Via 5-4-3-2-What? QBxCuts!

[Nova RTS 9147]

LRG traffic varies on the Whitestone Bridge. It similar to the Verrzano. It busy during Rush Hours but can also be busy according to the following events. Other times traffic can 'fly' with no delays, on the Bridge other times weekends and late evenings/overnights.

 

I do agree that an free extra transfer should be provided at Bay Plaza and Main/Roosevelt if the QBX1 is split into half.

 

There have been times (rush hour and weekends) where we flew over the Whitestone and times where it was stop and go traffic. So it's really hard to say.

 

And there should be an extra free transfer between the two new routes.

[GreatOne2k]

Q50 should be extended to LaGuardia Airport, for the East Bronx (MTA wouldn't have to pay for it). The West Bronx will just have to wait until the MTA can afford the Bx50.

 

Q50 can also have a stop inside Whitestone Cinemas as well

[Shortline Bus]

Q50 should be extended to LaGuardia Airport, for the East Bronx (MTA wouldn't have to pay for it). The West Bronx will just have to wait until the MTA can afford the Bx50.

 

Q50 can also have a stop inside Whitestone Cinemas as well

 

Also maybe merge the lower used Q48 and this new Q50 as well but use Northern Blvd to/from LGA after looping in/out of Main/Roosevelt.

[GreatOne2k]

Also maybe merge the lower used Q48 and this new Q50 as well but use Northern Blvd to/from LGA after looping in/out of Main/Roosevelt.

 

MTA could slowly cut back service on the Q48 (NYC Transit Bus) or reroute it and use the Q50 (MTA Bus) to save money in LGA.

 

Bx23 could have a Bx24 variant that goes into Bay Plaza, but follows the Bx23 (QBx1) in Earhart Lane, then later cut the Bx29 back to Pelham Bay so it will be a City Island Shuttle (NYC will now be paying for Bay Plaza service). MTA can use the savings to revive the Bx14 in Parkchester.

[JohnQPine]

Actually, I agree with this move. I got so confused when I was trying to get the QBx1 one time awhile ago, this was back in the QSC days. I kept getting on the Co-Op City loop bus by accident.

They should give the bus a regular route number. The Q50 sounds excellent. The next step is giving the MTAB express bus runs a regular route number, like instead of QM1A it would be X##.

[GreatOne2k]

Bx23 = QBx1 / Bellamy Loop Service

Bx24 = Section 5 service (expanded to also have PM service)

Bx25 = Asch Loop service

 

MTA can expand these buses later on to cut back on NYC Transit Bus routes.....

 

The QBx1 can save MTA tons of money for the MTA if they get creative. These rush hour branches can soon run to Bay Plaza (Bx24), then 7 days a week (Bx24, Bx25), then get expanded to other parts of the Bronx if needed (Bx24, Bx25)

[B35 via Church]

that's probably the only post of johnqpine's I'm gonna ever agree with everything he said in it....

 

 

Anyway, so they're finally breaking up this route... I say good... enough of this:

- Qbx1's coming from flushing, serve pelham bay park (PBP), loop through co-op via 1-2-3-4-5, then come BACK to PBP to terminate

- Qbx1's coming from flushing, serve PBP, loop through co-op via 5-4-3-2-1, then come BACK to PBP to terminate

- Qbx1's coming from flushing that serve PBP, to terminate over there @ section 3 (bellamy loop)]....

- Qbx1's that originate in section 5 (erskine/earhart) to end @ PBP

- Qbx1's that begin @ PBP and end at section 3 (bellamy loop)

- Qbx1's that begin @ PBP and end in Flushing

- Qbx1's that begin @ section 4 (asch) and end in Flushing

 

I'm sure I missed at least one more... the point is, there's far too many route patterns... you seldom know what bus is gonna do what... it's like you have to "notice the crowds" to make some type of assessment if the bus is going to co-op, or back to flushing (9.5 times out of 10, the flushing bound buses are less crowded)...

 

speaking of which, god help you if you're at PBP waiting for a flushing bound bus...

you see a Qbx1 pull into PBP & you don't know wth it's gonna do.... I mean, I spoke on this before about this route...

 

IMO, it's long past overdue....

 

 

 

I personally think it's a bad idea:

 

1. It'll be even more confusing. At first, many riders will find it hard determining which bus to get on.

2. New mapping and bus stop signage: dinero, dinero!

3. Who's gonna run these: MTA Bus? And from what depot?

4. I, personally, can't imagine how much time or confusion this will alleviate. The QBx1's problems come from traffic conditions and passenger volume (and driver temperament...) Changing numbers around will not solve any external conditions! You'll just be plastering a new number on a problem.

I have to respectfully disagree on points 1 & 4, sis....

 

2) good point.

3) good question....

1 & 4) I don't see how it would be more confusing... the unfamiliarity of the route numbers with the passengers themselves will fade away w/i a couple weeks..... you can expect that from any route that gets a route number change (that's why I'm not too big on renaming routes as much as say, Shortline bus is).....

 

Passenger volume & usage isn't really a problem (well, at least, traveling from PBP to co-op).... My gripe isn't even that the current qbx1 is too long; b/c once it gets onto the Bruckner svc rd, it's pretty much smooth sailing... Any route that travels over a bridge is gonna be (more) prone to traffic, so that's not my gripe w/ the Qbx1 either.....

 

furthermore, it's not the changing of numbers that'll solve the confusion of the many qbx1 patterns... it's the notion that people would know, when they see a "Q50", it'll be "the flushing bus"....As for the "bx23", I say that should get most of the service, compared to the Q50... it will end up being more important for co-op passengers seeking the train in the longrun.... whether this 23 would travel 5-4-3-2-1 or 1-2-3-4-5 won't make a bit of difference, b/c either way, it'll be a bus that serves co-op city on one end... and PBP on the othaaa......

 

 

....despite my long-winded stance, thanks for this information, Roku.

[mark1447]

I disagree with crap, wants to save money but now adding 2 new routes ill cost the t/a extra, like wtf?

[B35 via Church]

Q50 should be extended to LaGuardia Airport, for the East Bronx (MTA wouldn't have to pay for it). The West Bronx will just have to wait until the MTA can afford the Bx50.

 

Q50 can also have a stop inside Whitestone Cinemas as well

 

...and say goodbye to the 48 if that were to happen.

(something I would agree with btw... heh heh)

 

 

Bx23 could have a Bx24 variant that goes into Bay Plaza, but follows the Bx23 (QBx1) in Earhart Lane, then later cut the Bx29 back to Pelham Bay so it will be a City Island Shuttle (NYC will now be paying for Bay Plaza service). MTA can use the savings to revive the Bx14 in Parkchester.

 

...or the bx23 itself can loop through bay plaza if need be... no need for another variant for that.... it's not gonna take much (duration) for a bus to loop through co-op, just to come back to PBP (1/2 hour max, if that long).... if a route can be used to its max potential, while still serving one or two general areas, I say go for it....

 

I think once this "bx23" service starts, the only ppl. that'll think twice about the 29 would be city island residents (and restaurant customers )... so the 29 could be cut back to PBP w/o the "23" even needing a variant....

 

but that's just IMHO.....

 

 

Exactly the point, riders coming from the Bx12 and train often use the QBx1 to Flushing and Throggs Neck, but there are few Coop City residents who do use the QBx1 from Coop City to Throggs Neck.

 

I think the Q50 going through Coop can be due to politics since Assemblyman Mike Benedetto has both Coop and Throggs Neck in his district. He would argue that many seniors and students (specifically to Scanlan HS) use the QBx1 from the Neck to Coop City.

 

IMO, it's gotta be...

 

I mean, I can't see any reason why the "Q50" should even touch co-op city, if the "bx23" is gonna be a local service encircling co-op... What you notice from the qbx1's coming from Flushing is that, buses often tank out @ PBP, then the co-op crowd embarks upon the bus.... ppl. taking the qbx1 b/w flushing & throgs neck aren't really seeking service to co-op....

 

you're spot on, on both points there bro....

[KeystoneRegional]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Cait Sith]

I disagree with crap, wants to save money but now adding 2 new routes ill cost the t/a extra, like wtf?

 

Not exactly, its splitting one route into two, the same scenario used for the B61/B62 segments, same operating cost and probably the same headways. The only thing they would be spending their money on is the sign changing, which is not that big of a deal from the way I see it.

 

IAWTP, the two new routes actually would not save money, because counting in the sign changes, possible extra B/Os needed (since it is basically like QBx1 running in two section, there might be at least 2-4 extra B/Os) The QBx1 should stay it's way.

 

Think logically for a moment, why would you need extra bus operators for lines that will have the same headways & layover periods as the current QBx1? The only thing they would be spending money on is the sign changing, which is not that big of a deal....

[KeystoneRegional]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[Cait Sith]

I know sign changing is one thing, but there are four layover periods instead of two, so I believe the layover may cause the 'extra' B/Os to appear.

 

I can tell you've never examined the layover periods for the QBx1....

[KeystoneRegional]

Please, watch the Nazi Banksters Crimes Ripple Effect at http://jforjustice.co.uk/banksters

[GreatOne2k]

...and say goodbye to the 48 if that were to happen.

(something I would agree with btw... heh heh)

 

 

 

I mean, I can't see any reason why the "Q50" should even touch co-op city, if the "bx23" is gonna be a local service encircling co-op... What you notice from the qbx1's coming from Flushing is that, buses often tank out @ PBP, then the co-op crowd embarks upon the bus.... ppl. taking the qbx1 b/w flushing & throgs neck aren't really seeking service to co-op....

 

you're spot on, on both points there bro....

 

Would you make a three legged transfer for those who do ride from Co Op City and Flushing (or parts in between)?

[GreatOne2k]

...and say goodbye to the 48 if that were to happen.

(something I would agree with btw... heh heh)

 

...or the bx23 itself can loop through bay plaza if need be... no need for another variant for that.... it's not gonna take much (duration) for a bus to loop through co-op, just to come back to PBP (1/2 hour max, if that long).... if a route can be used to its max potential, while still serving one or two general areas, I say go for it....

 

I think once this "bx23" service starts, the only ppl. that'll think twice about the 29 would be city island residents (and restaurant customers )... so the 29 could be cut back to PBP w/o the "23" even needing a variant....

 

but that's just IMHO.....

 

 

you're spot on, on both points there bro....

 

Bx29 is quicker from section 5 to PBP (Hutchinson River Parkway) than QBx1 or Bx23, note it skips the Earhart Lane section that the QBx1(Bx23) has to go through, saving some time.

[SoSpectacular]

Well the only problem this solves is waiting for the right bus to show up at Pelham Bay to Flushing... When I'm fanning in the Bronx at least seeing the Q50 will be a welcome sight EVERYTIME it shows up...

[cotb16]

IMO, it's gotta be...

 

I mean, I can't see any reason why the "Q50" should even touch co-op city, if the "bx23" is gonna be a local service encircling co-op... What you notice from the qbx1's coming from Flushing is that, buses often tank out @ PBP, then the co-op crowd embarks upon the bus.... ppl. taking the qbx1 b/w flushing & throgs neck aren't really seeking service to co-op....

 

you're spot on, on both points there bro....

 

If I did the Coop City restructuring, it would've been a little bit differently:

 

1. The Bx12 SBS would serve Section 5 on its way to Coop City, stopping at Earhart/Hunter and Einstein/Hutch. This way, the Bx26 or Bx28 won't have to touch Section 5 since it Section 5 riders would have all of their subway connections with the Bx12 SBS, and most likely getting to the subways faster than those in other sections.

 

2. The BX26 would serve Sec. 1-2 (Dreiser-Carver-Truman), terminating at the coop City Post Office (Peartree/Givan avs).

 

3. The Bx28 would serve Sec 1-2 (Dreiser-Carver-Truman), also ending at the Post Office. It would not have to be split into the Bx28/Bx38.

 

4. The Bx23 (splitting from the QBx1), would become a north-south route running from Dyre Av station to Pelham Bay station via all sections except Bellamy Loop, in order to give Truman HS students access to Pelham Bay Park and Boston Rd (aka the Valley).

 

5. The Bx30 would serve Sec 3-4-5, terminating at Earhart Lane. This would allow Bellamy riders that aren't served by the Bx23 to reach Boston Road and points north of Coop City.

 

6. The Q50 would run from Bay Plaza (via current Bx12 routing or through Section 5 to avoid traffic at Bartow Avenue) to Flushing station. And since the Bx5 is running through Crosby Avenue, the Q50 would make all local stops along Bruckner Blvd to serve those living along the service road.

 

Any comments?

[Princelex]

Bx23 should run 24/7 in Co Op City to be a late night alternative to the Bx28, plus MTA doesn't have to pay for it

 

Q50 LTD should get increased service to help with crowding on the Q44 LTD

I agree with you completely. I'm willing to see where this goes. I hope that it will be better for us Co-Op City residents.

[hoodciti]

Wasn't a similar idea bounced around during the Queens Surface days... I believe the QBx1 was to be slip and # the Co-op City runs Bx72 or something like that to differentiate the Queens runs from the Co-op Only runs.

[JFK 7212]

Well there goes the current Bx23.