B35 via Church

Random thought:

Not sure if they changed the sign for the #52 as well, but while I was at NJT Elizabeth RR on Saturday, I saw a #26 that was signed up as "UNIVERSITY" (big letters)... As the bus was turning onto Julian pl<>Railroad av., the other frame of the sign looked like it transitioned to:

- "Eliz" (first line)
- "via Kean" (second line)

For certain though, it did not spell out Elizabeth.... I mean YGBFKM with "Eliz" ; there was more than enough space on that top-most line in that frame of the destination sign to spell out Elizabeth.... They also apparently got rid of the KU suffix next to the 26 (which is neither here nor there to me)....

1 hour ago, Lex said:

You know damn well Atlantic Terminal was brought up to stress a point related to that supplemental service.

I mean hey, none of his unwarranted snarkiness or deliberate obtuseness will nullify or change the simple fact that more Nassau & Suffolk LIRR riders at this juncture prefer Penn over GCT.... Regarding for this particular parade, he wants to argue proximity (which of course is the safe bet), but ignoring rider preference in that situation would've likely resorted to more of those riders having expressed more displeasure (to say the least) than the sheer lack of it from the actual act of the MTA having provided less of that extra service to GCT.... I'll make a quote-unquote safe bet of my own & say that all throwing (more of the) extra service GCT's way would've accomplished, is less utilized trains....

15 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

So catering to people's lack of information is more important than providing information. Got it.

Yes, customer retention is more important than "providing information" (or whatever indirect way you want to convey running more of that extra service to GCT)...

All that shoving of service down people's throats when service to GCT was first implemented resulted in, was a rollback of a significant enough an amount of peak service to Penn & direct service to/from Atlantic Terminal anyway....

14 hours ago, JAzumah said:

It is certainly cheaper. You have to go where the customer is comfortable going.

Shouldn't be that hard of a concept to come to grips with..... If the LIRR riders themselves didn't cause enough of an uproar over more of that extra service to GCT over Penn, then I sure as hell aint losing sleep over it... Lol....

12 hours ago, BrooklynBus said:

...and I doubt they would want to run all three routes on Broadway. 

This is the real reason I don't see that B53 ending up being implemented before whatever they ultimately got cooked up/finalized for Brooklyn's network...

18 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

...or the final plan is updated.

...which I fully expect to happen.

18 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Separate note, people forget how the M100 was changed despite not being a Bronx route. It'll be the same concept for the above routes.

Yeah, but this nuance can't be ignored - The M100 change removed a layer of service along most of 125th.... A B53 implementation with the Queens redesign OTOH would be the exact opposite of that - an addition of another layer of service (along Broadway)....

13 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

They would get more familiar with it if more trains went there.  (I don't understand why some folks are loyal to Penn at all costs — even, or especially, when GC would be more convenient for them.)

Logic would dictate that, but I still think it's more of a longevity thing than a higher frequency thing (as far as riders growing that much more accustomed to GCT service).

In any case, I find that unlike the typical urban commuter, the typical suburban commuter isn't nearly as transit savvy - so they're more apt to latching onto one particular commute/mode/station.....

Just now, Calvin said:

The SIM1C seems to carry a lot of riders today going Uptown early today. Not sure if it happens alot during the weekends or overnights but, seeing past Hylan Blvd and Fingerboard Road, most of the side seats were accompanied by riders. 

Parade goers.

11 minutes ago, xD4nn said:

I'm not sure how throwing money at increasing bus frequencies can help at all since a few depots are short on buses.

Legislators don't give two shits about those nuances.

3 hours ago, shiznit1987 said:

All this is just security theater until they overturn the bail laws. Who's gonna care about getting caught with a piece when they're out within 24 hrs. Waste of money. 

As for gun control, NYS has some of the toughest gun laws in the nation. Canada isn't shooting free either, Toronto has some rough pockets plus the TTC has had a recent crime wave. Britian now stops people for *knives* in the poor parts of London, Birmingham, etc. 

Unless you address a) drug addiction, b) forcing the mentally ill into treatment, no more coddling c) giving these teens/young men jobs d) fixing the schools and finally real consequences for serious crime, then nothing is going to change.

Without going down the political rabbit hole, what we're seeing happen to this city is being incentivized - including the influx of illegal immigrants.... Welcome to the dark side of capitalism.

On 3/15/2024 at 2:37 PM, NBTA said:

What are the next 10 routes to go fare free?

If you're referring to @Kingsbridgeviewer382's post at the top of the page, the proposal by state lawmakers being referenced is to throw $90 million towards the (bus) system... Half of which is to go towards increasing bus frequencies & the other half to go towards increasing the amt. of fare free routes to "up to" 3 routes per borough (which is where that 15 number comes from).... There were no specifics as to which routes would get service increases, nor which routes would be made fare free in said proposal.

4 hours ago, Q43LTD said:

It's supposed to go into effect with the Queens routes....

How are you coming to that conclusion?

Likely because Nassau/Suffolk patrons are more familiar with Penn than they are with GCT..... It'll take decades for GCT to reach the level of familiarity amongst LIRR riders that Penn currently has.... That parade could've been on 1st av. & I wouldn't doubt for a second that more of the extra service would've still been dedicated to running to/from Penn.

On 3/5/2024 at 9:30 AM, zacster said:

There seemed to be more historical talk on Subchat than this board, which focuses on current items.....

There's far more of a younger crowd here.

On 2/22/2024 at 10:48 PM, Lawrence St said:

The 355 schedule makes no sense. Only TWO trips on weekdays and they leave to AD at 10 and 12:30? And yet weekend service has 15 trips? How is the ridership on this route?

IDK, my guess is that the weekday buses are for whatever mall workers it can conjure up & the weekend buses are for actual mall shoppers....

The #126 - #85 - #772 combination on weekends has grown to be one of my fave's... Demand for the #355 from the mall is VERY hit or miss (most gun for the #85) & I'm surprised it has as many trips as it even does on weekends.... IME's, it's either buses leaving the mall crushloaded, or with less than a handful of people on it... Never seen anything in between..... Usage from PABT OTOH, I couldn't tell you....

On 3/5/2024 at 5:35 PM, DCTransitFilms said:

Another rumor, Big Tree will likely help the 24 with operators training on the route. Wouldn't be surprised if they do, especially with the evergrowing 24 ridership.

So how many garages is that now that's helping out with the #24?

On 3/1/2024 at 2:11 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

It's unfortunate to hear that about the S54, I guess what also doesn't help the 6 is that even in that part of the county its duplicated quite a bit with the H40. Not the same headways but in the case of the new 6 every rider counts. Part of the issue too, way I see is that Walt Whitman Mall is still being used as a major hub in that area, when it's just no longer the same anymore like it might have been in the past. Same situation with Sunrise Mall further down, everything is now moving towards Amityville LIRR even if its relatively slow (you still got the n19, n71 weekdays and n80 still terminating there, who know if that changes). However what complicates things further north a bit is HART. It was a mistake to not include those routes given how many duplicate the 30 minute routes on portions of their routes. Would have also liked to see more of a hub around Huntington Station if there was any part within the town that would make sense.

I haven't used HART since they did away with the brown/beige color scheme on their buses... I don't keep up on bus rosters & things like that, but it appears as if their entire fleet are all minibuses.... Anyway, they used to have more of an effect on the S54 at Whitman at least, but for years now, all I see getting off those things (HART buses) at Whitman, are stragglers.... That whole side of the bus area/terminal/whatever you wanna call it (the individual shelters for all the HART buses & the one for the n79) may as well be all one long ass bus shelter - similar to the ones inside Williamsburg Bridge Plaza....

While malls tend to make for ideal/off street bus terminals in the suburbs, I happen to agree with the sentiment regarding de-hubbing (lol) Whitman.... The new network did it with South Shore Mall; literally having nothing terminating there (and only having the one route; the #7, serving it).... There was too much redundancy with the old network b/w Bay Shore - Mechanicsville rd. & South Shore Mall.... The ironic part is that South Shore Mall still attracts the "average" mall shopper & has less bus service to/from it, while Whitman only attracts mall shoppers in a certain income bracket, but has an abundance of bus service....

As for Sunrise, I'm curious to see what NICE does with those routes, because I honestly don't see much of a point to having the n19, n54/55, n71, and n80 all running over to Amityville,

On 3/1/2024 at 2:11 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

With the 4 I guess it depends mainly how the two halves (in this case I'm considering Brentwood LIRR as the midpoint) compare to the 1. Like I previously mentioned, I can see the 4 getting better loads than the 1 west of Brentwood. The 4 between Amityville and Brentwood is roughly around a mile shorter than the 1 (~14 vs. ~15 miles) , so if you get around 93% of the ridership the 1 gets that would basically put you on par with the 1. Brentwood to Smith Haven is about 2/3s of the the existing route 1 (10 vs. 15 miles), so if you get 66% of what the 1 gets overall then that puts you on par.

Given those numbers, I don't think it's impossible for the 4 to potentially beat out the 1. Even the weaker eastern segment, is not a "weak" segment way I see it. In sheer overall ridership yeah the 4 would have to do significantly better than the 1 because of the longer routes.  However if you see view it the way that I outlined it above, it's not as far-fetched as it may sound. The 4 is also one of very few routes which I can see decent gains in ridership, which I think would put in a position where it can rival the 1. However in terms of average ridership per mile, the 4 and the 1 will likely be close, which is what I'm referring to when I say it's not "running laps ahead" of the 1....

Perceptionally, I suppose you could look at it that way if it helps (comparing separate segments of the #4, each to the totality of the #1), but to me it's immaterial.... Even if I were to resort to segmentizing, I still have to get back to the point where I'm analyzing the totality of the route.... I mean, especially here that you convey that the #4 is appx. at 24 miles & the #1 at appx. 15 miles, oh that further solidifies my stance on not ranking the #4 as the most efficient route.... I can't put any less stock at an almost double-digit distance difference between the 2 routes, than for whatever ceiling I'd ultimately have total #4 patronage at... Putting that another way, I don't see the #4 getting nearly that much more usage than the #1 to even break even (as in, to the point where they'd be equal in the ridership/mile category), let alone surpass the #1in that category.... The #4 will beat out the #1 in total ridership, but I don't see it being to the point where it's more efficient than the #1....

The only reason I wouldn't render the upper-third portion of #4 (say, b/w Central Islip & Smith Haven) as weak, is solely because of Smith Haven itself.... Nichols rd. has long been virtually an unofficial nonstop portion b/w Central Islip & Lake Grove on the old #3D for the longest (it was the only part of my former commute b/w LIRR Central Islip & SUNY Stony Brook that I looked forward to.... buses crawled like shit to get to the campus from Smith Haven {which I absolutely despised}, and I seldom took the old #3D to Brentwood on the commute home b/c Suffolk av. was plagued with more traffic b/w LIRR Central Islip & LIRR Brentwood back then, compared to now).... Traffic moves better along Suffolk av. nowadays, but from my few amount of rides on the #4 thus far (four total), there's undoubtedly less people on these #4's, compared to #3D's to/from Smith Haven.... There's a couple reasons I can think of as to why that is, but overall patronage (regardless of route) in/out of Smith Haven I would keep a watchful eye on if I were SCT... Furthermore, while I get that it was done for coverage purposes & connectivity reasons, I'm not as wild about having the #4 running to Amityville (the lower-third of the route basically) - but at least Straight Path will go way more towards aiding in having the #4 eventually accumulate more overall usage than the #1.... If the #4 perhaps ran to Babylon instead, we wouldn't be having this discussion, as such a route would undoubtedly be more robust/compact than the #1....

Those projected percentages you got there, I simply think are too ambitious; I don't see the #4 west of Brentwood garnering appx. 93% of total #1 usage (for starters, unfortunately, I'm still noticing a fair amt. of people taking (WB) trains along the Main Line within the county for short distances), nor see the #4 east of Brentwood garnering appx. 66% of total #1 usage...

To sum this up, while the two routes would be within a certain proximity for the top spot in the ridership/mile category, where we differ here is the sheer level/difference of plentifulness of total ridership on the #4, compared to the #1.

13 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church @BM5 via Woodhaven FWIW, when I took my second trip out there on a Sunday, the northern section of the 6 actually did better than the southern section (basically, there were about 7-8 people leaving Patchogue, who slowly trickled off down the line, and then 5-6 people got on at two stops along Wheeler Road in Central Islip, and another 7-8 people at various stops along Jericho Turnpike). Not sure how it does on the weekdays when the full connections at Central Islip are in effect (on weekends and evenings, half the buses connect at one part of the hour, and the other half connect at the opposite part of the hour). 

I've taken the full #6 twice thus far; both towards Whitman.... First time was on 1/20 & the most recent time was this past Wednesday (love this new 4 day work schedule).... The former of the two was on a dreary Saturday (kind of like today, minus the rain); I can safely say that 7-8 total pax. (myself included) didn't embark on that trip... The latter of the two definitely had less than 20 something total people on it.... I'd say it was closer to 15 ppl. than 20 & most people were off the bus after we served the North Complex.... There was only 1 person that boarded along Jericho Tpke (couldve been another dude, but dude needed the #7)... It was only me & some other dude that got off at Whitman... We both got on the Amityville bound#1 - I took it to Amityville, whereas dude got off b/w rt. 109 & the Southern State.

At minimum, your trip only illustrates that SCT should have BEEN rolled out with Sunday service.

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

I've been re-reading some of the redesign, and I can't fathom for the life of me why the 15 does this ridiculous loop in Yorktown...

The part that forms the loop is the "downtown" sector of Yorktown Heights.

On 2/22/2024 at 8:41 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

1] For me I tried to consider both route mileage and ridership with frequency as much as possible. It made it a little hard at times given that I think that some routes are more or less in the same general area (which ended up happening a bit more than expected).  I suppose the ranking comes out more towards ridership since most of those tie-breaking decisions on my end ultimately came down to route potential, but that's how I approached it.

2] Route 2 was one of the tougher ones to rank, because between it, the 6, 7 and 51 I figured they will eventually be around the same (for different reasons). However I didn't see either 2 or 6 doing worse than the 51 overall. What bumped up the 6 was the connection at Central lslip LIRR to other routes and the Ronkonkoma, and it being an airport connection. I think it will take more time for the Airport portion to pick up but I can see it eventually being used decently. However, with the 2 the main thing was that given that the route now provides connections to NICE Bus, you might eventually see more ridership on the route. Especially since it's absolute garbage to get down to the Babylon Branch if you're not near it on public transit. Also while the shift of riders from the former S42 and S20 to Route 2 plus any new riders who start/end their trips west of Babylon due to the new frequencies/coverage will be relatively low, collectively they'll add enough to where I believe it gives the 2 the edge over the 6.

While the 51 is a route with some particularly strong segments and more streamlined service than the previous network, I think the existing section between Smith Haven and Patchogue drags it down considerably. Now IDK what the ongoing redevelopment around Ronkonkoma LIRR will do going forward, but I suppose it'll boost it up a bit. I also suppose the direct connection from Stony Brook to the Ronkonkoma Branch could be somewhat enticing for some in the long run (instead of only having the PJ Branch as a suitable option). However the LIRR's dicking around of service post-ESA and service patterns (to keep it short, SMFH) will probably hurt those numbers. Basically, I see whatever the 51 currently has as being more or less the case further down the line, with maybe a small bump.

1] The easiest part for me was ranking the 30 min. routes, which I why I ranked them before plugging the hourly routes in to complete the list.... Albeit for different reasons, my expectation of the hourly routes being around the same benchmark when it comes to ridership/mile, is what made ranking them more difficult/challenging.... Specifically, comparing estimations of how long the routes are to one another.... To sum it up, if I had the route mileage of all the routes, I'd have been finished this list - maybe even within minutes of first seeing the post/inquiry....

2] Out of those 4 routes you list (#2, #6, #7, #51), the #7 to me is the most stable.... "Stable", in the sense that there's no part of the #7 that I'm all that worried about (in the 3 full rides I had thus far on the #7, the portion north of Jericho Tpke. is actually seeing more ridership than I expected) when it comes to potentially waning, or otherwise wishy-washy ridership.... I can't say the same about the #2, #6, or the #51....

I remember @hounddriver made a post referencing how empty the buses are on the north shore.... Even though I hadn't rode any of the routes yet at that time, I nodded my head as if to be like "yeah, I'm not surprised by that at all".... The first thing I said to myself when I first saw the post, was that the old S54 up there significantly fell off years ago (to the point where demand for the S58 was higher than that of the S54 in the north shore - which is quite sad, considering the S58 only went as far west as Huntington Square Mall in that region of the county), so I didn't necessarily think the new network would make things better in that regard....

As for the #2, by revamping the network the way they did, there's less of a need to use it as a conduit to get to other routes (like what used to be the case with the extent it was done with the S40 at Bay Shore & Patchogue)... Couple that with running it to Amityville & the having of nothing running to/from it in a northerly-southerly fashion in that Bohemia, Sayville, etc. part of the county, I am not optimistic for the route at all... NICE bus over at Amityville isn't going to bring near as much people to the route to have me be any more optimistic for it.... To me, the S40 was more than a coverage route... The #2 OTOH to me, just reeks coverage route (which includes for whatever meager amt. of former S20 & S42 riders that would use it) at this point.... They should've gotten rid of the S42 around the time they got rid of the 1B, 5A, 7D/E, etc....

As for the #51, Station Yards will do just as much for the route as Wyandanch Rising has/will do for the #4 & the #12 ... At best, it'll take some people to/from Downtown Patchogue (which just seems so... fake, to me... Walking around there, I feel like I'm in a video game or something - the people congregating in those establishments along Montauk Hwy. there even LOOK like AI renderings... but that's neither here nor there), but I don't even see that happening.... In any event, while IDK exactly how the route mileage compares between the #2 & the #51, I see more potential for the #51 than I do the #2.... I don't see the #6 doing better than either; the whole northern half of the route is a large reason for that....

On 2/22/2024 at 8:41 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

To answer your question regarding Route 4, even though I have the 4 ahead of the 1 it's not a situation where it's running laps ahead. That's also why I say in my rankings post that I could see the 4 beating out the 1. Overall I would put them around the same but the 4 has the advantage way I see it. Potential gains on the Amityville-Brentwood section in particular is what led to my ranking. With Amityville, Wyandanch, Deer Park and Brentwood now having more frequent and later service (especially on weekends - those last S33 buses from Sunrise during the 4-5 PM hours were early but the worst part was that they didn't even travel the full route!), it will definitely be used. On top of that, I can see loads in that section beating out what you typically see on the 1.

That's not to say the part eastern of Brentwood wouldn't do well either, but it would not be to the same degree as points west. That's where it would lower the overall efficiency of the entire 4 (and it's a decent chunk of the route as well). I'm aware that the 58 and 5 would chip in to Smith Haven ridership, however I don't see it being too much of an issue. For starters, I don't see the 5 in particular taking too much away from the 4 because of its indirect route. Maybe if they live near the 5 perhaps, but the 4 beats it out even with the Central Islip stopover. The 58 perhaps is more competitive with the 4, so maybe that can do some numbers, however I do not see it taking too much away either. Plus any ridership gains on that section west of Brentwood due to more frequent service and better connectivity with points west of Brentwood, would likely make up the losses in mall ridership to the 58. 

Cool.

I can see the #4 garnering more overall ridership than the #1, but not to the extent where it'd accomplish having a higher ridership/mile ranking than it... The #4 would just about have to run laps (so to speak) in the ridership department for it to be more efficient than the #1.... That's why I asked how much more usage do you see it getting over the #1...

As for what you're saying about the #58, while I still despise having it run to Brentwood from Riverhead, I will admit that the demand to/from Brentwood actually exceeds what I thought it would (which was never my concern, as if to say it would yield little usage... I just think the route from end to end is overkill, but just thought I'd point that out).... What I still gotta find out is, just how far east does most of that demand pan...

Just to be clear, we're making the same point about the #5, as it relates to the #4's efficiency & I agree with the demand for the #58 b/w Brentwood & Smith Haven being stronger than that of the #5 b/w the same 2 points... I wasn't at all trying to convey that the #5's running to Smith Haven would significantly affect the #4; "chipping in" to the ridership was the only point I was making with that...

Speaking of Smith Haven, I'm not sure what's going on, but the place isn't nearly a madhouse with waiting pax. as it used to be - at least not in my experiences.... Still don't think it should be one of the timed connection points... If it's a testament to the new network providing less of a need for more people to be xferring there, I wouldn't know it.... That, and/or the new network being a stark decrease in overall/county-wide coverage compared to the old network, bringing less people to the mall as a result...

18 hours ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church 

1] I think the main question boils down to how I ranked the 17 higher than the 62 and the 52A/B. Basically, it has to do with the length of the route. The 17 is relatively compact all things considered. It has Central Islip south of the LIRR tracks all to itself, and I think it does a decent job of combining the two halves of the old 3C in that area (Boulevard Avenue was a bit more centralized, but Lowell Avenue is still walking distance of the denser parts of Central Islip, and then it swings over towards Carleton Avenue and serves CI Town Centre, NYIT, and the courts, and then connects directly to the 2 on the southern end (albeit untimed). Compare that to the 52A/B, which are longer and less compact (realistically, I think most of the ridership will be Gordon Heights/Coram residents looking to connect with the LIRR at Ronkonkoma or with buses in Central Islip...maybe to a lesser extent some Central Islip passengers looking to go further east or out to say, Port Jefferson...that gets to be somewhat harder since besides the 51, the connecting routes all run hourly and you have to review the schedule closely to see whether the A or B is better for a given connection).

For the 62, the sheer length and amount of dead mileage brings down the ranking for me. 

From another perspective, the 17 is basically a straightened out 3C, whereas the 52A/B is basically a 6A rerouted to Gordon Heights and extended to Central Islip. The 3C was generally more efficient than the 6A and S62, so my thinking is that it generally applies to their restructured counterparts.

2] As for the 55 vs. the 5, I think the meandering route north of the LIRR (in Deer Park but especially north of Brentwood...not to mention the other alternatives between Brentwood & Hauppauge or Brentwood and Smith Haven) really bring efficiency down in that regard. (To put things into perspective, the 5 is about twice as long as the 55, and twice as frequent...I don't think the 5 gets four times the ridership as the 55 to make up for the extra resources needed to operate it). 

1] I agree with BM5 Woodhaven, where he said something to the effect of the #52a/b (at least the western/shared portion of the 2 routes) having more going for it.... Just like there was a need for a route like the #4 b/w Deer Park & Central Islip along the main line, there's also a bit of a need to connect Central Islip & Ronkonkoma along the main line.... I'd say you're grossly underestimating the #52a/b if you think most of the usage is going to come from Coram & Gordon Heights; those are hardly the folks commuting to/from the rail... The western/shared portion of the #52a/b I undoubtedly see garnering a lot more usage than either of the individual portions of the #52a/b (as in, east of SCCC Selden).... Basically, I see total #17 usage & total (individual) usage of the #52a & #52b being all washes.... The #52a/b isn't that much longer than the #17 for me to have ranked it ahead of them... With the #52a & #52b individually being hourly routes & the #17 being a 30 min. route, for me, that pushes the #17 back even further in the rankings...

I can see the case for wanting to rank the #62 below the #17, but I can't ignore having the #17 as a half-hourly route... I think 30 min. service for most of the route is that unwarranted - even for however compact it might be to you or anyone else (while it's shorter than most the routes in the network, I personally don't think it's all that compact, as there's too much of the route I see hardly getting much usage.... North of the main line, usage-wise, I see it being the weakest of the options getting to/from the county offices)....

Outside of service to the court complex, I'm beginning to think they made the #17 a 30 min. route, just so that they can interline it with the #11.

2] Oh, I actually do think it'll garner significantly more usage than the #55..... It's more due to the downfall of the old S61, than the potential I (still) see for the totality of the #5 - even with that empty mileage b/w Deer Park av & once it leaves Pilgrim Psych. center (which I see them doing eventually doing something with).... I'd say it started happening before the fact, but it does seem like ever since they fixed up downtown Patchogue, demand for the old S61 in general fell off a cliff... Similar to what happened with the demand for the old S29 north of Deer Park (around Grand Blvd.) falling off a cliff once they "simonized" (as I like to call it) Whitman mall...

9 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Vape??? They smoke weed, crack, etc and whenever used to complain to NYCT on WhatsApp they say they would send someone and never do.

Yep, I've experienced this too many times on the & the ... Wouldn't doubt for a second it happens on other lines as well.....

Come to think of it, I've seen one dude one night earlier this year shootin up (heroin) on the as well.... I usually don't take the from Manhattan, but I didn't feel like taking the M15 down to Delancey for the to get to WBP....

44 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

....It would be nice to see MTA PD finally in the subways and buses. I very rarely see them anywhere else outside of Woodside, Jamaica, Grand Central or Penn Station. Police responses can be slow at times too.

Hell, I would see them more on the LIRR than I would on the NYC subway.... News to me that they're even at Woodside....

But yeah, they'd randomly ride on Brooklyn/Atlantic terminal trains [LIRR].... Sometimes they'd take main line trains as far east as Hicksville, to then switch over to a WB train & ride back to Jamaica or whatever...

13 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I don't think it would be too crazy a take to a] combine the southern half of the #12 with the northern portion of the #3, and b] have another route be the result of a combination of the northern half of the #12 & the southern portion of the #3.... In other words, a Bay Shore - Whitman route & a Babylon - SUNY Farmingdale (via Deer Park & Wyandanch), both running hourly.... I'm not necessarily/staunchly proposing this, but this map portrays what I'm saying with this.... Regardless, the #12 at 30 min. headways is not efficient at all....

Damn... Just realized I forgot to... actually make the damn map

I'll get to it later, after I come back.

On 1/24/2024 at 9:09 AM, The TransitMan said:

You should check out Brentwood! Bro, those bus shelters along Brentwood Rd...GONE! Now it's just regular street lamps and such.. However, I do agree with you. They need to get a move on these bus stop signs. Especially on the NEW routes like the 52B and the updated 80. As for Patchogue, I'm not surprised that bus stop on West St is still like that. Just cater to the LIRR for the tourists if you ask me.

So there is a demand for service to Syosset? Really? I remember hearing about the MSBA bus route running up to Syosset but was discontinued years ago.

Yep, I noticed it on my initial ride on the #7... The immediate area looks infinitely tidier & presentable!

As for Syosset, well there's always been demand for the more commercial part of Syosset, south of the RR station (as in, along Jericho Tpke, over there by S. Oyster Bay rd. & Underhill rd).... Problem with the old N94 (the route you're referencing) was that it ran in the opposite direction along Jericho Tpke. to serve the business parks... It literally did nothing to address the demand for the part of Syosset people wanted.... Those taxi's at the RR station (Syosset) continue to make a killing because of it.

On 1/24/2024 at 9:59 AM, hounddriver said:

Why does the 58 stop at the Dennison Bldg in Hauppauge, but not the DMV-state office bldg where most passenger activity is,as well as transferring passengers?

Something's gotta serve it... I guess.

Their thought process is likely something along the lines of *everyone can xfer at Brentwood*... Three cheers for.... pulse points?

On 2/3/2024 at 6:53 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

Tracking is now available: https://gisapps.suffolkcountyny.gov/sctransit/

This is the rider navigator page (the page with all the interactive/individual route maps).... If this was the intent, then it isn't working (at least on my end) because I've been checking individual route maps at random throughout these past 2 weeks or so, and all of the maps remain static..... Static, as in, nothing is being shown as being in service/being tracked on any of the individual interactive maps....

On 2/17/2024 at 8:25 PM, Trainmaster5 said:

Although I’ve been traveling to Suffolk County ( Brentwood ) since my inlaws moved here in 1981 I’ve only ridden one SCT bus in my lifetime and that was an exploration trip on the S1. Rode it from end to end just for the experience. I remember telling my father-in-law that as a Brooklynite I wanted nothing to do with a bus system that seemed to stop operating after 7 pm. LIRR had a single track at Brentwood and the station was located on the west side of Brentwood Road. No westbound trains between 4:23 and 7:23 pms on weekdays. Because I worked late pms on work trains in transit I had to get that 4:23 train or catch a ride to Babylon if I hadn’t driven out there to Brentwood. There were times I had to climb up onto the trailing diesel to make that train. The Conductor would read me the riot act after we stopped at Deer Park. When they upgraded the LIRR line to 2 tracks and relocated the station house they installed bus stops on both sides of Brentwood Road  although that 3 hour gap westbound remained and then I started paying attention to the bus routes down there. I think there were 3 routes prefixed with an S, 27, 41, and IIRC 47. There were 3 routes prefixed with a 3, A, B and D. I remember the 41 went to the VA hospital and the 3D was for Stony Brook Hospital.

Even after reading B35’s adventures with SCT I still can’t see how the service was interconnected. In 40+ years of being around this area I travel to the South Shore Mall, Huntington Square and the Smith Haven Malls by car. I think I was spoiled by NYCTA bus service in Brooklyn and the city in general. Now with the new service out here in Suffolk I notice the 5 and 7 bus routes and I’ve seen a ARBOC (?) with a split 7/11 sign on the front door. The little jitney type buses have no numbers on the overhead signs which is bad enough but I drive through the Hauppauge Industrial area and I noticed old signs or missing new signs at some of the bus shelters or stops. Very tacky in my opinion. For all the fanners I thank you for enlightening me and keep up the good work. Carry on.

Yep, those are ARBOC's - and they even resort to running them on some of the longer routes in the system too... That split sign you saw was likely a 17/11, since they both interline at the county offices in Hauppauge... I've done 3 fantrips out there now & each time I've seen that ARBOC with the 11/17 paper on the windows..... I understand it's going to take a good minute to get a bunch of signs up county-wide & do away with all the shelters that are no longer bus stops, but I'm still of the sentiment that it's been long enough for them to at least do away with these placards for bus stops... For me, it's those very placards that are tacky... Missing bus stop signage is flat out embarrassing (I get miffed at missing signage here in the city, b/c the DOT's damn quick to put up new signage for new routes (and/or for routes that's been altered.... they usually do it days before a new route/altered route change is set to be implemented)....

While I'd like to do trip reports for all my fantrips, the reality is that I feel like it's all for naught nowadays.... Hate to sound like the old man yelling at clouds here, but that's the one thing I do miss about the good old days in this online transit community... Of course not everyone, but back then, there was more of an interest from forum users when it came to checking out some fantrip someone did - whether it was in text form and/or picture/video form.... But if I feel compelled enough, I'll still do them from time to time.

On 11/26/2023 at 1:59 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

{S1  S4  S66  S2  S7  S11  S6  S51  S55  S12  S5  S58  S92? S53  S17  S52A/S52B  S3  S62  S10  S77/77Y  S80}

On 11/26/2023 at 3:43 PM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

{4  1  66   5  2  6  51  7  58  11  92  55  62  12  53  52A/52B  77/77Y  3  17 > 10 (barely though) ..... ... ....... ..... .....  80}

6 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

{#1, #4, #5, #7, #66, #51, #11, #2, #58, #6, #92, #55, #62, #77Y, #12, #52a. #52b, #53, #17, #77, #3, #10, #80 (loop), #15 (Robert Moses), #110 (Suffolk Clipper)}

Hmm... noticing both of y'alls list, the one thing that apparent to me is that you two placed more of a bias/more stock into overall ridership.... I put more stock in route mileage (not saying either is really right or wrong)..... As you probably know, I've long been a proponent of proposing (what I like to call) compact routes & have never been a proponent of just proposing routes I believe will garner high amt's of ridership, regardless of distance (hence why I coined the term "superroute")... So I'm always going to place more of a bias on distance, even if it's 50.0000000001 to 49.999999999 (lol).....

While the apparent consensus is that the #1 & the #4 are the two top dog's (so to speak), I'm actually shocked that you both have the #2 as high up on the list.... I was contemplating putting it (and the #6, for that matter) further down on my list....

------------------------------

What I am curious about is...

@checkmatechamp13 Why you have the #17 so high up on the list, and why/how you have the #55 ahead of the #5 (even if it's hourly) ?

@BM5 via Woodhaven To sum it up, how much more usage do you see the #4 ending up garnering, compared to the #1?

While I read your initial post, your point/snippet regarding the #1 & the #4 sticks out to me.... While I agree the potential of the #4 is nothing to ignore, something else that shouldn't be ignored is just how much longer the #4 is to the #1... If the question was solely regarding ridership (instead of basically ridership per mile, with respect to frequency), I'd agree that the #4 would be ranked first.... Be there as it may, the #1's patronage, even though (the S1) lost ridership, would likely still be close enough to the #4 to where it wouldn't be less efficient than it... The #1 would have to lose a shit ton of ridership (on top of what the S1 already ended up losing) - as quite frankly, there's only but so much ridership to be had out in Suffolk County (which sucks that there's as much of an anti-bus mentality out in the 'burbs in general, but it is what it is).....

I know you don't care for the #5 also going to Smith Haven, but the #5 & the #58 eating into that Brentwood - Smith Haven demand is something else that brings down the #4 in terms of efficiency - in the sense that it's that much less riders that would use it, have those other 2 routes not run b/w the 2 points....

On 11/26/2023 at 1:59 PM, checkmatechamp13 said:

@B35 via Church @BM5 via Woodhaven Out of curiosity, what would be your ranking of efficiency of the routes in the new network? (I'd personally consider the S52 to be a bit weaker than the S17). I'd say as follows (to clarify, when I say efficiency, I mean ridership relative to length and allocated frequency).....

Wanted to take some time with these rankings... Sorry for the delay.

I'd go:

#1, #4, #5, #7, #66, #51, #11, #2, #58, #6, #92, #55, #62, #12, #77Y, #52a. #52b, #53, #17, #77, #3, #10, #80 (loop), #15 (Robert Moses), #110 (Suffolk Clipper)

How I did this, was that I ranked all the 30 min. routes first, then I did a little plug & play (so to speak) with the hourly routes... The #77Y I have ranked as high as I have it, due to its shorter span (which I can't ignore, since you're tying allocated frequency into this inquiry regarding how these routes fare, in regards to efficiency).... If it had the same span as the #77, I'd rank it b/w the #10 & the #80..... Even with the few. amt of trips per day, running 5 days a week, I still have the Suffolk Clipper as the most inefficient route in the system - far too much dead mileage (highway time), carrying next to nobody in the process.... I'm not sure what the story is with the 10B & the 10C; if they still have them running, or what.... So for that reason, I omitted them from the rankings....

----------------------------------------------------------

* As far as the most efficient route in the system (considering frequency), I have to go with the S1.... While the #1 has lost ridership b/w SUNY Farmingdale & Whitman mall, while I do see the #4 ending up being the most utilized route in the system, I don't see the #4 blowing the #1 out of the water to make up for the fact that it travels about 5-6 miles longer than it, to say it's more efficient.... The weakest part of the #4 is the stint b/w Central Islip & Smith Haven (not inclusive).... The core of the route is b/w Wyandanch & Central Islip (inclusive).... I would have the #4 as being the most efficient route in the system if it ran b/w Amityville & Central Islip, or b/w Wyandanch & Smith Haven... But the totality of the #4 I can't say is more efficient than the totality of the #1... The portion of the #1 north of Whitman has always been underrated, and the portion of the #1 south of Farmingdale remains solid/heavily utilized as it's typically been....

----------------------------------------------------------

** The next 4 routes (#5, #7, #66, #51) are all in the same "tier" to me.... With the #5, what kept it out of the top tier is the portion east of the county offices... Both the #5 & the #7 look to travel around the same distance, and I think they'll generally have around or about the same amt. of ridership.... While being toss-ups, I have the #5 higher than the #7, because I see it garnering more usage b/w Babylon & Hauppauge, than I see the #7 doing so b/w Bay Shore & Jericho Tpke..... The reason I have the #66 slightly behind the #5 & the #7, is due to the portion b/w Riverhead & Mastic (not inclusive)... While it'll garner more ridership than those 2 routes, it also travels a further distance.....

Lastly in this tier, the thing with the #51 is that, while the connecting of dots (so to speak) looks good on paper, the outer-thirds of the route (meaning, b/w [Patchogue & Ronkonkoma] & b/w [Smith Haven & Pt. Jeff Station]) is the reason I'd say it's the least efficient of the 4 routes... The portion north of Smith Haven I find to be potentially too hit or miss... The old S60 worked up there b/c S58's & S62's were often delayed, not to mention it offered a 1 seat ride to Smith Haven and Port Jeff from Coram Plaza & Gordon Heights... The #51 (I would say stops dead, but it interlines with the #53 & #55) terminates in Pt. Jeff Station... The old S60 from Smith Haven didn't die in Pt. Jeff Station.... Not saying/implicating that the #51 should run to Gordon Hgts (no need for it to), but what I am saying is that the #51 b/w Smith Haven & Pt. Jeff. Station won't be remotely utilized as the old S60 was b/w that same stretch... On the opposite end of the thing (#51), while the stint b/w Ronkonkoma & Patchogue will loom convenient, I don't see it making the route more efficient....

----------------------------------------------------------

*** After the 1st tier (#1, #4) & 2nd tier (#5, #7, #66, #51), there's a big dropoff in efficiency with the rest of these routes - for differing reasons, of course.... I guess everything b/w the #11 & #53 (which, at 12 total routes, constitutes almost half the total routes in the new network) is all in one tier.... To start this off, the #11 was one of the trickier routes to rank... While I'm in limbo if it should be 1/2 hourly or not (which is the main reason I don't have it in that second tier), I have it ranked higher up in this lower tier, largely due to how compact it is... Quicker link than the #7 b/w Bay Shore & Brentwood, and I see it transporting (more of) the masses b/w Hauppauge & Brentwood - even moreso than the #5...

Being perfectly honest, with the #2, #6, & #58, I would rank them lower down if I didn't use the #92 as a sort of median in this whole thing... Even though I have the #6 ranked lower than the #2, I believe the #2 will end up losing ridership, partly because of the #6.... Couple that with the extension to Amityville from Babylon, and I don't at all see the #2 as one of the upper echelon ranked routes in the system, in terms of efficiency... I'll break it down - see, with the old network, you had a lot of folks taking S40's from Patchogue to Bay Shore for a] Bay Shore, itself, and b] points between Bay Shore & Brentwood... With the #6 directly running to Central Islip, the connection to/for a route going to(wards) Brentwood is that much more feasible & will take a considerably less amt. of time (than the old S40 from that end of the route, to the (S45, S41 or 3B)).... The saving grace for the #2 will be the portion b/w Babylon & East Islip.... Have it not be for Sayville, I'd "say" the #2 would almost be a complete dead zone east of the Southern State (well, the Heckscher state Pkwy. at that point) in terms of patronage... Basically what I'm getting at here is that I see the demand for the #2 in Patchogue considerably waning....

With that said about the #2, I believe the #6 is in even worse trouble..... The saving grace for the #6 is easily the southern half of the route... I was seriously concerned about the old S54 b/w Hauppauge & Whitman, and my sentiment/concern is no different, now that the route has a new route number.... While I'm not sure which of the 2 routes is longer than the other (don't think there's a significant difference either way), I still see the #2 garnering more overall usage than the #6 - and that is saying a lot.... I don't know when it started happening, but at some point, folks stopped taking S54's along Jericho Tpke in the numbers that they used to in the past.... It still gets a fair amt. of usage at Whitman itself, but once it leaves Whitman, the situation is not good at all; not all that much passenger activity before it hits the county offices.... I seriously believe looking at the totality of the #6, it's a route I see completely hanging on (by a thread) with straggler level ridership - including the southern half of the route.... The reason you keep it at half-hourly headways, is due to the coverage it offers in Western Suffolk County in general.... All that said, I'll still say that the #6 is an improvement over the old S54 (which is probably not saying much of anything at this point).....  As far as the #58, I threw it between the #2 & the #6 because 1] it's an hourly route (if it was 1/2 hourly, I'd have it as far back as I do the #17, if not further back), 2] from their respective terminus', I see the #58 garnering more usage than the #6, but not necessarily more than the #2 - that's how far I believe the S54 has fallen/#6 will continue to wane, #3] the sheer amt. of dead mileage east of Middle Island, coupled with the stint b/w Smith Haven & Brentwood... have it not been for that, I'd actually have the #58 just ahead of the #11 - putting it ahead of both the #2 & the #6.... Ultimately with these 3 routes, I feel like I'm splitting hairs (given the sheer distance they all cover), but I just wanted to give some nuance/an explanation....

The #55 & the #62 I have ranked where they are, for different reasons.... Both of those routes have taken a hit in terms of popularity over the years...... The old S61 & S62 used to be heavily sought after routes... The #55 these days, all things considered, is a solid hourly route (if this route was 1/2 hourly {like the S61 used to be during certain parts of the day}, I'd have it back there with the #10 & the #80 in terms of efficiency & frequency)... The demand for the #62 in general OTOH fell off a bigger cliff - especially between Pt. Jeff & Calverton.... While I didn't think they'd actually propose it, I was worried that they would (originally propose axing the #62)..... Needless to say, Riverhead & Pt. Jefferson has been keeping that route alive for ages, but now I believe the situation is that much more dire... The reason I don't have it lower down in the ranking is due to the fact that it ends in Smith Haven.... If they still had it running to industrial Hauppauge, I'd have it ranked back there with the #17 (which is what/where I'd also have the #58, if it were 1/2 hourly).... To sum it up, even given the mileage of the #58 compared to the shortened #62, I still have the #58 being more efficient than the #62, because I easily see it garnering that much more riders....

I still say continuing to have the #12 ending at SUNY Farmingdale stunts the route's growth... It should either run to Conklin/rt. 110 or to the Walmart in Farmingdale (also along rt. 110)..... From Bay Shore, it ceases being all that useful west of Deer Park av.... The #12 between SUNY Farmingdale & Deer Park (av) feels like the old S42 b/w Babylon & Bay Shore - a snoozefest.... Not that the old 2b was raking in the riders either, but at least it served more people's residences.... I don't see the #12 being all that useful in the network & it has no business running half-hourly (even if it offers a connection to NICE bus)... I don't think it would be too crazy a take to a] combine the southern half of the #12 with the northern portion of the #3, and b] have another route be the result of a combination of the northern half of the #12 & the southern portion of the #3.... In other words, a Bay Shore - Whitman route & a Babylon - SUNY Farmingdale (via Deer Park & Wyandanch), both running hourly.... I'm not necessarily/staunchly proposing this, but this map portrays what I'm saying with this.... Regardless, the #12 at 30 min. headways is not efficient at all....

There's not much separating the #12, #52a, #52b, and #53 in the rankings.... I swear what I'm about to say wasn't done on purpose - If the #12 was an hourly route, I'd have it ranked right where I currently have it! Less efficient than the #62 (because I don't see any part of the #12 performing remotely close to either the #62 b/w Calverton & Riverhead, or the #62 b/w Smith Haven & Pt. Jeff), but slightly more efficient than the #52a/b & the #53.... Even though I used the #92 as a median for the rankings (in terms of what route I should throw where - as in, to the left or to the right of it on the list), the #12 is the actual median in the list (I would have the 10b & 10c ranked lower than the #12)... Scary coincidence/consistency.... Anyway, I have the #53 where I have it in the back end of this 3rd tier, simply because it's the longer of the four routes (#12, #52a/b, #53) & I see it garnering less overall patronage of the four routes... I have the #52a ahead of the #52b simply because it serves Coram Plaza before serving (more of) Gordon Heights.... While I'd say Mooney Pond brings down the #52a's efficiency, the #52b serving Brookhaven Town Hall & serving less of Gordon Hgts. brings down its efficiency even further.... I get that they're interlined, but still......

AFAIC, the #52 should be one route running between Central Islip & Coram Plaza, via Expressway Plaza & via Gordon Heights, but that's neither here nor there....

----------------------------------------------------------
**** I think I've said enough about the #17 in other posts... The #15, even though it runs summers only, I still find to be immensely excessive at hourly headways all day.... Already spoke on the #110 in the first paragraph..... With that said, unless you or anyone else has any specific questions about what I have ranked in this ass-end tier of abhorrently abominable routes, I think I'm going to end this post right here

12 hours ago, 40 to 241st said:

Ok I searched it up and found that it means something we’re you park to get a ride on something like a bus or train. So you were trying to say that you don’t like the idea of people parking along or near central avenue to get a ride on the bxm4c 

Close, but nah....

There's a distinct difference between park & riding (what you're describing) and "kiss & riding".... Kiss & riding, in this case, is where someone (usually a relative, friend, or acquaintance) drops you off to a bus stop, and then drives off afterwards... There's no parking at/around said bus stop involved.

So I say that to say, my point isn't about "not liking".... It's about Central Park av's layout not being all that conducive to have people being dropped off along it, to catch a bus, in any large enough scale... It makes for a poor stretch to have commuters engaging in that phenomenon.... It's far too cumbersome for most patrons proximate enough to Central Park av. to actually consider walking to the BxMC4... Suburban express routes tend to not do well if the stops aren't really proximate to their places of residence... Either that, or some sort of "official" park & ride type setup; which Westchester county in general sorely lacks....

On 2/11/2024 at 2:01 PM, Gotham Bus Co. said:

Maybe ditch the Q98 in favor of extending Q38 at both ends (to Ridgewood Terminal and Main Street Station).

Lol... Folks would just bombard the Q58 like they do now.

On 2/12/2024 at 2:31 AM, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Hard no with ditching the Q98 to extend the Q38. That's a Q38 problem and should be addressed on its own merits. The Q98 should not have to be sacrificed due to the shortcomings of another route. 

The problems I have with many of these types of proposals when they come up (whether it's via 63rd Drive/Penelope, via Eliot Ave or whatnot) are that they tend to significantly underestimate Grand Avenue ridership/ridership patterns, and overestimate Flushing-Ridgewood ridership. Sure the Flushing-Ridgewood ridership may be more interchangeable, issue is that it is not an overwhelming majority (let alone majority) of riders on the existing Q58 route. Grand Avenue is a major corridor and the different rider bases (Ridgewood, subway feeder, Corona , Flushing) all collectively make up a large chunk of Q58 ridership. That is followed by the usage in Corona. Seems like misplaced priorities to focus on what to do with a relatively minor group of riders (who would already see an improvement with the Q98). 

Plus with the way the Q38 goes through Middle Village, I don't think you would be saving that much time honestly. All you need is one parked car, delivery truck or whatnot and then any time savings goes out the window. The Q98 is an okay route in terms of making trips faster and providing necessary levels where demand is located. Penelope or Eliot Ave just don't come close to those levels, with Penelope being the lowest of the three.

The real question is what other areas are residents in Middle Village and Rego Park seeking along the proposed Q38 route? For starters north/east of Queens Blvd I would not keep as part of the Q38, easily the weakest part of the route. Much of nobody is seeking the area west of Queens Blvd given its primarily residential. I think the 62nd Drive/63rd Road segment should be part of the Q59 since it would connect it to more commercial areas of interest / ridership generators in Queens. Having the Q38 running between Queens Blvd & Fresh Pond Road though would make it lightly used given that it's acting as a subway feeder for the most part. We've had discussions on what to do with the route, I think B35's proposal to send the thing to Williamsburg isn't a bad one honestly, I could also see potentially sending it through Bushwick potentially working as well (ultimately depends on the route). However I wouldn't bring the Q98 into this one.

1. Oh, I'd say it's worse.... It's not even an underestimation of Grand Av., it's purposely ignoring rider habits along Grand av. in an attempt to bolster the Q38.... I've long came to that conclusion in regards to these/similar Q38 proposals over the years....

2. Before this discussion, I've never gave it any thought.... But I do concur with the sentiment though.... How much time would you say it would save? Or do you have it as being more or less a wash?

3. Yeah, that's why I say I get why they have the final proposed Q38 basically ending at Fresh Pond... Like you mentioned with that proposal I posed a couple weeks or so ago, I'd much rather use it as a supplement to the (western portion of the) Q54, over running it down Fresh Pond... The other viable option to attempt to remedy the Q54 is to split it.... The Q58 (which runs like wildfire) doesn't have the problems with unreliability the Q54 does....

12 hours ago, 40 to 241st said:

I don't know exactly what your trying to say about the Bxm4c but if I were to guess your saying that an express bus from Westchester to Manhattan shouldn't cover Central Av but why.

Do you know what kiss & riding is?

22 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The BxM4D was only created because of the railroad strike. The reason why the BxM4C wasn't apart of the MTA takeover is because it was based out of the local garage and not the express garage (which is now Yonkers).

My point is that coming out with a mini sub-network of direct Westchester-Manhattan routes will end up being a massive waste of money... Just like those MDX routes I brought up that Transdev proposed for NICEBus, IDK what it is they're seeing that has them thinking or believing that there's a demand for anymore direct bus service to/from Manhattan... The BxM3 doesn't do hot at all within Yonkers  (the masses are clearly content with taking local buses to the ) & the BxMC4 is what it is at this point.... I would hope that they are not foolish enough to rely on blind faith with whatever routes they (Transdev) had/has in mind....

I mean, Central Park av in & of itself with the BxMC4 is a terrible road for commuters to be kiss & riding along... God help you if you don't have someone to give you a ride; No way in f*** if I lived in the suburbs, would I subject myself to hoofing it out from my place of residence  - especially with terrain in mind, crossing Central Park av. (esp. certain parts of it over others) to catch a bus... It's enough that it's done with the BL-20/21....

39 minutes ago, Cait Sith said:

Last I heard, Liberty Lines and Transdev were among the bidders.

If Transdev wins, that would be extremely ironic given that Hudson Link is not that far off, and Transdev had this vision of implementing express routes to/from The Bronx and Manhattan(not drafted yet). They had this idea of replacing the 21 line with an express route.

They had the same vision for NICEBus with those MDX routes back in 2018, IINM....

There's a reason that the BxM4D is no longer a thing, with the BxM4C in & of itself being on the chopping block...