It's not the cleanest or prettiest, but is the NY Subway the best in the world?

[Quill Depot]

Let's remember how old our system is. And we should also remember that our system is still recovering from it's worst condition (70's and 80's). The subway is doing a good job at it too.

[Urbanfortitude]

Let's remember how old our system is. And we should also remember that our system is still recovering from it's worst condition (70's and 80's). The subway is doing a good job at it too.

 

With that fact you'd think there would be more funding put in place instead of more being cut away. I think the subway system would have to collapse before that happens. What the MTA is doing most of the time is basically patch work and some actual renovations.

[Guest lance25]

And therein lies the problem. Every time the state is scrapped for cash, the first casualty is the since obviously no one takes the trains or uses the buses. I understand the fiscal constraints we're all in, but can't keep giving them the short end of the stick. It's almost like the legislature wants to see the system return back to the dark days of the '70s and '80s.

[Roadcruiser1]

Which is exactly why. The rich people like Bloomberg can care less about mass transit. You know what they say mass transit like our subway is for poor people. They would say "Why do I have to care for something I don't need to use?" to "Poor people uses it therefore it's a poor people's transit".

[geoking66]

Which is exactly why. The rich people like Bloomberg can care less about mass transit. You know what they say mass transit like our subway is for poor people. They would say "Why do I have to care for something I don't need to use?" to "Poor people uses it therefore it's a poor people's transit".

 

…rich people use the subway as well. In their case it's more out of convenience than financial reasons, but a cross-section of New York City society depends on public transport. In one train you could easily see a successful investment banker on Wall Street and someone on welfare. At Bloomberg's level, yes they'll have drivers, but isn't in their interest to support mass transport? I mean, after all, more people taking the subway means less gridlock for taxis and limos.

[Roadcruiser1]

Not all of them cares for mass transit which I am trying to point out.

[Nexis4Jersey]

…rich people use the subway as well. In their case it's more out of convenience than financial reasons, but a cross-section of New York City society depends on public transport. In one train you could easily see a successful investment banker on Wall Street and someone on welfare. At Bloomberg's level, yes they'll have drivers, but isn't in their interest to support mass transport? I mean, after all, more people taking the subway means less gridlock for taxis and limos.

 

Its the same in NJ , but sadly is less common place in CT and LI and we need to change this....

[Culver Line]

And therein lies the problem. Every time the state is scrapped for cash, the first casualty is the since obviously no one takes the trains or uses the buses. I understand the fiscal constraints we're all in, but can't keep giving them the short end of the stick...

 

They can get away with it because they know that the people who use the trains don't have any way of pressuring them to fix what's broken and to make the service better.

 

They are a monopoly. People have to go to work and have no alternative but to keep using the trains and put up with the reduced/deteriating system and service.

[qjtransitmaster]

As far as i'm concerned the best subway system in the world is the one that runs the highest percentage of it's trains on schedule which automatically eliminates New York. :tdown:

 

What I also notice is that some of the more advanced systems with clean and pretty stations also have systemwide reliability rates in the 95% range or higher. That's no coincidence due to three factors.

1. The "standard" in terms of modern metros for reliability is 95%. If NYCT doesn't want to be seen as a joke among the world's major metros then 95% of weekday trains will have to run on schedule.

2. The cities with never and rapidly expanding metros have huge traffic and environmental concerns and people in these areas NEED to ride the subway. Without frequent and reliable service accompanied by borderline luxurious stations it will be hard to convince millions of people to ride the new subway lines. The attractive design and bright lights of the trains and stations help to attract the riders the city NEEDS on the subway.

3. Most Asian systems are run as government owned corporations. The government seeks a profit from the operation of these systems so they are quick to innovate and improve the machinery in any way possible to reduce the costly human workforce.

 

BEST POST SO FAR NYC trains are horribly unreliable when I am in a rush I walk to the express bus cause I can't even rely on the subway. MTA is just arrogant and I can't wait to try out asia maybe I can live in a better city. The MTA is frequent now they just need reliability and borderline luxurious stations and they can become perfect almost. The MNRR and LIRR however have frequent service and are much more reliable service but serve suburban and rural areas. I hope 287 rail corridor fixes it.

[qjtransitmaster]

Its the same in NJ , but sadly is less common place in CT and LI and we need to change this....

 

how would you change that in LI???? Isn't that an attitude LI ppl have towards transit.

[EE Broadway Local]

I'd have to agree yes, and here's my reasoning (maybe, not actually why):

 

1) Service is 24/7/365;

2) Express service is offered and not just rush hours;

3) History; New York City is among the oldest systems in the world. Mr. Alfred Eli Beach built a clandestine, short unique pneumatic-operated subway under Broadway in 1868 (that Mr. Boss Tweed wasn't thrilled about); elevated service began in 1870 and subway service began in 1904.

 

In Brooklyn, today's (J)/(Z) trains travel on a section of the oldest el survivng - a section that dates back to the late 1800's!

4) "Uniqueness": Where else can you find a subway line identified as West Side I.R.T., Broadway-Seventh Avenue Local and the (but never as the red line!).

4) Combination of equipment. New York is simply too large a system that it will ever have a single car type (though the R142s and R160s have gone far in narrowing the car types).

 

At its' peak, perhaps, our subway had R12s, R14s, R15s, R17s, R21s, R22s, R26s, 28s, R33 MLs and R33/R36 WFs on the I.R.T. and R1-R9s, R10s. R11s/R34s, R16s, R32 Brightliners, R38s, R40 Slants, R40Ms, R42s and R44s running in regular revenue service (1973-1977).

 

5) We also have a short system that runs subway-like under Sixth Avenue between West 9th and West 33d Streets and for one Lower Manhattan terminal and in each case, tunnels under the Hudson River to serve Hoboken, Jersey City, Harrison and Newark in New Jersey.

 

Known as PATH since 1962, this short system began as The Hudson And Manhattan Railroad and was affiliated with The Pennsylvania Railroad.

 

In H & M days, Tuscan Red MP cars served the Newark-Hudson Terminal Line and the famous "Black Cars" served the Journal Square-33d Street and Hoboken-Hudson Terminal and Hoboboken-33d Street Lines.

 

Original stations in Manhattan were Hudson Terminal and Christopher, Ninth, 14th, 19th, 23d, 28th and 33d Streets.

[geoking66]

As far as i'm concerned the best subway system in the world is the one that runs the highest percentage of it's trains on schedule which automatically eliminates New York. :tdown:

 

What I also notice is that some of the more advanced systems with clean and pretty stations also have systemwide reliability rates in the 95% range or higher. That's no coincidence due to three factors.

1. The "standard" in terms of modern metros for reliability is 95%. If NYCT doesn't want to be seen as a joke among the world's major metros then 95% of weekday trains will have to run on schedule.

2. The cities with never and rapidly expanding metros have huge traffic and environmental concerns and people in these areas NEED to ride the subway. Without frequent and reliable service accompanied by borderline luxurious stations it will be hard to convince millions of people to ride the new subway lines. The attractive design and bright lights of the trains and stations help to attract the riders the city NEEDS on the subway.

3. Most Asian systems are run as government owned corporations. The government seeks a profit from the operation of these systems so they are quick to innovate and improve the machinery in any way possible to reduce the costly human workforce.

 

By your logic a system that ran perfect 15min headways would be better than one with 2-3min ones, albeit delayed every so often and thereby reducing its on-time percentage. That benchmark fails miserably in any big city.

 

1) Most rapid transit systems do NOT run on schedules; New York is a rare exception. In most cases, systems are judged based on deviation from standard headways. Once the subway is eventually automated and reduced to OPTO (if ever, I'm pointing the finger at you, TWU), performance will both improve and the need for a schedule will disappear.

 

2) So you'd rather a limited system than one that's slightly grimier but runs just as well? I'd take the subway over the Washington Metro any day, even though the latter is basically rubbish and graffiti-free and has air conditioning in stations. Why? Because the Metro is falling apart and it's only 30 or so years old since WMATA would rather a system that looks pretty than runs well. Also, the New York City Subway is far older than most systems, and apart from London and Tokyo, networks at that age are in desperate need of maintenance. Ever been on the Paris Métro? It's pretty disgusting, but RATP is finally getting its act together; however, stations are smaller and of uniform dimension, and politicians are more willing to invest highly in public transport.

 

3) That's not true. The MTR Corporation, which is the standard for quasi-privatised systems, is a publicly-traded company of which the Hong Kong government holds a majority share. Its property division brings in revenue that compensates for the fact that even its rail division doesn't make a profit, because no company in the world does. However, the net loss is relatively low in Hong Kong, in part due to lower labour costs and its relatively young age. Japanese railway operating companies are private entities that are effectively subsidised by the Japanese government, a product of the privatisation of the Japanese rail network.

[T to Dyre Avenue]

Just because a rail system has more track miles, more stations and express tracks, doesn't automatically make it better than a system with fewer tracks and stations. Part of the problem with our system is the inconsistency of service. Let's be honest, how may times have you had to wait 10-15 minutes for a train when it's supposed to come once every five to six minutes? How about having to do it in a station that's hotter than Hell? And how many times have you been on a express train that ran really slowly and got passed by a local train, perhaps the one you transferred off of? What happens when your station has elevators and/or escalators that constantly don't work, like Main Street-Flushing?

 

That's why New York's subway system is not the best. It could be, but it would take a serious commitment on the part of the MTA, City Hall and Albany. Unfortunately, that commitment is seriously lacking on the part of our politicians and transit management. We deserve better.

[chrisliz09]

Just because a rail system has more track miles, more stations and express tracks, doesn't automatically make it better than a system with fewer tracks and stations. Part of the problem with our system is the inconsistency of service. Let's be honest, how may times have you had to wait 10-15 minutes for a train when it's supposed to come once every five to six minutes? How about having to do it in a station that's hotter than Hell? And how many times have you been on a express train that ran really slowly and got passed by a local train, perhaps the one you transferred off of? What happens when your station has elevators and/or escalators that constantly don't work, like Main Street-Flushing?

 

That's why New York's subway system is not the best. It could be, but it would take a serious commitment on the part of the MTA, City Hall and Albany. Unfortunately, that commitment is seriously lacking on the part of our politicians and transit management. We deserve better.

i once said this and it still haves meaning, this city does have a big system and for all the miles of track and hundreds of stations we have we are one of the best, now yes we do need too do work on this system and they are doing alot now and more should be done but this city the people refuse too pay into its system. for some reason people here think things come free and the gov should pay it all, well with that attitude we will never get much done now we pay $2.25 a single ride and $29 for the weekly pass, thats a steal too me other states aand cities pay around the same for far less than we have and even more in places like boston ma where you pay for distanc. 2.25 isnt going too pay for anything.