qjtransitmaster Posted July 22, 2011 Share #26 Posted July 22, 2011 The BXM7B doesn't exist anymore, so I don't know why you're bringing it up for. Second, if you read my post, I also stated that I see no point in having two runs each way. Either give them more express bus service or let a private provider give them express bus service. Boy are you off base. The BXM7 is certainly a necessity for folks in Co-op City, hence why it is well used. You really don't know what youre talking about. And again the BXM7B does NOT exist anymore. I did NOT suggest touching the BXM7!!!!!!!!!! I know it's importance well and ppl know that the BX29 to BXM7 is faster than BXM7A cause BXM7A makes more stops after pelham bay than BXM7. The city island demand is not high enough to warrant direct express bus service if that was true then BXM7B would have been enhanced. By the way the BXM7B was really rerouted through pelham bay area then renumbered as 7A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BusOperator3319 Posted July 22, 2011 Share #27 Posted July 22, 2011 The B103. While the route would be fairly long, extending at least some trips would make it more accessible, and have the added bonus of serving Starrett City. Seeing the thread title, I thought the B25 change would be a service cut. Guess the MTA wouldn't put that outright in their report, would they? @Q101 E Midtown Maybe the MTA will send the Q41/Q112 there in the future? The Q37 I'm thinking is the test of how service goes. Kinda like how as, Shortline Bus stated, the B83 and Q8 were latecomers to Gateway Mall. The B103 needs to be relabeled to be in line with the rest of the Borough single or double digit route numbers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 22, 2011 Share #28 Posted July 22, 2011 And why is that??? They have no direct access to a subway, so why shouldn't they have more express bus service?? Aside from that having two runs a day is rather pointless. Either give them adequate express bus service or let a private provider come in and do the job. Then let a private provider supply them direct service to manhattan.... I wouldn't really consider 15 minute service frequent, but the ride to connect to the or BxM7A isn't that long. heh... Considering how bad service used to be out there, it's a hell of an improvement.... Point is there should a bus connection at Rockaway Blvd for both branches of the line. Why not the (Q41), which is closer to the soon to be opened casino than the (Q112)? It could run on Rockaway Blvd from 111 St to Rockaway Blvd Station. Wasn't thinkin about the Q41; that could work also... but the reason I thought up the 112 initially, was due to its terminal setup over there just short of woodhaven (the rockaway blvd connection).... also I was thinkin of the Q2 & Q110 and how they terminate inside belmont when they do.... The Q37 could use the added ridership though... that's why I have mixed feelings about it... let's see how it goes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Of RedBirds Posted July 22, 2011 Share #29 Posted July 22, 2011 BxM7A to BxM8QM2A to QM20 B25 and Q37 travel path change http://www.mta.info/mta/news/books/pdf/110725_1115_BUS.pdf Wait BxM8 I Take that bus wow such a shocker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted July 22, 2011 Share #30 Posted July 22, 2011 Wait BxM8 I Take that bus wow such a shocker. You mean BX8... This is the BXM8... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted July 23, 2011 Share #31 Posted July 23, 2011 DUDE THEY DO NOT NEED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It's called use bx29 then switch to BXM7 done. The BX29 is that short it's not that serious. It's not like they have to use the local bus forever the ridership DOESN'T WARRANT IT!!!!!!! It's the same reason why NJT canceled express lines to newark decades ago other options exist. The BXM7B is useless and unnecessary those 2 runs aren't needed If it were me that line will be GONE completely!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and other redundant lines. If some additional trips are run and lined up with the Bx29, that might work (don't have them run right behind the Bx29. I don't know how the current setup is, though). It's only two trips: I don't see what would really be saved by eliminating them. When the BxM7B had the non-stop section, the cost per passenger was about $13, which isn't too high. Now that they are simply extended BxM7A runs, the cost to run to City Island is probably even less. DUDE the BXM7 and 7B are not even close to the X11 and x10!!!!!!!!! The X10 is extremely crowded it can't handle the X11 ppl the X10 and BXM7 are not even close in terms of ridership hence why X11 runs while BXM7B = USELESS!!!!!!! SI has NO alternatives. Bronx does!!!!!!!!!!! the S92 is too full to take over for X11. Plus the X22/19 have a stop at victory blvd The S92 is nowhere near full in this area. If a bus can manage a seated load, that's an accomplishment (maybe during school hours, it might have some standees, but that's about it). Sometimes it gets crowded near St. George, but the express bus riders would only have to ride to Richmond Avenue. NOTE: I'm not saying to cut the X11 or anything. Just mentioning some facts. The express trips there need to get axed!!!!!!!!! seriously the BXM7 is faster than the BXM7A so using BX29 to BXM7 if timed is faster than BXM7a city island trips which really aren't nessesary I don't see how transferring between buses can make the trip faster. Maybe I could see it if some BxM7s had an extra stop at Pelham Bay Park before going non-stop, but otherwise, it's definitely not faster. Even so, those folks use the X17 or X10 during the off peak which leaves them by Victory & Richmond. They can drive or walk from there or whatever. Or take the S62 (I think the X10 and S62 are timed to a certain extent) The B103 needs to be relabeled to be in line with the rest of the Borough single or double digit route numbers I don't see the purpose of that. Maybe if the whole borough's system was renumbered based on the service areas, I could see it, but otherwise, just leave it as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SIR North Shore Posted July 23, 2011 Share #32 Posted July 23, 2011 The Q37 extension is good but they're going to need a lot more access than that eventually. Hopefully the casino opening will force the MTA to re-draw more lines in SE Queens area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted July 23, 2011 Share #33 Posted July 23, 2011 Don't really care for the BxM7A and QM2A renumbering and the (B25) reroute. However, the (Q37) being taken off 116 St will do wonders. I'm kind of on the fence about it backtracking to serve Aqueduct. I would have the (Q7) stop inside the loop as well. I wouldn't cut the (Q112) short at Aqueduct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 23, 2011 Share #34 Posted July 23, 2011 Don't really care for the BxM7A and QM2A renumbering and the reroute. However, the being taken off 116 St will do wonders. I'm kind of on the fence about it backtracking to serve Aqueduct. I would have the stop inside the loop as well. I wouldn't cut the short at Aqueduct I wouldn't cut it (112) short either; it would be an extension eastward on rockaway blvd... instead of makin that right on rockaway/99th to eventually terminate, it would make a left, and continue on down to Aqueduct to terminate.... as for the Q7, they should send it inside there.. but the excuse will be: 'it already travels on rockaway blvd'..... I don't see how transferring between buses can make the trip faster. Maybe I could see it if some BxM7s had an extra stop at Pelham Bay Park before going non-stop, but otherwise, it's definitely not faster. I don't see the purpose of that. Maybe if the whole borough's system was renumbered based on the service areas, I could see it, but otherwise, just leave it as is. 1) Much as I don't wanna give this guy any props at all, I have to agree w/ him regarding the BxM7 being faster than the 7a... whether if there's anyone that does take the 29 a little further out for the BxM7 (compared to the ones that gun for the 7a), I'm not sure how often that scenario occurs.... but it isn't out of the question as much as you'd might think.... 2) I care more about where a route serves than the numbering of it... I don't get too caught up in that.... Agreed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAzumah Posted July 23, 2011 Share #35 Posted July 23, 2011 And why is that??? They have no direct access to a subway, so why shouldn't they have more express bus service?? Aside from that having two runs a day is rather pointless. Either give them adequate express bus service or let a private provider come in and do the job. The private sector would probably run two trips a day in each direction as well unless they used smaller equipment or ran a tour schedule there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q101viaSteinway Posted July 23, 2011 Author Share #36 Posted July 23, 2011 The private sector would probably run two trips a day in each direction as well unless they used smaller equipment or ran a tour schedule there. Why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 23, 2011 Share #37 Posted July 23, 2011 The Q37 extension is good but they're going to need a lot more access than that eventually. Hopefully the casino opening will force the MTA to re-draw more lines in SE Queens area. Actually starting with the (Q37) extension as soon as the casino opens is a good plan by bus. If it becomes even as close to the success of the Empire City Casino/Yonkers Raceway, then next year in '12 we can discuss adding as many as '2' or '3' other bus routes in the SE Queens area to serve it. If expanded again either the "Q41" or "Q112' or both would make the mose sense next. Thus it would provide a bus link(s) to the Rockaway Blvd station and Downtown Jamaica which connects to almost all of the rest of Queens via local buses and the LIRR. And if i am the owners of the casino i would pay the for a possible (Q41) and (Q112) extension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted July 23, 2011 Share #38 Posted July 23, 2011 Why Because there isn't that much demand. The BxM7B cost over $13 per passenger to operate, and I doubt a private company could reduce the costs (significantly) more than that. Actually starting with the (Q37) extension as soon as the casino opens is a good plan by bus. If it becomes even as close to the success of the Empire City Casino/Yonkers Raceway, then next year in '12 we can discuss adding as many as '2' or '3' other bus routes in the SE Queens area to serve it. If expanded again either the "Q41" or "Q112' or both would make the mose sense next. Thus it would provide a bus link(s) to the Rockaway Blvd station and Downtown Jamaica which connects to almost all of the rest of Queens via local buses and the LIRR. And if i am the owners of the casino i would pay the for a possible (Q41) and (Q112) extension. The thing about the Q37 reroute is that it increases the travel time for passengers east of the casino. Hopefully, the riders generated from this (as well as the ones who would've walked to the Q37, and save themselves a few minutes walking) balance out the riders whose trips would be made longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak7 Posted July 23, 2011 Share #39 Posted July 23, 2011 The thing about the Q37 reroute is that it increases the travel time for passengers east of the casino. Hopefully, the riders generated from this (as well as the ones who would've walked to the Q37, and save themselves a few minutes walking) balance out the riders whose trips would be made longer. That's the thing about mid-route diversions. They're not really that common on bus routes in high-density areas, usually only rural/exurban areas like Rockland and Suffolk. Thankfully the portion of the Q37 south of the Racetrack isn't that long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q101viaSteinway Posted July 23, 2011 Author Share #40 Posted July 23, 2011 Because there isn't that much demand. The BxM7B cost over $13 per passenger to operate, and I doubt a private company could reduce the costs (significantly) more than that. Well no union and 13 per hour wage you could reduce cost. Give City Island people choice, especially with weekends on City Island Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shortline Bus Posted July 23, 2011 Share #41 Posted July 23, 2011 Well no union and 13 per hour wage you could reduce cost. Give City Island people choice, especially with weekends on City Island Q101 got to reply with this. If extra monies were available to the beefing up soon to be BXM8 to City Island is the top need. There other express and or local bus routes *cough "BX23*cough* for instance that need more service alot more. With that said on summer weekends only maybe extend 1-2 trips in each direction on the BXM8 to/from City Island. Other than that, service is fine now with couple of trips rush hours extended out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cotb16 Posted July 23, 2011 Share #42 Posted July 23, 2011 Why not the (Q41), which is closer to the soon to be opened casino than the (Q112)? It could run on Rockaway Blvd from 111 St to Rockaway Blvd Station. I think it's because the Q37 connects to more lines than the , such as the and at Union turnpike, which would allow those from other parts of Queens (like Fresh Meadows, Jackson Heights, and Astoria) to reach the Casino, and the at Jamaica Av, which would allow a few guys from Brooklyn (like Williamsburg, Bushwick, and Cypress Hills) to reach the Casino. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted July 23, 2011 Share #43 Posted July 23, 2011 I wouldn't cut it (112) short either; it would be an extension eastward on rockaway blvd...instead of makin that right on rockaway/99th to eventually terminate, it would make a left, and continue on down to Aqueduct to terminate.... as for the Q7, they should send it inside there.. but the excuse will be: 'it already travels on rockaway blvd'..... I don't know, I would still put the (Q112) like right in front of the Rockaway Blvd station Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 23, 2011 Share #44 Posted July 23, 2011 That's the thing about mid-route diversions. They're not really that common on bus routes in high-density areas, usually only rural/exurban areas like Rockland and Suffolk. Thankfully the portion of the Q37 south of the Racetrack isn't that long. I have to be honest I HATE mid route diversions NONE make any sense period ever. If anything with Q37 a portion will have to be sacrificed to get the bus in the casino!!!!!!!!!!! Everytime I look at suffolk I get disgusted by the mid rte diversions those same diversions BURNED MY ASS with the unreliability. I think all mid rte diversions should get axed and instead let another line do that!!!!!!!!! Off topic in suffolk the S66 needs to ditch mastic beach and let S71 serve it instead!!!!!!! No one with a car used buses that backtrack!!!!!!!!!!!!! Most of the LI plans I made eliminate mid rte diversions completely without hurting riders. I missed a connection and had to wait an hour!!!!!!!!! Mid rte diversions are disgusting period!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 23, 2011 Share #45 Posted July 23, 2011 That's the thing about mid-route diversions. They're not really that common on bus routes in high-density areas, usually only rural/exurban areas like Rockland and Suffolk. Thankfully the portion of the Q37 south of the Racetrack isn't that long. There is a way to counter the diversion reroute Q37 to end at the racetrack then transfer it's S ozone park 135th ave segment to Q40 extend Q40 to aquaduct to replace Q37's 135th ave service eliminating the need for Q37 to backtrack eliminating the extra travel time added as long as transfers are timed at their meeting point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 23, 2011 Share #46 Posted July 23, 2011 I think it's because the Q37 connects to more lines than the , such as the and at Union turnpike, which would allow those from other parts of Queens (like Fresh Meadows, Jackson Heights, and Astoria) to reach the Casino, and the at Jamaica Av, which would allow a few guys from Brooklyn (like Williamsburg, Bushwick, and Cypress Hills) to reach the Casino. I think they chose the 37 (over the 41, at least... whose route is just as proximate to aqueduct) to help boost the ridership on that route, and quite frankly, the areas it passes through as well.... I don't know, I would still put the (Q112) like right in front of the Rockaway Blvd station That's the thing w/ the Q112 now... it turns off 99th onto rockaway blvd & ends well short of woodhaven, terminating at the other end of the subway station.... My thinking is, since it already serves the b/w lefferts & 104th (directly), Ozone park bound 112's may as well make that same turn off 99th to get to rockaway blvd, but instead head towards the aqueduct instead to terminate..... The Jamaica bound buses will start at aqueduct, and would continue across rockaway blvd & turn off exactly where the current jamaica bound 112's do, picking up those pax @ the exact same spot... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amtrak7 Posted July 23, 2011 Share #47 Posted July 23, 2011 There is a way to counter the diversion reroute Q37 to end at the racetrack then transfer it's S ozone park 135th ave segment to Q40 extend Q40 to aquaduct to replace Q37's 135th ave service eliminating the need for Q37 to backtrack eliminating the extra travel time added as long as transfers are timed at their meeting point Good idea, but if service to the subway is all that's needed how about this? -Discontinue Q10 Rock Bl branch -Terminate Q37 at the Racetrack -Extend Q9: Lincoln St -> Rockaway Bl -> 130 St -> 135 Av -> current Q37 route to Racetrack. Rockaway Bl passengers take Q7 and transfer. 135 Av passengers get either a direct option to Jamaica or change at Racetrack for service to 111 St and Kew Gardens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 23, 2011 Share #48 Posted July 23, 2011 Good idea, but if service to the subway is all that's needed how about this? -Discontinue Q10 Rock Bl branch -Terminate Q37 at the Racetrack -Extend Q9: Lincoln St -> Rockaway Bl -> 130 St -> 135 Av -> current Q37 route to Racetrack. Rockaway Bl passengers take Q7 and transfer. 135 Av passengers get either a direct option to Jamaica or change at Racetrack for service to 111 St and Kew Gardens. That's another way to do it. But I chose Q40 to create a full cross rte that's why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 23, 2011 Share #49 Posted July 23, 2011 lol... 1) You can't extend the Q40 along 135th... it's cut off by the Van Wyck.... 2) The Q37 down in S. Ozone park is fine as is.... you would be changing those residents' commutes for no real reason if you were to send Q40's on the other side of Van Wyck... Just for the racetrack/casino? I mean, to sit there & suggest that, only shows me that conclusions are being made just by looking at a bus map.... You cut the 37 back to aqueduct & extend 40's to aqueduct.... and Q10's would even be more crushloaded than they currently are... I guarantee it. 3) the Q9 I wouldn't bother sending that to aqueduct in any capacity... I'd send it to AIRTrain Lefferts blvd instead [rockaway blvd, then turn on lefferts], along the portion where the Q10 LTD's operate along.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q101viaSteinway Posted July 24, 2011 Author Share #50 Posted July 24, 2011 Send QM18 there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.