|
|
| Re: Archer Avenue at 20 (717730) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
|
| (718528) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 11 10:58:05 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by North-Easten T/O on Wed Dec 10 08:06:49 2008. The crew area isn't the only dump of those three stations. |
|
|
| (718530) | |
Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:01:18 2008, in response to Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R42 4787 on Wed Dec 10 00:17:44 2008. Not mint condition, and not done by a stellar scanner, but I thought some might be interested in this.1. Front of brochure:  2. Inside, part 1:  3. Inside, part 2:  4. Back, showing the new J/Z skip stop service (note Bowery not served by J or Z): 
|
|
|
| (718531) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:04:27 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 11 10:57:04 2008. These particular signs were installed in 1988, prior to GOH. Before 1988 the cars had rollsigns for all routes installed. The font used prior to 1988 was noticably different. IIRC, GP38's are in Helvetica. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (718535) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Thu Dec 11 11:15:50 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Dec 11 09:08:19 2008. They were colorblind! All they had to do was look at the color chart when they planned the design. I hate inattention to detail when it comes to subway station decorations. In this case it was a major oversight.wayne |
|
|
| (718536) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:17:19 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Thu Dec 11 10:03:09 2008. The MTA really went with the "hard sell" in the weeks prior to 12/11/88. Maps showing the new services were installed in all cars prior to Veterans' Day. Every Sunday paper for 3 weeks prior contained large pullout sections describing (and warning) of the new services. It was comparable to the current campaign for the digital TV switch.Yet still, on 12/12/88, people were massively confused. The Chinese were angry there was no bridge service to Canal St. (the area around Grand St. wasn't the center of the neighborhood it is now, these service changes forced that to happen). Many J riders did not know which train serviced their station(s), I had to tell friends and relatives that it was J for Forest Parkway, Z for Elderts Lane and both for Woodhaven Blvd. Brighton and Fulton St. riders were the most excited about the new changes, given that one express service was restored and the other had it expanded all day long. It wasn't until a while later that Brighton riders lamented the loss of access to the Broadway trunk via the bridge. Concourse riders finally saw the last of their awful R42's get pulled, they now had 100% R68/68A servicing the entire line. Car assignments on the first day(s), if you're interested: J/Z: R42 (GOH) R30 (redbird) (R30's were gone by New Years) B: Slant R40 (GOH) C: R10, R27, R30, R32, in order of frequency D: R68/68A E: R46 Q; R42, pre GOH (gone by Christmas, became CI overhauls, replaced by R68's) R: R32, R46 |
|
|
| (718537) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:20:44 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Thu Dec 11 10:01:10 2008. Problem is all that metal on the insides of the platforms rattles and bangs, contributing to the noise. Bare concrete would be quieter. |
|
|
| (718551) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 11:57:54 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 07:44:52 2008. Were you standing near one of the grates? Those do transmit sound. If you're not next to one or not next to the entrance, no, you really don't here it. Of course the obsessive types who post here want so badly to hear it that they "hear" it anyway. They hear it from Brooklyn. The rest of us regular passengers really don't."I think the sound proofing was meant more to reduce the noice within the station too, not just outside of it." Agreed. |
|
|
| (718556) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by MainR3664 on Thu Dec 11 12:20:44 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 09:59:01 2008. I was 20. |
|
|
| (718557) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:31:21 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 11 10:55:27 2008. How did he "mess things up?" If you get to leep your subway service intact and the 25% fare increase gets cancelled, Ravitch will have played a role in that.When was the last time you lifted a finger to improve the state of the subways, besides posting here, that is? |
|
|
| (718558) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:32:47 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 11 10:54:19 2008. Besides posting here, what are you doing about it? Could you have done any better (no...) |
|
|
| (718559) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:33:12 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:17:19 2008. J/Z: R42 (GOH) R30 (redbird) (R30's were gone by New Years)I rode a red R30 into Jamaica Center the first time I rode the new line between Christmas and New Years. The first and only time I took a red J into JC. B: Slant R40 (GOH) LOL!!! And into the early 90's. To this day, I still associate the slants with the B...and the West End El.... C: R10, R27, R30, R32, in order of frequency I think most of my car assignments and line references date to the period between Archer and the early 90's, as that's what I think about with the C too.... D: R68/68A And the N too! I still associate the R68's with the N and the D. E: R46 Another memory ingrained. I remember waiting at 23rd St/Ely with Jamaica Center rollsigned E's coming through.... |
|
|
| (718560) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:34:09 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 10:26:30 2008. Sick isn't it!!! Ugh, and it feels like yesterday. Where the HELL did those 20 years go??? |
|
|
| (718562) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:35:24 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:34:09 2008. Into a lot of roll signs and photos... |
|
|
| (718563) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:36:06 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 11:57:54 2008. The rest of us regular passengers really don't.LOL!! You are a regular passenger living in Kansas City and Reno? That must be some commute. |
|
|
| (718564) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:38:19 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by AMoreira81 on Thu Dec 11 10:57:04 2008. That's the rollsign I have. It doesn't have the A, C, B, D, Q, etc on it. |
|
|
| (718565) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:40:45 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:36:06 2008. LOL, I guess you don't recall that I spent plenty of years riding the Archer line. I never heard the trains when I was away from the entrance or subway grates.Of course you "want" to hear trains all the time - whether or not you are riding. When you are out with your girlfriend on a romantic date, do you whisper into her ear, "Sweetheart, can you hear the the clickity-clack of those R32s down in the Archer Av tunnel?" |
|
|
| (718566) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:42:01 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:04:27 2008. I think these lasted in some of the trains until the early 90's when they were replaced by the digital signs. I bought this rollsign in 1990 at the Transit Museum tag sale (for $25 no less), I should have bought 10 of them!! I also bought a second one for a friend, as well as a huge 6 foot "E to World Trade Center" track destination sign, and a "C to Rockaway Park or Euclid Ave" sign too at that time....as well as other goodies. I also took the subway home from Jay St-Borough Hall to Essex St, and then the J to Myrtle and the M after that.....getting some strange stares with all these signs, etc. The token (yes they were token clerks back then) just stood with his mouth open at my home station when I walked out....but amazingly no one said a word..... I could have just been some teenager unscrewing these signs and walking around the subway with them for all they knew!!! |
|
|
| (718568) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:43:58 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:32:47 2008. It's not the point if he could have done better or not, but there is no mistaking that those stations should be so decrepid and in disrepair after just 20 years, and it's not really 20 years....they have looked bad for at least 10 years already. |
|
|
| (718570) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:53:14 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:43:58 2008. I agree that the stations have some deficiencies. Excess moisture build-up, lousy crew quarters and materials that have not all held up well are real problems. But the Archer stations are not "dumps" by any stretch except to people with no perspective.There's plenty worse. |
|
|
| (718573) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 12:56:49 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:33:12 2008. I rode a red R30 into Jamaica Center the first time I rode the new line between Christmas and New Years. The first and only time I took a red J into JC.I rode one on the first Sunday. I rode one on the Z the next week and that was it. The R30 redbird disappeared almost overnight shortly after that Christmas. |
|
|
| (718575) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:57:55 2008, in response to Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:01:18 2008. Oh yeah!!! I have that one too!!! I forgot about that one!Check out this one I got from a neighbor when I lived in my own apartment in college for a couple years. He was a bery elderly man, and he found out I liked the subway.... He was a packrat, so his whole apartment was crap. But he gave me this brochure he saved from the 60's....amongst other things:  And check out this "Montauk" Branch schedule he had from the LIRR: 
|
|
|
| (718577) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 13:00:50 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:53:14 2008. Of course there are many worse....but the "worse" ones didn't fall apart at 10 years old already. |
|
|
| (718579) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:03:26 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 13:00:50 2008. The Archer stations have not fallen apart, not by a long shot. |
|
|
| (718581) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:03:44 2008, in response to Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:57:55 2008. Check out this one I got from a neighbor when I lived in my own apartment in college for a couple years. He was a bery elderly man, and he found out I liked the subway.... He was a packrat, so his whole apartment was crap. But he gave me this brochure he saved from the 60's....amongst other thingsDig that crazy KK/QJ skip stop service. Can you imagine that train bypassing Woodhaven Blvd BUT having it stop at Cypress Hills? Note that the train sometimes skipped two stops, then it makes two in a row. Very strange. And check out this "Montauk" Branch schedule he had from the LIRR: Neato. The Calverton station is still there, with the shelter and parking lot. |
|
|
| (718589) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Wado MP73 on Thu Dec 11 13:12:38 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 12:42:01 2008. If it didn't have "21 Street-La Guardia Connection" for the North terminal of JFK Express, that's not the last roll sign. (Photo is not mine, xtimx's)
|
|
|
| (718596) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:19:18 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 13:00:50 2008. MANY stations are in worse shape than the Parsons Archer and Van Wyck stations.Sutphin is arguably the worst, and is certainly in the top 5 worst. |
|
|
| (718601) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:21:40 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:19:18 2008. Chambers and Bowery are, but what others?Jamaica/Van Wyck is getting some kind of work being done right now, but I'm not sure of the nature of what's being done. |
|
|
| (718604) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:24:27 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:19:18 2008. Nonsense. Not even close.If you stop counting subway car serial numbers and pay attention to other things, you might be better off. But that's an old story with you. Are you doing something with yourself now besides foaming on about the subway? |
|
|
| (718606) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:25:25 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:21:40 2008. I don't know if I would put either Chambers or Bowery on the level of sutphin. At least both have decent lighting, and neither has the same level of water damage. 205th and 125th aren't in great shape either.That said, I think Sutphin might be the worst. |
|
|
| (718609) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:26:25 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:25:25 2008. Right, I forgot about 205th. |
|
|
| (718610) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:28:48 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:24:27 2008. Again, when you lose an argument you return to baseless attacks.Are you incapable of learning? Name a single station which you think is worse than Sutphin Blvd, and WHY that station is worse. |
|
|
| (718611) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:31:30 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:28:48 2008. How about all the stations on the Rockaway Peninsula that are about to undergo an overhaul? How about the Sea Beach line stations? |
|
|
| (718613) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:32:36 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:25:25 2008. 205 could use some work. When I saw that station in 2004, it wasn't horrible. I don't know what it looks like today, though. |
|
|
| (718614) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:33:09 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:31:30 2008. I wouldn't label them worse, and given the traffic comparisons between Sutphin/Archer and those stations, any comparison is silly. |
|
|
| (718617) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:36:12 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:31:30 2008. Sea Beach is nowhere near as bad. They have been doing a lot of work there over the past few years, replacing the platform, and replacing the canopy where such is needed.Rockaway Park branch isn't great, but is still in arguably better shape than Sutphin. |
|
|
| (718621) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by Steve B-8AVEXP on Thu Dec 11 13:40:42 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Wayne-MrSlantR40 on Thu Dec 11 11:15:50 2008. Did Moe have any insults aimed at color blindness? |
|
|
| (718622) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:41:49 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:36:12 2008. There is a reason why the TA has asked for bids for revamping the Rockaway Line and not sutphin. Most passengers would disagree with your ranking.But that's why you're a foamer...you just don't get it. |
|
|
| (718624) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:43:09 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:33:09 2008. To an obsessive foamer it's silly. To most riders and especially Rockaway users, it's not. |
|
|
| (718627) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:45:58 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:41:49 2008. Again, attacking when proven wrong. You can't learn.Try to make SUBSTANTIVE posts instead of attacks! WHAT ASPECTs of the rockaway park line stations are in worse condition than Sutphin/Archer? I would make the argument that such holds for the mezzanine. Not true for platform condition, or lighting, or ceiling/canopy condition. Stairs in both cases are pretty bad. |
|
|
| (718628) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:49:33 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 13:45:58 2008. "when proven wrong"You haven't posted any proof - only your obsessions. So I conclude you're foaming. Platform conditiuons on the Rockaways stink. You have chipped/fractured concrete, inadequate lighting and of course no ADA access, but the latter is not something that was included in the original station deign, obviously. The TA has finally got around to overhauling them as a group, and that's great. I was hoping that one or more of them would get an ADA compliance upgrade, but I don't know if that will happen. |
|
|
| (718638) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by R30A on Thu Dec 11 14:01:51 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:49:33 2008. ADA is irrellevant- Such is not changing and is not an aspect of most overhauls.Lighting is not comparable. Even at night, the Rockaway stations are MUCH brighter than Sutphin. Sutphin is one of the, if not the darkest station in the system. Flooring is also not comparable. The rockaway park platforms are in relatively good shape(Arguably better than average- they dont use the awful 5 foot concrete panels found in many other elevated stations) The archer stations all have floor tile which has worn to the extent that they are now quite slippery, especially considering the water leakage problem. |
|
|
| (718640) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:05:33 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 12:40:45 2008. LOL, I guess you don't recall that I spent plenty of years riding the Archer line.And what decade was that? I also thought it looked great when I used it regularly in the early 90's. Of course you "want" to hear trains all the time - whether or not you are riding. No, I didn't bring it up, I am just saying that YES, I did hear the trains a few times. That isn't a big deal until you made it into one. And once again, as I said (and you agreed with), the soundproofing was meant more to mediate or reduce the sound WITHIN the station itself, more so that outside. When you are out with your girlfriend on a romantic date, do you whisper into her ear, "Sweetheart, can you hear the the clickity-clack of those R32s down in the Archer Av tunnel?" Uh no, and I have no idea what that would have to do with this discussion anyway, aside from your usual, fetish of calling anyone that disagrees with you something derogetory. But this is my mistake once again. Once again, I presumed you were capable of adult discussion, and as usual, I was incorrect. |
|
|
| (718642) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:07:30 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:03:26 2008. No, but they are still in much worse progressively than they should be in at just 20 years old (and were like this for at least 10). |
|
|
| (718644) | |
Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:10:11 2008, in response to Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by RonInBayside on Thu Dec 11 13:31:30 2008. Those are elevated stations, and the Rockaway stations date to the time of the LIRR, and had basically nothing done to them aside from fare control additions since the LIRR ran them. The Sea Beach stations are also out door stations, and date from the 1910's or 1920's. That's a lot older than 20 years....not to mention, different scenario.How about some underground stations, which are comparing apples and apples? |
|
|
| (718649) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Dec 11 14:14:08 2008, in response to Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 11:01:18 2008. Nice. Shame they screwed up the labels on that last diagram... |
|
|
| (718651) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:15:18 2008, in response to Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 13:03:44 2008. What is interesting is that the East of Ronkonkoma service on the Greenport segment was on the "Eastern Long Island" schedule, and not the Ronkonkoma Branch schedule (I have all the schedules in that set). Also....there was no "Montauk Branch" schedule (just this one).Further, the Babylon to Patchogue stations were on the Babylon Branch schedule!! |
|
|
| (718652) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 14:15:53 2008, in response to Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by Kew Gardens Teleport on Thu Dec 11 14:14:08 2008. Heh, I just noticed that. D'oh! |
|
|
| (718654) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:16:37 2008, in response to Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:15:18 2008. And and in case you are interested.....Richmond Hill, Glendale, Fresh Pond, etc were on the City Zone schedule....and the same 4 trains that they ran at the end of service by 1998. (one express, one local west in the morning, and one semi-express, and one local east in the afternoon). |
|
|
| (718656) | |
Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Thu Dec 11 14:19:27 2008, in response to Re: Scans of service change brochure (was: Archer Avenue at 20), posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:15:18 2008. Well, Babylon to Patchougue is really more of a commuter line than Babylon-Speonk-Montauk. It gets hourly service to this day, IIRC. No other LIRR diesel line gets that sort of off-peak service.BTW, before 1987 wasn't the whole line from Hicksville to Greenport considered the same thing? It was all diesel back then. |
|
|
| (718657) | |
Re: some Sutphin Blvd pictures Re: Archer Avenue at 20 |
|
|
Posted by GP38/R42 Chris on Thu Dec 11 14:20:03 2008, in response to some Sutphin Blvd pictures Re: Archer Avenue at 20, posted by trainsarefun on Wed Dec 10 11:09:22 2008. Simply beautiful for something only 20 years old (and looked like this 10 years ago already). At least Chambers St has time on it's side to it's defense. |
|
|
|
Page 2 of 5 |
||
