|
|
| Re: Ready for SMEE on the (6)? (1197095) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Ready for SMEE on the (6)? |
|
|
Posted by mshull on Tue Jan 8 12:34:35 2013, in response to Ready for SMEE on the (6)?, posted by G1Ravage on Mon Jan 7 16:07:13 2013. I'm disappointed in management's decision to put the displaced R62As on the Pelham line.Like others in this thread, I think they make more sense on the 4, numerically, operationally and maintenance-wise. This seems like a repeat of the 1/9 skip-stop rollsign problems. Half of the front signs will be wrong during rush, displaying a 6 bullet instead of a 6 diamond if the custom of not changing front signs continues. If the road blows up, the side signs will be wrong too. They will wrongly display a diamond with Parkchester as the north terminal or a bullet with Pelham Bay Park as the north term. Hopefully Pelham Bay Park and Parkchester are close to each other on the rolls, but it will still be a lot of cranking 20 side signs per train multiple times a day. The 4 on the other hand, only changes south terminals twice a day. Once when it is extended to New Lots after midnight and then again before rush when it is shortened to Utica. Even then, this doesn't affect every train set, because most of them are laid up in the yards at that time of the day. Many of them could be set for the 4's regular daytime route and left that way. It just makes more sense to do a three-way swap, Pelham's cars to Corona, Corona's cars to Jerome, and Jerome's cars to Pelham. |
|
|
|