Eric B

[Wouldn't be surprised if they resurrect more 96's, to be what replaces them.] I wasn't being totally serious, but then aren't there a bunch of reserve stuff in Eastchester storage? It just seemed the were holding onto the '96's forever, while Transit held on to the 97's and 98/99's only to get rid of nearly all the '97's, and now they're taking the '98's back? I just never understood why it mattered how bad MTAB's maintenance of them is, when these are all the oldest fleets and next to go out anyway. It wouldn't affect Transit if they didn't keep taking them back from MTAB.

Wouldn't be surprised if they resurrect more 96's, to be what replaces them, then.

That's pretty much the way things were back in the really old days, before letter and number designations were the common route identifiers. (Even the IND letters were originally "markers" for the towers). I guess that's what may have worked back then, but the thinking is very different now.

Wonder if they'll end up ever looking at buying used cars from somewhere.

How about, if they ever did go through with the idea to close Rikers, build a bridge from the Bronx, and that would be a shortcut straight to LGA.

What LED lights? (Internal, headlights, tail lights, guard lights, end sign?)

Since the (F)s are running Bway-West End this weekend, then the ones running to 96th are like a combination of the original 🅣 and the future phase 3 and 4 . (I always wished they kept is as West End).

Like a mashup of an ADB front (RTS) with an early old look (rounded back).

http://brooklyn.news12.com/story/36340007/q-train-to-suspend-overnight-service-at-bk-stations-for-repairs

Yeah; earlier, when someone criticized your idea, I alluded to it apparently not being as far out as people think. But I still don't see how it would work, in practice, with the on the same track.

Wait; I must have missed something. (Gets so hard to tell the difference between actual plans and people ideas of where they think things should go, as it's all mixed together). There's an actual plan to run an up 2nd Ave.? What is the purpose of this? Because of the increase for the ? (I would think they would instead send some (M)'s up there instead; especially since all the displaced riders will be depending on it, and Queens Blvd is already where the service gets hung up the most. I had actually heard of a wild idea to run the and at the same time, with one going to 96th, though I don't know how they would manage that on 6th ave).

I thought that power problem was fixed. I would say, since they apparently insist on having those few oddball 179's in Pitkin, that they should be exclusively for the Rock Park shuttle.

Miscellaneous equipment ("C Division") crews. Not sure how it's assigned among them.

And why do they have to cross the and over to 2nd Av, affecting the instead of just turning them at W4th (which used to be the terminal in shutdown, before 34th became the long term shutdown terminal). Th is affected by stuff nowhere near where it runs, and it's the first thing mentioned on the news. "(M) service suspended due to train with Mechanical problems at DeKalb". I'm like "Huh"? ("Do they mean the ?") Again, do they plan to do this when the is shutdown, and the is covering the service, and with perhaps more trains?

And extra 15 minutes seems like a long time when you've already been riding through the traffic from Manhattan, in addition to however long it takes to get from 64th or Hamilton Pl (which are closest to Fresh Pond), to Woodhaven, and in all the traffic; only to come back all that distance. That sounds like it is probably close to a half hour out of the way. I realized there may not have been enough ridership in Glendale by itself, but I always used to suggest extending it also, perhaps to somewhere in that Woodhaven corridor where all those other routes go. They could replace something, like perhaps cutting back the QM12 that ends around there in that loop.

It's not cutting off Glendale; that's the end of the line. I'm talking about the Eliot portion, where it goes past Ridgewood, Maspeth and Glendale first, to Rego Park, and then backtracks via Eliot. Eliot could probably be served by having another line swing over.

That still seems like a long time, which would be shortened by picking up Fresh Pond directly from Maspeth.

But yes, that's just the news reporting that. It seems they too heard the earlier report as a positive declaration that the was specific. Did Lhota or the ever make another statement making it specific? Again, I think the may have been what was in mind, but the currently is the only full "mainline" route running with less cars, and so is the most obvious one that first comes to mind. They might not right away think the would need full length trains, but of course, it might when the is shut down.

Raising the height of equipment? I understood it was a width problem, where car bodies without the side curvature of the R44's and after couldn't clear. From what I saw in the initial report everyone want on, the was simply used as a general example of a line that COULD be lengthened because of capacity in the stations (where can't). Unless there was some further statement saying they would specifically lengthen it. If the lengthening is connected with the shutdown, then I would think the is what they would really be thinking of.

Permanently? Then never again any museum train through there? Or a work train that might use older B Div cars? What exactly did they do in that tunnel that can't be undone?

All of those expresses seemed fast, except for the whole McDonald/Church Ave. area diversion (and Cortelyou for the BM's). That's where you lost a lot of time, and then it would feel like it was now slower than the train. I always wished they would stay on the expwy and cut straight across Beverley.

They need to find a way to straighten it out so that it doesn't go all the way to Rego Park ad then come back west. It should cut off somewhere around Maspeth, and maybe swing something else over to serve Eliot Ave.

But they insist on making the new 116th St. addon an island platform, which requires redoing the tunnel in that area. I think they should just make it side platforms, which would be easier.

I saw one heading out of the yard at 8:20, when I was waiting to get into BWJ, and went down the express track, so if that's what you're talking about, it was gone already.