Jump to content
WpgBusDriver

Winnipeg and Artic Buses

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, armorand said:

I agree, it does get busy and i can't deny that, but artics though? I just think it would be better, if another route would be implemented, that covers the area east of Pembina (that the 72 already covers), but that then goes directly to Waverley West. It would boost service west of Waverley, along with provide relief for the 72, and also could be used by students to get to employment areas/groceries. Just seems like the better idea, thats in better interests for Winnipeg Transit. That, or if WT can't financially afford it, pressure the U of M to provide a wider campus shuttle service, or maybe a service to Pembina and back? It might help out the situation, and be financially viable enough to run their own private transit service...

That would make no sense the u of m already pays  for the 36 to run to hsc during the week and rather then they pay for a bus to Pembina why not help cover half the costs of running the 672 till 1 am that’s my opinion 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As David mentioned elsewhere, Winnipeg Transit refuses to do that. And the City of Winnipeg isn't helping, either.

The only option left, would be for the U of M to consider starting their own private transit service, on campus (already exists with U of M parking shuttle) - and off-campus, around the neighborhood. It could probably be provided for cheaper too, it would take stress off U of M/Pembina/Fort Richmond routes, and if Winnipeg Transit wants to seriously cover those riders, then they can do it when they are actually up to the task. It solves a problem for everybody, and its not like its completely without precedence, American universities have alot of their own private transit systems, and they seem to be working well. Why can't Winnipeg possibly implement that model, split funding between UW/UM/RRC, and maybe solve some of Winnipeg Transits headaches - or do i dare say, help reallocate resources elsewhere, by freeing up buses for the inner city, 47 and other troublespots?

If WT/City of Winnipeg can't cough up the resources or manhours, then why not encourage some private transit development between the schools at least, or the Outlet mall, or elsewhere? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After working at the U of M for 26+ years I can assure you that regardless of what UofM officials say in public, privately they see transit as a nuisance they are forced to put up with. If they had their way buses would dump people at the Stadium and not be allowed on campus at all. 

The chances of the UofM operating a district transit system into neighbourhoods around campus are exactly NIL. (You might have better luck convincing the Student Union [who already operate a shopping shuttle from campus to a grocery supermarket] but UMSU isn't exactly swimming in money).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, armorand said:

As David mentioned elsewhere, Winnipeg Transit refuses to do that. And the City of Winnipeg isn't helping, either.

The only option left, would be for the U of M to consider starting their own private transit service, on campus (already exists with U of M parking shuttle) - and off-campus, around the neighborhood.

I remember the RTS II bus or buses (there were 2 of them) from 1997-98 till fairly recently. I think when the 36 SuperExpress was implemented (what year? 2013 or so?) is when the Univ. of Man. stopped the Shuttle service. So that particular route was demanded by UMSU to provide an easier way to get from the U of M Ft. Garry Campus to the U of M Bannatyne Campus (Med. School).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DavidW said:

The chances of the UofM operating a district transit system into neighbourhoods around campus are exactly NIL. (You might have better luck convincing the Student Union [who already operate a shopping shuttle from campus to a grocery supermarket] but UMSU isn't exactly swimming in money).

Anything but the UMSU... I still remember the times they used their credit cards and students fees on exquisite nights out at the bar, among other things revealed by audits. I wouldn't trust UMSU with so much as a soup ladle...

Well, theres goes that idea.

1 hour ago, LilZebra said:

I remember the RTS II bus or buses (there were 2 of them) from 1997-98 till fairly recently. I think when the 36 SuperExpress was implemented (what year? 2013 or so?) is when the Univ. of Man. stopped the Shuttle service. So that particular route was demanded by UMSU to provide an easier way to get from the U of M Ft. Garry Campus to the U of M Bannatyne Campus (Med. School).

I wonder how much ridership has been generated above U of M expectations, with Route 36 since it started. Seeing as it connects through West End, Portage Avenue, Grant, and other key transfer points. If thats the case. Would be interesting to see ridership estimates and numbers over the years, for some of the route changes and new routes implemented over the years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, armorand said:

I wonder how much ridership has been generated above U of M expectations, with Route 36 since it started. Seeing as it connects through West End, Portage Avenue, Grant, and other key transfer points. If thats the case. Would be interesting to see ridership estimates and numbers over the years, for some of the route changes and new routes implemented over the years.

I can tell you right now that even with artics, the 36 leaves riders behind in the morning south of Westminster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, vivablue5215 said:

I can tell you right now that even with artics, the 36 leaves riders behind in the morning south of Westminster.

The 36 seems like an obvious candidate for improved frequency.  I assume since there's a financial relationship between the UofM and Transit to operate the daytime trips between the UofM's Fort Garry and Bannatyne campuses, Transit has been unwilling to recognize the route's demand level and fix the overloading problem.  It seems obvious to me that Transit should be operating the route, like every other route, out of its regular funding.  The traffic on the daytime trips is way more than just intercampus University traffic.

It was explained to me that the 36, and the school trippers (and, for example, the IKEA special from a few years ago), were technically charters.  The chartering agency pays a charter rate for the trips, with a discount credit for the farebox revenue (including an estimated share of pass revenue).  That seems acceptable for a route that Transit would otherwise not operate but the daytime 36's are obviously not that (anymore).

An example of a charter converted to regular service would be the weekend "Shoppers' Specials" that operated between Portage Place and Polo Park. Cadillac-Fairview owned both malls at the time and paid for the enhanced service. CF sold Portage Place, and Transit made its own decisions about extra inter-mall service after that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/10/2019 at 10:46 PM, DavidW said:

The 36 seems like an obvious candidate for improved frequency.  I assume since there's a financial relationship between the UofM and Transit to operate the daytime trips between the UofM's Fort Garry and Bannatyne campuses, Transit has been unwilling to recognize the route's demand level and fix the overloading problem.  It seems obvious to me that Transit should be operating the route, like every other route, out of its regular funding.  The traffic on the daytime trips is way more than just intercampus University traffic.

I've used the 36 to go to Sals (Pembina & Stafford), to travel to Superstore (Kenaston & Grant). Will be using it for the foreseeable future going for a haircut at Andy's (Nick) Pembina & Merriam. Use it in Fall/Winter months to attend a coffee house at HSC.

And if I do wanna do some grocery shopping at Superstore, I cannot really do it in that 75 mins. because the 36 doesn't operate often enough during the Spring-Summer months. Sometimes I just squeak by in about 80 minutes round trip. Can't really do a 36 > 65 > 65 > 36 because the headways on the 36 are sometimes 1 hr. or more between buses.

During the Summer months the 36 isn't crowded at all. It's during "semesters".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wpgtransit11-25 said:

1904EE76-50A0-40AC-9428-F13ABC82E61C.thumb.jpeg.72490bc328b40d7ad0437036818b4038.jpeg375 is parked in BG now ready for its entry in to service 

What are the numbers of the two XD60's behind it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Viafreak said:

What are the numbers of the two XD60's behind it?

That I don’t know I’ll ask my buddy. I’m assuming it’s ether 374 and 373 or it’s 376 and 377. But I’ll ask he’s not back till tmr as he only has his first piece of work is in n out of BG 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

371 was parked outside of the original Fort Rouge Garage today along with two of the D60LFs. I could see another XD60 parked between that garage and the maintenance garage but was too far away to see the number.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Viafreak said:

371 was parked outside of the original Fort Rouge Garage today along with two of the D60LFs. I could see another XD60 parked between that garage and the maintenance garage but was too far away to see the number.

 

I’ll go check  later I have lots of time this evening 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Wpgtransit11-25 said:

I’ll go check  later I have lots of time this evening 

Bring some binoculars. 👓

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Photos from inside Brandon Garage, Saturday 17 August 2019:

winnipeg-CWTS374NFxd40-daw2019aug17.thumb.jpg.e6d85f715d079c3b994ea2a03f8371e2.jpg  Winnipeg Transit #374 (2019 New Flyer model XD60)

winnipeg-CWTS375NFxd40-daw2019aug17.thumb.jpg.fc218722e3a389492742defa94e67abd.jpg  Winnipeg Transit #375 (2019 New Flyer model XD60)

winnipeg-CWTS376NFxd60-daw2019aug17.thumb.jpg.db08f5a74d1ed37e13b43fa2103c5049.jpg  Winnipeg Transit #376 (2019 New Flyer model XD60)

 

When the pictures were taken none of the three had fareboxes installed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its weird, seeing the fleet number above the door to be so small. Especially when NFI could've just moved it over and had it full size. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/21/2019 at 2:12 AM, armorand said:

Its weird, seeing the fleet number above the door to be so small. Especially when NFI could've just moved it over and had it full size. 

Not sure about the first order of XD40's (831-888) but the second and third orders of XD40's had the same size of fleet number above the door. I am guessing its something to do with the camera on the outside of the door. Its not like the number is super visible even if its full sized.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Viafreak said:

Not sure about the first order of XD40's (831-888) but the second and third orders of XD40's had the same size of fleet number above the door. I am guessing its something to do with the camera on the outside of the door. Its not like the number is super visible even if its full sized.

First order of XD40s had their fleet numbers pushed way back from the door.

Second order of XD40s initially had very small fleet numbers. They were eventually replaced when the exterior cameras were installed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...