Jump to content


Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

BrooklynBus

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    3,170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

BrooklynBus last won the day on May 6 2018

BrooklynBus had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,002 Excellent

2 Followers

About BrooklynBus

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://brooklynbus.tripod.com

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I would replace the northern end of the B67 with a rerouted B69 that served its original route so that B67 service could be returned to the frequencies it once had. The MTA really destroyed that route.
  2. I was the one who wrote the linked article he cited. I wrote it back in 2013 when much more land was available near Atlantic Terminal. Today, I do not know if a bus terminal like the one I envisioned would even be possible. I also once mapped out which routes I would terminate there and it would have included all bus routes traveling the length of the Fulton Mall and Livingston Street and no others. It would not include routes like the B54, B57, B61, B62, B63, and B103. It was to be an enclosed terminal with heating and A/C with a short walk between buses and a three car light rail vehicle that would be free and run via the Fulton Street Mall cutting through Borough Hall to Cadman Plaza with some vehicles continuing to Brooklyn Bridge Park or south toward Red Hook. The headways would be every two or three minutes most of the day. There would always be one waiting. Late night, buses could run on their present routes. Just as people do not mind across the platform subway transfers if there is no extra wait, I believe this transfer would be just as acceptable. It would also greatly increase reliability of any bus route terminating at the terminal since the routes would be shorter and not have to deal with Downtown traffic congestion. The light rail would have its own right of way and also would be reliable.
  3. It seems like they are just not capable of telling the truth. I was on a bus the other day with one of those digital screens. There was a trivia question which asked when was the first air conditioned bus first placed into regular service. The choices were 1956, 1966, 1976, or 1986. Knowing the way they think, I chose 1956 knowing it was not the correct choice and I chose correctly. Then the explanation appeared that in that year they had the first two experimental air conditioned buses purchased by Fifth Avenue a Coach. Only ten other buses followed in 1960, after the first two were removed from service and it wasn't until the 1970s that buses became air conditioned. However, they were not maintained and by 1978, over 90 percent of the air conditioned buses were inoperable. It wasn't until the Blitz contract in the mid 80s, that they started to repair them. It wasn't until the 1990s, that you had a decent chance of boarding a bus that was air-conditioned, about 40 years after the first experimental air conditioned buses. The MTA was not created until 1968, so there is no reason to give the impression that New Yorkers began to experience air conditioned buses in 1956, with the implication that all buses were air conditioned not too long thereafter. No one would claim regular airline service began in 1903 just because that was when the Wright Brothers first flew out of Kitty Hawk for like 56 seconds. Yet the MTA considers the first experimental air conditioned bus which wasn't even a success, because none followed, the beginning of air conditioning for the bus system in New York. So how can we believe anything they tell us when they distort the truth about something so simple?
  4. I rarely see anyone on the shoulder. It's not like a bus lane on the street.
  5. Since it was rebuilt, there is now a full shoulder which could double as a bus lane.
  6. Round tripping is what the MTA is scared stiff. God forbid someone makes around trip for one fare. That’s why they haven’t done it. The world would end. As if there were no way to do this now. Even before MetroCard some round tripping was possible. Since MetroCard it’s easier. What they don’t consider is now many new trips would be generated by the ability to run several quick errands for one fare.
  7. The goal should not be to give everyone a one-seat ride but to turn three bus trips in tom two bus trips. Most will resist having to take three buses. The need for an extra fare for those without unlimiteds is just a further deterrent. You are correct about revamping the the transfer system, but increasing the limit to three hours is not necessary since there is no record of getting off the last bus or train. If as many transfers as needed can be made within two hours of the first fare being paid, trips taking as long as three hours will still be possible with one fare. That also means the fare should not be raised to $5 to pay for this. I explained how such a system would work two years ago and also submitted it to the MTA as testimony for the last fare increase. https://www.rockawave.com/articles/a-fare-discussion/
  8. Couldn't agree more. And yes. Service issues are the most important. In the study I referred to that I did 44 years ago, bunching, reliability and crowding, topped the complaint list by far. They accounted for over 50 percent of the complaints, maybe 70 percent. So what else us new? The only thing that has changed I believe is that bus driver complaints went down. That was the second most popular complaint back then. Bus drivers who refused to kneel buses and who didn't pull up to the curb. The kneeling feature was much less reliable back then, and often the bus wouldn't "stand up" again after it kneeled which explained the drivers refusal. I also believe more drivers pull up to the curb today when they are able. Third most popular complaint which I also believe has declined were bus issues: no A/C, roaches, dirty seats, etc. And as I said routing was dead last.
  9. I attended meetings of the Northeast Bronx study back in the 90s. The MTA made a bunch of recommendations. The community responded with we like some of them and others we want to change and recommended their own changes. The MTA’s response was either accept al, our proposals exactly as we suggested or you don’t get any changes at all. The community refused and no changes resulted as a result of that study. The MTA ‘s conclusion was that large studies just do not work and started studying only one or two routes at a time. That didn’t change until they gave into politicians requests to study Northeast Queens several years ago before Byford.
  10. When I surveyed 8,000 bus riders in 1975, I don’t think more than three or four people recommended a route change in the comments section. If you look at thee d of the Bronx Existing Conditions Report, it says they received a few requests for new routes or extensions. No one suggested any route restructuring. Be funny if the final report doesn’t include any route restructuring because no one recommended any.
  11. You are probably right. Weinstein fought for the Avenue L B44 SBS Stop. She wrote one letter. I am not aware of anything else any of them has done transportation wise. Correct. That’s because riders accept existing routes as a given. That doesn’t mean changes are not warranted.
  12. There may be something to trains shaking foundations. I remember when they started running R44s on the Brighton line, there were complaints of cracks in the foundations. Don’t remember how it was resolved. Maybe the trains were removed. They never complained about any other car class. Not really true. Deutsch fought for five years to get a B44 SBS stop at Avenue R. I give him credit because he didn’t give up or forget about it.
  13. It still gets many users from the B41 and B41 and I assume the B47 around the corner which I really don’t see much. Forget about any of the other bus routes serving it. Not nearly as in the old days.
  14. But, God forbid if they need to go somewhere else in Brooklyn and there is no car available, most trips are three buses and two fares. Agree. It’s really ironic what happened with Kings Plaza. Before 1971, the place to shop in. Brooklyn was Downtown Brooklyn where all the fine stores were. Then Kings Plaza came and it became the in place to shop, single handedly killing Downtown Brooklyn which turned into shlock stores. Then Kings Plaza started to decline and Downtown Brooklyn began a resurgence starting with MetroTech. Now Kings Plaza is viewed as a slum.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.