Culver

They really gotta fix that issue with some buses not showing up on BusTime. Missed an S79 cause damn thing wasn't on BusTime.

9088-9102 might as well have square wheels. Some shitty maintenance there. Train was damn near rattling from the flatspots.

- Your assumption sounds plausible to me; nothing else really makes sense... I mean, the stops after trump village (the sea breeze stop) was the surf/W 8th st stop (outbound.... the inbound stop was over on W 10th IIRC) & the terminal @ stillwell (which dropped off right where the CI bound B36 picks up at)....

 

- Sans the Mill Basin portion, this is similar to the old B21 - except you don't have the route swinging as far west as Ocean Pkwy to run b/w Manhattan Beach & Sheepshead Bay.....

 

I would just scrap this particular idea, leave the B4 to serve Sheepshead east of the subway, and rename your rendition of the B31 to the B101, to keep your numerical scheme of B100's series intact...

 

So you'd have:

B100 - I'm assuming you'd leave this as is

B101 - Gerritsen - Bay ridge route via 65th

B102 - Lefferts Gdns/Prospect pk subway - Gateway mall route

B103 - Also assuming you'd leave this as is

 

IDK, just a thought.....

 

Any future plans for a 104 & a 105? Lol!

Yeah, B100 left as is.

My sig is already the B101 I had before, so that makes sense to me.

- Nah, you still have a few on here that feel that kings hwy west of the brighton & kings hwy east of the brighton should be served with one route.... My thing has always been that the B82 should have never been created.... They didn't know what to do w/ the old B5 (which was rapidly declining in usage), so they combined it with the B50 (which was already doing well).... The Av K thing was an observation of the B82 b/w flatbush/flatlands & utica/flatlands (not inclusive)..... I actually (and still) think putting local buses on that part of K would garner more folks using it, than what the B82 gets b/w that stretch... Not to mention the timewaste to get from flatlands/flatbush to flatbush/kings hwy....

 

- BrooklynBus' Rockaway-Sheepshead route (forgot what he called it at the time, but yeah, it's the Q51) is exactly what came to mind when I saw your "B101"... No need for the it's the internet comment, you're (or anyone else here is) not being held to any higher standard with these proposals.....

 

- x29, yeah, looks better (thought you were gonna contest NYsubwaybuff's idea it, due to it making more turns, tbh).... My main thing with that route (as much as I didn't want it to get the axe) was that it ended at stillwell/surf.... While I don't know the historical context behind that, they should have been truncated the outerborough terminal to Trump Village...

Agreed on the X29. Running it to Stilwell makes no sense seeing as the remaining stops there would be at...not residential blocks. I assume it was done simply as a matter of letting the bus make some more stops on its way to/from Ulmer.

I'm still trying to think of a way to make that B101 slightly useful. The B100 and B103 exist, the B102 is a seemingly useful idea, and that leaves poor ole B101.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc1308e05124fbf&msa=0&ll=40.597075,-73.93095&spn=0.046337,0.099134

Not sure if adding service to Kingsborough is the answer, but there are those articles about buses to/from Kingsborough being full and all, so maybe this version might lessen the load there.

* Your B82 is exactly what I would have my "B50" do... (old link for reference)

 

* The "B101".... Despite the fact that I'm against any bus service along Knapp, care to explain this one fam? Because I'm thinking about a bus taking on such a routing, and I depict buses would be empty as hell past (meaning, east of) sheepshead.... You may get some Sheepshead HS kids willing to walk to it to get to KP, but IMO, that's really about it.... I mean, connecting Mill Basin patrons to the Brighton @ Kings Hwy is more efficient than connecting them to it at Sheepshead..... As for the (real) B4, I would truncate (some) trips on the western end before I'd ever truncate (all) trips on the Sheepshead end.... Mill Basin commuters should not be used as sacrificial lambs, because the Sheepshead end of the B4 is perplexing/winding..... Lol.....

 

* The B102... I think Threxx had an idea similar to this.... But yeah, being general, this would be an efficient way for central brooklynites to get to Gateway.... Only problem I see atm is, having too many buses over there @ Prospect Park subway... Anything helping out the slow crawling B17 on Remsen I think would be of help...

 

* The "x26", I kinda-sorta saw VG8's point with it competing w/ the x28 (I remember that discussion), but then again, I'm not against giving Bay Ridge Pkwy express bus service either... The problem (as you can see) is where would such a route terminate on the outerborough (Brooklyn) end....

 

* Not gonna comment/critique on the whole B2/B31/B100/giving av P service plan, as we all have different plans on how to go about doing that....

 

 

Since I lost the Brooklyn map I had all drawn out using PSP (paint shop pro) due to my HD konking out my desktop pc, I'm gonna start mapping out my Brooklyn ideas on multiple google maps (thanks for making this post btw... gave me the kickstart to want to start doing it).... I remember all the changes I would make (for the routes I would alter), so at least that's one less thing to worry about..... I was all ready to start mapping out Queens (which was the next borough I was gonna tackle) on those blank maps that Gorgor made too... Not gonna re-map Brooklyn on that Brooklyn blank map, as I spent countless hours over multiple days doing that shit... Lol.....

Seems everyone agrees on the B82/B50 thing.

B101 was just a throwing-shit-at-the-wall exercise. I noticed there was already a B100 and B103, and I had a nifty B102, so had to get that B101. Brooklyn Bus had his Q51 follow the Ave U/Knapp/Emmons route, so I did that in Brooklyn, but instead of Queens sent it to Mill Basin to give those folks service somewhere else besides just the Kings Highway area. Probably not a feasible route, but it's the internet.

For the X26, I'd just terminate it there at 25/Ave U/86 St. Serves the regions I think would need it and a short deadhead to Ulmer.

I'm going to re-do the X29 and B31 based on input from these forums.

B31: Seems like the western end here is doable as it's same as B64 save for the last block.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc0be030547c230&msa=0&ll=40.611054,-73.970971&spn=0.092655,0.198269

X29: That Avenue Z thing

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc1a9c5e8e109f6&msa=0&ll=40.669181,-73.9888&spn=0.370295,0.793076

I suggest looking at the routes on the western end of the 31 in streetview because that routing is physically impossible...

Indeed. I'm gonna have to rework that one.

Rainy Saturday = bored and staying in. It also means looking at some stuff Brooklyn Bus proposed, some stuff I thought of, and some stuff others proposed and putting it on a map. Credit to all who mentioned any of the stuff on here, as I'm sure we've all thought of similar stuff at one point.

B2: An extension to cover the B82 west of Coney Island Ave, and a different B2 east of Flatbush. Also keeping the B100 under this plan.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc042fe840a7548&msa=0

B82: Now, that B2 thing only works if we agree to trunctuate the B82 at Coney Island Ave. However, the B82 using Ave K as transition between Kings and Flatlands is a thing I'd do anyways to both cut run time and a limited stop. Really no point in the current set-up at Flatbush they have with this route. So here's the shortened B82, with the main part being that Ave K thing that needs to happen even on a full-length B82.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc107749ff8dff6&msa=0

B4: Going strictly with what BB suggested on this one, because that southern portion of the route is a mess and a half, and also because I have another thing to go to Knapp and farther east.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc07102d5de99a4&msa=0

B101: Now if we do that B4 thing, we can then do this thing. Not the brightest idea, but this is an internet forum, not an MTA board meeting.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc1308e05124fbf&msa=0

B102: Done with input from some forum members here. Just trying to see if there's an area there that can be served. Maybe it works, maybe not.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc141ee8b57bbf0&msa=0

B31: BB's plan, but I'm extending it to 4 Ave to connect with the train.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc0be030547c230&msa=0

Now, these next two come from the eventuality of the B44 local assuming the same route as the B44 SBS.

B40: To fill in service on New York Ave. I think it could work.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc0d23d1cf387cb&msa=0

B49: Shift over the northbound Rogers portion to Bedford to make room for both 44s. Shouldn't be too much of a problem.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc0f60ec9b64b64&msa=0

B5: An extended B23, really, more like a subway feeder route.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc0950192cd83c7&msa=0

X26: Some shit I thought up a while back. Some suggested the western portion of Brooklyn drop-off/pick-up might take X28 riders. I don't see it. Too long a distance between the two.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc197f726b8f0d2&msa=0

X29: Brought back with a hitch at the very southern tip for seemingly no good reason other than maybe just covering slightly more ground around those towers and condos.

https://www.google.com/maps/ms?msid=202807188220210378870.0004f5cc1a9c5e8e109f6&msa=0

Feedback welcome.

So I saw 7088 today. Guess it's back from the dead.

Question, RE: school trippers on the S79-SBS.

So when one looks at the S79-SBS online timetable or bus stop maps, one may notice two PM school-tripper route branches:

http://web.mta.info/nyct/bus/schedule/staten/s079scur.pdf

One on New Dorp Lane for New Dorp HS, and one on Midland Ave for Egbert Intermediate School.

If, however, one were to look at the S79-SBS BusTime map (via web site or any mobile app that uses the API), one would see something else:

http://bustime.mta.info/#s79-sbs

Here, the New Dorp Lane and Midland Ave school tripper branches are not shown, but another one is. In fact, it's a school tripper branch that's not on the online timetable or bus stop maps. Unlike those two, this one actually runs and apparently has a 2:50 departure from Staten Island Technical High School on school days. I checked on bus time one day and sure enough a bus appears and leaves at 2:50.

Upon checking the school tripper bus stops for Midland and New Dorp, the S79 is not listed, but a bunch of other buses with branches there are and have buses leaving them at scheduled times (also seen via bus time).

So my question is this: What gives with this scenario? It's not the most important thing, but it is random and a curiosity. You would think the folks putting together the timetables would notice that the S79's school tripper run is at SI Tech HS, and not Egbert or New Dorp.

Why doesn't it make any sense?

Their mileage advantage goes out the window since the S79 doesn't have any stop-and-go traffic to deal with outside of three blocks on 92 St in Brooklyn going northbound, and there's the issue of the NG hybrids getting blown away by everything else on the bridge, including O5s and 3Gs. It's kind of the reason the MTA Bus's hybrids are getting converted to diesel, no?

The Q70 is for all intents and purposes an express route within 1 borough (although one can ride between Woodside and Jackson Heights). The MCIs at LaGuardia are only used during the rush hour and otherwise sit idle. (This is also the case for the Baisley Park MCI fleet). As MCIs are better suited for long highway runs, while hybrids are best suited for stop-and-go traffic, and there is not much turnover on the Q70, would it not make sense from a financial standpoint to assign MCIs to the Q70? This would also have the effect of releasing the nine buses assigned to the Q70 back to the regular local pool, in part relieving a bus shortage at LGA, as well as evening out the mileage on LGA's MCIs with that of other garages (the MCIs at LGA have largely been there since delivery).

 

The S79 SBS is a route that doesn't have much stop-and-go traffic...which is where hybrids are most efficient. Would it not make sense to swap 35 3Gs from CAS (which currently does not have hybrids), sending 35 NG hybrids there, but barring them from the S53 or S93, and using the 3Gs on the S79 SBS?

I've been suggesting this S79 3G thing (and making sure no hybrids on the 53/93) for a while. It makes no sense for them to run the hybrids on that route alone with the damn bridge on the route and the bus having long runs with green lights in SI.

As for the Q70 point, it's an interesting idea, but I doubt the would ever do such a thing. In theory, it would be great if those MCIs had usable coach luggage storage under the passenger area. In practice, I wonder about the cost.

The wrapped NGs for the S79 are so pointless. They're rarely ever on the S79 nowadays. Branding it as S79 SBS was a really dumb idea on all sides. Having less stops is great, but they could've just called it a limited and not wasted the time and money wrapping the buses.

Serious Question: Do the chains actually make a positive difference for these things weighing 30,000 pounds? At that point, on a 40-footer, if you're losing traction I don't think it's an issue where chains are gonna help. I've been on them with chains and without during the first snowstorm back in January (guess Ulmer didn't get em all chained up in time), and the only "advantage" offered by the chains was awful rattling and low speed limit.

Was on an LFS Artic today. And then an XD-40. Despite being an artic and being multiple times daily on Nostrand, the LFSA was like a damn tank. And then the XD-40... Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but the build quality is just night and day. NFI better get their shit together for their portion of that big order.

I think the is done with the whole hybrid phase after finding out they aren't really as fuel efficient as they thought they were.

 

As for the second part of your question, it's one of 2 things...

 

If you was on one with the ZF transmission (I'm sure you know which ones they are), they naturally do that. If you was on an Allison one, then the driver was manually shifting the gears to get the most out of each gear.

I get the hybrid thing, but the added stability of having a motor at each wheel of both mid and rear axles seems like a worthwhile benefit to go for on the artics.

I didn't catch the bus number, unfortunately.

The other thing that concerns me is the RTS they have. Those black things that be right where the rear wheels are at is missing on some units that i saw on the B6

The not-so-rare exhaust smell at the back of UP's RTSes is what concerns me.

They jackknife in bad weather since all the power is in the back section and the front 2 axles have no sort of traction.

 

...get a string and lay it flat on a table. Grab the back end of said string and push it forward and that basically shows what happens to a pusher type artic in bad weather

An issue that probably won't be an issue in the next generation of hybrid and electric artics with low-floor middle and rear axles that have a motor for each individual wheel. ZF already have a product available for a while, and I'm rather disappointed the didn't go for those axles with a hybrid set-up for their new artic orders. I know the cost thing is there, but it also buys the luxury of not having to pull the artics when it snows.

Random Note: Was on an UP RTS today and the transmission seemed to really be downshifting early and revving the engine a bit hard.

Another day, another round of annoyed passengers (justifiably annoyed at this point) trying to figure out which F train will stop where. Get on an at Jay, going express to Church. We pass another at Smith-9 then go local past Church. That train then goes express after Ditmas and passes us before Kings Highway. They've been doing this alternating express thing with late PM trains lately. I was on the other end of that a few weeks ago where I was on the one that went express after Ditmas. In addition to the countless problems at Church and Smith-9 over the past week or so sending everything express, foamers have had a ton of chances to foam TEH CULVERZ EXPRESSES. Needless to say, plenty of passengers seemed annoyed with this hopstop bullshit.

The is always a mess. They should have gotten around to doing CBTC on QBL first because the runs at max capacity in terms of trains per hour during the rush and it still runs like shit

I was referring specifically to the seemingly non-stop problems at Church last week or so. You are right on the lateness, though. There are always a few late ones that end up going express between 18 and Kings, but it's been worse since the towers now get to play around with the trains going express on different segments with the express tracks on the viaduct in service. Well, better if one lives at an express stop, I guess.

7599 moves well. Engine sounds nice, turbo spooling sound is nice and loud, and pop-off valve gives a good sound. Bus is also in better condition than some of the XD40 shitcans.

I think we're going on a week now of daily hours-long signal and switch issues on the Culver at Church Ave and/or Smith-9 Sts.

All the MTA had to do was to make the B37 stop with the B103, not the other way around (on top of this madness, three stops are added). Great thinking by the MTA, kudos (smh).....

This exactly. Sharing the stop on Atlantic/Pacific (and at most, also the 9 St stop, for connection to F/G/R) would've been enough.

The B103 as is seems to work fine. Why the has their little fetish for killing off lines I will never know. That's the sort of shit I expect from the a**holes running NICE.

If there are significant issues with the Xcelsiors, then that's not good. It reminds me of what happened with the TTC. Bad blood between them and New Flyer ever since.

Like with cable companies, there isn't really competition. NovaBus makes solid buses, but the idiotic (no, seriously, WHY? WHY Nova?!) wheelbase makes interior space cramped with no solutions thanks to the laws of physics. There just isn't any magic way to place seats that doesn't result in awful interior space on the Novas. That leaves NFI with their shitbox Xcelsiors that will maybe last 5 or 6 years before falling apart. Two awful choices, so the can't really have bad blood with anyone.

I just checked out Transit & Bus Committee meeting booklet.

When B37 bus restores with no Brooklyn Heights service, B103 will have 3 stops along 3rd and 4th Avenues at Warren St, 3rd St and 9th St.

So they're slowing down the B103 for the sake of slowing it down.

At least if the B46 ever gets SBS, it'll definitely get artics (at least, the Limited will) 

Those artics are gonna love climbing Mt. Utica going northbound.

Do you have ANY idea what you've started?!!! VG8 is going to breathe fire upon this forum for weeks now demanding we all apologize for saying Riverdale is part of yucky, gross, poor people Bronx.

[Darth Vader's Noooooooooooooooo!!!]

They're violent thugs. This has nothing to do with pro-union or anti-union, it's pro-SEIU or anti-SEIU. This (purpleshirts blocking streets) shows once again that the SEIU is a radical organization who doesn't know the meaning of a peaceful protest.

 

You want to sit there on the median of the road over there and make fools of yourselves as it is to get your word out fine, that's your 1st Amendment right (though the Port Authority has constantly shown no respect for the 1st Amendment but that's another story), but you can't block people from getting where they want to go and infringe on their right of free movement.

Violent thugs? As in, they physically beat people? Since when?

Anyways, blocking the road probably ain't the best way to go, but if my job got outsourced and benefits I paid into got stripped (quite literally robbery), I'd be pissed. As this is PA, not really surprising. When you got two massively anti-union governors in charge, that'll happen.