+- 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
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
RE: Grand River Transit - Acitta - 01-19-2021
(01-19-2021, 11:47 AM)danbrotherston Wrote:The $20,000 is fuel and operating cost savings. The $21,000 is just fuel savings. The lifetime savings are $280,000 for the hybrid and $434,000 for the fully electric.(01-19-2021, 11:33 AM)Acitta Wrote: Waterloo Region begins phasing out diesel buses this year
I am however confused, how do hybrids save 20,000 dollars per year in fuel, when electric buses only save 21,000 dollars a year in fuel?
RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-19-2021
(01-19-2021, 12:14 PM)Acitta Wrote:(01-19-2021, 11:47 AM)danbrotherston Wrote: I am however confused, how do hybrids save 20,000 dollars per year in fuel, when electric buses only save 21,000 dollars a year in fuel?The $20,000 is fuel and operating cost savings. The $21,000 is just fuel savings. The lifetime savings are $280,000 for the hybrid and $434,000 for the fully electric.
Thanks, I did misread that.
Although, I wouldn't think hybrids would save much in maintenance costs. Yes, the brakes do get less wear, but there are effectively two drivetrains to maintain, which can't be free.
In any case, their projections about longevity and costs are probably a bit vague anyway, given they were wrong about brake longevity by a factor of two.
RE: Grand River Transit - Coke6pk - 01-19-2021
(01-19-2021, 12:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote:(01-19-2021, 12:14 PM)Acitta Wrote: The $20,000 is fuel and operating cost savings. The $21,000 is just fuel savings. The lifetime savings are $280,000 for the hybrid and $434,000 for the fully electric.
Thanks, I did misread that.
Although, I wouldn't think hybrids would save much in maintenance costs. Yes, the brakes do get less wear, but there are effectively two drivetrains to maintain, which can't be free.
In any case, their projections about longevity and costs are probably a bit vague anyway, given they were wrong about brake longevity by a factor of two.
The electrical side has no moving parts, which can be very cheap. The ICE side is used about 50% of what a normal bus would use, so that extends its life and reduces maintenance costs.
Coke
RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-19-2021
(01-19-2021, 01:10 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(01-19-2021, 12:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Thanks, I did misread that.
Although, I wouldn't think hybrids would save much in maintenance costs. Yes, the brakes do get less wear, but there are effectively two drivetrains to maintain, which can't be free.
In any case, their projections about longevity and costs are probably a bit vague anyway, given they were wrong about brake longevity by a factor of two.
The electrical side has no moving parts, which can be very cheap. The ICE side is used about 50% of what a normal bus would use, so that extends its life and reduces maintenance costs.
Coke
I wouldn't say the electrical side has "no" moving parts, there are at a minimum, an electric motor or two, as well as some contactors. There may also be a temperature management system. And there is still a physical interface between the two systems, which can vary in complexity significantly.
To be honest though, I have no idea where most maintenance costs lie with any type of bus. For personal vehicles, usually the drivetrain is not a major source of repairs, and instead auxiliary equipment tend to fail.
RE: Grand River Transit - jeffster - 01-19-2021
(01-19-2021, 01:10 PM)Coke6pk Wrote:(01-19-2021, 12:39 PM)danbrotherston Wrote: Thanks, I did misread that.
Although, I wouldn't think hybrids would save much in maintenance costs. Yes, the brakes do get less wear, but there are effectively two drivetrains to maintain, which can't be free.
In any case, their projections about longevity and costs are probably a bit vague anyway, given they were wrong about brake longevity by a factor of two.
The electrical side has no moving parts, which can be very cheap. The ICE side is used about 50% of what a normal bus would use, so that extends its life and reduces maintenance costs.
Coke
Yeah, you know, gas is going to be gone at lot sooner than a lot of people think. It's the way things are going. I was thinking that my next car would be a hybrid, but at the rate we're going, it could very well be full electric.
Maintenance will be a lot different, mostly tires and brakes and whatever other final drive-train that cars share (lock shocks, etc). I have a friend that is a mechanic, his wife had said "he'll always have a job because people will always have cars...hahahahahahhaha". I am thinking how a high quality electric, "regular" car will be. I say regular, because they won't be muscle cars like the Tesla.
Finally. Really looking forward to this. Clean travel.
RE: Grand River Transit - jwilliamson - 01-22-2021
It looks like they're done road work at the university transit hub. Bus shelter structures are going up on either side of the road.
My phone died from the cold so I wasn't able to get any pictures.
RE: Grand River Transit - ac3r - 01-23-2021
So, bus drivers are still often not wearing a mask while driving. They were exempt from this before due to the fact they have the plexiglass shield. Now, with the emergency order issued a few days ago, do you believe it should be mandatory for GRT drivers to wear masks while they drive the bus?
RE: Grand River Transit - ijmorlan - 01-23-2021
(01-23-2021, 12:38 PM)ac3r Wrote: So, bus drivers are still often not wearing a mask while driving. They were exempt from this before due to the fact they have the plexiglass shield. Now, with the emergency order issued a few days ago, do you believe it should be mandatory for GRT drivers to wear masks while they drive the bus?
I think transit drivers should have their own separate ventilation so they don’t have to wear a mask. It’s one thing to wear a mask for 30 minutes while riding, quite another to drive an 8-hour shift with one.
That being said, until that happens, they should be masking up.
And the idea that safety measures such as masks and vaccinations are optional for employees who interact with the public is insane. The employer should develop workplace-specific procedures in consultation with public health authorities and their employees (either individually or via their union), and then 100% of employees who continue to be employed should be observed to comply with the procedures.
RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 01-23-2021
(01-23-2021, 02:52 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I think transit drivers should have their own separate ventilation so they don’t have to wear a mask. It’s one thing to wear a mask for 30 minutes while riding, quite another to drive an 8-hour shift with one.
I don't think driving a bus requires any more exertion than many of the factory and warehouse jobs that require wearing of masks.
RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 01-23-2021
(01-23-2021, 04:42 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(01-23-2021, 02:52 PM)ijmorlan Wrote: I think transit drivers should have their own separate ventilation so they don’t have to wear a mask. It’s one thing to wear a mask for 30 minutes while riding, quite another to drive an 8-hour shift with one.
I don't think driving a bus requires any more exertion than many of the factory and warehouse jobs that require wearing of masks.
And probably considerably less than healthcare workers who are working a highly active job.
RE: Grand River Transit - bgb_ca - 02-01-2021
I don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but I was on a bus for the first time since Christmas yesterday and noticed that least some of them now have the permanent driver shield installed vs the makeshift one.
RE: Grand River Transit - Nextasy - 02-23-2021
Not sure if it was mentioned already, but looks like the Conestoga Mall terminal is getting a reconfig. RFP has been issued.
Trips at the station in 2019 were up to 10,000/day, from 6,000 pre-LRT. The roadway and sidewalk capacity is insufficient, and much more pedestrian thru-traffic exists now due to ION.
Design to consider:
- Improvements to the pedestrian amenities/facilities including, sidewalks, crosswalks, street furniture (i.e. benches, trash receptacles, and bicycle parking racks) etc.
- Illumination Improvements;
- Signage Improvements throughout the station;
- Coordination involved as part of potential utility relocations as well as electrical and communications servicing for lighting and bus shelters
- Landscape enhancements where feasible;
- Couple other things that aren't as important
RE: Grand River Transit - danbrotherston - 02-23-2021
(02-23-2021, 03:56 PM)Nextasy Wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned already, but looks like the Conestoga Mall terminal is getting a reconfig. RFP has been issued.
Trips at the station in 2019 were up to 10,000/day, from 6,000 pre-LRT. The roadway and sidewalk capacity is insufficient, and much more pedestrian thru-traffic exists now due to ION.
Design to consider:
The 21/31 platform and Ion station are out of scope and will remain as-is.
- Improvements to the pedestrian amenities/facilities including, sidewalks, crosswalks, street furniture (i.e. benches, trash receptacles, and bicycle parking racks) etc.
- Illumination Improvements;
- Signage Improvements throughout the station;
- Coordination involved as part of potential utility relocations as well as electrical and communications servicing for lighting and bus shelters
- Landscape enhancements where feasible;
- Couple other things that aren't as important
Do you have more details on the specific improvements. There are several clear deficiencies (like, should have been career ending for the engineers designing it, deficiencies) in the design of the station. Specifically access to the bus station from the ION station is nearly 150 meters for pedestrians, to cover a distance of only about 50 meters as the crow flies.
And that's leaving aside the unnecessary but intentionally dangerous slip ramp into the mall, that I'm sure is outside the scope of the Bus station, and the lack of a pedestrian crossing across King to provide any access to the businesses on the other side of King. Good God I forgot how pedestrian oppressive that area is.
Fun fact I just realized looking at the map. That station is effectively grade separated. Maybe not a full height but the mall is clearly significantly lower.
RE: Grand River Transit - tomh009 - 02-23-2021
(02-23-2021, 03:56 PM)Nextasy Wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned already, but looks like the Conestoga Mall terminal is getting a reconfig. RFP has been issued.
Trips at the station in 2019 were up to 10,000/day, from 6,000 pre-LRT. The roadway and sidewalk capacity is insufficient, and much more pedestrian thru-traffic exists now due to ION.
Is this a regional RFP, for GRT? Or a city RFP, for the sidewalks and roads? I'm not clear whose responsibility this is.
RE: Grand River Transit - Nextasy - 02-24-2021
(02-23-2021, 05:49 PM)tomh009 Wrote:(02-23-2021, 03:56 PM)Nextasy Wrote: Not sure if it was mentioned already, but looks like the Conestoga Mall terminal is getting a reconfig. RFP has been issued.
Trips at the station in 2019 were up to 10,000/day, from 6,000 pre-LRT. The roadway and sidewalk capacity is insufficient, and much more pedestrian thru-traffic exists now due to ION.
Is this a regional RFP, for GRT? Or a city RFP, for the sidewalks and roads? I'm not clear whose responsibility this is.
It's a regional RFP