Bx6 SBS?

[Cait Sith]

Even with them moving around routes? That's insane. Castleton has that yard that I recall seeing, so they can certainly have some on their premises.

If they were to shift around the express routes, maybe. But the way the out-of-service lot is configured, 60ft buses would block it completely.

[DetSMART45]

Very much agree. The S79 had what....80+ stops? Now it's down to 20 something. On top of that, the bus lanes have actually been enforced.

 

It may not be a "true" SBS by design(lack of off-board payment), but it works, and it works well.

I don't normally take issue with you, but if that's your "standard-bearer" of SBS success, then you MUST have something additional to cling to other than cutting stops as a judgment of success.

 

The latest in the MTA SBS stable is the Q44.  'Splain to me how cutting of stops on the Bronx-portion is "saving" on the rest of the route, when it's nothing more than a pre-pay Limited.  As I've brought up before, a whopping 7 whole minutes are "saved" when going from a LTD to the wonderous SBS.  That route has NOTHING changed, in a practical sense.

 

So, going by your logic, the Q44 should perform even better because it has pre-pay as the saving grace, even though nothing else has changed -------- if compared to this new benchmark, being the S79.

 

Confine yourself to that.  IDC about differences in population density, or traffic volumes or anything else.  You made the statement, so let's just deal with that, on its face.

[MysteriousBtrain]

I don't normally take issue with you, but if that's your "standard-bearer" of SBS success, then you MUST have something additional to cling to other than cutting stops as a judgment of success.

 

The latest in the MTA SBS stable is the Q44. 'Splain to me how cutting of stops on the Bronx-portion is "saving" on the rest of the route, when it's nothing more than a pre-pay Limited. As I've brought up before, a whopping 7 whole minutes are "saved" when going from a LTD to the wonderous SBS. That route has NOTHING changed, in a practical sense.

 

So, going by your logic, the Q44 should perform even better because it has pre-pay as the saving grace, even though nothing else has changed -------- if compared to this new benchmark, being the S79.

 

Confine yourself to that. IDC about differences in population density, or traffic volumes or anything else. You made the statement, so let's just deal with that, on its face.

The Q44 is A LOT FASTER than it was before end to end. Before SBS, it was more than 2 hrs to get from end to end. Now, with those minor stops removed and prepayment was installed, the ride went out to be around 1 hr and a half, even when the drivers were switched in Flushing. So you can definitely say the Q44 improved big time.

It's not just prepayment that is looked at when SBS is installed, but what stops are the busiest on the route. For example, there was no need to have 3 stops in Flushing, so the northernmost one was taken away and all that go there now have to go to the stop near the . Minor details can make anything become successful.

[Cait Sith]

I don't normally take issue with you, but if that's your "standard-bearer" of SBS success, then you MUST have something additional to cling to other than cutting stops as a judgment of success.

 

The latest in the MTA SBS stable is the Q44.  'Splain to me how cutting of stops on the Bronx-portion is "saving" on the rest of the route, when it's nothing more than a pre-pay Limited.  As I've brought up before, a whopping 7 whole minutes are "saved" when going from a LTD to the wonderous SBS.  That route has NOTHING changed, in a practical sense.

 

So, going by your logic, the Q44 should perform even better because it has pre-pay as the saving grace, even though nothing else has changed -------- if compared to this new benchmark, being the S79.

 

Confine yourself to that.  IDC about differences in population density, or traffic volumes or anything else.  You made the statement, so let's just deal with that, on its face.

 

You're thinking way too far into what I said.

 

1st. I'm not talking from a transit fan perspective. I'm talking from a commuter perspective, especially one that has had to use the route for work-related and personal(family related)situations.

 

2nd. I have yet to ride the Q44 SBS, so I can't give an opinion on that one just yet. I'll get back to you on that when I do. But for others that have already taken the Q44 SBS, they'll probably give you their POV. Also, a schedule only says so little, it's a matter of experiencing it yourself, not only as a fan, but also as a commuter. Also, we haven't quite factored in how much time would be saved from the off-board fare payment especially at the major areas, because dwell times on the Q44 were HORRIBLE!

 

3rd. I only said that the S79 SBS is successful for what it currently is and what's massively changed on the route. The S79 used to take over an hour(roughly about 80 minutes) just to commute to/from Staten Island, now the route shaves at least 30 minutes from the commute, even more at times. That line was the only one that went from an 80+ stop local route(I think it was 88 stops) to a 20-25 stop SBS route. Granted, it should've been a limited from the get-go. But that line needed something for years, and the way they planned it out was pretty good, even though it's not a true SBS route by design.

 

They didn't add off-board payment for the line mostly because of the already bad amount of farebeating on the island. And as of a few years ago, they've been having undercover cops riding the buses out on the island. I've witnessed instances where they've been ticketing/arresting farebeaters, including kids.

 

Also, this point is just coming from a personal standpoint, but for every time I've missed the x1 to Manhattan, I would always take the S79 SBS to catch up to it, and 9 out of 10 times, it caught up with that very x1.

 

If they really wanted to test the capabilities of Select Bus Service, the S79 should've been it from the get-go than the Bx12. The S79 was one of the longest routes in Staten Island and in the city in terms of time and distance. Hylan Blvd would've been perfect to test out the capabilities of the service itself.

 

The Bx12 SBS hasn't proved much in my opinion, only that high ridership routes should get SBS in the TA's point of view. The M15 SBS has proven a lot more than the Bx12. I lived in the Lower East Side when the M15 SBS debuted and have taken it from end to end. If it wasn't for the 2nd Avenue Subway Construction and the ever-so increasing traffic along 1st and 2nd Avenue(moreso 2nd Avenue than 1st Avenue), it would be a lot better. But at the time that M15 SBS debuted, it was far better than the limited, especially with the dwell time being reduced by a whole lot.

 

In short, most of the SBS routes share the same problems. But since we're talking about the S79, that's something you have to experience yourself. To get from Bay Ridge to Staten Island Mall in 35-40 minutes compared to a 75-80 minute ride, you can't beat that. If the S79 had both artics and off-board fare payment. It would be far better than the rest of the current routes.

[bobtehpanda]

Yep, seen all of those PowerPoint promotions for SBS before.  Nice to see that you tried to back-up your points, but let's go back to my challenge:

All of this "fantasy-world" believing everything you've been provided by the JADED MTA has YET to be proven by real-world experiences/black-and-white figures.

 

And until the anti-SBS camp stumps up, they don't have any proof, either. No news outlets, think tank organizations, community groups that are angry about SBS (and there are quite a few) have ever bothered actually providing any data that isn't just personal anecdotes, even though data contrary to city testimony has been put forth for things like bike lanes. As someone who works to put myself through college, and has used SBS in the past, I don't have time to methodically collect data in a statistically rigorous way just because I have an itch to question everything put before me. I also have no reason to, because my personal experience with SBS has not largely contradicted the city's opinion.

[DetSMART45]

And until the anti-SBS camp stumps up, they don't have any proof, either. No news outlets, think tank organizations, community groups that are angry about SBS (and there are quite a few) have ever bothered actually providing any data that isn't just personal anecdotes, even though data contrary to city testimony has been put forth for things like bike lanes. As someone who works to put myself through college, and has used SBS in the past, I don't have time to methodically collect data in a statistically rigorous way just because I have an itch to question everything put before me. I also have no reason to, because my personal experience with SBS has not largely contradicted the city's opinion.

Forgive me all for being reactive, but .....

 

I am getting mighty tired of all of you who think SBS is the best thing since the cure to Polio pushing the "justification" of anti-SBS sentiments into anyone who questions it.

 

WHY DON'T YOU GO OUT AND PROVE THINGS YOURSELF?????????????

 

If you are sooooo sold on the efficacy and savings, then PROVE us "naysayers" wrong with your own research which backs up your Thesis.  Just WHAT is so hard to comprehend about that whole process?????

 

Have YOU NEVER had college/university courses where you're given a protagonist/antigonist view on a subject and asked to justify it by your OWN research to prove the point you've been assigned?  Why can't that be something applied here?  WHY in the FARKING FARK is it MY job to prove all of my points, especially given that YOU -- who've fallen for the Kool-Aid® the MTA gives you -- only cite what you've been given as talking points?  YOU should be able to run circles around me with all sorts of back-up -- YET you basically have nothing except your given points.

 

Don't take this personally, Bobtehpanda, but to form rational arguments, then BOTH sides need to cite their reason(s) in proving a point.  You may say that I offer nothing, except all that I've seen thusfar is the same old crap I could read on the MTA website -- NOTHING concrete.

 

There are plenty here who DON'T like it when I bring up my own area and things that happen.  So WHAT makes you think you're going to entertain anything outside of NYC-based thoughts?  The Green Line with the MBTA is a good example of plain out-of-control "Oh this will be wonderful" thinking -- except when it came to last week's events.  My own area's "If we build it they will come" thinking of NON-public transport users flocking to a multi-billion dollar train line -- JUST BECAUSE.  The Cleveland RTA's own "Health Line" which everybody hails as some cure for their region's transit problems, even though if it weren't for the "sponsorship" (yes, purposeful quotes there) it wouldn't really be as "successful" (once again, you're catching on) as they lead everyone to believe -- quite simply RTA couldn't afford it if they were running it on their own.

 

The list goes on and on.

 

The biggest problem -- as I see it -- is the MOST transit-centric city in the country FOR DECADES somehow cannot keep their captive customer base satisfied in getting them around town.  Especially on Local buses.  Anyone who knows NYC transit (including us "outsiders") KNOWS that Express buses replace subway service -- and should operate as such.  Subway is the "Express Bus" over Local/Limited service.  And Local/Limited is pretty much for "getting around town."  YET, the MTA has even screwed that up.  And so, those of you using buses as transport complain about all of those people clogging streets because they use cars/taxis/Uber because of the MTA not living up to what they say they are going to do.  NOW, you're going to think that this agency -- who can't even get their OWN city transit methods under some semblence of control and order to move the masses -- is going to make everything better on routes where THEY can't even get Limited-Stop buses to work EFFICIENTLY just by putting stainless-steel fare collection machines on the sidewalks, re-route traffic by putting bus lanes in, and employing all the other peripheral, distractive elements while STILL moving customers JUST AS SLOW AS BEFORE.  And THAT is called "success" to a whole lot of you.

 

Want a TL;DR ?

 

PROVE once and for all to all of us "naysayers" BY YOUR OWN RESEARCH -- or by a qualified, audited source -- that SBS actually LIVES UP to all of its selling points.  Yes, I'll keep harping on one point of contention: on-time-performance.  Why?  Because THAT is a significant reason customers of all ilks across the country, and dare I say, around the world, hold dear when it comes to CHOOSING PUBLIC TRANSPORT when it comes to their individual transit needs.

 

Switzerland and Japan have meticulous records of on-time performance, and brag about it.  Why can't New York?

[Cait Sith]

I mean, no one is saying/has said that SBS in general is the best answer to these things, nor is anyone saying that it's the be all, end all. It's been mentioned dozens, dozens and dozens of times that SBS has its flaws and the ideas put forth by the TA is pretty dumb in many ways. But the fact is, SBS is not perfect by any means. It works in some ways, like the S79, but each and every one of those routes have their flaws and their problems.

It's also not that serious to get worked up over nothing, particularly a misunderstanding.

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

Forgive me all for being reactive, but .....

 

I am getting mighty tired of all of you who think SBS is the best thing since the cure to Polio pushing the "justification" of anti-SBS sentiments into anyone who questions it.

 

WHY DON'T YOU GO OUT AND PROVE THINGS YOURSELF?????????????

 

If you are sooooo sold on the efficacy and savings, then PROVE us "naysayers" wrong with your own research which backs up your Thesis.  Just WHAT is so hard to comprehend about that whole process?????

 

Have YOU NEVER had college/university courses where you're given a protagonist/antigonist view on a subject and asked to justify it by your OWN research to prove the point you've been assigned?  Why can't that be something applied here?  WHY in the FARKING FARK is it MY job to prove all of my points, especially given that YOU -- who've fallen for the Kool-Aid® the MTA gives you -- only cite what you've been given as talking points?  YOU should be able to run circles around me with all sorts of back-up -- YET you basically have nothing except your given points.

 

Don't take this personally, Bobtehpanda, but to form rational arguments, then BOTH sides need to cite their reason(s) in proving a point.  You may say that I offer nothing, except all that I've seen thusfar is the same old crap I could read on the MTA website -- NOTHING concrete.

 

There are plenty here who DON'T like it when I bring up my own area and things that happen.  So WHAT makes you think you're going to entertain anything outside of NYC-based thoughts?  The Green Line with the MBTA is a good example of plain out-of-control "Oh this will be wonderful" thinking -- except when it came to last week's events.  My own area's "If we build it they will come" thinking of NON-public transport users flocking to a multi-billion dollar train line -- JUST BECAUSE.  The Cleveland RTA's own "Health Line" which everybody hails as some cure for their region's transit problems, even though if it weren't for the "sponsorship" (yes, purposeful quotes there) it wouldn't really be as "successful" (once again, you're catching on) as they lead everyone to believe -- quite simply RTA couldn't afford it if they were running it on their own.

 

The list goes on and on.

 

The biggest problem -- as I see it -- is the MOST transit-centric city in the country FOR DECADES somehow cannot keep their captive customer base satisfied in getting them around town.  Especially on Local buses.  Anyone who knows NYC transit (including us "outsiders") KNOWS that Express buses replace subway service -- and should operate as such.  Subway is the "Express Bus" over Local/Limited service.  And Local/Limited is pretty much for "getting around town."  YET, the MTA has even screwed that up.  And so, those of you using buses as transport complain about all of those people clogging streets because they use cars/taxis/Uber because of the MTA not living up to what they say they are going to do.  NOW, you're going to think that this agency -- who can't even get their OWN city transit methods under some semblence of control and order to move the masses -- is going to make everything better on routes where THEY can't even get Limited-Stop buses to work EFFICIENTLY just by putting stainless-steel fare collection machines on the sidewalks, re-route traffic by putting bus lanes in, and employing all the other peripheral, distractive elements while STILL moving customers JUST AS SLOW AS BEFORE.  And THAT is called "success" to a whole lot of you.

 

Want a TL;DR ?

 

PROVE once and for all to all of us "naysayers" BY YOUR OWN RESEARCH -- or by a qualified, audited source -- that SBS actually LIVES UP to all of its selling points.  Yes, I'll keep harping on one point of contention: on-time-performance.  Why?  Because THAT is a significant reason customers of all ilks across the country, and dare I say, around the world, hold dear when it comes to CHOOSING PUBLIC TRANSPORT when it comes to their individual transit needs.

 

Switzerland and Japan have meticulous records of on-time performance, and brag about it.  Why can't New York?

-Your arguments are based on the premise that individual riders should care if the MTA is overselling SBS or not. That is a very unrealistic expectation to place upon riders who likely only care about the performance of the route(s) they regularly utilize.

- SBS is not a case of 'build it and they will come'. The SBS routes all had really high ridership before it was implemented so it's either you have tens of thousands of riders annoyed by slow and overcrowded buses or you improve their ride even if its just slightly.

- On time performance is not the main reason buses have the stigma they do in New York and across the country. They do so because of a) the clientele that ride them and b) speed of the trip in actual time or relative to alternative methods. If we continue to cater to auto drivers by offering them all the road space possible then neither of the above will change. We need to look into more streets that could get the Fulton Mall treatment where only buses are allowed to drive on it. If the only real complaint about SBS is that it doesn't remove the cars then we know what to do. Let's see you use the on time performance rant with our subway which has pathetic OTP by world standards.

[checkmatechamp13]

One thing that isn't clear to me is why they don't have artics on the S79? Granted the hybrids move but some of these buses are pretty packed.  

 

The MTA uses artics as an excuse to cut service. They run 2 articulated buses for every 3 regular buses, which means that if buses ran every 10 minutes with regular buses, they would run every 15 minutes with articulateds.

 

The solution is to add more service, not run artics.

 

 

3rd. I only said that the S79 SBS is successful for what it currently is and what's massively changed on the route. The S79 used to take over an hour(roughly about 80 minutes) just to commute to/from Staten Island, now the route shaves at least 30 minutes from the commute, even more at times. That line was the only one that went from an 80+ stop local route(I think it was 88 stops) to a 20-25 stop SBS route. Granted, it should've been a limited from the get-go. But that line needed something for years, and the way they planned it out was pretty good, even though it's not a true SBS route by design,

In short, most of the SBS routes share the same problems. But since we're talking about the S79, that's something you have to experience yourself. To get from Bay Ridge to Staten Island Mall in 35-40 minutes compared to a 75-80 minute ride, you can't beat that. If the S79 had both artics and off-board fare payment. It would be far better than the rest of the current routes.

 

The S79 is wonderful, but it does not save 30+ minutes compared to the old trip. When I ride the bus at night with no traffic, and the B/O putting the pedal to the metal, it still takes around 45 minutes (Trust me, I have to make a connection to the S44/59, so I have to time it perfectly). During the day, it's closer to an hour.

 

They didn't add off-board payment for the line mostly because of the already bad amount of farebeating on the island. And as of a few years ago, they've been having undercover cops riding the buses out on the island. I've witnessed instances where they've been ticketing/arresting farebeaters, including kids.

 

http://www.mta.info/news/2012/09/03/select-bus-service-has-arrived-s79

 

Unlike other Select Bus Service routes, the new SBS S79 will not employ off-board fare collection, as boarding times were determined not to be a primary cause for bus delays. 

 

 

Along Hunts Point Avenue I would supplement the Bx34 with another route coming from Washington Heights.  I think it would be great if Hunts Point was served by different buses with longer headways but came from different areas of the Bronx, than one bus with shorter headways (like the current service pattern).

 

The question is: Are there really that many Bx6 riders traveling from Hunts Point all the way out to Washington Heights & High Bridge?

 

At this point I think the MTA will skip the LTD part of the Bx6 and just try to convert the entire route to SBS like the M60, M86, and Q44. I agree that an LTD should be on the route like all you guys as I mentioned in the very first post of this thread, but if the MTA decides to be like, "Hey, it would be best to turn the Bx6 into a complete SBS route like the M86 in Manhattan instead of listening to others about leaving a local on the route for reliable service", then basically, there will not be any improvements along this corridor. And to note, I'm not even 100% sure if they want to put bus lanes on the Bx6, like most other routes do. I don't think bus lanes will always be the answer because like the Merrick Blvd SBS, there may be NIMBYs complaining about how the bus lanes will make them lose their parking spots and make traffic worse on 161/163 St. And the artics are already going to take up more space if the Bx6 gets artics.

 

Merrick Blvd is completely different from 161st/163rd in terms of demographics. The area is denser, and the people are lower-income, which would mean that there would likely be a lot less opposition to a bus lane.

 

But at the same time, it doesn't appear that traffic is too much of an issue on the Bx6, except for some parts along the western end.

 

If anything I think the Bx6 can use a Limited first before having SBS right away. The Bx46 was the MTA's lame excuse to help the Bx6 without really adding any service on Bx6 . Look how that's turned out. I think even with an extension of the Bx46 that won't help. The MTA needs to improve the route itself. What is wrong with short turning buses at Grand Concourse instead of touching Manhattan?

 

The purpose of the Bx46 was to provide more coverage to Hunts Point. It had nothing to do with helping out the Bx6 (which it barely does). 

 

That's what they should've used it to do. If they extended it over to Yankee Stadium (as the community itself suggested), it would provide additional capacity along 163rd Street, as well as improve access to Hunts Point as well. (Since people coming off routes like the Bx41 SBS that the MTA brags so much about would have a direct route to Viele Avenue, Barretto Point Park, etc). 

 

I dont think the Bx6 needs SBS. I mean, you have a lot of people farebeating. From what I've seen, it seems to concentrate at Southern Blvd, coming off the subway, where there's a lot of farebeaters. There will be increased costs just to benefit a portion of riders. However, the numbers are high even with farebeating, and the the same can be said for the Bx41. Although, I dont really believe that will improve the Bx6. There needs to be more buses on the Bx6. You could possibly implement a limited/ local pattern, I guess. This would be a good time to extend the Bx46 to Yankee Stadium.

 

I would think it would be harder to farebeat on the Bx6 SBS. The B/O's job is not to stop farebeaters, but the Eagle Team's sole purpose is to do that. 

 

A limited would be useless.  What exactly would be the advantage of it when it wouldn't have off board payment?  That is one of the main reasons why the Bx6 is so slow to begin with in addition to the traffic lights and too many stops.

 

Limited = Skipped stops = Faster service

 

What you're describing is primarily an overcrowding issue. Here's what I would do:

 

Weekday Daytime:

Bx46: Every 30 minutes, from Yankee Stadium to the Hunts Point Food Market. (5 AM- 8 PM)

Bx6 Local: Every 10 minutes rush hours, Every 15 minutes middays, using artics, from Yankee Stadium to Hunts Point Avenue

Bx6 Limited: Every 10 minutes rush hours, every 15 minutes middays, using standards

 

Evenings/ Late Nights:

Bx46: Every 30 minutes as is

Bx6 Local: Every 12 minutes from 8 PM to 10 PM to Hunts Point Avenue . After 10 PM, service on the entire route is local, as is, every 15 minutes, using standards.

 

Saturday Daytime (9 AM to 8 PM): 

Bx46: Every 30 minutes, from Yankee Stadium to Hunts Point Food Market

Bx6 Local: Every 12 minutes, from Yankee Stadium to Hunts Point Avenue , with Artics. 

Bx6 Limited: Every 10 minutes  using standards

 

Evening/LATE Nights:

Bx46: Every 30 minutes, as is

Bx6 Local: As is, with standards

 

Sunday Morning, up to 1 PM

Bx6 as currently set-up, along with Bx46 service to/from Yankee Stadium

 

Sunday Afternoon (1 PM-7 PM)

Bx46: Every 30 minutes to/from Yankee Stadium

Bx6 Local: Every 12 minutes from Yankee Stadium to Hunts Point Avenue

Bx6 Limited: Every 10 minutes  using standards

 

The Bx46 should never be run "as is". It's not just about providing additional capacity along 163rd Street. It's about providing better connectivity to the subway and the rest of the Bronx bus system. If somebody lives by GC and Fordham Road, how are they supposed to get down to Barretto Point Park right now? They have to make two transfers, one of which involves a bus every 30 minutes. Do you think that's supposed to attract riders? Even if buses aren't full along 163rd Street during evenings and late nights, the whole purpose of the Bx46 was to improve access to the western part of Hunts Point, which it's doing a crappy job of considering it only connects to 2 subway stations and a couple of bus routes (and runs on crappy headways to boot).

[Fresh Pond]

The MTA uses artics as an excuse to cut service. They run 2 articulated buses for every 3 regular buses, which means that if buses ran every 10 minutes with regular buses, they would run every 15 minutes with articulateds.

 

The solution is to add more service, not run artics.

That's not always the case.

 

Look at the M34/A SBS when they were using the shorties. Once the artics came in, it was a bus-for-bus replacement. Now for lines like the M23, yeah they did that once the D60s came in, then realized it bit them in the ass in the long run and eventually added more buses.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

The MTA uses artics as an excuse to cut service. They run 2 articulated buses for every 3 regular buses, which means that if buses ran every 10 minutes with regular buses, they would run every 15 minutes with articulateds.

 

 

You're counting seats on the buses, not buses on the street.  The usual replacement is roughly 3 articulateds for every 4 standards (e.g. the fleet requirement for the Q44 went from 47 standards to 36 artics), so that you still get an increase in capacity with fewer buses. 

[checkmatechamp13]

You're counting seats on the buses, not buses on the street.  The usual replacement is roughly 3 articulateds for every 4 standards (e.g. the fleet requirement for the Q44 went from 47 standards to 36 artics), so that you still get an increase in capacity with fewer buses. 

 

That makes sense. But still, given that the S79 isn't particularly frequent during off-peak hours, I'd still prefer that buses be operated more frequently over adding artics (even if it means a more crowded ride). Plus, from what I've seen, B/Os on articulated buses tend to operate a little more cautiously, because a 60 foot bus has more of an opportunity to clip cars or pedestrians compared to a 40 foot bus (personally, whenever I see an M100 and M101 together at a stop, I always go for the M100 because it uses the 40 foot buses. Of course, there's been times I've gotten burned, but for the most part, they save a couple of minutes).

 

Now, if it could be guaranteed that the savings generated from operating articulated buses on the S79 could be reinvested into worthwhile improvements (i.e. Not creating shuttles on 30 minute headways that are designed to attract minimal ridership), then I'd be more in favor of it.

[Cait Sith]

The S79 is wonderful, but it does not save 30+ minutes compared to the old trip. When I ride the bus at night with no traffic, and the B/O putting the pedal to the metal, it still takes around 45 minutes (Trust me, I have to make a connection to the S44/59, so I have to time it perfectly). During the day, it's closer to an hour.

 

 

 

http://www.mta.info/news/2012/09/03/select-bus-service-has-arrived-s79

 

Unlike other Select Bus Service routes, the new SBS S79 will not employ off-board fare collection, as boarding times were determined not to be a primary cause for bus delays. 

 

Interesting, because the times I've ridden it(and still do very actively both in and out of the rush hour), I've gotten to Brooklyn in roughly 45 minutes, which is still good compared to the 70-80 minute debacle it used to be. So yeah, at least from my experiences, it has saved at the very least, 20 minutes, sometimes 30.

 

As for the 2nd part, we could believe that, but you and I both know that the TA tends to both fabricate things and deceive the public. We know very well that Staten Island is a haven for farebeating. They surely didn't want to take that chance with the machines. The MTA wouldn't address the rampant farebeating on the island in a press release or on their website.....

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Interesting, because the times I've ridden it(and still do very actively both in and out of the rush hour), I've gotten to Brooklyn in roughly 45 minutes, which is still good compared to the 70-80 minute debacle it used to be. So yeah, at least from my experiences, it has saved at the very least, 20 minutes, sometimes 30.

 

As for the 2nd part, we could believe that, but you and I both know that the TA tends to both fabricate things and deceive the public. We know very well that Staten Island is a haven for farebeating. They surely didn't want to take that chance with the machines. The MTA wouldn't address the rampant farebeating on the island in a press release or on their website.....

lol... Very true.  However, the lone Board Member from Staten Island (Allen Cappelli) definitely acknowledged years ago that it was a problem and work was done behind the scenes for a little while to combat the problem, but I wonder if that has been maintained?  I'm led to believe that isn't the case but I don't know.  The times that I do go back to Staten Island, it is usually via the express bus, and I would say that just about all of the farebeating that I've witnessed has been on local buses, all on the North Shore of course. lol  The S79 has never struck me as a bus with rampant farebeating.  Can't recall seeing anyone board and not pay.  The problem seems to be on the North Shore, particularly on lines that either pass by or go near housing projects.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

That makes sense. But still, given that the S79 isn't particularly frequent during off-peak hours, I'd still prefer that buses be operated more frequently over adding artics (even if it means a more crowded ride). Plus, from what I've seen, B/Os on articulated buses tend to operate a little more cautiously, because a 60 foot bus has more of an opportunity to clip cars or pedestrians compared to a 40 foot bus (personally, whenever I see an M100 and M101 together at a stop, I always go for the M100 because it uses the 40 foot buses. Of course, there's been times I've gotten burned, but for the most part, they save a couple of minutes).

 

Now, if it could be guaranteed that the savings generated from operating articulated buses on the S79 could be reinvested into worthwhile improvements (i.e. Not creating shuttles on 30 minute headways that are designed to attract minimal ridership), then I'd be more in favor of it.

I've been on plenty of artics that move just fine where the driver floors the bus. I was on an M15SBS last night.  We got from Houston and 1st up to 23rd in about 10 minutes.  Pretty good timing. If the driver sucks, it doesn't matter what type of bus is being driven.

[lupojohn]

Extending the Bx46 would be nice since that route is virtually non-existent in every way.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Extending the Bx46 would be nice since that route is virtually non-existent in every way.

I see no point in extending one route to mitigate the issues of the unreliable Bx6.  That would just make the Bx46 unreliable as well.  

[MysteriousBtrain]

I see no point in extending one route to mitigate the issues of the unreliable Bx6.  That would just make the Bx46 unreliable as well.  

It's not like the Bx46 is that useful anyways. A mini extension  IMO would not really hurt so much. Howerer, if frequencies are increased, then we have something to talk about. The crowds on 161/163 are a great reason why artics should show up on the Bx6.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

It's not like the Bx46 is that useful anyways. A mini extension  IMO would not really hurt so much. Howerer, if frequencies are increased, then we have something to talk about. The crowds on 161/163 are a great reason why artics should show up on the Bx6.

I disagree.  A mini version would only help if changes were made along the Bx6 corridor to enable a speedier commute.  Every time that I'm down there tutoring, I often times out walk the Bx6 from the BxM4 drop-off stop at Grand Concourse & 161st all the way to Boricua College.  That's pretty pathetic.  

[MysteriousBtrain]

I disagree. A mini version would only help if changes were made along the Bx6 corridor to enable a speedier commute. Every time that I'm down there tutoring, I often times out walk the Bx6 from the BxM4 drop-off stop at Grand Concourse & 161st all the way to Boricua College. That's pretty pathetic.

TBH the only thing that can make a fast trip are two obvious things: Bus lanes and the fare machines. If neither are implemented, you would look at one sh!tty ass route that does nothing for its consumers.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

TBH the only thing that can make a fast trip are two obvious things: Bus lanes and the fare machines. If neither are implemented, you would look at one sh!tty ass route that does nothing for its consumers.

Those things along with signal priority...

[checkmatechamp13]

Interesting, because the times I've ridden it(and still do very actively both in and out of the rush hour), I've gotten to Brooklyn in roughly 45 minutes, which is still good compared to the 70-80 minute debacle it used to be. So yeah, at least from my experiences, it has saved at the very least, 20 minutes, sometimes 30.

 

As for the 2nd part, we could believe that, but you and I both know that the TA tends to both fabricate things and deceive the public. We know very well that Staten Island is a haven for farebeating. They surely didn't want to take that chance with the machines. The MTA wouldn't address the rampant farebeating on the island in a press release or on their website.....

 

I think SBS actually makes it harder to farebeat, since there's more of a risk of being caught by the Eagle Team. (Also, the Bx41 definitely has its share of farebeaters and SBS works out just fine over there. On my trips up there pre-SBS, it was definitely higher than anything on Staten Island).

 

In any case, the (relative) infrequency of the S79 makes it better if there's no POP. Remember that one of the big complaints about SBS is missing the bus while trying to get a ticket, and the S79 is generally less frequent than the other SBS routes.

 

I've been on plenty of artics that move just fine where the driver floors the bus. I was on an M15SBS last night.  We got from Houston and 1st up to 23rd in about 10 minutes.  Pretty good timing. If the driver sucks, it doesn't matter what type of bus is being driven.

 

Even with a good B/O, I've noticed that they have to be a little more cautious. Not enough to impact the trip significantly, but between the higher crowds building up at stops, the difficulty merging, and the few extra minutes on the headway itself, it adds up. For the record, I'm not completely opposed to it, though, but my preference for the S79 is to just run more 40-footers.

 

Also, keep in mind that part of the reason the S79 is so crowded is because of the lack of alternatives. Remember that there's only 3 routes to Brooklyn. And on top of that, I've seen crowds of kids from Tottenville HS take the SIR from Huguenot to Eltingville and then pile on the S79 to reach the SI Mall, when the S55/56 travel directly from Tottenville HS to the SI Mall. What does that tell you about the quality of service on those lines?

 

Of course, the S79 is definitely a great bus line, and it's great that ridership has increased, but part of the problem is that for many, it's the only good bus line near them. I don't mind crowded buses, but we need to fix the underlying issues. The MTA is doing an SI Bus Study right now, and the community (myself included) is trying to emphasize that, among the many other issues regarding service out here.

 

I see no point in extending one route to mitigate the issues of the unreliable Bx6.  That would just make the Bx46 unreliable as well.  

 

It's not just about being unreliable, it's also about improving access to Hunts Point. As it is right now, it only connects to a few bus lines and 2 subway stops, which explains . The community itself suggested extending it further west (see Page 155) to improve access to other parts of The Bronx and Manhattan. It would connect directly to the and Bx41 SBS (which they love to brag about), among other routes, opening up access to a whole swath of the borough.

 

 

[B35 via Church]

I'd rather have an "unreliable" bus around with far more passengers than the current Bx46 gets utilizing it, than a reliable bus hardly anyone is bothering to give a second thought about.....

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I'd rather have an "unreliable" bus around with far more passengers than the current Bx46 gets utilizing it, than a reliable bus hardly anyone is bothering to give a second thought about.....

I believe his issue is more with the headway of the route, given that it is every 30 minutes. I mean, there are routes runnig every 30 minutes in the system too that are unreliable. Every bus route has some sort of unreliability factor. For example, the Q67 during the midday hours runs every half-hour, but is constantly delayed due to either heavy traffic leading up to Greenpoint Avenue going Eastbound, or the amount of interlining needed to be done. Sometimes, the buses come within minutes of each other, leaving huge gaps in service, but that's not often either.

 

Bus schedules can also be adjusted add additional time for both routes, as needed. Checkmate also brings up a good point with connectivity. The Bx46 only drops one off at the subway, and that sucks if you still need to get to another bus afterward. And if done correctly, the added service would allow for loads to be more balanced. That's why I was more in favor of the Bx6 Limited (not really for faster service, since that would be next to impossible on that line anyways) without TSP.

[B35 via Church]

I believe his issue is more with the headway of the route, given that it is every 30 minutes. I mean, there are routes runnig every 30 minutes in the system too that are unreliable. Every bus route has some sort of unreliability factor. For example, the Q67 during the midday hours runs every half-hour, but is constantly delayed due to either heavy traffic leading up to Greenpoint Avenue going Eastbound, or the amount of interlining needed to be done. Sometimes, the buses come within minutes of each other, leaving huge gaps in service, but that's not often either......

I didn't get that from that particular statement from Via Garibaldi 8 at all.....

 

He flat out says "That would just make the Bx46 unreliable as well."

(an extension of the Bx46 would make it unreliable as he deems the Bx6 being)

 

If his issue was with the 30 minute headways, there would be no point implicating that the Bx46 as is, is reliable....