New Diesel Bus Order 2023-2025?

[artthouwill]

5 minutes ago, Anthony Devera said:

Here are some example frequencies in Seattle. I got these by looking at the schedules of each route.

• 7: Every 3-10 mins during peak
• 36: Every 8-10 mins during peak (I believe this route has a mix of 40ft and 60ft)
• 40: Every 6-10 mins during peak
• 120: Every 5-10 mins during peak
• RapidRide C: Every 4-10 mins during peak
• RapidRide D: Every 6-8 mins during peak
• RapidRide E: Every 4-10 mins during peak

Someone pointed out that artics (especially 2-door) work better on routes with unidirectional ridership where people board along the length of the route and get off at major destinations or vice-versa, and most downtown routes in Chicago fit this profile. I'm still puzzled as to how artics supposedly work well on the 12 and 22 but not the 66, although someone mentioned that the 12 and 22 both have "reliever" routes like the 18 and 36 respectively, while the 66 doesn't have such a route. Does the 66 also have a largely unidirectional ridership pattern to/from Downtown, or is it more of a crosstown route like the 79?

On this note, does it make sense for CTA to briefly lease a few 3-door artics and test them on routes like the 79? Or is the 79's dwell time issue attributed mainly to the back section of the artic blocking the street or the slow-closing doors?

I would attribute 79s problem with artics to its blocking the streets and increased dwell time due to the narrative street for most of the route.

My personal observation if rge 12 us that Roosevelt is a wider street and rge heaviest id urs loads us usually between Western and the Red/Orange/Green Line station, which is why the 18 helps about east of Halsted. 

The 66 us unique.  Based on my personal observation,  the heaviest portion of the route is from Nagy Pier to Halsted    it is still heavy to about Western  but the crush loads are mainly downtown.   This is the only route that connects the north end of the Mag Mile to Navy Pier.   It also connects Northeesterb Hospital campus to the Red, Brown and Blue Lines.  As you noted, it does this alone  if there were a 31 Elston/Clybourn that were to run from Fairbanks and Ontario and along Chicago to Halsted to Clybourn or Chicago to Milwaukee and Milwaukee to Elston,  that would help out.  Ir if there were a 98 Ogden that ran along Chicago to Ogden and SW along Ogden,  that would help.  Fairbanks and Chicago are both barrow through downtown and ur does not seem like the bus only lanes along Chicago are of any benefit..  

[Shannoncvpi]

On 8/25/2022 at 10:56 PM, artthouwill said:

I would attribute 79s problem with artics to its blocking the streets and increased dwell time due to the narrative street for most of the route.

My personal observation if rge 12 us that Roosevelt is a wider street and rge heaviest id urs loads us usually between Western and the Red/Orange/Green Line station, which is why the 18 helps about east of Halsted. 

The 66 us unique.  Based on my personal observation,  the heaviest portion of the route is from Nagy Pier to Halsted    it is still heavy to about Western  but the crush loads are mainly downtown.   This is the only route that connects the north end of the Mag Mile to Navy Pier.   It also connects Northeesterb Hospital campus to the Red, Brown and Blue Lines.  As you noted, it does this alone  if there were a 31 Elston/Clybourn that were to run from Fairbanks and Ontario and along Chicago to Halsted to Clybourn or Chicago to Milwaukee and Milwaukee to Elston,  that would help out.  Ir if there were a 98 Ogden that ran along Chicago to Ogden and SW along Ogden,  that would help.  Fairbanks and Chicago are both barrow through downtown and ur does not seem like the bus only lanes along Chicago are of any benefit..  

Yea chicaho is tight downtown & bus lanes don't help it don't speed up service when cta will schedule buses 20+ mins apart so it don't speed up service at all I've witnessed myself 

[jajuan]

On 8/30/2022 at 6:48 AM, Shannoncvpi said:

Yea chicaho is tight downtown & bus lanes don't help it don't speed up service when cta will schedule buses 20+ mins apart so it don't speed up service at all I've witnessed myself 

Well bus lanes downtown are a completely different animal from bus lanes outside of downtown. From what I gather, Art is speaking on the Chicago Ave lanes between Larrabee and Michigan. And part of the problem I suspect keeps those particular lanes not as effective is they're only active during rush hour, so there may be weak parking restriction enforcement problems that creep in like at times happen with the lanes on Western at the O'Hare branch of the Blue Line. What seems to help the bus lanes on Dearborn is they're in effect at all times, no parking gets in the way, and cars don't move into them except at designated right turn segments. The Chicago ones don't have much in the form of que jumps and traffic signal priority. They only installed one que jump signal per direction, one for EB buses at Clark and the other for WB buses at Franklin. That won't do much to keep buses from getting stuck in downtown traffic. Now that Loop Link has long gotten past it's initial hiccups, it's biggest asset that I observe keeps buses moving when I sometimes ride the 157 instead of the 7 to make my connection to the 147, is that que jump signals are in place along the entire length that the lanes are active on Washington and on Madison. 

The Chicago Ave bus lanes between Laramie and Ashland don't have these sames kinds of issues. The traffic isn't as much a nightmare, and car drivers for the most part respect the solid white lines and leave the right lane strictly for buses when traveling straight and not needing to make a right turn. The biggest issues riders who aren't downtown may run into is that universal problem we all experience of runs not filled because of the labor shortage and westbound riders dealing with buses that get hung up downtown because of the downtown traffic nightmares. The city just needs to stay on top of making sure the lane markings stay visible and aren't fading too badly. There have been times I passed Chicago Avenue at different intersections within that stretch, and the white lines and bus only markings were pretty faded.

[Busjack]

According to the 2023 Budget, probably not. At the bottom of page 69:

Note, it says articulated buses are to be replaced with electric buses.

[artthouwill]

1 hour ago, Busjack said:

According to the 2023 Budget, probably not. At the bottom of page 69:

Note, it says articulated buses are to be replaced with electric buses.

While New Flyer has been building electric artics for the last 3 years, CTA hasn't shown it can consistently operate 3 electric buses.   Somehow they expect us to believe they can operate 208 electric artics?

[Busjack]

16 minutes ago, artthouwill said:

While New Flyer has been building electric artics for the last 3 years, CTA hasn't shown it can consistently operate 3 electric buses.   Somehow they expect us to believe they can operate 208 electric artics?

FWIW, it didn't say "electric articulated buses." Also, the budget says the Proterras are still in test stage.

My reactions are:

• CTA doesn't need that many artics.
• Most of the artics are at NP, which is near the bottom of priority for electric conversion. Maybe some electrics to 103, C. and K.
• It all depends on how much one believes the budget. For instance, it seems to ignore the other 500 of the 1000s that need to be replaced, and the mystery Nova Bus electrics.

[artthouwill]

24 minutes ago, Busjack said:

FWIW, it didn't say "electric articulated buses." Also, the budget says the Proterras are still in test stage.

My reactions are:

• CTA doesn't need that many artics.
• Most of the artics are at NP, which is near the bottom of priority for electric conversion. Maybe some electrics to 103, C. and K.
• It all depends on how much one believes the budget. For instance, it seems to ignore the other 500 of the 1000s that need to be replaced, and the mystery Nova Bus electrics.

What is the equivalent of 208 artucs?  Is it 208 electric artics or 312 40 ft electric buses?  

[YoungBusLover]

Well I'm surprised to see that the #7900s are getting rehabbed but happy overall because the elderly 2014 models desperately need it. 

 

 

[YoungBusLover]

26 minutes ago, Mr.NewFlyer1051 said:

well looks like chicago will see the XE60’s soon

On what grounds?

[Bus1883]

1 hour ago, YoungBusLover said:

Well I'm surprised to see that the #7900s are getting rehabbed but happy overall because the elderly 2014 models desperately need it. 

 

 

What parts the rehabs will include just everything mechanical?

[Bus1883]

44 minutes ago, Mr.NewFlyer1051 said:

well looks like chicago will see the XE60’s soon

Not on my battlefield

[Bus1883]

Shame, the 3200s were fully rehabbed about 5-7 years ago and there’s plans for a life extending overhaul of only 100 cars in 2026? When that time comes it’ll mark 8-10 years ago that they were rehabbed with completion in 2018. Gone on ahead and waste that money killing the 3200’s CTA

[Busjack]

2 minutes ago, Bus1883 said:

Shame, the 3200s were fully rehabbed about 5-7 years ago and there’s plans for a life extending overhaul of only 100 cars in 2026? When that time comes it’ll mark 8-10 years ago that they were rehabbed with completion in 2018. Gone on ahead and waste that money killing the 3200’s CTA

What does this have to do with diesel buses?

[Bus1883]

3 minutes ago, Busjack said:

What does this have to do with diesel buses?

My bad I wasn’t looking in the topic no need to be rough

[Guest ChicagoRail]

4 hours ago, artthouwill said:

What is the equivalent of 208 artucs?  Is it 208 electric artics or 312 40 ft electric buses?  

You're right there with 312.

[Busjack]

3 minutes ago, ChicagoRail said:

You're right there with 312.

But will CTA get that many additional drivers by, say, 2027? Who knows?

I'm still betting on the fleet being reduced.

[Guest ChicagoRail]

33 minutes ago, Busjack said:

But will CTA get that many additional drivers by, say, 2027? Who knows?

I'm still betting on the fleet being reduced.

Might as well order another round of 2 artics to replace 3 40' buses.

[Busjack]

12 hours ago, ChicagoRail said:

Might as well order another round of 2 artics to replace 3 40' buses.

That was the lie (I believe Huberman's) to justify getting the 4000s, hiding until the next administration that CTA had to take the NABIs off the street "for inspection."

The only reason there are 308 artics was the Dan Ryan rebuild. At least pre-COVID, 100 of them were spares. It still hasn't been demonstrated that artics work well on city streets, unless CDOT establishes 60-foot bus stops, CTA does away with mixed fleets on a route (resulting in a 60 foot bus being bunched behind a 40), etc.

[Busjack]

6 hours ago, Busjack said:

. It still hasn't been demonstrated that artics work well on city streets, unless CDOT establishes 60-foot bus stops, CTA does away with mixed fleets on a route (resulting in a 60 foot bus being bunched behind a 40), etc.

To elaborate on that, parking is banned in the rush direction bus lane on Jeffery, and apparently on part of Chicago Ave. IMO, CDOT would have to do that on 79th, between State and Stony Island. Artics might work on Ashland and Western, but not the ridiculous proposal for BRT in the left lanes.

I know Nova Bus doesn't currently have a 60' electric bus, but don't know why they couldn't  electrify the current platform, especially if MTA wants it.

[jajuan]

On 10/20/2022 at 3:25 PM, Busjack said:

FWIW, it didn't say "electric articulated buses." Also, the budget says the Proterras are still in test stage.

My reactions are:

• CTA doesn't need that many artics.
• Most of the artics are at NP, which is near the bottom of priority for electric conversion. Maybe some electrics to 103, C. and K.
• It all depends on how much one believes the budget. For instance, it seems to ignore the other 500 of the 1000s that need to be replaced, and the mystery Nova Bus electrics.

On your last bullet point, it struck me how CTA now says 500 of the 1000 series would be replaced by the current diesel order now in place and not the previous 600. I had pretty much been saying for a while that 600 or so replaced by this order as they previously had been saying before we even found out the order would be more Novas was unrealistic when more 100 6400s were still on the roster even after extra 25 7900s (8325-49) got delivered. And I agree with you that CTA doesn't really need 300+ plus artics as it presently has on the roster precisely because of the 100 on average that sit unused even during rush hour from looking at Maths22's tracker any given regular weekday during rush periods

On 10/20/2022 at 3:53 PM, artthouwill said:

What is the equivalent of 208 artucs?  Is it 208 electric artics or 312 40 ft electric buses?  

A mix of some sort maybe? We know it's likely they'll eventually need to get electric artics at some point to keep with their self imposed goal of a completely electrified bus fleet.

On 10/20/2022 at 8:38 PM, Busjack said:

But will CTA get that many additional drivers by, say, 2027? Who knows?

I'm still betting on the fleet being reduced.

True a reduction of the artic fleet seems likely as we both agree, but it still seems CTA would need to bring electric artics into their replacement plans in some capacity starting with the 4000s given the 4300s only accounts for 100 artics, well 98 if we take into account the diesel that burned on Lake Shore Drive and the hybrid that was wrecked by the dump truck when trying to pull out of 103rd. Maybe they can mix it up and do a simultaneous 40 foot and artic acquisition as I suggested to Art and do similar when it's the 4300s turn for replacement. Honestly I don't like that they worded things as the equivalent of the 208 4000s because it only raises questions and issues that they don't have answers for or even anticipated. You've already spotted that a potential need for more operators is one of those said issues.

[Bus1883]

2 hours ago, jajuan said:

On your last bullet point, it struck me how CTA now says 500 of the 1000 series would be replaced by the current diesel order now in place and not the previous 600. I had pretty much been saying for a while that 600 or so replaced by this order as they previously had been saying before we even found out the order would be more Novas was unrealistic when more 100 6400s were still on the roster even after extra 25 7900s (8325-49) got delivered. And I agree with you that CTA doesn't really need 300+ plus artics as it presently has on the roster precisely because of the 100 on average that sit unused even during rush hour from looking at Maths22's tracker any given regular weekday during rush periods

A mix of some sort maybe? We know it's likely they'll eventually need to get electric artics at some point to keep with their self imposed goal of a completely electrified bus fleet.

True a reduction of the artic fleet seems likely as we both agree, but it still seems CTA would need to bring electric artics into their replacement plans in some capacity starting with the 4000s given the 4300s only accounts for 100 artics, well 98 if we take into account the diesel that burned on Lake Shore Drive and the hybrid that was wrecked by the dump truck when trying to pull out of 103rd. Maybe they can mix it up and do a simultaneous 40 foot and artic acquisition as I suggested to Art and do similar when it's the 4300s turn for replacement. Honestly I don't like that they worded things as the equivalent of the 208 4000s because it only raises questions and issues that they don't have answers for or even anticipated. You've already spotted that a potential need for more operators is one of those said issues.

At first I thought they were trying to retire up to 600 of them if the first 100 was supposed to phase out the #6400s how are they going to retire the first 600 #1000s with 500 additional buses? 

[jajuan]

3 hours ago, Bus1883 said:

At first I thought they were trying to retire up to 600 of them if the first 100 was supposed to phase out the #6400s how are they going to retire the first 600 #1000s with 500 additional buses? 

That was precisely my point when they were suggesting at least 600 1000s would be done with the talk of roughly 400 being given a second rehab to keep them around even longer into the current 2020s decade. Of course it can be said they were factoring in electric bus purchases, but that wasn't realistic either given they are still treating 600s as test buses similar to as was the case with the current 700s, and the now retired 800s and 900s. Plus they still hadn't made as strong a commitment to electrics as now with their earlier announcements that all future orders for buses beyond the current up to 600 deal would be for electric buses in addition to giving a more realistic timetable of 2040 for when the fleet would be completely electrified over they're early tree leaf comments of 2030. That last part may upset activists, but the activists have to realize the garages have to be converted with the necessary infrastructure for recharging, not to mention an adequate number of route terminals. And that takes both time and money. It wouldn't make sense to rush into an electric fleet when you can't keep the buses charged to run the routes.

[Tcmetro]

CTA is still awaiting the 6 electrics from last year's LowNo grant and 10 from this year's grant. The budget also says that CTA has $68 million in CMAQ grants from 2020 and 2022 for electric buses.

If the existing and funded electric buses are considered as replacements for the 1000s, then that accounts for the 100 buses.

CTAs fleet plans have never been terribly transparent, and seem to be relatively flexible compared to other agencies.

[jajuan]

On 10/26/2022 at 8:06 PM, Tcmetro said:

CTA is still awaiting the 6 electrics from last year's LowNo grant and 10 from this year's grant. The budget also says that CTA has $68 million in CMAQ grants from 2020 and 2022 for electric buses.

If the existing and funded electric buses are considered as replacements for the 1000s, then that accounts for the 100 buses.

CTAs fleet plans have never been terribly transparent, and seem to be relatively flexible compared to other agencies.

Actually it doesn't in that the existing came with 6400s on the books and CTA's designation of them being test buses similar to the 700s, 800s and 900s were doesn't actually put them in a position to actually be on the road long enough during any given day to see any 1000s knocked off by their existence on the overall fleet roster. 

[William Miles]

Do anyone when are the cts  going buy  another nabi articulated bus or  electric articulated bus