|
|
| Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited (257691) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
| (257691) | |
Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited |
|
|
Posted by gold_12TH on Fri Mar 23 14:16:44 2012 |
|
|
| (257692) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 14:29:21 2012, in response to Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited, posted by gold_12TH on Fri Mar 23 14:16:44 2012. We've been talking about a change like this for a while here and I welcome this idea. Now can they set it up so that the Q52/53 are Far Rockaway based and the Q11/21 becomes all JFK and/or LaGuardia? That would be a REAL cost-savings because of the cut in deadhead length. |
|
|
| (257694) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by JAzumah on Fri Mar 23 14:42:18 2012, in response to Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited, posted by gold_12TH on Fri Mar 23 14:16:44 2012. The MTA is finally taking growth from service improvements into account?The end is near... |
|
|
| (257696) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 14:51:27 2012, in response to Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited, posted by gold_12TH on Fri Mar 23 14:16:44 2012. Is this the first time that all local service on a street has been eliminated, with only limited-stop service remaining? |
|
|
| (257698) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 15:39:33 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 14:51:27 2012. Some technicalities such as the B103, S89, and Q113 but I see where you are going. This is the first time I think they have ever added limited stops to make up for eliminating a local as far as I know. |
|
|
| (257699) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Mar 23 15:40:24 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 14:51:27 2012. I wonder what the headways on the Q52 will be. Will they continue to be 15 minutes peak and 30 minutes off-peak? |
|
|
| (257700) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Fri Mar 23 16:29:22 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Mar 23 15:40:24 2012. i wonder if they will just spit the 53 hw in half maybe some corridor increases. also running the right service level from the mall towoodside. |
|
|
| (257701) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 23 16:46:29 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 14:51:27 2012. Q35 which was *technically a local (*even though some drivers didn't stop unless you 'flagged them down') became limited stop on flatbush av some years ago. |
|
|
| (257702) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by Bounad Hanhic on Fri Mar 23 16:52:20 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by JAzumah on Fri Mar 23 14:42:18 2012. It might seem like that on the surface, but the greatest cost savings will result from getting Q53 riders to shift to the Q52 instead and thus move the Q53's work to Far Rockaway Depot without moving the Q53 itself as Gotham previously said in another post. |
|
|
| (257703) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 17:31:17 2012, in response to Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited, posted by gold_12TH on Fri Mar 23 14:16:44 2012. So Q 21 becomes the unofficial former Q 11 to Lindenwood branch. Why not restore the original Q 53 super limited or SBS route with only stops at Liberty Av and Jamaica Av and make the Q 52 limited the current Q 53 routing... |
|
|
| (257704) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 17:49:00 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 17:31:17 2012. Because then there would be no direct service from Arverne to the north.I like this new proposed setup. I think it does the best it can considering the circumstances. The next step would be to combine the Q22 and Q35 and use the savings from that to extend the Q52 to Far Rockaway and the Q53 to Roxbury, or one or the other. |
|
|
| (257708) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 18:14:56 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 17:49:00 2012. You still will have direct service to the North, the Q 52 will still operate from Averne, what I suggested is to restore the Q 53 back to its takeover days (minus via 63 Dr portion) with stops only at Liberty and Jamaica Avs, have the Q 52 be the curent Q 53. At the early stages of the game, the Q 21 to Arverne (soon to be the Q 52) is a work in progress in the Rockaways. I agree the Q 52 will eventually end up in Far Rockaway, (personally the Rockaway shuttle should just operate from Far Rock to Rock Pk). I'm not sure about the Q 53 to Roxbury, since the passenger flow tend to see pax not going beyond B 116 ST but more towards Far Rockaway.As for combining the Q 22 and Q 35, its 50 - 50 with me. what I would prefer a combination of Q 22/Q 35/ B2. All buses operate the Q 22 then alternate buses branch via Flatbush Av (Q 35) and via Av R to Kings Hwy Station (Q 22). |
|
|
| (257709) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri Mar 23 18:15:54 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 17:49:00 2012. UGH SMH!!!! I just saw that map!!! Slowing down the Q-53 even more....4 bus lines on Wodhaven and Cross Bay Blvds.....I mean really?? |
|
|
| (257712) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 18:59:56 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri Mar 23 18:15:54 2012. There is already 4 bus lines during rush hours (Q11,Q21,Q21 Ltd (soon to be Q 52), and Q 53) not to mention 4 express bus routes (QM 15,16, 17, and BM 5)on Woodhaven and Cross Bay Blvds... |
|
|
| (257716) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 20:06:29 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 17:31:17 2012. MTA Bus Company acquired the services that Green Bus Lines and Triboro Coach operated, and needed to prove that they could do better. They rearranged the service over and over again, largely ignoring (or ignorant of) the history and institutional service planning memory. As MTABC continues to revise service, previous service plans from the two private companies return. With the service from the Rockaways to Elmhurst now slowed down so much with the added stops along Cross Bay and Woodhaven boulevards, it is indeed worthwhile restoring the former Q53 service pattern non-stop between Broad Channel and Rego Park (though I might still want to keep the one intermediate stop at Liberty Av). |
|
|
| (257717) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 20:08:54 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 17:49:00 2012. The Q22 and Q35 each have their own challenges, and reliability would suffer with a through route from Far Rockaway to Brooklyn. There is some duplication of service between Beach 116 and Beach 148 streets, and with the relatively light patronage there, it might be worthwhile concentrating all service on Rockaway Beach Blvd. That is, move the Q35 to Rockaway Beach Blvd., and turn back most (if not all) Q22 buses at Beach 116 St. |
|
|
| (257718) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 20:09:03 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Fri Mar 23 15:39:33 2012. In the case of B103 and S89, those have always been limited stops, and there was no "elimination" of local service beneath those routes. In the case of Q113, the portion of the route over which only limited stop buses operate have never had local service.Stated another way, are there are streets where there had been both local and limited stop services, and subsequently all local service on those streets were withdrawn? |
|
|
| (257719) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Fri Mar 23 20:28:17 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 20:06:29 2012. I think it would be better just to have the Q52/Q53 operate as +SBS+. You still have fast service (not as fast as the Super-Express, but still), and you don't screw limited riders along the corridor (going to stops like Jamaica Avenue and places like that) |
|
|
| (257720) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 23 20:28:44 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by BusMgr on Fri Mar 23 20:06:29 2012. I do want the old Q53 route back, but keeping the transfers to the subway lines on Jamaica and Liberty avs. It's way too slow now. |
|
|
| (257721) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 23 20:31:38 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 18:14:56 2012. Or you can just leave the Q35 as is and merge the B2 and Q22... |
|
|
| (257749) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 09:36:35 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 23 20:31:38 2012. That would be costly! Two lines between Kings Plaza and Roxbury. |
|
|
| (257750) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by LRG5784 on Sat Mar 24 09:37:19 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by grand concourse on Fri Mar 23 20:31:38 2012. How would merging an New York City Transit and MTA Bus Co. actually work? |
|
|
| (257751) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 09:37:22 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Fri Mar 23 18:14:56 2012. I'm not following - could you spell out each line and routing more clearly so I can understand your idea? |
|
|
| (257755) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Mar 24 11:15:46 2012, in response to Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { "Q52" } Limited, posted by gold_12TH on Fri Mar 23 14:16:44 2012. I hope that the MTA now extends the Q21 Lindenwood service to Howard or Hamilton Beach, with the service via Cohancy taking the other alignment, which would restore 30-minute headways into Howard Beach and Hamilton Beach each off-peak. Currently, bus service there is one bus per hour. |
|
|
| (257757) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 11:30:30 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by LRG5784 on Sat Mar 24 09:37:19 2012. Either the Q22 is extended or the B2 is extended and the other line is eliminated. |
|
|
| (257759) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 11:36:34 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 09:36:35 2012. On some basis, I kinda agree with B49 about a Rockaway to KH-16th st bus line. It would eliminate the need for at least 1-2 (Q22,Q35,B100/B2) extra transfers. Obviously there's the A to C to Franklin for the S to Q, but that is also a pita. |
|
|
| (257760) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 11:38:03 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Mar 24 11:15:46 2012. via 157th ave |
|
|
| (257764) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 12:50:46 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 11:36:34 2012. But how many people are traveling from Far Rockaway to Midwood on a regular basis? I'm sure if they want Manhattan the A train is faster than a bus to Midwood for the Brighton Line. |
|
|
| (257766) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:33:21 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 12:50:46 2012. Well in terms of service from Midwood to Far Rockaway ... uncertain, what I do know is that there are people going as far as Arverne. I wrote a post about the B 2 a couple of months ago, about a study I did and I realize there are more people using the B 2 from the Rockaways to Midwood and the subway station then I realized. If the B 2 was extended to Rockaway Pk or Arverne or the Q 22 was extended, it would probably save money. The problem currently would be the B 2 being it is NYCTA route and not a MTA Bus route. |
|
|
| (257767) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 11:30:30 2012. Problem - how do you justify the jobs on either side if that line was cut?In other words if the B 2 is cut, how do you tell the union that you are saving there jobs that was lost? And you can't say that we will transfer them to that depot, to different identities... The solution would have to involve the B100.... If I made a agreement that cost of the B 100 elimination, in return combine B 100/ Q 22 route. With B2 service replacing B 100 service East of Flatbush Av, could be the best compromise. |
|
|
| (257769) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Mar 24 13:47:30 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 11:38:03 2012. It should be via 157 Avenue and continuing past Cross Bay to 102 Street and then going either to Howard Beach or Hamilton Beach---only one of those services would keep the Q11 name.To me, it should be: One trip via Lindenwood to Hamilton Beach, and the next trip via Cohancy Street to Howard Beach. Both cross in the vicinity of the Howard Beach subway station. That would restore 30-minute headways on each branch. I don't agree that the Q21 should share a southern terminus with the Q41...I think that it should be with the Q11. Also, I believe that the Q52 should be extended further east to Ocean Village, for a shorter deadhead. |
|
|
| (257771) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Sat Mar 24 14:00:29 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Fri Mar 23 18:15:54 2012. I have no problem with that---what I do have a problem with though is that Old Howard Beach continues to be underserved vis a vis transit. |
|
|
| (257772) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 14:30:35 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012. what about combining the the b103 short trips and the Q35. |
|
|
| (257773) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 15:04:53 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:33:21 2012. which is why one line would have to be extended and the other scrapped (unless it was just a partial overlap). It would be much more simpler if the divisions b/w MTA Bus and NYCT was removed and fully merged. |
|
|
| (257774) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 15:07:18 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012. Well it is your idea to merge the lines you mentioned. You should tell that to him. |
|
|
| (257776) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 15:10:29 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 15:07:18 2012. him* New flyer. |
|
|
| (257777) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 15:28:29 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:33:21 2012. it is NYCTA route and not a MTA Bus route.Which is why the most viable solution is the Q35 and Q22 combination IMO. If these routes are subject to delays then the causes of the delays should be looked at, or there should be lots of short-turns, or maybe even this combined route could have a limited of its own. |
|
|
| (257778) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 15:30:25 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012. They are playing games like this. The B2 cut on the weekends just "happened" to coincide with an increase in B100 frequency on the weekends. |
|
|
| (257779) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by checkmatechamp13 on Sat Mar 24 15:37:49 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012. So the bus would run from Mill Basin to the Rockaways? Bad idea. You're getting rid of an easier subway connection for Mill Basin riders. |
|
|
| (257781) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 15:49:40 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Sat Mar 24 15:37:49 2012. What he's trying to do is actually pretty creative. He's trying to get around the NYCT / MTAB divorce by combining the Q22/35 (MTAB) with the B100 (MTAB) instead of the B2 (NYCT). This would mean that the B100 would run from Kings Hwy Station to Far Rockaway and the B2 would cover Mill Basin. |
|
|
| (257782) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 16:11:14 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 15:30:25 2012. then they cut back from a 15 hw -a 20 hw on sat. |
|
|
| (257783) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 16:15:19 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 15:28:29 2012. Ok, fine. That'd work better without the B2 involved. |
|
|
| (257785) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 16:16:41 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Mar 24 15:49:40 2012. If he had mentioned the B100 earlier, then I would see how it could work. I like that idea as well. |
|
|
| (257786) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 16:19:58 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012. for the B100 and B2: would they remain the same up till Flatbush av* or would you basically have the B100 be renamed the B2 and the B2 be the new B100 only to continue on into Queens?*B2 running up Utica and making the turn onto Fillmore to then go to Mill Basin and B100 turning on Flatbush av and going to Queens. |
|
|
| (257787) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 16:19:58 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 13:37:26 2012. for the B100 and B2: would they remain the same up till Flatbush av* or would you basically have the B100 be renamed the B2 and the B2 be the new B100 only to continue on into Queens?*B2 running up Utica and making the turn onto Fillmore to then go to Mill Basin and B100 turning on Flatbush av and going to Queens. |
|
|
| (257796) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Sat Mar 24 17:47:03 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by grand concourse on Sat Mar 24 16:19:58 2012. My question is this: Is there REALLY a need for 2 local lines and 2 LTD stop lines for the woodhaven/crossbay corridor? |
|
|
| (257798) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 18:54:16 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by R 36 ML 9542 on Sat Mar 24 17:47:03 2012. it has todo with easy passenger recorgnition route # vs destination. |
|
|
| (257799) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 20:02:26 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 14:30:35 2012. I am guessing doing something like the short trips that Flatbush offered on the B 6 years ago. That is not a bad idea and outside of the box. |
|
|
| (257800) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by mike nash on Sat Mar 24 20:16:05 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 20:02:26 2012. no these trips operate 7 days a week for most of the day. |
|
|
| (257801) | |
Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited |
|
|
Posted by B49 Limited on Sat Mar 24 20:22:04 2012, in response to Re: Service changes on Q21 restructuring to Q21 Local & Q21 { ''Q52'' } Limited, posted by checkmatechamp13 on Sat Mar 24 15:37:49 2012. No the idea would be the B2 would run from Midwood to Mill Basin via the current B 2 route than via Kings Plz, Av U, E 66 St, then via the B 100 route.The Q 22 would assume with limited stops in Brooklyn via the B 100 route West of Flatbush Av. |
|
|
[1 2] |
||
|
|
Page 1 of 2 |
|