BUS - Random Thoughts Thread

[Around the Horn]

365 is currently sitting in the B64 stop at Shore Road and Mackay Place with a B64 sign up.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Around the Horn

[Via Garibaldi 8]

365 is currently sitting in the B64 stop at Shore Road and Mackay Place with a B64 sign up.

lol... What's so shocking about that? Maybe it's a Jackie Gleason tripper.

Edited May 9, 2014 by Via Garibaldi 8

[w8Hou]

what does the red box sticker represent and why is it that buses from ENY RTS or Old Gen Hybrid(s) has then except the Xcelsior

 

 

I think they're suppose to mark 1999 models mainly since I see them the most on those. But it could really mean anything.

 

 

IIRC, the red sticker on the ENY buses has something to do with what day they wash the buses. At one point buses at ENY only got washed on certain days on purpose.

NO, its something much simpler. Another way to identify them that they are ENY buses.

[aemoreira81]

Yesterday, in my attempts to track down 1002 (I did track it on BusTime and succeeded), I was on an M103 bus that when it reached City Hall, was told to become an M101 Limited bus - short-turning at 96 Street and then pulling in. Given how problematic and unreliable Third and Lexington Avenue bus service, might it be time to break up the Third Avenue bus service even more so?

 

I'm just throwing it out there, but what about severing the northern half of the M101 from the rest of the route and having these patterns instead?

 

M101: Fort George to 125th Street and 1 Avenue via Amsterdam and 125 Street...local service only?

M102 and M103 Local: Unchanged

M103 Limited (new service): City Hall to West Harlem (12 Avenue/125 Street) - Limited from Canal/Bayard to 125? (The northbound-only stop at Hester, the southbound-only stop at Prince, and East 1 and East 3 would be skipped.

 

Also, for fiscal reasons, I would argue that the M98 should be restored to its former route, except for 34th Street, so that only 42 Street is the deadhead. In the AM, some trips would be extra M104 trips, which would then deadhead to Fort Tryon Park and then do a downtown M98 trip before pulling in, and vice versa in the PM (M98 up, deadhead to 129 and Convent, do an M104 trip, and pull in from Times Square or stay on the M104.

Edited May 10, 2014 by aemoreira81

[E For Erica]

NO, its something much simpler. Another way to identify them that they are ENY buses.

But they're on other buses too...

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Yesterday, in my attempts to track down 1002 (I did track it on BusTime and succeeded), I was on an M103 bus that when it reached City Hall, was told to become an M101 Limited bus - short-turning at 96 Street and then pulling in. Given how problematic and unreliable Third and Lexington Avenue bus service, might it be time to break up the Third Avenue bus service even more so?

 

I'm just throwing it out there, but what about severing the northern half of the M101 from the rest of the route and having these patterns instead?

 

M101: Fort George to 125th Street and 1 Avenue via Amsterdam and 125 Street...local service only?

M102 and M103 Local: Unchanged

M103 Limited (new service): City Hall to West Harlem (12 Avenue/125 Street) - Limited from Canal/Bayard to 125? (The northbound-only stop at Hester, the southbound-only stop at Prince, and East 1 and East 3 would be skipped.

 

Oh God... Not another of these crazy ideas....

Edited May 10, 2014 by Via Garibaldi 8

[NYSubwayBuff]

Why is it crazy if you say that explain why. I for one think its a great idea because these super routes along lex (or any other avenues) are terrible and something must be done about them

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

 

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

Well, there was a hybrid on the QM15 today....

[trainfan22]

Wow, hybrid on a express route on a weekend?! You would think they would have more than enough MCIs around on weekends to make service. I could totally understand something like this happening during rush hour, but on a Saturday?

[tvega961]

Wow, hybrid on a express route on a weekend?! You would think they would have more than enough MCIs around on weekends to make service. I could totally understand something like this happening during rush hour, but on a Saturday?

At JFK, anything is possible.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Why is it crazy if you say that explain why. I for one think its a great idea because these super routes along lex (or any other avenues) are terrible and something must be done about them Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

Simple... Because there are already enough short turned M101, M102 and M103's.  The issue isn't short turns.  The issue is traffic, and until that's addressed, creating more short turns will just alienate more passengers and push them to use other means to get around.  The one thing that irks me is the constant sudden short turning of M101's M102's or M103's.  If you're getting on at 34th street and going below 23rd street, forget it, especially on weekends.  They short turn a ton of buses at 23rd street and you can wait 20 - 30 minutes for one damn bus to go to say 14th street or below.  Ridiculous to have so many buses coming and then suddenly short turn them.  What they need to do is address the double and triple parking on Lex. and have deliveries made at night instead of during the morning rush and times when traffic is heavy. Lexington Avenue is lined with a gazillion businesses, even above 60th street, and if you couple that with the narrow street, it's just one big disaster.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Via Garibaldi 8

[NYSubwayBuff]

I can agree with you about the short turns.Here is my solution I think there should be one branch going from city hall to 96 st on lex with 3 minute headways to go to the other destinations people would have to transfer at 96 for the 101, 102, 103

 

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk

 

 

[aemoreira81]

Oh God... Not another of these crazy ideas....

 

I remind you that until about 1995, the M101 ran from City Hall to Fort George (and the M102 from City Hall to Harlem). They were truncated because of reliability problems, and the M103 got created to serve City Hall.. You have that problem with the M5 today---that route is almost 15 miles long in Manhattan. Few customers from north of 125 Street ride south of there, and for those customers, there would be an additional transfer offered.

 

I also remind you that until the late 1980s, the M100 ran from East Harlem to Mt. St. Vincent. The Bx7 now covers the northern part of that service. Also, the M10 used to run from South Ferry to Rucker Park; the M20 now covers the southern section.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

I remind you that until about 1995, the M101 ran from City Hall to Fort George (and the M102 from City Hall to Harlem). They were truncated because of reliability problems, and the M103 got created to serve City Hall.. You have that problem with the M5 today---that route is almost 15 miles long in Manhattan. Few customers from north of 125 Street ride south of there, and for those customers, there would be an additional transfer offered.

 

I also remind you that until the late 1980s, the M100 ran from East Harlem to Mt. St. Vincent. The Bx7 now covers the northern part of that service. Also, the M10 used to run from South Ferry to Rucker Park; the M20 now covers the southern section.

Yeah I know all of that... I agree that the M5 is far too long... No disputing that... Reliability on that line is even worse now than what it was before. I keep saying that they need to bring the M6 back, but it's a money issue with the .  I don't think they want the M6 back because it just didn't generate enough ridership in their eyes, but the M5 set up as it is is really a mess.  The bunching is ridiculous.  However, I don't think further truncations would make a difference on the Lex line because there is already a ton of that aside from the official truncations that you mentioned above.

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

I remind you that until about 1995, the M101 ran from City Hall to Fort George (and the M102 from City Hall to Harlem). They were truncated because of reliability problems, and the M103 got created to serve City Hall.. You have that problem with the M5 today---that route is almost 15 miles long in Manhattan. Few customers from north of 125 Street ride south of there, and for those customers, there would be an additional transfer offered.

 

I also remind you that until the late 1980s, the M100 ran from East Harlem to Mt. St. Vincent. The Bx7 now covers the northern part of that service. Also, the M10 used to run from South Ferry to Rucker Park; the M20 now covers the southern section.

The difference is, the current M101 has the M3, M100, M102, and M103 as alternatives, so if the M101 is fubar'd, there were always be the alternatives.

[Q43LTD]

I remind you that until about 1995, the M101 ran from City Hall to Fort George (and the M102 from City Hall to Harlem). They were truncated because of reliability problems, and the M103 got created to serve City Hall.. You have that problem with the M5 today---that route is almost 15 miles long in Manhattan. Few customers from north of 125 Street ride south of there, and for those customers, there would be an additional transfer offered.

 

I also remind you that until the late 1980s, the M100 ran from East Harlem to Mt. St. Vincent. The Bx7 now covers the northern part of that service. Also, the M10 used to run from South Ferry to Rucker Park; the M20 now covers the southern section.

The M10 never ran to South Ferry. It ran from Battery Park City to Harlem...

[Culver]

I keep forgetting to post this...

So on Thursday I noticed BusTime showed an S79 that ran from SI Mall to Clove Road only. Never knew they had those short turns. It ended at Clove Road at about 4:07-4:08, and lo and behold disappeared off the map after making the Clove Road stop. Checked TTMG's list of display options for routes and sure enough they do have an S79 to Clove Road option. Learn something new every day.

[Abba]

Probobaly Was was a school day run

I think it's great the Bustime has those special runs.If only they can show the shuttle buses that replaces trains.Maybe one day.

[S78 via Hylan]

That S79 from the SI Mall to Hylan and Clove is a school tripper.

[B35 via Church]

Yesterday, in my attempts to track down 1002 (I did track it on BusTime and succeeded), I was on an M103 bus that when it reached City Hall, was told to become an M101 Limited bus - short-turning at 96 Street and then pulling in. Given how problematic and unreliable Third and Lexington Avenue bus service, might it be time to break up the Third Avenue bus service even more so?

 

I'm just throwing it out there, but what about severing the northern half of the M101 from the rest of the route and having these patterns instead?

 

M101: Fort George to 125th Street and 1 Avenue via Amsterdam and 125 Street...local service only?

M102 and M103 Local: Unchanged

M103 Limited (new service): City Hall to West Harlem (12 Avenue/125 Street) - Limited from Canal/Bayard to 125? (The northbound-only stop at Hester, the southbound-only stop at Prince, and East 1 and East 3 would be skipped.

 

Also, for fiscal reasons, I would argue that the M98 should be restored to its former route, except for 34th Street, so that only 42 Street is the deadhead. In the AM, some trips would be extra M104 trips, which would then deadhead to Fort Tryon Park and then do a downtown M98 trip before pulling in, and vice versa in the PM (M98 up, deadhead to 129 and Convent, do an M104 trip, and pull in from Times Square or stay on the M104.

Let me get this straight.... You're throwing this out there, because you were on a M103 whose operator was told to turn into a M101 LTD @ City Hall? Yeah, that trip had to DH to 8th st, but it's not as if a slew of M103's are interlining with M101's in that manner.....

 

From a (riderbase) transition standpoint, it makes sense to choose 125th.... However, I'm questioning LTD service south of 8th st, I'm sorry...

There is no need for LTD service past that point - and since you'd only have M102's/M103's on 3rd/Lex, you would severely cripple the 3rd/Lex LTD service by introducing it to traffic (along Bowery) resulting from the traffic from off the Williamsburg & Manhattan bridges! In other words, longer waits for LTD service.... This is a major advantage the current M101 ending at 8th st offers.....

 

As for the truncation of the M101.... I thought about this, and the thing is, Amsterdam itself doesn't need two local routes running along it to 125th/1st.... The current M101 runs on Amsterdam & 125th, to get people south of those points quicker (via LTD service)..... What I'm getting at is, it would have the MTA getting rid of the M101, to then tell riders to take the M100 or the M3 - which would be a service loss for the Amsterdam folks - even if they were to combine some trips from off the M101 into the M100.... This is why I figure they may as well leave the M101 as is, rather than throw LTD service on the 103.....

 

The M98 has nothing to do with the M101/2/3 issue here; it's a route that runs straight from washington heights to east harlem; avoiding the part of harlem (well, Harlem, as opposed to East Harlem) M100 & M101 riders want to get to..... IDK man, by even bringing that route up, it's almost like you're implicating that the M98 would be a replacement for M101 LTD service south of 125th...

 

Why is it crazy if you say that explain why. I for one think its a great idea because these super routes along lex (or any other avenues) are terrible and something must be done about them

I'm not big on super routes either, but I'm not going to support any ole solution someone suggests either.....

 

Simple... Because there are already enough short turned M101, M102 and M103's.  The issue isn't short turns.  The issue is traffic, and until that's addressed, creating more short turns will just alienate more passengers and push them to use other means to get around.  The one thing that irks me is the constant sudden short turning of M101's M102's or M103's.  If you're getting on at 34th street and going below 23rd street, forget it, especially on weekends.  They short turn a ton of buses at 23rd street and you can wait 20 - 30 minutes for one damn bus to go to say 14th street or below.  Ridiculous to have so many buses coming and then suddenly short turn them.  What they need to do is address the double and triple parking on Lex. and have deliveries made at night instead of during the morning rush and times when traffic is heavy. Lexington Avenue is lined with a gazillion businesses, even above 60th street, and if you couple that with the narrow street, it's just one big disaster.

Well apparently the issue is the amount of short turns, according to your own commentary.....

 

Simply put, the MTA uses those short turns (and on many trips) on the M101 as a viable solution.....

To be honest, I'd rather have the (amount of M101 trips) short turning, than what AEMoreira is inquiring about.....

 

.....Here is my solution I think there should be one branch going from city hall to 96 st on lex with 3 minute headways to go to the other destinations people would have to transfer at 96 for the 101, 102, 103

Don't agree; 96th isn't a median/major transition point on the 3rd/Lex routes enough to do that.... 125th makes more sense for this purpose (AEMoreira is actually right, in this sense)..... In other words, you would have more people xferring at 96th, than you would at 125th (or as VG8 states in an unrelated point, have more people looking for other means to get around)......

 

I remind you that until about 1995, the M101 ran from City Hall to Fort George (and the M102 from City Hall to Harlem). They were truncated because of reliability problems, and the M103 got created to serve City Hall.. You have that problem with the M5 today---that route is almost 15 miles long in Manhattan. Few customers from north of 125 Street ride south of there, and for those customers, there would be an additional transfer offered.

 

I also remind you that until the late 1980s, the M100 ran from East Harlem to Mt. St. Vincent. The Bx7 now covers the northern part of that service. Also, the M10 used to run from South Ferry to Rucker Park; the M20 now covers the southern section.

Intellectual dishonesty...

 

You mean to tell us that a truncated M101 b/w [125th/1st] & [ft george/193rd] would do the same for the current M101 route, as the Bx7 did for the old M100 to Riverdale.... as the M20 did for the old M10 b/w BPC (not south ferry) & Harlem.... as the M102 & M103 did for the old M101 b/w city hall & ft george.... Lol....

 

The difference is, the current M101 has the M3, M100, M102, and M103 as alternatives, so if the M101 is fubar'd, there were always be the alternatives.

Nailed it.

[Via Garibaldi 8]

Well apparently the issue is the amount of short turns, according to your own commentary.....

 

Simply put, the MTA uses those short turns (and on many trips) on the M101 as a viable solution.....

To be honest, I'd rather have the (amount of M101 trips) short turning, than what AEMoreira is inquiring about.....

 

 

Let me clarify...From my understanding, he's calling for more official short turns, and I'm saying that more official short turns aren't needed because there are already enough of them.  The problem is traffic, which causes more unofficial short turns to occur.

Edited May 11, 2014 by Via Garibaldi 8

[B35 via Church]

Let me clarify...From my understanding, he's calling for more official short turns, and I'm saying that more official short turns aren't needed because there are already enough of them.  The problem is traffic, which causes more unofficial short turns to occur.

That's your understanding, but what he's actually calling for is an outright CUT of the M101 south of 125th... Why do you think he brought up the old M100 to Riverdale & the old M10 to South Ferry(which never went to South Ferry, but BPC, but I digress w/ that) to you in a later reply......

 

I mean, you can't get anymore blatant than this:

I'm just throwing it out there, but what about severing the northern half of the M101 from the rest of the route and having these patterns instead?

----------------------------

 

As far as your (separate) point, I'm not debating what the actual problem is (I'm actually in agreement with your point about traffic)... What I'm getting at is, you're debunking your own point when you say the issue isn't short turns, but it being traffic.... His only mention of short turning buses, was when he brought up that M103 he was on, turning into a short turned M101 running to 96th st... I don't think his issue is the amount of short turns at all - He just wants to split up the M101 @ 125th because he realizes that's the major transition point of the M101... That is very different from talking about short turns..... The point you're making & what he's bringing up are two very different things....

 

Regardless, I still think his whole reconstruction bit is a hasty suggestion to make..... I don't like the idea of having the 3rd/Lex LTD being subjected to what the current M103 has to go through, at & south of Houston....

[B35 via Church]

Didn't know where else to put this, but obviously there's a problem here:

 

 

 

 

 

 

These screenshots were taken about 10 mins. ago.

 

Anyone else notices the discrepancy of service (and this is on a sunday at that)..... Nooooo question what the MTA is trying to do to/for those riders.....

 

 

[E For Erica]

Does the B47 normally run near Myrtle & Bushwick?

[Via Garibaldi 8]

That's your understanding, but what he's actually calling for is an outright CUT of the M101 south of 125th... Why do you think he brought up the old M100 to Riverdale & the old M10 to South Ferry(which never went to South Ferry, but BPC, but I digress w/ that) to you in a later reply......

 

I mean, you can't get anymore blatant than this:

 

----------------------------

 

As far as your (separate) point, I'm not debating what the actual problem is (I'm actually in agreement with your point about traffic)... What I'm getting at is, you're debunking your own point when you say the issue isn't short turns, but it being traffic.... His only mention of short turning buses, was when he brought up that M103 he was on, turning into a short turned M101 running to 96th st... I don't think his issue is the amount of short turns at all - He just wants to split up the M101 @ 125th because he realizes that's the major transition point of the M101... That is very different from talking about short turns..... The point you're making & what he's bringing up are two very different things....

 

Regardless, I still think his whole reconstruction bit is a hasty suggestion to make..... I don't like the idea of having the 3rd/Lex LTD being subjected to what the current M103 has to go through, at & south of Houston....

Well I think the whole idea is absurd...