🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <318ef6d7.4064669@news.mindlink.net>, Mr_Gigabyte@mindlink.net
(Mike Quigley) wrote:

> Is it possible the popularity of these buses has something to do with the
> >price<? Why do we see cops driving Fords or Chevrolets instead of
> (allegedly much safer) Volvos? Because they're cheap!

That would have to do with the tendering process... something I don't know
too much about.

But when something goes to tender, specifications are issued.  So
theoretically the cars (busses) meet the criteria when they arrive.  As
far as I know, New Flyer makes the only low floor bu sof this capacity. 
Other considerations *might* be that this is a Canadian company,
interchange of parts with current inventories etc.

I don't know and can't say for sure.

George

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4mo2h3$5s8@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, petert@unixg.ubc.ca (Peter Thomas
Chattaway) wrote:

> : The 337 service was cut down due to lack of demand.  Most often the
> : bus ran empty.  It was felt that the equipment and manpower required
> : could be better utilized elsewhere.
> 
> Funny, I remember it being a fairly full bus at those hours.  (When the
> bus runs empty -- i.e., *between* the morning and afternoon peak hours --

BC Transit routinely provides critical analysis of its routes.  And
remember that BC Transit does not cut the service or make changes.  All
these decisions are made based on data and recommendations submitted to
the Transit Commission and the city involved.

A few years back a number of routes were cut, redirected or rescheduled
including a number in North Delta, the old Airport and the 413 in
Richmond.

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4moa07$7ca@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, kundarew@unixg.ubc.ca (paul
kundarewich) wrote:
 
> Plus when the new skytrain extension came in they 
> increased my time to get home by 10 minutes!  150 million dollars
> to increase my time.  (The time they saved by the new extension they
> gave to bus drivers for a longer breaks)

Bus drivers do not get scheduled "breaks" per se.  The time at the end of
the line is considered "recovery time" to allow for traffic congestion and
correct spacing of service intervals.  i.e. a route which takes 1 hour and
4 minutes to drive would need how many busses for two way service at 15
minute intervals?  Depending on conditions, the answer is either 9 or 10. 
The 11 minutes at the end of the line allows for recovery and spacing.

> If a bus does breakdown and can't make it to ubc.  Why
> don't they tell the other bus drivers at ubc so that people can
> stop waiting for a bus that will never arrived.  

The first priority is to try and get the bus rolling again.  By the time
that attempt is made, the people who would normally have ridden that bus
have boarded the following one.  Where it is of more importance (after
peak hours), BCT will normally make adjustments to other service or do
what it takes to ensure continuity... even if it arrives late.

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <318fe4ac.1234062@ktk2.smartt.com>, Haralds Jass
<HJ@Superb-E.Com> wrote:

> Today I had a chance for the first time to ride just a few stops in
> the "new" bus. Simply horrible! I am not a tall person at all
> (~average height) and there is no legroom at all and the bus design is
> simply hideous and laughable - a five-year-old could have designed a
> better bus! :-)

But the opportunity doesn't appeal to you?  :-)

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

kundarew@unixg.ubc.ca (paul kundarewich) wrote:

>: Since Skytrain's startup in 1986 they have achieved slightly better
>: than 98% on time performance.  Hard to believe because the breakdowns
>: affect so many and are well publicized, but it is true.
>
>Hey.  I'm been caught numerous times by slow and breakdowns.
>Sometimes very late at night when i'm trying to catch the last
>bus home.  (Note to mention the suidsides ever now and then)
>98% for an automated system is not good enough.

Perfection has not been achieved is this world.  When people jump in
front of trains and mechanical breakdowns occur, delays enivitably
result.

>And when 
>they do break down there is no communication between sky train and
>the bus services so no one knows what's going on.

Wrong.  With any delay expected to exceed 10 minutes Skytrain control
calls Transit Control.  Plans are in place to accommodate people but
since Skytrain can handle more people faster than buses, it takes
slightly longer to move them.  Prior to them being moved, the buses
have to drive to the stations from wherever they are (either in the
garage or, if it's rush hour, from the various routes that they're
taken from) or drivers have to be assigned to shuttles.
In a major delay it takes roughly an hour to set up a 'bus bridge'
between the affected stations.

>Plus when the new skytrain extension came in they 
>increased my time to get home by 10 minutes!  150 million dollars
>to increase my time.  (The time they saved by the new extension they
>gave to bus drivers for a longer breaks)

I think the drivers would argue that point.

>Last gripe:
>
>If a bus does breakdown and can't make it to ubc.  Why
>don't they tell the other bus drivers at ubc so that people can
>stop waiting for a bus that will never arrived.  

There are 6 bus lines running into UBC (a couple more in rush hour).
Each line has an average of about 10 buses on it (the Broadway service
has quite a few more).  So that's 60 drivers so far.  Now UBC is not
Transit's only concern (it might be yours but there's a bigger picture
here).  SFU (the competition) has 3 lines comprising about 20 drivers,
so we're now at 80.  Of course not all people waiting for those
missing buses are standing at the end of the line so we'll have to
tell them as well...equal time, you know.  Then there's BCIT, those
downtown workers......well, you get the picture.  In a perfect world
everyone would get what they want...this world is not that place.

curt@cynic.portal.ca (Curt Sampson) wrote:

>In article <318ef17b.5949946@news.mindlink.net>,
> <Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca> wrote:
>
>>Since Skytrain's startup in 1986 they have achieved slightly better
>>than 98% on time performance.  Hard to believe because the breakdowns
>>affect so many and are well publicized, but it is true.
>
>That's not hard for me to believe. I'm not sure what exactly you're
>measuring with that 98% figure, but a quick guesstimate says that that
>leaves room for tens of thousands of late station-stops per year.

Skytrain considers any arrival or departure more than 30 seconds off
schedule to be late.

sruel@vcn.bc.ca (Steve Ruelle) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

(stuff deleted)

>UBC buses don't go to those exchanges, except for the #10 at Kootenay.

And the 25 to Brentwood (for connection with the 120, 151/152) and the
49th to Metrotown.  Both of these are approximately timed to catch
southbound suburban service.
  
>For the most part, timed bus exchanges are in the suburbs where 
>passengers have to make transfers to get where they are going.  I don't 
>consider UBC a bus exchange but a mass pickup/dropoff point for students 
>going to and coming from class.  Keeping a steady flow of buses entering 
>and leaving the loop is more appropriate in this context than having many 
>buses leave at once.

But students all get out of class at once.  Are you suggesting that
during the 50 minutes students are in class Transit should keep those
empty buses flowing away from the loop so that when the mass of
students come from class they have wait longer because the one that's
left surely won't carry them all.  This is say nothing of the cost of
having empty buses running around.

>: The day we can predict exactly all enevitabilities we won't need
>: transportation.
>
>I agree that it is hard to predict everything that can cause a bus not to 
>show up, but what about the passenger?  When a bus does not come (I'm not 
>talking about buses coming a few minutes late, I'm talking about not 
>showing up at all), nothing is done to notify the passenger and as a 
>result, they are left standing there.

Notification is something that is a concern but the practicality of it
in a real world is difficult.  The transit information department is
always notified of larger problems (power outages for trolley service,
etc) so they are the people to call.  Unfortunately the cost and
logistics of having someone run up and down bus lines over Transit's
service area (some 1200 square miles) to tell people of late and
missing buses would be prohibitive.
The driver's often know about major problems but, again, the logistics
constantly updated schedule information are not possible.

> I can forgive BC Transit if this 
>happens seldomly but in my 6 years of bussing, there has been a 10% 
>bus-cancellation rate.  This is an accurate stat, as I have been all 
>around the Vancouver system.  10% is unnacceptable.

Where did you get the stat?  I'm afraid it's not accurate.

Mr_Gigabyte@mindlink.net (Mike Quigley) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
>
>>At approximately $287,000 each, I don't think they are considered
>>cheap.
>
>But what do the "alternatives" cost?

There are 'alternatives' but they are;
1) more expensive - both GM and Flexible make urban transit type
coaches but run about $350,000.
2) not Canadian made - which translates into lost jobs with the
subsequent loss to the Canadian economy.  GM used to manufacture
coaches in London, Ontario (we still have several in our fleet) but
closed the plant entirely about 3 or 4 years ago (if memory serves).
3) as well they don't really meet our needs for accessibility and
integration into our present fleet.

chanp@direct.ca (Patrick Chan) wrote:

>Sometimes, the wait can stretch out for upwards of 2 hours.... usually
>for some unexplained reason...   A couple of summers ago, it seemed
>like one of the afternoon 403's disappeared from service.  When you're
>talking about a frequency of 1 an hour, a missing bus translates to a
>2  hour wait (assuming I just missed one).

The 403 base service is 30 minutes Monday thru Saturday.

(stuff deleted)
>I think that BC
>Transit should consider implementing is someting similar to OC Transpo
>in Ottawa...  an automated schedule update.   Each stop had a phone
>number to call...  the call went to an automated system that informed
>the caller of when the next bus is to arrive, or if there were any
>schedule changes due to traffic or mechanical failure or whatever.
>Or is this already in place?   

This would require a vehicle location system.  Something that Transit
looked at and shelved due to cost versus return (some 8 million
dollars).
Information is a bug-bearer for most transit systems.  People want to
know how long they'll have to wait (nobody likes to wait) but the
larger the system grows the more difficult and costly it is to
disseminate information to the public.  Being that transit systems are
funded from the public purse, cost is always a consideration.

Today I had a chance for the first time to ride just a few stops in
the "new" bus. Simply horrible! I am not a tall person at all
(~average height) and there is no legroom at all and the bus design is
simply hideous and laughable - a five-year-old could have designed a
better bus! :-) Virtually nothing makes sense or is logical about the
new buses...

In any case, here's an idea: why doesn't someone who is using the new
"toy" busses (they really are like very cheap mini-vans at the very
best) call U.TV and get the problem off the heart on "What bugs U?" I
could, but I have ridden the bus only one for something like 3 min,
plus I don't have the ~1h to spare to get on camera. (BTW,
tips@utvnews.com via E-mail for the initial contact).

-HJ


--************************************************************
Haralds Jass ("HJ") <HJ@Superb-E.Com>
http://hj.superb-e.com
                       *****
From my personal interest pages, to web/FTP space for
rent; from various public services, to lots of cool
web sites hosted. All this, and more -- all at:
              http://www.superb-e.com
                       *****
Quote of the week:
"For the things we have to learn before we can do them, we learn by doing them."
- Aristotle

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>There are 'alternatives' but they are;
>1) more expensive - both GM and Flexible make urban transit type
			         ^^^^^^^^ actually "Flxible"! 
>coaches but run about $350,000.

GM got out of the transit bus business 6 or 7 years ago. MCI took over
their Canadian operations while TMC took over their US production.
Canadian and US production was recently reunited under the NovaBus
name. The Canadian plant produces a low-floor model in competition
with that sold by New Flyer and delivered to BC Transit. 

>2) not Canadian made - which translates into lost jobs with the
>subsequent loss to the Canadian economy.  GM used to manufacture
>coaches in London, Ontario (we still have several in our fleet) but
>closed the plant entirely about 3 or 4 years ago (if memory serves).

GM's successor (NovaBus) builds its buses in St. Eustache, Quebec,
just north of Montreal. The London plant was closed when the Quebec
gov't (over ten years ago) agreed to buy a ton of buses from GM *if*
they moved the plant to Quebec. Ontario and Quebec bus purchases are
still heavily affected by this unfortunate history.

------------
Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/

In article <4mtqro$b8k@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, kundarew@unixg.ubc.ca (paul
kundarewich) wrote:

> So.  They can rest all they want when they get back to surrey central.
> They get paid $40,000-80,000.  I've worked longer
> hours for a lot less.  Why do they think themselves any different?
> BC transit is serving the public not the drivers.

I've been driving with BC Transit for several years now.  Where do I find
one of these 40-80 thousand dollar jobs driving? <g>  My T4 has never said
anything like that!

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4mtrhr$b8k@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, kundarew@unixg.ubc.ca (paul
kundarewich) wrote:

> ok.  that make sense sort of.
> But when the bus you need to take to make your connection doesn't
> show that sometimes adds an hour onto your travel time.

Understood.  But as Martin mentioned... it's not anything closes to a
perfect system.  And that's why this region also has a thriving cycle,
taxi and private vehicle business! :-)

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4mtddt$8rm@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher)
wrote:

> >BC Transit *does* consult with passengers, and very extensively at that. 
> >What they have failed to do was to ask you specifically.
> 
> I don't recall BC Transit making any consultations with passengers on
> this bus purchase. The only riders they consult are the
> mobility-impaired riders who need lifts and low-floor buses. BCT also
> did not consult with riders when it bought the outrageously noisy and
> rough New Flyer lift-equipped buses in 1991. At least the 1992 was
> *slightly* quieter and smoother riding.

A correction here.  BC Transit _does_ survey the public.  Funny enough, a
day after I made the original post, I got a call from Mark Trend
Research.  Thinking it was an election poll, I agreed to spend the time to
do it.  It was a fairly extensive BC Transit poll.

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4mt4cd$bge@cynic.portal.ca>, curt@cynic.portal.ca (Curt
Sampson) wrote:

> Of course, the problem might be better solved with articulated
> busses with higher capacity. Or, even better yet, the proposed
> Broadway LRT.

On the way (unless there are significant changes as a result of a poor
choice at the ballot box).  The service will tentatively start on or about
Labor Day with artic's travelling Broadway from Lougheed Mall to
Granville.  And LRT is on track for implementation as well.

For good info, see the Allardice link on the ICTU homepage at 

http://www2.portal.ca/~johansen/ictu.html

It's a very good study.  You can also request a copy of the BC Transit Ten
Year Plan by selecting the appropriate link on the page as well.

George

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

An "omnibus" reply to some of the issues raised in this thread:

Why did BCT buy the New Flyer low-floor?

New Flyer has the most experience building low-floor buses for the
North American market. Similar vehicles have been in operation in
Victoria for about four years now. The other two Canadian bus makers
(Orion Bus Industries and NovaBus) have not yet delivered production
low-floor buses but should be doing so soon. Perhaps then New Flyer's
dominance will be challenged. I'va also heard that Vancouver BC
Transit staff weren't too keen on buying low-floor but the BC Transit
Board of Directors (provincially appointed) forced them too.

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:

>> Except that with the new buses, a single wheelchair rider requires that 4 
>> seats be abandoned to accommodate the wheelchair. On the old buses, I 
>> think it was 2 seats.

The lift buses had one centre-facing seat that could be flipped up if
required to accomodate a wheelchair - total seating loss: three seats.
I'm pretty sure the low floors have at least two centre facing seats
which can be flipped up to provide more room for a total seating loss
of at least four seats. No doubt this is because of the high-density
seating layout used to try to counteract the intrusive nature of the
wheel wells and the resulting reduction of seating area.

The seat spacing does leave a lot to be desired for taller people. We
got a bit of bonus on the New Flyer lift-equipped buses since the
seats on the right side of the bus between the doors are unusually far
apart. On the low-floors the situation is much different. I found this
to be a special problem in Victoria where low-floor buses are used on
the bus to the Swartz Bay ferry terminal - there is very little room
for luggage.

>BC Transit *does* consult with passengers, and very extensively at that. 
>What they have failed to do was to ask you specifically.

I don't recall BC Transit making any consultations with passengers on
this bus purchase. The only riders they consult are the
mobility-impaired riders who need lifts and low-floor buses. BCT also
did not consult with riders when it bought the outrageously noisy and
rough New Flyer lift-equipped buses in 1991. At least the 1992 was
*slightly* quieter and smoother riding.

BTW, the soft seats on the low-floors were pushed for by the transit
union, not BCT staff. Apparently the soft seats are considerably
cheaper then the stainless steel model preferred by BCT staff. If
people respect them then they may prove economical but if boneheads
insist on slashing them or cutting out chunks of foam then all the
riders will pay in comfort for a certain groups anti-social behaviour.

>As for the lift equipped
>equipment, some of it dates back to 1987 models which were "retrofitted"
>with lifts after the fact.  All of this vintage are still on the road in
>our fleet.

BC Transit has never retro-fitted lifts to its buses. The first
lift-equipped bus was purchased from MCI in 1989 with more purchased
in subsequent years from MCI (in 1990) and New Flyer (in 1991 and
1992). Then the strangest thing happened - the NDP got elected and it
took almost 4 years for BC Transit to recieve its next new bus order.

>Also, feel
>free to contact BC Transit anytime you have an observation good or bad. 
>They are a service company just like any other.  And they do respond to
>rider concerns.

Yes, they sometimes deal with an issue well and will reply to your
concerns to varying degrees. They are often pretty poor at
communicating with the riders on a routine basis. Consider the
Blanca-UBC midday shuttles on the 9 Broadway; these have been in
effect for three schedule changes now with no explanation ever given
and no signs at UBC loop explaining why the buses aren't running
according to the schedule posted there.

The fallout form the messy shcedule changes in Coquitlam accompanying
the introduction of the West Coast Express woke them up and, at least
in that area, they seem to have become a bit more responsive.
 
------------
Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/
Vancouver transit anniversaries: 1996: SkyTrain turns 10 
1997: SeaBus turns 20		 1998: Trolley bus system turns 50!

In article <4ms7cc$39a@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>, petert@unixg.ubc.ca (Peter Thomas
Chattaway) wrote:

> Between the morning and evening peak hours, no problem.  THat's the way 
> it's always been, I imagine.  But I still don't see why a busload of 
> people trying to get to school or work via the SkyTrain should be dumped 
> at Guildford at a time when the 337 would already require *less* time to 
> take us to a SkyTrain station (thanks to the extension) than it used to.

Best to write or call BC Transit then.  And make sure you cc: City Council
in Surrey and the Transit Commission.  Make your argument and support your
facts.  They have a mandate to listen.

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4ms6rg$bfa@aphex.direct.ca>, chanp@direct.ca (Patrick Chan) wrote:

> Not really...  the buses are all equipped with some sort of a 2-way
> radio.   They could just patch it into a central dispatch that would
> just update the computers....  much could be automated.  

It's the "patch" that would cost.  Take your black and white TV and put a
color picture tube in it.  Just switch tubes.  Don't worry about stereo
sound or anything.

> The drivers
> could simply call in with whatever problem they encounter and provide
> an estimated delay.   8 million?  Probably much less than that.   If
> they need additional revenue, maybe adopting OC Transpo's $56 tickets
> for everything from walking/driving in the bus lane to fare cheating
> could be an option.

It's not like you're the very first person to consider this.  BC Transit
has studied (as has every other major city) how to provide information in
many modes.  It's just not as easy as it looks on the surface.

As for the drivers, if you were to add being a traffic reporter to their
duties, how much more would you be willing to pay?  Added responsibilities
cost money to employers.  You cannot just add one here and another there
before somebody says "whoa!".

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <4ms9am$fm6@morgoth.sfu.ca>, kbutler@sfu.ca (Kenneth Butler) wrote:
 
> >And eventually the software problems got fixed.  I also speculate that
> >with six car trains, bus service would have to be reconsidered in the
> >stations.  i.e. if unloading passengers from a four car train can almost
> >fill a bus, what happens when a single bus awaits the unloading of a six
> >car train?
> 
> This is not how it works, though, surely? The passengers off a typical 
> train are distributed over a number of bus routes, so the ones destined 
> for a particular route might fill only a quarter of a bus. In the 
> situation described above, the passengers are still arriving at the same 
> rate, so that 1/4 busfull every 4 minutes and 1/3 busfull every 5 work 
> out to the same thing (near enough).

O.K., let's give an example here.  Broadway Station and the #9 bus line. 
A 4 car train in both directions arrives while the service headway is bus
scheduled at 4 minutes.  That plus pedestrians adds up to 8 cars of
capacity plus wlak up people.  The bus pulls in and takes 2 minutes to
load to the doors.  The bus not only cannot load all the passengers at
Broadway Station, but passes up all the way to Main Street.  Now ...
extend that to a 6 car train in both directions.  3-4 minute headway on a 
bus route is considered to be just about saturation.  That means that you
can add busses, but you cannot space them out and translate that into
better service prequency.  They'll travel in packs.

Broadway Station is an extreme example, but Joyce and Metrotown at peak
hours offer similar situations.  To carry higher capacity less frequently
(long term) would mean a significant adjustment to bus service.

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

In article <johansen-0905960814240001@d176.portal.ca>,
George Johansen <johansen@portal.ca> wrote:

>3-4 minute headway on a 
>bus route is considered to be just about saturation.  That means that you
>can add busses, but you cannot space them out and translate that into
>better service prequency.  They'll travel in packs.

But wouldn't that be all right in this case? The westbound number
nine at Broadway station has been crammed at that point whenever
I've taken it to work in the morning. If we added another couple
of carloads of Skytrain passengers, two busses at the same time
would be be utilised.

Of course, the problem might be better solved with articulated
busses with higher capacity. Or, even better yet, the proposed
Broadway LRT.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson    curt@portal.ca		Info at http://www.portal.ca/
Internet Portal Services, Inc.	
Vancouver, BC   (604) 257-9400		De gustibus, aut bene aut nihil.

: Perfection has not been achieved is this world.  When people jump in
: front of trains and mechanical breakdowns occur, delays enivitably
: result.

True.  I'm not faulting bc transit for the suisides.  But i can
fault them for the other numerous breakdowns.  I've been 
dealyed numerous times five or ten mintutes that cause me to
miss a connection.  (Causing me to wait an hour.  Or sometimes 
late at night 1.5 hours at surrey central)
Sometimes it has taken me up to 3 hours to get home.
I could have drived to Kamloops in that time!

: >And when 
: >they do break down there is no communication between sky train and
: >the bus services so no one knows what's going on.

: >Plus when the new skytrain extension came in they 
: >increased my time to get home by 10 minutes!  150 million dollars
: >to increase my time.  (The time they saved by the new extension they
: >gave to bus drivers for a longer breaks)

: I think the drivers would argue that point.


So.  They can rest all they want when they get back to surrey central.
They get paid $40,000-80,000.  I've worked longer
hours for a lot less.  Why do they think themselves any different?
BC transit is serving the public not the drivers.

: There are 6 bus lines running into UBC (a couple more in rush hour).
: Each line has an average of about 10 buses on it (the Broadway service
: has quite a few more).  So that's 60 drivers so far.  Now UBC is not
: Transit's only concern (it might be yours but there's a bigger picture
: here).  SFU (the competition) has 3 lines comprising about 20 drivers,
: so we're now at 80.  Of course not all people waiting for those
: missing buses are standing at the end of the line so we'll have to
: tell them as well...equal time, you know.  Then there's BCIT, those
: downtown workers......well, you get the picture.  In a perfect world
: everyone would get what they want...this world is not that place.

It wouldn't take much to phone 1 bus driver who had a sign that
he could post at the stop.  

Or how about a broadcast message to all bus drivers.
That wouldn't take long.  

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
Re: service to UBC

>But students all get out of class at once.  Are you suggesting that
>during the 50 minutes students are in class Transit should keep those
>empty buses flowing away from the loop so that when the mass of
>students come from class they have wait longer because the one that's
>left surely won't carry them all.  This is say nothing of the cost of
>having empty buses running around.

In the afternoon there are no extra trips on the 4, 9  or 10 so they
all operate basically on even headways ranging from every 6-10 minutes
for the 10 to every 12 minutes for the 4 and 9. It is routine to see
all three leave in a convoy at about 25 minutes past the hour and
again at 35 past the hour. With classes ending at 20 past the hour,
many students can't make it for the 25 after departures and end up
being stuck waiting for the 35 after departures.

The suburban express routes out of UBC are scheduled for class finish
times but often leave at 35 minutes past the hour - again making for a
near 10 minute wait for many passengers.

------------
Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/

: > Plus when the new skytrain extension came in they 
: > increased my time to get home by 10 minutes!  150 million dollars
: > to increase my time.  (The time they saved by the new extension they
: > gave to bus drivers for a longer breaks)

: Bus drivers do not get scheduled "breaks" per se.  The time at the end of
: the line is considered "recovery time" to allow for traffic congestion and
: correct spacing of service intervals.  i.e. a route which takes 1 hour and
: 4 minutes to drive would need how many busses for two way service at 15
: minute intervals?  Depending on conditions, the answer is either 9 or 10. 
: The 11 minutes at the end of the line allows for recovery and spacing.

Then why didn't they just leave ten minutes later?  
That way they could have served more passengers who may not have caught
the bus otherwise.  

i.e.  Instead of leaving at xx:30 every hour.
Leave at xx:40 every hour.  
Spacing would be preserved.

Recovery i don't quite buy.  This same bus does in fact
leave at xx:40 during rush hour.  (Where the traffic is
heavy.  During non rush hour trips it leaves at xx:30)

Case to illustrate all the above:

One this bus left 20 minutes late.  Because of all the elimination
of delays, stops, and waits i still arrived home at the same time.

: The first priority is to try and get the bus rolling again.  By the time
: that attempt is made, the people who would normally have ridden that bus
: have boarded the following one.  Where it is of more importance (after
: peak hours), BCT will normally make adjustments to other service or do
: what it takes to ensure continuity... even if it arrives late.

ok.  that make sense sort of.
But when the bus you need to take to make your connection doesn't
show that sometimes adds an hour onto your travel time.

George Johansen (johansen@portal.ca) wrote:
: petert@unixg.ubc.ca (Peter Thomas Chattaway) wrote:

: > Between the morning and evening peak hours, no problem.  THat's the way 
: > it's always been, I imagine.  But I still don't see why a busload of 
: > people trying to get to school or work via the SkyTrain should be dumped 
: > at Guildford at a time when the 337 would already require *less* time to 
: > take us to a SkyTrain station (thanks to the extension) than it used to.
:
: Best to write or call BC Transit then.  And make sure you cc: City Council
: in Surrey and the Transit Commission.  Make your argument and support your
: facts.  They have a mandate to listen.

Well, I *did* sign a petition at the time which requested the restoration 
of the extension to the SkyTrain.  Presumably nothing came of that.  I'm 
too busy to pursue it independently.

--
Peter T. Chattaway  | "The greatest thing a human soul ever does in this
Culture Editor,     | world is to SEE something, and tell what it SAW in a
The Ubyssey         | plain way. ... To see clearly is poetry, prophecy, 
petert@unixg.ubc.ca | and religion -- all in one."  --  John Ruskin

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:
Re: Broadway Express bus

>On the way (unless there are significant changes as a result of a poor
>choice at the ballot box).  The service will tentatively start on or about
>Labor Day with artic's travelling Broadway from Lougheed Mall to
>Granville.  And LRT is on track for implementation as well.

BC Transit's 1996/97 Annual Service Plan says Lougheed Mall to UBC. If
it stops at Granville there will be a UBC student revolt against BC
Transit! Service will be 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. weekdays and cover 10 hours
on Saturdays. Frequencies should be 8-10 minutes peak, 10-15 minutes
off peak.

BTW, just heard (3:10 p.m.) on the scanner that BCT has eight bus
cancellations out of Oakridge Garage this afternoon due to a lack of
drivers. There will likely be more cancellations later in the day when
they run out of buses, as they usually do. One bus out of North Van
was cancelled, not sure about the other garages.

------------
Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>>like one of the afternoon 403's disappeared from service.  When you're
>>talking about a frequency of 1 an hour, a missing bus translates to a
>>2  hour wait (assuming I just missed one).
>The 403 base service is 30 minutes Monday thru Saturday.
Isn't that just peak hours?  Or did they change it?

>>Transit should consider implementing is someting similar to OC Transpo
>>in Ottawa...  an automated schedule update.   Each stop had a phone
>>number to call...  the call went to an automated system that informed
>>the caller of when the next bus is to arrive, or if there were any
>>schedule changes due to traffic or mechanical failure or whatever.
>>Or is this already in place?   

>This would require a vehicle location system.  Something that Transit
>looked at and shelved due to cost versus return (some 8 million
>dollars).
Not really...  the buses are all equipped with some sort of a 2-way
radio.   They could just patch it into a central dispatch that would
just update the computers....  much could be automated.  The drivers
could simply call in with whatever problem they encounter and provide
an estimated delay.   8 million?  Probably much less than that.   If
they need additional revenue, maybe adopting OC Transpo's $56 tickets
for everything from walking/driving in the bus lane to fare cheating
could be an option.

Patrick

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
: petert@unixg.ubc.ca (Peter Thomas Chattaway) wrote:

: >: The 337 service was cut down due to lack of demand.  Most often the
: >: bus ran empty.  It was felt that the equipment and manpower required
: >: could be better utilized elsewhere.
: >
: >Funny, I remember it being a fairly full bus at those hours.  (When the
: >bus runs empty -- i.e., *between* the morning and afternoon peak hours --
: >it's only bouncing between Guildford and Fraser Heights anyways.) 
:
: Unfortunately that's not true.

Alright, let me rephrase: when the *route* runs empty, it's only bouncing 
between Guildford and Fraser Heights anyways.  Cutting route 337 off at 
Guildford did not affect the "empty bus" hours because it never went past 
Guildford anyways.  It's the loaded peak hours I'm referring to.

: Most of Transit's routes are
: 'interlined'.  That is to say, one bus covers many different routes
: during its day.

Between the morning and evening peak hours, no problem.  THat's the way 
it's always been, I imagine.  But I still don't see why a busload of 
people trying to get to school or work via the SkyTrain should be dumped 
at Guildford at a time when the 337 would already require *less* time to 
take us to a SkyTrain station (thanks to the extension) than it used to.

--
Peter T. Chattaway  | "The greatest thing a human soul ever does in this
Culture Editor,     | world is to SEE something, and tell what it SAW in a
The Ubyssey         | plain way. ... To see clearly is poetry, prophecy, 
petert@unixg.ubc.ca | and religion -- all in one."  --  John Ruskin

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) writes:

>In article <318ef67c.3973933@news.mindlink.net>, Mr_Gigabyte@mindlink.net
>(Mike Quigley) wrote:

>> But why did they stop six-car Skytrains? Wasn't it due to the fact that the
>> computers freaked out or something?

>Purely my sometimes faulty recollection here, but I believe they were
>running six car trains when they were having software problems. 
>Apparently the quantity of four car trains was overloading, so they went
>to fewer trains, but maintained capacity by using them in six car
>combinations.

That's my recollection too. ISTR also that the six-car trains filled the 
platforms almost exactly, so there'd not be enough length to fit an 8-car 
train.

>And eventually the software problems got fixed.  I also speculate that
>with six car trains, bus service would have to be reconsidered in the
>stations.  i.e. if unloading passengers from a four car train can almost
>fill a bus, what happens when a single bus awaits the unloading of a six
>car train?

This is not how it works, though, surely? The passengers off a typical 
train are distributed over a number of bus routes, so the ones destined 
for a particular route might fill only a quarter of a bus. In the 
situation described above, the passengers are still arriving at the same 
rate, so that 1/4 busfull every 4 minutes and 1/3 busfull every 5 work 
out to the same thing (near enough).

Ken.

--
----------------Boring factual .sig:
Ken Butler, Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics 
Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada V5A 1S6;
kbutler@sfu.ca; http://www.sfu.ca/~kbutler/

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher) wrote:

>>In the afternoon there are no extra trips on the 4, 9  or 10 so they
>>all operate basically on even headways 

>Wrong.  There are extra 'trippers' that are inserted into all three of
>the above lines.  They are not specifically scheduled to service UBC
>but they do go out there.

I'm sure there are extra trips designed to serve UBC. These are what
reduce the headways to their peak period levels. However, they are NOT
timed specifically for class finish times.

>>The suburban express routes out of UBC are scheduled for class finish
>>times but often leave at 35 minutes past the hour - again making for a
>>near 10 minute wait for many passengers.

>I'm afraid if you're looking for service waiting for personal
>schedules then you're part of the 'must have my car' crowd.  Public
>transit is just that, public.  It attempts to strike a balance
>suitable for most.

Excuse me. If you went out to UBC and waited at Bay 1 for one of the
express routes you would find that most riders are there waiting on
the platform at 30 after the hour or even earlier, even though their
bus doesn't go until 35 or 38 after. On the 31, where alternate
service is available on the 9, many riders lose much of the time saved
by riding the express in the wait.


------------
Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/
Contributions to Vancouver-Seattle daily passenger rail service:
Washington State: US$30 million    BC Gov't: US$35,000

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>This 'lack of manpower' is not an uncommon problem.  I expect that
>we'll see posters advocating the simple solution 'Hire more drivers',
>but before we get into that let me say there are a number of
>mitigating factors involved here that many outside the public transit
>industry are probably not aware of.

I'm sure anyone who has waited for a bus that didn't show up or been
passed up by a full bus because the one before it was missing would
love to know what these mitigating factors are...

------------
Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/
Contributions to Vancouver-Seattle daily passenger rail service:
Washington State: US$30 million    BC Gov't: US$35,000

In article <4mv1jm$1ue@orb.direct.ca>, chanp@direct.ca (Patrick Chan) wrote:

> >As for the drivers, if you were to add being a traffic reporter to their
> >duties, how much more would you be willing to pay?  Added responsibilities
> >cost money to employers.  You cannot just add one here and another there
> >before somebody says "whoa!".


> So, you're saying a bus driver isn't capable of calling in when he's
> late?   Or if he looks ahead and sees a jam?   Give them a little
> credit. 

Give "them" a little credit?  <g>  I'm one of "them". :-)

> As you well know, many are very experienced and have a good
> feel for traffic.   If they're late, they know it.   The system
> doesn't have to be 100% accurate (not down to the last minute), but so
> long as it informs riders about delays.    Heck, I'd be happy if
> drivers would stick their head out the door at stops and shout "Bus
> #403 is delayed" or something to that effect.  It just gives the rider
> the info needed to make decisions.  

When there are problems on the Oak Street Bridge, you'll often find the
351 or 601 bus drivers bringing Richmond passengers up to Broadway where
the late inbound Richmond bus can "short turn".  This happens once in a
while.  Also happens at the ferry terminal, where the Swartz Bay may be on
time and the Gulf Islands ferry might be late.  A 404 might take off to
Ladner and the 640 might stay and wait.

> Anyways, wouldn't this
> information help BC Transit in their planning?  

There's planning and there's trying to anticipate acts of God.  Planning
says that at an "average" speed, a bus can do it's route in xx minutes. 
That is the planning aspect.  Planning does not involve keeping extra
busses waiting here and there "just in case".  When an accident closes
part of the tunnel, one bridge lane, a roadway in any particular
direction, or some moron in a dump truck takes out a trolley wire
someplace... all of these cannot be anticipated or "planned" for.  Similar
when there are equipment shortages or manpower shortages.  You can plan
contingencies for just about anything, but you can't plan for the
unexpected.  That's why the system is not perfect and never will be.

As for relaying information to people on the route, maybe that's an
opportunity for some entrepreneur.  Provide a cheap and easy relay system
to keep everything up to date.  BC Transit has a program called "Trapeze"
that has modlues that will do some of these things as they come on line
over the next few years, but as Martin pointed out... it all costs big
bucks!


> If certain buses at
> certain times are consistently late, then perhaps scheduling could be
> adjusted accordingly...     Doesn't BCT already collect this info (in
> some fashion)?   Is it that tough to pass it on to the riders?
> 
> Patrick

=====================================================================
George Johansen - johansen@portal.ca

The opinions expressed here are not necessarily the official 
platform or policy of any political party or company.
=====================================================================

Patrick Chan wrote:
>   Actually, it no one did drive pv's, I guess transit would
> be near perfect...   no more cars cutting off buses, no more traffic,
> enough people on buses to justify more routes, etc. 

 Want to borrow my rose coloured glasses? 8-) 

>   People don't take transit because it isn't perfect.
> But transit would be near perfect if everyone took it...   :)
> Patrick

The catch-22 is BC Transit says "Go Green", people would if the service was better!
BC Transit does a rider audit and says, "Riderships down, we have to cut back service."
So they do and less people use transit, "C'mon people GO GREEN!" or we'll have to cut 
service again.
What's wrong with this picture?

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:

>In article <4mt4cd$bge@cynic.portal.ca>, curt@cynic.portal.ca (Curt
>Sampson) wrote:
>
>> Of course, the problem might be better solved with articulated
>> busses with higher capacity. Or, even better yet, the proposed
>> Broadway LRT.
>
>On the way (unless there are significant changes as a result of a poor
>choice at the ballot box).  The service will tentatively start on or about
>Labor Day with artic's travelling Broadway from Lougheed Mall to
>Granville.  And LRT is on track for implementation as well.

BC Transit only has 21 articulated buses at this point.  To the best
of my knowledge no more are expected to arrive in the near future.

With the advent of the Westcoast Express some of the artic buses might
be able to be released to service Broadway.  This would help but the
fact of the matter is that there is not enough equipment to adequately
service the demand in all areas.

The other problem is internal to Transit.  The only two service
garages capable of handling the artic coaches are in Port Coquitlam
and Surrey (brand new up-to-date facility)...neither of which are in a
great position to service the line.

ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher) wrote:

>johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:
>Re: Broadway Express bus
>
>>On the way (unless there are significant changes as a result of a poor
>>choice at the ballot box).  The service will tentatively start on or about
>>Labor Day with artic's travelling Broadway from Lougheed Mall to
>>Granville.  And LRT is on track for implementation as well.
>
>BC Transit's 1996/97 Annual Service Plan says Lougheed Mall to UBC. If
>it stops at Granville there will be a UBC student revolt against BC
>Transit! Service will be 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. weekdays and cover 10 hours
>on Saturdays. Frequencies should be 8-10 minutes peak, 10-15 minutes
>off peak.

That, of course, is scheduled service.  No guarantee that it will be
articulated equipment.
>
>BTW, just heard (3:10 p.m.) on the scanner that BCT has eight bus
>cancellations out of Oakridge Garage this afternoon due to a lack of
>drivers. There will likely be more cancellations later in the day when
>they run out of buses, as they usually do. One bus out of North Van
>was cancelled, not sure about the other garages.

This 'lack of manpower' is not an uncommon problem.  I expect that
we'll see posters advocating the simple solution 'Hire more drivers',
but before we get into that let me say there are a number of
mitigating factors involved here that many outside the public transit
industry are probably not aware of.

ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
>Re: service to UBC
>
>>But students all get out of class at once.  Are you suggesting that
>>during the 50 minutes students are in class Transit should keep those
>>empty buses flowing away from the loop so that when the mass of
>>students come from class they have wait longer because the one that's
>>left surely won't carry them all.  This is say nothing of the cost of
>>having empty buses running around.
>
>In the afternoon there are no extra trips on the 4, 9  or 10 so they
>all operate basically on even headways 

Wrong.  There are extra 'trippers' that are inserted into all three of
the above lines.  They are not specifically scheduled to service UBC
but they do go out there.  There are a number 10 service buses that
leave the Oakridge garage, route down Oak, then west along Broadway,
10th to UBC.  Trolley coaches are generally in service when they leave
the garage so extra trips arriving at UBC are not readily apparent.
The other lines have similar trips inserted.

(stuff deleted)

>The suburban express routes out of UBC are scheduled for class finish
>times but often leave at 35 minutes past the hour - again making for a
>near 10 minute wait for many passengers.

I'm afraid if you're looking for service waiting for personal
schedules then you're part of the 'must have my car' crowd.  Public
transit is just that, public.  It attempts to strike a balance
suitable for most.

Your '10 minute wait' for some isn't enough time for others coming
from farther away on campus.

chanp@direct.ca (Patrick Chan) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>Isn't that just peak hours?  Or did they change it?

It has been this way for a number of years.

(stuff re updated scheduling info deleted)

>>This would require a vehicle location system.  Something that Transit
>>looked at and shelved due to cost versus return (some 8 million
>>dollars).
>Not really...  the buses are all equipped with some sort of a 2-way
>radio.   They could just patch it into a central dispatch that would
>just update the computers....  much could be automated.

I won't get into the technical aspects of what is required.  With all
due respect, you obviously don't have any idea the amount of
information necessary to form an operating database for the largest
(by area) transit system in Canada.  Also you are not aware of the
computing power necessary to 'just update' the whereabouts of 900-odd
buses.  BC Transit looked at all present AVL (automatic vehicle
location) systems presently in use (including Ottawa's).  The
approximate cost of a system suitable to handle our system, given
terrain, number of vehicles, service area, etc, was approx 8 million.

>The drivers
>could simply call in with whatever problem they encounter and provide
>an estimated delay.

And if the driver estimates incorrectly, then the information has to
be sent out again...and again...etc.  This takes more time, and like
all businesses means more money.  The difference being that the money
comes from the public purse.

>If they need additional revenue, maybe adopting OC Transpo's $56 tickets
>for everything from walking/driving in the bus lane to fare cheating
>could be an option.

BC Transit Security already issues tickets for fare fraud.  Many of
those are tied up in our already clogged court system.

Driving in the bus lane is a municipal area of policing (VPD, RCMP,
etc).  Jurisdictional problems have arisen in these areas.

Mr_Gigabyte@mindlink.net (Mike Quigley) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
>
>>Skytrain considers any arrival or departure more than 30 seconds off
>>schedule to be late.
>
>There are some seemingly predictable delays with the Skytrain. On my way to
>work in New West, it has often stopped just a bit east of Royal Oak for a
>minute or two (this is around 11:30 in the morning). Coming home around
>8:30 at night, for some reason there is often manual operation between
>Patterson and Joyce, then west of Joyce it starts acting "normal" again...

You've perhaps noticed the 'third track' just outside of Metrotown.
It is used to position trains that will eventually go into extra
service when demand rises.  Perhaps one of those trains was going into
the siding while your train waited.
>
>Once I was on my way to work and it blew a major fuse, I sat above Boundary
>Road for about half an hour!!

It doesn't happen oftern, but when it does it's a real pain in the
sit-down...for everyone.

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>Skytrain considers any arrival or departure more than 30 seconds off
>schedule to be late.

There are some seemingly predictable delays with the Skytrain. On my way to
work in New West, it has often stopped just a bit east of Royal Oak for a
minute or two (this is around 11:30 in the morning). Coming home around
8:30 at night, for some reason there is often manual operation between
Patterson and Joyce, then west of Joyce it starts acting "normal" again...

Once I was on my way to work and it blew a major fuse, I sat above Boundary
Road for about half an hour!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out my home page -- http://web20.mindlink.net/a4369/ -- location 
of the award-winning Hawaii Five-O Home Page, X-Files stuff & much more!

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:

>> ok.  that make sense sort of.
>> But when the bus you need to take to make your connection doesn't
>> show that sometimes adds an hour onto your travel time.

>Understood.  But as Martin mentioned... it's not anything closes to a
>perfect system.  And that's why this region also has a thriving cycle,
>taxi and private vehicle business! :-)

Yeah, but we're supposed to be trying to eliminate that by creating a
"perfect" transit system such that no one needs to drive private
vehicles.   Actually, it no one did drive pv's, I guess transit would
be near perfect...   no more cars cutting off buses, no more traffic,
enough people on buses to justify more routes, etc.    Cursed
catch-22, eh!   People don't take transit because it isn't perfect.
But transit would be near perfect if everyone took it...   :)

Patrick

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:

>> The drivers
>> could simply call in with whatever problem they encounter and provide
>> an estimated delay.   8 million?  Probably much less than that.   If
>> they need additional revenue, maybe adopting OC Transpo's $56 tickets
>> for everything from walking/driving in the bus lane to fare cheating
>> could be an option.

>It's not like you're the very first person to consider this.  BC Transit
>has studied (as has every other major city) how to provide information in
>many modes.  It's just not as easy as it looks on the surface.

Never said it was an original idea...   I did say that OC Transpo
(Ottawa)  has a system in place that allows riders to find out when
the next bus is.   This really helps when you're sitting there
waiting... wondering when the next bus is coming, trying to decide
whether or not a taxi would be a good idea.   
For example, when I was in Ottawa last year, I was at the airport,
waiting for a bus.   The schedule indicated the last bus to be at
11:30pm.   I got to the stop at about 11:15.   No bus.   I call the
number on the bus stop sign, and was told 11:30.  So I wait in -35C
weather.   At 11:35, still no bus.  I call... bus was cancelled.   So
I took a taxi.   Now, if I didn't have somewhere to call, who knows
how long I would have waited (I'm used to BC Transit, so I'm generally
quite patient about buses).   It works.

>As for the drivers, if you were to add being a traffic reporter to their
>duties, how much more would you be willing to pay?  Added responsibilities
>cost money to employers.  You cannot just add one here and another there
>before somebody says "whoa!".
So, you're saying a bus driver isn't capable of calling in when he's
late?   Or if he looks ahead and sees a jam?   Give them a little
credit.  As you well know, many are very experienced and have a good
feel for traffic.   If they're late, they know it.   The system
doesn't have to be 100% accurate (not down to the last minute), but so
long as it informs riders about delays.    Heck, I'd be happy if
drivers would stick their head out the door at stops and shout "Bus
#403 is delayed" or something to that effect.  It just gives the rider
the info needed to make decisions.   Anyways, wouldn't this
information help BC Transit in their planning?   If certain buses at
certain times are consistently late, then perhaps scheduling could be
adjusted accordingly...     Doesn't BCT already collect this info (in
some fashion)?   Is it that tough to pass it on to the riders?

Patrick

: >Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
: (stuff deleted)

: But students all get out of class at once.  Are you suggesting that
: having empty buses running around.

The buses wouldn't necessarily run empty.  Proper scheduling would entail 
students to get out of UBC and onto the buses as quickly as possible.  
Here's an example.  At xx:25, :27, :29 run the #4, 9, and 10 trolleys out 
of the loop to allow time for the students to get from class to the 
loop.  At the same times, run the #25, 41, 49 out.  With this method, 
someone who misses the #4 can just wait 2 minutes for the #9, and 2 more 
minutes for the #10.  When the buses all leave at once, you have to wait 
10+ minutes for the next batch.  

: >around the Vancouver system.  10% is unnacceptable.

: Where did you get the stat?  I'm afraid it's not accurate.

I got this stat from personal experience.  Unless I'm really unlucky, the 
10% no-show rate is valid as I have been all over the region.  BTW, what 
is the real stat? --
***************************************************************************
     -- A low mark is better than no mark --
	
		Steve Ruelle, Vancouver B.C., Canada
		Email: sruel@vcn.bc.ca
***************************************************************************

Ian Fisher (ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:
: Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

: >I'm afraid if you're looking for service waiting for personal
: >schedules then you're part of the 'must have my car' crowd.  Public
: >transit is just that, public.  It attempts to strike a balance
: >suitable for most.

: Excuse me. If you went out to UBC and waited at Bay 1 for one of the
: express routes you would find that most riders are there waiting on
: the platform at 30 after the hour or even earlier, even though their
: bus doesn't go until 35 or 38 after. On the 31, where alternate
: service is available on the 9, many riders lose much of the time saved
: by riding the express in the wait.

This is exactly right.   At bay #1, we have suburban express buses which 
leave UBC during afternoon rush hours.  There is the #31, #285 N.Van., 
Blue Bus, and a #480 Richmpnd bus.  They all leave at xx:38 which creates 
a major crowd problem.  It can be quite confusing when all 4 buses pick 
up in the same bay at the same time.  If the buses were to leave ONE AT A 
TIME, and load at the FRONT of the bay, we wouldn't have this 
crowd/confusion problem.  As for Martin's comment, massive crowds all 
waiting for a bus don't constitute 'personal' transit service.

: ------------
: Ian Fisher  ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca   Transport 2000 British Columbia
: Vancouver, BC, Canada              Visit the Transport 2000 BC Web Site:
: Telephone/Fax: (604)681-3192       http://www.vcn.bc.ca/t2000bc/
: Contributions to Vancouver-Seattle daily passenger rail service:
: Washington State: US$30 million    BC Gov't: US$35,000


--
***************************************************************************
     -- A low mark is better than no mark --
	
		Steve Ruelle, Vancouver B.C., Canada
		Email: sruel@vcn.bc.ca
***************************************************************************

Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:

>I won't get into the technical aspects of what is required.  With all
>due respect, you obviously don't have any idea the amount of
>information necessary to form an operating database for the largest
>(by area) transit system in Canada.  Also you are not aware of the
If course I don't.  I don't have the background or the training.  I'm
just throwing ideas into the pan...  things that other cities have
done.   

>computing power necessary to 'just update' the whereabouts of 900-odd
>buses.  BC Transit looked at all present AVL (automatic vehicle
>location) systems presently in use (including Ottawa's).  The
>approximate cost of a system suitable to handle our system, given
>terrain, number of vehicles, service area, etc, was approx 8 million.
Fair enough.   

>>If they need additional revenue, maybe adopting OC Transpo's $56 tickets
>>for everything from walking/driving in the bus lane to fare cheating
>>could be an option.
>BC Transit Security already issues tickets for fare fraud.  Many of
>those are tied up in our already clogged court system.
The difference is that during my 4 month stay in Ottawa, I had to show
my pass to at least 3 inspectors a week!   Meanwhile, during the 4
months I took BC Transit, I had to show my pass to only 1.. and that
was a driver.   However, on OC Transpo buses, pass holders board
through any doorway (often bypassing the driver "inspector"), while BC
Transit's drivers check each rider as they board.   So... which one is
more efficient at catching fare fraud?  Which one puts more money into
the transit system?   I don't have any data regarding this, so I won't
even try to guess. 

>Driving in the bus lane is a municipal area of policing (VPD, RCMP,
>etc).  Jurisdictional problems have arisen in these areas.
Fair enough.   OC Transpo has numerous inspectors driving up and down
the Transitway looking for offenders.  It's their property (I think),
so they have jurisdiction.  It seems that OC Transpo is given quite a
bit of leeway in enforcement considerations...  

Patrick

johansen@portal.ca (George Johansen) wrote:

>> So, you're saying a bus driver isn't capable of calling in when he's
>> late?   Or if he looks ahead and sees a jam?   Give them a little
>> credit. 
>Give "them" a little credit?  <g>  I'm one of "them". :-)
I've gathered that through your posts.... so you should know...   I
realize it's tough enough as it is to drive buses (with all them
personal cars cutting you off all the time, pedestrians stepping in
front of buses, irate passengers, etc).   But is it that much more
work?   (Hey... how about a raise for all the drivers for this extra
work? =)  )

>> Anyways, wouldn't this
>> information help BC Transit in their planning?  
>There's planning and there's trying to anticipate acts of God.  Planning
>says that at an "average" speed, a bus can do it's route in xx minutes. 
Fair enough.   But if you know that at certain times of the day, 9
times out of 10, the bus is late.... you know something has to be
changed.

>That is the planning aspect.  Planning does not involve keeping extra
>busses waiting here and there "just in case".  When an accident closes
I wouldn't expect that.   Buses ain't cheap... nor are keeping unused
manned.

>part of the tunnel, one bridge lane, a roadway in any particular
>direction, or some moron in a dump truck takes out a trolley wire
Or of the City of Vancouver increases the allowable commercial truck
height without telling Trolley Overhead....   As soon as tall truck
drives by... thump, thump....

>someplace... all of these cannot be anticipated or "planned" for.  Similar
>when there are equipment shortages or manpower shortages.  You can plan
>contingencies for just about anything, but you can't plan for the
>unexpected.  That's why the system is not perfect and never will be.
I wouldn't expect any transit system to be able to have every bus on
time all the time.   But it would be nice to have most buses on time
most of the time.   And when they're not, the riders are informed
somehow....

>As for relaying information to people on the route, maybe that's an
>opportunity for some entrepreneur.  Provide a cheap and easy relay system
>to keep everything up to date.  BC Transit has a program called "Trapeze"
Hmmm.....  

Patrick

ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
>
>>ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher) wrote:

>>I'm afraid if you're looking for service waiting for personal
>>schedules then you're part of the 'must have my car' crowd.  Public
>>transit is just that, public.  It attempts to strike a balance
>>suitable for most.
>
>Excuse me. If you went out to UBC and waited at Bay 1 for one of the
>express routes you would find that most riders are there waiting on
>the platform at 30 after the hour or even earlier, even though their
>bus doesn't go until 35 or 38 after. On the 31, where alternate
>service is available on the 9, many riders lose much of the time saved
>by riding the express in the wait.

As I mentioned above, public transit is just that, public.  It is not
possible to schedule to one specific group (in this case UBC students'
finish times).  Those buses travel to other parts of the city and meet
other buses which do the same.  There are many other groups that would
like to be scheduled too as well.

Thing to keep in mind (and this in not an excuse) is that public
transit is subsidized transportation.  You are not paying the whole
shot with your money in the farebox.  Since others contribute, they
are entitled to some consideration as well, hence a modified schedule
that attempts to meet some, but not all, expectations.  I think a 10
minute wait falls into the 'reasonable' time frame.  If the bus left
at 30 a student from Chemistry would wait, oh say 5 minutes (allowing
for walk time) whereas someone from the First Nations House of
Learning, the Asian center or the Museum of Anthropology would
probably just see taillights.  It's a compromise, there are few
alternatives in today's world.

sruel@vcn.bc.ca (Steve Ruelle) wrote:

>
>: >Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
>: (stuff deleted)

>: >around the Vancouver system.  10% is unnacceptable.
>
>: Where did you get the stat?  I'm afraid it's not accurate.
>
>I got this stat from personal experience.  Unless I'm really unlucky, the 
>10% no-show rate is valid as I have been all over the region.  BTW, what 
>is the real stat? --

I have taken an arbitrary day from the Oakridge transit garage which
is the largest garage in the system.  On an average weekday there are
approximately 4544.11 hours of scheduled service.  I picked a weekday
in December 95 (last month that I have all necessary figures for).  On
one day there were 72 minutes of diesel service lost and no trolley
loss.  On another day there were 369 minutes of trolley service lost
and no diesel time.

But let's be pessimistic here.  On a fictious day (bad storm, what
ever) let's say we lost 5000 minutes from this garage.  That's 5000
service minutes (83.33 hours) from a total of approx 272,640 minutes.
That's a percentage loss of 1.833920187793 % (using my trusty Windows
calculator).

I won't belabour the point but you can see that 10% is way out of
line.  I sympathize with the feeling of waiting in the rain when all
you want to do is go home.  I've 'been there, done that'.  It's not
fun at all.  Transit tries hard to live up to it's stated goals.  It's
not perfect but then again, what is?

sruel@vcn.bc.ca (Steve Ruelle) wrote:

>This is exactly right.   At bay #1, we have suburban express buses which 
>leave UBC during afternoon rush hours.  There is the #31, #285 N.Van., 
>Blue Bus, and a #480 Richmpnd bus.  They all leave at xx:38 which creates 
>a major crowd problem.  It can be quite confusing when all 4 buses pick 
>up in the same bay at the same time.  If the buses were to leave ONE AT A 
>TIME, and load at the FRONT of the bay, we wouldn't have this 
>crowd/confusion problem.  As for Martin's comment, massive crowds all 
>waiting for a bus don't constitute 'personal' transit service.

The physical constraints imposed by the UBC loop as well as
limitations with the mix of diesel and trolley equipment preclude the
assignment of one bay to each bus line.  This necessitates lumping the
rush hour only service into one bay.

To minimize waiting time, given the above constraints, the buses load
simultaneously.  If they loaded singlely, at the front of the bay, it
would take about 20 minutes to get everyone going.  Admittedly, it is
a bit confusing, everyone trying to get on their bus home at once but
it's the most accomodating solution.

Everyone here (so far anyway) is advocating changing the bus schedule.
How about we back up a bit.  UBC could stagger class times.  Some
classes out at 3:00, some at 3:10, 3:20.  Of course this would
necessitate staggered starting times.  Some students would have
difficulty coordinating classes...you see what I'm getting at?  One
relatively minor change seems a simple solution.  The reality is the
domino effect it has on all related items up and down the line.

chanp@direct.ca (Patrick Chan) wrote:

>The difference is that during my 4 month stay in Ottawa, I had to show
>my pass to at least 3 inspectors a week!   Meanwhile, during the 4
>months I took BC Transit, I had to show my pass to only 1.. and that
>was a driver.   However, on OC Transpo buses, pass holders board
>through any doorway (often bypassing the driver "inspector"), while BC
>Transit's drivers check each rider as they board.   So... which one is
>more efficient at catching fare fraud?  Which one puts more money into
>the transit system?   I don't have any data regarding this, so I won't
>even try to guess. 

I would think that the driver checking each passenger would be more
efficient at detecting who's attempting to cheat.  It is generally
accepted that a challenge from the operator regarding the fare is
enough inducement to get a person to pay the correct fare.

Fare fraud in BC Transit is a 3 to 5 million dollars a year
problem...officially.  I personally believe it to be considerably
higher.  The problem here (again, like schedules) is to strike a
balance.  Do you hold up 50 honest fare-paying people trying to get
home in order to deal with the single individual going 10 blocks who
refuses to pay?  The system will only be out $1.50 (slightly more if
it's rush hour or suburban service).

The other problems extend to the court system.  The present number of
outstanding tickets for fare fraud tied up in the courts is very high.
The courts have their priorities too (speeders, robbers, etc).
>
>>Driving in the bus lane is a municipal area of policing (VPD, RCMP,
>>etc).  Jurisdictional problems have arisen in these areas.
>Fair enough.   OC Transpo has numerous inspectors driving up and down
>the Transitway looking for offenders.  It's their property (I think),
>so they have jurisdiction.  It seems that OC Transpo is given quite a
>bit of leeway in enforcement considerations...  

This is true.  OC Transpo is responsible for the Transitway because
they are the only ones that use it and it is completely separate from
the rest of the road (sort of like Skytrain).  Our bus lanes form part
of the road system (a white line is not considered hard enough
separation) and, as a result, fall under local police jurisdiction.

In article <31942D75.2C25@bc.sympatico.ca>,
Wes Smith  <wes_smith@bc.sympatico.ca> wrote:

> The catch-22 is BC Transit says "Go Green", people would if the
> service was better!  BC Transit does a rider audit and says,
> "Riderships down, we have to cut back service." So they do and less
> people use transit, "C'mon people GO GREEN!" or we'll have to cut
> service again.  What's wrong with this picture?

I believe that `Go Green' is a provincial program, not a BC Transit
one, though of course BC Transit would be a big promoter of this.

I have some pretty serious doubts about the whole `Go Green'
programme.  They arose one day when I had managed, though a great
deal of luck, to negotiate my bicycle over the Alex Fraser bridge
without a puncture from the broken glass all over the sidewalk. I
was carrying my bicycle over all of the bushes that had overgrown
the too-narrow path underneath the bridge that cyclists are supposed
to use when I looked up to see a large `Go Green' sign on the bridge
above me.

I commute to work every day by bicycle, but I certainly woudn't be
if I had to go over that bridge every day.

cjs
-- 
Curt Sampson    curt@portal.ca		Info at http://www.portal.ca/
Internet Portal Services, Inc.	
Vancouver, BC   (604) 257-9400		De gustibus, aut bene aut nihil.

ifisher@unixg.ubc.ca (Ian Fisher) wrote:

>Martin_Williamson@mindlink.bc.ca wrote:
>
>>This 'lack of manpower' is not an uncommon problem.  I expect that
>>we'll see posters advocating the simple solution 'Hire more drivers',
>>but before we get into that let me say there are a number of
>>mitigating factors involved here that many outside the public transit
>>industry are probably not aware of.
>
>I'm sure anyone who has waited for a bus that didn't show up or been
>passed up by a full bus because the one before it was missing would
>love to know what these mitigating factors are...

First off, you have to have equipment for operators to drive.  The
number of companies that manufacture transit coaches is limited.  So
with other areas also vying for spots on the assembly line the lead
time between ordering and receiving coaches is in the area of 2 years.
The changing political nature of BC adds to the mix.  This makes
planning for the future difficult.

At present, due to government forced cancellation of Transit's
standing order for 50 buses per year (this was to maintain the
operating fleet at its present level, not increase it) Transit is
walking a very narrow line between the schedule and what is available
for service.  Maintenance requirements and unexpected failures
sometimes push over the line and coaches are late leaving the garage
or don't get out at all.  This does not even begin to touch on
servicing levels for new or expanded routes or increasing accessible
service.

Hire more drivers!  The load on the transit system in the lower
mainland varies greatly over the year.  Right now, with UBC out for
the summer, the load on the west side diminishes considerably.  In
another two months public school finishes and the load drops even
further (Transit provides a number of 'school bus' type services for
Vancouver, Burnaby and Coquitlam schools to name a few).  Anyone who
drives to work will notice the decrease in vehicles when UBC, BCIT and
SFU finish their winter sessions.  The question arises, what to do
with all these drivers (if they were hired) during the 3 months of
summer.  The load brought in by the tourist industry does not warrant
keeping them.

Part-time drivers is an issue that the driver's union (ICTU) has
always fought for a number of reasons.  Since I am not a member of the
union I will not debate the pros or cons of their position except to
point one area that I feel is valid.  I would not feel safe driving at
speed in one of the largest vehicles on the road with someone who
doesn't do it 5 days a week.  It's a difficult job to do well and full
time practice is required to keep up that skill.  Transit has one of
the best safety records in North America.  I feel that it is important
to keep it.

Government imposition of operating rules is a little known or
considered area that affects what service gets to the street.  As I
mentioned, BC Transit has one of the best safety records in North
America.  It was attained following operating rules arrived at and
agreed to by both company and union.  The provincial government has
now imposed the operating rules of the trucking industry on all
commercial transport, including urban transit.  This blocked some
operators from putting in extra time on the road along with other
items.  Admittedly, it is only a few hours here and there but a bus
here and there is what we're talking about.

Like all large commercial operations, providing public transit is a
complicated business.  For those on the outside solutions to some
problems appear to be simple, the unfortunate reality is that they're
not.