|
|
| Re: R188 observations (and **sigh** disappointments) (1258885) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: R188 observations (and **sigh** disappointments) |
|
|
Posted by R46 5636 on Sat Nov 16 11:15:25 2013, in response to Re: R188 observations (and **sigh** disappointments), posted by snarf368 on Fri Nov 15 22:19:18 2013. The reason the MTA tries to keep the amount of text minimal on the LED signs is because if it goes over a certain limit, It will scroll (Just look at the 21 St - Queensbridge programming for the (Q) on the R160).Now I don't get why they named the model "R188"... It's basically the same exact model as an R142A except with CBTC. For the ones that disagree with me, then why not call the R160 that can run on the (L) something different than the R160 that can't run on the (L)? They're the same model... So why aren't the R142A and the R188 the same model? Just because they were built several years apart doesn't mean they're different... Also, can't the R142A on the (4) support CBTC? If so, wouldn't it have been cheaper to just add the C-car to those cars and run them on the (7)? |
|
|
|