Jump to content
Attention: In order to reply to messages, create topics, have access to other features of the community you must sign up for an account.

Metro CSW

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,507 Excellent

About Metro CSW

  • Rank
    A former fan....

Profile Information

  • Location
    Everywhere and nowhere

Contact Methods

  • Skype

Recent Profile Visitors

10,493 profile views
  1. 4236 (B82 today), 7802 (maybe) & 7698 (B83 couple days) have readers. I think there's more out of ENY that has readers as of this month.
  2. my secondary theory would that the 140 cars (7961-8100) for the options. sorry I meant to say end at 7960 for the shuttle order.
  3. The 42nd Street Shuttle planned for 6 car trains or so the platforms of the reconstruction plan can hold six-car trains at both Grand Central and Times Square.
  4. I almost feel that the numbering is some kind of pattern or the 262s can be mixed in. LIke for example, if the six car sets of the 262 are on 4 trains (24 cars), then the numbering could maybe 7937-7959 and the rest of the base and first option could be within the 3328-4255(480+445) mostly ending at 4252. (Might be a different story if it's a 3 on 3 train) but who knows. Since the base order of those cars are said to be up to 504 cars. How the 211 numbering goes forward after 4256 could be anyone's crazy guesses for all we know. just a theory....
  5. https://new.mta.info/document/12706 page 33 for the map
  6. To earn his own; the typical way of saying this: If you can't take a little criticism, maybe YOU should go somewhere else. Good lord, that was a terrible designed map for a proposed route. Like a kindergardener trying to spell in the blackboard. Looks like the stock levels of Blockbuster. I didn't think lines would misused so much in my life. Almost like a crime graph marked across Brooklyn.
  7. Modifying Ulmer Park slightly or move it to ENY or Flatbush (why am I thinking FB, that's retarded) if it's a big enough demand for future route picks. With UP isn't almost seems political when it comes to buses they can handle. But they'll never lose the B6 which is financially understandable and obvious but who knows, I guess. I wouldn't be against the idea of B6 getting artics, no one would I would think, but it'll be a while before the surfaces a plan for a configuration/conversation, especially with the agency's financial track record. Who could possibly know at this rate? 1) It's not like a trying to announce when it will. 2) We acknowledge that it's not in the next CP, Thank you, Captain Obvious.... for the painfully reminder.
  8. I think it's safe to say that when the full installation and the actually OMNY card is revealed, it'll be truly feasible. I would think. Now? Not likely
  9. Sets that have been delivered and yet to be in service: 3288-3302. 3293-3302 in burn-in during most of this week. 3288-3292 maybe testing with another set.
  10. I like how these arguments just trails off the subject title in question. Bravo, guys lol. I simply think that the weekends don't really much demand unless it's a planned GO, obviously. Besides, that switch formation between Franklin Ave and Nostrand Ave don't need to be utilized if it's not peak hours; it'll just halt the trains unnecessarily when they can just go pass without waiting for a crossing train. It was always the that made it possible and I believe that was the brief reason why they cut it after 2010 regardless on finances but of course, brought it back for weekday demands. I think most of us know these reasons are obvious. No? Well.... ain't that something.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.