BUS - Random Thoughts Thread

[QM1to6Ave]

6 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

Finally caught one of the new Prevost on the QM4. Sadly I was the only one on the bus besides the driver but it was a good ride. What surprised me is the fact that the seats on the new Prevost has seat belts. Never thought I’d see seatbelts on a transit bus. 

I'm guessing the MTA paid for the belts so if a customer gets injured and sues, the MTA can say "you should have put the belt on" and get the suit dismissed

[SevenEleven]

9 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

Finally caught one of the new Prevost on the QM4. Sadly I was the only one on the bus besides the driver but it was a good ride. What surprised me is the fact that the seats on the new Prevost has seat belts. Never thought I’d see seatbelts on a transit bus. 

 

2 hours ago, QM1to6Ave said:

I'm guessing the MTA paid for the belts so if a customer gets injured and sues, the MTA can say "you should have put the belt on" and get the suit dismissed

Seatbelts were federally mandated for coach buses a few years back, after one of the Greyhound bus accidents where the bus flipped and there were casualties.

Hence why all the new NJT cruisers (and now our new Prevosts) have seatbelts.

[Kingsbridgeviewer382]

12 minutes ago, SevenEleven said:

 

Seatbelts were federally mandated for coach buses a few years back, after one of the Greyhound bus accidents where the bus flipped and there were casualties.

Hence why all the new NJT cruisers (and now our new Prevosts) have seatbelts.

The regulation took effect in 2016 after being passed in 2013.

[R10 2952]

I can easily see this seatbelt idea blowing up in the regulators' faces; big difference between a 5-6 person car and a full-size motor coach.  An overturned bus with 30+ people trapped hanging upside-down just seems like a recipe for a lawsuit.

Edited April 18, 2021 by R10 2952

[SevenEleven]

3 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

I can easily see this seatbelt idea blowing up in the regulators' faces; big difference between a 5-6 person car and a full-size motor coach.  An overturned bus with 30+ people trapped hanging upside-down just seems like a recipe for a lawsuit.

Usage is optional but if it saves you from being tossed around like a ragdoll. 🤷🏾‍♂️

[B35 via Church]

15 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

Finally caught one of the new Prevost on the QM4. Sadly I was the only one on the bus besides the driver but it was a good ride. What surprised me is the fact that the seats on the new Prevost has seat belts. Never thought I’d see seatbelts on a transit bus. 

Yeah, that tripped me out when I first embarked on NJT's MCI D4500CT's (was an early morning AC bound #559).... Still had the new bus smell & everything, but that's besides the point ... Anyway, as someone else mentioned, the seatbelt usage is optional - hell, I use them for shits & giggles, depending on my mood.... Not for nothing, but to me, they do make the ride a little more comfortable (on a route like the #319 anyway)....

14 hours ago, Snorunts said:

Sadly?

10 hours ago, paulrivera said:

Right?

I was the only one on a BxM1 a couple times last year and I loved it, especially the ride into Midtown.

Anytime the B/O's ask "where you going?" and you have a light bus, odds are you're in for a treat.

If you're looking at solely from a selfish busfanner's perspective, sure.... However, I feel where @NewFlyer 230's coming from with that; I also tend to see the trip today (so to speak / figuratively speaking) where I'm the only passenger on it, eventually ending up being the trip that won't exist tomorrow, due to insufficient usage..... Me personally, I don't always see being the lone passenger on a bus as a treat necessarily (b/o's are more prone to chit chat with you [I've gotten the whole "come up to the front" numerous times], you tend to be treated/assumed like you don't know where you're going, or somehow up to no good - especially if you're not a "regular".... or you can end up getting into a situation like @Q43LTD mentioned in this post)....

To your (PaulRivera's) point though, yeah, you do have b/o's that'll deviate off course to make your trip faster, if you're the sole passenger or whatever.... Happened several times to me on weekend BxM3's (getting to Getty Sq) alone... So I'm by no means intimating that it doesn't happen.

5 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

I can easily see this seatbelt idea blowing up in the regulators' faces; big difference between a 5-6 person car and a full-size motor coach.  An overturned bus with 30+ people trapped hanging upside-down just seems like a recipe for a lawsuit.

No problems thus far over in Jersey, so that's good....

[MHV9218]

10 hours ago, R10 2952 said:

I can easily see this seatbelt idea blowing up in the regulators' faces; big difference between a 5-6 person car and a full-size motor coach.  An overturned bus with 30+ people trapped hanging upside-down just seems like a recipe for a lawsuit.

To be fair, so long as you can un-click you're not trapped, and the person upside down hanging is probably in better shape than the person who went flying head-first at the floor in a rollover. This was an early argument against seatbelts – better to get thrown clean – and it didn't pan out.

[bobtehpanda]

37 minutes ago, MHV9218 said:

To be fair, so long as you can un-click you're not trapped, and the person upside down hanging is probably in better shape than the person who went flying head-first at the floor in a rollover. This was an early argument against seatbelts – better to get thrown clean – and it didn't pan out.

Not even at the floor, but out of the window, into rocks, down a cliff, or oncoming traffic or whatnot. There was that sad story of the woman who got thrown out of a Asiana plane at SFO when it crash landed, got covered in firefighting foam, and then got run over by another fire truck responding to the scene.

Also I find it hard to imagine a situation where you'd be

• trapped upside down when you otherwise wouldn't be, and
• be in a position where you couldn't unbuckle yourself

[QM1to6Ave]

27 minutes ago, bobtehpanda said:

Not even at the floor, but out of the window, into rocks, down a cliff, or oncoming traffic or whatnot. There was that sad story of the woman who got thrown out of a Asiana plane at SFO when it crash landed, got covered in firefighting foam, and then got run over by another fire truck responding to the scene.

Also I find it hard to imagine a situation where you'd be

• trapped upside down when you otherwise wouldn't be, and
• be in a position where you couldn't unbuckle yourself

The MTA could always install those seatbelt cutter tools that cost like $5. I remember school buses had them installed when I was in elementary school (even on old buses that didn't have belts installed, which gave me a good laugh)

[B35 via Church]

1 hour ago, bobtehpanda said:

Not even at the floor, but out of the window, into rocks, down a cliff, or oncoming traffic or whatnot. There was that sad story of the woman who got thrown out of a Asiana plane at SFO when it crash landed, got covered in firefighting foam, and then got run over by another fire truck responding to the scene.

Also I find it hard to imagine a situation where you'd be

• trapped upside down when you otherwise wouldn't be, and
• be in a position where you couldn't unbuckle yourself

Asiana 214 & that jackass fireman in question that ran over said lady & said "I mean, shit happens, you know"....

=========================

As far as this particular seatbelt side-discussion in question, I see it as a non issue, quite honestly....

 

[NewFlyer 230]

On 4/17/2021 at 4:23 PM, Snorunts said:

Sadly?

No I say sadly because the QM4 is one of those express routes I can see the MTA slashing a lot more service from. It used to do better in terms of ridership back under Queens Surface and early MTA bus days. I see a lot more emptier trips in later years.

[Lex]

6 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

No I say sadly because the QM4 is one of those express routes I can see the MTA slashing a lot more service from. It used to do better in terms of ridership back under Queens Surface and early MTA bus days. I see a lot more emptier trips in later years.

Those sky-high fares will definitely serve as a deterrent.

[R1609103]

6 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

No I say sadly because the QM4 is one of those express routes I can see the MTA slashing a lot more service from. It used to do better in terms of ridership back under Queens Surface and early MTA bus days. I see a lot more emptier trips in later years.

 

Is it the same thing for the QM44 or the QM44 has seen more riders?

[1train2255railfan]

I noticed that certain Orion 7 Hybrids (6725, 6736, 3850, etc) have partially peeled off "Clean Air Hybrid Electric Bus" labeling. Could that be due to age/wear and tear or are the decals beginning to be removed because the said buses are being retired soon? 

[Kingsbridgeviewer382]

35 minutes ago, 1train2255railfan said:

I noticed that certain Orion 7 Hybrids (6725, 6736, 3850, etc) have partially peeled off "Clean Air Hybrid Electric Bus" labeling. Could that be due to age/wear and tear or are the decals beginning to be removed because the said buses are being retired soon? 

Wear and tear. Buses rubbing off on surfaces inadvertently (like being passed through tree branches) is common. A lot of the labels are more newer that people think as those hybrid labels were replaced when the buses got repaints.

[MHV9218]

38 minutes ago, 1train2255railfan said:

I noticed that certain Orion 7 Hybrids (6725, 6736, 3850, etc) have partially peeled off "Clean Air Hybrid Electric Bus" labeling. Could that be due to age/wear and tear or are the decals beginning to be removed because the said buses are being retired soon? 

There would be no reason to remove the decals. Some of them are peeled off from advertising on the roofline that removed the adhesive, and some are just old stickers that are coming off. Stickers on buses usually last about 8-10 years in direct sunlight...RTS numbers were all peeling off by the end. 

[Via Garibaldi 8]

9 hours ago, NewFlyer 230 said:

No I say sadly because the QM4 is one of those express routes I can see the MTA slashing a lot more service from. It used to do better in terms of ridership back under Queens Surface and early MTA bus days. I see a lot more emptier trips in later years.

Yeah and that's because the service is run like garbage. That is one line I rode on weekends when I started my group to see what service is like. The schedules are terribly written #1, and #2, some of the buses would run 20-30 minutes late with no traffic to justify such lateness. Doesn't matter what the service is, if it is run poorly, people won't use it if it is unreliable. Now they switched the line back over to College Point. The schedules STILL have not been changed on weekends. Too much run time going back to Queens.

53 minutes ago, 1train2255railfan said:

I noticed that certain Orion 7 Hybrids (6725, 6736, 3850, etc) have partially peeled off "Clean Air Hybrid Electric Bus" labeling. Could that be due to age/wear and tear or are the decals beginning to be removed because the said buses are being retired soon? 

It also looks like they paint over that "Clean Air Hybrid Electric Bus" labeling, at least on some buses I've seen. Wouldn't surprise me if they did either. lol

Edited April 19, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[1train2255railfan]

Just saw an LFS Hybrid on the West Side Highway. Not sure which depot it was out of nor where it was heading, just that it was on the northbound lane. 

[trainfan22]

Is there any particular reason why the the Tuskegee LFS hybrids haven't hit service yet? I saw on YouTube that MTV is using their LFS for driver training. MTV has a lot of in route driver reliefs so I understand why they haven't hit service yet at MTV. Does the M31 have driver reliefs? Theres no footage of the Tuskegee LFS, not even driver training.

[1train2255railfan]

26 minutes ago, trainfan22 said:

Is there any particular reason why the the Tuskegee LFS hybrids haven't hit service yet? I saw on YouTube that MTV is using their LFS for driver training. MTV has a lot of in route driver reliefs so I understand why they haven't hit service yet at MTV. Does the M31 have driver reliefs? Theres no footage of the Tuskegee LFS, not even driver training.

A couple people have posted pics of them training on Instagram. They have been training, they might just need a little bit more. Hopefully they'll be in service soon 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

On 4/17/2021 at 3:34 PM, NewFlyer 230 said:

Finally caught one of the new Prevost on the QM4. Sadly I was the only one on the bus besides the driver but it was a good ride. What surprised me is the fact that the seats on the new Prevost has seat belts. Never thought I’d see seatbelts on a transit bus. 

 

On 4/18/2021 at 7:41 AM, B35 via Church said:

If you're looking at solely from a selfish busfanner's perspective, sure.... However, I feel where @NewFlyer 230's coming from with that; I also tend to see the trip today (so to speak / figuratively speaking) where I'm the only passenger on it, eventually ending up being the trip that won't exist tomorrow, due to insufficient usage..... Me personally, I don't always see being the lone passenger on a bus as a treat necessarily (b/o's are more prone to chit chat with you [I've gotten the whole "come up to the front" numerous times], you tend to be treated/assumed like you don't know where you're going, or somehow up to no good - especially if you're not a "regular".... or you can end up getting into a situation like @Q43LTD mentioned in this post)....

To your (PaulRivera's) point though, yeah, you do have b/o's that'll deviate off course to make your trip faster, if you're the sole passenger or whatever.... Happened several times to me on weekend BxM3's (getting to Getty Sq) alone... So I'm by no means intimating that it doesn't happen.

 

Kinda late to this discussion, but yeah, I had a similar feeling to the "sadly" comment.

 

I personally see the QM4 in a somewhat similar situation to the QM1 (when it ran during off-peak hours). It has good ridership during rush hours but as a standalone route during off-peak hours, it's performs terribly. The difference though, is that the QM4 doesn't run with any other express route during those periods.

I don't know what the ideal situation would be, with the QM4. I do think that there should be off-peak service on Queens Boulevard, so I would have done that yesterday. Basically stop at 67th Ave, 63rd Drive, and Woodhaven Boulevard. Those areas don't have the LIRR, and the subway can be pretty crappy. But of course, the MTA takes eons to implement something relatively simple.

IDK who's came up with it, but having the QM5 run via Jewel Ave instead (and boosting the QM6 to operate every 30 minutes during off-peak periods with heavy ridership) might also be another plan. I know it's come up in the past. 

Speaking about Queens Boulevard, I'm kinda surprised that none of the PBLs considered operating a full time express route along Queens Boulevard (making stops between Union Tpke and Woodhaven Blvd). I mean yeah, the LIRR stations at Forest Hills and Kew Gardens, but even with CitiTicket, the express bus is cheaper, serves more of Midtown, and can provide transfers to other bus/subway lines (if needed). Seeing how the QM18 basically operates that (but during peak hours only), I'm actually curious how an off-peak QM18 would operate. Ridership south of Metro might be on the lower end, but I think there's potential north of it. Depending on headways and/or marketing, it could work well. 

 

 

[NBTA]

35 minutes ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

 

Kinda late to this discussion, but yeah, I had a similar feeling to the "sadly" comment.

 

I personally see the QM4 in a somewhat similar situation to the QM1 (when it ran during off-peak hours). It has good ridership during rush hours but as a standalone route during off-peak hours, it's performs terribly. The difference though, is that the QM4 doesn't run with any other express route during those periods.

I don't know what the ideal situation would be, with the QM4. I do think that there should be off-peak service on Queens Boulevard, so I would have done that yesterday. Basically stop at 67th Ave, 63rd Drive, and Woodhaven Boulevard. Those areas don't have the LIRR, and the subway can be pretty crappy. But of course, the MTA takes eons to implement something relatively simple.

IDK who's came up with it, but having the QM5 run via Jewel Ave instead (and boosting the QM6 to operate every 30 minutes during off-peak periods with heavy ridership) might also be another plan. I know it's come up in the past. 

Speaking about Queens Boulevard, I'm kinda surprised that none of the PBLs considered operating a full time express route along Queens Boulevard (making stops between Union Tpke and Woodhaven Blvd). I mean yeah, the LIRR stations at Forest Hills and Kew Gardens, but even with CitiTicket, the express bus is cheaper, serves more of Midtown, and can provide transfers to other bus/subway lines (if needed). Seeing how the QM18 basically operates that (but during peak hours only), I'm actually curious how an off-peak QM18 would operate. Ridership south of Metro might be on the lower end, but I think there's potential north of it. Depending on headways and/or marketing, it could work well. 

 

 

I see that area south of Metro actually bringing in a hoard of people, especially since it can be used as an alternative from the ? Sign me up and sign me in. It’ll be interesting however, if that route went to JFK Airport, what would happen?

[EastFlatbushLarry]

2 hours ago, trainfan22 said:

Is there any particular reason why the the Tuskegee LFS hybrids haven't hit service yet? I saw on YouTube that MTV is using their LFS for driver training. MTV has a lot of in route driver reliefs so I understand why they haven't hit service yet at MTV. Does the M31 have driver reliefs? Theres no footage of the Tuskegee LFS, not even driver training.

to my knowledge, the issue is operator training, and getting the majority of operators trained beforehand, regardless of if you pick the avenues (m15/101/2/3), the 31 or the x (extra list)

I believe it'll be the same (staggered) process for us in KB, over at MV & anywhere else for that matter. there was an issue in training when the xd60's hit 100 street, and the d60hf's were being phased out, so they're doing their due diligence iinm

also, i do believe the 31 has reliefs on 92nd (like 100 street used to have for the 86) there's a swing room (or at least there was) on 92nd that's maintained by 100 street cleaners, btw. 

Edited April 21, 2021 by EastFlatbushLarry

[Via Garibaldi 8]

2 hours ago, BM5 via Woodhaven said:

 

Kinda late to this discussion, but yeah, I had a similar feeling to the "sadly" comment.

 

I personally see the QM4 in a somewhat similar situation to the QM1 (when it ran during off-peak hours). It has good ridership during rush hours but as a standalone route during off-peak hours, it's performs terribly. The difference though, is that the QM4 doesn't run with any other express route during those periods.

I don't know what the ideal situation would be, with the QM4. I do think that there should be off-peak service on Queens Boulevard, so I would have done that yesterday. Basically stop at 67th Ave, 63rd Drive, and Woodhaven Boulevard. Those areas don't have the LIRR, and the subway can be pretty crappy. But of course, the MTA takes eons to implement something relatively simple.

IDK who's came up with it, but having the QM5 run via Jewel Ave instead (and boosting the QM6 to operate every 30 minutes during off-peak periods with heavy ridership) might also be another plan. I know it's come up in the past. 

Speaking about Queens Boulevard, I'm kinda surprised that none of the PBLs considered operating a full time express route along Queens Boulevard (making stops between Union Tpke and Woodhaven Blvd). I mean yeah, the LIRR stations at Forest Hills and Kew Gardens, but even with CitiTicket, the express bus is cheaper, serves more of Midtown, and can provide transfers to other bus/subway lines (if needed). Seeing how the QM18 basically operates that (but during peak hours only), I'm actually curious how an off-peak QM18 would operate. Ridership south of Metro might be on the lower end, but I think there's potential north of it. Depending on headways and/or marketing, it could work well. 

 

 

The problem with the QM4 is the demographics in Forest Hills. It's not a question of affording the service because it does fine during the week. On Saturdays however, you have Shabbat, so you're not going to get much ridership along Jewel or other areas in Forest Hills for that reason, as a large part of the demographic is Jewish along parts of the route. Sundays, those people that take the bus during the week will likely drive, as that is a part of Forest Hills with lots of single family homes. The QM5 does too much. The QM4 could make the stops you suggested and be extended to terminate at the Fresh Meadows complex, and I would terminate it there, and allow the QM5 to continue along 73rd Av instead of making the stops along 188th St. The QM6 does not have enough ridership on weekends to give it 30 minute headways.

I can tell you right now, the senior planners would never go for it. Every time any discussion comes up about any addition of service, I'm met with we can't afford any more service (and that was pre COVID when the economy was booming), so they are only entertaining keeping the schedules as is for now.

Edited April 21, 2021 by Via Garibaldi 8

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

21 hours ago, Via Garibaldi 8 said:

The problem with the QM4 is the demographics in Forest Hills. It's not a question of affording the service because it does fine during the week. On Saturdays however, you have Shabbat, so you're not going to get much ridership along Jewel or other areas in Forest Hills for that reason, as a large part of the demographic is Jewish along parts of the route. Sundays, those people that take the bus during the week will likely drive, as that is a part of Forest Hills with lots of single family homes. The QM5 does too much. The QM4 could make the stops you suggested and be extended to terminate at the Fresh Meadows complex, and I would terminate it there, and allow the QM5 to continue along 73rd Av instead of making the stops along 188th St. The QM6 does not have enough ridership on weekends to give it 30 minute headways.

I can tell you right now, the senior planners would never go for it. Every time any discussion comes up about any addition of service, I'm met with we can't afford any more service (and that was pre COVID when the economy was booming), so they are only entertaining keeping the schedules as is for now.

If the QM5 was running via Jewel during the off-peak hours, then the QM6 would be the only thing on Union Turnpike during those hours. Although ridership on both routes tend to come more from east of 188th Street, the segment west of 188th Street isn't low in ridership which is why I mentioned boosting QM6 frequencies. The 30 minute headways may also be more attractive to potential users out east, and my take riders away from the QM5 in Glen Oaks, but the main thing regarding the Main Street to 188th Street segment. 

Although it may be cost neutral to even saving money depending on how its implemented (given that QM4 resources would be freed up, and QM5 runtimes would be similar and/or slightly faster than they currently are), I personally would go with trying out the additional stops along Queens Boulevard, and an extension to the Fresh Meadows complex (like you suggested). Don't necessarily have a preference of whether the QM5 should operate via Union Turnpike or via Jewel Ave during the off peak hour (more or less fine with either option).  I do think the QM5 shouldn't be serving Union Turnpike stops during the peak hour, but that's a separate discussion.

And yeah, I figured that planners would be reluctant to do so.