MysteriousBtrain

17 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

Any picture? Bustime has it on the Q24 right now.

I'm thinking he might of saw 4437 which is actually assigned to LG.

2 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

Can I just say no to the to Spring St ? There's no viable turnaround in that area

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Sure....

Just as much as I'd say no to the person on here that inquired on running B39's up to Union Sq.

1 hour ago, Q43LTD said:

And also no to Broadway Junction since the proposed B53 and 66 look like the old B40 on steroids

Even as an ADA shuttle even extending the B39 east to Lorimer St is kinda iffy due to the Williamsburg bridge traffic. (Yes I listed it in my proposal earlier but that doesn't mean it's good) 

Also on the topic of possible Manhattan terminals of the B39 the proposed L1-4 bus shuttles proposed a layover near Lafayette Av and Houston St (near the complex)

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Why are they still moving ahead with redesigning the express buses even though they got so much opposition from the Bronx portion? 

Reread what you posted, then look at the Bronx redesign, followed by the Queens and Brooklyn redesigns. 

Figure out which ones have X routes, which ones got feedback heard from, which one had a redesign of the redesign and then research what a bus network redesign is. After that, you should know why the Bronx express redesign was cancelled, and not (express) bus redesigns in general.

Order is not finished yet. Order compiles for 85 artics in the initial order with 85 option units. 85 XD60 buses were delivered in the base order during 2020 (20801-20885), with 25 options exercised by 2021 (20886-20910) and the final 60 being ordered beginning no later than 2024 (24801-24860?). These 60 buses will replace at least 40 aging NABI units:

https://www.nj.com/news/2022/12/nj-transit-spending-97m-for-new-buses-a-ferry-and-to-rebuild-locomotives.html

1 hour ago, Lex said:

Sure, but now you're switching the burden to the chronically-congested Church Avenue.

The fact that it's a bus route (in mixed traffic, no less) is my problem with the proposed B55, not that they're proposing a link between that part of Brooklyn and JFK Airport at all.

A bus route will sit in traffic no matter what unless you build a Busway, and the infrastructure in NYC has almost no way to build a Busway anywhere. 

The B15 to JFK was already bipolar enough as is as often I would see 3 spring Creek buses before a JFK Bound bus in a span of 20-30 min.

1 hour ago, Brillant93 said:

I would like to add that the B15 needs to be kept going to JFK. Queens have multiple routes going to LGA and JFK so why not Brooklyn? Having the B55 being the only route to JFK would be a huge taking. But also what about the workers who live in upper parts of the borough? Have both the B15 and the B55 to JFK.

The B15 does too much work for its own good. Too much delays and there's not much demand for Brooklyn-JFK riders outside ENY and riders to the . At least the B55 has service to Mid-Brooklyn, an area that struggles with easy access to subway service; the B15 has nearby subway alternatives.

9 hours ago, Sam855 said:

The B71 for sure, I mean if anything it deserved to be at least in the draft

I personally feel like they could reroute the B61 to cover the B71 to Grand Army Plaza. The B81 duplicates half the B61 as is (Red Hook to Prospect Park).

Not 100% familiar with bus number requirements for bus routes, but if it frees up space for MCH, why not swap the M15 SBS/M102 as well? I think the M102 uses slightly more buses than the M15 SBS but someone can correct me 

53 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It's important to note that all of these lines have changes, even if the routing remains the same because bus stops are being eliminated/combined... Tons of them in fact, even on routes like the B74.

When I refer to no change, I do mean route wise. Not really gonna bring up stops bc that's literally almost every route. If we're talking about service spans, I don't see much that I don't dislike but I'll give credit to the B76 and B5/6. The B76 make sense since it's designed as a part time route to begin with, and I'm happy the B6 LTD has 7 day service.

Let enough time for the Brooklyn bus Redesign to sink into my head. Now it's time to give out my opinions on each route:

B1: No change

B2/100: saw the merger coming, but I rather keep the Kings Plaza section since it has more ridership. 

B3: No change 

B4: idk that Coney Island section seems iffy....

B5/B6/84: B84 is basically split into the B5 and B6. If the B5 is gonna exist and you gonna have the B103 to New Lots (see below) don't see a need for a "B6 LTD" 

B7: Just keep the B7 as is. This is the wrong route to go north (see B60)

B8: could care less about the Av B section 

B9: No change 

B10/12: I'll honestly say I haven't rode the B12 enough to have a proper opinion but to what ik this wasn't the first time this "idea" was brought up. 

B11: simplicity on the west end I see 

B13: I swear this is the B18 without it being the B18. That said, is this really what they are doing bc you are missing a big chunk of Glendale/Ridgewood here 

B14: basically direct service to Euclid Av . Guessing that's a W.

B15: I'm wondering why the JFK portion wasn't its own route to begin with. B55 proposal aside, the first route should have been a New Lots Av bus route between Sutter Av and JFK Airport. Also is that northward extension to the really needed?

B16: I understand Boro Park needs coverage but I feel the 13/14 Av section would be better off as a split off route and keep the B16 on Fort Hamilton. 

B17/76: That B17 branch was a little off anyway so glad to see it as it's own route. 

B20: I'll take the split, but having the north half as a B7 extension dosent seem ideal (see B60) 

B24: Listen I feel the MTA wanted to be rid of "redundant loop routes" so they decided to split the Q38 and B24 in the Queens redesign and for the B24 the B53/Q68 was made. Q68 is a neat route, B53 I'll talk about soon 

B25/26: if anything the late night service should be the B25 and the B26 should end at Franklin Av for consistency

B27: this is basically a modified B75. Guessing the new B27 gonna save some time from not getting stuck on Flushing Av and Downtown Brooklyn

B31: No change 

B32/53: I just like the way the B53 is a combination of the B32 and ends of the B24, B46 and Q24. Gotta wonder how some of these ideas even went through to begin with.

B35/55: if they do not have the B55 as an artic route I will be really upset. You also gotta wonder about the sight of XN60s at JFK Airport. 

B36: No change 

B37: No change 

B38: Is the B38 really that dense to not need ltd service bc that route gets crowded even after artic conversion. Let's not even mention the Metro Av branch getting absolutely no replacement. 

B39: while there are no changes, you couldn't at least go a couple blocks east to connect to Lorimer St ?

B40/41: the split is something I thought was gonna happen. I don't dislike the idea 

B42: No change 

B43: wanna say congratulations to the board members that said "y'know what, the B15 and B43 are basically the same route in Bed-Stuy, might as well combine them" because you just made some extra work for some people. The B44/46 can't save anyone either

B44: so SBS to Sheepshead Bay but it's actually Coney Island hospital. Another case of confused riders getting on the wrong bus similar to the Bx6/SBS changes due next year. 

B45: fine with the Ralph av section, the St Johns change smells one way conversion in the future. 

B46: listen I don't have that much of a problem ending the B46 at Woodhull like most people likely would but if you gonna cut it back here why not extend the SBS here too? 

B47: just a case of "straightening out the route" 

B48/69: so what they swapped the northern ends of these routes and called it a day?

B49/68: yeah I don't see this lasting in the final redesign. And why is it we have the last two B4x and B6x routes swapping out terminals? 

B52: Just feel a bit indifferent on the minor reroute. 

B54: No change 

B57: That Jackson Heights section does not scream B57. Keep the Eastern terminal and if a Brooklyn connection is needed make a queens route run on Flushing Av/69 St between Woodhull Hospital and Jackson Heights. 

B60: it makes no sense to have the B60 go to Broadway Junction. Just give it the northern half of the B20 to keep a consistent north-south run. 

B61: If you gonna chip the park slope end and add a new B81 that duplicates half the B61 why keep the B61 on 9 St. Matter fact, make it more useful and run it on the B71 route on Union Street between 3 Av and Grand Army Plaza. 

B62: NO ASTORIA SERVICE!!! have a separate route between Astoria and Williamsburg if it's that important.

B64: they basically have the B64 replacing the Coney Island portion of the B82 while the B4 replaces the B64's segment. Just seems ehh 

B65: I feel the eastern terminal just kills off one block or so but that one block may make a difference.

B66: This section of the split B60 I like. I hope this B66 makes service more reliable.

B67: that Brooklyn Navy Yard section was literally so pointless and just there when the MTA was adding "service based on demands" in the mid 2010's. 

B70: what's there at 3 Av and 30 St bc I'm lost on this extension

B74: No change 

B81/103: so the Downtown Brooklyn portion of the B103 was discontinued just to make the B81 a thing. My memories may be gone, but this B81 (somewhat) looks promising with the segments of the B61, B67 and B23 it runs along. As for the New Lots extension of the B103, they basically make this a Canarsie shuttle that connects to the final stops on the IRT Lines. Somewhat W for Canarsie 

B82: the local basically become identical to the SBS save the Bath Beach portion now becoming the B6 route. (Definitely didn't see that coming -_-) 

B83: Do you really think Van Sicklen gonna let the B83 go away ? That's one of the spots that scream "do not take away my bus service".

I already covered my brief thoughts on the BM routes so no need to mention them again.

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Why was there no type of service restored to some of the B23? That section has been asking for restoration for the longest.

Double check bc I'm pretty sure the B23 ran on Cortelyou Rd.

Surprised nobody mentioned this but no BM1-4 service along the "Downtown Loop" is not something I am ok with . I'm hoping @Via Garibaldi 8will do his best to keep the loop intact and the MTA stops trying to force riders onto the local bus/subway to make up for lost service. The "C" routes are iffy too with no wall St service. My suggestions for exp service 

BM1: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM1/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM6

BM2: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM2/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM22 (or if it "confuses riders" BM9)

BM3: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM3/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM7

BM4: Off peak and Downtown bypass route is BM4/C, Downtown Loop only route is BM8

BM5: God knows why they even bothered renaming this to "BM35" when they literally said in the documents they wanna keep names as similar to the normal route as possible, but I guess you can't have a BM5c if there can't be downtown service to begin with. 

X27/28: the Queens redesign has the QM63-68, not sure why they didn't do the same here (assuming bc it's easier to "take away the 2" from their names to create the BM7/8) Just have these routes as the BM27/28/C. 

X37/38: The two routes that have appropriate names so no need to mess with it.

Sea Gate service: I know they are gonna fight hard for express service over there. They need to retain at least peak service along the BM(2)8/38.

35 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Apparently, 4518 has been sent to Baisley Park.  However, just want to confirm all others on this list are officially scrapped?

Possibly of the bus being sent there for parts then marked as scrap 

Need clarification since one of my depot assignment lists may be in accurate:

I have 3884, 3887, 3889, 3936, 3947 at 146. Is this still the case or is the 40 ft fleet 100% XDE40?

7 minutes ago, Kingsbridgeviewer382 said:

It was a loan. Its on the B60.

7354 or 7254?

7354 is on the B20 at this moment.

23 minutes ago, MTABusTransitFanner said:

4615 is from Flatbush

I have 4615 registered for MHV, but I think it's possible it was mentioned 4615 was never officially moved there.

3 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Who said I was the one using it? Sometimes we ask questions for others.

I'm not sure who said you used it, other than the fact you said:

20 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

It happens when I dip my metro card in randomly. One driver told me my card was “black listed”, everyone else told me on their screen it says NEGATIVE LIST. Not sure what’s going on with that.

Don't understand the reason stories have to be switched up if what you're saying is true. But anyways, yes there are sometimes glitches with MetroCards. One example is where I had an expired unlimited MetroCard that for some reason worked on the Subway but not on the bus. Lasted I think at least 2 months or such.

Kingsbridge is the Bronx Depot of hand me downs, as in when it comes to retirement many buses go to KB before they go and KB somehow is the one Bronx Depot with 5-10 older buses before they become fully retired or moved. They don't have as bad of maintenance of GH, but KB still has some notable moments, most notably on the articulated side especially given now that the 1200's are getting ran down and would definitely need to be retired before 2025.

8 hours ago, MTATechOperation said:

Yeah not sure why but both units have gone back, very weird. Someone spotted 6196 with a Hale Sticker Monday while it was on the 15 SBS+. Anyways, carry on. 

↓

On 10/17/2022 at 9:02 PM, Calvin said:

* Just a note: Hale has 4 Nova units that came from Tuskegee Airmen, but they are in rotation. Some will remain at Hale while others can be switched between said depot and Tuskegee Airmen. Example: 5257 running on the M103 that has a Hale sticker while 5263 is at Hale for service on the M35. Also, with 5863 that was at MCH before with the sticker and few weeks later, it's on the M101 with 5825 taking its place on the M35. 

Same thing that's been going on for a couple years still occurs even if it's literally for 1 day. Technically, I count all the hale LFSA a part of OH/OF no matter the decals.

6 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

Report his a** with the info you have (even better if yoy have the bus number), it shouls be enough to do an investigation 

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

He's likely banking on the fact that no one will report him, so don't wait until next time. Report him now. There have been a number of things going on with these buses that have pissed me to the core and I had a long conversation with the  about it recently. Skipping of stops is one, but on the express side, the blocking of seats, denying people the right to sit, including disabled people and even denying service in some cases where they arbitrarily decide what stops they are going to serve, etc. and skip the others by turning off their signage or putting up NOT IN SERVICE... These are all examples of discrimination. The  rules note that service is NOT to be denied to anyone, so the driver does not get to decide what stops they feel like serving. Sick of hearing about stuff like this.

I already contacted the MTA for both times it happened. Caught the bus number, run number and got in contact with the MTA. Last night they reported to me to see if both 5993 and 6031 was skipping stops. Bus driver had 5993 so I told them 6031 was making all necessary stops but 5993 wasn't. At the very least they told me there would be an investigation going into place. Wasn't gonna wait for the next time I get left behind. If this does happen again I at least know the guy and will do more than just report him via a bustime screenshot. 

Just a little steam I'm gonna let out real quick. So there's this Q44 Driver that is supposed to leave the Bronx Zoo at 8:30-8:35 PM. Earlier this week, he skipped my stop, so I chase him down, and he quickly turns his bus signs off, claiming he is not in service. However, when I checked the bustime app, he is shown on the tracker as an active bus. Maybe it was a glitch, idk but he was a face I wouldn't forget.

The same thing happened today. Driver is signed as the Q44, skipped the Bronx Zoo stop, this time having a completely blank sign. I dash to the Tremont Av stop to see if he was gonna go into service there. As I predicted, he skipped that stop too, but was still showing on the tracker as an active bus. 

Now that ik this driver's face, I will most definitely take further action the next time I see him.  To think we have bus drivers that can get away with running an empty bus and claiming they not even supposed to be in service? It most definitely will not be happening to me. He's gonna learn his lesson. People like him ruin it for everyone smh.

7 hours ago, JAzumah said:

Sounds like a Summer 2023 implementation.

If the Q44 is expected be modified, implementation would most likely occur when OMNY is fully implemented (end of 2023)

28 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

Was he driving the bus in an unsafe manner with it swaying from side to side? No

Sounds like you definitely saw what the driver was doing given you are defending a complete stranger.

10 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Y'all rocking with this new Bx41 Local schedule??

https://new.mta.info/document/88916

I don't even know wtf I was even looking at......

33 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

5579: MQ to OH.  Bus spotted on M101 on Wednesday sported with OH Decals. 

Now the question is when will the SBS scheme be phased out since at this point it doesn't really matter if all buses are gonna be sent to depots like this.