The chatting between operators must include any information regarding conditions of the vehicles, Right Of Way and Overhead Contact System which has not gotten in to the current train orders in order to ensure safe operations.

As an operator I have always preferred making reliefs at terminals – bus or rail. This allows me to adequately prepare for operations. Any time I am rushed to begin working increases the chance of making mistakes. Operating costs seem to preclude making reliefs at terminals.

I know it must be frustrating to riders when the train is stopped for any reason. The relief happens only once per day on my shift. Delays in the DSTT and losing the preempt cycles on ML King happen much more frequently. Each of these can delay the train two to three minutes or more per event, per trip. While I do not waste any time making reliefs, I prefer to focus on trying to solve the delays mentioned above. Both of which are fixable. We report delays up the chain and I am sure that dedicated people are working hard on solving them (I have seen progress on some and participate in discussing the rest. There are political issues dealing with ML King signals which have been mentioned elsewhere on this Blog.

When I get the opportunity travel to other cities I see examples both of other systems suffering from the same difficulties we see here and practises much better than ours. I am convinced that we will get better even though it may seem to take too long.

Uh – people at the ‘terminus’ have a tendency to want to go to the OTHER endof the terminus, i.e. folks at Tukwila/SeaTac want to go downtown. How would having driver do their changeover here NOT impact time?

Explain.

The 8, 14, and 48 don’t run late enough to serve the last train, unless you happen to be taking the 14 just up the hill to Hunter and Hanford. So they’re simply irrelevant to the problem of what to do with the last train load of commuters.

At other times, you simply wait for next train.

There are two problems with that, from the rider perspective.

1. In peak NB hours, going out of service in mid-run and making everyone wait for another train is a major slowdown in the passengers’ commute, and the type of thing that makes commuters say “Screw it — I’ll drive.”

2. Making Beacon Hill riders get out at Mount Baker when the train is going through Beacon Hill anyway seems kind of silly. Beacon Hill is protected from the weather and a better place to wait for another train. And if it was the last train, this means a pretty serious uphill hike for Beacon Hillers, with no good bus service to fill in at that time of night.

(For what it’s worth, every time I’ve seen a driver switch there, it’s been very quick — not 5 minutes at all. However, I have been stopped for about 5 minutes at the O&M stop at least once, but was sitting so far back that I don’t know if it was a driver switch that time or some other cause. The driver switches I have actually seen have been quick enough.)

If they switched operators at the terminus, passengers would already be at their destination and the operators could take all the time they need without impacting passengers’ travel time. Do you really not see the difference?

I understand why they switch there, because it’s more convenient for the operators, but stopping a train full of people in the middle of nowhere is not really adding to the image of Link being fast and efficient.

I’m sure that the residents in and around the Mt. Baker station area would disagree that they live ” in the middle of nowhere”, as would anyone that – well drove, walked past, rode through, or had ever experienced that area. You might also want to talk to the folks of Twisp. Now THAT is the “middle of nowhere”. Or say Garyowen, Indiana.

They really should be switching operators at the end of the line so the operators can take the time that they need without impacting the travel time of passengers.

What difference would that make? Whether at the end of the line or at Mt. Baker – any delay is still a delay. And I don’t think it’s for the convenience of drivers – it’s an efficiency issue (including cost).

Oran,

The short answer is that as a fellow citizen, I don’t believe that your time is worth anymore than mine, or anyone elses.

I guess like all folks, my reaction to the “5-minute” gripe that has come up here and on other threads (funny how it’s always “5-minutes”) is based on my own personal experience/baggage. Having served in the military and seen some of the world, and having worked in nonprofit organizations supporting people with significant disabilities for 20 years, having seen people wait for hours for a hot meal, months for health care, and years for basic support services (if they get them at all), feeling sorry or otherwise empathetic for someone getting very, very worked up about 5 minutes out of their commute time isn’t something that fits into my personal psyche.

Mind you, I’m not speaking for Metro, for drivers or as a driver here but as a citizen who also rides the bus and has all of my life. Having seen the things that I’ve seen, eperienced the things that I’ve experienced, and having the general values that I hold – if you’re going to be substantially put out, stressed out, angry, indignant, etc. over 5 minutes time (regardless of what YOU think your time is worth), you’re not going to get a heck of a lot of sympathy from me unless that’s 5 minutes you had to wait for paramedics to arrive, for warning to get out of the way of a tornado, etc. Missing a connecting bus once in awhile because you had an expectation that you’ll always be able to make that connection with 5 minutes in-between the arrival of one mode of transport and the departure of another? No, I will not apologize for not acknowledging that your anger has some validity. I gotta be me, I guess.

It is unfair and unreasonable to put all the blame on drivers or even Metro as a whole. The operation of streets and signals are beyond their control. If Metro controlled the streets they would give utmost priority to transit but they don’t so they have to work with city transportation departments, King County (funny how they are the same department but are siloed), and WSDOT, which have their own priorities.

I know the city (Seattle) is trying to make bus transit operate better by providing facilities like bus lanes and signal priority and removing bottlenecks. They have to deal with other groups who share our roads and who may disagree.

The more infrastructure a transit agency has in their control or in their favor, the better service they can provide.

And no – I don’t believe that my question is irrelevant. How could it be?

I don’t make assumptions about what the average rider is thinking – I prefer – and I believe that both ST and King County Metro prefers – to listen to what the average rider is thinking.

Having been an average rider for years – I have to say I never had some of the thoughts I hear from many here, much of which jump almost immediately to snarky comments about incompetent or “untrustworthy” driver/operators.

No, I don’t think that there is a “blatant disregard for the valuable time of customers” – and find such characterizations more than just “overly negative” – I’m sorry, but such a characterization of those who plan and run the services we’re talking about here do not have horns, forked tails. They do not live in a sealed box, nor do they routinely torture puppies and kittens for the sheer pleasure of it – but you and others on this board often make it sound as if this is the case.

There’s no shortage of negative rhetoric on any issue, and I’ve certainly been guilty of carrying on on a degree of my own. Surely you must acknowlege that perhaps not every question about service has an easy answer, indiviudal, or incompetent process to blame?

Normally I’m not one to start calling people names, and getting personal and I apologize for those remarks. Forgived and moving right along… Let’s return to the original posts:

…changes mid-day at mt. baker. … having to wait 5 minutes on a light rail line in the middle of the line without any advance warning is highly unacceptable.

this is truly inexcusable. i can’t think of another city in which i’ve ridden light rail where service delays are built into the middle of the trip but not called out on any schedule anywhere.

This is an information problem. Like you said, information is key, and I think we all agree here. Make an announcement! That should deal with most complaints. They have canned messages for being delayed in the tunnel (“The train is bring held due to traffic ahead. The train will be moving again shortly. We apologize for the delay.”) and for service delays in general. Why not one for operator reliefs. This is the easiest solution.

Building reliefs in the printed schedule This is more difficult as there are no detailed schedules posted at stations, just the frequencies and first/last train time. The timetable in the schedule book also abbreviates a large part of the day by saying (“every 10 minutes”). A note could be added, “during transition between peak and off-peak hours, some trains may be taken out-of-service or change crew at SODO or Mt Baker, adding a few minutes to your trip. Please plan accordingly.”

The worst is when a southbound train makes crew changes around 5:30pm at the O&M Facility. Nothing quite like sitting in a full train for 5 minutes while the operators chat with each other. I’ve been caught in this pickle twice.

Next, operational issues. This seems to be an excessively long relief time.

First, do operator changes really take 5 minutes every time? I doubt it. How long do they usually take? Most, from my personal observations, have taken around 1-2 minutes. It involves the operator to be relieved safely stopping the train, leaving the train, relief operator boarding the train, enter the cab, set up his/her stuff, and proceed. There are no external safety checks to be done (or they were done really quickly, visually). 1-2 minutes is within the margin of being on-time (< 3 min) and shouldn’t be a big deal. If some operators can do it in less time than others, then you have a training and discipline issue. All I can say is to instill a sense of urgency and to review relief procedures with operators. Riders must keep filing complaints for excessively long delays like this to keep the pressure on ST (I know, I work in a public agency, too). A lot of problems can be fixed with training e.g. Link operators not understanding how the signal priority system works.

Second, having reliefs in the peak direction during peak hours. With trains coming every 7-8 minutes, having reliefs can add delay to the entire system (not to mention less recovery time at the end for the incoming operator). The train might already been delayed in the tunnel by a minute or two, why intentionally add more delay and anger customers? Moving people quickly with minimal delay should be the priority in this three hours of peak. Having reliefs in the off-peak direction affects the least amount of people. So that 5:30 pm SB relief should be moved up to 5:10 pm NB before the train gets downtown and give those extra 20 minutes for relief time of walking to their car. Or schedule reliefs before and after peak. My route 257 driver doesn’t jump out in the middle of the route so why should Link? I know scheduling is a complex business but the software can be programmed with rules. Overtime and pay rules are complex negotiations between the Union and the agency so I don’t know if what I suggested is even possible.

I don’t think we have to change the relief point now. They’ll be changed eventually as the system grows and we add more lines and more trains.

Metro aims for an 80% on-time rate.

Then according to this “by the book” interpretation – you can expect 2 in 10 buses to be late on average, and 1 in 10 trains.

That means that if you’re connecting to a bus, you can expect (at a minimum) to miss your connection one out of ever 4 days – according to the stats you provide.

Back to the real world – the one that you and I both agree can and should continue to listen to consumers and look for ways to improve things. We both know that some buses never seem to run on time, at least during certain calendar stretches. The #12 for example outbound on Mariner, Seahawk, or Sounder game days NEVER run on time – due to congestion on first avenue.

Some buses run on time in the summer – but not when public school is in session.

So aside from what I often see as a reflexive and almost gleeful instinct to pin problems on drivers – for whom the average consumer onfortunately holds on to a bevy of unpleasant and (mostly) completely inaccurate stereotypes – what other factors might be coming into play, and what might be done about them?

Scheduling is one issue. An operators, we are very invested in quality service to the everyday user of the services we provide. Why? Because we’re the first to hear about it when people are unhappy, and invariably the first to be blamed, usually by folks who have no clue nor have they taken the time to consider that there are other factors at play besides the uniformed public servant with a big target on their forehead sitting behind the wheel.

For a pretty good explanation of how scheduling on buses is done, take a look at the last couple of ATU 587 newsletters, which include articles from a scheduler attempting to explain “how things work” to us drivers – who are ourselves often out of the information loop.

You can find the articles in these issues – they’re a good read:

Time Point Intervals and Recovery Time – Bill Clifford
http://www.atu587.com/documents/ATUJuly2009.pdf

Randall Kelley Responds to Last Month’s Article by Bill Clifford
http://www.atu587.com/documents/ATUAugust2009-2-.pdf

Now Martin – really, “the drive can’t be trusted”? I hope you can acknowledge a flat bias in that statement, and a failure to recognize that there are other factors besides “untrustworthy drivers” that might impact the time that a train gets to the station.

As far as budgeting more than 5 minutes to make a connection – whether from Link to bus or from bus to bus, you appear to be saying that 5 minutes is the limit to what is reasonable to budget in terms of extra time. I hear your argument, I simply disagree. My perspective is one of someone who has been a Metro rider since I was a reallty little dude watching JP Patches to my current status as an operator and Grandson of a 43-year career driver.

You appear to be aruging that if it is necessary to budget more than 5 minutes to ensure making a connection, that is unreasonable and something needs to change. I agree with Oran that always looking for ways to improve the system can and should be a priority, and those improvements can and should include enhancing schedule reliability. I diagree however with what I perceive as a quick-to-judge condemnation of drivers and rail operators when things don’t work out that way.

I also believe that as a consumer of public transportation – as am I – you have some responsibilitiy of your own, and one of those responsibilities as with anything else, be it work, medical appointments, air travel, etc. – is PLAN FOR DELAYS. Suggesting that you may want to plan for more than 5 minutes to make a bus or train connection doesn’t to me in either my long history as a commuter and citizen of the world to be unreasonable. I am hearing that you disagree.

As far as separating good companies and agencies from bad, I guess I’d be interested in seeing some statistics from other transit agencies on how well they run their buses and trains on time, and how they compare to Metro and Sound Transit.

Wouldn’t you?

From your updated intro on this thread:

given that late night service is just as good on the 36 as it is on the 7

Is it possible that rationale for Mt. Baker has to do with the fact that more than just the 7 runs there? The 8, 14, and 48 all service the Mt. Baker Transit Center, and at greater frequency than the 36 passes the Beacon Hill station.

Aren’t the bus connections, both to downtown and to South Seattle and beyond – actually better at Mt. Baker station than Beacon Hill, considering the additional routes that service the Mt. Baker bus transit station?

On another note – I have made a number of points and provided a number of explanations in response to questions that have arisen about some of the observations about relief points, delays, etc. I have done so respectfully and in good faith – and had those points gone unresponded to – including by you.

Rather than getting personal and calling my posts “patronizing and annoying” – something that as I said likely adds nothing to the conversation – how about acknowledging that some user perceptions are based upon a lack of information and at least in some cases unrealistic expectations?

Most importantly – what do we do about all that?

Neither Martin nor you – the engineer – have offered any real solutions that take some of these complexities into account, only continued pile-on criticisms. Comments such as “it takes brains” or “Maybe Susan Hutchison was right” aren’t patronizing?

I’d love to bring the discussing back from the brink of incivility here – and pledge to do my part in that by shelving some of my own frustration baggage drawn from my daily experience as a driver. How about you? There’s likely stuff to be learned here yet.

Back to one of the main points – where *should* Link operator reliefs take place that makes the most sense? How much time should those reliefs take, and in what form? Should ST (or for that matter Metro on bus reliefs) pony up more money for necessary overtime to make sure that drivers are compensated for their time getting to and from relief points? Should schedules be made less cost efficient in some cases so that such reliefs are more ‘transparent’ to the commuter?

I’m all for venting and kvetching – from either the consumer, operator, or administrator end of things, but not sure that ultimately foments progress, particularly in a forum such as this.

I agree with Martin that your tone is becoming increasingly patronizing and annoying.

I didn’t see Martin make any such stated assessement, so will presume it is youru own, not his. I will also add that if that type of observation/criticism is intended to add to the discussion, I fail to see how it would.

At any rate – regardless of your perspective, I see a double standard as your observation is applied.

Nevertheless – I do encourage you to follow that urge to become a part-time, or even a full-time driver (if Metro ever starts promoting anyone from full to part-time) again. Your perspective as well as your “tone” when encountering comments critical of transit and operators such as I frequently see on these threads may change substantially.