|
|
| Re: Subway Planning (1325886) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Subway Planning |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Fri Nov 28 18:52:32 2014, in response to Re: Subway Planning, posted by BusRider on Fri Nov 28 17:59:19 2014. The reason for swapping the 2 and 3 in Bkln was to give the 3 equipment relatively full time access to Livonia Barn for inspection and light maintenance. Until that time the 3 equipment was being maintained at 240 Barn along with #1 equipment. Upgrading Livonia barn gave each IRT line its own dedicated maintenance facility. Swapping the 4 and 5 south terminals gave better continuity of service for the Lex Av services allowing for the 4 to use the E/Pky leg of the Bkln line at all times and sending the 5 to Flatbush whenever it ran to Bkln. Car types really had no bearing on scheduling since many BMT/IND lines had mixed equipment anyhow. The only thing that affected scheduling was the swapping of the N and R north terminals to give the R full time easy access to a maintenance facility. Prior to that, R equipment was based in CIY and getting a train from 95 St to CIY required a turnback move on the 4 Av mainline N/O 36 St which interfered with express service. During the period between 1976 and 83, car assignments were in a state of flux and although there wasn’t the degree of mixing equipment within trains like there was in late 1969/early 1970, there was s bit of mixing solid trains. |
|
|
|