Welcome Guest!
In order to take advantage of all the great features that Waterloo Region Connected has to offer, including participating in the lively discussions below, you're going to have to register. The good news is that it'll take less than a minute and you can get started enjoying Waterloo Region's best online community right away.
or Create an Account




Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 4.75 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Grand River Transit
(03-04-2018, 10:55 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: The fact that there are such lengthy layovers at all indicates there is too much slack in the schedule.

If we’re talking occasional layovers at specific points, mostly endpoints but potentially major stops in the middle of a long route, then lengthy layovers do not prove too much slack. A certain amount of slack is required to get reliable service. If the bus is late for whatever reason, it is good to have some scheduled layover time to allow the return journey to still leave on time.

Excessive layovers in the middle of a route may indicate that drivers are not properly using their schedule adherence device to drive slower when they are in danger of running hot. A correctly driven bus does not gradually get further and further ahead of schedule until it stops for 10 minutes at a timepoint. The correct way to drive is to slow down, stop at yellows, pause briefly before leaving every stop, and so on, such that the bus never gets more than about 0s ahead of schedule. It is the drivers’ job to drive this way and management’s job to ensure that drivers drive this way using an appropriate progressive discipline strategy to ensure that only drivers who are able to do their jobs properly continue to be drivers.

But a schedule may usefully have significant layovers at the ends and even in the middle as mentioned to allow late buses to get back on schedule.
Reply


(03-04-2018, 01:29 PM)ijmorlan Wrote:
(03-04-2018, 10:55 AM)Pheidippides Wrote: The fact that there are such lengthy layovers at all indicates there is too much slack in the schedule.

If we’re talking occasional layovers at specific points, mostly endpoints but potentially major stops in the middle of a long route, then lengthy layovers do not prove too much slack. A certain amount of slack is required to get reliable service. If the bus is late for whatever reason, it is good to have some scheduled layover time to allow the return journey to still leave on time.

Excessive layovers in the middle of a route may indicate that drivers are not properly using their schedule adherence device to drive slower when they are in danger of running hot. A correctly driven bus does not gradually get further and further ahead of schedule until it stops for 10 minutes at a timepoint. The correct way to drive is to slow down, stop at yellows, pause briefly before leaving every stop, and so on, such that the bus never gets more than about 0s ahead of schedule. It is the drivers’ job to drive this way and management’s job to ensure that drivers drive this way using an appropriate progressive discipline strategy to ensure that only drivers who are able to do their jobs properly continue to be drivers.

But a schedule may usefully have significant layovers at the ends and even in the middle as mentioned to allow late buses to get back on schedule.

+1

Also, layovers provide opportunity for crew change, bathroom breaks, mental health breaks, etc.

Layovers have their place, but you're right, it shouldn't be because buses are running early.

On the issue of slack though, there can be too much slack.  The biggest risk in my mind, of measuring on time performance is that the easiest solution to fixing on time performance is simply to add tons of slack and slow everyone down.
Reply
I understand the need for crew changes and breaks, making sure the entire network is as efficient as possible, and working within the limits of the allocated budget/available buses, but there is definitely still room for improvement.

Take for example the #2. Each trip it arrives at Charles Terminal and then sits for 13 minutes before it departs again. It does this 32 times a day. So it is sitting idle 416 minutes a day (7 hours!). The entire route takes 47 minutes to do (1,504 minutes a day) meaning the bus is idle for 21% of the day (still using fuel, still paying an operator). Even if you cut that idle time in half to 6.5 minutes you can get 4 more trips a day. Cut that to further to 3 minutes and you can get nearly 7 more trips a day. That's enough for AM/PM rush 20 minute service instead of 30min service. Imagine the fuel savings alone.

The iXpress regularly swaps the operator, does a safety check around the bus, and boards/alights a much heavier passenger load than the #2 in less than 3min.

That said I have also been stuck on an iXpress that is waiting to get on schedule again for upwards of 10 minutes which makes no sense. The iXpress should just go, the next one will be along soon enough.
Everyone move to the back of the bus and we all get home faster.
Reply
(03-05-2018, 11:06 PM)Pheidippides Wrote: I understand the need for crew changes and breaks, making sure the entire network is as efficient as possible, and working within the limits of the allocated budget/available buses, but there is definitely still room for improvement.

Take for example the #2. Each trip it arrives at Charles Terminal and then sits for 13 minutes before it departs again. It does this 32 times a day. So it is sitting idle 416 minutes a day (7 hours!). The entire route takes 47 minutes to do (1,504 minutes a day) meaning the bus is idle for 21% of the day (still using fuel, still paying an operator). Even if you cut that idle time in half to 6.5 minutes you can get 4 more trips a day. Cut that to further to 3 minutes and you can get nearly 7 more trips a day. That's enough for AM/PM rush 20 minute service instead of 30min service.  Imagine the fuel savings alone.

The iXpress regularly swaps the operator, does a safety check around the bus, and boards/alights a much heavier passenger load than the #2 in less than 3min.

That said I have also been stuck on an iXpress that is waiting to get on schedule again for upwards of 10 minutes which makes no sense. The iXpress should just go, the next one will be along soon enough.

FYI every GRT bus has had an anti-idling device installed that shuts off the engine if they idle for too long.
Reply
My guess is that they're aiming to facilitate timed transfers with other routes. Having it run at a consistent frequency also makes it a lot easier for users to predict when it will arrive at their stop without having to consult a schedule.

If they chopped 10 min off the stop at Charles Street, they would miss the timed transfer more often (although passengers would only have to wait 5 minutes in the worst case I think). But it would also mean that the bus schedule would be all over the map throughout the day.
Reply
Signs have started to go up at stops that will be moved/removed with the service changes, directing riders to the website or consultations.

Notably, they state the change is expected 'in fall 2018'.

If Ion is launching in Spring, as we're promised, what happens over the summer...?
Reply
I thought you said bus changes always happen in the fall?
Reply


They *usually* do, but the Ion launch was always expected to be an exception to that...
Reply
Sounds like there will be some overlap, which probably makes sense for people to get used to things.
Reply
I saw one of those signs at union/King where the route 4 stops. But that one makes sense since the 4 and the replacement going down union will be routing to GRH to meet ion.
Reply
Had a driver comment earlier when I tapped my card, asking how I found it so far and if I was encountering any issues with it. I think it was the first time he had someone use one.
Reply
Tuesday I had to tap a second time. I got on the 7A, which sat for a minute (red light?) and then the 200 pulled up behind, so I got off and boarded to the 200. The first tap had an error, butI tapped again and it was accepted.
Reply
Article talking about the potential for GRT service to reach AYR in 2019.

https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/mobile/ayr-...-1.3834265
Reply


Made me think of all the bus wrap discussion.

https://kitchener.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1344293
Reply
GRT emailed all us farecard beta testers today and had us fill out an experience survey.

Included in the email, if anyone had questions or doubts:
Quote:Keep in mind that when the beta test ends, your EasyGO fare card is yours to keep. Any fare products left on the card after the beta test ends are yours to use. The only thing that will change is that you'll no longer receive the 20% discount when you reload your card.
Reply
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »



Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Invisible User(s), 5 Guest(s)

About Waterloo Region Connected

Launched in August 2014, Waterloo Region Connected is an online community that brings together all the things that make Waterloo Region great. Waterloo Region Connected provides user-driven content fueled by a lively discussion forum covering topics like urban development, transportation projects, heritage issues, businesses and other issues of interest to those in Kitchener, Waterloo, Cambridge and the four Townships - North Dumfries, Wellesley, Wilmot, and Woolwich.

              User Links