York Region Transit: Viva service thread

[just_chillin]

In other YRT/Viva news, the 2010 batch of YRT buses arrived about a month ago and have been in service for a few weeks now. There are a few New Flyer D40LFs, and lots of D40LFRs.

The front of the YRT LFR doesn't look sleek like Mississauga Transit's, it has weird bulging headlights and a turn signal separate from the headlamp cluster. The back looks great though.

At least some of Viva's 2010 NovaBus LFXs are here. I've spotted them driving around out of service.

The New Flyer D40LF's you are referring too have been in service for a while now. The 2010, 10xx series New Flyer D40LF's (the ones with the usual old style looking front) were delivered around summer 2010 (Fleet numbers 1001-1019 all assigned to South-East Division Miller Transit). They have been in service for around 6 months now. They are exactly the same as the 2009, 9xx series (901-945) delivered in 2009.

The New Flyer D40LFR's with the new styled outer look and roof top HVAC system (Current Fleet numbers 1020-1030->with more expected) began to arrive start of November with 1020-1024 delivered to South-West Division Veolia Transportation, and those ones put in service around middle to end of November. The remaining ones (1025-1030) were delivered to South East Division Miller Transit about end of November/ beginning of December and all put into service on Tuesday, December 29, 2010.

The Nova LFX for Viva began to be delivered start of December and after inspections and training should be seen in service by Spring 2011.

Only 3 artics? It seems like more than that. Nearly every third purple that I see is an AG300.

.

Probably just "seems" like it.. as only 3 are assigned to purple right now.

I think the Novas will be used primarily on the Purple route. Someone mentioned in another thread that Novas are rear-wheel drive while the Van Hools are front-wheel drive, which means the latter can handle hills better. Thus the Novas would be able to handle smooth terrain of the Purple line over the steep hills along the Blue line.

Nope. The Nova's will be used almost exclusively on viva blue. Rear/Front wheel drive, drive-ability etc doesn't matter.

Also I happen to like the new New Flyer buses. Their exteriors are far nicer than the Orion VII NG and the interior is very modern as well. Only problem is that from inside they are surprisingly loud.

The interior is exactly the same as the 2009 and 2010 model D40LF's except for the front where the HVAC dips into the interior and the drivers area is a little different looking. Also, loud??? Hmm... I have a feeling one or two of two things, either 1) you were sitting close to the front and 2) the HVAC system was turned on. Because aside from that they are actually quieter than the 2009 and 2010 models.

I think I went on one of these new buses (on the 300 express) ... other then looking a little better on the outside I perfer the seats in the old busses, they're a lot more comfortable! I also thought it was a little to bright in the interior at night time.

Not possible. First off only in VERY RARE circumstances would dispatch assign a 30foot bus to ANY express run. Second, all the new 2010, 30foot BRT-Styled Eldorado's have been assigned to North Division-First Student. You saw a 2010 New Flyer D40LFR, especially since one of the runs that had been assigned an LFR for the past couple of weeks is one that does routes 300, 301, 302 and 1 in one shift.

Also, you prefer the seats in the old buses?? Which old buses? The seats in the New Flyer's from 2008 and older have low back's and harder surfaces. The new seats in the 2009 and 2010 New Flyer LF's and LFR's and the new 2010 Eldorado's AND the new Nova LFX's have American Seating InSight seats with higher backs and softer surfaces. Unless of course you are talking about the "cushion" type seats in the Ex-GO Buses (Fleet numbers 001-014, and 225-233) and the 300 series express buses (301-310).

 

[Electrify]

Nope. The Nova's will be used almost exclusively on viva blue. Rear/Front wheel drive, drive-ability etc doesn't matter.

Good to hear. Probably just more propaganda from the anti-artic posters here to try to justify the TTC not using them.

The interior is exactly the same as the 2009 and 2010 model D40LF's except for the front where the HVAC dips into the interior and the drivers area is a little different looking. Also, loud??? Hmm... I have a feeling one or two of two things, either 1) you were sitting close to the front and 2) the HVAC system was turned on. Because aside from that they are actually quieter than the 2009 and 2010 models.

Probably the HVAC which I thought looked cool. There are also updates to 2009 D40LFs (not Rs) and older ones, besides the seating. I think they use LED lights, and the lighting is filtered blue near the front (less harsh).

 

[reaperexpress]

Good to hear. Probably just more propaganda from the anti-artic posters here to try to justify the TTC not using them.

People including myself were concerned with a rear-drive artic to climb hills and run in slippery conditions without jackknifing. It is a major stretch to say that people are determined to thwart a non-existent TTC initiative to use them. Personally I love the AG300s and think the TTC is in desperate need for artics due to capacity issues.

Probably the HVAC which I thought looked cool. There are also updates to 2009 D40LFs (not Rs) and older ones, besides the seating. I think they use LED lights, and the lighting is filtered blue near the front (less harsh).

Lights are filtered blue at the front of all YRT buses, the oldest of which were built in 2000. The 2009 and newer D40LFs do have a sleeker ceiling profile though.

I'm not completely sure, but I think the 2007 and 2008 models have interior LED floor and door lights as well.

 

[just_chillin]

Probably the HVAC which I thought looked cool. There are also updates to 2009 D40LFs (not Rs) and older ones, besides the seating. I think they use LED lights, and the lighting is filtered blue near the front (less harsh).

That's right. I forgot. The D40LF's have had full LED lighting since 2009. The ones in 2007 and 2008 still had fluorescent lighting throughout the bus except for the front and rear door lights and drivers overhead light which were LED. The blue at the front is generally standard on the entire fleet (less glare on the windshield for the driver), just the 2009 and newer models have the blue LED cover which is probably more noticeable to you.

Again and again I'm impressed with the progress YRT/Viva is making on transit in York Region, especially when compared against the TTC, which hasn't done anything productive (aside from perhaps the York U busway) for many years.

Then why does there seem to be so much negativity online with regards to YRT/Viva?? Just do a search and people are bad mouthing left, right and centre. They don't even know what transit was like in the region prior to YRT amalgamating in 2001!. I think they just all compare to TTC unfortunatley which you can't do!

 

[taal]

Thanks for those images. I was meaning to take a visit to see the progress recently but never got a chance. I don't live too far away so I'll definitely have to take a walk around some time soon. Looks impressive.

Again and again I'm impressed with the progress YRT/Viva is making on transit in York Region, especially when compared against the TTC, which hasn't done anything productive (aside from perhaps the York U busway) for many years.

St. Clair doesn't count for anything ? ...

Many many service increases on bus routes in the last 2/4 years (granted many may be removed now lol).

- this is what really counts ..

Also, if anyone but Ford was elected you'd probably start seeing progress on sheppard (I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing).

And to top the cake - the % of ridership increase is extermely impressive - you wouldn't expect a built out city to get increases even when suburbs have struggled.


Sorry, as a long time YRT user - they're good at making things pretty and that's about it. btw - these dedicated bus routes are great - the issue is there has been just about 0 increases to any other routes that are suppose to feed these ... that's what maters most.
Moreover ... politics - I get they had to built the BRT here to start because it's part of the downtown Markham center. Want to know something, the BRT as built today (i.e. this section) will probably increase service by a grand total of 0% ... this area is barely used - in sense that this section of street isn't overly busy from a traffic point of view - The viva buses already had a decent short cut they take through this area.. Again, in 2/3+ years it's a good idea so I'm not faulting anyone. But the key will be what's built on Hi-way 7 / Yonge ... and no, not Newmarket ... talk about politics.

I'm actually much more impressed with Brampton - although I'd say the YRT has does a better job the MT.

 

[doady]

Since 2006, Mississauga, Brampton, and Toronto have all each added more transit service hours annually than York Region. But hey, why let facts interfere with this discussion.

 

[xtremesniper]

Wow, what's with the hate?

I'm about to go to sleep so I'm going to keep this short and simple.

- St. Clair was a disaster by many respects. I don't know what to count it as. But sure, we'll say it was ... a "development".
- Any increases that are added, are later removed or added again. The TTC is so finicky like that, and they're also terribly slow at everything (why can I still not rely on the subways after hours north of Eglinton?). Politics plays wayyy too much of a role on transit in Toronto compared to any other city/town in the GTA.
- Putting transit in place before an area gets intensified is always a good thing, no matter how you look at it.
- Yes, the YRT feeder routes suck. Problem is most of the time they're north/south routes that feed the Viva, which means those routes are the TTC contracted routes that they don't have nearly as much control over. They did improve frequencies last year but I'm not sure if they were reverted back recently.
- It's hard to convince a region consisting of arguably more middle-to-upper class citizens than any other region in the GTA to leave their cars at home and take a bus instead. They need things like the Viva's flashy marketing and business oriented design to make them feel less like their taking a bus, but more like they're riding a decent alternative to the car. Like it or not, a lot more people in Brampton need transit than people in York do.

So, for that, I still give YRT credit where credit is due. Are they perfect? No. Is there still tons of work to be done? Yes. But progress has been made, flashy marketing involved or not.

 

[taal]

First of all there is no hate - at least on my part
I'm not sure where to start ... my comments in red below

Wow, what's with the hate?

I'm about to go to sleep so I'm going to keep this short and simple.

- St. Clair was a disaster by many respects. I don't know what to count it as. But sure, we'll say it was ... a "development".
In many ways I'd count it as a 'success', yes there were a lot of issues during construction - but very little of this was directly the fault of the TTC.
Ignoring that, and some TTC route management issues that exist elsewhere - by all means it's a success in my books.


- Any increases that are added, are later removed or added again. The TTC is so finicky like that, and they're also terribly slow at everything (why can I still not rely on the subways after hours north of Eglinton?). Politics plays wayyy too much of a role on transit in Toronto compared to any other city/town in the GTA.
I'm not sure what your basing this on - many increases have been made and very little have been "removed" - even after some of the late evening reductions we may see. I'm not sure what exactly is 'finicky' about this process -I can point out several routes that YRT has also played a similar game with.

What's not reliable about the Yonge line north of Eglinton - this is a known project - yes I believe it was scheduled to complete by this point but I'm not sure what this has to do with 'reliability'.

Regarding politics - given the size of the TTC and Toronto it's not a surprise this will be an 'issue'. Having said this I pointed out a few example of how this plagues the YRT and york region as a whole. I'd even go as far to say it effects York region more then anyone really knows because so little of it covered in the media.

- Putting transit in place before an area gets intensified is always a good thing, no matter how you look at it.
Sure, no argument there - but at the same time what about the areas that are already intensified that deserve improved transit now (i.e. parts of Yonge / Hi-way 7). This isn't really a YRT issue - we see this all the time.

- Yes, the YRT feeder routes suck. Problem is most of the time they're north/south routes that feed the Viva, which means those routes are the TTC contracted routes that they don't have nearly as much control over. They did improve frequencies last year but I'm not sure if they were reverted back recently.
Here you have me completely lost ... first of all, there are many other feeder routes that are plagued with issues (namely a lack of service) that go in every direction.
More importantly, why bring the TTC into this - York region pays the TTC for the service they desire - it's up to them, the TTC has no involvement here whatsoever.

- It's hard to convince a region consisting of arguably more middle-to-upper class citizens than any other region in the GTA to leave their cars at home and take a bus instead. They need things like the Viva's flashy marketing and business oriented design to make them feel less like their taking a bus, but more like they're riding a decent alternative to the car. Like it or not, a lot more people in Brampton need transit than people in York do.
I'm not sure what your referring too here, all of York region ? That's a big chunk of the GTA in it self to make such a blanket statement
But I see what you're getting at and I agree (regarding the 'class' and what they require) - flash it is ...
There are many choice TTC riders though (those who do not need to use it) but this requires subways (which are arguably as flashy as it gets) or extreme service on bus routes - which the TTC probably does better (and worse) then just about any other city in North America. Better as in the scheduled head ways on many routes are sub 5min in rush hour - the worse is the reality of operating such frequent service and poor management choices i.e. bunching ...

So, for that, I still give YRT credit where credit is due. Are they perfect? No. Is there still tons of work to be done? Yes. But progress has been made, flashy marketing involved or not.
I will yes. Actually I'll take it a step further, I'll give all of the GTA suburbs (touching Toronto) credit in terms of the transit they provide - compared to many other cities in North America they offer much more comprehensive service believe it or not.

But I can't help but think "all flash and no substance" - it's not quite true here but in many ways neglecting the other routes hurts - and I think in time flash isn't needed. Any large city that is heavily dependent on transit (note there are not that many of these in North America) does not benefit from flash after a certain point - I think the BRT should be great but not until it's completed all the way so that's still some time off - by then if other service hasn't improved I don't think we'll see the drastic ridership increases they're most definitely forecasting.

Another thing working in Hi-way 7's favor is the large amount of employment growth - condos are coming but these aren't the driving force.

 

[smallspy]

People including myself were concerned with a rear-drive artic to climb hills and run in slippery conditions without jackknifing. It is a major stretch to say that people are determined to thwart a non-existent TTC initiative to use them. Personally I love the AG300s and think the TTC is in desperate need for artics due to capacity issues.

The AGs suffer from the exact same issues in the snow as "pusher"-style artics. There have been a number of jackknifing incidents since they've been operating, some with passengers onboard and some without.

As for artics, could the TTC use them? Absolutely. Should they jump into the pool blindfolded with both feet tied? Absolutely not.

Remember those GM artics built in the early-to-mid 1980s that the TTC had and then sold to Mississauga? The ones cherished by many busfans? The reason that the TTC got rid of them is because they were poorly designed, and cost over 3 times more to run and maintain than a regular 40' bus. The Orion IIIs were better in both regards, but suffered from other issues that resulted in them not having a long life in Toronto.

Let's get a couple here to test and see which ones are actually capable of holding their own before a large number of them is ordered.

Dan
Toronto, Ont.

 

[doady]

Artics work for VIVA because VIVA has all-door boarding, an honour fare system, and fixed stops. The TTC bus system doesn't have these, so it doesn't make much sense for them to use articulated buses.

 

[wilson_wu]

The VIVA Artics aren't as great as people make them out to be.

I recall numerous snowy days where VIVA's artics (sometimes 2 or 3 of them at a time) were abandoned at the bottom of the hill near Royal Orchard because they simply couldn't climb it. Yet a 40 footer on viva pink would have no problem and just glide by the abandoned artics.

 

[Electrify]

Artics work for VIVA because VIVA has all-door boarding, an honour fare system, and fixed stops. The TTC bus system doesn't have these, so it doesn't make much sense for them to use articulated buses.

Neither do a lot of systems, yet they also use articulated buses.

 

[doady]

Neither do a lot of systems, yet they also use articulated buses.

And exactly which of these systems have a higher cost recovery ratio than the TTC?

I mean, if the whole point of artics is to increase the efficiency of the TTC, then surely this idea can be supported by providing an example of an artic-using system in either Canada or the US that more efficient than the TTC. After all, it doesn't make sense for the TTC to look to less efficient systems to improve its own efficiency, does it?

 

[Rainforest]

^ Following that premise, TTC should never learn anything from any other transit system that has a lover cost recovery ratio. Surely the TTC knows better, and if the other system's practices diverge from TTC's, it is the reason they can't attain the same recovery ratio.

 

[xtremesniper]

I'm not sure what your basing this on - many increases have been made and very little have been "removed" - even after some of the late evening reductions we may see. I'm not sure what exactly is 'finicky' about this process -I can point out several routes that YRT has also played a similar game with.

What I meant by 'finicky' was that the TTC is dictated far too often by the wants of the current mayor. YRT routes change all the time, yes, but that's due to seasonal ridership increases/decreases. TTC routes are often dictated by some idiot deciding that he no longer deems a certain route to be necessary at this or that time of day. You don't see that on the YRT.

What's not reliable about the Yonge line north of Eglinton - this is a known project - yes I believe it was scheduled to complete by this point but I'm not sure what this has to do with 'reliability'.

For me, reliability also has something to do with me being able to get home in one piece. Not only is the project over-due, but they still refuse to properly inform riders that service ends at Eglinton until you're already there. As someone who has to continue my trip as far north as I can possibly get via TTC, it's a little tiresome to deal with and it's just frustrating that they're taking their typical unionized sweet time doing what they're doing. And if they have good reason for the delays, they sure aren't communicating them to anyone. But that's a whole other issue.

Regarding politics - given the size of the TTC and Toronto it's not a surprise this will be an 'issue'. Having said this I pointed out a few example of how this plagues the YRT and york region as a whole. I'd even go as far to say it effects York region more then anyone really knows because so little of it covered in the media.

That's true, but I still believe that it's a little different given that no one "mayor" runs the entire region, and thus no one person can just simply stick his nose in their business and decree that certain routes are simply not needed, or new ones that go to nowhere are somehow necessary just to service some relatives they have or something.

More importantly, why bring the TTC into this - York region pays the TTC for the service they desire - it's up to them, the TTC has no involvement here whatsoever.

Perhaps it's not as simple as that? I can only imagine that the fees the TTC charges to run those routes are terribly expensive, especially given the wages of TTC drivers these days. I'm sure cost of running the line has some impact on how frequent the YRT is willing to run them. Some lines increased in frequency a year or two ago, but if I remember correctly when the Toronto budget came into play some time last year, most of those improvements were reversed, or made even worse than they were previously.

I'm not entirely convinced that YRT has full control on those lines, especially given that south of Steeles, they're run as typical TTC routes so they have to abide by some scheduling rules there as well.

And on the topic of flashy marketing, I agree that it eventually becomes a burden more than a benefit. However, until we reach that point (which is fairly far away) the flash is fine by me.