|
|
| Re: Circle B and Diamond B (300729) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Circle B and Diamond B |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Aug 22 18:15:24 2006, in response to Re: Circle B and Diamond B, posted by Channel 7 Eyewitness News on Tue Aug 22 10:10:35 2006. What would actually be better than the use of the diamond is a reinroduction of the single letter/double letter sysyem to the B Division. The IND Division was the first to use the system in which single letters denoted express trains and double letters denoted local trains. Trains which ran express anywhere on their route carried the single letter of an express. This explains why the E and F services carried the single letter designations even though they ran local on their Manhattan mainlines. They both ran express in Queens hence the single letter designations. This would eliminate a lot of confusion and enable NYCT to relaese currently used letters for new services. Under the return to the old system, the C would become a AA and would of course replace the A service during the midnight when there is no 8 Av/Fulton express service. The V would be designated a FF, the W would be a NN and other local services would change to such designations as GG, JJ, LL, MM and RR. Also the original IND designations were based on the north end branch line and the Manhattan trunk line. Thus A/AA was Wash hts/8 Av, B/BB was Wash Hts/6 Av, E/EE was Qns/8 Av and F/FF was Qns/6 Av regardless of what the lines didi at the opposite end. In theory, the E could operate via Houston St to Church Av (which it once did) or Stl, the F could could operate via 8 Av and out to Fulton St etc. The BM lines, when they received letters, based their combinations on the south end branch line and their Manhattan trunk line although trying to superimpose an IND system if train designations on the BMT was really not as successful since the T West end Exp ran via Bway while the TT West End Loval ran via Nassau St. The only new designations that would be required would be for the Brighton express since it cannot under the proper IND system be called a B since it does not originate in Wash Hts nor can it be called a DD since it operates exp on 6 Av and the Brighton Line. The TA's excuse is that since the numbered lines don't have the single/double difference, the lettered lines shouldn't either.If these "educated fools" at the MTA studied their history, they would know that when the BMT first started using numbers to describe their routes in the 1920s with the D types, both locals and expresses of any given line carried the same number and it was up to the riding publc to read whether the sign read 1/Brighton Exp ir 1/Brighton Lcl. Therefore, there is nothing wrong with a local and an express on the same identical route using the same number as long as the riding public is intelligent enought to READ the signs. If the largely uneducated immigrant population of NYC could tell the difference between a Lexington Av Exp and a Lexington Av Lcl, then I'm sure that the present better educated yuppie population of NY that we have today should be able to do likewise. The IRT did not even use numbers until the arrival of the R-12s in 1948 and even then the IRT lines were not officialy referred to by numbers until the BMT/IND merger of 1967. |
|
|
|