2012 MTA Ridership Stats

[WorkerX]

The M2, that whole drop I am 100% convinced is due to the insane headways. I see it myself: all it takes is one bus running late and it's 30-35 minutes waiting for a bus, if not more. So nobody waits for it, and they just grab the local. It's bullsh!t that the MTA switches around services levels for the 5th Ave buses, cause generally the number of riders isn't shifting intentionally, it's usually a random decision that a rider will make to take the next bus they see cause they're sick of waiting...never a conscious change in service. But some guy in planning looks at the numbers and says 'Cut the service!' and we all lose, cause now even more people give up and take the local, and the numbers dip even more, and it gets even worse. It's ridiculous, and I'm so sick of waiting an hour for a bus that used to be no more than a ten-fifteen minute wait ten years ago!

 

 

The Lex decreases I firmly believe are due to the sh!t service Tuskegee put out last year. Ops with no bus to pull out, breakdowns, the lot. When service gets bad, people lose faith and stop taking the bus, something that the MTA doesn't seem to grasp when it cuts and cuts. That should be a little better now that TU's got a new fleet, however. Have to wait and see. Interesting numbers on the whole.

 

 

These two posts explain to me how infuriating it is to get from the East Side to either Lenox or 7th.   One has been run into the ground by the MTA on the thought that the M3 & M4 need better service on the whole route and thus ruining the branches of the M2 and M1 (which just got weekend service back).  The other is TU just ruining their buses into the ground.  I doesn't shock me out of the core "Harlem" routes (M10, M2, M7, M102, M1) that the M7 would do the best.   Even if you add in the M3, the M7 seems to do better within Harlem.  It makes it seem that the best way to get to Harlem would be get an M7 if you aren't taking a subway

 

As for 125th St, I'm not going to say that one corridor helps all the buses on it jump to the Top 10 of their boros, but it does show how long overdue something is needed there that benefits all (passengers, pesidtrians, drivers, and delivery)

[bobtehpanda]

These two posts explain to me how infuriating it is to get from the East Side to either Lenox or 7th.   One has been run into the ground by the MTA on the thought that the M3 & M4 need better service on the whole route and thus ruining the branches of the M2 and M1 (which just got weekend service back).  The other is TU just ruining their buses into the ground.  I doesn't shock me out of the core "Harlem" routes (M10, M2, M7, M102, M1) that the M7 would do the best.   Even if you add in the M3, the M7 seems to do better within Harlem.  It makes it seem that the best way to get to Harlem would be get an M7 if you aren't taking a subway

 

As for 125th St, I'm not going to say that one corridor helps all the buses on it jump to the Top 10 of their boros, but it does show how long overdue something is needed there that benefits all (passengers, pesidtrians, drivers, and delivery)

 

The problem seems to be that MTA can't see the forest for the trees. Ideally, MTA should be adjusting the branches based on the ridership on the branches themselves, and not on the full length of the route, although I'm not sure if this is possible.

[checkmatechamp13]

What made S55 jump so much though?

 

It gained a measley 26 riders. The only reason it was a relatively large percentage is because S55 ridership is so low. The S56 lost 25 riders during that same time period, so for all you know, it could've just been that the S55 showed up before the S56 at the ETC a little more often than it used to, so some people switched to that.

[Mysterious2train]

All of the Lexington Av routes had a decrease in ridership. That's troubling.

Mysterious2train: could it be increasing traffic on Lexington?

Well, on the bright side, the M15 saw an increase, so maybe they just shifted to the M15.

The Lex decreases I firmly believe are due to the sh!t service Tuskegee put out last year. Ops with no bus to pull out, breakdowns, the lot. When service gets bad, people lose faith and stop taking the bus, something that the MTA doesn't seem to grasp when it cuts and cuts. That should be a little better now that TU's got a new fleet, however. Have to wait and see. Interesting numbers on the whole.

Fully agree. I've tried to take those buses because they happen to be convenient for me, and they just never show up, so I gave up on them.

Slow service [primarily going downtown] + Occasionally spotty service + attractive alternative = That would do it!

 

 

 

The scheduling is also pretty spotty. Since the M102 and M103 have uneven headways, they'll often come right around the same time and then you'll have to wait some 10-12 mins for the next bus. There's lot of bunching; on 3 Av you'll definitely see bunching when traffic gets rough in Midtown, and this continues until 99 St. The M101 also bunches a lot, especially on Amsterdam. It's pretty ridiculous at times. Some days, on Amsterdam, you'll have to wait upwards of 15 mins just for either an M100 or an M101. But no matter where bunching is, it's hard to get rid of. Usually the two buses will just leapfrog each other. If one bus is in front, the other bus behind will usually not pass it, even if the bus in front is picking up all the passengers, because the bus in back is either making a lot of drop-offs or the B/O is intentionally driving very slowly.

 

Like MHV said, the service is definitely pretty shitty. Poor scheduling is just part of it. Reminds me of one day in the Summer I was waiting at Lex and 124 for a downtown bus. It's a little after 11:30 AM. There's an M101 supposed to show up at 11:35, it never came. At 11:45 an M101 and M103 were supposed to show up at the same time. The M101 shows up right before the M103, everybody gets on the M101 while the M103 is right behind picking up only a handful of people. And since the M101 also stops at 122 and 119 St this continued for another 3 stops. Now trying to do so myself I'll admit making an even schedule isn't the easiest thing to do but having buses show up often at the exact same time is pretty ridiculous.

 

I guess some of those riders ending up on the M15 isn't the worst thing in the world, since they're using the Select service well, but as someone who sees the corridor as important in its own right it's dismaying. Between the M15 and M60 SBS, SAS and the I guess there isn't much of a reason to try and work on the routes [Although I probably am biased.]

 

These two posts explain to me how infuriating it is to get from the East Side to either Lenox or 7th. One has been run into the ground by the MTA on the thought that the M3 & M4 need better service on the whole route and thus ruining the branches of the M2 and M1 (which just got weekend service back). The other is TU just ruining their buses into the ground. I doesn't shock me out of the core "Harlem" routes (M10, M2, M7, M102, M1) that the M7 would do the best. Even if you add in the M3, the M7 seems to do better within Harlem. It makes it seem that the best way to get to Harlem would be get an M7 if you aren't taking a subway

 

As for 125th St, I'm not going to say that one corridor helps all the buses on it jump to the Top 10 of their boros, but it does show how long overdue something is needed there that benefits all (passengers, pesidtrians, drivers, and delivery)

About the M3 and M4 I agree service can be pretty erratic. For example, I ride late in the morning [like ~10:30 on weekdays] and the buses are pretty early on average [maybe ~5 mins early] At that time, there's extra M4 service [every 5 mins, since some buses are returning to Manhattanville Depot] and because of that the buses aren't that crowded and pretty quick. So you have B/Os going incredibly slow just to try and stick to the schedule [the whole 9 yards: [waiting at stops doing nothing, stopping at stops where nobody's getting on or off, intentionally missing stops] [even then, they're still a min or two early, usually]. Other than 110 St at times and parts of Broadway, traffic is pretty light. So I suppose my main issue is schedules allotting too much time and buses going slow as a result rather than poor service. But that's just when i ride. I can't speak for other times of the day, especially when there's less M4 service. I do notice the M1 bunches sometimes. I see two buses close together for no good reason. It's not even that frequent. But I digress.

 

 

[qjtransitmaster]

Slow service [primarily going downtown] + Occasionally spotty service + attractive alternative = That would do it!

The scheduling is also pretty spotty. Since the M102 and M103 have uneven headways, they'll often come right around the same time and then you'll have to wait some 10-12 mins for the next bus. There's lot of bunching; on 3 Av you'll definitely see bunching when traffic gets rough in Midtown, and this continues until 99 St. The M101 also bunches a lot, especially on Amsterdam. It's pretty ridiculous at times. Some days, on Amsterdam, you'll have to wait upwards of 15 mins just for either an M100 or an M101. But no matter where bunching is, it's hard to get rid of. Usually the two buses will just leapfrog each other. If one bus is in front, the other bus behind will usually not pass it, even if the bus in front is picking up all the passengers, because the bus in back is either making a lot of drop-offs or the B/O is intentionally driving very slowly.Like MHV said, the service is definitely pretty shitty. Poor scheduling is just part of it. Reminds me of one day in the Summer I was waiting at Lex and 124 for a downtown bus. It's a little after 11:30 AM. There's an M101 supposed to show up at 11:35, it never came. At 11:45 an M101 and M103 were supposed to show up at the same time. The M101 shows up right before the M103, everybody gets on the M101 while the M103 is right behind picking up only a handful of people. And since the M101 also stops at 122 and 119 St this continued for another 3 stops. Now trying to do so myself I'll admit making an even schedule isn't the easiest thing to do but having buses show up often at the exact same time is pretty ridiculous. I guess some of those riders ending up on the M15 isn't the worst thing in the world, since they're using the Select service well, but as someone who sees the corridor as important in its own right it's dismaying. Between the M15 and M60 SBS, SAS and the I guess there isn't much of a reason to try and work on the routes [Although I probably am biased.]About the M3 and M4 I agree service can be pretty erratic. For example, I ride late in the morning [like ~10:30 on weekdays] and the buses are pretty early on average [maybe ~5 mins early] At that time, there's extra M4 service [every 5 mins, since some buses are returning to Manhattanville Depot] and because of that the buses aren't that crowded and pretty quick. So you have B/Os going incredibly slow just to try and stick to the schedule [the whole 9 yards: [waiting at stops doing nothing, stopping at stops where nobody's getting on or off, intentionally missing stops] [even then, they're still a min or two early, usually]. Other than 110 St at times and parts of Broadway, traffic is pretty light. So I suppose my main issue is schedules allotting too much time and buses going slow as a result rather than poor service. But that's just when i ride. I can't speak for other times of the day, especially when there's less M4 service. I do notice the M1 bunches sometimes. I see two buses close together for no good reason. It's not even that frequent. But I digress.

 

With service so erratic and pathetic why do you even put up with it at all? You don't have to wait 15 mins especially for a bus that is slow if it was an express bus I can understand but for a slow local when the subway is right there is kinda silly if you took the train your trip time will be cut by 20+ mins or even more. Fortunately many riders or former bus riders finally figured it out. I do think run time should be better adjusted to match actual traffic conditions.

[bobtehpanda]

With service so erratic and pathetic why do you even put up with it at all? You don't have to wait 15 mins especially for a bus that is slow if it was an express bus I can understand but for a slow local when the subway is right there is kinda silly if you took the train your trip time will be cut by 20+ mins or even more. Fortunately many riders or former bus riders finally figured it out. I do think run time should be better adjusted to match actual traffic conditions.

 

Because there's a limit to how many people you can crush onto the Lex trains? There's a reason we're throwing billions of dollars at SAS. Not to mention, a lot of Lex stations aren't accessible, and a lot of unpleasant things happen on the , like that person who fell in after defecating in between cars, and in the case of the M3 and M4, those take you to the West Side, which you can't do from the Upper East Side by subway unless you go all the way back down to 42nd St.

 

That being said, I don't usually deal with the buses on Lexington - if I'm in the area and I need to get somewhere, I'll usually walk using Fifth Ave - it doesn't take that long, and it's nice exercise along a scenic route.

[checkmatechamp13]

With service so erratic and pathetic why do you even put up with it at all? You don't have to wait 15 mins especially for a bus that is slow if it was an express bus I can understand but for a slow local when the subway is right there is kinda silly if you took the train your trip time will be cut by 20+ mins or even more. Fortunately many riders or former bus riders finally figured it out. I do think run time should be better adjusted to match actual traffic conditions.

 

He's referring to Amsterdam Avenue. There's hills in that area (so if you have to walk to the subway and then back to your destination on Amsterdam, that takes time and energy). Plus, you're not expecting to wait 15+ minutes, because with two buses that are scheduled to come every 10 minutes or less (individually), you would think something would end up coming relatively quickly.

 

Plus, some people may be taking it to reach the subway in the first place. They might want to go crosstown, or maybe they live on Amsterdam, and say, 135th, but they want the at 125th.

 

Not to mention that not everybody is necessarily in a hurry. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't have good service where possible.

 

As for Lexington, well there's the obvious seniors and disabled (and people carrying packages). Not to mention that in general, bus trips in Manhattan in Manhattan tend to be fairly short. For instance, a couple of days ago, I took the M5 from Cortlandt Street to South Ferry, which is a little over 1/2 mile. Why? Because I needed to catch the ferry, was carrying something, and didn't think I could run the 1/2 mile. I couldn't take the because between going up and down the stairs (which uses energy) and waiting for the train, the bus would probably be quicker. So I walked along Broadway, and fortunately, I saw an M5 a couple of blocks away. Would I ride it all the way from Washington Heights to South Ferry? Of course not, but a bus in Manhattan is usually handy for short trips.

[Quill Depot]

M14 ridership is boosting again and the M106 ridership has increased 20.1%.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Because there's a limit to how many people you can crush onto the Lex trains? There's a reason we're throwing billions of dollars at SAS. Not to mention, a lot of Lex stations aren't accessible, and a lot of unpleasant things happen on the , like that person who fell in after defecating in between cars, and in the case of the M3 and M4, those take you to the West Side, which you can't do from the Upper East Side by subway unless you go all the way back down to 42nd St.

 

That being said, I don't usually deal with the buses on Lexington - if I'm in the area and I need to get somewhere, I'll usually walk using Fifth Ave - it doesn't take that long, and it's nice exercise along a scenic route.

This guy just doesn't get it.  Some people prefer using the bus and don't care how long it takes and sometimes people are just tired.  Taking the subway can be very tiring... What he forgets about is the amount of time it takes to get to the train station go up all of the stairs or down the stairs, then back up or down again to get out and if you need to make a transfer within the system that's another schlepp.  The bus may be slower but in some cases the time overall is pretty much the same and you're not exhausted in the process like you are with the subway.

[B35 via Church]

This guy just doesn't get it.  Some people prefer using the bus and don't care how long it takes and sometimes people are just tired.  Taking the subway can be very tiring... What he forgets about is the amount of time it takes to get to the train station go up all of the stairs or down the stairs, then back up or down again to get out and if you need to make a transfer within the system that's another schlepp.  The bus may be slower but in some cases the time overall is pretty much the same and you're not exhausted in the process like you are with the subway.

I don't know how many people have picked up on this, but this is something I've long noticed with him.....

 

QJT attempts to make bus services faster by coming up with all sorts of silly suggestions involving either putting them on some highway, or a prolonging time spent on some highway.... It's very odd.... It's like he tries to have local buses take on aspects of express buses, and express buses take on aspects similar to that of rail transportation - both of which are predicated by increasing non-stop portions....

 

To sum it up.... He tries to get people out of their personal vehicles with his bus ideas, but tries to make buses rail-like....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I don't know how many people have picked up on this, but this is something I've long noticed with him.....

 

QJT attempts to make bus services faster by coming up with all sorts of silly suggestions involving either putting them on some highway, or a prolonging time spent on some highway.... It's very odd.... It's like he tries to have local buses take on aspects of express buses, and express buses take on aspects similar to that of rail transportation - both of which are predicated by increasing non-stop portions....

 

To sum it up.... He tries to get people out of their personal vehicles with his bus ideas, but tries to make buses rail-like....

That and the fact that he tries to dictate to people what works best for them when it's them taking the commute and not him... If I want to take the bus from the Upper West Side to the East Side then let me because that's what works best for me.  Don't tell me to take a friggin' subway. If I wanted the subway I know where it is and how to get to it but sometimes people don't want to take the subway.  Last night was a perfect example.  I wanted to get to Whole Foods to pick up dinner and I just did not have the energy to schlepp down to the subway and deal with those stairs, so I hopped on the local bus instead, which was pretty quick.  Not as fast as the subway but still good enough and I didn't have to deal with the stairs to boot.

[B35 via Church]

That and the fact that he tries to dictate to people what works best for them when it's them taking the commute and not him...

True, but his character flaws are another story.....

[qjtransitmaster]

He's referring to Amsterdam Avenue. There's hills in that area (so if you have to walk to the subway and then back to your destination on Amsterdam, that takes time and energy). Plus, you're not expecting to wait 15+ minutes, because with two buses that are scheduled to come every 10 minutes or less (individually), you would think something would end up coming relatively quickly.

 

Plus, some people may be taking it to reach the subway in the first place. They might want to go crosstown, or maybe they live on Amsterdam, and say, 135th, but they want the at 125th.

 

Not to mention that not everybody is necessarily in a hurry. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't have good service where possible.

 

As for Lexington, well there's the obvious seniors and disabled (and people carrying packages). Not to mention that in general, bus trips in Manhattan in Manhattan tend to be fairly short. For instance, a couple of days ago, I took the M5 from Cortlandt Street to South Ferry, which is a little over 1/2 mile. Why? Because I needed to catch the ferry, was carrying something, and didn't think I could run the 1/2 mile. I couldn't take the because between going up and down the stairs (which uses energy) and waiting for the train, the bus would probably be quicker. So I walked along Broadway, and fortunately, I saw an M5 a couple of blocks away. Would I ride it all the way from Washington Heights to South Ferry? Of course not, but a bus in Manhattan is usually handy for short trips.

 

Err that pretty sums up how people use buses in manhattan.

This guy just doesn't get it.  Some people prefer using the bus and don't care how long it takes and sometimes people are just tired.  Taking the subway can be very tiring... What he forgets about is the amount of time it takes to get to the train station go up all of the stairs or down the stairs, then back up or down again to get out and if you need to make a transfer within the system that's another schlepp.  The bus may be slower but in some cases the time overall is pretty much the same and you're not exhausted in the process like you are with the subway.

you obviously are not fit are you.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

you obviously are not fit are you.

I walk up and down several flights of stairs and up and down hills daily, so no I'm quite fit.  Just because I don't feel like running up and down subway stairs after working for 8+ hours doesn't mean I'm not fit. 

[qjtransitmaster]

That and the fact that he tries to dictate to people what works best for them when it's them taking the commute and not him... If I want to take the bus from the Upper West Side to the East Side then let me because that's what works best for me.  Don't tell me to take a friggin' subway. If I wanted the subway I know where it is and how to get to it but sometimes people don't want to take the subway.  Last night was a perfect example.  I wanted to get to Whole Foods to pick up dinner and I just did not have the energy to schlepp down to the subway and deal with those stairs, so I hopped on the local bus instead, which was pretty quick.  Not as fast as the subway but still good enough and I didn't have to deal with the stairs to boot.

Dude a trip like that can't be done with subway as UWS and UES aren't linked with crosstown subways so of course you use the bus your using examples that are irrelevant to my stance what does that say about you? Sometimes local buses have L shapes.

[qjtransitmaster]

I don't know how many people have picked up on this, but this is something I've long noticed with him.....

 

QJT attempts to make bus services faster by coming up with all sorts of silly suggestions involving either putting them on some highway, or a prolonging time spent on some highway.... It's very odd.... It's like he tries to have local buses take on aspects of express buses, and express buses take on aspects similar to that of rail transportation - both of which are predicated by increasing non-stop portions....

 

To sum it up.... He tries to get people out of their personal vehicles with his bus ideas, but tries to make buses rail-like....

you forgot new lines in some cases for example bronx to JFK via clearview and springfield blvd or brookville blvd/cross island over one exit.

 

Another meant to cut down travel time is Flushing to crown heights via van wyck and union tpk then jackie robinson to eastern parkway. I admit the parkway is the hardest part as buses must be shorter than 10"3 there. Only instance where a local bus would do highway would be belt series sort of but that can change. Making buses tie into the subway with rail-like characteristics is anything but silly. What is silly is the notion that doing nothing is a good idea. I'd sum it up by borough SI 3 extend for ridership purposes since they lack ridership. Brooklyn only new routes based on alan rosen's B22 idea but with support from queens. Queens one DH becomes revenue and 2 via highway to link to brooklyn better and get to LGA faster one gets an LGA variant due to overserving flushing. 

[bobtehpanda]

Dude a trip like that can't be done with subway as UWS and UES aren't linked with crosstown subways so of course you use the bus your using examples that are irrelevant to my stance what does that say about you? Sometimes local buses have L shapes.

 

MOST of the local buses in Manhattan have L-shapes if they serve areas north of 125th, and you didn't seem to understand that when you said that people using the Lexington Avenue buses from those areas should just take the subway.

 

you forgot new lines in some cases for example bronx to JFK via clearview and springfield blvd or brookville blvd/cross island over one exit.

 

Another meant to cut down travel time is Flushing to crown heights via van wyck and union tpk then jackie robinson to eastern parkway. I admit the parkway is the hardest part as buses must be shorter than 10"3 there. Only instance where a local bus would do highway would be belt series sort of but that can change. Making buses tie into the subway with rail-like characteristics is anything but silly. What is silly is the notion that doing nothing is a good idea. I'd sum it up by borough SI 3 extend for ridership purposes since they lack ridership. Brooklyn only new routes based on alan rosen's B22 idea but with support from queens. Queens one DH becomes revenue and 2 via highway to link to brooklyn better and get to LGA faster one gets an LGA variant due to overserving flushing. 

 

First of all, you keep harping about LGA needing all this transit service. It doesn't. AIrports have two types of demand - travelers and employees. Only business travelers use airport transit on a regular basis, and they'd want a service with the amenities of a cab - think Hampton Jitney-style service complete with complimentary food and drink, or a direct train service, which isn't happening. Employees who would use transit already are - keep in mind that airport employees don't have to pay for parking and usually aren't that far from the airport itself. Not to mention, these workers are spread out over a relatively wide area, so attempting to serve them all with new bus routes isn't going to work.

 

What's silly is not bus service with rail-like characteristics - when done right, BRT can move upwards of 30K people per hour, per direction, which is comparable to mid-sized subway lines. (Granted, you need a road that's sufficiently wide for this to work, but that's another story.) What's silly is that you propose routes that have lots of stops on the outer ends but nothing in the middle - by the very nature of such a service, it's only going to attract people who are headed to the two places where it's stops. SBS, despite the fact that it is not real BRT, works as a limited-stop service because it also serves short-haul trips. Your routes don't.

[qjtransitmaster]

MOST of the local buses in Manhattan have L-shapes if they serve areas north of 125th, and you didn't seem to understand that when you said that people using the Lexington Avenue buses from those areas should just take the subway.

 

 

First of all, you keep harping about LGA needing all this transit service. It doesn't. AIrports have two types of demand - travelers and employees. Only business travelers use airport transit on a regular basis, and they'd want a service with the amenities of a cab - think Hampton Jitney-style service complete with complimentary food and drink, or a direct train service, which isn't happening. Employees who would use transit already are - keep in mind that airport employees don't have to pay for parking and usually aren't that far from the airport itself. Not to mention, these workers are spread out over a relatively wide area, so attempting to serve them all with new bus routes isn't going to work.

 

What's silly is not bus service with rail-like characteristics - when done right, BRT can move upwards of 30K people per hour, per direction, which is comparable to mid-sized subway lines. (Granted, you need a road that's sufficiently wide for this to work, but that's another story.) What's silly is that you propose routes that have lots of stops on the outer ends but nothing in the middle - by the very nature of such a service, it's only going to attract people who are headed to the two places where it's stops. SBS, despite the fact that it is not real BRT, works as a limited-stop service because it also serves short-haul trips. Your routes don't.

You make a good point but you thought I was a bit excessive with LGA you have a point in that regard I did say 1 variant I didn't say completely. Another 1 is a bit low priority due to the Q70 and which may only be a few mins slower than my proposal but that idea is not serious by itself in the long-term some of my routes would be BRT like and the JFK-bronx one would have BRT features it won't be on many congested parts so HOVs won't be needed for this route. short haul I see well serving transfer points would being short haul feeders to the route that are connecting to other lines and or even to the airport. Or in the flushing case to speed up transit trip times for outerborough uncommon trips.

[B35 via Church]

....Only instance where a local bus would do highway would be belt series sort of but that can change. Making buses tie into the subway with rail-like characteristics is anything but silly. What is silly is the notion that doing nothing is a good idea.

Except doing nothing isn't my stance at all, generally speaking.... I'm all for improving current services that aren't doing as well - Within reason, of course.... The majority of your suggestions are not within reason at all, that is your problem....

 

Not agreeing with your ideas in-particular doesn't mean I support doing nothing... Miss me with your self-centered way of thinking.....

 

As far as trying to make buses rail-like, it is silly because for one, it doesn't consider the feasibility of getting to one mode over another for riders.... Buses in general are meant to complement the subway/the rails, not supplement it.... That's the thing with SBS/LTD services - They need to be supplementary to locals; that's what makes them beneficial over locals.... You still need local variants running along a given route (that have SBS/LTD service) to account for the riders that don't reside near a SBS station/LTD stop....  Making buses rail-like (increasing non-stop portions) pretty much gives the middle finger to those people.....

 

See QJT, The equivalent of what you attempt to do with routes at times is actually what I think the MTA's attempting to do on a grand scale - that is, do away with having as many routes take on characteristics of "local" routes (making stops every 2-3 blocks) & try to make routes longer (distance-wise) while having less stops in the process, that of which stops at/near major intersections (why do you think the MTA over-glorifies SBS)..... Meaning, increased walking time for folks that would normally wait at a "local" (bus) stop, to get to a stop....

 

....like the subway.

 

 

I'd sum it up by borough SI 3 extend for ridership purposes since they lack ridership.

 

Brooklyn only new routes based on alan rosen's B22 idea but with support from queens.

Queens one DH becomes revenue and 2 via highway to link to brooklyn better and get to LGA faster one gets an LGA variant due to overserving flushing. 

You have said in the past that you don't look to improve services borough by borough, but more in a regional sense - Increasing the # of interborough routes or whatever.... Now you're saying you're saying you'd sum it up by borough? You're way too inconsistent.....

 

It's more & more looking like you just blurt out ideas for the hell of it without even considering the actual residents of this city....

There has to be some semblance of realizm, "err", realism with what you propose, and that is severely lacking with you......

You have been exposed too many times as not knowing what you're talking about when it comes to NYC's bus routes.....

 

..What's silly is not bus service with rail-like characteristics - when done right, BRT can move upwards of 30K people per hour, per direction, which is comparable to mid-sized subway lines. (Granted, you need a road that's sufficiently wide for this to work, but that's another story.) What's silly is that you propose routes that have lots of stops on the outer ends but nothing in the middle - by the very nature of such a service, it's only going to attract people who are headed to the two places where it's stops. SBS, despite the fact that it is not real BRT, works as a limited-stop service because it also serves short-haul trips. Your routes don't.

I wasn't referring to BRT when I said "rail-like" in that post.....Having local buses unnecessarily divert onto highways absolutely is silly....

 

(But since you bring it up, I'd argue "real" BRT won't be anywhere near as effective in NYC as it is in other cities.... one reason of which you point out in this very post of yours...)

[qjtransitmaster]

Except doing nothing isn't my stance at all, generally speaking.... I'm all for improving current services that aren't doing as well - Within reason, of course.... The majority of your suggestions are not within reason at all, that is your problem....

 

Not agreeing with your ideas in-particular doesn't mean I support doing nothing... Miss me with your self-centered way of thinking.....

 

As far as trying to make buses rail-like, it is silly because for one, it doesn't consider the feasibility of getting to one mode over another for riders.... Buses in general are meant to complement the subway/the rails, not supplement it.... That's the thing with SBS/LTD services - They need to be supplementary to locals; that's what makes them beneficial over locals.... You still need local variants running along a given route (that have SBS/LTD service) to account for the riders that don't reside near a SBS station/LTD stop.... Making buses rail-like (increasing non-stop portions) pretty much gives the middle finger to those people.....

 

See QJT, The equivalent of what you attempt to do with routes at times is actually what I think the MTA's attempting to do on a grand scale - that is, do away with having as many routes take on characteristics of "local" routes (making stops every 2-3 blocks) & try to make routes longer (distance-wise) while having less stops in the process, that of which stops at/near major intersections (why do you think the MTA over-glorifies SBS)..... Meaning, increased walking time for folks that would normally wait at a "local" (bus) stop, to get to a stop....

 

....like the subway.

 

 

 

You have said in the past that you don't look to improve services borough by borough, but more in a regional sense - Increasing the # of interborough routes or whatever.... Now you're saying you're saying you'd sum it up by borough? You're way too inconsistent.....

 

It's more & more looking like you just blurt out ideas for the hell of it without even considering the actual residents of this city....

There has to be some semblance of realizm, "err", realism with what you propose, and that is severely lacking with you......

You have been exposed too many times as not knowing what you're talking about when it comes to NYC's bus routes.....

 

 

I wasn't referring to BRT when I said "rail-like" in that post.....Having local buses unnecessarily divert onto highways absolutely is silly....

 

(But since you bring it up, I'd argue "real" BRT won't be anywhere near as effective in NYC as it is in other cities.... one reason of which you point out in this very post of yours...)

To be honest none divert to highways away from it's local portion. Many of my suggested express lines have no parallel local road so nearby local buses will serve the local riders actually. That borough by borough was a quick summary of each line they however work best together. Notice they are either extensions of LTD buses already LTD or new altogether. Clearview and belt don't have long service roads. So a local next to it is not possible. Like the crown heights-flushing one there are already buses on nearby local roads not on the path due to road layout. Yes it is like a LTD with stops at major intersections it will be on union tpk till the parkway local is called Q55 but that goes to ridgewood. You seemed to miss how the route even is designed or the road layout. It is unreasonable to charge $6 for many of these routes due to how they are structured.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

To be honest none divert to highways away from it's local portion. Many of my suggested express lines have no parallel local road so nearby local buses will serve the local riders actually. That borough by borough was a quick summary of each line they however work best together. Notice they are either extensions of LTD buses already LTD or new altogether. Clearview and belt don't have long service roads. So a local next to it is not possible. Like the crown heights-flushing one there are already buses on nearby local roads not on the path due to road layout. Yes it is like a LTD with stops at major intersections it will be on union tpk till the parkway local is called Q55 but that goes to ridgewood. You seemed to miss how the route even is designed or the road layout. It is unreasonable to charge $6 for many of these routes due to how they are structured.

Oh really? Most of these routes cut down travel time considerably OR make the commute much more managable.  The BxM1 and BxM2 at night can get to Riverdale in 35 - 40 minutes.  Traveling from the East Side to Riverdale via the subway would be double that with all of the transfers required.  

[qjtransitmaster]

Oh really? Most of these routes cut down travel time considerably OR make the commute much more managable.  The BxM1 and BxM2 at night can get to Riverdale in 35 - 40 minutes.  Traveling from the East Side to Riverdale via the subway would be double that with all of the transfers required.  

I meant BXM1/2 vs Bx7 to MNRR marble hill with bx7 meeting the train and minimal wait between them the walk is 3 mins tops so I wanted to know how quick that would be if MNRR and bx7 are on point. Lets say you take bx7 to marble hill walk 4 mins to mnrr then buy your ticket in 1 min 3 to 2 mins later the train comes. I now see your argument. Those are fastest at night BUT ridership is high making cuts unfeasible.

[B35 via Church]

To be honest none divert to highways away from it's local portion. Many of my suggested express lines have no parallel local road so nearby local buses will serve the local riders actually. That borough by borough was a quick summary of each line they however work best together. Notice they are either extensions of LTD buses already LTD or new altogether. Clearview and belt don't have long service roads. So a local next to it is not possible. Like the crown heights-flushing one there are already buses on nearby local roads not on the path due to road layout. Yes it is like a LTD with stops at major intersections it will be on union tpk till the parkway local is called Q55 but that goes to ridgewood. You seemed to miss how the route even is designed or the road layout. It is unreasonable to charge $6 for many of these routes due to how they are structured.

- You're going off on an unrelated tangent that I'm not gonna waste time trying to figure out; talking about crown heights-flushing....

 

Anyway, none divert to highways from its local portion? Are you saying you've never suggested that some local route divert or extend along some highway? If so, that would be a bold faced lie & you know it.....

 

- You can argue by itself that $6 may not be worth it or whatever, but unreasonable due to how they're structured? Surely you jest...

Face it, structuring our express bus service like NJT structures their full service routes isn't gonna fly here in NYC.....

That is something else I've noticed with a decent portion of your suggestions - Too stuck on the suburban style of planning.....

[qjtransitmaster]

Oh really? Most of these routes cut down travel time considerably OR make the commute much more managable. The BxM1 and BxM2 at night can get to Riverdale in 35 - 40 minutes. Traveling from the East Side to Riverdale via the subway would be double that with all of the transfers required.

I meant BXM1/2 vs Bx7 to MNRR marble hill with bx7 meeting the train and minimal wait between them the walk is 3 mins tops so I wanted to know how quick that would be if MNRR and bx7 are on point. Lets say you take bx7 to marble hill walk 4 mins to mnrr then buy your ticket in 1 min 3 to 2 mins later the train comes. I now see your argument. Those are fastest at night BUT ridership is high making cuts unfeasible. You gave me an idea actually. You make a point.

- You're going off on an unrelated tangent that I'm not gonna waste time trying to figure out; talking about crown heights-flushing....

 

Anyway, none divert to highways from its local portion? Are you saying you've never suggested that some local route divert or extend along some highway? If so, that would be a bold faced lie & you know it.....

 

- You can argue by itself that $6 may not be worth it or whatever, but unreasonable due to how they're structured? Surely you jest...

Face it, structuring our express bus service like NJT structures their full service routes isn't gonna fly here in NYC.....

That is something else I've noticed with a decent portion of your suggestions - Too stuck on the suburban style of planning.....

Hmm I an not advocating for any full service line regular fare it good enough they are similar to LTD stop routes but they connect places that the subway doesn't connect well. Extending a few over the highway yes but 10 to 15 mins is reasionable. Divert means reroute taking away not my suggestion. Some only a short stint to connect queens better. Like B84 via belt and airtrain lefferts to reach baisley blvd and provide bus service there and improve connectivity in preparation for other lines. You are too stuck on local buses to see the bigger picture. The subway only does so much and new LTDs or SBS are needed to close gaps even for mid haul trips. Ridership on connecting lines would increase.

[B35 via Church]

Hmm I an not advocating for any full service line regular fare it good enough they are similar to LTD stop routes but they connect places that the subway doesn't connect well. Extending a few over the highway yes but 10 to 15 mins is reasionable. Divert means reroute taking away not my suggestion. Some only a short stint to connect queens better. Like B84 via belt and airtrain lefferts to reach baisley blvd and provide bus service there and improve connectivity in preparation for other lines. You are too stuck on local buses to see the bigger picture. The subway only does so much and new LTDs or SBS are needed to close gaps even for mid haul trips. Ridership on connecting lines would increase.

I'm not talking about the fare structure of a full service line, I'm talking about the route structure of a full service line....

You do try to morph local services here in NYC like that of NJT's full service lines..... I know what divert means, thanks....

 

A 10-15 minute diversion or extension over the highway on a local route is reasonable? For who exactly....

That is exactly my point when I say you don't even consider the actual residents of this city with your suggestions...

 

Yeah the subway only does so much, but that doesn't mean you attempt to f*** up local/LTD bus service in the process....

 

Lol, I'm just as much as stuck on local buses as you are stuck on putting local routes on highways....

Because we're talking about local buses, genius....

 

My money's on my way of thinking, and any transportation planner with a modicum of common sense would be too... Trying to improve local/LTD routes route by route wherever possible, instead of looking at the bigger picture (as you put it) in extending said routes along some highway to some external area where there is ZERO demand for, is flat out asinine, no matter how you slice it or refuse to come to grips to it....

 

1) ....like that suggestion of having the Bx46 extended to Van Cortlandt Park–242nd Street via say norwood and I-895...

2) Oh yeah, there was also the one where you figured out what to do with the Q76 - running it up to 233rd st in the bronx via pelham bay park & via baychester av.....

3) Had a good ole time cracking up at that Bx16 to morris heights via I-87 re-route as well....

4) Now you're talking about linking crown heights & flushing.... smh.....

 

I mean, for fu**s sake QJT, you are the same person that actually proposed a route that would "link" the Bronx to Nassau County