Q67 to Ridgewood

I don't have time to even get mad at him. Don't care.

And nobody has time to deal with your highway fetish and trying to bastardize every bus route and subway line in the system. Cut the crap already, it's getting old and if you have nothing informative or relevant to the discussion to post, then don't bother posting.

B27: There's really no point for the B16 to do that, turning onto 13/14 avenue at least makes it garner some ridership there.

B57: You aren't gonna garner many riders if you cut the route down, and it depends what time you took the B57 south of Downtown. Because if you take the B57 north at like 9 AM on a Sunday, there's your answer. Your extension to the subway will not garner the same amount of riders, believe it or not.

B67/B69: If you think 16 Avenue doesn't have traffic, you got some homework to do. And a good chunk of the B67 route is on Flatbush Avenue, mind you.

You eliminate the B69 on 7th, you get everyone bombarding the B67's very full, and have B69's running empty. Waste of CNG.

B77: If you think DUMBO doesn't warant service, the neighborhood would like to have a nice talk with you.

The B25 is Bascially used to feed into the subway. Besides, if the B25's not needed, what makes it think the B77 rendition in DUMBO will do any better, its not like ridership will increase with the tip of a wand. You're better off having them with their own routes, because they all are high ridership routes. A concoction of the three weakest portions would probably make the route vulnerable to reductions in service.

B27: No comment, your prerogative

 

B57: It was the 5:19pm bus from Red Hook that I took. While I do agree that there should be two routes going from Downtown Brooklyn to Red Hook as the B61 can't handle the load alone (remember the issues it had with severe overcrowding when it was the only route serving Red Hook) I stand by the point that it should not be the B57 doing that as that route is plagued with unreliability

 

B67/B69: In my experience of being in that area, 16 Avenue traffic isn't bad at all. Also the B67 did perfectly fine when it was the only route running along 7 Avenue, but obviously since the MTA is lazy and frugal when it comes to making service changes, they'll put the B69 on 7 Avenue to cut service on the B67.

 

B77: I never said DUMBO doesn't warrant service. I'm saying a route with no business being there like the B25 shouldn't go there.

Not going to bother quoting.

The 57 extension is pointless. Think about the logic here, if they had to split the B61 into two routes because of the route being too damn long and being constantly late at all times of the day, what makes you think a much more extended Brooklyn route would work....the 57 already gets slammed along Flushing Avenue, don't screw up the line any more.

As for IKEA, I've been on 57s where there were seated loads to and from IKEA.

As for the Q24 being empty along Broadway, as a person who uses the Q24 daily, you could not be more wrong. People get on the Q24 along Broadway, it's not full, nor is it not fully seated, but once it gets to Broadway Junction, it becomes a heavily standing load. It all depends on the time and the day. Going TO the last stop in Brooklyn also varies.

And watch how you speak to people, Mr. [/b]Q67[/b]. You've been banned far too many times because of the way you like to talk, along with the way you act.

1) I'm not saying that the B57 ridership down there is bad. I was mentioning an experience I had with the B57. The catch of extending the B57 to QCM on it's eastern end was to also to truncate it on it's western end to end it where it did before the 2010 service cuts at Boerum/Schemerhorn. I particularly found the B57 extension down Court/Smith Streets to be foolish anyways as it made the route more unreliable for the benefit of none of the B57 riders between Maspeth and Downtown Brooklyn. Buses not to mention tend to crawl along Smith/Court Streets which also doesn't help matters.

 

2) It isn't on a consistent basis, that's the problem. People would only really use the Q24 along Broadway if the bus is right there at Broadway Junction. I always thought and still think that the MTA is wasting their money sending Q24s on a street that adds to the unreliability to the route as well as it carries air most of the time on it. Broadway doesn't need bus service south of Myrtle Avenue (the only reason the B20, B46, and B47 are on Broadway south of Myrtle Avenue is so that they could get to Malcolm X Boulevard, Ralph Avenue, and Decatur/Schaeffer Streets respectively). And that useless terminus at Lafayette/Patchen doesn't help matters either.

B27: There are enough transit alternatives out there along the Fort Hamilton Pkwy segment, which should be enough.

 

B57: You would almost double the length of the route, to serve an area that doesn't have a bus that is still close to the subway. I'd still say that with Red Hook, the bus line would still get more riders than with a Downtown Brooklyn- Elmhurst Rendition (at least, per trip and per mile). The amount of riders gained won't be enough. Besides, the B57 is still pretty long, I'm sure it gets stuck somewhere along Flushing Avenue, and to add to that, you want the B57 serving Grand Avenue as well? 

 

B67: A 1.5 mile extension along 16 Avenue (which isn't that wide to begin with), will have effect on reliability, the route already has bad reliabilty, you want to add the problems, should an overflow of cars on that corridor ever occur. And if you think a "short" extension isn't gonna hurt reliability, go look at the Q24 (anyone who uses the Q24 can probably back me up on this). The Q24 had horrible reliabulty problems even when it terminated at Broadway Junction, and now, the 1.7 mile extension (which is just the same distance as you are proposing with unreliable B67) even made it worse.

 

B69: With the B71, the B63 and B65 were close by, one could take those bus or walk to the multiple north-south buses and catch a bus going to near it's destination

 

B77: That's irrelevant; the fact that DUMBO is a part of the route is good enough to know that reliabilty will be a problem. Besides, I'm pretty sure that the bus route would be of similar distance to the B25.

B27) I still stand by my point that the B16 has no business being on 13/14 Avenues and should just stay on Fort Hamilton Parkway to Caton Avenue.

 

B57) The part south of Downtown Brooklyn, more ridership my ass..... When I got on a B57 at IKEA, I was the only passenger that boarded from the first stop. The bus never got to more than a 1/4 seated load between Red Hook and Downtown Brooklyn. East of Woodhull, the seated load was like 2/3. The B57 going to Red Hook is wasteful mileage and it should just be reverted back to ending in Downtown Brooklyn.

 

B67) Seriously you're bringing up the Q24 along Broadway as an analogy? First thing is that Broadway has a lot of traffic, unlike 16 Avenue. Second thing, Q24s are totally empty along Broadway. The Q24 should be reverted back to ending at Broadway Junction, that was one of the cuts back in 2010 that I agreed with

 

B69) The B65 is nowhere near Union Street, what in the blue hell does that have to do with anything. You can disagree all you want but Union Street needs their bus back and the B69 has no business duplicating the B67.

 

B77) You aren't getting it. The B25 has no business being up there. It's a waste of mileage for that route to run buses up there where there is no demand for areas the B25 serves. What I'm trying to do is make the B25 more efficient by truncating it from an area it doesn't need to serve.

B25 - I'm not sure that I can agree with this, as some route is going to have to be rerouted to serve that area. In the 2010 service cut proposals, it was proposed for the B67 to serve DUMBO, but it has been extended the other way.

 

B27: what major ridership generator is there on the northern end of the line? You skip Downtown Brooklyn, which is why the B69 doesn't generate too much ridership, and the Navy Yard isn't being directly served either.

 

B57: In a vacuum, this may sound like a good idea. However, for why I would oppose this, see why I oppose the B77 idea.

 

B67: On the fence for this one, but I'm inclined to oppose it as the B67 is already more than an hour long on weekdays. Oppose the northern end truncation because something has to serve the Navy Yard directly (see also my opposition to the B77) which also leads me to oppose an extension of this route. I feel that the area may be best served by a new route also servicing Kings County Hospital.

 

B69: The resulting route would essentially be nearly a circle, and there wouldn't be many ridership generators. Any route between Red Hook and South Ferry would need to extend somewhere to the south, possibly along 9th Street. A route from Lower Manhattan to Park Slope via 9 Street could work, but only as a weekday-only service, and such a route likely would need to skip the Red Hook Houses. The B69 wouldn't cut it though.

 

B77: The Clymer Street gate closes at 8 PM on weekdays and is closed on weekends. The B67 must travel through that gate in order to turn around at a nearby corner, as there is no suitable location in the Navy Yard to relay. On weekends, the resulting route, terminating either at Fulton Mall or Sands Street, would be too short.to be worth running.

B25) I would cut it back to improve on reliability and that the route has no business being up there.

 

B27) It avoids Downtown Brooklyn so it could be a faster link from Williamsburg-Prospect Park-Borough Park-Bay Ridge. The routing has very sufficient demand on it's own.

 

B57) No comment

 

B67) The B77 does serve Navy Yard, what are you talking about..... And what demand is there for a route from KCH to Navy Yard?

 

B69) It's only slightly circuitous, not a big deal. It's important that Union Street gets bus service restored and it eliminates duplication of the B67. Also weekdays only? I don't favor weekday only routes for the matter that people don't stop needing buses between Friday night and Monday morning.

 

B77) I said earlier that the Navy Yard would be required to allow buses to pass through even wen it's closed. I agree that it wouldn't make sense to cut it off at Downtown Brooklyn.

He's had even worse proposals.

 

I think he's only around so that members can use up the -1's.

Don't forget Vtrain as well.

Ok, smart one...

 

*sarcasm*

 

 

 

Wallyhorse with his around -15 downvotes on a thread he started with a bunch of proposals I believe.

Yeah it was the one about the Cranberry Tunnel.

B27: Not all gaps need to be closed.

 

B57: What's the purpose of serving QCM and the QBL with a bus coming from Bushwick. There aren't many people to begin with that ride the B57 in Queens. The B57 is good right now as it is. Maspeth High School is served already by the Q58/Q59 on Grand Avenue (Maspeth High School is on 74 street between Grand Avenue and 57 Avenue btw). Oh, and that hospital on Hoffman Drive, has been closed since 2010. 

 

B67: If you've taken the B67 at all, you would know that by now, just saying.

 

B69: 1,500 signatures, pretty good. Now, how many of these 1,500 riders will be regular riders. (Besides, the places they say have no alternative, like the Brooklyn Public Library, they have the Multiple up-down routes to the B41/ / / /  or the B61 to the B69).

 

B77: How does it use less congested streets if all the streets are congested in the DUMBO area. You're still using the same streets at the end of the day. Also, the B77 would be about the length of the B61, and the congested streers ontop of that.

Well if their mode is good for them, they will not change it.

 

Same thing could be said in the bronx with making a new Boston Road Bus (while making the 60/61/62 closed-door, there is no purpose when you have that carrier providing service, besides, it would not gain many riders, which is the same situation that's going on here).

B27: I don't think every service gap should be closed, just the ones where there is demand and there is demand Fort Hamilton Parkway.

 

B57: Extending the route there would gain new riders, that's the whole point.

 

B67: A relatively short extension along 16 Avenue which has no congestion would barely have any effect on reliability, just saying.

 

B69: The problem is the lack of horizontal routes, not vertical routes.

 

B77: I'm referring Court/Smith Streets (B77) and Fulton Street (B25).

B27: Oh, because people love to transfer, especially when it's unnecessary .

B57: Clearly to serve Queens Center Mall and the QBL subway, Maspeth High School, and that hospital on Hoffman Drive if I may add to generate more ridership on the B57.

B67: Looks like we are just gonna have to disagree on that.

B69: http://carrollgardens.patch.com/groups/around-town/p/millman-petitions-to-bring-back-b71-bus

B77: I forgot to add, a reason this would be better than the B25 is that this B77 is a much shorter route and it uses less congested streets.

Also, seeing now that you brought up the B110, that route is irrelevant. First thing, it's not operated by MTA, it's run by Private Transportation. Secondly, that bus always gets stuck on the BQE since it always gets jammed. The B110 is a perfect example on why buses should not use the BQE.

B27: Yes they do, if they don't want to walk it, they could take either mode to the B16 route. 

 

B57: If the whole point is to bypass traffic, what's the point of extending it there?

 

B67: But they don't most of them time, so it will be an issue, on top of that, the route extension will only make you kiss the schedule good-bye.

 

B69: I'd like a source that states that these people want the B71 back, because I haven't heard of one yet

 

B77: You can assure yourseld no one in DUMBO is looking for those areas, but you don't know the story the other way around...

B27: Oh, because people love to transfer, especially when it's unnecessary .

 

B57: Clearly to serve Queens Center Mall and the QBL subway, Maspeth High School, and that hospital on Hoffman Drive if I may add to generate more ridership on the B57.

 

B67: Looks like we are just gonna have to disagree on that.

 

B69: http://carrollgardens.patch.com/groups/around-town/p/millman-petitions-to-bring-back-b71-bus

 

B77: I forgot to add, a reason this would be better than the B25 is that this B77 is a much shorter route and it uses less congested streets.

About making the Red Hook-Navy yard one route: I assume the MTA considered making Red Hook B57 + Navy Yard B67 one route, but decided against it thinking it might not be strong enough as a route. If the Navy Yard part of the route would still be weekdays only, that means off-peak the route would only run between Downtown Brooklyn and IKEA, so it might not perform well. The B75 was somewhat of a weak route. The MTA probably found it better to extend the B57 and B67 since they were routes with established ridership.

 

I agree that there should be a B71-esque route through the Battery Tunnel, but I wouldn't merge it into the B69. The two halves of the route wouldn't do much for each other. At least, somebody along Vanderbilt or Flushing wouldn't benefit from something going to Lower Manhattan like that.

 

Today's B16 was created in 1931, according to Wikipedia. I can kinda get why it's routed the way it is, but if I didn't know any better, I would assume it runs on 13 Av to avoid Maimonides.   I don't really like of a B27 route. If something was to run straight down 13 Av, I would rather it'd be a revived B23.

 

1) Yeah, I got that idea from you. It makes a lot more sense than those foolish B57 and B67 extensions. It would reinstate a one seat ride from Williamsburg to Red Hook which was lost when the old B61 was split into the current B61 and the B62 and it's more direct as well as serve DUMBO and the Navy Yard through the center.

 

2) IMO, it should be a reroute the B69 since the B69 is nothing more than a duplicate of the B67. No one on Vanderbilt has to ride it out to South Ferry. The ridership along Vanderbilt to the Grand Army Plaza is quite sufficient so that wouldn't be an issue.

 

3) There is demand for Williamsburg-Prospect Park-Borough Park-Bay Ridge so that was why I created the B27. It would be a route that would have been a multi purpose route that gives a link from Williamsburg to Borough Park and it operates along 13/14 Avenues.

B25: Any route that goes there will face delays, what's the difference. Same thing can be said for the other Downtown Brooklyn Routes

 

B27: No there isn't; if you live on Fort Hamilton Pkwy, you have the B35 (39 street), B11 (49 street), the train (44 street) , and B16 (56 street) nearby, to get you to other modes, so it's not needed. Besides, that area to Willamsburg has the B110 bus. You live near 9th Avenue, the B70 is on 8th Avenue, if you live near 11th  or 12th Avenues, you can still walk to the nearest mode (on the cross street). 

 

B57: 57th Avenue isn't even worthy enough for bus service (take that from a resident in the area). It's as useless as the B32/Q103 proposal that's been discussed over and over again.

 

B67: A short section. You do realize the length of the B67 extention you're talking about here is about the length that the B67 spends on McDonald Avenue (1.5 miles; if you think that the runtime wont be that much longer, I got a bridge to sell to you).

 

B69: There is no need, those residents would've said something about it by now if there was real demand for it.

 

B77: No it wouldn't, you'd seclude the ridership into just DUMBO, Reed Hook, Gowanus, Cobble Hill, Downtown Brooklyn, and Willamsburg on one route (without transferring). It's totally different from Having service service those areas, on top of Bed-Stuy, ENY, Ocean Hill, Maspeth, Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bushwick, Park Slope, Windsor Terrance, and Kensington (as the current set-up provides). Good luck asking Navy Yard to do that, which probably won't, much less for the reason of a bus passing there (on which they already despise).

B25: See my reply under B77

 

B27: First thing is that those routes have nothing to do with the gap along Fort Hamilton Parkway. Also if you really think someone is going to walk from 13/14 Avenues to Fort Hamilton Parkway, I have a bridge myself to sell you. Folks also have been clamoring for B16s to stay on Fort Hamilton Parkway and for a through 13/14 Avenue route.

 

B57: I already said the routing on 57 Avenue was to bypass traffic on Grand Avenue, not to provide coverage along the street. And a B32/Q103 merger is actually an excellent idea. It would directly link Astoria to Williamsburg and it makes two dinky routes with low ridership useful, what are you talking about..... But I won't dive into that.

 

B67: As long as the buses remain within schedule and pick up passengers, runtime isn't an issue.

 

B69: Really? I heard residents are demanding the B71 to come back as the elimination of that route left riders stranded. A B69 reroute was also one of the things that they suggested.

 

B77: What good does the B25 serving those areas do for DUMBO? I can assure you no one in DUMBO is looking for areas along the B25 past Downtown Brooklyn. There's much more demand for Red Hook and Williamsburg than some Clinton Hill and Fort Greene

B25: The 25 to Cadman is the best that's gonna happen, and every other bus route in Downtown Brooklyn is Unreliable.

 

B16/B27: The B16 doesnt need to be straightened down F H Pkwy, nor is there a need for this B27. Just parallels said route and the B43/B48.

 

B77: This is probably the most feasible suggestion of all of them, but I'm skeptical on this. You'd  be serving less areas (directly) compared to as if you leave them alone. The three route surpass a great amount of areas, and I'd leave it at that, besides, all these routes have different headways (and there is a difference, especially on weekends). Besides, how are you gonna run the route on Weekends if the Navy Yard isn't open (IIRC....)

 

B57/B67/B69/B71 ordeal: There is no need for the B69 to run the old B71 route (especially since you have the 61 and the 57 feeding to the train). And do you know how unreliable the B67 is, for thed fact that you want to extend it down to the train.

 

The B57 doesn't need to be extended either, you;re making a superroute prone to huge unreliableness. Also, terminating service at QCM is gonna be a nightmare. And btw, the B57 actually gets ridership south Downtown Brooklyn, more than north of Broadway. And I'm pretty sure no one from Maspeth High School wants brooklyn, most of them bombard the Q47's, and the Q58/Q59's. 57 Avenue doesn't need a bus route, that's why you walk to the train or walk to Grand Avenue, both which arent that far. 

 

I've feel like we've had this B67/B69/B71 conversation before, but can't pinpoint to when and who it was with.

B25: I always thought that this route had no business serving DUMBO. It already has enough shit to deal with on Fulton Street and the aim is to make the route a little more efficient.

 

B27: There is actually a need for bus service north of 56/57 Streets on where the B16 turns off. The only reason it operates on 13/14 Avenues like that was because the MTA was too lazy to run a through route along 13/14 Avenues. B16 has no business being on those streets. As for my B27 paralleling the B43 and B48, I don't see how they have anything to do with the route. Neither route serves the WBP.

 

B57: I put the route on 57 Avenue more so to bypass traffic on Grand Avenue than provide coverage. I have the B57s end between 57 and 59 Avenue on 92 Street, across the street from the Q88 stop under the overpass that connects the two sides of QCM. About the part south of Downtown, the MTA made a foolish move on extending the B57. They reduced service and buses became even more unreliable. Also I'm implicating that it also shouldn't take on that task as no one on the Maspeth-Downtown portion wants the other "side" of the route. Also ridership east of Woodhull is higher than south of Downtown Brooklyn. I didn't care for the B75 but when the MTA got rid of it, they should've replaced the Smith/Court portion with another route.

 

B67: I would still have something serve 16 Avenue. The B67 makes sense since it terminates right there at Cortelyou/McDonald. As for reliability, it would have very little effects, if any on reliability as it's a short extension and 16 Avenue doesn't get congested. Don't forget that I also cut the B67 back to it's old terminus full-time as well.

 

B69: I have said this too many times that what the MTA did to the B69 in 2010 was retarded. They tried to use it as an excuse to make the B67 obsolete. Look at it this way: What the MTA essentially did was eliminate the B69 and they rerouted every other B67 north of Flatbush Avenue onto the B69 route and then relabled them as B69s. Also there is a need for bus service along Union Street. The problem with the old B71 was the portion east of Grand Army Plaza. West of Grand Army Plaza, usage was alright. East of it on Eastern Parkway was the issue since the route had no one riding it there. I chose to reroute the B69 to eliminate duplication of the B67. This would allow B67 and B69 service levels to be restored to the way they were pre-2010. It doesn't replace the B71 entirely, just the portion where the bulk of ridership was.

 

B77: Actually it would serve more areas. It serves the parts of DUMBO served by the B25 and the parts served by the B67 extension. As for Navy Yard being closed on weekends, looks like the Navy yard is just gonna have to allow buses to pass through on Saturdays and Sundays .

This is a Brooklyn bus prop... since none of that is going to happen I'll clarify that was SATIRE!!!

Ye hath taken the bait, and now Brago, attack...

GIGANO REISU!!

Proposals for restructuring routes in Downtown Brooklyn and DUMBO:

B25: Cut back to Tillary Street/Camden Plaza West. Have something else serve that part of DUMBO. Othe B25 is extremely unreliable and buses get stuck up there.

B27: New route operating between Williamsburg Bridge Plaza and 4 Avenue/86 Street in Bay Ridge. This route operates via Washington Avenue and 13/14 Avenues. That would allow the B16 to be straightened to stay on Fort Hamilton Parkway. This route would also serve Prospect Park and Borough Park.

B57: Truncate this route to Schermerhorn Street/Boerum Place (that was where it terminated prior to the 2010 service cuts) on it's western end. The route is unreliable and it doesn't even get much ridership on the Red Hook-Downtown Brooklyn segment. But extend it on it's eastern end to Queens Center Mall via Grand and 57 Avenues. Most B57 riders that get off at the last stop transfer to Q58s or Q59s to get to QB anyways. The extension also directly serves Maspeth High School.

B67: Eliminate that foolish extension through Navy Yard. Buses would revert back to ending at Sands/Jay Streets in DUMBO. But extend it to 62 Street/New Utrecht Avenue on southern end via 16 Avenue to replace part of the B23. MTA apparently thinks that these riders could easily make their way to the B8 for bus service when they eliminated the B23 but that wasn't the case.

B69: Eliminate the portion south of Flatbush Avenue that duplicates the B67. The MTA only integrated the B69 into the B67 to bastardize service levels on both routes. Instead, reroute it onto Union Street so it replaces the B71 west of the Grand Army Plaza since Union Street was left without bus service when the B71 was cut. The route would also go to South Ferry via the BBT as the B71 was planned to go there prior to elimination

B77: New route operating between Red Hook IKEA and Williamsburg Bridge Plaza. This route would replace the B57 along Court/Smith Streets, the B25 in DUMBO, and the B67 in Navy Yard.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=204309787698206762506.0004f01b02ae50d1d2f56

Anyways

Comment 3000 is mine...

Convert Flatbush depot to CNG, fill it with C40LFRs, XN40s and purchase 64 NABI 65-BRTs.

Wrong thread dude.

Proposals for restructuring routes in Downtown Brooklyn and DUMBO:

 

B25: Cut back to Tillary Street/Camden Plaza West. Have something else serve that part of DUMBO. Othe B25 is extremely unreliable and buses get stuck up there.

 

B27: New route operating between Williamsburg Bridge Plaza and 4 Avenue/86 Street in Bay Ridge. This route operates via Washington Avenue and 13/14 Avenues. That would allow the B16 to be straightened to stay on Fort Hamilton Parkway. This route would also serve Prospect Park and Borough Park.

 

B57: Truncate this route to Schermerhorn Street/Boerum Place (that was where it terminated prior to the 2010 service cuts) on it's western end. The route is unreliable and it doesn't even get much ridership on the Red Hook-Downtown Brooklyn segment. But extend it on it's eastern end to Queens Center Mall via Grand and 57 Avenues. Most B57 riders that get off at the last stop transfer to Q58s or Q59s to get to QB anyways. The extension also directly serves Maspeth High School.

 

B67: Eliminate that foolish extension through Navy Yard. Buses would revert back to ending at Sands/Jay Streets in DUMBO. But extend it to 62 Street/New Utrecht Avenue on southern end via 16 Avenue to replace part of the B23. MTA apparently thinks that these riders could easily make their way to the B8 for bus service when they eliminated the B23 but that wasn't the case.

 

B69: Eliminate the portion south of Flatbush Avenue that duplicates the B67. The MTA only integrated the B69 into the B67 to bastardize service levels on both routes. Instead, reroute it onto Union Street so it replaces the B71 west of the Grand Army Plaza since Union Street was left without bus service when the B71 was cut. The route would also go to South Ferry via the BBT as the B71 was planned to go there prior to elimination

 

B77: New route operating between Red Hook IKEA and Williamsburg Bridge Plaza. This route would replace the B57 along Court/Smith Streets, the B25 in DUMBO, and the B67 in Navy Yard.

 

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=204309787698206762506.0004f01b02ae50d1d2f56

even if the gets upgraded service to offset the loss of the ?

 

The fact that you even suggested to eliminate the made no sense. It doesn't matter if you "boost" the , don't throw the train into this. The train serves an important role in being supplementary to the . All you would do is put even more crowding onto , , and trains. So do you think the should be eliminated so more trains could be added since the runs like crap? Did I even have to go over this shit with you? SMH

Anyone that suggests the idea to eliminate the , shouldn't be allowed to suggest jack crap around here.

This

And Grand Avenue depot's fleet is still boring, even with the Orion V's there.

Those Orion Vs need to go. I used the full B57 Red Hook-Maspeth and the bus I got on was an Orion V. Being on an Orion V is torture, especially on a long and slow route like the B57. They're uncomfortable and they always look like they are about to break down. It was a foolish decision to assign those pathetic buses to Grand Avenue.

I don't know what this garbage of eliminating the is about but it makes no sense. The is needed to take crowding off the . The is already overcrowded and eliminating the would exacerbate the issue. If there is a need for more trains and the tracks are at capacity, installing CBTC makes much more sense than this nonsense.