Jump to content

BUS - Random Thoughts Thread


Recommended Posts

So I thought I'd share a little experience I had today...
So I was over at Washington Heights this evening trying to get home and was waiting at 168th in front of the hospital for the next Midtown bus, and I walk over to the s/b M5 stop and see 4263 parked there. I believe I tracked it on the n/b M5 running pretty late (15+ mins behind) and it probably got short turned as a result. Maps says that the next one was coming in around 4 mins, and since there was no other bus leaving 178th, I assumed he'd just go into service there. About a minute before the bus was scheduled, the op turns on the bus, and those of us waiting start walking up but alas, he quickly pulls out NIS and starts speeding away down Broadway (I watched it go down a few blocks), so I instead crossed the street for the M3 that was just about to turn in, as the next M5 was another 20 min wait. I thought that he might've just been going back to the depot (which didn't make a lot of sense if he was on layover), but what do you know, I pull up the tracker a few mins later and 4263 was in service on the M5 for the trip I'd expected it to be on, around the 150s.

I'm just curious as to whether it was his personal choice to do so or not, and as to why whomever might feel that he couldn't just go into service from where he was at... everyone waiting at stops north of 157th (where I think he started making stops) went a whole 40 mins without an M5 passing, and it just seems like a big inconvenience. IIRC, this has happened to me before, except the op went into service right after having left the stop I was waiting at as NIS.

As for Manhattan N/S routes, yeah they are pretty terrible during the week and you're best off waiting for the weekend when the runtime is shorter for most routes. These days traffic isn't such as much an issue but rather buses running hot and taking a slow pace for the whole duration, which I do not blame them for doing. Though I will say it is a little annoying when some are slugging it despite being behind, which leads to all the bunching and crowding and whatnot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 38.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I still do, just during the wee hours of the morning (would usually walk down to 181st for the Bx35 or 36 afterwards).... Sometimes during the crack of dawn on weekends also...

In any event, the M103 is way too quick during the overnight hours & hardly carries much of anyone... They should just have M101's running to City Hall during those hours. Most the overnight usage is b/w Washington Hgts. & E. Harlem.

I am quite surprised that all 3 routes that serve Lex Ave/ 3rd Ave all run overnight. I always felt like it was overkill considering that it runs parallel to the (6) which is accompanied by the (4) at night. I’ve never used the M101/102/103 late at night so I don’t know what kind of usage they get but I can’t imagine it being too good to warrant 3 buses per hour along with the (4) and (6) running local. 
From what I remember Lexington Ave/3rd Ave is a ghost town after 10pm. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I am quite surprised that all 3 routes that serve Lex Ave/ 3rd Ave all run overnight. I always felt like it was overkill considering that it runs parallel to the (6) which is accompanied by the (4) at night. I’ve never used the M101/102/103 late at night so I don’t know what kind of usage they get but I can’t imagine it being too good to warrant 3 buses per hour along with the (4) and (6) running local. 
From what I remember Lexington Ave/3rd Ave is a ghost town after 10pm. 

I find it a bit absurd how overnight service that corridor managed to be spared all this time, considering 5th/Madison Avenues has a bus every 60 minutes (and used to be every 30 minutes prior to 2010). As for why an M101/M102 extension isn't considered, it's likely due to the run structures. There's an almost 2 hour gap in full route M101 service south of 96th Street when the M103 starts running hour, and for most it might be their last trip of the day. The M101 for the most part has a more frequent (although inconsistent) headway. There would need to be some rewriting in the schedule for that to happen during the overnight period if something like that were to happen. 

If it were up to me honestly, I prefer to keep the M103 overnight and have the M100 run instead of the M101 during the overnight. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I am quite surprised that all 3 routes that serve Lex Ave/ 3rd Ave all run overnight. I always felt like it was overkill considering that it runs parallel to the (6) which is accompanied by the (4) at night. I’ve never used the M101/102/103 late at night so I don’t know what kind of usage they get but I can’t imagine it being too good to warrant 3 buses per hour along with the (4) and (6) running local. 
From what I remember Lexington Ave/3rd Ave is a ghost town after 10pm. 

Yeah, it is overkill... I would do away with the M102 & the M103 overnights (whenever they go back to running overnight subway service)...

6 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

As for why an M101/M102 extension isn't considered, it's likely due to the run structures. There's an almost 2 hour gap in full route M101 service south of 96th Street when the M103 starts running hour, and for most it might be their last trip of the day. The M101 for the most part has a more frequent (although inconsistent) headway. There would need to be some rewriting in the schedule for that to happen during the overnight period if something like that were to happen. 

Perhaps, but why would the M102 run to City Hall (if the overnight M103 were to be scrapped)?

6 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

I find it a bit absurd how overnight service that corridor managed to be spared all this time, considering 5th/Madison Avenues has a bus every 60 minutes (and used to be every 30 minutes prior to 2010)....

 

....If it were up to me honestly, I prefer to keep the M103 overnight and have the M100 run instead of the M101 during the overnight. 

M100 should be running overnight regardless; completely separate issue.... Don't even have to run it to 2nd av either... All this time & the Bx12 is still "orphaned" over there in Inwood....

If this is about 2 routes serving Amsterdam vs. 2 routes serving 3rd/Lex, I'd still supply Amsterdam with the M100/M101 over supplying 3rd/Lex with the M102/M103.... One thing I will agree with, is that 5th/Madison could've stood to have more overnight service... There's something inherently wrong with running M101's/102's/103's along 3rd/Lex, with just the M2 solely, previously running along 5th/Madison... FWIW, at least they got the M3 & the M4 running "essential overnight service"....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Idk if anyone noticed the newly updated Brooklyn overnight map but it lists the Bx99 on the map even though it stops nowhere in Brooklyn.

They must really want to push the new 99 overnight routes on us.

I think they also want to show the Bx99 as a continuation of the (4) train in the city. You take the M99 for Brooklyn stops and then the Bx99 for The Bronx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, SevenEleven said:

I think they also want to show the Bx99 as a continuation of the (4) train in the city. You take the M99 for Brooklyn stops and then the Bx99 for The Bronx.

Thing is, neither the M99 nor Bx99 remotely function as such in the CBD (the BM2 does a better job of that).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I am quite surprised that all 3 routes that serve Lex Ave/ 3rd Ave all run overnight. I always felt like it was overkill considering that it runs parallel to the (6) which is accompanied by the (4) at night. I’ve never used the M101/102/103 late at night so I don’t know what kind of usage they get but I can’t imagine it being too good to warrant 3 buses per hour along with the (4) and (6) running local. 
From what I remember Lexington Ave/3rd Ave is a ghost town after 10pm. 

I think it has something to do with the old 3rd Avenue elevated line running every 20 minutes (same reason the Bx15 runs every 20 minutes north of 149th Street. It's not ridership-based)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

They must really want to push the new 99 overnight routes on us.

I don't get the sense that these routes are being pushed onto us, necessarily....

Regardless, the question is, are these overnight bus routes (and the discontinuation of overnight subway service) permanent..... I don't see it being the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Casey Stengel and their 2017s..they are not in great shape. 5989 has an axle that is sounding off rather badly, sounds worse than flat wheels on a train, and this ain't the first instance either. 6021 and 6023 also had these issues, don't know if it was fixed or not.

Edited by NBTA
Didn't finish my statement lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/6/2020 at 9:42 PM, B35 via Church said:

2] What's the most amount of modes (you can include rail transit) you've ever used to complete one linked trip within the city for a commute? (Do not include joyrides/fantrips)

  • ...of those unlinked trips, how many of them included buses?

S52 from Curtis High to the ferry

Ferry to Whitehall

(R) to Continental

(F) to 179th

Some NICE bus that got me stranded for hours at some college on LI cuz I took the wrong one when I tried going to Roosevelt Field.

This was to go to Walmart and Denny’s before I knew there was a Walmart in Bayonne and (back then) a Denny’s on Essex Street by City Hall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

I am quite surprised that all 3 routes that serve Lex Ave/ 3rd Ave all run overnight. I always felt like it was overkill considering that it runs parallel to the (6) which is accompanied by the (4) at night. I’ve never used the M101/102/103 late at night so I don’t know what kind of usage they get but I can’t imagine it being too good to warrant 3 buses per hour along with the (4) and (6) running local. 
From what I remember Lexington Ave/3rd Ave is a ghost town after 10pm. 

I've been on the all three routes overnight, and the only one that actually still has somewhat of a ridership is the M101, but most people that get on just go to the next stop where the subway is available (on 3rd/125th/Lex) or just get off anywhere between 193rd St and 125th St.

 

The M102 overnight in my opinion is redundant, as IIRC it was created as an alternative to when the (3) wasn't running to 148th St. All it does is supplement the M103.

The M103 isn't used as much, but is still used somewhat since it is the literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Perhaps, but why would the M102 run to City Hall (if the overnight M103 were to be scrapped)?

It was meant to be an either or (so only one of those routes would go there during the overnight). If an M102 extension is less expensive than an M101 extension (i.e, if they can milk the M102 operators just the right amount without needing an extra bus), then that would most likely be considered over the M101 (where an extra bus would likely be needed). The runtime is 35-40 minutes at night on the M102, and 9 minutes is given on the M103 from Cooper Square to City Hall, so it's very likely the M102 would just be chosen solely based on cost. Also, I'm not too sure about this, but based on the arrival and departures time at its northern terminal, it looks like overnight M101 operators take their scheduled break there. If that's the case, you'll need an extra bus, which kinda negates eliminating the M103 overnights. 

10 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

 

M100 should be running overnight regardless; completely separate issue.... Don't even have to run it to 2nd av either... All this time & the Bx12 is still "orphaned" over there in Inwood....

 

If this is about 2 routes serving Amsterdam vs. 2 routes serving 3rd/Lex, I'd still supply Amsterdam with the M100/M101 over supplying 3rd/Lex with the M102/M103.... One thing I will agree with, is that 5th/Madison could've stood to have more overnight service... There's something inherently wrong with running M101's/102's/103's along 3rd/Lex, with just the M2 solely, previously running along 5th/Madison... FWIW, at least they got the M3 & the M4 running "essential overnight service"....

I would provide Amsterdam and 3rd/Lex with 30 minute headways during the overnight ideally, but if we were to use existing resources, I would prefer to run the M100 over the M101 along Amsterdam Ave during the overnight hour, and then have the M102/M103 on Lex. However, with an M102 to City Hall (overnights), keeping the M101 as it is, and eliminating the M103, you free up the resources from the M103 to run hourly overnight service on the M100. 

1 hour ago, Lawrence St said:

I've been on the all three routes overnight, and the only one that actually still has somewhat of a ridership is the M101, but most people that get on just go to the next stop where the subway is available (on 3rd/125th/Lex) or just get off anywhere between 193rd St and 125th St.

The M102 overnight in my opinion is redundant, as IIRC it was created as an alternative to when the (3) wasn't running to 148th St. All it does is supplement the M103.

The M103 isn't used as much, but is still used somewhat since it is the literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan.

The M102 isn't really an M103 supplement, and that underestimates the M102 off of 3rd/Lexington Avenues. Additionally there rest of that statement is just not true because:

  • The (3) and M102 serve completely different areas of Manhattan once they go off Lenox Avenue 
  • The M102 started (as the M101A) after 148th Street opened, when the (3) was running 24/7
  • Even when the overnight (3) train shuttle was eliminated in the 90s, shuttle buses were provided to/from 135th Street

I don't see exactly what being the "literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan" correlates when it comes to ridership patterns, never mind that the (6) and M103 south of Cooper Union (technically from 42nd Street) take different routes. If anything, reasons why the M103 would get usage, on top of it serving 3rd/Lexington Avenues, is because it serves Downtown (the M15 does too, but to the far east) and parts of Lower Manhattan that the M101 & M102 don't reach, and it serves more of East Harlem that the M102 doesn't, where most people would be willing to use the bus compared to people in the UES which may stick to the subway if necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2020 at 3:29 PM, B35 via Church said:

As a Brooklynite, nobody's going to sway me into taking the (A) to get to the Rockaways over a bus.... Smart man IMO... If I ever need to get to the Rockaways for any reason (if I'm not driving, of course), it's the Q35 or the Q53 for most occasions.... Hell with the (A) & for damn sure, to hell w/ the LIRR... I don't even care that it's situated by the quote-unquote notorious Redfern houses, it's more that it's in the middle of nothing in-particular....

A bit off-topic... Funny you mention the Redfern Houses. I used to work with the youth there when the Police Athletic League had the cornerstone program there. That was some years ago. During the summers we'd take the (A) to get to our trip destinations. A lot of those kids aspired to get out of there someday. I haven't forgotten their faces, even though it's been 4+ years since I last worked over there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

It was meant to be an either or (so only one of those routes would go there during the overnight). If an M102 extension is less expensive than an M101 extension (i.e, if they can milk the M102 operators just the right amount without needing an extra bus), then that would most likely be considered over the M101 (where an extra bus would likely be needed). The runtime is 35-40 minutes at night on the M102, and 9 minutes is given on the M103 from Cooper Square to City Hall, so it's very likely the M102 would just be chosen solely based on cost. Also, I'm not too sure about this, but based on the arrival and departures time at its northern terminal, it looks like overnight M101 operators take their scheduled break there. If that's the case, you'll need an extra bus, which kinda negates eliminating the M103 overnights.

Yes, an either/or - so the M102 is inclusive, which is why I asked... In other words, I was asking why would the M102 be chosen over the M101 for that purpose....

Funny you mention that in the penultimate statement, because I've actually experienced the opposite on the overnight M101 almost every time I've rode up to Ft. George.... They layover on the Astor end of the route & take virtually no break on the Ft. George end.... Couple of times as I was walking along St. Nich' (as in, before it turns onto 190th to get back to Amsterdam), the b/o would honk his horn at me (I'm guessing, as if to say stay up [stay safe] or whatever).....

One time in particular I remember, albeit a couple of years ago, I was the only person on the bus after we hit 181st/Amsterdam.... She asked where I was getting off.... I (gambled and) said 193rd... She dropped me off at the hill... I got off, and within about a minute or so, she changed the signage & drove off.... Maybe she took a proper/longer layover at 190th/Amsterdam, IDRK.....

-------------------------

Side note: They changed the terminal/layover scenario of the M3 & M101 in Ft. George yet again.... Now they got M3's ending at the park (where the 101 used to) & the M101's ending across the street from the back end of that high school, but laying over at the hill (the SB M3 stop, just short of 193rd).... It's going to come to a point where they're going to discontinue buses running along Amsterdam, north of 190th...

6 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

The M102 overnight in my opinion is redundant....... All it does is supplement the M103.

The M103 isn't used as much, but is still used somewhat since it is the literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan.

4 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The M102 isn't really an M103 supplement, and that underestimates the M102 off of 3rd/Lexington Avenues....

IDK, I'll just put it like this... I wouldn't go as far to say that all it does is supplement the M103, but the M102 along Lenox & along 116th doesn't garner too much more usage than the M103 b/w City Hall & Astor overnights either (especially on weekdays)....

Edited by B35 via Church
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

There was plans to turn the abandoned SIR North Shore branch into a BRT route but IDK what happened with that. I'd rather that corridor become a light rail route than a bus BRT though, since NYC doesn't have a LR route the North Shore line is the best shot of getting one.

TriBoro RX could be one. The thing with the North Shore Line is that the catchment area is limited because it runs so close to the waterfront so a busway would allow bus routes to use it that penetrate the neighborhoods better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Still goofy as f***, but wasn't what I was expecting.... At least the driver wasn't injured & the bus wasn't damaged.

I'm gonna go ahead & say that they need to go on ahead & (formally) open up these clubs.... You have people throwing secret raves over there by the new Kosciuszko bridge, by the Manhattan bridge (co-incidentally, both on the Brooklyn sides of the bridges), now this nonsense.... As an introvert, I can't relate - so I could only imagine how a socialite's social life (and those that are either unemployed or are WFH) is holding up right now.... Repression (which IMO is worse than suppression) would have someone meticulously planning a temporary commandeering of a damn bus to paaaar-taaaaay :(<_<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Still goofy as f***, but wasn't what I was expecting.... At least the driver wasn't injured & the bus wasn't damaged.

I'm gonna go ahead & say that they need to go on ahead & (formally) open up these clubs.... You have people throwing secret raves over there by the new Kosciuszko bridge, by the Manhattan bridge (co-incidentally, both on the Brooklyn sides of the bridges), now this nonsense.... As an introvert, I can't relate - so I could only imagine how a socialite's social life (and those that are either unemployed or are WFH) is holding up right now.... Repression (which IMO is worse than suppression) would have someone meticulously planning a temporary commandeering of a damn bus to paaaar-taaaaay :(<_<

Imo they just need to throw the book at these a**holes, harder and more often. Opening up the clubs we'd just have cases up the wazoo, and when those a**holes got sick they'd spread it to the rest of us. Cause it's never just the reckless guy who gets sick, it's also his delivery guy, and the B/O who takes up down the block, and the guy at his Chinese place, etc. If it were just consequences for the people who are stupid enough, it'd be a different thing. I believe in speak softly and carry a big stick on this. City doesn't need to make a big scene, we just need to have very hard consequences if you break this, cause it affects all of us. People who refuse to comply with contract tracing even after knowingly spreading covid? $2000-3000 fine. Stuff like this is just gonna make this pain in the ass longer for everybody.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

Imo they just need to throw the book at these a**holes, harder and more often. Opening up the clubs we'd just have cases up the wazoo, and when those a**holes got sick they'd spread it to the rest of us. Cause it's never just the reckless guy who gets sick, it's also his delivery guy, and the B/O who takes up down the block, and the guy at his Chinese place, etc. If it were just consequences for the people who are stupid enough, it'd be a different thing. I believe in speak softly and carry a big stick on this. City doesn't need to make a big scene, we just need to have very hard consequences if you break this, cause it affects all of us. People who refuse to comply with contract tracing even after knowingly spreading covid? $2000-3000 fine. Stuff like this is just gonna make this pain in the ass longer for everybody.

People are holding these underground parties anyway... Engaging in large enough gatherings.... Same goes for eating in/at these makeshift curbside restaurant seating arrangements, being that people can't dine-in.... So my attitude is one of the inevitable as far as that goes.... Everybody is not out here wearing masks, gloves, properly sanitizing, etc... It is what it is with that...

Regardless of anything covid related, these winners should be imprisoned & heavily fined just for pulling that nonsense.... Soon as the reporter said something about blocking off the bus with 2 parked cars or some shit, I thought something serious happened to the driver & someone stole the bus & drove off somewhere - to party on the bus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

I've been on the all three routes overnight, and the only one that actually still has somewhat of a ridership is the M101, but most people that get on just go to the next stop where the subway is available (on 3rd/125th/Lex) or just get off anywhere between 193rd St and 125th St.

 

The M102 overnight in my opinion is redundant, as IIRC it was created as an alternative to when the (3) wasn't running to 148th St. All it does is supplement the M103.

The M103 isn't used as much, but is still used somewhat since it is the literal surface version of the (6) in Manhattan.

I always felt like the Manhattan bus system was a big mess, more so with the N/S routes than the crosstown routes. I feel like there is a lot of redundancy as well as routes covering too much ground. When these routes were being planned I wonder who thought it was a good idea to have long drawn out routes that cover over half the distance of Manhattan itself.  And the fact that very little has been changed with the bus system within the last 30 years shows how much concern the MTA has. I think the MTA has the mentality of “as long as the route works it’s fine” even though the entire bus system needs a “good” redesign to better serve today’s ridership patterns. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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