Bus Bunching

Real‑time information: apps vs stop displays

• Many see digital timetables at stops as crucial, especially for visitors, people without local apps, or in areas with poor signal.
• Others argue personal devices make fixed displays “less important,” but want smarter apps (e.g., warning about diversions and suggesting alternate stops).
• Several riders still prefer physical displays for daily commutes, citing less friction than pulling out a phone.
• Suggested compromises: QR codes at stops pointing to live data; low‑power e‑ink signs.
• Discussion notes GTFS (schedules) vs GTFS‑RT (realtime), and that many people don’t realize services like Google Maps can show transit times.

Passenger behavior, trust, and crowding

• Even with signs showing another bus/train close behind, people often cram into the first overcrowded one due to past experiences of “phantom” follow‑up service.
• Some say the underlying issue is system overload, not bunching per se; others frame it as a coordination problem where individually rational choices worsen crowding.
• A minority willingly wait for the emptier following vehicle, especially where headways are short and reliability is high.

Operational tactics to fight bunching

• Holding vehicles to “even out service” feels perverse to onboard riders but is defended as global optimization; some suspect it’s sometimes just driver shift timing.
• Frequency‑based schedules (“every 8 minutes”) are preferred in dense networks, with apps for fine‑grained timing.
• Skipping stops or switching locals to express mid‑journey is heavily criticized as undermining reliability, though some accept it when buses are already bunched or full.
• Common practice in many systems: buses pass stops only if nobody wants to board or alight.

Infrastructure, demand surges, and dwell time

• Strong support for bus‑only lanes and signal priority; they reduce but don’t eliminate bunching, since passenger surges and long dwell times still create positive feedback.
• Proposed mitigations: faster fare payment (smart cards, less cash), better vehicle/stop design for quick boarding, slightly padded schedules, and rules for when leading buses temporarily stop picking up.

Cars vs transit debate

• One commenter claims buses are mathematically doomed (too slow, infrequent) and advocates universal self‑driving EVs and car‑oriented cities.
• Multiple replies counter that car‑centric design is spatially inefficient and dangerous, and that mass transit (plus walking/cycling) is essential to “human‑oriented” cities.