+- Waterloo Region Connected (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com)
+-- Forum: Waterloo Region Works (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=14)
+--- Forum: Transportation and Infrastructure (https://www.waterlooregionconnected.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+--- Thread: Grand River Transit (/showthread.php?tid=13)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 04-28-2018
Good that they’re looking at it. But I really want to know the expected revenue loss from restricting window coverage to, say, 10%. I personally think the occasional “total paint” (Ottawa terminology) vehicle is fun, as long as the windows remain mostly unobstructed. Window coverage when used should be artistically interesting. For example, an ad that involves hockey might have somebody’s hockey stick extending up across the window but otherwise leave the windows alone.
I hope they don’t reject the idea of cancelling all full wraps because of the revenue loss without really considering the most crucial portion of the request from riders, which is to stop covering up the windows. All too often I have seen bureaucracies reject a request in its entirety without bothering to understand what actually matters about the request and apply some creativity to come up with an appropriate solution.
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 04-30-2018
Saw this interesting video on Reddit
[video=YouTube]https://youtu.be/6FU1cHrS4D0[/video]
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 05-01-2018
Anyone want to buy a city bus?
https://www.govdeals.ca/index.cfm?fa=Main.AdvSearchResultsNew&searchPg=Location&inv_num=&category=00&kWord=&kWordSelect=2&sortBy=ad&agency=5676&state=&country=&locID=25508&timing=bySimple&locationType=state&timeType=&timingWithin=1
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinT - 05-03-2018
(04-30-2018, 11:42 PM)bgb_ca Wrote: Saw this interesting video on Reddit
[video=YouTube]https://youtu.be/6FU1cHrS4D0[/video]
Nice.
I grew up near Rockway Gardens, and the senior's center where the trolley buses turned around (with their garage across the street) was my stop as a kid. Although I was only three years old when service ended, I swear I still have foggy memories of those buses and their overhead wires.
RE: Grand River Transit - panamaniac - 05-03-2018
(05-03-2018, 03:29 PM)KevinT Wrote:(04-30-2018, 11:42 PM)bgb_ca Wrote: Saw this interesting video on Reddit
[video=YouTube]https://youtu.be/6FU1cHrS4D0[/video]
Nice.
I grew up near Rockway Gardens, and the senior's center where the trolley buses turned around (with their garage across the street) was my stop as a kid. Although I was only three years old when service ended, I swear I still have foggy memories of those buses and their overhead wires.
My main memory is of how jerky the ride tended to be.
RE: Grand River Transit - Canard - 05-03-2018
Really? I'm surprised to hear that, I would have expected the ride to be much, much smoother, being direct drive.
I suppose the shunting of current through a bank of resistors for speed control is non-stepless, and resulted in noticeable jerk in the acceleration?
RE: Grand River Transit - panamaniac - 05-03-2018
It's a long time ago, but I remember jerking everytime the driver "put his foot on the gas" (so to speak). Plus, cruising down King St, there was a lot of stopping and starting.
RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 05-15-2018
Anyone else find the current 200 detour between Kitchener and Waterloo a little absurd?
As it was before the current detour, if the 7 and 200 left at the same time from Charles and the 200 took Charles instead of Joseph the 7 would just beat it to Uptown; now it isn't even close.
Why not just send the 200 up King and move the 200 stops from Victoria/Joseph to King/Victoria, and Park/Green to King/Pine?
RE: Grand River Transit - D40LF - 05-16-2018
There's no room for buses to pass each other on King anymore.
RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 05-16-2018
(05-16-2018, 12:07 AM)D40LF Wrote: There's no room for buses to pass each other on King anymore.
Well, if I’m understanding Pheidippides correctly, the 200 isn’t faster than the 7 now anyway, so it wouldn’t need to pass the 7 to do better than this wander-over-half-the-city detour.
Really they should just route the 200 down the LRT tracks for the King St. portion of the route. Except there might be clearance problems — part of the point of building LRT rather than BRT is that the exclusive lanes don’t need to be as wide.
RE: Grand River Transit - Canard - 05-16-2018
If the 200 has fewer stops than the 7, why not just let it go first?
RE: Grand River Transit - Pheidippides - 05-16-2018
Exactly.
The 7's schedule usually says it should take about 13min from Charles to Uptown and 200's schedule says 12min; a 1min difference.
If a 7 and 200 leave Charles at the same time the 7 driver could just let the 200 pass, and it will be unlikely the 200 catches up to the previous 7. Even if the 200 gets stuck behind a 7 for that stretch the time penalty is <1min. That detour is, surprisingly, only 2km extra, but it is all the turns that seem to slow the 200 (stop lines not being where they need to be to give the bus clearance around a corner etc.).
Maybe it is related to additional stop closures in uptown because of the bike lane work?
RE: Grand River Transit - trainspotter139 - 05-16-2018
(05-16-2018, 06:37 AM)ijmorlan Wrote:(05-16-2018, 12:07 AM)D40LF Wrote: There's no room for buses to pass each other on King anymore.
Really they should just route the 200 down the LRT tracks for the King St. portion of the route. Except there might be clearance problems — part of the point of building LRT rather than BRT is that the exclusive lanes don’t need to be as wide.
It's not a clearance issue per se but it definitely is not possible because of LRT testing.
RE: Grand River Transit - KevinT - 05-16-2018
Having rode the iXpress last week and yesterday from Pinebush to R&T Park and back, I'll confirm that the wonkiest/slowest part of the route is between the downtown terminal and the hospital. It seemingly made no sense whatsoever.
What bugged me the most though was that the rear emergency roof hatch was open on every single one of them. Whenever it got up to speed the air turbulence started bringing diesel exhaust in, and being a good little boy who always moves to the back I was right there to breathe it in and get a massive headache. To add insult to injury, the rain was coming in through it yesterday morning as well and dripping on unsuspecting passengers from time to time. Is there some policy that they keep that hatch open, or does some fellow passenger that wants a little more air keep popping it open? Wouldn't it raise an alarm at the driver's console? Aren't they all air conditioned now and so wouldn't need this for ventilation?
RE: Grand River Transit - trainspotter139 - 05-16-2018
(05-16-2018, 10:56 AM)KevinT Wrote: Having rode the iXpress last week and yesterday from Pinebush to R&T Park and back, I'll confirm that the wonkiest/slowest part of the route is between the downtown terminal and the hospital. It seemingly made no sense whatsoever.
What bugged me the most though was that the rear emergency roof hatch was open on every single one of them. Whenever it got up to speed the air turbulence started bringing diesel exhaust in, and being a good little boy who always moves to the back I was right there to breathe it in and get a massive headache. To add insult to injury, the rain was coming in through it yesterday morning as well and dripping on unsuspecting passengers from time to time. Is there some policy that they keep that hatch open, or does some fellow passenger that wants a little more air keep popping it open? Wouldn't it raise an alarm at the driver's console? Aren't they all air conditioned now and so wouldn't need this for ventilation?
They have a mechanical thing that turns it into a vent.