MTA Takeover of SIM23 & SIM24

[JAzumah]

40 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Not cool.

It's one thing to talk about solving things and it is another to solve them.

You can't complain about being short drivers and not change the schedule. I had to do that last August with my own customers. They want the schedule to be accurate and achievable. 

Express buses are not limousines. Each of these units cost $225/revenue vehicle hour to operate. The buses have to move where the people are. You cannot justify having Super Express service on top of normal express bus service on Richmond Avenue when the SIM23 and SIM24 services would have ONE HOUR gaps in service during rush hour. The maximum increase in travel time is NINE MINUTES. They will get the 4X and 8X back when the MTA has enough drivers.

The difference between me and you is that I've had to make these decisions. It isn't fun, but it is necessary. There isn't really a difference between the forums and the real world. I've seen this process from the very beginning when the city gifted the MTA a piece of land on the South Shore of Staten Island to get the point across that they need to run buses down there. I remember the deal brokered that brought the X22, X23, and X24 into existence and I still growl at how the MTA botched their end of the deal in the beginning. However, the X22's schedule was useable from day 1. I watched the city try to make the MTA eat the subsidy of the 23 & 24 for 15 years. You have no concept of what used to be there and how it got to today's network.

So spare me the "it doesn't affect you" business. Your problem is that you try to make everyone happy. You can't. The best you can do is be fair about how you allocate resources. Everyone gets to have a useable bus service as much as possible in their community. Let's not make the claim that people won't be able to commute because of a 6 month suspension of the SIM4X and SIM8X. I can credibly make the claim that the South Shore bus network won't balance itself out until the SIM23 and SIM24 has a useable schedule. I can also credibly claim that most express bus service operating to Lower Manhattan should be on a 15, 20, or 30 minute schedule right now. I see the buses EVERY WEEK. Let's not pretend they are even half full.

If the network can't be managed, the network DIES. I continue to make the argument that the express bus fare is too high. That is why the BM network carries like garbage. Having three missed trips on the B35 inconveniences almost as many people as the entire BM system carries in a day. Both sets of buses cost around $225/revenue vehicle hour, but one generates 15-20 passenger trips and the other generates 100 passenger trips. Which adds more to the transit system? We are starting to talk about bus replacement and the MTA planned to cut 104 bus operator positions from express bus service reductions in 2019. You can try to fill up the buses you have or they will disappear.

Soon, we will have the same discussions with your Queens homies...and your Bronx homies...and your Brooklyn homies. The theme is going to be USE IT OR LOSE IT because it is time to replace all of these buses. Get used to this discussion.

Edited December 13, 2021 by JAzumah
Not finished

[Via Garibaldi 8]

3 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

It's one thing to talk about solving things and it is another to solve them.

You can't complain about 

Whatever. You don't know what's going on behind the scenes and you have been pushing this SIM4X and SIM8X idea well before the SIM23 and SIM24 was mentioned, so you have an agenda.

[Future ENY OP]

Did the board approve the additional change today during the committee meeting this morning? 

Because from the looks of things I think this change got approved.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

5 minutes ago, Future ENY OP said:

Did the board approve the additional change today during the committee meeting this morning? 

Because from the looks of things I think this change got approved.

They said that they are evaluating the feedback on the proposed changes. I can't go into particulars, but if they make any changes, they promised to give advance notice beforehand. There wasn't a vote on this. They voted to implement the Bronx Local Bus Redesign though, with some minor changes.

Edited December 13, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

33 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Whatever. You don't know what's going on behind the scenes and you have been pushing this SIM4X and SIM8X idea well before the SIM23 and SIM24 was mentioned, so you have an agenda.

He has a point. There are routes with lots of runs that aren't even filling up a majority of the buses. Like the SIM6 for example has buses running every 5mins in the morning. If you pay attention to the number of people on those buses, some buses leave SI with 7 or 8 people, some leave with 12-13, some with 25+. You can easily trim down the service from every 5mins to every 10mins at some points (especially runs where buses are not even near capacity). They can also implement a varying schedule. Have the schedule fluctuate to run more frequently when more people are boarding, and then decreasing and increasing again. There's A LOT of wasted resources in the morning and I can confirm that commuting from SI in the mornings. Yes some routes get hit hard but there are also runs and routes that are carrying AIR. All he's saying is for the time being, shift resources to meet demand until there are enough drivers to meet the normal demand. Ridership is not where it was at pre-pandemic. I'd have no problem if the schedule was adjusted to decrease frequency for my route, as long as I know those buses were definitely coming (so I can plan my commute) and those trips are to be filled with drivers. What's happening now is they have schedules posted and they cant fill the schedules across the board, while WASTING their current resources in the process. 

 

 

[JAzumah]

26 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

You don't know what's going on behind the scenes and you have been pushing this SIM4X and SIM8X idea well before the SIM23 and SIM24 was mentioned, so you have an agenda.

Yes, I have an agenda. When the MTA tries interesting things, they have to work or they will stop doing them.

The 8X definitely has a future. I am not sure if the 4X does. The 4X could work on a 30 minute headway. We can't keep running 4X trips with 10 people on them. I could take those 4X buses and run hourly service around the clock to Newark Airport (particularly the cargo area). See what the Amazon site is doing? Newark Airport would do a similar amount, but around the clock. Normal Joes would be able to commute there from SI and work on the ramp for $19/hour to start with health and flight benefits. Is that the discussion behind the scenes because that SHOULD be the discussion behind the scenes.

Behind the scenes, are you discussing reverse peak express bus service to Amazon? Some of the express buses deadhead right by the facility on their way back for a second trip. You could set up a bus stop right by 8 Avenue & 42 Street and drop them off at Amazon enroute to the next trip via NJ.

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a bus to Newark Penn Station or Metropark?

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a bus to Downtown Brooklyn?

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a V-Z bike bus? FEMA would fund 100% of the cost of a bike bus across the V-Z Bridge because more people are commuting by bike to avoid interaction with others.

It is a pain in the neck to get the MTA to expand because everyone thinks they are the town bicycle. They tell the MTA to do things and then they tell the MTA to go find the money. This makes the MTA reluctant to expand anything. Therefore, service changes have to come from within the MTA's footprint first. Every service has to earn its keep. That does not mean profitable in their case, but it does mean used. It seems to bother you that I want MTA buses to be well used. On the express system, that means an average of 35 pax/bus. In this environment at this time, I would say 20 pax/bus until July 2021, 25 pax/bus through January 2022, with a FULL recovery (35 pax/bus) by January 2023. That is a 55-60% farebox recovery ratio from January 2023. Why is that unfair?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

9 minutes ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

He has a point. There are routes with lots of runs that aren't even filling up a majority of the buses. Like the SIM6 for example has buses running every 5mins in the morning. If you pay attention to the number of people on those buses, some buses leave SI with 7 or 8 people, some leave with 12-13, some with 25+. You can easily trim down the service from every 5mins to every 10mins at some points (especially runs where buses are not even near capacity). They can also implement a varying schedule. Have the schedule fluctuate to run more frequently when more people are boarding, and then decreasing and increasing again. There's A LOT of wasted resources in the morning and I can confirm that commuting from SI in the mornings. Yes some routes get hit hard but there are also runs and routes that are carrying AIR. All he's saying is for the time being, shift resources to meet demand until there are enough drivers to meet the normal demand. Ridership is not where it was at pre-pandemic. I'd have no problem if the schedule was adjusted to decrease frequency for my route, as long as I know those buses were definitely coming (so I can plan my commute) and those trips are to be filled with drivers. What's happening now is they have schedules posted and they cant fill the schedules across the board, while WASTING their current resources in the process. 

 

 

The schedules say that the SIM6 should run every five minutes, but that doesn't mean that's happening. Friday, Staten Island was down 100 bus operators, so obviously that means longer waits, and there are lines with longer waits every day. It's easy for you to say that you would prefer to have your service cut back, but this is a day by day thing and it isn't always clear what trips will need to be cut, so that is the problem. You could have your service cut back and you still may be waiting for a bus.

There is a lot that dispatch does behind the scenes to try to keep the wait times down by shuffling service around. 

[JAzumah]

11 minutes ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

There's A LOT of wasted resources in the morning and I can confirm that commuting from SI in the mornings. Yes some routes get hit hard but there are also runs and routes that are carrying AIR. All he's saying is for the time being, shift resources to meet demand until there are enough drivers to meet the normal demand.

Exactly. Otherwise, they are going to just set money on fire and then come to express bus riders and say, "Gosh, things are expensive now, so we need a fare increase to $7.50 to keep your bus".

The MTA would be wise to implement a Monday-Thursday schedule and a Friday schedule for the next year. That might save them enough to forget about the Spring 2022 fare hike altogether.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

17 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

Yes, I have an agenda. When the MTA tries interesting things, they have to work or they will stop doing them.

The 8X definitely has a future. I am not sure if the 4X does. The 4X could work on a 30 minute headway. We can't keep running 4X trips with 10 people on them. I could take those 4X buses and run hourly service around the clock to Newark Airport (particularly the cargo area). See what the Amazon site is doing? Newark Airport would do a similar amount, but around the clock. Normal Joes would be able to commute there from SI and work on the ramp for $19/hour to start with health and flight benefits. Is that the discussion behind the scenes because that SHOULD be the discussion behind the scenes.

Behind the scenes, are you discussing reverse peak express bus service to Amazon? Some of the express buses deadhead right by the facility on their way back for a second trip. You could set up a bus stop right by 8 Avenue & 42 Street and drop them off at Amazon enroute to the next trip via NJ.

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a bus to Newark Penn Station or Metropark?

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a bus to Downtown Brooklyn?

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a V-Z bike bus? FEMA would fund 100% of the cost of a bike bus across the V-Z Bridge because more people are commuting by bike to avoid interaction with others.

It is a pain in the neck to get the MTA to expand because everyone thinks they are the town bicycle. They tell the MTA to do things and then they tell the MTA to go find the money. This makes the MTA reluctant to expand anything. Therefore, service changes have to come from within the MTA's footprint first. Every service has to earn its keep. That does not mean profitable in their case, but it does mean used. It seems to bother you that I want MTA buses to be well used. On the express system, that means an average of 35 pax/bus. In this environment at this time, I would say 20 pax/bus until July 2021, 25 pax/bus through January 2022, with a FULL recovery (35 pax/bus) by January 2023. That is a 55-60% farebox recovery ratio from January 2023. Why is that unfair?

It's unfair because it's not your commute and you also don't talk about how unreliable the service has been. All you focus on is the how many people are riding. When you provide a poor product, people don't use it. It's easy for you to call for someone's service to be cut because it doesn't impact your pockets, as you will put food on the table regardless, but let's gloss over that. These aren't some fantasy routes. People purchase their homes and so on around their transportation options which you're calling to be cut.

I didn't get into this to call for peoples' service to be cut, knowing how difficult some of these commutes are, especially on Staten Island. There is nothing wrong with calling for service to be more efficient, but there is a way to go about it to find other ways to get buses to run fuller, and in theory, that was supposed to be what the SI Redesign was supposed to achieve.

Edited December 13, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

2 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The schedules say that the SIM6 should run every five minutes, but that doesn't mean that's happening. Friday, Staten Island was down 100 bus operators, so obviously that means longer waits, and there are lines with longer waits every day. It's easy for you to say that you would prefer to have your service cut back, but this is a day by day thing and it isn't always clear what trips will need to be cut, so that is the problem. You could have your service cut back and you still may be waiting for a bus.

There is a lot that dispatch does behind the scenes to try to keep the wait times down by shuffling service around. 

I know that's not happening....I clearly said What's happening now is they have schedules posted and they cant fill the schedules across the board, while WASTING their current resources in the process. 

If 20% the drivers on Friday didn't have set work on Friday and were extras or those putting in for OT, they could've made the service. There's clearly too much service open to meet the demand, and the service is not even needed across the board. Ridership is NOT what it was pre pandemic right now, and the social distancing nonsense is over. If ridership is down 50% or 40%, then the overall schedules should be down 50% or 40%. Not the schedules at 100%. That's the issue. If the schedules were down to match ridership, you'd have fuller buses, trips that can actually be assigned, more drivers available to cover work, and more service reliability (not a guessing game each day on which trips are to be canceled). 

 

You're looking at solutions from the surface, we're looking at the domino effect that's causing these issues. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

4 minutes ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

I know that's not happening....I clearly said What's happening now is they have schedules posted and they cant fill the schedules across the board, while WASTING their current resources in the process. 

If 20% the drivers on Friday didn't have set work on Friday and were extras or those putting in for OT, they could've made the service. There's clearly too much service open to meet the demand, and the service is not even needed across the board. Ridership is NOT what it was pre pandemic right now, and the social distancing nonsense is over. If ridership is down 50% or 40%, then the overall schedules should be down 50% or 40%. Not the schedules at 100%. That's the issue. If the schedules were down to match ridership, you'd have fuller buses, trips that can actually be assigned, more drivers available to cover work, and more service reliability (not a guessing game each day on which trips are to be canceled). 

 

You're looking at solutions from the surface, we're looking at the domino effect that's causing these issues. 

This is a waste of time. I'm out of here with the BS. If you support your service being cut, got for it.

[JAzumah]

4 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It's easy for you to say that you would prefer to have your service cut back, but this is a day by day thing and it isn't always clear what trips will need to be cut, so that is the problem.

MBTA is rewriting their schedules effective 12/19: MBTA Making Service Cuts Due To Bus Driver Shortage

Service in Raleigh and Durham is being cut again because they are short drivers: Temporary Service reduction set for Nov. 21

Tri-Met is also cutting service because they are short drivers effective 1/9: TriMet to reduce bus services, citing ‘severe workforce shortage’

By now, the MTA has an average of how many drivers they are short by day of week. Create a Monday-Thursday schedule and a Friday schedule. New Jersey Transit has an "Adjusted Weekday" schedule for those lighter days and many private commuter companies have a Friday schedule because their ridership is lower on Friday. If these other agencies can do it, the MTA should do it as well. It is a big headache to have to deal with a long emergency situation like this on an ad-hoc basis. If the MTA rewrites the schedules, it gives their dispatchers a fighting chance of having a good day.

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

1 minute ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

This is a waste of time. I'm out of here with the BS. If you support your service being cut, got for it.

You gotta stop with the entitlement. 

[XcelsiorBoii4888]

10 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

MBTA is rewriting their schedules effective 12/19: MBTA Making Service Cuts Due To Bus Driver Shortage

Service in Raleigh and Durham is being cut again because they are short drivers: Temporary Service reduction set for Nov. 21

Tri-Met is also cutting service because they are short drivers effective 1/9: TriMet to reduce bus services, citing ‘severe workforce shortage’

By now, the MTA has an average of how many drivers they are short by day of week. Create a Monday-Thursday schedule and a Friday schedule. New Jersey Transit has an "Adjusted Weekday" schedule for those lighter days and many private commuter companies have a Friday schedule because their ridership is lower on Friday. If these other agencies can do it, the MTA should do it as well. It is a big headache to have to deal with a long emergency situation like this on an ad-hoc basis. If the MTA rewrites the schedules, it gives their dispatchers a fighting chance of having a good day.

Service cuts only sound bad because normally service cuts mean SRO buses and longer waits etc. However, this is a different type of service cut (more like "efficient service integration") because the ridership is not there and clearly the driver availability is not there at all. I support service cuts (when needed) as long as it doesn't lead to SRO buses or severely long wait times, which is not what we're proposing anyways. I hate every morning waiting for the express bus and you don't know if your bus is going to run today, until you get to the stop. Or if the bus or two buses before yours didn't run and now your bus is unexpectedly crowded and late. Every day its something new and it gets irritating. 

Edited December 13, 2021 by XcelsiorBoii4888

[JAzumah]

15 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It's unfair because it's not your commute and you also don't talk about how unreliable the service has been. All you focus on is the how many people are riding. When you provide a poor product, people don't use it. It's easy for you to call for someone's service to be cut because it doesn't impact your pockets, as you will put food on the table regardless, but let's gloss over that. These aren't some fantasy routes. People purchase their homes and so on around their transportation options which you're calling to be cut.

No, let's not gloss over that.

NO ONE is going to be stranded by a service suspension of the SIM4X and SIM8X for six months. NO ONE. Bus service will be available on the same path and the same bus stops, but it will take up to 9 minutes longer. It will not jeopardize anyone's ability to put food on the table. The fact that you are making such an argument shows just how detached from reality you are with regards to what we are weighing here.

I want a schedule that looks like this (5:00/6:00/6:30/7:00/8:00) to become (5:00/5:30/6:00/6:30/7:00/7:30/8:00) on the SIM23 and SIM24. The latter schedule is SIGNIFICANTLY more useful. In fact, if I explained this to commuters on the SIM4 and SIM8, THEY WOULD AGREE WITH ME to make this change.

SIM23 Academy schedule: SIM23 Schedule effective 2/19/2021
SIM24 Academy schedule: SIM24 Schedule effective 10/2020

I care about the integrity of the system as a whole. This is a better use of resources than the 4X and 8X. In a normal world, they wouldn't be competing for resources, but we are not in a normal world.

 

31 minutes ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

I didn't get into this to call for peoples' service to be cut, knowing how difficult some of these commutes are, especially on Staten Island.

Welcome to reality.

Bus drivers don't like having a mask on their faces all day either. It gives them headaches. They don't like getting COVID scares from their co-workers as well as their families. Half of my industry is dead or in suspended animation. I don't like large chunks of my recovery money being tied up by computer algorithms. We live in the real world and we have to make real world decisions and sometimes, it hurts to make those decisions (or to have other decisions made for you). I don't expect you or anyone else to "like" it. If the MTA could go to the driver store and buy more drivers, they would. We are in a reality that we cannot buy our way out of, so we have to adjust until we can do better.

[JAzumah]

21 minutes ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

I hate every morning waiting for the express bus and you don't know if your bus is going to run today, until you get to the stop. Or if the bus or two buses before yours didn't run and now your bus is unexpectedly crowded and late. Every day its something new and it gets irritating. 

It is the type of BS that makes you want to drive if you have access to parking in Manhattan. Which is why so many people are driving into the city, especially early in the morning.

It is hard on the dispatchers. What are they supposed to tell people? 

It is hard on the drivers, who have to field stupid questions about things that they do not control.

No one likes the uncertainty. 

[checkmatechamp13]

13 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

That's a great idea and the people that already complain about long waits on the South Shore lines can wait even longer according to you. Every single South Shore line gets a load of complaints about long waits, all related to driver shortages... The SIM2, SIM22, SIM25 and SIM26 are examples... Sorry, but the logical thing to do is to add more service when there are enough operators to meet a higher frequency, which could be sometime in 2022. 

We have schedules and ALL riders on ALL lines should be getting the buses on the schedules, not oh let's make this line every 30 minutes on paper, but we can't meet the schedules. That's a terrible way to do things and not right to any of the riders. My stance is very simple. The  should make sure that they start the SIM23 and SIM24 off by consistently meeting the frequencies and service spans NOW, then as they deal with their driver shortage, and they can actually meet schedules across various lines, by all means, add more service to the SIM23 and SIM24.

That makes no sense. The SIM23/24 are going to be just as prone to driver shortages as any other route. The lower frequency would only compound the problem.

4 hours ago, XcelsiorBoii4888 said:

I know that's not happening....I clearly said What's happening now is they have schedules posted and they cant fill the schedules across the board, while WASTING their current resources in the process. 

If 20% the drivers on Friday didn't have set work on Friday and were extras or those putting in for OT, they could've made the service. There's clearly too much service open to meet the demand, and the service is not even needed across the board. Ridership is NOT what it was pre pandemic right now, and the social distancing nonsense is over. If ridership is down 50% or 40%, then the overall schedules should be down 50% or 40%. Not the schedules at 100%. That's the issue. If the schedules were down to match ridership, you'd have fuller buses, trips that can actually be assigned, more drivers available to cover work, and more service reliability (not a guessing game each day on which trips are to be canceled). 

You're looking at solutions from the surface, we're looking at the domino effect that's causing these issues. 

I wouldn't quite say that service should be reduced to precisely match ridership (The ridership decline might not be at the same level across all times of the day, and then you get into the issue of cutting the span of the route, or cutting hourly routes to run every 2 hours). 

Other than that, I agree with the general concept, and the key is how they assign the B/Os. One of the common complaints is "I see 3 buses of some other route, and no buses for mine", and the problem is that it's not that easy to switch B/Os between routes if they already have an assigned run. But if, like you said, they had more of them on the extra board (and fewer on "standard runs"), it would be easier to adjust them as needed.

4 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

Do you know how many people use the SIM4X and SIM8X that would be forced into a longer commute and have to change their commute? If it were my service you were calling for to be axed, I'd be pissed.

Funny thing is...I actually use both of those routes, and I'm not pissed at all with him. I don't necessarily think it's the best proposal (It might be, given the time constraints), but I'm definitely not mad at him for suggesting it (again, as a rider of those two routes)

3 hours ago, Future ENY OP said:

Did the board approve the additional change today during the committee meeting this morning? 

Because from the looks of things I think this change got approved.

Apparently, it doesn't require board approval and is just for information purposes. (See 3:59:25)

 

3 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

It's easy for you to say that you would prefer to have your service cut back, but this is a day by day thing and it isn't always clear what trips will need to be cut, so that is the problem.

That's why he's suggesting a higher percentage of the B/Os be assigned to the extra board.

2 hours ago, JAzumah said:

NO ONE is going to be stranded by a service suspension of the SIM4X and SIM8X for six months. NO ONE. Bus service will be available on the same path and the same bus stops, but it will take up to 9 minutes longer. It will not jeopardize anyone's ability to put food on the table. The fact that you are making such an argument shows just how detached from reality you are with regards to what we are weighing here.

To be clear, it can take up to 20 minutes longer, depending on the precise trip (see the 6:45am SIM8 & SIM8X departures from Westport Street, respectively)

That being said....

2 hours ago, JAzumah said:

I want a schedule that looks like this (5:00/6:00/6:30/7:00/8:00) to become (5:00/5:30/6:00/6:30/7:00/7:30/8:00) on the SIM23 and SIM24. The latter schedule is SIGNIFICANTLY more useful. In fact, if I explained this to commuters on the SIM4 and SIM8, THEY WOULD AGREE WITH ME to make this change.

As a commuter on the SIM4/4X and SIM8/8X, I agree that the scenario that you propose is better than the scenario the MTA (or @Via Garibaldi 8) is proposing. However I do not think that is the best scenario that can be achieved given the constraints in driver availability.

The best scenario given the constraints in driver availability would be to continue to operate the SIM4X & SIM8X to the southern terminals of their respective parent routes, and during the hours of SIM4X/8X operation, their respective parent routes would be cut back to the SI Mall. Adjust the frequencies as needed. 

But given that we only have 3 weeks to get this all into place, your scenario may very well be the most feasible, given time constraints. As you said...

2 hours ago, JAzumah said:

We live in the real world and we have to make real world decisions and sometimes, it hurts to make those decisions (or to have other decisions made for you).

 

 

[JAzumah]

In the past, I suggested that the southern portion of the X17J be reversed and redesigned X21. In a medium term scenario, I would agree that the 4X and 8X would make an excellent zoned express service that would top off at the Mall and head out. There would be some operational benefits starting those buses at the Mall as well.

[JAzumah]

It's one thing to explain it like B35 via Church, who doesn't like cutting service because he is concerned it may never return. That is a logical position because that has happened quite a bit. It is another thing to try and sell these service changes as something that would cause someone to sell their house and move away. In this particular case, it is not true. 

Ultimately, I would love to see the MTA take another shot at running the SIM2 off-peak next summer. They can use the Huguenot Park & Ride as a focal point for creating a strong weekend service based on all of the riders in the area. The MTA should take the opportunity to distribute mini-Staten Island express bus maps attached to MetroCard holders so that everyone in the area knows which bus goes where.

[Lawrence St]

8 hours ago, JAzumah said:

Yes, I have an agenda. When the MTA tries interesting things, they have to work or they will stop doing them.

The 8X definitely has a future. I am not sure if the 4X does. The 4X could work on a 30 minute headway. We can't keep running 4X trips with 10 people on them. I could take those 4X buses and run hourly service around the clock to Newark Airport (particularly the cargo area). See what the Amazon site is doing? Newark Airport would do a similar amount, but around the clock. Normal Joes would be able to commute there from SI and work on the ramp for $19/hour to start with health and flight benefits. Is that the discussion behind the scenes because that SHOULD be the discussion behind the scenes.

Behind the scenes, are you discussing reverse peak express bus service to Amazon? Some of the express buses deadhead right by the facility on their way back for a second trip. You could set up a bus stop right by 8 Avenue & 42 Street and drop them off at Amazon enroute to the next trip via NJ.

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a bus to Newark Penn Station or Metropark?

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a bus to Downtown Brooklyn?

Behind the scenes, are you discussing a V-Z bike bus? FEMA would fund 100% of the cost of a bike bus across the V-Z Bridge because more people are commuting by bike to avoid interaction with others.

It is a pain in the neck to get the MTA to expand because everyone thinks they are the town bicycle. They tell the MTA to do things and then they tell the MTA to go find the money. This makes the MTA reluctant to expand anything. Therefore, service changes have to come from within the MTA's footprint first. Every service has to earn its keep. That does not mean profitable in their case, but it does mean used. It seems to bother you that I want MTA buses to be well used. On the express system, that means an average of 35 pax/bus. In this environment at this time, I would say 20 pax/bus until July 2021, 25 pax/bus through January 2022, with a FULL recovery (35 pax/bus) by January 2023. That is a 55-60% farebox recovery ratio from January 2023. Why is that unfair?

Woah woah, since when is there an Amazon site bus, unless your talking about the s40.

[JAzumah]

9 hours ago, Lawrence St said:

Woah woah, since when is there an Amazon site bus, unless your talking about the s40.

It is an idea. The MTA could use deadheading express buses to carry Amazon workers to/from Midtown.

[NBTA]

57 minutes ago, JAzumah said:

It is an idea. The MTA could use deadheading express buses to carry Amazon workers to/from Midtown.

It’s an extremely smart idea, especially with the influx of workers there (I personally think there should be an express bus that already operates in that area, but that’s neither here or there).

[Via Garibaldi 8]

18 hours ago, JAzumah said:

No, let's not gloss over that.

NO ONE is going to be stranded by a service suspension of the SIM4X and SIM8X for six months. NO ONE. Bus service will be available on the same path and the same bus stops, but it will take up to 9 minutes longer. It will not jeopardize anyone's ability to put food on the table. The fact that you are making such an argument shows just how detached from reality you are with regards to what we are weighing here.

I want a schedule that looks like this (5:00/6:00/6:30/7:00/8:00) to become (5:00/5:30/6:00/6:30/7:00/7:30/8:00) on the SIM23 and SIM24. The latter schedule is SIGNIFICANTLY more useful. In fact, if I explained this to commuters on the SIM4 and SIM8, THEY WOULD AGREE WITH ME to make this change.

SIM23 Academy schedule: SIM23 Schedule effective 2/19/2021
SIM24 Academy schedule: SIM24 Schedule effective 10/2020

I care about the integrity of the system as a whole. This is a better use of resources than the 4X and 8X. In a normal world, they wouldn't be competing for resources, but we are not in a normal world.

 

Welcome to reality.

Bus drivers don't like having a mask on their faces all day either. It gives them headaches. They don't like getting COVID scares from their co-workers as well as their families. Half of my industry is dead or in suspended animation. I don't like large chunks of my recovery money being tied up by computer algorithms. We live in the real world and we have to make real world decisions and sometimes, it hurts to make those decisions (or to have other decisions made for you). I don't expect you or anyone else to "like" it. If the MTA could go to the driver store and buy more drivers, they would. We are in a reality that we cannot buy our way out of, so we have to adjust until we can do better.

Well I'm glad that you're going to have the ultimate decision on this (apparently you're in Planning Operations with the , which is essentially the way you're acting).  You don't know how many people we already have standing on some of these SIM express bus trips and you don't know how much the  would cut, which could create even more problems.

If you were all for efficiency, you wouldn't just be focusing on the express bus system, as subway ridership is still down significantly, as are the railroads. I'm not sure what your agenda is, but go for it.  I've said what I had to say on this topic and overall and I will not be posting anymore. 

[checkmatechamp13]

33 minutes ago, NBTA said:

It’s an extremely smart idea, especially with the influx of workers there (I personally think there should be an express bus that already operates in that area, but that’s neither here or there).

The SIM30 (and off-peak SIM33C) operates near there (not really walking distance, but a short ride on the S40/90)

[Future ENY OP]

3 minutes ago, checkmatechamp13 said:

The SIM30 (and off-peak SIM33C) operates near there (not really walking distance, but a short ride on the S40/90)

Is it even feasible to send the 33C (Off peak) to Amazon for express service into Manhattan. I'm quite sure the ridership could essentially jump since you may have workers who commute from Brooklyn/Lower Manhattan via ferry to the fulfillment center.