| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
"Gareth Davis" wrote in message om... Since we are on the topic of comparing things stateside, I thought I'd share my recent experiences of the NYC subway system during a recent stay. Stations: All stations I saw appeared litter free with no signs of vandalism, however it is probably fair to say every single one looked very dirty and smelt like a public toilet! Most of the stations I used did show signs of renovation work in progress although in a couple of cases this meant that platforms and passageways were open with surfaces potholed while they were in the process of relaying them. Also there were no staff to be seen inside the ticket barriers on most stations. I was very impressed by the extending platform edges on the curved platforms at South Ferry, but was not impressed by the fact that the rear 5 coaches (of 10) do not fit into the station and there is no passenger connection between units 5 and 6. Anyone who could not read the English posters might have difficulty there as the muffled announcement did not help, and the staff made no effort to detrain people in the wrong carrages at the previous station. I realised in time, but there were still people in my carrage as I left and legged it along the platform. The station is on a loop so anyone in the wrong carrages will just get returned to the previous station. One thing that caused me a great deal of confusion is that the stations often have seperate external entrances for each direction of travel, and no internal bridge/underpass if you enter via the wrong one. Sometimes these external entrances were a block apart with no signposting between them. I guess this is something you get used to, but as a first time visitor to a station it is baffling. Fair structu Much easier to understand than London, no zones, no local cross-boundary fares just a single $2 flat fare per journey (including a bus transfer as part of the same subway journey). Travelcard style unlimited use tickets were also available but I used the pre-pay MetroCard which I could buy or refill at each station. Also if you put $10 on your MetroCard it gave you another $2 journey for free. Passenger information: No tube maps posted on platforms (usually the only one is outside the gateline), no destination/time indicators on platforms, most announcements muffled and distorted (yes, much worse than London). Signs were of variable quality. Given that multiple destinations depart from the same platforms, and there are express/stopping varients of services this lack of info didn't help. The line number/letter is displayed on the front of each train and once on the side of each car with the terminus points to make up for this though. The dot matrix signs inside the newer stock were also a great help in understanding where the train was going. Overall I think that if I was offered reduced / flat fares NYC style but in return for their shoddy, dirty, smelly stations, lack of staff, lack of information and uncomfortable trains then I would turn it down. After all, given the current exchange rate, I'm not paying more then $4 a day for my Z1+2 annual. So everyone at LU reading this, give yourselves a big pat on the back. I have experienced a comparable system and the Underground is equal or far better in all aspects except for cost. But then I guess you get what you pay for. Of course I'm sure other people's experiences will be different. -- Gareth Davis Broadly I found the same things. One thing that seemed weird for me was to get used to not having to put your ticket in the barrier to get out of the station. I'd say there are fewer stations and far fewer interchanges than in London, but I love the idea of having express trains on the network. I thought passenger information was very, very lacking. One thing that I didn't think was particularly helpful was their using the term "uptown" and "downtown" at the same time as having "up" stairs and "down" stairs. Talking of stairs, haven't they heard of escalators? Money wise, overall, I think it's got to be less expensive than London. $7 a day buys you an unlimited travel card for subway/buses beats the £8+ for a Peak LT card. |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
|
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
|
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 00:54:31 -0500, "JB" wrote:
Broadly I found the same things. One thing that seemed weird for me was to get used to not having to put your ticket in the barrier to get out of the station. I'd say there are fewer stations and far fewer interchanges than in London, but I love the idea of having express trains on the network. There are 468 stations on the New York subway system. There are 275 on London Underground. I have traveled through 466 NYC subway stations--only omitting Pennsylvania Ave. and New Lots Ave. in Brooklyn (they were a bit daunting when I lived in New York). Express trains of the type that New York has are very rare on subways and metros worldwide. In fact, I believe that they are unique to New York. I thought passenger information was very, very lacking. One thing that I didn't think was particularly helpful was their using the term "uptown" and "downtown" at the same time as having "up" stairs and "down" stairs. Talking of stairs, haven't they heard of escalators? Money wise, overall, I think it's got to be less expensive than London. $7 a day buys you an unlimited travel card for subway/buses beats the £8+ for a Peak LT card. In New York, they do economies of scale: there are more commuters there than in London, I believe. As for escalators, there are very few needed because most subway lines were "cut and cover" lines rather than deep-bored tubes. There are some escalators from #7 stations in Manhattan, and some in other places--going from the elevated #4 station at 161st St. to the underground D station, for example (ISTR, but my memory may be faulty). Uptown and Downtown as directional designators helps signage as, for example, at 42nd Street Times Square "Uptown" trains can end at 137th St., 148th St. Lenox Terminal, 207th Street Washington Heights, 242nd Street Van Cortlandt Park, 241st Street in the Bronx, 168th Street and Broadway, 57th Street Manhattan, Ditmars Boulevard Astoria, or 179th Street Jamaica (some of these may have changed in the interval of the last 13 years since I lived there...). To put all these possible destinations on a sign outside the subway entrances (not to mention the Downtown destinations, which could be quite extensive as well) would mean a very large sign or very small writing. However, most New Yorkers have a vague idea whether the place they're going is Uptown or Downtown, and visitors either learn quickly or end up in Flatbush. In Brooklyn, perversely, Downtown is the part nearest Manhattan, so a train going "Downtown" from Coney Island will end up going "Uptown" once it reaches Manhattan. It's a quirk that residents just know, and visitors and newbies must quickly learn. -- Chris Hansen | chrishansenhome at btinternet dot com "The problem with the French is that they have no word for 'entrepreneur'." President Bush to Prime Minister Blair, at Bush's first G8 summit. |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
All stations I saw appeared litter free with no signs of vandalism,
however it is probably fair to say every single one looked very dirty and smelt like a public toilet! Most of the stations I used did show signs of renovation work in progress although in a couple of cases this meant that platforms and passageways were open with surfaces potholed while they were in the process of relaying them. Also there were no staff to be seen inside the ticket barriers on most stations. They seem to be people who sit all day in a glass box, who you can't understand what is being said. One thing that caused me a great deal of confusion is that the stations often have seperate external entrances for each direction of travel, and no internal bridge/underpass if you enter via the wrong one. Sometimes these external entrances were a block apart with no signposting between them. I guess this is something you get used to, but as a first time visitor to a station it is baffling. The map is huge and confusing. The only thing I remember was the Q diamond, and never understood what it did, compared to the Normal Q line. About the same as the UK, less evidence of tagging on the trains compared to the UK however they had a far worse etching problem, probably down to some lines having everthing internal covered in stainless steel plating. The newer trains had dot-matrix screens and clear recorded announcements, just like the Jubilee and Northern lines. One line also had lights behind each station on the route maps above the windows which indicated the trains current position on the line. One thing missing on all lines was seat cushions, the moulded plastic seats quickly become uncomfortable. On most trains you could look out the front window (drivers cab is on one side) which was kind of cool to stand by for a near drivers eye view. When I was there I was on a train that was announcing every station wrong because it was an express train, used on a local service. No tube maps posted on platforms (usually the only one is outside the gateline), no destination/time indicators on platforms, most announcements muffled and distorted (yes, much worse than London). Signs were of variable quality. Given that multiple destinations depart from the same platforms, and there are express/stopping varients of services this lack of info didn't help. The one thing that annoyed me. You swipe the tickets in a turnstile like they do with Credit cards in a shop, but my card refused to swipe and I spoke to the unhelpful man in the glass box and he muffled something to me in another language, and he opened the side gate, which I went through, and held open for about 3 others. Their revenue protection is awful. Anyway, I missed a train and sat on a horrible platform with 10 buskers and watched the dogs/rats run along the track and loud trains whizz through the middle. Think of the Central line at bank and times the noise level by 5. -- To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline For Railway Information, News & Photos check out the Award Winning Railways Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk "Loving First Great Western Link since 2004" |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Fri, 2 Apr 2004 at 21:19:25, Gareth Davis
wrote: Of course I'm sure other people's experiences will be different. I agree about the very uncomfortable seats - the same applied on the buses, too. But overall I found the system fairly easy to use, and I was impressed by the length of the trains - I was never on one that was uncomfortably crowded, even when I travelled in the rush hours. But they were nothing like as comfortable as DLR trains...... or even Jubbly line (you usually get a seat at Canning Town going East, I find). -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 at 12:47:55, Joe wrote:
The map is huge and confusing. The only thing I remember was the Q diamond, and never understood what it did, compared to the Normal Q line. Q Diamond was the express, normal Q the local (we took the Q Diamond to get to and from where we were staying with a friend in Brooklyn). One thing I didn't say in my previous post was how marvellous the commuter trains seemed to be compared to SouthCentral and Thameslink! We took the commuter train to Trenton, New Jersey, and changed there to another commuter train to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and it was wonderful. Really comfortable, for local trains, with staff on the trains to check your ticket and reduce vandalism, clean lavatories that worked...... enough said! Left SC and TL absolutely standing! -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Express trains of the type that New York has are very rare on subways and metros worldwide. In fact, I believe that they are unique to New York. Not quite unique, as the Met line in London also operates express, semi-fast and stopping services. -- Spyke Address is valid, but messages are treated as junk. The opinions I express do not necessarily reflect those of the educational institution from which I post. |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
"Spyke" wrote in message
... Express trains of the type that New York has are very rare on subways and metros worldwide. In fact, I believe that they are unique to New York. Not quite unique, as the Met line in London also operates express, semi-fast and stopping services. Although can the Met Line's overground service to Amersham etc really be classed as a subway/underground service or is it a main-line service that would be operated by National Rail and TOCs if it were in south London? |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Although can the Met Line's overground service to Amersham etc really be
classed as a subway/underground service or is it a main-line service that would be operated by National Rail and TOCs if it were in south London? Most of the bloody passengers use the Mainline services from there because some don't like LU trains. Though, I do know some prefer LU -- To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline For Railway Information, News & Photos check out the Award Winning Railways Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk "Loving First Great Western Link since 2004" |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Paul Corfield writes:
Some of the other observations are responses to societal problems - upholstered seats would never work in NYC given the prevalence of vandalism and graffiti. I agree that metal or plastic seats are not comfy but it would be far too expensive to provide them. Actually, I wonder if that's still true now. The totally graffiti- covered trains that you used to see 25 years ago are a thing of the past, thanks to vigilant enforcement and improved security at the yards (depots). Maybe the environment has also improved to where proper seats could be reintroduced. And New York does beat London on two other issues of onboard comfort: all trains are air-conditioned, and with no "tube profile" trains, the whole floor area is available for standing if needed. On the whole I find the London system a much more pleasant environment, but slower-moving and, of course, more expensive for most trips. -- Mark Brader "Inventions reached their limit long ago, Toronto and I see no hope for further development." -- Julius Frontinus, 1st century A.D. My text in this article is in the public domain. |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
In message , Spyke
writes Express trains of the type that New York has are very rare on subways and metros worldwide. In fact, I believe that they are unique to New York. Not quite unique, as the Met line in London also operates express, semi-fast and stopping services. And the Piccadilly fasts in West London. -- Roland Perry |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Subject: Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
From: Thank you..very good report.p46 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 08:49:00 +0000 (UTC), Christian Hansen
wrote: Express trains of the type that New York has are very rare on subways and metros worldwide. In fact, I believe that they are unique to New York. Well not really - the Met Line is express in north west London and the Piccadilly Line is express in west London. I would agree that the scale of express operation is far greater in New York but NYC is lucky that it followed the earliest underground pioneers and therefore some forethought was applied to the construction of the system. There are obvious parallels with things like the Paris RER and German S Bahn systems which provide skip stop service in the suburbs as well as fast links across the central area of their respective cities - not subways per se but often in tunnel and performing the same function. In New York, they do economies of scale: there are more commuters there than in London, I believe. Err depends how you define the term commuter and whether you are simply comparing LUL against the NYC subway or whether you would include our Overground railway lines which provide mass transit service in South London where the Tube network is sparse. I realise you have a number of main line commuter networks in New York as well but I'd guess they are not as busy in totality as London's main line commuter network. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
|
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message
... On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 at 12:47:55, Joe wrote: The map is huge and confusing. The only thing I remember was the Q diamond, and never understood what it did, compared to the Normal Q line. Q Diamond was the express, normal Q the local (we took the Q Diamond to get to and from where we were staying with a friend in Brooklyn). But nowhere does it obviously tell you that the diamonds are express and the circles are local; if you look very closely in the corner of the map, in very small print, you may notice that the word 'express' tends to be seen near diamonds, but it's far from obvious. The squares seem to be terminating points, but I'm not certain about that. The previous poster said "The map is huge and confusing", I would say that is an understatement. There are maps on at least some platforms, but they tend to be positioned behind seats, so when someone is sitting there you can't see them! This also seems to be the case with the maps inside cars. These maps seem to be the same size as the ones you can get in folded form brom the booth at stations, about 50x80cm. This map really could do with receiving the attention of Mr. H. Beck. This map shows land masses and areas of water, there's a lot of water around New York, and other features, such as parks and some streets. It's not a diagram like the London one, but it's not a true scale map either. If you don't have some idea of where the station you're trying to reach is, geographically, there's no easy way to find it on the map. To be fair, the Subway is a much larger system than the Underground, and producing a really clear map would not be easy, but I'm sure they could do better than the present one. The signs on the side of the cars are difficult to see as the train pulls into a crowded platform, there are no London type 'Next train' indicators on the platforms, some stations have attractive tile mosaic name signs displated high on the walls, otheres have only small square ones attached to the columns, facing along the platforms, and difficult to see from a train. Some stations have more than one name, if youare on the N, R ow W line, and want the Staten Island ferry terminal, you need to get off at Whitehall Street. This is shown on the map as being by the ferry terminal, but the 1 and 9 lines terminate at South Ferry station, which appears to be some distance away. In fact, as you leave Whitehall Street station the New entrance to South Ferry station is only about ten seconds walk away, and the old entrance, closed since 9-11, little further. To confuse things further, some of the previously mentioned signs on the columns at Whitehall Street actually say South Ferry. The 4 and 5 lines serve nearby Bowling Green station, all three stations being closer than exits from some single London stations. The map seems to represent tracks, or at least routes, rather than services, the 1 and 9 lines are represented by a single red line, the N,R and W by a single yellow one as are the Q, Q diamond and another branch of the W which branch off at Canal Street, and turn East to cross the Manhattan Bridge, this re-joins the other yellow line at DeKalb Av., something like the Bank and Charing Cross branches of the Northern line, but the whole thing just looks a mess on the map. Somebody has drawn a London style map of the Subway, and put in on their web-site; I can't remember the address, but Google will find it. The creator recognises some problems, mainly caused by the number of stations. New Yorkers seem to prefer their style of map for some reason. I see nothing wrong with the plastic seats; ok, they're not as comfortable as the London ones, but it's not as if people normally spend hours on end sitting on Subway trains, and at least they're easy to keep clean. In terms of passenger information, including the map, and siignage, London is far better, but in most other ways I think New York is better. The stations I have seen, admittedly quite a small number were clean, at least parts likely to come into passengers were, both stations and trains were more larger than typical London ones. Most ticket machines seem to work, and unless you are making a short journey, the $2 flat fare is good value, there was a major outcry last year when it was increased from $1.50. Metrocards are available in unlimited ride, like Travelcard, and stored value pre paid types. Free transfers are available to buses, and between certain nearby stations, though strangely, not in the case of Whitehall Street/South Ferry. For a single $2 fare it is possible to travel from the Noth of the Bronx to the Southern tip of Manhattan. The Staten Island Ferry is free, but even better, on reaching the Island, you swipe your Metrocard through the gate at the Staten Island Railway terminal. and it gives you a free transfer to that line, and the whole length of the Island. It's a pity that the Metrocards are not valid on the other rail systems in the area. The Subway is operated by the MTA, I think the suburban rail lines in New York are too, but cross the Hudson, and you're in New Jersey. Linking the two are the old Hudson Tubes, now known as PATH, operated by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, this links the World Trade Centre and 33rd Street in New York with Newark and Hoboken in New Jersey. This charges $1.50, but you can buy a card with 11 rides for the price of 10. You cannot however use Metrocards, though there has been talk of it for the future. It shouldn't be difficult, fit Metrocard readers to the gates, record the number of triips made with them, and allocate the apppropriate revenue to the Port Authority. Once in New Jersey the suburban rail lines are operated by NJ Transit, as are two light rail lines, the newly-built Hudson-Bergen, and the Newark city Subway, which has recently received new vehicles, and been extended. All of these systems have their own tickets. It's rather like needing one Travelcard type ticket South of the Thames, another one on the Waterloo and City, and different tickets on each underground line in the North. The Hudson-Bergen line is impressive, the stops, stations or whatever they're called, are better those on British tram/light rail systems, and there seems to be almost no vandalism. I seem to have said a lot about what's bad with these systems, but there's a great deal which is good, A lot of money is clearly being spent on the railways over there, to the fury of many of the local people, but they do seem to be getting something to show for the investment. With certain notable exemptions, we seem to be pouring large amounts of money in, but getting little improvement out. One thing I didn't say in my previous post was how marvellous the commuter trains seemed to be compared to SouthCentral and Thameslink! We took the commuter train to Trenton, New Jersey, and changed there to another commuter train to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and it was wonderful. Really comfortable, for local trains, with staff on the trains to check your ticket and reduce vandalism, clean lavatories that worked...... enough said! Left SC and TL absolutely standing! I've only been one stop, from the new station serving Newark International Airport Station to Newark Penn to change to PATH. I will be over there in three weeks, probably for the last time, and will be going to Trenton to see the new New Diesel powered light rail line, the 'River Line', which NJ Transit opened from there to Camden three weeks ago |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
|
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Bob Watt wrote:
On 03/04/2004 13:16, in article , "Annabel Smyth" wrote: was impressed by the length of the trains - I was never on one that was uncomfortably crowded, even when I travelled in the rush hours. This may be partly because Americans tend not to like walking - I used to catch a northbound Lexington Avenue local from 23rd St., and found that while most of the ten-car train was packed, there were usually seats in the last car; to get to them involved walking three or four carlengths from the station entrance. Ah, just as on Victoria line in London ;-) -- Lars Elmvang ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Min mailadresse finder du ved kun at skrive det overeksponerede domænenavn én gang |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Sat, 3 Apr 2004 at 22:44:52, Stephen Furley
wrote: But nowhere does it obviously tell you that the diamonds are express and the circles are local; if you look very closely in the corner of the map, in very small print, you may notice that the word 'express' tends to be seen near diamonds, but it's far from obvious. The squares seem to be terminating points, but I'm not certain about that. The previous poster said "The map is huge and confusing", I would say that is an understatement. What's more, it tends to be inaccurate; when we were there, there were engineering works on one of the tracks over Manhattan Bridge, which meant that the line didn't go where it said it did. According to some sources, they can't do the "next train" indicators that we have, as it's "too complex", which I think is b*ll*cks, but there you are..... But at least once you know where you are going, and which train to take, you get a 24-hour service, on admittedly less comfortable, but also less crowded trains. -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
But nowhere does it obviously tell you that the diamonds are express and
the circles are local; if you look very closely in the corner of the map, in very small print, you may notice that the word 'express' tends to be seen near diamonds, but it's far from obvious. The squares seem to be terminating points, but I'm not certain about that. The previous poster said "The map is huge and confusing", I would say that is an understatement. And I thought the tourists in London were bad with their maps. If I lived there I'd probably end up punching someone who opened out a huge map in a busy subway -- To reply direct, remove NOSPAM and replace with railwaysonline For Railway Information, News & Photos check out the Award Winning Railways Online at http://www.railwaysonline.co.uk "Loving First Great Western Link since 2004" |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message
... According to some sources, they can't do the "next train" indicators that we have, as it's "too complex", which I think is b*ll*cks, but there you are..... Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! But at least once you know where you are going, and which train to take, you get a 24-hour service, on admittedly less comfortable, but also less crowded trains. You can't really complain about them being less comfortable and then praise them for being less crowded, because the two go together. As soon as a transport system starts using plastic seats, it is seen as a distress purchase and is shunned by anyone who thinks they are above the hoi poloi, solving any overcrowding problem within weeks. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
This map really could do with receiving the
attention of Mr. H. Beck. . Have a go your self....could be fun... |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
For more information on the Hudson Tubes with a history, sightseeing
tour and three picture galleries, go to: http://www.hudsoncity.net/tubes/gatewaytubepage.html ================================== "Stephen Furley" wrote in message .."Annabel Smyth" wrote in message It's a pity that the Metrocards are not valid on the other rail systems in the area. The Subway is operated by the MTA, I think the suburban rail lines in New York are too, but cross the Hudson, and you're in New Jersey. Linking the two are the old Hudson Tubes, now known as PATH, operated by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, this links the World Trade Centre and 33rd Street in New York with Newark and Hoboken in New Jersey. This charges $1.50, but you can buy a card with 11 rides for the price of 10. You cannot however use Metrocards, though there has been talk of it for the future. It shouldn't be difficult, fit Metrocard readers to the gates, record the number of triips made with them, and allocate the apppropriate revenue to the Port Authority. Once in New Jersey the suburban rail lines are operated by NJ Transit, as are two light rail lines, the newly-built Hudson-Bergen, and the Newark city Subway, which has recently received new vehicles, and been extended. All of these systems have their own tickets. It's rather like needing one Travelcard type ticket South of the Thames, another one on the Waterloo and City, and different tickets on each underground line in the North. The Hudson-Bergen line is impressive, the stops, stations or whatever they're called, are better those on British tram/light rail systems, and there seems to be almost no vandalism. I seem to have said a lot about what's bad with these systems, but there's a great deal which is good, A lot of money is clearly being spent on the railways over there, to the fury of many of the local people, but they do seem to be getting something to show for the investment. With certain notable exemptions, we seem to be pouring large amounts of money in, but getting little improvement out. One thing I didn't say in my previous post was how marvellous the commuter trains seemed to be compared to SouthCentral and Thameslink! We took the commuter train to Trenton, New Jersey, and changed there to another commuter train to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and it was wonderful. Really comfortable, for local trains, with staff on the trains to check your ticket and reduce vandalism, clean lavatories that worked...... enough said! Left SC and TL absolutely standing! I've only been one stop, from the new station serving Newark International Airport Station to Newark Penn to change to PATH. I will be over there in three weeks, probably for the last time, and will be going to Trenton to see the new New Diesel powered light rail line, the 'River Line', which NJ Transit opened from there to Camden three weeks ago |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't
do them properly! I've always seen them working properly, except once when it was turned off |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! I've always seen them working properly, except once when it was turned off Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! I've always seen them working properly, except once when it was turned off Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! I've always seen them working properly, except once when it was turned off Last week at Victoria [Westbound District} the indicator said "Northfields" ....it was a Parsons Green's train..p46 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
(Proctor46)typed
Last week at Victoria [Westbound District} the indicator said "Northfields" ...it was a Parsons Green's train..p46 Met Line indicators at Preston Road (north-west bound) are so unreliable that if you don't check the front of the train, you *must* look and listen at Harrow. -- Helen D. Vecht: Edgware. |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
"Proctor46" wrote in message
... This map really could do with receiving the attention of Mr. H. Beck. . Have a go your self....could be fun... I have a 1970s New York Subway map which is Beck-like. ISTR there is a scan of it on the web somewhere (not on my site...) -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
|
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
John Rowland:
I have a 1970s New York Subway map which is Beck-like. That map is sort of Beck-like, but it uses a different stripe for each route, and the route variations are rather more complex than in London. Imagine London's triple line for Circle / H&C / Metropolitan turned into six, with a separate coloured stripe for each branch of the Met, and you'll get the idea. (Since many routes have express and local trains, station stops were shown on each individual route as dots within the colour stripe.) I always liked it, but many people found it, shall we say, more successful as abstract art than as a route map, and so the current design was introduced to replace it. -- Mark Brader | "Oh, sure, you can make anything sound sleazy if you, Toronto | you know, tell it exactly the way it happened." | -- Bruce Rasmussen: "Anything But Love" My text in this article is in the public domain. |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 at 14:03:03, John Rowland
wrote: "Annabel Smyth" wrote in message ... According to some sources, they can't do the "next train" indicators that we have, as it's "too complex", which I think is b*ll*cks, but there you are..... Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! True, but at least they give you some idea! But at least once you know where you are going, and which train to take, you get a 24-hour service, on admittedly less comfortable, but also less crowded trains. You can't really complain about them being less comfortable and then praise them for being less crowded, because the two go together. As soon as a transport system starts using plastic seats, it is seen as a distress purchase and is shunned by anyone who thinks they are above the hoi poloi, solving any overcrowding problem within weeks. Yeah, you have a point. But then, didn't the unlamented Mrs Thatcher once say that nobody over 30 should be seen on a bus, or something? Hmmm...... -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
In message , Annabel Smyth
writes Yeah, you have a point. But then, didn't the unlamented Mrs Thatcher once say that nobody over 30 should be seen on a bus, or something? Hmmm...... My personal favourite was her reported reply, when advised about the need for a Chelsea - Hackney tube line: "Why would anyone from Chelsea want to go to Hackney?" -- Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for London & the Heart of England http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message
... On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 at 14:03:03, John Rowland wrote: "Annabel Smyth" wrote in message ... According to some sources, they can't do the "next train" indicators that we have, as it's "too complex", which I think is b*ll*cks, but there you are..... Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! True, but at least they give you some idea! What I meant was that although they are very useful on the Victoria Line and certain other lines, there are stations on the Circle Line where the nice multiline LED displays only tell you about one train[1], and only when it is practically in the station anyway. The Piccadilly Line displays are great at telling you about the next three trains to Heathrow but neglecting to give any clues about the next train to Rayners. It is almost as if the system was bought off the shelf, having been originally designed for a network with simpler lines (such as Tokyo or Paris Metro). [1] That's one LU train, not one ONE train. -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
|
ice skating
-- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 Hey Annabel, the above link dosen't exist, but found your pix on following link: http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/photos/ ......You're a chunky, goodlooking tootsie who seems to be quite agile on a skating rink! |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
John Rowland wrote:
"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message ... On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 at 14:03:03, John Rowland wrote: "Annabel Smyth" wrote in message ... According to some sources, they can't do the "next train" indicators that we have, as it's "too complex", which I think is b*ll*cks, but there you are..... Well, LUL can't do the next train indicators either, at least they can't do them properly! True, but at least they give you some idea! What I meant was that although they are very useful on the Victoria Line and certain other lines, there are stations on the Circle Line where the nice multiline LED displays only tell you about one train[1], and only when it is practically in the station anyway. The Piccadilly Line displays are great at telling you about the next three trains to Heathrow but neglecting to give any clues about the next train to Rayners. It is almost as if the system was bought off the shelf, having been originally designed for a network with simpler lines (such as Tokyo or Paris Metro). [1] That's one LU train, not one ONE train. You know I never even considered that it would be more useful to show the next trains to Heathrow and Rayners Lane rather than just the next three trains whereever they go. I suspect that it wouldn't cause much problem on the Piccadilly technically... but I think they prefer people to just get on the first train to Acton anyway if there's no Rayners in the next three, to ease possible overcrowding. After all, in the winter when you're waiting in a warm tunnel, if you knew the next Rayners train was in ten minutes and that it was the fifth train, would you still get the first train to Acton Town and change...? -- Dave Arquati Imperial College, SW7 www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London |
ice skating
"C stock" wrote in message
... Hey Annabel, the above link dosen't exist, but found your pix on following link: http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/photos/ .....You're a chunky, goodlooking tootsie who seems to be quite agile on a skating rink! Less of your lip, or she'll give you a right hook, like she gave this chap! http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/photos/P014.jpg -- John Rowland - Spamtrapped Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001 http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood. That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line - It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 at 15:20:53, John Rowland
wrote: What I meant was that although they are very useful on the Victoria Line and certain other lines, there are stations on the Circle Line where the nice multiline LED displays only tell you about one train[1], and only when it is practically in the station anyway. The Piccadilly Line displays are great at telling you about the next three trains to Heathrow but neglecting to give any clues about the next train to Rayners. It is almost as if the system was bought off the shelf, having been originally designed for a network with simpler lines (such as Tokyo or Paris Metro). Seems to work pretty well on the Northern Line, though, than which you can't get much more complicated. I'm learning rather more about its vagaries than I ever wished to know, at the moment..... the Jubilee line seems far simpler. Although who, who, recorded the bright and breezy voice that says "Willesden Green!" after the rather dreary "This train terminates at"..... -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 |
ice skating
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 at 18:54:16, John Rowland
wrote: "C stock" wrote in message ... Hey Annabel, the above link dosen't exist, but found your pix on following link: http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/photos/ .....You're a chunky, goodlooking tootsie who seems to be quite agile on a skating rink! Less of your lip, or she'll give you a right hook, like she gave this chap! http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/photos/P014.jpg Indeed I might! Link is working now, by the way - thanks for pointing out that it wasn't. -- Annabel Smyth http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/index.html Website updated 8 March 2004 |
Subway (New York) vs Underground (London) [Quite long]
On Mon, 5 Apr 2004 15:20:53 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote: [dmis] What I meant was that although they are very useful on the Victoria Line and certain other lines, there are stations on the Circle Line where the nice multiline LED displays only tell you about one train[1], and only when it is practically in the station anyway. The Piccadilly Line displays are great at telling you about the next three trains to Heathrow but neglecting to give any clues about the next train to Rayners. It is almost as if the system was bought off the shelf, having been originally designed for a network with simpler lines (such as Tokyo or Paris Metro). While I acknowledge the points that you have made about refining the information provision the main point is that the dot matrix indicators (DMIs) were a simple upgrade off the back of existing signalling systems. In the case of the Circle the signalling system and design is not sophisticated enough to look back far enough to correctly determine the sequence of trains. There is also the issue of trains terminating / departing at key junctions (edgware rd, aldgate) that add to the complication as to what will be e.g the next s/b train at Paddington on the Circle / District line. The Jubilee Line and Central Lines are better because there is a much more up to date control system which can better understand where the trains are relative to the timetable and can therefore provide a better prediction of arrival times and destinations to both the controller and to the DMIs. Almost every other LUL line is decades behind modern day practice - new displays will be provided at all stations and when Line Upgrades come into operation there should be the level of sophistication of information that deals with the network's apparent complications. I look forward to that day. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:58 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk