U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-02-2013, 07:23 PM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,991 posts, read 42,026,386 times
Reputation: 14811

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by munchitup View Post
I've heard the Blue Line at rush hour is worse than both of those. It's an LRT line that nearly gets heavy rail ridership. It seems that the Expo Line will be a crush like that too once it goes to Santa Monica.

I usually get seats on the Local buses (2, 217, 212, 4 are my main routes), but that is rarely the case on the Red Line. I've always gotten a seat on the Gold Line and Expo Line.
That's not a crush. Or not only is your train so crowded there's no seat, it could be so crowded there's no room to stand.

When the Train Is Too Crowded to Board - NYTimes.com

Happened to me once or twice on a bus here, due to either an unusual event or the previous bus missed its schedule.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-02-2013, 07:35 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
10,087 posts, read 13,124,386 times
Reputation: 3982
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
That's not a crush. Or not only is your train so crowded there's no seat, it could be so crowded there's no room to stand.

When the Train Is Too Crowded to Board - NYTimes.com

Happened to me once or twice on a bus here, due to either an unusual event or the previous bus missed its schedule.
Yeah that used to happen to me in Boston during Red Sox games. Sucks to be in a 90 degree Park Street station and have that happen multiple times in a row.

I wasn't trying to imply the video showed it at "crush" level (or did you mean not being able to get a seat? I definitely don't consider that a "crush" of people lol). Honestly in LA the only place I have experienced it being so busy people couldn't board was on the Orange Line BRT. I've read about it happening on the Wilshire bus line too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 07:49 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,269,372 times
Reputation: 2924
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I don't see the difference except that the light rail isn't as well used. The LA bus passengers look normal, not hoodlum-like.
The BRT buses used on the LA Orange Line are 60 feet long with a seating capacity of 57 passengers. The light rail used on the LA metro are 75 foot long with seating for 79 passengers. And that's just one rail car in a 3 car train. So yes there is a big difference in seating capacity. Since they are longer the light rail cars also give you much more legroom. They are also a lot wider than the BRT buses which gives you more elbow room, so you don't feel like a sardine. The photo shows just one car in a 3 car train, so to say that it isn't being well used is not correct. That 3 car train is carrying well over 200 passengers.



Quote:
Originally Posted by nei View Post
I don't see the difference except that the light rail isn't as well used. The LA bus passengers look normal, not hoodlum-like.
The guy in the hoodie and dark glasses is dressed like a hoodlum (whether he is or not is another story - but he is dressed like one). And you can't see who is sitting in the back of the bus which is usually where the hoodlum types prefer to sit.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Laurentia
5,593 posts, read 6,384,610 times
Reputation: 2388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
After Rosa Parks white people dumped public transit to ride in safe secure private pods where they don't have to sit next to dark people, poor people or other undesirables..
So what if they don't? It occurs to me that you poor blacks are better off without such hostile people around you . I can only speak for myself, but I've seen plenty of white people that I wouldn't want to sit next to, so it's not a problem confined to blacks by any stretch of the imagination. In my time I've encountered blacks who were well-groomed, not smelly, and didn't bother me; I'd rather sit with a black man who fits that description than a white man who doesn't, and vice versa.

Having privacy and the ability to control your own personal space is a positive characteristic to have in a form of transportation, and it's a benefit that people of all races can enjoy, and indeed are enjoying now. The modes of public transportation do offer positive characteristics of their own, but using white guilt to induce people to use forms of transit they consider inferior strikes me as very lowdown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 08:04 PM
 
Location: Soldotna
2,268 posts, read 1,807,399 times
Reputation: 1067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maine7090 View Post
After Rosa Parks white people dumped public transit to ride in safe secure private pods where they don't have to sit next to dark people, poor people or other undesirables.. Even today its a huge factor, people just don't talk it.
I ride the bus because I don't want to sit next to smelly people, sick people and junkies.

Shrug...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-02-2013, 09:13 PM
 
9,520 posts, read 14,854,178 times
Reputation: 9769
It ain't dark people or poor people. It's smelly people, hostile people, and crazy people, all of whom can be found (in a rainbow of colors) on many municipal buses.

Packing people like sardines doesn't help on any mode of mass transportation, and if Cisco Kid thinks it doesn't happen on rail, there are any number of trains which would demonstrate otherwise. But standing on heavy rail is generally less unpleasant than standing on the bus because it's less bumpy; not sure about light rail, I've rarely ridden it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 12:14 AM
 
Location: Monmouth County, NJ & Staten Island, NY
407 posts, read 408,066 times
Reputation: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandviewGloria View Post
"...know better than to..." is also a good way to phrase it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWQor-f-puw
Pretty much sums up why I avoid a huge percentage of the mass transit in my area...especially local buses like this, and light rail. I find that the express buses from my neighborhood to downtown have virtually none of these problems (also helps that a one way fare is double that of subway/local bus lol) and I don't even find much of these issues riding the subway in Manhattan or other boroughs, since you have 8-10 big railcars to pick from.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
When crowds of people are packed together like sardines they can start to behave like animals. And why something like that isn't very likely to happen on light rail.
Are you kidding me? Nice cherry-picked photos by the way, question: do you or have you ever ridden a light rail system, let alone on a daily basis for any period of time?

The HBLR used to get crush loaded just like a bus all of the time, and at each end of the car would have a step-up portion similar to most low floor transit buses which could (and usually did) create the same "packed in" situation with what happened on the bus above. I've also experienced the same situation in a variety of other rail transit like the NYC subway, LIRR, Metro North, PATH and NJ Transit rail.


Copyright nycsubway.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 06:18 AM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,269,372 times
Reputation: 2924
I wasn't talking about the NYC subway, or the NJ rail. I was talking about the LA light rail because that's what I'm familiar with. Try to keep up. Subways are not light rail they are heavy rail.

I didn't say light rail doesn't get crowded. I said it is less likely to. Light rail can and does get crowded, but not nearly much or as frequently, or as badly crowded as buses do. Or fills up as quickly. It's not rocket science. When your carrying capacity is several times greater you don't get crowded nearly as often. One train operated by one driver can do the job of 10 buses and 10 drivers. I have never seen a light rail system as badly overcrowded as that bus in the video. But what I do know is that severe overcrowding is very common on buses in dense metropolitan areas. That's because buses are a low-capacity solution and cannot handle a very high demand. Buses make sense in the suburbs or on less busier routes but to use them in extremely dense places as your primary or only mode of transit, is not very smart. Penny-wise but pound foolish.

And as badly as you believe the NY subway to be crowded now, how much worse do you think it would be if they closed up the whole subway system and replaced it with bus service? Would you like that better, since your such a big fan of buses? Whatever crowding there is now would be a hundred times worse if it were replaced with bus service.

That NYC subways and buses are often overcrowded is an argument in favor of adding light rail on the surface. Because obviously the severely overcrowded buses are failing to do the job. They are not doing a great job of easing the burden on the subways. Light rail would do a better job of that. It doesn't make sense to use low-capacity transit in high-density and high-demand areas. Use the right tool for the job. Don't expect that a bunch of cramped buses and a rusting, rat-infested 100 year old subway system is enough to do the job. NYC could use modern light rail, imo. Because they seem to be stuck in the 19th century and what they have right now is a joke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 07:15 AM
 
Location: Bronx, New York
2,141 posts, read 2,572,013 times
Reputation: 3182
This is a joke and would NEVER happen in NYC. You can walk and beat the pace of some of the cross-town buses in Manhattan and some of the busier parts of the outer-boroughs. Adding hundreds of thousands of people to the bus system in NYC would create havoc...nothing would move.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
I wasn't talking about the NYC subway, or the NJ rail. I was talking about the LA light rail because that's what I'm familiar with. Try to keep up. Subways are not light rail they are heavy rail.

I didn't say light rail doesn't get crowded. I said it is less likely to. Light rail can and does get crowded, but not nearly much or as frequently, or as badly crowded as buses do. Or fills up as quickly. It's not rocket science. When your carrying capacity is several times greater you don't get crowded nearly as often. One train operated by one driver can do the job of 10 buses and 10 drivers. I have never seen a light rail system as badly overcrowded as that bus in the video. But what I do know is that severe overcrowding is very common on buses in dense metropolitan areas. That's because buses are a low-capacity solution and cannot handle a very high demand. Buses make sense in the suburbs or on less busier routes but to use them in extremely dense places as your primary or only mode of transit, is not very smart. Penny-wise but pound foolish.

And as badly as you believe the NY subway to be crowded now, how much worse do you think it would be if they closed up the whole subway system and replaced it with bus service? Would you like that better, since your such a big fan of buses? Whatever crowding there is now would be a hundred times worse if it were replaced with bus service.

That NYC subways and buses are often overcrowded is an argument in favor of adding light rail on the surface. Because obviously the severely overcrowded buses are failing to do the job. They are not doing a great job of easing the burden on the subways. Light rail would do a better job of that. It doesn't make sense to use low-capacity transit in high-density and high-demand areas. Use the right tool for the job. Don't expect that a bunch of cramped buses and a rusting, rat-infested 100 year old subway system is enough to do the job. NYC could use modern light rail, imo. Because they seem to be stuck in the 19th century and what they have right now is a joke.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-03-2013, 07:22 AM
nei nei won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Thirteenth Edition (Jan-Feb 2015). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Long Island / NYC
45,991 posts, read 42,026,386 times
Reputation: 14811
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
I didn't say light rail doesn't get crowded. I said it is less likely to. Light rail can and does get crowded, but not nearly much or as frequently, or as badly crowded as buses do. Or fills up as quickly. It's not rocket science. When your carrying capacity is several times greater you don't get crowded nearly as often. One train operated by one driver can do the job of 10 buses and 10 drivers. I have never seen a light rail system as badly overcrowded as that bus in the video. But what I do know is that severe overcrowding is very common on buses in dense metropolitan areas. That's because buses are a low-capacity solution and cannot handle a very high demand. Buses make sense in the suburbs or on less busier routes but to use them in extremely dense places as your primary or only mode of transit, is not very smart. Penny-wise but pound foolish.
Unless your passenger volume is several times greater than a bus. You can always increase the frequency if capacity is a problem on both systems. The other issue is that bus overcrowding is often on a small portion of the route at short periods of the day.


Quote:
That NYC subways and buses are often overcrowded is an argument in favor of adding light rail on the surface. Because obviously the severely overcrowded buses are failing to do the job. They are not doing a great job of easing the burden on the subways. Light rail would do a better job of that. It doesn't make sense to use low-capacity transit in high-density and high-demand areas. Use the right tool for the job. Don't expect that a bunch of cramped buses and a rusting, rat-infested 100 year old subway system is enough to do the job. NYC could use modern light rail, imo. Because they seem to be stuck in the 19th century and what they have right now is a joke.
I'm not sure, but I think the NYC bus system doesn't have as extreme crowding problems as the subway, as the highest volume routes are usually subways (with a couple of exceptions). The buses aren't meant to ease the burden of the subway, they're meant for spots the subway doesn't cover or for some short trips.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top