trainfan22 Posted July 4, 2011 Share #351 Posted July 4, 2011 Why should train signs even matter anymore in the IRT I bet a blind person can figure out their destination with the new countdown clocks they even feature re-routes so if I'm at Union Sq and theres a coming it won't say its a it'll be correct. People will have to LISTEN to announcements more then to avoid getting on the wrong train en-route to the wrong destination. Didn't the Redbirds have the rollsigns for a few decades on the ? I know there weren't digital signs at the time for the IRT but how was that handled? Back in the Redbird days, I recall one roll of the rollsigns being white and one half had the train info and the other had the train info. IDK about the terminal signs though. IIRC, one of the cars in the TOMC consist has the spilt rollsign I'm describing. Found a photo of it online.... http://picasaweb.google.com/mfoggin/RedbirdRollsign#5215167774585050898 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2 Train Master Posted July 4, 2011 Share #352 Posted July 4, 2011 During the days of the redbirds, there weren't any other options besides either changing the signs or leaving them and hoping riders knew where the trains were going. And if I recall correctly, someone here said that sometimes, only the first and last car (and sometimes the C/R's car) were changed to the correct reading. Thats a similar situation with the ( 95% of the time the entire consist has the incorrect northern terminal some may say 145th some say Bedford I don't ever recall seeing an entire ( train with the correct terminal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overclocked Posted July 4, 2011 Share #353 Posted July 4, 2011 Thats a similar situation with the ( 95% of the time the entire consist has the incorrect northern terminal some may say 145th some say Bedford I don't ever recall seeing an entire ( train with the correct terminal. Don't mean to interrupt but that is an oversimplification, i constantly use and there are at least 3-5 sets always with correct terminals, not everyday, but it's not 95% either. I agree though that it is annoying especially when they are different in the same car. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQ RIDE Posted July 6, 2011 Share #354 Posted July 6, 2011 If they go through with that new plan to upgrade the 62A's with digital signs and announcements; that would solve the flexibility problem. Of course, NYCT would have to install new wiring to install new destination signs on the R62A. The R44/R46 had motorized rollsigns, and NYCT simply used the existing wiring to power the LCD signs. The R62/R62A, on the other hand, have manual rollsigns. I agree that the would be the ideal route for the R62As. The and swap cars frequently, and it would be a total nightmare for subway operators if one or both of those lines were to switch to R62As. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest lance25 Posted July 6, 2011 Share #355 Posted July 6, 2011 Of course, NYCT would have to install new wiring to install new destination signs on the R62A. The R44/R46 had motorized rollsigns, and NYCT simply used the existing wiring to power the LCD signs. The R62/R62A, on the other hand, have manual rollsigns. The R62s and R68s have at least another 20 years left on them, so it's not like it would be a wasted expense, should they go forward with this proposal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQ RIDE Posted July 7, 2011 Share #356 Posted July 7, 2011 The R62s and R68s have at least another 20 years left on them, so it's not like it would be a wasted expense, should they go forward with this proposal. Actually, initial R62 and R62A replacement is currently planned for 2023, so it isn't quite 20 years from now. Probably by the time the R211s (R46 replacement) are delivered in 2015, a new contract number will be assigned for the R62/R62A replacement. Also, the red/green LED border would come in handy for the and , otherwise it was a big waste of money, since the and don't have diamond services anymore (don't think the ever had one). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IntExp Posted July 7, 2011 Share #357 Posted July 7, 2011 Actually, initial R62 and R62A replacement is currently planned for 2023, so it isn't quite 20 years from now. Probably by the time the R211s (R46 replacement) are delivered in 2015, a new contract number will be assigned for the R62/R62A replacement. This is the we are talking about people, which is the poster child of people who do not know how to adhere to a schedule. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted July 7, 2011 Share #358 Posted July 7, 2011 Actually, initial R62 and R62A replacement is currently planned for 2023, so it isn't quite 20 years from now. Probably by the time the R211s (R46 replacement) are delivered in 2015, a new contract number will be assigned for the R62/R62A replacement. Also, the red/green LED border would come in handy for the and , otherwise it was a big waste of money, since the and don't have diamond services anymore (don't think the ever had one). Just Relax dude, Stop going hard for new trains, you don't even live here, just relax 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted July 7, 2011 Author Share #359 Posted July 7, 2011 Just Relax dude, Stop going hard for new trains, you don't even live here, just relax I really don't think its that serious...... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted July 7, 2011 Share #360 Posted July 7, 2011 I really don't think its that serious...... I Know but hes foaming to the maximum death, We know the more NTT's are coming, all he gotta do is wait 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 7, 2011 Share #361 Posted July 7, 2011 Of course, NYCT would have to install new wiring to install new destination signs on the R62A. The R44/R46 had motorized rollsigns, and NYCT simply used the existing wiring to power the LCD signs. The R62/R62A, on the other hand, have manual rollsigns. I agree that the would be the ideal route for the R62As. The and swap cars frequently, and it would be a total nightmare for subway operators if one or both of those lines were to switch to R62As. I don't know how they plan to resolve that issue. When I sent in a suggestion to upgrade the cars with digital signs awhile ago, they said there weren't enough pins in the couplers for that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ABQ RIDE Posted July 7, 2011 Share #362 Posted July 7, 2011 I don't know how they plan to resolve that issue. When I sent in a suggestion to upgrade the cars with digital signs awhile ago, they said there weren't enough pins in the couplers for that. As a side question, why did NYCT choose to go with manual rollsigns on the R62/R62A/R68/R68A instead of motorized ones like what the R44/R46 originally had? Was there a reliability problem with the motorized signs? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted July 7, 2011 Share #363 Posted July 7, 2011 I don't know how they plan to resolve that issue. When I sent in a suggestion to upgrade the cars with digital signs awhile ago, they said there weren't enough pins in the couplers for that. they should do it though but if the pins are the problem, then they are screwed 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted July 7, 2011 Share #364 Posted July 7, 2011 As a side question, why did NYCT choose to go with manual rollsigns on the R62/R62A/R68/R68A instead of motorized ones like what the R44/R46 originally had? Was there a reliability problem with the motorized signs?Because they had too many problems with those motorized signs. they did not always line up in every car. Like if one would get stuck or something. And then, some would be stuck on a continuous scrolling mode. they should do it though but if the pins are the problem, then they are screwed They were able to somehow get the enablers in there. So I imagine, if it's a completely computerized system, they can bundle several functions in one pin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T to Dyre Avenue Posted July 11, 2011 Share #365 Posted July 11, 2011 Why would R62As go onto the Lex at all? That would just be a stupid decision considering ridership alone. The additional width of R142 and R142A doors allows for slightly lower dwell times, while the staggered door placement slightly increases standing room, or rather aids in spreading out standing passengers and making it easier for them to move to the centre of the car. Putting R62As on a Lexington Avenue line is not a stupid decision, as long as that line is not the . That's because the shares a significant amount of track and southern terminal with the and often both lines use each other's trains. And that's why it would be a stupid decision to put R62As on the . Only if R62As are assigned to both the and would it not be such a stupid decision. Except that there aren't enough R62As currently based in Corona to fully equip both lines, so that's just not happening. Meanwhile, the MTA is sending R142As to Kawasaki to be equipped with CBTC technology. Most of those cars are based out of Westchester Yard, home of the train, a line that's not getting CBTC any time soon. By having the and swap fleets, it's an almost even swap. And the can use the same LED circle/diamond markers currently used on the (7)/<7> because it also has a similar local/<6> express setup. Makes perfect sense to me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
m7zanr160s Posted July 12, 2011 Share #366 Posted July 12, 2011 Putting R62As on a Lexington Avenue line is not a stupid decision, as long as that line is not the . That's because the shares a significant amount of track and southern terminal with the and often both lines use each other's trains. And that's why it would be a stupid decision to put R62As on the . Only if R62As are assigned to both the and would it not be such a stupid decision. Except that there aren't enough R62As currently based in Corona to fully equip both lines, so that's just not happening. Meanwhile, the MTA is sending R142As to Kawasaki to be equipped with CBTC technology. Most of those cars are based out of Westchester Yard, home of the train, a line that's not getting CBTC any time soon. By having the and swap fleets, it's an almost even swap. And the can use the same LED circle/diamond markers currently used on the (7)/<7> because it also has a similar local/<6> express setup. Makes perfect sense to me. Me too. I don't know why this has been discussed for so long. Those LED's would be perfect for the . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R32 3838 Posted July 13, 2011 Share #367 Posted July 13, 2011 it would make perfect sense but we have to wait and see, the to me would be perfect because its not 24/7 but at the sametime the (2)/(5) shares the R142's, the would be okay but, the would make the most perfect sense but at the sametime you have those heavy crowds on the lex, thats why the R142's have wider doors for, so its a situation that the TA has to work on 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoking66 Posted July 17, 2011 Share #368 Posted July 17, 2011 ^ Not only that, but UES residents would get pissed off quite quickly if they were in essence "downgraded" to not-NTT cars. I can't quite imagine trying to run R62s on the Lex anymore; it's already insane with better-designed cars. I don't see why the (7)'s fleet couldn't get upgraded with CBTC unless there were some sort of technology hindrance, but I'm not an expert on train technology so I'm sure someone has a better understanding of why the MTA would rather swap fleets. Come to think about it, wasn't the equipped with CBTC-compatible R143s before CBTC went into service? It would make more sense to bring in the CBTC-compatible R188s before attempting to work with CBTC, at least having the Flushing Line outfitted by that point. But I guess money's the important factor right now. Oh well, it'll be a shame to see the Lex not be fully-NTT after almost a decade. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 17, 2011 Share #369 Posted July 17, 2011 :sigh: Why do people still assume that? They can either ride the trains or deal with the roads if they don't like it. They are not likely sending those R62As to the because of the sharing terminals and yards. So it has to be the or . Why you [in general] still think that UES riders would hate R62As is just nuts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East New York Posted July 17, 2011 Author Share #370 Posted July 17, 2011 ^ Not only that, but UES residents would get pissed off quite quickly if they were in essence "downgraded" to not-NTT cars. I can't quite imagine trying to run R62s on the Lex anymore; it's already insane with better-designed cars. I don't see why the (7)'s fleet couldn't get upgraded with CBTC unless there were some sort of technology hindrance, but I'm not an expert on train technology so I'm sure someone has a better understanding of why the MTA would rather swap fleets. Come to think about it, wasn't the equipped with CBTC-compatible R143s before CBTC went into service? It would make more sense to bring in the CBTC-compatible R188s before attempting to work with CBTC, at least having the Flushing Line outfitted by that point. But I guess money's the important factor right now. Oh well, it'll be a shame to see the Lex not be fully-NTT after almost a decade. Only the NTT trains are CBTC compatible. R62's are not. The R188's are essentially R142A's with full CBTC capabilities at delivery. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoking66 Posted July 17, 2011 Share #371 Posted July 17, 2011 I'm surprised that R62s couldn't be retrofitted with CBTC, though. Why do people still assume that? They can either ride the trains or deal with the roads if they don't like it. It comes off badly on the MTA. Service cuts are bad enough in the public's mind, let alone putting older rolling stock onto the busiest line in the system. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 17, 2011 Share #372 Posted July 17, 2011 again: would you rather have something or nothing? Yes those trains are old, what isn't? It's not like the redbirds are being brought back into service. Those R62As have at least 10-15 more years left [they are maybe 30~ years old now]. Most trains are retired at about 40 years of service and new cars aren't cheap. It's best to keep older cars running if it is still financially 'cheaper' to keep them in running order as opposed to buying new trains. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoking66 Posted July 17, 2011 Share #373 Posted July 17, 2011 again: would you rather have something or nothing? Yes those trains are old, what isn't? It's not like the redbirds are being brought back into service. Those R62As have at least 10-15 more years left [they are maybe 30~ years old now]. Most trains are retired at about 40 years of service and new cars aren't cheap. It's best to keep older cars running if it is still financially 'cheaper' to keep them in running order as opposed to buying new trains. I'll take whatever comes, although I have a preference for keeping the Lex NTT for capacity reasons (R142s and R142As handle crush loads better than R62s). However, I'm seeing this from a non-fan's point of view, and that's one of another con against the MTA. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
7LineFan Posted July 17, 2011 Share #374 Posted July 17, 2011 I'm surprised that R62s couldn't be retrofitted with CBTC, though. They couldn't have foreseen CBTC in the 1980s so they couldn't have designed for it. In order to retrofit the R62A for CBTC you would need to add computers to a car that frankly doesn't have the space for them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grand Concourse Posted July 17, 2011 Share #375 Posted July 17, 2011 I'll take whatever comes, although I have a preference for keeping the Lex NTT for capacity reasons (R142s and R142As handle crush loads better than R62s). However, I'm seeing this from a non-fan's point of view, and that's one of another con against the MTA. And as a 'typical rider's perspective' view, I don't think it will matter much at all. As long as the basic stuff like the climate control and doors work, then I don't see how much of a downgrade the R62A will be compared to the R142s. Look at Brighton R68s and R160s. It doesn't matter what runs there. People are still going to get on the trains. I don't believe people are that selective that they'd rather wait another 10 min for another train type to show up. So in the short run, people will be unhappy, but people complain a lot. Just make the most of it and take it for what it is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.