BUS - Random Thoughts Thread

[MHV9218]

5 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

There is no argument. That's a fact, KingMHV9218. People do pay attention. They may not skip the bus unless it is in terrible shape, but if possible, yes, riders prefer newer buses. I have learned that when the topic has come up. I find it comical that you think this place with a small sampling of mainly transit fans is representative of how ALL passengers feel. Don't be ridiculous.

I would bet you all the money in the world that the vast majority of people waiting for a bus would take any bus over a new bus or their preferred bus or whatever. Yes, people like newer buses. Marginally. Not so much that they let other buses go by and just wait there. You know this.

 

Just now, Lawrence St said:

My lord do you two love arguing like a married couple...

 

All I did was say they shouldn't be retiring the OGs too fast. You can look at who started it. You're right, maybe the smart thing to do is just not respond, but...

Edited December 1, 2020 by MHV9218

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

My lord do you two love arguing like a married couple...

There is no argument. He argues with anyone who disagrees with what he has to say.  KingMHV9218...

1 minute ago, MHV9218 said:

I would bet you all the money in the world that the vast majority of people waiting for a bus would take any bus over a new bus or their preferred bus or whatever. Yes, people like newer buses. Marginally. Not so much that they let other buses go by and just wait there. You know this.

Of course they would, but you made it sound as if passengers don't care or pay attention. They DO care and they DO comment on it. I say that as someone who has received a lot of feedback on buses around the same age.

[MHV9218]

Just now, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

There is no argument. He argues with anyone who disagrees with what he has to say.  KingMHV9218...

Buddy, scroll back up like three posts. I just offered a comment about the bus fleet and you posted some petty "You would say that" comment.

Leaving this conversation, bored of it. If others have opinions about retiring the O7 fleet early I'd love to hear it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

7 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Buddy, scroll back up like three posts. I just offered a comment about the bus fleet and you posted some petty "You would say that" comment.

Leaving this conversation, bored of it. If others have opinions about retiring the O7 fleet early I'd love to hear it.

And I'm offering mine. You don't have to agree with it. You said it yourself. The buses have been in service 13 years. Not sure how much longer these buses need to go. If memory serves me correctly, the  was retiring buses around 12-13 years before those RTS buses, so this doesn't seem anywhere out of the ordinary. 

Edited December 1, 2020 by Via Garibaldi 8

[Lawrence St]

50 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Buddy, scroll back up like three posts. I just offered a comment about the bus fleet and you posted some petty "You would say that" comment.

Leaving this conversation, bored of it. If others have opinions about retiring the O7 fleet early I'd love to hear it.

The reason for the early retirement of the Orion 7 OG Hybrids and why they won't keep them for longer is because they have old hybrid technology.

Basically, those buses use an old version of the hybrid system which isn't really efficient and is extremely difficult to keep maintaining since parts wear out fast. Its getting to the point where simply retiring is saving money then keeping them going. 

And another thing: most of the routes that are operated by Orion 7 OG's aren't good enough to actually make the old hybrid technology work, since routes are a mix of stop and go traffic, etc etc.

[MHV9218]

9 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

The reason for the early retirement of the Orion 7 OG Hybrids and why they won't keep them for longer is because they have old hybrid technology.

Basically, those buses use an old version of the hybrid system which isn't really efficient and is extremely difficult to keep maintaining since parts wear out fast. Its getting to the point where simply retiring is saving money then keeping them going. 

And another thing: most of the routes that are operated by Orion 7 OG's aren't good enough to actually make the old hybrid technology work, since routes are a mix of stop and go traffic, etc etc.

Definitely right that the application of the hybrids wasn't always right route-wise, but do you know which parts exactly are failing? Obviously Orion itself is out of business, but BAE is obviously alive and well, as is Cummins, and you'd think they'd have some support capacity. And if were the acid batteries themselves, could always swap for lithium-ion packs like on 6401 etc. J

ust saying, crazier things have happened and I can't even remember an MTA order retired this quickly in years (exception the CNGs, which obviously have to go for their own reasons). I guess the 1996 D60s only got 14 years, but that's about it. Even the rotting, salt-ruined O5s made it longer lol.

[trainfan22]

IIRC New Flyer still makes parts for Orion and NABI buses. Bee Line's O-V are around the same age as the MTA Orion OG's and all of Bee Line Orions are still running AFAIK.

 

 

Objectively speaking, from a passenger prospective the Orion OG/NG at their current age are equally comfortable as the XD40s IMO. OG's might be a disaster behind the scenes but they got me from Point A to point B comfortably many times in recent years. Living in ENY service area I legit cannot think of a reason to dislike the Orions and favor the XD40s and vice versa. I don't think the average rider cares about the age of the bus as long as it gets them from point A to point B. 

[Lawrence St]

33 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Definitely right that the application of the hybrids wasn't always right route-wise, but do you know which parts exactly are failing? Obviously Orion itself is out of business, but BAE is obviously alive and well, as is Cummins, and you'd think they'd have some support capacity. And if were the acid batteries themselves, could always swap for lithium-ion packs like on 6401 etc. J

ust saying, crazier things have happened and I can't even remember an MTA order retired this quickly in years (exception the CNGs, which obviously have to go for their own reasons). I guess the 1996 D60s only got 14 years, but that's about it. Even the rotting, salt-ruined O5s made it longer lol.

Its some of the parts that are in the hybrid systems themselves that correlate with the Orion systems. I can't recall what they are off the top of my head (ill check later today or tomorrow) but some of these parts are specific to Orion themselves and without those parts, the hybrids can't function properly.

Despite 3086 (or whatever number that converted Orion 7 OG was) having an issue now and then, it was actually easier to repair it.

[Cait Sith]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

The reason for the early retirement of the Orion 7 OG Hybrids and why they won't keep them for longer is because they have old hybrid technology.

Basically, those buses use an old version of the hybrid system which isn't really efficient and is extremely difficult to keep maintaining since parts wear out fast. Its getting to the point where simply retiring is saving money then keeping them going. 

And another thing: most of the routes that are operated by Orion 7 OG's aren't good enough to actually make the old hybrid technology work, since routes are a mix of stop and go traffic, etc etc.

It's not so much that they have old technology....parts are plentiful for the BAE systems tech, it's the cost of upkeeping the buses in general. Orion VIIs, CNGs, Diesels and Hybrids have had overall maintenance costs go up significantly after they hit 10 years, and this is most evident with agencies that have had issues with their fleet. TTC, for example, retired a batch of NG hybrids before retiring their OG hybrids because of multiple problems with those buses.

In our cases, costs for maintenance on our now-retired Orion VIIs have gone up more than the majority of the RTS fleet we had, the Orion V fleet(especially the 6000s) were a little higher than the RTS because of the frame and body rot and other issues.

[MHV9218]

Here's a totally unrelated thought. Did the lead acid O7 NGs get repainted in the new scheme twice? I remember those buses getting the new scheme between 2013-2015, but now I'm thinking those buses must have been repainted again in 2018 or 2019 based on the new turn stickers and the numbers. There are a handful of NGs that still have the tiny grey wide right turns sticker, but almost all of them have the new orange sticker. I stopped commuting on them as my daily around 2016 and stopped paying as close attention.

[NBTA]

5 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

IIRC New Flyer still makes parts for Orion and NABI buses. Bee Line's O-V are around the same age as the MTA Orion OG's and all of Bee Line Orions are still running AFAIK.

 

 

Objectively speaking, from a passenger prospective the Orion OG/NG at their current age are equally comfortable as the XD40s IMO. OG's might be a disaster behind the scenes but they got me from Point A to point B comfortably many times in recent years. Living in ENY service area I legit cannot think of a reason to dislike the Orions and favor the XD40s and vice versa. I don't think the average rider cares about the age of the bus as long as it gets them from point A to point B. 

Difference between those Vs and our VIIs is the shape that their in. Those Vs are in amazing shape, granted Bee-Line keeps their buses in great shape anyway (577 was still in shape for an old bus).

[Cait Sith]

10 hours ago, NBTA said:

Difference between those Vs and our VIIs is the shape that their in. Those Vs are in amazing shape, granted Bee-Line keeps their buses in great shape anyway (577 was still in shape for an old bus).

And on top of this, Bee-Line has routes that don't run 24/7 most of the time, so they don't get beat up as NYMTA's fleet.

Plus, Bee-Line has a much, much smaller fleet, which makes it easier to maintain their fleet a lot better.

Comparing NYMTA to Bee-Line is like comparing NJT with Rutgers University shuttles, you just can't.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

17 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

Objectively speaking, from a passenger prospective the Orion OG/NG at their current age are equally comfortable as the XD40s IMO. OG's might be a disaster behind the scenes but they got me from Point A to point B comfortably many times in recent years. Living in ENY service area I legit cannot think of a reason to dislike the Orions and favor the XD40s and vice versa. I don't think the average rider cares about the age of the bus as long as it gets them from point A to point B. 

The average passenger doesn't know what bus is what, but they do know if they've been riding an old bus based on the amenities provided.  If the bus is clean and maintained well, it's less of an issue, but when those things aren't done, that's when they notice.  You are speaking for yourself. I am speaking from the experience of getting feedback from hundreds of passengers (I've had multiple posts about such things from passengers), both solicited and unsolicited.  Not only that, but look at the people that complained about those RTS buses, which led to them being retired. 

It's not about "disliking" any particular fleet. It's about whether or not the bus provides what passengers need. If I can't read the destination signage, the HVAC stinks or the seats are uncomfortable, I don't care what model it is. I would be happy to see it gone in favor of something that provides the basics, and that is the attitude of most passengers. Aside from that, looking at what other transit agencies are doing, the  needs to keep up and need to show passengers that they are getting something from these ongoing fare hikes every other year.

Even looking at Metro-North, which does an excellent job with its fleet, they are constantly looking to improve the customer experience. That's what it is about and how you grow ridership.

[paulrivera]

20 hours ago, MHV9218 said:

They should not be scrapping 13-14 y/o buses on the verge of this budget disaster, imo...

If we get our money, then we can start slicing the fleet. I know the flipside argument is that diminished service would mean a diminished fleet, but they also want to cut down the maintenance regimen, so I dunno...don't love the look of this.

Only handling Nova/Prevost parts and New Flyer/MCI parts and only dealing with those two bus manufacturers (instead of three) would inherently result in cost savings.

(One would think anyways... the idea comes from the airline industry, where the more streamlined the fleets are, there are less training and maintenance costs)

[Lex]

12 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The average passenger doesn't know what bus is what, but they do know if they've been riding an old bus based on the amenities provided.  If the bus is clean and maintained well, it's less of an issue, but when those things aren't done, that's when they notice.  You are speaking for yourself. I am speaking from the experience of getting feedback from hundreds of passengers (I've had multiple posts about such things from passengers), both solicited and unsolicited.  Not only that, but look at the people that complained about those RTS buses, which led to them being retired.

Ah, yes, Clayton Guse and a handful of idiots who bought into his conspiracy theory.

[MHV9218]

34 minutes ago, Lex said:

Ah, yes, Clayton Guse and a handful of idiots who bought into his conspiracy theory.

Yeah, and not to mention, that was almost exactly the MTA retirement schedule anyway. They maybe pushed it up by an extra few months. Which they shouldn't have, don't get me wrong, but it's not like it was some mass outcry that got rid of them.

[Cait Sith]

48 minutes ago, Lex said:

Ah, yes, Clayton Guse and a handful of idiots who bought into his conspiracy theory.

Yep, that's exactly what it was.

The complaints mostly stemmed from the fact that Gleason, at the time, was getting brand new buses. They felt that the areas served by routes that have the RTSs, were left out, which was factually untrue especially since they already had new buses on those lines, hence coming up with all of these theories of the RTSs polluting the air in low-income neighborhoods and all that crap, even though the RTS fleet had EPA KITS INSTALLED in them....the RTS fleet put out way less emissions after 1998. If we were to use the logic they employed to the RTS with the rest of the Brooklyn fleet, Brooklyn probably wouldn't have any operable buses and would have to wait for electrics. The low-income argument was bullshit, because if that was remotely true, the MTA would not have been running those buses in the Upper East and West Sides...

Not to mention, the person that created these theories didnt know the fact that, you know, other buses smoke up sometimes too.

Yes, the breakdowns did go up a bit, but that happens with every bus at that age. However, the newer buses at the time had higher breakdown rates in some situations than the RTS fleet altogether.

Kind of funny about all of the complaints that came after the RTS fleet retired, space being the biggest complaint. Those M66 and M72 passengers would not stop complaining for a long time and most of those riders WANTED the RTSs back just because of the space alone. They finally got used to those New Flyers.

[Kingsbridgeviewer382]

23 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Yeah, and not to mention, that was almost exactly the MTA retirement schedule anyway. They maybe pushed it up by an extra few months. Which they shouldn't have, don't get me wrong, but it's not like it was some mass outcry that got rid of them.

Also, by the time the complaints started to be shared in the papers most RTS units were already on the chopping board with 100+ units active (which only represented a small fraction of the 5,000+ active buses in the city).

[Lawrence St]

46 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

Yep, that's exactly what it was.

The complaints mostly stemmed from the fact that Gleason, at the time, was getting brand new buses. They felt that the areas served by routes that have the RTSs, were left out, which was factually untrue especially since they already had new buses on those lines, hence coming up with all of these theories of the RTSs polluting the air in low-income neighborhoods and all that crap, even though the RTS fleet had EPA KITS INSTALLED in them....the RTS fleet put out way less emissions after 1998. If we were to use the logic they employed to the RTS with the rest of the Brooklyn fleet, Brooklyn probably wouldn't have any operable buses and would have to wait for electrics. The low-income argument was bullshit, because if that was remotely true, the MTA would not have been running those buses in the Upper East and West Sides...

Not to mention, the person that created these theories didnt know the fact that, you know, other buses smoke up sometimes too.

Yes, the breakdowns did go up a bit, but that happens with every bus at that age. However, the newer buses at the time had higher breakdown rates in some situations than the RTS fleet altogether.

Kind of funny about all of the complaints that came after the RTS fleet retired, space being the biggest complaint. Those M66 and M72 passengers would not stop complaining for a long time and most of those riders WANTED the RTSs back just because of the space alone. They finally got used to those New Flyers.

Not to also mention that if Cuomo didn't intervene in the shutdown, we would've had a massive shortage of buses to operate the shuttles due to the early retirements.

This is the thing that annoys me the most about the news in general, they spit out untrue facts (ESPECIALLY in the transit divison) and get everyone to believe their crap.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

4 hours ago, Lex said:

Ah, yes, Clayton Guse and a handful of idiots who bought into his conspiracy theory.

I don't know who they were, but as someone who put up with riding those buses in the dead of summer a few times with no AC on them, I just know that those buses needed to go. They were work horses no question, but the signage was worn out/illegible, no AC, leaks when it rained, etc. Not worth the $2.75 fare. Worst off, the  last year proposed having fewer overhaul cycles for their fleet, which is insane.  Absolutely not.

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I don't know who they were, but as someone who put up with riding those buses in the dead of summer a few times with no AC on them, I just know that those buses needed to go. They were work horses no question, but the signage was worn out/illegible, no AC, leaks when it rained, etc. Not worth the $2.75 fare. Worst off, the  last year proposed having fewer overhaul cycles for their fleet, which is insane.  Absolutely not.

For as large as 's fleet is, their maintenence is great. Be happy you don't live in New Jersey, where equipment is breaking down every 3 minutes.

[SoSpectacular]

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

For as large as 's fleet is, their maintenence is great. Be happy you don't live in New Jersey, where equipment is breaking down every 3 minutes.

Indeed, those maintenance guys put in the work to keep our buses going. Very appreciative of them!

[Via Garibaldi 8]

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

For as large as 's fleet is, their maintenence is great. Be happy you don't live in New Jersey, where equipment is breaking down every 3 minutes.

It has improved, yes, but there was some falsifying of reports going on not that long ago about things being fixed on numerous buses that weren't, and so blatant and obvious that if you saw them you would laugh. Some shortages still crop up from time-to-time, but not as bad as before. I suppose COVID has helped take some of the strain off on that end; that and advocacy groups complaining to the big wigs. Depots like Spring Creek have been better in terms of cleanliness.

I ride the express buses in NJ. I have not had any issues. My buses have been relatively right on-time just as they have been in the years I have used them, though I don't use them regularly. Just for leisure trips to shop or whatever.

[B35 via Church]

8 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

For as large as 's fleet is, their maintenence is great. Be happy you don't live in New Jersey, where equipment is breaking down every 3 minutes.

Yes, our maintenance here in NYC is well above par, but let's not spread false narratives about other public transportation systems to try to bolster that point.... There aren't a host of breakdowns going on with the buses in NJT.....

15 hours ago, Lex said:

Ah, yes, Clayton Guse and a handful of idiots who bought into his conspiracy theory.

Speaking of false narratives, speak of the devil.... I been stopped reading that guy's articles....

Only but so many dam Guse eggs I can try to intellectually & logically.... stomach.

[MysteriousBtrain]

5 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Yes, our maintenance here in NYC is well above par, but let's not spread false narratives about other public transportation systems to try to bolster that point.... There aren't a host of breakdowns going on with the buses in NJT.....

Speaking of false narratives, speak of the devil.... I been stopped reading that guy's articles....

Only but so many dam Guse eggs I can try to intellectually & logically.... stomach.

Forgot about that article. Feels like because of Guse we have buses retiring more rapidly especially at the time that article was posted.