WMATA only ran DC and intra-jurisdiction routes

[79MetroExtraMD]

Yeah - It's very odd.  Perry, I think you all have a logical route numbering system.  I also agree with Btco.net about WMATA's number of routes which is indeed misleading.

I think WMATA actually has more routes than NYCT.  To compare the two,  WMATA has about 1400 buses assigned to 9 divisions.  To anyone not familiar with NYC's bus operations.  NYCT has about 4600 buses assigned to 18 depots.  That's an average of 255 buses per depot, yet the TA has just 245 routes (local and express).  This does not include MTAB.

Doesn't include MTAB yet until everything eventually becomes MTAB. I think the last time I heard Metro had about 300 routes per se.

[WayneNYC]

Yeah - It's very odd.  Perry, I think you all have a logical route numbering system.  I also agree with Btco.net about WMATA's number of routes which is indeed misleading.

I think WMATA actually has more routes than NYCT.  To compare the two,  WMATA has about 1400 buses assigned to 9 divisions.  To anyone not familiar with NYC's bus operations.  NYCT has about 4600 buses assigned to 18 depots.  That's an average of 255 buses per depot, yet the TA has just 245 routes (local and express).  This does not include MTAB.

Doesn't include MTAB yet until everything eventually becomes MTAB. I think the last time I heard Metro had about 300 routes per se.

It's already in the works internally, but one thing I'd bet the mortgage on is that everything will not become MTAB.  MTAB (and LIB) will likely be absorbed in NYCTA and the rumored name MTA Regional Bus or something along those lines will likely be the new name.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Yeah - It's very odd.  Perry, I think you all have a logical route numbering system.  I also agree with Btco.net about WMATA's number of routes which is indeed misleading.

I think WMATA actually has more routes than NYCT.  To compare the two,  WMATA has about 1400 buses assigned to 9 divisions.  To anyone not familiar with NYC's bus operations.  NYCT has about 4600 buses assigned to 18 depots.  That's an average of 255 buses per depot, yet the TA has just 245 routes (local and express).  This does not include MTAB.

WMATA's official response to this type of idea is that the current system is less confusing than implementing a new one, and I would be inclined to agree.

[WayneNYC]

Yeah - It's very odd.  Perry, I think you all have a logical route numbering system.  I also agree with Btco.net about WMATA's number of routes which is indeed misleading.

I think WMATA actually has more routes than NYCT.  To compare the two,  WMATA has about 1400 buses assigned to 9 divisions.  To anyone not familiar with NYC's bus operations.  NYCT has about 4600 buses assigned to 18 depots.  That's an average of 255 buses per depot, yet the TA has just 245 routes (local and express).  This does not include MTAB.

WMATA's official response to this type of idea is that the current system is less confusing than implementing a new one, and I would be inclined to agree.

Yes, we've had this topic in the past, probably on BTCO.  I would also agree with WMATA too, but of course the downside is that they continue on with a strange route numbering system.

[Perry]

At one time WMATA was thinking of changing route numbers so they corresponded with street names, particularly the numbered ones, 14th, 16th, etc., but they said it would be too confusing.  However if they did it logically, it wouldn't take long for people to figure out where they were going particularly if the route numbers were intuitive.  If a bus was numbered 16 and it operated on 16th Street and they went up or down from that point based on the streets they ran on, it wouldn't be that hard. 

It doesn't help that WMATA doesn't operate in a grid, they have so many routes that meander.  NYC is able to have their routings follow some sort of reasoning based on the fact that they have that grid system.

Pierre L'Enfant (raises fist as this is being said!!!)......

[WMATAGMOAGH]

And what would they do with the buses running on named or lettered streets in that scenario?  Or it would it have just been a partial renumbering?

[WayneNYC]

I can understand the anxieties with doing a large scale route numbering project, but I think in WMATA's case it's one of those things that needs to be done.  In WMATA land division is interchangeable with depot in NYCTA/MTAB talk, but perhaps WMATA should approach a route renumbering project in terms NYCTA land divisions.  They could do all of NoVa routes, let it all settle in.  Then do MD routes and make adjustments based on their experiences with the NoVa project and finally the DC routes.

I like the route designation by street of operation.  It works well for NYCT in Manhattan (on crosstown routes) because nearly all Manhattan streets are numbered and most main east-west streets have just one crosstown route.  That said, it pretty much works from 116th Street and south because crosstown service on streets north of 116th is served by Bronx routes.  Also in the case 125th Street, crosstown service is handled by several routes (Bx15, M60, M100, M101) none of which are true crosstown routes.

Implementing routes numbered after streets in DC may be a challenge though since there are so many streets that are not numbered.     

[btconet]

I guess the concept is that as long as WMATA continues with the current numbering scheme, they're only staving off the inevitable. 

NY is one of the few places the letter-number combos really work, as the letters truly mean something, and thus are intuitive.  In WMATA land, numbers that might mean something are readily outnumbered by those that don't.  24P means Pentagon and R2 might mean "Riggs" but Q doesn't readily suggest Veirs Mill, and 1A doesn't readily suggest Vienna as an outer terminus.

Taking a page from the New York book, could a strict letter prefix, number suffix system work here in a global way.  It MIGHT not be as complicated as one might think.

D = DC
P = PG
M = MoCo
A = Arlington
X = Alexandria
F = Fairfax
L = Loundon
W = Prince William

Then either a C for cross jurisdiction (except DC-n County lines that would retain the outer destination as its designator) routes or a double letter combo to list the two outer jurisdictions linked.  Smaller Operators would simply use 100 numbers over their existing routes.

On the few examples where numbered streets exist, they'd use those, but otherwise, use the existing designations as a base in order to put the routes in a sequential order for numbering.  At first, existing numbers would not be reused to avoid confusion unless they remain on the same line (i.e. the D8 could remain).

If they wished to retain odd numbers for peak only services (though probably grouping all together instead of every variation with its own number), they probably could, as well as 9 suffixes to note Limiteds.

Possible Examples:
16th Street Line = D16
A2=D22
J2 = M22
J1 and J3 = M23
C2 = MP12
J5 = MP25
Ride On 1 = M101
Dash 7 = X107
Art 41 = A141
PG 14 = P114
PG15X = P159
1A = AF2
Fairfax Conn. Routes = F+existing number

Probably lots I didn't think about here, but it's a start...

[Perry]

I like your thinking Adam.  You could even simplify that more and just have M=MD, D=DC and V-VA and then have a series equal an area.  M100's could be PG, M200's could be Montgomery, etc.

Oren, I'm not sure how it would be handled for crosstown routes with names as that would add another layer and probably why the whole renumbering thing was scrapped.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

I don't think the letter suffixes would necessarily work NYC style.  What do you do with a route like the E6, or even though it doesn't exist anymore, the B11?

If such a change had to occur, I'd opt for something along the lines of what the Las Vegas system is based on how Perry has described it.  The system would be all numerical and without letter prefixes or suffixes, and it would include all the regional bus providers.

1-10: DC Circulator and Georgetown Metro Connection
11-99: DC WMATA Routes
100-199: Montgomery County WMATA Routes
200-299: Ride On routes (all RO routes, except for the 100, could just have their numbers changed by adding 200 to the existing number, so the 1 would be the 201, the 15 would be the 215, the 55 would be the 255, and so on). 
300-399: PG County WMATA Routes
400-499: TheBus, Connect-a-Ride, and other systems in Maryland
500-550: DASH
550-599: ART
600-699: WMATA Virginia Routes (Alexandria/Arlington routes would be at the lower end of this range, Fairfax and further flung routes would be higher)
700-799: Fairfax Connector
800-899: CUE, PRTC, Loudon Transit, and other VA providers
900-999: Maryland MTA Routes (I realize they don't fit into the scheme, which effectively goes clockwise around the region starting with Montgomery County, but it does mean that the routes get to keep their existing numbers)


Within this system, I think it would be good if the route numbers increased in a clockwise manner, similar to the entire scheme.  Therefore, the lowest numbered DC routes would be in NW, and the highest would be in SE/SW.  The T2, which is effectively the western most WMATA route in Montgomery County, would get a number closer to 100 than to 199 (although I could make a compelling case for the T2 being the 150 or 190), although the Z routes would get numbers closer to 199 than to 100.  The 15K would get a higher number than the 9A or REX because that route is closer to the American Legion Bridge than the Wilson Bridge, and further along in the clockwise rotation around the region.

[79MetroExtraMD]

What ever happened to if it aint broke don't fix it. Besides, all that renumbering would be a pain in the ass for scheduling, signing, routing, etc. The costs to have to replace everything to these "schemes" probably would be through the roof. From what I see, it seems as though there should be a single agency combining the major TAs.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

From what I see, it seems as though there should be a single agency combining the major TAs.

And how would that be any different in terms of costs with "scheduling, signing, routing," as you put it?

[WayneNYC]

What ever happened to if it aint broke don't fix it. Besides, all that renumbering would be a pain in the ass for scheduling, signing, routing, etc. The costs to have to replace everything to these "schemes" probably would be through the roof. From what I see, it seems as though there should be a single agency combining the major TAs.

Yes, it would be a lot of work and associated expenses to renumber the routes.  However, the current is indeed broken as it's confusing and inconsistent.  Remember, it should make sense for Joe and Jane Rider who are not mass transit fans and/or employees.

I remember when I first moved to the area and learned of the C2, C4 only to learn that more C routes existed in PG county.  Also again, I have to mention the Z11/Z13.  Also - What about the current situation with the Y5, Y7, Y8 & Y9.  In my opinion these's nothing normal about this arrangement, and I'd bet many a passenger has been confused with the line.

[btconet]

I tend to agree that it's broke.  I'm a transit buff and there's LOTS I have no clue about when it comes to DC Bus Routes.

Consider a new transit rider who just moved to the area, Let's say they're near Greenbelt and need to get to Silver Spring.  All they know is they live in PG County and need to get into Moco.

A look at WMATA's website only spells out routes three ways - DC, MD, and VA.  Click on the MD page, and you get a slew of routes, nearly all letter-number combos and with only a vague descriptor of the line name.

Only through either digging up the (dated) PDF system map or clicking on every single bus schedule does one begin to try to figure out their routing (and even then it takes a good while and some second guessing).

While I find the oft cryptic designation system novel and enigmatic as a transit fan, I find it bewildering as a customer.  I've had numerous instances of letting buses pass me by because I had no clue if it would get me where I was going only to later find out it would have been a perfect option.  And I'm damn sure I'm not the only one (even on this board) to make these errors.

Perhaps if I get time, I'll see if I'm game for tweaking and refining the criteria to address the challenge of a full areawide renumbering.

That much said, I don't disagree about the pain of renumbering thousands of bus stops - but as mentioned earlier, there are too many anyways!

[WES]

I looked at the topic again and reading the responses I have thought of doing this.  Wayne, Perry, Adam and Chris had great ideas and combining them with a few of my own, this might work if it is done this way.

1)Decentralize WMATA send the scheduling out to the local governments.  This should improve schedule coordination.  If Montgomery County had total control over what they route plan what would be the chances that buses from 3 routes wouldn't bunch up from Randolph Road to Wheaton Station.  Also have those same local governments control the garages.  Metrobus would be metrobus, and RIDE ON would be RIDE ON, but every route that is planned or adjusted would be done only by Montgomery County, no 6th Street interference.  Sharing facilities would be a union issue, purchasing buses might mean an all Flyer outfit but eh.

2)Once that is done get rid of the sitting WMATA board and replace it with the heads of the local transit agencies.  The current Metro board doesn't really know anything about transit for the most part, and heck, most of them don't even ride transit.

3)As previously mentioned, slowly renumber the routes.  I like the D for DC, P for PG, etc.  Have, as much as possible, the same string of routes operating from each subway station or the subway line, for example route P110s to 120s operating from New Carrollton and the M100s to M140s operating out of Silver Spring.  If operating from one or more subway stations, use the number of the station where the first morning trip begins out of or the garage closest to the station where the route originates.  Locals, expresses, limiteds and county lines could be seperated by groups.  Example would the the current seventy being renamed the D70.  The 79 would be renamed for example the D170 or the D270, where the route is the same but a change in the number denotes the difference in service offerings.  WMATA run buses would be in the begining of the route designation and the county run routes would be further back.  For example (again), the P00s to P100s would be WMATA run local buses, the P200-249 would be WMATA run express buses, the P250-P299 would be any The Bus express routes, the P300-P349 would be any WMATA run limited lines, P350-P399 would be The Bus limited lines and finally the P400-P600s would be The Bus local lines.  As all of this is finalized, test them in a small area, like Alexandria, or Arlington and then make changes where needbe.  If there is a minor route deviation, have a route A,B noted in the schedule as well as the run box, having the longer run boxes might be necessary.

If this sounds confusing, I tried, but having a C12 running in southern PG, having a C28 running in Central PG and having a C2 running in Montgomery can sometimes confuse someone moving here to ride transit.

Let me know what you think.