What to Do With Surplus Artics

[jajuan]

On 7/2/2025 at 8:49 AM, artthouwill said:

I don't think the issue is turns.  More than likely the issue is efficiency.   The heaviest portion of the 36 is south of Diversey.  It is a supplement to the 22 which his the heavier route.  Therefore 40ft buses make more sense on the 36 because north of Diversey only requires a 40'.  The only way an artic makes the 36 is either a trip is part of a block run on an artic route, or a situation where a bus is needed and the immediate available bus is an artic.

@EasyMoney the width of the artics don't ilprohibit the use of artics on Broadway.  The street is NOT too narrow.  

I wasn't arguing for artics to be on the 36. I was just pointing out the flaws in EasyMoney's positions for why they don't get placed on the route very often. 

On 7/2/2025 at 2:04 AM, EasyMoney said:

I Work out of north park im just telling you what they tell me i been here for a year never seen a artic on the 36

As pointed out before me, low artic usage on the 36 is more a function of the ridership counts and patterns don't call for anything more than 40 foot buses. It has nothing to do with the width of the roadways that are part of the route, number of turns or even the tightness of turns. If any of those had any weight, we wouldn't see the high number of artics on the 22, 151 or any of the express routes assigned to North Park.

Yes you may be a bus operator working there, but as you mentioned that's been the case for a year. However, North Park has been my neighborhood area home garage for 15 years with another 15 added from having been a regular rider of North Park bus since my high school days. So I think I have a good amount of observational experience with how and why different bus types within its ever evolving roster have been deployed among its given slot of assigned routes over the years. I mention this not to flex, but to make the larger point that we all learn from each other here whether any of us be operators observing from the inside such as yourself or passengers observing things from the outside. Heck, a number of our operator members are operators because they joined our forum as teenagers and younger adults and the discussions we've had here sparked their desire to become operators or reinforced a desire that was already there. 

[MetroShadow]

5 hours ago, jajuan said:

I wasn't arguing for artics to be on the 36. I was just pointing out the flaws in EasyMoney's positions for why they don't get placed on the route very often. 

As pointed out before me, low artic usage on the 36 is more a function of the ridership counts and patterns don't call for anything more than 40 foot buses. It has nothing to do with the width of the roadways that are part of the route, number of turns or even the tightness of turns. If any of those had any weight, we wouldn't see the high number of artics on the 22, 151 or any of the express routes assigned to North Park.

Yes you may be a bus operator working there, but as you mentioned that's been the case for a year. However, North Park has been my neighborhood area home garage for 15 years with another 15 added from having been a regular rider of North Park bus since my high school days. So I think I have a good amount of observational experience with how and why different bus types within its ever evolving roster have been deployed among its given slot of assigned routes over the years. I mention this not to flex, but to make the larger point that we all learn from each other here whether any of us be operators observing from the inside such as yourself or passengers observing things from the outside. Heck, a number of our operator members are operators because they joined our forum as teenagers and younger adults and the discussions we've had here sparked their desire to become operators or reinforced a desire that was already there. 

+1 (And in 20 years on this forum, it helped me go into ops planning).

NP is my home garage, too, having grown up on the Clarendon/Lake Shore Corridor. I might have seen a handful of artics on the 36 since the 90s, but capacity doesn't call for it. With how artics work differently than a 40', I'm impressed that I have seen those turns happen on Irving Park (without daylight interventions or bad parking), let alone some of the turns I've seen in the Bay Area with narrower streets. 

[Sam92]

On 6/24/2025 at 11:45 PM, EasyMoney said:

Cant use Artics On 36 From Broadway/Addison To Broadway/Diversity Street To Narrow Can Cause Accident  

 

8 hours ago, jajuan said:

I wasn't arguing for artics to be on the 36. I was just pointing out the flaws in EasyMoney's positions for why they don't get placed on the route very often. 

As pointed out before me, low artic usage on the 36 is more a function of the ridership counts and patterns don't call for anything more than 40 foot buses. It has nothing to do with the width of the roadways that are part of the route, number of turns or even the tightness of turns. If any of those had any weight, we wouldn't see the high number of artics on the 22, 151 or any of the express routes assigned to North Park.

Yes you may be a bus operator working there, but as you mentioned that's been the case for a year. However, North Park has been my neighborhood area home garage for 15 years with another 15 added from having been a regular rider of North Park bus since my high school days. So I think I have a good amount of observational experience with how and why different bus types within its ever evolving roster have been deployed among its given slot of assigned routes over the years. I mention this not to flex, but to make the larger point that we all learn from each other here whether any of us be operators observing from the inside such as yourself or passengers observing things from the outside. Heck, a number of our operator members are operators because they joined our forum as teenagers and younger adults and the discussions we've had here sparked their desire to become operators or reinforced a desire that was already there. 

I think what might have been said was 36 isn't an artic designated route like 22 or 151 so doesn't get them unless it's the only thing available 🤷

[Sam92]

We all know that delays caused artics to get pulled from certain routes... This link might give more details as far as how and why. 

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://tram.mcgill.ca/Research/Publications/Articulated_buses.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi-7JzH3cSOAxUstokEHSz8AOkQFnoECEkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw1EceqYGY6oWaf2m8dg-y8b

[Busjack]

8 hours ago, Sam92 said:

We all know that delays caused artics to get pulled from certain routes... This link might give more details as far as how and why. 

 

A few things I noted:

• The dwell time is unaffected because STM uses 3 door artics.* CTA uses 2 door ones.
• The routes looked like one rush-hour one, one all day frequent one, and one limited stop one (but no indication of BRT). So, I guess similar to CTA.
• The study only deals with running time, and says on page 17: "Since the data obtained from the STM was collected from a sample of trips it was not possible to measure the effects of using articulated service on either the reliability of service or on headways." But that is exactly about what posters are complaining.
• It assumes that if increased running time requires more equipment to maintain headways, it would be more artics (pages 16-17),* not mixed fleets that CTA uses.

BTW, I noted that the data used included Automatic Vehicle Location and Automatic Passenger Counts, things CTA has but people I said were stuck  in 1968 ignore.

----

*Searching for a picture of a Montreal articulated bus yielded this 2024 Montreal Gazette article that instead of increasing its fleet and garage capacity as planned pre-Covid, the board voted to retire 155 buses, including artics, and not replace them. 

[Busjack]

On 10/16/2025 at 9:52 PM, Master58 said:

There's no feud here. Everyone is entitled to their opinions.  

 

Np has over 130 artics.  Only 80 are in use. 

 

6 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

This entire notion that NP has to many artics is due to several underlying factors that have been addressed over the years. 

Long story short the CTA has to many to evenly distribute across the system without there being some type of bottleneck. However, NP needs a higher number of artics due the amount of work those buses put in compared to 103rd, they're far more prone to getting into accidents as well as breakdowns than 103rd. Giving 103rd more than what's necessary isn't feasible either. Spare ratios are important and NP having a surplus does help with that. The #4300s out of 103rd constantly breaking down more often it seems even after the rehabs they received. Wishful thinking would have C and 77th added back into the mix to help even things out while the #1000s get there 2nd overhaul. I can think of a couple of routes in particular that could use a helping hand in artics and that's the 2, 3, 4, 8, 66, and 157. 

Somehow, as some of youa  drive a 77th Garage bus on Route 68, the 2026 Budget is not where yo discuu this when this topic exisrs! I said that before, but it seems that everyone ignores that.

@YoungBusLover hut some of the issues, but those as I see it:

• @Master58's "NP has 50 too many" is way too simplistic.
  • How many does 103 have and how many are in service?
  • How many does 103 need?
    • Only routes that really need them are 6, J14, 169 (a night route), 192 (a J14 deadhead), and a few sxhool trips. They certainly are not needed for regular trips on N5, 15, 28, 29, 30, and especially 34, 95, 103, 106, 108, 111, 111A, 112, and 119.
  • How many in each garage are able to be in service?
• They were run at one time or anotherb on 77th and Chicago garage routes. Why did they fail?

 

[Master58]

8 hours ago, Busjack said:

 

Somehow, as some of youa  drive a 77th Garage bus on Route 68, the 2026 Budget is not where yo discuu this when this topic exisrs! I said that before, but it seems that everyone ignores that.

@YoungBusLover hut some of the issues, but those as I see it:

• @Master58's "NP has 50 too many" is way too simplistic.
  • How many does 103 have and how many are in service?
  • How many does 103 need?
    • Only routes that really need them are 6, J14, 169 (a night route), 192 (a J14 deadhead), and a few sxhool trips. They certainly are not needed for regular trips on N5, 15, 28, 29, 30, and especially 34, 95, 103, 106, 108, 111, 111A, 112, and 119.
  • How many in each garage are able to be in service?
• They were run at one time or anotherb on 77th and Chicago garage routes. Why did they fail?

 

 

Np has 130 artics and only 80 are being used then that leaves 50 artics not being used right? Lol 

So those 50 can be used at other garages. 

146, 147 , 151 , 22 are covered. 

135 and 136 only use the artics in the morning.  In the afternoon they can get by with 60 fts (1000s or novas) 

148 can get by with a few artics and the rest with 60fts.  

 

 

[Busjack]

3 hours ago, Master58 said:

Np has 130 artics and only 80 are being used then that leaves 50 artics not being used right? Lol 

You only repeated yourself, and hence only told a partial story.

Try answering the other questions, starting with how many 103 has, how many is it using, and how many does it need?

So long as you repeat yourself, so may I.

[Master58]

2 hours ago, Busjack said:

You only repeated yourself, and hence only told a partial story.

Try answering the other questions, starting with how many 103 has, how many is it using, and how many does it need?

So long as you repeat yourself, so may I.

I never said 103rd needs more artics.

Let's try this again lol

My case is NP doesn't need 130 artics.  

NP doesn't need 130 artics

NP doesn't need 130 artics

NP doesn't need 130 artics

NP doesn't need 130 artics.

Get the point lol

Justify why north park needs 130 artics. When all 130 artics aren't being used. 

 

[Sam92]

15 hours ago, Master58 said:

 

Np has 130 artics and only 80 are being used then that leaves 50 artics not being used right? Lol 

So those 50 can be used at other garages. 

146, 147 , 151 , 22 are covered. 

135 and 136 only use the artics in the morning.  In the afternoon they can get by with 60 fts (1000s or novas) 

148 can get by with a few artics and the rest with 60fts.  

 

 

 

12 hours ago, Busjack said:

You only repeated yourself, and hence only told a partial story.

Try answering the other questions, starting with how many 103 has, how many is it using, and how many does it need?

So long as you repeat yourself, so may I.

@Master58, @Busjack is probably asking who has a higher unused spare ratio. But anyway to answer one part of the question I counted around 30 artics out from 103rd at 8:00AM on Wed, Thur, Fri; I lost track of how many 4000s it has since it they became so scattered. FTA recommends 20% so if NP is using 80 artics in the peak then it is only over by 26 artics and needs 100 assigned. Now back to 103rd we gotta account for the fact that 6 probably should be all artic but isn't so 103rd should have 40-45 artics in service under normal circumstances so a 20% spare ratio for that means 103rd should have 55 assigned for 6 and J14; 65 if they want to add artics back to 26. I can't speak too much on K but based on the past they either usually end up with the same amount as 103rd or just slightly more so it's not like NP is solely holding all the excess baggage. All 3 seem to be equally high as far as surplus goes. If they cant get 77 or C to use artics we probably only need 230 so while the 208 electrics are to replace the 4000s, I don't see why CTA is possibly looking at replacing all the 4300s with artics as well. I know "up to 100" means they won't do all 100 but I figure it should be up to 50 at most

[Busjack]

14 hours ago, Busjack said:

You only repeated yourself, and hence only told a partial story.

...

So long as you repeat yourself, so may I.

 

11 hours ago, Master58 said:

I never said 103rd needs more artics.

Let's try this again lol

....

Get the point lol

Justify why north park needs 130 artics. When all 130 artics aren't being used. 

Sorry, you did EXACTLY what I said. You repeated yourself. It isn't LOL. It's🙁 (to use your language). You did not advance the dialog

As i indicated in the Budget topic, one response may be to write CTA a comment that the capital plan should be changed to delete the 208 electric buses or not rehab the 4300s because CTA can't use them. But you can't say that. Another response would be to say where they CAN be used.. You did s.

Maybe the 50 artics are like the 1630-2029s at FG and 77th and CTA is too lazy to call the scrapper. You trll us.

But until you do, tou're just "Pete and Repeat were walking down the street, Pete went away. Who was left?" "Repeat." "Pete and Repeat were walking down the street, Pete went away. Who was left?" "Repeat ." "Pete and Repeat were walking down the street, Pete went away. Who was left?" LOL.

Update: I see yjat while I was typing @Sam92 provided some answers, but that doesn't excuse your failure to take responsibility.

 

 

 

[Busjack]

1 minute ago, Master58 said:

Where in this tread have I said 103rd needs more artics? 

 

You still haven't proved that lol.

 

 

All you proved is that you can't read and your LOLs are not funnt. If you can't read and comprehend my post, try @Sam92's.

[Master58]

1 hour ago, Sam92 said:

 

@Master58, @Busjack is probably asking who has a higher unused spare ratio. But anyway to answer one part of the question I counted around 30 artics out from 103rd at 8:00AM on Wed, Thur, Fri; I lost track of how many 4000s it has since it they became so scattered. FTA recommends 20% so if NP is using 80 artics in the peak then it is only over by 26 artics and needs 100 assigned. Now back to 103rd we gotta account for the fact that 6 probably should be all artic but isn't so 103rd should have 40-45 artics in service under normal circumstances so a 20% spare ratio for that means 103rd should have 55 assigned for 6 and J14; 65 if they want to add artics back to 26. I can't speak too much on K but based on the past they either usually end up with the same amount as 103rd or just slightly more so it's not like NP is solely holding all the excess baggage. All 3 seem to be equally high as far as surplus goes. If they cant get 77 or C to use artics we probably only need 230 so while the 208 electrics are to replace the 4000s, I don't see why CTA is possibly looking at replacing all the 4300s with artics as well. I know "up to 100" means they won't do all 100 but I figure it should be up to 50 at most.

@BusjackHere's a solution to answering your question for the remaining artics. 

[Busjack]

6 minutes ago, Master58 said:

@BusjackHere's a solution to answering your question for the remaining artics. 

Again, you can't read my update. I saw @Sam92's post. And if it will make you feel any better. @EasyMoney brought up 103rd.

[Master58]

14 minutes ago, Busjack said:

Again, you can't read my update. I saw @Sam92's post. And if it will make you feel any better. @EasyMoney brought up 103rd.

See.... it wasn't that hard. Lol

[Sam92]

23 hours ago, Busjack said:

 

 

As i indicated in the Budget topic, one response may be to write CTA a comment that the capital plan should be changed to delete the 208 electric buses or not rehab the 4300s because CTA can't use them. But you can't say that. Another response would be to say where they CAN be used.. You did s.

 

 

 

 

Well the 4300s are rehabbed; BUT the 100 60fts to replace them are what shouldn't be there unless they plan on using them for the proposed BRT service on Cottage, Pulaski and Fullerton. 

[Sam92]

On 10/18/2025 at 10:13 AM, Busjack said:

 

• They were run at one time or anotherb on 77th and Chicago garage routes. Why did they fail?

 

Well although CTA stopped vocally talking about 2 for 3 replacements with new artic's and 148 didn't reduce its headways with its artics, the headways on 79th were in fact reduced* but added running time probably meant that they ended up needing the same amount buses in which case C and 77 were 5 buses short to meet the spare ratio**. You can't pick one of those 2 garages because even though you'd have enough to and they have other artic worthy routes, you wouldn't be able to equip those other routes after 79 or 66 because they other artic routes require more than the 25 artics that would have been left (and you can't mix fleets) so there would have been 4 garages with surplus. 

*The pick before 79 became all artic had a block with 7-10 min headways. That same time period went to 10-13 min with artics. 

**They only gave C and 77th 40 artics a piece, the fact that cutting the interval back didn't work means that they should have had 45 a piece if they needed to keep headways the same. 

[Sam92]

Just curious.... When did 146 start getting artics? I see in the past 103rd had the most artics on past bus assignments with 103rd having 46 (all for 14), NP and A having about 27 a piece (for 147 at P). Then after they got consolidated between NP and 103 NP averaged around 50 while 103rd held around 70-80 up till 03-04 so was it around then or did 136 get those extras out of the 50? I see some MAN artic's started making their way to K for 156 in 03-04 also

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, Sam92 said:

Just curious.... When did 146 start getting artics? I see in the past 103rd had the most artics on past bus assignments with 103rd having 46 (all for 14), NP and A having about 27 a piece (for 147 at P). Then after they got consolidated between NP and 103 NP averaged around 50 while 103rd held around 70-80 up till 03-04 so was it around then or did 136 get those extras out of the 50? I see some MAN artic's started making their way to K for 156 in 03-04 also

I could be wrong but would it have been around the time that North Park started getting NABIS?

[YoungBusLover]

11 hours ago, Sam92 said:

Well although CTA stopped vocally talking about 2 for 3 replacements with new artic's and 148 didn't reduce its headways with its artics, the headways on 79th were in fact reduced* but added running time probably meant that they ended up needing the same amount buses in which case C and 77 were 5 buses short to meet the spare ratio**. You can't pick one of those 2 garages because even though you'd have enough to and they have other artic worthy routes, you wouldn't be able to equip those other routes after 79 or 66 because they other artic routes require more than the 25 artics that would have been left (and you can't mix fleets) so there would have been 4 garages with surplus. 

*The pick before 79 became all artic had a block with 7-10 min headways. That same time period went to 10-13 min with artics. 

**They only gave C and 77th 40 artics a piece, the fact that cutting the interval back didn't work means that they should have had 45 a piece if they needed to keep headways the same. 

C and 77th could really use artics for school runs and the AM/PM rush.  Headways on 79th are tight as they were before the pandemic and crush loads are back in full effect out there. King Drive, Cottage Grove and Halsted would benefit tremendously during peak hours especially if Randolph storage reopened. Hickory storage is a bit too small to house 10 - 13 artics along with Navy Pier storage. Something has to give though especially with how bad things have gotten on the 8 and 66 due to the year plus long construction. It just adds more kerosine to an already intense fire.  I do understand that 40 - 45 wouldn't be enough to spread the wealth around for C and 77th though.  Currently 115 #4000s are in service out of 208 and 78 #4300s are in service which is alarming considering combined that's only 193 artics for the entire system to split among 3 garages give or take the rest that are down for maintenance majority being #4000's.  

[YoungBusLover]

On 10/19/2025 at 12:05 AM, Master58 said:

I never said 103rd needs more artics.

Let's try this again lol

My case is NP doesn't need 130 artics.  

NP doesn't need 130 artics

NP doesn't need 130 artics

NP doesn't need 130 artics

NP doesn't need 130 artics.

Get the point lol

Justify why north park needs 130 artics. When all 130 artics aren't being used. 

 

Technically NP has 100 active artics not oos while 103rd has 55. Seems like a good balance to me between the two garages. Look at the work they do and you tell me if it suffices NP needing less.

[dailycommuter62]

saw a artic signed for the #9 going down ashland yesterday with the run K452, when did kedzie start doing trippers on ashland?

[YoungBusLover]

49 minutes ago, dailycommuter62 said:

saw a artic signed for the #9 going down ashland yesterday with the run K452, when did kedzie start doing trippers on ashland?

Benito Juarez High School School tripper has one artic do a trip from Cermak to 63rd on Ashland then that run deadheads downtown to do a trip on the 143 if I'm not mistaken. Only in a perfect there would be a few runs that go all the way south to either 95th or 104th.

[Sam92]

10 hours ago, YoungBusLover said:

C and 77th could really use artics for school runs and the AM/PM rush.  Headways on 79th are tight as they were before the pandemic and crush loads are back in full effect out there. King Drive, Cottage Grove and Halsted would benefit tremendously during peak hours especially if Randolph storage reopened. Hickory storage is a bit too small to house 10 - 13 artics along with Navy Pier storage. Something has to give though especially with how bad things have gotten on the 8 and 66 due to the year plus long construction. It just adds more kerosine to an already intense fire.  I do understand that 40 - 45 wouldn't be enough to spread the wealth around for C and 77th though.  Currently 115 #4000s are in service out of 208 and 78 #4300s are in service which is alarming considering combined that's only 193 artics for the entire system to split among 3 garages give or take the rest that are down for maintenance majority being #4000's.  

Navy Pier actually used to store artics when 66 had them mind you all that I'm referring to is 2013-15 when 77 and C first tried them. Also it's not about spreading the wealth as you're supposed to totally convert a line to artics (mixed fleets are mainly seen in cases of an artic helping out school trips to then become an LSD route etc). So we know with 80 surplus artics across the system (if everything was in good repair) you can definitely pull the 45 for 79 or 66 but it has to be a total conversion now mind you it WOULD lower the surplus to like 30-40 if they were to do that. Considering how CTA prefers to consolidate fleets and the 6 going to 103rd during the 2010 cuts it looks like if only one route is using artics they'd probably either consolidate it Into another artic garage like 6 or just ditch artics altogether and do a bunch of short trips to add the capacity like Halsted

[YoungBusLover]

15 minutes ago, Sam92 said:

Navy Pier actually used to store artics when 66 had them mind you all that I'm referring to is 2013-15 when 77 and C first tried them. Also it's not about spreading the wealth as you're supposed to totally convert a line to artics (mixed fleets are mainly seen in cases of an artic helping out school trips to then become an LSD route etc). Looking back at what happened then, after the red line reopened it looks like the plan was for 80 of the artics to be introduced on 66 and 79 until the aforementioned issues in my other post popped up thus while they were looking to cut labor costs, the running times negated that and actually resulted in needing 45-50 just for 79 or 66 alone. 80-45 is 35, so if you send them to 7 you MAY have enough for 4 and 79 but maybe just BARELY. 

Yeah I see where you're coming from now, A happy medium would be for CTA to have no more than 280 - 320 Artics spread evenly throughout the system. 35 out of 193 would be too low of a number under the current circumstances for 7 as they would need them for more than just the 4 and 79 unless they interline certain trips from the 2, 3, X4 and 8. I've always wanted the 8 to have certain trips (using artics) start from UIC-Halsted for the PM rush to go as far south as Root then deadhead to either Randolph/Columbus or Ontario/Fairbanks to help supplement there afterwards. The 2 could work the same as the 192 deadhead do in the morning for certain trips interlining with the 3, 4 , or 79. It's possible to run artics are multiple routes for a trip the same way NP does. It's just a matter of having enough equipment to do it successfully.