|
|
| Re: Subway route letter uses (1528663) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Subway route letter uses |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Oct 31 07:32:58 2019, in response to Re: Subway route letter uses, posted by randyo on Wed Oct 30 17:10:41 2019. I think I saw a schematic drawing of an R1 with a front roll sign showing "34". As the A was the first IND route, I'm guessing that had they gone with the BMT numbering system, today we'd have the 34 running from 207th.I'm guessing there may also have been a large gap in the numbers, as the highest BMT # was 16. I wonder if they would've completely skipped 17-33, or if, even though the 34 was the first new route, subsequent routes might have had lower numbers. It's definitely possible for systems to use lower numbers/letters later- just look at Denver, which established its A and B lines years after the system initially opened. But yet another idea (my own idea for NYC, but derived from the Berlin S-Bahn) would be to create number families, just as we have color families now. For example, taking into account the IRT and BMT as well, we could make the orange routes all 6X (for 6th Avenue)- the D become the 61, the F the 62, the M the 63 and the B the 64. We do the same thing on 8th Ave- and we have the 81, 82, and 83. , the West Side IRT gets numbered 7X, the East Side 4X. The L becomes the 14. What to do with the 7, J, and G is a little trickier. They'd have to get unique numbers. Like the 7 would be the 95- a really catchy, easy-to-remember number for a super-busy line and yet unique- no other 9X #s to be used. |
|
|
|