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.

Will the (2)&(5) lines receive R62A's, & will the (7) Line Receive R142s &/or R142As?


r40s 4501

Recommended Posts


  • Replies 115
  • Created
  • Last Reply

No (2)(5) is R142 and R62A for (7) with future of R188. Tho there is plans to send the extra R62As from the (7) to ether 148/Livonia, 242nd/137 or Union Port/180th according to a document i saw on the t/a site..

 

Corrected for you:

 

 

 

I should have been a English major...

 

 

 

there was no need for that bro, he always does that lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are (2)(5) lines get r62a and is the (7)line get r142 or r142a

 

O.o lolwut?

 

Will the (2) and (5) lines get R62A's and will the (7) line get R142's or R142A's?

Corrected :)

 

 

and no, something else is happening

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Corrected :)

 

The apostrophes in the car designations are incorrect, actually. 's is akin to saying "is". Compare the following sentences:

 

  • There's a chance of rain on Saturday.

  • There is a chance of rain on Saturday.

 

 

Now lets take what you thought to be correct: "Will the (7) line get R142's or R142A's?" We can expand that sentence the following way: "Will the (7) line get R142 is or R142A is?" Doesn't make sense now, does it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The apostrophes in the car designations are incorrect, actually. 's is akin to saying "is". Compare the following sentences:

 

  • There's a chance of rain on Saturday.

  • There is a chance of rain on Saturday.

 

 

Now lets take what you thought to be correct: "Will the (7) line get R142's or R142A's?" We can expand that sentence the following way: "Will the (7) line get R142 is or R142A is?" Doesn't make sense now, does it?

 

But plurals of numerals have an apostrophe, don't they?

 

  • 3 3's vs

  • 3 3s

 

 

Then again, could be a regional difference. The British in Birmingham recently got rid of the apostrophe. At least for possessives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The apostrophes in the car designations are incorrect, actually. 's is akin to saying "is". Compare the following sentences:

 

  • There's a chance of rain on Saturday.

  • There is a chance of rain on Saturday.

 

 

Now lets take what you thought to be correct: "Will the (7) line get R142's or R142A's?" We can expand that sentence the following way: "Will the (7) line get R142 is or R142A is?" Doesn't make sense now, does it?

 

What 7LineFan said:

But plurals of numerals have an apostrophe, don't they?

 

* 3 3's vs

* 3 3s

So.....

Will the (7) line get R142's or R142A's? is correct B)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What 7LineFan said:

But plurals of numerals have an apostrophe, don't they?

 

* 3 3's vs

* 3 3s

So.....

Will the (7) line get R142's or R142A's? is correct B)

 

It's unnecessary and advised against.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see the (2) nor the (5) swapping their R142 cars with the (7) and their R62A cars at all. In fact I'm reading reports that the (7) will get converted R142A cars from the (6) and not the R142s. I don't know, it's too early to tell.

 

Back to topic, the (2)(5) will keep their R142s. I don't think most passengers would be too happy to see cars other than R142 on the (2)(5). (7) will get R188s in which I have no clue what they look like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see the (2) nor the (5) swapping their R142 cars with the (7) and their R62A cars at all. In fact I'm reading reports that the (7) will get converted R142A cars from the (6) and not the R142s. I don't know, it's too early to tell.

 

Back to topic, the (2)(5) will keep their R142s. I don't think most passengers would be too happy to see cars other than R142 on the (2)(5). (7) will get R188s in which I have no clue what they look like.

 

 

I agree, I think it is most likely it will be the R142As from the (6) that will be moved to the (7) so it would be a direct fleet swap. The (6) can also use those R62As with the LED signs so they won't have confusions about the local or express in the Bronx. Not to mention how much of a pita it would be to change so many strip maps if you have the (2)/(5) R142s sent to the (7).

(2)/(5) needs NTTs because they both share the same terminals and yards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree, I think it is most likely it will be the R142As from the (6) that will be moved to the (7) so it would be a direct fleet swap. The (6) can also use those R62As with the LED signs so they won't have confusions about the local or express in the Bronx. Not to mention how much of a pita it would be to change so many strip maps if you have the (2)/(5) R142s sent to the (7).

(2)/(5) needs NTTs because they both share the same terminals and yards.

 

Where the problem lies in your suggestion is the fact that (6) riders like their NTTs. If the R142As were moved off the (6), the MTA would never hear the end of it. Keep the NTTs on the (6).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that should be a reason, but worst comes worse, the (6) still sends out their R142As and the (4) will then take on the R62As and the (6) takes on the (4)'s NTT.

But either way the (2)/(5) has to stay as is for flexibility at the terminals.

 

Finally, imo, I don't think the MTA should care about what 'riders prefer', the riders should be happy they even have a train. Plus the R62As are not that bad and the 6 only stopped running them like 6 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally I don't think the MTA should care about what 'riders prefer', the riders should be happy they even have a train.

 

+1

 

The subway ain't about preference, it's about Rapid Transit. Deal with what they give you B)

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.