RollOver

I wonder if the R32s on the are able to do a 4/4 position like the does? (I know R42s have different positions)

Yes. However, from what I read from some T/O like last year or the year before on Facebook, he said something like "Simply put, SMEEs = 5/3 position and NTTs = 4/4 position on the (J)".

But this is all I can remember though.

Those R62As are taking a beating like the R142As on the line did.

What a demanding line the is.

The remaining 224 R32 cars were originally from Jamaica.

The was suppose to use R40/42s exclusively (which it did for a brief period in December 2008), but shortly afterward, those R40/42s were transferred to Jamaica, and Jamaica gave up its R32s for 207th.

I remember a couple of months ago (in this thread), I actually said they should avoid sending SAS to make a transfer with the Lex at 125th. Keep SAS on 2nd Ave and send it straight up to the Bronx via 3rd Ave, with a transfer to the at 3rd Ave-138th St and a transfer with the and at 3rd Ave-149th St.

Much better.

14 requests though? I'll do them, but next time, limit them to 5 please? Thanks

Ok, I will next time and onwards.

My request of R142 electronic side signages (after you finish your finals):

2 TO FLATBUSH AV

2 B'WAY-7 AV EXP

2 EASTERN PKWY LCL

2 TO FLATBUSH AV

2 B'WAY-7 AV LCL

2 EASTERN PWKY LCL

2 TO WAKEFIELD-241

2 B'WAY-7 AV EXP

2 WHITE PLAINS RD LCL

2 TO WAKEFIELD-241

2 B'WAY-7 AV LCL

2 WHITE PLAINS RD LCL

4 TO UTICA AV

4 LEXINGTON AV EXP

4 EASTERN PKWY EXP

4 TO NEW LOTS AV

4 LEXINGTON AV LCL

4 EASTERN PKWY LCL

4 TO WOODLAWN

4 LEXINGTON AV EXP

4 JEROME AV LCL

4 TO WOODLAWN

4 LEXINGTON AV LCL

4 JEROME AV LCL

5 TO FLATBUSH AV

5 BRONX-LEX AV EXP

5 EASTERN PKWY EXP

5 TO FLATBUSH AV

5 LEXINGTON AV EXP

5 EASTERN PKWY EXP

5 TO BOWLING GREEN

5 BRONX LCL

5 LEXINGTON AV EXP

5 TO EASTCHETSER-DYRE

5 LEXINGTON AV EXP

5 BRONX LCL

5 TO EASTCHESTER-DYRE

5 LEX AV-BRONX EXP

5 TO NEREID AV

5 LEX AV-BRONX EXP

Take your time after your finals, please and thanks.

I'm saying in general.

I know, my fault. I edited my post to make up for it.

To be honest, it differs depending on the situation. If I can remember correctly, there is a video on YouTube showing a R143 on the that had door problems, so it was taken OOS and workers had to stay by the open door while the train was moving.

And to whom said that R32's need to get off off the , what in the world makes you think that would be a good idea? The R32's are on their last legs, they've been in the system for nearly 60 years. This is part of the reason why the MTA wanted to balance the fleet between the and , so that riders on the would stop complaining and the R32's don't have to use their A/C 24/7 and not be underground all the time.

When the isn't running, almost all of its trains are stored outside...

But nevertheless, you're right. The line is entirely underground and the cars it uses have been around for half a century.

I do think that the more effective terminal would have been at 3rd Avenue-149th Street.

Dead ass, me too.

I'm surprised to learn about the aforementioned glitch with the bullet on the forums.

I'm starting to think that I should have posted this in the Subway Random Thoughts Thread, but whatever.

Continue the discussion.

This is a surprise.

It really does look beautiful. I love it.

Had a huge blast on the today lol. Haven't rode the line since the so-called R188s began running on the line (and at the same time, R62As getting their half-width cabs converted to full-width cabs). But l was glad, the R62A train I took had an RFW on the Flushing-bound side, unlike the Manhattan-bound side.

You can't turn trains at Canal Street (unless you mean Chambers Street)...and you can't run Far Rockaway trains express in Brooklyn because the headways are a good 15-20+ minutes (like Lefferts Boulevard trains are), which leads to the Brooklyn local stations having 15-20+ minute waits as you're having half of the trains express and the other half of the trains local...

Simply keep all trains local whenever you suspend the entirely.

Fumigation doesn't take that long in most cases.. well on NTT at least. I ridden a 160 that pulled in to 179th and left the station to relay under a minute. On NTT all the crew has to do is just step out there cab and look though the windows on the end of the cars which can see though the entire train...

 

The reason there having delays is because trains have to go extra slow though the work area.. not really cause of fumigation. They could just simply make the mostly 160s on weekends if that is the issue, the weekend a while back where went to 179th it was mostly 160s on the line for whatever reason.

Oh. I thought the T/O or C/R are suppose to leave their cab for a little bit and walk/pass through the entire train first to check for passengers still sitting down. Some passengers don't listen, even with the NTTs having automated announcements.

EDIT...

Wait, never mind. I think I restated what you said.

Why do they continue to run the to 71st Ave when the and are running local?

 

 

Delays [/size] Posted: 11/21/2015 10:03AM

 

Due to track maintenance between Queens Plaza and Forest Hills-71 Av, , and trains are running with delays in both directions.

Allow additional travel time.

I feel you. They are better off extending the to/from 179th Street whenever weekend work requires all Queens Boulevard trains to run local or express in either one or both directions because fumigation at any terminal takes at most 5 minutes or so. And having a station being set up as a terminal while also through service is a bad idea.

Why does it look like the wall was blown off.

It does look like it was blown off, but I doubt.

And everyone else jumping onto Javier just let him be.

Yeah. Javier isn't bad as I made him out to be before.

Was the or the affected?

I.R.L., I may actually get my wish.

Can't tell if you're being sarcastic, but this is what proves my point about you, CenSin, especially that smirk on your face. Express service=great in your mind. Nothing else except for express service is all you're worried about.

I just wish you see how wrong it all is given the current track layout and current service patterns on each line, but whatever floats your boat...

@Wallyhorse: Look, while your ideas aren't too far off, however, your idea would just have trains being rerouted here and there, and also delaying other lines due to bottlenecks (such as West 4th Street where the would have to merge with not only the , but also the as well, and it can delay all other trains behind). Think about the real world Rogers Junction (not my world, but the real world Rogers Junction) for a moment.

In addition, since you're still all about worrying of express trains mentality and the fact that you keep on mentioning them time after time, I might as well just simply entertain your own nonsense:

- is restored and is extended to/from Brooklyn, allowing either the or to run express on the Culver Line. is rerouted back to its old route. is cut back from 18th Avenue to Church Avenue.

- is extended to Coney Island, with some rush hour dropouts at Brighton Beach. R160s should probably run on the line, and give its R68/As to the , so swapping trains at Coney Island with the is easier (at least during rush hours and maybe off-peak).

I think that's about it. However, I don't think Jamaica can maintain R68/As at all.

They really, really need to get rid of a few ridiculous programs and transfers on the R142, like the to Woodlawn. (Yes, there is a program for that last time I checked.)

Nice avatar, Javier lol.

Yawn.

Softly speaking, I don't care if my ideas are fantasy or not. I am glad that they are. This is the proposal thread anyway. You should have posted your aforementioned thought in the Random Thoughts Thread then if you didn't want me to object to you. Yet, I remember one time you claimed that you like some of my reconfigurations so.

I stand up for myself and my own posts. With all due respect, CenSin, you're a joke, put simply. I mean you want to inconvenience hundreds, if not, thousands of passengers by implement express service on the Culver Line in Brooklyn even though there's been well over millions of threads in the forums that it can't really happen at any time soon for reasons A, B, C, D, E, F, G etc. I get that you love express trains and all, but it's not always a good idea, especially when it comes to the Culver Line. You want to sacrifice something that's right for something that's wrong.

@CenSin: So then have each train crew get to their originals/terminals a bit early so that they can be able to pull their trains out in time, or at least, have the train leave the terminal about 2 minutes early. Thoughts?

And no, I won't implement express service on the Culver Line at all, ever. Because I have already extended the to/from 18 Avenue with a new track layout design between 18 Avenue and Ditmas Avenue, so that Coney Island-bound trains are no longer held by any sort of fumigation and relaying delays caused by service at Church Avenue. Forget about the political pressure.

The only way to implement express service on the in Brooklyn and cut the back to Church Avenue is to restore the and have the revert back to its old, useless route. I won't consider doing any of that either.

It's easier to get a head flipping one coin than two heads flipping two coins? How do you figure that? I guess having both Manhattan-bound trains come/leave Brighton Beach and Sheepshead Bay at the same time isn't good enough for you then I suppose. So you prefer that the should be extended to Coney Island so that you can have your one-seat express ride or what?