Jump to content


CPTDB Wiki Editor
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Everything posted by roamer

  1. I certainly agree with J. Mc. The more he plays golf at this point, the better. Again, I'm a believer in science and not conspiracy theories combined with a lot of nonsense (e.g. injecting disinfectant and powerful light into the body as a cure, etc.). Therefore, trump should stay on the golf course as much as possible and leave the decisions pertaining to getting the virus under control to scientist and medical professionals. Again, I apologize for letting my political stance clearly known. J. Mc 's post is extremely poignant and spot on using succinct wording and appropriateness. I didn't realize there was actually a "politics" sub-forum here. I know this is a Canadian forum so won't go ranting about U.S. politics there but, again, please excuse my inappropriate and off-topic remarks ...it's just that I'm so stressed-out with not only how badly this virus is being treated by our U.S. administration but with a lot of things they have been and are currently doing.
  2. True, I agree with your specifying it being more nuanced and your perception is spot on. Republicans generally see it as you described. Most Democrats do not. Again, I used to be a Republican voter and spent thousand of dollars through the decades supporting Republican campaigns but never again will give a dime to any GOP candidate because of the lack in believing in what is essentially "science" and their very shallow and short-sighted thinking. But anybody reading what you wrote should see the absurdity in the logic of those claiming that their rights are being violated. Again, masks are not protecting YOU as much as it's protecting those around you. To me, it is selfish to say "my Constitutional rights are being violated because I have a right not to wear a mask as the government can't tell me what to do." Yes, if it is only protecting you, then it might be a valid argument. I don't think a person has the right to spread the virus around to other people because once again, "science" is showing that the virus can be and in many cases is asymptomatic. A person can be spreading it and infecting others hours before they show symptoms or may end up never showing symptoms and be infecting others. Wearing a mask can help not to spread the virus under those conditions. If it's strictly based on "the government can't tell me what to do as I have the freedom to do what I want" then it truly is ABSURD! Why should I obey a law or any social mores? That's taking away my freedom. The government tells me I can't poop in the street in public but it's something I want to do. That's taking away my freedom! I should have the right to poop in the street if I want. But there are rules governing pooping in the street to protect society from getting infected with those random people who may want to spread human feces in the streets. But what if I'm one who wants very badly to do it? Are my rights being violated? Shouldn't I have the freedom to do as I wish?? My apologies for using such an inappropriate analogy but I guess I find both "the government shouldn't require me to wear a mask, I have the right to spread a deadly virus to others" and "the government can't tell me that I can't poop in the street as that's taking away my freedom" equally ABSURD.
  3. Pertaining to the efficacy of face masks, I tend to take as truth what "the scientists" (e.g. U.S. CDC) are advising. The use of a non-medical face mask isn't to protect the wearer. It seems many are not interpreting the efficacy in terms of who it's protecting. The wearing of a non-medical face mask is to protect those around you from YOU. Since we know that Covid19 can be asymptomatic, many might have it and not know it. Therefore, wearing a non-medical face mask is protecting those around you from your spittle just in case you are carrying the virus. The U.S. CDC's exact wording is "...the use of simple cloth face coverings to slow the spread of the virus and help people who may have the virus and do not know it from transmitting it to others." Even if we do not sneeze or cough, when a human talks there's a certain amount of saliva being sprayed into the air. Very minute amounts, yes. But if one of those minute specks of spittle land on your face or hand, and you touch your face with your hand that contains the very tiny amounts of spittle, you could become infected should that person who produced the spittle is positive for Covid19. Remember, that person might not know if they have the virus since many cases are asymptomatic. And even if you've had a test in the morning and you tested negative, it doesn't mean that you're negative forever. You could very well test positive in the afternoon. So why not wear a mask just in case? ...it's to protect others from YOU. It's selfish, IMO, not to wear a mask. I hear so many saying "I don't have the virus so I'm not going to wear a mask" or "I'm young and have a good immune system so I'm not worried about getting Covid 19 so I'm not wearing a mask. Not wearing a mask in public (or covering your mouth with something ...cloth, paper, or whatever other non-medical face covering), is inconsiderate ...period. It shows you only care about yourself and not others. Sure, when I put on a mask, I don't believe it's doing too much to protect me from getting the virus but I would be devastated if I were to learn that I somehow transmitted it to someone else and they were to get severely sick or die from it. So I want to do everything I can to not have that happen ...staying at home as much as possible, wearing mask in public, and keeping distance when around others. I'll protect YOU by wearing a mask and I hope you'll do the same for me. (In the U.S., it's a politically divided issue. Democrats understand "the scientific" reasoning behind wearing face-coverings. Republicans do not think they really have to wear a mask. I've been a life-long Republican voter but will never vote for another as I do believe in "science" and do not believe it should be a political issue. Therefore, I will never associate myself with Republicans again --but I do not have much longer to go as I'm an old fart as many of you know. Moderators, feel free to delete this post as I really don't want this to become a political discussion. Thank you.)
  4. Thanks, A. Wong ! The article didn't mention the left mirrors, however. I may write to the reporter and have him view this thread. And maybe to Bradshaw too. Although bus manufacturers have some responsibility in making the windshield A-pillar as thin as possible, Edmonton Transit, in my opinion, is derelict by using those mirrors. Believe me, it makes a world of difference by not having the mirror housing blocking your vision being mounted at eye-level when making a left turn in a bus. Being able to easily see over the left mirror housing is the difference between night and day ...or it was for me.
  5. Yes! Definitely. I've always been angry at the LFR windshield design with its thick pillar. The Xcelsior's pillar design was a definite improvement. I initially thought that the Xcelsior's design was a result of the law suit that came about from the horrific 2010 TriMet accident that killed two and injured three others in a left-turn accident where the driver did not see the group legally crossing the street because her vision was blocked by the left mirror housing and A-pillar. However, the Xcelsior was designed much before that accident happened. BTW, as I said in my post of 21 February, I'm so angry at TriMet. They still use a huge left mirror despite what happened in 2010. Evidently, on their Xcelsiors, they use a mirror of the same dimensions and mounting position as Edmonton ...example HERE. "TriMet "has not gone anywhere near far enough to address the problems that this has exposed," Pope said. The transit agency still trains its drivers to make unsafe turns, he said. The driver's side mirror also creates a dangerous blind spot for bus operators and should be repositioned, he said." From article updated Jan 10, 2019: Despite $4 million settlement in fatal Portland bus crash, TriMet safety problems persist, lawyers say Very interesting! Thank you. “We’re not sure yet whether or not the blind spot issue was a factor in this tragedy." Gimme a break! I'll bet my life on the fact that it was "the blind spot" ...like I mentioned, a driver doesn't purposely run into a pedestrian legally crossing the street inside a crosswalk with a green light!! Comparison of the three NFI coaches, LF, LFR, and Xcelsior:
  6. Thanks for posting. I can't tell you how much it hurts to see these accidents continue to happen especially when discovering that an agency continues to use the exact mirror and mounting position that just increases the chances of a driver not seeing a pedestrian crossing the street. The bus involved in this accident was Edmonton Transit System coach 4790, an NFI D40LFR. Edmonton Transit continues to use one of the longer/ taller left mirrors and some are mounted where they can block the vision of a driver seeing a pedestrian crossing the street as the bus is making a left turn. This is the classic example: a lady innocently crossing the street with a green light inside a crosswalk. The driver did not hit this pedestrian on purpose. I'm certain that his/her report will state something similar to "I just didn't see the pedestrian in time to stop." Transit agencies can help their bus drivers by using a smaller left mirror and mounting it in a lower position so it doesn't block vision while making a left turn but some just don't see the necessity for doing so. 😧
  7. Hah, interesting. So the "era" continues. I'm kind of chuckling to myself. My fiddling with the wiki is futile and kind of stupid especially since it's so awkward and time consuming for me as an "elderly person" with no tech skills to struggle with the language. I'll move both the 1100s and the 3600s back to the active section and leave it to others more "in the know" to adjust the wiki page going forward.
  8. Thanks. I'll adjust the wiki when I can get to it ...unless somebody else wants to jump in to do it. It is the end of an era but not anything groundbreaking as this was scheduled to be done way before this time. Now, all the primary fleet is low-floor and hybrid, battery-electric, or ETB, correct? Because of the Sound Transit overlay, however, I suppose there will be traditional buses --high-floors, straight diesel, etc.-- around the area for a long time to come.
  9. Both were signed out yesterday. I'm monitoring them but I think it's too early to call them officially retired. Let's at least wait until service levels get back to normal and/or employees or others that know employees can give us information from the inside. eta: ...sorry, not yesterday but on Wednesday
  10. Okay, I just cleaned up the 3600 wiki page and moved the 1100 page to the retired section the other day. Yes, once 3660 and 3680 are no longer used, it will be the end of an era ...no more traditional high floors and no more traditional diesels.
  11. Interesting idea. We all hope it won't be needed for too long. I've added Seattle. I hope others will add other Washington state agencies.
  12. Does anybody know if any of the remaining four 1100s (30' Phantoms) are parked in the Bellevue yard? ...or if they are "officially" retired? They obviously are not in service because of not only having one door, but for the fact that the route 200 is suspended during the shutdown, so I'm wondering if they are actually retired or being stored in the yard for future use once the 200 is back in operation and the shutdown mandates are lifted. Last shakeup, one or two of them were being used on the 236/238 along with the 200. The 246 now is back to using 3700s so that might be where the 1100s could be used again once things are somewhat back to "normal." I'm going to take the liberty of showing the remaining four 1100s as "retired" on the wiki but will reinstate them as "active" if observing they are eventually back in service. On another note, since the start of this shakeup, there have been only four 3600s (D40LFs) being signed-out and they are all at North ...3660, 3667, 3678, and 3680. Are there any others there sitting idle but ready for use? ...or are the rest of the 3600s "officially" retired besides the four mentioned?
  13. *sigh* RTA bus hits, kills woman in crosswalk in Dayton And once again, look at the type (size) and mounting position of left mirror they use ...file photo from CPTDB wiki Thanks, captaintrolley
  14. It appears that Aznichiro is getting it done ...and I'm sure in just a tiny fraction of the time that it would have taken me, an old guy who has extremely limited skills in web-based functions.
  15. I notice that 2787 is in revenue service today, March 03. I'll keep an eye on the others you list that haven't been observed in service for over a month now. Do you know somebody at Metro that has information as it pertains to if a coach is "officially" retired?
  16. As of Sunday, March 1st, coach 7485 has been activated and the tracker shows it being in service for the first time. It is the final coach to be activated in the 2nd-batch (7430 to 7494) of the 2018-2019 Gillig Low Floor Advantage series. All coaches in both batches are now in service.
  17. I've only observed it a few times where a 40-footer has been assigned to the route-200 but today, coach 7418 has been out on one of the runs since the beginning of service. Screenshot from tracker attached: coach 7418 at 13:27 hrs. 25Feb20
  18. Yeah, now that I think about it, you're right. I agree that the scheme with the grey lower portion was not attractive at all. I guess that's why it didn't last long ...or at least we should be glad it didn't last long. Yes, by 2000, things had changed dramatically, including how the instruction department was run. The most substantive change, however, was that one in 1976-77 when Metro finally pulled away and made a distinct separation from the antiquated Seattle Transit System protocol and procedures. And although the racial and gender issues have had their problems through the Metro days too --even up until the mid-2000s-- those of the STS days were truly cringe-worthy. Man, those procedures and way-of-thinking had to go and I personally welcomed that 1976-77 transition and the improvements that followed.
  19. No, I quite agree what what you've said. As you know, I just want to keep stimulating my mind and memory for not only as my physical body gets more feeble, so does my mind and I want to challenge myself to remember as much as I can, not only about transit but also other things that happened so many years ago. So I was just reminiscing and not really analyzing why the changes were made ...or needed. I can still remember the way Glen (the supervisor who did the board at North Seattle for years before I arrived) wrote those assignments on the board each day (...and Tom, the gruff window man that I was almost afraid of for the first few months when I was a rookie until getting to know him and finding out he was the nicest guy you'd ever want to meet. I find myself thinking back to those first days at North Seattle as it had a lot of good memories ...and the barn being across from Seattle Center, it just felt that we there there right in the thick of activities that were frequently going on). Yes, the manner in which STS operated was not to my liking at all. It's procedures and many things they did were so antiquated. I welcomed some of the changes Metro made. One thing that bothered me when going through training was the boot camp atmosphere where a drill sergeant (instructor) was yelling and screaming at those who made the slightest mistake. I didn't need to feel like I was in the Army again. It was especially difficult for the women and I remember several left the day in tears. There was also blatant racism shown too. Even though women and minorities were being hired in larger numbers in the early days of Metro as compared to STS, I still witnessed a lot of the archaic social values that I heard were prevalent at STS. That seemed to change rather quickly once that important transition started in earnest in that 1976-77 time period. The signage you referenced was definitely a change for the better. I thought the STS signage was a hodgepodge. The "To -- Via" signage Metro initiated was at least very consistent. The AMGs came from the factory with the "To -- Via"along with electric roller signs. They even retrofitted a few of the remaining STS equipment with "To -- Via" front signs and electric rollers. I thought it was a waste of money at the time to put electric rollers on some of the 200s, however. So not only the nomenclature but the entire modernization that was observed during the transition was all for the better as the first three to four years of Metro's existence were by name only as it was essentially still STS. Much later --late 80s? to mid 90s-- was the livery change for both the uniform color (it was so good to get out of those brown pants and yellow shirts!!) and the bus colors when the Phantoms arrived. Can you remember when the uniform colors were changed? There were three bus paint-scheme changes, correct? ...the original white with brown and yellow accents, then the white with the brown and yellow stripe with gray bottom, and the current ...?
  20. I just ran across the photo below on the wiki and it made me so mad that I have to voice my frustration here or I won't be able to sleep tonight. As you folks know, I'm passionate about this problem and getting transit agencies to address it head on. TriMet in Portland Oregon is the agency that had the absolutely horrific accident in 2010 that involved a left turning bus where two young women were killed and three others injured when they were unfortunate enough to be crossing the street, in a crosswalk with the light in their favor, only to be hit by the TriMet bus making a left turn where the driver did not see them because of a wide A-pillar and huge left mirror used on a NFI D40LF. I corresponded with the driver a few years later, Sandi Day, and she told me that she plain didn't see them because her vision was blocked. So what do I see now? TriMet has some new NFI Xcelsior electric buses that actually have a relatively thin A-pillar now (New Flyer was sued --see HERE-- along with TriMet by the families of the victims) but LOOK AT THE LEFT MIRROR THEY ARE USING !!!! It's the exact mirror I've been harping about throughout this thread!! TriMet XE40 (courtesy of OR Transit Fan) eta: Again, TriMet management is really so incompetent in its thinking process. A left mirror of that size and mounted in that position blocks the vision of a short driver or a driver that chooses to sit lower in the driver's seat as a left turn is being executed ...especially if the pedestrian is also short. We see so many of these accidents where it's either a woman driver (generally, women are shorter than men) and a short or shorter pedestrian ...or a combination of both. You don't need to eliminate left turns. You don't have to have talking buses that announce that the bus is turning. All that needs to be done is to give the driver a chance to better SEE the pedestrian when making a left turn. Reducing the size of the left mirror and mounting it in a position so that it doesn't block the vision of the driver when making the left turn would all but eliminate these types of accidents. These accidents happen because the driver didn't SEE the pedestrian. They are not doing it on purpose or are they necessarily doing it because of negligent driving practices. Transit agencies should help their drivers SEE those pedestrians by attempting to eliminate as much as they can, the obstacle(s) that are blocking the driver's vision ...namely the left mirror housing and the A-pillar. Using a smaller left mirror and purchasing buses with narrower A-pillars is what is needed as it gives the driver an adequate chance to SEE the pedestrian. Yes, it's the driver's responsibility to rock-and-roll or bob-and-weave in the seat as they are making the turn. But as I've said several times in this thread, I WAS rocking-and-rolling in the seat and STILL didn't see the pedestrian in the two close calls I had. The Oregonian: Portland-- Left-turn bus accidents, like fatal one in downtown Portland, alarmingly common among transit agencies .
  21. Why am I seeing a different image than the one Community Shuttle is showing? I'm seeing a white coach with a what appears to be red stripe through its belt-line that's partially hidden by some trees.
  22. I believe it was Aznichiro115 who did the Sound Transit route list for the wiki so maybe he'll see this and give you a reply. Personally, I'm not sure how advantageous it would be to have all the routes listed with their destinations on the wiki page as it would take up a tremendous amount of space. I think for the general public, it would be just as easy to go the the KCM website to view the listing of routes. I'm always willing to make minor verifiable changes on the KCM wiki page but constructing a placement grid showing all the routes in the system is too big a job for the time I have to devote to it especially with my limited patience and skill level Additionally, I believe there will be some major changes coming to the eastside routes so it's probably best to wait until that happens should anybody want to tackle such a project.
  23. Also, that one post of mine that Taco referenced that had the PDFs attached relating to "ROUTES: An Interpretive History of Public Transportation in Metropolitan Seattle, part V " ...they must've not transferred when this forum transitioned to their new software. If there's anybody who doesn't have it and would like to see it, I can also email those PDFs to you too. *sigh* going back to those requesting that series five years ago, one was Zack Willhoite who told me that even being a transportation aficionado, he didn't think he'd seen it so I sent it to him ...continue to RIP, Zack, we all think of you often. ,
  • Create New...