Interested Rider

If my memory serves me correctly, the 60th Anniversary of the A train going to Lefferts Boulevard and the Rockaway extension is at the end of April (I think April 29). The 40th Anniversary of the opening of the New York City Transit Museum is July 4. I remember that the Electric Railroaders Association had a tour before it opened and I was on the tour which included a ride from Manhattan to Brooklyn on the Queen Mary Double Decker bus. Anything planned for either of these two anniversaries?

I do not know if this is the appropriate thread for this change on the N Train beginning tonight at 11:30 PM and continuing till Monday at 5 AM and my source is the Bay News and it is also on the MTA website. The N will be running via the West End Line all weekend in both directions with shuttle bus service being provided between Coney Island and 36th Street.

I just came across the following delay: MTA website 6:52 PM 03/21/16 Due to a train with unruly passengers at 50th Street southbound D trains are running express from 9th Avenue to 62nd Street.

The problems at Court Street started this morning (and are still continuing as of this time) and I noticed when I waiting for the Q at Sheepshead Bay at 9:10 AM, there were two Q trains headed for Coney Island within a five minute interval. In addition we passed another two (at least) headed in that direction on our way to Prospect Park. What disturbs me is that MTA did not think it was important for us the paying passengers to know about this problem as when I was waiting on 34th Street for the Q and heard the announcmeent about signal problems at Court Street, I would have taken the F train to Coney Island and took the bus from there. I could have taken the F to Jay Street which would have gotten me the Q after Court Street or gone back to Times Square and took the 2 to Flatbush and then taken the bus. Today was one big public relations disaster for the MTA as far as I am concerned.

The signal problems on the southbound track at Court Street were still continuing as of 5:20 PM as of WINS. I boarded a southbound Q train at 3:10PM at 34th Street and we finally reached DeKalb Avenue at 3:55 PM, It was crazy today.

You know what is interesting here: ABC Radio called it a "derailment" at 6:30 PM and the MTA website was saying something else at the time. If you compare what is listed under the subway delays for 1,2,3 it says something else while the big thing is saying "a derailment". 1984 deja vu.

ABC Radio is reporting that there was a minor derailment and the Fire Department is on the scene with ladders to take out the passengers. (6:20 PM and 6:30 PM)

It is with deep regret that I read here that Vintage Soul has decided to give up doing the roster and cboli22 to stop posting his reports on bus transfers on this thread. I, for one, appreciated the quality and timelieness of their work and while I did not say it in writing on this thread, I alluded to this when I referred to the persons that I look for when I look to see what I want to read in a post on this thread on 01/02/13. One of the things that I look for is accuracy and both of you went way beyond the call in your work. When I first came on the forum, I too thought I knew everything about buses and posted something that was already posted and it was correctly pointed out to me that the bus had been in the garage for a couple of weeks. It was at that time that I learned the value of the index and the high value of their work. Last week I rode a bus that I was familiar and thought it was new to the garage, however, the work of Vintage Soul proved me wrong as I checked through the index and found that it had been there for weeks. Back in the days when the information was done with pencil and paper, the only time that we knew what buses were transferred was when we met others with the same interests on an irregular basis. Nothing like today's world where the internet rules and instant gratification is the norm. This is why I will not even entertain the thought of questioning a member who has proven to provide accurate information, day in and day out. The pictures that both of you post here are the historical records of today that those of us who saw the past wish that we could have taken years ago and are appreciated. Your work will be greatly missed.

Whenever I speak to bus drivers or persons who are interested in transit, this is the one thread that I refer to for its accuracy and timelieness. This is one that I look for whenever I visit the forum during the day along with the photographs taken by many of our members. There are certain posters to this thread (and others) that when I see a post with their handle, I go to it immeadiately as I know that the person is relaying information that must be disseminated as soon as possible. Their reporting is unquestioned as based on their previous posts here and being quoted on bus chat (reference to NYCTF) indicates that others have attested to their accuarcy of providing information. I also know that if there was an opportunity to take a photographic image of some bus that was seen on a certain route and time, it would have been done if they would have been able to do it at that time. This is why I am disappointed that some have decided to begin a needless verbal war. The information involving the transfer of buses between Ulmer Park, Flatbush and East New York is of importance to all of us who live and commute in the Southern Brooklyn area. It is especially important to those of us who used to be able to tell what route a bus was on by its number or by its characteristics as this information is no longer accurate. This is why I ask that the writers return to the basic theme of posting transfers of buses.

Lance is correct that the information given out for unplanned subway disruptions (and I must add, it is no better with unplanned bus disruptions as well) is incorrect and in many cases erroneous. What is the purpose of giving out information to the public which is not correct? Is it for someone to say "look what i am doing" to justify their position? What this does is that it supports the theory that the agency's employees that write and approve the information being disseminated to the public are totally out of touch with the reality of the situation. I am sorry but this will not change, now or in the near future.

I was just listening to the radio and there is a report of a smoke condition at Bowery and that M, J and Z trains are not running between Broad Street and Marcy Avenue. I checked the Mtainfo and they said the same thing with the exception of listing the Z train. I have one question since when does the M still run to Broad Street and what is happening to the M service on the 6th Avenue Line with service to Forest Hills. Don't the persons providing this information ever look at current maps or is this another occurance (which has unfortunately become commonplace) where the information is wrong ? The public is entitled to correct information and they are not getting it.

I am going to ask a what I consider a very stupid series of questions. Does anyone proofread these advisories? Does anyone check these advisories to make sure that they are accurate and providing correct information? Does anyone look at a map? Does anyone ride the subway? (As if they did they would not be writing these advisories this way). This is not the first time this has happened (and members of the forum including myself will attest to the numerous times that it has happened) and it seems that the ones who write these advisories do not care about the riding public getting to and from where they are going but to write and send something that indicates that they have done their job. We know that the traffic reporters on the radio dont know anything either as otherwise they would correct these errors before they would report it as well. Maybe as part of the job specifications, the persons who write these advisories should be tested in their knowledge of the subway and bus system (and the streets as well) prior to being offered this position. They should be tested periodically to make sure that they know about what they are writing before something as confusing as this is sent out.

I concur with my fellow forum members on the proposal to bring back the Q/74 by merging it with the Q/37. It is an excellent suggestion that will provide Richmond Hill with direct service to Queens College. There are a couple of problems that need to be resolved by the powers that be for it to become operational. 1) The streets that the merged route will operate presents a problem in this case especially on trips toward South Ozone Park. Let the original Q/74 loop on Queens Boulevard remain as it enables the route to drop off on Queens Boulevard at the subway station and then proceed onto Kew Gardens Road before resuming its regular route. This way there is no problem with traffic as the bus car bear right off of the service road right unto Kew Gardens Road. Toward Queens College there is no problem in going straight across Queens Boulevard is fine as the Q/74 used to stop where the Q/46 stops on the other side of Queens Boulevard. 2) Who is going to operate the route, MTA bus or NYCTA? The Q/74 was part of NYCTA and its buses operated out of Casey Stengel. The Q/37 is part of MTA bus and was operated by Green Bus Lines before being taken over by MTA bus. Will the MTA bus and NYCTA jointly operate the route or will one or the other operate the entire route? 3) Union and franchise issues are involved here as well. Will this set a pattern in other parts of the city where other NYCTA and MTA Bus routes may be merged and a possible loss of jobs for operators and other personnel? Franchise issues can possibly be an obstacle to implementation even though the merger of the two routes makes a lot of sense? The restoration of the Q/74 (A/K/A Q/44 VP) and merger with the Q/37 will be a revenue producer and after all, is that what the MTA is looking for now.

Joe Lhota has stated that he wants transit agencies to get together for the railroads but what about bus service between Staten Island and New Jersey? That would be a good place to start the cooperative process by working with New Jersey to provide service to and/from Staten Island. The service was needed, is needed and will be needed now and in the future, not only for the Woodbridge Mall but for Newark Airport and Newark Penn Station and other points as well. I cannot tell you how many times good ideas has been proposed over the years and were shot down, for one reason or another. The agencies need to cooperate as revenues have to increase as funding on all levels is continuing to decrease and service will continue to deteriorate on all levels. The members are making excellent suggestions and the time has come for the agencies to start thinking outside the box.

I filed a complaint about the problem that i encountered on southbound B train going over the Manhattan Bridge on May 31, 2012 at 5:25 PM and I received a response that I am sharing with the members. The quotations used here are from that response. "As you (I) indicated on May 31, 2012 southbound B and D line service experienced delays south of the Grand Street Station beginning at 4:58 PM. Several management strategies were implemented until regular service resumed at 6:08 PM." "In response to your comments, we have forwarded your e-mail to.....for review" The response that I received raises some interesting points since the problem began at 4:58 PM, then why was the B train allowed to leave Grand street at 5:25 PM or approximately 30 minutes after the problem occurred? If the problem occurred at 4:58 PM (according to the response) then this raises other issues as to why were the trains not rerouted to terminate at 2nd Avenue or rerouted via the F Line to Coney Island or held at the West 4th Street, Broadway - Lafayette Street or Grand Street Stations? Did someone in management finally realize at 5:30 PM, the serverity of the delay and the trains on the Manhattan Bridge had passengers and crew on board with no timetable as to when they would reach Dekalb Avenue that B and D Line service was finally rerouted away from the Manhattan Bridge?" What I find totally amusing is the phrase "several management strategies were implemented" which leaves me scratching my head in total bewiderment. Did this mean that there was no one around at that time that could make a rational decision to reroute the trains 10 -15 minutes into the delay or it was like nobody cared about the passengers and the crew but just cared about the schedule?

When I rode the Q77 on Thursday May 31, 2012, the passengers were a mixture of young and old people on both trips. There were schoolkids but not many as compared with the number of passengers that rode the bus. I can understand the pro and con arguments presented here as the route does not go directly to Jamaica as it goes to Hillside Avenue and then goes to Jamaica. Most of the routes (with the exception of the Q76) go north or south by 188th Street. When looking at the Queens TA bus routes from 2010, I think that it is extremely important to know how the original route system developed close to 80 years ago and how it impacts upon today's route system. This is why I suggest that you read a fascinating article on this subject: "Queens: North Shore Bus Company and NYCTA Queens Division" by Bernard Linder . Motor Coach Age, April-May 1977 pp.4-36 which is available for research purposes only at the Archives Division of the Queens Library, 89-11 Merrick Boulevard across from the bus terminal. This article will help to explain how the route structure developed, what companies were involved and the takeover by the city. It has a route by route description of the changes to the route and the dates of each and every change. When you enter the library go to the front desk and ask for a research pass to the archives. One caveat: You cannot copy the entire article as I wanted to do (with a different article) and copies are 15 cents per page.

Interestingly yesterday, I rode the Q77 from the bus terminal to/and from Montefiore Cemetery and it had a good load throughout the trip. I took the 11 AM from the bus terminal and the 1:23 PM from the cemetery and we had a nice crowd to 179th Street.

There were signal problems on the Manhattan Bridge Brooklyn side and it started a lot earlier as i was onboard a southbound B train that left Grand Street at 5:25 PM and it started and stop right after we left Grand Street. There were two D trains in front of our train as I waited at 47th - 50th Streets tonight. We stopped for five minutes went a few feet and stopped again for another few minutes and went a few feet again. All we were told was that it was signal problems. We finally reached DeKalb Avenue at about 6 PM as once we got off the bridge, the train started moving. If I have a complaint it is why did they send us on the bridge in the first place knowing that there were signal problems. That was the second problem of my trip from Queens tonight as i boarded a southbound F train marked Kings Highway at 4 PM at 169th Street and when we reached Roosevelt Avenue, the conductor announced that we would not be going via the 63rd Street Tunnel but stopping at Queens Plaza. When we reached there, the doors were kept closed for a few minutes and then finally the train became a G train. I could only blame myself for not staying on that train as i had to go beyond Kings Highway and would have saved myself a lot of grief

If my memory serves me correctly, the B/64 in the early 1950's was extended to 86th Street and Shore Road then via Shore Road, 83rd Street, Colonial Road and then back on 86th Street. It was discontinued a couple of years later as the route was cut back to 4th Avenue. This proposed extension also means that the B/16 eastbound stop will be where the B/1 will stop now and the antics will be turning there?? Please check the Staten Island bus proposals thread and check out our fellow member Checkmate champ proposal for the S/79. He makes a lot of sense with his proposal and also check out buschat as Community Board 10 is planning to have a meeting with the City Department of Transportation and the Brooklyn and Staten island bus planners to see what could be done to resolve the problem.

I would like to get back to Checkmatechamp' suggestion to extend the S/79 to 59th Street and 4th Avenue Station. Reading on buschat today it seems that problems involving 86th Street - 4th Avenue has gotten the attention of Community Board # 10 and there will be a meeting held later on this month with all three groups invited and hopefully coming to the meeting. The City Department of Transportation, Brooklyn Bus Division and the Staten Island Division have been invited. This is where his suggestion to extend the roite to the 59th Street Station comes into play as the proposals that are being put forth for 86th Street make it much worse. The extension will do many positive things if the route follows the service road to 86th Street then straight coming out on 7th Avenue to 60th Street to 4th Avenue. Return via 4th Avenue, Bay Ridge Parkway, Service road to 92nd Street and the Bridge. (I am unsure of the names of some of the streets). Stops will be at 86th Street (On the formerly blockbuster side in the northbound direction), Bay Ridge Parkway, 70th Street and 60th Street and 4th Avenue. Since checkmatechamp did not specify the route, I took the liberty to come up with a suggested route, The reason I like his suggestion is that eliminates the problem at 86th Street and it allows for transfer to two subway lines. I used to transfer with many other riders from the northbound N to the southbound R early in the morning and reversed the trip later in the afteroon. With the bus at 60th Street (located at the far end of the 59th Street Station), it eliminates the necesity of the R and usually missing the bus. I also think that this extension will increase ridership especially from the upper Hylan Boulevard corridor as riders may choose the N and R connection over the ferry and 86th Street.

I have a problem with the S/79 SBS and it involves two other players besides Staten island namely Brooklyn (86th Street terminal) and the New York City Department of Transportation. Taking the latter first, BusChat is reporting that the City Department of Transportation is considering cutting the number of lanes on 86th Street east from 4th Avenue by one as there has been too many pedestrian accidents.When i used to take the S/79 bus to Staten Island at 6 AM in the morning, there was no problem as there was no traffic. In the afternoon, it was a zoo with the double parkers and everyone was trying to go around them. You could spend ten plus minutes to go the two blocks to Fort Hamilton Parkway at that time. The second is the B/1 change with the B/64 which added traffic to the 86th Street terminal. Interestingly, there is talk on buschat to extend the B/1 to 3rd Avenue as well which would free up space at 4th Avenue but cause problems with the B/16. If we add the antics and the fare machines, and the wide turns at 86th Street to this equation, you now have a tolerable situation becoming an impossible situation. I agree with Checkmatechamp13, Via Garibaldi and everyone who believes that traffic signal priority and bus lanes in both directions on Hylan Boulevard from Tysens Lane to Clove Road will help the S/79 more than SBS. My opposition to the Antics is based on the all the detours that the S/79 had to take due to accidents, brush fires and everything else that happens. Hylan Boulevard may be wide enough for antics but when the S/79 has to detour to Amboy Road (or Richmond Road) on one lane streets and then turn onto these streets (which are just bad if not worse), forget it. I agree that S/79 needs better service (having rode this route and seeing it grow from when it started to go to Brooklyn with the limited hours into the route that it is today but antics and SBS is not the answer.

A point of clarification involving the last paragraph: A person could be working for an agency and could be just as frustrated as a person in the community in trying to initiate changes such:as those being proposed on the thread. The difference is that if you are the outside you can speak more freely whereas anyone who works (or has worked) for any agency knows, you have to make a choice between speaking outside the agency which is permitted (provided that certain procedures are followed) under New York State Civil Service Law (and its consquences) or keeping it internal (and your job). If I was asked, I would say follow the latter and forget the former as it is totally useless. The statement was not to denigrate those that have degrees but to indicate that those who are on the outside have more freedom in terms of voicing opinions. The statement about the inner circle indicates the level of frustration in trying to initiate change in this agency.. It is extremely rare that even the smallest change comes from the outside of the agency, no matter how practical, how much money it may save or how many additional riders will use the service. The problem is that over the years a bureaucracy has developed that is not accountable to the public and based on this fact, an inner circle has been created that has the attitude that they are above us and could do whatever they please. Thus decisionmaking is made by a select few individuals with a revolving door of chosen outsiders who are responsive to them that come and go at will. This is why I recommend two books by Mark Leven "Ameritopia" and "Liberty and tyranny" as both of these books provide further information that proivde addtional support to the my comments on this subject.

I have to agree with Brooklyn Bus as it has to be a coalition of bus riders, bus drivers (yes! the dedicated staff that drives the buses must have a say in the change of bus routes), dispatchers, business owners and other interested parties such as members of this forum. The present MTA structure not only discourages public involvement but the command structure is totally insulated from public scrutiny. It is a political bureaucracy that determines its own routes. Its finances are determined by forces in Albany and City Hall as that is how it was created and nurtured. Remember Robert Moses, the first of the transportation czars who was not directly involved with the Board of Transportation when it was created in 1940, His impact upon the agency cannot be underestimated even in today's world. I think that many of the ideas presented in this thread are very good and the give and take is great, Most of us do not have degrees in City Planning but we are quite knowledgeable in how our communities have evolved. We are quite aware of the institutions in our communities and how much bus service is needed to provide this service. I, however, am quite pessimistic that any change will be done and many of us (myself) are not part (or will ever be part) of the MTA inner circle where it could be done.

When the Bay Ridge Avenue, 13th Avenue and 86th Street was the B/34, the headway was about 7 minutes from end to end with service to 13th Avenue from Shore Road during rush hours making the headway on that portion of the line 3 1/2 minutes. The headway during the non peak hours were about the same with no 13th Avenue short turns. Since that time the route has lost the 13th Avenue short turns and the headways have increased as it does not have a traffic generator (which it had until the opening of the Verrazano Bridge, namely the 69th Street Ferry to Staten Island) Unless things change, the headways will continue to increase whether it was the B/1 or is the B/64. The B/4 headway was 13 minutes during the rush hours and 17 minutes during the day. When I worked in Bay Ridge during the 1960's, I very seldom took the B/4 as there were 2 B/34 buses for every 1 of the B/4 buses. This has not changed but has gotten worse as the route has been extended when it took over part of the old B/21 route. The B/64 (which I relied on for many years) to 86th Street-4th Avenue from Coney Island was an extremely productive route as it took 1/2 hour from end to end with a change of bus drivers at the depot. It was for me, the alternative to the B/1 which would get stuck under the elevated line and add an extra 10 -15 minutes to the trip going home. The route should be re-rerouted via the Veterans Hospital to 86th Street and 4th Avenue and remained at Coney Island. (I will let someone else figure out what to do with the 13th Avenue and Bay Ridge Avenue portions of the route, possibly another route from 39th Street and 1st Avenue via 8th Avenue, Bay Ridge Avenue? Now with Select Bus Service coming to the S/79, just think of the B/1 and the S/79 select and regular bus service terminating at 86th Street - 4th Avenue and the proposal to narrow 86 Street too and did I add the articulated buses on the S/79?

I live on the Nostrand Avenue end of the B/36 and there is no need for a B/36 limited but for short turn buses to the Sheepshead Bay Station especially during rush hours. Service levels have to be increased as many times there are standees during non-rush hours and on weekends just as many members of the forum have suggested. The B/4 has to be restored to Knapp Street back to the times that it had before the June 2010 cuts. No everyone wants to take the B/44 and then take the B/36 to the station (and crossing Nostrand Avenue and Avenue Z). I agree that the B/2 service on the weekends as well. The problem is that this community is not active and interestingly there is an election for the state senate this coming tuesday and I have not seen one word as to what either candidate will do to stop the cuts in MTA funding or to help bus service in this area.