B35 via Church

SB direction is mostly dropoffs, NB direction is much more of a mix of boardings & dropoffs.... NB direction has higher turnover than the SB direction, but turnover in general is quite low, as again, SB direction is mostly dropoffs & the NB direction is more boardings than dropoffs..... Usage in general is high, turnover is not (high).... They most certainly could.... They just don't want to run the M55 to Columbus Circle for that reason.... IDK how else to describe the M55, other than the fact that it just, well, exists.... That isn't to say nobody rides it, but I don't really see too many people specifically gunning for/relying on it; it's more or less just another bus (like, if it shows up, great, f*** it, I'll take it... That sort of thing).... The M5 GWB - South Ferry rendition of the route had more riders using it south of Greenwich Village, than is currently occurring/ongoing with the M55.... The situation with the B37 doesn't compare, though... The refraining of reviving the former B37 routing past Atlantic had to have been for performance related reasons; buses along Livingston even during rush hours carried air back when it ended with the B45.... It's not that they didn't fully revive the old B37 because they didn't want to have egg on their face (so to speak); as if to say Livingston was just bustling with ridership, thus, they should've left it alone... Lol.... - Not sure what you're asking there, TBH.... All I'm going to say here is that they had the proposed QT78 in the original draft running down 69th from Broadway to Metropolitan, serving Metropolitan av , to end at Fresh Pond rd... Of course, they also had this route going to Roosevelt Island - Lol, yeah, basically.... I'd have just left the thing at Norwood.

I certainly remember the Qm22.... (I) should've been more specific, by stating that I wonder how a local route would fare..... The Q101R was carved from the old rendition of the Q101 that ran from Manhattan to Rikers Island... When the Q101R was created: the Q101 remained running to Manhattan, but got cut back to 19th av. it (the Q101R) got a] bumped over to 21st st. & b] ran no further south than QBP So in short, the Q101R never ran to Manhattan & the Q101 always ran along Steinway st.... Neither of the old routings fulfilled my inquiry/inquisitivity... Your reply to my post is blank.

No, the waterfront didn't need its own route.... Astoria doesn't need a direct route to Downtown Brooklyn, either..... For all I care, they can do away with the waterfront service; the weakest portion of the current B32 is the Williamsburg segment..... The Greenpoint segment gets its riders, as current B62 service/reliability is abysmal...... At the same time, I still say they're ignoring the need for connecting WBP - LIC, just as much as they're ignoring the need to connect Astoria - 21st st & QBP (both the proposed B62 & proposed Q69 bypass it).... It's one thing to try to declutter an area (QBP), but if you're sending buses directly to areas where there's even less of a demand to (B62 from Astoria to Downtown Brooklyn & Q69 to Hunters Point Ferry, both skipping QBP in the process), it defeats the purpose.... The current Q101 goes directly to Manhattan, but I would honestly like to see how a 21st st. service running to Manhattan would fare.....

Moderate usage. The point is that, with the proposed B62 bypassing WBP (due to racking up mileage to run up to the Astoria projects, among other things) & the proposed B53 turning off at Greenpoint av, there's nothing directly connecting WBP & LIC.... The irony here is that the lack of a connection from off the old B61 (Queens Plz - Red Hook) at WBP spurred complaints back then (hence, the current B62's diverting to serve WBP)... Doesn't help that the proposed B53 serves the waterfront, over directly serving commercial Bedford av. on top of it.....

Worse than half the waiting area... It's ridiculous... It's only the first 2 rows of seating proximate to the Atlantic av side of the terminal (meaning, proximate to the local routes on street level).... Was out in AC 2 Saturdays ago... Had to scurry to said seating area to sit down to sift through my bag (thought I lost something at the time).... Security was there, but dude didn't enforce shit (there were 2 people snoring their asses off, as a matter of fact - 1 guy with his mouth open... yuck).... I never got the sense that you have to have a ticket to sit down in those seats.... Now Penn Station (NYC), they are absolutely anal about having a LIRR ticket in order to sit in that sectioned off room/area of seating by the escalators....

I would do more with it.... One solution would be to run it to WBP; especially being that they have the proposed B62 bypassing it. The M55 terminates on 44th/6th... Ever since they split up the penultimate rendition of the M5 (Washington Hgts - South Ferry) into the current M5 & the current M55, the NB M7 in Midtown has seen a noticeable spike.... Although 42nd st. in general is a major street, folks riding along 6th are not getting on/off 42nd to the tune you might think they would.... 57th st & Columbus Circle easily sees more passenger activity on the M5 & M7 than 42nd on the M5/M7/M55.... So the way they ended up splitting the southern portion (as in, the current M55) of that rendition of the M5 in question, is a stub.... The M55 would be far more useful if it ran up to 59th, then stubbing over there 2 blocks north of 42nd..... ...to have that proposed B81 run past Pritchard Sq. to cover the rest of PPW. Regardless of that proposed B81 though, stopping the B61 dead at Pritchard Sq. is justified.... It's where the current B61 commonly tanks out.... The only problem I have with the proposed truncation is that it shouldn't terminate on the movie theater side of Pritchard Sq... It should terminate on the same side of Pritchard Sq, to where riders can feasibly xfer to the B68....

AFAIC, the current B57 from end to end is a massive waste of resources; the SB B57 is more or less an afterthought past Downtown Brooklyn; you don't see any real collective of riders specifically waiting for B57's in Downtown seeking SB service.... On top of it, it's usually stragglers left on the bus after it serves Downtown Brooklyn.... The masses in Downtown that are seeking service towards Cobble Hill, etc. essentially all gun for the B61.... So I'm most definitely not defending the current B57, if that's what you're trying to get at... I would only run the thing between Downtown Brooklyn & Flushing/Metropolitan av., at current headways.... I've always thought that the fact that service runs separately on uni-directional streets (Smith/Court) was a huge deterrent to Cobble Hill & Carroll Gardens patrons on the old B75 & the current B57..... Usage was never great on the B75 on that stretch (either direction) either..... It's definitively a stub, no doubt about it... The patrons of the area will tell you that. Aside from that, while I'm not all too high on the proposed B57, what I will say (if I haven't elsewhere on here already) is that the proposed B57 is a better use of resources than the current B57..... Interesting (as in, good) question.... I'd say in very very rare cases like the Bx36 in Soundview (even with the new routing, it's still a highly utilized route that doesn't need to run down to Clason Pt. with the Bx27/39 or to Castle Hill/Zerega with the Bx22)... Or maybe like with the Q49, where it doesn't need to pan east towards Flushing, nor northwards towards Ditmars Blvd (or LGA for that matter).... There's some that's done for logistical reasons like the Bx1 in Kingsbridge & the B35 in Brownsville, but even those are on the wrong side of the threshold of stub terminals IDRC for.... IDC for either of the two types mentioned... Stubbing a route somewhere because there happens to be another route that runs further in that same direction, doesn't cut it for me... For instance, the M55 should at least run to 59th (regardless if there's a multitude of routes running up/down 5th/6th).... Nobody on the Q18 cares that the Q67 continues down 69th st. to get to the .... LMFAO at the fact they stubbed the newest rendition of the Bx30 at Pelham Parkway (when riders are clearly still taking the Bee Line routes along Boston Rd. to get to Fordham Plaza)...

Yeah, it's right there by Hamilton RR station..... The furthest west any of those Monmouth county local routes run, is way over in Freehold....

A combination of the proposed B27 & the proposed B57 would be longer than the old B61 that ran between Red Hook & Queens Plaza (and look what happened with that rendition of the B61 after rider complaints).... So, yeah - too long... Hell, one could argue the proposed B57 itself would end up looming unmanageable.....

Taking the proposed B27 into consideration, I'm going to deduce that someone of note realizes the B57 carries more (than the B62) between the Farragut projects & Downtown Brooklyn, and the realization of the B61 carrying more between Downtown Brooklyn & Red Hook (than the B57).... In other words, that part of the current B57 you're inquiring about (that the proposed B27 entails) is being split up for mere coverage purposes.... The fact that they resorted to appending the Downtown Brooklyn - Farragut projects usage of the current B57 to the current usage of the B57 b/w Downtown Brooklyn & Red Hook, to come up with this proposed B27, says enough....

No way in hell am I sticking my USB devices in those ports on the buses....

You'd think there'd be a list of what buses leave from what gates when, on the port authority site.....

Rather common. What I've been noticing more & more, are the b/o's that turn on the not in service signage mid-route - to only drop off whatever passengers that are left on the bus.... Now if you're one of the people that's already on a bus of sorts, that can be a good thing, as it speeds up your trip... However, if you're someone waiting at a stop & get flagged in that manner, it's infuriating.

Nice to see #2625 out & rolling along route 9 earlier today.... Bus looks nice & clean also. Never knew that Howell P&R was used as a storage facility.... Saw maybe about 25-30 buses or so towards the very back corner.... Later on in the day, I also saw something else up close & personal that, as a passenger, I definitely was not supposed to see.... I'm just going to leave it at that.

You're apparently falling victim to recency bias.... I'm saying that because the basis for congestion pricing has long been to reduce vehicle.... congestion.

While one could argue that it expedited it, the farebeating issue didn't precipitate congestion pricing.... Congestion pricing would've eventually happened in this city, even if every single person paid their fare....

Amazing how people have money for the things they want, but never have money for the things they need

That could be a 24a/b or a 44...

Putting what I think should happen with the route aside, I'd rather they leave the old nomenclature as is, because of that reason.

While she (the b/o) did yell out "Scotland Road" when she pulled up to the stop at Jersey Gardens, she also said "24A".... She kept blurting out 24A at every stop where someone boarded (or attempted to board).... So she apparently didn't get the message of any of that.... ....unless she did that as a courtesy to riders, knowing that we wouldn't know wtf a 24S was on the first day. ------------------ Something interesting to note was that, before she pulled up to the stop, she stopped adjacent to a dispatcher in a white car - signed up with the HOWELL signage (before changing it to the 24 signage as displayed in my last reply)! I still don't know what to make of that... My immediate thought was, since when are there 40'-ers running out of Howell....

Took the #24a from Jersey Gardens earlier this afternoon.... For whatever the reason, I saw an OOS #31 at Ivy Hill, while I was waiting for the #37. I bring this up to say two things: 1} 24's are out there like wildfire... Obvious/vast improvement in service on the first day, compared to Coach USA... 2) They don't have "normal" signage for the 24/31 yet (pretty sure it's the same deal with the #44, although I never came across one today)..... On the front/top/main signage, it just displays the route number in the middle of the sign... like this [ 24 ]

Albeit many years ago, I did Greyhound to Philly twice.... Had a not so favorable experience both times. Megabus I refuse to embark on.... Peter Pan I never tried/considered; might try them out.... Good lookin out, fam. Yep, well aware of my NJT options & the fact that the Greyhound terminal's gone kaput.... I'm assuming what you have in parentheses are supposed to be bus depots/garages.... Nonetheless, thanks for the suggestions. I've done the #139 to the #317 in the morning several times (that's that 7:30 #139 trip that gets you to Lakewood to where you're sitting there for about a 1/2 hour before that #317 arrives, that gets you to Philly a little after 12..... For the purpose of riding a bunch of SEPTA routes, I'd like to get to Philly earlier than that) , but for some reason, I like taking the later #317 trips towards Lakewood & Asbury, more than I do the morning trips towards Philly..... Of my South Jersey/Philly trips that aren't closed out with the #409 to the NEC, I do the #317 - #139 (full knowing I'm never out of the woods with the #139, given its service span).... I don't think I've ever closed out a South Jersey/Philly trip doing the #551 down to AC for the #319 back to NY (if I did, it was a lonnng ass time ago... lol)..... I refrain from that, for the simple reason of avoiding those late night crowds seeking #319's.... I think I'm going to try out Peter Pan (as @trainfan22 mentioned) before bothering with Amtrak & see how that goes.... Albeit not the full route for either, I've taken the #17 & the 21 before.... May just consider starting on one of those 2 routes, based on familiarity & sheer laziness (in terms of planning, I mean).... IDK, but I have some time to figure some things out with a potential SEPTA trip, as I have something else planned for tomorrow (being that the vast majority of NJT routes are going to be on weekday schedules ).... In any case, thanks for the suggestions.

No different than it being abandoned.... While there's facets of it I don't exactly favor, I still think they're going to go through with this redesign, regardless...

Assuming they haven't completely abandoned this study (which I don't believe to be the case), given that NJT's set to operating the #24, 31, and #44, there's a good chance this NewBus proposal will be amended.... How, will be the question.

Discern, or otherwise consider how many buses would be dedicated to running out of Stengel, then we can more or less figure out if that proposed Q88 could/would run out of Stengel... That said, I personally don't see that proposed Q88 running out of Stengel; terminal proximity isn't the sole factor that goes into what route runs out of what depot anyway.....