|This page uses content from Wikipedia. The original article was at Unused New York City Subway service labels. The list of authors can be seen in the page history. As with Metro Wiki, the text of Wikipedia is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License 3.0 (Unported) (CC-BY-SA).|
Several New York City Subway service labels have never been used, but have appeared on rollsigns. Template:NYCS DD, Template:NYCS FF and Template:NYCS MM are covered in the D, F and M articles. The others are included here.
Current rollsigns include the following:
- Green 8, 10 and 12 (the same color as the 3, 3 and 3)
- Purple 11 (the same color as the 3 and its diamond service)
- Red 13 (the same color as the 1, 2 and 3)
- Red 3, unused since May 27, 2005
It is likely that these were assigned arbitrarily, for use if a new service is inaugurated over existing trackage.
Template:NYCS P, T, Template:NYCS U, Template:NYCS X and Template:NYCS Y appear on current rollsigns as a black letter on a white circle. No current services use this color, so the signs would likely be patched if any of these services were to become permanent. Specifically, T is the planned label for the Second Avenue Line, and would be colored turquoise or otherwise known as teal.
In the 1990s, Template:NYCS P (short for Penn Station) was planned for a nonstop between Sutphin Boulevard–JFK (at the LIRR's Jamaica station) and 34th Street–Penn Station, continuing locally to 168th Street, via the BMT Archer Avenue Line, BMT Jamaica Line, Chrystie Street Connection, IND Sixth Avenue Line and IND Eighth Avenue Line (switching to the latter at West Fourth Street). This would have been used during a threatened Amtrak strikes that would have prevented LIRR trains from entering Penn Station.
Template:NYCS P was skipped in the 1960 assignment of letters to BMT services, possibly because of the slang use of the word. Others speculate that it may have been reserved for the BMT Culver Line, which was converted to a shuttle in 1959. No evidence has been found for either claim. (The fact that the letter was proposed for the Penn Station service seems to also disprove the letter's unusability.)