Queens Bus Redesign Discussion Thread

[B35 via Church]

7 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'm glad you said it. no offense to anyone on here, but the fantasy bus lines people conjure up are NOT logistically possible or plausible. I'm not expecting anyone to think from the mindset of management, but from an aspect of living, breathing human beings operating a line from Fordham to jfk 24/7/365 is insane. there's no way to adequately account for runs/run pay, personnel/extra list personnel, equipment wear & tear... even with built in short signs, there's no way an operator is doing a full trip both ways without that run being at minimum over 8 hours. if a line like that did exist, it would suffer from the worst case of bunching, b/o's "abusing" personals at each end, incomplete trips, etc. i would know... i left 100 street to get away from the m101 for these reasons (and more)

It's why I coined the term superroute many moons ago.

I personally despise the M101's structure... Always did.... Even more miffed that it was kept intact, while the M100 was taken off as much of 125th st for this new M125.... To me, it's hypocrisy.... The MTA AFAIC is going to forever die on this M101 hill (and I'm not talking about Ft. George either... lol).....

Edited May 14, 2023 by B35 via Church

[limitednyc]

How would u break up the m101?

[B35 via Church]

16 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

How would u break up the m101?

Simple.

First & foremost, at minimum, I'd revert the previous rendition of the M100....

Then fold most of the M101's resources (buses & manpower) into the M103 & the M100....

Of the resources that would be allocated to the M100, a new branch of the M100 (call it, whatever) would continue up Amsterdam to Ft. George... The current resources dedicated to the M100 & the resources reallocated from the broken up M101 that would go towards the new branch, would be divided into these two M100 branches more or less evenly....

Edited May 14, 2023 by B35 via Church

[EastFlatbushLarry]

17 minutes ago, B35 via Church said:

It's why I coined the term superroute many moons ago.

I personally despise the M101's structure... Always did.... Even more miffed that it was kept intact, while the M100 was taken off as much of 125th st for this new M125.... To me, it's hypocrisy.... The MTA AFAIC is going to forever die on this M101 hill (and I'm not talking about Ft. George either... lol).....

I'm holding out "hope" (for what it's worth with this organization) that the Manhattan redesign (if there'll be one) finally brings about cutting the 101 in half (so to speak) around 125 on the east side. i don't know how (or why) the 101 is still a thing... even going back, the city hall - fort George thing was bonkers in the bad ol' days of true OG MaBSTOA 

[limitednyc]

So u are saying recreate the old 100 with two branches on to ft geogre and the other to inwood.

[EastFlatbushLarry]

18 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

How would u break up the m101?

following B35's lead, I'd personally have the 101 terminate with the 100 on the west side ("Manhattanville") or send it to 1 ave/127.. and reallocate runs to the 102 & 103 making either the 102 or 103 the 3rd Av/Lex limited. having personally suffered many a run on lex/3rd, there definitely needs to be limited service of some kind... especially if one or both services run to city hall

[B35 via Church]

31 minutes ago, limitednyc said:

So u are saying recreate the old 100 with two branches on to ft george and the other to inwood.

Exactly.

35 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'm holding out "hope" (for what it's worth with this organization) that the Manhattan redesign (if there'll be one) finally brings about cutting the 101 in half (so to speak) around 125 on the east side. i don't know how (or why) the 101 is still a thing... even going back, the city hall - fort George thing was bonkers in the bad ol' days of true OG MaBSTOA 

The days before there was even an M103... yikes....

Sarcastically speaking of course, but I like how when the M100 was giving the M101 a run for its money (in terms of popularity) between Harlem & Upper Manhattan, they kept nibbling away at M100 service to try to maintain the M101 being that much more attractive to it (the M100) ... Not too long before the time they would randomly throw artics on the M100..... The average rider may not pick up on (or care) about these types of things, but I certainly do & it's maddening.... I believe the term some people use on here for the phenomena is "silent cuts" & it definitely applies..... They continue to overserve the shit out of the M101, while shortchanging the M103 like crazy...

I hope they dismantle the M101 also.... But I certainly expect for it to remain intact, while a couple of routes that few to none of us would expect they'd break up, to be broken up....

29 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

following B35's lead, I'd personally have the 101 terminate with the 100 on the west side ("Manhattanville") or send it to 1 ave/127.. and reallocate runs to the 102 & 103 making either the 102 or 103 the 3rd Av/Lex limited. having personally suffered many a run on lex/3rd, there definitely needs to be limited service of some kind... especially if one or both services run to city hall

Fair.

My rationale in throwing more service on the M103 over the M102 because for one, at least Lenox av. has help... Once you get dumped off the M101 or the M102 at Astor pl, it is a helpless feeling waiting for that M103 to get to Chinatown (or Park Row, if anyone needs be)....They're underestimating the demand for the NB M103 along the Bowery... I'm in Chinatown quite a bit these days, and even IDK where this demand/growth for the M103 down there spawned from.... Unless I'm being spoofed by how delayed/unreliable M103's get, and those are just riders piling up......

I know this is the Queens thread, but I'll just throw it out there that I'd have (an extended & expanded) M98 be the 3rd av LTD... I most certainly wouldn't leave 3rd/Lex without a skip-stop service....

Edited May 14, 2023 by B35 via Church

[limitednyc]

Do u keep the northern of the 102 as is?

[EastFlatbushLarry]

1 hour ago, limitednyc said:

Do u keep the northern of the 102 as is?

in a word: yes

the 102 doesn't empty out the way the 103 does in & around 99th street or to be kind 106th. there are several riders who ride from 3 av across 116 to points on lenox... and definitely southbound from lenox to lex (and points south of 116 & lex)

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

IDK where this demand/growth for the M103 down there spawned from.... Unless I'm being spoofed by how delayed/unreliable M103's get, and those are just riders piling up

well, imo when i worked in 100 street (around 2010/2011 or so) they started drastically cutting runs on the 101 runboard (which includes the 101/2/3) the 101 used to go well over 160 runs, but incrementally, they (as you alluded to with the 100) kept nibbling away at the 101... i mean every pick we lost runs within the course of a year (or more).. to the point where the union was beside itself, almost begging b/o's not to drag the line, stop the bunching, pass your leaders (there used to be a MaBSTOA rule where we were NOT allowed to pass our leader(s).. but that's another story for another time) after a point, they (Manhattan division) started camping out/roaming around fort George with "jimmys" (road ops AND road control slds/superintendents) making sure we weren't taking extra layover time/partaking in other "extracurriculars" (i mean well into the night like 9-11pm... btw they had issues with Manhattanville around this time period, but the focus was to whip 100 street into shape)

anyway, they started cutting any runs that showed up to 99/3rd or 125/Amsterdam carrying air.. not pieces of runs (like if you had a 101/103 split and you only carried air on your 101 piece) your WHOLE run... 103 runs in those days more than likely always split with the 101... it usually went 101/103 or 101/102.. barely were there any all-local all day runs (102/103, which imo would be suicide on wheels)

what management didn't account for was screwing over ridership south of Cooper union. as I've discussed before in the past, i had runs (especially on weekends) where i was on the 101 and was instructed by the sld at Cooper union to do "shuttles" to/from city hall & Cooper union due to the lack of 103's. now, traffic on delancey doesn't help on time performance on the 103 at all, but scheduling 103's to run upwards of 12 minutes below Cooper union was/is despicable. 12 minutes is doable above Cooper union barring a 101/2 lying in wait for a unsuspecting/unsavvy 103 b/o to take advantage of.

i say all of that to say that I'm assuming the results of what you currently see today is a direct result of management punishing 100 street's runboard back in the day and putting the primary focus on cleaning the road on 3rd/lex, while leaving Chinatown/the Bowery to figure it out. it used to be a pleasure to operate the 103 specifically on the bowery when we had quality operators on 101/2/3 working in unison. it got messy real quick, and going to city hall wasn't worth the hassle or late slip.

[EastFlatbushLarry]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

I'd have (an extended & expanded) M98 be the 3rd av LTD... I most certainly wouldn't leave 3rd/Lex without a skip-stop service....

it's funny. in those days, before and after being laid off, we despised the M98 b/o's .. we absolutely felt that they could've been of more service to us in the pm rush (when they ended and started at 34th street)

don't get it twisted: they weren't carrying air northbound, but a quill or Manhattanville 38xx NG with a standing load doesn't hit the same at 5:42pm on a Thursday like a d60hf with a standing load does, especially if he/she is flying by you 😒 

[EastFlatbushLarry]

3 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

Sarcastically speaking of course, but I like how when the M100 was giving the M101 a run for its money (in terms of popularity) between Harlem & Upper Manhattan, they kept nibbling away at M100 service to try to maintain the M101 being that much more attractive to it

Kingsbridge (the M100) was absolutely applying pressure back in the day, especially northbound. there were plenty of customers who'd pass up on my packed m101 artic run for a bone dry m100... as they should've. however, as you stated, they tried to take advantage of the artics on 125 & Amsterdam by way of the 101, thinking that Washington heights residents weren't savvy enough to peep game or thinking they'd voluntarily take the m101 to 161 and wait for a m100 there. boy were they mistaken, especially when they had no choice but to cut alot of M101's short at 161 to send us back downtown in service. this is when they came up with rush hour m100 artics, and given it's popularity, i am firmly of the belief they sabotaged the 100 because they didn't want 101's, Bx15's AND 100's, all with artics, crawling across 125.

[Gotham Bus Co.]

6 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

following B35's lead, I'd personally have the 101 terminate with the 100 on the west side ("Manhattanville") or send it to 1 ave/127.. and reallocate runs to the 102 & 103 making either the 102 or 103 the 3rd Av/Lex limited. having personally suffered many a run on lex/3rd, there definitely needs to be limited service of some kind... especially if one or both services run to city hall

Basically, the longer 3rd/Lex trips (147/Lenox to 6th or Lexington/125 to City Hall) would run LTD, and the shorter trips (125th to 6th replacing M101) would be the locals.

[EastFlatbushLarry]

2 hours ago, Gotham Bus Co. said:

Basically, the longer 3rd/Lex trips (147/Lenox to 6th or Lexington/125 to City Hall) would run LTD, and the shorter trips (125th to 6th replacing M101) would be the locals.

pretty much. I'd prefer to see LTD's on the 102 from cooper union to 147 with a possible 8-10 minute headway (I'm considering the layover situation in the area around M.C. Hale) and 103's from city hall to 125 at 6-8 minute headways for the most part. i will submit that built in short signs will make the paddles and headway set up messy

[Kamen Rider]

14 hours ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I'm glad you said it. no offense to anyone on here, but the fantasy bus lines people conjure up are NOT logistically possible or plausible. I'm not expecting anyone to think from the mindset of management, but from an aspect of living, breathing human beings operating a line from Fordham to jfk 24/7/365 is insane. there's no way to adequately account for runs/run pay, personnel/extra list personnel, equipment wear & tear... even with built in short signs, there's no way an operator is doing a full trip both ways without that run being at minimum over 8 hours. if a line like that did exist, it would suffer from the worst case of bunching, b/o's "abusing" personals at each end, incomplete trips, etc. i would know... i left 100 street to get away from the m101 for these reasons (and more)

I think a lot of these armchair transit planners would change thier tunes in a heartbeat if they had to drive the S78 or scrape the wall on the A the whole way from 207 to Far Rockaway.

As someone who’s done the latter multiple times, it is an endurance challenge, more so when there is flagging on the line and you’re rolling along for several stops at 10 MPH.

2 and a half hours I think is my longest trip.

[EastFlatbushLarry]

1 hour ago, Kamen Rider said:

I think a lot of these armchair transit planners would change thier tunes in a heartbeat if they had to drive the S78 or scrape the wall on the A the whole way from 207 to Far Rockaway.

As someone who’s done the latter multiple times, it is an endurance challenge, more so when there is flagging on the line and you’re rolling along for several stops at 10 MPH.

2 and a half hours I think is my longest trip.

i must say, shoutout to y'all. all respect due for dealing with that overnite on any consistent basis. you said it best: endurance challenge indeed. long distance driving, be it bus, truck, subway t/o's... it's not something to take lightly in any way. sitting for long periods of time is about as abnormal to the human body as a pitcher throwing overhand. we're supposed to take breaks every 2 hours according to most doctors... get up, stretch, hydrate, etc. for example, my ex wife ended up getting blood clots in her legs & lungs because of not stretching and keeping her blood flow correct over the course of less than 5 years (that M101) so for anyone that says it's not a "big deal" operating a bus (or train) for approx. 2 hours or more one way, i beg to differ. people get lost in their fanaticism and forget there are human beings operating (NOT driving) damn near million dollar pieces of equipment with real life consequences, not just potentially to the general public, but to ourselves, our health and family/families. yes, we signed up for it and qualified, but you can't be a fan of something or someone and also be completely dismissive of the human element.

getting back to the Q44, personally I'm not necessarily a fan of the Fordham to Jamaica idea. you're basically creating the Queens/Bx version of the M101 imo, but I'm not ignorant: there's been a demand for it for quite some time. i work in the bronx division, and where the current Q44 ends is a bit odd, connection wise to the rest of the bronx, i get it. meanwhile tho, a line like the B60 in the brooklyn redesign will potentially be chopped in half at fulton street. oddball shit. I'm sure you have examples of weirdo GO's that have been implemented downstairs just as i can speak to weird ass detours upstairs... it's the nature of this beast. i get that people may have these grandiose ideas but we have to somehow color within the lines of reality.

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

...getting back to the Q44, personally I'm not necessarily a fan of the Fordham to Jamaica idea. you're basically creating the Queens/Bx version of the M101 imo, but I'm not ignorant: there's been a demand for it for quite some time. i work in the bronx division, and where the current Q44 ends is a bit odd, connection wise to the rest of the bronx, i get it. meanwhile tho, a line like the B60 in the brooklyn redesign will potentially be chopped in half at fulton street. oddball shit. I'm sure you have examples of weirdo GO's that have been implemented downstairs just as i can speak to weird ass detours upstairs... it's the nature of this beast. i get that people may have these grandiose ideas but we have to somehow color within the lines of reality.

That is the real issue with the Q44 (from the passenger perspective) on the Bronx end, spawning the cosigning/consensus of that extension to Fordham in this MTA network redesign... Folks don't wanna deal with that xfer to the Bx9.

With this network redesign proposing extending the Q44 to Fordham though, yeah, I'm not with it either.... Starting up a separate Flushing - Fordham route would be one thing, but Jamaica - Fordham to me just screams chaotic logistical mess....

This will also be the unpopular opinion, but all things considered, the Q44 shouldn't be running past Parkchester.... Of course, there wouldn't be any room for that in the current state of the network, being that they now got Bx11's parking any which where around Grant Circle.....

Edited May 15, 2023 by B35 via Church

[EastFlatbushLarry]

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Folks don't wanna deal with that xfer to the Bx9

THIS. especially after dark. not saying during the day is any better. that whole setup around west farms depot is peculiar.. the Sheridan, the Q44 layover, the Bx9's... its piss poor imo

 

1 hour ago, B35 via Church said:

Starting up a separate Flushing - Fordham route would be one thing, but Jamaica - Fordham to me just screams chaotic logistical mess

...especially if they aren't going to split that line between 2 depots. I'm sorry, I'm not a fan of Casey Stengel potentially doing pull outs to Fordham or this continuous splitting of the 44 at 39 Avenue. I'm all for a separate Fordham - flushing line. it's a similar situation imo when they talk about sending Q6's to Queens Village via combining it with the Q1 or sending Bx41's to LGA... just leave it be.

by the way, it doesn't really take much for the Q44 to ish the bed on any given day. friggin butterfly effect that line: someone sneezes on archer... aaaaand bunching occurs in flushing, and they want to add Fordham to the mix? if they think bronx riders were mad about bx15's being stuck on 125 street because of the triboro, wait til the 44 implodes trying to traverse to Fordham 

 

2 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

This will also be the unpopular opinion, but all things considered, the Q44 shouldn't be running past Parkchester

I've been yelling from that mountain for quite some time... at times, it's been my argument that at bare minimum, the 44 Parkchester short sign should be implemented alongside or in place of the Whitestone am runs. but as you stated, the 11's there now.

honestly, i don't know how feasible this is but i always felt they could've tried having Bx9's & Q44's layover by morris park av & 180 (the 180th station) especially now that 40/42's are running on 180th

[MysteriousBtrain]

12 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

THIS. especially after dark. not saying during the day is any better. that whole setup around west farms depot is peculiar.. the Sheridan, the Q44 layover, the Bx9's... its piss poor imo

I always wondered why there wasn't a "local Bronx portion" between Fordham and Flushing. This route could be very useful and even a couple stops on the current Q44 could be served by the local instead. 

 

14 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

...especially if they aren't going to split that line between 2 depots. I'm sorry, I'm not a fan of Casey Stengel potentially doing pull outs to Fordham or this continuous splitting of the 44 at 39 Avenue. I'm all for a separate Fordham - flushing line. it's a similar situation imo when they talk about sending Q6's to Queens Village via combining it with the Q1 or sending Bx41's to LGA... just leave it be.

Iirc pending finalization of construction, all trips on the Q44 are supposed to be sent to Jamaica depot to reduce unnecessary short turns and layovers for reliefs. Still doesn't excuse the extension to make trips longer. 

 

16 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

I've been yelling from that mountain for quite some time... at times, it's been my argument that at bare minimum, the 44 Parkchester short sign should be implemented alongside or in place of the Whitestone am runs. but as you stated, the 11's there now.

The Q44 is one of the handful of routes in the city that became so successful it hurts itself in the long run. Imagine being the OP that had to drive on the Q44 pre-1999. Even the Q20A/B is only able to do so much. I remember reading the (original, and not pre redesign, the original original) Bx36 was also replaced slowly by the Q44, giving it more weight to carry. If they needed a Bronx-Queens connector, could have found a way to make an "express route" between West Farms and Flushing. All this short turning still gonna upset passengers. 

21 minutes ago, EastFlatbushLarry said:

honestly, i don't know how feasible this is but i always felt they could've tried having Bx9's & Q44's layover by morris park av & 180 (the 180th station) especially now that 40/42's are running on 180th

The main problem is layovers. There is definitely not enough space for both the Bx9 and Q44 to be rerouted over there. At the very least, the Q44 is still gonna have to end at/still serve West Farms so the rerouted is basically moot. Besides, the current Q44 route between Parkchester and West Farms is already as straightforward as it can get. No need to add more unnecessary turns especially on narrow streets.

[danielhg121]

1 hour ago, MysteriousBtrain said:

Iirc pending finalization of construction, all trips on the Q44 are supposed to be sent to Jamaica depot to reduce unnecessary short turns and layovers for reliefs. Still doesn't excuse the extension to make trips longer. 

I feel like CS is going to raise hell if this goes through. Also, this doesn't seem exactly feasible to implement. You're gonna run every bus up there in service to Fordham? that's just clogging the streets. 

Jamaica Depot has plenty of routes down there that need artics but it will need some route restructuring. They're also redoing 165th Street Bus Term to accommodate artics.

[NewFlyer 230]

7 hours ago, B35 via Church said:

That is the real issue with the Q44 (from the passenger perspective) on the Bronx end, spawning the cosigning/consensus of that extension to Fordham in this MTA network redesign... Folks don't wanna deal with that xfer to the Bx9.

With this network redesign proposing extending the Q44 to Fordham though, yeah, I'm not with it either.... Starting up a separate Flushing - Fordham route would be one thing, but Jamaica - Fordham to me just screams chaotic logistical mess....

This will also be the unpopular opinion, but all things considered, the Q44 shouldn't be running past Parkchester.... Of course, there wouldn't be any room for that in the current state of the network, being that they now got Bx11's parking any which where around Grant Circle.....

This is also unpopular but I believe the Q44 should completely skip serving Union Street and Parsons Blvd with it instead having it jump on the Whitestone Expressway much sooner. 

I would have it run on Linden Place to the Whitestone Expressway, with it possibly having a stop at 20th Ave. Afterwards it would head on the expressway and continue to the Bronx. It is a select bus route and I don’t think it should be taking that detour through Whitestone especially since they are extending it further north in The Bronx.

This is where the Q94 would come into play. I would create the Q94 to provide local service between Flushing and Fordham vía Union Street and Parsons Blvd. I would restore a few of the old Q44 stops in the Bronx and have the Q94 serve those stops. 
 

 

[limitednyc]

U mean via part of the q25?

[checkmatechamp13]

2 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

This is also unpopular but I believe the Q44 should completely skip serving Union Street and Parsons Blvd with it instead having it jump on the Whitestone Expressway much sooner. 

I would have it run on Linden Place to the Whitestone Expressway, with it possibly having a stop at 20th Ave. Afterwards it would head on the expressway and continue to the Bronx. It is a select bus route and I don’t think it should be taking that detour through Whitestone especially since they are extending it further north in The Bronx.

This is where the Q94 would come into play. I would create the Q94 to provide local service between Flushing and Fordham vía Union Street and Parsons Blvd. I would restore a few of the old Q44 stops in the Bronx and have the Q94 serve those stops. 

I believe the original draft of the Q44 had it doing that. (I agree, and I would also have a stop at 14th Avenue for the connection to the Q31)

I'm not sure if a completely separate route is necessary for the Flushing-Bronx segment. I think it would be better to have buses short-turned as-needed at the Bruckner Interchange  (from Fordham Plaza) to avoid issues at the Whitestone Bridge.

[NewFlyer 230]

5 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

I believe the original draft of the Q44 had it doing that. (I agree, and I would also have a stop at 14th Avenue for the connection to the Q31)

I'm not sure if a completely separate route is necessary for the Flushing-Bronx segment. I think it would be better to have buses short-turned as-needed at the Bruckner Interchange  (from Fordham Plaza) to avoid issues at the Whitestone Bridge.

The reason I proposed that local variant between Flushing and the Bronx is to speed up the Q44 SBS and give those coming from Jamaica a quicker ride. The Q44 sees decent Bronx usage from Jamaica and being that this route is proposed to become even longer I don’t think it should serve Whitestone. Instead let another route do that which I’d name the Q94. The Q94 wouldn’t be as frequent as the Q44 but it can provide local service to make up for the loss of the Q44. 

[xD4nn]

5 hours ago, danielhg121 said:

I feel like CS is going to raise hell if this goes through. Also, this doesn't seem exactly feasible to implement. You're gonna run every bus up there in service to Fordham? that's just clogging the streets. 

Jamaica Depot has plenty of routes down there that need artics but it will need some route restructuring. They're also redoing 165th Street Bus Term to accommodate artics.

From what I heard when Jamaica gets the Q44, Jamaica will be forced to give up the Q17 and some other route.

[Q43LTD]

Maybe the Q30?