|
|
| Re: N to 96/2 (1422383) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 13 of 16 |
||
|
| (1425707) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 11:49:27 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 10:28:11 2017. Bingo! |
|
|
| (1425708) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 28 11:51:44 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 11:32:31 2017. Agreed. I would say that if the E to 179th did not travel below 14th St / 8th Ave and also made all local stops east of Forest Hills, it could very well be appropriate to call it the F. |
|
|
| (1425711) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 11:54:28 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Nilet on Sat Jan 28 00:21:59 2017. What about at the ends of branches where express trains start serving every stop - are they now local stations or express stations? |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1425713) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 11:55:45 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 10:30:11 2017. Right on. |
|
|
| (1425714) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 28 12:11:37 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Nilet on Fri Jan 27 16:31:26 2017. I proposed something like this earlier in the thread.A changeover on the Manhattan Bridge, if executed and announced properly has the potential to inconvenience nobody, eliminating any ambiguity at Coney Island and along the entire Brooklyn portion of the run, without moving that ambiguity to Manhattan since they would see only "Q." The only ones affected by this would be Brooklyn riders headed beyond Times Square who miss everything: the destination / interior signage, the Manhattan Bridge announcements, and the station-by-station announcements in Manhattan announcing the train as a Q to 96th. But thinking about it realistically, it probably is more likely that more passenger minutes are lost due to this confusion than any confusion that may occur seeing a Q via the Sea Beach. So I admit I have no good argument against the current arrangement, for now. |
|
|
| (1425727) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jan 28 13:06:03 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 10:30:11 2017. The 179st E trains are a useful route though - people wait specifically for the southbound trips, both AM and PM.Northbound trips it's harder to tell when they run, and the transfer to the F is easy enough, so no one really bothers. |
|
|
| (1425730) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 28 13:24:42 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jan 28 13:06:03 2017. Same goes for A to Rockaway Park, though AlM's point seems to be simply that as these variations do not get their own letter, neither should an N/Q variation. |
|
|
| (1425735) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:15:16 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 28 12:11:37 2017. I would just go with Diamond N. |
|
|
| (1425737) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:16:45 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 10:30:11 2017. Define "useful". Are they running empty ? |
|
|
| (1425738) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:16:47 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:15:16 2017. How is that better? Why not diamond Q then?Besides, diamond used to mean rush hours only and now means peak direction express. The trains in question are neither of those things. |
|
|
| (1425739) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:18:02 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 10:28:11 2017. It had everything to do with absence of double-letters. They had to break the convention that B no longer stood for Wash Hts and C for Concourse. |
|
|
| (1425740) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:18:28 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:16:45 2017. No, because they're correctly signed as Qs, so many people get on them from Canal to 57th Street as they would the normal Qs that run before and after. |
|
|
| (1425741) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:19:38 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 11:49:05 2017. That's right. But only one 8th Avenue letter had been allotted to Wash Hts in the original IND nomenclature: A |
|
|
| (1425742) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:19:42 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:18:02 2017. A convention that was never important to anyone except railfan purists. |
|
|
| (1425743) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:20:54 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 11:32:31 2017. The exact same reasonable argument was used to call the Sea Beach - SAS N - you can't accept it. |
|
|
| (1425745) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:50:20 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:20:54 2017. No. It wasn't the exact same argument. |
|
|
| (1425752) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 15:25:04 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:19:42 2017. Excellent post. |
|
|
| (1425753) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 15:26:21 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 14:19:38 2017. As I said before somewhere in this thread, the letter designations can be totally random, and they still would serve their purpose. They can call it an X, who cares as long a people know where the X train goes. |
|
|
| (1425758) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Jan 28 16:20:18 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 15:26:21 2017. I'm beginning to wonder if this thread is the longest running in SubChat history?If anyone keeps such stats! |
|
|
| (1425759) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by GojiMet86 on Sat Jan 28 16:25:39 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Sat Jan 28 16:20:18 2017. There are longer ones on BusChat involving you-know-who... |
|
|
| (1425770) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jan 28 19:33:45 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by GojiMet86 on Sat Jan 28 16:25:39 2017. Pretty sure this is the longest running on-topic one that hasn't devolved into name calling and personal attacks. So there's that :). |
|
|
| (1425771) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Rainman89 on Sat Jan 28 19:53:27 2017, in response to N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 02:06:40 2017. The 2ave / 96 sta N should label as N, not Q via N line , The Subway map is so big and huge the MTA can't find a little space room to let the public know which/how many N leaving time from brooklyn or 96 sta and same thing with the Rush hours E train leaving and heading to 179 F train station. If they change the N train to the Q that head to 96 sta. is that mean the E train go to 179 label as F via eight ave line running with the C E ? |
|
|
| (1425772) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:55:31 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:18:28 2017. It is not because they are INcorrectly signed as Q - it is because they run and there is demand for them and the DESTINATION sign says where they are going. |
|
|
| (1425773) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:57:14 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:16:47 2017. Because as you have told a MILLION times Q MEANS BRIGHTON. That is the name given to the public of the Brighton Line.Diamond can mean whatever they want it to mean. |
|
|
| (1425774) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:58:08 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Rainman89 on Sat Jan 28 19:53:27 2017. We have been saying that along. But some here think the TA is The Lord. |
|
|
| (1425781) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Jan 28 20:43:11 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jan 28 19:33:45 2017. Except for a short detour that didn't go too far, and this detour too, it's been pretty much consistent with the exact topic of the original post. |
|
|
| (1425790) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 21:22:34 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:55:31 2017. There is no demand for Sea Beach-2nd Avenue service. These trains running solely out of operational necessity. |
|
|
| (1425791) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 21:23:01 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:57:14 2017. Q ALSO MEANS 2ND AVENUE! |
|
|
| (1425802) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jan 28 21:54:46 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by italianstallion on Sat Jan 28 11:54:28 2017. What about 75th ave. In a sense it is an "express" stop as the F express stops there, but the E skips it weekdays.Since the likely answer to that question is 'local stop', let's follow it up: what about 169st and Sutphin Blvd. The F stops there, but weekdays the same 7 southbound Es skip it. Is that an express stop or local? |
|
|
| (1425808) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 22:36:29 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 21:23:01 2017. If at some point, the MTA decides to swap the north terminals of the N and the Q will Q still mean 2nd Avenue? |
|
|
| (1425810) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 22:41:28 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:55:31 2017. And as I mentioned in another post, if the MTA at some point decides to swap the north terminal os the N and Q, then what? |
|
|
| (1425811) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 22:43:35 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 22:36:29 2017. Why such a minor change? Maybe the West End Line will go to 96/2, the Brighton Line will go to Astoria, and the Sea Beach Line will go up Grand Concourse. :) |
|
|
| (1425813) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 22:53:53 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Fri Jan 27 17:36:52 2017. Actually, there were several options to avoid breaking he combination letter system as originated by the iND. Since there was an HH route intended to be used for a Fulton St lcl in Bkln, the letter H could have been used for the current C service since its extension into Manhattan up 8 Av does not violate any rules of IND logic since it is still a Fulton St Lcl and there was never any rule prohibiting the original HH from going into Manhattan instead of Court St. The now named B would be changed to a D since it is a Bronx Concourse/6 Ave express service and the letter D would be appropriate. The current D could then be renamed the T which was the former letter used of the pre Chrystie West End service which the D has absorbed. That would leave the now unused K and V and possibly a U or even an O for use on the SAS when the full line is eventually opened. |
|
|
| (1425814) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 23:06:27 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 22:36:29 2017. No, it won't. But for now, it is. |
|
|
| (1425818) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by K. Trout on Sat Jan 28 23:21:25 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by randyo on Fri Jan 27 16:15:39 2017. It always seemed to me that there was an attempt to group and serialize BMT service letters by terminal and mainline in the same way as the IND.In the east, one group oriented around the Broadway mainline (J/K), a connection to it serving a similar geographical area and sometimes connecting to it (L), and a branch of said mainline (M). By sheer coincidence, J was the next letter available after the IND sequence, so it greatly helps passengers understand the new naming scheme. In the south, the group is oriented around Coney Island (N/Q/T), with a branch (R). Of course, to remain purely sequential, R should have been the West End, and T the Bay Ridge. Maybe the TA figured that with Chrystie St and the B extension on the way, they wouldn't want to break the N/Q/R sequence. |
|
|
| (1425819) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 23:39:40 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 22:43:35 2017. Good [point, however, I was just trying to point out that certain parts of line names are written stone but not all. |
|
|
| (1425820) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 23:40:27 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 23:06:27 2017. If it’s swappable then that belied your argument. |
|
|
| (1425827) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jan 29 05:10:09 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sat Jan 28 19:57:14 2017. And it's still ongoing! *munches popcorn*OK, from now on the handful of AM trains which run to 96th & 2nd via Sea Beach will be called Steve. There. The argument is now over. |
|
|
| (1425828) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jan 29 05:20:06 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Sat Jan 28 21:54:46 2017. What about 75th ave. In a sense it is an "express" stop as the F express stops there, but the E skips it weekdays.Bypassed by  express; ergo, local stop.Since the likely answer to that question is 'local stop', let's follow it up: what about 169st and Sutphin Blvd. The F stops there, but weekdays the same 7 southbound Es skip it. Is that an express stop or local? Bypassed by express; ergo local stop. Although how many people seriously ride those seven trains between 179th and Kew Gardens?On an unrelated note, Parsons Boulevard has a sign on the northbound express track announcing limited service to 179th. Odd that they'd need to mention that on the signage, and in any case I thought those trains ran local?
|
|
|
| (1425829) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Jan 29 06:20:06 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Nilet on Sun Jan 29 05:10:09 2017. I will agree with your post as soon as you show us your certificate demonstrating that you have been appointed Lord High Emperor of the MTA. Oh, and you have to get the Steve schedule onto the MTA web site too. Otherwise you're just a figurehead emperor. |
|
|
| (1425834) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 29 07:47:24 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 14:19:42 2017. You are full of shit and s STOP calling everyone who doesn't agree with you a railfan. |
|
|
| (1425836) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 29 07:49:09 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 21:22:34 2017. So what ? No excuse to mis-label a train. |
|
|
| (1425837) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 29 07:49:54 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by randyo on Sat Jan 28 22:41:28 2017. Whatever MTA wil do, Spider Pig will agree, and call everyone who objects a foamer. |
|
|
| (1425838) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 29 07:52:07 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 21:23:01 2017. Which also has the N train, so marked southbound, as the real Brighton Line also has a B. |
|
|
| (1425840) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jan 29 08:14:55 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sun Jan 29 06:20:06 2017. Oh, and you have to get the Steve schedule onto the MTA web site too.Done. Just scroll down to "weekday service nourthbound" and you can see the trains which terminate at 96th/2nd marked with a + symbol at 57th/7th/ |
|
|
| (1425847) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Sun Jan 29 08:59:41 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Nilet on Sun Jan 29 08:14:55 2017. Nah.I haven't seen your certificate. And the schedules don't call it Steve. Alternative facts! |
|
|
| (1425849) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Sun Jan 29 09:07:05 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sun Jan 29 08:59:41 2017. I haven't seen your certificate.No such thing exists. And the schedules don't call it Steve. They don't need to. Naming conventions are fundamentally arbitrary. Alternative facts! A naming convention is a definition; a definition is not a claim of fact and cannot be classified as true or alternative. |
|
|
| (1425853) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sun Jan 29 09:22:34 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Sat Jan 28 22:43:35 2017. I've thought of Bay Ridge to Concourse (via Bridge and 6th Ave) if it ever happened that there was demand for one of the Brighton services to go through Montague. |
|
|
| (1425870) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Sun Jan 29 12:03:32 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Sat Jan 28 21:22:34 2017. "These trains running solely out of operational necessity."Again, so what! There is simply no reason to label the E-trains that come out of or head to 179th Street as "F" trains! There is simply no reason to label the few W-trains that come out of or head to Coney Island as "N" trains as they travel to/from the train yard. There is simply no reason to label #5 trains that come out of or head to 238th Street as "#2" trains as suggested in prior messages in this stream. There is simply no reason to label N trains that head to 96th Street-Second Avenue as Q trains on the Manhattan bound trip, and then re-label those same trains as N-trains for the downtown Brooklyn bound journey. A number of silly reasons have been offered before, and those reasons still remain silly. Mike |
|
|
| (1425872) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Sun Jan 29 12:05:17 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Joe V on Sun Jan 29 07:49:09 2017. They aren't mislabeled. |
|
|
|
Page 13 of 16 |
||
