Previously, Amtrak operated 8 weekday round trips on the line, and 6~7 weekend round trips. Annual ridership in 2016 was just over 270,000, which works out to about 743 per day.
-
Show this thread
-
The new "Hartford Line" timetable doubled the number of trips available, with 16 weekday round trips and 12~13 on weekends. So you'd expect twice as much ridership, right? There wasn't significant population growth or new development in the meantime--land use was mostly constant.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likesShow this thread -
But during the first full week of service, ridership more than doubled: 1,531 average daily passengers (if it had only doubled, it would've been 1,485), with a weekly total of 10,719 from June 18~24.http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-biz-hartford-line-ridership-report-20180626-story.html …
1 reply 1 retweet 4 likesShow this thread -
Fast-forward another five weeks, and the average daily ridership had increased to 1,644 (total ridership during first six weeks of operation = 69,067). That was by the end of July. By September 7th, the average had gone up yet again, now at 1,860http://www.courant.com/business/hc-biz-hartford-line-ridership-20180907-story.html …
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likesShow this thread -
Considering that the target was to hit an average daily ridership of 1,945 by next June, it appears that the line is more successful than its backers initially expected. Doubling the frequency MORE THAN DOUBLED the ridership, because of how many more trips became practical.
1 reply 4 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Now, the line is still terribly infrequent by any practical standards--you're not really talking about frequent service if you're talking about "trips per day" instead of "trips per hour." How many more riders could take advantage of this service if the waits were much shorter?
1 reply 1 retweet 8 likesShow this thread -
The current schedule concentrates trips in the AM and PM peaks, with very little service for most of the hours of the day. How many more riders would use it if it weren't tailored to 9-5 office commuters?
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likesShow this thread -
The economics of passenger rail work best with *high frequency* service, despite the cost of providing it, because that's how you make rail convenient enough for millions of people to want to use it. Cost control is important--no more locomotives!--but frequency is fundamental.pic.twitter.com/IEIG688eZC
4 replies 4 retweets 21 likesShow this thread -
This thread has focused on how to induce higher ridership by increasing service--but it works the other way too! What is the correct course of action if you're dealing with overcrowded trains on a commuter route?pic.twitter.com/PuFO7MHPcO
4 replies 6 retweets 22 likesShow this thread -
Both approaches double the seating capacity of the route--but only one of the approaches cuts the wait times in half!
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread
This has been a #TrainTwitter special announcement
Thank you for your attention
pic.twitter.com/35GXBou2Y9
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.