5 ms·
> The biggest cities in the world does not have overnight sub, and they carry far more people around the city, is that a problem? No, of course not. I don't th
by chimeracoder 9y ago
> The biggest cities in the world does not have overnight sub, and they carry far more people around the city, is that a problem? No, of course not.
I don't think we want to use Guangzhou, Shanghai, Nanjing, Delhi, Jakarti, Beijing, Mumbai, São Paulo, or Lagos[0] as models for New York City's transit. A casual observer might claim Tokyo is a decent model, except that Tokyo is structurally a radically different city, to the point where the comparison doesn't provide much of value.
> The cost of overnight running, does it justify the value?
It absolutely does. Shutting down the subway overnight would cripple the entire city. Even though overnight service is limited compared to daytime service, it's an essential part of the city's infrastructure.
Moreover, eliminating overnight service isn't actually necessary for providing the improvements that the subway needs, so talking about eliminating overnight service is a red herring.
[0] the nine cities in the world, excluding Tokyo, whose metropolitan area is larger than New York City's.
- justicezyx 9y ago> It absolutely does. Shutting down the subway overnight would cripple the entire city. Even though overnight service is limited compared to daytime service, it's an essential part of the city's infrastructure. > Moreover, eliminating overnight service isn't actually necessary for providing the improvements that the subway needs, so talking about eliminating overnight service is a red herring. I see statements & 0 facts... Please check your references and come back with data.
- chimeracoder 9y ago> I see statements & 0 facts... Please check your references and come back with data. For starters, I provided facts that debunked your un-cited and inaccurate claim about subways in other large cities. If you're going to make the claim that overnight service is the root of the MTA's current problems, the burden is on you toprovide evidence that (a) temporary closures for routine maintenance are not sufficient, (b) something changed drastically in the last 15 years, because the MTA has run overnight for most of the subway's existence without a problem; and (c) the problems that overnight service allegedly causes are somehow more significant than the other problems the MTA has (which are discussed extensively in this article and comment thread).
- justicezyx 9y agoReducing maintenance cost and more room for other improvements, I see no need to justify this reasoning at all. It's your responsibility to show that the saved maintenance cost is hurting the "essentials" of NYC subway.
- chimeracoder 9y ago> Reducing maintenance cost and more room for other improvements, I see no need to justify this reasoning at all Yeah, see, that's the thing: you're making a pretty big fallacy assuming that the costs of providing overnight service actually impact maintenance work in any meaningful way. As it turns out, overnight service is relatively inexpensive to provide, and temporary disruptions to evening or weekend service for maintenance (which already happen) are sufficient to address most maintenance problems that can't be handled during working hours. Cutting overnight service wouldn't solve the problems that are actually preventing the maintenance that's needed. I'm not going to bother to go into more specifics, because they're well documented, not just in this comment thread but also the exact original article. If you're interested, those are both excellent places to start.
- justicezyx 9y agoHmm, I am curious where are the documented evidence about overnight subway