Around the Horn Posted October 17, 2016 Share #51 Posted October 17, 2016 I agree with this. I'm sick of the brawls for space. I got backhanded a lot last summer just trying to get to the seven open seats in the back. Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer To add to the concerns that may arise, let's not forget that these buses cross through destitute neighborhoods. Crowding wouldn't be as much an issue if freeloaders weren't given a pass. Also the operators need to be more finicky with the rear door switch. In addition, newer buses' rear doors can be driver controlled. believe they're called XD70s. I also believe the SBS artics also demonstrate this. Buses can't improve unless habits are quashed. I couldn't see myself ever driving buses because I'd be a stickler. I would be frowned upon for setting an example instead of going with the flow. This is how operators get hurt. Because one says it's OK but not the other... Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer I proposed something similar in past comments suggesting the B41 be local to Bergen and a new designation for all time ltd service to Kings Plaza. That's when I mentioned the Staten Island naming system. Regardless of what the names are, two endpoints is confusing for the same route. When I text for bus routes I'm only given two options not three. THAT'S confusing. Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer Remember what we said the last time, about your embellishments? Also, dog whistles much? POP and Eagle teams on all bus routes should be a requirement, with the new fare payment system. Quite honestly, they should be out there already. Get the Eagle team out there on Utica Avenue and fine everybody who doesn't have a MetroCard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bx41 Wakefield Posted October 18, 2016 Share #52 Posted October 18, 2016 I held off on this thread for a reason... Wanted to see the nature of the replies before I responded.... In the midst of replying in here a few mins ago, this thing overheated & shut off.... Screw it, I'm not typing all of that again. Basically, I said, since I've never been an advocate of artics since their inception here, I would say every single route should be running 40' buses on em.... Of course, that is 100% contingent on service increases (that I know won't happen)..... Also said that most Bronx routes, aside from my bias, shouldn't be running artics on them regardless.... After they got introduced on the Bx12, all hell broke loose... The old 55 got em, then routes like the 40/41/42, then IINM, they started running on the concourse, then routes like the 9/19/22/39 got em... I believe the 4 & the 5 were the last to get em in the Bronx...... Regardless, current status quo on & acceptance of artics IMO justifies a future increase in the amount of artics being added to NYC's arsenal (hell, look no further than the Brewer routes)... I simply refuse to advocate that. The first routes in the system to get artics in 1996 were the Bx1/2 and Bx55. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pranavbhat924 Posted October 18, 2016 Share #53 Posted October 18, 2016 More buses needed on the q37 Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted October 25, 2016 Share #54 Posted October 25, 2016 In the Bronx, I would propose de-articulating the Bx5 (can easily be satisfied with a rigid between Pelham Bay and Story Avenue,a nd frequencies between Story Avenue and West Farms don't warrant an articulated bus either), Bx12 Local (and shorten it to run only between Pelham Bay Park and Grand Concourse when the Bx12 SBS is running---stops west of Grand Concourse are all served by a nearby SBS stop, Bx22, and Bx39 (same reasons as Bx5). Artics would be reallocated to the Bx6 (some runs) and Bx36 (most runs), and if any remain, to the B6 and B15. (The B41, B82, and Q58 would be next in the pecking order in Brooklyn Division, and the Q5 and Q6 in Queens.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassTransitHonchkrow Posted October 25, 2016 Share #55 Posted October 25, 2016 Remember what we said the last time, about your embellishments? Probably was a while back. But I stand by my remarks. Enforcement requires endorsement, and motivation. I know full well the system was designed to fail. Does that mean I, or anyone, should be idle tongued about it? Nope. But the fare will still go up. Won't be long before I start mortgaging 10% of my soul to cover costs. ???? Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow ???? THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 25, 2016 Share #56 Posted October 25, 2016 Probably was a while back. But I stand by my remarks. Enforcement requires endorsement, and motivation. I know full well the system was designed to fail. Does that mean I, or anyone, should be idle tongued about it? Nope. But the fare will still go up. Won't be long before I start mortgaging 10% of my soul to cover costs. Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer I don't know what mortgaging 10% of your soul for Metrocard money says about the value of your soul, but whatever. Whatever happened to the double deckers? I feel like they'd be useful on the express buses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted October 25, 2016 Share #57 Posted October 25, 2016 I don't know what mortgaging 10% of your soul for Metrocard money says about the value of your soul, but whatever. Whatever happened to the double deckers? I feel like they'd be useful on the express buses. They were tried years ago on the X17 and I don't the cared for them due to the height/safety issues. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/double-decker-buses-commuters-feel-tourists-mta-test-run-article-1.323085 I didn't like the idea of them when they came to Staten Island, and I am glad they didn't become part of the fleet. If those sensors don't work, then what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 25, 2016 Share #58 Posted October 25, 2016 They were tried years ago on the X17 and I don't the cared for them due to the height/safety issues. http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/double-decker-buses-commuters-feel-tourists-mta-test-run-article-1.323085 I didn't like the idea of them when they came to Staten Island, and I am glad they didn't become part of the fleet. If those sensors don't work, then what? While the height definitely sucked, double decks are pretty well suited for the type of stopping that express buses do, since they have lots of seats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted October 25, 2016 Share #59 Posted October 25, 2016 While the height definitely sucked, double decks are pretty well suited for the type of stopping that express buses do, since they have lots of seats. Those buses just aren't practical for local buses or express buses, especially from a boarding stance. Apparently the was considering using those in place of artics but the transverses and other areas of Manhattan (i.e. Riverside Drive) created height issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 25, 2016 Share #60 Posted October 25, 2016 Those buses just aren't practical for local buses or express buses, especially from a boarding stance. Apparently the was considering using those in place of artics but the transverses and other areas of Manhattan (i.e. Riverside Drive) created height issues. They're not really supposed to be a replacement for artics. The ideal use case of a double decker is one where ridership tends to stay on for long periods of time and there isn't a lot of churn along the middle segments of the route, which as far as I know pretty accurately describes an express route (since you can't disembark in the outer boroughs or embark in Manhattan when going towards Manhattan, and vice versa) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted October 25, 2016 Share #61 Posted October 25, 2016 They're not really supposed to be a replacement for artics. The ideal use case of a double decker is one where ridership tends to stay on for long periods of time and there isn't a lot of churn along the middle segments of the route, which as far as I know pretty accurately describes an express route (since you can't disembark in the outer boroughs or embark in Manhattan when going towards Manhattan, and vice versa) That is actually not completely true. Staten Island has transfer points within the borough and the BxM18 serves as a transfer point within Manhattan, be it going to Riverdale or Downtown/Wall Street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted October 26, 2016 Share #62 Posted October 26, 2016 On the topic of artics, what really might be needed is the concept of a stretched 45-foot low-floor urban transit bus, as that would work on routes that are too busy for 40-foot buses, but aren't busy enough for artics. I'd like to see New Flyer or Nova design one (with a third axle to satisfy axle load limits). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted October 26, 2016 Share #63 Posted October 26, 2016 On the topic of artics, what really might be needed is the concept of a stretched 45-foot low-floor urban transit bus, as that would work on routes that are too busy for 40-foot buses, but aren't busy enough for artics. I'd like to see New Flyer or Nova design one (with a third axle to satisfy axle load limits). The main problem with this (and proposals that have been floated in the past to use small buses) is that this means more fleets with more specialized use cases. Keeping everything at 40 ft and 60 ft makes maintenance and scheduling much easier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted October 26, 2016 Share #64 Posted October 26, 2016 On the topic of artics, what really might be needed is the concept of a stretched 45-foot low-floor urban transit bus, as that would work on routes that are too busy for 40-foot buses, but aren't busy enough for artics. I'd like to see New Flyer or Nova design one (with a third axle to satisfy axle load limits).There was one already. The NABI 45C CompoBus. We all know how that turned out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
78 via Stew Leonards Posted October 28, 2016 Share #65 Posted October 28, 2016 BL 45 does not need any artics at all BL 42 on the other hand needs a lot of em and doesnt have enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassTransitHonchkrow Posted October 29, 2016 Share #66 Posted October 29, 2016 I don't know what mortgaging 10% of your soul for Metrocard money says about the value of your soul, but whatever. I'm being metaphorical. MetroCard fare increase are one third steeper than the national inflation rate. It's hard to ride or profit from public transportation if you price everybody out of it. The 10% soul was simply a cruel self inflicted joke. Kind of like having to sell your body plasma. ???? Eric Shields | #MassTransitHonchkrow ???? THE Hudson Valley's essential Fare-blazer ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulrivera Posted October 30, 2016 Share #67 Posted October 30, 2016 The main problem with this (and proposals that have been floated in the past to use small buses) is that this means more fleets with more specialized use cases. Keeping everything at 40 ft and 60 ft makes maintenance and scheduling much easier. Plus depots that don't already have 45 foot buses would need to rework some of their maintenance areas. For instance, the only local routes in the Bronx you can readily run a 45 foot transit bus would be on the Bx23 and the Q50 since ECH handles 45 foot equipment on a regular basis, and those two routes don't really need 45 footers to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeC Posted October 30, 2016 Share #68 Posted October 30, 2016 Plus depots that don't already have 45 foot buses would need to rework some of their maintenance areas. For instance, the only local routes in the Bronx you can readily run a 45 foot transit bus would be on the Bx23 and the Q50 since ECH handles 45 foot equipment on a regular basis, and those two routes don't really need 45 footers to begin with. The Q25 and 53 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted October 30, 2016 Share #69 Posted October 30, 2016 The Q25 and 53He said in the Bronx. Those are in Queens depots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted October 30, 2016 Share #70 Posted October 30, 2016 To be honest, I don't think any articulated route should go back to using shorties. There should be more routes getting them. Maybe during the overnight hours they can have 40 footers. Except for the select routes that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeC Posted October 30, 2016 Share #71 Posted October 30, 2016 He said in the Bronx. Those are in Queens depots. Yea I know but for the same reason College Point could handle them too is what im saying. But, both are planned to go SBS and should get artics anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MassTransitHonchkrow Posted November 9, 2016 Share #72 Posted November 9, 2016 There was one already. The NABI 45C CompoBus. We all know how that turned out... Did a search on them to get a good look. For all that strive to know about Transit, my know how of buses is like Swiss cheese. They do look sleek enough to squeeze through Ossining's South side with ease. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.