Jump to content

MTA express bus changes: New SIM9, South Shore extension and more


Lil 57

Recommended Posts

14 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

 

Didn't the "C" variants of the X routes not say C on them? The X1 always said X1.

Yeah. They have the signs saying “1C”, “3C” and “4C” now because the off-peak versions are so different from the peak versions (the 4C in particular is so different from the 4). It can get confusing though, some people (non-commuters) have asked me what the C stands for and “combination midtown-downtown” doesn’t always make much sense to them. (So sometimes I say it’s because the C routes start up at Central Park and that makes more sense to them.🤷🏽‍♂️)

IMO the off-peak routes should have a simpler name (run a “SIM1” off-peak especially) because people using them are less familiar with the system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 183
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

There was the X10B and X10 and the X17J and X10C. 

I know, But why did the (MTA) go for the longer "SIM" prefix than the shorter "SM" prefix? Guess the local buses are going to be renumbered into "SI" routes when it's their time to be fixed messed around with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

I know, But why did the (MTA) go for the longer "SIM" prefix than the shorter "SM" prefix? Guess the local buses are going to be renumbered into "SI" routes when it's their time to be fixed messed around with.

I wondered the same thing, I suggested SM to them a while back. Something I’ve personally noticed is that initially some people said “S-I-M” but now it’s almost universally “sim” (one syllable).

I don’t think they need to (or should, for that matter) change the locals to SI. Why make the routes more of a mouthful. Also putting a 1 next to an I (like SI1) is annoying. If the routes change so much that it warrants new numbers (like the SIMs), they can keep the S but use numbers from 1-39, maybe 100-120 for limiteds, to avoid overlap with the current numbers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SIMplicity said:

I wondered the same thing, I suggested SM to them a while back. Something I’ve personally noticed is that initially some people said “S-I-M” but now it’s almost universally “sim” (one syllable).

I don’t think they need to (or should, for that matter) change the locals to SI. Why make the routes more of a mouthful. Also putting a 1 next to an I (like SI1) is annoying. If the routes change so much that it warrants new numbers (like the SIMs), they can keep the S but use numbers from 1-39, maybe 100-120 for limiteds, to avoid overlap with the current numbers.

Mabye. But if that was the case, the "X" routes would have their prefixes kept the same with a different number range. We'll see what happens when the time comes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/29/2018 at 7:09 PM, NoHacksJustKhaks said:

This agency is part of a first world country and world class city, and many of it's actions today are in a similar vein to what many corrupt third world countries do. It's truly shameful that they have such a leverage over riders and continue to see it as a win in their book, for their benefit. I feel for Staten Island right now, being subjected to this cr*p.

Unfortunately, the city and state have always been like this. The Bloomberg years, as much of a dickwad as he was, were kind of an aberration compared to how the city's political establishment normally functions.

On 9/29/2018 at 4:02 PM, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

If she could bike it to work without being a sweaty mess because of the hills and how heavy the bike is for her, she would've long switched to CitiBike. lol

Has your colleague considered an electric bike? Every day they get cheaper and better. They've certainly made my life a lot easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Has your colleague considered an electric bike? Every day they get cheaper and better. They've certainly made my life a lot easier.

I don't think she has the space. She has a studio in Yorkville.  I think I could store a bike in my apartment, but her place I'm sure is quite small in comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, limitednyc said:

they also added service on the 4c   in the pm shoulder and between 7 and 10 pm .

The current 4C schedule from 7-9pm IMO was honestly some of the dumbest scheduling I’ve ever seen. In those two hours there used to be 10 X17s and 8 X10s, total of 18 trips. But in that same span of time, there are now SIX SIM4Cs?! I mean, it’s good they’re increasing it to 9 (still far fewer trips than before), but they never should have screwed it up so bad in the first place!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, SIMplicity said:

The current 4C schedule from 7-9pm IMO was honestly some of the dumbest scheduling I’ve ever seen. In those two hours there used to be 10 X17s and 8 X10s, total of 18 trips. But in that same span of time, there are now SIX SIM4Cs?! I mean, it’s good they’re increasing it to 9 (still far fewer trips than before), but they never should have screwed it up so bad in the first place!

don't for get the 5 sim8 's and 1 sim8x as of 10/8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, limitednyc said:

isn't the  the sim 4  the same as the old 17A,. can u compare the service level  pre restructuring with the current/new schedule.  they also added service on the 4c   in the pm shoulder and between 7 and 10 pm . 

They basically took some SIM4 trips and turned them into SIM4C trips (at the end of the AM rush, and at the beginning and end of the PM rush). They also reduced the AM frequency from every 6 minutes to every 8 minutes when buses were overcrowded, so that's probably where they got the money for the PM buses.

2 hours ago, Lil 57 said:

I'm thinking that it would be good to reconstruct off-peak service for the SIM3c and 4c routes.

1. Create a new off-peak route, The SIM32c. This route would be the SIM32 in Staten Island, but also would stop along the Narrows Road. (The SIM3c would bypass the Narrows Road). The route would to East Midtown via Church/Madison. The span and headways on this would be similar to the X10.

2. The SIM3c would skip the Narrows Road like I said earlier and Sunday evening service to SI would be every 30 mins instead of every 55-60 minutes.

3. The SIM4c would be extended to Woodrow/Huguenot at all times and would hit follow the X17c routing north of the ETC, skipping Gannon Ave. Sunday service would run every 30 mins all day.

4. The SIM3c/4c and 32c would run until 2:15 AM weekdays, 1:00 AM Saturdays and Midnight on Sundays.

No need. Just run the SIM4 and SIM32 off-peak and have another route cover Midtown.

1 hour ago, Lil 57 said:

Didn't the "C" variants of the X routes not say C on them? The X1 always said X1.

At different times in history, the off-peak X10 was the X10C and the off-peak X17 was the X17C. But there was always a corresponding X10B and X17A/J.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

No need. Just run the SIM4 and SIM32 off-peak and have another route cover Midtown.

If we want to keep the Downtown/Midtown pattern for the Off-Peak Routes I would have one route go to Worth Street, 23rd street or 42nd street (depending on the Midtown variant) and one goes to Midtown.) Heres how I would do It:

Hylan Blvd:

SIM1 - 23rd Streed

SIM10 - Midtown, CPS

(During late nights the SIM1c would run since the run times are around one hour at this time and I don't think there's enough night ridership to justify 2 routes running down Hylan during that time.)

Tottenville:

SIM2 - Worth St or 42nd Street

SIM24 - Extended to Tottenville via Hylan off-peak, Midtown, 57th Street

Watchogue Road:

SIM3 - Midtown, CPS

SIM34 - Rerouted to Port Richmond off-peak, 23rd Street.

Gannon Ave:

SIM32 - Stops on Narrows Road off-peak, 23rd Street

SIM52 - New route, off-peak only. Takes SIM32 route (Stops on Narrows Road off-peak) in SI goes to Midtown via the FDR, 23rd Street and Madison Ave (Southbound via 5th). Ends at 57th/Lexington.

Richmond Ave:

SIM4 - Extended to Huguenot off-peak, Worth Street or 42nd Street.

SIM8 - Midtown, 57th/Lexington.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

If we want to keep the Downtown/Midtown pattern for the Off-Peak Routes I would have one route go to Worth Street, 23rd street or 42nd street (depending on the Midtown variant) and one goes to Midtown.) Heres how I would do It:

Hylan Blvd:

SIM1 - 23rd Streed

SIM10 - Midtown, CPS

(During late nights the SIM1c would run since the run times are around one hour at this time and I don't think there's enough night ridership to justify 2 routes running down Hylan during that time.)

Tottenville:

SIM2 - Worth St or 42nd Street

SIM24 - Extended to Tottenville via Hylan off-peak, Midtown, 57th Street

Watchogue Road:

SIM3 - Midtown, CPS

SIM34 - Rerouted to Port Richmond off-peak, 23rd Street.

Gannon Ave:

SIM32 - Stops on Narrows Road off-peak, 23rd Street

SIM52 - New route, off-peak only. Takes SIM32 route (Stops on Narrows Road off-peak) in SI goes to Midtown via the FDR, 23rd Street and Madison Ave (Southbound via 5th). Ends at 57th/Lexington.

Richmond Ave:

SIM4 - Extended to Huguenot off-peak, Worth Street or 42nd Street.

SIM8 - Midtown, 57th/Lexington.

That's how you would do it, but that's the opposite of what I would like to see done.

The idea with me is to have the express service spread out instead of just concentrated into a few corridors. Notice how with my proposal, I chose the SIM6 instead of the SIM10. Notice how I put the SIM26 in there. And if the SIM34 were to run off-peak, I would definitely keep running it to Mariners Harbor.

As far as I'm concerned, if you give me a route to Downtown, that's fine. I'll figure it out from there (and vice versa going home). I'd rather see my home route cut Downtown (as a matter of fact, I'd prefer it that way for reliability reasons) if it meant that another neighborhood with no express service was able to receive that express service. 

19 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

just another question since the x17j came into being why has there not been rushour service between 42nd street and worth street during peek hours?

Keep in mind that the X17J didn't always go through NJ. It was originally a variant that went up West Street, then eventually it went inbound via NJ and outbound via the FDR (and 23rd), and eventually went via NJ in both directions. IIRC, back in the 1990s, it was the X17A (Annadale-Worth Street), and the X17 from Huguenot to Midtown via Church/Broadway, with like 4 rush hour trips that took the bypass route (which at that time was via West Street). Then eventually, they started building it up, and that became the sole Midtown pattern.

In other words, the X17J started out like the X42 (and well, you see how they're trying to push that as the SIM3, for better or for worse).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

That's how you would do it, but that's the opposite of what I would like to see done.

The idea with me is to have the express service spread out instead of just concentrated into a few corridors. Notice how with my proposal, I chose the SIM6 instead of the SIM10. Notice how I put the SIM26 in there. And if the SIM34 were to run off-peak, I would definitely keep running it to Mariners Harbor.

As far as I'm concerned, if you give me a route to Downtown, that's fine. I'll figure it out from there (and vice versa going home). I'd rather see my home route cut Downtown (as a matter of fact, I'd prefer it that way for reliability reasons) if it meant that another neighborhood with no express service was able to receive that express service. 

Keep in mind that the X17J didn't always go through NJ. It was originally a variant that went up West Street, then eventually it went inbound via NJ and outbound via the FDR (and 23rd), and eventually went via NJ in both directions. IIRC, back in the 1990s, it was the X17A (Annadale-Worth Street), and the X17 from Huguenot to Midtown via Church/Broadway, with like 4 rush hour trips that took the bypass route (which at that time was via West Street). Then eventually, they started building it up, and that became the sole Midtown pattern.

In other words, the X17J started out like the X42 (and well, you see how they're trying to push that as the SIM3, for better or for worse).

thanks for the history , but when they regulated the the service pattern why did they have the midtown/downtown service gap gap during peek time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

thanks for the history , but when they regulated the the service pattern why did they have the midtown/downtown service gap gap during peek time.

They probably felt that it wasn't worth the trouble to serve the area in between. There were a lot of changes that were made in that regard. The X14 used to also run the same route as the X10/17 up 6th/Madison and down 5th/Broadway (except it always terminated in West Midtown as far back as I have maps that show the patterns, which is 1993). Then eventually they had it run up the FDR and bypass the areas between Worth & 23rd (the X13 started out as a Downtown-only variant of the X14 the same way the X11 started out as a Downtown-only variant of the X10). 

So the idea of having buses be Downtown-only or Midtown-only isn't anything new, nor is it an inherently terrible idea. It's just the execution of it in this plan that was terrible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

So the idea of having buses be Downtown-only or Midtown-only isn't anything new, nor is it an inherently terrible idea. It's just the execution of it in this plan that was terrible.

It's one of those ideas that make sense on paper but simply do not work in reality. 

Not every idea proposed, regardless to being a smart one at that, is possible. The MTA is claiming that this network will improve commutes, make things better for everyone, but in reality, it's just gotten even worse to the point where saving SI from this madness is impossible...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Coney Island Av said:

It's one of those ideas that make sense on paper but simply do not work in reality. 

Not every idea proposed, regardless to being a smart one at that, is possible. The MTA is claiming that this network will improve commutes, make things better for everyone, but in reality, it's just gotten even worse to the point where saving SI from this madness is impossible...

As I've said, it can work with the proper scheduling, and with proper prioritization of buses. Things like bus lanes and traffic signal priority require coordination with other agencies, but routing and scheduling? That's entirely within the MTA's control and they dropped the ball on that.

It worked out well for the X17A/X17J. It's a shame that they're cannibalizing the SIM4/X17A the way they are now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

As I've said, it can work with the proper scheduling, and with proper prioritization of buses. Things like bus lanes and traffic signal priority require coordination with other agencies, but routing and scheduling? That's entirely within the MTA's control and they dropped the ball on that.

It worked out well for the X17A/X17J. It's a shame that they're cannibalizing the SIM4/X17A the way they are now. 

Even with proper scheduling, a plan like this must have all of the other things that are out of their control. Why? Because congestion is worsening, and more importantly, they've eliminated options that riders could fall back on when one corridor has a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Even with proper scheduling, a plan like this must have all of the other things that are out of their control. Why? Because congestion is worsening, and more importantly, they've eliminated options that riders could fall back on when one corridor has a problem.

And also, when you combine routes into a smaller number of higher frequency routes (case study: SIM10), reliability is so much more important. If the X7 for instance runs every 10 minutes and one trip leaves the terminal 4 minutes late, it’s not a big deal, that bus and the bus behind it can recover and handle the load. But if a SIM10 is scheduled to run every 4 minutes and due to some minor incident or traffic a trip leaves 4 minutes late (and the trip behind it is also running late), that’s an 8 minute gap in service, so theoretically (bc of the 4 minute headways) twice the number of people will now be waiting on line along the route, and that late bus might fill up around 42nd or 34th St... then the people down by 23rd Street are left stranded, and the next few buses may not have enough room to accommodate them, and bam you have severe overcrowding... With higher frequency routes the effects of a delay or incident are magnified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Even with proper scheduling, a plan like this must have all of the other things that are out of their control. Why? Because congestion is worsening, and more importantly, they've eliminated options that riders could fall back on when one corridor has a problem.

I think the main problem lies within the routing between the end of the Verazaano and Manhattan. As I've said before, a bus or car breaks down in the HOV lane and all hell start's to break loose and then that becomes a safety problem. There should be exits from the HOV lane every mile so buses can easily leave if something like were to happen and not get trapped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

I think the main problem lies within the routing between the end of the Verazaano and Manhattan. As I've said before, a bus or car breaks down in the HOV lane and all hell start's to break loose and then that becomes a safety problem. There should be exits from the HOV lane every mile so buses can easily leave if something like were to happen and not get trapped.

I've been assessing the bus lanes either in person, or via social media to get a feel for how things are going. We'll be planning more trips in the coming weeks in Brooklyn, Staten Island, Queens and the Bronx and riding trips during peak and off-peak periods.  We saw some blatant offenders this morning, but they had traffic cops out trying to keep the lanes clear.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Future ENY OP said:

I got a chance to drive along 278  the other day and noticed a HOV lane for the reverse direction heading to Staten Island. When did this reverse direx HOV lane begin? 

Hope this speeds up the PM commute. 

They switch direction based on the rush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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