Jump to content
wordguy

More Bus Moves

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Busjack said:

Nope. FG is short and 103rd already has a surplus of artics. Basically, CTA is limiting garages to 2 series, to the extent possible.

Maybe it does on the 2019 proposed contract, depending on which company wins it.

The real question is whether the new layout will facilitate artics.

FG Is short flyers to lowkey 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Aiden Tabucic said:

FG Is short flyers to lowkey 

Sorry but no. This isn't about CTA assigning buses to fit an enthusiast's specific wishlists to see any one model at a given garage. It's about whether CTA keeps enough operable buses assigned at the garages to fit the schedule needs for each of the garage's assigned routes. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Artics have always been a funny issue. When CTA first got their first artics in 1980, they were used as "unassigned spares" for at least a year, being tried out on practically every route out of every garage. Then they finally settled on there routes - 99-Stevenson Express, 6-Jeffery Express, and 22-Clark. When the 7100's showed up, they went on basically the same routes, just adding 151-Sheridan and 147-Outer Drive Express. Attempts to run them on other routes have been made from time to time, such as on 15-Jeffery Local and 28-Stony island on weekends for one pick, and of course 79 and 66, but in the end the artics have pretty much stayed where they were initially, on routes with long non-stop portions for the most part. On local routes, the dwell times at stops are just too long compared with standard buses, and unless you make the schedule almost walking-speed, endless delays are almost inevitable.

This has also been shown to be true in other cities too. Most cities with large fleets use them on express routes of one sort or another. Places like Atlanta and Portland which once had artics gave up on them when the express routes were eliminated by rail extensions. Milwaukee had 40 artics years ago, but never replaced the original fleet when it was discovered they were being used two to three hours a day on Freeway Flyers, and were nearly impossible to run anywhere else because they were so slow loading. New York used theirs on "Select Bus" routes which are prepaid BRT-style runs with stops every half mile or so.

CTA 4300's were bought for a specific reason - Dan Ryan replacement routes. They worked very well there. Once the Ryan was back in service, the 4300's became excess baggage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, andrethebusman said:

Artics have always been a funny issue. When CTA first got their first artics in 1980, they were used as "unassigned spares" for at least a year, being tried out on practically every route out of every garage. Then they finally settled on there routes - 99-Stevenson Express, 6-Jeffery Express, and 22-Clark. When the 7100's showed up, they went on basically the same routes, just adding 151-Sheridan and 147-Outer Drive Express. Attempts to run them on other routes have been made from time to time, such as on 15-Jeffery Local and 28-Stony island on weekends for one pick, and of course 79 and 66, but in the end the artics have pretty much stayed where they were initially, on routes with long non-stop portions for the most part. On local routes, the dwell times at stops are just too long compared with standard buses, and unless you make the schedule almost walking-speed, endless delays are almost inevitable.

This has also been shown to be true in other cities too. Most cities with large fleets use them on express routes of one sort or another. Places like Atlanta and Portland which once had artics gave up on them when the express routes were eliminated by rail extensions. Milwaukee had 40 artics years ago, but never replaced the original fleet when it was discovered they were being used two to three hours a day on Freeway Flyers, and were nearly impossible to run anywhere else because they were so slow loading. New York used theirs on "Select Bus" routes which are prepaid BRT-style runs with stops every half mile or so.

CTA 4300's were bought for a specific reason - Dan Ryan replacement routes. They worked very well there. Once the Ryan was back in service, the 4300's became excess baggage.

Yeah I remember when being a small kid of about 5 or 6 and seeing artics for the first time and being mesmerized by how big they seemed compared to standard buses. My first ride ever on one was on the 66 believe it or not. I used to see them quite a bit on 94 since in those days it was assigned to Archer before going to Kedzie for a while starting in 1986. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, andrethebusman said:

Artics have always been a funny issue. When CTA first got their first artics in 1980, they were used as "unassigned spares" for at least a year, being tried out on practically every route out of every garage. Then they finally settled on there routes - 99-Stevenson Express, 6-Jeffery Express, and 22-Clark. When the 7100's showed up, they went on basically the same routes, just adding 151-Sheridan and 147-Outer Drive Express. Attempts to run them on other routes have been made from time to time, such as on 15-Jeffery Local and 28-Stony island on weekends for one pick, and of course 79 and 66, but in the end the artics have pretty much stayed where they were initially, on routes with long non-stop portions for the most part. On local routes, the dwell times at stops are just too long compared with standard buses, and unless you make the schedule almost walking-speed, endless delays are almost inevitable.

This has also been shown to be true in other cities too. Most cities with large fleets use them on express routes of one sort or another. Places like Atlanta and Portland which once had artics gave up on them when the express routes were eliminated by rail extensions. Milwaukee had 40 artics years ago, but never replaced the original fleet when it was discovered they were being used two to three hours a day on Freeway Flyers, and were nearly impossible to run anywhere else because they were so slow loading. New York used theirs on "Select Bus" routes which are prepaid BRT-style runs with stops every half mile or so.

CTA 4300's were bought for a specific reason - Dan Ryan replacement routes. They worked very well there. Once the Ryan was back in service, the 4300's became excess baggage.

If I were running  CTA (and obviously I'm nof), I would find a way to sell 100 artics and use the money to buy 100 40 ft. buses. But, from what you say, I might not find any takers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Busjack said:

If I were running  CTA (and obviously I'm nof), I would find a way to sell 100 artics and use the money to buy 100 40 ft. buses. But, from what you say, I might not find any takers.

It definitely brings up the question if CTA will stay at just over 300 artics when it comes time to start replacing artics when the 4000s come up for retirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Busjack said:

If I were running  CTA (and obviously I'm nof), I would find a way to sell 100 artics and use the money to buy 100 40 ft. buses. But, from what you say, I might not find any takers.

Going off what Andre is stating,  Only way to make them worth the money spent while we still have 300 artics would be to reintroduce X-service along with tweak the stopping pattern to the remaining routes that still use them currently.  That was my main reason for advocating bi-directional #26 service.  Not only does it give a quicker link to downtown but it would also give reason to cut back  some #6 service south of 63rd since the south end is what really fouls up the #6's performance with the 2 left turns at 67the/Stony Island and 71St/South Shore along.  That Hyde park segment of the route could also shed a stop or two to help keep in line with what Andre says.  On the north #147 can use the same help cause a lot of stops on Sheridan are pretty close together as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Going off what Andre is stating,  Only way to make them worth the money spent while we still have 300 artics would be to reintroduce X-service along with tweak the stopping pattern to the remaining routes that still use them currently. 

The way it is sounding, the only way it works is to expand the size of the bus stops. I don't know if the parking deal prevents that (i.e., put in X4 or X8). As previously noted, X9 and X49 being out of 74th (mostly 74th in the case of 49), which doesn't handle artics, puts a fly in that ointment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Busjack said:

The way it is sounding, the only way it works is to expand the size of the bus stops. I don't know if the parking deal prevents that (i.e., put in X4 or X8). As previously noted, X9 and X49 being out of 74th (mostly 74th in the case of 49), which doesn't handle artics, puts a fly in that ointment.

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. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sam92 said:

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. 

Depends on what are "such changes." If artics, which was your original premise on "Only way to make them worth the money spent while we still have 300 artics would be to reintroduce X-service," they have already struck out on 66 and 79, and the current plan is to make 66 electric. If the real problem is dwell time, you have to reduce it (hence my suggestion of bigger bus stops) . Only thing accomplished by making the routes limited stop would be to slightly reduce the dwell time by reducing stops, but there is going to be a bigger crowd at each stop. Maybe one way to process the crowd more quickly is put several Ventra machines on each bus (sort of like the Go Lane) or prepaid boarding (can't afford the necessary Customer Assistants).

I still say "sell the buses." :Looks like a similar problem as getting something out of the Optimas, and CTA eventually sold half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What this recent part of this discussion now implies is:

Don't anticipate the CTA to order any articulated buses - new or used - in the foreseeable future. As a matter of fact, the CTA can do almost entirely with 40-footers for the foreseeable future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, RJL6000 said:

What this recent part of this discussion now implies is:

Don't anticipate the CTA to order any articulated buses - new or used - in the foreseeable future. As a matter of fact, the CTA can do almost entirely with 40-footers for the foreseeable future.

The budget (if it can be believed) is 600 40 foot buses in the next 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Busjack said:

Depends on what are "such changes." If artics, which was your original premise on "Only way to make them worth the money spent while we still have 300 artics would be to reintroduce X-service," they have already struck out on 66 and 79, and the current plan is to make 66 electric. If the real problem is dwell time, you have to reduce it (hence my suggestion of bigger bus stops) . Only thing accomplished by making the routes limited stop would be to slightly reduce the dwell time by reducing stops, but there is going to be a bigger crowd at each stop. Maybe one way to process the crowd more quickly is put several Ventra machines on each bus (sort of like the Go Lane) or prepaid boarding (can't afford the necessary Customer Assistants).

I still say "sell the buses." :Looks like a similar problem as getting something out of the Optimas, and CTA eventually sold half.

I mean there'd still be local service to handle the crowds that don't want to walk to an express stop so the crowds wouldn't be too much bigger.  Plus yeah the struck out on 79Th/Chicago as local routes but who's to say limited stops wouldn't at least make a more accurate schedule 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

I mean there'd still be local service to handle the crowds that don't want to walk to an express stop so the crowds wouldn't be too much bigger.  Plus yeah the struck out on 79Th/Chicago as local routes but who's to say limited stops wouldn't at least make a more accurate schedule 

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×