[darwink]

That bus in particular had the new all-weathers on the front but the drive wheels still had all seasons.

With most of the weight on the back, they don't foresee benefits from swapping the rear. Maybe some benefits from added control to the front wheels.

Probably the largest single benefit of battery busses designed from the ground up will be better weight distribution dramatically improving performance. Perhaps all wheel drive could even be trialed.

Vancouver swaps all their tires for winter?

Far more days with slush/snow transition leading to caked ice due to compression. Also, more routes with challenging hills.

 

[Mr.Wonderful]

In the long-term, funding advocacy combined with squeezing more for less is critical - most importantly for me, improve the speed of buses so we don't need as many buses (and as many operators), to offer a given level of service. It's the whole "primary transit network" philosophy - concentrate stops spaced farther apart, improve operational practices that reduce dwell times and time-wasting merge times into and out of traffic, realign route designs to avoid time-wasting turns/inefficient bus loops, and inordinately long time points. Basic stuff, but done relentless attacking every inefficient point in the network of thousands of inefficient points.

Holy moly, this so much. There is way too much slack in the schedule for many routes on weekend and late night runs which cause huge inefficiency across the network. If they are going to attack anything first, it should be this. A combination of less car traffic, less ridership (fewer stops to pick up/drop off passengers), and that Calgary Transit doesn't appear to alter their block times for these slower periods, makes transit so needlessly slow. They could definitely eek out some additional frequencies or savings on this alone.

The amount of weekend trips that I have been on where the bus is driving 30km/h for good portions of the route because there is so much slack in the schedule... It drives me mad. Even more blood boiling is when the operator SLOWS DOWN TO GET STOPPED BY A RED LIGHT because they're early and would have to wait at a timing point anyway (of course my ire is directed towards the schedule, not the operator).

 

[whatchyyc]

With most of the weight on the back, they don't foresee benefits from swapping the rear. Maybe some benefits from added control to the front wheels.

They're planning to change all the tires to the all weathers, I think this is just a result of piecemeal replacements as I've seen buses with them only on the rear and articulated buses with them on all 3 axles. But yes as well a lot of winter bus tires are only offered for steer axles

 

[Joborule]

Calgary Transit to end express route bus service by 2027

Calgary Transit is phasing out its so-called express routes, citing a necessary trade-off between underperforming routes and providing wider bus service to Calgarians.

...According to Calgary Transit, eight express routes still remain in the city. Express routes serve various communities in a cluster of stops before travelling without stops for longer distances, usually to the downtown area.

 

[ByeByeBaby]

According to average ridership numbers provided by Calgary Transit, Express Route 70 sees 100 boardings per day. In contrast, routes like Calgary’s 301 / Max Green have more than 10,000 passengers per day.

First, it's terrible communication and PR to announce the closure of a route a month before it stops running, but it's Calgary Transit. Also little disingenuous on CT's part to provide the only comparison being the busiest bus route in the city, especially since the 70 only makes two trips in each direction each day; are they expecting 2,500 people to get on a single bus?

As a comparison: 100 boardings across 4 trips is 25 per trip (the bus is half full or so); given the trip takes 45 minutes, that's 34 or so per revenue hour. Calgary Transit doesn't have a ridership dashboard publicly available (do they even have one internally?), so I looked at the 2024 TSPR from Translink in Vancouver. For a comparison, route 405 is a bus running in the low density parts of Richmond; it has 35 boardings per revenue hour, which places it 128th out of 195, so the 70 would comfortably be in the bottom third. (As another comparison, the Max Green would finish 20th for bus routes in Vancouver, just ahead of the 007, which is an ordinary ass bus that happens to have frequent service and travel down some good corridors -- Commercial, then thru downtown to 4th in Kits and Dunbar.) Not a great route.

However, comparing by service hours flatters express services; the trip from Crestmont to downtown takes 45 minutes, but the bus does not appear in Crestmont nor disappear in downtown. Per Google Transit, it takes 20-35 minutes to go from Spring Gardens to Crestmont to arrive at 7 AM, and 10-20 to go from downtown to Spring Gardens at 8 AM. So the single trip takes 100 minutes (have to use the long end of the times to base a schedule around) to serve 25 riders. At $150/hour as a rough estimate of operating cost, that's roughly $10 per person trip.

I do have sympathy for the person profiled in the article; I have no sympathy at all for whoever forced them at gunpoint to buy a house in Crestmont, perhaps the worst-served community in the city for transit, given that direct transit service was obviously very important to them. (Second worst; I've heard rumours that Valley Ridge was deliberately designed so it couldn't be served well by transit so that the residents wouldn't be bothered by transit riders. Even if it's not true, look at the road network -- it may as well be true.) I can't wait for an article from someone in Belvedere who is furious at how long it takes to get to the mountains.

But speaking of disingenuous (bolding mine):

“If Bus 70 is discontinued, many residents will face significant hardships. The proposed alternative services simply do not offer the same convenience or coverage and would increase commute time to two hours each way—from community to downtown and back.”

 

[lemongrab]

I used to benefit really nicely from an express bus, but the operational challenges must be pretty significant.

The 117 (McKenzie Town), 151 (New Brighton), and 131 (Auburn Bay) are duplicative of the 302 (and shuttle routes), so this is just eliminating the one seat ride.

Similar deal with 62, 64, 109, 116, 142...all feed into Centre St.

Losing the one seat ride is probably a bigger psychological impact than the actual time penalty. Places like Crestmont and Valley Ridge certainly shouldn't have that white glove service

 

[lemongrab]

Bigger fare increase likely coming

https://livewirecalgary.com/2025/12/01/calgary-transit-fares-likely-to-bump-up-to-4-a-ride/

Ward 10 Coun. Andre Chabot referenced a previous city study on the elasticity of Calgary Transit fares.

“In fact, the evidence showed that increasing fares actually increases ridership. Seems counterintuitive, but as long as you provided a service in conjunction with that increased fare, it actually resulted in increased ridership,” he said.

“So, yes, it is an increase in fares. But then we can look at how we can increase safety, security, cleanliness, something to provide some sort of increased level of service to justify the increase, or maybe increased frequency.”

According to transit officials, the increase will generate an additional $4 million in Calgary Transit revenue.

Not sure there's any real justification for Chabot's argument here. While I'm personally fine with eliminating the express buses, it's reasonable for people to see only reduced service and higher fares here.

Far more concerning to me is that they seem to have considered ditching free fares for youth under 12

The elimination of the free fare zone in the downtown and removal of free fares for youth under 12 barely survived, with each defeated in 7-8 votes.

IMO under 18 should be free (and under 25 should be the seniors rate), but if it's about more easily dealing with trespass issues then how about a $1 fare for <18 and free fare zone?

 

[darwink]

if it's about more easily dealing with trespass issues

Both of them are. For youth, it is about not being able to easily discern ages, so revenue leakage plus the UK 'hoody' problem-teenagers doing teenager stuff that is seen as disruptive.

 

[Red Star]

Looks like there's a couple significant changes to the Winter Service Schedule.

Winter Service Changes

www.calgarytransit.com

New route 15 will service Downtown to Deerfoot Meadows. Route 15 is a combination of previous routes 30, 106, and 449.

The frequency looks horrible. A bus every 30 minutes.

 

[Transit Apologist]

Looks like there's a couple significant changes to the Winter Service Schedule.

Winter Service Changes

www.calgarytransit.com

New route 15 will service Downtown to Deerfoot Meadows. Route 15 is a combination of previous routes 30, 106, and 449.

The frequency looks horrible. A bus every 30 minutes.

To be fair it's equal to or better than the service levels the 30, 106 and 449 ran separately, and it fills in some gaps/missing connections in that part of the system.

 

[CBBarnett]

Looks like there's a couple significant changes to the Winter Service Schedule.

Winter Service Changes

www.calgarytransit.com

Not a lot to get excited about in this update. The lack of narrative and boring change log approach remains very difficult to parse whether the changes were a net good, bad or indifferent for most users. From my quick take, I didn't see any obvious service increases to any route, and looks like incremental decreases in frequency in some places.

Going on a bit of deep dive on this one.

Compare this Calgary Transit update:

My questions:

1. What hours are "weekday mid-day" service?
   • It doesn't define this anywhere on this schedule update website, nor on the link available to the schedules themselves.
   • Checking the official 2025 CT map, it defines "Mid-day" as 0830 – 1600 (much bigger window than I thought). Small pet peeve is mixing 24 hour and 12 hour time across the website, either is fine just pick one!
2. Is "frequency revised to 26 minutes" better or worse than current frequency?
   • Had to check the schedule on this one. It's worse. Here's the current frequency. Note, it doesn't appear to line up to the definition of "mid day". Route 2 seems to only have mid-day frequency from 9:30 to 14:00:
   • 
     
     
   • I think what they are trying to say is that mid-day frequency on Route 2 (defined here as between 9:30am and ~2pm) is increasing from every 23 minutes to every 26 minutes. There's no way to know that though as the definition of "mid-day" and what the service schedule actually says are inconsistent.
3. What does weekend "run time" mean? Is this slower or faster than previous?
   • I don't know, but I assume this means the total length of a trip? If so, I can figure out what the actual impact is by comparing today's total run time to the new schedule's run time on weekends.
   • Adding the complexity is that weekends have 3 service types: Saturday Day, Saturday Evening, Sunday. I assume this means all trips are running at a different total time, but no way to know for sure so I'll just pick a comparable one.
   • Here's two Saturdays, December is old schedule, January is new schedule. The start times don't line up, but it's the closest trip:
   • 
   • So that's actually reasonably good, 6 minutes shorter total trip time. I assume the previous trip was often finishing too fast, so they could reduce the padding in the schedule a bit. It's incremental, but a good news story.

Here's Translink's version of the same thing:

In summary:
Ignoring the service frequency differences between Vancouver and Calgary, just focusing on the information sharing and communication strategy. Calgary Transit provides me with only questions I have to go and figure out to understand if anything actually changes for me and if that change is good or bad. Translink just tells me the narrative (what is changing and why), and all the details I need. No further searching required. They just tell me everything that happened and what it actually means.

Service is important, but the communications approach is so critical and low-hanging fruit! How can Calgary Transit attract transit advocacy and citizens to help them get more budget when no one can easily tell how the service is changing at all? I had to go to a giant amount of work, fill in the gaps with the inconsistent terms and definitions to get the answer - the bus is 3 minutes less frequent on weekdays between 9:30 to 2:00p!

 

[CalgaryTiger]

Not a lot to get excited about in this update. The lack of narrative and boring change log approach remains very difficult to parse whether the changes were a net good, bad or indifferent for most users. From my quick take, I didn't see any obvious service increases to any route, and looks like incremental decreases in frequency in some places.

Going on a bit of deep dive on this one.

Compare this Calgary Transit update:

View attachment 702195
My questions:

1. What hours are "weekday mid-day" service?
   • It doesn't define this anywhere on this schedule update website, nor on the link available to the schedules themselves.
   • Checking the official 2025 CT map, it defines "Mid-day" as 0830 – 1600 (much bigger window than I thought). Small pet peeve is mixing 24 hour and 12 hour time across the website, either is fine just pick one!
2. Is "frequency revised to 26 minutes" better or worse than current frequency?
   • Had to check the schedule on this one. It's worse. Here's the current frequency. Note, it doesn't appear to line up to the definition of "mid day". Route 2 seems to only have mid-day frequency from 9:30 to 14:00:
   • View attachment 702201
     
   • I think what they are trying to say is that mid-day frequency on Route 2 (defined here as between 9:30am and ~2pm) is increasing from every 23 minutes to every 26 minutes. There's no way to know that though as the definition of "mid-day" and what the service schedule actually says are inconsistent.
3. What does weekend "run time" mean? Is this mean it's slower or faster than previous?
   • I don't know, but I assume this means the total length of a trip? If so, I can figure out what the actual impact is by comparing today's total run time to the new schedule's run time on weekends.
   • Adding the complexity is that weekends have 3 service types: Saturday Day, Saturday Evening, Sunday. I assume this means all trips are running at a different total time, but no way to know for sure so I'll just pick a comparable one.
   • Here's two Saturdays, December is old schedule, January is new schedule. The start times don't line up, but it's the closest trip:
   • View attachment 702204
   • So that's actually reasonably good, 6 minutes shorter total trip time. I assume the previous trip was often finishing too fast, so they could reduce the padding in the schedule a bit. It's incremental, but a good news story.

Here's Translink's version of the same thing:

View attachment 702194

In summary:
Ignoring the service frequency differences between Vancouver and Calgary, just focusing on the information sharing and communication strategy. Calgary Transit provides me with only questions I have to go and figure out to understand if anything actually changes for me and if that change is good or bad. Translink just tells me the narrative (what is changing and why), and all the details I need. No further searching required. They just tell me everything that happened and what it actually means.

Service is important, but the communications approach is so critical and low-hanging fruit! How can Calgary Transit attract transit advocacy and citizens to help them get more budget when no one can easily tell how the service is changing at all? I had to go to a giant amount of work, fill in the gaps with the inconsistent terms and definitions to get the answer - the bus is 3 minutes less frequent on weekdays between 9:30 to 2:00p!

Great work, as a transit rider, I have to admit there is very little to get excited about even though the budget is going up and fairs are some of the highest in the country. The changes due to the budget don't seem to be to core routes instead seemed to add a little better service to suburban routes. Now a lot of the routes listed that are being improved are likely well used (I don't know that though) but as you state there is little to no narrative, Calgary Transit is very bad to terrible at telling the Calgary Transit story.

 

[CBBarnett]

Great work, as a transit rider, I have to admit there is very little to get excited about even though the budget is going up and fairs are some of the highest in the country. The changes due to the budget don't seem to be to core routes instead seemed to add a little better service to suburban routes. Now a lot of the routes listed that are being improved are likely well used (I don't know that though) but as you state there is little to no narrative, Calgary Transit is very bad to terrible at telling the Calgary Transit story.

It's the context and narrative that are always lacking. Changes are happening but it's not clear why and leaves a muddled grey area of speculation that doesn't serve customers or transit's objectives. Taking Translink as a queue, Calgary Transit's quarterly update should be something like.

Route 2 Killarney​

What are we changing and why:​

• We are reducing frequency due to lower than expected ridership demand during weekdays during the mid-day. Bus service resources are being reallocated to other routes with increased ridership demand.
• We are adjusting the weekend schedule to better align to actual travel times and road conditions.

What does that mean:​

• Monday to Friday: between 9:30a and 2:00p, Route 2 will arrive every 26 minutes (an increase from every 23 minutes today).
• Saturday and Sunday: Route 2 has a new schedule and will run slightly faster (end-to-end travel time will decrease from 1 hour 8 minutes to 1 hour 2 minutes)

To view the upcoming schedule changes for this route, see link​

​

This would give anyone the information they need as a transit user, but also give a chance for anyone to audit what they are actually doing. I could now send a complaint to my Councilor without having to do a complex investigation to figure out whether I like or don't like the change.

 

[Transit Apologist]

I believe the frequency decreases on several routes this signup (including the 2) are just schedule padding for slower travel times (winter road conditions). Adding 3 minutes to the midday headway wouldn't be enough to take any buses off the route. It would definitely be nice if CT would communicate that though!

 

[lemongrab]

Context to how I started thinking about 'bus traps' here:
https://skyrisecities.com/forum/threads/calgary-bike-lanes-and-bike-paths.24519/post-2325367

Route 94 is two independent loops running on 50 min frequency (14km total, 5 traffic lights. 24.7 kph when travelling; 16.8 kph for the 50 mins)

94 North (Strathcona) = 14 min loop, 6.22kms with 2 slow traffic lights and 1 medium light = 26.7 kph

8 min break

94 South (Sirocco) = 20 min loop; 7.76kms with 1 slow traffic light and 1 fast light = 23.3 kph

8 min break

But if you reopen the bus way (car trap) you could eliminate a bunch of redundancy and make this:

9.25km loop with 3 slow traffic lights:

This eliminates a lot of the 'fast' running on stroads (which is always preceded by a slow traffic light), so it's hard to know how the average travel speed would shake out, but at 23 kph = 24 mins, 25 kph = 22 mins; 27 kph = 20:30. So let's call it 22 mins and add the 8 min break and we're down to a 30 min frequency without significantly affecting the service area. The adjusted route for Sirocco actually runs right by a seniors' residence where it turns WB onto 17th (and another one just north of Sirocco Station).

Very few homes 'lose' here; a handful go from <200 meters to nearest stop to <425 meters (but there are a bunch of homes in the centre of these loops that are over 500 meters either way.