Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #26 Posted April 13, 2011 The fold up seats on subway cars have not and will not be used. That idea permeated from the prior administration and this administration wants no part of it. Therefore forget about no seats on buses. And for further elaborate on Bill's comments, most transportation companies around the country including the are trying to see how they can make commuters' trips MORE comfortable, not less comfortable. That's why they originally started putting those so called "cushioned" seats in, even though they're hard as bricks, but at least they were trying to make things more comfortable. The goal is to make more people want to use public transportation and if people are going to be smashed in like sardines on buses, those who have other alternatives will use those instead. Your idea would do nothing more than push people away from the system in a time where the is trying to make people's commutes easier and better. Of course this is public transportation, but there are certain levels of expectations that must be maintained if the system is going to continue to be used by more and more people, otherwise more and more folks will just resort back to the comfort of their cars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted April 13, 2011 Share #27 Posted April 13, 2011 Standees take up less space than people who are seated. I agree about the stupidity of the public. Maybe there could be signs on the seats that are folded up to say: "Pull down to sit" or something like that. So your answer to my original question was a yes.... If that's the case, then I have to disagree w/ that state of mind/thinking... I would rather have more buses running with seats on them... Than less buses running with folded seats (which equates to no seats in the minds of the general public) in them... More people/bus is one of the (obvious) reasons why the mta decided to purchase articulated buses.... With the exception of the Bx12, M15, and M101, routes that ended up getting artics on 'em, ended up losing service.... ^^ My point: The way MTA deems it, more people/bus = (justification for) less service. Worse, we'd be talking about less service on the 40 footers themselves, if they were to go w/ folded seats throughout the bus or w/e.... ...and the general public don't read destination signage(s)... forget about what's plastered/stickered onto the underbelly of the seating... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted April 13, 2011 Share #28 Posted April 13, 2011 So out of all of the people on the bus, nobody can fit in the back? Everybody is 6'4'' and will hit their head on the ceiling if they stand in the back? Plenty of older people working find ways of standing on the bus. They may prefer to sit, but I think that, during rush hour, they've basically given up hope of getting a seat and their biggest concern is getting on the bus and getting to work on time. I'm not sure how they do it on the R160s, but I'm sure they could do it the same way on the buses. I'm 99% sure it is all up to the passengers as to whether or not they want to leave the seats up. As far as people carrying packages, most of them can't get a seat anyway, and because of the fact that the seats take up more space, they have to let buses go by before they can even get on. I do agree about getting rid of cushioned seats being a good idea. Those seats can be pretty bad after a long rainstorm. It's not so much about (only) hitting your head on the ceiling, bro.... I'm sure you've taken a physics course somewhere along the line in your studies, so you'd know that it takes a heavier person a more strength & balance to hold himself onto a moving, higher elevated platform, compared to a platform closer to the ground.... I shouldn't have to exert anymore energy than what I would normally have to, while commuting on a bus, because someone wants to have more people stand on said buses.... As was said, it's not only the people that take the bus a couple of blocks, or the casual rider him/herself taking buses.... People have some serious commutes on local buses - You as a Staten Islander should know that more than anyone here in NYC.... Yes, people's concern is getting to where they got to go on time.... Thing is (given your idea there) if you have more people standing/crammed onto buses, you're gonna have more buses flagging people too - and that's already happening on certain (heavier) routes (of course, this B35 is one of them).... You don't want that happening on the average route that has moderate ridership w/ seated passengers @ its current headways... You'd only be compounding the problem by having an increased amt. of people standing up on buses running on higher headways.... Foresight is what you're lacking w/ this.... You can't stand on a bus that never shows up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova RTS 9147 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #29 Posted April 13, 2011 So your answer to my original question was a yes....If that's the case, then I have to disagree w/ that state of mind/thinking... I would rather have more buses running with seats on them... Than less buses running with folded seats (which equates to no seats in the minds of the general public) in them... More people/bus is one of the (obvious) reasons why the mta decided to purchase articulated buses.... With the exception of the Bx12, M15, and M101, routes that ended up getting artics on 'em, ended up losing service.... ^^ My point: The way MTA deems it, more people/bus = (justification for) less service. Worse, we'd be talking about less service on the 40 footers themselves, if they were to go w/ folded seats throughout the bus or w/e.... ...and the general public don't read destination signage(s)... forget about what's plastered/stickered onto the underbelly of the seating... im happy you mentioned this, since a lot of people don't remember the artic fiasco from 10 years ago. People don't remember that when these larger capacity buses came into service, a lot of customers lost service (except for the buses you mentioned. Hell, M101 didn't really improve until a few years ago) on their lines. I remember people literally screaming at their bus drivers when the M23 switched from RTS to Artic, and service being cut by 1/3rd. For the sake of the argument, lets say some routes get seatless buses (which is also stupid since you're assuming people who have long commutes won't bitch and moan about having to stand for that extra time before/after a long day work), who's to say the MTA won't simply cut service even more to pack in these cattle buses?! I know if I was trying to fix a budget and I see that some bus routes got this extra capacity, you're damn right I'm going to cut that corner and put even more people on that bus. The idea, while noble in its intent, is very shortsighted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #30 Posted April 13, 2011 im happy you mentioned this, since a lot of people don't remember the artic fiasco from 10 years ago. People don't remember that when these larger capacity buses came into service, a lot of customers lost service (except for the buses you mentioned. Hell, M101 didn't really improve until a few years ago) on their lines. I remember people literally screaming at their bus drivers when the M23 switched from RTS to Artic, and service being cut by 1/3rd. For the sake of the argument, lets say some routes get seatless buses (which is also stupid since you're assuming people who have long commutes won't bitch and moan about having to stand for that extra time before/after a long day work), who's to say the MTA won't simply cut service even more to pack in these cattle buses?! I know if I was trying to fix a budget and I see that some bus routes got this extra capacity, you're damn right I'm going to cut that corner and put even more people on that bus. The idea, while noble in its intent, is very shortsighted. The thing that checkmate keeps assuming is that NO ONE gets to sit down during rush hour and that is so not true. Staten Island is unique in that most of the routes from the ferry have a certain pattern in terms of people getting on and off that is different from other lines that don't go to the ferry or even other lines in other boroughs. When I took the ferry coming home, I always had a seat on the bus unless I chose not to sit and let someone else sit. A line like the (S53) will have certain stops where the bus will empty out a bit and then more folks may get on (i.e. Hylan Blvd). This is certainly the case with buses in other boroughs as well. He talks as if the people that do get seats during rush hour don't exist. I'm telling you, if they did that people would be so pissed about having to stand that you can't even imagine. I don't know how he came to the conclusion of trying to justify this, but it just wouldn't fly w/passengers. His thinking is that with the chairs folded up, you can fit more people on the bus and thus everyone will be able to get on, but as others have said, more people on a bus means fewer buses, which means that you'd still have people being left behind, so in the end it would just make things worse all around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova RTS 9147 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #31 Posted April 13, 2011 The thing that checkmate keeps assuming is that NO ONE gets to sit down during rush hour and that is so not true. When I took the ferry coming home, I always had a seat on the bus unless I chose not to sit and let someone sit. He talks as if the people that do get seats during rush hour don't exist. I'm telling you, if they did that people would be so pissed about having to stand that you can't even imagine. I don't know how to came to the conclusion of trying to justify this, but it just wouldn't fly w/passengers. His thinking is that with the chairs folded up, you can fit more people on the bus and thus everyone will be able to get on, but as others have said, more people on a bus means fewer buses, which means that you'd still have people being left behind, so in the end it would just make things worse all around. I dont know where he lives, but I can say that chances are, if you use a heavy line and you get on in the middle of the line, you're not going to get a seat. That doesnt mean people don't sit. I ride the M9 during rush hour, a line that gets pretty packed between Alphabet City and East Broadway (hell, sometimes beyond). I can tell you that there are people sitting down on that bus. And like I said previously, some of these routes are an hour+. The M15 from South Ferry to the Upper East Side is at least an hour. Imagine if you're getting on an empty bus with no seats, and then more people start crowding on, making the bus even more crowded, and you have to go to the 70s, 80s, or hell the 90s. Thats not going to be a fun ride. And this doesn't even touch the potential safety issues that go along with that. Leaving one B/O to handle 80+ standing people will not fly with anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #32 Posted April 13, 2011 I dont know where he lives, but I can say that chances are, if you use a heavy line and you get on in the middle of the line, you're not going to get a seat. That doesnt mean people don't sit. I ride the M9 during rush hour, a line that gets pretty packed between Alphabet City and East Broadway (hell, sometimes beyond). I can tell you that there are people sitting down on that bus. And like I said previously, some of these routes are an hour+. The M15 from South Ferry to the Upper East Side is at least an hour. Imagine if you're getting on an empty bus with no seats, and then more people start crowding on, making the bus even more crowded, and you have to go to the 70s, 80s, or hell the 90s. Thats not going to be a fun ride. And this doesn't even touch the potential safety issues that go along with that. Leaving one B/O to handle 80+ standing people will not fly with anyone. That also. I think he's assuming that because he usually doesn't get a seat when he gets on that others don't either, which is not the case. It's also a psychological thing IMO. If you get on an empty bus and see all of the seats up when you could be sitting down, I would imagine some people would say f*ck this sh*t, I want to sit down for my $2.25 and they would pull down those chairs if they could, assuming they weren't locked. You would also have more confrontations too because if the seats were locked, people would want the B/O to unlock them, so in sum you'd have more confrontations. Sometimes I have to laugh at checkmate because he thinks that the service should be for free, but at the same time he looks for ways to generate less service, so how do you attract more riders to a system this way? This is one area that we will always disagree on. On a whole, I think that service, be it on the subway, local bus or express bus needs to be better, so you will rarely hear me calling for less service regardless of where it is at. I went to Flushing Queens back some months ago to visit a potential client and I wanted to take the QM4 there, but my colleague isn't a fan of the express buses, so we took the to one of the local buses (Q44) I believe. The bus ride was short, but I couldn't believe how crammed those buses out in Queens get. I mean we were only going maybe 5 minutes, but it was insane. We were packed like sardines and the back was full as well, so I couldn't even imagine what that bus would look like with all of the seats up. :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Share #33 Posted April 13, 2011 Those going short distances won't mind as much, but those riding longer distances or those with ailments will want a seat. Hell some elderly people don't care where the seat is. If they see someone that is younger than them sitting, they'll ask the younger person if they can let them sit there and usually the younger person obliges. I've also seen younger folks volunteer their seats to older folks who wasn't expecting to be given a seat. The point is that it is a bad idea all around. And what happens if there aren't any buses for a long period of time? All you're going to have is people being crankier and more confrontations. You'll have people that will be pissed because they had to wait X amount of minutes for a bus and then they can't even sit down when several of them finally come because the seats are all up. As we've seen w/Select Bus Service, no matter how much info. is put out there, there will still be people that will not read about it and that will be confrontational about the process. On those hot summer days in the city when you're waiting for a local bus forever, there is nothing more relaxing than getting a seat with some air conditioning. People should expect some sort of level of comfort for riding, even at $2.25 and the least they can get is a seat if they really need one. Doing this would be putting the system back and we'd be looking more like a transit system in a 3rd world country where people are packed on like herd. :tdown: Like I said before, let's not give the more "brilliant" ideas to cut service. The thing that got me thinking about this was an aspect of the problem of peaky ridership patterns. The S46 is one of those routes: You'll see crushloaded buses in the peak direction (especially in the AM rush hour, because of all the school kids being factored in), and emptier buses off-peak. Therefore, the MTA is faced with the problem of having to add service, but having to add it during the most expensive time. The only other solution to this problem would be to add artics to these types of routes, but then you have the problem of running empty artics off-peak. So that is the only cost-efficient way I could think of to solve that problem. The fold up seats on subway cars have not and will not be used. That idea permeated from the prior administration and this administration wants no part of it. Therefore forget about no seats on buses. I was on the subway this weekend and saw the fold-up seats. And for further elaborate on Bill's comments, most transportation companies around the country including the are trying to see how they can make commuters' trips MORE comfortable, not less comfortable. That's why they originally started putting those so called "cushioned" seats in, even though they're hard as bricks, but at least they were trying to make things more comfortable. The goal is to make more people want to use public transportation and if people are going to be smashed in like sardines on buses, those who have other alternatives will use those instead. Your idea would do nothing more than push people away from the system in a time where the is trying to make people's commutes easier and better. Of course this is public transportation, but there are certain levels of expectations that must be maintained if the system is going to continue to be used by more and more people, otherwise more and more folks will just resort back to the comfort of their cars. My intention was for the savings to go into service expansions to underserved areas, so I'm sure that for every rider that is turned off by having to stand during rush hour, there will be 2 or 3 attracted by a service expansion. So your answer to my original question was a yes....If that's the case, then I have to disagree w/ that state of mind/thinking... I would rather have more buses running with seats on them... Than less buses running with folded seats (which equates to no seats in the minds of the general public) in them... More people/bus is one of the (obvious) reasons why the mta decided to purchase articulated buses.... With the exception of the Bx12, M15, and M101, routes that ended up getting artics on 'em, ended up losing service.... ^^ My point: The way MTA deems it, more people/bus = (justification for) less service. Worse, we'd be talking about less service on the 40 footers themselves, if they were to go w/ folded seats throughout the bus or w/e.... ...and the general public don't read destination signage(s)... forget about what's plastered/stickered onto the underbelly of the seating... It's not so much about (only) hitting your head on the ceiling, bro.... I'm sure you've taken a physics course somewhere along the line in your studies, so you'd know that it takes a heavier person a more strength & balance to hold himself onto a moving, higher elevated platform, compared to a platform closer to the ground.... I shouldn't have to exert anymore energy than what I would normally have to, while commuting on a bus, because someone wants to have more people stand on said buses.... As was said, it's not only the people that take the bus a couple of blocks, or the casual rider him/herself taking buses.... People have some serious commutes on local buses - You as a Staten Islander should know that more than anyone here in NYC.... Yes, people's concern is getting to where they got to go on time.... Thing is (given your idea there) if you have more people standing/crammed onto buses, you're gonna have more buses flagging people too - and that's already happening on certain (heavier) routes (of course, this B35 is one of them).... You don't want that happening on the average route that has moderate ridership w/ seated passengers @ its current headways... You'd only be compounding the problem by having an increased amt. of people standing up on buses running on higher headways.... Foresight is what you're lacking w/ this.... You can't stand on a bus that never shows up. See my comments above. The thing that checkmate keeps assuming is that NO ONE gets to sit down during rush hour and that is so not true. Staten Island is unique in that most of the routes from the ferry have a certain pattern in terms of people getting on and off that is different from other lines that don't go to the ferry or even other lines in other boroughs. When I took the ferry coming home, I always had a seat on the bus unless I chose not to sit and let someone else sit. A line like the (S53) will have certain stops where the bus will empty out a bit and then more folks may get on (i.e. Hylan Blvd). This is certainly the case with buses in other boroughs as well. He talks as if the people that do get seats during rush hour don't exist. I'm telling you, if they did that people would be so pissed about having to stand that you can't even imagine. I don't know how he came to the conclusion of trying to justify this, but it just wouldn't fly w/passengers. His thinking is that with the chairs folded up, you can fit more people on the bus and thus everyone will be able to get on, but as others have said, more people on a bus means fewer buses, which means that you'd still have people being left behind, so in the end it would just make things worse all around. Obviously, if nobody got a seat, we wouldn't be having this discussion. That also. I think he's assuming that because he usually doesn't get a seat when he gets on that others don't either, which is not the case. It's also a psychological thing IMO. If you get on an empty bus and see all of the seats up when you could be sitting down, I would imagine some people would say f*ck this sh*t, I want to sit down for my $2.25 and they would pull down those chairs if they could, assuming they weren't locked. You would also have more confrontations too because if the seats were locked, people would want the B/O to unlock them, so in sum you'd have more confrontations. Sometimes I have to laugh at checkmate because he thinks that the service should be for free, but at the same time he looks for ways to generate less service, so how do you attract more riders to a system this way? This is one area that we will always disagree on. On a whole, I think that service, be it on the subway, local bus or express bus needs to be better, so you will rarely hear me calling for less service regardless of where it is at. I went to Flushing Queens back some months ago to visit a potential client and I wanted to take the QM4 there, but my colleague isn't a fan of the express buses, so we took the to one of the local buses (Q44) I believe. The bus ride was short, but I couldn't believe how crammed those buses out in Queens get. I mean we were only going maybe 5 minutes, but it was insane. We were packed like sardines and the back was full as well, so I couldn't even imagine what that bus would look like with all of the seats up. :eek: I'm looking at it from a cost-efficiency standpoint (see my comments about peaky ridership patterns above), considering the MTA's financial position. I'm one of the few that would take reduced service (as long as it isn't to a ridiculous extent) over fare hikes. And, like I said, I think it would be better to redistribute the resources to service expansions that are sorely needed. And if the service was completely funded by an outside revenue source (taxes, congestion pricing, etc), those problems would be very much lessened. A lot of the ridership generated by free transit would occur off-peak, reducing those problems peaky ridership patterns, and the increased ridership in general will fill these buses and make it hard to justify any service reductions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #34 Posted April 13, 2011 I was on the subway this weekend and saw the fold-up seats. Those "fold-up" seats you saw are there so that when folks come on the train who are in wheelchairs, they have somewhere to park the wheelchair, thus keeping them out of the aisle, etc., but those are there for handicap purposes only. My intention was for the savings to go into service expansions to underserved areas, so I'm sure that for every rider that is turned off by having to stand during rush hour, there will be 2 or 3 attracted by a service expansion. I highly doubt that. I challenge you to go out and do a survey like FamousNYLover does and see what people say. I'm sure many of them would wonder why can't they get both... More service and be able to sit down like normal human beings during rush hour instead of having to stand even if they are the first ones on the bus after working 8+ hours. If you think it's okay, you should experiment with it this summer. Take the limited stop bus or local bus to the ferry, stand on the bus, the ferry and the subway both coming and going and see how you feel. Like I said, the would look to CUT not add. Obviously, if nobody got a seat, we wouldn't be having this discussion. That's kind of the whole point. For the most part if there is a seat people want to sit in it. If the saw that they could get away with this during rush hour, what would stop them from doing it at all times?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted April 13, 2011 Author Share #35 Posted April 13, 2011 Those "fold-up" seats you saw are there so that when folks come on the train who are in wheelchairs, they have somewhere to park the wheelchair, thus keeping them out of the aisle, etc., but those are there for handicap purposes only. I highly doubt that. I challenge you to go out and do a survey like FamousNYLover does and see what people say. I'm sure many of them would wonder why can't they get both... More service and be able to sit down like normal human beings during rush hour instead of having to stand even if they are the first ones on the bus after working 8+ hours. If you think it's okay, you should experiment with it this summer. Take the limited stop bus or local bus to the ferry, stand on the bus, the ferry and the subway both coming and going and see how you feel. Like I said, the would look to CUT not add. That's kind of the whole point. For the most part if there is a seat people want to sit in it. If the saw that they could get away with this during rush hour, what would stop them from doing it at all times?? 1) Did they have a trial with it, though? 2) I can get the riders on the bus, but how could I estimate the number of potential passengers that would ride a service if it were introduced? I don't plan on ringing doorbells across my neighborhood asking if riders would use the S93 if it were extended further westward. 3) I could probably do that in real life, considering the fact that I'm young. In any case, I think that would be an unfair comparison. Do the vast majority of bus riders in the city spend 30 minutes on a bus and 40 minutes on the subway to get to their destination? People might spend 70 minutes (or more) commuting, but I'm sure most of those commutes involve spending more time on the subway than local bus. The whole point of throwing this idea out was to figure out a way of solving the problem I described above. Maybe as a compromise, there could be more seating in the back to compensate for seats being folded up in the front (or buses could have more bench seating than window seating) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 13, 2011 Share #36 Posted April 13, 2011 1) Did they have a trial with it, though? 2) I can get the riders on the bus, but how could I estimate the number of potential passengers that would ride a service if it were introduced? I don't plan on ringing doorbells across my neighborhood asking if riders would use the S93 if it were extended further westward. No, to my knowledge there was never a trial period. See link: http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-08-26/local/27073578_1_subway-cars-subway-riders-nyc-transit The talked about the idea and then decided to can it. The fold up chairs only exist in the corners of certain cars (I believe the middle car, the last car and the first car) or something like that and they only fold up in case wheelchiars come on the trains. They have nothing to do with trying to squeeze more passengers on. They were around when the R142s started rolling out on the line. I still remember when the first car come out too on the line. I was at Times Square I believe. :cool: Regarding the surveying thing, talk w/FamousNY. He does surveys on the buses a lot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted April 14, 2011 Share #37 Posted April 14, 2011 These fold up seats - a whole row of them, not just the ones next to the crew cabs. It was on one R160B set. this set is the only one out there. This was to see how rush hour service would be like if the seats were folded up. The public bitched about the proposal and that's why there probably wasn't a 'trial run'. Those seats are still there because the MTA probably doesn't have the money to change the seats back to what it originally had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 14, 2011 Share #38 Posted April 14, 2011 These fold up seats - a whole row of them, not just the ones next to the crew cabs. It was on one R160B set. this set is the only one out there. This was to see how rush hour service would be like if the seats were folded up. The public bitched about the proposal and that's why there probably wasn't a 'trial run'. Those seats are still there because the MTA probably doesn't have the money to change the seats back to what it originally had. That's my point though. Those seats aren't folded up like the ones in the corner, so even if they have that one in service the seats are only up in the wheelchair areas if at all. I thought I heard somewhere that they were going to stop having those seats in the corners anyway that pop up after someone gets up from them? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q25toJamaica Posted April 15, 2011 Share #39 Posted April 15, 2011 I've been on a few, bus was empty though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trainfan22 Posted April 15, 2011 Share #40 Posted April 15, 2011 As someone who has a almost hour long commute on a local bus, no! Who wants to stand up for that long? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 15, 2011 Share #41 Posted April 15, 2011 I've been on a few, bus was empty though Those don't count! Those are for wheelchair seats on the RTSs! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q25toJamaica Posted April 15, 2011 Share #42 Posted April 15, 2011 Those don't count! Those are for wheelchair seats on the RTSs! Lol I know I just found it interesting that this operator constantly ran buses without putting these down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 15, 2011 Share #43 Posted April 15, 2011 Lol I know I just found it interesting that this operator constantly ran buses without putting these down. That just proves my point to checkmate that B/Os wouldn't worry about putting seats down after rush hour... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted April 15, 2011 Share #44 Posted April 15, 2011 That's my point though. Those seats aren't folded up like the ones in the corner, so even if they have that one in service the seats are only up in the wheelchair areas if at all. I thought I heard somewhere that they were going to stop having those seats in the corners anyway that pop up after someone gets up from them? :confused:Those rows of seats [in that single train] need to be 'locked' to be set in the folded up position. But with that 'test' not going well with the riders, they won't be in the folded position anytime soon. A bunch of the recent R160s don't have those corner seats anymore. But since they only seat 1 and on a 8/10 car train it's a loss of 8 seats total. Sucks for those wanting seats, but overall, probably not a great loss since there's no 'partition'. I wouldn't want to sit there with someone standing above me especially if the train makes a lot of turns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted April 15, 2011 Share #45 Posted April 15, 2011 And for further elaborate on Bill's comments, most transportation companies around the country including the are trying to see how they can make commuters' trips MORE comfortable, not less comfortable. That's why they originally started putting those so called "cushioned" seats in, even though they're hard as bricks, but at least they were trying to make things more comfortable. The goal is to make more people want to use public transportation and if people are going to be smashed in like sardines on buses, those who have other alternatives will use those instead. Your idea would do nothing more than push people away from the system in a time where the is trying to make people's commutes easier and better. Of course this is public transportation, but there are certain levels of expectations that must be maintained if the system is going to continue to be used by more and more people, otherwise more and more folks will just resort back to the comfort of their cars. On the cushioned seats though---as buses are going for repainting, the upholstered seats are coming out, being replaced with hard seats. No, to my knowledge there was never a trial period. See link:http://articles.nydailynews.com/2010-08-26/local/27073578_1_subway-cars-subway-riders-nyc-transit The talked about the idea and then decided to can it. The fold up chairs only exist in the corners of certain cars (I believe the middle car, the last car and the first car) or something like that and they only fold up in case wheelchiars come on the trains. They have nothing to do with trying to squeeze more passengers on. They were around when the R142s started rolling out on the line. I still remember when the first car come out too on the line. I was at Times Square I believe. :cool: Regarding the surveying thing, talk w/FamousNY. He does surveys on the buses a lot. It was cars 8714, 8716, 8719, and 8721 for the B division one. Now, buses for SBS service, IMO, should be reseated so that all of the seats have their backs to the windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova RTS 9147 Posted April 15, 2011 Share #46 Posted April 15, 2011 I've been on a few, bus was empty though Some drivers fold the seats up before starting a run if they feel/know they're getting a disabled person. My regular on the M9 does that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted April 15, 2011 Share #47 Posted April 15, 2011 im happy you mentioned this, since a lot of people don't remember the artic fiasco from 10 years ago. People don't remember that when these larger capacity buses came into service, a lot of customers lost service (except for the buses you mentioned. Hell, M101 didn't really improve until a few years ago) on their lines. I remember people literally screaming at their bus drivers when the M23 switched from RTS to Artic, and service being cut by 1/3rd. For the sake of the argument, lets say some routes get seatless buses (which is also stupid since you're assuming people who have long commutes won't bitch and moan about having to stand for that extra time before/after a long day work), who's to say the MTA won't simply cut service even more to pack in these cattle buses?! I know if I was trying to fix a budget and I see that some bus routes got this extra capacity, you're damn right I'm going to cut that corner and put even more people on that bus. The idea, while noble in its intent, is very shortsighted. Some of you guys fails to realize that you can only pack so many people into a bus. Each coach has a weight/passenger limit for both safety, and operating reasons. Aside from that, it's never going to happen. Personally, I have pulled down seats plenty of times when they were no longer in use by wheelchair passengers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Up Front Posted April 15, 2011 Share #48 Posted April 15, 2011 And there's nothing wrong with pulling the wheelchair seats back down after a passenger on a wheelchair has gotten off, or the bus operator has forgotten. As long as the B/O says not to pull them down or someone else on a wheelchair doesn't get on, you can sit on them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted April 15, 2011 Share #49 Posted April 15, 2011 On the cushioned seats though---as buses are going for repainting, the upholstered seats are coming out, being replaced with hard seats. It was cars 8714, 8716, 8719, and 8721 for the B division one. Now, buses for SBS service, IMO, should be reseated so that all of the seats have their backs to the windows. I know they had them on a few cars, but what I never heard of is it the trains were actually put into service with the seats locked and up?? I had heard that they would order cars like this and test it out and then I heard nothing until the idea was scrapped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted April 17, 2011 Share #50 Posted April 17, 2011 I know they had them on a few cars, but what I never heard of is it the trains were actually put into service with the seats locked and up?? I had heard that they would order cars like this and test it out and then I heard nothing until the idea was scrapped. Before the plan could be put into effect, leadership at the top changed. This was Lee Sander's idea, of which Jay Walder wanted no part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.