qjtransitmaster

The walk is pretty long, and not only that, but the terrain is so uneven and hilly (just look at Riverdale Avenue between 231 and 236 as an example. One section is so high up, the other one is very low and on a hill (in addition). Most of the streets branching out also are upward on a hill (and then come back down before getting to the Henry Hudson). Riverdale Avenue residents also prefer the BxM1/BxM2 because they come as frequent as the local routes, and is more beneficial to them than the (because let's face it: I don't blame them one bit. Who wants to lag all the way to Manhattan, making every damn stop, while the express bus gets to the CBD faster. Even if you change at 96, the ride itself is very long. The is also very crowded, and that's also another problem).

 

I'd go further to say that about half the ridership (or even more) from Marble Hill and on, are not being used by the Bronx residents in Riverdale and Kingsbridge, but more from the outerlying areas (Westchester, west of the Reservoir, and whatever other areas those people come from). The topography makes it really difficult for one to want to opt to take the subway.

 

Another example is Forest Hills: A good majority utilize the LIRR in the off peak hour because the fare is almost that of the express, and it gets them to the CBD even faster than the (I don't even consider the QM4 a Forest Hills bus, tbh, most of that ridership went to the QM12, and when those off peak trips died, so did the riders. Most QM4 riders who utilize it off peak hours take it past the Van Wyck.

yup this is the reasoning behind one of my suggestions.

What the hell are you smoking? Again with this Bx16 on the Deegan shit?

calm your shit it is only one to 2 exits . Got another way to get to the from there that isn't time consuming I am all ears.

He (BxM4) wants the M98 out of MJQ for the sake of seeing RTS' on the route since Manhattanville doesn't have any high floor buses

sadly we can agree on this. Why even bother repling to him?

my new combined Bx10-Bx34 route.

Start at Woodlawn.

current Bx34 routing from Woodlawn to Norwood. current Bx28 routing from Norwood to Paul Ave-205th St. current Bx10 routing from Paul Ave-205th St to Riverdale

 

Bx28 replaces Bx34 south of Norwood.

Bx26 replaces Bx38 between Bedford Park and Fordham Center

Bx38 is eliminated. Bx28 serves all of Co-Op City

or easier but faster idea keep bx34 & reroute bx16 via I-87 to the and have it run down Broadway to marble hill mnrr. Now you can switch to bx7 or metro north or bx10 for quick Riverdale access. All without extending bx10.

Few things dude...

 

- In general, forget about combining north-south routes with solidified crosstowns... That's the WORST thing you can do to any portion of Manhattan's bus network.... Talking about merging M106 with M7, and running M22's to East 8th to somehow replace the M5.....

 

- 59th is not a high turnover stop for the 3rd/Lex routes... You are just going to force more people onto subways & M101's by truncating the locals @ 59th.....

 

- The M9 & the M22 more or less duplicates each other, but guess what - They serve different markets.

Running the M22 to up to Greenwich Village via City Hall solves nothing......

 

- It's not that the M4 is useless in Upper Manhattan, it's that the MTA uses the drawn out M4 to supplement the M5 north of 3333 Broadway (a practice I don't care for much myself).... The obvious problem with what you're suggesting w/ the M4 though is that you can't end buses at Columbia (been over that already).... Also, speaking of "futility", sending any of those GWB routes to Cloisters would be just that - Futile.... There is no demand on either end for such a change; bronx riders don't want no hudson heights & hudson heights patrons tend to ride as far south as the Upper West Side - they are not trying to get to the heart of Dominican Heights; "err", Washington Heights.....

 

As far as sending one of the GWB routes to Riverside drive with the Bx6, that would be one very circuitous routing for no real good reason.... Do the Bx6 to the M4 to the Bx11.... You are simply playing mapmaker without knowing how these routes are used, and it is blatantly obvious to me... All because you think Manhattan's routes in general are too long....

 

You can attempt to shorten the things, but the options you present here will drive current riders of the affected routes absolutely nuts.....

actually the drawn out m4 is basically fooling people. Those going to UWS can take the . that is the reasoning behind that. Plus the shorter m5 won't need m4's help. That was what I was getting at.

The M9/M22 west of city Hall, I can agree with you on; I would extend the M22 to where the M9 currently ends & cut the M9 back to City Hall....

 

This way, reliability increases tenfold with the M9 in the LES & East Village (which are no picnics), which needs it....

 

The side effect of running the M22 on down to commercial S. End av is that it would make the M20 virtually useless in BPC....

 

For all I care, to hell with 1 pl. (its old terminal before it got extended to S. Ferry), the M20 can be cut back to BMCC (or at best/furthest, to WFC (where the M22 ends) throughout most of the day, with only rush hour & weekend service running down to South Ferry.... The M5 is no where near as useless south of Rockefeller Ctr. (50th st) that you're proclaiming it to be.....

OK that can work. The reasoning behind m5 truncation was that the M7,1/2/3/4(lesser) provide frequent service. & E 8th to chambers is shorter than it appears and that may service that area better than the m5. But your idea can work too. Question why does m9 need truncating? Based on observation people seem to like the m9 there and it does use side streets to Battery park.

Why do NJT routes have, like, a gazillion variations? The MTA isn't that complicated.

a combination of high demand from outlying areas of the said bus routes. The variants help reduce overcrowding on many lines & the inability of the rail network to meet peak demand & infrequent rail service in comparison to the buses that are back to back.

What mnrr needs is more frequent service not an excuse to run less. As for LIRR maybe double deckers can do wonders for peak trains. And may enable reverse peak trains to run more frequently.

My cousin told me that on the LIRR, when they reach the end of third-rail power, a locomotive is attached to the EMU and the train is pulled for the rest of the route. Is this true?

no besides only battery powered EMUs can run on diesel territory but the range is limited by the train model Japan is trying it sadly I assume an FRA waiver would be needed to get those here.

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2014/prototype-battery-powered-train/ the UK is testing these. In the long or even short term the LIRR& MNRR can save a ton of $$ by retrofitting their EMUs with these battery packs read the article.

Once again, you're robbing Peter to pay Paul...

You making the M7/106/whatevertheshitnumberyougiveit longer and more unreliable than what it is. The M106 is fine as it is.

You say to reroute the M22 to go via the M5, now what about the east end of the M22?

Stop with the super routes already

you mean west end of m22. Plus that area has the M9. As for M106 you kind of have a point. The basis for that was to increase service hours on 106th street while making the M7 more manageable than it's current form plus compared to the current M5 it is not even close but I see your point the midtown segment of M7 might hurt this merged route. Ohh well. As for east end of M22 no change and it will go no further than 8th street heading north.

So basically, you are discontinuing service where one route goes while another route that barely serves it replaces it? This would not work out IMO.

Also, Manhattan buses do more work than you think.

better reliability for m4&5 & no corridor loses service completely. M102/103&106 riders would gain more service indirectly. The Madison/5th ave corridor will see wait times reduced due to improved m4 reliability due to it's streamlined form. M5 will gain more consistent service on Broadway in upper Manhattan and Riverside Dr. Buses won't waste time on futile segments that hurt the rest of the line. And people won't fool themselves into thinking they are going somewhere when they know full well how long and unrealistic said route is. The problem is Manhattan bus routes try to do too much resulting in horrible quality service.

MTA can try to make shorter more reliable routes though. : M102/103 can be adjusted to run more frequently with a truncation at 59th so neither is too long.

M106 can be merged into M7 boosted M102&116 picking up the slack.

M22 is practically duplicating the M9 I would have M22 replace M5 between chambers & east 8th. M5 is useless south of midtown 50th street.

 

M4 is useless in upper Manhattan. It should go no further than Columbia university. LTD stop bus service on Broadway is an exercise in futility. Let bx11&35 take over fort Washington ave. With bx35 to cloister's museum & bx11 sharing a terminal with bx6. Distance riders on Broadway use block by block m5 as a local ending at 168th.

 

As for m50 &12 not sure how 12 is doing reliability wise just wait and see. M50 hmm what parts are the most reliable?

The portion south of 14th st anyway.....

yes that portion is exactly what I am talking about.

I would.... It would screw Williamsburg riders (There are more Williamsburg riders that take the 62 over the 32, AINEC)....

 

The Williamsburg portion of the B32 is dominated by yellow/green cabs, and quite frankly, I don't think that's going to change (similar situation in DUMBO with the B25)... It's the usage to/from Greenpoint that the 32 (which is more residential) is taking away from the 62 (which is commercial).....

B62 might get phased out with part of it's route transferred to other lines like the B69.

No, M20 is used mostly like disable, seniors and tourists, but there should be improve bus and Holland tunnel study.

used really I am sorry I guess the M20 I was on was so empty I couldn't see any riders other than me with a microscope. M20's ridership is so bad it makes N50&36 look like it is used.

Not enough transit riders go to the zoo. A lot of people go to the Javits Center as well, but the Javits Center doesn't have its own public or private shuttle despite the fact that it is located in the middle of nowhere with awful pedestrian connections, because it doesn't have the kind of consistent all-day demand that a school, university, employment area, or shopping mall would have.

 

The Bronx Zoo is so close to the subway that running a dedicated service to the subway a couple blocks away would be rather pointless. Where would you run a dedicated shuttle to? Fordham Plaza (which is already connected by bus)? Grand Central? Pelham Bay Park? It's not really possible because zoo patrons come from everywhere in very small amounts.

 

The X80 is different. Randall's literally only has the M35, and it's well known that concerts and events of that nature have a lot of people who need to leave at the same time, so it makes sense that we have an extremely special bus service for the Island. Zoos don't generate that kind of transit demand.

correction the javits center does have it's own shuttle in fact it has several shuttles to various parts of Manhattan during events they are usually ran by academy or other private entities.

How about, that's what the is for. Where would they terminate inside Mermaid Loop?

what's not even humor him.

extend the B67 and B69 further down McDonald Avenue to Coney Island. And make one of them a Limited

how about no.

Considering how long it takes for the MTA to even get around to implementing SBS, any sort of talk of extension is just foolishness. Never mind that the entire point of SBS is to provide faster transit to communities without subway service, and the entire route from Gun Hill to Wakefield has the directly overhead.

this man deserves a medal you have my salute. Stole my thunder but you are right. The SBS is for areas without subways.

I'm sorry but people living in Woodlawn live there for a reason.  They like that area because it's isolated AWAY from the subway and the ghetto areas of the Bronx.  The residents there are interested in train service, Metro-North.  No need to extend that bus there when the Bx31 serves the station & metro-north.

fixed that for you.

 

the best ways to go are the Metro North. Thats what I do for the most part. but If you take the subway, the best way to go is the . But for the record. the are actually closer to Woodlawn than the

more accurate.

or you could extend the Bx41 so people dont have to walk

not going to happen understand MTA doesn't need to waste the milage bx41 is good enough. This nonsensical thinking is what makes some routes like Manhattan's M4 so unreliable in the end you ruin service for the many to serve the few.

I say we extend the Bx41 further north on Webster Avenue up to Woodlawn terminating at McLean Avenue.

or you can take the and walk.

I'm thinking of a few routes that will provide service between the Queens Zoo and Flushing:

1. Simple route between Queens Zoo and Flushing-Main Street, every 30 minutes. Called Q62. Via 111 Street and Roosevelt Avenue terminating at H.H. Expressway and Saultell Avenue.

2. Extension of the Q50 via mentioned route.

3. Split the Q39 back into the original Q39 and Q50 routes. Extend the old Q50's eastern terminal to be as follows:

Eastbound routes go regular Q39 route via 99 Street, left on 57 Avenue onto Martense Avenue, right onto Van Doren Street, left on Saultell Avenue, onto 111 Street, and the Q62 route to Flushing.

Westbound routes com from the Q62 route via 111 Street, right on Saultell Avenue, Right on Waldron Street, left on Otis Avenue, onto H.H. Expressway, and regular Q39/old Q50 route to Metropolitan Avenue.

4. Use my old Bx54 plan between Fordham Plaza and Flushing with a few tweaks. It will now be like the current Q50 plan and have limited stops between Flushing and West Farms.

5. Extend a bus from Bayside to go past Main Street to head along the Q62 path.

how about simply rerouting Q58 or just walk from Q58 the 1 block.

Has anyone seen what they have done with the N20? They reduced morning westbound service dramatically, buses were always full and there is a big Manhattan commute at that time. It appears they removed all the shortened westbound Great Neck routes and now only have westbound routes originating in Hicksville and Glen Cove. Did they make a mistake on the schedule or is this actually what there doing it might be a big mistake.

 

those short turns carried air most of the time people simply piled onto n21s & N20 Roslyn/Hicksville. When the great neck runs ran I always saw them in queens carrying air with Roslyn or Hicksville trips minutes or sometimes seconds ahead or behind. Then again they only carried in the westbound direction eastbound was a joke.

Also, the N4X may have attracted ridership and/or siphoned ridership from the N6.

that explains the n6's improved reliability

That or people needing destinations in eastern queens that are better served by n4.

 

Why is the n4 experiencing double digit growth in ridership? Could it be that more people are choosing to take the n4 to Jamaica, instead of going all the way up to the Hempstead Turnpike to take the n6?

Jamaica is only a terminal for n4 however n4 is more frequent than the LIRR.

I think it's not necessary. Let the 64 stay at Jewel

I was just pointing out the obvious