6 ms·

>Planners can set minimum and maximum amounts of time to be spent at each stop, and buses might even be told to skip certain stops during crowded runs >Passeng

>Planners can set minimum and maximum amounts of time to be spent at each stop, and buses might even be told to skip certain stops during crowded runs >Passengers might be encouraged to wait for a following bus, with the inducement that it’s less crowded. >Northern Arizona University improved its service by abandoning the idea of a schedule altogether and delaying buses at certain stops in order to maintain even spacing. FYI the real solution is bus lanes so busses don't get stuck in traffic. But for that, you need to make space that isn't for cars. So you won't get it in Arizona.

manbitesdog 1y ago
In Spain most city roads with 2+ lanes per direction have a dedicated bus lane, yet you still get bus bunching and spacing adjustments anyways. - Imagine bus A is followed by bus B, it's 5PM and people are leaving work simultaneously - Bus A spends a lot of time on each stop picking passengers up - When bus B arrives, fewer people are waiting and it tends to take less time - Eventually, bus B catches up to bus A so A must skip stops to maintain proper spacing As for why this doesn't annoy people: if both buses are already close together, any ETA changes from spacing adjustments are minimal, and bus A will show no destination on the front display, so no false expectations are created.
- kevindamm 1y ago
  except that bus A must often go to stops that it would skip, if any of the passengers want to get off there.
- sebstefan 1y ago
  If there's bus lanes the bunching happens much more slowly. You fix it by giving slightly more time than needed to the busses for their routes on the schedule, say, 20 seconds per stop. That way if they lost some time on some stops, they fetch it back later. With the inconvenience that all the routes take longer
  - whycome 1y ago
    Could you standardize the dwell time? Hit a max and then maintain regularity
derdi 1y ago
Bunching also happens on things like subway lines that have no other traffic. Many passengers are irrational about forcing their way onto already overcrowded trains.
- actionfromafar 1y ago
  It's a coordination problem - taken in isolation, it's not irrational. If only you refrain from doing it, and 37 other people do, you will still have to wait for the next train, and the train in front of you will be almost as late anyways.
  - derdi 1y ago
    The wait for the next train is one factor, the overcrowding is another one. I'm usually not in such a hurry that a minute's wait would make a difference. But the next train is very likely to be much less crowded and much more comfortable to ride on. From my point of view the decision is clear, in isolation, just from my own selfish point of view. And I think many others are making a choice that makes them unhappy. (Train systems differ, the one where I live has sufficient capacity that you rarely get two overcrowded ones back to back. I know there are places where this does not apply.)
    - sokoloff 1y ago
      > a minute's wait Is your subway system running trains every 1-2 minutes (30-60 trains per hour)? Mine has trains at 5-8 minute spacing at peak times and 8-12 minutes off-peak.
      - derdi 1y ago
        No, it's running at 3-5 minutes at peak times. But bunching significantly shortens the interval between the delayed, overcrowded train and the empty one right behind it.
- summa_tech 1y ago
  It's not as irrational as all that. Subway system here has an amazing propensity to send random trains on express tracks, especially during peak traffic. I understand that this is done to alleviate congestion, but the net effect is that when you see a train going somewhere you want, you _seize the opportunity_.
closewith 1y ago
Bus lanes exasperate this problem by fast tracking buses to common choke points. It's one of the very few disadvantages of bus lanes.
- AStonesThrow 1y ago
  [dead]
- Zambyte 1y ago
  What causes the choke points?
  - closeparen 1y ago
    Passengers getting on and off, intersections, other buses.
    - Zambyte 1y ago
      Busses stopping or slowing down at intersections is a bug that should be fixed. Other busses is a symptom of the problem, not the cause. Passengers getting on and off can be a cause, but that is probably a symptom of boarding accessibility issues.
      - closewith 1y ago
        Yes, as long as buses don't travel in public or pick up passengers, they'll be extremely efficient.
        Zambyte 1y ago
        What?
slyall 1y ago
Another element is fast fare payment. The faster you can load passengers the lower the penalty for every stop the better This involves smart cards and fast electronic payment methods. Also removing or discouraging cash payments. It also might involve designing buses and stops to get people on/off buses faster
- SoftTalker 1y ago
  I miss tokens. CTA used to use them. Dropping a token in the fare box as you got on the bus was faster than any app or smart card.
cyberax 1y ago
> FYI the real solution is bus lanes so busses don't get stuck in traffic The real solution is to stop using transit to move human misery from one place to another. Get everyone an individual car (a self-driving at this point EV, of course) and redesign cities to be human-oriented, not transit-focused. There is NO mathematical way to make buses robust. They will always be some combination of too slow, too expensive, or too inconvenient for most people. Buses have low average speed because they need to stop often. And you can't make bus stops more infrequent, because people won't be able to walk from their homes fast enough. And doing complicated systems with local/express buses just wastes time during transit. Buses can't be frequent, because the average daily load is already just around 15 people per bus. And this is with longer off-peak intervals. Etc.
- occz 1y ago
  None of the claims in this comment are grounded in reality.
  - cyberax 1y ago
    On the contrary. I have researched every statement behind them, and ran simulations to prove them. And I was not actually the first person to do that, what I said is well known. Urbanists just prefer not to talk about it, it complicates the propaganda. After all, urbanism is supposed to have no downsides. It's like violence: if it's not helping, you're not doing enough of it.
    - albumen 1y ago
      Some evidence to support your statements would be very helpful.
- brazzy 1y ago
  > Get everyone an individual car (a self-driving at this point EV, of course) and redesign cities to be human-oriented, not transit-focused. These two things are in direct, violent contradiction. Mass transit is what allows human-oriented city design. Individual traffic requires car-centric, human-hostile design.
throwaway290 1y ago
> FYI the real solution is bus lanes The article literally shows that the problem is crowds of people. After work you have 40 people queuing for bus b at every stop so bus c catches up. traffic congestion would mostly affect both buses.
- rob74 1y ago
  The article shows no such thing. The crowds of people are not the root cause most of the time - if the buses would come at regular intervals, statistically they would all have the same delay because of passengers. But if a bus is already delayed ("if Bus B is delayed by traffic congestion, it incurs a penalty"), there will be more people waiting, which will slow boarding, which leads to more delays, which leads to even more people waiting at the next station etc. But of course, the cause for the initial delay is not always traffic congestion, it can also be a bus breaking down, a large group (e.g. a school class) boarding the bus etc. So dedicated bus lanes (and other measures such as buses/trams being able to influence traffic lights) can't completely eliminate bunching.
  - throwaway290 1y ago
    Maybe you haven't seen a big crowd. During the day there can be such crowds going to work after 7am that bus must wait for ages then complete cutoff at 9am then some bumps around lunch then another craze at 4-6pm and this even without irregular local events like as you say groups of students Bus lanes are good but it's driven by crowd sizes and a lot of combatting bunching can be done without adding bus lanes
    - Muromec 1y ago
      Where I live the interval at around 7 am is 10 minute, which drops to 15 after 9 am or something and is 20 at the most chill times. Haven't ever seen an empty bus or really overcrowded one either.
      - throwaway290 1y ago

manbitesdog 1y ago

In Spain most city roads with 2+ lanes per direction have a dedicated bus lane, yet you still get bus bunching and spacing adjustments anyways. - Imagine bus A is followed by bus B, it's 5PM and people are leaving work simultaneously - Bus A spends a lot of time on each stop picking passengers up - When bus B arrives, fewer people are waiting and it tends to take less time - Eventually, bus B catches up to bus A so A must skip stops to maintain proper spacing As for why this doesn't annoy people: if both buses are already close together, any ETA changes from spacing adjustments are minimal, and bus A will show no destination on the front display, so no false expectations are created.

kevindamm 1y ago
except that bus A must often go to stops that it would skip, if any of the passengers want to get off there.
sebstefan 1y ago
If there's bus lanes the bunching happens much more slowly. You fix it by giving slightly more time than needed to the busses for their routes on the schedule, say, 20 seconds per stop. That way if they lost some time on some stops, they fetch it back later. With the inconvenience that all the routes take longer
- whycome 1y ago
  Could you standardize the dwell time? Hit a max and then maintain regularity

derdi 1y ago

Bunching also happens on things like subway lines that have no other traffic. Many passengers are irrational about forcing their way onto already overcrowded trains.

actionfromafar 1y ago
It's a coordination problem - taken in isolation, it's not irrational. If only you refrain from doing it, and 37 other people do, you will still have to wait for the next train, and the train in front of you will be almost as late anyways.
- derdi 1y ago
  The wait for the next train is one factor, the overcrowding is another one. I'm usually not in such a hurry that a minute's wait would make a difference. But the next train is very likely to be much less crowded and much more comfortable to ride on. From my point of view the decision is clear, in isolation, just from my own selfish point of view. And I think many others are making a choice that makes them unhappy. (Train systems differ, the one where I live has sufficient capacity that you rarely get two overcrowded ones back to back. I know there are places where this does not apply.)
  - sokoloff 1y ago
    > a minute's wait Is your subway system running trains every 1-2 minutes (30-60 trains per hour)? Mine has trains at 5-8 minute spacing at peak times and 8-12 minutes off-peak.
    - derdi 1y ago
      No, it's running at 3-5 minutes at peak times. But bunching significantly shortens the interval between the delayed, overcrowded train and the empty one right behind it.
summa_tech 1y ago
It's not as irrational as all that. Subway system here has an amazing propensity to send random trains on express tracks, especially during peak traffic. I understand that this is done to alleviate congestion, but the net effect is that when you see a train going somewhere you want, you _seize the opportunity_.

closewith 1y ago

Bus lanes exasperate this problem by fast tracking buses to common choke points. It's one of the very few disadvantages of bus lanes.

AStonesThrow 1y ago
[dead]
Zambyte 1y ago
What causes the choke points?
- closeparen 1y ago
  Passengers getting on and off, intersections, other buses.
  - Zambyte 1y ago
    Busses stopping or slowing down at intersections is a bug that should be fixed. Other busses is a symptom of the problem, not the cause. Passengers getting on and off can be a cause, but that is probably a symptom of boarding accessibility issues.
    - closewith 1y ago
      Yes, as long as buses don't travel in public or pick up passengers, they'll be extremely efficient.
      - Zambyte 1y ago
        What?

slyall 1y ago

Another element is fast fare payment. The faster you can load passengers the lower the penalty for every stop the better This involves smart cards and fast electronic payment methods. Also removing or discouraging cash payments. It also might involve designing buses and stops to get people on/off buses faster

SoftTalker 1y ago
I miss tokens. CTA used to use them. Dropping a token in the fare box as you got on the bus was faster than any app or smart card.

cyberax 1y ago

> FYI the real solution is bus lanes so busses don't get stuck in traffic The real solution is to stop using transit to move human misery from one place to another. Get everyone an individual car (a self-driving at this point EV, of course) and redesign cities to be human-oriented, not transit-focused. There is NO mathematical way to make buses robust. They will always be some combination of too slow, too expensive, or too inconvenient for most people. Buses have low average speed because they need to stop often. And you can't make bus stops more infrequent, because people won't be able to walk from their homes fast enough. And doing complicated systems with local/express buses just wastes time during transit. Buses can't be frequent, because the average daily load is already just around 15 people per bus. And this is with longer off-peak intervals. Etc.

occz 1y ago
None of the claims in this comment are grounded in reality.
- cyberax 1y ago
  On the contrary. I have researched every statement behind them, and ran simulations to prove them. And I was not actually the first person to do that, what I said is well known. Urbanists just prefer not to talk about it, it complicates the propaganda. After all, urbanism is supposed to have no downsides. It's like violence: if it's not helping, you're not doing enough of it.
  - albumen 1y ago
    Some evidence to support your statements would be very helpful.
brazzy 1y ago
> Get everyone an individual car (a self-driving at this point EV, of course) and redesign cities to be human-oriented, not transit-focused. These two things are in direct, violent contradiction. Mass transit is what allows human-oriented city design. Individual traffic requires car-centric, human-hostile design.

throwaway290 1y ago

> FYI the real solution is bus lanes The article literally shows that the problem is crowds of people. After work you have 40 people queuing for bus b at every stop so bus c catches up. traffic congestion would mostly affect both buses.

rob74 1y ago
The article shows no such thing. The crowds of people are not the root cause most of the time - if the buses would come at regular intervals, statistically they would all have the same delay because of passengers. But if a bus is already delayed ("if Bus B is delayed by traffic congestion, it incurs a penalty"), there will be more people waiting, which will slow boarding, which leads to more delays, which leads to even more people waiting at the next station etc. But of course, the cause for the initial delay is not always traffic congestion, it can also be a bus breaking down, a large group (e.g. a school class) boarding the bus etc. So dedicated bus lanes (and other measures such as buses/trams being able to influence traffic lights) can't completely eliminate bunching.
- throwaway290 1y ago
  Maybe you haven't seen a big crowd. During the day there can be such crowds going to work after 7am that bus must wait for ages then complete cutoff at 9am then some bumps around lunch then another craze at 4-6pm and this even without irregular local events like as you say groups of students Bus lanes are good but it's driven by crowd sizes and a lot of combatting bunching can be done without adding bus lanes
  - Muromec 1y ago
    Where I live the interval at around 7 am is 10 minute, which drops to 15 after 9 am or something and is 20 at the most chill times. Haven't ever seen an empty bus or really overcrowded one either.
    - throwaway290 1y ago