Lex

Well, it's definitely an abstract piece. Even so, it feels wrong.

Last I checked, 222 > 210, and we've already had serious issues with the R179s. Moreover, it's been stated multiple times (including in official documents!) that the R32s are not to be retired before the R211s arrive and are plentiful enough to facilitate replacement.

Sure, they may not be, but the same can't be said for those who control the purse strings.

Because we totally don't have anything of the sort already...

And with no infill stations or reduced fares, to boot. It really makes this renovation questionable...

And it's still 6 cars long...

Thing is, I wasn't talking about that.

The starts in Manhattan and ends in Brooklyn. All but two stations on the Brooklyn leg are served by the in some capacity, whereas all but two stations on the entire route are served by the in some capacity. Brooklyn IRT ridership leans heavily toward Lexington Avenue, whereas Manhattan ridership simply seeks a train. East of Franklin Avenue, there are no real draws, and connections are typically fairly easy to make with other trains. Hell, until about 20 years ago, it ran using 9-car trains, only ending the practice in order to be a more capable supporter. (Its support role is, in fact, the only thing keeping it around. Even taking the night service into account, it's clear that its existence hangs from a thread, as most who actually care about it use one of the two stations with no regular service whatsoever, and the MTA will point to the buses in a heartbeat.)

Then please point to proof that the having the lowest score is because of the swap. I guarantee you that it doesn't exist.

Your "point" is not proven.

Honestly, I'm not convinced that 10% will cut it, especially for Metro-North...

What's this obsession with merging the M35 into anything? Leave it alone, it does what it's supposed to.

In all honesty, I can see that and the B32 possibly being at least moderately successful, unlike the B84 and -- barring the summer -- Bx46.

The problems started well before the MTA even became a thing. Simply put, there were competing interests and/or a lack of capital. At this point, we'd either need a grand vision from people who plan to fund any such development or to simply give up on the idea.

Anything that fails to serve both Brooklyn and the Bronx should be knocked out of consideration.

That alone is more than enough reason to keep the swap going.

I already love it. (Also, I find the location mildly amusing, for some reason.)

Like the , the bulk of the Q50's ridership is of the incidental variety (people may take it if it's the first to show, but their needs could probably be met with other routes). In fact, the Q50/Bx23 split reflects this, as the latter has a considerably more robust schedule and higher ridership in spite of the far lower overall coverage. The only thing I don't particularly enjoy about the actual Q50 proposals regarding Co-op City is that no one thought to at least try a shorter, straighter route that could make it more attractive to anyone living by the development's eastern flank.

If this is a joke, it's not funny.

"Don't make me come back out, y'hear?"

Yes, origin/destination data and existing schedules are vital when planning so as not to screw people over.

The underlying issues are unrelated to that particular work, though...

Is there even anything more to discuss? If not, I wouldn't mind seeing this thread locked.

It took a bit to register, but we'd better keep a very good eye on the B37 and B63. I can see someone trying to either "combine" the two or (more likely) scrapping both and telling everyone to use the .

The bus system's already struggling. I can only imagine how bad it would be under NJT...