Jump to content


CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

9,819 profile views

DE40LFR's Achievements

  1. Charging arm has been erected but no electrical components yet to be installed.
  2. A good idea that might work for a rail project north of Harkness is to use the section between Harkness and Queen Elizabeth as a sloped guideway, having an overpass over Queen Elizabeth, curving north, crossing over a new bridge over the Assinaboine and entering Union Station, utilizing the unused platforms. Overall, it would run parallel to the existing rail tracks. What would happen after Union would be another problem... perhaps proceed underground somehow and end up under portage. That option or having at grade on Graham.
  3. My sightings today: Can someone identify this paint scheme? Behind these two Xcelsiors was a Sound Transit artic. Same LACMTA local 5772 bus that was reported as a 'two month battery test bus' Pieces of the Calgary XD60 order. Not too many buses out when I went. The others included the Den Ousten bus, 'Blue Mule,' Grey XN60 Demo, Orange D30LFR, all of which were also already reported at NFI by 'GMC T6H-5307N'
  4. Bus 981 had to pull over due to a mechanical issue. It was on a 54 run and ended at Avalon loop.
  5. Yeah I don't think replacement of the D30LF's will be seen in the foreseeable future quite yet. 2017 will mark the 911-925 series 20 years in service which will be around when transit could consider replacing them. They have been refurbished and I would say there in good shape for a while longer. As for what replacements will be, the LFR platform is slowing fading away as New Flyer really wants to go all out on their Xcelsior platform. So D30LFR's wouldn't be something I would see being replacements. Additionally, I don't think New Flyer offers Xcelsior in a 30 foot version. Thus, a reasonable guess would have to be the MiDi, but I would hope transit demo's it first before buying. But also consider, transit might want a 35-foot replacement or just take on 40-foot instead, where Xcelsior would be an option. All of which is great speculation since the D30LF's are generally in good shape.
  6. Nice contributions DavidW! I'm quite interested on this endeavour New Flyer (and a variety of other organizations) are embarking on. The technology still quite new and in alpha/beta phase type testing. I'm excited to see and ride the test vehicles for Winnipeg Transit.
  7. Spotting yesterday by the downtown MB Hydro Building. I'm very interested in getting a rooftop photo next time.
  8. The route structure too also makes things difficult. During peak hours, they'd need many rt wrapped buses as routes like the 163, 180, 181, 183 etc. would be on the transitway whereas only a few would be needed off peaks. Given these routes also interline with other non-rt routes, it makes the rt wraps very difficult to remain exclusive to just the rt routes. With that said, I would use the rt branded buses only for 160, 162 and 170 service and that's it - that way there's no way that they can appear on non-rt routes. The ~30 rt buses would be too much for that idea as transit is already limited, so it'd just be half of that and they would have their own storage area within the garage for easy access. Would the same or brand new wraps make a come back for the second phase and transit could retry to make the distinctive service? (given that there's enough resources at that time).
  9. There's a 36 run starting from Portage/Sherbrook bound for the U of M at 9:10a which appears to be a regular articulated bus. Today it was 977. Managed to catch a few shots of this beast.
  10. From Friday: 977 leaving U of M campus at 8:20a. Highly likely that it was doing a 36 run - I might have to adjust my schedules to take that run to school instead.
  11. http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/Bendy-buses-to-make-debut-239975641.html
  12. Unidentified articulated bus just spotted heading NB on Queen Elizabeth at Mayfair on the Route 59 South St. Anne's Exp!
  13. 976 and 977 seen sitting behind FRG both displaying 'Winnipeg Transit' with the flying T logo around noon today. My educated guess is more driver training. With my narrow scope of taking the U of M bound buses, Articulated buses are needed on a few runs of the 160, 161 and 36 as pass ups are a regular thing. I would expect transit to not put the artics just on 'generally busy routes.' But specific runs of routes that are known to have regular pass ups.
  14. That column has a lot of truth actually. I live right across the street from the U of W and I'm a U of M student. To make my 8:30a class, I usually take the last 161 that will get me there on time, at 7:49a. But if I'm running late, I have an opportunity to take the 36 at Maryland/Portage at 8:06a (gets me there 5 mins after class start). I usually walk the few blocks from U of W to Maryland but one could also take the 11, 21, 24, 67 a few stops and save more time. In general, I like to take RT just because it's right outside my house and it gets me right in front. BUT I 100% agree that I have to give about 40-45 for the 161 (fastest university 'super express') whereas the 36 is about 30 mins plus a 6-8 min walking time. So in conclusion, for a commuter needing to go right from end to end of the RT line, it's actually faster to not take RT. One short cut that only works if all the connections are good is to take a 16, 18, 60 or 58 down to Osborne Station and transfer to a 185. This is ONLY effective if traffic is good on Osborne, transfers are good and it's the 185 you transfer to. Otherwise, might as well take the 60 all the way. As a pro-RT supporter, I find this to be a very inconvenient truth - I still believe that the RT transit way is a good investment though, especially the second phase. The only variable I'm concerned about is how RT will get to the U of M - via Bison Dr, through the ex-golf course, exit onto University Crescent - But I will no longer be a U of M student by then!
  • Create New...