GO Transit

[yige_t]

Saying "trains or simple" or "buses are too complicated" suggests that one technology is inherently better or more straightforward than the other. That's not at all the case. Schedules for both can either be straightforward, or overly complex.

That was exactly my point. Thank you.

I won't say that the existing GO route classification is perfect, or even desirable (I do, however, understand the unique circumstances behind it). I'm all for supporting simplifying the GRT network and have supported the removal of route 7 branches from day one. 

But to say that complex route structure/patterns are intrinsic to bus technology only is utterly false:


(JR Shonan-Shinjuku and Ueno-Tokyo line map)

Related but off topic... As an aspiring planner/bus (and rail) enthusiast, it hurts to see buses being looked down upon in this forum (by a small number of members), with comments like "it's just buses, LRT is more important" or "buses are too confusing, trains are better..." Many of the perceived rail-bus differences have nothing to do with the mode itself*. Trains are not inherently better than buses all the time. Just because LRT was chosen over BRT for the ION route (I am pro-LRT myself), doesn't mean we should have LRT everywhere in the Region. Merits of each mode should be examined on a route-by-route basis. Many of the best transit projects in Canada are bus-based (see Ottawa Transitway, Vancouver B-Line, Viva, Züm, our very own iXpress...) so I hope we can cut the "trains are always better" BS once and for all, because every transit mode has a place where they belong.

*Human Transit blog has a nice list of perceived rail-bus differences: read here and here.

~End rant~