Unification of Express Bus Designations

[Via Garibaldi 8]

And what if the MTA should ever decide that it wants to *gasp* lure new riders to express bus routes? The amount of money it costs to implement these changes is not very large - signs need replacing every now and then, and in any case that's a DOT perogative. You'd have to redo maps and schedules, but this literally consists of editing text boxes.

 

That being said, I would prefer a "QX", "BX", "BxX", "SX" designation, because it's very intuitive (and let's be frank, SM is just a very bad designation for a bus route to have). The problem with grouping by numbers in X is the very real possibility of overlapping service numbers - look at what happened with the S42 and X42.

What do you mean what if?  In other words, new riders are going to come flocking to the express bus because they change the sign from X1 to SX1? Are you serious with this? I can understand changing the branches because that did actually make the express buses like the QM1A more marketable and clearer in terms of which bus went where, but I don't see how changing a prefix is going to make an express bus more "marketable".    I would argue that the destination signs are far more important than the prefixes.

 

If we want to talk about "uniformity", then all express buses should have the same signage at the bus stop to make them more visible and the same set up in terms of the destination signage used too but they don't.  

[Lennyj17]

#2 You seem to be implying that making the system uniform will actually make things clearer when in fact the local buses are uniform and the riders still act confused, so I don't see the point in wasting money to make things uniform and "clearer" if the same problems will still exist. Now the QM1A set up for example WAS a good change to make that QM1, QM5, QM6, QM7 and QM8 and break them up into branches to make things clearer and also to get a true feel of ridership on each route.  

 

Could you make the prefixes uniform?  Sure, but it would be just for the hell of it and a complete waste of money. If it didn't cost anything I wouldn't care, but wasting money on something that won't help riders to me is inexcusable.  The money would be better used on increasing service.  The majority of express bus riders use the lines on a daily basis with a small amount of riders being non regulars and I do mean small.  By regulars that includes people that just use the express bus on occasion.  

 

Easy you're contradicting yourself.....again the PBL lasted eon's with QM1, QM1A type designations and people got by just fine... But again it's not the way the MTA does things, they like things to be Uniformed, regardless if you like it or not.

 

This is amazing I never seen someone so against having a Uniformed Transit System where everything is. You'd win more points just by admitting you don't like change. 

 

Yes I do ride the Express Bus, the BxM7 on a Weekly, if not Daily basis. I understand the Express bus just fine. I still like for things to be Uniformed has nothing to do with understanding the Express Bus system. If people will be confused by things being Uniformed, well I don't know what to say for them, except they're a lost cause.

[Lennyj17]

 

That being said, I would prefer a "QX", "BX", "BxX", "SX" designation, because it's very intuitive (and let's be frank, SM is just a very bad designation for a bus route to have). The problem with grouping by numbers in X is the very real possibility of overlapping service numbers - look at what happened with the S42 and X42.

That could work too, I don't know about "BxX" however.....I rather just keep "X" if that's the case. Just make sure common designation numbers don't operate over common routing... like S42 and X42

 

You'd think having an MCI vs a Local bus show up would be enough of a differentiator  that Local 42 vs Express 42 confusion wouldn't happen. But I can see some people not being so bring. 

[peacemak3r]

I read 3 pages of "seriously?....seriously?"

 

I don't see the need for change at all and just to keep the system as it is right now. You know what they say, don't change if it's not broke.  I personally see nothing wrong with the current system.  I mean there are destination signs next to the numbers, changing it seems as if people can't read.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Easy you're contradicting yourself.....again the PBL lasted eon's with QM1, QM1A type designations and people got by just fine... But again it's not the way the MTA does things, they like things to be Uniformed, regardless if you like it or not.

 

This is amazing I never seen someone so against having a Uniformed Transit System where everything is. You'd win more points just by admitting you don't like change. 

 

Yes I do ride the Express Bus, the BxM7 on a Weekly, if not Daily basis. I understand the Express bus just fine. I still like for things to be Uniformed has nothing to do with understanding the Express Bus system. If people will be confused by things being Uniformed, well I don't know what to say for them, except they're a lost cause.

lol... If the truly believed in being "uniform" they would never put local buses on express bus routes and vice versa, so your argument that the cares so much about "uniformity" is crappola.  

 

Figures you would ride the BxM7.  Co-Op City folks are never satisfied.

[Vistausss]

@VG8: My idea takes too much space on the display? You had no problem with the old QM1A, which takes up just as much space as XQM1.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I prefer X for SI

 

And QM, BxM, BM for the other boroughs.

 

Just my thoughts.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

@VG8: My idea takes too much space on the display? You had no problem with the old QM1A, which takes up just as much space as XQM1.

I think you need to re-read what I said about the QM1A in multiple posts... 

[The Real]

Alright guys, let me lay some of this guess work to rest.

 

When the MTA took over the privates there was (and probably still is) a plan to intergrate the BM, BxM and QM routes into the X system. A close friend of mines, when it first came out, had told me what the initial plans were, I...to this day still remember what it would be.

 

 

 

The BMs would meld into the X30s

The QMs would meld into the X40s and X50s

The BxMs would meld into the X70s and X80s

 

 

At the time...

BM1 -> X33

BM2 -> X34

BM3 -> X35

BM4 -> X36

BQM1 -> X39 (BM5)

 

QM1 -> X40 (QM1/7)

QM1A -> X41 (QM5/6/8)

QM2 -> X43

QM2A -> X44 (QM20)

QM3 ->X45

QM4 -> X46

QM10 -> X47

QM11 -> X48

QM12 -> X49

QM15 -> X50

QM16 -> X52

QM17 -> X53

QM18 -> X54

QM21 -> X55

QM22 -> X56

QM23 -> X57

QM24 -> X58

QM25 -> X59

 

BxM1 -> X70

BxM2 -> X71

BxM3 -> X72

BxM4A -> X73

BxM4B -> X74 (BxM4)

BxM6 -> X75

BxM7 -> X76

BxM7A -> X77 (BxM8)

BxM7B -> X78 (BxM8)

BxM9 -> X79

BxM10 -> X82

BxM11 -> X85

BxM18 -> X86

 

 

Now I do not know if this plan is still in play or whether it was totally abandoned. I would say definite abandoned since the rebranded QM5, 6, 7, 8, 20 and BM5 routes came out AFTER. SO lets not run around like this is still a possibility because at press time it is not known if it is or not.

[Lennyj17]

^^^^^^ Makes perfect sense IMO.....and this is what we'll probably see sometime after the merger

[QM1to6Ave]

It's ironic that they turned the QM2A into the QM20 becasue they didn't like letters, then made the M34A

[B35 via Church]

If push came to shove & the route notations had to be unified, I would use the x notation for express buses.....

[Eric B]

I was leaning towards using the MTAB standard myself for just that reason. But X can work too again if each borough is grouped by a range of consecutive numbers. 

In that case, we could do away with letters altogether and be like NJT, or even out MTA sign codes, and use a "hundred" number to represent each borough (and for those routes over 100, a higher number or something).

 

That being said, I would prefer a "QX", "BX", "BxX", "SX" designation, because it's very intuitive (and let's be frank, SM is just a very bad designation for a bus route to have). The problem with grouping by numbers in X is the very real possibility of overlapping service numbers - look at what happened with the S42 and X42.

 

That's a good compromise. Really, simple borough letter combinations could then be used for local routes that go extensively through two boroughs.

I prefer X for SI

 

And QM, BxM, BM for the other boroughs.

 

Just my thoughts.

I had thought of that idea as well.

[QM1to6Ave]

I just want to point out sometihng about the QM1/5/6/7/8 change. The 7/8 change was definitely a good idea because that is essentially a separate route from the 1/5/6. However, since the 1/5/6 have a lot of overlap, the change makes it very annoying to read the schedule for those stops that all 3 branches stop at. Similarly, there still is no distinction between 3rd ave and 6th ave service from route number alone, which would be nice.

 

I'm not trying to be whiny, I'm just pointing out that sometimes making changes creates new problems and you end up with the same net number of issues, plus you are out all the money you spent making the change. 

 

(as an aside, on the B/O's on here pointed out when they made the change that it was due to some old ladies constantly complaining that they wanted to get on the same bus as their friends, but couldn't figure out which bus had started at North Shore Towers or Glen Oaks. I still find that funny since it was not really meant to help people avoid getting lost, it was just to appease some old bags.)

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I just want to point out sometihng about the QM1/5/6/7/8 change. The 7/8 change was definitely a good idea because that is essentially a separate route from the 1/5/6. However, since the 1/5/6 have a lot of overlap, the change makes it very annoying to read the schedule for those stops that all 3 branches stop at. Similarly, there still is no distinction between 3rd ave and 6th ave service from route number alone, which would be nice.

 

I'm not trying to be whiny, I'm just pointing out that sometimes making changes creates new problems and you end up with the same net number of issues, plus you are out all the money you spent making the change. 

 

(as an aside, on the B/O's on here pointed out when they made the change that it was due to some old ladies constantly complaining that they wanted to get on the same bus as their friends, but couldn't figure out which bus had started at North Shore Towers or Glen Oaks. I still find that funny since it was not really meant to help people avoid getting lost, it was just to appease some old bags.)

LOL... I think you're making a big deal over the QM1 QM5 QM6 set up.  What exactly is so confusing?  It's pretty similar to the 2009 QM1A set up I saw and when the QM5 and QM6 run on weekends, they basically alternate with service every 15 to 30 minutes just like the BxM1 and BxM2 do in Riverdale. Your rush hour express bus service is also similar to our since we also have three buses with the BxM18 sandwiched in between or with the BxM2.  That 188th street stop gets good service I see.  Even more frequent than Riverdale at times during off-peak which is pretty impressive.  We get an express bus every 15 minutes for the most part during off-peak during the week to the city.

[QM1to6Ave]

LOL... I think you're making a big deal over the QM1 QM5 QM6 set up.  What exactly is so confusing?  It's pretty similar to the 2009 QM1A set up I saw and when the QM5 and QM6 run on weekends, they basically alternate with service every 15 to 30 minutes just like the BxM1 and BxM2 do in Riverdale. Your rush hour express bus service is also similar to our since we also have three buses with the BxM18 sandwiched in between or with the BxM2.  That 188th street stop gets good service I see.  Even more frequent than Riverdale at times during off-peak which is pretty impressive.  We get an express bus every 15 minutes for the most part during off-peak during the week to the city.

I'm not making a big deal over it or saying it is so confusing. My point is that by making the designations easier to understand, the schedules became more confusing since you need to compare 3 different columns.

 

Yes, ridership is so high during weekdays they could do with an extra few buses since many fill up completely before Main Street. Weekend service is 2 buses per hour 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I'm not making a big deal over it or saying it is so confusing. My point is that by making the designations easier to understand, the schedules became more confusing since you need to compare 3 different columns.

 

Yes, ridership is so high during weekdays they could do with an extra few buses since many fill up completely before Main Street. Weekend service is 2 buses per hour 

lol... But seriously though if you're in the area where you're served by all three buses, you don't even need to read the schedule during the rush.  Service is frequent enough that you can just show up and get a bus in about 10 minutes to the city.  I don't travel during the rush most of the time but I was looking at the schedule yesterday of the Riverdale buses and was amazed at the number of options I'd have if I traveled at certain times.  Basically access to a Super Express bus on each route.  I do use the express bus sometimes at rush hour and I have yet to be on a BxM1, BxM2 or BxM18 that was so packed that I had to stand.  I usually still get a seat all to myself and on the rare occasion I've had to sit next to someone on a Super Express BxM1, but never on a BxM2 or BxM18.  In short, we're both spoiled when it comes to express bus service during the week.

[QM1to6Ave]

lol... But seriously though if you're in the area where you're served by all three buses, you don't even need to read the schedule during the rush.  Service is frequent enough that you can just show up and get a bus in about 10 minutes to the city.  I don't travel during the rush most of the time but I was looking at the schedule yesterday of the Riverdale buses and was amazed at the number of options I'd have if I traveled at certain times.  Basically access to a Super Express bus on each route.  I do use the express bus sometimes at rush hour and I have yet to be on a BxM1, BxM2 or BxM18 that was so packed that I had to stand.  I usually still get a seat all to myself and on the rare occasion I've had to sit next to someone on a Super Express BxM1, but never on a BxM2 or BxM18.  In short, we're both spoiled when it comes to express bus service during the week.

 

It's the off peak times that the schedule is necessary and a pain to read.

 

I certainly agree that we are lucky to be in areas where there is high express bus service, though it sounds like the rush hour Qm1/5/6 are more packed than your BxM's...I've been taking it a few years now and almost never get a row/seat to myself. Maybe once every month.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's the off peak times that the schedule is necessary and a pain to read.

 

I certainly agree that we are lucky to be in areas where there is high express bus service, though it sounds like the rush hour Qm1/5/6 are more packed than your BxM's...I've been taking it a few years now and almost never get a row/seat to myself. Maybe once every month.

lol... Yeah but off-peak you already know that on weekends it's just the QM5 and QM6 and they alternate providing 30 minutes for the most part.  During the week, headways between the QM1, QM5 and QM6 off-peak are pretty damn good most of the day that you can still show up without looking at the schedule.  

 

As for the BxM1 it's just crowded enough to demand 15 - 20 minute headways.  The BxM2 is crowded enough to get 15 minute headways at the most and the BxM18 is about the same.  The thing with the Riverdale buses is ridership fluctuates a lot which makes cutting anything difficult. You can get a totally full bus one day and a semi-crowded one the next, though I've been noticing that the BxM1 and BxM2 have been fuller of late in particular, as well as the BxM18, including later buses.  I also purposely try to get emptier buses so that I don't have to sit next to anyone so I plan to commute generally outside of rush hour unless I have to meet a client somewhere or be in early so I'm usually on the cusp of rush hour at the best and if the BxM1 gets too crowded, then I'll switch to the BxM2 which can also be crowded, but not as crowded as the BxM1.

[QM1to6Ave]

lol... Yeah but off-peak you already know that on weekends it's just the QM5 and QM6 and they alternate providing 30 minutes for the most part.  During the week, headways between the QM1, QM5 and QM6 off-peak are pretty damn good most of the day that you can still show up without looking at the schedule.  

 

As for the BxM1 it's just crowded enough to demand 15 - 20 minute headways.  The BxM2 is crowded enough to get 15 minute headways at the most and the BxM18 is about the same.  The thing with the Riverdale buses is ridership fluctuates a lot which makes cutting anything difficult. You can get a totally full bus one day and a semi-crowded one the next, though I've been noticing that the BxM1 and BxM2 have been fuller of late in particular, as well as the BxM18, including later buses.  I also purposely try to get emptier buses so that I don't have to sit next to anyone so I plan to commute generally outside of rush hour unless I have to meet a client somewhere or be in early so I'm usually on the cusp of rush hour at the best and if the BxM1 gets too crowded, then I'll switch to the BxM2 which can also be crowded, but not as crowded as the BxM1.

 

Got it, that's good to know. I occasionally need to use the BxM's to head into the bronx.

[Cait Sith]

 

(as an aside, on the B/O's on here pointed out when they made the change that it was due to some old ladies constantly complaining that they wanted to get on the same bus as their friends, but couldn't figure out which bus had started at North Shore Towers or Glen Oaks. I still find that funny since it was not really meant to help people avoid getting lost, it was just to appease some old bags.)

 

I couldn't help but laugh at this because it's very true. Till' this very day, people still get Glen Oaks & North Shore Towers confused....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I couldn't help but laugh at this because it's very true. Till' this very day, people still get Glen Oaks & North Shore Towers confused....

It's understandable to a degree.  Technically the North Shore Towers complex is partially in Glen Oaks and the QM5 and QM6 terminate not too far from each other.

[Cait Sith]

It's understandable to a degree.  Technically the North Shore Towers complex is partially in Glen Oaks and the QM5 and QM6 terminate not too far from each other.

 

North Shore Towers is Floral Park. Had they made the QM6 destination sign a little more descriptive in that regard, it would make things much more easier.

 

One of the reasons they kept the Lake Success reading is because it goes along the lines of the Q46 Lake Success branch except it goes to the hospital, which is a short distance from the towers itself. It should've been like this or something in that regard.

 

QM6       FLORAL PARK

       NORTH SHORE TOWERS

 

That way, most people wont get it confused.

 

Often times, people don't confuse the Fresh Meadows/Glen Oaks routes except for some trips on the QM5 that bypass Fresh Meadows. But confuse the QM5/6 often because of the signage. People get confused with the QM6 signage kind of often.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

North Shore Towers is Floral Park. Had they made the QM6 destination sign a little more descriptive in that regard, it would make things much more easier.

 

It should've been like this or something in that regard.

 

QM6       FLORAL PARK

       NORTH SHORE TOWERS

 

That way, most people wont get it confused.

 

Often times, people don't confuse the Fresh Meadows/Glen Oaks routes except for some trips on the QM5 that bypass Fresh Meadows. But confuse the QM5/6 often because of the signage. People get confused with the QM6 signage kind of often.

Yeah, the thing is that area (where the North Shore Towers that are) seems to have a few names... Floral Park is one, along with Glen Oaks.  In fact some people associate it with Long Island (Lake Success) because it's right on the border (North Shore Towers that is and part of it is actually in Lake Success).  I agree that the signage should be a bit clearer though.

[B35 via Church]

Lake Success sounds like an area where a bunch of well off ppl. reside in... I'll go as far as to say I think that had a small part with it being on the destination signage as well.... Had the area been named lake failure or lake overflow (lol) or something another, Floral Park probably would've been on the express bus destination signage instead....

 

I still don't see how NST is technically in floral park, when the neighborhood of floral park is well south of NST.... If Glen Oaks is a subsection of Floral park, then that would be news to me.... While I didn't think NST was in Glen Oaks, I thought NST was its own neighborhood & had its own zipcode.....

 

How big a neighborhood is Floral park then? What are the (accepted) boundaries....