Queens Division Bus Proposals/Ideas

[FamousNYLover]

If it was up to be, I'll merge Q49 and Q29 together.

From 82nd St-Jackson Heights, west on Roosevelt Av to 74th St-Broadway, following Q49 route to Astoria-102nd St, possibly extending to 108th St area for easy connection to Q48 bus.

SB: Following Q49 route back to 74th St-Broadway, east on Roosevelt Av to 82nd St-Jackson Heights Station.

[qjtransitmaster]

lmao !

 

 

I'd say most of those pax. that wait at the Q9's first pickup stop (Rockaway Blvd) are people coming off Q7's.....

A significant amt. of them are coming off Q10's though.... Very few are folks that live around the immediate area.

from what direction?

 

Q18,29,104, 64& 23 involved in a new proposal segment swapping in this one.

[qjtransitmaster]

*slaps forehead* the Moore Terminal is the bus terminal at the 74 Street-Broadway/Jackson Heights-Roosevelt Avenue station served directly by Q47, Q33, and Q49. Oakland Gardens was where the Q75 terminated. Also how am I insulting you. I didn't call you a bad name so don't call me stupid and you can also get in trouble for that in case you don't know. I said that your ideas were ridiculous. That's not insulting it shows that your proposals are not going to work. And again, I said the Q29 should only be extended to Moore Terminal.

That is exactly what my proposal does dude try to read is that too difficult for you? My Q29 proposal does just that and more due to it replacing Q104. Which ohh the Q64 thing you gave me an idea streamline Q23 and have it serve cooper with Q64 taking over Q23's southern segment and extending to Oakland gardens. You are stupid for not reading my post fully and judging what you don't even know. Edited July 10, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[qjtransitmaster]

If it was up to be, I'll merge Q49 and Q29 together.

From 82nd St-Jackson Heights, west on Roosevelt Av to 74th St-Broadway, following Q49 route to Astoria-102nd St, possibly extending to 108th St area for easy connection to Q48 bus.

SB: Following Q49 route back to 74th St-Broadway, east on Roosevelt Av to 82nd St-Jackson Heights Station.

Or merge with Q104 dropping the 48th steet segment more detail on why tomorrow.

[Q90]

That is exactly what my proposal does dude try to read is that too difficult for you?

But you're making ADDITIONAL changes don't you freaking get it? It makes no sense to extend Q29 or Q52/Q53 along Broadway or have Q64 go to Ridgewood. Dude why do you make such crazy proposals. I mean seriously merge B13 with Q67 that makes no sense whatsoever. QJT, if your gonna propose a bus route, make sure it isn't ridiculously long and it doesn't cause inconvenience for too many. Although the Q29 is not a long route, it's just not the route that should operate down Broadway.

 

I'm just going to point out that there is a dedicated topic for this sort of thing, specifically created so that people don't clog up the forum with topics like this.

I know but the thread recently became dead. So that's why this proposal has it's own topic. Also tomorrow I will post a topic about a Q13 route I had in mind but I'm not gonna mention any information now as it is irrelevant and the map isn't complete.

[B35 via Church]

from what direction?

Either direction.....

[Fresh Pond]

Moore terminal? Explain this. And for Q64 that extension provides a direct link to woodhaven Blvd Q53/52 for the rockaways. Also yes some Q64 trips can extend to replace Q75. Since when should Q64 extend to Oakland gardens? No need to be rude. Q29 to that area absorbs Q104 or Q29 to Astoria via Q18's 30th ave portion rerouting Q18 to absorb Q104. That is another option. Isn't your Q90 just as ridiculous? Think before throwing insults stupid. That Q29 extension also gives connections to Jackson heights lines and the upcoming Q70.

Son...

 

That is exactly what my proposal does dude try to read is that too difficult for you? My Q29 proposal does just that and more due to it replacing Q104. Which ohh the Q64 thing you gave me an idea streamline Q23 and have it serve cooper with Q64 taking over Q23's southern segment and extending to Oakland gardens. You are stupid for not reading my post fully and judging what you don't even know.

The hypocrisy...its everywhere...

[qjtransitmaster]

But you're making ADDITIONAL changes don't you freaking get it? It makes no sense to extend Q29 or Q52/Q53 along Broadway or have Q64 go to Ridgewood. Dude why do you make such crazy proposals. I mean seriously merge B13 with Q67 that makes no sense whatsoever. QJT, if your gonna propose a bus route, make sure it isn't ridiculously long and it doesn't cause inconvenience for too many. Although the Q29 is not a long route, it's just not the route that should operate down Broadway.

well it is more direct than your Q90 idea which is equally as crazy so before you judge I suggest you look at yourself first. I backed away from Q64 to Ridgewood but who says it can't just end on myrtle ave for Q55 to Ridgewood? That does the Q90's job without duplicating a huge chunk of the Q53/52. With Q64 only to union tpk replacing Q23 that is minor actually and Q23 via that routing is not very long and is more direct than the Q58 to boot. I figured Q23 would be better than Q64 for that. Q29 would be better than Q53/52 though B13 merger was to upgrade service levels and make a more direct route and improve access to those industrial areas. So you don't really get it I am not crazy it's just you who doesn't read carefully. I will admit the B13 idea is not a part of my NYC proposal and is just a random idea. Last I checked that Q90 is as insane if not moreso than a simple Q29 extension. Edited July 10, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[Q90]

That is exactly what my proposal does dude try to read is that too difficult for you? My Q29 proposal does just that and more due to it replacing Q104. Which ohh the Q64 thing you gave me an idea streamline Q23 and have it serve cooper with Q64 taking over Q23's southern segment and extending to Oakland gardens. You are stupid for not reading my post fully and judging what you don't even know.

Oh so I'm stupid but the person who goes around and makes silly proposals whom has no idea about what he's coming up with and insults anyone who disagrees with him isn't. Anyways truncating the Q23 at Queens Boulevard and 108 Street is so not gonna work out and the Q64 shouldn't be extended from Forest Hills. Can't you just come up with a normal proposal and accept it when people criticize you because it's not that hard. Also you complain that people are rude yet look at the way you're acting.

[qjtransitmaster]

Oh so I'm stupid but the person who goes around and makes silly proposals whom has no idea about what he's coming up with and insults anyone who disagrees with him isn't. Anyways truncating the Q23 at Queens Boulevard and 108 Street is so not gonna work out and the Q64 shouldn't be extended from Forest Hills. Can't you just come up with a normal proposal and accept it when people criticize you because it's not that hard. Also you complain that people are rude yet look at the way you're acting.

Q23 to Ridgewood swapping southern part to Q64 is quite normal no new roundabout route needed. Just because you don't agree with my idea doesn't make it crazy it just means you have a different view. My total proposal is quite normal you just haven't seen it yet. If you read what I said you would know that Q23 is not truncated in my proposal and only a few Q23 riders ride past forest hills the ones that do mostly come off the subway. You accept ? Even if Q23& 64 are left as is folks can use Q29 to Q55. Edited July 10, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[Q90]

well it is more direct than your Q90 idea which is equally as crazy so before you judge I suggest you look at yourself first. I backed away from Q64 to Ridgewood but who says it can't just end on myrtle ave for Q55 to Ridgewood? That does the Q90's job without duplicating a huge chunk of the Q53/52. With Q64 only to union tpk replacing Q23 that is minor actually and Q23 via that routing is not very long and is more direct than the Q58 to boot. I figured Q23 would be better that Q64 for that. Q29 would be better than Q53/52 though B13 merger was to upgrade service levels and make a more direct route and improve access to those industrial areas. So you don't really get it I am not crazy it's just you who doesn't read carefully. I will admit the B13 idea is not a part of my NYC proposal and is just a random idea. Last I checked that Q90 is as insane if not moreso than a simple Q29 extension.

Q29 extension along Broadway is NOT a simple extension. That's making the route more than twice as long. Also you're saying my Q90 is a duplicate of the Q53 but look at the Q11/Q21. Why aren't they duplicates since they operate almost entirely along the Q52/Q53 and my Q90 only operates along maybe for like about a couple of miles at the most. Oh that's right you're just a hypocrite and I completely understand your ideas, they just don't make sense.

[qjtransitmaster]

Q29 extension along Broadway is NOT a simple extension. That's making the route more than twice as long. Also you're saying my Q90 is a duplicate of the Q53 but look at the Q11/Q21. Why aren't they duplicates since they operate almost entirely along the Q52/Q53 and my Q90 only operates along maybe for like about a couple of miles at the most. Oh that's right you're just a hypocrite and I completely understand your ideas, they just don't make sense.

Q11/21 are local versions of Q53/52. My plan doesn't require a new route. I didn't know a supposed 15 min extension was that long do tell how that is so long?

 

 

Wow yuki

Edited July 10, 2013 by qjtransitmaster

[qjtransitmaster]

I see ok then makes sense.

[Q90]

Q23 to Ridgewood swapping southern part to Q64 is quite normal no new roundabout route needed. Just because you don't agree with my idea doesn't make it crazy it just means you have a different view. My total proposal is quite normal you just haven't seen it yet. If you read what I said you would know that Q23 is not truncated in my proposal and only a few Q23 riders ride past forest hills the ones that do mostly come off the subway. You accept ? Even if Q23& 64 are left as is folks can use Q29 to Q55.

Q23 to Ridgewood? How about leave it at Forest Hills. Before you should even CONSIDER rerouting Q23 to Ridgewood, it should be straightened out. How about it never turns off 108 street or 71 Avenue and runs across their full lengths. Anyways it's not crazy because I disagree with it, it's crazy because it would cause disruptions to the bus system. Altering these routes would cause nothing but disruptions and are not needed.

[Q90]

Q11/21 are local versions of Q53/52. My plan doesn't require a new route. I didn't know a supposed 15 min extension was that long do tell how that is so long?

Wow yuki

Well no shit the Q11 and Q21 are locals. The Q90 would be a local as well. Also 15 minutes is more time than you think and it is pointless to make Q29 go to Astoria.

[qjtransitmaster]

Q23 to Ridgewood? How about leave it at Forest Hills. Before you should even CONSIDER rerouting Q23 to Ridgewood, it should be straightened out. How about it never turns off 108 street or 71 Avenue and runs across their full lengths. Anyways it's not crazy because I disagree with it, it's crazy because it would cause disruptions to the bus system. Altering these routes would cause nothing but disruptions and are not needed.

and how is that sir. Direct faster link to 108th from Ridgewood via cooper ave is not disruptive as it is on Yellowstone. Also Q64 taking that segment reduces wait times for residents since Q64 is more frequent and most Q23 riders north of forest hills do not go south of forest hills. You still haven't provided evidence why that is disruptive to the bus system when in fact it speeds up travel time to forest hills and indirectly flushing from the woodhaven corridor and more. However I do agree with your streamlined idea of keeping it on 71st ave so it never turns off that can work too actually. However as I said riders coming off the subways use the Q23 south of forest hills at those deviated stops on 69th ave and burns hence the current meandering on the Q23.

[Q90]

and how is that sir. Direct faster link to 108th from Ridgewood via cooper ave is not disruptive as it is on Yellowstone. Also Q64 taking that segment reduces wait times for residents since Q64 is more frequent and most Q23 riders north of forest hills do not go south of forest hills. You still haven't provided evidence why that is disruptive to the bus system when in fact it speeds up travel time to forest hills and indirectly flushing from the woodhaven corridor and more. However I do agree with your streamlined idea of keeping it on 71st ave so it never turns off that can work too actually. However as I said riders coming off the subways use the Q23 south of forest hills at those deviated stops on 69th ave and burns hence the current meandering on the Q23.

So you're asking why extending Q64 to Forest Hills and extending Q23 why it's disruptive. About the Q64 you just answered your own question. Most people get off at Queens Boulevard on the Q23 so why would more service be needed. Not to mention the Q64 is actually a very efficient route and sending it to Forest Hills would help destroy that. Q23 is also long enough and doesn't need to be lengthened.

[qjtransitmaster]

So you're asking why extending Q64 to Forest Hills and extending Q23 why it's disruptive. About the Q64 you just answered your own question. Most people get off at Queens Boulevard on the Q23 so why would more service be needed. Not to mention the Q64 is actually a very efficient route and sending it to Forest Hills would help destroy that. Q23 is also long enough and doesn't need to be lengthened.

actually it would become slightly shorter than Q58. While only select Q64 trips would absorb that Q23 segment to avoid overserving them.

[B35 via Church]

QJT, we been over this before about extending Q64's west of Queens blvd...

[Vistausss]

Some of us railfans would like that option just to fan, but the average commuter doesnt want to shell out the extra chedda yet alone the god-knows-how-long of an off-peak wait. 

 

LMAO. This really cracked me up. Were you stoned when you wrote this?

 

Look dude, it's true that some people might not wanna pay the extra money for LIRR. But if the *average* commuter, which you refer to, wouldn't want LIRR then explain to me where LIRR gets all its commuters from. It's quite on par with MNRR in terms of yearly commuters.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Vistausss

[bobtehpanda]

LMAO. This really cracked me up. Were you stoned when you wrote this?

 

Look dude, it's true that some people might not wanna pay the extra money for LIRR. But if the *average* commuter, which you refer to, wouldn't want LIRR then explain to me where LIRR gets all its commuters from. It's quite on par with MNRR in terms of yearly commuters.

 

East of the City Line. The NY Metro Area is 22M people,  and there are only 8M in the city itself - the rest of em is where all the commuter rail ridership comes from.

[bobtehpanda]

I know but the thread recently became dead. So that's why this proposal has it's own topic.

 

Really, because the thread has posts from today and yesterday, and the day before.

 

Normally I would suggest the lock of a thread like this but the hypocrisy is pretty hilarious.

[Vistausss]

East of the City Line. The NY Metro Area is 22M people,  and there are only 8M in the city itself - the rest of em is where all the commuter rail ridership comes from.

 

The City Line is also quite heavily used, especially on weekends because LIRR (and MNRR) has deals for traveling within the CTZ.

 

But even with your argument it doesn't make it right. East of the City Line people can use SCT and NICE. No need for LIRR, yet lots of people use it.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Vistausss

[BM5 via Woodhaven]

The only Q29 Extention I see feasible is a merge of the Q33 (like B35 said previously, although I don't agree with all parts of that plan). The Q23 to Ridgewood would make the route unreliable. Don't you people get there is enough ridership to keep the Q23 running across Queens Blvd as it is. It has a good amount of ridership. A 64 to Ridgewood is not practical.

Edited July 10, 2013 by Q23 Central Terminal

[qjtransitmaster]

The only Q29 Extention I see feasible is a merge of the Q33 (like B35 said previously, although I don't agree with all parts of that plan). The Q23 to Ridgewood would make the route unreliable. Don't you people get there is enough ridership to keep the Q23 running across Queens Blvd as it is. It has a good amount of ridership. A 64 to Ridgewood is not practical.

well that Q23 can just end on myrtle or 61st street via cooper and 12 min Q64 or every other bus replace Q23's segment the cooper ave corridor is unlikely to make Q23 unreliable. I saw that road many times. It doesn't have to go all the way to Ridgewood. Even with every other Q64 it is frequent enough where it isn't a problem.

East of the City Line. The NY Metro Area is 22M people,  and there are only 8M in the city itself - the rest of em is where all the commuter rail ridership comes from.

the sad part is inspite of more people residing in the NY metro area outside NYC than in NYC itself they still get horrible bus service at least in Suffolk and Westchester and CT you would think service levels would match the population.