146 Destination Sign

[trainman8119]

Anybody happen to catch the updated destination sign on the 146 southbound ? The flip on the first describing the route name flips so fast I don't think Evelyn Wood could read it !!!

[jajuan]

Anybody happen to catch the updated destination sign on the 146 southbound ? The flip on the first describing the route name flips so fast I don't think Evelyn Wood could read it !!!

Yes I noticed it months ago and thought that same thing. It takes a few flips to really catch what's displayed. You have to be a speed reader to read it for sure.

[MetroShadow]

I'm a speed reader and I can barely get it in.

[jajuan]

Oh well the flip is definitely too fast. So much for the speed reader theory.

Seriously though a big reason I can get it in is from being a Chicago resident and knowing the route's south terminus. What about those who don't live here and are visiting? Good luck to them.

[rmadisonwi]

Oh well the flip is definitely too fast. So much for the speed reader theory.

Seriously though a big reason I can get it in is from being a Chicago resident and knowing the route's south terminus. What about those who don't live here and are visiting? Good luck to them.

Programming glitch. Hopefully will be corrected at some point in the future.

The bug shouldn't really impact anyone, because the important info (i.e. the destination of the route) is displayed for the normal amount of time. It's just the route name that flashes by quickly. And seriously, who really needs to know that the 146 is the "Inner Drive/Michigan Express." What useful information does that actually tell the passenger?

In many cases, the route name in the destination sign doesn't tell you much of anything useful. For example, on Western, one can see a bus that says "49 Western." Wow, never would have figured that I might catch a Western Avenue bus on Western! Next, you'll tell me that I can board the Fullerton bus on Fullerton, or a 79th Street bus on 79th.

For routes that operate pretty much entirely on one street (with the possible exceptions of their turnarounds), having the route name in the destination sign contributes nothing towards informing the passenger of where the bus goes (especially since the bus stop has the same information already on it, often including a map of the route).

On the other hand, you have a route like the 147 "Outer Drive Express" which is named after a road on which the route doesn't stop at all. The route name doesn't tell you anything about where the bus is going (it only vaguely tells you how the bus will get there...wherever "there" is). Plus, all of the Lake Shore express routes use the Outer Drive at some point, but only one has that name.

Then you have route 145 Wilson/Michigan Express, which doesn't operate on Wilson during the rush hour (which is why the destination signs on any buses with a recent sign update no longer actually show the route name, they just say "145 Express to Lake Shore/Grace").

Routes such as 124 Navy Pier and 130 Museum Campus are named after one destination, so when traveling the other way the name is actually misleading to anyone boarding. This is also why the #10 signs were changed last year so that, northbound, they just say "To Water Tower" instead of confusing tourists with "Museum Sci/Ind" as the route name on the northbound trips. The 124 and 130 also do not show their route name when traveling away from their namesake destination.

Then there's stuff such as the 129 West Loop/South Loop (where, exactly, does that bus go? How does the route name help me figure out where the bus goes?), or the 11 Lincoln/Sedgwick (try riding on Sedgwick on weekends) or the 30 South Chicago (which runs anywhere but on Sunday).

I know that long rant doesn't have much to do with the 146 sign screw-up, except to say that as long as the important part can be read (i.e. where the bus is going), missing the route name really doesn't make a difference at all. Besides, if you really wanted to know the route name, and you're standing at the bus stop, just read the side sign, where the timing is actually correct (and, if you're not standing at the bus stop, what difference does it make to you if you can read the sign or not, you're not getting on the bus anyway).

[trainman8119]

Programming glitch. Hopefully will be corrected at some point in the future.

The bug shouldn't really impact anyone, because the important info (i.e. the destination of the route) is displayed for the normal amount of time.

I agree about the important info, just was pointing out something I noticed. I am sure this is all ADA related, but frankly I'd just assume destination signs state just that...destination (and route number). It's really that simple, just like the old days. 20 to Michigan..real simple, yeah ?

[Busjack]

The bug shouldn't really impact anyone, because the important info (i.e. the destination of the route) is displayed for the normal amount of time. It's just the route name that flashes by quickly. And seriously, who really needs to know that the 146 is the "Inner Drive/Michigan Express." What useful information does that actually tell the passenger?....

No need for me to quote more, since it repeats many of the complaints I have had about sign theory lately, although I have always said that Pace is much more inconsistent than CTA.

With all the LSD buses, the main function inbound is to indicate where the express zone starts, i.e. 144 at Irving and 146 at Belmont. Also, on the other side 145 via Michigan and 146 via State. Obviously, the restructuring found that such differences count (remember the articles at the time about the little old ladies south of Irving Park complaining that they lost the 145, even though the frequency of the 146 was increased, so they got the 145 to Grace (or whatever at the time) reinstated).

Other transit agencies have dealt with the issue by having signs to the effect of 229 Express to Foster/to Howard; 229 Express to Irving Pk/to Berwyn; 229 Express to Belmont/to Grace; etc. (my having assigned an arbitrary number here). In effect, 5750's 1973 era sign showing the never displayed reading "151 Sheridan Express via Foster to Howard" would have accomplished the same thing. However, instead of going in that direction, CTA decided, when numbering the express routes in 1976, to give them individual numbers (i.e. 145-147). The individual names are undoubtedly a legacy from the days when the numbers were not on the express route headsigns. At least we don't have the totally messed up WMATA numbering system (or the one Kruesi proposed for the express and angular street routes).

As far as routes being named for destinations, I agree about that confusion, which is much worse on Pace. It probably doesn't make much difference on north suburban routes, in that the predominant street is not shown on most of the signs (which I would think would meet with rmadison's approval), but in the South Division it does. Instead of having a sign saying 354 Harvey-Oak Forest Loop to Central via 147, they have something like 354 Harvey TC/CTRCLKWISE, even while it is leaving Harvey (I guess it has the same issue that the old CTA 127 Circulator had that it couldn't figure out where to flip on the west side of the loop). I was thinking that they should have renamed 356 Harvey/Tinley Park* to 356 183rd, but I guess that once they started the late evening short runs, that would have caused the same problem as Wilson-Mich Exp. to Grace.

______________

*For rotjohn's benefit, one of them I saw at Harvey had an orange front sign saying " INLEY HOSP," so they do break. Maybe that's why the ADA regs require the same sign readings on the front and side.

[cta5658]

The #146 isn't the only one who had their signs changed, lately i've been seeing SB #14 Buses saying "14JEFFERY EXPRESS *flip* 14 TO 103RD/*Top* Stony *bottom* Island" but some still say "14 TO STONY/103RD"

[jajuan]

Well I'm not going to quote the long rant either, but Busjack does bring up a valid point that while some don't see the necessity for showing route name, others might. I've got plenty of friends who are not native born Chicagoans and grew up elsewhere, and they learned how to navigate the system by seeing the route names on the buses. The route name after all does have its purpose with routes that share streets with other routes along different stretches. Using the 78 as an example, if I'm new in town and I'm trying to learn my way about town and the transit system just seeing 78 to XYZ flashing on the front sign of a bus doesn't necessarily do much for me waiting westbound on Wilson east of Clark since I'm not yet familiar with many of the route numbers if any. For all I know, I should be boarding a bus that has 145/148 to ABC. But if I see MONTROSE flashed across the sign, I know that bus is going to get me on to Montrose.

[jacksone44]

ive noticed this too, but became to lazy to make a post...lol

[cta_44499_FG]

I guess that once they started the late evening short runs, that would have caused the same problem as Wilson-Mich Exp. to Grace.

______________

Oddly enough, those same 145 are now running around with "145 EXPRESS// to LAKE SHORE/GRACE" now.

What always got me was the inconsistency of the black express on an amber or green background on the X routes. The X49 had it, the others didnt.

[Busjack]

Oddly enough, those same 145 are now running around with "145 EXPRESS// to LAKE SHORE/GRACE" now.

What always got me was the inconsistency of the black express on an amber or green background on the X routes. The X49 had it, the others didnt.

They were on X21 and X55 for a while. Of course, the problem on X55 was that by then they were using worn out flip dot signs on the 6000s. For that matter, X21 was also running Flxs.

[nickper]

Busjack - good call on the WMATA route numbering system in the D.C. area. Off topic, but I've never in my life seen or heard of anything like what exists in Washington. In Northern Virginia, the there are line numbers followed by a route branch letter, such as 17A,B,F,M; 17G,H,K,L. Even if there is only one "route" within a number "line," they still use letters - there is only one "24", the 24T (why not just use 24?). In Maryland and the District itself it gets crazy - J1, J2, J3; J11, J12, J13; W13; P6; K6; L2,4 - just all over the place with some number only routes where streetcars used to operate. Then there is the 70 and 71. Not two different routes but one route (the "7") with two different terminals. Talk about confusing to anyone who does not take the time to understand let alone tourists or new folks.

Sorry for the random rant.

[MetroShadow]

Busjack - good call on the WMATA route numbering system in the D.C. area. Off topic, but I've never in my life seen or heard of anything like what exists in Washington. In Northern Virginia, the there are line numbers followed by a route branch letter, such as 17A,B,F,M; 17G,H,K,L. Even if there is only one "route" within a number "line," they still use letters - there is only one "24", the 24T (why not just use 24?). In Maryland and the District itself it gets crazy - J1, J2, J3; J11, J12, J13; W13; P6; K6; L2,4 - just all over the place with some number only routes where streetcars used to operate. Then there is the 70 and 71. Not two different routes but one route (the "7") with two different terminals. Talk about confusing to anyone who does not take the time to understand let alone tourists or new folks.

Sorry for the random rant.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who noticed how botched up this system is, especially when I thought the "x" was the express buses (I failed in such an attempt).