Waterloo Region Connected

I don't understand why meshing the opening is so important with a "fall bus schedule". Just change the bus schedule to match the train opening. ion is far more important than buses and buses are flexible.

(10-06-2016, 11:34 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]15 minute with reduced trains is optimistic. I'm expecting closer to 30 minute headways with anything less than the full compliment.

Relevant to discussions of frequency:

link to full baseline service plan:

http://rapidtransit.regionofwaterloo.ca/...7RFPV3.pdf

2 trains less than full compliment still gets us 10 minute service.

Frankly, we'd be foolish to launch with 30 minute service. That's three times worse service than exists today on iXpress, and at that point it has no value. I'm better off taking a local route with those kinds of frequencies.

I know the charts - but why are we buying 14 trains then if we think we can hit the same headway with far fewer? That's what I'm getting at. Just scale it.

Is it possible to run some sort of truncated service terminating somewhere before Fairview or Conestoga?

(10-06-2016, 11:47 AM)Canard Wrote: [ -> ]I know the charts - but why are we buying 14 trains then if we think we can hit the same headway with far fewer? That's what I'm getting at. Just scale it.

I can suggest a few reasons, and they all boil down to "what are you willing to do in the short term that is not sustainable for longer periods of time?"

Running with no backups in case of vehicle failure.
Accepting more expensive (or delayed) maintenance and service, because you have to fit some activities into overnights or weekends that you could have otherwise done on a train that's not running on a given day.
Potentially more complicated train/staff scheduling, because all trains are running at peak time and none can switch in or out of service.

These are all things GrandLinq may be willing to accept for a couple of months.

(10-06-2016, 11:56 AM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]Is it possible to run some sort of truncated service terminating somewhere before Fairview or Conestoga?

There is a crossover south of Cedar station and truncated service could be possible here. However truncating ION service would mean adding service hours to GRT as well as complicating transfers between ION and the rest of GRT's system.

I noticed this morning that the highway ramps from 85 To/From Northfields are now open.

@dunkalunk: I like your analysis and agree with most your conclusions. Frequency is key.
@Canard: I, too, am anxious for the trains to start rolling. Everyone's seen these tracks being built, and soon we'll see the burn-in runs crossing our paths... any delay continues to strain the public's patience.

If we assume (big assumption) that the goal is to increase system-wide ridership, it is unclear what of all the myriad options will be optimal.

Adding buses to supplement long headways will not build ridership on ION (especially if the buses aren't immediately adjacent to the stations (UW, Seagram, etc.)), but may act as a "gateway drug" to get existing riders thinking about moving to ION and stop ridership slippage that way.

Starting rail service in a splashy way will get "hearts and minds" of the public and encourage people to think about using transit. Doing this in the winter months will suppress this heavily as people shiver thinking about transit in the cold. If we start in a Spring as people are coming out of their Seasonal Affective Disorders, then I think we can ride that high.

No matter what we do, we'll be missing out on the benefits of doing things another way. Damned if you do.

I was a bit surprised to see that the corner of Francis and Charles still does not have its signals activated. With both Victoria and Francis fully reopened, traffic should be increasing here - indeed, GRT buses are detouring through here. Everything looks installed, what's the delay in turning them on?

(10-06-2016, 11:10 AM)urbd Wrote: [ -> ]I want ION to be open and running as soon as possible even at 15-18 min peak intervals... There probably will be a special 200 still in operation at the same time as ION starts to fill the gaps, and as long as it is very clear that it's a transition phase for a few months it shouldn't be a big deal. Bus riders are already used to so much change that i'm sure this wouldn't affect ridership.

Also, I could not care less if the opening ceremony is December 31st at midnight with 2 feet of snow. We need this service, asap.

I'm less concerned about existing riders and more concerned about retaining new riders who decide give ION a shot because trains are sexy. If your train is suddenly a bus and has to travel in mixed traffic, it is no longer sexy. Also, if a local bus in mixed traffic ends up getting you to your destination on the ION route quicker than the ION train because it left closer to when you wanted to leave, that is also not sexy.

(10-06-2016, 12:21 PM)KevinL Wrote: [ -> ]I was a bit surprised to see that the corner of Francis and Charles still does not have its signals activated. With both Victoria and Francis fully reopened, traffic should be increasing here - indeed, GRT buses are detouring through here. Everything looks installed, what's the delay in turning them on?

There are actually several lights all along Charles that are not yet on. I too am curious why some aren't and some are. It's not very safe - I watched more than one driver come to a full stop at a green light because they thought it was still a 4-way stop.

If the system experience gets worse with ION's launch, that will be the story and perception that lasts. Trying to run with half buses, half trains, is simply not feasible. If they can get to 10 minute frequency, you'll be happy and there's a good delivery of train standpoint to start service from. 15+, and you're creating a perception that won't soon go away.

If they are thinking of running with fewer/no spares, it makes safe driving around trains *absolutely* critical. It means we can't have the roadway operating in no-train mode next year, we absolutely need to have the correct no-turn signs in, possibly even dummy lights simulating trains (possibly during early burn-in or empty runs). Will this frustrate motorists a bit early? Absolutely. But if it's middle of winter when they try to start training drivers for how trains will restrict their movements, we will absolutely fail at it and see crashes, injuries, and very little time before we can't hit any acceptable level of service. New driving techniques are not going to be learned in the dark of early morning/late evening winter drives to/from work.

Hopefully train burn-in runs will see train movements at the time and frequency we expect to see loaded trains running, and for a long enough time for everyone to become accustomed to them. This should make for a minimal learning curve at launch.

I think first impressions will matter. Take the time to get it right (as possible - there will be hiccups) the first time. I'd like to see it launch on-time (or early!), but really I want them to get it right and not give the naysayers any material to work with. What's a few more weeks or months at that point anyway? Especially given Bombardier's recent reputation for overpromising and under-delivering why bother getting hopes up with this kind of talk?

(10-06-2016, 11:56 AM)jamincan Wrote: [ -> ]Is it possible to run some sort of truncated service terminating somewhere before Fairview or Conestoga?

But the Record told me that ION is a service to take people from one mall to the other. /s