RailRunRob

18 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

I can't answer for B35 via Church, but I can for myself. I have come to my conclusions by working with or for the MTA for over 45 years and by personal experience. The quote you used from me about waiting excessive amounts of time for a bus only to get bypassed by not in service buses, I have personally experienced numerous times.  When buses are running every 20 or 30 minutes at 9:30 PM, why should I be bypassed by a not in service bus? Some bus operators even see the stupidity of this and I was picked up last year by one if these "not in service" buses.

You would have had to go through my experiences to know what I know, like the MTA sometimes reorganizes not to make Operations better, but to justify a promotion for a specific individual. You won't find that in a link or board meeting reports. They are also very secretive. Bet you didn't know the MTA was considering taking over the privately operated buses back in 1981. They asked me to use my connections to obtain the schedules from the private bus operators and in reports we weren't even allowed to write the name of the project. We called it Project Q (for Queens) where most of the private routes were. 

As far as my assertion regarding the reasons for increasing not in service bus operations, I have a 10 or 15 year old letter from the then head of buses explaining their rationale. 

And can 100% respect that 45 years in the game no argument there you understand the inter-workings. Im only asking the questions We build AVL software I know the tools that a agency would have at there disposal and I know the things that my clients ask and what they request data wise and how the information relates to their concerns. So again I wanted to say I was never saying whether the MTA was doing the right thing or the wrong thing. Only asking if this process or that process was taking into consideration by everyone or if we knew if the MTA took the steps as well. Almost like I became the voice of the MTA Along with the target on my back.

19 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

It's called actually using the bus routes in question consistently and observing (your and others') ridership habits. It's not rocket science

I mean that's a given that's a part of planning you send people out and you talk to people you ask questions you listen and you take notes. But then what do with it? how do you correlate that with the 20 other teams of people that were on the 20 other lines? What's the goals? Where did you miss the mark? New goals.. Everyone makes it sound easy yet no one commenting is working the redesign or doing any type of transit planing as far I as I know of beside @BrooklynBus and im in the boat as well. But I do work in transportation software I do it for a living I've been doing it for a while and im just asking objective questions? How the MTA runs their business I don't know. I can only speak from a overall planning respective.

15 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The good thing about numbers is that they can't be refuted.... You know what else is good about numbers? The fact that they can also be suppressed.

 

So what is your Northstar? Compass? Guidelines? What is acceptable and what isn't? Is it based on it absolutely can't be what you see from your two eyes?

34 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

it is very crowded or too crowded for you to board and you wait much longer or give up and walk or take a cab and the MTA loses a fare. How is this good business practice? 

12 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

You're absolutely criticizing the commuter & the enthusiast & you're still doing it with this post.....

RailRunRob is speaking from the vantage point that the MTA's conclusions are coming from their data.... Apparently, he's taking our criticisms as criticizing the data, because data in & of itself is made to formulate, or derive by a justified conclusion.... The key word in all that is justified....

As you stated, the MTA does not use data to benefit the greater good.,... Numbers aren't always used to support something positive; there isn't much of any benevolency going on here with the MTA.... RailRunRob seems to think that is....

The good thing about numbers is that they can't be refuted.... You know what else is good about numbers? The fact that they can also be suppressed.

 

I'll simplify it even more what I'm asking is what makes you an expert how do you know this? Can you show me send me some links send me some data send me some reports monthly MTA meeting reports? Im not saying the MTA isnt worng I dont work for them neither do you I take it.. So with that said I'm just asking you to show me how you came to these conclusions I wanna know what you know?  How it does it get more basic than that. Are these your opinions or are you stating this as facts? Is it ground in emotion or actual knowledge?  

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

Just because someone is planning bus routes with the idea of what is best for the passenger, does not automatically mean they are not considering what it would cost to operate these proposals. I have always kept cost in mind when formulating proposals. The difference between my philosophy and the MTA’s is I believe to attract more passengers, you have to increase your investment in the system. That’s how most business that want to grow operate. I believe there is a direct relationship between ridership and revenue.

I agree with you re investments are key attracting growth you have to know your customer and the only way to do that I have an open line of communication and have an ear to the street. I take it that you worked for the MTA or planning at some point as well that I didn't know.

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

No plan will please everybody, but the objective is to help more people than you hurt. Where is the analysis that shows with these new routes, more riders will require fewer transfers?

That's a great question definitely should be a correlation between the current ridership data and the new estimates. The data using the remix platform is pretty broad standard stuff like line coverage as well as demo and point of reference reach data but again id love the comparison data even if the current network was created in Remix if would go along way.

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The planners also never ride the bus, so they have no idea why riders choose to take a bus instead of a train when there is a choice. They don’t realize how many use a different route in one direction versus the other because they consider factors like being able to get a seat, something the MTA  ignores in its planning. 

I would hope the MTA is getting their planners into the field kind of crazy to think about that if true. Not understanding a persons(riders) journey and interaction with your planed network is unacceptable.

21 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

And why do you feel just because someone is passionate about something, they can’t also be objective? 

No at all passion can definitely be a driving force "Love what you do you'll never work a day in your life" you know the saying. But on the flip it could turn into a bias especially not going through an objective process that was my only point. The one thing I know going into any task is that I can't assume I know for a user or in this case for a rider sometimes I'm too close to the forest to see the trees im not exempt

43 minutes ago, BrooklynBus said:

The MTA decides what they want to do, then goes and cherry picks through the data to support the conclusions it made. They don’t let the data guide the conclusions. As proof, look at all the high volume bus stops they eliminated. The buses won’t save time by doing this. They will just overload adjacent stops. Riders will become inpatient and more will evade the fare by entering the rear door. And as for the lightly used stops eliminated, buses won’t run faster either if most buses would have skipped these stops anyway. 

Also, why would you cutback the Q53 where there is heavy ridership from Woodside with buses filled by the time they reach Queens Center if you are letting the data lead the way to forming your conclusions? 

And why are they ignoring passenger travel time and numbers of transfers needed to complete a trip? 

Again not to sound like a jerk just from my experience there layers data also has to fit into operating budgets. Driver salary, fuel cost ,maintenance all things to have be factored in. Now with that said this is a draft and im sure the design team was also instructed to save were ever they can on route expenditures while meeting certain guildines maybe coverage etc I dont know for sure. But from an agency standpoint Byford gets a budget And just like the private sector they're going to try to cut some corners. As learned from the Bronx and Staten Island express bus redesign the publics going I have to come out and Politicians raise their voice. As to why they're ignoring travel time and transfers for trip Completion? Whatever system they have set up under their guidelines they feel like it's acceptable. Running more buses on the feeder lines etc etc. Happened in CO-OP and it didnt stick. The public needs to give feed back. 

49 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

You have a thread full of people that have a personal interest & passion for the bus network because they have something to lose, if some facet of this proposed network ends up becoming reality.... Quite frankly, it's insulting to come on here & ask a forum comprised of enthusiasts, commuters, and even MTA bus operators if they're looking at things from the vantage point of a business exec'....

I don't have a problem with your narrative, I have problem who you're directing it at.... It's as if you're criticizing the MTA through those of us on here voicing their opinions.....

You know what and it may be my fault maybe I'm too much on build and business side. Maybe I am taking people's opinions as truth and overthinking it when somebody just wants to voice there opinion, point of view or just simply get something off there chest. I apologize for that again my intent is not to diminish to someone else's opinion. Just simply offering different point I'm definitely not criticizing and I'm sorry that that's what im giving off from your POV. But I am definitely looking at it objectively and going through the possible what,why and the goals these planners had in mind. So when I hear someone say the MTA is up to no good I'm automatically going to ask how you came to that conclusion and look some type infomation or data I'm just trained too. Maybe that gives off  A** hole vibe (Shurgs) But to me it's objective reasoning and confirmation. And if it's an opinion it's an opinion no need poke and prod. The one thing I can tell you that I know is that I don't know. So if im off or missing something just let me know.But I do think it's important to have another point of view Who wouldn't want the actual designers of this plan to be on a thread like this to explain their point of view? True that's not me but sometimes even having someone say"Hey did you think about this? Or did you take a look at that? Might give you another perspective. And that goes both ways. Comfort is the enemy of progression IMO. But rest asured the respect is there.

12 minutes ago, LTA1992 said:

And this is why we need OMNY. The MTA would finally get accurate data on where everybody is going and this sort of thing will be far easier.

100% as a transit system you have to be Technology and data driven now and moving forward.

2 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The problem isn't that we don't understand.... Nobody here is disagreeing that data & feedback shouldn't have a place in making an informed decision.... You're trying to refute something that's not being argued....

BrooklynBus' point more or less is that the MTA does what it wants - and he's spot on with that.

I guess ultimately my issue is trying to process how much of the comment is personal preference or perception especially in a thread of people that have personal interest and passion for the bus network. If someone has a passion for buses or its a hobby. Could they be blinded by there personal views? Or are they looking at it from an executive business POV? Which any bus operation is it's customer and market-driven, competitive and needs to more focused on efficiency. This particular topic kinda hits home my company we build tracking and customized vehicle platforms a little different from this but we understand the cost and things (KPI)'s that our clients measure success. How many miles ' between breakdown?, Fuel efficiency and cost? On-time performance? They count every penny as they should it adds up over time and with a fleet of trucks or Buses. So I'm looking through this redesign I can't help but process it through operations and numbers pov as well. Void of anything personal bc the goal of a bus route is to move and attract people. So I'm not saying you don't have a point with the MTA but for me the next step is to ask how you came to that conclusion? There's absolutely a unique point of view from being on the street and seeing it firsthand. But there's also an equally unique situation when you're the person having to go over the budget and numbers and balance it and making the hard call. The bottom line it'd be amazing to have detail rider stats for current service to compare measure against the proposals That would take most of the guesswork out. But that's my angle.

6 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The MTA's been doing it for decades.

Even if that's true we should still understand the correct way of doing it which is with data and feedback. Or we're no better then folks at the MTA  were pointing out.

1 hour ago, BrooklynBus said:

Why do assume there had to be data? I think it was just done to set up the B15 to operate on Linden non stop to the airport to make the route quicker.

How do you run a business, offer a product or measure cost without data? What you're saying maybe true but you already on step five you skipped a few trust steps 1-4 was everything from road ops to ridership and mileage all before that decision is made for anything. To your point how do you measure if somethings quicker without data? Im I missing something?

40 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Using your example here, "The good ole 44" is a remembrance of something from the old network.... It's a facet from the same old network that you (in your devil's advocate argument) "can psychologically understand why someone would just create this shock and awe by renaming everything. This forces every rider from day one to forget everything thing they knew about the old network and start over."

I haven't forgotten everything, if that good ole 44 still exists for me to eloquently refer to it like that.... Lol....

I get your ultimate point about simplification.... Maybe it's not your intent, or that I'm missing something, but as that post in question read, the point I'm making is that your devils advocate argument sounds rather contradictory.

I think some of it is perception as well. Of the local routes roughy, 82% are brand new or renumbered routes in my book that very much qualifies as shock and awe again that's from my POV. The comment that spawned that particular response was based around possibilities of leaving most of the route numbers the same or close to the same and they didn't understand why they needed to renumber. Thus my response "I can psychologically understand why someone would just create this shock and awe by renaming everything. This forces every rider from day one to forget everything thing they knew about the old network and start over." With 82% of your old world destroyed your essentially starting over even with the outliers from a design standpoint.100% vs 82% But I can also understand if you're looking at it from an absolute standpoint you could make the argument with 15 or so outlines. Won't play devil's advocate on that one tho lol.

16 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Archangel here....

If I were to be forced to forget everything I knew about the old network by renaming everything, then what relevancy does having some of the proposed routes maintain the route numbers of the current routes (they may have the exact routings of) have?

Simplification If the new route is pretty much the same as the old one we love and remember to keep it." Oh, this go's to Parkchester, right? good ole 44" If it doesn't and causes more confusion and than it's worth memory wipe and completely renumber. "She ain't the old Q20 you remember why don't you try this nice new QT86 did you know it go's to Atlas Mall as well? Let me tell you all about it." New product new name.

20 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

300 minutes = 5 hours = no overnight service

Duh! Makes perfect sense. 

20 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

You could also take 2 trains to get there under the current system. 

One of my coworkers said most likely they will implement Brooklyn & Queens at the same time...there is just too much intertwined between the 2.

Yeah for sure Some of these new routes travel pretty far into Brooklyn. Pertaining to the QT5 just trying to get into the head of the planners just thinking about the new transfer  options that would open for Flatbush,East Flatbush and Brownsville riders. Im sure there won't be to many people traveling across Church from extreme western neighborhoods (Ie Sunset park) for a connection to the QT5 but it opens up options for ENY,Ozone Park as well as points beyond for riders on the eastern end of the B35 and even the B8 and B15 if they Survive as is with the Brooklyn redesign. There had to be some type of data from current stats that hinted that service should be extended into Brownsville. Just thinking.

----- Double post

4 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

I’m not concern with the 35. If you read my comment carefully you would notice I’m only talking about riding patterns in and around Brookdale. I live near the hospital and the 8, 15 and 35 all run there. 
 

But, actually who wants to take a bus from Sunset Park to Jamaica. I sure don’t, and I sure won’t take a bus from Brownsville to Jamaica if I have the  LIRR which could get me there within minutes. 

I'm familiar with Brookdale used the dentist there a-few times concerned about patterns? transfers, ridership layovers? The issue is We don't have the data so we don't know who would take that long of a trip. Maybe not a sunset park to Jamaica But who's to say someone wouldn't do a Utica to Jamaica or Nostrand to Jamaica?

The route seems to have decent capture and coverage.

QT5 Route stats 

Within a quarter of a mile of the route.

42,201 population

11,071 jobs

11,329 public transit to work

49.4% with no vehicles

Within half a mile.

139,731 population

30,419 jobs

36,603 public transit to work

44.6% with no vehicles

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

Again, I’m not 100% on this at all. However, I do see it’s a blue route but this only helps hospital workers. I mean most take the B8, B35, B15 or drive. That 101 is something else. But we will see. 

What about the direct connection to the B35? It's hard to give opinions when you don't have a rider matrix. Very long ride indeed but you technically would have a 2 bus ride from Sunset Park to Jamaica.

8 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

"Every 300 minutes" lmao

Yeah they need to update that. I'm sure we can assume that's 30mins.

12 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

Fordham Plaza's gonna be a circus with the Bx15,17, Bee-Line 60/61, and now the Bx34 and Q44 all turning and laying over within a block of each other tho...

Yeah going to be abit tight looks like 189th might lose some more parking slots. Do think the Q44 would get good usage from Fordham with a direct connection to the 12,15 and 41 and Metro North.

They seem to running this directly off the Remix platform. There's is a decent amount of data in here that can be used to check on decisions made in this plan. So if there's something maybe you don't agree with you can at least check on it here.  Interested in hearing comments once we go through some of the data.

  https://platform.remix.com/map/4ee65d6/line/5dcb5db?latlng=40.68584,-73.79061,12.5&dir=0&jane.latlng=40.69288,-73.76257&jane.hour=17&jane.day=weekday&jane.mode=frequency&jane.stat=population&jane.transfer=walking&jane.duration=60&jane.direction=from

21 minutes ago, Union Tpke said:

The thing is, there is no reason to needlessly confuse people. For most routes, a majority of it consists of an old route. For instance, either have the QT14 be the Q10 or Q64. Have the QT17 be the Q12. The QT38 is almost the same as the Q2. The QT40 could be the Q4. The QT16 the Q25 or Q34.

The goal should be to confuse people as little as possible.

Just playing devils advocate for a second and approaching it from a planning standpoint. I can psychologically understand why someone would just create this shock and awe by renaming everything. This forces every rider from day one to forget everything thing they knew about the old network and start over.  For example if I keep the Q10 and now it doesn't go to JFK and also runs via Jewel Ave it's not the Q10 peoples mind plus the Q64 riders. Years and years of habit is hard to break easier to just start over you odn thave Expectations from the old setup. It's really the lesser of two evils but in the long run people should adapt. Notice most of the routes that have the same exact routing do keep there numbers 24,37,56,58 etc which makes sense from a riders perspective it's the same route they've always known. All in IMO of course working in the UX field I can visualize  the process of understanding the rider and some of the exercises the designers might have gone through. There probably other internal organization and area plus the 4 different route types guided the numbering structure as well. Interesting none the less. Your point is taken going to be a mess for abit.

8 minutes ago, N6 Limited said:

I believe its to discern which route someone is talking about when making comments or suggestions. If you say "QT44" they know you're referencing the route from the redesign whether you comment on the interactive map, or mta.info, twitter, etc, and NOT the existing Q44.

Right that's what came to mind when I was reading it as well. That makes sense Especially when shifting thru this amount of routes and data plus the feedback channels. Have to collect and organize all this.

5 minutes ago, Kamen Rider said:

hell, SI used to use R for Richmond.

I remember. There does seem to be sometime type of method to the madness with the re numbering. most of the Qns-Bklyn routes kept there numbers. Q24,44,50,54,55,56,58,59 and afew other local routes. That's a conscious decision so there thinking about it at some level.

5 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

These numbers have been there for decades, mostly coming from original streetcar and bus lines. Don't fix what isn't broken. That could've been the very simplest part.

Happened in the Bronx in 1984. And in Staten Island i remember the S7 now the S53. People adapt they always do.

QT1-QT7 certainly have SBS characteristics. Are these routes going to be branded SBS or with all door boarding on the horizon does it even matter?