As has been noted many times, in many places, New York City is a net contributor to the New York State budget and the federal budget. And, in most ways, the City of New York is, effectively, the country's capital. But unlike other capitals, much of the country fails to recognize its centrality.
The result if that New York City has to finance a vast array of support items that, in other countries is financed at the national level. New York City provides a vast array of subsidies to over 100 museums, over 100 colleges and universities, and to the area transit systems.
The NYC subway system, 100% owned by the City of New York, subsidizes regional transit (LIRR and Metro North). Intracity bridges are either paid for by the city (NYC DOT Bureau of Waterway Bridges)or by the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority tolls which are a form of tax on city residents who take intra-city trips.
But, in order to get any financial assistance for our transit system, we were forced to hand over control to the crooked MTA which is a study in how to make money dissappear. The MTA's financial acumen is best exemplified by the renovation of their headquarters which consumed some 2 BILLION dollars.
If you would like to see a discussion of how the city might make the subway system run properly, take a look at http://solutionsny.nyc/nycta.html.
1
London has invested a lot, £5 Billion on refurbishing tube lines and new rolling stock, £15 Billion on Crossrail, £6.5 Billion on Thameslink and billions upgrading national rail stations. There is also the new rolling stock, London Overground, the Docklands Light Railway and South London Tramlink.
Whilst the £1.5 Billion Northern Line expansion has now started, with the £3 Billion Bakerloo Line extension set to start in the next decade along with the £30 Billion Crossrail 2.
Whilst all 9,200 London Buses will be clean electric and hybrid, London currently operating 2,500 such buses, the largest fleet in Europe.
As for National Projects HS2 will cost over £55 Billion, following the £6 Billion spent on new track and tunneling under London as part of HS1, and in the North HS3 is in the offing at an estimated cost of £7 Billion, and will link Northern Cities via a high speed system.
Whilst the £1.5 Billion Northern Line expansion has now started, with the £3 Billion Bakerloo Line extension set to start in the next decade along with the £30 Billion Crossrail 2.
Whilst all 9,200 London Buses will be clean electric and hybrid, London currently operating 2,500 such buses, the largest fleet in Europe.
As for National Projects HS2 will cost over £55 Billion, following the £6 Billion spent on new track and tunneling under London as part of HS1, and in the North HS3 is in the offing at an estimated cost of £7 Billion, and will link Northern Cities via a high speed system.
But we're number one, don't you know? Who else has over a dozen aircraft carriers with their many support ships? Who else has a military that far exceeds any other?
Its all a matter of priorities, as said by president Eisenhower:
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement.
Its all a matter of priorities, as said by president Eisenhower:
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children. The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities. It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population. It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals. It is some fifty miles of concrete pavement.
2
What a load of bunk. I lived and worked in London for 10 year and while an upgraded Victoria line (one of the quicker and more effective lines on the tube system. I found the"Tube" just as crowed and problematic as the NYC Subway System, and unlike London the New York Subway doesn't close at midnight.
I have to agree with DM Moscow it the underground system that beats all others. Milan, Italy is much cleaner, quitter and quicker but they only have a couple of lines.
I have to agree with DM Moscow it the underground system that beats all others. Milan, Italy is much cleaner, quitter and quicker but they only have a couple of lines.
1
I've lived in NYC and suburbs for my entire 60 years. And I'm still trying to master the subway system.
I am one of those people who can't walk around the block without a GPS......and yet in London and Paris, I had the metro systems down to a science within a couple of days. I went everywhere via public transport, arrived on schedule, and never got lost.
I am one of those people who can't walk around the block without a GPS......and yet in London and Paris, I had the metro systems down to a science within a couple of days. I went everywhere via public transport, arrived on schedule, and never got lost.
2
Glad Londoners like the tube. Seems every time I'm in London at least one major line is shut down for weekend work. Or there is a strike. Or the trains are packed and people get really rude. Taking the tube to/from Heathrow is a slog on the best of days. Heathrow Express is pricey but the only way to go.
1
Moscow is the subway to beat all subways. The stations are clean, filled with artwork not defiled by graffiti, and have jarringly fast escalators since their stations are much deeper than NY's. The trains are fast and cheap. There are no concessions made for foreign visitors so good luck getting around if you don't read or speak Russian - though the Muscovites, despite their dour faces, were very friendly and helpful. London's tube is great, but Moscow gets the gold medal.
3
I can't say I share the love for the Tube. I live in Zone 2 (one away from the city center for accounting purposes), but have to rely on the District Line to get into the city from my home. Off-peak is fine, but trying to get a train at rush hour means waiting for two or three to go by before doing my best impression of a Tokyo commuter and backing into the carriage trying not to get my nose caught in the closing doors. Following that, there's usually a good 10-20min where the train sits dead on the tracks because of a delay at Earl's Court (one of the hubs for multiple lines). Signal failures are common, as are line closures (or impromptu station closures).
Instead of dealing with that, I usually just bike in. I'll probably be taken out by a bus one of these days, but at least that will be outside.
Instead of dealing with that, I usually just bike in. I'll probably be taken out by a bus one of these days, but at least that will be outside.
1
The signal failures will be going away - they are replacing the old system, or didn't you know?
2
Biking doesn't work for the majority of commuters.
We need better mass transit service and options for all people. But city planners think that they can take the pressure off their lack of investment in transit by encouraging people to bike. It's just not a good option, and takes away from the vehicles that do need to be on the street like delivery trucks, buses and emergency vehicles.
We need better mass transit service and options for all people. But city planners think that they can take the pressure off their lack of investment in transit by encouraging people to bike. It's just not a good option, and takes away from the vehicles that do need to be on the street like delivery trucks, buses and emergency vehicles.
3
I am in Amsterdam right now. Their Metro is limited by European cities but city is small and trams work great. Best part are the kind and helpful employees who speak fluent English. Not like New York where most service employees are impossible to understand.
4
As long as we have to suffer the delays here, forewarned is forearmed. The MTA actually sends texts and emails whenever there is a delay on any line. Believe me, the reconfiguration of trains switched to different lines can be mind boggling at times; you could start on a #1 train and suddenly find it's turned into a #5 and running up the other side of the island. You can sign up for alerts for any or all subway lines and bus lines. You never know, it might help. It's helped me.
http://www.mymtaalerts.com
http://www.mymtaalerts.com
3
Tube fares. The government more or less sets the fares - for example, TfL can't choose to significantly lower or raise particular fares. cf Ken Livingstone's Fares Fare campaign which was challenged and reversed. That's when zones were introduced (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fares_Fair). But if you think London fares are expensive, they are miniscule compared to most bus and rail fares in the countryside of Britain! Don't forget the system also gives unlimited free rail and bus travel for under 11s, free bus travel for 11-16s, other significant travel discounts for all students over 11, and completely free travel for all over 60s (which fortunately now includes me!) (https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/media/press-releases/2012/october/mayor-rest.... And with the Oyster Card, your daily or other period travel is capped to the equivalent of just a handful of journeys beyond which you pay no more - and it always calculates the cheapest rates for your journeys. This also applies to each individual touch credit or debit card you select to use instead of an Oyster card (it will calculate any cap afresh or any additional card used).
Yeah, I have a life-long fascination and respect, for London's transport. I am still amazed that the impossibility of three-quarter of a million pounds' worth of train arrives every two minutes at a platform and accommodates usually all, or most, of everyone on the platform!
Yeah, I have a life-long fascination and respect, for London's transport. I am still amazed that the impossibility of three-quarter of a million pounds' worth of train arrives every two minutes at a platform and accommodates usually all, or most, of everyone on the platform!
7
The issue of costs of fares is really a wash for residents - in New York they pay more local taxes as a result of heavily subsidised fares, in London fares are higher but there is a lower local tax burden as a result.
Both systems are subsidised, but in London fares are set at roughly the level they pay for the operational costs of the system (paying staff, keeping stations clean, fixing day to day maintenance failures), while the subsidy goes almost entirely to capital investment and upgrades. In New York the fares are held lower too so the subsidy is higher.
The side effect though, is that in New York, politically it is really, really hard to put up the fares AND really hard to put up taxes - hence its current problems of little capital available for much needed investment and upgrades. You also see it on things like the "feel" of stations - how in New York they often feel run down, because they are all the subsidy going to keep fares low and not much left over to maintain the system.
The other advantage of the London approach is that non residents actually pay for the system, and are not subsidised by local tax payers. It's great when I am in New York that you pay for me to ride your Subway for a lot less than it costs - but is that really fair?
You get what you pay for - but how you pay matters too.
Both systems are subsidised, but in London fares are set at roughly the level they pay for the operational costs of the system (paying staff, keeping stations clean, fixing day to day maintenance failures), while the subsidy goes almost entirely to capital investment and upgrades. In New York the fares are held lower too so the subsidy is higher.
The side effect though, is that in New York, politically it is really, really hard to put up the fares AND really hard to put up taxes - hence its current problems of little capital available for much needed investment and upgrades. You also see it on things like the "feel" of stations - how in New York they often feel run down, because they are all the subsidy going to keep fares low and not much left over to maintain the system.
The other advantage of the London approach is that non residents actually pay for the system, and are not subsidised by local tax payers. It's great when I am in New York that you pay for me to ride your Subway for a lot less than it costs - but is that really fair?
You get what you pay for - but how you pay matters too.
5
Horrible trains what a way to commute.
1
But where else do they announce " Mind the Gap"!
6
Toronto.
1
Hong Kong
1
In Berlin in German and English at some stations.
If you like the London Tube, then you have to go to Shanghai to see how a city handles millions of travelers every day. There are lots of lines, they cover miles and miles of the city and 'burbs, and the stops are actually located near someplace that you (as a foreigner or as a resident local) want to go. On top of that, they are very, very clean, cheap, and reliably safe. And you can pay with refillable transit cards or your smartphone. BTW, the signs are in English and Mandarin, and there are maps at the exits to help guide you when you get off (altho those tend to be Mandarin only). What's not to like?
5
If you think the London tube was "an alternate universe," you should check out the subway system in Tokyo (where I lived for nearly 12 years). Yes, the trains are extremely crowded during rush hour, but they're also incredibly clean and they run on time nearly 100% of the time. Plus, the underground stations are air-conditioned. Tokyo's system is better than Hong Kong's and Beijing's -- better than just any other country's.
3
I must have ridden a different subway while in London. Each time I've been (around four separate times) I've experienced the dreaded engineering works. I've been dropped in the middle of no where en route to a friends late at night while the rest of the train line was out of service. No signs, no help, no way to get to my destination. This was before smart phones and uber. Boston is far from perfect, but at the very least when they shut down stops, or alter routes they offer help and bus alternates.
Also - coming in from the airport during the morning rush hour on a teeny tiny car with luggage is a nightmare.
Also - coming in from the airport during the morning rush hour on a teeny tiny car with luggage is a nightmare.
2
From your post, that was some time since.
They have fixed a lot since then.
About the only good thing to come out of having the vile fascism of the "olympic games" foisted on to us, was that they made sure the system was working, & having got it that way, are now keeping it up to scratch
They have fixed a lot since then.
About the only good thing to come out of having the vile fascism of the "olympic games" foisted on to us, was that they made sure the system was working, & having got it that way, are now keeping it up to scratch
1
As a Londoner I agree that the Tube is really great.... except when you really need it in peak hour as a commuter. It's a pain having to wait for several trains to go by before you can squeeze on one, or being shoved about on the platform. Dare take the Piccadilly Line to Heathrow with a suitcase when it's busy and you'll get the evil eye.
6
Though better than NY, I found the London Underground to be not the most reliable subway system due to many scheduled shutdowns, especially on weekends. Certainly they are better than the unscheduled variety though. If you want to experience really great subway systems, go to Montreal, Paris, Madrid, Milan, or (especially) Barcelona.
5
The older I get, the more I appreciate how well TfL manages to integrate all its transport offerings, but for me the best system is run by BVG in Berlin.
2
As a new Yorker who has lived in London for 16 years I am always amazed by tourists who say the Tube is wonderful. To know it you have to do the grinding daily rush hour commute through floods, strikes, signal failures, "passenger in front of train" incidents and station closures. The Tube is an antique that struggles far more than NYC's system.
4
Strikes are not that common, actually
1
I have to say, if that's all you learned about travelling on the Tube in London, you didn't dig very much. Signalling problems are a daily occurrence here. During rush hour, you might have to let 3 or 4 trains go before you can board one, from the crowds. This happens every day. Fares are only for the people who can afford them and they rise every year, but service doesn't seem to be getting better. Weekend closures for work and signal replacement have been going on for years but staff numbers in stations are being cut. It's easy to look at somebody's shoes when youre crammed so close to them it's either that or their sweaty armpit.
7
I live in Seattle and we finally built a light rail. It now takes less than 2 hours to get from one end of the city to the other in some directions, which is a huge plus. This article makes me feel like quite the bumpkin. I have used light rail around the world, but now we have our own.
You want enthusiasm? Come to Seattle. Or maybe not, actually. I hear our enthusiasm looks like other cities' boredom. But I promise, we are enthusiastic.
You want enthusiasm? Come to Seattle. Or maybe not, actually. I hear our enthusiasm looks like other cities' boredom. But I promise, we are enthusiastic.
3
I lived in London for four years and there's nothing romantic about rush hour commute along the District Line. And signal failures, that's every day in London too. Just checked the Tube Status page: "Waterloo and City Line: No service due to a power supply problem."
3
There are many other better subway systems in the world that the reporter could have gone to other than the London tube. For a substantially underground subway system that navigates under densely populated areas with the kind of crowd density, crowd control, coverage convenience, frequency, and efficiency, the Hong Kong MTR is as good a model as it can get for NYC to study.
4
The Tube is wonderful but it shuts down at midnight, and can be more expensive. So- trade off filth ,erratic running,confusing or no signage , one price for all trips vs clean, good signage expensive, closed at midnight
2
You'll find the Tube now has an all-night service, albeit only Fridays and Saturdays. https://tfl.gov.uk/campaign/tube-improvements/what-we-are-doing/night-tube. Also using an Oyster Card saves time and money for trips.
2
Even Mexico City has a more functional subway system than New York. It's time to invest in our infrastructure.
The Tube is not open not 24 hours, seven days a week, correct? That's a huge difference between NYC and London.
I was fortunate to visit London a couple years ago, the underground is great, and the buses are great too. I was in Tokyo last month, their system is even better. New York has fallen very far behind, they aren't even the best system in the US (Chicago and DC beat NYC easily). I doubt the will exists in NYC to catch up to the other Worldwide Great Cities.
5
On my tube commute this morning, I had two wait for two packed trains to pass before I could get on one. Good thing they were coming every 1-2 minutes, or I might have had to wait approximately forever. My tube line is regularly packed. Even on a Sunday afternoon, there is no guarantee of getting a seat.
When things go wrong, they can go very wrong. And it can be caused by equipment failure, weather (for the large proportion of "underground" lines that are actually above ground), planned engineering works or industrial action.
Tube is really the only viable option from my house to get to work. By tube, I have a 35 minute commute. Even if I were to drive (no parking in central London + the congestion charge), Google maps (which notoriously underestimates British road congestion) reckons the 10 miles would take 75+ minutes at rush hour. When the tube isn't running and I have to take alternative forms of public transport (buses and trains), I expect to add an extra hour or more to my normal 35 minutes.
I have never lived in New York and I do notice when I visit that there are shortcomings on the subway compared to the tube, but the tube is definitely not a paradise.
And for whomever is praising the Paris metro, it's not a patch on the tube. The trains are less frequent, more crime ridden and dirtier than the tube. I have never encountered a pool of pee in a London underground station. I wish I could say the same of the Paris metro.
When things go wrong, they can go very wrong. And it can be caused by equipment failure, weather (for the large proportion of "underground" lines that are actually above ground), planned engineering works or industrial action.
Tube is really the only viable option from my house to get to work. By tube, I have a 35 minute commute. Even if I were to drive (no parking in central London + the congestion charge), Google maps (which notoriously underestimates British road congestion) reckons the 10 miles would take 75+ minutes at rush hour. When the tube isn't running and I have to take alternative forms of public transport (buses and trains), I expect to add an extra hour or more to my normal 35 minutes.
I have never lived in New York and I do notice when I visit that there are shortcomings on the subway compared to the tube, but the tube is definitely not a paradise.
And for whomever is praising the Paris metro, it's not a patch on the tube. The trains are less frequent, more crime ridden and dirtier than the tube. I have never encountered a pool of pee in a London underground station. I wish I could say the same of the Paris metro.
5
The London Tube runs more efficiently than New York's subway, but has ventilation problems--no air grates in the sidewalk. NY has air grates and exhaust fans which helps when the outside air is not too polluted with traffic exhaust, which is almost never. Trains in London whiz in and out of the station every 2 minutes or so. The stench of urine pervades the cars and stations of the NYC subway. The E train is notoriously odorous. I had to let 3 F trains leave the station without me on them as the stench was so bad as I entered the car I jumped back out the door. you can go to work in clean clothes and pick up the smell of urine on route. The filth of some NYC stations is a disgrace. London's stations and trains are much cleaner.
5
Overstated. The London Underground in summer is quite unbearable - mostly no A/C. And the ticket prices are very high.
4
I was in London just last week, one stop from getting into Heathrow from downtown, and the train stopped. A message said we had to transfer to another train as there were switching signals problems and that train couldn't continue. Then another message said the second train on the neighbouring track also couldn't continue and that we would have to go upstairs and take a bus. There were quite a few people towing luggage, no doubt on their way to catch a flight at Heathrow. No one around to tell us which bus to take to continue our journey, and the crowd rapidly growing in the bus stops as the subway cars emptied. No buses that we saw indicated their route would ever go to Heathrow. One bus even shut the door in the face of a group of people who were trying to get on, and drove away. It took over an hour of bus hopping and shuttle from one terminal to the other to finally get into Heathrow, just one stop further on the subway line.
1
Nauseating that we paid so much for the limited new fancy stations on the 2nd Avenue line, catering as usual to the very wealthy and that's it, without bothering to replace these signals first. Hoping the expansion of the ferry line plus citibike can eliminate the need for the subway in my life.
3
I was in London just last week, one stop from getting into Heathrow from downtown, and the train stopped. A message said we had to transfer to another train as there were switching signals problems and that train couldn't continue. Then another message said the second train on the neighbouring track also couldn't continue and that we would have to go upstairs and take a bus. There were quite a few people towing luggage, no doubt on their way to catch a flight at Heathrow. No one around to tell us which bus to take to continue our journey, and the crowd rapidly growing in the bus stops as the subway cars emptied. No buses that we saw indicated their route would ever go to Heathrow. One bus even shut the door in the face of a group of people who were trying to get on, and drove away half full. It took over an hour of bus hopping and shuttle from one terminal to the other to finally get into Heathrow, just one stop further on the subway line.
3
You need to go back and re-report this story between June and September when temperatures in the un-airconditioned Tube frequently reach over 100 degrees. Transport for London workers hand out bottled water but people still pass out on the platforms and in the cars. I'll take a delayed cool NYC subway over a hotter-than-hell but on-time Tube any day!
1
Since the NYC cars are air conditioned - dumping the heat into the air outside the car - and stations are not and do not have much in the way of exhaust fans, stations in NYC can get extremely hot in the summer. And there's a lot more of it in NYC than in London.
1
Anyone coming to London:make sure you buy an Oyster card. The system logs you in/out of the stations you enter/exit and automatically works out the cheapest fare for you. Alternatively use your bank debit card - it works just the same. Never buy individual journey tickets - way too expensive.
BTW The system was overhauled by a New Yorker - Bob Kiley, who used to run your MTA. The funding for upgrading came from a combination of government funding and increased rail fares.
BTW The system was overhauled by a New Yorker - Bob Kiley, who used to run your MTA. The funding for upgrading came from a combination of government funding and increased rail fares.
6
I'm on the Victoria Line in London, which this month will increase frequency to 36 trains per hour. That's one every 100 seconds. Modern (moving block) signalling is the key thing.
A few months ago I was, for a week, using the L Train from 1st Avenue. I'd assumed, being computer driven, it would be a similar experience. I was quite surprised to see a "next train 8 minutes" on the indicator.
Oh and Metrocards. Love the price, but the not the 90s tech. In London most people just use their bank card. The system automatically tracks what you've spent, and caps it so you can't spend any more than buying a one day pass. You can even use your phone, the whole transit system works with Android and Apple Pay - buses, everything. No special app, just the standard phone payment system.
Still, the subway does have some good things about it that are hard to find in any other city. Express trains and 24 hour service on every route - the Underground has neither and will never have, due to the infrastructure.
A few months ago I was, for a week, using the L Train from 1st Avenue. I'd assumed, being computer driven, it would be a similar experience. I was quite surprised to see a "next train 8 minutes" on the indicator.
Oh and Metrocards. Love the price, but the not the 90s tech. In London most people just use their bank card. The system automatically tracks what you've spent, and caps it so you can't spend any more than buying a one day pass. You can even use your phone, the whole transit system works with Android and Apple Pay - buses, everything. No special app, just the standard phone payment system.
Still, the subway does have some good things about it that are hard to find in any other city. Express trains and 24 hour service on every route - the Underground has neither and will never have, due to the infrastructure.
3
Not technically true re: lack of express trains. Some Met line trains run like an express, as do some on the Piccadilly line.
1
You think New York is bad? Come on down to the Nation's Capital. Our METRO is a disaster. Unsafe and unscheduled, it cannot be counted on to get you to your destination in a timely fashion or even to get you there. Broken escalators, broken trains, broken hearts. Horror stories abound, but the biggest problem (other than the years of deferred maintenance) is the lack of money, which may now be solved by a dedicated sales tax throughout the DMV (no, not the Department of Motor Vehicles; District, Maryland, Virginia).
3
For all it's faults, the Tube is a wonder. I lived in Boston for 10 years, and then DC (originally from Memphis). I have lived in London (mostly) since 1985 and I love the Tube.
When I first arrived, it was extraordinarily dirty, and people could smoke in some carriages and in the stations. Awful. But a clean-up campaign after the Kings Cross fire disaster boosted ridership, and the high fares do enable track and equipment improvements.
Disclosure: Since last year I ride free on all buses, trains and Tube in London. Older age (over 62 now?) can get an electronic Freedom Pass travelcard. I use mine several times a day, mostly for buses.
When I first arrived, it was extraordinarily dirty, and people could smoke in some carriages and in the stations. Awful. But a clean-up campaign after the Kings Cross fire disaster boosted ridership, and the high fares do enable track and equipment improvements.
Disclosure: Since last year I ride free on all buses, trains and Tube in London. Older age (over 62 now?) can get an electronic Freedom Pass travelcard. I use mine several times a day, mostly for buses.
11
Have to disagree with your comment about cost having been in New York a couple of months ago - yes, NY has a flat fare, but the charge you cite is from outer London. In central London, all journeys are £2.30 which equates to your flat gate and that's where most journeys are done. I'd also admit to be happy to pay the extra - it was all very well getting from JKF to Manhattan for $2.75 but we stood for ages waiting, as you said. If a little extra sorted the issues you raise, surely that would be worth it? I'm not from London but I often have to work there - on balance, I preferred the overall experience in London and we stayed out of the Subway in NY wherever possible.
9
If the NYC transit system were to charge the actual cost of service they'd have a nicer system too. Instead they use general tax revenues and federal grants to barely cover the cost of just running leaving little funds to improve the service.
1
Plus you have to pay $5 more to get from the terminal to the subway at JFK, even if you have an unlimited Metrocard. After two weeks in London, using the Tube and buses all the time, I got on a grim, dirty NYC subway at JFK and felt I had plunged into a different planet (where I actually live.)
2
You are not the Michael Brown who is Commissioner of Transport in London are you ?
1
Try the Paris métro, and hey! they even have safety barriers on the platforms. Your transit system is like your healthcare system, so yesterday.
28
The first line of the London Underground was created in 1863, while the NYC subway originated in 1904.As a result there is little provision for handicapped access on either. However, in London there is an effort to provide it but much less so in New York. In London about 70 out of 270 Underground stations have some degree of step-free access.
http://www.transportforall.org.uk/public/ug/
http://londonist.com/2011/11/accessibletubemap
http://www.transportforall.org.uk/public/ug/
http://londonist.com/2011/11/accessibletubemap
3
London's Tube is light-years ahead of NY's subway--as are the transport systems of virtually EVERY Euro capital!
And the staff are generally friendly and helpful...
But the trains are often very, very crowded and hot on hot days. And people definitely complained when staff were cut back drastically a few years ago, and about other maintenance and upkeep issues. Too bad a reporter allegedly sent on-site couldn't present a less simplistic and more nuanced view of how Londoners see the Tube.
And Londoners -- like pretty much everyone on mass transit, in general -- look at the floor or the ceilings -- when NOT looking at media, as pretty much everyone, everywhere is these days
And the staff are generally friendly and helpful...
But the trains are often very, very crowded and hot on hot days. And people definitely complained when staff were cut back drastically a few years ago, and about other maintenance and upkeep issues. Too bad a reporter allegedly sent on-site couldn't present a less simplistic and more nuanced view of how Londoners see the Tube.
And Londoners -- like pretty much everyone on mass transit, in general -- look at the floor or the ceilings -- when NOT looking at media, as pretty much everyone, everywhere is these days
12
Over two weeks in London I found the Tube personnel to be universally helpful and polite. My experience with years of NYC subway and bus personnel is just the opposite.
1
Much of Berlin's subways (U or S) are historic rail lines, but run very very well. I'm always amazed at how often I find a train is coming in 2, 3, 4 minutes. Barcelona is often very very good also.
People interested in problems faced by transit planners might enjoy the very readable and engaging book by expert Jarrett Walker "Human Transit" How Clearer Thinking about Public Transit Can Enrich Our Communites." Jarrett also blogs on transit strategy topics.
People interested in problems faced by transit planners might enjoy the very readable and engaging book by expert Jarrett Walker "Human Transit" How Clearer Thinking about Public Transit Can Enrich Our Communites." Jarrett also blogs on transit strategy topics.
11
Two thoughts to share.
First, your article was great. I vote for shutting down whole sections and JUST GET THE SYSTEM up to date. Pull the band-aid off quickly; just do it. Although I don't use the subway, I did at one time and can feel your pain.
Second, last time I was in London using the Tube, about 9 years ago, I recall newspapers everywhere, people actually reading the print editions, then leaving them just everywhere.
First, your article was great. I vote for shutting down whole sections and JUST GET THE SYSTEM up to date. Pull the band-aid off quickly; just do it. Although I don't use the subway, I did at one time and can feel your pain.
Second, last time I was in London using the Tube, about 9 years ago, I recall newspapers everywhere, people actually reading the print editions, then leaving them just everywhere.
3
I don't know why so many Americans are in love with the Tube. Perhaps it's the glow from being on vacation. Having lived in London with daily commutes on the Tube from '98-'04, it is not without its troubles. I lived in North London where that Northern Line was consistently delayed--very similar to the F and R. To get me to work, I had to transfer to the Circle Line which was notorious for signal troubles. At least London has the countdown clocks to tell me that my train is coming in about 20mins. London has the overnight hours to maintain the system. Our system does not shut down. Additionally, NYC has the only system in which multiple lines share the same tracks. So of course, the N is being held by supervision at 34th St while waiting for the R to go ahead to 49th St first. I don't think our system is superior. I have my long list of complaints. I do think that giving NYC full control of the subways instead of Albany, will be a huge step forward.
9
NYC's is very much not "the only system in which multiple lines share the same tracks" and signal issues cause delays to cascade across multiple lines. This is a longstanding issue on the Chicago 'L' and San Francisco's Muni Metro. Get out more.
Oh crap! None of you remember the NY subways back in the 1950's and 60's, long before A/C. I recall the No 1, Broadway line regularly stopped between stations and often waited a good 15 minutes or more, without announcements because the intercom systems were all broken. All Transit signs were paper or rolled paper signs in the trains and often a no. 6 train might read it was a No 5 or a 2 train and was not going to the Bronx but back to City Hall. Our subways have been infinitely worse and we still put up with them because they actually do get us around the biggest and almost one of the best cities anywhere. Even the Russkis put up with them , for the sake of the banks and our ironclad courts which let Chinese, Russian and thieves from anywhere, stash billions here, pay no tax, buy solid gold US citizenship for pennies on the pound of gold, and even return home to steal more.
Our trains are a trial but , for the sake of the city, we have put up with worse.
Grrrr! I hate foreigners what dump on our subway trains! Weez NYC and weez got the best damaged trains anywhere and we don't need pusher with scissors to cut people's clothes off to stuff folks in cars.
(Tokyo did or does that)
If you don't like our subways, walk! Or, push for a proper set of street level trolley-(light rail) and a companion set of light rail funiculars running 20 feet or more off the ground. Such LightRailsystems were common in US cities all through the the country until WWII.
Our trains are a trial but , for the sake of the city, we have put up with worse.
Grrrr! I hate foreigners what dump on our subway trains! Weez NYC and weez got the best damaged trains anywhere and we don't need pusher with scissors to cut people's clothes off to stuff folks in cars.
(Tokyo did or does that)
If you don't like our subways, walk! Or, push for a proper set of street level trolley-(light rail) and a companion set of light rail funiculars running 20 feet or more off the ground. Such LightRailsystems were common in US cities all through the the country until WWII.
1
"Additionally, NYC has the only system in which multiple lines share the same tracks" - no, London has that too - just look at the complications of the Circle, Metropolitan, Hammersmith and City, and District lines - even lifelong Londoners like me get confused sometimes. Not sure if this link will work: http://content.tfl.gov.uk/standard-tube-map.pdf
7
Take heart - the London tube was similar to the New York subway at one time. Of course, that was back in the 1960's. Maybe your grandchildren will see an improvement...
3
Subways, Amtrak, Tunnels, Bridges, Roads like the LIE and BQE all require government funding to function. They have been starved for years by those (mostly Republicans) who have followed the really wrong advice of Ronald Reagan in his inaugural address. The reality is that government is the only solution for public works, providing jobs, and growing the economy. The British seemed to know the obvious: public works actually require public funding. The only consolation I can offer tired New Yorkers is that the subway, on most days, is an improvement over the bumper to bumper third world traffic that chokes the city.
13
The problem I had in riding the London tube was the small size of the train cars. They were narrower than NYC train cars and during rush hour they were far more crowded than NYC cars. I could only think that when the tunnels were designed over 100 years ago they were built to hold a smaller Englishman then what exists today. As for the signaling problems or non problems in London I did not notice any problems.
3
That's why it's called the tube - the deep lines are all bored, as opposed to the "cut and cover" method which I believe NYC used for its subway.
4
Deeper tunnels mean smaller trains, only the district and metropolitan lines that run on surface and cut and shunt tunnels have the luxury of being full height.
6
The Governer and our Mayor should be embarrassed by how bad the subway system has become. The daily delays must cost city employers billions in lost production, due to overall poor service. The State is spending millions on so called "Planned work' which is meant to upgrade the system. All Planned Work really does is interrupt service with confusing schedules and delays, to the point you need a degree from the MTA just to get around the city. The only thing "Planned work" is good for is putting money into contractors and the MTA big shots pockets. The level of service has decreased since Planned work started a couple of years ago. A system that was once considered the best in the world has turned into a bad joke!
1
There are many excellent subway systems in the world, so I am surprised that The Times sent you to London. Of the older systems, I would choose Stockholm, Tokyo, Paris (quiet!), and even Moscow over London. You should try to talk your management into sending you to Singapore, Berlin, Munich, Frankfurt, and Madrid. The emerging LA system will eventually be OK, with the major problem being the difficulty of covering the massive sprawl of the city, making it hard to match Paris and Tokyo, where the relative density of stations is higher.
I would also add that other countries place a higher value on public transportation than does the US, where the bus, train, and metro systems are mostly an embarrassment. The San Francisco Bay Area *should* be good, but is quite awful, especially by the standards of these other cities.
Federal and local leaders in the US seem to think that money spent on public transportation systems supports poor and minority populations, which often means that these systems, such as SEPTA and MARTA, are starved. Case in point: the new Atlanta baseball stadium in suburban Cobb County: try getting there by public transportation, especially on a Sunday.
To me, the Tube is just mediocre against my ideals. It just looks good to an American because our systems are so horrible.
I would also add that other countries place a higher value on public transportation than does the US, where the bus, train, and metro systems are mostly an embarrassment. The San Francisco Bay Area *should* be good, but is quite awful, especially by the standards of these other cities.
Federal and local leaders in the US seem to think that money spent on public transportation systems supports poor and minority populations, which often means that these systems, such as SEPTA and MARTA, are starved. Case in point: the new Atlanta baseball stadium in suburban Cobb County: try getting there by public transportation, especially on a Sunday.
To me, the Tube is just mediocre against my ideals. It just looks good to an American because our systems are so horrible.
8
The Brits care about London and are willing to put money into improving the city, whether it be improving the underground, pay for the upkeep of the British Museum. Here, at home, no one cares about New York, the engine of commerce and a net payer into the federal coffers. That money we send goes toward suburban roads or mortgages, rural farm lobbies, or fighting endless wars overseas. Meanwhile, the subway is a mess, our railroads hanging by a thread, and the Metropolitan Museum, probably the single most important repository of artifacts in the world, struggling to make ends meet.
22
The only time I ever intentionally make eye contact on NYC subways is to try and offer an apologetic expression to international tourists I see riding on them. They must be either mystified or horrified that a supposed first-world city like NY has such a rundown and dysfunctional transit system.
9
If you think New York is bad, try our Washington metro. Absolutely unbelievably broken, and it is only 40 years old. It's a total embarrassment. New York's system is heaven on earth by comparison.
9
Good start Emma: keep up the criticism.
The most telling aspect of the MTA -- and it applies to Metro North and LIRR as well -- is how often the same "problem" occurs; and to the long-time rider it appears that the crew and management are dealing with this "problem" for the first time. I have ridden all of the above for thirty years now, and those "problems" have occurred countless times.
The surest sign that management and employees don't care is to experience the same problems over and over again with no improvement in sight. Contempt for the public (the customers) is apparent at every turn.
The most telling aspect of the MTA -- and it applies to Metro North and LIRR as well -- is how often the same "problem" occurs; and to the long-time rider it appears that the crew and management are dealing with this "problem" for the first time. I have ridden all of the above for thirty years now, and those "problems" have occurred countless times.
The surest sign that management and employees don't care is to experience the same problems over and over again with no improvement in sight. Contempt for the public (the customers) is apparent at every turn.
4
I recall living in New York in the mid 90's, when getting "stuck" in a tunnel meant a few quiet moments of reprieve from the otherwise breakneck rhythm that dictated life in the Big Apple. Sometimes the lights would go out in the quiet car as the conductor announced the delay in hushed tones. The slience was punctuated by little more than the audible crinkles of tabloids and broadsheets slowly and patiently unfurling on commuter laps.
3
There is a definite infrastructure crisis in the New York City Subway System that affects the quality of life for millions of riders.
What is the master plan going forward to meet the standards currently in place in the UK. ?
What is the master plan going forward to meet the standards currently in place in the UK. ?
7
Every time I visit London I am again grateful for the Tube, which is the fastest and most efficient way to get around when you're a tourist with a long list of things you want to visit and limited time. It's also easy to figure out. A couple of points: the system is divided into zones, and the fare goes up depending on how many zones you cross. You can buy a 7-day pass that reduces the individual ride cost, and the fare drops when you travel outside of rush hour. Also, some lines are more crowded than others; at certain stops on the Piccadilly line on weekends, for example, there is such a crush on the platforms that I've waited for two and even 3 trains to go by before I've been able to get on. All in all, it's still one of the best systems in the world, if not the best.
8
There are the additional issues raised by the way the MTA is governed. Not only is it under the jurisdiction of the state, but most of the MTA Board members haven't been on the subway in decades, if ever. They arrive at MTA Board meetings by car and driver - they have EZ-passes paid for by the MTA, for god's sake! They have no idea what goes on and how frustrating it is to ride the subway at times. It should be a requirement of being on the MTA Board to take the subway at rush hour several times a month, along with the LIRR and Metro North. The 24 hour schedule is a legitimate constraint to getting repairs done, and it is one that London does not have to consider. But Fasttrack has worked well, and it should be continued as much as possible to do upgrades and repairs.
5
The far hills really are always greener ... the "tube", too, has had its troubles. The difference between the MTA and TfL is that things in London finally got so bad, about 20 years ago, that "stiff upper lip" wasn't going to cut it any more. The Central Line was shut down for days at a time and then finally for months in 2003, after a motor fell out of the underside of a tube train. Britain found the money to modernize the system: Signals, electrical cables, rolling stock etc. We, too, could have the same system reliability and real-time information. All it will take is more tax revenues from the State - and a $4 fare.
15
Come to Chicago. We love our L!
And, contrary to the Times reports from Chicago over the last two years, there are millions of us (alive) who use it every day
And, contrary to the Times reports from Chicago over the last two years, there are millions of us (alive) who use it every day
12
As I live part-time in Chicago, I can totally agree with Paul about the L. I can ride the Blue line from O'Hare to Western Ave., catch the bus to Clark st. and I'm home. Total cost $7.50, and only because the fare FROM O'Hare is $5,,,sort of an "entry tax" for the city. When I reverse commute, it's only a total of $5 to get to O'Hare. If I take a cab, it's $45, with a tip! The Go shuttle costs about $32, one way, and in either case, you generally have to sit in traffic. It takes about the same elapsed time. I forgot to mention the "Bus Tracker" app, which tells you when the next bus is due....for all lines! Lots better than NYC.
1
I have traveled to London for 10 days every year since 1990. I have ridden the Tube more times in those 10 days than I have the NYC subway for the other 355 days of the year. I live in NJ and commute through the Port Authority to East 50th Street and will walk unless it's a downpour because of the NYC subway system. The Tube is cleaner, quieter and more efficient. The timers in the Tube are an effective tool, even though I have rarely waited for a train for more than 2 -3 minutes. And that Tube experience has been consistent for the past 25+ years. If I recall, the man hired away from the Tube to run the NYC subway did not stay long because of how difficult the unions were.
5
I was often inconvenienced by transit strikes, breakdowns, and blackout hours when I lived in London.
1
Can you report on what it took to get the Tube the way it is now? I lived in London in 2002 when the Central Line was shut down for a year following an engine exploding. The whole time since then and for a decade before has been a constant sustained effort at growth and rebuilding. The Tube was already extensive enough that there's almost always another route but that same year the congestion charge was brought in, buses already had "red lanes" but huge numbers were added, the Oyster card was brought in, after the Central Line other lines were overhauled. Fares were raised a lot and fare structure changes several times, bus only pass or fare is less on purpose because the Tube part was considered full. The Mayor just lowered bus fare again. There's a lot to be learned from what they do and how they rebuilt it, and you are in a position to report it!
2
Countdown timers would help a lot. Maybe a phone app would be cheaper to roll out than building displays, but anything is better than keep checking to see if the train is coming.
It might be better and less expensive to upgrade the existing signal system rather than install a brand new one. The old equipment may not be as efficient would seem to be, and may need to be fixed, but it works and has worked for a long time. So many of the new subway stations are already having failures with the brand new equipment as well as cost overruns, so I just have my doubts about total replacement.
The good folks in London can use their Oyster Card, a renewable personal transit card. This lowers the fare considerably from what is quoted here and makes Tube fares affordable for daily use.
7
I think we've moved on from the Oyster Card. I don't use the Tube daily but when I do, I simply 'tap' my credit card and am charged the same fare as I would pay using an Oyster Card.
1
No, the £3.30 quoted is the (peak time) Oyster fare. If you want to pay cash, the same journey will cost you £4.90 (over $6!).
1
If the NYC system were shut down for hours every night, as I believe the Tube is, you would get many of the things you wish for, sooner.
5
What I like about Transport for London (TfL) that runs the Tube is that it has over the last 20 years been very welcoming and open to technology and change and that has permeated in to forward planning. The Oyster card was a pioneer and is still miles ahead of so many other transport payment cards. They've had real time information at stations for almost two decades. They've been very keen to give their transport information to outside developers to develop their own apps to make traveling easier (most Londoners use Citymapper and Bus Checker). They're constantly adapting. And that's why I think they're great
3
At least the NYC metro is functional and has a tax base to support it in perpetuity. D.C. Metro GM Jack Evans is literally begging VA & MD for money, and fares are higher than London. The DC area isn't hoping for a gleaming system of the future. All we want is a train that works.
1
Other ways the tube puts NY trains to shame
- No swiping. You pay by placing your Oyster card near a sensor.
- Family/handicap entries that open wide for the aforementioned and people with bikes, luggage, strollers, etc.
- Upholstered and cushioned seats
- Clean trains and clean stations
- Maps of the line at each decision point as well as maps on the train tunnel wall
- Did I mention the clean trains and stations?
- No swiping. You pay by placing your Oyster card near a sensor.
- Family/handicap entries that open wide for the aforementioned and people with bikes, luggage, strollers, etc.
- Upholstered and cushioned seats
- Clean trains and clean stations
- Maps of the line at each decision point as well as maps on the train tunnel wall
- Did I mention the clean trains and stations?
14
But it is expensive even with an Oyster card! When I was in London as much as I appreciated riding the tube I wondered how working people afforded their daily commute...
Most Londoners who commute by tube have an annual season ticket. This is still not cheap (mine is almost £2,000 per year these days) but many employers will give their employees interest-free loans to allow them to spread the annual cost out over the course of the year.
1
What the NYC subway lacks in cleanliness and clarity we make up for by having it always be Showtime.
5
I complain about a lot of things in my city, but the Delhi Metro is a true lifeline. I've lived here before and after the Metro opened 15 years ago, and it has transformed the experience of the city for a woman who does not drive. Frequent, fast, dependable, clean, air-conditioned and safe; it's a system I'm grateful for. Yes, it can be jam-packed in rush hour, and yes, the network needs further expansion and a better integration into the wider public transport system, but overall it works.
I visited New York a couple of years ago and played awed tourist, impressed by so much in your city, but your famed subway system left me fairly underwhelmed. It was one of the few areas where I felt Delhi actually came off better in comparison.
I visited New York a couple of years ago and played awed tourist, impressed by so much in your city, but your famed subway system left me fairly underwhelmed. It was one of the few areas where I felt Delhi actually came off better in comparison.
2
That thing of not catching another's eye on the Tube means we can commute in rush hour, crammed onto the cars like sardines, bodies an inch from each other but still separate, still each with our own clearly-defined personal space. Even then you are alone on the Tube. And yet I have managed to start conversations there, and people often will open up, perhaps stroking a neighbour's dog. Though often I find the people I speak to are American.
London Transport has yet to succumb to what I sadly call the American Disease. That is never ever maintain, never invest unless it will get your picture in the paper and a big pay check. Customers, clients or voters...who cares. They are just a means to an end ...making money. It's sad because at one time Europeans came to NYC and marveled at our city. When they traveled to other big cities they marveled too. So much diversity in products and people. Thinks worked...phones, WCs, transport. No longer go to London, go to Berlin, hell go to Prague! The subways are more predictable and cleaner. Even the 100 year old wooden cars in Budapest are better maintained. But of course the mayor takes a helicopter or a police escorted limo and other big wigs do the same. Their photo ops on the subway are offensive.
Our country is run like a third world second hand store. It's sad, demeaning and wrong. While the rich get obscenely rich the rest of us don't even get second best....we get the trash they don't want.
Our country is run like a third world second hand store. It's sad, demeaning and wrong. While the rich get obscenely rich the rest of us don't even get second best....we get the trash they don't want.
36
Some days I love the NYC Subway; some days I hate it but, to be fair, there are few things I love EVERY day. No debating the subway is in need of major updates, but Londoners loving their Tube? Think that might be some wishful thinking. I have many colleagues in our London office who complain bitterly about it. Perhaps those met by our itinerant reporter were just too polite to wax on about their frustrations.
6
Anyone who lives on the continent and can use REALLY top-class metro systems like those in Munich and Vienna regularly find London's tube to be badly-maintained and jury-rigged. Come to Vienna (or Munich) if you want to see first-class underground transportation that has been maintained and upgraded regularly.
1
That's a silly comparison, you are hardly comparing like with like.. Munich's underground was built in 1971, compared to London's, it is brand spanking new and the Munich Metro was not built for one of the world's most popular, frenetic cities and nice as Vienna is, neither was Vienna's.
2
I do like the Tube in London. But among other issues: the cars are significantly smaller than in NYC (narrower, and lower ceilings; thus, cramped for a tall person, and much less room from one bank of seats to the other side); cloth seats that can get very grotty; LONG escalators, with waits; a lot of to-ing-and-fro-ing to change lines in central London (up and down stairs, with narrow passages; like Times Square, but in some cases worse); and no late-night service for a lot of the system. But it is frequent and predictable, operator announcements are understandable, and fellow passengers are usually very well-behaved.
2
i have spent quite some time over the years using both the NYC lines every day, and the London tube; both are marvels of engineering. however, NYC lines and stops are much closer together and more convenient. the Underground has far fewer stations, much farther apart and with the exception of the newer lines, cars are smaller, lower and i agree with DogHouse49, the cloth seats on some lines (the Circle for instance) make one hesitate to sit. but, at least the Underground actually goes directly to the airport, unlike NY where getting to the airport on public transportation is a nightmare. Underground stations, especially on the older lines, are not immaculate, but nowhere near as dirty as some of the stations on lines like the 53rd Street E station, and the newer lines, like the ones that stop at Canary Wharf are quite gleamy... as is the newer stations on the 7 line. both systems have much to commend them. the only thing that makes the Underground just a tiny bit better, is there are none of the constant, blaring, hectoring, scolding announcements i'm subjected to on the NYC subway each day.
1
The NYC subway is much better than the DC Metro.
2
Rubbish. In London for two years now and the Tube is loathed universally. It comes more often than the F but every Londoner I know hates having to commute by it. And it stops at night. Please.
4
Agreed. Emma's account of the Tube is clearly from one who doesn't ride on a daily basis. Or is on vacation and gaga for foreign things.
The Berlin system works far better, and it did even in 1988. The NYC subway is the *only* one with express tracks -- interesting as to why other systems, like Paris, didn't pick that up -- and it runs 24/7.
NYC -- and Emma seems to have been sucked into this realm -- have the right to complain about their subway, but the Tube is no magic alternative. Just ask the Londoners who use it daily.
The Berlin system works far better, and it did even in 1988. The NYC subway is the *only* one with express tracks -- interesting as to why other systems, like Paris, didn't pick that up -- and it runs 24/7.
NYC -- and Emma seems to have been sucked into this realm -- have the right to complain about their subway, but the Tube is no magic alternative. Just ask the Londoners who use it daily.
1
Not only do Londoners pay more for the privilege the system shuts down late at night to allow for work and cleaning to be done.
1
I ageee with this article wholeheartedly. As a Londoner, and former NYer, I can hand on heart say I am happy to pay their higher London fares, since I get a ride that is safe, clean, quick, and efficient. constant reinvestment in subway infrastructure is key.
3
go to Vienna next and enjoy clean, well serviced trains that arrive on time and provide wifi everywhere, like, you know, in most cities that are interested in infrastructure and servicing the people.
3
The reason the author is in London is because both transit system s (London and NYC) are older, antiquated and somewhat neglected but that London has put an amazing amount of effort to upgrade it's underground to something like modern which could shine a light on how to improve our new york subway
I also love the more modern system s in Munich and Tokyo etc but those are not comparable as in 'apples to oranges' perhaps Paris metro should be on the author s next list though.
I also love the more modern system s in Munich and Tokyo etc but those are not comparable as in 'apples to oranges' perhaps Paris metro should be on the author s next list though.
4
I just got home from a week in London. My family, who are heavy users of the subway in Boston, were amazed at how frequently the London trains came, how clean and well-lit the stations were, and how easy it was for us to figure out how to get where we were going. Even on the day of the London Marathon, the service was quite smooth. I love public transportation in general, but the Boston subway "T" has become crowded, dirty and unreliable. Our system is deeply in need of investment. At least the fares are low though.
3
Calling the London Tube a "Wonderland" is a bit of an exaggeration. Perhaps the (upgraded) Victoria line passengers are content, but did you talk to anyone on the Circle or District lines, for example? Also, did you happen to notice the system status boards near the turnstiles in the Tube stations? On any given day, there are often delays, sometimes severe, on one or more of the lines. At least the customers are forewarned.....
3
As an ex-New Yorker, I remember subway delays none too fondly. I should point out, though, that in the San Francisco Bay Area, with its more modern signals, BART trains run every 15 minutes on each line -- during rush hour. Not too surprisingly, they're overcrowded, sometimes dangerously so.
Was in London recently and the British Tube sucks. They barely have any escalators or lifts for handicapped passengers or people with strollers or people with luggage.
When you are trying to catch a train at Paddington or Victoria Station this would come in handy to say the least. And the maps that they hand out should come with magnification glasses. It is a bad joke.
NYC has a much better system for handicapped passengers hands down.
When you are trying to catch a train at Paddington or Victoria Station this would come in handy to say the least. And the maps that they hand out should come with magnification glasses. It is a bad joke.
NYC has a much better system for handicapped passengers hands down.
1
and, as a person who spent the last 6 months on crutches, i can tell you, NYC isn't great for handicapped passengers either.
1
I have been traveling to London for 10 days a year every year since 1990 and I ride the Tube more times in those 10 days than I ride the NYC subway for the other 355 days. I live in NJ and commute daily through the Port Authority to East 50th Street. Barring a torrential downpour, I don't ride the subway for all the reasons why those interviewed about the Tube ride the Tube. The Tube is cleaner, quieter and more efficient. The trains runs more frequently and I rarely wait more than 2 -3 minutes for the nest train. The continuously updated train arrival displays are a great tool. The NYC subway is like a survival test; the Tube is a pleasure.
I took the metro in Hong Kong recently. It was immaculate, and there were arrows on the ground and stairs indicating the proper flow of foot traffic -- which everyone observed. It was heaven.
4
When you have a Governor who only cares about photo ops (e.g., 2nd Ave subway and Kosciuszko Bridge openings) but does not allocate sufficient resources, let along select the best people to oversee the day-to-day operation of a decrepit system, this is what you get.
4
I too have been much impressed by the London Underground which I am told is over a hundred years old. I first rode it in 1977 and last in 2005 and the standards had been maintained. 1930s MTA technology is old and a systemwide overhaul Is desperately needed. The infrastructure loving New Yorker who happens to be our president should jump in and tackle this issue for the city of his birth. I am certain our twitterer in chief has read your and other hapless commuters woes and let's hope he takes it as day 101 objective and fires off an executive order!! Building this system to showcase the world's foremost business capital is a more fitting legacy than the Wall. Grateful NY commuters may even call it the Trump much like Londoners call theirs the Tube!!
1
Donald Trump is not interested in infrastructure unless it is a gold building with his name on it. His promised but so far not mentioned at all idea for infrastructure is public-private ventures. That means toll roads and maybe glossy airports if they can charge higher landing fees to cover or maybe cover them with advertising. Trump has no interest in the subway. He has not been on a subway since he was a child.
1
One of the things I've noticed in and around the Tube is how pleasant the staff is, in comparison to US. There is a pride of service there which makes a huge difference.
24
I second your comment, Jeff. With one minor exception, on a family trip to London three weeks ago, I noted the striking difference between the "happy to help" attitude of the Tube's employees and the "mile-away-would-you-please-go away" stare of so many MTA employees. One recco, however, for the London Tube's managers: You should allow riders to cash in their Oyster card at least on the day it expires. At 10 pounds it wasn't a fortune, but the system won't refund the 10 pound deposit on the pass unless the Oyster card's 7-day value has expired - which ours did the day after we flew back to NYC. But the speed, efficiency and cleanliness of the London Tube - and the city in general - was something we repeatedly observed throughout our visit. A shame that New Yorkers have adopted a culture of passive acceptance of filthy streets and substandard public infrastructure - from Penn Station to the Port Authority to our subways.
2
When leaving NYC for a London vacation I was treated to arrogant dismissive if not belligerent treatment from MTA and TSA personnel, as I have on many occasions over the years in NYC by both subway personnel and bus drivers. Heathrow and various Tube employees were ALL cheerful, polite and helpful. Returning to JFK I was treated the NYC/USA way by someone at what turned out to be a Border Security person. Bleahh.
Obviously this indicates severe MTA (and TSA and Border Security) management shortcomings. I work in a public customer service position. There is no excuse for what we are subjected to in NYC by public employees.
Obviously this indicates severe MTA (and TSA and Border Security) management shortcomings. I work in a public customer service position. There is no excuse for what we are subjected to in NYC by public employees.
It's lovely that the Times sent Ms. Fitzsimmons to experience the London Tube. I wish someone would sent the Governor and several MTA and Port Authority officials to London. Not to mention Madrid, which has a transportation system to die for. Everything connects, everything works. It was excruciatingly embarrassing to return from a trip to Spain and watch arriving Europeans trying to negotiate the system from JFK to Penn Station. It's dirty and noisy, what minimal signage there is sends you in circles, there aren't enough ticket machines and half of them are broken... What a mess! We are not leveraging available technology: we are so far behind it's ridiculous. Once famous American know-how and inventiveness has been long over-ridden by our increasing irresponsible politics. We should be ashamed of ourselves.
6
Look, the water level is already rising, which will make most of the "tube" obsolete and other famous subways to become inundated. Time to think of a new mode of transportation; go boats! Build boats not war.
As an occasional out-of-town visitor to Manhattan, I find that the greatest contrast with the UK is with the ease of finding your way around in the Tube. London has put effort and energy into making the experience clear for those from out of town who are unfamiliar with the layout and how to get from point A to point B. The signage and diagrams are intuitive and comprehensible. Once on a train, there are three ways to know where you are and what stop is next: first, a clear diagram indicates where you are; second, a scrolling sign displays the next stop; and finally—wonder of wonders—a crystal-clear audio recording, in pleasant tones, announces what the next stop will be. I might add that finding one’s way around the London bus system is equally clear.
5
You might try the Metros in Moscow or St. Petersburg as well. They certainly far outshine the Manhattan area subways.
2
As I read this article, amidst my first trip to London, I have to say that everything the author states rings true for me. I am continually delighted by the London Tube, as well as by the local buses. Dependable, clean, pleasant and fast. I am happy to pay a little more than NYC subways in order to get where I'm going in a reasonable period of time. Just lovely!
6
Also, the Tube is super, super crowded and very expensive!!
2
I worked for London Transport for 33 years and loved my job. Things were bad in the 1980's for both the Tube and the bus system and into the 1990's for the buses but the Tube began to turn itself around in that latter decade. We decided to go for it. Increase service and the riders will come and they did. Then we got a Labour government in 1997 and although their mechanism for funding was flawed at least it was funding. We were able to invest in modern signalling and trains and jointly with a rejuvenated bus system and the take over of a number of suburban lines (like the LIRR) we now have an integrated system to be proud of.
3
I am not from New York city but it sounds like you need better management and high rates.
The sad truth is that this reporter could have written his piece sitting on the subway in almost any other big city but New York. I travel a lot for work and almost always take public transportation. In the last year alone I have been on subways in: Tokyo, Seoul, Hong Kong, Moscow, St. Petersburg, Barcelona, Cairo (yes, Cairo), Paris, Berlin, Cologne, Buenos Aires, Mexico City (again, yes, Mexico City).
Every one of these systems was more frequent, more reliable, and light years cleaner than the mess that we have to endure every day in New York City.
How about we crowdfund a short foreign transit tour for our MTA officials and state government officials? I dare them not to come back ashamed.
Every one of these systems was more frequent, more reliable, and light years cleaner than the mess that we have to endure every day in New York City.
How about we crowdfund a short foreign transit tour for our MTA officials and state government officials? I dare them not to come back ashamed.
4
I love the New York subway system. It's fast. It gets you there. But that was a year ago. Could things have changed that much? Ill find out soon enough.
My daughter lives on the Upper West Side and often does Uber (group) but that has its problems too.
If you want perfect service pay up!!!
My daughter lives on the Upper West Side and often does Uber (group) but that has its problems too.
If you want perfect service pay up!!!
Was recently in the Santiago, Chile metro. May even be a better subway role model than London :)
1
"eye contact was discouraged on the Tube"
That made me laugh and reminisce. A carriage packed full of people all ignoring each other's existence and defending their mere millimetres of personal space - is it a British thing, a London thing, a commuter thing or a human thing, I've always wondered. The Tube is always fascinating to the non-Londoner, said with fondness.
That made me laugh and reminisce. A carriage packed full of people all ignoring each other's existence and defending their mere millimetres of personal space - is it a British thing, a London thing, a commuter thing or a human thing, I've always wondered. The Tube is always fascinating to the non-Londoner, said with fondness.
1
Eye contact is discouraged in London, full stop. Though I took my dogs across the city recently as part of a longer journey (the way that so many rail journeys to anywhere in the South East require an awkward transit across London could be the subject of another article) and I was amazed at how the experience of being in London changed with a couple of dogs in tow. Not only were those numerous green spaces that one walks past without really noticing suddenly a multitude of welcome oases along the way but people kept smiling and talking to me! In London!
(Dogs are welcome on the Tube but it's not really the best environment for them, being noisy and shaking, not to mention the fact that you are required to carry your dogs on the escalator which is fine with one but pushing it a bit with two.)
(Dogs are welcome on the Tube but it's not really the best environment for them, being noisy and shaking, not to mention the fact that you are required to carry your dogs on the escalator which is fine with one but pushing it a bit with two.)
1
I lived in London for five years and used the Tube every day. There is no better subway system in the world. Period.
1
To be brutally honest, London may be an age-appropriate comparison for New York City, but other than that this is a fairly low target to aim for. In London, neither the trains nor the platforms are air-conditioned so you can smell the tunnel smells. Unlike Singapore, where all underground platforms are sealed off from the tunnel with tight screen doors.
3
Singapore's system wasn't built 150 years ago. Hearteningly for London, Singapore has stated that it wants a bus system as wonderful as London's.
As a point of note, some lines now have air-conditioning/cooling, and there is a desire by the Mayor, the London Assembly and TfL to continue to expand this across more lines and on stations (https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-projects/four-lin..., http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/boris-johnson-promises-deepline....
London's subway as a whole is older than NY. Yet years ago, they had countdown timers. In NYC, we still have large sections on the B division (the old IND and BMT) where they don't have them yet. And when over the years you complain how they could not have them, the answer you get is we don't need them. Fare structure, true single rides are more expensive but...you can easily get fares that cap after 3 rides and they use modern fare techniques not a metrocard that was already dated the day it was introduced and we're still waiting for modern fare media. There are probably still those working for NYC transit think we should go back to tokens. Just examples of the intransigence NYers are faced with in trying to enter the 21st century.
28
The NYC subway stations are horrendous and there are fewer and fewer manned booths. Just wait for crime to come roaring back.
In addition to the signals, the subways need more cleaners to handle the passenger volume and personnel to have some of the booths reopened. And there should be a serious RAT eradication program. The rat population in many urban area is rising, NYC included. This is a public health issue not just an "esthetic" one. I read the NYC forum on TripAdvisor. It says a lot when potential visitors mention their rat phobia and express fears about seeing the rodents in the subway stations, and the NYC forum respondents blow it off by saying that rats are a way of life in the big city. REALLY?
The Tube is nice but the best system I have been on is in Taipei. The stations and trains are clean. There are even safe clean restrooms in stations. Who would have "thunk?"
In addition to the signals, the subways need more cleaners to handle the passenger volume and personnel to have some of the booths reopened. And there should be a serious RAT eradication program. The rat population in many urban area is rising, NYC included. This is a public health issue not just an "esthetic" one. I read the NYC forum on TripAdvisor. It says a lot when potential visitors mention their rat phobia and express fears about seeing the rodents in the subway stations, and the NYC forum respondents blow it off by saying that rats are a way of life in the big city. REALLY?
The Tube is nice but the best system I have been on is in Taipei. The stations and trains are clean. There are even safe clean restrooms in stations. Who would have "thunk?"
3
London's and NYC's mass-transit systems date from about the same era. The electrified undergrounds both began early-20th century. One difference is that the 1860s-70s Metropolitan Line, which ran in trenches, was integrated with the Underground, while the 3-story-high Elevateds in New York were not. Another is that the London Underground system does not run 24/7, even now. This gives London "breathing space" for repairs and maintenance that NYC does not have. Finally, the majority of people in Home Counties England live in the metropolitan area or at least within commuting distance. By analogy, you'd need most of New England and the Mid-Atlantic States to be able to avail themselves of the NYC Subway, to get the same mass-support for its maintenance.
4
Doesn't look like the British government has been starving the London Underground. Let's keep the focus on where it belongs - the politics that prevents our transit systems from receiving the funds they need (and deserve).
2