|
|
| Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? (1417474) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
|
| (1417777) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Nov 29 08:30:30 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by BusRider on Mon Nov 28 17:06:57 2016. Fulton?The R stop at Cortlandt doesn't connect with Fulton. |
|
|
| (1417778) | |
Bringing the "Brown R" back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:10:32 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by randyo on Mon Nov 28 15:47:01 2016. We've had quite a discussion elsewhere of bringing back the "BrownThe Jamaica line would actually be what the (J) was for a brief period after 9/11 in running from Archer Avenue-Jamaica Center to 95th Street-Bay Ridge, BUT with it being a split line where both the (J) and (K) terminate at Chambers and that being the transfer point between the two lines. The (J) coming from Archer Avenue would come in on the "downtown express" track at Chambers. A southbound (K) train would be waiting for it on the "downtown local" track and would leave once passengers have completed the cross-platform transfer between the two lines, with the (J) then doing the relays as it did for many years when it terminated there on weekends. The (K) coming from 95th Street-Bay Ridge would come in on the "uptown local" track. A northbound (J) / (Z) train would be waiting for it on the "uptown express" track and would leave once passengers have completed the cross-platform transfer between the two lines. The (K) would then doing the relay to the "downtown local" track immediately after the (J) / (Z) heading for Jamaica Center leaves Chambers to be in place for when the next (J) / (Z) train arrives at Chambers. The only exceptions to this format would be where: As this "Brown (K)" would be limited to a maximum of 8 TPH, during rush hours (when the (J) / (Z) are at 12 TPH), a limited number of (J) trains would be extended to Broad Street, terminating and starting back there during rush hours. (K) trains that are going to or coming from East New York Yard would either continue to or begin at Broadway Junction and run in service to and from there. That to me would work. |
|
|
| (1417779) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:11:28 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Mon Nov 28 20:45:32 2016. Which is exactly why the (R) and (N) were switched in 1987. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1417780) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:19:07 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by MainR3664 on Tue Nov 29 07:28:54 2016. Not any worse than my idea for a (T) to 96th/2nd during the (L) shutdown that I would do that would be really (M) trains as another letter that would run from Metropolitan Avenue to 96th Street-2nd Avenue 24/7. |
|
|
| (1417781) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Tue Nov 29 09:31:05 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Mon Nov 28 20:45:32 2016. Some ppl should just stick to planning in HO scale :) |
|
|
| (1417788) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Nov 29 10:32:38 2016, in response to Bringing the "Brown R" back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:10:32 2016. How does 4th Avenue have problems to 95th Street?Everybody else says that it has too much service. ROAR |
|
|
| (1417793) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 29 11:24:07 2016, in response to Bringing the "Brown R" back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:10:32 2016. No. |
|
|
| (1417797) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Nov 29 12:12:43 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by randyo on Mon Nov 28 16:15:16 2016. Fine, then run them express on the local tracks. 3 routes, 20 minute headways- no backups. |
|
|
| (1417799) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Nov 29 12:35:17 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Nov 29 12:12:43 2016. Let's say we're waiting at 4 Av-9 St at 3 AM tomorrow morning.The way it's scheduled now, the R arrives first going northbound along Fourth Avenue. The N follows three minutes later and the D about two to three minutes later. They would end up having to wait behind the R if they don't rewrite the schedules. They could write up new timetables, but that has effects well beyond the southern BMT. |
|
|
| (1417800) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by Elkeeper on Tue Nov 29 12:44:32 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Nov 29 12:35:17 2016. With 20 minute headways, new timetables should be no problem anywhere. |
|
|
| (1417803) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by LA Scott on Tue Nov 29 13:18:13 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Elkeeper on Tue Nov 29 12:44:32 2016. What's the point of giving less service to the local stations and screwing up the timing of work trains coming out of 38?Not every section of track needs to be used in revenue service 24/7. |
|
|
| (1417818) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Nov 29 15:49:41 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Mon Nov 28 19:49:43 2016. I believe it was August of 1976, but it sounds about right. |
|
|
| (1417824) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:03:56 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Broadway Lion on Tue Nov 29 10:32:38 2016. The problem is the (R) gets held up elsewhere by too many switches and other lines. Some of this should alleviate with the (Q) running on the SAS, however, it's still a big problem with sometimes very long gaps in service on the (R) that have been well-chronicled here and elsewhere (especially where sometimes there is as much as a 45-minute gap between (R) trains!). This (K) would eliminate that issue because it would be one-half of a split route with the (J) between Bay Ridge and Jamaica (with both halves terminating at Chambers).The main purpose of the (K) is to get riders in Bay Ridge and along 4th Avenue local stations to the various transfer points, including: (A) (C) (F) at Jay-Metrotech (A) (C) (2) (3) (4) (5) at Fulton Street (B) (Q) at Dekalb (B) (D) (N) (Q) (2) (3) (4) (5) at Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center (D) (N) at 36th Street (F) (G) at 4th Avenue-9th Street (2) (3) (4) (5) at Court Street (4) (5) (6) at Chambers Street This doesn't even include the (R) that obviously can be transferred to anywhere up to Court Street or the late-night (N) that also can be transferred to anywhere between 59th Street and Court Street in Brooklyn. Those wanting to continue to Jamaica can then do a simple transfer to the (J) at Chambers in this format. This (K) (former "Brown R") fixes a lot of issues. |
|
|
| (1417826) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:04:56 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 29 11:24:07 2016. And why not?The main purpose of the (K) is to get riders in Bay Ridge and along 4th Avenue local stations to the various transfer points, including: (A) (C) (F) at Jay-Metrotech (A) (C) (2) (3) (4) (5) at Fulton Street (B) (Q) at Dekalb (B) (D) (N) (Q) (2) (3) (4) (5) at Atlantic Avenue-Barclays Center (D) (N) at 36th Street (F) (G) at 4th Avenue-9th Street (2) (3) (4) (5) at Court Street (4) (5) (6) at Chambers Street This doesn't even include the (R) that obviously can be transferred to anywhere up to Court Street or the late-night (N) that also can be transferred to anywhere between 59th Street and Court Street in Brooklyn. Those wanting to continue to Jamaica can then do a simple transfer to the (J) at Chambers in this format. |
|
|
| (1417831) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Nov 29 16:16:57 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:03:56 2016. It fixes a lot of issues and adds a lot of new ones. |
|
|
| (1417832) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Tue Nov 29 16:21:01 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:19:07 2016. The letter “M” belongs to any service that operates out of Metropolitan Av and over most of the M line as it presently exists. The service to 96 could still keep the letter M similarly to the way the 8 Av exp service uses A for both the Rockaway and Lefferts branches. |
|
|
| (1417833) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:22:36 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by randyo on Tue Nov 29 16:16:57 2016. Not that many new ones.If properly executed, the (K) would do its relay from the north to the southbound track immediately after the (J) heads north to Jamaica with the intention of being on the "southbound local" track ahead of a (J) arriving at Chambers on the "southbound express" track (the (J) in this format would relay like it did on weekends for many years at Chambers). Only exceptions as noted are a handful of rush-hour (J) and (Z) trains that continue to Broad and start back from there and (K) trains on a yard run that would continue to or begin in service at Broadway Junction. |
|
|
| (1417848) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Nov 29 17:56:55 2016, in response to Bringing the "Brown R" back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 09:10:32 2016. Where are you going to get all this 480' (8 car) capable train cars ? The will have just enough to cover the J, L, M, and C once all R179's are here and the R32's and R42's are gone. |
|
|
| (1417850) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Kevin from Midwood on Tue Nov 29 18:04:44 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:04:56 2016. Because Lower Manhattan already has enough service. |
|
|
| (1417870) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Nov 29 19:18:31 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Kevin from Midwood on Tue Nov 29 18:04:44 2016. Lower Manhattan is going residential.Technology, Jersey City, moves to Midtown, Indian outsourcing, many bank mergers, and bank collapses since 1987 have all taken its toll on employment levels and office space. |
|
|
| (1417887) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 29 21:29:33 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:04:56 2016. No. |
|
|
| (1417888) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue Nov 29 21:49:22 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:22:36 2016. NO.LEAVE IT ALONE. |
|
|
| (1417917) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 00:49:38 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Kevin from Midwood on Tue Nov 29 18:04:44 2016. This has LITTLE to actually do with lower Manhattan:Chambers just happens to be the easiest spot to terminate such a (K) train that would a supplement to the (R) in Brooklyn and replace it entirely late-nights. Anyone who has complained about the lengthy delays on the (R) in Brooklyn I suspect would appreciate this (K) running on 4th Avenue. |
|
|
| (1417918) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 00:52:44 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Tue Nov 29 17:56:55 2016. You find the cars, or extend the service orders on the R179s to accommodate the additional (K) service. Most likely, you would continue to use the R32s and R42s on the (J) as needed in rush hours ONLY until enough cars are in place with the additional line to scrap them.Also, this (K) would be a maximum of 8 TPH as it first and foremost would be a supplement to the (R). |
|
|
| (1417919) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 00:55:17 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Tue Nov 29 19:18:31 2016. That it is, and there are a good number of those in lower Manhattan who may actually work in downtown Brooklyn for instance.Chambers just happens to be the easiest spot to terminate such a (K) line in a split with the (J) that also would be terminating there. |
|
|
| (1417921) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Nov 30 01:28:05 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:04:56 2016. Wallyhorse,I understand your reasons for wanting the creation of the (K) train - a basic re-creation of the Brown-R train of yesteryear. I understand why you want this K-train to run at all times, and to replace the midnight hours R-train shuttle. I disagree on the shortening of the J and Z trains to Chambers Street to accomplish your goals, where you would require J & Z riders to transfer to and from K trains to reach Fulton Street or Broad Street. I view that as a major short-coming of your plans. Major strides had been made at the MTA to get the Broad Street and Fulton Street stations open 24/7/365 and the J-train servicing those stations 24/7/365. Those were important gains made. I would prefer that J & Z trains continue to service Fulton Street and Broad Street 24/7/365 without any back-sliding and/or requiring J & Z riders to have to transfer trains as they had to for decades on the weekends and late nights - when J-trains ended at Canal Street and Chambers Street. The original rush hours only Brown-R train did not require a shortening of J or Z train service. Your new K-train service would help Lexington Avenue subway riders reach Brooklyn when due to Joralemon Street tunnel repairs weekend #4 trains do not travel to and from Brooklyn. Your new K-train service could easily speed up the commutes of south Brooklyn riders. These kinds of benefits do not have to come at the expense of J & Z train northern Brooklyn riders. Mike |
|
|
| (1417925) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by K. Trout on Wed Nov 30 02:14:47 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Tue Nov 29 16:22:36 2016. If properly executed If there's one thing I've learned from years of reading this and other railfan forums, it's that these three words come with a whole can of worms attached. |
|
|
| (1417932) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 06:49:32 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 00:52:44 2016. The R179 is done at 300 cars. There are no option orders.The R42's are physically shot. Some R32's will linger until the R211, but beyond 2021, that is it. |
|
|
| (1417933) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 06:52:34 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Michael549 on Wed Nov 30 01:28:05 2016. The J's strong suit is that it serves Wall Street, also now handling M passengers from Metro Ave. Truncating it like was done on weekends just to run a South Brooklyn/Nassau St service simply is not acceptable. |
|
|
| (1417948) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 10:02:32 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 06:52:34 2016. As noted, the way it would be done here, would be a simple, cross-platform transfer that would be done where the connecting train is already there.I also noted in rush hours, as this (K) would be maxed at 8 TPH, there would be a limited number of (J) / (Z) trains that would continue to Broad and start back from there (usually up to 4 such TPH during peak hours). |
|
|
| (1417954) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 11:33:40 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 10:02:32 2016. You can't balkanize service like that that. 4 trains per hour in the rush is 15 minutes, which renders the service a novelty like the Rock Park shuttles. As for people off the M train, they already wind up transferring to the J along the way if headed downtown. You cant ask them to change again. |
|
|
| (1417957) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Nov 30 12:09:09 2016, in response to Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by nh153 on Sat Nov 26 20:10:04 2016. Why not? Extending the overnight R cuts out the one extra transfer to the D or N that had to be done when the R shuttle turned at 36th St. Cutting out that extra transfer significantly cuts down trip times for late-night R riders. |
|
|
| (1417963) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Nov 30 12:42:52 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Wed Nov 30 10:02:32 2016. The J/Z/K schedule and all this crossing over may work out on paper but in reality does not. Even if a train is a few minutes late connections are missed and congestion from trains going over switches will be problematical. |
|
|
| (1417965) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 12:51:49 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Nov 30 12:42:52 2016. And these so-called Chambers St "transfers" would take place in the most rat-infested, disgusting, and filthy stations in the system. |
|
|
| (1417973) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Wed Nov 30 14:04:17 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 06:52:34 2016. "The J's strong suit is that it serves Wall Street, also now handling M passengers from Metro Ave. Truncating it like was done on weekends just to run a South Brooklyn/Nassau St service simply is not acceptable."I agree with you - I'm just a bit "long-winded" in saying so! Mike |
|
|
| (1417974) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Nov 30 14:12:26 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by randyo on Tue Nov 29 16:21:01 2016. That would be too confusing for the much higher number of riders who use the M in Manhattan and North Queens versus the riders who use the A in South Queens. It's why the W was put back into service - it would have been confusing to have the Q going to both 2nd Avenue and Astoria (along with keeping the N local full time in Manhattan).And why can't a similar argument be made that the letter T "belongs" to any service running on the 2nd Ave Line in the same vein that M "belongs" to any service operating out of Metro? |
|
|
| (1417976) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Nov 30 14:26:41 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Nov 30 14:12:26 2016. Because when the full SAS starts running all the way downtown, the letter T will be used for that and it would be even more confusing. |
|
|
| (1417981) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by randyo on Wed Nov 30 14:44:35 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Wed Nov 30 06:49:32 2016. And the R-32s and 42s have to be assigned in such a way that they can’t be sent through the Montague St tube dur to the incompetence of the TA’s planners and engineers! |
|
|
| (1417983) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by FYBklyn1959 on Wed Nov 30 14:48:48 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by randyo on Wed Nov 30 14:44:35 2016. Ridiculous. So if some R-42s (and 32s that are based at ENY) need to get to CIY for maintenance, they have to make a reverse move via Chrystie St. |
|
|
| (1417994) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Nov 30 15:30:23 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by randyo on Wed Nov 30 14:26:41 2016. By the time we get even a part of Phase 3 operational, the 6th Ave T will have long been eliminated and the L and M trains will be back to their pre-shutdown operations. |
|
|
| (1418049) | |
Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why? |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Wed Nov 30 23:05:34 2016, in response to Re: Overnight R Train to Whitehall? Why?, posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Wed Nov 30 15:30:23 2016. If they're reviving a 6th ave operation it should be the letter V. No one remembers it anyway. |
|
|
| (1418066) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Dec 1 10:48:05 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Wed Nov 30 12:42:52 2016. The idea is the (J) going north or (K) going south does NOT leave until the connecting train arrives (lone exceptions being the handful of (J) trains to/from Broad to fill in the gaps in rush hours when the (K) is maxed at 8 TPH and (K) trains coming from/going to East New York Yard that begin or end at Broadway Junction). The connections allow for the other train to start back to its base. |
|
|
| (1418067) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Dec 1 10:49:07 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by FYBklyn1959 on Wed Nov 30 14:48:48 2016. That looks to be the case now.It is ridiculous that no one thought of that situation when they rebuilt Montague. |
|
|
| (1418076) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Dec 1 11:46:44 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Dec 1 10:48:05 2016. How many minutes do they wait for a late connection?Wouldn't waiting for a late connection cause the next train to wait in between stations to get in? You need a certain amount of recovery time. |
|
|
| (1418098) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 1 17:04:32 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Wallyhorse on Thu Dec 1 10:48:05 2016. "not leaving until the connecting train arrives" is for LIRR and MN Scoots and Shuttles, not a rapid transit operation. It does not even work for the Rockaway Park or 95th Street R shuttles. |
|
|
| (1418119) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Dec 1 20:35:48 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 1 17:04:32 2016. Exactly. |
|
|
| (1418123) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by GojiMet86 on Thu Dec 1 21:00:49 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Bill from Maspeth on Thu Dec 1 20:35:48 2016. All this hoopla for bringing back the letter K and the Brown R. |
|
|
| (1418127) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by #5 - Dyre Ave on Thu Dec 1 21:47:32 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by Joe V on Thu Dec 1 17:04:32 2016. But then again, he wants to turn the entire B Division into one giant reverse-branched mess! |
|
|
| (1418140) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Fri Dec 2 01:09:35 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by GojiMet86 on Thu Dec 1 21:00:49 2016. Please you have not seen some of Wallyhorse's other grand schemes. This one is one of his simplest ideas!Would you believe that if he could he'd send the M-train to the Bronx! I'm joking! Actually Wallyhorse has not proposed that one yet - but give him time. (Smile) Mike |
|
|
| (1418148) | |
Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K) |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Fri Dec 2 06:56:59 2016, in response to Re: Bringing the ''Brown R'' back as (K), posted by GojiMet86 on Thu Dec 1 21:00:49 2016. Just extend the J during rush hours... |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 3 |
||
