Gothamist: How Does NYC's Subway Stack Up Against the World?

Komeddyk

Wed, 07 Mar 2007 14:22:15 -0500

Somebody using pheromons to attract women, whether is real it? Where they can be got?

Osame

Mon, 05 Mar 2007 22:11:34 -0500

I live in London right now and I can tell you NYC Subway is streets ahead of here. The London mayor just announced a major coup: the London Tube will now run "late" on weekends ie till 1am instead of midnight!! Can you imagine that in NYC? Yes the Subway it is dirty but no more than the rest of the city. But its coverage is pretty good and pricing is quite decent for those who love far out of town. A weeky card for people in the outer reaches of London is is not too far off $70. I liked the Paris system but again its not 24 hour. NYC Subway should get more credit for what it is and yes they can clean it up and add a few more lines, particulalry in Brooklyn and get moving faster on the far east and west sides of manhattan.

Josh

Mon, 05 Mar 2007 13:09:37 -0500

Not that I expect it to appear on this list, because it's certainly falling into third-world status, but Chicago's L system is also 24 hours (on 2 lines, with 24 hour bus connections) and another line (Brown) runs on a shuttle basis, connecting to 24-hour Red, until 2:15 or so on weekends. It also provides direct rail connections to both O'Hare and Midway airports, and O'Hare is 24 hours. Plus, there's nothing like the views of the city from the L. Better than the view from LIC, that's for sure. However, like New York, it smells like piss in the summer, homeless people pass out in the front of the cars, the stations are over 100 years old and falling apart, and the subway portion is larely dingy (NYC has it right and paints them black, Chicago is stupid and paints them white, so they look like shit).

NoDragon

Sun, 04 Mar 2007 22:48:43 -0500

What's more important to you ? Safety ? Clean Subway ? On Time ? Dependable ? Crime ? Not Falling into the tracks ? In Hong Kong's Subway, You can trust no one around you will rob you. It rarely happens. All citizens are afraid of jail. Time: There are message boards indicating time to arrival of each train. Falling into tracks ? If you have been at Las Vegas Airport and took the train, you will remember a wall that prevents you from falling into the tracks. Hong Kong's subway has it. New York City doesn't. Clean NYC subway ? You must be lucky not seeing feces and newspaper in a subway car. And rats on the tracks. Hong Kong ? CLEAN. NYC's subway is not clean, not safe, nothing prevents you from falling into the tracks, nothing tells you when the next train comes. And NYC's metrocard system does malfunction, whereas Hong Kong's Octapus card system is a tap and go system. It is available on a watch. Not Rolex or Cartier, but no errors and you can use the balance to buy food at many places. NYC's metrocard ? Only works in the subway, oh and NJ pathtrain. BIG DEAL.

Not Amused

Fri, 02 Mar 2007 15:49:17 -0500

This whole conversation summed up with this sentence . Just take a look at the Norwood station in the Bronx . Sure their renovating it, Just think if the MTA had of done all this work over a period of time instead of within the last [10] years . We would be at the top of the list, Even without the direct connections too the Airports . Sad thing is we will never be on that level with the current attitude taken by the MTA .

gruntled

Thu, 01 Mar 2007 15:06:37 -0500

Take the London Tube to the airport? How? It doesn't go to Gatwick, Luton, or Stanstead. If you ride for an hour, it gets you to Heathrow. How you get your suitcases down the stairs and through the throngs on the overcrowded and un-air conditioned cars is beyond me, presuming you're arriving or departing when the "world best" system is actually operating. It is the world's oldest, though. Perhaps they should modernize it into the 20th Century. Or 21st.

rider

Wed, 28 Feb 2007 14:45:42 -0500

You should read the comments on this same topic on Shanghaiist.

adamks

Wed, 28 Feb 2007 10:02:55 -0500

obviously the writer of this piece has never been to BERLIN. the clean, efficient, safe, well-lit, extensive, and amazingly integrated system is the best i've ever traveled. a monthly pass is a bit more than new york's (€60-70), but does new york have an U-Bahn, S-Bahn, street trams, and buses in one huge system?

excy

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:39:28 -0500

I love the Paris Metro....and also love the Montreal Metro. That is not surprising since there are a lot of similarities. The architecture of the Montreal stations and the public art are very cool. Cheap, safe and clean - what's not to like? I appreciate the New York City subway for convenience and value...but I hate the smell of urine. And the New York City subway is confusing if you are not from NYC or familiar with the system. The employees in the NYC subway ticket booths can be pretty rude...but I suppose that can happen anywhere.

interlard

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:43:08 -0500

I don't expect anyone will read this, but I'm compuslive: The NYC subway lacks 2 vital features: 1. It's often hard to tell if the train you are on stops at the station you are going to. If you're lucky, you'll spot the overcomplicated key on your tiny pocket map (which by now is out of date). Good luck decyphering, "Stops All Times, Except Late Night and Rush Hours peak directions (6:15am to 9am, 4:30pm to 7:45pm)". It's different for different lines & stations. This is retarded in the extreme. 2. There are 2 subway maps in the ENTIRE CAR YOU ARE IN. One has been vandalized and the other is blocked by a hairy man who smells of piss (compare to the number of homeless in, say, London. Go on, actually look it up). There are lots of empty surfaces around you that would easily take a list of the stations this train stops at. But not here. If you're lucky, MTA spent $1000 on a "modern" map with little lights on it. But there are only 4 in the car, it's crowded and you aren't near one. Anyone you ask can't help you. On the plus side: It's cheep. It's 24 hours The cars are big. You can piss anywhere and no one will notice.

JerseyCityWestSideMafia

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 18:05:10 -0500

The PATH train and Hudson Bergen Light Rail are awesome. I only wish the light rail would run 24 hours like the PATH!

Benjamin Kabak

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:24:40 -0500

I've got to amend my post from yesterday. My reading comprehension was bad. amNY reported the average WEEKDAY ridership. So their math is fine. My bad.

MHR

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 14:03:18 -0500

"I've said this before and I'll say it again: who the fuck needs to ride the subway at 3am during the week?" Um... I do. I work late hours (bartender) and I appreciate that the subway runs all night. True the frequency of trains at that hour is nothing compared to daytime, but I rarely have to wait more than 20 minutes. And it's a lot cheaper than taking a cab every night.

Eric

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:33:06 -0500

"Um... the london underground fare is now £4.00 cash for "zone 1" travel...which $8 dollars US!!!" While that's true, cash fares have been grossly inflated to get people to move to the Oyster card. A single zone 1 trip with an Oyster card costs £1.50, which isn't that out of line with New York. I hate to say it, but I'm really starting to think that zoned fares might be beneficial to the NYC system.

Dorfie

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 12:35:45 -0500

Taipei has an extremely efficient, clean and extensive subway system. Why was it left off? Probably because Virgin doesn't fly there.

Donald

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 11:59:15 -0500

No one who ranked London as the best can have ridden either the Victoria, the Northern or the Central line at rush hour: the ranking, a complete farce. London is the most crowded, expensive and unreliable.

Emily

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:34:23 -0500

The Virgin writeup couldn't have possibly been written by anyone older than a 6th grader, unless the british schools are even worse than I've been told. Let's see: London: "Oyster cards allow you to touch against a subway turnstile and go -- and you can pay as you ride." What does that even mean? How do you pay "as you ride"? "Eclectic station artwork"? It's nothing if not absurdly few and far between. Paris: "The Paris subway system is the second oldest in the world (the initial system was completed in 1900) and aids roughly 1.365 billion people with their daily commutes." Whoa, how many is that? That's more people than in India. By a lot. "Excellent coverage: every building in the city is within 500 meters (1600 feet) of a subway station." Umm, really? That's, like, uh... wrong. I think they meant "some buildings within 500 meters" Moscow: "at least 44 of these stations are rated as architectural sights" At least 44? How many at most? Also 44? Can't we just count them up, there's only 172 total. "Fastest worldwide system (120km/h or 75mph)." Umm... where'd you get that? Average speed is 41.57 km/h. That's about, what, half as fast? Besides, how can something be the fastest system? I'm pretty sure the system barely moves. Tokyo: "Trains always stop in the same place" Umm, that's true of pretty much everywhere. Some highlight. Also, great accompanying picture of not the subway. Seoul: "It is also one of the biggest subway stations worldwide, running 179.4 miles in length." Whoa, that's one hell of a big station. Maybe you meant... enh, who cares. "The trains mostly run underground, but 30% of the system is above ground" Great, where is that not true? New York: "It has grown from 28 stations when it was founded in October of 1904 to 462 stations presently" Were you counting them by hand? We have 468. Montreal: "Diverse, beautiful architecture and unique station art" Umm, perhaps you meant, every station looks very very 60's and exactly the same? Beijing: "Cheap fare (3 yen for most trips)" They take Yen in China now? Did Japan invade recently? Hong Kong: "The Hong Kong subway, also known as the Mass Transit Railway (which translates to "underground railway" in English)" I'm no expert, but I'm pretty sure "Mass Transit Railway" translates to "Mass Transit Railway" in english. I could be wrong, though. "Clean and modern system with air-conditioned cars." You meant... air-conditioned stations. Everyplace has air-conditioned cars, it's like 2007. Well, except for #1 London. Sao Paulo: "Known as one of the cleanest and safest systems in the world" To who?? Perhaps one of the top 300 safest and cleanest. And only if you don't count all the garbage and the petty crime. "Affordable fare" Umm... everything in Brazil is affordable. It's not London. Aside from that, though, great post.

MT

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:48:29 -0500

Or check out forgotten New York. That website is the BEST±!

MT

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:44:56 -0500

To anyone who doubts the architectural integrity of the NYC Subway, I suggest you take a tour or go to a lecture sometime. The work and the detail that went into the original stations is really under appreciated. You'll be shocked by the gems we walk through every day and never even notice it.

um

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:23:11 -0500

I've said this before and I'll say it again: who the fuck needs to ride the subway at 3am during the week? Lots of us, idiot. As much as I LOVE the lack of garbage (even without garbage bins), ease of getting to both airports (which you can do until about 2am, btw), and relative civility of London's Tube, have any of you actually TRIED getting a cab in London in the middle of the night lately? Ok then.

mark

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:05:58 -0500

i love the NYC subway....you can get home at 4am...unlike all the other big cities! and if anyone has spent time in london will know becasue it has no express tracks, a break down means the whole line shuts down!!!!!!!

BkMan

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 07:56:36 -0500

Ok first of all. 1) 24 hours service means CRAP when you have to wait an hour on a filthy dingy Subway Platform with homeless people all around at 4am. 2) the NY Subway was built closer to the ground and hence the low ceiling because originally the builders were afraid that people wouldn't ride the Subway if it was too far underground 3) Express service means CRAP when an A express train takes JUST as long to reach 34th st from Jay St as a C train. The C train is often faster! 4) Maintenance is by far the worst in our system then anywhere else I have seen. I have been to Athens (gorgeous new clean subway), Moscow (clean beautiful and fast), Paris (efficient & clean) etc etc. 5)You get what you pay for. In NYC the subways are the cheapest mode of transport, everyone know if they have to ride the subways they will no matter how filthy it gets or how much their service sucks. There's no alternative. This is the management lax, the employees lazy. They have no incentives of any sort what so ever to peform at any kind of acceptable level.

angry

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 02:17:20 -0500

"the late-night wait for a subway is no more than 20 minutes." Meanwhile you skipped one arriving train hoping that you could catch the one you really wanted until it dawns on you after 45 minutes that hey maybe your train isn't running at this hour or at this very night. Hey maybe you should have been paying attention to the conductor of the last train when he said "wer wer werrrr werwere werrr erwerrr wererer. Wer Wer next stop! Closing doors. ". I agree with other readers with the leaky ceilings and the unbelievable screeching on the 4,5,6 lines at Union Square. Also the ridiculous number of stairs you have to take to get around at some of the stations. And one more serious thing: I am seeing more and more bags left under the seats in the past month than ever!

Tom

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:27:34 -0500

"I don't use the subway after 11pm, so the service is pointless" about sums up how people feel. Surprisingly enough, the city does continue to operate after you people go home. I'd like to hear someone chime in who's been to a Red Sox game that finishes after midnight. Ask them how worthless a 24-hour service is.

MHR

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 01:27:11 -0500

Harry Matthews

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:24:19 -0500

I've traveled to many (but not all) of the cities mentioned. I'm anazed by the London rating. Not only does the whole system shut down around 11 PM, but it has long suffered from neglect. The last time I was there, the "arrival time" listed on the LCD board was off by 15 minutes, and a sign by the ticket window noted, "London Transport cannot ensure that trains will arrive on schedule, or at all." Paris boasts wonderful electric maps and service into the early morning, but the stations are baffling catacombs and official guidance though curious keys. Many NY subway stations are stunning; others still await rehab (to be kind). But they are all open 24/7, and they all charge a flat fare much lower than their "competitors." Whenever an overseas visitor asks me, "How late do the trains runs?" I answer "All night." Despite the growsing of other bloggers, the late-night wait for a subway is no more than 20 minutes.

anonymass

Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:09:03 -0500

I've said this before and I'll say it again: who the fuck needs to ride the subway at 3am during the week? Are we really better served with perpetually screwed up weekend schedules as a result of having this phantom "24-hour" service - which a few smart people have pointed out is a falsehood? Not to say that I haven't been on the subway at 3am on a Tuesday, but I don't think I'd ever do it again. The MTA should just shut most if not all lines down between 2am and 5am during the week and do maintenance then. How many trains really pass on a given line during those hours anyway? That said, I'd keep the weekend "24-hour" service since those are the times when people do need the subway into the wee hours.

Toby

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:39:37 -0500

I love how in DC you can take the subway at 3AM from Georgetown, have your farecard (their 1970s version of a MetroCard) go through the washing machine in you wallet without loosing its inegrity and how you can eat and drink on the subway. Wait you can't. Nevermind.

EiNY

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:29:02 -0500

I don't think the subways are being ranked; that's just a numbered list. Believe me, no one would think to put the overpriced and overburdened Tube at Number One.

ando

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:26:46 -0500

Has anyone considered that this is from Virgin Vacations? That seems like the equivalent of an onboard airline magazine. Hell, they couldn't even bother to look up the miles that our subway covers (660). Compare to Seoul, S. Korea's (quoted as "one of the biggest subway stations worldwide") 179.4 miles or Paris's 133.7 miles--the one where "every building in the city is within 500 meters (1600 feet) of a subway station." Or just combine the length of the top 3 systems on the list and they still don't cover the same amount of space.

Kevin Bracken

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:07:27 -0500

> [the metro in] Prague is very nice. Kinda surprising from a country that was under communist control for so long. Not sure if you know much about the Czech Republic: after they switched to capitalism, public transit ridership in Prague plummeted from 85% to less than 40. People started buying cars and the city started building Robert Moses-style inner-city highways, the major ones of which have been a disaster. I agree, New York was way too low on this list. I have taken some of the others and the fact that we have 24 hour transit keeps the city alive at night. In Paris, I tried to head out late and found that most people were already leaving or asleep. London's 24 hour BRT is pretty sweet, but not a part of this train survey.

Peter

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 22:04:36 -0500

I found the Red Line in Los Angeles very clean and very fast. Unfortunately, it's much too small and covers much too little of the city.

pete

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:53:08 -0500

Washington DC should be on that list, its beautiful and space age compared to NYC subway, im a NYCers BTW. Very fast trains, carpeted, soft seats, strong acceleration, and trains never crawl, safe stations with no hidden spaces, metrocards say how much is on them in ink, DC has no direct lighting so its to dark to read anything to prevent you from being distracted, escalators everywhere, electronic signs, Air Conditioning, tolerable noise levels (pretty much 100% of NYC subway is perminent hearing damage) and recently full blown RFID farecards. http://chnm.gmu.edu/metro/popup/nyc67.html

dc

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:46:57 -0500

in tokyo, if the train runs even a minute past the schedule, they'll write a note to your boss to explain while u're late. 24 hour service doesn't meant as much when u're still waiting for an hour or two (with no idea if u just missed it or if it's coming in 30 min.), only to realize that the train u were waiting for is running the F line or is running express stops.

Ethan

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:41:16 -0500

It isn't super extensive, but the subway system in Prague is very nice. Kinda surprising from a country that was under communist control for so long.

s

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:37:31 -0500

i love the tokyo subway system. clean, fast, and efficient... cushioned heated seats and no vagrants! yeah, your cell phone works in it too but no one would dare talk on the phone. everyone texts. that's something worth paying extra for. NYC subways are extensive and the express service is great when the trains run on time but i could care less about 24 hour service. i never take the train past 11PM for safety reasons. it seems that the majority of subway crime happens in the wee hours. i'd rather cab it than chance it.

Matthew

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 21:22:46 -0500

Wow, New York sucks compared to everyone else. Ouch.

Hobo Bill

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 20:42:07 -0500

DC isn't a subway, it's a glorified commuter rail. Let's go to greenbelt!

rind the metro

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:59:35 -0500

Yes, you can blame the unions. In the US, unions would rather battle management for every perceived slight that pick the fights that are worth fighting. And the employees try to do as little work as possible. And the system rewards length of service, not skill level - much like our school system. DC should have been on the list.

dc

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:51:55 -0500

I've been a New Yorker all my life, but especially after going to Asia recently, I def. agree with the rankings. I'd rank it even lower. Pros: 24 hour service No more than a few blocks away from subway stop (at least in Manhattan) Gripes: Dirty Trains often come late Weekend subway messes (lines don't even run properly) Going deaf in Union Square (which the MTA still denies) Dangerous turnstiles (should be a fire hazard) Dilapidated stations (even at Grand Central looks like paints chipping off the 7 line station) PLEASES SWIPE AGAIN messages No clear exit/entrances No climate control stations Leaky stations etc. etc. etc. And yeah, it does sound like it's asking a lot - but it seems that most of these major cities have been able to implement these technologies and more. Meanwhile we're finally just about to test trains that run on schedule. I think at the end of the day, we all agree that New York city deserves much better.

Alex

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:43:23 -0500

As long as it's 24 hours and runs decently well--which NY's does--I really don't give a shit if it's clean or architecturally pleasing. Seriously, the 24 hours thing is so clutch.

M

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:39:37 -0500

I was in London last fall and as nice as the Tube is... it's not airconditioned or 24/7. At times it was very crowded and incredibly stuffy. And personally I prefer the pay one price to travel anywhere on the system over the pay by zone operation. I did like the ability to take the tube to the airport however.

M.

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:36:33 -0500

Ed H.

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:33:50 -0500

NYC gets the bulk of its points for how extensive the system is, the single fare, and the 24hr service. It stops there. It's unthinkable that it's 2007 and we're just "currently testing" LED displays to tell you how long until the next train. That's been everywhere in the world for at least a dozen years.

M.

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:32:01 -0500

Tatyana

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:25:16 -0500

Although I love 24/7 availability and low cost, I hate the dirt, garbage, urine smell, and lack of air-conditioning at many stations. I have used underground train systems in London, Moscow, Paris, and Tokyo and most of them were in better condition than our subway. Tokyo subway was was especially clean, well air-conditioned, and impressive technically. And while I'll always vote for our subway, I do wish that NY Transit would spend some serious dough improving at least the heavy-used stations, like 34th St, Grand Central, and Time Square - the sweltering heat in the summer and the year-round smell of piss and vomit is not something to be proud of.

M

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:23:13 -0500

whatever

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:16:28 -0500

The NYC subway system is evocative of some third-world country. All you need are some goats and chickens in the subway cars to complete the picture.

SP

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:05:23 -0500

uhm, yes, technically it is running 24hrs / day, but in the dead of night, the trains only run about 1nce every hour and a half or two, and that's if you're on a major line. other lines don't run at all. for christ's sake, the L train only runs about 1nce an hour during the day. the subway would benefit hugely from closing down if only for at least three or fours hours at night. when i was little i would have said NY had the number 1 subway in the world, but the quality of service has gone to shit in the last 15 years. riding on the weekends is hell because thats when they choose to do their maintenance and construction. if they closed down they could do more work during the week after hours. Paris is definitely my favorite of all the subway systems i've tried. And to the moron bashing the unions and the fact that the subway is state run, you will notice that the top subway systems in the world are all state and union run and in countries with a much broader and deeper reaching social mandate.

Mid-C Frank

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:01:32 -0500

They rank London's Dickensian tubes above the Paris Metro??? This review is meaningless!!!!!!!

Tatyana

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 19:00:48 -0500

Mid-C Frank

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:56:03 -0500

They rank London's Dickensian tubes above the Paris Metro??? This review is meaningless!!!!!!!

just saying

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:36:40 -0500

Virgin Vacations lauds the Paris subway system by saying that it "aids roughly 1.365 *billion* people with their daily commutes." Now that is more than a little bit amazing--especially when you consider that the ENTIRE population of France is less than 81 million!

Brooklynite

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:34:17 -0500

NYC gets points for 24 hour service and the extent of the system. Big losses though, on aesthetics. Most of the stations are filthy dungeons. I've used the systems in Paris, SanFran, Athens, and DC, and New York is BY FAR the filthiest and gloomiest system. Maintenance is too long deferred, then completed in a half-assed manner. For decades nothing of consequence has been added; kudos to Bloomberg for pushing along much needed capital investments including Second Ave subway, Fulton Street, etc. Now: reopen the express tracks on the Brooklyn F lines! Overcrowding is reaching epidemic proportions at rush hour.

Toby

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:29:40 -0500

If you can't ride a subway 24/7 what good is it? As for the condition of the NYC subway today, we are paying for decades of neglect and catching up. None of the other systems have the great value for money that is found here and a lot of them don't offer free transfer to buses and vice versa.

just saying

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:29:22 -0500

Virgin Vacations praises the Paris subway system by saying that it "aids roughly 1.365 *billion* people with their daily commutes." Now that is more than a little bit amazing--especially when you consider that the ENTIRE population of France is less than 81 million!

Benjamin Kabak

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:18:34 -0500

amNY kind of sucks at math. 1.5 billion total riders/365 days a year = 4.1 million riders a day. The 7.2 million riders represent the highest one-day total from 2006. I've written more about this at my blog.

Benjamin Kabak

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:15:37 -0500

blah

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:10:08 -0500

24hrs and cheapness pisses all over expernsive, clean and infrequent. Nuff said.

JerseyCityWestSideMafia

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:03:13 -0500

Um... the london underground fare is now £4.00 cash for "zone 1" travel...which $8 dollars US!!!

MT

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:59:14 -0500

For all it's foibles I would rank the NYC subway #1 just for the fact that is it 24 hours. After having lived in a few cities where that is not the case (London and Boston specifically - but it's especially problematic in London since the city is SO spread out), I see it as a Godsend.

timbnyc

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:58:59 -0500

The A/C they're installing in the Columbus Circle station is a much more meaningful improvement than the displays. (does anyone think LEDs signify up-to-date technology?)

wha?

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:57:12 -0500

How many underground systems are there worldwide?

J

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:56:50 -0500

Santiago Chile had a really nice modern system. It wasn't entirely underground so you could take the subway to see the Andes without getting off. I don't think it was terribly extensive though, but if NY could look like that it would be amazing.

krackilow

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:50:23 -0500

For these two reasons alone we should rate #1. Unfortunately we are also saddled with an incompetent union of lazy workers with a sense of entitlement. Furthermore they are supported by the fact that the MTA is controlled by the State and not the city it serves. > but NYC Transit is the only 24 hour one. > NYC subway ridership averages out to 7.2 million riders on weekdays.

Subway Sam

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:46:11 -0500

No surprise in those rankings. Our stations are in horrible condition, and have no feeling of openness. Most ceilings are low, and our platforms are crowded by columns and staircases. It has also taken way too long for our trains and stations to match the technology available. Just look at the condition of the newest tiled floors! They used to have white specs, now they are all brown. A simple cleaning solution would help, but instead they just powerwash the stations, ignoring the dust on everything.

James

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:40:32 -0500

Yeah, Ney York was definitely ranked too low. The fact that it runs 24 hours a day should have at least pushed it to the top three. I dread going to parties in Boston knowing that I'm going to have to end up walking back to my friends appartment because we were out after 12.

Subway Jared

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:36:18 -0500

NYC: 24 hours NYC: Air conditioned NYC: Most number of stations NYC: $2 flat fare (equivalent to £1.01 or €1.51)

Subway Jared

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:26:38 -0500

NYC: 24 hours NYC: Air conditioned NYC: Most number of stations NYC: $2 flat fare (equivalent to £1.01 or €1.51)

Jen Chung

Mon, 26 Feb 2007 17:24:47 -0500

What makes some other transit systems head and shoulders above the NYC subway is accessibility to major airports. London and Hong Kong make traveling to the airport so easy, whereas in NYC, it's a hassle.