BxM4Woodlawn Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3426 Posted June 5, 2014 How about no to all? What's your reason for these proposals? What's your hatred towards low floor buses? What are you gonna do when the whole local bus fleet is 100% low floor? by that time I'll probably be moving out of NY and down south to the Carolinas 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted June 5, 2014 Author Share #3427 Posted June 5, 2014 by that time I'll probably be moving out of NY and down south to the CarolinasI don't think it matters. Where ever you go, there will be low floor buses... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3428 Posted June 5, 2014 I don't think it matters. Where ever you go, there will be low floor buses... You are wasting your time there is no point arguing with an idiot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BxM4Woodlawn Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3429 Posted June 5, 2014 You are wasting your time there is no point arguing with an idiot. not in the Carolinas in the countryside! I wont have to deal with the NBA either, we got real sports down there like Football and Nascar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3430 Posted June 5, 2014 not in the Carolinas in the countryside! I wont have to deal with the NBA either, we got real sports down there like Football and Nascar You sir forgot about the bobcats try again. You are simply too stupid to insult. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BreeddekalbL Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3431 Posted June 5, 2014 You sir forgot about the bobcats try again. You are simply too stupid to insult. you mean the hornets, the original hornets changed their name to the pelicans 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fresh Pond Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3432 Posted June 5, 2014 You sir forgot about the bobcats try again. You are simply too stupid to insult. ...but you just insulted him by calling him stupid...shit ain't that serious now 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 5, 2014 Share #3433 Posted June 5, 2014 ...but you just insulted him by calling him stupid...shit ain't that serious now I guess your right damn. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3434 Posted June 8, 2014 Okay, so why don't we make the QM20 stop off peak hours on weekdays in Jackson Heights (eastbound) and the QM2 weekends as well, just so that extra riders may use the bus. The additional runtime would be minimal,at most a minute. QM20 buses making stops in Jackson Heights 9:00 AM- 4:00 PM depatures, 6:35 PM- 11:30 PM depatures 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3435 Posted June 8, 2014 (edited) Okay, so why don't we make the QM20 stop off peak hours on weekdays in Jackson Heights (eastbound) and the QM2 weekends as well, just so that extra riders may use the bus. The additional runtime would be minimal,at most a minute. QM20 buses making stops in Jackson Heights 9:00 AM- 4:00 PM depatures, 6:35 PM- 11:30 PM depatures NO!!! that will only bastardize them further. Nobody in Jackson heights needs an express bus & do just fine however making off peak service service queens center mall by woodhaven would make a bit more sense sort of. Edited June 8, 2014 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cait Sith Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3436 Posted June 8, 2014 (edited) NO!!! that will only bastardize them further. Nobody in Jackson heights needs an express bus & do just fine however making off peak service service queens center mall by woodhaven would make a bit more sense sort of. Compared to the ideas you make, his idea is actually logical to a degree. All you'd have to do is make a stop on Northern and 74th or 82nd and that's it....that idea was actually pitched at a community meeting, but Bayside/Bay Terrace residents, with their tremendous political pull was like "nah son...." Edited June 8, 2014 by Cait Sith 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3437 Posted June 8, 2014 (edited) q56 extension to queens village LIRR station "purpose of this extension is to tap into a new rider base at the queens village LIRR station and to tap off the rider base at francis lewis and springfield blvd" https://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=218345366120084192601.0004fa6d880b75ef6b5bb&msa=0&ll=40.708231,-73.876019&spn=0.097725,0.181789 This is another way of saying the Q110 & the Q56 should be combined, except the route should end @ LIRR QV instead of Belmont park.... New riderbase @ LIRR QV? What new riderbase? There is no cohesion b/w Q110 riders & Q56 riders to suggest that Q56's be extended out to LIRR QV..... - Q110 riders are the ones that are coming off other modes that have reached Jamaica, that reside east of Jamaica (the neighborhood).... - Q56 riders are the ones that ride within Jamaica, and neighborhoods west of Jamaica.... Being that I ride the Q56 coming home on occasion, I can tell you most the riders that board in Jamaica (which includes the first stop), generally don't ride past Lefferts.... The only way I can see this somewhat working is if you make all Q110's during rush hour originate from 179 Street, and have it only run during rush hours. .....Which would be stupid, because that would justify cutting Q110 service, to have Q56's running to some LIRR QV.... There are simply too many riders that seek 110's at that first stop after it turns onto Jamaica av (and having those riders taking 56's, nah....) It would also screw riders that need Hempstead av (which is not exactly lowly utilized on the Q2 & Q110)..... the Queens bound QM2 and QM20 need to use the LIE eastbound to the Whitestone Expwy north from now on the Queens bound QM3 should use the LIE to the BQE to Northern Blvd The QM2/3/20 actually move along Northern blvd during the PM rush.... The last thing the LIE needs is more buses on it.... .....Many seem to think that the Q3 is such a horrible route. The only reason why its like that is because takss a indirect route to JFK. That on top of its headways make that route seem long and unreliable. For many years I've always believed that the Q6 should serve the terminals because it has LTD service it's routing is more direct and lastly it has major connections such as the LIRR the and routes traveling from many different areas. In my I believe it will make the Q6 a more popular route and maybe it could need articulated buses. The only probably that needs to be fixed is the bunching. - Not horrible, just indirect (which it is)..... Have the Q3 end short of JFK (for example), it would be similar to the Q77 & how that route terminates abruptly (to the point where you have folks constantly suggesting it should be extended southward).... Then you would have folks on the forums suggesting the Q3 should run inside JFK - If you take the Q6 off Rockaway, yeah it would be more direct to/from JFK.... Q19: Need to have 24-hour service to provide service to discontinued M60 SBS stops at 43rd-Sound Sts, 46th St, 49th St, 74th Street. Q29 and Q49 should merged. Southbound: Via 75th St, turn right at Roosevelt Av, turn left at Broadway, turn left at 75th St, turn right at Roosevelt Av, regular Q29 route. Northbound: Via 83rd St, turn left at Roosevelt Av, follow Q49 route through Victor Moore Bus Terminal to East Elmhurst. Q72: Sundays need to run every 15 minutes instead of 30 minutes. - Foolish reason to have a bus route run 24/7, I don't care what route it is..... - The Q29 & the Q49 should be merged on what grounds? Lol @ wanting to create an indirect route of that magnitude; that's about a 1/2 mile backtrack for the 29 to do the full 49.... - The Q72.... I agree that headways should be decreased, but not to 4 BPH.... I'd say 3 BPH at the most (every 20 mins). I'm starting to think he's just passing haphazard ideas for the sake of it with no explanation... Trolling. Edited June 8, 2014 by B35 via Church 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3438 Posted June 8, 2014 too many quoted blocks of text in one post error? Lol...... Anyway: Question how frequent is the Q3? And how is it used which parts have the highest and lowest ridership? Go look at the schedule to see how frequent the route is. The ridership on the Q3 is spread out; it's not a polarized route like some may believe (as if to say, most of its ridership are traveling b/w the airport & the F).... I mean, yeah, you have the riders that ride out of Jamaica that get off for the airport... and also, the riders that ride out of Jamaica that get off for the airport.... the latter riderbase much more so than the former.... Q79: bring back full time service from Little Neck to Floral Park via Little Neck Pkwy People really need to stop with this. The Q36 on weekdays is just fine. It provides coverage those riders don't use/need.... Outside of extended coverage, it isn't fine at all. Okay, so why don't we make the QM20 stop off peak hours on weekdays in Jackson Heights (eastbound) and the QM2 weekends as well, just so that extra riders may use the bus. The additional runtime would be minimal,at most a minute. QM20 buses making stops in Jackson Heights 9:00 AM- 4:00 PM depatures, 6:35 PM- 11:30 PM depatures I wouldn't bother, for a reason QJT already stated..... Under that logic, exp. bus routes in general that run during off peak hours should make more stops along its routing for that purpose you state.... NO!!! that will only bastardize them further. Nobody in Jackson heights needs an express bus & do just fine however making off peak service service queens center mall by woodhaven would make a bit more sense sort of. I generally agree w/ the point, although I wouldn't argue bastardization..... Bastardization would come into play, if a lot those patrons would board buses during off peak hours...... I just don't see those patrons using buses during off peak hours, so there's not much of a point infusing stops in Jackson Hgts on those two routes, regardless of when they would do so...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3439 Posted June 8, 2014 It provides coverage those riders don't use/need.... Outside of extended coverage, it isn't fine at all. But that brings into question whether LNP actually needs bus service above coverage level. The level of service on the Q36 is pretty similar, if not the same amount of service provided on the old Q79 (minus weekend service), and the Q79 carried air because it was a glorified LIRR shuttle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 8, 2014 Share #3440 Posted June 8, 2014 But that brings into question whether LNP actually needs bus service above coverage level. The level of service on the Q36 is pretty similar, if not the same amount of service provided on the old Q79 (minus weekend service), and the Q79 carried air because it was a glorified LIRR shuttle. I'm referring to area coverage, not coverage headways.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BM5 via Woodhaven Posted June 9, 2014 Share #3441 Posted June 9, 2014 I wouldn't bother, for a reason QJT already stated..... Under that logic, exp. bus routes in general that run during off peak hours should make more stops along its routing for that purpose you state.... I generally agree w/ the point, although I wouldn't argue bastardization..... Bastardization would come into play, if a lot those patrons would board buses during off peak hours...... I just don't see those patrons using buses during off peak hours, so there's not much of a point infusing stops in Jackson Hgts on those two routes, regardless of when they would do so...... The reason I proposed it was because the QM2/QM20 run exactly where the QM3 stops, but bypass them. I thought it could encourage more people to use them going towards Jackson Heights, at a minimal difference in runtime. I also proposed it because it seems like a dense enough area which would use the bus, especially in that area of Jackson Heights, which leads to my first reason (in a way). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted June 9, 2014 Share #3442 Posted June 9, 2014 The reason I proposed it was because the QM2/QM20 run exactly where the QM3 stops, but bypass them. I thought it could encourage more people to use them going towards Jackson Heights, at a minimal difference in runtime. I also proposed it because it seems like a dense enough area which would use the bus, especially in that area of Jackson Heights, which leads to my first reason (in a way). If the QM3 ever gets increased a] patronage along Northern blvd (east... of flushing) & b] service, I can bet the current Jackson Hgts. stops would perish (they already got rid of 1 of them; the old 82nd st stop)..... Mind you, the QM3 is a rush hour only service with a limited amount of trips, and they got rid of a stop in jackson heights.... That to me, says enough.... Worse than that, it only runs on northern during the PM rush..... Guess they figure Jackson Hgts. isn't even deserving of exp. bus service during the AM..... So this idea that we're gonna have Qm2's & 20's stopping along Northern, just b/c they run along it, to me, is rather unfounded.... It's not like those 2 routes in their totalities are in a serious need of ridership (I'm willing to bet that's why the QM3 made stops along northern blvd (west... of flushing))..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennyj17 Posted June 9, 2014 Share #3443 Posted June 9, 2014 (edited) Haven't seen this one posted in the ~350 pages of back and forth. If the MTA should ever get around to merging MTAB into NYCT... How about a Q48/50 combo.... giving us a BX-LGA one-seater. Also Q32/33 I really don't see the point of these being separate routes outside of MTAB/NYCT. Edited June 9, 2014 by Lennyj17 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted June 9, 2014 Share #3444 Posted June 9, 2014 But that brings into question whether LNP actually needs bus service above coverage level. The level of service on the Q36 is pretty similar, if not the same amount of service provided on the old Q79 (minus weekend service), and the Q79 carried air because it was a glorified LIRR shuttle. Well the Q79 had too much service because it ran every 20 minutes during both rush hours and then 30 minutes off hours . On Saturdays I think it had a combination of 30-45 minutes all day. From what I see the Q36 via Little Neck Parkway is utilized a little more than the Q79 was. The only thing is the routing it self because I would have it run directly on Hillside to Jamaica if that's where the people want to go. Other than that its good the way it is now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted June 9, 2014 Share #3445 Posted June 9, 2014 Haven't seen this one posted in the ~350 pages of back and forth. If the MTA should ever get around to merging MTAB into NYCT... How about a Q48/50 combo.... giving us a BX-LGA one-seater. Also Q32/33 I really don't see the point of these being separate routes outside of MTAB/NYCT. The 32/33 split is because they serve different markets (feeder vs Manhattan service), and because a single combined route would probably have reliability go down the drain. The Q48 and Q50 would be complicated to combine due to the turn restrictions at Main and Roosevelt, and using local streets in Flushing to run a through route would be slower than just having two straight routes. (A Flushing route that arrives from the north but doesn't stop anywhere near Main/Roosevelt is essentially useless.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lennyj17 Posted June 10, 2014 Share #3446 Posted June 10, 2014 (edited) The 32/33 split is because they serve different markets (feeder vs Manhattan service), and because a single combined route would probably have reliability go down the drain. The Q48 and Q50 would be complicated to combine due to the turn restrictions at Main and Roosevelt, and using local streets in Flushing to run a through route would be slower than just having two straight routes. (A Flushing route that arrives from the north but doesn't stop anywhere near Main/Roosevelt is essentially useless.) I would agree when the 33 used to go to LGA...but now the terminals for the 2 routes a less than a mile away from each other, an't be that big a difference, other than that they're the exact same route pretty much...No-One rides the Q32 between Northern and 74th into Manhattan...They use it to get to Subway because it just happens to come before the Q33, people riding the Q32 into Manhattan don't start to board until around Woodside.... . How hard would it be really for the Q50/48 to make a right turn from Main on Roosevelt, the 17/27 used to have to make that left which is much hard than to make a simple right...... BX-bound wouldn't be an issue at all uses all the same stops that are in place now. Plus Q50/48 combo puts people closer to the than the 50 does now....Not that it's that big of a walk, but still it's closer... I would keep the LTD of the Q50, but keep the 48's headways. EDIT: I take back my 48/50 combo suggestion, as I just noticed that LGA routes must run in a loop...the Q50 would be too long of a route to only have 1 terminal at the BX end. Edited June 10, 2014 by Lennyj17 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobtehpanda Posted June 10, 2014 Share #3447 Posted June 10, 2014 I would agree when the 33 used to go to LGA...but now the terminals for the 2 routes a less than a mile away from each other, an't be that big a difference, other than that they're the exact same route pretty much...No-One rides the Q32 between Northern and 74th into Manhattan...They use it to get to Subway because it just happens to come before the Q33, people riding the Q32 into Manhattan don't start to board until around Woodside.... . How hard would it be really for the Q50/48 to make a right turn from Main on Roosevelt, the 17/27 used to have to make that left which is much hard than to make a simple right...... BX-bound wouldn't be an issue at all uses all the same stops that are in place now. Plus Q50/48 combo puts people closer to the than the 50 does now....Not that it's that big of a walk, but still it's closer... I would keep the LTD of the Q50, but keep the 48's headways. EDIT: I take back my 48/50 combo suggestion, as I just noticed that LGA routes must run in a loop...the Q50 would be too long of a route to only have 1 terminal at the BX end. There were a lot of banned turn movements after DOT redid the intersection and Kissena/Main a few years back, which is why the 17/27 no longer did that. I would rather the restrictions stay in place, since the intersection is certainly much smoother running than it was a couple years ago prior to the change (although it's gotten worse again due to the parking lot at the old Caldor/the New World Mall. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 10, 2014 Share #3448 Posted June 10, 2014 I would agree when the 33 used to go to LGA...but now the terminals for the 2 routes a less than a mile away from each other, an't be that big a difference, other than that they're the exact same route pretty much...No-One rides the Q32 between Northern and 74th into Manhattan...They use it to get to Subway because it just happens to come before the Q33, people riding the Q32 into Manhattan don't start to board until around Woodside.... . How hard would it be really for the Q50/48 to make a right turn from Main on Roosevelt, the 17/27 used to have to make that left which is much hard than to make a simple right...... BX-bound wouldn't be an issue at all uses all the same stops that are in place now. Plus Q50/48 combo puts people closer to the than the 50 does now....Not that it's that big of a walk, but still it's closer... I would keep the LTD of the Q50, but keep the 48's headways. EDIT: I take back my 48/50 combo suggestion, as I just noticed that LGA routes must run in a loop...the Q50 would be too long of a route to only have 1 terminal at the BX end. Extension of the Q70 via 2 more queens stops on whitestone expressway shared with Q50 Then non stop to Westchester square boom LGA to bronx route. If made a super route drop bx4a and let Q70 eat that portion to parkchester and end there. But then is would look more like the Q52 in structure sort of. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union Tpke Posted June 13, 2014 Share #3449 Posted June 13, 2014 There should be Queens Blvd bound Q46 limited service in the afternoon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted June 13, 2014 Share #3450 Posted June 13, 2014 There should be Queens Blvd bound Q46 limited service in the afternoon. Already exists 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.