Jump to content

The 12 train


rfortyslant

Recommended Posts


Putting the (11) were sure lessen the confusion of the Flushing Local or Express. Best to wait when NTTs hit the (7).....

 

The signs on the NTTs can't fit the (11) sign on them, unless the get new ones that can or retrofit the current ones. I doubt the (MTA) is going to change the <7>, or thy would be changing the <6> too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Putting the (11) were sure lessen the confusion of the Flushing Local or Express. Best to wait when NTTs hit the (7).....
I don't believe you'll see any NTT cars in the next 5 years on the(7) according to the line super. The new barn was spec'd for 62As.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, renaming the <7> the (11) wouldn't solve anything because the crews don't have enough time to change the signs at the temrinal, the same problem as what exists now. There owuld be more confusion over (7)/11 than there is over (7)/<7> because people never trust the signs anyway. They know to listen to the conductor to ifnd out if the train is express or loco.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thats true....to an extent...during the weekdays you see alot of (J)(Z) trains running half the train will be signed up for the (J) and the other half will say (Z), what really matters is what the front of the train says....the side signs are wrong alot, I remember during the 9/11 service re-routes when the (E) was extended to Brooklyn, a train of R-46's pulled in to W4St, the only thing that said (E) was the front and the back....the entire trains LCD screens displayed (K) 8 Ave local

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I think the (8),(10),(11),(12),(13),(14),and (15) are a bad idea to redesignation these routes because it would just have too many lines and it would not fit all together in the termianls and lines and would not have space on the line. I think the (MTA) should have never added 10 through 15 rollsign on the R62/R62A. I hope (MTA) does not add more and more numbers on the rollsign on the R62/R62A and never plan to add more and more numbers then there will be no space on the line and it would not fit alltogther and it be a disaster. The (8) is unused but for now the (8) is planned to redesignation <6> express service but instead of redesignation the <6> express service then The MTA could change the plan and have (8) as a new route to skip stop with (4) and then it be a great idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the (8),(10),(11),(12),(13),(14),and (15) are a bad idea to redesignation these routes because it would just have too many lines and it would not fit all together in the termianls and lines and would not have space on the line. I think the (MTA) should have never added 10 through 15 rollsign on the R62/R62A. I hope (MTA) does not add more and more numbers on the rollsign on the R62/R62A and never plan to add more and more numbers then there will be no space on the line and it would not fit alltogther and it be a disaster. The (8) is unused but for now the (8) is planned to redesignation <6> express service but instead of redesignation the <6> express service then The MTA could change the plan and have (8) as a new route to skip stop with (4) and then it be a great idea.

 

Those were added "just in case"... there was never a plan to redesignate the lines... besides, there is no room on the R142s (and R412As, for that matter) to display double digit bullets, so say goodbye to all of them except the (8) and the (9), which I would have like to have seen on an R142 before it was retired...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those were added "just in case"... there was never a plan to redesignate the lines... besides, there is no room on the R142s (and R412As, for that matter) to display double digit bullets, so say goodbye to all of them except the (8) and the (9), which I would have like to have seen on an R142 before it was retired...

 

You are right since the R142s don't have room for two numbers I guess the (MTA) cannot redesignate and renumber the routes. The (MTA) only could save the (8) and (9) only because it not double numbers. I know back in May 1986 the Double letters became single letters. Well I guess the (MTA) cannot redesignate the numbers. The (MTA) could save (8) and (9) only because there are single numbers and there unused and leftovers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are right since the R142s don't have room for two numbers I guess the (MTA) cannot redesignate and renumber the routes. The (MTA) only could save the (8) and (9) only because it not double numbers. I know back in May 1986 the Double letters became single letters. Well I guess the (MTA) cannot redesignate the numbers. The (MTA) could save (8) and (9) only because there are single numbers and there unused and leftovers.

You forget the R62/As are still in existence.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know the R62/R62A still exsits but the (MTA) cannot redesignate and renumber the routes because the R142/R142A is there and anyways it be confusion.

There are some routes that don't use R142/As whatsoever, i.e. the (1), the (3), the (7)....

 

But anyways, about confusion, with transit, only stupid, ignorant people get confused, those who read, maps especially, will do just fine.

 

But, since R142/As can display nothing more than a single digit, then there would be no point.

 

The MTA wouldn't renumber or redesignate routes anyway because of their ignorance at times, but hey, who could dislike this announcement, "This is a Pelham Bay Park bound <6> train, making express stops in the Bronx."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are some routes that don't use R142/As whatsoever, i.e. the (1), the (3), the (7)....

 

But anyways, about confusion, with transit, only stupid, ignorant people get confused, those who read, maps especially, will do just fine.

 

But, since R142/As can display nothing more than a single digit, then there would be no point.

 

The MTA wouldn't renumber or redesignate routes anyway because of their ignorance at times, but hey, who could dislike this announcement, "This is a Pelham Bay Park bound <6> train, making express stops in the Bronx."

 

I love that annoucement:p:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know im late, but whats the Point of the (MTA) adding thes signs if they are not being used on the <5><6><7> I think

 

thats just a waste of money

 

(MTA) needs to bring back the <5>....that was use for to/from Flatbush Avenue during AM and PM rush hours and limited PM rush hours to Nereid Avenue-238th Street

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(MTA) needs to bring back the <5>....that was use for to/from Flatbush Avenue during AM and PM rush hours and limited PM rush hours to Nereid Avenue-238th Street

 

weel wha can we do, protest lol.. MTA already killed the Diamond <5> . I mean even the <B><D> and <M> . Since they just wanted used for Express service, n which one like doesnt have many transfers like the (6) on Pelham Side and (7) on flushing

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.