Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Bus stop balancing is fast, cheap, and effective

worksinprogress.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 656 posts

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

#511

Post by gpvos »

cyberax wrote: post #465
sensanaty wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What people really misunderstand in these discussions is that no one is talking about completely killing off driving as an option, and no one says that public transportation works in literally 100% of circumstances. We just want there to be viable public transportation options for situations where it makes sense. This even makes it easier for the people who do have to drive, like you, as there will be less congestion…

> What people really misunderstand in these discussions is that no one is talking about completely killing off driving as an option I find this statement utterly hypocritical. Sure, we're not killing off driving. We are just choking off the roads with bike lanes, forcing extra-high density ("just build more"), removing parking, forcing the drivers to pay for transit that they don't use, and just to pay in general. Bu…

If you actually had to pay a proper price for your parking space, which is currently heavily subsidized, you would suddenly consider taking public transit instead, even if that were priced at actual cost.

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

#513

Post by connorboyle »

janalsncm wrote: post #127
stetrain wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are two groups of people that you can optimize for. One is the group of people who already rides the bus. In most US cities this is a small group of people who have no real alternative. The other is the group of people who might ride the bus if it were convenient. Not just in terms of accessibility to a stop, but also accounting for the journey time. If someone tries riding the bus and finds that a 20 minute dr…

In my experience, the problem was long wait times between buses and unreliable pickup times. That meant you realistically had to add buffer at each end of your trip: in case the bus was early and in case the bus was late. Not only was that more than 20% of my trip time, it was also mental overhead of worrying whether you already missed the bus. The bus might come 2x per hour. Maybe 2:18 and 2:48. But it might come at…

A bus route that is made twice to be twice as fast (whether through stop consolidation or some other means) will mechanically be twice as frequent, given the same number of service-hours. Slow buses are either more expensive to run, or come less frequently.

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

#514

Post by BoredomIsFun »

I live a large post-Soviet cities, and the biggest difference between US and our system is that we do not need to press the button here when we want to leave. Yes stops are arguably sparser, but the buses are guaranteed to stop at every stop. A small detail that nonetheless removes anxiety of missing your destination. Get in, pay, get out.

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

#515

Post by jwr »

epolanski wrote: post #128
janalsncm wrote: post #118

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…

As an European I don't mind buses at all. I neither feel unsafe nor I find them dirty. A single bus carries on average 20 times the people cars occupying the same space would (as you rarely get more than 1 person per car in peak hours). I'd rather take buses than the car in any city. Cars make cities dangerous, noisy, polluted, congestions make people nervous behind the wheel, fights are far from uncommon. Finding pa…

The reason why US bus ridership is so low is because buses are terrible. They are dirty, loud, inconvenient to get onto, often badly designed inside (too many seats, too little space), with unsavory individuals making you feel unsafe. In summer they aren't air conditioned, they seem to be refrigerated, you literally need a coat to stay warm. The fact that they are also slow is just icing on the cake.

In addition to that, the US has a stigma: "only poor people ride buses".

Get on a bus in Europe to see the difference.

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

#516

Post by rbanffy »

iamcalledrob wrote: post #359
Retric wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 think this is a US-centric perspective. In the US, buses (and public transport in general), are thought of as social programmes. Anyone can use them, but they are really for people who can't drive or are too poor to own a car. The rider makeup then looks like that. The elderly and the poor, sadly. Services run at a huge loss and are dependent on massive and unpopular government subsidies. Quality of service is bad.…

> In my opinion, operating transport as transportation programme, not a social programme, is how you get more adoption in the long term

Yesterday I came across a couple articles that encapsulate this thought.

https://jacobin.com/2026/02/zohran-mamdani-efficiency-nyc-bu...

And

https://coreyrobin.com/2025/11/15/excellence-over-mediocrity...

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

#517

Post by panick21_ »

retired wrote: post #462
panick21_ wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many more households could afford it then want to afford it. Its just a huge waste of money. Cars are assets that massively deprecate in value and are utilized a extreme minimum of time. They are a horrible investment of large amounts of money. In the rare cases where you need a second car, you can rent one extremely easily. > Even if you are poor in the US cars are remarkably accessible. You can finance a used car w…

I calculated this back when I commuted daily. I was spending €700 a month on my car. Public transport would have been only €450 a month. Still went by car. Car was 35 minutes door to door in a climate controlled environment with a good seat and good stereo system. Public transport was two hours, multiple legs with various trains and busses, various payment systems, problems with missing connections, waiting outside i…

Are you taking into account depreciation of the car and interest? Are you taking into account the cost of your parking spot?

Also, you example is just that. It will depend on many things. In places that are properly designed often the difference is nowhere near as large and the difference in money is bigger.

Also, in places where there is lots of public transport, when you get a universal ticket, you can also use it for free for everything other then commuting. Its completely normal to do all your other activities by public transport as well. When I go out and I want to have a drink, a car is not an option (unless people are just pieces of garbage, witch the US system makes almost inevitable).

> having a peaceful commute

Except of course that all of US popular media is full of people who have horrible long commutes suffering from stress and road rage.

Sitting in a train is more peaceful then driving by a lot. I can literally read a book and drink coffee or as I often do simply have a nap.

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

#518

Post by Someone »

mjevans wrote: post #491
iamcalledrob wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Incidentally, London has a "Freedom Pass" (free transport for retirees), which is funded in the way you describe. Instead of TfL being forced to take the loss, they are reimbursed by local government cost of the transport. As an aside, I also take some issue with this pass being completely free to use. In my experience, people end up using it to go a single stop just because it's free, so why not -- which slows bus s…

Taking such a fee also has transaction costs, in the time if nothing else. To liken this back to the old days - the difference in time between flashing a valid transfer slip (of paper) and having to drop change into the automated till.

Nowadays, both are “scan your card at entry and exit”, aren’t they?

Elderly will have to do that, too, because a) I expect they still want to track usage, and b) allowing some passengers to hop on a bus without checking in makes it too easy for those ineligible to do that (e.g. elderly who do not live in London) to try and do that, too.

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

#519

Post by xxs »

fn-mote wrote: post #213
bogedy wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

always seemed obvious to me that the reason for the disparity is that european buses are a way to get around dense cities and US buses are a welfare program for residents of sparser cities who can't afford cars. the bus lines don't actually go anywhere people care about, they're their just to provide the bare minimum ability to go somewhere. the top comment is right and this article is a good exmaple of what transit…

This argument doesn’t mesh with what I experience in my daily life. Busses go places I care about: two blocks from my work, and to the airport. My US city is dense. Not like Europe, but unless the argument is that major metropolitan areas in the US are not dense enough (LA?), I don’t buy it. Bus transit has problems, but I don’t think it’s as simple as the parent is asserting.

Virtually US cities are not dense compared to Europe. The large cities in Asia are on its own level, though. US is at the bottom when it comes to population density. For instance LA has half the density of Romania's capital Bucharest.

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

#520

Post by gadders »

iamcalledrob wrote: post #367
x0x0 wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Honestly, there aren't that many crazy people on the SF Muni/busses. The detractor for taking these services is speed and frequency. Even factoring in parking, traffic, and bus lanes, it's much faster to drive within SF than take the bus. Stopping every 2 blocks and missing every other green light kills throughput. My local bus stop to connect to BART supposedly had service every 20 mins, but often a bus would be out…

What is the correct number of crazy people you think you should meet on the bus?
Post reply on HN