qjtransitmaster Posted October 2, 2013 Share #951 Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) I personally think they should be limited service instead of express and expand service to at least every 30 minutes: M-F 6a-11p SAT 7a-9p SUN 8a-8p .Every thing other than that is fantastic.BTW Id call them the S49 LTD(your X50) and S50LTD(your X51) Ok why did I not get the same response I've been suggesting this for the longest not as new routes but as a restructuring of 2 weak lines into strong useful routes. However my version of serving Raritan center was via an NJT through route via Richmond ave and Richmond parkway. While MTA route S89 loses it's southern part and serves the drumgoole and ends at the bricktown mall which becomes a transfer point. Edited October 2, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 2, 2013 Share #952 Posted October 2, 2013 (edited) How about a S99 along victory and forest into NWA. Frequency weekdays: Rush: 2 per ferry. Middays: 15 Eve 20 Weekend Rush(NOONPM) 15 weekend AM/Eve 30 And a shuttle from bayyone to forest av stopping at innis st (S89 shortened) -40-20 40-20-20-40 40-20-20-40 Along with the LTD's, we will have served all 3 bridges Was discussed before. Hint NJT 10 I believe someone other than me suggested it. I would have took it a step further and have it go down south ave to WSE to bricktown mall and back through middlesex absorbing an 8xx route it would become a 3xx series line with 301 or 311 designation as a SI through-route at rush replacing 81x as a phase 3 implementation back I admit I haven't talked much about my true NJT plans and how they relate to SI. In NJT phase 1 some NJT lines in Hudson become pure LTD to speed em up enough to extend to middlesex via SI with 3 or less stops. Want me to tell you more? I like the S99 idea though it's interesting. I have mixed feelings about this, and I never post here. I think both routes should be operated by the . While I have no problem with any of those other P/O's doing it, they've got a lot on their hands right now. Especially Academy with them running interstate service and operation NJ Transit's Middlesex County 800s. If anything you should have the MTA do this because 1) It's oriented towards SI more than it is NJ, 2) MTA has the buses to spare. Plus, it'd be pretty cool to see some express buses stopping in NJ. You and me both strangely enough. Edited October 2, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaTransitMan4608 Posted October 5, 2013 Share #953 Posted October 5, 2013 Looks like QJ's wish may come true if Liedy has his way. http://www.silive.com/news/index.ssf/2013/09/dem_bp_candidate_liedy_extend.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted October 5, 2013 Share #954 Posted October 5, 2013 Was discussed before. Hint NJT 10 I believe someone other than me suggested it. I would have took it a step further and have it go down south ave to WSE to bricktown mall and back through middlesex absorbing an 8xx route it would become a 3xx series line with 301 or 311 designation as a SI through-route at rush replacing 81x as a phase 3 implementation back I admit I haven't talked much about my true NJT plans and how they relate to SI. In NJT phase 1 some NJT lines in Hudson become pure LTD to speed em up enough to extend to middlesex via SI with 3 or less stops. Want me to tell you more? I like the S99 idea though it's interesting. You and me both strangely enough. That is true...however, contracting may be how it has to start with buses provided by the MTA to these operators, because this would require making stops on the street outside of its service area. Academy has a Perth Amboy facility, Coach USA is in Elizabeth and New Brunswick, First Transit is in Union, Atlantic Express is all over NY and NJ (the X23 and X24 buses have New Jersey plates on them), and Student Transportation is also all over New Jersey. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q67 via Borden Posted October 29, 2013 Share #955 Posted October 29, 2013 (edited) How about an S87 that runs between Bay Ridge and St. George. I have always found it intriguing that there was no one seat ride between the two areas, especially considering that St. George is one of the major areas people travel to in Staten Island. This S87 would also directly serve the Stapleton Waterfront which is under development. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=204309787698206762506.0004e9e8f459dcc51d817 Edited October 29, 2013 by Q67 via Borden 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 30, 2013 Share #956 Posted October 30, 2013 How about an S87 that runs between Bay Ridge and St. George. I have always found it intriguing that there was no one seat ride between the two areas, especially considering that St. George is one of the major areas people travel to in Staten Island. This S87 would also directly serve the Stapleton Waterfront which is under development. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=204309787698206762506.0004e9e8f459dcc51d817 It's called S78 to S79 or S51&52 to 79 or 53 try again. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted October 30, 2013 Share #957 Posted October 30, 2013 In the light of the thread being specifically about SI: how about we improve current service on SI first before creating a route to please a few anti-transfer people? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q67 via Borden Posted October 30, 2013 Share #958 Posted October 30, 2013 It's called S78 to S79 or S51&52 to 79 or 53 try again. Coming from the guy who wanted to combine the Q26 and the Q77 or send the Q31 up the Throgs Neck to Westchester Square. Think you should heed your own advice and on a side note, quit the immature posting. It doesn't make you look funny or cool. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Around the Horn Posted October 30, 2013 Share #959 Posted October 30, 2013 How about an S87 that runs between Bay Ridge and St. George. I have always found it intriguing that there was no one seat ride between the two areas, especially considering that St. George is one of the major areas people travel to in Staten Island. This S87 would also directly serve the Stapleton Waterfront which is under development. https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=204309787698206762506.0004e9e8f459dcc51d817 If it was extended past SGT to West New Brighton then it could work... It's called S78 to S79 or S51&52 to 79 or 53 try again. Give him some respect,He had a good proposal.Instead of your idiotic response,give him some CC such as extending the route past SGT.Your response does nothing to improve his proposal... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q67 via Borden Posted October 30, 2013 Share #960 Posted October 30, 2013 If it was extended past SGT to West New Brighton then it could work... Give him some respect,He had a good proposal.Instead of your idiotic response,give him some CC such as extending the route past SGT.Your response does nothing to improve his proposal... LOL.....And the worst thing is that QJT comes with proposals that make no sense yet he has the nerve to come up with immature BS to people that make proposals more logical than his. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S78 via Hylan Posted October 30, 2013 Share #961 Posted October 30, 2013 @Q67, your proposal is good, but like Vistauss said, I think we should focus on improving service on the island. This isn't to knock your idea down or anything. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 30, 2013 Share #962 Posted October 30, 2013 LOL.....And the worst thing is that QJT comes with proposals that make no sense yet he has the nerve to come up with immature BS to people that make proposals more logical than his. Explain the segment between Clifton and Tompkinsville please that caught me off guard. If it was extended past SGT to West New Brighton then it could work... Give him some respect,He had a good proposal.Instead of your idiotic response,give him some CC such as extending the route past SGT.Your response does nothing to improve his proposal... Well I guess your right why not try to improve mine as well? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q67 via Borden Posted October 30, 2013 Share #963 Posted October 30, 2013 Explain the segment between Clifton and Tompkinsville please that caught me off guard. Well I guess your right why not try to improve mine as well? 1. That was to serve the Stapleton Waterfront 2. Simple: listen to people when they give you constructive criticism 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted October 31, 2013 Share #964 Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) 1. That was to serve the Stapleton Waterfront 2. Simple: listen to people when they give you constructive criticism Ohh well however bay ridge is redundant there are other parts of brooklyn that are a pain to get to. Constructive criticism involves changes to an option not slamming it. Edited October 31, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S79 Select bus servi Posted November 1, 2013 Share #965 Posted November 1, 2013 We can add LTD service along the S46 from west brighton Thdn bring it down the S78 to tompkins and then the S52 to fingerboard into the bridge and follow the S79SBS to brooklyn Stops: Rich terr-bdwy Castleton-bdwy C-bard av IS61 Cebra-Victory St Pauls-Victory or bay-victory Tompkins and broad (where 74 and 78 meet near romeos pizza) Tompkins-Hylan Fingerboard-Narros rd N or S 92 st 86 st-4 av on the side of the S79 Have it run every 10 during rush in the peak direction, 15 off peak direction, middays and 30 in evenings. It can run every 30 minutes to coordinate with the ferry on weekends. You can also add supplemental service as needed. For example, add two trips to IS61 in the morning, similar to the current S42. Finally, lets call this route the S77 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted November 1, 2013 Share #966 Posted November 1, 2013 (edited) We can add LTD service along the S46 from west brighton Thdn bring it down the S78 to tompkins and then the S52 to fingerboard into the bridge and follow the S79SBS to brooklyn Stops: Rich terr-bdwy Castleton-bdwy C-bard av IS61 Cebra-Victory St Pauls-Victory or bay-victory Tompkins and broad (where 74 and 78 meet near romeos pizza) Tompkins-Hylan Fingerboard-Narros rd N or S 92 st 86 st-4 av on the side of the S79 Have it run every 10 during rush in the peak direction, 15 off peak direction, middays and 30 in evenings. It can run every 30 minutes to coordinate with the ferry on weekends. You can also add supplemental service as needed. For example, add two trips to IS61 in the morning, similar to the current S42. Finally, lets call this route the S77 Interesting line try going deeper into Brooklyn. Like sheepshead bay via belt and canal ave. It doesn't need bay ridge as S79&53 go there. To be honest via S52 cross route with many links to the ferry. More on that later. Edited November 1, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vistausss Posted November 1, 2013 Share #967 Posted November 1, 2013 Isn't Fingerboard Rd already served enough? I mean, I know Arrochar is a dense town but Fingerboard Rd is served by at least 2 local buses and 1 express bus as we speak. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q67 via Borden Posted November 1, 2013 Share #968 Posted November 1, 2013 Interesting line try going deeper into Brooklyn. Like sheepshead bay via belt and canal ave. It doesn't need bay ridge as S79&53 go there. To be honest via S52 cross route with many links to the ferry. More on that later. So you want a bus route that goes from deep within SI to Sheepshead Bay? Really now..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Threxx Posted November 2, 2013 Share #969 Posted November 2, 2013 To be frank, why not just combine the S42 and S46? The S42 could be a rush hour only branch of the S46 called the S46A or something of the like. Considering that the S52 already runs through there, I see little opposition from residents... then again, the S46 does pass through a more middle-class part of SI, so there still may be trouble. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted November 2, 2013 Share #970 Posted November 2, 2013 (edited) To be frank, why not just combine the S42 and S46? The S42 could be a rush hour only branch of the S46 called the S46A or something of the like. Considering that the S52 already runs through there, I see little opposition from residents... then again, the S46 does pass through a more middle-class part of SI, so there still may be trouble. That is an interesting way to look at it. Edited November 2, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted November 2, 2013 Share #971 Posted November 2, 2013 So you want a bus route that goes from deep within SI to Sheepshead Bay? Really now..... It can work only as a pure LTD as a local hell no. like how S79 is a pure LTD. But for uniformity it would work best as a SBS pure route. With activation of S83 this can be a connector. However if distance is an issue then S83 via belt in place of this type of route. Then again S53's base won't have it for good reason too. However there is unmet demand from other parts of south Brooklyn to Staten island. B4&B1 are slow and both run like Shit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted November 2, 2013 Share #972 Posted November 2, 2013 It can work only as a pure LTD as a local hell no. like how S79 is a pure LTD. But for uniformity it would work best as a SBS pure route. With activation of S83 this can be a connector. However if distance is an issue then S83 via belt in place of this type of route. Then again S53's base won't have it for good reason too. However there is unmet demand from other parts of south Brooklyn to Staten island. B4&B1 are slow and both run like Shit.How many times were you told, no buses on the Belt?! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted November 2, 2013 Share #973 Posted November 2, 2013 How many times were you told, no buses on the Belt?! Upto Knapp it's allowed plus the alternatives are too slow. Try again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted November 2, 2013 Share #974 Posted November 2, 2013 Upto Knapp it's allowed plus the alternatives are too slow. Try again. By definition, a bus on the Belt would not be picking up passengers. This bus would essentially be burning money on the Belt even if it was full (and it probably wouldn't be), and the MTA simply cannot afford to do so. Why do you think express bus service is so expensive to provide and costs at least $6, even with all the service cuts they've done over the years? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted November 3, 2013 Share #975 Posted November 3, 2013 Up to Knapp it's allowed plus the alternatives are too slow. Try again.Stop putting buses highways. Back to the drawing board you go... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.