[theluketaylor]

When I was a teen in Calgary the transit agency was really good at dealing with issues like this during peak periods. They would pair or triple busses together and alternate stops. If someone requested the stop the drivers would radio to coordinate. Sometimes both buses would have a requested stop, but they would work together so only one bus allowed new riders on. The non-loading bus would quickly drop off passengers and leave while the other stayed behind to handle new riders. Nearly all the stops had dedicated out of traffic space for the bus, so the leap-frog maneuver was really simple. A small amount of low cost infrastructure and some operational cooperation enabled much better service.

[a_e_k]

Another simple strategy that I've seen is simply for the loaded bus to allow the empty bus to overtake it and go on ahead (and just stay ahead).

[pc86]

That sounds identical to what the Calgary busses do? You'd still need coordination between the busses to know when the loaded bus "wants" the empty one to overtake it.

[a_e_k]

The difference is that it was a one-and-done thing rather than leapfrogging back and forth as it sounds like `theluketaylor` was describing.

And yes, the drivers would coordinate. (I've sometimes seen it done with a brief honk for attention followed by a hand wave.)

[mulmen]

Why does the loaded bus’ preference matter? If you see a bus stopped ahead of you with the same route number and nobody requested that stop then just continue.

[hobo_in_library]

The driver in the front sticks his hand out the window and waves to the one in the back