|
|
| Re: On this date in 1976... (1431896) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: On this date in 1976... |
|
|
Posted by New Flyer #857 on Sat Apr 1 15:03:45 2017, in response to Re: On this date in 1976..., posted by The Silence on Sat Apr 1 02:36:52 2017. Yes I see your points regarding the high ambiguity of some London Underground "lines." I've mentioned in the past Paris' RER, which has so many branches reduced to one label and color based on the main artery they use in the city center Example.So here's the thing. . .we don't call the 1, 2, and 3 on 7th Ave in New York all one line with various branches. We use different designations. Same goes for the other Manhattan arteries as appropriate. Even Paris' RER you will notice, designates a number suffix for the various branches (even if not part of station signage, which is real time and always showing destination anyway). London's Underground, I'd be willing to bet, would add designations to the ambiguous places too if they were letters and numbers rather than actual words. I'd also throw in that Earls Court has clear platform signage too to identify each train before it arrives. Lastly, Heathrow is a terminal, and trains for Heathrow have "Heathrow" marked permanently on their front signs throughout a run. In any case, each situation worldwide is different, and I've put forth three advantages to renaming the Lefferts Blvd branch of the A. And since letters are available (H, K, etc.), the only disadvantage I can think of is the one-time signage change at all appropriate points systemwide but MTA does not seem to be one to let signage changes be the thing to prevent them from making a reasonable revision in service patterns. Maybe in a different city, these advantages would not be enough to outweigh the drawbacks, but in this case I think the case is at least close, if not fully established. |
|
|
|