aemoreira81

Which seems odd, since for a long time, Jamaica Depot had the oldest equipment, especially in the late 1990s. Now, their oldest bus is 8090, a grand total of about 4 years old.

The reason why it ran to Port Morris in the past was because the terminus was at the front door to the Walnut Depot. Once that closed, the Bx17 should have been rerouted sooner. As for the Bx10, the problem is how you're turning it around if one approaches Norwood-205 Street from the south instead of the north. It would serve as a great terminus if you can turn it there, but how? Those side streets aren't exactly wide. It should still run to one subway station---125 Street .

The terrain of the area prevents that. Bailey and Sedgwick represent about a 100-foot change in elevation (Bailey is 20 feet above sea level where it meets West 233 Street; if 233 Street were drawn on a map to Sedgwick, Sedgwick is 120 feet above sea level at that point. NYC elevation map: https://data.cityofnewyork.us/Transportation/Elevation-points/szwg-xci6 Bailey and Sedgwick are two unique markets. That said, for the Bx10 or Bx20, I would have proposed running the Bx20 along the wider Independence Avenue.

On the M100 proposal (included since the link does), that route should be kept to at least 125 Street/St. Nicholas Avenue, as it has no subway connection on its southern end as proposed. I'm surprised that the Bx46 wasn't made a branch of the Bx6. A way to pay for that might be to have the Bx6 Local not go to Manhattan when the SBS is running and terminate it at Yankee Stadium. Then: Bx6A - via 161/163 and Hunts Point Avenue, and Bx6B - via 161/163 and Longwood.

On the express side, I would actually propose that the BxM5 (currently the BxM11, be extended to Woodlawn via what would otherwise be deadhead distance. Running via Bronxwood instead of White Plains Road would make that cost-neutral over deadhead distance. Now, if the NYCDOT will permit express buses via the Henry Hudson Parkway, that is a game-changer for the BxM2 and BxM18---but why can't buses go all the way down? As for the BxM6/10 service, it basically restores the pattern under New York Bus Service, where the BxM6 only ran weekdays and Saturdays and the BxM10 was rerouted at other times. As for the BxM17, I wonder if it would make sense to have that route run via the BQE as well to the Manhattan Bridge and then enter Lower Manhattan that way. (Return service would be via the Williamsburg Bridge.) Branching the Bx16 would not cause that result if there is no NYC Transit service along Boston Road. Rather, there would be one branch serving Pelham (isolated from the rest of NYC), and one branch going to Co-op City Section 1.

The big problem as I see it is in Co-op City, where the layout really prevents anything more direct, especially with respect to Section 5, as well as the Bx29's truncation. As for the Bx30, this resurrects the old Bx7 Boston Road...one might as well turn it over to Bee-Line and branch the Bx16 at the eastern end. In the past, it was an issue to not serve it. But with Bee-Line using MetroCard (and almost certainly to switch to OMNY, along with NICE), this isn't too important anymore. The best changes are to the cross-town routes in the mid-Bronx (Bx6 SBS, Bx11, Bx35, Bx36, and Bx40)...especially the Bx36, which could see a reduction in as many as 5 buses at peak times without reducing frequency of service. But to work, the Bx11 needs to become articulated. A missed one was with the Bx46 though. IMO, the Bx6/46 combination could have worked, with the Bx6 truncated to Yankee Stadium during the Bx6 SBS's hours. A few changes would be needed, including modifying 174 Street between Southern and Hoe (and that intersection), and tearing down the dead-end along Balcom Avenue.

8616 at Gun Hill and was on the Bx16 today.

The charging port system on the single seats on bus 6234 is really unwieldy if you ask me. The seats are comfortable, but there has to be a better way to install the outlets. Also, it appears that there has been a system-wide WiFi outage.

I hope they know that the bus is capped at 40 mph and that they will need to reset the speed limiter. --- REPLY ENDS HERE --- All of the local buses have driver shields. However, I would argue that the express buses should have driver shields as well. It's because a bus driver was stabbed to death earlier today in Tampa, FL (news story and aftermath (WARNING: Graphic image). I would go so far that a driver shield should be made standard for all "urban transit" buses nationwide.

Because the LFS has a much more even wheelbase and a shorter trailer section than the XD60. The LFS articulated wheelbase is 22'/22'9"...a rigid LFS has a wheelbase of 22' as well. It's probably somewhere like 38'/24".

The real problem is the shoulder period, after the morning rush. I take that route regularly (I used to go via the express buses) to CSI, but have found long gaps after the morning rush. That said, how one ends up with a 40-minute gap in service is amazing. I would argue that the B82 SBS should be out of Ulmer Park, but there is no room there for 22 more buses and something would have to leave or be split---possibly the B36 being split with Flatbush on weekdays. (The first few runs can deadhead via the Belt from Ulmer Park to Spring Creek Towers, and vice versa in the late evening, deadheading via the Belt from Spring Creek Towers back to Ulmer Park, now that all of the bridges between Exits 9 and 14 are complete.) The deadhead from UP to Spring Creek, even with buses capped at 40 mph, would be comparable in time to the run-on and run-off to and from East New York Depot. Additionally, any driver changes could be done at Ulmer Park more easily at the final stop.

Those buses from the 4245-78 batch being transferred to Manhattan Division...I would hope they undergo a thorough product overhaul and repaint before being inducted into Manhattan Division service. Except for 4246/63/78, they are among the last unrepainted NGs in the system. As for the Q70, that badly needs to go to articulated service, based on the crowds alone.

The metro area appears to be an outlier when it comes to mass transit. You have to realize that unlike most of the rest of the USA, sprawl is not possible in NYC, forcing things to go up instead of out (NYC is a city on islands, except for the Bronx). Heck, a 700-foot building in midtown is being demolished to replace it with a 1,000-foot one (the replacement was approved last week). Because of that, you can only have so many cars, requiring mass transit. In the USA, outside of Greater New York, the idea is that mass transit is a welfare system and you don't need frequent service into the suburbs.

Also 8610 new to Yukon from the factory.

For traffic going to Queens...is there a reason why the QM1/2/4/5/6/20 can't return the same way they came in, via the Queens Midtown? I mention these because they operate middays and weekends via a loop in Manhattan, but passengers may have to sit through a lengthy layover at 36 Street. By introducing a same last and first start point, with the return via 5 or 7 Avenue, that would eliminate that inconvenience. The other routes would not matter since they only operate in one direction.

BTW, when did 6103 get transferred to Flatbush?

Two sides are marked MTA Bus, but the only picture I have is of the front door side, which says MTA New York City Bus. 6234 by Adam E. Moreira, on Flickr

In addition, there is also a shortage of drivers with commercial licenses period...both bus and truck drivers. In addition to transit agencies, long distance companies like Coach USA and First Transit (Greyhound) are hiring people who might not otherwise have been considered. The problem is greater for interstate operators (regionally also includes all the transit operations in NJ), though as those drivers have federally mandated rest periods. I wish I had seen this post earlier. Bringing it back to NYC relations and other large agencies---might this influence larger agencies to buy more articulated buses, since you need fewer drivers but can offer more capacity? I see this hitting the smaller end of the transit bus market more so, as agencies are going to be more loath to buying smaller buses when a larger bus at a reduced frequency can work.

IINM, none of the saved buses were originally purchased by the Port Authority. 1201 wasn't, 4349 wasn't, and 4396 (0010) wasn't either.

More a curiosity post, starting with buses ordered 1953 and later: 1. Which numbers have never been used or allocated by the MTA for bus numbers? (Off the top of my head, I can identify 1859, 6956-6999 and 7938-7999.) 2. Which numbers (or group of numbers) was used the latest for the first time?

It might just be the blue-and-yellow LFS buses (except for 8231, which is still capped at 50 mph). I thought those buses were capped at 43 mph, but yes, they are capped a little higher and it just might be a Yukon thing.

You said it elsewhere, but this bus now has a BLACK back. A few of the RTS buses retired this year retired with black backs (5126 and 5174 as two examples).

The GMC RTS buses (at least until the 1985 order inclusive) were notorious for that...some just went down hard and would not go back up, sometimes forcing a bus to be removed from service. When the last Orion low floors are removed, another complaint will be eliminated---bus too high. The O7 rides a lot higher than the LFS or Xcelsior. The other problems are when a dispatcher isn't paying attention and won't put a bus in place (instead saying to keep going) and ghost buses (not visible to either the dispatcher or the customer). This has been a problem with the newer XD40 and LFS buses.

From the pictures posted elsewhere, I notice that 5249 was just repainted without white window trim it had later in its revenue life. Was it also repainted to a black back? Next should be to repaint the now-38 year old 1201 to its as-delivered condition with the M Surface logos. That said, even though I didn't get to see the send-off, this is one of those models where a send-off was truly justified. The RTS era in NYC (counting the RTS-03 models purchased by Green Lines) was 40 years...from 1979 until 2009 (none of those RTS-03s survive anymore). This outlasted the New Look era in NYC by 2 years (which was 1958 until 1995). As for the dedicated museum fleet of RTS buses, it now includes at least 5 buses certainly (1201, 5249, and 8971 NYCT, 10001 Green Lines, and 3865 Jamaica Buses) that can run. Then one can count the MetroCard buses which are 8319 and 8797 (and 4396?), and possibly 8628 as a Command Center bus. Would it be too soon to see the RTS (at least 1201) operate as part of the Holiday Museum Fleet?

The OP must be familiar with the Blue Night Network of the TTC, which ironically was where Andy Byford worked from 2013-8. I do agree that there might be justification for an overnight network, but not all the routes as the OP suggests. Routes I would suggest: S340: Current S40 routing to Port Richmond, via Port Richmond Avenue, then the S46 route to Edward Curry Avenue, and then west on Curry to Matrix Park. S346: Current S46 routing to Port Richmond, then via the S59 route to Rockland Avenue. Operations via Rockland, Kelly, Richmond Valley, and Marsh, then via Richmond Avenue to terminate at the Eltingville Transit Center. S348: Current S48 routing. S352: Current S52 routing, but bypassing the South Beach Houses loop (served by S378 instead) extended to Grant City via S51 south of Seaview Avenue (after serving SI University Hospital)-- S353: Current S53 routing. S362: Current S62 routing. S374: Current S74 routing, but no Bricktown Mall. Terminate in Tottenville S378: S51 routing to Hylan Boulevard in Rosebank, then via Hylan to Sand Lane, operate via McClean to serve South Beach Houses, continue to Hylan via Reid, then S78 route to Tottenville. No Bricktown Mall. S379: Current S79SBS routing, but all local stops. No SI Mall (operate via Marsh Avenue). It works easiest for Staten Island as there is a common "pulse point" at either 86 Street or the SI Ferry.