R44 Front Car with LCD?

[mark1447 685]

Ive seen this Loads of times through the yrs, thought it would be good to figure out why the (NYCT) had it like this:

 

From the 207th Street Yard, during GOH, 1990

R44 314

 

 

and did the MTA really had those small digits for the car numbers?

[Radioguy 2]

I remember riding those and being annoyed that I couldn't tell what it was until it was really close. Those LEDs were really illegible at the tunnel entrances. That's also still a problem with the current 160s. As nice as they are. Colors are far more visible at a distance.

[Joe 781]

The LED "rollsigns" on the front are a mush at a distance, not to mention they're all red. Don't know if it's a 2 or a 5 coming.

[N-Trizzy2609 11]

I HATE one colored LED/LCD!!! For Christ Sakes make em' colored already!!. That way if it Brown it an coming or if it's green I know a damn is near.

[mark1447 685]

That LED from the front of that car, looks soo old tech, i wonder why the MTA added it there, if they were gonna use rollsigns anyways?

[Eric B 1,073]

This was before GOH, and they were testing it out, and after deciding against it, then stuck with rollsigns. (and it's not LED's or LCD's, but rather frontlit flipdots, just like on the buses. The side signs on this train had that too, but without the light).

[Pablo M 201 35]

That looks cool though. Very retro. I like it. If only they sticked with it.

[Guest Charles]

The R44s used to have 3-digit car numbers, but during their overhaul from 1990-1992, the MTA replaced the 3 digit car numbers with their current 4 digit car numbers from 52xx to 54xx. However ,the R44s on the Staten Island Railway still retain their 3 digit car numbers. Also in this overhaul, the MTA switched the the flipdot to a rollsign in the front but did viceversa for the side signs.

Personally, just a flipdot could be hard to see. I prefer the big colored circles. After all, the colors are the symbol of the train's route. Hate to see the Lexington Avenue line becoming "red."

[mark1447 685]

The R44s used to have 3-digit car numbers, but during their overhaul from 1990-1992, the MTA replaced the 3 digit car numbers with their current 4 digit car numbers from 52xx to 54xx. However ,the R44s on the Staten Island Railway still retain their 3 digit car numbers. Also in this overhaul, the MTA switched the the flipdot to a rollsign in the front but did viceversa for the side signs.

Personally, just a flipdot could be hard to see. I prefer the big colored circles. After all, the colors are the symbol of the train's route. Hate to see the Lexington Avenue line becoming "red."

 

ya tech those days were not so good, and was this train in revenue service?

[Guest Charles]

I don't think that train went into revenue service, possibly it was just a test by the MTA? I don't think it ever left the yard, but R44s before the overhaul I'm pretty sure used the color sign.

[metsfan 2]

That looks cool though. Very retro. I like it. If only they sticked with it.

 

Only if backlit with proper route colors.

 

- A

[Radioguy 2]

I don't think that train went into revenue service, possibly it was just a test by the MTA? I don't think it ever left the yard, but R44s before the overhaul I'm pretty sure used the color sign.

 

You missed my post above. I believe I rode an A with this LED rollsign. It was in the 90's, and I got on at Fulton-Nassau to the Rockaways. It was definitely in revenue service at some point, because there would have been no other way I'd recognize it. The same is true of the R-110B, which I had never knew existed until I stepped on board one at Wavecrest.

 

You would think that with the issue of illegible rollsigns at distances, and the easy recognition of color, that the current issue of the red rollsigns would have featured various colored LEDs at least.

[INDman 414]

That R44 did not have an LED sign, it used a metal flip dot sign like the older buses have now. I think the R110A was the first subway ca with an LED front sign.

[Radioguy 2]

Well, the sign it did have as shown above, was just as illegible as an LED one.

[INDman 414]

I would guess so, the ones they have on the older buses are crap. Even at night you can't see them too well, I just wish I could have seen what they looked like with rollsigns. I do think that the NTTs should have stuck with rollsigns at least in the front and sing the excuse that they take time to change does not work since alot of places have computer controlled signs now.

[7LineFan 256]

I would guess so, the ones they have on the older buses are crap. Even at night you can't see them too well, I just wish I could have seen what they looked like with rollsigns. I do think that the NTTs should have stuck with rollsigns at least in the front and sing the excuse that they take time to change does not work since alot of places have computer controlled signs now.

 

It kinda does. It's a lot simpler to type in a few keystrokes, and it's a nuisance to change every single rollsign. Also computer controlled signs have barcodes on the rollsign to identify it to the computer, and if that barcode gets dirty, there goes the rollsign. While rollsigns may look better, I think the LCD's were the right way to go.

[BroadwayBuffer 40]

It kinda does. It's a lot simpler to type in a few keystrokes, and it's a nuisance to change every single rollsign. Also computer controlled signs have barcodes on the rollsign to identify it to the computer, and if that barcode gets dirty, there goes the rollsign. While rollsigns may look better, I think the LCD's were the right way to go.

 

For the side-signs, electronic is the way to go for that reason, but not so for the front. Those problems wouldn't effect front rollsigns. They're easier to read from a distance and they display the correct the route-color instead of having red for each route. Even if the LEDs were able to display correct colors, there would still be legibility issues with colors like gray and brown. If not rollsigns, having an LCD screen with a route-bullet either top-center like the current LEDs or on the side where the flag and logo are would be a good move.

[7LineFan 256]

For the side-signs, electronic is the way to go for that reason, but not so for the front. Those problems wouldn't effect front rollsigns. They're easier to read from a distance and they display the correct the route-color instead of having red for each route. Even if the LEDs were able to display correct colors, there would still be legibility issues with colors like gray and brown. If not rollsigns, having an LCD screen with a route-bullet either top-center like the current LEDs or on the side where the flag and logo are would be a good move.

 

Yeah... I was thinking they should have gotten LCD screens.

[Eric B 1,073]

For the side-signs, electronic is the way to go for that reason, but not so for the front. Those problems wouldn't effect front rollsigns. They're easier to read from a distance and they display the correct the route-color instead of having red for each route. Even if the LEDs were able to display correct colors, there would still be legibility issues with colors like gray and brown.

I say just have a white letter with the circle in the route color. That way, the actual letter would always be legible, and the colors would only be the circle, which would not need to be "legible".

The different colors, with the letter being brighter would also eliminate the big monochromatic blur at a distance.

[Sea Beach 8]

Ewwwwwwwwwwwwww,the 44 looks really nasty with that digital front sign.

 

I wonder why they dont use color LCD bullet signs for the 160's. The red makes it hard for people to tell which train it is,especially the elderly. Some people might even think its the or train!!

[Radioguy 2]

I say just have a white letter with the circle in the route color. That way, the actual letter would always be legible, and the colors would only be the circle, which would not need to be "legible".

The different colors, with the letter being brighter would also eliminate the big monochromatic blur at a distance.

 

Thanks for agreeing, but I disagree on the white letter/number. They aren't as legible on light backgrounds, and become washed out to the point of being illegible again.

 

In fact, ( all should be in black, as the letters would be more discernible at a distance.

 

I wonder why they dont use color LCD bullet signs for the 160's. The red makes it hard for people to tell which train it is,especially the elderly. Some people might even think its the or train!!

 

Exactly. It's so obvious an issue, that it amazes me that they actually went into production.

[Eric B 1,073]

Thanks for agreeing, but I disagree on the white letter/number. They aren't as legible on light backgrounds, and become washed out to the point of being illegible again.

 

In fact, ( all should be in black, as the letters would be more discernible at a distance.

But it wouldn't be a light background (like emulating the rollsign bullets). It would be the same as it is now, only you would change the color of the square letter panel to white, and the circle/diamond array to RGB to make the colors. So the white would still be on the black background. The color would be around it. That would emulate the bullet enough without having the white directly on the color, which probably would be too much washout.

[Radioguy 2]

But it wouldn't be a light background (like emulating the rollsign bullets). It would be the same as it is now, only you would change the color of the square letter panel to white, and the circle/diamond array to RGB to make the colors. So the white would still be on the black background. The color would be around it. That would emulate the bullet enough without having the white directly on the color, which probably would be too much washout.

 

If you mean what we have now on the R160's but in different colors, then that would be an obvios improvement, but still not what I'd consider ideal.

 

Is this what you mean?

 

I still think that dark on light is more distinguishable at a distance than the reverse. I beleive that from a stop away, I would recognize a black letter on a bullet of lighter color better than a color or white letter on a black bullet including a color circle.

[Eric B 1,073]

Wow; did you make that just for this discussion, or did you or someone also think of the same idea?

Yeah; that's what I'm talking about. Though it would look more realistic if you had black on the outside of the circle as well.

 

No; the light letter on dark backgrounds is more legible, because look how relatively small and thin the letter is, compared to the solid background. So there will always be some glare, but the glare would just spill onto the dark background. If the background was lit, and the letter was dark, then the glare would spill into the thin letter lines from all sides, and you would probably just see this mass of light with some darkness in the middle until it got really close. It would be "bathed" in light, like sunspots. Even with the printed station signs, they realized this and moved away from black on white, to white on black.

 

On a sign like that, you want to have a minimum of lit surfaces, not only to cut the glare, but then it is less LED's used, which would make it cheaper (and especially since I'm trying to get them to use the higher costing RGB's). And notice, they cut out the solid dot matrix like the 110A sign had; and now a small square matrix for the aphanumeric characters, as well as the circle and the diamond shapes are all on separate arrays with nothing inbetween).

[Radioguy 2]

Wow; did you make that just for this discussion, or did you or someone also think of the same idea?

Yeah; that's what I'm talking about. Though it would look more realistic if you had black on the outside of the circle as well.

 

Here ya go:

 

No; the light letter on dark backgrounds is more legible, because look how relatively small and thin the letter is, compared to the solid background. So there will always be some glare, but the glare would just spill onto the dark background. If the background was lit, and the letter was dark, then the glare would spill into the thin letter lines from all sides, and you would probably just see this mass of light with some darkness in the middle until it got really close. It would be "bathed" in light, like sunspots. Even with the printed station signs, they realized this and moved away from black on white, to white on black.

 

Well, I think the brightness of the lamp, and the font used has an impact on this. The ocr font currently used isn't appropriate, in my opinion. Something more like Arial would be better, and alleviate the problem you're talking about.

 

On a sign like that, you want to have a minimum of lit surfaces, not only to cut the glare, but then it is less LED's used, which would make it cheaper (and especially since I'm trying to get them to use the higher costing RGB's). And notice, they cut out the solid dot matrix like the 110A sign had; and now a small square matrix for the aphanumeric characters, as well as the circle and the diamond shapes are all on separate arrays with nothing inbetween).

 

In my opinion, color needs to travel more than text, but legibility need sto be enhanced as much as possible.I think we can at least agree that the current R142/160 ones were a mistake.