Waiting for the L2

Transit

by David Alpert • March 24, 2008 1:38 pm

The L2 bus travels along Connecticut Avenue from Friendship Heights, detours through Adams Morgan, down 18th and New Hampshire through Dupont, and then along K Street to McPherson Square. It also runs right past my window. I started keeping track of its actual times and compared them to the schedule. (Click for a bigger version).

This chart shows how much time you are likely to wait at 18th and S based on when you show up. The darkest area is 10% of the buses: for example, at exactly 8:00, 10% of the time a bus will come within 3 minutes, but 90% of the time it will take longer than 3 minutes. The lightest area is 100% of the buses (that I've observed); at 8:00, 100% of the time a bus will come within 8 minutes (not bad).

The red dotted line represents the schedule. The WMATA trip planner reports that this bus should arrive at 7:48, 8:04, 8:23, 8:36, 8:48, 9:01, and 9:16. If all buses showed up exactly on time, the entire chart would coincide with the red line.

You can see that many of the triangular areas deviate to the left of the red line. That means that the bus often shows up early. If you get to the stop at 8:46, two minutes before the scheduled 8:48 arrival, 30% of the time the bus will show up within four minutes, but 70% of the time it will take 12 minutes or more because 70% of the time this bus shows up before 8:46. And it's been as early as 8:41 (that's where the tall light blue spike appears), which means to be safe and avoid risking a 23-minute wait for a 9:01 bus that may show up at 9:04, you have to arrive to the stop seven minutes ahead of time.

The tighter the triangle, the more accurate the bus's appearances. As you can see, the 8:04 is pretty good, only deviating to the left (early) occasionally and then not very far early. At the same time, it's not late much; the big dark triangle means that the bus isn't usually more than a couple minutes late either. On the other hand, its light colored spike is very high, meaning that occasionally even if you show up a minute early you might be stuck waiting 28 or 32 minutes if the 8:23 is late.

The 8:23 and 8:36 appearances aren't very consistent, leading to the lack of visible shape in those areas. Those buses are often early and often late, and several times have shown up within one minute of each other.

You can see all my data on this Google Spreadsheet. The first tab is my direct observations; the second tab is the calculated data that generated the chart.

In conclusion, the 8:04 is fairly reliable, while the later buses are not so much. WMATA is working on offering real-time bus info which would help since someone could see how much time actually remained until the next bus, and see this before leaving home. The other big recommendation I see from this data is for the drivers to try harder to avoid being early. They should wait at certain key stops until the correct departure time. That way, commuters could at least know for certain that if they showed up a minute or two before the bus's scheduled arrival, they wouldn't be left waiting at the stop for 20 minutes.

7 comments — Share	— tags: buses

Metro releases station-oriented bus maps (Aug 17, 2009)
Bus on-time performance: It matters what you measure (Jun 17, 2009)
Circulator thrombosis (Mar 16, 2009)
Gotta cut bus service? Let's combine and simplify routes (Jan 14, 2009)
Optimal bus waiting strategy (Jan 30, 2008)

Comments

Bus drivers are already required to wait at certain key stops until the correct departure time. (These are called "timing points," I think.) Sounds like they aren't doing as good a job as they could.

On the other hand, it is awfully hard to keep buses on schedule during rush hour traffic in this area. Especially in the evening rush. The best solution, and it isn't perfect, is to run buses frequently enough that you don't worry about the schedule (for most people, that means at least once every 15 minutes). That means, within a given budget, fewer routes running more often. It also helps to have shorter routes, so that buses don't bunch up when they are delayed.

A reminder of why buses are a complement, not a substitute, for rail transit.

by Ben Ross on Mar 24, 2008 2:39 pm

Agreed on the rush hour traffic issue. I think the 8:23 and 8:36 buses' inaccuracy (the lack of spikiness in the middle of the graph) is largely caused by traffic, but being early is not (especially for the 8:48 which is consistent, but early).

I'm definitely with you on fewer routes running more often. I mentioned it in this post on streetcars a while back as well.

by David Alpert on Mar 24, 2008 3:54 pm

A friend forward this post to Jim Hamre of WMATA. Here is the relevant part of his response. - David

Your data shows that it is not necessarily that the schedule is wrong, but that execution of the service plan is sometimes inconsistent. As I work on service planning issues here in the District especially, I am finding it also to be a cultural norm that riders on the bus have been vocal about not wanting the bus to wait at time points. As a result, drivers have responded to the pressure by not waiting.

In our recent 30s line study we engaged meeting participants in explaining this phenomenon and got strongly held opinions on the matter, However, our recommendations from the study are attempting to address the issue of how we can engage customers to help us help them by accepting that on-time is quick enough and that it is in their own best interest to reduce other passenger-related delays to improve performance of the line.

Operations supervision is also a key issue to enforce consistent behaviors among drivers and performance of the operating plan. The staff reductions relating to the District's insolvency in the mid 90's have not been restored and continuing cost pressures have kept the number of street supervisors to a bare minimum. We at Metrobus recognize the need and have been trying to increase the number of street supervisors this past year.

by Jim Hamre on Mar 24, 2008 9:28 pm

So when the tough gets going, blame the customers? I can see people complaining after 7 or 8 minutes, which used to be the norm during rush hour at the Dupont North stop on the 42. Why people didn't riot, I don't know. But riders can wait 3 or 4 minutes, if the situation is explained and/or there are explanatory signs posted.

by it's me silly on Mar 25, 2008 9:04 pm

I didn't read it as "blame the customers." 3-4 minutes feels like a lot when you're sitting on a bus and impatient. Announcements and/or signs probably would help, which is why they are working on "how to engage customers," but I'm not at all surprised WMATA and especially the drivers get blowback if they wait at time points.

by David Alpert on Mar 25, 2008 9:10 pm

I too live on 18th St and often lament the seemingly random L2 schedule. If your end destination is McPherson square or nearby walk 2 blocks to 16th St and take one of the incredibly regular S1, S2, or S4 buses.

by Kevin on Mar 27, 2008 2:58 pm

When I first moved to 18th & Willard late last summer, I was excited about the bus stop (the L2) being so convenient, as I could take it to & from work during the winter months instead of walking. However, I was EXTREMELY disappointed with the service and waited over 30 minutes for a bus on about a dozen mornings because the 8:23 & the 8:36 buses that you reference were not consistent. Thus, this makes me very late to work. So I gave up and went back to walking. It was always so odd to see all of these L2 buses headed north, but none headed south as I walked to work. I also had a similar problem getting the L2 home in the evenings, but the wait wasn't as bad.

by Guy on May 1, 2008 2:09 pm