I received a long comment in reply to an earlier post about service in the Beach from a TTC operator, and this deserves its own thread.
Updated November 11: Driver Bob left a short note attached to the wrong thread in which he dismisses the discussion here. I have added it to the end of this post just before the comments.
A second comment, apologizing for the first, has also been added.
The Queen streetcar is the subject of much discussion here, and I have been remiss in failing to post an analysis of the CIS (Communications & Information System) data for this route to substantiate many of my (and everyone else’s) observations. Over the next few weeks, in preparation for a Rocket Riders’ meeting in early December, I will post a series of articles looking at the line’s operation in detail.
For those who are unfamiliar with the sort of analyses that will appear here, please read all of the articles about the King route filed under Service Analysis on this site. As I write this, there are nine of them (with one more to come), and you should read them in order. They include some of the background on how the CIS system works and the various ways I have sliced and diced that data. I will not repeat this information here in the interest of brevity.
By way of introduction to the data, this post deals with Christmas Day, 2006. This is important for a few basic reasons:
Collectively, this means that the observed behaviour of the line shows what happens when most of the sources of random delay are eliminated. Continue reading
The Rocket Riders will devote their December 4 meeting (Metro Hall, 6:30 pm) to a discussion of the Queen Car, its many problems and ways to fix them. In support of this, I will start publishing analyses of that route’s operation here based on the CIS data from December 2006.
Yes, I have let that whole project slip out of sight in past months for a variety of reasons. Mea culpa.
Here is an overview of my past writing on this issue:
Route Structure
The amalgamation of the Queen and Long Branch services was a disaster from the day it started, but the TTC has never acknowledged this problem or studied alternatives, publicly, in detail. One extremely long line is impossible to manage. The schedule includes a huge amount of padding for “recovery time” that is actually counterproductive because operators can basically run on any time they please and still have time for a lengthy break at the end of the line.
Service on the Long Branch section is very spotty with very long gaps quite common.
Service on Kingston Road is compromised by the difficulty of integrating the 502 and 503 services and by the very wide off-peak scheduled headway.
My proposed route structure is not definitive, and I am sure others will come up with various schemes. The underlying theme is to shorten routes and to provide overlaps so that short-turns will not totally devestate service.
Peak Period Operations
A major problem exists on both King and Queen with the morning peak where many cars enter service off-schedule. This plays havoc with service at the ends of the lines due to short turns and causes ragged headways at a time when there is no traffic congestion to blame for this situation.
The peak period Lake Shore trippers to downtown do not operate at predictable times even there is no possible way that “traffic congestion” can interfere with on-time operation.
Vehicle Allocation
[Note: An ALRV is the 75-foot long two-section streetcars commonly seen on King, Queen and Bathurst. A CLRV is the 50-foot long car seen on the system overall.]
The 501 operates with ALRVs on wide headways while the 504 runs with CLRVs on close headways. The TTC should reverse this arrangement so that ALRVs are used on King where their greater capacity is badly needed.
Equally important will be that we actually see ALRVs where they are scheduled. The number of times in the past year when I have seen CLRVs operating ALRV runs on Queen, overcrowded because they are carrying an ALRV headways, is quite ridiculous. In my review of the King car, I found that the peak period extra ALRVs that are supposed to build capacity inbound through Parkdale in the morning are more often operated with CLRVs.
The TTC seems to be utterly incapable of assigning larger vehicles where they are required.
Service Levels
On Queen, the change to CLRVs on closer headways would improve the frequency of service even with the inevitable short-turns.
On Lake Shore, the change to CLRVs will improve scheduled headways, and integration to a single downtown destination will avoid the problems inherent with a few rogue trippers. Combined with a shorter, easier-to-manage route, this should make service in southern Etobicoke much more attractive.
On Kingston Road, consolidation of the 502 and 503 would provide one common, frequent service during the peak period that would have some hope of reliability outbound from a single downtown location.
On King, the change to ALRVs would provide additional capacity provided that current headways are maintained.
Summary
The Ridership Growth Strategy seeks to improve service quality, but little attention has been paid to the streetcar network on the grounds that the fleet is fully committed already. This is certainly not true during off-peak periods, and the TTC needs to account for the large number of spare cars during the peak.
Proposals for transit priority must focus on “micro” changes to individual intersections and neighbourhoods with parking restrictions and signal improvements. The “macro” scheme for reserved lanes through the business district does not address major sources of congestion, and diverts attention and effort from overall improvements to route operations.
There is no question that improving service level and quality on these major crosstown routes will cost more. There should be a huge incentive for the TTC to improve line management. Sadly, they will more likely trot out their usual complaints about congestion as the source of all troubles. The cheapest service improvement comes from managing what we have properly.
I have written before about the need to reorganize the way service is operated on the Queen line, and the TTC never quite gets around to doing a detailed review. I’m not sure what it will take to light a fire under them, but the time is long overdue for them to admit the through-routing of 501-Queen and 507-Long Branch was a disaster.
Other related issues include the problem of Humber Loop (not the most ideal location for a transfer given its isolated location) and the mix of services running downtown from Parkdale.
I received a comment from “Ed” recently that shows finally, someone has realized there are problems on Lake Shore, although the “fix” is a temporary one. Continue reading
Today’s Star contains an article beginning a series about the hidden corners of the TTC with a look at the ghost station at Queen and Yonge. This was built back in the 50s with the Yonge Subway, and passengers crossing between the northbound and southbound platforms walk through an underpass on the platform level of that station.
Back in 1968, a few years after the original Keele-Woodbine section of the Bloor-Danforth subway had opened, the TTC was thinking about the Queen Street subway. One proposal floated through the Commission for streetcar subway through downtown operation. The full report is interesting reading because clearly, in 1968, the TTC was still thinking of new ways to use its streetcars.
The proposal was for a subway from west of Sherbourne to east of Spadina. Schemes for streetcar subways had been around for a while, and I described an earlier one in a post last year.
The report throws cold water on this scheme saying that it would not materially improve the capacity of the streetcar line, and it is clear their sympathies lie with a full subway scheme. Things did not change much for decades thereafter. It is worth noting that in the late 1960s, there were more than 60 cars/hour on Queen Street east of Yonge. Today, the service is equivalent to 23 cars/hour allowing for the larger size of the ALRVs. Continue reading
In a separate thread here, there is an extensive discussion of whether it is faster to take the Queen car from Woodbine to Yonge, or to take a bus north plus two subway trips. I originally quoted a running time of 20 minutes for this trip, but was subsequently convinced to up this to at least 25.
Recently, I began looking at the Queen car’s operating data for December 2006. [For all of you who have been waiting, the grand work on King is now complete and I will be publishing a much abridged version here soon in installments. In time I will also address the perennial Spadina vs Bathurst question.]
For the first three weeks of December, the running time from Woodbine to Yonge sits quite consistently on 25 minutes from about 7:30 am until 6:00 pm. The spread in values ranges mainly from a low of 20 to a high of 30, although the majority of observations are within a few minutes of 25. For trips leaving Woodbine from about 8:00 to 8:30, the running times can be extended to over 30 minutes although this tends to occur moreso on poor weather days.
A related problem is the reliability with which each scheduled car actually shows up for the peak inbound trip. In my analysis on King, I had already discovered that several cars scheduled to pass through Parkdale during the height of the peak do not always show up, or show up late leading to erratic service just when it is most needed. I looked for the same effect on Queen and was not surprised by what I found.
In the two hour period from 7:00 to 9:00, there should be about 25 cars westbound on Queen (I say “about” because the actual value is fractional thanks to the 4’52” headway). As on King, some of these cars do not show up reliably or at all, at least east of Woodbine Loop, and the problem is more severe as the rush hour goes on. Missing runs are particularly a problem starting around 8:00.
This means that just at the point when most people want to get downtown for a start in the 8:30 to 9:00 period, the service gets reliably worse. Because of crowding, this also means that travel times will be extended.
I have not yet had a chance to examine this in detail for the Queen route, but on King the origin of the problem is quite clear. Some runs, especially those scheduled to enter service comparatively late, don’t always make it out of the carhouse, or if they do, they are late. Those that are late are often short-turned, or make their trips well off-schedule. Either way, they are missing from the time and the place when they are most needed.
The reason for this, I believe, is that these runs do not have assigned operators but use either staff from the Spare Board (operators with no assigned work who fill in for absences) or volunteers working overtime. There is, of course, a good chance that the number of operators available for these runs will be lower on days when the weather is bad. People who are marginally ill choose not to come in to work, and people who might take overtime prefer not to work in snowstorms. Just when all the service is needed on the street, critical peak period cars are missing.
Intriguingly, there is very little variation through the day in running time over this section, and systemic traffic congestion does not appear to play a role in westbound trips over this segment of the route.
Often, I have discussed the question of the adequacy of service to meet demand, and the TTC routinely talks about the level of scheduled service. The problem here is that anywhere from 20 to 40 percent of the “scheduled” service may be missing on any weekday during the morning peak westbound at Woodbine.
Congestion is a serious problem on parts of the system. However, this is not a question of transit priority or rights-of-way, this is a question of the TTC actually operating all of the scheduled service.
I received the following comment from Tina R., and there are enough separate issues here that it deserves its own thread. This deals with service to The Beach as well as general questions about buses versus streetcars and LRT, and express operations.
An update about running times on the Queen car, added on May 27, appears at the end of this post.
[Those of you who want oodles of details won’t find a complex spreadsheet or chart here, and you will have to take some of the numbers on faith. Trust me. The reason for this post is to stimulate discussions and to ask the question “Why Not?”.]
We all know that service on the King and Queen routes leaves a lot to be desired, but little is done about the situation beyond the usual complaints of congestion and the need for an exclusive right-of-way. Although major changes won’t happen until we have a larger fleet, improvements are still possible if only there is the will to make them.
I have been looking at a number of route configurations (some of you will know of my schemes for the Long Branch car), but believe that in the short term the first issue we must confront is the assignment of vehicle types to these two routes and the number of cars available for service.
My proposal, briefly, is that the King line operate exclusively with ALRVs and that Queen run with CRLVs. Service and capacity would be increased in both cases.
The following discussion concerns the AM peak when service is at its height. All other times of day would be adjusted accordingly. Continue reading
The following is a combination of two comments sent in recently by Renee Knight, and I’m putting them in their own thread.
The 501 Queen Car in the Beach is doing a terribly pathetic job of serving this neighbourhood. Even in the midst of summer and with tourists flocking to the neighbourhood, there seems to be no consideration to the people that live here and need to get out of the beach for work, doctors, medical appointments…
In the last 5 years the state of service on the streetcar has become so abysmal that people buy houses in the Beach thinking they can take the Streetcar to their offices downtown, and to often end up either driving to work or selling their homes and moving downtown where they can walk to work.
Today alone, I waited 20 minutes for a streetcar that’s supposed to go every 6 minutes, and then got turfed off at Connaught, and then again at McCaul, just to go to Trinity and Strachan from Queen and Wineva, and this at 10:00 a.m. on a Thursday. We’re not talking rush hour, no traffic problems, it’s a great sunny day.
The problem is that the people who decide on the short turns the drivers make aren’t anywhere near the route, and could care less if the schedule is being met, as in picking up passengers along the route. The focus is on the downtown core. TTC doesn’t get it that we also need to get downtown from the beach and back home again. Three streetcars and an hour an a half for a 40 minute trip is really pathetic, and it does not have to be this way.
I don’t believe that traffic congestion is the problem. I believe the problem is a negligent management so out of touch with its ridership that they just don’t care. And as far as that goes, this creates staff that doesn’t care either, if they can’t meet schedules, and are constantly being yelled at; after a while you give up and stop listening. That’s what we are finding on our route. Drivers have given up, their supervisors are not listening to them or us. What are we to do? It’s only going to get worse if no-one is looking at solutions!
For many years, the streetcar was very enjoyable to take, not so anymore!
I have called in to customer service, written letters that go unanswered… What can we do in the Beach to improve the service? Petition?
Any suggestions, Steve?
[2nd part]
Yes, this used to be the TTC’s motto before, The Better Way. What happened to the better way? It’s not better anymore.
I’ve taken the transit in this city for over 20 years, and the surface routes are painfully deteriorting in service. Particularly the Queen Car (501 – Neville Park – serving the Beach) I have never been more disappointed at the level of service on this route. My 64 Main bus does not disappoint, but anytime I have to take the Queen car, I am concerned, as 9/10 times, I will not get a streetcar for at least 20 minutes, often 30 or more minutes.
We always give ourselves around 15 minutes leeway to get to our desinations, assuming we should not have to wait to long for a streetcar that is scheduled to come to the stop (Queen & Wineva) every 6 minutes, so it isn’t a matter of people leaving late and blaming transit. It’s a matter of transit short turning 1/2 of the streetcars that are scheduled to come into the Beach, and that’s before any problems start on the line.
It’s just not an acceptable level of service.
I long for the days when I could see a car that wasn’t headed to Neville in a 20-30 minute wait, and trusting I’d see a car come my way before the one that just went down to Neville.
It used to take 30 minutes to get to Yonge & Queen from Wineva, now it takes an hour, trip time is still the same, what’s changed is the wait time. Very rarely are the traffic issues so bad that the neglect of not serving the Beach at least reasonably close to the schedule is actually neccesary.
What happens now, is that car returning from Neville Park will have one or two cars within minutes behind it, leaving terrible gaps in service that no-one seems to care about. The “we’re sorry for your inconvencience” from a Customer Service staffer just does nothing to remove the problem! In fact it’s like a slap in the face for bothering to call in!
The schedule, as we say in the Beach is “Published Fiction”. It’s a joke, and should be an embarrasment to the TTC, and those who supervise the line. I do not blame the drivers, they simply follow directions of their superiors, no matter how daft.
Steve: I really am getting tired of the TTC’s lame excuses that all their problems would go away if there were no traffic congestion. First off, the congestion is not anywhere near as bad all of the time on all of the routes as the TTC claims. Second, there are ongoing problems with mismanagement of the service as described in Renee’s comments above.
For decades, the TTC has forgotten that many of the people who actually use the routes downtown live on the outer part of the line. Screw up the service there and you drive away ridership.
In case everyone thought that this had turned into a blog about the Spadina Subway and intercity rail travel, let’s come back to the real world of the Queen Car with the following note.
Hi Steve
This is not really a comment, but rather a follow-up to my earlier comments re: service in the Beach. It’s not getting any better.Let’s start with a math quiz . What’s the next number in this sequence?
18,33,1,14,2,10,11 ______(??? )
Give up? Well the answer is “who knows, could be any number”. It’s the 501 from Neville.
These were the 501 headways departing Neville westbound on a normal, dry road, no traffic, no accidents type middle of the weekday when all a person wanted to do was spend $10 on a streetcar going to Queen & Lee etc to do local errands. Can you believe it? Is anyone in charge of supervising this major streetcar route???
Walked down to the loop from Fallingbrook at 12:30 and saw 42xx departing westbound. 12:48 (run#7) finally came 18 minutes later. Thought I would hang around and see what followed:
- The next car, 4244 departed at 1:21-33 minute gap!!!!
- Then in a brilliant move, car 4250 left one whole minute later at 1:22 (came empty, left empty).
- 4210 left 14 min later at 1:36.
- Then run 14, 4230 left 2 minutes later at 1:38 (again empty)
- 4225 left at 1:48, and finally
- 4225 left at 1:57.
This is a very common situation, not unusual at all. What happens with this mess down the line? Where do the supervisors supervise from? Do they know what is going on here????
This is sad and funny at the same time. Is anyone in control of this route??
Thought you may find this interesting Steve.
Pete
Yes, it is interesting and far, far too common. The service at Neville Loop is supposed to run every 5’30”.
I am still mired in detailed analysis of the King route (which I hope to finish over Easter weekend) and have not had the heart to look at Queen Street yet. The bottom line, however, is that service is quite irregular even on days, like Christmas, when it should run like a clock.
Steve Munro 