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.
Sign in to follow this  
The Real

Manhattan Added: Comprehensive MTA Regional Bus Operations Destination Sign Code List

Recommended Posts

http://www.ttmg.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=MTA_Regional_Bus_Destination_Sign_Codes

 

I will continue to add the remaining codes in this order:

Staten Island

Subway Shuttles

LIRR Shuttles

Miscellaneous

Queens

 

After the NYCB Queens is installed, then I will go back and update MTAB Queens.

 

I will not be inputting any Long Island codes. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Great to see, fantastic resource just like the rest of the wiki.

 

General question though, does anybody have the code for M5-Greenwich Village? I've seen it a few times recently on M5s turning around at Houston Street and it's one of those flawed codes, the signs flash for about a second and then switch, also reminds me of the old M5.

 

Its on the code sheet dude, Manhattan 8055

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Most of the better LI codes were for the cut routes. I have seen N47s signed up as "East Meadow Loop," though...

 

How are the subway shuttles signed?

 

Subway shuttles are signed in the 9000s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks...but question: Why does the MTA not put all of the codes into the buses (i.e., all MTA Bus codes in NYCT buses and vice versa)?

(MTA) Bus and NYCT are two different entities. They have to reprogrammed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to go O/T but if (or when) the two brands get merged to form MTA Regional Bus would the MTAB express routes get renumbered with the 'X' prefix? (e.g. BxM1 becomes X71, BM5 becomes X35, etc.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks...but question: Why does the MTA not put all of the codes into the buses (i.e., all MTA Bus codes in NYCT buses and vice versa)?

 

It's doable but the flash chip of the ODK can't hold them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That'd be a problem with routes that share numbers... What'd we do if there was NYCT's X1 and say the BM1 was turned into another X1 when the merger goes down? Since they're two different routes, it's impossible to use the letter suffix (X1a, for example).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That'd be a problem with routes that share numbers... What'd we do if there was NYCT's X1 and say the BM1 was turned into another X1 when the merger goes down? Since they're two different routes, it's impossible to use the letter suffix (X1a, for example).

 

It could be like the QM2A renumber to the QM20. Just use up as much empty unused routes as possible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That'd be a problem with routes that share numbers... What'd we do if there was NYCT's X1 and say the BM1 was turned into another X1 when the merger goes down? Since they're two different routes, it's impossible to use the letter suffix (X1a, for example).
I favored the consultant's idea to just expand the DOT-styled borough letter combination to the whole system. So X1 would become SM1; though that sounds funny, because there were no privates using SM like the other three outer boroughs had and even the Atlantic express routes used the X. So you could keep the X just for Staten Island. (Since those routes are more significant to the borough anyway). The Manhattan express routes would also keep the X.

 

In the other boroughs, I don't think there would be a conflict, as the DOT numbers are generally low, while the X numbers are high as the low X numbers are all in Staten Island; so the X's in those boroughs could easily be changed into "-M" combinations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I favored the consultant's idea to just expand the DOT-styled borough letter combination to the whole system. So X1 would become SM1; though that sounds funny, because there were no privates using SM like the other three outer boroughs had and even the Atlantic express routes used the X. So you could keep the X just for Staten Island. (Since those routes are more significant to the borough anyway). The Manhattan express routes would also keep the X.

 

In the other boroughs, I don't think there would be a conflict, as the DOT numbers are generally low, while the X numbers are high as the low X numbers are all in Staten Island; so the X's in those boroughs could easily be changed into "-M" combinations.

 

Or we could revert to the old system:

X27 -> B27X

 

However, the only issue would be the melding in the DOT Private express routes. I would just say screw it and put the BM, BxM and QM routes into the X System like this:

 

BM1 -> NEW X32

BM2 -> NEW X33

BM3 -> NEW X34

BM4 -> NEW X35

BM5 -> NEW X36

 

BxM1 -> X82

BxM2 -> NEW X83

BxM3 -> NEW X84

BxM4 -> NEW X85

BxM6 -> NEW X86

BxM7 -> NEW X87

BxM8 -> NEW X88

BxM9 -> NEW X89

BxM10 -> NEW X90

BxM11 -> NEW X91

BxM18 -> NEW X92

 

QM1 -> NEW X50

QM2 -> NEW X51

QM3 -> NEW X52

QM4 -> NEW X53

QM5 -> NEW X54

QM6 -> NEW X55

QM7 -> NEW X56

QM8 -> NEW X57

QM10 -> NEW X58

QM11 -> NEW X59

QM12 -> NEW X60

QM15 -> NEW X61

QM16 -> NEW X62

QM17 -> NEW X65

QM18 -> NEW X66

QM20 -> NEW X67

QM21 -> NEW X69

QM24 -> NEW X70

QM25 -> NEW X71

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh... As an express bus rider I hate the idea... I like my BM1, BM3, BM4, BxM1, BxM2, X1, X2, X9, X17J, X30, X37 and so on just the way they are. :( Sorry to rattle so many off, but those are some of my favourite lines to ride on or have destination signs for. I mean I can't imagine taking the BxM2 to Riverdale and it being something else. :eek: The funny thing is that most folks don't say "BM3" when referring to them. We just say, "Hey did the "3" come yet?", although some folks do say "BM3". For the "X"s I usually hear or say 1X, X1 or the 1. :cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ugh... As an express bus rider I hate the idea... I like my BM1, BM3, BM4, BxM1, BxM2, X1, X2, X9, X17J, X30, X37 and so on just the way they are. :( Sorry to rattle so many off, but those are some of my favourite lines to ride on or have destination signs for. I mean I can't imagine taking the BxM2 to Riverdale and it being something else. :eek: The funny thing is that most folks don't say "BM3" when referring to them. We just say, "Hey did the "3" come yet?", although some folks do say "BM3". For the "X"s I usually hear or say 1X, X1 or the 1. :cool:

 

 

Well I honestly believe when the day comes that its all one, the BM/QM/BxM days will be OVER and it will be all "X"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well I honestly believe when the day comes that its all one, the BM/QM/BxM days will be OVER and it will be all "X"

 

You think the (MTA) thinks that this will better streamline things? lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You think the (MTA) thinks that this will better streamline things? lol

 

You LOL, but the renumbering to the "X" system was something that was already in the plans when the Private take over occurred. It was just placed on the backburner, for now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You LOL, but the renumbering to the "X" system was something that was already in the plans when the Private take over occurred. It was just placed on the backburner, for now...

 

Yeah, I lol because I don't see why it is so necessary. What exactly is wrong with the way things are now? I mean what do they expect to gain by changing the BMs to Xs?? :confused: I don't see this making any difference in terms of ridership increases, so it seems like a waste of time to me. If anything folks would be more confused for a while.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah, I lol because I don't see why it is so necessary. What exactly is wrong with the way things are now? I mean what do they expect to gain by changing the BMs to Xs?? :confused: I don't see this making any difference in terms of ridership increases, so it seems like a waste of time to me. If anything folks would be more confused for a while.

 

I'm going to explain to you one of the varying reasons why....

 

As RBO takes effect and everything becomes one. The biggest hurdle the MTA will face will be Destination Sign programming. The destination sign's brain can only handle so many readings. Omitting something as trivial as a BM and turning it into an X could open up so much more memory in the signs programming. This is why you have things separated now as it is, the MTAB Program and the NYCB Program can not be placed into one single program as it will not fit. The biggest problem with bus movements is the need to keep reflashing signs as buses are moved between the two entities.

 

Think about it, use the left side of your brain just for a minute for me. Let's say MTA Regional Bus is in full swing, Bus #8080 Leaves Queens Village for Eastchester, and because the sign program is separated instead of having the bus ready to go for the next morning OR even that day, the bus has to be sidelined to be reflashed with another set of readings, BUT THEN, Eastchester looses the bus 4 days later back to Queens Village, NOW that sign has to be reflashed again and guess what, they aren't that quick to reflash stuff.

 

NOW...with a streamlined route system, with streamlined readings where EVERY reading is in the bus. 8080 would've been from QV to EC to QV without the loss a valuable day of service because it didn't have the right sign program (MIND YOU that is tied into the farebox programming for the operator).

 

So you see, operationally, it makes all the sense in the world have the signs all together, but we can't do it if we don't have the space....which is taken up by several signs that are using 1-2 extra characters that could be used in another form or fashion.

 

And before you jump up and say how does one measly character matter, it does when the character is bigger than the dest readings themselves, that 1 larger character omitted could easily make way for 1-2 more full readings in terms of use of memory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well said Trevor! Besides, I'm sure when the time comes for MTA Regional Bus to be fully operational people would definitely be warned about the new bus route renumberings well ahead of time so there will be little confusion as possible...oh wait, I forgot people can be ignorant and don't read...oh well, let 'em wait five hours for a BM3 while X34s that essentially ARE the BM3 are going to the same place that they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That'd be a problem with routes that share numbers... What'd we do if there was NYCT's X1 and say the BM1 was turned into another X1 when the merger goes down? Since they're two different routes, it's impossible to use the letter suffix (X1a, for example).

 

The BM routes should be renumbered...I would also say that some SI routes would have to be renumbered---such as X42 to X13 and X31 to X16.

 

I would have the routes work as follows:

X1-X25: SI (X30, X31, and X42 would be renumbered to X16, X20, and X13, respectively; X17A to X18)

X26-X39: Brooklyn

X40-X59: Bronx

X60-X89: Bronx

X90-X99: Special Event

Also, I would change the M15 SBS and Bx12 SBS to read only 15 SELECT - (last stop) and 12 SELECT - (last stop)

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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