T to Dyre Avenue

No. I don’t work for RTO. I don’t have to know what any of those terms are or answer any of them off the top of my head, thank you very much. And I’m not even gonna bother to look them up. What matters is I ride the trains as a member of the public and as someone who’s shown a strong interest in the system and grown to appreciate its history (unlike most riders). I’m goddamn sure if you asked any of the riding public what any of those terms mean, you’d get blank stares. But like many other people in this city, I recognize when the system has shortcomings and want to see better. So I’ve made suggestions on here and spoke to and wrote my elected state representatives (not like they really give two shits, but I guess that’s par for the course). I might even agree with suggestions made by others, like I did with @RandomRider0101 upthread. He conceded his point about 9-car trains and was willing to move on. And so was I. The first time you responded my previous was fine and your points were fair enough. I was willing to accept the reasons you gave and move on. But then you had to go and quote my post this second time in a far more obnoxious and less respectful tone. And that is not fine. I really don’t appreciate it.

Excuse me, but I’ve been riding the subway for the better part of the past 45 years. I think I know a hell of a lot more than “squat” about the system when I show interest in it. And I really don’t think making a suggestion to add more capacity to the line should be dismissed as being a “buff who don’t know squat!” You see, this agency (and its predecessors) has a history of saying “no can do” to suggestions made by the riding public, even when other transit agencies prove successful with the exact same suggestions. At least give me a real reason why 9-car 179 trains would be more trouble than it’s worth to operate. Instead of saying I know squat. Is that really too much to ask?

It really shouldn’t be to hard to do this either.

Fully agree. GO or no GO, the always seems to get delayed. How many times can we keep running it the same way and expecting different/better results?

Yes! Why can’t they just reposition the cameras?

How did the bridge end the possibility of building a parallel subway tunnel between Brooklyn and Staten Island? Like this - https://www.vanshnookenraggen.com/_index/2022/02/a-tunnel-too-far-part-2-hylans-dream/ I don't disagree that it wouldn't be cheap. But I think the real problem is a lack of will more than anything else.

It’s legitimate.

Southbound trains should hold at either 36th OR 59th, not both.

What does ANY of this have to do with replacing the tracks in the 63rd St Tunnel which runs NOWHERE near South Brooklyn? Running the in place of the (you’ve posted this for the zillionth time now!) will absolutely NOT any be any better at addressing any issues that may result from this project. Completely moot point now that Max Rose and Mathylde Frontus are out of office and Justin Brannan and Andrew Gounardes aren’t still actively pursuing it. If they don’t care anymore, then why do you?

Riders on the didn’t seem to like it when they got the R62As back from the . At least, the ones who posted on here they didn’t seem to.

For me, the best news would be is if the new City Ticket includes a free transfer to the subway or buses. Then I’d definitely use the LIRR more. Weather permitting, of course, because my nearest station is Auburndale, and I live near 16th Avenue, so walking down to 39th Avenue is a long way to go, no matter which way I go.

Around 2016-17, when the R62As were being prepared for, then transferred back to the line, there was plenty of complaining from line riders about them. Search the Subway threads from about that time and you'll find no shortage of posts complaining about it. BART basically has several branch lines that converge into one main line through Oakland and SF, so every piece of equipment they have can show up on any of their lines. For CTA, it's not uncommon for them to transfer trains from one line to another. But it's rare that it will be older cars replacing newer cars. That was done with some 2600-series cars being sent to the Orange Line to replace newer 3200-series cars, which were in turn sent to the Blue Line.

I’m starting to get used to the “SI” display. I wouldn’t mind if they started to switch to using that designation officially on all printed documents related to the (maps, station signs, etc.) rather than change the trains’ displays.

I always wondered if SEPTA would consider ordering its own version of the R211 with an orange front and seats as the replacement for the B-4 cars. Having rode the subways in Philly many times, including regularly in 1996-98 when I went to college there, it doesn’t seem like there’s anything unique about the Broad Street Line that would prevent NYC B-Division subway stock from running there. They might need a power upgrade on Broad St to accept New Technology trains, like they had to do in the Rockaways in order for R160s, R179s and R211s on the . Yes. Other than the upcoming Alstom trolleys, the only talk of new SEPTA transit rail equipment I’ve been hearing about are replacements for the M-4 cars. But I for one was surprised to read that that they’re talking about replacing the M-4 cars and not the B-4 cars, even though the M-4 cars are 15 years newer than their Broad St counterparts. I guess the M-4 cars really are that bad.

They couldn’t really do that back in December 2001 because they still had the in South Brooklyn during midday hours as well as rush to compensate for the and being shut out of Brooklyn until 2004 due to Manhattan Bridge work.