Articulated Posted May 8, 2019 Report Share Posted May 8, 2019 21 minutes ago, Express691 said: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/fraser-valley-express-bus-route-lougheed-town-centre-station?fbclid=IwAR21oIdHFkGJyaJSmqu6UJL_BC4tZLqz6hizapii-UudxEFcQjQoGp045Wc 66 FVX could be getting an extension to Lougheed Station. ((Cross-posting between both threads)) Sounds almost like they're looking to combine the 66 with the 555 for a one-seat ride. Can't say I necessarily disagree with the proposal, but with that length they might want to get some better suited equipment for that run rather than urban-spec'd Novas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Millennium2002 Posted May 8, 2019 Report Share Posted May 8, 2019 For that long of a run, a commuter coach with a lavatory would be nice. That or timed washroom breaks between the two termini. Having said that, on the numerous times that I've taken this bus towards Harrison Hot Springs and back, everyone on board (myself included) seemed to be well prepared for the long runs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ350 Posted May 11, 2019 Report Share Posted May 11, 2019 On 5/7/2019 at 10:01 PM, Millennium2002 said: For that long of a run, a commuter coach with a lavatory would be nice. That or timed washroom breaks between the two termini. Having said that, on the numerous times that I've taken this bus towards Harrison Hot Springs and back, everyone on board (myself included) seemed to be well prepared for the long runs... Rumour, and it's always rumour until units show up, is that we "May" get Suburban Enviros on this run....... Rumour...... Take it with a grain of salt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Express691 Posted September 19, 2020 Report Share Posted September 19, 2020 Since the opening of the 216 Street interchange, the 66 FVX now uses the HOV on/off-ramps at 202 Street. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/transportation/transportation-infrastructure/projects/highway1-216th Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ350 Posted July 17, 2021 Report Share Posted July 17, 2021 5 New Girardins are currently in Abbotsford, getting final delivery prep to be put into service in Chilliwack. I'll get the unit numbers later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ350 Posted July 17, 2021 Report Share Posted July 17, 2021 15 hours ago, RZ350 said: 5 New Girardins are currently in Abbotsford, getting final delivery prep to be put into service in Chilliwack. I'll get the unit numbers later. Unit numbers are 2779-2783 Sorry I don't have time to update the wiki. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiNorth Posted July 23, 2021 Report Share Posted July 23, 2021 The BC Transit FVX Map still shows the bus using the 200th street exits instead of the new(er) HOV exits on 202. I assume the FVX is now using them, since they're finally open after like a decade of sitting idle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Express691 Posted July 23, 2021 Report Share Posted July 23, 2021 11 minutes ago, InfiNorth said: The BC Transit FVX Map still shows the bus using the 200th street exits instead of the new(er) HOV exits on 202. I assume the FVX is now using them, since they're finally open after like a decade of sitting idle. Yeah, theyve been using the HOV ramps at 202nd for the past year, since the conclusion of the widening project around 216th 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ350 Posted August 15, 2021 Report Share Posted August 15, 2021 9203 Has been transferred to Chilliwack, all the buses 9201 to 9210 will soon be Chilliwack buses. the new Girardins are also in service. 9315 to 9318 will be transferred out, probably to Victoria. I'll try to get the list of Arbocs that were replaced soon. Again, I simply don't have time to update the Wiki, my apologies. As a note, one Chilliwack bus will be posted to Abbotsford moving forward, as a backup in case of a breakdown on the 66. they don't want to use the CNG buses on the run, until Chilliwack switches over at a future date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiNorth Posted November 16, 2021 Report Share Posted November 16, 2021 Several Fraser Valley Novas were used to evacuate the people stranded along the highways. CH-149 Cormorant ferrying people out. https://twitter.com/EmilyLazatin/status/1460346810170413056?s=20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Express691 Posted November 16, 2021 Report Share Posted November 16, 2021 15 hours ago, InfiNorth said: Several Fraser Valley Novas were used to evacuate the people stranded along the highways. CH-149 Cormorant ferrying people out. https://twitter.com/EmilyLazatin/status/1460346810170413056?s=20 Was wondering who would be called in to help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Express691 Posted November 17, 2021 Report Share Posted November 17, 2021 66 FVX - Floods discussion, comments go in the thread linked below https://cptdb.ca/topic/15983-langley-to-chilliwack-by-bus/?do=findComment&comment=928909 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ350 Posted February 10, 2022 Report Share Posted February 10, 2022 Starting March 27 all Chilliwack runs will be re-numbered as 50s 1 will be 51 etc 66 remains Agassiz will be 71 and Hope 72 Also the extension of the 66 to Lougheed goes live. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ephrex Posted February 10, 2022 Report Share Posted February 10, 2022 Can confirm, intention is to avoid route number duplication with Abbotsford / Mission routes for a potential eventual system consolidation given the NextRide rollout -- which is on pace for installation around that time frame as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiNorth Posted February 11, 2022 Report Share Posted February 11, 2022 22 hours ago, RZ350 said: Starting March 27 all Chilliwack runs will be re-numbered as 50s 1 will be 51 etc 66 remains Agassiz will be 71 and Hope 72 Also the extension of the 66 to Lougheed goes live. This is big news - the only issue is that I'm sure you won't be permitted to board the 66 at Carvolth... which, despite me understanding the non-competitive aspect of the rules, is not good transit planning. I really hope that we someday see the whole Lower Mainland as one system connected by expresses on the arterials. One can dream. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ephrex Posted February 11, 2022 Report Share Posted February 11, 2022 2 hours ago, InfiNorth said: This is big news - the only issue is that I'm sure you won't be permitted to board the 66 at Carvolth... which, despite me understanding the non-competitive aspect of the rules, is not good transit planning. I really hope that we someday see the whole Lower Mainland as one system connected by expresses on the arterials. One can dream. That's not really happening so long as BCT and Translink remain separate entities. In any case, all current travel patterns get a boost with the service change (no one comes out on the short end of the stick really), so I would consider that a win. With the 555 having a higher service level than the 66 (as well as being cheaper) it's not as if there's a point for anyone to go out of their way to take the 66 between Lougheed and Carvolth anyway. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiNorth Posted February 12, 2022 Report Share Posted February 12, 2022 18 hours ago, ephrex said: it's not as if there's a point for anyone to go out of their way to take the 66 between Lougheed and Carvolth anyway. Unfortunately it's interlining - people should be able to take the first vehicle going to their destination instead of letting a mostly empty 66 leave the loop for Lougheed. Sort of like if you had to buy different tickets back when the M and Expo lines were interlined. Or, as a better example, if you're trying to get to Langley Centre from Brookswood, you're not going to let a 561 or 563 pass by just because the 531 is the bus you planned to take. It is inefficient and wasteful. Interlining allows for busier portions of routes (Carvolth to Lougheed included) to be a bit more frequently accessible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Articulated Posted February 12, 2022 Report Share Posted February 12, 2022 2 hours ago, InfiNorth said: Unfortunately it's interlining - people should be able to take the first vehicle going to their destination instead of letting a mostly empty 66 leave the loop for Lougheed. Sort of like if you had to buy different tickets back when the M and Expo lines were interlined. Or, as a better example, if you're trying to get to Langley Centre from Brookswood, you're not going to let a 561 or 563 pass by just because the 531 is the bus you planned to take. It is inefficient and wasteful. Interlining allows for busier portions of routes (Carvolth to Lougheed included) to be a bit more frequently accessible. The 555 is already a fairly frequent route - it's not like passengers at Carvolth are going to be waiting half an hour for the next bus to Lougheed if they can't get on the 66. Meanwhile the 66 is not that frequent either, so its impact on relieving any pressure off the 555 seems rather minimal. Another possible drawback to allowing passengers destined for Carvolth to board the 66 at Lougheed is that it creates the potential for passengers headed to the Fraser Valley (who don't have an alternate route) to be crowded off their bus by people who have alternates to take. The 66 and 555 are two different routes operated by two unrelated systems, on two separate schedules. As far as I'm aware, they won't be coordinating their headways or schedules (or "interlining" as you call it, which is actually a completely different concept). So it's quite possible at least some of the 66 trips will leave either slightly ahead of or slightly behind a scheduled 555, making your point/argument moot. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Express691 Posted February 12, 2022 Report Share Posted February 12, 2022 The flat fare rate is completely separate too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ephrex Posted February 12, 2022 Report Share Posted February 12, 2022 Operating a blended schedule on two routes (which also isn't interlining) with distinctly different service levels is all but impossible. Even if hypothetically the 66 were to transform into a through route concept from a 555 (eg every third 555 continues as a 66) that would also create an immense amount of inefficiencies for that to be realistic. Any time the "extension" portion's round trip cycle isn't a whole number multiple of the intended service level (which also has to work seamlessly with the "base" portion), huge inefficiencies are created (the 50-61 in Victoria is a perfect example of this). The March schedules will likely have the 66 runtimes vary by as much as 20-30 minutes per round trip (proportionally much more than the 555 most likely because there's no HOV lane), so a through route design will undoubtedly create a wasteful schedule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiNorth Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 22 hours ago, Articulated said: (or "interlining" as you call it, which is actually a completely different concept) Good points all around. As someone still learning the terminology, what is the correct term for a route that supplements another route and follows a virtually identical path serving the same termini? For instance, in Victoria, the 27/28 are what I would usually refer to as "interlining" but I'm happy to be using the right term instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ephrex Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 32 minutes ago, InfiNorth said: Good points all around. As someone still learning the terminology, what is the correct term for a route that supplements another route and follows a virtually identical path serving the same termini? For instance, in Victoria, the 27/28 are what I would usually refer to as "interlining" but I'm happy to be using the right term instead. From a route design perspective, the 27/28 (and the 2/5 and 30/31 for that matter) are different in that they can largely be considered the same route with a split-tailed route design. These would be cases where in other systems (TTC in Toronto comes to mind), similar routes would likely be designated branches of a common route. Interlining as a term describes whenever a vehicle continues onto a different route. This can include through-routes by design (eg. 50-61) or any time a bus is blocked on multiple different routes for blocking efficiencies (think cases where a bus would arrive at, say, UVic as one route, take their layover, and leave as another.) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Articulated Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 1 hour ago, InfiNorth said: Good points all around. As someone still learning the terminology, what is the correct term for a route that supplements another route and follows a virtually identical path serving the same termini? For instance, in Victoria, the 27/28 are what I would usually refer to as "interlining" but I'm happy to be using the right term instead. If you really needed a term, the "blended headways" as described in @ephrex's previous post is probably the closest, assuming headways are being managed properly. And agreeing with his point, for pretty much every transit system outside of Victoria, those pairs would be considered the same route with different branch letters. 22 minutes ago, ephrex said: Interlining as a term describes whenever a vehicle continues onto a different route. This can include through-routes by design (eg. 50-61) or any time a bus is blocked on multiple different routes for blocking efficiencies (think cases where a bus would arrive at, say, UVic as one route, take their layover, and leave as another.) Another example of interlining in the Victoria context would be the 3/10 in Downtown Victoria, where pretty much every arriving route 3 continues to route 10 and vice-versa (unless they're running in/out of service). 7/21 also works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ephrex Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 21 minutes ago, Articulated said: If you really needed a term, the "blended headways" as described in @ephrex's previous post is probably the closest, assuming headways are being managed properly. And agreeing with his point, for pretty much every transit system outside of Victoria, those pairs would be considered the same route with different branch letters. Another example of interlining in the Victoria context would be the 3/10 in Downtown Victoria, where pretty much every arriving route 3 continues to route 10 and vice-versa (unless they're running in/out of service). 7/21 also works. Yes, the 27/28 (and the other examples I used, 2/5 and 30/31) are all scheduled for blended headways during all service hours. The 3/10 and 7/21 would both qualify, yes, being through-routes by design. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZ350 Posted February 13, 2022 Report Share Posted February 13, 2022 On 2/9/2022 at 11:30 PM, ephrex said: Can confirm, intention is to avoid route number duplication with Abbotsford / Mission routes for a potential eventual system consolidation given the NextRide rollout -- which is on pace for installation around that time frame as well. It's also for UMO as the system would be "confused" by someone riding the 1 in Abby to get the 66 then board the 1 in Chilliwack 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now