What to Do With Surplus Artics

[NewFlyerMCI]

funny enough, 4315 is on the 15

[XE NewFlyer]

I was thinking,  if dwell time is a problem on artics the only sensible reason would be the fact that the back doors take a few seconds to close. To my knowledge both the 66 and 79 used just 4000's. As a frequent rider of artics i noticed 4300's doors close faster than the 4000's ones. Is it possible that 4000's are the only buses causing dwell time problems? If so almost all of the 4300's could move to 77th and Chicago which have the heaviest routes and the rest at the other garages where they might be needed.

Here is my idea of the garage assignments it could go down any way but this is one option I think would work

103rd: 4312-4316

NP: 4317-4322, 4324-4327, 4370-4379

Chicago: 4328-4332, 4334-4349  

77th: 4301-4311, 4350-4369, 4380-4399 

 

[Sam92]

46 minutes ago, XE NewFlyer said:

I was thinking,  if dwell time is a problem on artics the only sensible reason would be the fact that the back doors take a few seconds to close. To my knowledge both the 66 and 79 used just 4000's. As a frequent rider of artics i noticed 4300's doors close faster than the 4000's ones. Is it possible that 4000's are the only buses causing dwell time problems? If so almost all of the 4300's could move to 77th and Chicago which have the heaviest routes and the rest at the other garages where they might be needed.

Here is my idea of the garage assignments it could go down any way but this is one option I think would work

103rd: 4312-4316

NP: 4317-4322, 4324-4327, 4370-4379

Chicago: 4328-4332, 4334-4349  

77th: 4301-4311, 4350-4369, 4380-4399 

 

I don't think series made a difference cause 77th started with all 4300s and Chicago had half their artics made up of 4300 before they were sent north

[andrethebusman]

4/3 list:

4000-4066 K

4067-4070 P

4071 K

4072-4073 P

4074 K

4075-4079 P

4080-4116 103

4117-4166 P

4167 oos

4168-4171 P

4172-4195 103

4196-4207 K

4300 ood

4301-4320 103

4321-4322 P

4323 oos

4324-4325 P

4326-4327 103

4328-4332 P

4333 oos

4334-4399 P

[Manny018]

How come np doesn’t make the 148 and 151 an all artic route during  the morning rush period? Np has a sufficient enough number of artics between 4000s and 4300s to make the 22, 135, 136, 146, 147, 148, 151 and run a few artics on the 152 and 56 all at once, even run a few artics on the 50, sometimes the 50 gets really heavy in both rush periods. But even in the evening I’ll see 1000s on the 135 and 136 and why not just run all artics? Np should just utilize the artics as much as possible and run them. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

12 hours ago, Manny018 said:

How come np doesn’t make the 148 and 151 an all artic route during  the morning rush period? Np has a sufficient enough number of artics between 4000s and 4300s to make the 22, 135, 136, 146, 147, 148, 151 and run a few artics on the 152 and 56 all at once, even run a few artics on the 50, sometimes the 50 gets really heavy in both rush periods. But even in the evening I’ll see 1000s on the 135 and 136 and why not just run all artics? Np should just utilize the artics as much as possible and run them. 

Because then you'll be using a chainsaw when you need a scalpel. Every crowding issue can't be solved by just throwing artics at it. Could CTA allocate them better than they are now? Yes. Are they using them extremely inefficiently as they are now? Not really.

• The 151 uses about 23-26 buses during peak, of which maybe 3-6 will be non-artic. I think they got it covered
• The 156 is higher priority for artics than the 148. In fact, every route you mentioned has a higher priority, bar the 50, the 56, the 152 and maybe the 22
• 152 might benefit from artics, but doesn't need them.
• Same thing with the 50. That said, the 50, much like the 82, does get artics occasionally, outside of school and/or united center runs.
• The 56 will never need artics unless something happens to the Blue Line
• The evening LaSalle Crawls have slightly less ridership than the morning ones, at least based on personal observations. Also a way to get buses stored downtown back north (happy to be wrong about that one)
  • Additionally, I can tell you that the 136 at least, is not consistently full all the way to the end of the line, a majority of the ridership from the few times I've taken it is off the bus between Foster and Thorndale

[XE NewFlyer]

On 5/14/2019 at 12:12 PM, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

• The 151 uses about 23-26 buses during peak, of which maybe 3-6 will be non-artic. I think they got it covered

Not in the morning just in the afternoon

On 5/14/2019 at 12:12 PM, NewFlyerMCI said:

 

• The 156 is higher priority for artics than the 148. In fact, every route you mentioned has a higher priority, bar the 50, the 56, the 152 and maybe the 22
• 152 might benefit from artics, but doesn't need them.
• Same thing with the 50. That said, the 50, much like the 82, does get artics occasionally, outside of school and/or united center runs.

There is a surplus of artics all of these routes can have them. not to mention other routes like the 2, 3, 4, 77 etc that need artics but don't have them.

yes this is a silly problem that can be solved without selling buses there are so many ways to do this. reduce stops on routes, get back doors to close faster etc.

[NewFlyerMCI]

5 hours ago, XE NewFlyer said:

Not in the morning just in the afternoon

There is a surplus of artics all of these routes can have them. not to mention other routes like the 2, 3, 4, 77 etc that need artics but don't have them.

yes this is a silly problem that can be solved without selling buses there are so many ways to do this. reduce stops on routes, get back doors to close faster etc.

Pretty sure the 2 doesn't need artics. 3 and 4, sure, but I don't see 77th getting artics back anytime soon. Although you could make a case that the 4 and maybe the 3 could be shared with 103rd. It doesn't matter if there is a surplus of artics, not all of the routes the user mentioned need them. I'd rather see slightly underutilized artics on routes that already have them than have them completely underutilized on routes that don't need them. As for your last point, all of this has been discussed before. Nothing we can do until CTA shuffles buses around.

[YoungBusLover]

1 hour ago, NewFlyerMCI said:

Pretty sure the 2 doesn't need artics. 3 and 4, sure, but I don't see 77th getting artics back anytime soon. Although you could make a case that the 4 and maybe the 3 could be shared with 103rd. It doesn't matter if there is a surplus of artics, not all of the routes the user mentioned need them. I'd rather see slightly underutilized artics on routes that already have them than have them completely underutilized on routes that don't need them. As for your last point, all of this has been discussed before. Nothing we can do until CTA shuffles buses around.

The 4 with artics would be a night mare in itself, the last time that route had artics the nabis were just about brand new. Now if the X4 was back then sure put some artics on it but artics on a local run is just as slow as a regular 40 foot run and slightly less packed with passengers during peak hours. 

[NewFlyerMCI]

4 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

The 4 with artics would be a night mare in itself, the last time that route had artics the nabis were just about brand new. Now if the X4 was back then sure put some artics on it but artics on a local run is just as slow as a regular 40 foot run and slightly less packed with passengers during peak hours. 

The 4 had artics when 77th last had artics, the 79 wasn't the only one to use them, the 2 and 3 got a few as well. Of course the buses are going to go the same speed, but they won't be as packed anymore as long as they don't reduce the frequency like they did for the 79. Now, the route doesn't need to be completely artic, but something like the 26, where there is often an even mix or slightly more artics than shoeboxes would be beneficial. It would especially help from the stretch from the Loop to 35th or 47th and then from 63rd to 79th, where it can often be standing room only or just a few seats left. The 3 would be worse off with artics than the 4, which CTA recognized last time they had some, since the 4 had more than the 3.

[Manny018]

Why does 4366 make a trembling sound?

[Nova's at 103rd]

On 5/25/2019 at 5:38 PM, YoungBusLover said:

The 4 with artics would be a night mare in itself, the last time that route had artics the nabis were just about brand new. Now if the X4 was back then sure put some artics on it but artics on a local run is just as slow as a regular 40 foot run and slightly less packed with passengers during peak hours. 

Being a very frequent rider of the 4, having artics would mean they would only operate between Illinois Center and 95th which is smart but when school starts back up 65% of the rush hour ridership comes from between 115th and 95th but artics can't operate the turns at 95th and Cottage Grove to go further south and either at 115th. Artics can be smart but then new flyers and novas heading to 115th would be crowded as usual and since they come every 20 minutes it would be a major headache having artics crowded and new flyer and novas crowded.

[artthouwill]

18 minutes ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

Being a very frequent rider of the 4, having artics would mean they would only operate between Illinois Center and 95th which is smart but when school starts back up 65% of the rush hour ridership comes from between 115th and 95th but artics can't operate the turns at 95th and Cottage Grove to go further south and either at 115th. Artics can be smart but then new flyers and novas heading to 115th would be crowded as usual and since they come every 20 minutes it would be a major headache having artics crowded and new flyer and novas crowded.

I think the artics CAN make the turns at 95th going east to SB Cottage Grove and from Cottage Grove to WB 115th.  If an artic can turn a 135° angle from NB Exchange to EB 83rd, it can make 100° turn.  Obviously a driver would have to watch the high curb, but if he makes that turn and uses the left lane on Cottage  Grove until the trailer wheels have cleared the corner, he should be fine.  

[Nova's at 103rd]

On 8/12/2019 at 2:19 PM, artthouwill said:

I think the artics CAN make the turns at 95th going east to SB Cottage Grove and from Cottage Grove to WB 115th.  If an artic can turn a 135° angle from NB Exchange to EB 83rd, it can make 100° turn.  Obviously a driver would have to watch the high curb, but if he makes that turn and uses the left lane on Cottage  Grove until the trailer wheels have cleared the corner, he should be fine.  

Ok you convinced me about southbound but northbound would be a even more of struggle because of the support beams in the middle of 95th and I've been on several new flyers that have got stuck or scrapped making that turn as it is sharp, but it's possible an artic can make both turns.

[andrethebusman]

My experience is that artics can make a tighter turn than 40 footers. When the 7000s were new we took one on a "test run" that included coming down LeClaire and making the turns at Elston. No problem.

[strictures]

About 10 years ago, the Clark/Arthur terminal was supposed to be turned around and the buses would enter from Clark, instead of that short stretch of Ashland. That way they would exit to a traffic light & not have to cross traffic from the opposite direction both entering & leaving the terminal.  Several weeks ago, I asked the new 40th Ward alderman's chief of staff why this never happened & he said the CTA claimed the artics for the 151 couldn't make that turn.

Since I see them leave onto Clark without a problem, including some that do make a tight left turn to the median, that claim has to been BS.  They also easily make a tight left turn at the north end of the terminal, right along the guard rails.

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, andrethebusman said:

My experience is that artics can make a tighter turn than 40 footers. When the 7000s were new we took one on a "test run" that included coming down LeClaire and making the turns at Elston. No problem.

To your point, and you can confirm this, I believe the portion of the artic in front of the accordion is 35' and the trailer is 25', roughly speaking.   This makes tighter turns.

[andrethebusman]

About 35 and 30 considering joint is actually in the middle of the bellows

[artthouwill]

2 hours ago, Nova's at 103rd said:

Ok you convinced me about southbound but northbound would be a even more of struggle because of the support beams in the middle of 95th and I've been on several new flyers that have got stuck or scrapped making that turn as it is sharp, but it's possible an artic can make both turns.

They can and those drivers that scrape their 40's are being careless.  To make the turn from NB Cottage to WB 95th, the driver has to be in the right lane.  When making the left turn, he needs to make sure he's in the right hand lane on 95th.  He should be using his driver side mirror to make sure he clears the abutment.  New Flyers have a very good turning radius so the driver can widen his turn a little bit.  Once in the viaduct he can get close to the right abutment and he is clear once his rear wheels enter .The key for an artic to make that same turn is to keep the front of the bus in the right WB lane.  @andrethebusman can verify this.

[artthouwill]

1 minute ago, andrethebusman said:

About 35 and 30 considering joint is actually in the middle of the bellows

Well the bus is only 60' long which is why I said 35 and 25 with 35 and 30 being 65. Lol!

[andrethebusman]

Most artics (but not all) have a roughly 30-32 foot front and 25-28 foot rear. Neoplans were equal lenght 30-30, very different on turns.

[monsieurmétro]

On 5/27/2018 at 8:57 AM, Busjack said:

You wasted state capital money on the Optimas, NABIs, and 4333 series artics.

It seems really stupid that they decided that those would be D60LFRs instead of their hybrid brothers (DE60LFRs) like the 4300s and 4000s (DE60LFs) were. Is there a reason that I am not yet aware of for this decision such as cheaper to purchase them or something else?

[NewFlyerMCI]

24 minutes ago, monsieurmétro said:

It seems really stupid that they decided that those would be D60LFRs instead of their hybrid brothers (DE60LFRs) like the 4300s and 4000s (DE60LFs) were. Is there a reason that I am not yet aware of for this decision such as cheaper to purchase them or something else?

That's probably why

[busfan2847]

13 hours ago, monsieurmétro said:

It seems really stupid that they decided that those would be D60LFRs instead of their hybrid brothers (DE60LFRs) like the 4300s and 4000s (DE60LFs) were. Is there a reason that I am not yet aware of for this decision such as cheaper to purchase them or something else?

They were part of a Seattle order not delivered to Seattle, but I assume already in production. Delivery started six months after the order was placed.

The straight clean-diesel were $157,000 cheaper per bus but I do not think that was the reason.

From Tribune on 5/12/2012

"Calling it too good of a deal to pass up, the CTA board on Wednesday approved the purchase of 100 new accordion-style buses, averaging $800,000 each, that were left over from a contract initiated by the Seattle transit system.

The CTA will pay New Flyer Industries Inc.$80.1 million for the 67 clean-diesel buses and 33 diesel-electric hybrid buses. The 60-foot articulated buses were part of an order for up to 715 buses that King County Metro Transit in Seattle agreed to buy from New Flyer. The CTA will use federal and local funds."

"The CTA is paying $740,000 for each of the 67 diesel buses and $897,000 for each of the 33 hybrid buses, CTA spokeswoman Molly Sullivan said. The purchase from New Flyer includes spare parts and extended warranties, she said."

https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2012-05-10-ct-met-cta-buses-0510-20120510-story.html

[jajuan]

On 12/8/2019 at 9:13 PM, monsieurmétro said:

It seems really stupid that they decided that those would be D60LFRs instead of their hybrid brothers (DE60LFRs) like the 4300s and 4000s (DE60LFs) were. Is there a reason that I am not yet aware of for this decision such as cheaper to purchase them or something else?

Plus what our old fiscal conservative friend Busjack was getting at in that statement was that CTA put money into purchasing the series he mentioned only for there not to be a long term use or need from them. The Optimas were indeed used on really lightly used bus routes, but the problem was they had a really crappy suspension system and couldn't handle Chicago streets very well. So they spent too much time in the garage maintenance bays when they should have been on the street. With the NABIs, at the time of purchase CTA was in a desperate need of new buses because a majority of the fleet was approaching, at or far beyond the federally recommended minimum service life for retirement eligibility. So they end up having NABI take advantage of that desperation to sell them the NABI 60 LFW model, which was an unproven model in terms revenue operation by any TA. That was one red flag. It couldn't even pass the Altoona engineering standards testing which is a requirement for any bus model to be on the road for any TA. That was another red flag. CTA gets the buses and as the warning signs suggested, the bus was poorly designed with poor suspension and other problems that kept them stuck in the garage for maintenance more than they were on the road. The final straw came when a bus was found to have a splitting at the articulation joint, leading CTA to pull every artic from service with the exception of at time what few NF artics they had. There was a huge reshuffle of buses among all the garages with the lighter route garages loaning 40 foot buses to the artic garages to help shore them up until more NF 4000s arrived to replace lost artics. Our friend Busjack would tell you that the evidence says that this is the real reason CTA got the 4000s. Also CTA sued NABI over this debacle. It was this incident that led CTA to totally revamp its vehicle purchase protocols to include the now strict standards it imposes on manufacturers before it accepts ownership of any vehicle purchased as part of any order. In the case of the NF LFR 4300s, the only true need CTA had for more articulated buses was for use on the Red Line replacement shuttle routes that were placed in service during the time that CTA demolished and completely rebuilt the Dan Ryan section of the Red Line. After that work was done, CTA has pretty much easily had 100 artics parked across the artic garages at any given time including during rush periods when looking at the average number of artics in service on a route dureing different times of the day. That's even with 40 foot buses being seen on the 6, 146 and 147 for example being an extremely rare occurrence when historically 40 foot buses on those routes were more mixed in with artics than they are today. That's also even with accounting for expanded artic use on the 12, 22, 26, and 151 as examples of routes that didn't have as heavy an artic presence just a few years ago. When examining artic deployments with the help of Maths22's tracker, the numbers show that CTA just doesn't need anywhere near the just over 300 artics it current has. It needs not much more than the just over 200 it had in the 4000s before getting the 4300s. That's pretty much the background and context of what Busjack was getting at in his comment that was quoted. Two series CTA only ran in service for only a few years out of the initial longer term planned use. The third it purchased in the long term but only had a shorter term need.