Live data from Hacker News

Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

worksinprogress.co

441–450 of 656 posts

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#441
post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buses are implicitly subsidized by road maintenance spending. Road wear and tear occurs according to the fourth power of axle weight, which effectively means almost all of the wear and tear is incurred by the heaviest vehicles, which include buses.

Roads still need maintenance even if nobody uses them, so a significant portion is split evenly across all traffic. Busses are light compared to 18 wheelers and other heavy equipment, they also replace many cars and SUV’s which keep getting heavier. Finally that rule of thumb isn’t really that accurate, “A 1988 report by the Australian Road Research Board stated that the rule is a good approximation for rutting damag…

> Busses are light compared to 18 wheelers and other heavy equipment, they also replace many cars and SUV’s which keep getting heavier.

They don’t replace nearly enough cars and SUV’s to make up for the difference in fourth power of axle weight. But yes, 18 wheelers are worse.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#442
post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But lots of people _do_ already ride buses! There are already current riders, and potential riders who are making these marginal decisions. Occasional riders will decide between transport modes based on the trip - making marginal improvements (or regressions) would change the rate at which they choose to ride the bus. Even if every current person's mind has been completely made up based on past experience, there are…

I also live in Chicago and wouldn’t mind walking extra to another stop, but Chicago also has a massive traffic problem, particularly post pandemic. During rush hour, the bus is stop and go already. I’m really curious how this would pan out here, but it can’t be the only solution.

I think the only way to solve this is to invest much more into making buses nicer & increasing the numbers, and then instituting bus-only lanes on major arterial roads so that taking the bus becomes faster than fighting traffic.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#443
post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not feasible to have a bus stop right in front of every house. And this is why point-to-point transportation is almost always faster and more convenient, if you can afford to use it. (That load-bearing "if" is important, though.)

> And this is why point-to-point transportation is almost always faster and more convenient Point-to-point transportation is faster and more convenient because: 1. we don't have bus lanes so buses are forced to sit in the same traffic as cars and 2. buses are often underfunded so have slow/infrequent service. Point to point transportation is often slower and less convenient if buses and public transit is done right.…

> Point to point transportation is often slower and less convenient if buses and public transit is done right.

Only if you're also intentionally making point-to-point worse.

Note that I'm not comparing to "get in your own car and drive", which has the disadvantage of having to park. I'm comparing the ideal taxi-shaped thing to the ideal bus-and-tram-and-train-shaped thing.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not feasible to have a bus stop right in front of every house. And this is why point-to-point transportation is almost always faster and more convenient, if you can afford to use it. (That load-bearing "if" is important, though.)

Self driving cars for hire (Waymo, Tesla, others) can be that point-to-point system that is affordable. We will just have to build tunnels to deal with the increase in traffic. Hopefully the Boring Company or someone else can get tunneling costs way down.

I generally agree that self-driving cars are going to take this niche, but not with tunnels. Tunnels add the same dedicated infrastructure problems as mass public transit.

I'd suspect most car trips today are 1 or 2 passengers with the back seat and trunk empty; we'll eventually see new form factors of on-demand vehicle that trim off unneeded space. If you need to get from A to B alone, no cargo to speak of, you order a ride that covers that class and it's small. If you're taking a shuttle from the airport with your whole family and luggage, you order a ride with those specs.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In many places, yes, US pedestrian infrastructure is worse. In other ways - wheelchair accessibility for example - the US is miles better than many European cities.

Wheelchair users are a subset of pedestrians. If your pedestrian infra is shit, your wheelchain infra can't be much better. (Sure, only if you count whatever remains of pedestrians infra, it might look acceptable).

A vast majority of wheelchair users in the US are car users.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#446
One of the problems in the US is that buses stop often and have really shitty doors. Often only 2 doors. And even worse, sometimes everybody needs to buy a ticket from the driver.

The buses are also smaller, with many fewer bendy-bus. So if you go to fewer stops, you could overwhelm individual buses.

So if you want shorter distance between stop you need to optimize the ingress/egress with lots of doors. And you need a fast accelerating bus, like an electric or preferably trolley bus. But the US does the exact opposite, short stops with bad buses.

But yeah, the US makes so many mistakes with buses, its actually crazy. Of course, many other make many of the same mistakes but usually only a few not all of them.

Canada is also making many of the US mistakes, but at least in large cities their buses see far more use then in comparable US cities. So they are doing better while still having some feeling North American.

So I agree, some amount of stop reduction does make sense in the US. And its attractive because its basically a 'zero cost' solution. But by itself its only a drop in the bucket.

The real problem is car priority in all aspects of design and its total primacy in the way of thinking.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#447

I believe the central thesis of this article is unsupported, and other assertions are false. One, the article asserts that too many stops is the main cause of low ridership in the US. I didn’t even see a correlation (which would still not prove one causes the other) between number of stops and ridership. This is the central thesis of the article. Two, removing stops will likely not make the remaining stops nicer. Cit…

> Two, removing stops will likely not make the remaining stops nicer.

Not buy itself, but as a strategy for the operator to focus on fewer high quality stops, over time that will have an effect.

> So while the number of bus stops might matter at the margins

You are ignoring that some of the things you complain about would be helped by fewer stops.

> we’re not talking about a system where marginal improvements will matter.

Its crazy to say marginal will not matter. Then nothing will ever matter. There is no revolutionary solution anywhere in sight. You need to improve on the margin with the budget you have.

> you need to make the bus an attractive option for more people.

... by marginally improving every aspect as much as you can.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#448
post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it goes without saying, but the reason you don’t mind the bus in Europe is not because you are European but because the European buses are nicer. The things you say about noise and pollution are also true in the US, and American drivers are acutely aware of them. But the alternative is not a European bus, so people drive.

But also too, packed with junkies who, at best, behave erratically and at worse assault randoms. Taking the bus around sf makes it immediately clear why (not all, but most) people who have options choose them.

People always claim this and then talk about their car as a perfect save heaven. When in reality road rage incidents are also incredibly common. People taking out their guns or starting fights. And of course generally accidents kill a lot of people.

That said, if you only look at driving in a city like SF, this is likely less of an issue.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#449
Hmm. Interesting thought but maybe not everyone without a car needs a bus? My favorite way to get around SF is an EUC. On the side walk, I'm a pedestrian, moving at 2 miles per hour. On the road I'm a car, moving at 30-40 miles per hour. In the coffee shop, I'm a guy with luggage. CALTRAIN is great for moving me and the EUC between San Francisco and Palo Alto. Truck takes me and the EUC to the coast for a swim.

Re: Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

#450
post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But lots of people _do_ already ride buses! There are already current riders, and potential riders who are making these marginal decisions. Occasional riders will decide between transport modes based on the trip - making marginal improvements (or regressions) would change the rate at which they choose to ride the bus. Even if every current person's mind has been completely made up based on past experience, there are…

> I'm personally able to walk a block or two further “A block or 2” each way at the start and destination is a significant difference (4-8 blocks) for most elderly people. Busses fill two different roles, as primary means of transportation and arguably more importantly as a backup means of transportation. They can serve a vital role for cities without the kind of investment it would take to make most typical HN reade…

I live in Japan, where most people are old, and I can confidently say you’re wrong
Post reply on HN