More Bus Moves

[Aiden Tabucic]

Any more bus moves

[Busjack]

17 minutes ago, Aiden Tabucic said:

Any more bus moves

Follow something like @maths22 tracker and figure it out.

[Busjack]

To get back to this topic, which is More Bus Moves, the only way the surplus of artics is relevant is if someone can figure out a way to use them, apparently out of C or 77 garages, so as to move buses out of there to FG and move about 100 6400s to the junk yard.25 8325s and 20-40 electric buses only get the job half done.

[Anthony Devera]

I'm sorry if someone answered this earlier, but why did artics fail on the 66 and 79? I heard it was slowing down the travel times, but what was the problem with using artics on these routes?

[Sam92]

7 hours ago, Busjack said:

Again, limited stops are being made a panacea by commenters for problems other than for which they were intended. First it was Uber, now you are trying to make them justify keeping on 100 articulated buses that CTA management itself acknowledged (in the FOIA response) are not needed.

No I'm saying since as we all know by now they're required by law to keep any bus purchased for 12 years might as well just and figure something while they're stuck with them that could possibly attract more riders from,  uber was mentioned as a source of where those riders might return from

[andrethebusman]

4 hours ago, Anthony Devera said:

I'm sorry if someone answered this earlier, but why did artics fail on the 66 and 79? I heard it was slowing down the travel times, but what was the problem with using artics on these routes?

Essentailly unable to keep existing schedule speed. Result was erratic service.

[RJL6000]

28 minutes ago, andrethebusman said:

Essentailly unable to keep existing schedule speed. Result was erratic service.

By extension, what Sam92 stated is practically the only reason for Kedzie Garage to have any artics at all. After all, Kedzie currently has no high-ridership express routes assigned to it. That fact alone dictates that Kedzie should have been re-equipped entirely with 40-footers. But for now, they're stuck with the 81 artics currently assigned to them. And yes, they have to run some of the artics somewhere, such as the #151 short trips and the weekend #12 trips (which I'm sure has been suffering from much the same problem as using artics on the #66 and #79).

[Sam92]

8 hours ago, RJL6000 said:

By extension, what Sam92 stated is practically the only reason for Kedzie Garage to have any artics at all. After all, Kedzie currently has no high-ridership express routes assigned to it. That fact alone dictates that Kedzie should have been re-equipped entirely with 40-footers. But for now, they're stuck with the 81 artics currently assigned to them. And yes, they have to run some of the artics somewhere, such as the #151 short trips and the weekend #12 trips (which I'm sure has been suffering from much the same problem as using artics on the #66 and #79).

That might be why they were snatched from running weekend #82 service but possibly that bus only lane on Roosevelt might be someone keeping the problem at bay to an extent enough to where they figure their OK over there.  

[Busjack]

15 hours ago, Sam92 said:

No I'm saying since as we all know by now they're required by law to keep any bus purchased for 12 years

That's only those funded with federal money. 150 were leased with CTA money, and 67 (one dead) with state money. That's why I said they should be sold, as the Optimas were, if CTA can find a buyer. The 90 federal ones can be sold if the money is reinvested. CTA apparently came to some kind of resolution with the feds over the half of the NABIs purchased with federal funds.

There's also the 500,000 miles, and if the buses are getting only 2/3 the use they are supposed to, you're talking 18 years, in any event. I don't know how far the rehabs have gone yet, but they have a service life, too.

From what @andrethebusman implies, there would have to be improvements to the street infrastructure (I mentioned the bus stops before) to get them to run on time. For instance, way back when CTA thought it was getting a grant for X8, X66 and X79,I doubted how express bus can run on such narrow streets as 79th between State and Stony Island, Halsted in Greektown, and Chicago at least east of Milwaukee.Looks like artics can't. Only ones I can see coming back that might use artics are X3 and X4. Only way J14 works is that parking is banned during rush hour.

Apparently the only reason artics are being used on Belmont fill ins is that they have to get back to the garage somehow.

[BusHunter]

On 4/24/2018 at 11:35 AM, Busjack said:

Again, limited stops are being made a panacea by commenters for problems other than for which they were intended. First it was Uber, now you are trying to make them justify keeping on 100 articulated buses that CTA management itself acknowledged (in the FOIA response) are not needed.

They can use more artics. Artics work good on routes where there are standing loads. Who wants to stand on a bus waiting for a seat? And when you have a standing load it's harder on the operator to run their bus safely. This gets into the fta standard that riders cannot go ahead of the yellow or white line that cta seems to circumnavigate.  I dont know why artics would mess up the schedule. (A standing load bus doesn't mess up the schedule???) There probably more accidents with them or maybe the union is trying to get rid of them on the non express. They do take away jobs and the union would have a vested interest to their constituents.. having a seat is important. There is no standing on uber... the latest i heard is that now employers are offering uber riides for employees as part of its benefits but this seems to be on the professional level.

[andrethebusman]

Kedzie uses artics basically on two routes 151 shorts and 156. You also see them on 12 on weekends. 

[jajuan]

On 4/23/2018 at 10:46 PM, Sam92 said:

Well jujuans observation of the X9's effect on thinning passenger loads supports that Ashland could do without but looking at other routes,  I can see western,  Cicero,  Chicago,  north ave,  79th,  Irving Park,  Kimball(?) benefitting from such changes even if it started off as rush only initially.  This also could possibly attract some people back from uber because even though you wouldn't get door to door service on demand,  the return of quicker cross-town travel for $2.50 vs the cost of an uber could be enough. Of course Irving Park would have to be taken up partially by NP for this. 

Western doesn't need them either. X49 created the same effect as that of the X9 on Ashland. Yeah you have the school crowds with Lane Tech and Clemente High School. But those are handled by school trips NP runs on the local route using artics. As you already noted Kimball was tried and didn't really work. So why try yet again especially when Kimball is stop sign heavy? Chicago and 79th were just tried. Didn't work. So same questions there as with Kimball. Why reach in that direction again? Irving Park you either have to pass that over to NP in exchange for something that FG can do at least as efficiently as NP, figure out a way to share it with FG or figure out a way for FG to house artics after the surrounding neighborhood as effectively boxed it in and made any space expansions all but impossible.

On 4/28/2018 at 12:13 PM, andrethebusman said:

Kedzie uses artics basically on two routes 151 shorts and 156. You also see them on 12 on weekends. 

Which gets to RJL6000's point and my own thoughts that Kedzie doesn't really need 81 artics. There's also the 134 and 143 by the way, but the larger point as we all agree still is NP, 103rd and Kedzie's pattern of artic deployments did not really change much after taking on more artics after Chicago like 77th couldn't figure out how to use them effectively. 

[Busjack]

10 hours ago, jajuan said:

figure out a way to share it with FG or figure out a way for FG to house artics after the surrounding neighborhood as effectively boxed it in and made any space expansions all but impossible.

That isn't the problem as CTA bought the adjacent properties (Pyramid, Garden center) but doesn't seem to have demolished them. What the problem is is that it rebuilt the shop, but did not enlarge the lifts.

 

[jajuan]

8 hours ago, Busjack said:

That isn't the problem as CTA bought the adjacent properties (Pyramid, Garden center) but doesn't seem to have demolished them. What the problem is is that it rebuilt the shop, but did not enlarge the lifts.

 

Gotcha. Thanks. I had forgotten they did buy some adjacent property and that we did have a discussion about that kerfuffle of rebuilding the shops without enlarging the lifts.

[Aiden Tabucic]

Quick Question....Does Anyone Know Why 1767 1778 1916 Are working forest glen routes do you think North Park Gave Up 3 Of Theirs 

[ajm522]

1 hour ago, Aiden Tabucic said:

Quick Question....Does Anyone Know Why 1767 1778 1916 Are working forest glen routes do you think North Park Gave Up 3 Of Theirs 

 More then likely a few loaners, you can watch them over next few days to a week and determine if they are on loan or now belong to FG. Spring pick happened a few weeks ago so any major shifts would of happened then.

[BusHunter]

On 5/1/2018 at 7:35 AM, Busjack said:

That isn't the problem as CTA bought the adjacent properties (Pyramid, Garden center) but doesn't seem to have demolished them. What the problem is is that it rebuilt the shop, but did not enlarge the lifts.

 

They were supposed to expand the yard but why do that now there will soon be no 54A. If anything maybe they need to lease some of the yard to Pace. I wonder where Pace will get all the garage  space for the service expansions in the pipeline.

[Busjack]

10 hours ago, BusHunter said:

They were supposed to expand the yard but why do that now there will soon be no 54A. If anything maybe they need to lease some of the yard to Pace. I wonder where Pace will get all the garage  space for the service expansions in the pipeline.

Again, you haven't been reading either this forum or the reports, so there is no point repeating.

[Aiden Tabucic]

12 hours ago, ajm522 said:

 More then likely a few loaners, you can watch them over next few days to a week and determine if they are on loan or now belong to FG. Spring pick happened a few weeks ago so any major shifts would of happened then.

I was wrong 1916 Is Working 93 Today i will check about the other 2

[Aiden Tabucic]

12 hours ago, ajm522 said:

 More then likely a few loaners, you can watch them over next few days to a week and determine if they are on loan or now belong to FG. Spring pick happened a few weeks ago so any major shifts would of happened then.

Nothing is showing up about 1778 1767 they were probably just helping out filing some of the gaps 

[Aiden Tabucic]

12 hours ago, BusHunter said:

They were supposed to expand the yard but why do that now there will soon be no 54A. If anything maybe they need to lease some of the yard to Pace. I wonder where Pace will get all the garage  space for the service expansions in the pipeline.

If you wanna talk about pace expansion that would fit in under the Pace Section Not here 

[TransitXan17]

Everyday, I go on Streetsblog Chicago and get updates on recent development and transit news is Chicago and for other major cities. An article by the Chicago Tribune was featured in their daily briefing. It was about Light Rail! I have been to other major cities that have light rail, (Seattle, San Francisco, Portland, Boston, and New York (Currently planning the BQX)) But I found it interesting that the thought of Chicago having a Light Rail going through, in this case, the Lincoln Yards, could happen. Many Light Rail/Streetcar projects have been created for the sole purpose of development. But I think the redevelopment of the Lincoln Yards is meant to COMPLETELY change the area, mainly because it’s very industrial. What do you guys think? Would you like to see a Light Rail is Chicago? 

[Busjack]

48 minutes ago, TransitXan17 said:

Everyday, I go on Streetsblog Chicago and get updates on recent development and transit news is Chicago and for other major cities. An article by the Chicago Tribune was featured in their daily briefing. It was about Light Rail! I have been to other major cities that have light rail, (Seattle, San Francisco, Portland, Boston, and New York (Currently planning the BQX)) But I found it interesting that the thought of Chicago having a Light Rail going through, in this case, the Lincoln Yards, could happen. Many Light Rail/Streetcar projects have been created for the sole purpose of development. But I think the redevelopment of the Lincoln Yards is meant to COMPLETELY change the area, mainly because it’s very industrial. What do you guys think? Would you like to see a Light Rail is Chicago? 

That article is about as big of a joke as, for instance, the Monroe distributor of about 1992. Only thing indicated is that some developer is submitting a plan that might include a use for an abandoned ROW. There's no way to assure that the developer will build the development (especially if he is counting on Amazon HQ2), no less the LRV. 

[Anthony Devera]

4 hours ago, TransitXan17 said:

Would you like to see a Light Rail is Chicago? 

 

3 hours ago, Busjack said:

Only thing indicated is that some developer is submitting a plan that might include a use for an abandoned ROW.

It might be nice to see the South Chicago branch of the Metra Electric converted into a light rail line, similar to the Gold Line plan from many years back. Though maintenance costs might be high, LRVs would probably be quieter than the trains used on the Metra Electric. LRVs would also run well at the grade crossings, at least better than L rolling stock with third rail, and they could take advantage of the existing overhead wire. However, I'm not entirely sure how much demand there would be for such a project. Plus, it would be much cheaper to simply increase headways on the Metra Electric.

[Tcmetro]

The "Amazon" (North Branch/Goose Island) light-rail probably won't pan out. I think the biggest obstacle is that the line will have to use streets that will be shared with cars, which will inevitably have traffic once the land is developed. 

Also, the line as currently envisioned only connects to the Pink/Green line at Clinton and most likely (but not guaranteed) Ogilvie and Union. What this says to me is that the light-rail proposal is more about getting suburbanites over to the North Branch employment center which is probably the wrong focus as the whole idea of locating up there is to attract workers from Lincoln Park, Wicker Park and the other north side neighborhoods.