This is the absolute worst way to travel in New York City

[IAlam]

The love affair with SBS IMO is nothing more than their desire to cut costs.  Have new buses paid for with federal funds and cut overhead where possible, and it's a success!

Well at least their being smarter with their money, if you can get someone else to pay it for you, why wouldn't you? 

[checkmatechamp13]

Reliability and outdated routes are the two biggest problems with the buses. 

 

A comment about reliability: Aside from bad schedule writing (too much time between timepoints in some cases and not enough time between others), another issue that needs to be looked into is buses leaving their terminals on-time. A few days ago, I was waiting for the S93, saw that the bus was sitting at the terminal (one stop away) and scheduled to depart in 5 minutes. Finally, around 15 minutes later, the bus pulls up, and when I get off the bus at my transfer point, I see another S93 right behind it. Now maybe there's the chance that he needed to take a bathroom break or something, but how often does this go on around the city?

 

Another issue is at the ferry, oftentimes the B/Os will see a whole crowd of people waiting, but if the schedule says they leave at say 4:30pm (to meet a ferry that arrived at say, 4:25pm), they'll take their time, turn on the bus, and begin pulling into the stand at 4:30pm, and by the time they actually leave, they're already 5 minutes late when there was no reason for the holdup. 

[78 via Stew Leonards]

this is what happens with communists and bums like Bloomberg and DeBlahblah in office.  Man I miss Rudy in City Hall

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

I'm basing this mainly on BusTime observations of the higher ridership routes, but service seems much worse during the PM Rush (on the Bx12 at least I can point to actual riding experience backing this) than the AM Rush and i'm not even talking about pure number of BPH. The spacing of buses is far more erratic during the PM rush hour than the AM on routes like the M15, B44 and others and i'm stuck wondering how it's not the reverse given the AM Rush is more demanding and has heavier traffic levels in most areas. 

 

Even on the and lines the service during PM Rush hour makes AM Rush service (which isn't the greatest itself) seem like a godsend. Is there something that happens at the strike of noon that causes any service management skill within the agency to just disappear or something?

[MHV9218]

this is what happens with communists and bums like Bloomberg and DeBlahblah in office.  Man I miss Rudy in City Hall

 

Rudy was an enemy of the MTA who worked with the governor to prevent it from being funded properly. He's part of the reason buses are late.

[checkmatechamp13]

I'm basing this mainly on BusTime observations of the higher ridership routes, but service seems much worse during the PM Rush (on the Bx12 at least I can point to actual riding experience backing this) than the AM Rush and i'm not even talking about pure number of BPH. The spacing of buses is far more erratic during the PM rush hour than the AM on routes like the M15, B44 and others and i'm stuck wondering how it's not the reverse given the AM Rush is more demanding and has heavier traffic levels in most areas. 

 

Even on the and lines the service during PM Rush hour makes AM Rush service (which isn't the greatest itself) seem like a godsend. Is there something that happens at the strike of noon that causes any service management skill within the agency to just disappear or something?

 

The only thing I can think of is that in the AM rush, most buses are starting their trips fresh from the depot (lines like the Bx12 & B44 have like 2 buses covering the whole route overnight, and probably go to something like 40-50 (when you consider the locals & SBS buses) by the time you're at the height of the AM rush. In the PM rush, you still have some pull-ins and pull-outs, but not as many as in the AM rush, so any delays that happened back at 2-3pm when the schoolkids got let out didn't have a chance to clear up.

 

Probably a similar situation with the subway lines. In the morning, you're getting trains fresh from the yard, while in the afternoon, a lot of those trains have already been out for a few hours to meet the midday & school dismissal demand.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Isn't this what they should be doing anyways? People are whingeing on and on about waste all the time.

See below...

Well at least their being smarter with their money, if you can get someone else to pay it for you, why wouldn't you? 

To a certain degree they are.  They've argued that they've continued to cut costs, but they've done so in very underhanded ways in some cases.  For example, if a driver calls out sick, they may decide not to replace that driver, meaning that bus doesn't run.  That is not my idea of being fiscally responsible by purposely not running service.  This was something that they admitted to once media outlets got wind of it, and it's something that they have likely continued to do as a way to "cut costs".  

 

A comment about reliability: Aside from bad schedule writing (too much time between timepoints in some cases and not enough time between others), another issue that needs to be looked into is buses leaving their terminals on-time. A few days ago, I was waiting for the S93, saw that the bus was sitting at the terminal (one stop away) and scheduled to depart in 5 minutes. Finally, around 15 minutes later, the bus pulls up, and when I get off the bus at my transfer point, I see another S93 right behind it. Now maybe there's the chance that he needed to take a bathroom break or something, but how often does this go on around the city?

 

Another issue is at the ferry, oftentimes the B/Os will see a whole crowd of people waiting, but if the schedule says they leave at say 4:30pm (to meet a ferry that arrived at say, 4:25pm), they'll take their time, turn on the bus, and begin pulling into the stand at 4:30pm, and by the time they actually leave, they're already 5 minutes late when there was no reason for the holdup. 

I'd say it's becoming worse on both the local and express buses.  Now I understand that drivers need a break, but some guys are purposely leaving the terminal late because they can't stay on schedule, so what you have is one guy leaving on time, another guy leaving 5 - 10 minutes late and then staying late and arriving 20 - 30 minutes behind schedule, and NEVER getting back on schedule the entire day.  This has a huge impact on service too because if I know that a certain driver will be driving who is consistently late, I will make every effort to avoid that bus.  You even hear that sort of conversation among drivers.  

 

Driver #1: Oh well I'm early so I'm sitting at such and such stop.

Driver #2:  Well I ALWAYS leave late so I'm never early.

 

The other thing that I've heard is some drivers now claim that management doesn't want them sitting at the stop idling, so they won't pull into the first stop until they are due.  We had a driver on the BxM6 like that.  He had his bus right at the first stop.  There's a line of people waiting in the scorching heat to get on, and they asked him if he could let them on earlier and be courteous since it was so hot out and the bus is right there, and he claimed he couldn't because he could be written up for doing so.  Seems like a lot of stupid rules that need to be changed if you ask me.  The idea that it's okay for a driver to be late seems foolish.  It also allows some of them to abuse overtime since they can just say that they were stuck in traffic, etc.  

 

In my neighborhood I know a lot of people have been speaking up about this very issue and demanding that buses adhere to the schedule, even inquiring with drivers when they sit at bus stops for prolonged periods of time.

 

Rudy was an enemy of the MTA who worked with the governor to prevent it from being funded properly. He's part of the reason buses are late.

Rudy hasn't been in office for over 10 years, so how exactly is he part of the reason that buses are late? Yet another preposterous claim on your part... 

 

 

I think it's a little over dramatic to call it the worst way to travel around NYC. I think the proper way to way to look at it is that it is the hardest way to travel. There is always room for improvement. A study on how to deal with traffic can help.

 

It's actually quite accurate.  A trip via bus from the Upper West Side to the Upper East Side can take a good 45 minutes.  In addition to long waits, they continue to cut bus service on many lines to the bare bones, and make trips more inconvenient as times goes on changing the destination of buses in between trips/taking buses out of service mid-trip, and forcing riders on to other buses.  I'm certain that you have plenty of people that simply don't want to take the subway that still stick with the bus or that can't due to disabilities, etc., but when you see how long trips take, it's easy to understand why some give up and seek alternatives.

[MHV9218]

Rudy hasn't been in office for over 10 years, so how exactly is he part of the reason that buses are late? Yet another preposterous claim on your part... 

 

Capital Plans and major investment occur over longer periods of time. When folks like Giuliani colluded with the State to keep funding low even coming out of a surplus, that has ramifications for many years.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Capital Plans and major investment occur over longer periods of time. When folks like Giuliani colluded with the State to keep funding low even coming out of a surplus, that has ramifications for many years.

lol... Please.  That has NOTHING to do with why buses are late and you know it, as if somehow, the bus fleet is in such terrible shape more than 10 years after Giuliani left office. We've had a plethora of new buses coming in year after year, so that is just a big lie you're selling.  Buses are late because of liberals such as de Blasio who have done their damnest to make driving as miserable as possible in this city, ramming in bike lane after bike lane and more and more pedestrian plazas and ensuring that his folks at the DOT enforce Vision Zero to a "T" by having traffic signals not remain in sync and lowering the speed limit to 25 mph from 30, in addition to the asinine policies regarding adhering to bus schedules.

[MHV9218]

lol... Please.  That has NOTHING to do with why buses are late and you know it, as if somehow, the bus fleet is in such terrible shape more than 10 years after Giuliani left office. We've had a plethora of new buses coming in year after year, so that is just a big lie you're selling.  Buses are late because of liberals such as de Blasio who have done their damnest to make driving as miserable as possible in city, ramming in bike lane after bike lane and more and more pedestrian plazas and ensuring that his folks at the DOT enforce Vision Zero to a "T" by having traffic signals not remain in sync and lowering the speed limit to 25 mph from 30, in addition to the asinine policies regarding adhering to bus schedules.

 

You clearly don't understand MTA funding that well. Bus routes almost unilaterally lose money, while subways can actually break even. Whenever funding is an issue, bus service is the first to go. The problem is not just fleet age: it's scheduling, it's maintenance, it's the number of dispatchers, etc. With better funding, I guarantee you we would see a more efficient and quicker bus system. You're repeating a myth from the biased Post that safer streets mean slower traffic. I recognize you may only have one news source, but the Post is not reliable for anything besides Trump propaganda. If you actually review the studies on this, traffic calming measures have not made traffic slower. The Midtown-Times Square redirection, for example, actually lessened gridlock on many different avenues. The presence of more bike lanes is also a good thing, not a bad one, as more people out of cars is better for bus service, and fewer accidents also smooths traffic. Traffic signals are still in sync and if you really thought city buses were going 30mph, you must not have been traveling in NYC.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

You clearly don't understand MTA funding that well. Bus routes almost unilaterally lose money, while subways can actually break even. Whenever funding is an issue, bus service is the first to go. The problem is not just fleet age: it's scheduling, it's maintenance, it's the number of dispatchers, etc. With better funding, I guarantee you we would see a more efficient and quicker bus system. You're repeating a myth from the biased Post that safer streets mean slower traffic. I recognize you may only have one news source, but the Post is not reliable for anything besides Trump propaganda. If you actually review the studies on this, traffic calming measures have not made traffic slower. The Midtown-Times Square redirection, for example, actually lessened gridlock on many different avenues. The presence of more bike lanes is also a good thing, not a bad one, as more people out of cars is better for bus service, and fewer accidents also smooths traffic. Traffic signals are still in sync and if you really thought city buses were going 30mph, you must not have been traveling in NYC.

We're talking about why buses are late in 2016, not 2001.  Blaming someone who hasn't been in office for over 10 years is just absurd.  The last major round of service cuts we had was in 2010 when Bloomberg (not Giuliani) was in office.  The blame should lie with the current mayor and his ridiculous DOT policies and the .  For what it's worth, numerous reports have shown that Vision Zero has been ineffective in lowering fatalities.

 

 

 

Since de Blasio launched Vision Zero shortly after taking office, traffic deaths plummeted by 22% in two years; 2015 was hailed as the safest for city streets in history. But in the first six months of 2016, there have been 111 traffic deaths, up from 107 during the same period last year.

I guess AMNY has a hidden agenda too... 

 

Source: http://www.amny.com/transit/nypd-s-enforcement-of-vision-zero-traffic-initiative-slammed-in-new-report-1.12106566

 

Bike lanes are only good if people are actually using them.  In some cases they are useful, and in others, they have done nothing but add more congestion, as the people with bikes ride IN TRAFFIC instead of in the actual bike lanes.  I don't need a study to tell me this.  I see it on a daily basis throughout the city.  Traffic calming is another name for purposely adding congestion.  When you have 45,000 fewer cars entering the city but yet congestion is worse, I don't know what else to call it.

[MHV9218]

We're talking about why buses are late in 2016, not 2001.  Blaming someone who hasn't been in office for over 10 years is just absurd.  The last major round of service cuts we had was in 2010 when Bloomberg (not Giuliani) was in office.  The blame should lie with the current mayor and his ridiculous DOT policies and the .  For what it's worth, numerous reports have shown that Vision Zero has been ineffective in lowering fatalities.

 

I guess AMNY has a hidden agenda too... 

 

Source: http://www.amny.com/transit/nypd-s-enforcement-of-vision-zero-traffic-initiative-slammed-in-new-report-1.12106566

 

Bike lanes are only good if people are actually using them.  In some cases they are useful, and in others, they have done nothing but add more congestion, as the people with bikes ride IN TRAFFIC instead of in the actual bike lanes.  I don't need a study to tell me this.  I see it on a daily basis throughout the city.  Traffic calming is another name for purposely adding congestion.  When you have 45,000 fewer cars entering the city but yet congestion is worse, I don't know what else to call it.

 

If you actually read that article, you'd see it's calling for more enforcement, not less. Is that what you seek? Your 45,000 statistic is unsourced and ignores the influx of delivery traffic, trucks, Ubers, and all the other reasons traffic is up. 'Traffic calming' is not another name for purposely adding congestion; your Post is showing. Your anecdotes are also, statistically speaking, irrelevant. Bike lanes have been a huge success in the city.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

If you actually read that article, you'd see it's calling for more enforcement, not less. Is that what you seek? Your 45,000 statistic is unsourced and ignores the influx of delivery traffic, trucks, Ubers, and all the other reasons traffic is up. 'Traffic calming' is not another name for purposely adding congestion; your Post is showing. Your anecdotes are also, statistically speaking, irrelevant. Bike lanes have been a huge success in the city.

Is that so? I thought de Blasio's office said Ubers weren't the reason traffic was up.  Seems like they don't even know what's going on... What a surprise...

 

As for bike lanes being a success, according to who?  Numerous neighborhoods have been fighting their implementation (not including CitiBike and their bike stands in random spots throughout the city), and yet the DOT continues to put them in anyway without fully studying them and how they will impact neighborhoods and traffic flow.  I am all for bike lanes, but some of them are either useless or have been put in without sufficient planning on how to make them co-exist cohesively with existing traffic.

 

As for my 45,000 number, that's actually from the article I listed in my original post, so isn't something I just decided to make up.

[MHV9218]

Is that so? I thought de Blasio's office said Ubers weren't the reason traffic was up.  Seems like they don't even know what's going on... What a surprise...

 

As for bike lanes being a success, according to who?  Numerous neighborhoods have been fighting their implementation (not including CitiBike and their bike stands in random spots throughout the city), and yet the DOT continues to put them in anyway without fully studying them and how they will impact neighborhoods and traffic flow.  I am all for bike lanes, but some of them are either useless or have been put in without sufficient planning on how to make them co-exist cohesively with existing traffic.

 

As for my 45,000 number, that's actually from the article I listed in my original post, so isn't something I just decided to make up.

 

Your use of that figure was entirely wrong and I'm not sure if that was intentional on your part or you just didn't read the article. There are 45,000 fewer cars entering the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan than a couple years ago, not 45,000 fewer cars coming into the city itself. Car registration in the city is at all time highs, more delivery trucks are coming in than ever before, and general car usage has not decreased.

 

Actual statistics, not made-up ones: 

 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/mobility-report-2016-print.pdf

 

Bike lanes have been in a success in that they are being used and have been proven safer than leaving cars and traffic together. No bike lanes are installed without planning or community discussion.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Your use of that figure was entirely wrong and I'm not sure if that was intentional on your part or you just didn't read the article. There are 45,000 fewer cars entering the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan than a couple years ago, not 45,000 fewer cars coming into the city itself. Car registration in the city is at all time highs, more delivery trucks are coming in than ever before, and general car usage has not decreased.

 

Actual statistics, not made-up ones: 

 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/mobility-report-2016-print.pdf

 

Bike lanes have been in a success in that they are being used and have been proven safer than leaving cars and traffic together. No bike lanes are installed without planning or community discussion.

Last I checked, the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan is in the city... We can split hairs if you would like but it seems pointless.  In any event, the point still remains that the city hasn't been responsive in trying to combat congestion, as shown by the increase in the amount of helicopter trips by the Hizzoner to avoid it.

 

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/30/nyregion/mayor-de-blasios-trips-by-police-helicopter-rise-sharply-records-show.html?_r=0

 

If anything, they've added to it by taking away space for cars, trucks and the like.

 

As for your second part, that is a lie and you know it.  Hell there's even been discussion on this very forum about bike lanes being installed against the wishes of the community.  I guess some of us live in liberal bubbles... 

[checkmatechamp13]

I'd say it's becoming worse on both the local and express buses.  Now I understand that drivers need a break, but some guys are purposely leaving the terminal late because they can't stay on schedule, so what you have is one guy leaving on time, another guy leaving 5 - 10 minutes late and then staying late and arriving 20 - 30 minutes behind schedule, and NEVER getting back on schedule the entire day.  This has a huge impact on service too because if I know that a certain driver will be driving who is consistently late, I will make every effort to avoid that bus.  You even hear that sort of conversation among drivers.  

 

Driver #1: Oh well I'm early so I'm sitting at such and such stop.

Driver #2:  Well I ALWAYS leave late so I'm never early.

 

The other thing that I've heard is some drivers now claim that management doesn't want them sitting at the stop idling, so they won't pull into the first stop until they are due.  We had a driver on the BxM6 like that.  He had his bus right at the first stop.  There's a line of people waiting in the scorching heat to get on, and they asked him if he could let them on earlier and be courteous since it was so hot out and the bus is right there, and he claimed he couldn't because he could be written up for doing so.  Seems like a lot of stupid rules that need to be changed if you ask me.  The idea that it's okay for a driver to be late seems foolish.  It also allows some of them to abuse overtime since they can just say that they were stuck in traffic, etc.  

 

In my neighborhood I know a lot of people have been speaking up about this very issue and demanding that buses adhere to the schedule, even inquiring with drivers when they sit at bus stops for prolonged periods of time.

 

The thing is that if you're going to leave late to avoid getting ahead of schedule, you have to be familiar enough with the route to play that game. For example, on the S93 in the morning, you have a couple of minutes of slack between CSI & Jewett, and then a couple of minutes of slack between Clove & Fingerboard (only if the B/O is quick, and even then, you hit traffic sometimes). You need all the time you can get between Jewett & Clove, and between Fingerboard & 86th because of all the traffic (so no matter how quick you can load up passengers and pull off, and no matter how quick you are about catching all the green lights, you're going to have to sit in traffic in those areas). So that means that even if you consider yourself the quickest B/O out there, you should be leaving no more than 5 minutes late tops.

 

When done right, however, it works wonders. I've had times when a B/O left late, but floored it and made up the time and then some.

 

I can see why it's better to have a bus run late than early (if it's early, that means the people have to wait a full headway interval for the next bus, whereas if it's late that means the bus just picks up some extra passengers). But there's a limit. 20 minutes late or 1 minute early....obviously the late bus will have a much larger impact on service (especially if the service runs fairly frequently).

 

There was a study on the impact of timepoint removal on limited-stop service. Basically, drivers were instructed to leave the terminals on-time, and keep up with the flow of traffic. The only timepoints were short-turn points and relief points, and the B/Os were told that it was alright for them to leave early, even at those timepoints. The headway adherence actually improved a bit, because B/Os were all generally keeping up with the flow of traffic instead of some leaving late and others leaving on-time and holding at timepoints. So if buses were late at intermediate stops, they were more uniformly late and vice versa for being early.

 

Granted, these were high-frequency limited-stop routes with local counterparts, but at the same time, there's opportunities to change this on the regular routes. For example, along streets like Victory Blvd where there's three bus routes that are generally timed with the ferry (plus the limiteds), you shouldn't have ferry-bound B/Os holding at timepoints east of Jewett Avenue. If somebody misses a bus, there's likely another one shortly behind.

 

Last I checked, the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan is in the city... We can split hairs if you would like but it seems pointless.  In any event, the point still remains that the city hasn't been responsive in trying to combat congestion, as shown by the increase in the amount of helicopter trips by the Hizzoner to avoid it.

 

His own source proves your point (Page 14):

 

Travel speeds in Manhattan south of 60th Street have dropped 20% from 2010 speeds—and declined 10% in the past year alone. (Taxi GPS is used as a proxy for travel speeds.)

 

So yes, despite 45,000 fewer cars entering the CBD, travel speeds have dropped 20% in (what is essentially) the CBD.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

The thing is that if you're going to leave late to avoid getting ahead of schedule, you have to be familiar enough with the route to play that game. For example, on the S93 in the morning, you have a couple of minutes of slack between CSI & Jewett, and then a couple of minutes of slack between Clove & Fingerboard (only if the B/O is quick, and even then, you hit traffic sometimes). You need all the time you can get between Jewett & Clove, and between Fingerboard & 86th because of all the traffic (so no matter how quick you can load up passengers and pull off, and no matter how quick you are about catching all the green lights, you're going to have to sit in traffic in those areas). So that means that even if you consider yourself the quickest B/O out there, you should be leaving no more than 5 minutes late tops.

 

When done right, however, it works wonders. I've had times when a B/O left late, but floored it and made up the time and then some.

 

I can see why it's better to have a bus run late than early (if it's early, that means the people have to wait a full headway interval for the next bus, whereas if it's late that means the bus just picks up some extra passengers). But there's a limit. 20 minutes late or 1 minute early....obviously the late bus will have a much larger impact on service (especially if the service runs fairly frequently).

 

There was a study on the impact of timepoint removal on limited-stop service. Basically, drivers were instructed to leave the terminals on-time, and keep up with the flow of traffic. The only timepoints were short-turn points and relief points, and the B/Os were told that it was alright for them to leave early, even at those timepoints. The headway adherence actually improved a bit, because B/Os were all generally keeping up with the flow of traffic instead of some leaving late and others leaving on-time and holding at timepoints. So if buses were late at intermediate stops, they were more uniformly late and vice versa for being early.

 

Granted, these were high-frequency limited-stop routes with local counterparts, but at the same time, there's opportunities to change this on the regular routes. For example, along streets like Victory Blvd where there's three bus routes that are generally timed with the ferry (plus the limiteds), you shouldn't have ferry-bound B/Os holding at timepoints east of Jewett Avenue. If somebody misses a bus, there's likely another one shortly behind.

They seem to be doing this with SBS to a degree, though you still have drivers that seem hell bent on leaving the terminal late and dragging the line to avoid picking up passengers, leading to loads that are imbalanced.  Even on the M86, it's amazing how buses run in packs.  You can miss three buses in a matter of minutes, and then be forced to wait a good 20 minutes before the next pack arrives.  

[JubaionBx12+SBS]

They seem to be doing this with SBS to a degree, though you still have drivers that seem hell bent on leaving the terminal late and dragging the line to avoid picking up passengers, leading to loads that are imbalanced.  Even on the M86, it's amazing how buses run in packs.  You can miss three buses in a matter of minutes, and then be forced to wait a good 20 minutes before the next pack arrives.  

If anything the lack of headway adherence is more noticeable on the SBS routes. Given the off-board payment and all door boarding allows full busloads to board in a matter of seconds why would drivers want to avoid passengers anyway? It's not like the driver saves much time with an empty bus and if anything slows down the crushloaded bus in front of the pack as even with all door boarding moving in and out of crushloaded buses is a time killer. 

 

As I type the next Westbound Bx12 SBS bus is 21 minutes away from Pelham Pkwy/WPR. The headways are 6 minutes. Go figure.

[MHV9218]

Last I checked, the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan is in the city... We can split hairs if you would like but it seems pointless.  In any event, the point still remains that the city hasn't been responsive in trying to combat congestion, as shown by the increase in the amount of helicopter trips by the Hizzoner to avoid it.

 

You're not paying attention to the statistic. That is specifically referring to the cars entering that segment of Manhttan, not cars entering the city itself. It's not splitting hairs, it's reading.

 

His own source proves your point (Page 14):

 

Travel speeds in Manhattan south of 60th Street have dropped 20% from 2010 speeds—and declined 10% in the past year alone. (Taxi GPS is used as a proxy for travel speeds.)

 

So yes, despite 45,000 fewer cars entering the CBD, travel speeds have dropped 20% in (what is essentially) the CBD.

 

That did not prove his point at all. The 45,000 figure is not from 2010, it is from 2014. Furthermore, this is ignoring the notes in the report, which specifically describes the number of freight trips raising each year and use of non-taxi livery cars spiking as well. 

 

His point is cribbed from the conspiratorial Post notion that the city is actively working to manufacture congestion. That is stupid and wrong.

[DetSMART45]

Boy this thread blew up all of a sudden!  Alright, here we go:

The love affair with SBS IMO is nothing more than their desire to cut costs.  Have new buses paid for with federal funds and cut overhead where possible, and it's a success!

That's the name of the game: Have a problem and throw other people's money at it, and if it doesn't change anything, then let's just go and get more money and keep sending it down the same rabbit hole.  Unfortunately, ALL OF YOU POOR SCHMUCKS are footing the bill eventually anyways.  There IS NO FREE MONEY, even if you think Fed money is "free."

 

Isn't this what they should be doing anyways? People are whingeing on and on about waste all the time.

Yeah, people whinge on about waste all the time, except you think it's everybody ELSE's problem except your own.  It's coming out of YOUR POCKET, whether directly or indirectly.

 

Well at least their being smarter with their money, if you can get someone else to pay it for you, why wouldn't you? 

YEP, you're right!  Just like how you actually pay EXTRA for that soda, that pack of cigarettes, that loaf of bread, that carton of milk when you go to a store because someone else has stolen items from that store.  You NY-ers think you're getting some sort of "free ride" on some truly MAGICAL Fed money when it really comes out of your pocket as well as someone from Buffalo, someone from Niagara, someone from Baltimore, someone from Los Angeles ...... YEAH, pretty good "scheme" you got going there.

 

this is what happens with communists and bums like Bloomberg and DeBlahblah in office.  Man I miss Rudy in City Hall

Rudy got some sort of accountability going.  It wasn't perfect, but it put a dent in the free-for-all that was NYC in DECADES prior.  We've got, to a certain extent, the same type of thing going here in Detroit after all of the GRAFT-ridden DECADES that led to it becoming an utter shithole.  See, that's the problem when it comes to picking the pockets of people and thinking there's going to be something always there.  When you come up with lint, you can't somehow turn that into something valuable, even at the local pawnshop.

 

P. Bahara is gonna clean house.

 

Rudy was an enemy of the MTA who worked with the governor to prevent it from being funded properly. He's part of the reason buses are late.

YEAH?  But you've had TONS of friendly Democrats in charge since then from Albany on down and things haven't improved.  Nice try.

 

Capital Plans and major investment occur over longer periods of time. When folks like Giuliani colluded with the State to keep funding low even coming out of a surplus, that has ramifications for many years.

Really?  So back in the 1970s when Democrats ran everything (into the ground) then that had no ramifications, right?

 

You clearly don't understand MTA funding that well. Bus routes almost unilaterally lose money, while subways can actually break even. Whenever funding is an issue, bus service is the first to go. The problem is not just fleet age: it's scheduling, it's maintenance, it's the number of dispatchers, etc. With better funding, I guarantee you we would see a more efficient and quicker bus system. You're repeating a myth from the biased Post that safer streets mean slower traffic. I recognize you may only have one news source, but the Post is not reliable for anything besides Trump propaganda. If you actually review the studies on this, traffic calming measures have not made traffic slower. The Midtown-Times Square redirection, for example, actually lessened gridlock on many different avenues. The presence of more bike lanes is also a good thing, not a bad one, as more people out of cars is better for bus service, and fewer accidents also smooths traffic. Traffic signals are still in sync and if you really thought city buses were going 30mph, you must not have been traveling in NYC.

Bolded statements for right now:

 

Fleet age is just as critical of an element as all of the others that you cite, except it can be used as one of those "excuses" toward justification of the failures of those others.  And, quite frankly, the MTA has been given practically BLANK CHECKS by not only Albany, but the NYC-region and the Feds, and things have NOT CHANGED but in a lot of cases have worsened.  You CANNOT be serious in your assertion that with "better funding" things would be so much better.  GOD ABOVE.....WHERE have you EVER in your born days (and you ARE well old enough) seen ANYTHING improve in a demonstrable, dramatic way under government control after you've thrown more money at it?  Let's hit some hotspots:  Education, public housing, homeless "outreach" as just starters.  YEAH, real success stories right there, especially when the RESIDENTS of "public housing" under Mayor Boob-berg had to threaten to take the city to court for them to install security cameras and other apparatus to maintain safety that (this is key) THE CITY PROMISED THEM WOULD BE INSTALLED.  Guess what?  NYCHA had the funding thrown at them to begin with, and they decided to make band-aid repairs everywhere else, but the residents had to FORCE the issue and call them on their promises made.

 

Yeah, those SBS routes are SOOOOOOO much better than what was there before -- when a whopping 5 MINUTES are shaved off of a current Local route, but MILLIONS of dollars are thrown at the whole project.

 

Funny how Apple can develop a new iPhone that you *MUST* have, because it is SOOOO much better than what was available before, right?  If Apple followed the MTA, you'd still be on a FLIP-PHONE, and paying higher prices.  You wouldn't want that for your technology, but somehow that's OK when it comes to transportation THAT YOU ARE PAYING FOR.  (Oh, and YOU'RE WELCOME, because my Federal tax dollars are paying for your shoddy service as well.)

 

If you actually read that article, you'd see it's calling for more enforcement, not less. Is that what you seek? Your 45,000 statistic is unsourced and ignores the influx of delivery traffic, trucks, Ubers, and all the other reasons traffic is up. 'Traffic calming' is not another name for purposely adding congestion; your Post is showing. Your anecdotes are also, statistically speaking, irrelevant. Bike lanes have been a huge success in the city.

Yep, and until Uber came along, everything was flowing just perfectly.  OMG .......

 

Your use of that figure was entirely wrong and I'm not sure if that was intentional on your part or you just didn't read the article. There are 45,000 fewer cars entering the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan than a couple years ago, not 45,000 fewer cars coming into the city itself. Car registration in the city is at all time highs, more delivery trucks are coming in than ever before, and general car usage has not decreased.

 

Actual statistics, not made-up ones: 

 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/mobility-report-2016-print.pdf

 

Bike lanes have been in a success in that they are being used and have been proven safer than leaving cars and traffic together. No bike lanes are installed without planning or community discussion.

HILARIOUS how you're going to completely base your defense on government figures, when it has been documented not only here but elsewhere how the NYCDOT and other "collaborators" like to highlight things that make themselves look so noble.  How many times have community groups gone up against politicians (in general), told them they don't want something, and get completely ignored, and then when real-world observations/figures come out that run contrary to what the "geniuses" of government concoct, those are just dismissed via a whole bunch of mumbo-jumbo?

 

That's enough for now, that bike lane crap ... oh please.

[Trainmaster5]

@ DetSMART45

 

That was a classic summation of the true costs of strict adherence to the liberal mantra for a generation or so in the " big cities". I consider myself a liberal, especially compared to the alternative, but I'm not blind either. I have relatives who fled Detroit when Gordy did and they warned us New Yorkers what they saw on the horizon. Federal aid in housing, transit, and the like should only be temporary because it's not sustainable in the long run and against what liberals claim to want, "fairness". Why should a resident of Iowa or Kansas or NC have their tax dollars spent to support mass transit in Philly or in NYC long-term? Big City mayors, governors, and the agencies they control constantly line up at federal trough to feed. That's Democrats and Republican leadership mind you. As I age and look back it reminds me of the Sixties all over again but with a nasty twist. MLK, RFK, and even Malcolm and those groups like the Panthers, Young Lords and the SDS. Is this what we strived for and wanted to pass on to later generations ? I think not. Somehow in some respects the Federal Government has become that drug dealer we were warned about back then. " Free" Fed money for SBS or the transit center in Lower  Manhattan, wow. Except as you and a few others have correctly pointed out there is no free here. That money can only be used for a specific purpose and after the initial disbursement the city, the state, and the are stuck with the ongoing costs. This makes you, the taxpayer, hooked on Fed dollars that have been cut off. Sort of like a junkie with no fix in sight, huh ? Well guess what genius? To keep that shiny new transit center or those SBS bus services in good order you're going to need more money or cut service elsewhere. Are you really going to stick it to the taxpayer again ? If that's the only choice I'd say we're on the same path the other big cities are on, that long downward spiral. As I said in the beginning I may be a proud liberal in some respects but I sure ain't blind nor stupid. Just my rant. Carry on.

[DaTransitMan4608]

Remind me never to discuss politics with any of you. Y'all argue just like the idiots on Facebook who blame liberals or conservatives for things that they probably have absolutely nothing to do with. Rudy ain't perfect, DeBlasio ain't either. They each had their own hand in why bus service is the way it is. How about instead of pointing fingers, let's discuss a solution. What can be done? What does the city need to do? Ask questions like that. If y'all keep playing this blame game you're gonna see things get worse and automatically resort to blaming instead of looking for a solution.

 

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using NYC Transit Forums mobile app

[bobtehpanda]

Yeah, people whinge on about waste all the time, except you think it's everybody ELSE's problem except your own.  It's coming out of YOUR POCKET, whether directly or indirectly.

 

When highways get 90% of construction and maintenance with a blank check from the feds, but other forms of transport literally get nothing, a few million is a literal one-time drop in the bucket compared to the billions we waste on questionable highway projects without so much as a cost-benefits analysis.

 

A set of cookies are in the room with a rich man and two poor men. The rich man takes all the cookies except one and tells the poor man, "That other man is trying to steal your cookie."

 

Rudy got some sort of accountability going.  It wasn't perfect, but it put a dent in the free-for-all that was NYC in DECADES prior.  We've got, to a certain extent, the same type of thing going here in Detroit after all of the GRAFT-ridden DECADES that led to it becoming an utter shithole.  See, that's the problem when it comes to picking the pockets of people and thinking there's going to be something always there.  When you come up with lint, you can't somehow turn that into something valuable, even at the local pawnshop.

 

P. Bahara is gonna clean house.

 

YEAH?  But you've had TONS of friendly Democrats in charge since then from Albany on down and things haven't improved.  Nice try.

 

Really?  So back in the 1970s when Democrats ran everything (into the ground) then that had no ramifications, right?

 

Comparing us to Detroit, even though we still have record job growth and unemployment dropping in this town.

 

This is part of that BS narrative that the tabloids in this town like to push, even though it turns out that crime started dropping during the last two years of Dinkins' term, under Giuliani and broken windows it didn't drop faster than the national drop in crime, and all the other smoke and mirrors. Like how according to Bloomberg he closed the minority gap in education and made everyone smarter, and then the State Regents board rejigged their tests to the 2000s standards and all the gains among all students were wiped out overnight. It's also ridiculously convenient that somehow Republicans never get tossed out for corruption. It's almost as if there's shit on both sides.

 

 

 

Yep, and until Uber came along, everything was flowing just perfectly.  OMG .......

 

I remember back in the day when I could just drive into Manhattan during the Giuliani era and hit all greens and find a parking spot on the same block. /s

 

The city has gained a million people since 1999. There is no room for new highways and we don't have the money for new transit, so traffic was bound to get worse.

 

 

HILARIOUS how you're going to completely base your defense on government figures, when it has been documented not only here but elsewhere how the NYCDOT and other "collaborators" like to highlight things that make themselves look so noble.  How many times have community groups gone up against politicians (in general), told them they don't want something, and get completely ignored, and then when real-world observations/figures come out that run contrary to what the "geniuses" of government concoct, those are just dismissed via a whole bunch of mumbo-jumbo?

 

If community groups were so sure that the figures were wrong, why don't they just go to court to fight the false figures and stop implementation? This works all the time.

 

Except, wait, the last time someone filed suit about DOT figures and "mumbo jumbo", the suit was tossed out due to lack of merit.

[BrooklynBus]

Your use of that figure was entirely wrong and I'm not sure if that was intentional on your part or you just didn't read the article. There are 45,000 fewer cars entering the Central Business District of Midtown Manhattan than a couple years ago, not 45,000 fewer cars coming into the city itself. Car registration in the city is at all time highs, more delivery trucks are coming in than ever before, and general car usage has not decreased.

 

Actual statistics, not made-up ones:

 

http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/mobility-report-2016-print.pdf

 

Bike lanes have been in a success in that they are being used and have been proven safer than leaving cars and traffic together. No bike lanes are installed without planning or community discussion.

Yes they are being used, but to what degree and at what cost? They Queens Blvd lanes inconvenience tens of thousands of vehicles daily to benefit perhaps a thousand bike riders.

 

As more ride bikes, accidents increase, so how do they improve safety? As for community discussion and approval, what you stated is an outright lie. They installed a bike lane in my neighborhood in 2003, and we have been trying to get it removed or relocated to a safer location for 13 years without any success. There was no prior discussion. They just installed it one day without even informing the community they were doing it.

[checkmatechamp13]

They seem to be doing this with SBS to a degree, though you still have drivers that seem hell bent on leaving the terminal late and dragging the line to avoid picking up passengers, leading to loads that are imbalanced.  Even on the M86, it's amazing how buses run in packs.  You can miss three buses in a matter of minutes, and then be forced to wait a good 20 minutes before the next pack arrives.  

 

I still think it's annoying the way on the schedule, it says "Every 10 minutes" "Every 8 minutes", etc. I understand that the whole point is so that buses have the flexibility to run ahead of schedule, but at the same time, when service is running less frequently than every 8-10 minutes, it would be nice to get an idea of when the bus is supposed to arrive.

 

I will say that as far as SBS routes go, the S79 seems to be performing pretty well in terms of consistency. I work right around Hylan & Narrows, and the S79 bunches on occasion, but the longest gap I've seen was about 20 minutes (which isn't bad since midday buses run every 15 minutes anyway).