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.

BUS - Random Thoughts Thread


Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Concerning your comment in Scrapped Equipment, it is indeed hard to see the '02s coming back into service. Instead, it is more likely that more 2008 CTs and/or 2007 CLs will be kept around than previously expected, once 1587-1606 are delivered. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 35.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Cait Sith

    1427

  • Via Garibaldi 8

    3442

  • XcelsiorBoii4888

    1537

  • BM5 via Woodhaven

    1316

Top Posters In This Topic

12 minutes ago, 1train2255railfan said:

Concerning your comment in Scrapped Equipment, it is indeed hard to see the '02s coming back into service. Instead, it is more likely that more 2008 CTs and/or 2007 CLs will be kept around than previously expected, once 1587-1606 are delivered. 

Coming from a mechanic's perspective and thinking that repowering these 2002 is the wisest choice. It's NOT.

Unless NYCT wants to take on Spring Creek's 2008 CT's and keep the current surviving ones at CAS (that could be a possibility)

I'm not 100% on the rules and regs when it comes to NYCT receiving (MTA) bus equip. (Clarification needed please)

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The A/C on the Nova hybrids suck, rode them three times already, the latter two all the windows was closed and the bus was still warm on a hot day. Why is my luck so bad in regards to LFS's and A/C? I regularly get Orions and New Flyers with working A/C. The XDE40s at MCH have excellent A/C in my experience.

 

 

Also, forgot to post this yesterday, but 9507 was on the (L) shuttle. If anybody was wondering if 9500-9509 are used on subway shuttles. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Castleton lost 8702 & 8703, should the TA order 5 new Novabuses from their 8755-8963 order, number them 8964-8969 and send them to Castleton to replace the 8700s that they lost? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, FLX9304 said:

Since Castleton lost 8702 & 8703, should the TA order 5 new Novabuses from their 8755-8963 order, number them 8964-8969 and send them to Castleton to replace the 8700s that they lost? 

They can probably do that, increase the option order by 10 buses or so. Instead of CAS getting 20 buses they can get about 30-35.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

The A/C on the Nova hybrids suck, rode them three times already, the latter two all the windows was closed and the bus was still warm on a hot day. Why is my luck so bad in regards to LFS's and A/C? I regularly get Orions and New Flyers with working A/C. The XDE40s at MCH have excellent A/C in my experience.

The A/C on all the Novas suck compared to the New Flyers. This dates back to the original LFSA's they got way back in 2010.

When GH had the XD60's, they used to have some of them run on the Bx12 SBS in the summer because the AC on the 1200's were so trash. The 1200's didn't last too long on the Bx12 SBS, they ended up swapping them out in 2012, then swapped the 2012 models out a couple of years ago. The XD60's would still show up on the SBS Bx12 every so often in the summer until they got sent to Brooklyn.

The 1200's have since had their A/C's tuned up, and the newer artics have been decent enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, paulrivera said:

The A/C on all the Novas suck compared to the New Flyers. This dates back to the original LFSA's they got way back in 2010.

When GH had the XD60's, they used to have some of them run on the Bx12 SBS in the summer because the AC on the 1200's were so trash. The 1200's didn't last too long on the Bx12 SBS, they ended up swapping them out in 2012, then swapped the 2012 models out a couple of years ago. The XD60's would still show up on the SBS Bx12 every so often in the summer until they got sent to Brooklyn.

The 1200's have since had their A/C's tuned up, and the newer artics have been decent enough.

The 1200s didn’t leave the 12 Select until 2014 and the XD60’s showed up on the 12 Select all the time, not just the summertime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

The A/C on the Nova hybrids suck, rode them three times already, the latter two all the windows was closed and the bus was still warm on a hot day. Why is my luck so bad in regards to LFS's and A/C? I regularly get Orions and New Flyers with working A/C. The XDE40s at MCH have excellent A/C in my experience.

 

 

Also, forgot to post this yesterday, but 9507 was on the (L) shuttle. If anybody was wondering if 9500-9509 are used on subway shuttles. 

That is ironic, considering that the Nova LFS HEVs have very loud HVACs. Considering I’m next to a route with HEVs, the HVACs are very noisome especially from above. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They started to eliminate bus stops along Northern Blvd on the Q66.

I guess it makes the bus slightly faster 

Now they need more service on that route outside of rush hours (MTA should really consider off peak/weekends short turns between 51 Street and Flushing), and the buses need to stop coming in bunches/and or in threes. The inconsistent service is what usually drives people to walk to the (7) rather than wait for the 66.

The Q49 on the other hand, is perfect. During heavy loads, there are unscheduled trips from 74th Street. Its the perfect feeder service from the subway. Which is why if MTA goes ahead with the Queens bus design (QT74), 90% the current Q49 ridership will be lost. Its simply faster for most people to walk from 82nd St or 90th St up to East Elmhurst/Corona than wait for a bus that comes every 15 minutes

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Mtatransit said:

They started to eliminate bus stops along Northern Blvd on the Q66.

I guess it makes the bus slightly faster 

Now they need more service on that route outside of rush hours (MTA should really consider off peak/weekends short turns between 51 Street and Flushing), and the buses need to stop coming in bunches/and or in threes. The inconsistent service is what usually drives people to walk to the (7) rather than wait for the 66.

The Q49 on the other hand, is perfect. During heavy loads, there are unscheduled trips from 74th Street. Its the perfect feeder service from the subway. Which is why if MTA goes ahead with the Queens bus design (QT74), 90% the current Q49 ridership will be lost. Its simply faster for most people to walk from 82nd St or 90th St up to East Elmhurst/Corona than wait for a bus that comes every 15 minutes

 

The one thing I would consider for the Q49 is overnight service. In large part the ridership on the Q66 serves an entirely different base than those seeking any QBL subway line (and the options dwindle at night from Northern Boulevard with only the (E) , vs. Jackson Heights with the (E)(F) and (7) ). 

The one other thing I would also consider, and this might seem a little on the selfish side (but whatever), is overnight service on the Q47 between Jackson Heights and Glendale only. 

I personally think that having a bus on 69th Street and actually serve more of inner village would do okay. Something also has to give when there's no bus service in Middle Village at night, unless you go to any of the "border" streets of the neighborhood (Metropolitan Ave, Woodhaven Boulevard) or all the way to Grand Avenue.  Although it would cover more area, the Q38 would carry air since evening ridership tends to favor the Q29 and Q47, but since the Q47 serves an express stop, it would be more convenient to/from the subway. Also you can use one bus on the Q47 vs. 2 for the Q38 (assuming an hourly headway). 

One of the issues though (which has been talked about here in the past) is that Queens in general tends to be less vocal about transportation needs. So do I realistically see that happening, not really (in the meantime). The bus redesign proposal gives 69th Street overnight service (which is a plus), but then not only cuts the number of routes in Middle Village and sends them to places most people aren't going to....they trim evening service as well. I've taken those late night Q47s, including the last bus from Jackson Heights on multiple occasions, and they aren't empty either. It was even worse pre-covid, those buses had standees basically all the time. Evening ridership did take a hit on the route, but there's still instances of standees on a relatively frequent basis. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree that the Q49 deserves overnight service, I'm of the belief that the running of the Q32 overnight keeps the MTA from doing so (even though it only dumps people off no further north than Northern).... I'd personally run the Q49 over the Q33 overnights myself....

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

12 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

While I agree that the Q49 deserves overnight service, I'm of the belief that the running of the Q32 overnight keeps the MTA from doing so (even though it only dumps people off no further north than Northern).... I'd personally run the Q49 over the Q33 overnights myself....

I believe the Q32 overnight was only when they shut down the subway from 1am. Its now back at ending service at 1am

Lots of people use the Q33/49 interchangeably. They would get off at 35th Ave/82nd Street and walk.  

I can see why the MTA wanted to run the Q33 instead of the Q49 however. This way passengers from the Q47/49 could theoretically walk from the Q33 (they don't, they walk from the (7) )

I do agree with you in that Q49 would fill in the gap in that area better than the Q33, considering the fact that both Q72 and the Q23 don't run at night

13 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The one thing I would consider for the Q49 is overnight service

Shouldn't be too hard even with one bus. The last Q49 now leaves at around 1:40 and the first one leaves around 4

13 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The one other thing I would also consider, and this might seem a little on the selfish side (but whatever), is overnight service on the Q47 between Jackson Heights and Glendale only. 

I personally think that having a bus on 69th Street and actually serve more of inner village would do okay. Something also has to give when there's no bus service in Middle Village at night, unless you go to any of the "border" streets of the neighborhood (Metropolitan Ave, Woodhaven Boulevard) or all the way to Grand Avenue.  Although it would cover more area, the Q38 would carry air since evening ridership tends to favor the Q29 and Q47, but since the Q47 serves an express stop, it would be more convenient to/from the subway. Also you can use one bus on the Q47 vs. 2 for the Q38 (assuming an hourly headway). 

One of the issues though (which has been talked about here in the past) is that Queens in general tends to be less vocal about transportation needs. So do I realistically see that happening, not really (in the meantime). The bus redesign proposal gives 69th Street overnight service (which is a plus), but then not only cuts the number of routes in Middle Village and sends them to places most people aren't going to....they trim evening service as well. I've taken those late night Q47s, including the last bus from Jackson Heights on multiple occasions, and they aren't empty either. It was even worse pre-covid, those buses had standees basically all the time. Evening ridership did take a hit on the route, but there's still instances of standees on a relatively frequent basis. 

There could also be a business case in having night service on the Q47 through Jackson Heights (not Marine Terminal though it would end where the current Q69 ends). By running the Q47 and the Q49 overnight, you wouldn't need to run the Q33 overnight.

Right now the only realistic option for people to get to the areas north of Northern Blvd is to take the Q33, or walk from the Q66 or from Roosevelt Avenue.

Regarding Q29 vs Q47, I think Q47 would serve better if the goal is for network coverage, but Q29 I believe would perform better as the route to run late night. What if we run the Q29 at late night but extend it to 74th St, would that change the equation? Traffic/double parking is lighter during the overnight hours so it should be quicker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mtatransit said:

I believe the Q32 overnight was only when they shut down the subway from 1am. Its now back at ending service at 1am

Lots of people use the Q33/49 interchangeably. They would get off at 35th Ave/82nd Street and walk.  

I can see why the MTA wanted to run the Q33 instead of the Q49 however. This way passengers from the Q47/49 could theoretically walk from the Q33 (they don't, they walk from the (7) )

I do agree with you in that Q49 would fill in the gap in that area better than the Q33, considering the fact that both Q72 and the Q23 don't run at night

Hell, I'm of the belief that if the Q33 never ran inside the airport, they would've never had it operating overnights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

I believe the Q32 overnight was only when they shut down the subway from 1am. Its now back at ending service at 1am

Lots of people use the Q33/49 interchangeably. They would get off at 35th Ave/82nd Street and walk.  

Yeah, the Q32 doesn't run overnights. It also ends relatively early on Sundays. For all the DH'ing it does (first buses depart from Penn Station about an hour before they depart from Jackson Heights), they may as well operate it 24/7.

3 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

There could also be a business case in having night service on the Q47 through Jackson Heights (not Marine Terminal though it would end where the current Q69 ends). By running the Q47 and the Q49 overnight, you wouldn't need to run the Q33 overnight.

Right now the only realistic option for people to get to the areas north of Northern Blvd is to take the Q33, or walk from the Q66 or from Roosevelt Avenue.

I would rather have the Q33 and Q49 over Q47 and Q49. The areas along the Q47 are dead, after a certain hour. Most southbound ridership comes from Marine Air Terminal at that time, and northbound ridership can be pretty light. I would keep the Q33 though. 

3 hours ago, Mtatransit said:

 

Regarding Q29 vs Q47, I think Q47 would serve better if the goal is for network coverage, but Q29 I believe would perform better as the route to run late night. What if we run the Q29 at late night but extend it to 74th St, would that change the equation? Traffic/double parking is lighter during the overnight hours so it should be quicker.

The areas along the Q29 are closer to the subway than the Q47, and the Q29 fails to serve more of Middle Village because it runs along Woodhaven Boulevard & then Dry Harbor Road (which remains being close to Woodhaven). The Q47 at the very least still covers a larger catchment area within the neighborhood. And the 69th Street and Calamus Ave portions aren't as close to the subway (and the Q18 doesn't run overnights on top of that). 

Also the later at night it is, ridership slows down from Hoffman Drive on all local routes. The Q53 seems to be the only one that carries, partially because it comes from Jackson Heights but also because of its frequencies. The Q47s ridership at night is the strongest and most consistent (per bus) out of all the Middle Village local routes without hesitation. 

The Q47 also has quite a few riders traveling south of Eliot Ave at night, where it starts becoming closer to the Q29 route path (south of Furmanville they run together). It can be operated with one bus on hourly headways, perhaps even extended at night to Myrtle Ave to further cover riders along the Q29 route. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

Yeah, the Q32 doesn't run overnights. It also ends relatively early on Sundays. For all the DH'ing it does (first buses depart from Penn Station about an hour before they depart from Jackson Heights), they may as well operate it 24/7.

I would rather have the Q33 and Q49 over Q47 and Q49. The areas along the Q47 are dead, after a certain hour. Most southbound ridership comes from Marine Air Terminal at that time, and northbound ridership can be pretty light. I would keep the Q33 though. 

The areas along the Q29 are closer to the subway than the Q47, and the Q29 fails to serve more of Middle Village because it runs along Woodhaven Boulevard & then Dry Harbor Road (which remains being close to Woodhaven). The Q47 at the very least still covers a larger catchment area within the neighborhood. And the 69th Street and Calamus Ave portions aren't as close to the subway (and the Q18 doesn't run overnights on top of that). 

Also the later at night it is, ridership slows down from Hoffman Drive on all local routes. The Q53 seems to be the only one that carries, partially because it comes from Jackson Heights but also because of its frequencies. The Q47s ridership at night is the strongest and most consistent (per bus) out of all the Middle Village local routes without hesitation. 

The Q47 also has quite a few riders traveling south of Eliot Ave at night, where it starts becoming closer to the Q29 route path (south of Furmanville they run together). It can be operated with one bus on hourly headways, perhaps even extended at night to Myrtle Ave to further cover riders along the Q29 route. 

I’ve been a strong advocate for a stronger overnight bus network for a while because some of the existing routes that run overnight simply don’t do enough. Take the Q100 for example, it’s a waste having it run limited overnight when it would be far more useful to have it run local overnight along 21 street. 

But in regards to the conversation about the Q33/Q47 and Q49, I’m also in agreement with ”B35” that as long as the Q33 has overnight service the Q49 probably won’t. And I get it, the Q33 is a more direct route and it’s in between the Q47 and Q49. 

I don’t know how popular this idea would be but I would simply have the Q33 and Q47 stop running at midnight to have a late night route (let’s call it the Q87 to make things simple) cover the entire Q33 route and the Q47 route between Jackson Heights to Middle Village. You kill two birds with one stone and I don’t think there will be much issue with the route besides Roosevelt Ave, but buses can run on 35th Ave between 74/75th street to 82nd & 83rd Streets to avoid Roosevelt Ave traffic. 
 

I also feel to better improve connectivity the Q23 should have overnight service because currently the whole eastern sections of Corona, Rego Park and Forest Hills has no bus service. 
I would also add more Q19 service which in my opinion is YEARS overdue. It’s absurd that it runs ever 30 minutes during the weekends and service stops at 8:30/9pm. How does the MTA expect this route to grow if they are being so stingy with service. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Calvin said:

I wonder what was the BQM1 renamed as the BM5 about. BQM1 is the current BM5 that's between Spring Creek to Midtown except it goes east of Spring Creek following the QM15. Was it to group all the Brooklyn-Manhattan routes as one?

It was most likely that and to also avoid confusion with the QM1 or BM1. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wasn't the BM5 originally non stop in Queens? That may have something to do with it, why have Q in the line's name when it doesn't stop in that borough! That is how it was early into MTA Bus era. No idea what Command service pattern was. Eventually they added BM5 stops along Woodhaven Blvd. 

 

 

I only been on the BM5 once years ago on a Orion CNG (epic ride) and people didn't start getting off until the bus got in East New York IIRC. 

Edited by trainfan22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

Wasn't the BM5 originally non stop in Queens? That may have something to do with it, why have Q in the line's name when it doesn't stop in that borough! That is how it was early into MTA Bus era. No idea what Command service pattern was. Eventually they added BM5 stops along Woodhaven Blvd. 

 

 

I only been on the BM5 once years ago on a Orion CNG (epic ride) and people didn't start getting off until the bus got in East New York IIRC. 

The BQM1 made a stop at Linden Boulevard & 79th Street, which was in Queens (Lindenwood). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

The BQM1 made a stop at Linden Boulevard & 79th Street, which was in Queens (Lindenwood). 

Even so, it's effectively a Brooklyn stop, given how close to the border it is and what's around it.

I find the BxM3 and Route 28 (admittedly on a tangent) more interesting, as the former has most trips run to/from downtown Yonkers while the latter uses an external name that hints at the existence of a BxM4 branch that was canned in 2010 (BxM4A, with the BxM4B dropping its letter suffix) and implies that it has stops in the Bronx (it doesn't).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lex said:

Even so, it's effectively a Brooklyn stop, given how close to the border it is and what's around it.

I find the BxM3 and Route 28 (admittedly on a tangent) more interesting, as the former has most trips run to/from downtown Yonkers while the latter uses an external name that hints at the existence of a BxM4 branch that was canned in 2010 (BxM4A, with the BxM4B dropping its letter suffix) and implies that it has stops in the Bronx (it doesn't).

BxM4C had a stop at 138 St at one time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lex said:

Even so, it's effectively a Brooklyn stop, given how close to the border it is and what's around it.

I find the BxM3 and Route 28 (admittedly on a tangent) more interesting, as the former has most trips run to/from downtown Yonkers while the latter uses an external name that hints at the existence of a BxM4 branch that was canned in 2010 (BxM4A, with the BxM4B dropping its letter suffix) and implies that it has stops in the Bronx (it doesn't).

The price differential between the 20/21 and 28 is large enough that a name difference was needed.

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.