Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
 [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 10-21-2013, 09:53 AM
 
814 posts, read 1,150,307 times
Reputation: 981

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Like_Spam View Post
PAT was doing that on a few routes, not so terribly long ago. They paired the Bellevue/West View trips with the Highland Park route- for a West View to Aspinwall route.

PAT gave up on the idea, but maybe it will come back.
They gave up on it because it's a terrible idea. As Moby Hick pointed out, it's the long, meandering routes that kill PAT's efficiency. Making the routes even longer and more meandering is not moving in the right direction.

What really should happen is the 61C should only run from McKeesport to Sq Hill, coupled with every-5-minute-or-less peak service from Sq Hill to Downtown.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-21-2013, 10:02 AM
 
Location: Pittsburgh
6,782 posts, read 9,594,008 times
Reputation: 10246
Quote:
Originally Posted by that412 View Post
What really should happen is the 61C should only run from McKeesport to Sq Hill, coupled with every-5-minute-or-less peak service from Sq Hill to Downtown.
They've moved a bit in that directly lately. There is now a 61D variant at evening rush hour that runs from Oakland to Greenfield and no further. It does reduce the waiting times and crowds by a fair bit. I think that if they tried to completely separate the portion of the 61C that served McKeesport from the rest of the route in the current funding environment, people would assume this was a prelude to cutting service to poorer areas. I think people might be right about that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2013, 10:13 AM
 
814 posts, read 1,150,307 times
Reputation: 981
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moby Hick View Post
I think that if they tried to completely separate the portion of the 61C that served McKeesport from the rest of the route in the current funding environment, people would assume this was a prelude to cutting service to poorer areas. I think people might be right about that.
In an ideal world, pretty much all lengthy suburban service would be truncated at certain transfer points, regardless of whether those routes serve rich suburbs or poor suburbs. Core service would be stacked to the point where transferring would be such a breeze, people wouldn't think twice about having to do it. Wishful thinking, most likely.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-21-2013, 10:42 AM
 
5,802 posts, read 9,894,970 times
Reputation: 3051
McKeesport should be a Transit Hub in its own right.....with a Trunk line that runs between Mckeesport and Duquesne via Rankin Bridge to the Busway for express service to Downtown and people going to Oakland can transfer at Swissvale to the P3..

There should still be a 61C that runs between Kennywood and Downtown...people wanting local service i.e Homestead, Greenfield, Sq Hill can transfer from the Mckeesport express to the 61C at Kennywood. With the 61C shortened, it and the 61D should have each 10 min headways during the rush hour, meaning where the 61C and D are the same route service would be every 5 mins.

Service from Forbes & Murray where you have 61ABCD service headways at a combined should never be more than 2.5 mins, giving each branch 10min service headways.
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:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

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 > U.S. Forums > Pennsylvania > Pittsburgh
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top