Culver

So we've concluded that there are about fifteen B23 routes on this thread, all probably better than the one the MTA ran. Lovely.

The should've revived the B23. Either that or Extend the B67 to Borough Park and the B69 to Flatbush

Excellent idea, this.

Alright, now I see.... His plan is to:

 

- divert S66's emanating from the pt. richmond side towards brooklyn via clove rd, etc. & extended to 59th st subway....

(for starters, who along Jewett is going to want access to Brooklyn... Who up on the north shore period would take his 66 over the 53 (which would be a backtrack btw) to get to brooklyn? Having buses directly serve 59th st. subway will not make that much difference, compared to the ppl that already take the 53 up in that part of SI, to Brooklyn)....

 

- have an Av. P route (I was trying to understand why he mentioned Av. P in all this) extended to St. George via grymes hill & victory blvd, coming off the bridge....

------------------------------------

 

The problem is obvious here; he doesn't know how to effectively serve grymes hill.... This is where connecting the dots in this case doesn't make sense...  I mean, you want to have a St. George (ferry) - Brooklyn route, fine.... But there are simpler ways to try to serve that market (and draw in more riders) than having buses run from brooklyn, up a hilly community & back down to victory blvd itself, towards the ferry.....

 

What I'm questioning (outside of serving grymes hill to/from brooklyn) is the running of buses along victory towards the ferry to/from brooklyn.....

 

* If you want to appeal to (more) SI riders heading towards Brooklyn up from the area around the ferry, you're better off serving the areas along/around st. paul's/van duzer between beach st & the ferry itself.... The question would then be, which path would such a route serve b/w beach st & narrows rd N/S......

 

* If you want to quickly link Brooklyn to the SI ferry, you'd have buses take the lily pond exit towards school rd, then run em up bay to get to the ferry....

See, this is why my S58 goes via Bay to Fingerboard, turns on Fingerboard, then onto the bridge. Alternate was having it follow the S78 route b/w St. George and Hylan/SIE/Bridge. Question is which of the two routes b/w the bridge and St. George would get more riders.

for 20 to 30 extra mins wasted waiting for a very unreliable connection. You underestimate how hard people try to avoid that. To most that $3 isn't worth it. Otherwise X1 wouldn't be so packed so that stance is null and void.

Or maybe more people are switching from driving to the express now that they know they have a reliable 24/7 bus route.

R does not connect to the N very well X1 will always win especially since it is now 24/7 $5.50 is nothing compared to those tolls!! Not enough people will take the extra 20 mins as proven by how packed the X1 always is. I do agree S83 would be very welcome I never made a case against it and I think no proper case against it can be made anyway. X10 and X1 X17 have all kinds of people slamming those lines. If you want to reduce X10 ridership run X14 full-time. Then again most of X10's ridership is on the SIE service road anyway. 

The R connects to the N well enough for myself and all the people that now use the S79 SBS; and all the people that get off R trains in PM rush hour and pack every last inch of S79s and S53s.

EDIT: On tolls. I think what will end up happening is people who previously used express buses are moving to the S79 and S53, and people who drove are now packing into the express buses. We'll see how it goes, but if the MTA adds an S83 LTD (seriously, just do it for the April pick), they'll give a lot of good options for folks. The tolls might end up pushing more people onto buses than they anticipated.

Since there is already the S79 going to bay ridge I think this S58 should skip and just go to the 59th station for the . Current riders transfer to S79 so with that said I doubt bay ridge needs a route from st george from deeper in SI maybe but there are enough locals to bay ridge for now. Unless the S79 and 53 get CRUSHED BAD I don't see the need for a new route. But this new route can bring more people to transit connecting to the directly would help alot.

You can bet your ass they get packed in peak direction. The S79 SBS is pretty damn quick in Staten Island. It has (and I'm betting numbers will show this) now become a decent alternative to express buses since SI folks can now save $5.50 a day by taking S79 SBS to the R to the N. The transfer from the S79 SBS to the N can take 5 minutes during rush hours since the actual ride from 86 St to 59 St on the R is about that long. From 59 St it's another 5-10 minutes to downtown Brooklyn and 5 more to Canal. It adds up, but for the savings in MetroCard or single fare, it seems enough people are willing to take the extra 20 minutes and avoid the express bus. I reverse-peak commute this way on some days, and am met with a stampede of people making that transfer in peak direction. An S83 LTD would be very welcome by S53 riders, I can guess that much based on how packed I've seen those buses.

you sure you don't want to serve clarendon ave with this line?

I'd be open to it. Depends on whether we have any idea if it would get used. How's the B8 do down on Ave D? If you send it down Clarendon, might as well make it go all the way and have it go to Brookdale Hospital, Canarsie or Spring Creek.

Another try at B23. Reviving this route is like trying to get blood from a stone. I think maybe the people along 16 Ave just don't want to take a bus. So with this route, keeping the extension via Ocean Ave to Prospect Park in hopes of transfers and rides along Ocean. Extending to 86 St and 18 Ave in hopes it can get some passengers taking it to/from the two D stops it crosses.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004d4388a0c93da0499d&msa=0&ll=40.63519,-73.983479&spn=0.078552,0.154324

again, the oldest bus is a 9300. FB, ENY still have 8700/8800 RTSs. If anything on average, up is pretty well balanced in having a bunch of younger RTSs vs the other depots ranging from extreme new to extreme old.

 

And to everyone bellyaching, wouldn't you prefer a temporary decrease of buses now in favor of a larger fleet order? Some of you are too shortsighted to see the bigger picture. Plus be fortunate that all the issues those buses have had doesn't seem to be scaring off the mta from canning the order altogether.

If this 90 bus test order is as good as ENY has suggested, the MTA (like everyone here says, you never know with them) may tell NFI and NovaBus to go pound sand and wait another year to order 600 of whatever the 90-order bus is after that gets validated in testing. Now that's probably not likely, but hey, never know.

I do agree, the RTS units UP has are in good condition and on the newer side. If anything, they'll just get a ton of the finalized version of the MTA-spec XD40 next year to move out the RTS buses.

If it's not a limited, it shouldn't be numbered S97 (any SI route with an 80 or 90 is a limited). It should be numbered S5X (because it's not a North Shore crosstown, Victory Blvd route, or South Shore route).

So S50 or S58 then. Yeah, S58, since one of the two variants I had follows the S78 anyways.

Just so everybody knows, the first version went up Tompkins (basically, taking the S78 route north of the SIE).

 

BTW, if it's a limited, what stops would it make (both the Tompkins version and the Bay Street version)?

Didn't think about making it a limited since the run between the bridge and St. George isn't particularly long. For the Tompkins route I thought of having it follow the S78, for this one follow the S51 once it gets to Bay Street.

Because why the hell not:

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004d48e11746ef3900f0&msa=0&ll=40.622683,-74.050598&spn=0.078567,0.154324

Modified S97, now with more Bay Street goodness.

Well, that was a rather pointless move of the MTA....

I guess they figure they'll just replace all of UP's RTSes with the big order. Funny, for all the time UP has had XD40s, I've never gotten a single one on the damn B6. Always an RTS; though admittedly RTSes in good shape.

I wonder if anybody made a post about a possible 65 Street route?

Ha. I did a few pages back.

B101.

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004d4387b43710de3a48&msa=0

- Bus pulls in

 

-Shifter or driver pulls it up to fuel station

 

-then there it get's topped off with diesel & other fluids (fluids like DEF if it uses a Diesel particulate filter) also gets the farebox emptied/vaccumed

They use waterless coolant, I presume?

Speaking of XD40s, any idea as to why 4815 and 4862 are still not swapped back b/w UP and EN?

There was a Downtown Brooklyn route years ago though from Staten Island, so at some point there must've been demand....

Just have one of the fifteen X17 branches make a stop downtown.

Basically, this is the suggesting of a SI-downtown route all over again...

Exactly. Such a route isn't needed. At best you can maybe have one line go to 59 St, that's far enough. The ride to Downtown Brooklyn on the N from there is 10 minutes.

A St. George to Bay Ridge route for the sake of having one, here it is (sorry if others have something like this, but this thread is 30+ pages...).

https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004d48e11746ef3900f0&msa=0

Would terminate across the street from the S93LTD as drop-off/layover only, then start its runs at the same stop on 86 St as where B1 starts. Not sure if anybody would actually use this, but I suppose less transfers and all might draw people. If the S79SBS, S53 and S93LTD are all packed in peak directions (both for S93LTD few times I've seen it) during rush hours, why not this shittle route.

BTW, I'm guessing if an S83LTD happened, it would share space with S93LTD, right? S53 being full time gets to keep its own space, right?

Yeah well MTA Bus said that the S53 has the S93 as a limited which is total BS.  I don't see how the S93 can be viewed as the S53's limited when it only serves a few stops that the S53 serves.

It's a ridiculous statement on their part, really.

BM3 extended to trump village

Uh, the BM3 to Trump Towers/Village/Hairpeace Memorial might be OK. Don't those folks currently avoid the yucky subway like the plague? If you're adding 4 stops (At Coney Island Ave, Ocean Parkway, Neptune/ W5, W5/Sea Breeze), might be worth a try. But then the X29 would still exist if the Tower-dwellers flocked to the express buses.

I know the S99, S83LTD, et al. are supposed to be part of North Shore improvements, but the MTA should really just get on with it already. The 53 needs its S83LTD supplement (every time I see the S53 the past two weeks it's bloody packed).

Lol, I don't think you can have 'sm'. It stands for something else entirely lol. A clue: 'bondage'.

I know, I know. Hadn't thought of that, but that's a good reason to keep the X designation for SI expresses.

No, I was just saying as a joke: "why not just swap the unions from SI and mta bus? Maybe then you could consolidate the mta bus personnel at SI and get the merger rolling more quickly here."

Eh, why not. Besides, don't they have it in their contract that only SI depot drivers can drive buses in SI?

I'd keep the complete merger simple. All buses under MTA Bus logo (I'd also make the subways MTA Subway), NYCDOT routes keep their city mandate and subsidies but can now be distributed, split, etc. to depots that would make it easier to deadhead, etc. Basically as name suggests, it's all one big, happy family, one radio communication system, one agency ordering buses, and SI can keep their own union and continue to feel special. And of course the route designation change with SI expresses being X (could do SM, I guess, but folks would flip a shit with so many "X" routes changing) and the other three being BM/BxM/QM only for conformity.

lol, how about swapping the unions at mta bus with SI? Spin SI off as its own system like LIB and then you can better integrate mta bus and nyct in the other 4 boroughs.

So SI union is what's causing the hold up? And I wouldn't consider my proposal that extreme. I only suggest the route names to make a uniform policy. Have SI expresses use X since they already have the vast majority of those, while making the other boroughs use the NYCDOT express designations.