|
|
| N to 96/2 (1422383) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
|
Page 1 of 16 |
|
|
|
| (1422384) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 03:13:38 2017, in response to N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 02:06:40 2017. There is a Q via Sea Beach program to 96/2 which will be used.So will these northbound trains be labeled Qs, so that once they get onto the Manhattan Bridge no one can see that they came via Sea Beach? (In contrast to the previous situation, where they were labeled Ns to 57/7 and were clearly marked as such.) |
|
|
| (1422386) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jan 3 05:08:31 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 03:13:38 2017. They are (N) trains using (N) crews, but will utilize (Q) signage northbound in an apparent attempt at reducing customer confusion. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (1422389) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Tue Jan 3 07:17:32 2017, in response to N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 02:06:40 2017. Thank you. |
|
|
| (1422429) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 13:51:07 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by G1Ravage on Tue Jan 3 05:08:31 2017. "apparent attempt at reducing customer confusion."DING!! - Attention Customers, the N train you are riding is now a Q train. I think there will be lots of confusion - especially for those who expected the train to go towards Astoria (not everyone reads the digital signs, they just look at the route letter). |
|
|
| (1422432) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 14:02:44 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 13:51:07 2017. By signing them up as Q trains all the way from Stillwell confusion is minimized. People who don't pay attention are going to be confused no matter what. |
|
|
| (1422440) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 14:28:39 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 14:02:44 2017. It would not be minimized if the train - now shosing Q signs - is running on the N (would it be wrong to assume they have a program "This is a Manhattan bound Q train running on the N line"?)I think the train would start from Stillwell as an N but get changed as it nears 57/7. |
|
|
| (1422445) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 14:43:09 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 14:28:39 2017. Do you think that riders in Brooklyn will avoid getting on the Q because they think it won't stop where they need it to stop? There are people who are that oblivious, so it's possible. |
|
|
| (1422449) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by zac on Tue Jan 3 14:54:52 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 14:43:09 2017. Maybe, maybe not, but there are riders going to 2nd Ave that are waiting for the Q train and would let an N train go by. Sea Beach riders OTOH, all mostly know where the Q goes in Manhattan, the same stops as the N.And the other way, whatever train comes in at 86/72/63, it won't matter much to the rider what letter it carries, the train can only go one way. What will matter is that when that train pulls into Times Square, it shows as an N. Otherwise how would anyone know where it is going? I did something like that a few weeks ago, jumped on a train on the express track at TS without looking, only to find it was an N. I don't want to find out at Pacific. |
|
|
| (1422450) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 14:56:39 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 14:43:09 2017. I think at Stillwell itself it will cause confusion. You're on the N platform and a Q is loading. No way you want to be on that train, right?After Stillwell it should be fine with very few exceptions. |
|
|
| (1422451) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 14:58:32 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 14:28:39 2017. I do not understand the need for all of this effort.Simply sign the damn N trains to where they are supposed to be going! Whether it is to 96th Street-Second Avenue! Or Queens! Even if it is coming out of Coney Island on its regular route. If there is any "confusion" on the part of the riders - the conductors simply makes an announcement at the 57th Street-Seventh Avenue station that THIS N-train will be going along Second Avenue, and for any Queens bound N-train riders to take another N or W train. This is easy! Conductors are there to make announcements! Lexington Avenue #5 riders for DECADES headed to the Bronx from Manhattan watched the signage or simply waited until the East 180th Street station for the announcement on which direction the #5 will be taking, White Plain Road or Dyre Avenue. A train riders have done something similar for DECADES! Just my thoughts. Mike |
|
|
| (1422464) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Jan 3 16:03:45 2017, in response to N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 02:06:40 2017. Here is the procedure because there is no program: for now.Odd, they recently updated the Q program to spell stuff out in full. For example, Broadway Exp is now Broadway Express. |
|
|
| (1422466) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 16:18:02 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 14:58:32 2017. There is no program for N to 96/2.Therefore the line super put out a memo to post the next best thing: Q via Sea Beach. All proper stations will be posted on the "FIND". |
|
|
| (1422467) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 16:22:07 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 14:28:39 2017. Sorry but the super is doing what she's being paid to do. Perhaps the decision was made by her boss: the general super. Or even the general supers boss! |
|
|
| (1422468) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Jan 3 16:23:10 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 13:51:07 2017. The way they are doing it makes sense. Trains should show the letter associated with their destination. The Second Ave. line has been heavily promoted as being the Q train, so yes, a train labeled N going there would cause confusion, and would cause delays at the station where that DING!! occurred. But a train starting out on the "wrong" route won't cause confusion, a northbound train on the Sea Beach, or a southbound train on Second Ave., is where it is, and the letter (and other signage) showing where it is going is what counts. The one place where clear announcements will be needed is at Stillwell Ave. when the "Q via Sea Beach" is starting out, but there will be enough time there to make them. |
|
|
| (1422472) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 16:32:23 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 14:28:39 2017. No, it would be signed as a Q from the start. |
|
|
| (1422473) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 16:32:56 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by zac on Tue Jan 3 14:54:52 2017. iawtp |
|
|
| (1422474) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 16:33:40 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 14:56:39 2017. If proper announcements are made at Stillwell, all will be fine. |
|
|
| (1422476) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 16:35:50 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Dyre Dan on Tue Jan 3 16:23:10 2017. Yes. The only other confusion is someone who reads the N timetable, seeing that some Ns are going to 96th, but looking in vain for those trains on the tracks since they are called Qs. But how many will care about that? |
|
|
| (1422477) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by r17-6599 on Tue Jan 3 16:47:51 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 13:51:07 2017. Just my thought but here's case where the MTA could use diamond vs circle destination signs. No? And of course educate the public (and crew) about that. |
|
|
| (1422478) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 17:02:45 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 16:35:50 2017. Actually, that would have perturbed me eventually if it hadn't been for this thread.I'd be thinking, that's strange, I used to see occasional northbound N's to 57/7; why am I no longer seeing Ns to 96/2? Whereas I'm still seeing occasional southbound Ns on the express track rather than the local at 42nd. Where could those southbound Ns have come from other than 96th? |
|
|
| (1422496) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 18:57:53 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 14:56:39 2017. One of those exceptions is at Atlantic Ave-Barclays (made more so by forcing Pacific St's name to conform to the rest of the complex). The Q stops at DeKalb after Atlantic Ave. The "Sea Beach" portion of the N has passed. Without knowing how awkward it is to go from the express track at Pacific to make the stop at DeKalb, there may be some assumptions made that these Qs stop at DeKalb. |
|
|
| (1422498) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 18:59:10 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 18:57:53 2017. Solution: Bypass Atlantic. Problem solved. :-) |
|
|
| (1422501) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 19:06:45 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 18:59:10 2017. Hah awesome. After 59st Bklyn I can picture it now: "due to us no longer being on the Sea Beach, in order to maintain accurate digital signage the next stop will be the first Q stop we can make, Canal St.". That service pattern would quickly make these the most favored trains in Brooklyn. |
|
|
| (1422509) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 19:34:05 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 16:18:02 2017. It is simple!For the N-trains that are headed up Second Avenue - simply have the conductors make the announcements at each of the Manhattan express stations and at the 57th Street-Seventh Avenue station for riders to change to either N or W trains to Queens. If needed turn off the FIND system screens at that those stations, and the conductors makes repeated announcements. Of change the wording to "Special." What ever, the conductors are there to make announcements about the trains. That's their jobs! "This train is being diverted to 96th Street-Second Avenue. Riders wishing to travel to Queens should take the following N-train or W-traisn to Queens." "THIS N-train will be going along Second Avenue, and for any Queens bound N-train riders to take another N or W train." This is not difficult. At times trains get "diverted" - even if it a regular part of the train schedule and operation. Mike |
|
|
| (1422512) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Jan 3 19:43:24 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 19:34:05 2017. In practice, many conductors are hard to hear and understand. The automated announcements, by contrast, are almost always audible and understandable. I prefer that the TA not rely on the audibility of conductors' announcements. |
|
|
| (1422513) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 19:43:55 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by r17-6599 on Tue Jan 3 16:47:51 2017. Diamond has been officially defined as "express variant of a route" as the use for rush hours was too nebulous. As such the only remaining diamonds are 6 and 7. If the F express in Brooklyn ever happens, it will get a diamond.As a side note, there is one situation where a diamond could be added to the B division today: rename the C the (A) and the A the <A>. |
|
|
| (1422515) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Joe V on Tue Jan 3 19:50:07 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Kriston Lewis on Tue Jan 3 16:03:45 2017. Is it harder to come up with a new program of N to 9th/2nd than to patch mylar ? Maybe we should go back to that. |
|
|
| (1422516) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Jan 3 19:50:41 2017, in response to N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 02:06:40 2017. As a side question, how long does creating and implementing a new program actually take? It isn't as though no one had sufficient notice that the line would be open this January 1. Or is the issue that the train can have only so many programs and the computer doesn't have room for more? It just seems strange to me-- almost makes old-fashioned roll signs look good. |
|
|
| (1422517) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 19:57:41 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Jan 3 19:50:41 2017. Have you ever thought that maybe this program is deliberate? |
|
|
| (1422519) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 20:05:35 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 18:57:53 2017. The stops are on the FIND map and clear computer announcements are made at Barclay's stating if the next stop is DeKalb (doubtful) or Canal. Therefore, there shouldn't be any confusion. |
|
|
| (1422522) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 20:12:37 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 19:34:05 2017. You don't understand. The Line Superintendent wrote a memo on how Sea Beach Trains to 96th St. are to be signed up. Period. You work for NYCT, you follow orders of supervision. Period. They do not want N crews to do their own thing. Manual announcements can supplement the orders of the line superintendent. |
|
|
| (1422523) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 20:12:44 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 19:43:55 2017. "As a side note, there is one situation where a diamond could be added to the B division today: rename the C the (A) and the A the ."There are times when to leave well enough alone, and this is one of them. Just the leave the C train alone! It is a well understood local train! Mike |
|
|
| (1422524) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 20:15:53 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 20:12:37 2017. IMO the line superintendent made the right decision. |
|
|
| (1422527) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 20:25:33 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 20:12:37 2017. I do not work for the MTA.I am free to criticize anything that I feel is stupid. I am also free to celebrate or point out the things that I like. While I try to understand what they are doing and why - that does not mean that I have to agree with it. Yes, I understand your point about MTA staff having to follow orders - even if the orders are "dumb" - from some kind point of view. They pay your salary you do what they want. It's the bargain one makes. We here on the forum give our opinions about transit stuff all of the time. As well as debate transit stuff. This is no different. Thank you for the information about the Line Superintendent's memo. Mike |
|
|
| (1422528) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 20:27:12 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 20:25:33 2017. "I am free to criticize anything that I feel is stupid.I am also free to celebrate or point out the things that I like." No wonder you have so much fun here. :-) |
|
|
| (1422531) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Allan on Tue Jan 3 20:30:03 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by r17-6599 on Tue Jan 3 16:47:51 2017. The MTA educate the public??? Has that ever been possible? |
|
|
| (1422536) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Tue Jan 3 21:12:38 2017, in response to N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 02:06:40 2017. Will this N, now Q, stop at 49th St? Be awful confusing for those passengers who get on the N at 49th, thinking they're headed to Queens, only to find out it shifts BACK to the express track as it's going to 96 and not Astoria. |
|
|
| (1422541) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 21:29:39 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 20:12:44 2017. Hahahaha...For now yes, mainly because the equipment and train lengths between the two are varied (and cannot show the differences well). But, if the C ever becomes full length, and both have the same equipment, a ton of schedule flexibility particularly in the shoulder periods opens up by having them share a designation. Not to mention we're almost out of letters. The current unused ones are: H - Reserved I - Looks too much like 1 K - available O - Looks too much like 0 P - Sounds like... T - Reserved U - Sounds like a word V - available X - Reserved (used for special trains IIRC) Y - Sounds like a word We have two letters left for new routes. The C could very well be a necessary sacrifice one day... |
|
|
| (1422542) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by zac on Tue Jan 3 21:36:06 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 16:32:56 2017. And this evening I got a text from my daughter, she was at Pacific, she got on the wrong train... |
|
|
| (1422544) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Jan 3 21:46:30 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 21:29:39 2017. "Excuse me, sir, I need to go to Utica Avenue and Kings Plaza. Which train do I take?""Y." "I want to go shopping with my wife." "Y." "Because she threatened to leave me if I didn't buy her a new dress." "Fella, I don't care-- Y." "Then why do you keep asking me why?" "I'm not asking you, I'm telling you, Y." "I give up. I'll ask someone else!" "Y!" "Because you obviously don't know anything about the subway system." |
|
|
| (1422546) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 21:52:21 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by FormerVanWyckBlvdUser on Tue Jan 3 21:12:38 2017. It does not stop at 49th St. because it is a Q train. |
|
|
| (1422549) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 21:57:55 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 20:25:33 2017. In your post you were saying what the c/r's should do. that's my beef. Go re-read it.I was just pointing out what supervision wants them to do. It's obvious from your response that you may have a problem holding down any job because in any job you do what the boss wants because he writes the checks, you are working for him. If you don't want to follow orders, then you need to have your own business. |
|
|
| (1422552) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 22:06:32 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Andrew Saucci on Tue Jan 3 21:46:30 2017. Third Base!Ha, Ha! Mike |
|
|
| (1422554) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 22:16:00 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 21:52:21 2017. Which is why calling it a Q is the best option, despite some railfans being against it for some foameriffic reason. |
|
|
| (1422555) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Steamdriven on Tue Jan 3 22:16:28 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 21:29:39 2017. There's a plenty of letters; use the Greek alphabet. |
|
|
| (1422557) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by AlM on Tue Jan 3 22:39:09 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 22:16:00 2017. Though for the last 5 years they have had N trains to 57/7 that have not stopped at 49th, and no one has died from it. :) |
|
|
| (1422558) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Michael549 on Tue Jan 3 22:45:07 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 21:57:55 2017. No, I am critical of the following idea:There are a number of N intervals are destined for 96/2 M-F. 0736, 0819, 0901, 1501, 1538 CIYD, 1549, 1644. Basically these are "N" trains leaving Coney Island making the regular N-train stops with N-train crews. But these trains that are traveling the "N-route" will be labeled Q-trains on the uptown trips, but upon reaching the 96th Street-Second Avenue terminal - they will be re-labeled as N-trains for their return trips to Brooklyn. All of this is because there is an automated computer announcement for N-trains leaving 96th Street/2nd Avenue toward Brooklyn - but not an announcement program for N-trains that leave Coney Island over the usual Fourth Avenue/Sea Beach route toward Manhattan. This is so that the riders won't be "confused" - as if riders along the Sea Beach and Fourth Avenue stations will not be confused by a Q-train that is not traveling on its usual Brighton line. For some reason there is a Q-train announcement program for the uptown routing of a Q-train via Fourth Avenue & Sea Beach to 96th Street. As in the MTA could spend the resources to create such an announcement program, but not one for the few N-trains that would be traveling to 96th Street/2nd Avenue. So the bright idea is re-label N-trains as Q-trains uptown/Manhattan bound, and then re-label those N-trains again for their downtown Brooklyn bound trips. So what happens in case these relabeled Q-trains that are actually N-trains have to be sent to Queens, for an un-expected MTA diversion to solve a gap problem? The train goes through an identity crisis as the conductor flips through announcement programs? All of this in preference for just telling the riders exactly where the train is headed via the conductors on the train with normal regular N-train signage. In times past - the conductors could be relied upon to simply tell riders where the trains are headed - but some how that simple idea is now supposed to be seen as something that is "very strange." During plenty of G.O.'s and numerous other events the conductors simply gave out useful information, but somehow in this instance they the conductors can not be relied upon to do so. Puzzling. The idea that riders can NOT read signs or understand train directions given by conductors is a strange one. Also Puzzling. This is not difficult. At times trains get "diverted" - even if it a regular part of the train schedule and operation. Conductors make announcements and provide useful information as needed. ------- Yes, I understand that "you are just pointing out what supervision wants them to do." I'm just saying that this whole project/task/endeavor could simply be much simpler. Mike |
|
|
| (1422559) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Bill from Maspeth on Tue Jan 3 22:49:59 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Spider-Pig on Tue Jan 3 22:16:00 2017. The N Line Superintendent got it right. |
|
|
| (1422560) | |
Re: N to 96/2 |
|
|
Posted by Italianstallion on Tue Jan 3 22:51:49 2017, in response to Re: N to 96/2, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Tue Jan 3 21:29:39 2017. Lots of currently used letters "sound like a word." Like B, C, G, J, L, R, the future T. So that should be no impediment to the use of U or Y. |
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 16 |
|
