Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Uwe

  1. Would you give it a rest. I am not Charlie or a relation of his or whatever else you may think of. And if Leduc wants to use hybrids its their call not ETS. And if you would do your homework the hybrids work better for stop and go situations not highway. BTW how did you do in the election? vinyl...kings and tail. The pictures of the buses were all over the news.
  2. No hybrids on the c-line. Be out at Century Park and you will see which buses are going to be used. yes The only 190's left are 195 and 196. 196 is still tied to the spruce grove service. Not sure about 195. So another number had to be thought of.
  3. C-Line starts Monday, November 1.
  4. No more MC-9s... even from most contracted carriers. Maybe a GCTU MC-12. Uwe
  5. Formely Oregon Coachways. Rebranded as OC&W when Oregon Coachways was purchased by MTRWestern. See http://www.mtrwestern.com/press_pass_pages...sRelease001.pdf They also hold at least one AmtrakBus contract. Uwe
  6. These are the 53XXX units previously asigned to the Toronto-Mtl route, now on Toronto-Niagara corridor. Uwe
  7. Not Charlie either nor Charles or whatever you think.
  8. I thought you were talking about the design of the logo. But yes ETS did have help in designing the C-Line, just like all the other regional services, and ETS will be contracted to operate the service, just like all the other regions. However, the decision on the routing was all Leduc and County. And just out of curiousity, how would you and your expertise have designed the routing? It is most unfortunate that this is not starting up on Monday as I feel that this would be a highly used service. And when I said Greyhound doesn't run all day it was based on their schedule on their website. For example, Greyhound has one trip leaving Leduc at 6:15 a.m. and the next is at 9:15a.m. Not really similar at all to what C-Line was going to provide. And for the last time...not Chuck.
  9. You guessed wrong. The C-Line design was a Leduc/County decision. Not sure if true but heard that Greyhound cannot go to the airport. Also, check the Greyhound schedule. They aren't all day.
  10. "Chinatown" operations in the US are legal. The US has a deregulated market, ie not brriers to entry, but requires such things as minimum insurance and ADA compliance. Current regulations in Canada would require any proponent wishing to provide a scheduled service to meet certain criteria to be granted a license and most likely face opposition from existing carriers: PUBLIC NECESSITY AND CONVENIENCE: The Board will have to determine from the information in your application, if the issuance of an operating licence to an applicant will serve “PUBLIC NECESSITY and CONVENIENCE”. Over the years, the Board has given amongst other considerations to the following factors, when considering what constitutes public necessity and convenience: - the transportation needs of the public as seen through the public witnesses - the adequacy and quality of the existing services - the level of competition in the area in question - the choice of modes of transportation - the convenience of the public - the uniqueness or distinctiveness of the proposed service or equipment - the viability of the proposed service and market sustainability - the fitness of the applicant ... financial, operational and safety - the impact on existing carriers if the service were granted Please demonstrate by the information you provide how your proposed service meets the above-mentioned factors as they pertain to your particular application. Uwe
  11. SMT (Eastern) was Scotia Motor Transit. Uwe
  12. The 102DL3s, 4501-4506, and the H3-45s 5601-5606 (one is burned though), are still sporting the blue and green lines. Uwe
  13. La Quebecoise has operating rights in Toronto and at Pearson Airport (as many other Quebec carriers). That may be a staging area. Uwe
  14. Airport service - does Edmonton need it? I think so as its a great marketing tool to make the city more attractive. But at what cost and who will use it? Let me play devil's advocate for a minute. Let's start with cost (approximately $2M per year as per the proposal that ETSAB put forward). From what I heard from Boutilier is that the money to fund this service would come out of ETS' service budget, so what route(s) should be cut or cutback in order to come up with the $2M? Okay, leave service alone but pull it out from somewhere else in transits budget...okay, where? And I understand from the news that the city is to approach the regional partners to see if they would put into the airport service. City of Leduc - nothing in it for them so why would they pay. Leduc County - same thing. Airport - can't see them willing to fork out money. If it was such a good idea for them they would have established something long ago. By getting people to stop driving and parking at the airport that is lost revenue on their end. Why would they want to lose that revenue and hand money to the city to run buses when there are taxis, skyshuttle and the airporter. Financially makes no sense to them. So that brings it right back to Edmonton footing the whole bill. Now on to part two - who will use the service? Not I for one; businessmen - probably not since they will be expensed by their companies; families - not likely, can't see a family of four lugging their cases onto the bus just to save a few dollars when they have spent hundreds if not thousands to fly to some destination; students - sure, this one is likely but how often would they be flying...once maybe twice a year, more likely zero times. So who will use this service? Visitors to the city - again, they have spent tons of dough to get here, can't see them cheaping out once they get here. Okay, so we get airport service and it costs $5 one way trip. Great I save money over what the taxis would charge but once I get to Century Park I have to buy a ticket to get on the LRT or cash for the bus. Still cheaper than a taxi. You've just flew in and have used your last $5 to get on the bus but once you get to Century Park you need to find more money to pay for the next leg of the trip. But wait, I hop on the last airport bus after a long flight then get to Century Park to find out that the bus I would take home is now out of service - how do I get home? By taxi...I should have just got into a taxi right at the airport and been home way ahead of what a bus would have done. And I would just love to wait at Century Park for a taxi late at night...that would be fun, especially for females. Or say my international flight leaves at 6am. I have to be at the airport at 4am...buses not running. This service will not meet all the needs of all the people and that is why I think that ETSAB was totally out to lunch thinking the service would make money or break even. Then to hear at the last council meeting that 50% cost recovery would be good. But in my opinion this service will recoup no more than 10%, most likely less, but what the heck its only money and we won't know until we try. So put the service in for a one year trial and see what it does. I would love to be proved wrong and see that it is the most wonderfully used route in all of transit. Only time will tell.
  15. I have sent several letters to ETS requesting transit service to the International Airport. The responses I got back basically said that ETS cannot provide service to areas outside of the city boundaries using city of edmonton taxpayer money to subsidize the service. The region must pay full operating costs of the service, like they do for spruce grove, fort sask and edmonton garrison. The International Airport pays its taxes to Leduc County and nothing to Edmonton. So yes, Edmonton does need transit service to the airport, but which trips/routes would you like to see cancelled in order to pay for the service because dollars to donuts you won't see council giving ETS any money to run this service so the money has to come from somewhere...which is why the big wait to see what the capital region board does.
  16. Actually, it was an MC-9 that was "shortened" to 35 feet by Dupont in Quebec City. They have two of them, one two-axle and another with the tag. Uwe
  17. For buses plated outside of Ontario, the tickets have no bearing on plate renewal. The land across the street was Voyageur Colonial/Colonial Coach Lines way back when. Zoning bylaws probably forced them out of there and the land is too valuable today for a coach parking lot, it would have been sold. Uwe
  18. They used to have super express departures from Mississauga Square One to Montreal Metro De la Savane. Uwe Not a rumour, it was just cancelled before put into service. 4 departures and arrivals from Mississauaga Square One via Downtown Toronto were once contemplated. Uwe
  19. To my knowledge, there were no plans to run a Mega brand along the Hamilton Hub routes. If anything, it would have been the Toronto-Niagara corridor. Uwe
  20. Acadian has purchased at least one ABC M1235 for their scheduled route operation in and out of Campbelton, New Brunswick. Coach Canada/TWW has been using their newly acquired IC coaches on their Kingston-Pearson Aiport shuttle during the slower days. Uwe
  21. There are some interesting articles about the whole introduction of GO Transit into the Niagara corridor. Some numbers are quoted on capacity use, there is no need for DDs there, with the occasionnal strong travel weekends. Uwe
  22. The 7AM from Toronto TO Ottawa and the 1300 from Ottawa to Toronto have gone via Peterborough for years. Coaches may also stay/go up to HWY 7 before due to heavy congestion along 401 between Belleville and Toronto. Uwe None of the TMN&O units ever made it to Eastern Canada. All of the transfered buses from the US are automatics. Greyhound was kicked out of the terminal for selling tickets there. Greyhound sets the fares, not the Toronto Motorcoach terminal. Any increase in fares in set by Greyhound. Additionnaly, Greyhound reduced agents commission from 10% to 8% earlier this year. I'm not sure how equipment and operators availability and the fact that they lengthened the routes makes a case for subsidizing Greyhound. The operators in Manitoba and Northern Ontario are dispatched out of Winnipeg and Thunder Bay, not Toronto/Kitchener, not too mention that they are two completely different divisions/unions. If subsidies are to be considered, than it may be time to consider franchising the routes or complete deregulation. There is no excuse under a regulated system that shoudl permit an operator to cherry pick the profitable routes. Uwe
  23. TWW has always had 15 coaches assigned to TO-MTL. When they purchased the line from VCL, they received 19 102C3s (24XX) which were traded in for 15 102DL3s (533XX), then replaced by 15 J4500s (534XX). The J4500s are now on the Niagara routes. Uwe
  24. 15 TD925s are assigned to Trentway-Wagar for TO-MTL. There are another 60 some operating out of New York and Chicago. Uwe.
  25. All of the operating authorities are held in the name of Greyhound Canada Transportation ULC. This was done a few years back as they integrated all line-run companies. Such names as "Voyageur" and "Grey Goose" are trade names only. The whole point behind the inter-city bus regulatory framework is that profitable routes cross-subsidize the less frequented ones. It may be time for GCTU to exit the market as it may be their cost structure that is preventing it from running the routes properly. Uwe
  • Create New...