Jump to content

Bronx Division Bus Proposals/Ideas


cotb16

Recommended Posts

No, that's not what I mean. During the PM Rush, the Bx15 local and the Bx15 LTD are both scheduled to leave the first stop at the same time. (They're both running on 10 minute headaways). Once Limited service ends, the frequency of service stays the same, so instead of having 1 Local bus and 1 Limited bus leaving at the same time, there are now 2 local buses leaving at the same time.

 

Limited service ends pretty arbitrarily (and notably earlier than on the Bx55) but I suppose it ends arbitrarily on a lot of routes.

Yeah, but one is a short turn & the other goes the full distance to manhattan..... That's what's conveniently being left out.

 

I don't really see much of a problem here TBH, unless the short turn buses are being shunned & the masses are waiting for the Manhattan bound 15's..... I mean, I highly doubt (of the trips that are departing the same time) there's a situation/occurrence where crowds are filling up the short turns along the route & the Manhattan bound buses are being shunned/running almost empty..... Although unconventional, this is their way of balancing loads.... Knowing how the 15 is, I can bet those buses are not running back to back for most the trip... Matter fact, they're probably spaced out enough by time whichever bus reaches the Hub first....

 

To tell the truth, I'd rather this setup, than more 15's ending at the hub when LTD service ends (I'm surprised this isn't the case now with how frugal the MTA is, and hope it won't ever end up being the case).....

 

I don't have a particular opinion either way on GreatOne's suggestions, but as far as Bx15 LTD service ending too early, the fact that the 41 now has SBS also factors into it..... There were 55 trips that ran to/from GunHill/WPR.... Instead of merging/running however many more 55 trips there were, into today's 15, The idea is to simply have w/e riders that used to take 55's to/from GunHill take 41's instead..... Not saying I agree with it all, but it is what it is.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 2.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Yeah, but one is a short turn & the other goes the full distance to manhattan..... That's what's conveniently being left out.

 

I don't really see much of a problem here TBH, unless the short turn buses are being shunned & the masses are waiting for the Manhattan bound 15's..... I mean, I highly doubt (of the trips that are departing the same time) there's a situation/occurrence where crowds are filling up the short turns along the route & the Manhattan bound buses are being shunned/running almost empty..... Although unconventional, this is their way of balancing loads.... Knowing how the 15 is, I can bet those buses are not running back to back for most the trip... Matter fact, they're probably spaced out enough by time whichever bus reaches the Hub first....

 

To tell the truth, I'd rather this setup, than more 15's ending at the hub when LTD service ends (I'm surprised this isn't the case now with how frugal the MTA is, and hope it won't ever end up being the case).....

 

I don't have a particular opinion either way on GreatOne's suggestions, but as far as Bx15 LTD service ending too early, the fact that the 41 now has SBS also factors into it..... There were 55 trips that ran to/from GunHill/WPR.... Instead of merging/running however many more 55 trips there were, into today's 15, The idea is to simply have w/e riders that used to take 55's to/from GunHill take 41's instead..... Not saying I agree with it all, but it is what it is.....

My thinking precisely having seen a similar set up with the S48...

 

No, that's not what I mean. During the PM Rush, the Bx15 local and the Bx15 LTD are both scheduled to leave the first stop at the same time. (They're both running on 10 minute headaways). Once Limited service ends, the frequency of service stays the same, so instead of having 1 Local bus and 1 Limited bus leaving at the same time, there are now 2 local buses leaving at the same time.

 

Limited service ends pretty arbitrarily (and notably earlier than on the Bx55) but I suppose it ends arbitrarily on a lot of routes.

I know what you mean and that's why I said what I said... Maybe they feel that local service works quickly enough at that time. On Staten Island we had that set up years ago when I used to take the S48.  We would have two S48's at the same time and like B35 said one would go the full length and the other would be a short turn to avoid one being slammed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thinking precisely having seen a similar set up with the S48...

 

I know what you mean and that's why I said what I said... Maybe they feel that local service works quickly enough at that time. On Staten Island we had that set up years ago when I used to take the S48.  We would have two S48's at the same time and like B35 said one would go the full length and the other would be a short turn to avoid one being slammed.  

That's also a plausible possibility, but I think the (main) reason is more that they wanted to efficiently merge the old Bx55 into the Bx15, nothing more & nothing less.... As such, it turned out that you have w/e amount of trips leaving Fordham at the same time....

 

But yeah, the initial concern was put out there like there are 2 Bx15's locals leaving at the same time, terminating at the same terminal..... That's why I made that point about one being a short turn.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's also a plausible possibility, but I think the (main) reason is more that they wanted to efficiently merge the old Bx55 into the Bx15, nothing more & nothing less.... As such, it turned out that you have w/e amount of trips leaving Fordham at the same time....

 

But yeah, the initial concern was put out there like there are 2 Bx15's locals leaving at the same time, terminating at the same terminal..... That's why I made that point about one being a short turn.....

Speaking of which, when I'm on the BxM11 making my way near Pelham Parkway, I see a lot of artics on lines like the Bx39 and so on.  It's interesting that bus usage is so high in some parts of the Bronx when the subway is right there.  

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Speaking of which, when I'm on the BxM11 making my way near Pelham Parkway, I see a lot of artics on lines like the Bx39 and so on.  It's interesting that bus usage is so high in some parts of the Bronx when the subway is right there.  

The (2) is very infrequent plus bx39 has many riders that are going south of Pelham parkway or coming from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (2) is very infrequent plus bx39 has many riders that are going south of Pelham parkway or coming from.

Yeah they really should do something about the (2). Far too infrequent... I use it during the week for travel within Manhattan and the waits are ridiculous... 12 minute wait during rush hour.  

Edited by Via Garibaldi 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know...  The thing is more people need the (2) than the (3) .

Exactly my point agreed my friend. One way to solve the problem would be building a 2nd express track between E180th and 149th to allow the (5) to get out the (2) 's way allowing more frequent service then extend (4) to new lots full time. And reroute (5) to serve Kingston and nostrand ave ending at Utica Full-time. Can the (3). Make Harlem shuttle from 125th or 135th or just abandon it. More (2) s

Edited by qjtransitmaster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Exactly my point agreed my friend. One way to solve the problem would be building a 2nd express track between E180th and 149th to allow the (5) to get out the (2) 's way allowing more frequent service then extend (4) to new lots full time. And reroute (5) to serve Kingston and nostrand ave ending at Utica Full-time. Can the (3). Make Harlem shuttle from 125th or 135th or just abandon it. More (2) s

I wouldn't to that far... The folks in Harlem would be pissed, especially with the amount of building going on there.  The (3) helps to alleviate some of the stress off of the (2) .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah they really should do something about the (2). Far too infrequent... I use it during the week for travel within Manhattan and the waits are ridiculous... 12 minute wait during rush hour.  

.....One way to solve the problem would be building a 2nd express track between E180th and 149th to allow the (5) to get out the (2) 's way allowing more frequent service then extend (4) to new lots full time. And reroute (5) to serve Kingston and nostrand ave ending at Utica Full-time. Can the (3). Make Harlem shuttle from 125th or 135th or just abandon it. More (2) s

Inconsistent & Infrequent service is one thing, but IMO, the main problem up there with the 2 is that it snail crawls throughout its stint in the Bronx..... You (QJT) can propose building an adjacent track for the 5 all you want, it doesn't address that problem with the 2..... Quite frankly, I don't blame folks up there in Williamsbridge, Wakefield, etc. for opting for the bus (express or local)....

 

Having 4's go to new lots full time helps brooklyn riders (avoiding an xfer for the 3 east of utica), but absolutely screws (western) bronx riders......

Having 3's be bastardized to that of a shuttle, or eliminated, would put too much strain on (what would then be) the lone 7th av express in manhattan.... Nothing would be solved here; matter fact, you would actually exacerbate service with this....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what this garbage of eliminating the (3) is about but it makes no sense. The (3) is needed to take crowding off the (2) . The (2) is already overcrowded and eliminating the (3) would exacerbate the issue. If there is a need for more trains and the tracks are at capacity, installing CBTC makes much more sense than this nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inconsistent & Infrequent service is one thing, but IMO, the main problem up there with the 2 is that it snail crawls throughout its stint in the Bronx..... You (QJT) can propose building an adjacent track for the 5 all you want, it doesn't address that problem with the 2..... Quite frankly, I don't blame folks up there in Williamsbridge, Wakefield, etc. for opting for the bus (express or local)....

 

Having 4's go to new lots full time helps brooklyn riders (avoiding an xfer for the 3 east of utica), but absolutely screws (western) bronx riders......

Having 3's be bastardized to that of a shuttle, or eliminated, would put too much strain on (what would then be) the lone 7th av express in manhattan.... Nothing would be solved here; matter fact, you would actually exacerbate service with this....

Oh God... I had one hell of a commute going to a tutoring session up near Pelham Parkway.  I'm tracking my BxM11 bus, and the damn guy blows right by my stop even though he saw me hailing him for him to stop.  The waits are so long for a (2) train that you can almost get an express bus faster.  Really pathetic.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Inconsistent & Infrequent service is one thing, but IMO, the main problem up there with the 2 is that it snail crawls throughout its stint in the Bronx..... You (QJT) can propose building an adjacent track for the 5 all you want, it doesn't address that problem with the 2..... Quite frankly, I don't blame folks up there in Williamsbridge, Wakefield, etc. for opting for the bus (express or local)....

 

Having 4's go to new lots full time helps brooklyn riders (avoiding an xfer for the 3 east of utica), but absolutely screws (western) bronx riders......

Having 3's be bastardized to that of a shuttle, or eliminated, would put too much strain on (what would then be) the lone 7th av express in manhattan.... Nothing would be solved here; matter fact, you would actually exacerbate service with this....

even if the (2) gets upgraded service to offset the loss of the (3) ?

 

Oh God... I had one hell of a commute going to a tutoring session up near Pelham Parkway.  I'm tracking my BxM11 bus, and the damn guy blows right by my stop even though he saw me hailing him for him to stop.  The waits are so long for a (2) train that you can almost get an express bus faster.  Really pathetic.  

So true one of the reasons BXM11 gets used more than usual similar routes. I take that bus some times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

even if the (2) gets upgraded service to offset the loss of the (3) ?

 

The fact that you even suggested to eliminate the (3) made no sense. It doesn't matter if you "boost" the (2), don't throw the (3) train into this. The (3) train serves an important role in being supplementary to the (2). All you would do is put even more crowding onto (2), (4), and (5) trains. So do you think the (M) should be eliminated so more (J) trains could be added since the (J) runs like crap? Did I even have to go over this shit with you? SMH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact that you even suggested to eliminate the (3) made no sense. It doesn't matter if you "boost" the (2), don't throw the (3) train into this. The (3) train serves an important role in being supplementary to the (2). All you would do is put even more crowding onto (2), (4), and (5) trains. So do you think the (M) should be eliminated so more (J) trains could be added since the (J) runs like crap? Did I even have to go over this shit with you? SMH

Dude you just went hard for no reason...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The (3) isn't going anywhere.

 

Enough said.

 

Anyone that suggests the idea to eliminate the (3) , shouldn't be allowed to suggest jack crap around here.

 

I swear, some people have no knowledge about the basics of a supplemental line: (3)(5)(B)(C)(M) (R) for example. SMH.

Edited by RollOverMyHead
Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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