

Speaking of NABI's, it weird how the signage of #147 look when it's going to Devon because the font is so small and the whole entire route name positioned on the top of the board (enough room for a second row). I've seen that on all the the New Flyers also. I wonder if a LED Nova display the same format on #147?

Yeah I also found the signs for #147 Devon short trippers weird in that same respect. I know if I find the 'Devon" destination hard to read from a distance sometimes even with my glasses, other folks find them hard to see too. You'd think they'd program the signs to show something similar to what NB 136 buses display so that they're easier to see at a distance.

[Busjack]

Speaking of NABI's, it weird how the signage of #147 look when it's going to Devon because the font is so small and the whole entire route name positioned on the top of the board (enough room for a second row). I've seen that on all the the New Flyers also. I wonder if a LED Nova display the same format on #147?

They are all Luminator signs and it depends on what was programmed into them. The bus assembler doesn't have anything to do with what CTA programs into them.

Luminator and Twinvision used to have descriptions of the programming software on their sites, but I didn't see it. Twinvision's was called ELYSE. But the issue is no different than if I program small font here, it is going to be smaller on your computer, too.

The only base line is that the fonts have to be ADA compliant. Apparently two lines on a sign is.