Jump to content
BCT-3122-D800-10240

Winnipeg Transit and area

Recommended Posts

What happened to 963-970? The numbers around it were Orion Is, but those numbers aren't listed on the Wiki.

Edited by Imgursdownvote4love
https://youtu.be/R0tvrLcOITU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Imgursdownvote4love said:

What happened to 963-970? The numbers around it were Orion Is, but those numbers aren't listed on the Wii.

Never had buses in that number. Orion’s were only 941-962 35ft and 971-976 977-982 were 40ft

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bus is coming 1965 said:

Never had buses in that number. Orion’s were only 941-962 35ft and 971-976 977-982 were 40ft

Correction :   941-962 were 30 foot and 971-982 were 35 foot.   Although they existed elsewhere (Windsor, London, Oakville, ON and GO Transit come to mind) Winnipeg did not have any 40 foot Orion I's.

Edited by doug_oak
981-982 corrected to 971-982

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The website lists that there is the upcoming spring service change, but there is no summary of the changes. I’m assuming it’s only a reduction in the university routes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MMP15 said:

The website lists that there is the upcoming spring service change, but there is no summary of the changes. I’m assuming it’s only a reduction in the university routes?

No it's not just that, there are also schedule changes for 20, 42, 46, 47, 48 and 163 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, matt548 said:

No it's not just that, there are also schedule changes for 20, 42, 46, 47, 48 and 163 

They added one more bus to the 46, the 20 finally got fixed cause no more electric buses and 47 they got rid of the 117  am bus and the 163 last bus is at 602 instead of 611 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Wpgtransit11-25 said:

They added one more bus to the 46, the 20 finally got fixed cause no more electric buses and 47 they got rid of the 117  am bus and the 163 last bus is at 602 instead of 611 

so 20 doesn't get really long layovers anymore?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wpgtransit11-25 said:

The 20 finally got fixed cause no more electric buses

No more on the 20, or no more period?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LilZebra said:

What is so special about the photo above?

So what?

It’s the ideas in motion bus it’s being the open houses for phase 2 reoutes  to the road and to the  Community 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, bus is coming 1965 said:

571F1313-76C5-4C45-A566-F08CB671F7FB.thumb.jpeg.69f74216952ca3ec790c7cab1ee035cb.jpeg

 

I stopped in to visit the public consultation bus Wednesday afternoon at Osborne Junction. All the seats have been removed from the lower level and the area filled with information panels about the proposed route network for the Southwest Transitway.

They answered my questions and were generally quite friendly. I'm still quite concerned that they are making compromises in the concept that will make the service plan problematic. They want to talk about rush hour frequencies when the measure of the concept is in the base service (including midday). Introducing transfers into many journeys is OK for transferring between two intersecting high frequency services. When one service is high frequency and the other low, transferring is convenient one way (from low to high) but terrible the other (high to low). Many of the proposed feeders are (midday) 30 or 40 minute headways. Yikes!

I liked that they came up with a mobile public consultation venue, and I like that they are willing to look at route planning differently from the last five to seven decades, but if a new concept is going to work they need to think outside their am-rush-to-downtown / pm-rush-from-downtown thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know if the 137/161 super express routes will co-exist with BLUE, or simply be replaced? Is it possible that there will be a “BLUE Express” route that travels on the transitway, but does not stop at all stations?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, MMP15 said:

Does anyone know if the 137/161 super express routes will co-exist with BLUE, or simply be replaced? Is it possible that there will be a “BLUE Express” route that travels on the transitway, but does not stop at all stations?

No more 137/161 it’s nust the blue line it’s gonna be 28 brand new articulated buses running during the day every 3-4 minutes so it replaces the 137,161,163,162,180/181,183

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Went to the open house in st Norbert. I learned a lot like that the have had feedback that they probably will be keeping the 65,66 on brt but possibly going broadway smith/Donald to red river college and that the reason for the buses being numbered as 676 for example it goes via a rapid transit station I like the ideas. My favourite is naming it just the blue line with no route number 

Share this post


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

My favourite is naming it just the blue line with no route number 

Maybe in pre-computer days where Humans managed things. But these days, with electronic schedules, a route must be identified at least to the computer that does the scheduling to tell it apart from other routes.

Being sarcastic here, but if they're going with route numbers beginning with "6" then why not a route "666"? We already have run 66-6.

And to that, why is there no route 13 nor a route 69? I've asked this for several years and I still don't think I've gotten an answer. I know "13" is a superstitious "unlucky" number in some culture. And "69" has sexual connotations.

Or like bus no. "711" is the "Slurpee bus".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LilZebra said:

Maybe in pre-computer days where Humans managed things. But these days, with electronic schedules, a route must be identified at least to the computer that does the scheduling to tell it apart from other routes.

Being sarcastic here, but if they're going with route numbers beginning with "6" then why not a route "666"? We already have run 66-6.

And to that, why is there no route 13 nor a route 69? I've asked this for several years and I still don't think I've gotten an answer. I know "13" is a superstitious "unlucky" number in some culture. And "69" has sexual connotations.

Or like bus no. "711" is the "Slurpee bus".

No 666 cause there’s route 666 cause the 66 goes thru to downtown the 6 series as example 664, 672 is to tell the rider that this bus isn’t going downtown and will be connecting to the blue line and the rapid transit station. And for example with the 13 and 69 routes I think transit likes to stay away from them cause to some the number 13 is unlucky and the sexuality of 69 so to save its self lots of trouble it chooses not to use numbers 13 and 69 for routes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wpgtransit11-25 said:

No 666 cause there’s route 666 cause the 66 goes thru to downtown the 6 series as example 664, 672 is to tell the rider that this bus isn’t going downtown and will be connecting to the blue line and the rapid transit station. And for example with the 13 and 69 routes I think transit likes to stay away from them cause to some the number 13 is unlucky and the sexuality of 69 so to save its self lots of trouble it chooses not to use numbers 13 and 69 for routes 

lol he mentioned 666 because it's considered the devil's number 

and about 13, Edmonton and Calgary have route 13, why can't Winnipeg? 

also why is there no 23?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally don't like the idea of 600 series numbers. Not sure why but it seems tacky to me. You could accomplish the same thing with a destination sign that clearly states it terminates at a RT station. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 1046bluebus said:

I personally don't like the idea of 600 series numbers. Not sure why but it seems tacky to me. You could accomplish the same thing with a destination sign that clearly states it terminates at a RT station. 

This. 

I Absolutely agree

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, 1046bluebus said:

I personally don't like the idea of 600 series numbers. Not sure why but it seems tacky to me. You could accomplish the same thing with a destination sign that clearly states it terminates at a RT station. 

But by labeling it a 600 series u kno just by the number it’s goimg to a RT station 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Wpgtransit11-25 said:

But by labeling it a 600 series u kno just by the number it’s goimg to a RT station 

Yeah but for example 29 is planned to terminate at Beaumont stn, and its number won't change

 

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...