Don't think this has been posted here, and thought it was pretty interesting.  Why there are only 11, I don't know, but they are all fantastic systems.  Includes a short vid for each one.

 

http://www.virgin-vacations.com/site_vv/11-top-underground-transit-systems-in-the-world.asp

 

 

Fun stuff, I love taking subways and light rail.  I can attest to the London Underground being a great system... Londoners couldn't live without it.

My favorite European transit system is Vienna, and my favorite transit system in the U.S. is probably D.C. I'm surprised they didn't make the list. Paris and New York's systems are certainly extensive and get you where you need to go, but in other categories I think they fail.

My favorite European transit system is Vienna, and my favorite transit system in the U.S. is probably D.C. I'm surprised they didn't make the list. Paris and New York's systems are certainly extensive and get you where you need to go, but in other categories I think they fail.

 

I agree with you, how could DC not make the list?!  :wtf:

 

Of the systems I've been on:

–  I would have made Moscow No. 1!!  Its awesome

–  Hong Kong and Tokyo should have been rated higher and NYC Lower. 

–  DC should have been on the list before NYC. 

–  Madrid's stations or subway isn't that great its just NEWER and everywhere (ie. stations in super close proximity like shaker square, drexmore and Coventry). I think the majority of it has been built over the last decade. 

–  The Montreal system is barely bigger then Cleveland's.  Why is it on the list? Its wasn't all that to me.

Is it true that NYC's is the only mega rapid-rail system in the world with extensive express + local service?  (I don't mean the one line Chicago's has, for instance) ... I don't think London's or Paris' have it, do they?  Maybe Tokyo...

Is it true that NYC's is the only mega rapid-rail system in the world with extensive express + local service?  (I don't mean the one line Chicago's has, for instance) ... I don't think London's or Paris' have it, do they?  Maybe Tokyo...

 

Its true. If I remember correctly Tokyo has one way "peak" express service, ala the old shaker rapid or the NYC 7 Train line.

I think NYC's is brokedick compared to DC's. DC's is so much easier to use and doesn't pull any tricks on you, like stations closing on the weekends or tossing you on a shuttle bus. DC's also runs later and is much cleaner -- of course, you expect things to be dirty in NYC.

I think NYC's is brokedick compared to DC's. DC's is so much easier to use and doesn't pull any tricks on you, like stations closing on the weekends or tossing you on a shuttle bus. DC's also runs later and is much cleaner -- of course, you expect things to be dirty in NYC.

 

DC Metro closes at 2 or 3am.  NYC's is 24 hours.

 

Despite that, DC's system is fantastic and should be included in the list.  The main weakness of it is that it's much more successful at moving people in and out of the district than it is at moving people within it.

I think NYC's is brokedick compared to DC's. DC's is so much easier to use and doesn't pull any tricks on you, like stations closing on the weekends or tossing you on a shuttle bus. DC's also runs later and is much cleaner -- of course, you expect things to be dirty in NYC.

 

Since when in NYC are "tossed on a shuttle bus" without prior knowledge?  DC runs later?  A how can a system run later that 24 HOURS???????

 

If you had around 3mm people a day riding on your system...would you be crystal clean?

 

I think NYC's is brokedick compared to DC's. DC's is so much easier to use and doesn't pull any tricks on you, like stations closing on the weekends or tossing you on a shuttle bus. DC's also runs later and is much cleaner -- of course, you expect things to be dirty in NYC.

 

DC Metro closes at 2 or 3am.  NYC's is 24 hours.

 

Despite that, DC's system is fantastic and should be included in the list.  The main weakness of it is that it's much more successful at moving people in and out of the district than it is at moving people within it.

 

Ahhh....good observation...i didn't think about that.

I didn't know NYC's was 24 hours. I guess so many stations were closed that I just thought the whole thing was closed. DC's closed at 3 or 3:30 when I last lived there in 2004.

DC's system is by far the cleanest system to use.  Although my one beef with the DC system is that stations are often times difficult to locate.  They are within bldgs or in other akward locations.  Whereas places like DC and Chicago are in plain site with stairwells leading down directly from the sidewalk.  Not from some lobby or business.

DC's system is by far the cleanest system to use.  Although my one beef with the DC system is that stations are often times difficult to locate.  They are within bldgs or in other akward locations.  Whereas places like DC and Chicago are in plain site with stairwells leading down directly from the sidewalk.  Not from some lobby or business.

 

Do you mean NYC?  BTW, there are lots of place in NYC that have stations interconnected or "in" building entrances which can be hard to find or in the outer boros difficult to locate or find which particular entrance is open.  DC has the cleanest system in the US, I think the BART is pretty Clean as well.  I don't think the stations in DC are hard to find.  I think Philly, Newarks & Atlanta system stations are far less visible.

 

I didn't know NYC's was 24 hours. I guess so many stations were closed that I just thought the whole thing was closed. DC's closed at 3 or 3:30 when I last lived there in 2004.

Closed?  when was this?  NYC cannot afford to close any stations.  Or are you saying that you went to a particular station the entrance you tried at that station was closed.  The system is 24 Hours but not all entrance/exits are open 24 Hrs.  thats what the green and red globes are for.  Green indicates that the station entrance/exit is open 24 hours, red indicates the station enterence/exit is open "parttime".  Most Stations in NYC have minimum of 2 or 4 points of entry/exit.

^No I meant what I said...I have not ridden every line of either system, but I have used each.  My experience in DC left me amazed at how clean their mass transit was, but NYC's accessiblity was much better!  You're right Philly's system is also confusing when trying to find entry points.  As for the other two systems I wouldn't know...never riden them.

I have ridden underground lines in DC, New York, Boston, Chicago, San Fran., London, Paris and Barcelona and Toronto.  Overall, taking everything into account, in my opinion DC has the best system of those I have experienced.  It is very clean and architecturally attractive.  It is easy to quickly understand the fare system which is important given all the tourist who are not familiar with the system.  It really goes every where you need to go (and is still expanding as they will soon break ground for an extension of the Orange Line to Tyson's Corner and out to Reston and Dulles) including the tourist attractions, important federal offices, the downtown business district, most highly populated neighborhoods, the Pentagon, National Airport, Arlington Cemetery and Union Station to name a few.  I disagree with the comment that it is mostly a commuter line although it serves that purpose well.  There is great coverage in the city and you can easily live in DC and not own a car (I did it for 4 months way back when the Metro was still in its infancy...it has expanded significantly since then).  The trains run very often and they are diligent about enforcing rules like no food which keeps the stations and cars clean.  It does cost a fortune to run but you can see why.  Also, DC, Northern VA and Maryland has experienced some of the best transit related development of any city in the nation.  While the various governmental groups were a driving factor, you can tell that many private developers were and are on board and they have done an excellent job of urban planning.  An amazing example is the Balston station in Norther VA on the Orange line.  When I lived in DC in the early 80's the area around the station was a nondescript collection of strip malls and auto dealerships.  Now it is a dense and extensive neighborhood with hundreds of mixed used buildings including offices, ground floor retail, apartments and condos in well designed buildings.  The few negatives, the Metro does not run into Georgetown (you have to get of at GW and walk about a mile) as the residents did not want it when it was originally  planned.  Also don't like that the station at National Airport is not right in the terminal (although it has been a while since I have been there and they have renovated National so maybe it does now).  Also, the Alexandria stations (especially King Street) are too far away from Old Town. 

 

As for the rest.  Chicago really  does not have that extensive an underground system that I can tell although their rail system in general is very good.  Same with Boston and while it has been a while, I believe the underground train I took was actually light rail.  San Fran.'s BART is actually primarily a commuter line that mostly serves Market Street.  However, its overall transit system is great with extensive light rail that serves large portions of the city and a good bus system that is well used.  New York is New York.  What can you say.  London's system is incredible (Mind the Gap) as is Paris and pretty easy to use (watch out for pick pockets in Paris).  Barcelona's is not  the extensive but serves a good portion of the city.  It hooks up with the train stations which is smart.  Toronto's is also somewhat limited but clean.

Also don't like that the station at National Airport is not right in the terminal (although it has been a while since I have been there and they have renovated National so maybe it does now). 

 

The last time I rode it, in 2005, the station was still outside the terminal.

 

edit: changed 2004 to 2005

The few negatives, the Metro does not run into Georgetown (you have to get of at GW and walk about a mile) as the residents did not want it when it was originally  planned.  Also don't like that the station at National Airport is not right in the terminal (although it has been a while since I have been there and they have renovated National so maybe it does now). 

 

I don't know where the station at National was before, but it's right outside the door of the terminal now.  Amazingly convenient.

 

As for the lack of access in Georgetown, the resident opposition story is a myth.  This is from Zachary Schrag's book, The Great Society Subway: A History of the Washington Metro: 

Now, as in the 1970s, there is a legend about Metro among the people of Washington. Many believe that WMATA planned a station for Georgetown, then withdrew its plans in response to opposition from politically influential residents who feared that the subway would bring undesirables—the poor, the criminal, the nonwhite, and the tacky—to their exclusive neighborhood. In fact, although Georgetown residents did oppose a transit station, their attitude was essentially irrelevant, for a Georgetown station was never seriously considered. 

 

While it would have been possible to build a subway line to Georgetown, it would have been difficult. Georgetown's commercial center, the busy intersection of Wisconsin Avenue and M Street, lies quite close to the Potomac River. Any tunnel under the Potomac (such as the one that today connects Foggy Bottom and Rosslyn) would have been so deep at the river's edge as to render a station there impractical. Thus, the most serious proposal to put a station in Georgetown, a 1963 sketch by [National Capital Transportation Agency] planner John Insco Williams, depended on a combined highway-transit bridge across the river. According to Williams, highway planners, not Georgetown residents, vetoed this option. Moreover, Williams's map shows that the curve up to Georgetown could not have followed the street grid, but would have to be buried under private property. And "if you get under buildings," planner Thomas Deen recalled, "you get into all kinds of problems, digging under foundations, and settlement, and liability, and lawsuits."

 

These technical problems could have been overcome had planners felt a compelling need to serve Georgetown. They did not. They intended to serve as many rush-hour commuters as possible, which meant connecting suburban parking lots, bus nodes, and clusters of apartment buildings with dense collections of office buildings in downtown Washington and Arlington. Under this logic, Woodley Park, with its hotels, apartment blocks, and bus routes, was one obvious site for a station, as was the Pentagon, with its 20,000 employees. Georgetown lacked apartments or office buildings or parking, and much of the area within walking distance of Wisconsin and M is under water. "We were building the system for the commuters," William Herman recalled, "and there were not many people commuting to Georgetown. So why spend money on something that didn't meet our goals?"

^In DC, the Metro station didn't move, but the airport was rebuilt with with it's main USAir (if I recal) terminal right at the station.  A portion of the old airport is visible which is where the old entrance was and it is several blocks away from the Metro station, which I suspect was built there b/c it new of National Airport's plans...

 

In addition to the Georgetown flaw in DC Metro, I also think it covers Capital Hill very poorly... It would have also been nice to have gone up the throat of centera/NW DC up the 16th street cooridor directly past Adams-Morgan which, now, is one of DC's hottest nabes.

^In DC, the Metro station didn't move, but the airport was rebuilt with with it's main USAir (if I recal) terminal right at the station.  A portion of the old airport is visible which is where the old entrance was and it is several blocks away from the Metro station, which I suspect was built there b/c it new of National Airport's plans...

 

In addition to the Georgetown flaw in DC Metro, I also think it covers Capital Hill very poorly... It would have also been nice to have gone up the throat of centera/NW DC up the 16th street cooridor directly past Adams-Morgan which, now, is one of DC's hottest nabes.

 

The entire National Terminal was torn down with the exception of the "guitar" terminal, now know as terminal A and the location of the continental President Club.  This portion of the airport is on some historic charter or something like that.  I read that the last time I was in the Presidents Club, as the president club connects somehow to terminal A, but is not in use becuase of security issues.

 

I agree with Clvlndr in the coverage of DC.  There are many barrios which were undesirable when the metro was in its infancy and are now hot.  I'm also curious why they built the line around Howard instead of straight thru.

I'd have to say New York's got to be best: most coverage plus the express service is the only one of extensive systems around the world.  Its flaws?  No connection to Staten Island.  Weak up the lower east side of Manhattan.  Need a few more crosstown lines (not just in midtown).

 

... Most fun system? that's easy: the Chicago L.

^I'll also put in a vote for Boston's T: comprehensive, esp for such a small, compact city.  Flaw?  Stations kinda ratty.  Green Line, too congested (train-wise) and slow.  Also, relocation of Orange Line El pulled service too far away from Boston's central-south corridor along Washington Street (where, egad, BRT was installed to satisfy steamed commuters).  It now duplicates the Green Line too much.

I like NYC, its the old guard, where else can you see rats that are larger than lap dogs?  Paris and London are sweet.  DC's system is very clean, but the coverage is spotty and as based on my personal experience, you still have to have a car after 9PM in DC.  :wink: One thing to note, not all the systems have airport connections!  And who was the first to have that convenience??  Unfortunately, nothing with else has been done with the Red Line.

  Boston sucks, I felt I was riding on a condemned ride at cedar point.

 

^C'mon, NYC is not all that bad... Some stations, esp outside midtown, yes, I've seen a few rats; but they've spent millions (maybe billions) upgrading that system -- even air conditioning some stations to rescue passengers from those stifling NYC summer underground days.  With the total comprehensiveness & convenience of MTA, I'll deal w/ a little grit... Boston has character, plus like NYC's subway, you can 'paak ya caaa in Baasten' ... since the T puts you within a block or 2 of anywhere you have to go (why the silly system/and city/ shut down after 12:30a, is beyond me).... If your travel is in/around downtown D.C. and selected close-in areas/burbs, you don't need a car in D.C. after 9p esp on Sat/Fri nights, where trains now run until 3a (Cleveland actually predated METRO with Fri/Sat late service during the summers ... until a jerk named Calabrese ended it shortly after he was hired since he'll do most anything to discourage rail usage in this town)-- passenger convenience, (even helping keep people safe by some Flats/Warehouse Dist party drunks off the road) be damned!!  Thanks, JoeC, you're a peach.

^C'mon, NYC is not all that bad... Some stations, esp outside midtown, yes, I've seen a few rats; but they've spent millions (maybe billions) upgrading that system -- even air conditioning some stations to rescue passengers from those stifling NYC summer underground days.  With the total comprehensiveness & convenience of MTA, I'll deal w/ a little grit... Boston has character, plus like NYC's subway, you can 'paak ya caaa in Baasten' ... since the T puts you within a block or 2 of anywhere you have to go (why the silly system/and city/ shut down after 12:30a, is beyond me).... If your travel is in/around downtown D.C. and selected close-in areas/burbs, you don't need a car in D.C. after 9p esp on Sat/Fri nights, where trains now run until 3a (Cleveland actually predated METRO with Fri/Sat late service during the summers ... until a jerk named Calabrese ended it shortly after he was hired since he'll do most anything to discourage rail usage in this town)-- passenger convenience, (even helping keep people safe by some Flats/Warehouse Dist party drunks off the road) be damned!!  Thanks, JoeC, you're a peach.

 

Honey, that post alone just tells me you don't ride the system very often.  Those Sewer Bunnies are HUGE!  THEY ARE EVERYWHERE NOW.

 

What station is airconditioned?  I think you're confusing the NYC Subway with the MTA MetroNorth/LIRR Stations, some of which has AC and Heat.

 

In DC I normally dont take a car, but cabs aren't as frequent as they are in Chicago or NYC and when you are outside of NW or Downtown DC, in the district, you sort of still need a car.  If you live out NW going to Silver Spring.  It like living south of Kinsman in Cleveland - too far away from the train.

Re:DC - having lived in DC for 3 yrs, my opinion is similar to several others: It's clean and easy to understand but there are large sections of the city that it's simply hard to get to via rail (try getting to the Lincoln Memorial or anything anywhere near the west end of the mall without a long schlep, along w/Georgetown).  Bus transfers (10 yrs ago anyway) were a bit cumbersome and the fare structure, while equitable, is a bit of a pain if you're going outside of DC proper (not a big deal...)  Despite some warts, I'd take NY's functionality over DC.

 

That said, DC & the VA suburbs (don't know as much about MD) have done a great job with TOD.  A lot of those stations along the orange line in VA weren't really near much when they were built, but are now semi-destinations in their own right (thinking Clarendon, Court House, Ballston). 

MTS, the GCT 4/5/6 station has airconditioining units -though can't say they really much unless you're standing right below the blowers.

 

NYC's systen is of course very extensive but it loses major points for extreme rush hour congestion (both people-wise on trains and train-wise on tracks), deplorable station conditions compared to other cities, trackside columns on platforms (wtf?), poor management, unhelpful employees, weekend service disruptions and crap airport connections.  Like much of NYC, subway is awesome, but falls way below its potential.

MTS, the GCT 4/5/6 station has airconditioining units -though can't say they really much unless you're standing right below the blowers.

 

NYC's systen is of course very extensive but it loses major points for extreme rush hour congestion (both people-wise on trains and train-wise on tracks), deplorable station conditions compared to other cities, trackside columns on platforms (wtf?), poor management, unhelpful employees, weekend service disruptions and crap airport connections.  Like much of NYC, subway is awesome, but falls way below its potential.

 

How did I know someone would say the GC-42 Street?  :roll: 

 

Those fans that blow hot air and debris around, I would NOT call "air conditioning".

^^Au contraire, MTS, I travel to NYC 3, 4 times each year; and always ride the sub (get all day pass)... I'm pretty sure 34th Penn Station has AC; there were others; and no, it was more than hot air they were blowing around, it was actually pretty cool... Went to a Mets game 2 years ago and was amazed how modernized the #7 line was (and how nice and upgraded -- not gentrified -- many of the black & Hispanic hoods were along the way - one where we stopped for dinner after the game-- TAKE THAT, JOHN ROCKER, YOU RACIST IDIOT!!!), which is all elevated once it passes under the East River although it terminates in a subway in Flushing which, now, is probably the biggest Asian-town in greater NYC -- it dwarfs the block or 2 they call "Chinatown" in Manhattan... I've had my issues over the years w/ MTA and filth and stuff, but you've got to give them their due -- it's a monster-sized system, but they are dedicated to making it better.  I like the new cars and, replacing the tokens with farecards -- including the slick all-day pass -- as they did 7-8 years ago, is a miracle in itself. 

 

But as I said, there's no more fun system the Chicago's L, though it's not nearly  as comprehensive... Its both fun to ride... and look at: strings of little cars zipping over streets and alleys btw buildings.  There's none quite like it in the world.

Is it true that NYC's is the only mega rapid-rail system in the world with extensive express + local service?  (I don't mean the one line Chicago's has, for instance) ... I don't think London's or Paris' have it, do they?  Maybe Tokyo...

 

yes and no. the nyc subway system was built for express service from the start. however, some cities with old subways have newer commuter trains that act like express trains within the city limits -- like for example the rer in paris or the jr trains in tokyo. city dwellers can use them as they would the subway if they have to make a longer crosstown trip, although they usually have different pricing and operations. btw --- this is the same in nyc, where for example, you might take the metro-north train to fordham if you wanted to go to belmont aka the bronx little italy or botanical garden if you wanted to go to the botanical garden or bronx zoo.

 

 

But as I said, there's no more fun system the Chicago's L, though it's not nearly  as comprehensive... Its both fun to ride... and look at: strings of little cars zipping over streets and alleys btw buildings.  There's none quite like it in the world.

 

well, i do love the chicago loop zone, but to be fair yes there is some quite like it in the world....its the same thing on many older subway lines outside of manhattan in nyc, only much more of it. sure the loop is a classic, but really an el is an el. also, just for example, from the looks of the new jubilee lines in the eastend london docklands, or the wild looking yurikamome monorail line in tokyo to odaiba island i'd say there may even be some up and coming modern versions of interesting el-styled trains.

 

 

Is it true that NYC's is the only mega rapid-rail system in the world with extensive express + local service?  (I don't mean the one line Chicago's has, for instance) ... I don't think London's or Paris' have it, do they?  Maybe Tokyo...

 

yes and no. the nyc subway system was built for express service from the start. however, some cities with old subways have newer commuter trains that act like express trains within the city limits -- like for example the rer in paris or the jr trains in tokyo. city dwellers can use them as they would the subway if they have to make a longer crosstown trip, although they usually have different pricing and operations. btw --- this is the same in nyc, where for example, you might take the metro-north train to fordham if you wanted to go to belmont aka the bronx little italy or botanical garden if you wanted to go to the botanical garden or bronx zoo.

 

Or if you want to ride the LIRR from downtown brooklyn to Jamaica.  A lot of people who work on wall street that live on Long Island, do this instead of going into penn station then transferring to a downtown subway.

^^Au contraire, MTS, I travel to NYC 3, 4 times each year; and always ride the sub (get all day pass)... I'm pretty sure 34th Penn Station has AC; there were others; and no, it was more than hot air they were blowing around, it was actually pretty cool... Went to a Mets game 2 years ago and was amazed how modernized the #7 line was (and how nice and upgraded -- not gentrified -- many of the black & Hispanic hoods were along the way - one where we stopped for dinner after the game-- TAKE THAT, JOHN ROCKER, YOU RACIST IDIOT!!!), which is all elevated once it passes under the East River although it terminates in a subway in Flushing which, now, is probably the biggest Asian-town in greater NYC -- it dwarfs the block or 2 they call "Chinatown" in Manhattan... I've had my issues over the years w/ MTA and filth and stuff, but you've got to give them their due -- it's a monster-sized system, but they are dedicated to making it better.  I like the new cars and, replacing the tokens with farecards -- including the slick all-day pass -- as they did 7-8 years ago, is a miracle in itself. 

 

But as I said, there's no more fun system the Chicago's L, though it's not nearly  as comprehensive... Its both fun to ride... and look at: strings of little cars zipping over streets and alleys btw buildings.  There's none quite like it in the world.

 

3/4 times a year??  I take that train almost every day.  That is not A/C, its an industrial snowblower, masquarading as a fan!  GC is the only station with that contraption!  

 

The 7 is hardly modern, compared to the new 2, A or G trains.  The trains you rode are are the same as the other IRT lines, since NYC Subways unloaded the "red bird" trains.  Queens is NYC most diverse boro, and most of the stops along the 7 are latin, asian or indian. with a lil Greek thrown in.

 

MTA introduced the metro card back in '94, which migrated into the metrocard "gold" in late '97/early '98 that allowed people to use the card to transfer to other bus, subway lines without the card deducting another fare and available systemwideand the day pass, weekly and monthly passes are introduced. In 2004 tokens were no longer accepted on the NYC transit system.

 

I have tokens from every fare change since I moved to NYC and an original "blue" metrocard.  They'll be worth something someday.  I just thought,  I moved here right before the 63 street tunnel open, it was such a big deal back then.

 

Flushing isn't an "asia town" its a neighborhood.  Thats one of the misconceptions they are trying to fight.

 

The chicago el is ok.  but on some parts of the line it looks very unsafe as it has no railings.

 

^no railing?  The Chicago L guardrail/walls are usually only at sharp corners where, in the 1970s, 2 trains collided and one jumped the tracks and crashed to the street, killing a number of people including a man on the sidewalk (if I recall).  Otherwise, the only railing is for track workers on the catwalks next to tracks.  Oftentimes, also if I recall, those walks are in between tracks and there's no railing at all.  Their technology no doubt relies on the laws of physics and that gambles on the minute possibility that the rolling, flanged wheels of the heavy trains will rarely jump their tracks -- and they rarely do.  Steel retaining walls would probably have to be pretty strong and heavy to prevent a moving train from falling over the edge of an el structure and building such walls along the many miles of elevated would probably be cost-ineffective given such a low risk, and add too much weight to the old steel viaducts -- this an educated guess from my non-civil engineering background/perspective.

 

Somebody with more knowledge than I, please chime in...

The 7 is hardly modern, compared to the new 2, A or G trains.  

 

 

I think you mean the "L" train, not the "G" train.  Those rust red trains were horrible and smelly.  I'm so glad they are gone!

 

Ahhh...so is the metrocard what help people living in "two fare" zoning?

 

What is the difference between a metrocard and metrocard "gold"?