MTA to Cut QM1 service along Union Turnpike - Winter 2016

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Technically, it is extra service to Fresh Meadows, since the rider along 188 Street north of 73 Avenue get more service during the day, whereas the 73 Avenue portion remains the same. Once south of 73 Avenue, it is definitely a cut.

 

 

I have to agree with VG8 on this one. The walk from 64 to 73 Avenue is not as short is its seen, and if you're getting on the bus from points north of the LIE, and have a somewhat long walk, you might even double that distance (since not everyone who gets on lives in the intermediate area).

 

Regardless, buses shouldn't be doing that when they're scheduled to go on up as far as 64 Avenue before coming down. I would also submit a complaint if a driver did that (and I use bustime in many situations, and track it, even when I'm physically at the stop). 

I especially track the QM2 back to the city.  There's a part of the route in Beechhurst where it disappears from BusTime briefly, and even though I know this, I always track it and wait for it to come back on BusTime to ensure that I'm not burned.  Same deal when I need the QM1, QM5 or QM6.

[IAlam]

I especially track the QM2 back to the city.  There's a part of the route in Beechhurst where it disappears from BusTime briefly, and even though I know this, I always track it and wait for it to come back on BusTime to ensure that I'm not burned.  Same deal when I need the QM1, QM5 or QM6.

are you talking about where the Q15 ends cause I could see drivers skipping that part of the route 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

are you talking about where the Q15 ends cause I could see drivers skipping that part of the route 

I'm not sure of the exact spot that the QM2 goes off of BusTime, but it's just before 14th Avenue coming from Bay Terrace.  It doesn't skip the route.  It just goes off of BusTime because it's likely a dead spot.

[checkmatechamp13]

I have to agree with VG8 on this one. The walk from 64 to 73 Avenue is not as short is its seen, and if you're getting on the bus from points north of the LIE, and have a somewhat long walk, you might even double that distance (since not everyone who gets on lives in the intermediate immediate area).

 

Regardless, buses shouldn't be doing that when they're scheduled to go on up as far as 64 Avenue before coming down. I would also submit a complaint if a driver did that (and I use bustime in many situations, and track it, even when I'm physically at the stop). 

 

It's less than 1/2 mile, and for anybody who really can't walk, there's the Q17/88 (and the Q17 goes all the way down to Union Turnpike, where you have the choice of both the QM5 & QM6). And he's talking specifically about those co-ops, which do not stretch north of the LIE. He's talking about "depriving" them like express service is some divine right and they're being left miles from an express stop.

 

Yes, I agree that (in general) buses shouldn't be bypassing stops and loops in general (unless they're bunched up or it's the drop off-only part of an express route). Which is why he brought up having buses travel directly down 73rd Avenue so at least the riders are informed that they need to make their way down there for the express bus.

 

Exactly... Maps don't tell the whole story, trust me.  In some places you have to be VERY strategic when walking to the express bus.  The other thing is if none of the buses are making the stops then it's a service cut because they are not being served at the stop, so those who decide to stand there aren't getting those buses.

 

Which is why he mentioned that they could make it official so people aren't waiting for a bus that isn't going to show up.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's less than 1/2 mile, and for anybody who really can't walk, there's the Q17/88 (and the Q17 goes all the way down to Union Turnpike, where you have the choice of both the QM5 & QM6). And he's talking specifically about those co-ops, which do not stretch north of the LIE. He's talking about "depriving" them like express service is some divine right and they're being left miles from an express stop.

 

Yes, I agree that (in general) buses shouldn't be bypassing stops and loops in general (unless they're bunched up or it's the drop off-only part of an express route). Which is why he brought up having buses travel directly down 73rd Avenue so at least the riders are informed that they need to make their way down there for the express bus.

 

 

Which is why he mentioned that they could make it official so people aren't waiting for a bus that isn't going to show up.

You have a habit of arguing that people can simply walk to the next stop when they're being bypassed, but of course it isn't okay when it happens to you.  Hypocritical to say the least...

 

No, the drivers can stop there and do their damn job like they're supposed to.  That's what they're paid for.  Stop excusing their unprofessional behavior.

[checkmatechamp13]

You have a habit of arguing that people can simply walk to the next stop when they're being bypassed, but of course it isn't okay when it happens to you.  Hypocritical to say the least...

 

No, the drivers can stop there and do their damn job like they're supposed to.  That's what they're paid for.  Stop excusing their unprofessional behavior.

 

I'll repeat myself again.

 

Yes, I agree that (in general) buses shouldn't be bypassing stops and loops in general (unless they're bunched up or it's the drop off-only part of an express route). Which is why he brought up having buses travel directly down 73rd Avenue so at least the riders are informed that they need to make their way down there for the express bus.

 

Routes and schedules should be designed to maximize the convenience of the passengers overall, within the constraints of the MTA's budget and the physical street grid. And the B/Os should always be operating according to those routes and schedules. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

Bypassing the detour to 64th Avenue and making it official is for the sake of the passengers overall. There's QM5 riders who live east of 188th Street who have to deal with this detour as well. If it turns out that the detour is, in fact worthwhile, then it should be kept, and all B/Os scheduled to travel along that detour shall do so.

 

That's like when they write the schedules and they pad them too much. The B/Os either have to hold at the timepoint or drive slowly so they don't run hot. Both of those options are better than running hot, but in the long-term, if B/Os are having to do this consistently (i.e. It's not just a quick B/O, or something that happens once in a while) the schedule should be adjusted so that there's less time in the schedule and the buses are allowed to travel quicker. Passengers need to get where they're going, and they shouldn't be forced to wait at green lights or go through unnecessary detours.

 

You mentioned the last QM2 of the night arrives 10 minutes early. Assuming the B/O not just being lazy and leaving the terminal 10 minutes early, the schedule should be adjusted so that there's 10 minutes less in the schedule. So that the passenger knows when the bus is coming. The B/O is there to serve the passengers, but at the same time, it's up to the MTA to route and schedule buses so that the passengers are served efficiently.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I'll repeat myself again.

 

 

Routes and schedules should be designed to maximize the convenience of the passengers overall, within the constraints of the MTA's budget and the physical street grid. And the B/Os should always be operating according to those routes and schedules. That's the point I'm trying to make.

 

Bypassing the detour to 64th Avenue and making it official is for the sake of the passengers overall. There's QM5 riders who live east of 188th Street who have to deal with this detour as well. If it turns out that the detour is, in fact worthwhile, then it should be kept, and all B/Os scheduled to travel along that detour shall do so.

 

That's like when they write the schedules and they pad them too much. The B/Os either have to hold at the timepoint or drive slowly so they don't run hot. Both of those options are better than running hot, but in the long-term, if B/Os are having to do this consistently (i.e. It's not just a quick B/O, or something that happens once in a while) the schedule should be adjusted so that there's less time in the schedule and the buses are allowed to travel quicker. Passengers need to get where they're going, and they shouldn't be forced to wait at green lights or go through unnecessary detours.

 

You mentioned the last QM2 of the night arrives 10 minutes early. Assuming the B/O not just being lazy and leaving the terminal 10 minutes early, the schedule should be adjusted so that there's 10 minutes less in the schedule. So that the passenger knows when the bus is coming. The B/O is there to serve the passengers, but at the same time, it's up to the MTA to route and schedule buses so that the passengers are served efficiently.

It's an official stop, so there is no excuse for you bringing up how those people can simply walk to another stop.   I have inside information that these drivers are deliberately bypassing the stops so that they have more layover time.  That's what this is all about, so put the culpability where it lies, which is with the drivers, not the nor the passengers.  The is trying to sell this change as a service increase for that area, which it technically is, and these drivers are turning around and looking for a way to screw over these passengers so that they can relax on the clock and it's completely wrong.  It's best not to make certain remarks when you don't have the full story.

[checkmatechamp13]

It's an official stop, so there is no excuse for you bringing up how those people can simply walk to another stop.   I have inside information that these drivers are deliberately bypassing the stops so that they have more layover time.  That's what this is all about, so put the culpability where it lies, which is with the drivers, not the nor the passengers.  The is trying to sell this change as a service increase for that area, which it technically is, and these drivers are turning around and looking for a way to screw over these passengers so that they can relax on the clock and it's completely wrong.  It's best not to make certain remarks when you don't have the full story.

 

It's best not to assume I don't have the full story, nor talk about "inside information" that's plainly obvious to anybody on these forums. On a forum like this, do you really think it's a big secret how layovers work? If you show up to Midtown early, you get that much more time on your break before your next trip (and yes, I also know about the new QM setup where they have to go all the way to 57th and then come back down to 36th for their next trip)

 

I'm not questioning whether the drivers bypassing those stops is wrong (because it is, and you're absolutely right on that note). I'm questioning whether it's worth having that detour in the first place. Does the time saved for riders in those apartments by not having to walk down to 73rd Avenue outweigh the time lost by QM5 riders east of 188th Street? And if you have so much "inside information", then I want definitive stats on this, not a general "Oh yes, because those are co-ops and condos up there".

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's best not to assume I don't have the full story, nor talk about "inside information" that's plainly obvious to anybody on these forums. On a forum like this, do you really think it's a big secret how layovers work? If you show up to Midtown early, you get that much more time on your break before your next trip (and yes, I also know about the new QM setup where they have to go all the way to 57th and then come back down to 36th for their next trip)

 

I'm not questioning whether the drivers bypassing those stops is wrong (because it is, and you're absolutely right on that note). I'm questioning whether it's worth having that detour in the first place. Does the time saved for riders in those apartments by not having to walk down to 73rd Avenue outweigh the time lost by QM5 riders east of 188th Street? And if you have so much "inside information", then I want definitive stats on this, not a general "Oh yes, because those are co-ops and condos up there".

If you had the full story, you wouldn't be giving the B/O's bypassing the stop the benefit of the doubt (as you did in earlier posts in this thread) about why they're skipping the stop in the first place, so spare me with that nonsense about what you know.  I quite frankly am not interested in discussing why the buses are stopping there.  The stops are listed on the QM5 schedule, and they're listed for a reason, and those drivers should be stopping there.  End of story.  Since you feel so strongly about the detour, why don't you ask the residents that depend on the QM5 in the area if they really need the stop  , and see what they say?  I'm sure they would have a few choice words for you and rightfully so.  Meanwhile, don't let anyone dare suggest that your neighborhood doesn't need service.  

[checkmatechamp13]

If you had the full story, you wouldn't be giving the B/O's bypassing the stop the benefit of the doubt (as you did in earlier posts in this thread) about why they're skipping the stop in the first place, so spare me with that nonsense about what you know. 

 

What benefit of the doubt? My very first post in this thread was:

 

At this point, I'm inclined to just advise you guys to report every instance of inbound QM5s bypassing those QM1 stops. Passengers shouldn't have to risk waiting another 30 minutes for a bus just because a B/O didn't feel like traveling another few blocks. 

 

You can use this link to report it through email: http://mta-nyc.custhelp.com/app/ask

 

By telephone, you can call 511, and then say "Comments or Concerns"

 

 

The stops are listed on the QM5 schedule, and they're listed for a reason, and those drivers should be stopping there.  End of story. 

 

Like I said, I fully agree.

 

Since you feel so strongly about the detour, why don't you ask the residents that depend on the QM5 in the area if they really need the stop   , and see what they say?  I'm sure they would have a few choice words for you and rightfully so.  Meanwhile, don't let anyone dare suggest that your neighborhood doesn't need service.  

 

I could ask anybody if they need a route in their neighborhood and the answer would automatically be yes. The question is, do they have the numbers to back it up? Obviously, in my case, the answer is yes. If the numbers back it up for QM5 riders as a whole, then by all means, keep the service.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

 

What benefit of the doubt? My very first post in this thread was:

 

 

I could ask anybody if they need a route in their neighborhood and the answer would automatically be yes. The question is, do they have the numbers to back it up? Obviously, in my case, the answer is yes. If the numbers back it up for QM5 riders as a whole, then by all means, keep the service.

 

And then you added this...

 

 

 

You mentioned the last QM2 of the night arrives 10 minutes early. Assuming the B/O not just being lazy and leaving the terminal 10 minutes early, the schedule should be adjusted so that there's 10 minutes less in the schedule. So that the passengerknows when the bus is coming. The B/O is there to serve the passengers, but at the same time, it's up to the MTA to route and schedule buses so that the passengers are served efficiently.

As for the numbers being there to support it, no one brought that up but you, as that was not even being discussed since we were talking about passengers being bypassed at the stop, not whether or not the stop is needed.  It's almost as if you're trying to justify why these passengers are being bypassed, and there isn't a justification for it. Given how many angry passengers QM1 noted at the stop, the answer to that question seems rather obvious. 

 

And no, not everyone would say that they need a route in their neighborhood.  

[busrider5000]

To address a few previous posts:

 

There are no coops/condos in the area on and off 188th Street between 73rd Avenue and 64th Avenue.  It is a giant rental development.  So there wouldn't be a board or anything like that.  (http://www.freshmeadowsapartments.com/home.php)  This includes the three story garden apartments, the three high rises apartment buildings, and all of the other townhouse type places in that development.  

 

You can't argue that the Q17 and Q88 serve those stops because it would be unfair for a customer to have to burn their transfer on a local bus (many express bus riders transfer free to the subway/another local bus in Manhattan) and it would also add additional time and inconvenience to a rider paying a premium price for express service.  

 

Unfortunately, the way the route is, it's way too easy for drivers to bypass the FM stops.  A couple of years ago a driver bypassed FM on a the 6PM from Glen Oaks (which before the change was the first westbound that stopped in FM) and I mentioned it to him and he said "I'm running late as it is--they told me to skip it--and no one gets on down there anyway.)  

 

Regarding buses that disappear from BusTime--every single QM5 disappears off BusTime because if you check the route on BusTime, the QM5 is supposed to make a left on third avenue and enter the lower level of the bridge.  However, even before the left turn from 57th street to 3rd avenue was banned, the buses stayed on 57th Street, crossed 3rd and 2nd Avenues, and entered the upper level entrance of the bridge.  So, if the bus goes off the planned route, it will disappear from BusTime.  It reappears in the bridge itself, but then disappears because the bridge exits are different from the upper/lower levels.  It reappears after the Queens Blvd/Van Dam intersection, where the QM5 rejoins the published route.

 

Even the "new" bus schedule with the QM1 changes still shows the bus taking a left on third avenue--which has been prohibited by the city for a few months now.  

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

To address a few previous posts:

 

There are no coops/condos in the area on and off 188th Street between 73rd Avenue and 64th Avenue.  It is a giant rental development.  So there wouldn't be a board or anything like that.  (http://www.freshmeadowsapartments.com/home.php)  This includes the three story garden apartments, the three high rises apartment buildings, and all of the other townhouse type places in that development.  

 

You can't argue that the Q17 and Q88 serve those stops because it would be unfair for a customer to have to burn their transfer on a local bus (many express bus riders transfer free to the subway/another local bus in Manhattan) and it would also add additional time and inconvenience to a rider paying a premium price for express service.  

 

Unfortunately, the way the route is, it's way too easy for drivers to bypass the FM stops.  A couple of years ago a driver bypassed FM on a the 6PM from Glen Oaks (which before the change was the first westbound that stopped in FM) and I mentioned it to him and he said "I'm running late as it is--they told me to skip it--and no one gets on down there anyway.)  

 

Regarding buses that disappear from BusTime--every single QM5 disappears off BusTime because if you check the route on BusTime, the QM5 is supposed to make a left on third avenue and enter the lower level of the bridge.  However, even before the left turn from 57th street to 3rd avenue was banned, the buses stayed on 57th Street, crossed 3rd and 2nd Avenues, and entered the upper level entrance of the bridge.  So, if the bus goes off the planned route, it will disappear from BusTime.  It reappears in the bridge itself, but then disappears because the bridge exits are different from the upper/lower levels.  It reappears after the Queens Blvd/Van Dam intersection, where the QM5 rejoins the published route.

 

Even the "new" bus schedule with the QM1 changes still shows the bus taking a left on third avenue--which has been prohibited by the city for a few months now.  

That's probably since the bus was close to the original routing, that it took it as being on Third Avenue. The buses all follow 57 Street; I've seen that happen too, but it's not the operator going north on Third. That express bus route is wrong on both sides when going up to the Queensboro and coming from the Queensboro. It's probably the MTA being lazy as always.

 

Regardless what it is, I wouldn't eliminate service in Fresh Meadows north of 64 Avenue. If they want to reduce runtime on the QM5, start reducing travel time after it passes 6 Avenue/36 Street. There is just way too much time given, and that would impact less riders than just turning left onto 188 Street at 73 Avenue (and vice versa going the other way).

[IAlam]

honestly whether you like it or not, agree with it or not, whether people get on there or not, whether it worth having buses there or not, it is on their run and time table, MEANING THAT THEY HAVE TO GO THERE AND STOP. Failure to do so mean that they are not doing their job even if they are running late. Layover time is catch up time for late buses not break time they are technically not off duty during layover. 

[QM1to6Ave]

To address a few previous posts:

 

There are no coops/condos in the area on and off 188th Street between 73rd Avenue and 64th Avenue.  It is a giant rental development.  So there wouldn't be a board or anything like that.  (http://www.freshmeadowsapartments.com/home.php)  This includes the three story garden apartments, the three high rises apartment buildings, and all of the other townhouse type places in that development.  

 

You can't argue that the Q17 and Q88 serve those stops because it would be unfair for a customer to have to burn their transfer on a local bus (many express bus riders transfer free to the subway/another local bus in Manhattan) and it would also add additional time and inconvenience to a rider paying a premium price for express service.  

 

Unfortunately, the way the route is, it's way too easy for drivers to bypass the FM stops.  A couple of years ago a driver bypassed FM on a the 6PM from Glen Oaks (which before the change was the first westbound that stopped in FM) and I mentioned it to him and he said "I'm running late as it is--they told me to skip it--and no one gets on down there anyway.)  

 

Regarding buses that disappear from BusTime--every single QM5 disappears off BusTime because if you check the route on BusTime, the QM5 is supposed to make a left on third avenue and enter the lower level of the bridge.  However, even before the left turn from 57th street to 3rd avenue was banned, the buses stayed on 57th Street, crossed 3rd and 2nd Avenues, and entered the upper level entrance of the bridge.  So, if the bus goes off the planned route, it will disappear from BusTime.  It reappears in the bridge itself, but then disappears because the bridge exits are different from the upper/lower levels.  It reappears after the Queens Blvd/Van Dam intersection, where the QM5 rejoins the published route.

 

Even the "new" bus schedule with the QM1 changes still shows the bus taking a left on third avenue--which has been prohibited by the city for a few months now.  

 

I always wondered why the buses disappeared from bustime while going over the bridge. So funny that it has the lower level routing, because I can only think of maybe three times in my life that the bus went over the lower level (and that goes back to the Queens Surface days)

[checkmatechamp13]

And then you added this... (**my quote about the QM2 running hot**)

 

And your point is? I'm giving an example of a case where the schedule apparently doesn't reflect the conditions on the road. I didn't say that was the case here. But what I am saying is that things like excess runtime and diversions do have an impact on riders and should be analyzed accordingly. With the QM2, it's the excess runtime, and with the QM5, it's the diversion.

 

As for the numbers being there to support it, no one brought that up but you, as that was not even being discussed since we were talking about passengers being bypassed at the stop, not whether or not the stop is needed.

 

What is the title of this thread? I thought it was "MTA to Cut QM1 service along Union Turnpike - Winter 2016". Questioning whether the midday QM5 diversion is worthwhile is relevant to the topic, right?

 

It's almost as if you're trying to justify why these passengers are being bypassed, and there isn't a justification for it. Given how many angry passengers QM1 noted at the stop, the answer to that question seems rather obvious. 

 

Like I said, look at my very first post in the thread. Questioning whether the diversion is needed, and talking about B/Os skipping that diversion are two different topics.

 

And no, not everyone would say that they need a route in their neighborhood.  

 

So let me be precise to please you. If I were to ask a typical transit rider (who's not well-versed with statistics or planning) if a route in their neighborhood is needed, I can promise you to a 95% confidence interval that they would say it is.

 

Happy now?

 

You can't argue that the Q17 and Q88 serve those stops because it would be unfair for a customer to have to burn their transfer on a local bus (many express bus riders transfer free to the subway/another local bus in Manhattan) and it would also add additional time and inconvenience to a rider paying a premium price for express service.  

 

I will agree with you that there should be an extra transfer programmed in (not just in this case, but in general). As for the time and inconvenience, just remember that there's also additional time that it costs the QM5 riders who have to divert through Fresh Meadows. That's why the question is whether it's worth doing the diversion.

 

Unfortunately, the way the route is, it's way too easy for drivers to bypass the FM stops.  A couple of years ago a driver bypassed FM on a the 6PM from Glen Oaks (which before the change was the first westbound that stopped in FM) and I mentioned it to him and he said "I'm running late as it is--they told me to skip it--and no one gets on down there anyway.)  

 

If the dispatchers said to skip it, that's their fault, not the B/O's fault. However, considering the next bus was an hour behind that, it was something that they should not have ordered, and so somebody at the MTA (whether it was the dispatchers or the B/O) was doing something wrong and should be held accountable.

 

Regardless what it is, I wouldn't eliminate service in Fresh Meadows north of 64 Avenue. If they want to reduce runtime on the QM5, start reducing travel time after it passes 6 Avenue/36 Street. There is just way too much time given, and that would impact less riders than just turning left onto 188 Street at 73 Avenue (and vice versa going the other way).

 

North of 73rd Avenue.

 

And yes, I can agree with you on that at the minimum. Reducing the runtime from 6th/36th to 57th/3rd would be a better alternative than eliminating the off-peak diversion to 64th Avenue.

[Lordsaitamaboss]

And your point is? I'm giving an example of a case where the schedule apparently doesn't reflect the conditions on the road. I didn't say that was the case here. But what I am saying is that things like excess runtime and diversions do have an impact on riders and should be analyzed accordingly. With the QM2, it's the excess runtime, and with the QM5, it's the diversion.

 

 

What is the title of this thread? I thought it was "MTA to Cut QM1 service along Union Turnpike - Winter 2016". Questioning whether the midday QM5 diversion is worthwhile is relevant to the topic, right?

 

 

Like I said, look at my very first post in the thread. Questioning whether the diversion is needed, and talking about B/Os skipping that diversion are two different topics.

 

 

So let me be precise to please you. If I were to ask a typical transit rider (who's not well-versed with statistics or planning) if a route in their neighborhood is needed, I can promise you to a 95% confidence interval that they would say it is.

 

Happy now?

 

 

I will agree with you that there should be an extra transfer programmed in (not just in this case, but in general). As for the time and inconvenience, just remember that there's also additional time that it costs the QM5 riders who have to divert through Fresh Meadows. That's why the question is whether it's worth doing the diversion.

 

 

If the dispatchers said to skip it, that's their fault, not the B/O's fault. However, considering the next bus was an hour behind that, it was something that they should not have ordered, and so somebody at the MTA (whether it was the dispatchers or the B/O) was doing something wrong and should be held accountable.

 

 

North of 73rd Avenue.

 

And yes, I can agree with you on that at the minimum. Reducing the runtime from 6th/36th to 57th/3rd would be a better alternative than eliminating the off-peak diversion to 64th Avenue.

Is that QM5 diversion even necessary? If most ridership is east of 188th why not have super express trips bypass western union turnpike more often?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

What is the title of this thread? I thought it was "MTA to Cut QM1 service along Union Turnpike - Winter 2016". Questioning whether the midday QM5 diversion is worthwhile is relevant to the topic, right?

 

 

Like I said, look at my very first post in the thread. Questioning whether the diversion is needed, and talking about B/Os skipping that diversion are two different topics.

 

 

So let me be precise to please you. If I were to ask a typical transit rider (who's not well-versed with statistics or planning) if a route in their neighborhood is needed, I can promise you to a 95% confidence interval that they would say it is.

 

Happy now?

 

 

I will agree with you that there should be an extra transfer programmed in (not just in this case, but in general). As for the time and inconvenience, just remember that there's also additional time that it costs the QM5 riders who have to divert through Fresh Meadows. That's why the question is whether it's worth doing the diversion.

1) If the was cutting the QM1 specifically because of Fresh Meadows then perhaps it would be, but they are giving the area MORE service than before.  Surely they aren't that stupid that they would do that if there wasn't enough ridership there.  Stop beating a dead horse already.  

 

2) You're not placating me.  Just don't go making assumptions about what others would say when you are not them.

 

3) It seems as if the consensus is from people that live in the area or that use the QM5 is that the stops in Fresh Meadows should remain.  Can you accept that and move on, or do you want to continue to bring something up that no one else (aside from you) is interested in discussing??

[Cait Sith]

I always wondered why the buses disappeared from bustime while going over the bridge. So funny that it has the lower level routing, because I can only think of maybe three times in my life that the bus went over the lower level (and that goes back to the Queens Surface days)

 

The kiddos who made some of the bustime routings definitely got that wrong...it's not the first time either.

 

It amazes me as to how they didn't catch that yet...or how the riders didn't even report it!

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The kiddos who made some of the bustime routings definitely got that wrong...it's not the first time either.

 

It amazes me as to how they didn't catch that yet...or how the riders didn't even report it!

That's what it is.... No one has likely reported it.  When they first rolled out BusTime on Staten Island, I used to communicate directly with them about certain issues and they were very responsive since I guess they wanted it to be successful.

[QM1to6Ave]

The kiddos who made some of the bustime routings definitely got that wrong...it's not the first time either.

 

It amazes me as to how they didn't catch that yet...or how the riders didn't even report it!

Speaking of, when the QM1/5/6 Manhattan-bound gets onto the LIE from Queens Blvd, some B/O's stay to the right on Queens Blvd and take the LIE entrance ramp on the right, while other BO's make a left onto Woodhaven Blvd, drive a block, then take the entrance ramp on the right (right near the QM10/11 stop). Which is the official routing?

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Speaking of, when the QM1/5/6 Manhattan-bound gets onto the LIE from Queens Blvd, some B/O's stay to the right on Queens Blvd and take the LIE entrance ramp on the right, while other BO's make a left onto Woodhaven Blvd, drive a block, then take the entrance ramp on the right (right near the QM10/11 stop). Which is the official routing?

Looking at the route directions, the routing via Woodhaven Blvd is the official routing (bustime has it via the entrance ramp at Horace Harding).

[QM1to6Ave]

Looking at the route directions, the routing via Woodhaven Blvd is the official routing (bustime has it via the entrance ramp at Horace Harding).

I suspected as much, since that's what used on peak runs, but weekends and some off peak use the other route, which seems to save two or three minutes.

[Lordsaitamaboss]

I suspected as much, since that's what used on peak runs, but weekends and some off peak use the other route, which seems to save two or three minutes.

How do the QM5&6 handle LIE traffic on weekends when it's jammed?

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

How do the QM5&6 handle LIE traffic on weekends when it's jammed?

The LIE isn't that much of an issue on the QM5 and QM6 on the weekend, since they're heading inbound only. The LIE gets congested more in the outbound direction in the afternoon, so those buses aren't really affected. However, there will be a bit of a delay getting into the Queens-Midtown Tunnel, and the delays can sometimes stretch as far down as Greenpoint, but that isn't as common (most of said congestion only goes back to the Pulaski bridge or 21 Street).