B35 via Church

Yeh, they aint goin bring it back... Wouldn't matter now anyway; those riders done successfully shifted to the brighton line or the BM's.... You really took those ideas seriously.....

I used to take the x29, and I also share these same sentiments.... I didn't like how the MTA thinned service (and even went as far as changing the span to deter usage on top of it) on that route before they cut it, and then mentioned oh how the route had low ridership..... Ridership was actually Increasing on the route if you asked me..... They did just about everything to get rid of the route....

Buses run every 8-10 mins. on that short route, so it's not the amt. of service that needs to be boosted..... What I can't stand about the Q64 is that the physical buses will be sitting there on 108th (at least 2 at a time... most I seen was 4), but crowds would just start lining up on QB before the driver (I guess) decides it's time to turn the corner, pick up pax, and leave.... this is not sporadic, but a very common occurrence on that route.... I don't know why he's using the Q64 as a sticking point in an agreeance in bringing the 74 back.... Q64's were crowded while Q74's ran, and they aren't that much more crowded now that the 74's gone.....

Yep (to your point & the fact that there are two of them), but those are dedicated bus services..... i.e., private services.... Even all the more reason why I don't think those students would wait around for a Bx33 to the campus' from 137th .... especially if the buses aren't right there when they come up from the subway..... That's just CCNY.... then there's the non-ccny folks that have to be factored in as well; how many folks on that side of 133rd are tryna get over to the M1's, 2's, 3's,10's, etc. of the world on the opposite side of 133rd.....

Neither did Woodlawn & Yonkers riders (see BxM4b), especially for the sake of a branch that no one took (see BxM4a b/w Lehman coll & grand concourse) Seriously though (well, not that the above was a joke), I'm not too fond of 2 hr. headways.... I was gonna point that out, but I didn't bother at the time I read his post....

Screw 165th, they need a few Q111's to start on Archer during the weekday ! ---- Anyway: - The infamous Q7 to Green Acres idea rears its head again..... I'm not beating that dead horse.... for those that don't know, I absolutely hate that idea.... - Q36 LTD's... another dead horse.... get rid of this damned thing already....

I proposed something similar to that idea a couple yrs ago back on RD.... except I had it continuing down amsterdam & across 125th to end w/ the Bx15.... I was basically presenting such a plan the same way you are with yours.... However, actually attending there for a couple summers, I came to a realization that made me rescind any Bx33 extension.... Problem is, CCNY kids aren't walking down to St. Nicholas park to catch the 33 ..... and I can assure you none of them students coming off the will take the bus to CCNY itself (your best case scenario would be to have buses at the station ready & waiting for them).... Even the old M18 up/down convent didn't do those students any justice - and that stopped at 125th st subway (A/B/C/D) & stopped right dead in front of the campus' as well...... You would have to add service to the route to make it more conducive to them, on top of extending it (b/c buses only run like 15 mins peak, 20 off peak IINM)..... You'd have to gauge how many CCNY students are from the bronx, that would ride down from wherever they're emanating from, to even reach the 33... Speaking of which, you also have to consider where the Bx33 goes in the Bronx, if you want to talk about improving the route.... Quite honestly, I'm glad the route is still around... I wouldn't do any tinkering around with it.... Good idea on paper, I just don't think it'd be all too worth it realistically....

I wouldn't revert the M104.... or concoct any other route panning down 42nd st..... So, no, to your little question here.... The rest of the post you wasted your time directing at me.....

Exactly.

Yep... like I said earlier, it's a misconception to believe that a lot of ppl. walking about in an area will equal a lot of people on a newformed bus route in that area..... It's an illogical remedy; you don't give ppl. suppositories to cure the common cold they have.... Some facts are just gonna have to be faced here... every street aint suitable for a bus route just because there's asphalt (or in some areas... brick) between the opposing sidewalks.... I guess what's bothering me w/ some of these ideas, is this mindset of "connecting the dots" without realizing, knowing, or even considering what current problems exist......

No quotes, but few things: - extending the Q26 to get rid of the Q77 is just as bad as merging the Q76 w/ the Q77 (which has been mentioned before on several occasions, albeit not in this thread).... you're basically creating a route very similar to the Q27 - a long, winding route that goes from Flushing to SE Queens..... The system doesn't need another one of those type of routes..... - To imply that a route shouldn't exist (or in this particular case, be brought back) because it's not part of the main bus route system structure for its region, is mind boggling..... That's like telling an illegal he/she can't ride the bus b/c he.she isn't a citizen - even though they paid the fare.... - Another proposal that has a public bus route going from airport to airport.... You'd have to have enough major xfer points along such a route enough to draw as many ppl. to it to keep such a route afloat...... It's a double-edged sword b/c serving 2 airports + major xfer points in between, makes for the most unstable route one could possibly draw up..... Forget about an airport to airport route just nonchalantly serving a couple communities in the mix & expecting it to flourish..... - To send the 112 down to the rockaways is excessive... everyone cannot have 1 seat rides..... Those riders are gonna simply have to take the Q21 or Q53 to rockaway blvd for the Q41 or the Q112 & call it a day.....

You're not totally wrong, but this is a half-truth.... If I told you I'm driving my car originating from East Flatbush, what good would that do a planner.... lol... The origin means nothing without knowing the destination of vehicular traffic..... and even then you have to somehow try to get folks out of their personal vehicles to make mass transit conducive enough.....

The B71 ended on Sterling at Rogers.... Yeah, I just wanna make sure exactly what he means.....

Sure I've had ideas here & there w/ a few routes, but I just realized all this time posting on these forums, I never really fully analyzed (down to the 'T') as to how I would optimize Queens' bus system... probably due to laziness, as there are so many routes that have to be considered.... Nonetheless, the two immediate ones that come to mind (Brett already listed one of them) are: - Q79 revival... - Q9 extension to Lefferts Blvd AIRtrain.....

I have to agree w/ Future Fla b/o on this one... I don't see the need for bus service along eastern pkwy..... Sure there are bus routes that parallel subway lines which get decent/very good usage, but Eastern Pkwy. I can't fathom being one of them.... too small/too weak of a draw; the stint the old B71 used on eastern pkwy. was a good example of that.... Don't understand what you're suggesting here..... Rather than speculate, I'll ask - Could you explain exactly what you would have B14's do.....

Nah, I have it goin nowhere near eastern pkwy.... matter fact, I'm pretty adamant about it staying w/i the confines of downtown bklyn. on the brooklyn end - since the old 51's ridership consisted of the elderly (women to be specific) coming off the fulton st routes & [off the B65 as well (at its terminal)].... I don't remember who at the moment, but someone suggested that the 51 should go to atlantic mall, someone else mentioned prospect park subway, and I think someone else mentioned sending the route to gowanus.... all on separate occasions.... Just to clarify, my B51 proposal stems from downtown brooklyn to BMCC.... Same question I've long had for those that want to extend the B14 down to the library (flatbush av/eastern pkwy)....

None of the connections to those subway or bus routes would be lost with what I'm saying here...... Secondly, you just illustrated what I already knew - virtually the Bx6's entire usage in Manhattan all come off transfers from other routes/modes....the same cannot be said for any of the other bronx-manhattan routes - not even the Bx33..... Where are people taking the Bx6 in Manhattan that doesn't involve taking some other bus or subway before or afterwards? In plain english, there is nothing of interest along/around 155th itself.... sending the Bx6 to 168th would change that.... I'd rather seek to improve the network & build on its individual service, than to add another layer of service as a band-aid solution (I'm gonna start using that term; "layer of service"... credit to BrooklynBus)

Disagree if you like.... But defend your reasoning.

So what..... See, I hate when you resort to this, and you've been doing it for years now... You love using that as a trump card.... Don't underestimate what the younger folk in this transit community know, because of their age.... The wanting to restore weekend service on the x27/28 isn't that preposterous to the point where you have to try to belittle him.... That was his point; you shouldn't bring up an idea based on what you've seen on one occasion.... Anyway, yeah, those folks are clamoring for a restoration of express service.... Honestly, I think weekend service should be brought back on those 2 routes.... The only problem/question is, at what headways & at what span.....

That M18 idea.... I actually don't have a problem with the looping at park row... I could see ppl. using such a route b/w S. Ferry & Park Row.... It's the routing north of 14th st that's the problem.... Why you have buses going up to 50th if PABT is your focal point, I honestly don't know.... Is that all supposed to be for a turnaround??? But regardless, forget about putting a bus on park av over there by Grand Central... and two, aint nobody goin opt to take a bus from PABT, having to pan across 42nd st, to get to lower manhattan.... that is just not practical.... I'm not clamoring as hard as some are for the reverting of the M104, but I think that makes more sense than having a bus serving 42nd st, to have it turn on Park avenue.....

Thanks, but stop with the mini modding.... That idea has to do with the Bx6, a Bronx route.

...and extending the Bx13 would make for a (much) longer wait for a bus to washington heights.... In any event: 1) At the expense of Bronx patrons having a chance to catch the express, I'd say it's well worth it..... 2) The M2 takes an indirect path to Columbia Presbyterian as it is... It takes Edgecombe b/c the M3 runs on Amsterdam (that wasn't done by accident either)... - Harlem riders can (and do) take the 100/101 there, for a number of reasons... - Madison av riders (those south of 110th, that is) seeking that area can take the M3... Come to think of it, if the M2 continued west on 155th, then you could have M3's short turn on 168th.... ...then you can instantiate M3 LTD's (which I think should happen anyway).... LTD service would run the full route from 191st to E. village (LTD's make all local stops b/w 191st & 168th)... M3 locals would start at 168th.... M3 LTD service would run the same way M2 LTD's do..... M2 LTD's would run the same way M1 LTD's do (which is rush hrs. only).....

To be honest, only thing I like about his "B28" is the fact that it allows for much easier travel between both sides of prospect park....

How about swapping the M2 & Bx6 north of 155th..... The increase in pax that would come from Bx6's at 168th st could very well justify an increase in service.... Instead of having to bother with extending Bx13's to supplement the Bx6.....

As for this M28 idea.... I don't see who's commute that would help on any large-scale basis.... Pedestrian traffic doesn't automatically equal high ridership on a bus if it were to travel along said streets where ped. traffic exists..... That is a misconception..... A good example of that is the M50.