qjtransitmaster Posted July 7, 2013 Share #1726 Posted July 7, 2013 via 131st & via 135th to lefferts.... Your suggestion may have been to serve van wyck residents..... My suggestion is to serve the same residents that the current Q9 does, plus an attempt to boost ridership on the route while still trying to keep the route rather efficient...... This is the main reason why I don't agree with sending Q9's all the way to T5 (Which is why I didn't bother to directly comment on your suggestion when you first posted it)...... Furthermore, explain to me how MORE people would opt to drive or take a taxi if the Q9 were to be extended to lefferts airtrain (as opposed to leaving the Q9 right where it is)..... That counter-argument doesn't make sense..... Currently, out of JFK, you have those that take airtrain b/w JFK & Jamaica, those that take the Q3, and those that xfer from Q10's to Q9's @ Rockaway blvd..... Sending Q9's to lefferts airtrain not only eliminates an xfer b/w the Q10/Q9 back to jamaica, but it would also offer a (quicker) connection to Brooklyn via the B15.... I'm quite sure riders would rather take AIRtrain freely from w/e terminal they're leaving from, to lefferts airtrain for an extended Q9 - compared to xferring b/w Q10's/Q9's & compared to taking airtrain from w/e terminal they're leaving from, to ride it out on the Q3's (which is not all that direct) back towards Jamaica...... Yeah, sending Q9's to T5 would be more direct than the Q3 b/w JFK & Jamaica, but I don't think you really need the Q3 & the Q9 ending at T5.... Hmm... interesting, (I) never put any thought into sending Q84's to LIRR Jamaica..... I admit I like the Q9 airtrain extension very good idea. It can tie in perfectly. T5 would be wasted mileage at this point. I find it odd that there are no local stops between Rockaway Blvd and the Federal Circle AirTrain station... The problem I have with this (and that the PA would have with this) is that this would essentially create a poor man's AirTrain, where travelers too cheap to pay for AirTrain get on the bus following the exact same route, while dumping them on the AirTrain (which is free for intra-airport travel), so that's a huge minus. Besides, Q9 riders who need the airport can either walk to the Q10 or transfer to the Q10 at the southern terminus of the Q9. The Q10 runs often enough for that to work. Nice try but this gives people a Brooklyn connection and caters more to airport employees than passengers. Most passengers look at buses as an afterthought unless they are quick and direct. The AirTrain is not irrelevant to the discussion for the very reason you posted here - you'd rather take that then a $5 ride from Jamaica. This will only siphon riders away from a service that was built expressly for the very purpose of transporting unsuspecting tourists. Plus, you end up with a Q33-like situation where you end up overcrowding a route with airport passengers, requiring very expensive increases in frequency and inconveniencing those who are using the bus to get to their homes, and not the airport. A Q9 to the airport is not going to get all its airport bound passengers from the surrounding neighborhood, which is what you're trying to imply. Airport routes only have two stable sources of ridership - business travelers and airport employees. (People on vacation are more likely to use a cab, since it's faster and cheaper the more people you're traveling with. They also fluctuate widely in numbers.) Since Southeast Queens isn't exactly a business mecca, you presumably want to target employees, who are probably provided transit passes on AirTrain and employer provided parking (I could be wrong.) If you want a cheap ride from the subway to the airport, you can take the Q10. It is not about the cheap ride. Also Q33 like situation is unlikely as LIRR and subway riders looking to catch a flight will not risk missing their flight to save a mere $5 or $2.50. They will continue to use the airtrain like they do now especially LIRR customers from LI looking for JFK they won't be caught dead on an extended Q33 like Q9. Like you said earlier don't most airport employees live near the airport? Last I checked the Q9 serves areas NEAR TO JFK!!! And an extension would help airport workers a lot more than you realize. And about employees getting free passes it means nothing if there is no airtrain stop nearby. Last I checked the Q10 connection Q9 has is with a branch and the Q10 branch is not as frequent as you are leading us to believe I know I used the Q10 branches individually from JFK service is subpar and isn't timed so well with Q9 buses. B35 has made his point and now I am using your own logic against you. As due to airtrain you are not gonna get a Q33 situation as one airtrain is not only faster but unlike B35's or even Q90's plans it serves all terminals directly with this bus you will need to transfer and wait. Passengers don't have that kind of patience they only put up with Q33 because Q70 isn't available yet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted July 7, 2013 Share #1727 Posted July 7, 2013 The Q9's ridership and frequency stops it from serving JFK. It's a very direct route but you just can't have a lot of empty buses heading down the Van Wyck. The Q37 could serve JFK only if it received better headways on the weekends because a lot of people would want to go to the Q37 instead of taking the Q8, Q55, Q56, Q41 and Q112 to the Q10. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q90 Posted July 7, 2013 Share #1728 Posted July 7, 2013 The Q9 doesn't need to go to JFK and for the people who want to go to JFK can take the Q10 which is only a block away the the Q9's terminal. I would rather have the Q6 serve the JFK terminals because its more direct it runs more often and will be great alternative to the Q3. I can also see the Q37 extended to JFK due to the fact that it parallels the Q10 and it can take off loads from the Q10. I see people walk from the Q37 on 111th street to Lefferts to get the Q10 and they both serve the same general area. The Q9 to JFK will most likely not happen especially when the Q6 and Q37 which are more direct can serve JFK. Yeah you have the people who near the Van Wyck but they never had any problems taking the Q9 or the any other routes the cross the Van Wyck south of Jamaica Ave to the Q10. No the Q6 should be left alone and the Q6 serves the Postal Facility. Rerouting it to JFK would cause problems for employees who use it. Q37 to JFK actually isn't a bad idea (maybe it could even replace the 130 Street branch of the Q10) but I'm not gonna go crazy about that. And even if the Van Wyck people aren't complaining it's still more convinient for them and would boost the Q9's ridership. And about frequency, Q9's frequency will obviously increase with the JFK extension. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 7, 2013 Share #1729 Posted July 7, 2013 (edited) Well you can stick with your Q9 to Lefferts all you want but you aren't gonna change my proposal to JFK. Also there's nothing wrong with the Q9 being an alternative to the AirTrain. Saying it shouldn't go to JFK just because it is an AirTrain alternative is like saying the Hudson and New Haven Lines of Metro North shouldn't operate because they are cheaper alternatives to Amtrak. And tell me what's immaterial about serving Van Wyck passengers? A lot of people on Van Wyck go to JFK but don't have direct MTA service so it's important they get that service so the Q9 gets more riders. I understand exactly what your telling me about your Q9 to Lefferts for connections and I respect your idea (though I don't agree with it obviously) but again more people would benefit from direct service to JFK than connections at Lefferts AirTrain. Like I said before you can get those same connections at Federal Circle and actually it's shorter since my version of the Q9 doesn't turn off Van Wyck so it goes straight there. So although Q9 to Lefferts does somewhat make sense, it is better to send Q9s to JFK almost like an Airtrain local. Listen, I wasn't trying to change anything of yours to begin with, so you can miss me with this whole bit about sticking to my idea & trying to change your opinion.... You're telling on yourself when you're making this exchange about opinion changing - "Not trying to change your opinion but do you still want to stick with your Q9 to Lefferts after I have explained my reasoning to you?" Now you come on here saying: "Well you can stick with your Q9 to Lefferts all you want but you aren't gonna change my proposal to JFK" Your analogy doesn't make sense either because MNRR isn't meant to be an alternative to Amtrak.... Outside of using the same trackage, there is no cohesion b/w the two services.... Whereas you are trying to directly have the Q9 be an alternative to the AIRtrain..... And being an alternative to the AIRtrain wasn't the only stated reason for the Q9 not running all the way to T5..... As if the point about inefficiency wasn't brought up..... I like how you're intentionally ignoring that point...... You apparently have reading comprehension problems also..... I didn't say anything about serving van wyck passengers being immaterial; I said "I don't care about AIRtrain not making stops along the Van Wyck; it's immaterial"... That was a direct response to YOU saying "And I knew the airtrain would be brought up but it is actually irrelevant and do you want to know why? It doesn't make any stops along the Van Wyck Expressway so those people who want to go to JFK can't use it"..... AIRtrain not making stops along the Van Wyck is immaterial to what I'm suggesting for the Q9..... I understand your suggestion, I just don't agree with it.... Stop explaining your suggestion to me because it's futile..... And really, enough with the transference already - Your issue is not my issue. I admit I like the Q9 airtrain extension very good idea. It can tie in perfectly. T5 would be wasted mileage at this point. The Q9's ridership and frequency stops it from serving JFK. It's a very direct route but you just can't have a lot of empty buses heading down the Van Wyck. Exactly the point, it's wasted mileage...... It would make an already efficient route grossly inefficient.... When you got QJT saying an idea is wasted mileage, that says a LOT Edited July 7, 2013 by B35 via Church 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q90 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1730 Posted July 8, 2013 Listen, I wasn't trying to change anything of yours to begin with, so you can miss me with this whole bit about sticking to my idea & trying to change your opinion.... You're telling on yourself when you're making this exchange about opinion changing - "Not trying to change your opinion but do you still want to stick with your Q9 to Lefferts after I have explained my reasoning to you?" Now you come on here saying: "Well you can stick with your Q9 to Lefferts all you want but you aren't gonna change my proposal to JFK" Your analogy doesn't make sense either because MNRR isn't meant to be an alternative to Amtrak.... Outside of using the same trackage, there is no cohesion b/w the two services.... Whereas you are trying to directly have the Q9 be an alternative to the AIRtrain..... And being an alternative to the AIRtrain wasn't the only stated reason for the Q9 not running all the way to T5..... As if the point about inefficiency wasn't brought up..... I like how you're intentionally ignoring that point...... You apparently have reading comprehension problems also..... I didn't say anything about serving van wyck passengers being immaterial; I said "I don't care about AIRtrain not making stops along the Van Wyck; it's immaterial"... That was a direct response to YOU saying "And I knew the airtrain would be brought up but it is actually irrelevant and do you want to know why? It doesn't make any stops along the Van Wyck Expressway so those people who want to go to JFK can't use it"..... AIRtrain not making stops along the Van Wyck is immaterial to what I'm suggesting for the Q9..... I understand your suggestion, I just don't agree with it.... Stop explaining your suggestion to me because it's futile..... And really, enough with the transference already - Your issue is not my issue. Exactly the point, it's wasted mileage...... It would make an already efficient route grossly inefficient.... When you got QJT saying an idea is wasted mileage, that says a LOT Since when do you agree with QJT. You always disagree with him and also even I found his ideas ridiculous. And no, I do not have comprehension problems and why are you blowing up on me when I'm just sharing my idea. Also if you understand my idea then why are you acting like I'm making an idea like QJT's. I would never make crazy route extensions or merge routes like he proposes. And please do tell, how is making the Q9 going to JFK wasted mileage? It would boost ridership just like your Q9 to Lefferts. Look, I'm not trying to be an idiotic burden on this forum, I was here to discuss ideas I had in mind and post them here so people like you can give me feedback about. And I also admit I'm not too familiar with demand in neighborhoods but I want to learn about it so I can make better proposals and you can help me too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1731 Posted July 8, 2013 (edited) While noble, all you're doing is making the transfer b/w those same two buses more convenient..... However, I'm not sure of the purpose of having Q9's end over there w/ the (short turn) Q10 & the Q37 - just so that xferring b/w the two routes (Q9/Q10) is less of an inconvenience..... If that's your main reason for running Q9's to 149th/150th, you may as well extend the current Q9 to 128th/Rockaway blvd (same stop as the westbound Q7 & the northbound Q10) & call it a day..... Which for that particular purpose, is actually a good idea..... The idea of extending the route to 150 Avenue is to shorten the run-on and run-off. South Conduit Avenue and the Nassau Expressway have a lot fewer traffic signals and a higher speed limit. That is why it made sense to extend the Q37 across the 130 Street overpass...the deadhead becomes easier. The increased route distance is offset with less non-revenue mileage and time (after 130 Street on South Conduit Avenue, the next traffic light is at Rockaway Boulevard for runoffs, and for runons, the deadhead is via the Nassau Expressway and North Conduit Avenue). During the rush hours, some trips would still end at Rockaway Boulevard to facilitate easier deadheading back to Jamaica. From 128th and Rockaway Boulevard, you have to go to Foch Boulevard to turn buses around and the southern end is facing away from JFK Depot. Edited July 8, 2013 by aemoreira81 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1732 Posted July 8, 2013 (edited) Since when do you agree with QJT. You always disagree with him and also even I found his ideas ridiculous. And no, I do not have comprehension problems and why are you blowing up on me when I'm just sharing my idea. Also if you understand my idea then why are you acting like I'm making an idea like QJT's. I would never make crazy route extensions or merge routes like he proposes. And please do tell, how is making the Q9 going to JFK wasted mileage? It would boost ridership just like your Q9 to Lefferts. Look, I'm not trying to be an idiotic burden on this forum, I was here to discuss ideas I had in mind and post them here so people like you can give me feedback about. And I also admit I'm not too familiar with demand in neighborhoods but I want to learn about it so I can make better proposals and you can help me too. those so called crazy route extensions don't exist in my final plan they are fodder to throw ideas around and eliminate the worst ones as I know my first draft is not perfect. You are not a burden he never said you were he just disagreed with us that is all. Q9 to JFK VS lefferts the pros with your idea are if a large group of van suck folks work and go to the airport they get a fast direct ride and can use airtrain to reach other areas. Like I told bobtehpanda your not going to get those in jamacia to use this to JFK since airtrain is there. The weakness is you risk missing connections with the B15& potential other Brooklyn routes that can extend to JFK. The strengths of B35's idea is more potential connections while maintaining easy reach to JFK without going into JFK. Should brooklynbus aka Alan Rosen's B22 become reality then Q9 to lefferts can get connecting passengers from that bus for those going to areas served by Q9. Heck those Fed up with the van suck traffic may just say f**k IT and take B22 belt parkway bus to Q9 to reach jamacia or areas around the van suck. The thing is if you look at some of my proposals alone you will never get or understand how they work. Why cause they are designed with other routes in mind. My so called mergers how do you know of em they are mostly not involving bus routes in NYC how do you know about em I never specified any in detail. And if you read my NICE and LI proposal you would know they do not involve complete mergers at all. My NYC plans mostly involved either new routes or short segment swapping again which I haven't detailed at least not together. Edited July 8, 2013 by qjtransitmaster 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1733 Posted July 8, 2013 (edited) Since when do you agree with QJT. You always disagree with him and also even I found his ideas ridiculous. And no, I do not have comprehension problems and why are you blowing up on me when I'm just sharing my idea. Also if you understand my idea then why are you acting like I'm making an idea like QJT's. I would never make crazy route extensions or merge routes like he proposes. And please do tell, how is making the Q9 going to JFK wasted mileage? It would boost ridership just like your Q9 to Lefferts. Look, I'm not trying to be an idiotic burden on this forum, I was here to discuss ideas I had in mind and post them here so people like you can give me feedback about. And I also admit I'm not too familiar with demand in neighborhoods but I want to learn about it so I can make better proposals and you can help me too. Oh, so what that I agreed with QJT... I don't disagree with literally everything the guy says... You pulled this same "since when do you agree with _____" mess when QJT agreed with me in the Brooklyn thread..... Although I don't agree with your Q9 suggestion, I'm not acting like it's ridiculous.... I'm so-called "blowing up" on you because you're trying to make this some sort of damn pissing contest, talking about changing opinions & what I'm "sticking" with all I want.... Why did it even have to be about that? That's what I was annoyed with & that's why I responded to that crap accordingly..... With your responses to myself & bobt3hpanda in this discussion, you are not acting like someone that's willing to learn..... How is sending the Q9 to JFK wasted mileage? Nevermind the fact that it duplicates AIRtrain for a second, how many people do you think are gonna be on these buses from Jamaica to JFK T5 (and everywhere in-between) the way you've decided to route the Q9 with your suggestion.... Sure it would boost ridership (compared to the current Q9), but to what extent for the extra mileage you'd have it undergoing.... It all goes back to efficiency - The longer the route, the more passengers it has to carry from terminal to terminal.... You increase the distance between said end terminals, the more people you're gonna have to a] benefit & b] actually get, to taking these buses (This is if you want to keep the Q9 efficient like it already is).... This is why the B15 works, this is why the Q10 works, this is why the Q3 works..... If you'd send it to JFK T5 just for the sake of sending it to the airport & ignoring everything else that goes into route planning, then there's really nothing more to tell you..... Look man, this is your suggestion, not mine - So please tell us where ALL this latent ridership is coming from along/around the Van Wyck service roads, because with the current Q9, I'm just not seeing it.... With as hard as you've been pleading for serving Van Wyck passengers specifically throughout this discussion, You have yet to explain where this wave of people will come from - enough to extend the route another 3-4 miles from Rockaway Blvd to T5.... You said it yourself, "Also I don't think it will siphon that many riders from the AirTrain since the AirTrain would still be significantly faster".... Of course not, how can you...... Such an extension involves quite a bit of "dead" mileage b/w Rockaway blvd & T5 (dead mileage in the sense of, a long enough nonstop portion where you're not picking up anyone)..... This wouldn't bode well for the Q9 because it's currently not a high-ridership line..... So it is absolutely wasted mileage..... I'm quite sure this is why you have at least one person on here talking about not having a lot of empty buses running down the Van Wyck...... But you OTOH, wanna sit here & make the case that more people would opt to drive or take taxi's if the Q9 were to be sent to lefferts airtrain instead of T5.... Give me a break..... There wouldn't be anymore people that would do that - the amount of people driving or taking taxi's to JFK would either: - remain stagnant (because these are the people that aren't considering public transportation either way), or.... - become less (because some people would consider taking the extended service).... Edited July 8, 2013 by B35 via Church 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astoria Line Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1734 Posted July 8, 2013 The one good thing about the Q9 is IF it was extended to JFK, it would be a cheaper alternative to get to the Jamaica area than AirTrain but not everyone wants cost over convenience and speed... also, is the demand there? That's why I would be hesitant over sending it to T5, ALSO because the Q10 is already in the area.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1735 Posted July 8, 2013 Plus the airtrain from lefferts serves ALL terminals while Q9 to T5 would benefit the few. As Q9 to airtrain lefferts benefits the many either going to other terminals or Brooklyn via B15 and eventually others. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B35 via Church Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1736 Posted July 8, 2013 The idea of extending the route to 150 Avenue is to shorten the run-on and run-off. South Conduit Avenue and the Nassau Expressway have a lot fewer traffic signals and a higher speed limit. That is why it made sense to extend the Q37 across the 130 Street overpass...the deadhead becomes easier. The increased route distance is offset with less non-revenue mileage and time (after 130 Street on South Conduit Avenue, the next traffic light is at Rockaway Boulevard for runoffs, and for runons, the deadhead is via the Nassau Expressway and North Conduit Avenue). During the rush hours, some trips would still end at Rockaway Boulevard to facilitate easier deadheading back to Jamaica. From 128th and Rockaway Boulevard, you have to go to Foch Boulevard to turn buses around and the southern end is facing away from JFK Depot. In other words, outside of making the xfer b/w the Q9/Q10 more convenient, the idea for extending the route to 149th/150th isn't for the benefit for the passenger.... smh...... You are not a burden he never said you were he just disagreed with us that is all. Q9 to JFK VS lefferts the pros with your idea are if a large group of van suck folks work and go to the airport they get a fast direct ride and can use airtrain to reach other areas. Like I told bobtehpanda your not going to get those in jamacia to use this to JFK since airtrain is there. The weakness is you risk missing connections with the B15& potential other Brooklyn routes that can extend to JFK. The strengths of B35's idea is more potential connections while maintaining easy reach to JFK without going into JFK. Plus the airtrain from lefferts serves ALL terminals while Q9 to T5 would benefit the few. As Q9 to airtrain lefferts benefits the many either going to other terminals or Brooklyn via B15 and eventually others. Exactly why I wouldn't have the Q9 run to a particular terminal..... Q9 to Lefferts AIRtrain provides a basic bus-to-rail connection.... The fact that riding AIRtrain within the airport is free, is an added benefit.... This is why you have so many B15 riders as it is now getting off at Lefferts AIRtrain coming from Brooklyn..... The lot of em I bet just say, f**k it & take AIRtrain to w/e terminal they're tryna get to... side note: remember when the Q10 served all JFK terminals..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q90 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1737 Posted July 8, 2013 The one good thing about the Q9 is IF it was extended to JFK, it would be a cheaper alternative to get to the Jamaica area than AirTrain but not everyone wants cost over convenience and speed... also, is the demand there? That's why I would be hesitant over sending it to T5, ALSO because the Q10 is already in the area.. There is demand to JFK from Van Wyck. A lot of residents that live along or near the Van Wyck go to JFK so it would boost Q9 ridership by a huge margin. And the Q10 in the area isn't too much of a big deal plus the B15 is there too. And from Jamaica, anyone who doesn't want to pay the extra $2.50 for the AirTrain or elderly/disabled people would benefit from this. not to mention it does to an extent supplement the Q10 by eliminating transfers current JFK bound Q9 passengers use to the Q10. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q90 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1738 Posted July 8, 2013 I also have another idea. It's a merger of two routes that have low ridership. It's the Q16 and Q48. No changes will be made to either route other than making the Q16 continue down Union Street until Roosevelt Avenue, then turning onto Roosevelt to meet up with the Q48 and adjustments of the Q16 in Bayside. The Bayside adjustments would include eliminating the Francis Lewis Boulevard branch of the Q16 so all buses will run via Utopia Parkway instead. And when the Q16 turns off Utopia, it would turn off directly at 29 Avenue instead of at 26 Avenue, then a left on Francis Lewis, and a right on 29 Avenue. Here is how it will look like and it will retain the Q16 name: http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF&msa=0&msid=214089513480814599261.0004e0f61eb1f68f8f8f5 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1739 Posted July 8, 2013 There is demand to JFK from Van Wyck. A lot of residents that live along or near the Van Wyck go to JFK so it would boost Q9 ridership by a huge margin. And the Q10 in the area isn't too much of a big deal plus the B15 is there too. And from Jamaica, anyone who doesn't want to pay the extra $2.50 for the AirTrain or elderly/disabled people would benefit from this. not to mention it does to an extent supplement the Q10 by eliminating transfers current JFK bound Q9 passengers use to the Q10. The deeper you go into JFK the higher your risk of missing a connection is and you screw over riders to other places unless you make em go through federal circle then the weakness in your plan gets negated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q90 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1740 Posted July 8, 2013 The deeper you go into JFK the higher your risk of missing a connection is and you screw over riders to other places unless you make em go through federal circle then the weakness in your plan gets negated. I said this millions of times that you would be able to transfer to the Q10 or B15 at Federal Circle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubBus Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1741 Posted July 8, 2013 (edited) One thing. How about leaving the 84 at the canopy and extending the 42 to Sutphin Blvd ? Another question, which route would short turn at Jamaica Ctr, 111 and/or 113 local?1. 42 to 83 (free xfer) for . Work on the operation hours of the 42. 2. Short turn Q111 and Q113 locals. Rosedale Q111 and Q113 LTD will run full route....... Edited July 8, 2013 by SubBus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qjtransitmaster Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1742 Posted July 8, 2013 I said this millions of times that you would be able to transfer to the Q10 or B15 at Federal Circle. ok I did say federal circle negates your plan's weak point. I was being objective on my stance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astoria Line Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1743 Posted July 8, 2013 (edited) 1. 42 to 83 (free xfer) for . Work on the operation hours of the 42. 2. Short turn Q111 and Q113 locals. Rosedale Q111 and Q113 LTD will run full route....... I actually think the Q111/Q113s short turning @ Jamaica Ctr is a great idea! Now about the other one.. I don't think the Q42 should be extended.. The Q42 doesn't run enough nor have enough ridership (IMO) to warrant an extension. (I didn't 100% agree with all day service returning on the route in the first place..) I always see Q42s come into Jamaica Ctr not even SRO (same as exiting Jamaica Ctr)... The buses most likely would run up to Sutphin empty.. which isn't very cost efficient... I don't think the Q84 should be extended either for the ridership issue either.. (That route does get riders in the rush hours, but outside of those times, the route itself is not even SRO, everytime I've ridden it, or seen it on Merrick, it was practically empty...) As for the Q83,The Q83s will come into Jamaica Ctr even more packed than they are now.. BUT the route does have the frequencies to support this (IMO). It is better to extend a higher ridership route, than a lower ridership route (again, IMO) If a route HAD to be extended to Sutphin on the (which I don't think is a high enough ridership subway station, nor a high trafficking terminal in the first place...) it would have to be a high ridership route, like the Q5, Q85, Q83 or Q4. A good example to support this, the Q40 (which terminates at Sutphin on the F). I've seen this route numerous times and have observed the ridership patterns, not as many people get on at Sutphin/Hillside, as compared to Sutphin/Archer.. mainly because Sutphin/Archer is a higher ridership/trafficking station... Edited July 8, 2013 by Astoria Line 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted July 8, 2013 Author Share #1744 Posted July 8, 2013 1. 42 to 83 (free xfer) for . Work on the operation hours of the 42. 2. Short turn Q111 and Q113 locals. Rosedale Q111 and Q113 LTD will run full route....... How about extending the hours to 11 pre-2010? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NewFlyer 230 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1745 Posted July 8, 2013 I never understood why the Q40 went to Hillside Ave anyway, I think it's a waste. As for the Q111/113 Jamaica Center should only be a short turn for the Q111 as the Q113 runs every 10 minutes including LTD and local service. There is a lot of people who board the Q111/Q113 at Hillside Parsons Station. The Q110 doesn't get a whole lot of people there and the Q112 it depends on the day. Sometimes when I board it at 2PM on Saturday 2 to 5 more people board it and something only one person or just myself alone is on. The Q25/Q34 and Q65 should start on Jamaica Parsons and most of the people get on and get off there. Most of the buses crowd there anyway. Some people get on at Archer Ave and 150st and LIRR Airtrain Station. I personally like getting on there so I can have myself a seat anywhere I like because on Parsons the buses usually leave crowded unless there are two buses together. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astoria Line Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1746 Posted July 8, 2013 I never understood why the Q40 went to Hillside Ave anyway, I think it's a waste. As for the Q111/113 Jamaica Center should only be a short turn for the Q111 as the Q113 runs every 10 minutes including LTD and local service. There is a lot of people who board the Q111/Q113 at Hillside Parsons Station. The Q110 doesn't get a whole lot of people there and the Q112 it depends on the day. Sometimes when I board it at 2PM on Saturday 2 to 5 more people board it and something only one person or just myself alone is on. The Q25/Q34 and Q65 should start on Jamaica Parsons and most of the people get on and get off there. Most of the buses crowd there anyway. Some people get on at Archer Ave and 150st and LIRR Airtrain Station. I personally like getting on there so I can have myself a seat anywhere I like because on Parsons the buses usually leave crowded unless there are two buses together. - I never understood the Q40 going to Hillside Ave either, but it was probably to reduce crowding at 165 (methinks, notice how all the other JFK routes go there..) - The 113 LTDs and locals do run 10 min headways, but somehow they still bunch up (I live along the route AND get on at Jamaica.., I notice this all too often) - The Q112 doesn't get much ridership in general LOL... its the red-headed stepchild of BP Depot, even having 30 min headways at 8pm on a weekday... - The Q110 REALLY picks up at that stop by Old Navy on Jamaica Ave... that route actually REALLY picks up. - Nah sending those 25s/34s/65s to Sutphin is fine.... sure it is empty, but it'll alleviate crowding in the Jamaica Ctr area.. (3 less routes terminating there..) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted July 8, 2013 Author Share #1747 Posted July 8, 2013 - I never understood the Q40 going to Hillside Ave either, but it was probably to reduce crowding at 165 (methinks, notice how all the other JFK routes go there..) - The 113 LTDs and locals do run 10 min headways, but somehow they still bunch up (I live along the route AND get on at Jamaica.., I notice this all too often) - The Q112 doesn't get much ridership in general LOL... its the red-headed stepchild of BP Depot, even having 30 min headways at 8pm on a weekday... - The Q110 REALLY picks up at that stop by Old Navy on Jamaica Ave... that route actually REALLY picks up. - Nah sending those 25s/34s/65s to Sutphin is fine.... sure it is empty, but it'll alleviate crowding in the Jamaica Ctr area.. (3 less routes terminating there..) At one time, DOT proposed sending the 40 to 165 St because "it was no longer a necessity" to connect with the since one can get QB express service at Jamaica LIRR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astoria Line Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1748 Posted July 8, 2013 At one time, DOT proposed sending the 40 to 165 St because "it was no longer a necessity" to connect with the since one can get QB express service at Jamaica LIRR I wonder why that never followed through? It sounds logical in this day and age 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Q43LTD Posted July 8, 2013 Author Share #1749 Posted July 8, 2013 I wonder why that never followed through? It sounds logical in this day and age I have no idea. Maybe the felt it was best to leave as is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aemoreira81 Posted July 8, 2013 Share #1750 Posted July 8, 2013 I wonder why that never followed through? It sounds logical in this day and age Mileage is probably why. Why the Q40 goes to Hillside and Sutphin probably has to do with where you can reasonably turn the bus around. 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.