4 ms·

==NYC is one of the few (like 2, maybe 3) America cities with an actual usable rail system== Interested to hear what the other cities are. Chicago? San Fran?

djstein 8y ago
Chicago and DC
- rhino369 8y ago
  DC Metro is having issues on par with NYC's. The cause is likely the same; improper maintenance.
  - stevehawk 8y ago
    But they are also heavily investing in expanding it (recently opened silver line) . Dc is banking heavily on the future of that rail where NYC seems to have quit caring entirely.
gamegoblin 8y ago
Boston's system is pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway
- dsfyu404ed 8y ago
  It's cleaner than anything in Silicon Valley and less crowded than NYC. Timeliness and reliability are quite lacking though. It desperately needs rolling stock that wasn't due to be EoL'd a decade ago and it needs proper management which the thinly veiled jobs program known as the MBTA doesn't seem to be able to provide. edit: apparently SF is not representative of public transit in other cities in California.
  - tomjakubowski 8y ago
    Assuming you mean California, LA's Metro rail is no dirtier than Boston's MBTA rail. Sometimes it smells a little funky, but so do the streets -- Boston doesn't have quite the homeless population of Los Angeles.
    - mlthoughts2018 8y ago
      LA’s metro rail is definitely dirtier than the MBTA, and while you’re right that LA faces more challenges with homeless people, there is still a meaningful presence of homelessness on the MBTA, combined with the fact that it’s a much larger rail network in terms of track and ridership and that it has to operate even during horrible winter conditions, I’d say there is a marked step up from LA metro rail to the MBTA in overall quality. I’ve lived in both downtown LA and Cambridge, and it’s really difficult to conduct life in LA relying primarily on local rail options. Whereas in metro Boston, it’s much easier to live car-free than to own a car. The subway and commuter rail are just a superior way to get around 99% of the time. I mean, it’s not the same degree of car-obsolescence as New York, but it’s much closer to New York in that regard than it is to the situation in LA.
discodave 8y ago
DC
lev99 8y ago
DC proper.

djstein 8y ago

Chicago and DC

rhino369 8y ago
DC Metro is having issues on par with NYC's. The cause is likely the same; improper maintenance.
- stevehawk 8y ago
  But they are also heavily investing in expanding it (recently opened silver line) . Dc is banking heavily on the future of that rail where NYC seems to have quit caring entirely.

gamegoblin 8y ago

Boston's system is pretty good: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MBTA_Subway

dsfyu404ed 8y ago
It's cleaner than anything in Silicon Valley and less crowded than NYC. Timeliness and reliability are quite lacking though. It desperately needs rolling stock that wasn't due to be EoL'd a decade ago and it needs proper management which the thinly veiled jobs program known as the MBTA doesn't seem to be able to provide. edit: apparently SF is not representative of public transit in other cities in California.
- tomjakubowski 8y ago
  Assuming you mean California, LA's Metro rail is no dirtier than Boston's MBTA rail. Sometimes it smells a little funky, but so do the streets -- Boston doesn't have quite the homeless population of Los Angeles.
  - mlthoughts2018 8y ago
    LA’s metro rail is definitely dirtier than the MBTA, and while you’re right that LA faces more challenges with homeless people, there is still a meaningful presence of homelessness on the MBTA, combined with the fact that it’s a much larger rail network in terms of track and ridership and that it has to operate even during horrible winter conditions, I’d say there is a marked step up from LA metro rail to the MBTA in overall quality. I’ve lived in both downtown LA and Cambridge, and it’s really difficult to conduct life in LA relying primarily on local rail options. Whereas in metro Boston, it’s much easier to live car-free than to own a car. The subway and commuter rail are just a superior way to get around 99% of the time. I mean, it’s not the same degree of car-obsolescence as New York, but it’s much closer to New York in that regard than it is to the situation in LA.

discodave 8y ago

lev99 8y ago

DC proper.