SI officials: What the L y'all gonna do with those buses?

[Lil 57]

1 hour ago, East New York said:

It’s not SBS at all if you ask me. In this case it stands for “Super-Limited Bus Service” in my eyes lol. They need to build MVM’s and actually speed up the line. 

The only thing "SBS" about the S79 is the wrapped buses, and when buses show up that are unwarped, forget it. The  only used the phrase "SBS" to get government money for the S79 (And to make it seem that Staten Island wasn't being left out), otherwise, it would have just been called a Limited.

[Lawrence St]

13 hours ago, East New York said:

I understand exactly what they are saying, and I agree they need new buses. All they had to do was ask the MTA, or read NYCTF. They went about it all wrong. As a borough, they have the youngest fleet average anyway. They just want brand new pretty blue buses. Lol

It’s not SBS at all if you ask me. In this case it stands for “Super-Limited Bus Service” in my eyes lol. They need to build MVM’s and actually speed up the line. 

Off topic in this case is ok, because they (the SI polititions) are beating a dead horse anyway. 

 

Edit: XD40’s all have ISL/Allison That was an error. The XN40’s and 60’s have the ISLG/ZF set-up.

 

Now getting into these power trains. The difference is because of the set-up, and the weight. The Orion VII E10’s (official Daimler designation) 7000-7089 are powered by (save the EPA upgrades) the same Cummins ISL9/ZF Ecomat as LFS’ 8015-8754

The E10 “3G’s” weigh about 2,000 lbs more than the Nova, thus requiring the engine and transmission to be tuned for more power at take-off. The shift scheduling, as well as torque tuning are different. Some of the Nova’s have been tuned, and take off a but faster than others.

The only thing I don’t like about the LFS is this design. I feel like the structure should stay the same because its solid, and based directly off the RTS modular technology. However, I think the front needs a facelift, and the wheelbase needs to be expanded just a touch. The new windows will hopefully address the visibility issue, but a full redesign would address than just that.

Apparently, the s79's problem wasnt dwell times, it was traffic. This is what I was told by a former B/O.

[B35 via Church]

22 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Finally someone agrees with me that the s79 isnt a true SBS lmao

What exactly is a true SBS ?

Serious question.

[Lawrence St]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

What exactly is a true SBS ?

Serious question.

A true SBS, in my eyes is:

SBS Machines

Bus Lanes

Fully wrapped buses.

[B35 via Church]

16 minutes ago, Lawrence St said:

A true SBS, in my eyes is:

SBS Machines

Bus Lanes

Fully wrapped buses.

The point I'm making is that we should have "true" BRT in this city.... SBS is much more of a brand than it is a service type.

[East New York]

5 hours ago, Chris Alleyne said:

Correction. I meant to say since 2006. The Orion VII Next Generation hybrids they got were used by at least one other depot at the time (late 2008/early 2009). Infact IIRC, only #3813 and #3817 were delivered to the  Manhattan division in general brand new. BTW, slightly off topic, does anyone know what the tanks are certified for on the 1700s and 1800 NG CNGs? Are they 15 years or 18?

Brand new or slightly used buses don’t matter. As long as service is covered is what’s important.

1700-1839 are NG’s

1840-1884 are 3G’s. Both with 20 year tanks just like all of our CNG buses from the C40LF 4G’s and newer iirc. 

5 hours ago, Chris Alleyne said:

But Gleason used to have Orion 7s before? Why can't they use the EPA10s? I get they are clean diesel and have a different setup to what JG was used to (DD50G EGR + Allison world B400R), but they are still Orion 7 buses. Back in 2013-2014 JG did very briefly used a few Novabus RTS's when they were short on CNGs, so I'd assume they still to this day have a diesel pump.

Why would Gleason even need Orion VII’s? And they usually fuel diesel buses like the RTS MetroCard buses they have, at other depots. 

I don’t think you understand MTA’s consolidation practices. MTA wants buses grouped by commonality for ease of maintenance and logistics. You are pushed ideas for buses to places that they don’t need to be, and there is no reason for them to go there anyway. 

Gleason has a full fleet of New Flyer buses all with common parts inside and out as they are the only C40LF 4G’s in existence. That means they are very similar to the Xcelsiors. This is why Gleason got rid of the Orion VII’s they had quite a while ago, and now the last few remain at West Farms. 

JG was going to get 8 XD40’s for L Train which would be easy for Gleason to house and do light maintenance on because they already have the common parts. 

This another reason why Staten Island politicians need to just relax for a bit. The only Xcelsiors going to the Island anytime soon will be electric. We don’t need to be shipping parts out there just yet. 

40 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

The point I'm making is that we should have "true" BRT in this city.... SBS is much more of a brand than it is a service type.

Now what exactly is “true BRT” in terms of your definition.

Another question for you. Which SBS routes have you ridden?

[Bay Ridge Express]

Is the B82 a "true" SBS?

[B35 via Church]

2 hours ago, East New York said:

Now what exactly is “true BRT” in terms of your definition.

Another question for you. Which SBS routes have you ridden?

1st question: In general, buses that operate on their own stretch of roadway (as in, separate of vehicular traffic), with TSP, with stations (separate from bus stops), with off-board payment....

2nd question: Everyone except the B82.... No particular reason.

[Lawrence St]

45 minutes ago, Bay Ridge Express said:

Is the B82 a "true" SBS?

Yes. The s79 is the only "fake" SBS.

[trainfan22]

If the North Shore line SBS pans out, that would be our first true BRT with it having its own roadway, I wanted it be to an Light Rail as the MTA operates every mode of transit EXCEPT for Light Rail. The North Shore line would be the perfect place to build an light rail line.

 

 

NYC is just too built up and overcrowded to have multiple BRT routes, there's no room for buses to have their own roads in most of the city so we have to settle for the SBS routes we have now.

[B35 via Church]

13 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

NYC is just too built up and overcrowded to have multiple BRT routes, there's no room for buses to have their own roads in most of the city so we have to settle for the SBS routes we have now.

Exactly, so don't put it out there & have people believe SBS is BRT, because it isn't (referring to the MTA with that)....

Half-assery irks me to no end, and that's what SBS is.....  Go hard or go home.

Edited February 13, 2019 by B35 via Church

[bobtehpanda]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

1st question: In general, buses that operate on their own stretch of roadway (as in, separate of vehicular traffic), with TSP, with stations (separate from bus stops), with off-board payment....

2nd question: Everyone except the B82.... No particular reason.

 

43 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

Exactly, so don't put it out there & have people believe SBS is BRT, because it isn't (referring to the MTA with that)....

Half-assery irks me to no end, and that's what SBS is.....  Go hard or go home.

I mean, you know some people would get their britches in a bunch about having the precious car lanes taken away even more than they do now. The Woodhaven SBS thread was what, 60+ pages long? You had those rich people in Chelsea getting up in arms over a dedicated bus roadway on 14th St, which is probably why Cuomo killed the L train shutdown. And we saw the same exact thing when they had that proposal to bus-only 34th St.

Could you imagine the ruckus if they started doing something as simple as building curbs for the bus lane? (Linked image is Paris - look at how narrow the street is!)

[Brillant93]

1 minute ago, bobtehpanda said:

 

I mean, you know some people would get their britches in a bunch about having the precious car lanes taken away even more than they do now. The Woodhaven SBS thread was what, 60+ pages long? You had those rich people in Chelsea getting up in arms over a dedicated bus roadway on 14th St, which is probably why Cuomo killed the L train shutdown. And we saw the same exact thing when they had that proposal to bus-only 34th St.

Could you imagine the ruckus if they started doing something as simple as building curbs for the bus lane? (Linked image is Paris - look at how narrow the street is!)

I kept saying the culture here is just ehh. You have some many car oriented minded people in a dense city like this. If true sbs or brt were to exist in nyc we would really have to rethink car ownership. Also I don’t get why the B82 isn’t a true sbs because I mean it does quite well for a sbs route in a narrow stretch. To me I could see the mta using it to help other potential routes in nyc that have difficult routing. 

[Deucey]

23 hours ago, bobtehpanda said:

 

I mean, you know some people would get their britches in a bunch about having the precious car lanes taken away even more than they do now. The Woodhaven SBS thread was what, 60+ pages long? You had those rich people in Chelsea getting up in arms over a dedicated bus roadway on 14th St, which is probably why Cuomo killed the L train shutdown. And we saw the same exact thing when they had that proposal to bus-only 34th St.

Could you imagine the ruckus if they started doing something as simple as building curbs for the bus lane? (Linked image is Paris - look at how narrow the street is!)

That's because in Paris and other places, they view congestion as inconveniencing everybody , while here, congestion inconveniences "ME!!!!!"

Let us get to $1.60/L fuel long-term - like happened during the Bush years to us Californians - I bet those bus lane curbs will be a godsend to all those new bus riders with CUVs and Trucks in the garages at $400/month.

[B35 via Church]

On ‎2‎/‎12‎/‎2019 at 8:43 PM, bobtehpanda said:

I mean, you know some people would get their britches in a bunch about having the precious car lanes taken away even more than they do now. The Woodhaven SBS thread was what, 60+ pages long? You had those rich people in Chelsea getting up in arms over a dedicated bus roadway on 14th St, which is probably why Cuomo killed the L train shutdown. And we saw the same exact thing when they had that proposal to bus-only 34th St.....

....the same Woodhaven thread that was laced with know-it-all-ism & pure unadulterated 100 proof ego from BrooklynBus? That one?

Anyway, your point isn't lost here, of course those sect of people would - but at the same time, we wouldn't even have buses in this city if it were up to the pro-car/anti-transit folks.... I can't allow that to be some sort of a deterrent if my interest/concern is to make surface transit a more viable option....

11 hours ago, Deucey said:

That's because in Paris and other places, they view congestion as inconveniencing everybody , while here, congestion inconveniences "ME!!!!!"

Underrated point.

[JAzumah]

Here's the thing:

The people who condemn drivers for not wanting to give up road space are missing an important part of this discussion.

In general, the MTA does not provide enough service. The city does not support the bus service already provided, does not allow for new open door private bus service, and does not protect the legal vans out there. You want to convince drivers to give up their road space to an agency already strained at providing bus service? How about rapid service to anywhere other than the CBD core? Public transit is supposed to take no longer than 2x the travel time by car. Most of the car itineraries are 3x faster than public transit. Why should anyone give up their cars to ride a public transit system that cannot handle the volume it already has?

This idea that more riders will yield more support for public transit in NYC is not happening. When you pit congestion pricing versus a 30% fare hike, this is a false choice. It will not be possible to pass a 30% fare hike without political fallout. Can congestion pricing pass without existing MTA funds being raided? I have questions. If congestion pricing is supposed to provide capital support, it should not be pitted against a fare hike.

Driving provides a level of certainty. I don't know how anyone can be certain about what is happening around the MTA right now.

[Lawrence St]

2 hours ago, JAzumah said:

Here's the thing:

The people who condemn drivers for not wanting to give up road space are missing an important part of this discussion.

In general, the MTA does not provide enough service. The city does not support the bus service already provided, does not allow for new open door private bus service, and does not protect the legal vans out there. You want to convince drivers to give up their road space to an agency already strained at providing bus service? How about rapid service to anywhere other than the CBD core? Public transit is supposed to take no longer than 2x the travel time by car. Most of the car itineraries are 3x faster than public transit. Why should anyone give up their cars to ride a public transit system that cannot handle the volume it already has?

This idea that more riders will yield more support for public transit in NYC is not happening. When you pit congestion pricing versus a 30% fare hike, this is a false choice. It will not be possible to pass a 30% fare hike without political fallout. Can congestion pricing pass without existing MTA funds being raided? I have questions. If congestion pricing is supposed to provide capital support, it should not be pitted against a fare hike.

Driving provides a level of certainty. I don't know how anyone can be certain about what is happening around the MTA right now.

So how does the B110 operate?

[Brillant93]

2 hours ago, JAzumah said:

Here's the thing:

The people who condemn drivers for not wanting to give up road space are missing an important part of this discussion.

In general, the MTA does not provide enough service. The city does not support the bus service already provided, does not allow for new open door private bus service, and does not protect the legal vans out there. You want to convince drivers to give up their road space to an agency already strained at providing bus service? How about rapid service to anywhere other than the CBD core? Public transit is supposed to take no longer than 2x the travel time by car. Most of the car itineraries are 3x faster than public transit. Why should anyone give up their cars to ride a public transit system that cannot handle the volume it already has?

This idea that more riders will yield more support for public transit in NYC is not happening. When you pit congestion pricing versus a 30% fare hike, this is a false choice. It will not be possible to pass a 30% fare hike without political fallout. Can congestion pricing pass without existing MTA funds being raided? I have questions. If congestion pricing is supposed to provide capital support, it should not be pitted against a fare hike.

Driving provides a level of certainty. I don't know how anyone can be certain about what is happening around the MTA right now.

The mta can’t provide the service it promises because most of the time our buses are stuck behind traffic which in some cases are caused by double parking and other things such as drivers trying to compete for one parking space. 

In dense places not driving personal vechiels should be encouraged. Why? Because dense places aren’t made for traffic. It’s one of the reasons why I don’t expect this Elon musk hyper loop thingy to even work. You can fix traffic by providing more spaces for traffic. 

Now if I’m more spread out places like suburban and rurual areas cars would be needed because lack of transportation and far distant of places for people to go to. 

[East New York]

On 2/16/2019 at 7:22 PM, JAzumah said:

Here's the thing:

The people who condemn drivers for not wanting to give up road space are missing an important part of this discussion.

In general, the MTA does not provide enough service. The city does not support the bus service already provided, does not allow for new open door private bus service, and does not protect the legal vans out there. You want to convince drivers to give up their road space to an agency already strained at providing bus service? How about rapid service to anywhere other than the CBD core? Public transit is supposed to take no longer than 2x the travel time by car. Most of the car itineraries are 3x faster than public transit. Why should anyone give up their cars to ride a public transit system that cannot handle the volume it already has?

This idea that more riders will yield more support for public transit in NYC is not happening. When you pit congestion pricing versus a 30% fare hike, this is a false choice. It will not be possible to pass a 30% fare hike without political fallout. Can congestion pricing pass without existing MTA funds being raided? I have questions. If congestion pricing is supposed to provide capital support, it should not be pitted against a fare hike.

Driving provides a level of certainty. I don't know how anyone can be certain about what is happening around the MTA right now.

Now this I have to agree with this 100%

2 hours ago, IRTDude1987 said:

Is NICE planning on joining the all-electric trend?

I’m sure they will take MTA’s lead at some point in the future, however seeing as they are now privately operated by a company I don’t particularly care for, I have no interest in their operations.

When Mangamo or whatever his name is announced that they wanted to break away from MTA, I knew it was a conservative plot for only one company to take them over. Everyone wanted to argue with me and say it was a conspiracy theory, and long before the bidding even began or they separated from MTA I said exactly who was going to take it over, but did not explain that it was about the money, and personal relationships and secret meetings that would be kept under wraps. Everyone say no, there will be a few companies to bid. I said I know, and no matter who bids, the winner is written on the wall because I know most all the executives, or their profiles in this entire industry.

Rant over. Lol 

[JAzumah]

On 2/16/2019 at 10:18 PM, Brillant93 said:

The mta can’t provide the service it promises because most of the time our buses are stuck behind traffic which in some cases are caused by double parking and other things such as drivers trying to compete for one parking space. 

In dense places not driving personal vechiels should be encouraged. Why? Because dense places aren’t made for traffic. It’s one of the reasons why I don’t expect this Elon musk hyper loop thingy to even work. You can fix traffic by providing more spaces for traffic. 

Now if I’m more spread out places like suburban and rurual areas cars would be needed because lack of transportation and far distant of places for people to go to. 

The MTA will never provide enough bus service because in a subsidized model, you generate more demand than you can support. That is the nature of subsidies. In some communities, they are aggressive at trying new things. In NYC, we are fighting a losing battle to keep what we have. The good news is that the MTA is getting better at managing the service they do have and they are pushing all the zero dollar improvements they can.

[JAzumah]

On 2/16/2019 at 9:30 PM, Lawrence St said:

So how does the B110 operate?

It was started prior to 1989, so they got a city franchise. This was a route that the MTA refused to operate (they were asked).

[Lil 57]

7 hours ago, JAzumah said:

This was a route that the MTA refused to operate (they were asked).

Any reasons why they refused?

[trife86]

13 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

Any reasons why they refused?

Ain't no body got time for dat!

[Bay Ridge Express]

33 minutes ago, Lil 57 said:

Any reasons why they refused?

I have a guess: it's the least conventional and most religiously oriented bus of the division.

[bobtehpanda]

On 2/20/2019 at 5:19 PM, Lil 57 said:

Any reasons why they refused?

Given that the bus route has landed in hot water for segregating genders Rosa Parks style, I'm gonna assume they don't want the trouble.

Public ownership of that route would be a massive headache.