|
|
| Re: Weird WMATA Sign Readings (99738) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > BusChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Weird WMATA Sign Readings |
|
|
Posted by WayneJay on Mon Jun 2 19:01:08 2008, in response to Re: Weird WMATA Sign Readings, posted by R36 #9346 on Mon Jun 2 17:42:51 2008. Then again, many NYCTA routes have one or more endpoints which are unique to the route. Then there are corridors where multiple routes serve the same terminal areas, but have different ways of getting there (i.e. the Flushing-Jamaica corridor: Q17 via 188th, Q20/44 via Main, Q25/34 via KissPar, Q65 via 164th).You may recall that Green Bus Lines received 50 Orion 5's built to WMATA specs, including the Vultron signs. I once saw a dest. sign reading list for the signs. Like their WMATA counterparts, they used a separate Route/Dest configuration. The driver had to enter one code for the route, and another for the destination. I agree that NYCTA routes largely does not have lots of "shared" terminal points. Even with those TA routes with different branches... those could be programmed in not much different from the current setup. The difference is that the route number would come separately, which again allows for more flexibility. Yes, I quite familiar with the WMATA rejects. Yes, the B/O has to enter the route and destination separately, which I guess it does make a bit more work for the B/O. However, when route changes (and new routes) are made, as long as the destination already exists the TA wouldn't have to update the signs on all of the buses. My point is that currently when NYCTA creates a new route or make destination changes to an existing route, they have to update the signs on all of the buses. If the route number and destination had separate codes they would only need to update the signs when new destinations were added. |
|
|
|