It will come as absolutely no surprise to anyone that transit ridership in March 2020 was well below March 2019. April’s will be even lower, but for now we have just the data for March released earlier this week by the Federal Transit Administration.
Those data show that overall rail ridership declined by 46 percent while total bus ridership fell by 38 percent. Among the nation’s largest urban areas, the declines ranged from just 8 percent in Oklahoma City to 54 percent in Washington, DC. At the lower end of the range, Richmond — just a few miles from Washington — saw just a 12 percent drop; Raleigh was 18 percent; and San Antonio was 19 percent. At the upper end of the range, Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Kansas City, Memphis, New Orleans, New York, San Francisco-Oakland, and Seattle all lost between 40 and 47 percent of their riders.
IEP programs are designed getting viagra in australia by team of individuals including the child’s parents or caregivers. All of the research shows tomatoes are indeed pure heart and blood food. levitra samples In a modern stadium with a winning team to support, Baltimore Ravens tickets are coveted in a cialis for woman town that loves its pro football. Actually, there are numerous reasons for erectile dysfunction as buy discount cialis it slows your metabolism and you feel fatigued all the time.
Ridership in the urban areas with most transit declined by 40 to 54 percent.
As usual, I’ve posted an enhanced version (11-MB) of the FTA spreadsheet showing annual totals in columns HU through IM; mode totals in rows 2184-2205; transit agency totals in rows 2210-3209; and totals for the 200 largest urban areas in rows 3220-3420. Also as usual I’ve made these enhancements both on the ridership (UPT or unlinked passenger trips) and service (VRM or vehicle-revenue miles) pages.
things we can be certain of
– Transit agencies in bigger cities are facing huge financial burdens.
– The COVID19 crisis has exposed it’s lack of fiscal savings
– The agencies will continue to suffer fiscal hardship struggling to get passengers in a pandemic frightened world. (Even thou most infections were statisically found at home).
– To alleviate it the agencies will no doubt ask for some sort of financial assistance. In other words more subsidies.
In other words, Business as usual
So transit use is Down……..big deal.
The devastation of the airline industry sounds terrible but from this may come better things. Even before COVID-19, the era the airline industry was in bad straights because they were battling economies, fuel prices, maintenance and subsidy battles. While the left continues to argue in favor of trains as a means to replace or substitute air travel. This circumstance my yield a revival of the air industry, turn of the century when aviation was new, tinkerers in their garages were busy with new fangled flying whatcama call its, REGARDLESS, there’s a multitude of new technologies and old ones that may revive the air industry.
1: The return of the turboprop! the jet age saw the decline and phase out of propeller planes in major service, while prop planes are still used they’re mostly for small planes and remote facilities. While Boeing and Airbus cartel shifted to jets away from Turboprop and smaller planes. But the investigation in aerodynamic changes, aerobody construction and improved engine efficiency.
With the airline industry most likely financially crippled it’s a safe bet the airline industry will liquidate it’s biggest planes. The Jumbo jet era is over; has been over for a while. For one thing regional flights are more prevalent than international ones, at distances less than 500 miles, a prop plane may win out if it can load quickly, if even straight from the runway. Propeller designs have evolved, look at the A400, for greater efficiency and the fuel economy. The Lockheed Constellation, one of my favorites, one of the most beautiful planes ever made, flew on fuel economies superior to jets…it took 50 years for turbofans to catch up.
2: the re-emergence of the seaplane/amphibious aircraft: While the advent of runway adopts and local airports reduced the need for amphibious planes, the next generation of sealed waterproof composites and lighter/stronger structures may see a possible revival of the “Flying boat” China’s AVIC 600 signifies a possible return? Although this is transit for it’s artificial island bases in the pacific. To fly from Los Angeles to Honolulu a distance of 2,552 miles, a plane needs at least a 3000 mile fuel range, a flying boat with a 2600 mile range can land in the water even in emergency.
3: The Dynalifter: The 1930’s saw the end of the airship era. Blimps and Airships however may make a comeback. An Ohio company Ohio Airships, hopes to combine the advantages of air cargo while significantly reducing fuel consumption. They achieve this by designing slow cargo airships, called “Dynalifters”. These air vessels mix the design of a plane and a rigid airship. The craft uses a helium filled bag made of modern durable material and like airships has a rigid skeleton to support it but unlike airships they’re not lighter than air thus wont float away without a tether. Like an airplane it has wings and takes off and lands like a plane. Despite it’s gigantic size of conceptual models, Requiring only 1500 feet of runway and capable of carrying over 100+ tons. Large ones carrying as much as 500 tons (five 747 freighters worth) While slower than a 747 it does it with greater fuel economy. Making it a boon for cargo delivery and humanitarian aid relief in infrastructure-less environments.