7LineFan

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

They clearly aren't maintaining the machines are regularly as they should be.  The good news is you can dispute any OMNY charges right online in your OMNY account to get reimbursed if you overpay.

Thankfully it was just a transfer so I didn't lose any money... this time.

6 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Could've been the bus you were on.

Perhaps. But it's just so frustrating because I've had so many problems with the SBS machines on that same route not reading my MetroCard and then me having to pay an extra fare and go through claims to get my money back, so I switch to OMNY to put all of that behind me and then this happens... same crap different farecard.

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Were the readers on the bus frozen or what? The Eagle Team is supposed to carry readers with them to scan your OMNY card to verify that you paid.  I've been hearing about quite a few people lately having issues paying with OMNY and to be honest, I encounter about one broken OMNY reader a week (one free ride a week at $6.75) and I only travel a few times a week to the City. You do the math... lol

They didn't look frozen, but they lit up red and read "Tap Again" instead of green with "GO" on them. And then when I checked my OMNY account, no transfer listed.

Surprising because my card worked perfectly for the rest of the day before that: subway, bus, a different SBS line.

On 11/16/2021 at 3:04 PM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Driver has no control over the OMNY reader.  I've been on at least three express buses so far recently where the OMNY reader looked fine, but when I went to tap a contactless card, nothing happened, so they were frozen on that screen.  The amount of "NOT IN SERVICE" OMNY readers has also been high.  I've boarded a good three express buses recently where they were "NOT IN SERVICE" and stayed that way the entire ride.  Given that a number of riders were challenged by bus operators for the broken OMNY readers, I've been extremely vocal about what a ridiculous policy the  has about OMNY and have made it clear that they should change their asinine policy.

Their policy is that if you board and an OMNY reader is broken, they expect you to have a back-up Metrocard because OMNY is just an option to pay for now, but if the reverse happens where the farebox is broken, you aren't expected to have a payment with OMNY, so I made it clear that I think it's a BS policy and I've been filing formal complaints when drivers have harassed me on it.

A number of other riders in my group have been doing the same.  The drivers have essentially accused them of farebeating and riders' response is to take a seat, and I applaud them. I no longer use a Metrocard with any regularity since I bought an OMNY card and I have no intentions of going back to it, nor should be I forced to either. 

Ultimately, this is their payment system and it's their problem if their readers are broken.  Since I've made a stink, no driver has complained or been confrontational, as they should not be. Now if I board at the first stop and it reads "NOT IN SERVICE" and the driver asks me to come up when it comes on, I'm happy to oblige and have done that a few times now, but I expect to be treated with respect. Don't come at me with the accusations that I'm a fare beater like one driver did when the OMNY reader was frozen. He offered no apology for his rude, unprofessional behavior and just said "oh it isn't working" after calling himself showing me up when I went to tap and nothing happened.  Then he had the nerve to call me up to the front, take his contactless card out and attempt to tap as if he showing me something I don't know, so I said yeah it's frozen - I was thinking to myself dude I've been using contactless cards for years now, so this is not new technology despite it seeming new here in the US. It's very popular overseas.  Only when nothing happened did he stop with the harassment, so I went and took a seat and filed a formal complaint and that's how I handle it.  

Been a while since I've been on this site but I found out about this conversation and wanted to comment.

Similar thing happened to me about a month ago, on the Q44SBS. I was trying to transfer from the subway and the OMNY reader wouldn't read the transfer. Tried the reader in the back, no dice. Tried the reader in the front, no dice. And then the bus left with me on board. What happens if Eagle Team decides to show up for the first time in like five years? I can't exactly go back and pay at the machine, and it was supposed to be a transfer anyway.

The kicker was when I called OMNY support to figure out what went wrong and the first thing they asked me was "How did you pay for that trip?" Come on now...

Cuomo is giving a press conference right now, I assume about the coronavirus, and someone asked him about this interview.

His response? "I never worked with Byford; I worked with Pat Foye and the board... [Byford] doesn't even run the system."

And then goes on to claim that he spent months in the tunnels and on the tracks, as if that qualifies him to make decisions about the system over someone whose entire career has been in public transport.

At my table on Wednesday I was the only person who said anything good to say about the plan. And I only had one good thing to say.

Mostly good reviews, if the author going to cherrypick the people who had good things to say for his article.

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

What did he look like? Could’ve been Mark Holmes. We’ve “chatted” a few times now. Lol We were talking about the Bronx routes in the November meeting. Came over and shook my hand at the Riverdale Town Hall meeting since we got such a huge turnout because we spread the word so quickly. I have met most of the planners, so not too many people I don’t know.

Guy's name is Ryan, not Mark. The other dude who worked on the Queens redesign, the one who I didn't speak to, is named Julian.

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Actually I wasn’t there. A lot of people from my angry group are pissed and went. Apparently each table was told something different. At one table, they sent express bus riders to a separate room. At another table, they were told that express buses wouldn’t be discussed. Talk about a lack of consistency. A disabled person had such a hard time getting in there that they gave up and left.

My table did wind up talking about the express buses a little but but it did not dominate the discussion. There was a guy in another room standing in front of two boards with both the express bus map and the local bus map and apparently he was directly involved in the Queens redesign, but I didn't go over and speak to him specifically.

21 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Tonight’s workshop in Flushing was a disgrace! People showed up to discuss their lines and were told to make comments online. What’s the point of coming for if you can’t discuss the lines you use!?? 
 

*photos removed*

Some people left in frustration.

 

I was told to make comments online as well but the guy at my table (the closest one in your second photo, although I was in a different session) actually had a pen and pad and was writing suggestions down--more broad suggestions rather than specific, but he filled out a whole page between the time that I arrived and the time that I left. I must not have had the same experiences you did because I felt the atmosphere at my table was generally productive.

Everyone I talked to said the same thing: they were this radical in the redesign on purpose so that they would get pushback and get the public to actually come out to these things. Standard negotiating tactics.

44 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

Looks like the QT12 would be nice and fast.  @7LineFan You should leave a comment on the Route Profile page that there should be stops by the pedestrian crossings.

https://new.mta.info/system_modernization/bus_network/queensbusredesign/routes/qt12

I've been leaving comments using the general feedback page and will be attending the Flushing workshop on Wednesday evening. Hopefully it will be well attended because there are bigger problems than the QT12 (i.e. Main Street corridor).

3 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

This route needs more stops. Ridership is not concentrated at major stops like they believe it is, especially east of Flushing Meadows Park. It's really only during rush hours where you see the concentration of people at stops like Utopia Parkway, Main Street, and Kissena Blvd (due to Queens College and all the public schools nearby).

Thank you for saying this. I live near the Q88 and if they go through with the QT12 the nearest bus stop to me would be around 10 minutes away and that's at a somewhat brisk pace. Add in inclement weather and you can forget it.

In general I don't think there should be any red or blue routes without a corresponding green route on the same corridor, or close by going the same general direction. The QT12 is the worst example of this, as there would be no east-west local service on the HHE anymore.

47 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I’ve been on Q44’s later than that and the bus was SRO especially if it is heading to The Bronx. The only problem with the Q44 is the bunching with is inevitable on a route that is over 13 miles long. It is not uncommon to see 3 buses bunched at midnight especially heading to Jamaica. With the way this plan is looking, I prefer our existing system over this. There are a couple of ideas that I like such as the removal of the Q58 from 108th street, the Q88 continuing along Horace Harding Expressway, a 73rd Ave route. I like that the Rikers Island route is a part of the current Q102, but the Q102 isn’t this weird C shaped route anymore. I do like how the Q55 would go into Jamaica because currently ending it at 117th and Jamaica Ave seems so abrupt and in the middle of nowhere almost. I like how they reduced the amount of routes traveling on Woodhaven Blvd but of course as I’ve stated before the Q52 needs to go not the Q53.

One of my biggest gripe with this Queens bus plan besides the random combination of some of these routes, the stupidity of some of this proposed routes and the eliminate of stops is that they are renaming all these bus routes. Like for example I don’t see why they wouldn’t want to keep the route that runs along Kissena Blvd and Parsons Blvd called the Q25. The Q25 has run along Kissena Blvd ever since bus routes were created. So instead of naming it the new Q16 call it the Q25. People are familiar with the current naming scheme anyway so if possible they should try to keep the numbers the same if possible. 

Honestly what they did with the Q58 is the best thing about this redesign and long overdue. If you want to get to Flushing from the Queens Boulevard subway, for example, now you don't have to deal with the long and winding Corona section and can just go straight there, and there's a real chance it'll decrease bus bunching which is still a big problem especially on the Flushing end. Too many times I've pulled up the MTA app and seen four buses in a row all 15 minutes away from me. I would, however, make it a red route instead of a blue--with the QT6 being a blue route and the QT12 being a red, my little section of Flushing has had all of its east-west local service stripped from it.

There was a discussion earlier in this thread about the renaming. Boils down to either keep as many route numbers the same as possible to increase familiarity or blow the whole thing up and renumber everything and force people to learn the new routings. I can see both arguments, but I'm probably more in favor of renumbering the entire network because it would force people to actually read the map and actually learn about the new network. Mostly the same is not exactly the same. Either way, however, there's going to be people not paying attention to where they're going or what bus they're on no matter how well publicized this is...

1 minute ago, paulrivera said:

Wait, not even whatever's replacing the Q20?

This redesign's a borderline scam. At least the Bronx redesign maintained service spans and headways on the local side.

The so-called QT86 is only planned to run 17 hours a day. Every day.

Also take away Q44 overnight service on weekends and now you have no service on weekend nights.

9 hours ago, paulrivera said:

Anyone else notice they're proposing cutting the weekend hawk runs on the Q44? Last bus on Sat/Sun at 9:30?!? Like, are you kidding me?

It's the little shit they're trying to sneak in like this that's going to make people lose even more faith in this agency, I swear.

If they have their way Main Street will have no bus service at all during weekend nights.

I've been on Q44s much later than 9:30 that are SRO. It's ridiculous.

13 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Funny thing is that since they took the blue plywood down, they basically were stopping there the other day. They just didn't open the door...

They did that even when they plywood was up. Every time a downtown train I was on would come into the station it would stop and wait a few moments before proceeding.

Never did that for 23rd St.

1 hour ago, CTK246 said:

God I hope not

Why not? Some of the old ones are on their way to being illegible, even though it's common sense to know where the train is going.

5 hours ago, RES2773 said:

I'm a sucker for LEDs. Loving the train in pretty much every way. Honestly, I think it'd be too boring without the Cuomo wrap, and I think it's good the trains will resemble the buses. The flip seat weight limit lightly worries me, though.

Also, the FIND display is brilliantly designed. But it's over the doors, unlike the current NTTs. How many per car would this mean if this design sticks?

8 per car. Based on the simulation of the "flexible" FIND I'm going to assume it's just an LCD display... so honestly it's not as brilliant as it seems. It's just programming.

Besides the Japanese have had that kind of above-door flexible information display for years now (although maybe not as large a display), so this is just the MTA playing catch-up.

It's a shame since it's such an easy fix. All they need to do is replace the soft-white bulbs with the newer blue-white ones and clean the light cases. And it's not even like this would be an expensive move since they'd likely get a discount for buying in bulk.

"If it still works..."

And I get the feeling they probably have a large stock of fluorescent lamps as well.

But if they could switch the entire fleet (and all the stations) over to LED tube lamps, considering how much more energy efficient LEDs are over fluorescents, they'll realize a huge cost savings eventually, even if the purchasing cost is higher.

It would seem that I am in the minority then. Even extending the cab door up into that space, to me, would clean up the look significantly. As for the front bullet, I'd do it like the R110B's front curtain sign for the   and   readings.

But I guess my design aesthetics are different from all of yours.

Not a big fan of the split front destination sign. Looks clunky to me. I'd rather they put all that information in one place, whether it's the top or the side of the door.

Whoops, I made a mistake! Sorry, the bundle in which both lenses are non VR-capable comes w/ a Nikon D3200. The bundle that comes with a VR-lens is with a Nikon D3300.

 

My question as to which bundle works best still applies, hopefully! Once again, thanks!  

Ah, see, now we're throwing different cameras into the mix. However, the D3200 is the predecessor of the D3300 so they're very similar. The way the camera world works now, each "new" model in a camera line is an incremental improvement over the previous version (more MP, better ergonomics, more video resolution, etc). So if you don't know the (admittedly small) differences between the two, research them and get your hands on them again (the 3300 has a slightly different button layout than the 3200). What's important here is that you find a camera that you're comfortable with--not necessarily the most capable on the market.

In terms of lenses, the 18-55 VR II is actually a huge improvement over the 18-55 VR that I have. It's a collapsible lens, which means that it can be made smaller in order to fit into a bag more easily. It also has a real focus ring on the front, which means that you don't have to twiddle the whole front of the lens in order to manually focus. Performance-wise, they're pretty much exactly the same, but the ergonomics would lead me to get the VR II.

The real question here is, what kind of shots are you going to be taking and in what conditions? If you're doing low-light, VR is much more important. If you don't mind moving closer to your subject, then the 18-55 is all you need. If you're shooting from far away and can't get close enough, or you like the makes-far-away-things-look-closer effect of the telephoto, you might want to have the 55-200.

Of course you could choose a package with a D3300 and an 18-55 VR II with a 55-200 VR, but that's going to cost you a bit more.

To clarify - the bundle with the non-VR lens - both lenses, the 18-55mm and the 55-200mm are non-VR, so if I go with that bundle, neither of my lenses have vibration reduction. So with that mind, which bundle works out better? The one where the lens is VR, or the one where neither lens is VR capable?

Neither is VR-capable? Are they Nikon-branded lenses?

To my knowledge Nikon hasn't released a package with a non-VR 18-55 (or a non-VR 55-200) in years. I could be wrong, but VR has been standard on the entry level lenses for a while now. When I got my D3100 with 18-55 and 55-200 three or four years ago, both were VR.

Hey guys! I haven't been here in a while, feels good to be back. 

 

I'm back because I need your advice regarding cameras -  I'm currently in the market for one, and I settled for a Nikon D3330 (24.2 MP DSLR). However, there are two bundles available on Amazon, and I'm stuck between the two. They're both essentially the same price, and they both come with a bag and an SD Memory card.

 

The difference, however, is that one comes with an 18-55mm VR II Zoom Lens and 32 GB Memory card, while the other one comes with 18-55mm and 55-200mm Non VR DX zoom lenses and a 16 GB Memory card. Again, both are the same price, so money is not a factor. My questions are, what are VR lenses, are they worth it, and which bundle should I get on Amazon?

 

Thank you all in advance! 

VR stands for Vibration Reduction. Basically it reduces blur caused by jittery or shaky hands, especially in lower light situations where the shutter has to be open for longer. (Proper technique--or using a tripod--is obviously the best way to reduce blur, but this helps quite a bit.) It's much better to get lenses with VR for this reason. It's controllable by a switch on the lens as well so if you ever want to turn it off, you can.

Which is why I question the fact you're considering a bundle with a non-VR telephoto lens (the 55-200). Might as well have the option not to use it than not to have it at all.

On the issue of the different kits, definitely go for the kit with the two lenses. Even the cheapest lenses cost more than a memory card.

http://d35kvm5iuwjt9t.cloudfront.net/dbimages/sfx105775.gif

The cheapest seats are the Granstand Outfield seats at $69

Trumper concourse is $89.

Outfield is $99

Concourse outfield is $129

Miller Bullpen bar is $149

Bronze is $189

Silver is $259

Gold Concourse and Gold Grandstand is $369.

Platinum is $499.

 

A lot of the SCG members are very ticked off on them having to pay for thier seats that they pay for with thier membership.

Yeah, even for the States those are high. They've even managed to outprice Yankee Stadium, where the tix are hilariously expensive, in everything below Bronze.

The game might the fans might not. They're charging an arm an a leg for it. Throw in food at the gate and its one expensive day out.

How much are tickets?

And apparently there's more than a few Americans who are making the trip over, so you never know...