B35 via Church

Yeah, the #125 runs like crap, but length isn't the reason why I wouldn't bother running the #123 to JSQ... @BreeddekalbL's "random thought" there appears to be rather implicative of having the #123 take the place of the #119 running inside JSQ, which I can't concur with.... I'd kill two birds with 1 stone here, because I never cared for the #126 running past Hoboken to serve that pocket of Jersey City at/around Hamilton Park.... I can side with the general idea of running the #123 to Exchange Place, but during peak hours (peak direction), I'd divvy up trips between 1] short turning at Congress st. HBLR, 2] terminating at Hamilton Park (less total trips serving it than the current #126), and 3] terminating at Exchange Place - however, peak trips to/from Exchange place would be all 'X" trips (inbound trips would run straight to PABT after Congress st, outbound trips would have Congress st. be the first stop after leaving PABT).... All other times, no service to Hamilton Park, but I would still have a significant enough an amount of trips short turning at Congress st. HBLR.... You mean like the current #126 from Hoboken & the current #119 & #125 from JSQ?

For what? The #119 would go back inside JSQ.....

Hard disagree.... Subjecting the #119 to the helix & that stretch of 30th/31st st in Union City would loom that much more detrimental to the thing, compared to the way the route currently slogs south of Congress....

It's not better publicized because it's not for the general public... It's only for Mercer county residents.

I'm more of a proponent of microtransit being used within denser areas, as opposed to within semi-rural areas... In either case, as I not too long ago said in the SCT redesign thread, microtransit shouldn't be used to supplant public fixed routes (especially those that are under-performing, or otherwise below par).... Specifically to the 2 routes mentioned, well, as we both know, Bee Line themselves destroyed the #12... As for the #32, I honestly think fixing that route is an easy fix... Get rid of the portion west of Park Hill & have it circulate to/from MNRR Yonkers - something like this..... The #8 is all is needed for the portion of SW Yonkers, west of South Broadway....

I have no doubt about it..... Otherwise, SCT would've unapologetically cut the 10B/10C outright.... Public transit providers are (mis)using microtransit as a passive means to slowly cut bus service... The concept will be used as the scapegoat as to why to the "East Hampton Zone" & the "Southampton Zone" will end up failing.... It puts the (performance of the) 10B & the 10C off the hook. Not saying you're implicating this, but I still want to make the point.... To sum it up, microtransit is not the answer to a poorly utilized fixed route service... This is the trend (or craze, as BM5 puts it) that these public transit providers are resorting to & to me, at the very least, it's further aiding in giving microtransit a bad rep'...

The problem AFAIC isn't the general concept of microtransit (which is how the pro-microtransit folks construe the criticism) as much as it is microtransit being used by public transit providers to supplant fixed route services.... Let's just call it for what it is - it's done as a passive, gradual way of cutting bus service.... For discussion's sake I guess, I'll just leave this flowchart here from Jarrett Walker's blog for anyone to ponder where the 10B & 10C falls into this...

Feel sorry for the poor guy/girl..... I would've helped out with getting him/her back to PABT if I was on that bus.... Too many pax in those situations either get worried/panicky or start cursing out the b/o & it tends to piss me off....

In order to keep the scheme of only having n1's running [to Jamaica in the AM] & [from Jamaica in the PM], this is how they try to handle catering to n1 demand from Jamaica during the AM hours.... That's what has to be resorted to; As they can't have inbound AM n1 trips leave as n1's back to Hewlett, because almost all of them are interlined with AM n26 trips to Great Neck. As I see it, the issue with those old n15's to RFM via OCR was that the demand was grossly imbalanced/one-sided... Virtually nil during the AM hours, but enough to warrant service during the PM hours... If there's people at the Country Glen shopping center & those other shopping plaza's up along Glen Cove rd. in Carle Place making their way to the WB n22/24 to xfer for those Mineola n15's (instead of for the n40/41), I wouldn't know it... But what I do know is that there no noticeable amt. of people walking from those shopping centers to RFM, or people making their way to that stop across from the Carle Place diner to take the EB n22/24 or SB n27 the one stop to RFM....

...but yet the #163's that short turn at GSP Mall have no suffix; go figure.... It would be one thing if GSP mall was a part of the regular #163 route to Ridgewood Terminal, but it isn't..... JSQ, OTOH, was always a part of the #119 before the construction at JSQ, so to append a temporary suffix for that, **shrugs**....

....and as for the lowly utilized express bus routes?

Ever since they came out with the revision of the initial draft, I've stated (on here) that I thought the #11 should've ran to Smith Haven over the #5.... Specifically, I would do 2 things with the #11 at this point regarding that: Smithtown is overserved with the current #5 (30 min. headways)... Not only that, but it's a waste of time having it sit in traffic in Smithtown to have every trip (on weekdays) pick up/drop off almost nobody... The waste-of-timeness (so to speak) includes the backtrack from the NYS Office Bldg. to have it serve more of Smithtown (as in, via the North Complex & via Old Willets Path)... With that said, not only would I reduce service to hourly in Smithtown, I would have a branch of the #11 to Smith Haven running via rt. 111 after serving the NYS Office Bldg.... I see what's going on with the #58 to Brentwood & now I'm more than convinced that the #58 should be cut back to Smith Haven.... Not because that it doesn't do well, but because too sizeable a portion of pax. getting off at Brentwood are xferring to #7's or #11's... That, and quite frankly, I think it's ultimately more beneficial to have the #58 & the #62 be the (respective) Smith Haven - Riverhead routes & the #11 offering a 1-seat ride b/w Smith Haven & points south of Brentwood (towards Bay Shore), than the current setup with having the #58 be a Brentwood - Riverhead route & the #11 being one-half of a deliberate/all-day interlining scenario with a route I don't think should even exist in its totality in the first place (of course, I'm talking about the #17 here).... So I say all that to say, I'd have the other hourly branch of an #11 to Smith Haven bypassing Smithtown via the Smithtown Bypass I honestly don't care if each branch gets a separate route number or not, but the point is, I'd say it'd be well worth it for a Bay Shore - Smith Haven route hitting (the pulse point that is) Brentwood, and industrial & governmental (lol) Hauppauge in the process.... ---------------------- As far as the #5 is concerned, my outlook thus far on it, unfortunately, is rather low..... Even given the whole 3 routes doing Brentwood - Smith Haven & 3 routes doing Brentwood - Hauppauge bit, I would look into dismantling it before having it run up to Hauppauge from Babylon, to then run back down to LIRR Central Islip (never mind that I don't think anything should be terminating there to begin with)... Speaking of which, if it's anything that should perhaps take over parts of the #17 north of the main line, it's one of the #52 branches.... Have one of them continue westward along Motor Pkwy down Hawthorne or something....

I'm CTFU if they got the outbound #108 signed up as "NWK" in 3 big ass letters. But yeah, I brought up the "Eliz" BS in an earlier post in this thread, referencing having seen it on a #26... Just dumb all the way around... For whatever the reason, they're regressing in the designation signage category.

Lake Success (Nassau County). We were in a meeting (11 of us present, only 2 people felt it).... Interesting that the only 2 people that felt it were (standing) on the little podium we have.... The rest of us were sitting down.... I was one of the people sitting down.... I'd say there's about a 10-12 foot distance b/w the podium & those of us that were seated.

That's exactly the point of doing that.... and quiet is as kept, buses randomly (unofficially/wrongfully) have been doing that for ages. Especially during the PM rush hour on Fridays, I used to stay seeing M20's on the middle lane or left most lane (with waiting pax. getting screwed in the process).....