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.

R62/R62A Getting new rollsign


R33WF

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 105
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Oh NO!! Its looks terroriable like that! Even tho it helps people to indenify the route and where its heading aye!! The ones on the R26-36 were much better the this!

 

So is this the only (1) to be on the (1)?

 

Nice Catch!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh NO!! Its looks terroriable like that! Even tho it helps people to indenify the route and where its heading aye!!

 

So is this the only (1) to be on the (1)?

 

Nice Catch!

 

so far it is the only one i saw that has the new sign

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well why does the 62s need to get em only, not the others...

 

I really Hope that no others get this I Think It looks Horrable like that. i hope they dont stick with this i mean whats if there a emergancy and they take the 1 to Flatbush or New Lots then the'll have a (1) saying Chamers and its suppost Says FlatBush Or New Lots

i for one dont like it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really Hope that no others get this I Think It looks Horrable like that. i hope they dont stick with this i mean whats if there a emergancy and they take the 1 to Flatbush or New Lots then the'll have a (1) saying Chamers and its suppost Says FlatBush Or New Lots

i for one dont like it

If this gets through, they will have rollsigns that would show the (1) going to places like New Lots, Utica, Flatbush or whatever godforesaken place the (1) could go to. I think that was the intention, because apparently some riders don't know where the train would go. (Lame excuse, the side rollsigns have a good amount of information)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this gets through, they will have rollsigns that would show the (1) going to places like New Lots, Utica, Flatbush or whatever godforesaken place the (1) could go to. I think that was the intention, because apparently some riders don't know where the train would go. (Lame excuse, the side rollsigns have a good amount of information)

That would require a lot of signs. To me, as long as people look at the side signs, they should be fine. While it MIGHT (if at all) be helpful, the (MTA) should not make this a top priority. And if a train IS rerouted, the side signs also couldn't be changed in time like on the 142/A. One more thought: what about changing the hind rollsign once the TO changes ends? If that isn't changed, people entering the station facing the back of the train would get confused

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If this gets through, they will have rollsigns that would show the (1) going to places like New Lots, Utica, Flatbush or whatever godforesaken place the (1) could go to. I think that was the intention, because apparently some riders don't know where the train would go. (Lame excuse, the side rollsigns have a good amount of information)

 

Besides if its going to be on all routes then that could mean that the Roll SIgn could take up a lot of room in the roll sign cabinet? Besides is it rly only going to be (1)(3)(7)? The (6) may get its R62As back when (7) goes CBTC, and who knows about the (2)(4)(5). Not rly the (9)..

 

Maybe leave the Roll SIgn Route how it is and add the designation on the bottom.

 

@7LineFan Did it rly had it? I thought it was LOCAL | EXPRESS on the bottom? :confused: have a pic?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Besides if its going to be on all routes then that could mean that the Roll SIgn could take up a lot of room in the roll sign cabinet? Besides is it rly only going to be (1)(3)(7)? The (6) may get its R62As back when (7) goes CBTC, and who knows about the (2)(4)(5). Not rly the (9)..

 

Maybe leave the Roll SIgn Route how it is and add the designation on the bottom.

 

@7LineFan Did it rly had it? I thought it was LOCAL | EXPRESS on the bottom? :confused: have a pic?

Who knows, but it does look like a test, given the fact that it is the only car in this train to have it. And it probably will, given a variety of probable destinations. It's a load of bull, the numbers will be small and the destination won't be readable until the train is at most 20 feet away from you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who knows, but it does look like a test, given the fact that it is the only car in this train to have it. And it probably will, given a variety of probable destinations. It's a load of bull, the numbers will be small and the destination won't be readable until the train is at most 20 feet away from you.

 

Problem is that people are just to lazy to read the side sign. Thats why lots of em ask people where this train is going and crap!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it looks cool, but now the rollsigns will have to be very long to hold all the commom terminals the a train could use. I think the never should have removed the destination rollsign like they did from the R40 up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, firstly it looks terrible. Secondly, the (1) doesn't terminate at Chambers street. Thirdly, they would need too many roll signs to use that. Fourthly, nice catch.

 

Yes It can end at Chambers if there was a G/O at ether SF or alone Brooklyn.

 

I hope the T/A doesnt plan to use former end stations..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I'm in the minority here. I don't completely hate it at all, it's very useful. But I'm not the rollsign's greatest fan either. This will HELP on (3) G.O.s that during the weekday midday, end at Utica Avenue. They never change the signs in time on the R62s. Let's see where this goes. I'm holding complete judgment until I see some more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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