|
|
| Re: N to 96/2 (1422566) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 23:24:22 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 23:08:50 2017. You said:"The northbound Q via Sea Beach program was created DELIBERATELY! They could call them Ns but they choose not to." I said: "For some reason there is a Q-train announcement program for the uptown routing of a Q-train via Fourth Avenue & Sea Beach to 96th Street." As in the MTA could spend the resources to create such an announcement program, but not one for the few N-trains that would be traveling to 96th Street/2nd Avenue? You said: "They could call them Ns but they choose not to. Why do you consider it so wrong to call them Qs?" My answer: If the MTA could create a Q-train announcement program for the uptown routing of a Q-train via Fourth Avenue & Sea Beach to 96th Street - then the MTA could ALSO create such a program for this direction of the N-train - to match the downtown/Brooklyn bound N-train announcement program. Especially since the MTA knew that a few (some) N-trains would regularly travel to/from 96th Street/2nd Avenue. If there were an uptown/Manhattan bound N-train announcement program as well as a downtown/Brooklyn bound N-train announcement program (which there is) - then those few N-trains would simply be labeled N-trains for both directions. Simple. Just like #5 trains to 238th Street, or A-trains to/from the Rockaways as compared to Lefferts trains. The N-train line would be treated just like other subway routes that have a few trains that get diverted to another terminal. In the case where signage for a diversion did not exist, or "stuff happens" the conductors simply make announcements as they have done for decades. Mike |
|
|
|