Temporary Route Switch

[WES]

This might be an idea.  If the NABI BRTs isn't worth putting on the R2, U8 then how about this idea.  How about doing a temporary exchange giving Bladensburg the T18, F4 (only) and the P12 which happens to be Landover's busiest routes in exchange for an equal bus requirement route, (say the R2, 3,4, 83, 86, even U8,U4).  It's an idea that I thought of this morning, that with the fact that these routes seem to have standing room more than seeminly the R2 and U8, why not get union agreement and temporarily switch the mentioned routes.

Because it seems like when the Benning Road project is finished those older NABIs are scrapyard bound instead of keeping some of the better ones and using them on routes that would need them and with the budget problems WMATA is having right now, increasing the F4, P12 and T18 is right now out of the question.  And until the Benning Road project is completely done running the Bladensburg artics on those said PG routes might make better sense than using them on routes that may not necessarily warrant them.

The only deadheading problem would be the P12 from Eastover but what does everyone think.

[Annex4421]

Hold up wasn't this what myself and Landoverdivision was talking about in terms of Landover needing artics, I mean that is a good idea but Bladensburg has enough routes as is, If anything why not just put artics at Landover in the 1st place I mean how about some 60 BRTs and some 5200s go to Landover I mean Bladensburg has the majority of the 5200s but 40fts still be on the X2 especially during rush hour, so if they don't use them why not give them to Landover? Why not the unions agree on that instead?

[WES]

With WMATA thinking the logical choice would be to do that, but apparently WMATA doesn't think that noone else could use artics, so once the Benning Road project is finished, those NABIs are as good as gone.  We have all said here that WMATA needs to keep the better artics for routes that they can't right now increase in frequency, that are overcrowded but those suggestions always seem to go in one ear and out the other.

Putting CNG artics in a garage that doesn't have CNG facilities wouldn't work as not only would Landover need a CNG filling station, Landover would have to be fitting to repair them, that includes CNG detection devices and stuff along the lines.  Switching lines and having those NABI BRTs where they could be used better would be the best option, though it isn't a point A to point B solution, in dealing with how WMATA runs is the best solution.

One union wouldn't like their routes being taken, without something in return, especially when dealing with a "rival" union dare I say.

It isn't the most effecient solution but again with WMATA sometimes the most logical solution in their eyes isn't the best one.

[Annex4421]

Well the best thing for WMATA to do is just order more artics or put the older NABIs at the Landover Division. The NABI BRT's do come in handy on the U8 and the R2 so they're not getting wasted on the routes but the best thing would be either more artics or putting some older NABI's at Landover.

[Annex4421]

I have a suggestion how about letting Bladensburg do some 70 runs during rush hour, so that Northern can put extra artics on the S2/S4? in exchange Northern can do some 79 runs during rush hour, and maybe run the 79 on the weekends and let Northern do it.

[79MetroExtraMD]

I have a suggestion how about letting Bladensburg do some 70 runs during rush hour, so that Northern can put extra artics on the S2/S4? in exchange Northern can do some 79 runs during rush hour, and maybe run the 79 on the weekends and let Northern do it.

Isn't that what the 79 is for. Also, some of the rush hour runs cut back to Archives. Plus, its not so much as putting extra artics on the S line, its the traffic and bunching as a result that causes the overcrowding conditions. Also, do bear in mind, any kind of change does require a new pick and scheduling changes (driver paddles).