|
|
| Express bus renumbering. (327885) | |
 |
|
| Home > BusChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
| (327886) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Sat Mar 24 16:39:39 2018, in response to Express bus renumbering., posted by Chicago44 on Sat Mar 24 16:29:07 2018. It would make sense. Doing this enables the route groupings to be shown separately on the "service status" part of the website. Currently, x1-x68 are shown as a single group.But I do not know if any such plans are in the offing.. |
|
|
| (327887) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Sat Mar 24 17:03:46 2018, in response to Express bus renumbering., posted by Chicago44 on Sat Mar 24 16:29:07 2018. It's like deju vu all over again |
|
|
| (327889) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Sat Mar 24 18:33:12 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by MainR3664 on Sat Mar 24 16:39:39 2018. I remember when NYCTA dropped the borough suffix from express routes in favor of the"x" prefix. I see where this could be helpful but I always felt the old designation with borough prefix and "x" suffix made more sense. |
|
|
| (327892) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Sat Mar 24 22:44:27 2018, in response to Express bus renumbering., posted by Chicago44 on Sat Mar 24 16:29:07 2018. BM doesn't sound like a very nice designation to use; it will make people think of something else. So what else to use? Maybe BkM? |
|
|
| (327894) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Sat Mar 24 23:05:32 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Dyre Dan on Sat Mar 24 22:44:27 2018. BM has been used in the past with no problems |
|
|
| (327903) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sun Mar 25 07:57:13 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by northshore on Sat Mar 24 23:05:32 2018. And is still used. |
|
|
| (327911) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Dan on Sun Mar 25 16:25:13 2018, in response to Express bus renumbering., posted by Chicago44 on Sat Mar 24 16:29:07 2018. The 'SIM' designation for the proposed SI express routes is cumbersome and pointless. Routes like the 'SIM1C' will east up space on the electronic destination signs. If the MTA does go over to this new nomenclature then 'SM' would be a little better, even with it's other connotation. What about the local routes? Will the S78 become the SI78, etc. Talk about confusing. Is every boro going over to a 2-letter boro designation? I think some people at the MTA have too much time on their hands. |
|
|
| (327917) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Sun Mar 25 18:47:35 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Dan on Sun Mar 25 16:25:13 2018. Agreed! They don't use SI now. No point adding the "I". |
|
|
| (327919) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Mar 25 22:22:20 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by WayneJay on Sat Mar 24 18:33:12 2018. Wouldn't that make the Brooklyn ones confusing? The BX28 would be significantly different from the Bx28... |
|
|
| (327920) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Mon Mar 26 07:45:25 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by WayneJay on Sun Mar 25 18:47:35 2018. It would only be good for speech brevity. "Sim" (as a word) rolls off the tongue better than "S-M." |
|
|
| (327925) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Snilcher on Mon Mar 26 17:08:21 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by WayneJay on Sun Mar 25 18:47:35 2018. I didn't even like the change from R to S. S introduced confusion with Suffolk County bus routes. |
|
|
| (327929) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Mon Mar 26 20:58:34 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sun Mar 25 22:22:20 2018. I think he is suggesting B28X instead of BX28. Either way, I prefer BM28. |
|
|
| (327933) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 23:41:30 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Snilcher on Mon Mar 26 17:08:21 2018. If they were going to go with the single letter boro designations like they insisted on doing with the single letter subway routes, then the logical way (which of course is never the MTA way)to do it would be: M - Manhattan, B - Bronx, K - Brooklyn (Kings Co), Q - Queens, an S - Staten Island. The only change from the current would be the Bronx and Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (327939) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Mar 27 11:08:24 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 23:41:30 2018. Noooooo! We Bronxites love our Bx. |
|
|
| (327940) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Tue Mar 27 11:11:48 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by italianstallion on Tue Mar 27 11:08:24 2018. Well... We're certainly used to our Bx, but I get Randyo's point. |
|
|
| (327943) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Tue Mar 27 12:28:26 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by R30A on Mon Mar 26 20:58:34 2018. Yes, that's correct. I think for the TA to move to DOT-type or their old style with borough prefix and "x" suffix are better options than the current "X" prefix and number.My gripe with the current is that for someone in Manhattan... If they see a QM2 come along... the "Q" serves as an immediate indication that this route provides service to Queens, but you don't necessarily know that when a X68 comes along unless they're able to make that determination from the destination reading. |
|
|
| (327957) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Tue Mar 27 16:49:44 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by WayneJay on Tue Mar 27 12:28:26 2018. More accurately, it would be best to characterize the scheme as that used by the Board of Estimate, or its Bureau of Franchises, than as DOT.The general rule used by the Board of Estimate was that a bus route within a single borough received a single prefix letter corresponding to that borough, and a bus route operating between multiple boroughs received a multiple letter prefix. The prefixes did not relate to the character of the service being local, express, or otherwise. For example, the multi-letter prefix of local route QBx1, operated by Queens Transit Corp. and its successors, indicated its operation within both Queens and the Bronx, and other routes used various combinations. As well, the Board of Estimate used a single letter prefix in designating Q53 for the express route operated by Carey Transportation (now Transdev) between the two airports in Queens. The Board of Estimate was not always consistent, most notably using the single letter prefix "B" for all routes operated by the Brooklyn and Queens Transit Corp. (now New York City Transit Authority), regardless of the borough(s) of operation. This is, in essence, the same scheme that was later adopted unilaterally by NYCTA for its express routes, a single letter "X," regardless of the borough(s) of operation. It was several years ago that the NYCTA unilaterally changed the designations of several "B" prefixed routes that had been operated by B&QT to align with the primary borough of operation (e.g., B58 became Q58), so the present-day re-designation of express routes is just an extension of that practice to NYCTA express routes. (It was not only NYCTA that would unilaterally change bus route designations; e.g., Green Bus Lines changed its route MQ23 to route QM23.) The next logical step would be to re-designate other multi-borough bus routes to multi-letter prefixes (consider, for example, routes Q44 and B39 becoming routes QBx44 and BM39, respectively). However, it may be that NYCTA is under the mistaken impression that multi-letter prefixes designate express routes (which, as shown above, is not actually the case), then it might not want to take that next logical step. In short, there are many inconsistencies with New York City bus route numberings, and discussions could go on forever as to what would be "best." |
|
|
| (327965) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by BusRider on Wed Mar 28 07:06:36 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Tue Mar 27 16:49:44 2018. Very interesting post! |
|
|
| (327975) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Mar 28 15:27:36 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by randyo on Mon Mar 26 23:41:30 2018. It's just amazing that everything takes the MTA so long. They took over the privates in 2004 and it took them 18 years to standardize express bus route numbering. But I suppose that's quick since it took about sixty years to allow free transfers between all bus routes. |
|
|
| (327988) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Mar 29 09:23:23 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BrooklynBus on Wed Mar 28 15:27:36 2018. Well, even after the "big bang" on Staten Island this summer, won't there still be the x27, x28 x63, x64, and x68? |
|
|
| (327989) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Mar 29 09:31:52 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Tue Mar 27 16:49:44 2018. 1) I lived the first 11 years of my life in Flushing, so I remember the B58. As an adult, my job has also brought me out to both Ridgewood and Flushing- both ends of the route. It does not enter Brooklyn at any time during regular service- even on Wyckoff Avenue, it's on the Queens side.I didn't know that as a kid- I assumed it actually went to Brooklyn. Now I realize it was because the route was created by the B&QT. |
|
|
| (327990) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Thu Mar 29 11:01:24 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Tue Mar 27 16:49:44 2018. Yes, I remember the B58 and B55 that came to the border at Myrtle/Wyckoff but didn't enter Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (327991) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Thu Mar 29 11:06:54 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by MainR3664 on Thu Mar 29 09:23:23 2018. I can't imagine what the TA wouldn't take the opportunity convert the Brooklyn and Queens express routes when the SI rexpress routes are done. Basically, they'd be able to make one announcement and then have all express routes done. |
|
|
| (327993) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Thu Mar 29 12:08:01 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Tue Mar 27 16:49:44 2018. I don't think QBx44 would fit on the display panel on the back of most buses. They might have to shorten it to QBx4. |
|
|
| (327994) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Thu Mar 29 14:46:09 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by MainR3664 on Thu Mar 29 09:31:52 2018. Don't forget the related B72 bus route. Unlike the B55 and B58, it did not even touch the borough of Brooklyn (though many years prior, as a street railway route, it did provide through service into Brooklyn to Williamsburg). After it was sold by the NYCTA, its designation was changed to Q72, but by action of the Board of Estimate, not by unilateral action of Triboro Coach. |
|
|
| (327995) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by BusMgr on Thu Mar 29 14:46:13 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Dan on Sun Mar 25 16:25:13 2018. A 1983 article in the New York Times references the express bus routes operated by Domenico Bus Service, between Staten Island and Manhattan, as routes RM1, RM2, and RM3. |
|
|
| (327996) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by northshore on Thu Mar 29 14:51:58 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Thu Mar 29 14:46:13 2018. The original express bus route on Staten Island was the R8X to Downtown Brooklyn. It was later followed by the first Staten Island express bus route to Manhattan, the R9X |
|
|
| (327998) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Snilcher on Thu Mar 29 17:05:37 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by WayneJay on Thu Mar 29 11:01:24 2018. In an old busfan magazine there was a quiz that featured the question "What bus route belongs to one borough, runs entirely in another borough, and has a name containing the name of a third borough?"The answer, of course, at the time: B55 (Richmond Hill). |
|
|
| (328005) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Mar 30 08:38:35 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by MainR3664 on Thu Mar 29 09:31:52 2018. The Q58 has not run on Wyckoff Avenue for several years now. It runs on Ridgewood Place and therefore enters Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (328029) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Sat Mar 31 12:59:56 2018, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Spider-Pig on Fri Mar 30 08:38:35 2018. I suppose I could look up the service guide. But in any event, how long is it in Brooklyn? 2-3 blocks? |
|
|
| (328030) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Sat Mar 31 13:03:30 2018, in response to Express bus renumbering., posted by Chicago44 on Sat Mar 24 16:29:07 2018. another thing that's confusing me about the "SIM" renumbering is why is the X21 being renamed the SIM22?There's an existing x22, which is being broken up into the SIM25 & SIM26, but the x21 barely seems to be changing, ad the new plan has room for a SIM21- so why not just leave it alone- the 1,15,23,24, 30 & 31 are keeping their numbers, and the 23 & 24 are actually getting significant re-routes... |
|
|
| (350289) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Allen45 on Sat Jul 12 22:15:53 2025, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Tue Mar 27 16:49:44 2018. Another inconsistency worth noting is how NYC Omnibus’ franchises for the multi borough TB routes were MQ25 and BxQ19 whereas for Fifth Avenue Coach M31 was assigned to the franchise given to run buses between 57th street and 5th Avenue and either 81st and Northern or Elmhurst |
|
|
| (350290) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Allen45 on Sat Jul 12 22:21:30 2025, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by BusMgr on Thu Mar 29 14:46:09 2018. I wonder why the B72 was sold? I know there were plans to take over other NYCTA routes that failed during the same time period. Also talks of the Queebs operators taking over Fifth Avenue Coach routes failed.Later on, I also remember reading that Triboro Coach had a proposal to take over the Q88 around 1975 and that Queens Transit had a proposal to run a branch of route Q25/34 in competition with the Q44VP |
|
|
| (350291) | |
Re: Express bus renumbering. |
|
|
Posted by Snilcher on Sun Jul 13 01:07:45 2025, in response to Re: Express bus renumbering., posted by Allen45 on Sat Jul 12 22:21:30 2025. I wonder why the B72 was sold? I know there were plans to take over other NYCTA routes that failed during the same time period.One difference between the B72 and other B-routes is that the B72 ran nowhere near Brooklyn (although it originated as an extension/branch of what later became the B58, it was truncated in 1929). Queens Transit had a proposal to run a branch of route Q25/34 in competition with the Q44VP. (later Q74, now discontinued) Interesting. Was it just a branch that would run down Union Turnpike to the Kew Gardens station, or would it duplicate the city bus service on Vleigh Place? |
|
|