Rick44

[Delete]

7361 & 7362 FB to ENY.

The Vendor right? Not JFK depot?

It may be a loan, but 5204 is on the B83.

Now, I'm sure that's totally true for NYCT - but I've also noticed JK and LG buses (Usually RTS' and the Old Gens) get their scheduled overhaul painting done in ENY, usually in the summer, the last 3 summers I've noticed it. So does MTA bus have two different depots doing their overhaul paintings? And that overhaul painting isn't just painting for some buses right?

To be fair @Jdog14 said Staten Island is getting more LFS' in the future, not specifically Castleton. Now, there's no confirmation of future plans for the new buses, but that idea makes sense (pushing the hybrids out of Staten Island).

Gotta catch up pal. He & Trevor both reported that 7483 is an extra off the 2015 order, and 7484 (in the blue & yellow) is the start of the new order.

Never has. Why does 0011 say clean-air energy? They couldn't just say all-electric? Makes it seem like it's a hybrid.

Those headlights... something different right?

Is the Bay Ridge-JFK SBS still a thing?...

The B82 Local and SBS can and will be handled at East New York. They'll have artics and the local fleet, which they'll probably cut trips on. There definitely won't be a need to move any part of the B82 elsewhere.

What the hell? ERRRRRRPPPPPPPP!!!!!! I remember when the private companies tested this... I wonder why the MTA wants to test this lol! Northeastern Bus Rebuilders on IG, is where that photo comes from originally.

I believe Gun Hill receiving the XD60’s was indicative of the order switcharoo, since the reason they received them is because the Novas were delayed.

I think the first set of buses are going to Gun Hill, hence the Select Bus Service wrap.

JFK NEBR?

The right side to be specific. My friend saw it on the Belt Pkwy today by Rockaway Parkway.

You can check what I said in the Moves and Transfers section about where that info actually came from.

Nobody gave credit to the original spotter. Doug DeMuro - he's a Youtuber who reviews cars. The minute I shared that video on FB, transit fans noticed. Skip to 10:39 if you want the clip.

6109.

What is the B81? Unless that's a typo, I need some clarity on that and the B82 SBS to Bay Ridge. I've never heard of that. Ever. If that is a typo and you meant B82 SBS - then absolutely not. As I already said earlier, the Belt Parkway would screw that up real quickly. Unless you go the "back way" using local streets, which I mentioned somewhere else in the forums, and got met with the "it's a roundabout routing" - to which I said "it's still faster than the Belt". Now that they've added the speedbumps on Van Siclen Av between Seaview Av and Vandalia Av - it would be slower. On the wide portions of Flatlands Avenue (Ralph to Pennsylvania) there is congestion and disorganization during the rush hours. People double park, lots of traffic because people wanna avoid the Belt Parkway, etc. The lanes will help the buses there during those peak hours (only). And maybe during the rush hours they should ban parking on that wide section of Flatlands Av. Your SBS idea isn't bad. I like some of it. What I like about your idea is the better connections it'd make for people on the western side of the route. I'm down for Bay Ridge for the most part - just some slight changes I would make on that end. More info below. What I don't like about your idea, is truncating the eastern end of the B82 Local to Ralph Av. If you rode that route (the local), you'd see how horrible an idea that is. Rockaway Parkway, sure, but shortening it to Ralph cuts away people's direct connection to the many amenities on Flatlands Av in that area. Not down with that. The B82 Limited should be eliminated. It ain't working as is during the hours it's used the most. And because of this, travelers do need a transfer to the Brighton Line. You can't just shaft that connection. However you can improve that connection. I have an idea for that. More info below. The current routing of the B82 around Flatbush Avenue needs to go, the SBS change to Avenue K is a must. Shore Road/Owls Head Park - from experience, that terminal doesn't best serves the customers that would use the route, and that also somewhat duplicates the B9 in that area. A better, more connective terminal would be 4th and 86th. The B5 and B50 shouldn't have been combined, but instead reorganized, and based on my experiences riding the route (B82) these past few years, I'll detail my suggestions based on what they planned, what I see, and your ideas. The B5 should be restored and operate from Coney Island-Stillwell Av to Kings Highway station, via current B82 routing. The B50 should be restored and operate from Coney Island Avenue/Kings Highway (The B7 terminal) to Rockaway Parkway station via Kings Highway, Avenue K, Flatlands Av, Rockaway Parkway Station area2, Glenwood Rd, East 103 Street, back to Flatlands Av, and current routing to Spring Creek. The B82 Limited should be eliminated as a part of this idea. The B82 SBS should operate from Spring Creek Towers to 86 Street station via 4th Avenue, 60th Street, 8th Avenue, 65th Street, Avenue P, Coney Island Avenue, Kings Highway1, Avenue K, Flatlands Av, Rockaway Parkway Station area2, Glenwood Rd, East 103 Street, back to Flatlands Av, and current routing to Spring Creek. 1 If they were getting rid of all cars on Kings Highway between Coney Island Av and Ocean Av from 6am-7pm at least, then I'm down for the straight route through Kings Highway. Otherwise, that's no good. Use a combination of Avenue P, East 16th St, and Avenue R westbound, and Kings Highway eastbound only. 2 So far, I like the DOT/MTA's idea of turning Glenwood into a two-way, but I need more information to really be all for it. Hmm, I could go with this instead of that B5 idea. Would help free up a slot for the B82 SBS (in my plan) to stop westbound. And back to the last piece of your post BrooklynBus - The B41 SBS idea is a joke. As a matter of fact, I wouldn't be surprised if they cut the limited.

My thought is that it would be westbound Glenwood Rd would be bus-only westbound between 103rd and 96th. I assume so, but then I'm unsure whom this SBS benefits. Agree with all these sentiments. Nah the road changes on the B82 route are more important than most would believe, gotta take the route in the area in different times of day to notice.

There won't be that crappy BRT smack dab in the middle of the boulevard. That helps a bit. Prior updates from Dante (ENY) and Trevor (I think he mentioned that too), among others, state artics will be on the Bx6 SBS. I agree with you on that whole Bx6 Local elimination - get it overwith, especially when the presentation states "Frequencies will be split between the SBS and the Local". It doesn't detail that change at all, my assumption is that it will be a two way bus lane street, with cars only allowed eastbound in their own lane. More on this below. I agree with the Bx6 SBS sentiments. Make it a full SBS, forget this local crap! I removed the LIC stuff, I honestly don't have much opinion one way or the other because I have not kept up with the growth and changes in the area. As for the B82, 6 general thoughts, the last one responds to you agar io: 1. They shafted Coney Island - They would've handed out so many summonses, the neighborhood would've rioted anyway - for no good reason. Plus the Coney Island trips don't get served as extensively during the day as they used to. Most people use the train to somewhere further in the route (East 16th Street) instead. Saves them no time in their overall trip, but whatever works for them. 2. If the idea for the Rockaway Parkway Station area is what I just assumed above - they don't need a SBS at all, just make most of the road changes mentioned (and diagrammed) in the pdf, and you'll speed up service ten-fold! Especially during rush hour, the route configuration and traffic between Rockaway Parkway station and Kings Highway between Coney Island Av and Ocean Av slows the route down. 3. The italic pieces in thought number 2 - about that... They barely gave any details about any of the changes east of Flatlands and Louisiana Avenues. I need more on that before I can make more detailed responses on those changes. 4. What they currently have detailed looks to be great ideas. Based on the multiple times I have rode the B82 these years (I live by the last stop of the B82 in Spring Creek, so I would know) and the detailed traffic patterns and pedestrian changes they have made make better sense. Problem is, those changes will slow the route just a bit, and it isn't slow in that area anyway, so - with the Rockaway Parkway stuff it'll even itself out. 5. There's no need for an Avenue K and Kings Highway stop, the neighborhood probably requested that for convenience, or they just figured it's a traffic light and turn they have to deal with, so might as well stop. It's not necessary. 6. That idea about staying on Glenwood both directions till Pennsylvania is a bad idea, since that directly (and unnecessarily) follows the B6 in an area where there is no need to duplicate the B6, eliminates the parking on Glenwood in areas where they need parking over bus service, offsets the travel by adding a walk for the students going to South Shore HS and more importantly Bildersee JHS, and shafts customer traffic for shops on Flatlands Avenue between Ralph and Rockaway Parkway, which includes those students. Also, making Glenwood Road a two way should only be done in high volume areas, and the way I'm assuming they are going about it, is as far as I'd go making that a two way. The B17 branch to Rockaway Parkway is going to have some impact as well on the current layout, but even more impact if your idea was implemented. To be blunt, Coney Island doesn't need the B82 SBS. That qualifies the cut. Also, explain more about what you mean by the reroute that looks good and the one that hurts more than it benefits. The reroute on Avenue K is definitely something the locals should do. The MTA would probably be afraid to make that change at first. B82 SBS to Gateway Mall - I don't trust the Belt Parkway with that task. Point blank. Don't care that it's one exit either.

I believe 30-35, yeah. Like I said it was just a educated thought, but obviously I don't know.

Limitednyc, yes I am more than assuming WF is becoming all CNG. And I see your math FLX9304, I've got that math for the most part, but the unknown variable is the extra artic buses needed for the Bx6 SBS and what extra C40's may be leftover as a result.

Correct Turtle, and there still will be some C40's left over. We'll just wait and see, I was just theorizing the possibility based on a few things including the numbers I crunched too, which I have different ones from limitednyc apparently. I see that WF is also getting an expansion fleet, the potential Bx6 SBS is also supposed to have artics.