News   Mar 28, 2024
 130     0 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.6K     1 
News   Mar 27, 2024
 1.2K     2 

Which bus routes need articulated buses?

W. K. Lis

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 24, 2007
Messages
24,074
Reaction score
14,768
Location
Toronto, ON, CAN, Terra, Sol, Milky Way
To use an articulated bus, the route has to have curves and turns that can accommodate them. Also the bus bays at most subway stations are too short for them.

Even worse, they now have double articulated buses, especially in Europe. See this video link presenting the first 25 meter double articulated hybrid bus from Hess and Vossloh Kiepe.

It's good that the Dufferin jog will be eliminated, one candidate for an articulated bus.
 
Last edited:
To use an articulated bus, the route has to have curves and turns that can accommodate them. Also the bus bays at most subway stations are too short for them.

Articulated buses actually have a smaller (i.e better) turning radius than regular 40 foot buses... in other words, articulated buses can make tighter turns than the buses the TTC is using now. So pretty much all the current routes in Toronto can use artics. The problem are the bus bays probably.

And many of the routes have so many branches. Maybe artics are best on the simpler routes like 25 Don Mills or 34 Eglinton East. That way individual branches don't become too infrequent.

As far as I know, York Region uses artics only on VIVA Blue on Yonge. MT mostly uses them on routes 1 Dundas, 5 Dixie, 19 Hurontario (weekends), 26/76 Burnhamthorpe and 110 University. Simple routes with few or no branches.
 
Could this thread include some other bus speculation as well?

Articulated busses are needed so, so badly in the city. I'd say some good candidates are Jane, Dufferin, Kingston Road, Steeles and Finch at least. I think Jane, Dufferin South and Finch West are good LRT candidates, but they should've gotten articulated busses years ago. IMO, Kingston Road could do well with just a ROW and articulated busses.

On the opposite side of things, I think that some routes could do well with using those mini busses. A lot of routes in the city get so little riders that it really makes no sense to waste a whole bus worth of gas and traffic space on just a couple people. Sure it doesn't look as impressive, but I think the savings overtime could make it worth it.

Also another thing, trolley busses. I don't get what the deal is with these, they seem so taboo. Trolley busses would save the city a lot of money, especially in the future with ever climbing gas prices and carbon taxes. They have better and smoother acceleration, can climb hills a lot easier, are easier to maintain, and consume absolutely no gas. The city should definitely be looking into this, but they seem to have abandoned the notion that they exist, along with articulated busses.
 
The TTC will be looking into articulated buses again with the Transit City Bus Plan. Hopefully this time they find a manufacturer that can meet their requirements.

Deffinately the 39 and 53, which used to have artics until the TTC retired them, should have artics.

As far as I know, York Region uses artics only on VIVA Blue on Yonge. MT mostly uses them on routes 1 Dundas, 5 Dixie, 19 Hurontario (weekends), 26/76 Burnhamthorpe and 110 University. Simple routes with few or no branches.
There's the odd one onto Purple as well. Also Viva stated they will not be getting any more 12m buses; only artics.

On the opposite side of things, I think that some routes could do well with using those mini busses. A lot of routes in the city get so little riders that it really makes no sense to waste a whole bus worth of gas and traffic space on just a couple people. Sure it doesn't look as impressive, but I think the savings overtime could make it worth it.
The excuse I've heard is that most of the cost comes from the operator, so the savings are minimal if using a smaller bus. However, it doesn't seem to stop other systems which use a bus that fits the ridership.
Also another thing, trolley busses. I don't get what the deal is with these, they seem so taboo. Trolley busses would save the city a lot of money, especially in the future with ever climbing gas prices and carbon taxes. They have better and smoother acceleration, can climb hills a lot easier, are easier to maintain, and consume absolutely no gas. The city should definitely be looking into this, but they seem to have abandoned the notion that they exist, along with articulated busses.
Got to agree, trolleybuses would be great for Toronto. It's too bad Toronto scraapped theirs. I wonder if this taboo stems from the perception of possible high costs relating to starting one up?
 
Last edited:
Now that GO and the inter-city bus lines are starting to use double-deckers, perhaps TTC should consider this as an alternative, if they ever consider articulated buses.
 
On the opposite side of things, I think that some routes could do well with using those mini busses. A lot of routes in the city get so little riders that it really makes no sense to waste a whole bus worth of gas and traffic space on just a couple people. Sure it doesn't look as impressive, but I think the savings overtime could make it worth it.

I elect the Calvington, Milner, Rosedale, Forest Hill, St Andrews and Christie routes. Artics would be nice for Finch, Kingston and Don Mills in advance of the LRTs.
 
If this list does not include every Transit City route, than it should tell you something about Transit City.
 
Last edited:
I don't think there any point for the TTC to buy 30 foot buses. They would need such a small number of them, there would probably be little or no benefit. There are few routes that could use them, and they only use a few buses anyways. Even in the 905 there is little use for them.
 
Got to agree, trolleybuses would be great for Toronto. It's too bad Toronto scraapped theirs. I wonder if this taboo stems from the perception of possible high costs relating to starting one up?

In a way, the trolleybus saga of the early 90's is very reminiscent of Transit City. It was a politically-motivated use of fad technology that was supposed to herald great transit savings. Instead of worshipping LRTs, they worshipped CNG buses instead.
 
Hamilton is using articulated buses on the bus rapid transit routes 10 (B-Line Express) and 20 (A-Line Express).

I was told by GO Transit that there are constraints on the routes that can be used by the double-deckers, i.e. they use them on 407/403 routes but couldn't use them on the QEW Express from Hamilton to Toronto. I don't know whether that would be due to height clearance or turning radius issues.
 
In a way, the trolleybus saga of the early 90's is very reminiscent of Transit City. It was a politically-motivated use of fad technology that was supposed to herald great transit savings. Instead of worshipping LRTs, they worshipped CNG buses instead.

That's an interesting point. And as you can see today, the TTC has given up on CNG technology with the buses either retired or converted to diesel.

Hamilton is using articulated buses on the bus rapid transit routes 10 (B-Line Express) and 20 (A-Line Express).

I was told by GO Transit that there are constraints on the routes that can be used by the double-deckers, i.e. they use them on 407/403 routes but couldn't use them on the QEW Express from Hamilton to Toronto. I don't know whether that would be due to height clearance or turning radius issues.

Yep it's due to height. With a height of 4.268m the ADL E500s need to run on routes with a heigh clearance. For example, I was told the Triton entrance to Scarborough Town Centre cannot accomodate the GO double deckers. It can however accomodate the Van Hool double decker Megabus has as the are only 4m in height.
 
Last edited:
310! Even after the frequency increase in the summer, they are still packed.

This route also has chronic bunching problems due to the 310A getting out of sync with the 310 and probably operaters soaking each other (I'm sure most want to pick up as few cutomers as possible on this route).
 
Last edited:
The excuse I've heard is that most of the cost comes from the operator, so the savings are minimal if using a smaller bus. However, it doesn't seem to stop other systems which use a bus that fits the ridership.

It comes down to order size. We are ordering buses in volumes larger than the entire fleets of some cities that use smaller buses and get a good volume discount. We couldn't get any discount for a handful of buses to run around Rosedale and Forest Hill. Add on top of that the extra cost for special training and maintenance for a non-standard bus in the fleet and it all evens out.
 
The other problem, is that very few routes are not used to capacity during rush hour. So while small buses might do just fine outside rush hour for many routes, they would be useless during rush hour which is when demand is the highest.
 

Back
Top