[urbanactivistTX]

Just a question for the forum community...

List the many mass transit and commuter systems that you have used. If you were to compare them, which was...

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing

2) the most (least) comfortable to ride

3) best (worst) bargain for the money

4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes

Lastly, observe the city/metro you were in... does the system provide enough coverage and frequency to not need private transportation?


Have fun.

[brickell]

Most pleasing - DC metro
Least Pleasing - Philly subway
Most Comfortable - NJTransit commuter rail
Least comfortable - a packed commuter train to Stansted Airport in London. The train seemed nice enough however.
Best Bargain - NY Subway
Worst Bargain - NY AirTrain
Most Illogical - Miami Metrorail
Most Logical (to my use) - DC yellow line from Reagan to city center.
Bonus: Best fare collection - Oyster Card, London
Worse: Philly and Miami - still using tokens (at least the last time I was up there)

Miami transit is adequate if you need it but no fun at all.

[Justin10000]

List the many mass transit and commuter systems that you have used. If you were to compare them, which was...

I will list only the major systems - I have ridden many smaller city systems.

TTC
New York - MTA
PATH
NJT
SEPTA
PATCO line
Montreal
Washington
San Jose VTA
Portland Trimet
King Metro/Sound Transit
Translink
SF Muni
BART
Caltrain
GO Transit
OC Transpo


1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing

Most asthetically pleasing - Montreal Metro. No question
Least asthetically pleasing - PATH. I love the system, but it feels really cramped, due to the small stations.

2) the most (least) comfortable to ride
Most comfortable - BART. The seats are great
Least comfortable - I would New York MTA. Not a fan of the hard longitudal seats

3) best (worst) bargain for the money
Best value for the money - Almost all of them.
Worst Value - SEPTA. The fare system is awful, and I do not like their "Convenience pass". No free transfers between modes.

4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes
Hmmm...

New York MTA. There is a subway or bus stop almost every corner. Seems logical to me!

Lastly, observe the city/metro you were in... does the system provide enough coverage and frequency to not need private transportation?

-I do not believe in privatization. It's not an effective way of providing transport to the masses. People are going to have to learn eventually that the private sector cares about profit first, and providing services second. I do not understand why people think the private sector would do a better job, without subsidies. That being said, the TTC is providing decent service in my area, and I have no complaints.

[emathias]

List the many mass transit and commuter systems that you have used. If you were to compare them, which was...

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing
2) the most (least) comfortable to ride
3) best (worst) bargain for the money
4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes

Lastly, observe the city/metro you were in... does the system provide enough coverage and frequency to not need private transportation?

I put my full list of used transit systems beneath my question answers.

1) Most aesthetically pleasing was Stockholm's subway. Least was Boston's subway stations (I didn't see many, though).

2) Most comfortable overall was the Oslo airport express train, but limiting to innercity transit, I'd vote for the Paris metro. Least would probably be ... the buses in Cancun? I don't know, no one system was so horrible that it stood out as terribly worse than the lower-tier as a whole.

3) Paris and Madrid's are both great bargins, although the buses in China in general are a tremendous value if you can navigate the characters. Worst bargain might be Oslo, with high prices and so-so coverage - then again everything in Norway costs through the nose.

4) This is difficult to answer. Paris and Madrid have great general coverage, though, so I'm giving them a tie. Worst is harder to consider since what I consider logical as a tourist probably isn't reflective of the overall logic of a system. Simply because they haven't kept up with the changes in their cities for the most part, I'm tempted to list all American cities as a tie for this simply because even with solid core systems as backbones, new developments in their cities have create routes for which there are surprisingly poor transit choices. Even in the U.S. city with the best rail system, there is no rail to Laguardia airport, getting to Kennedy isn't particularly easy even with rail connections now, and that means the easiest airport to get to from the city isn't even in the city, but in Newark - how nutty is that?

List:

Still would need a car:
Minneapolis lightrail
Bergen, Norway, hill-climbing rail thing
Cancun, Mexico buses

Still would want a car:
Portland, Oregon buses and MAX light rail
Seattle buses and the monorail
Maastrict, the Netherlands, buses
Hefei, China buses (maybe no car is okay)
Beijing subway and buses (maybe no car is fine is certain areas of the city)

No car is fine or desirable:
San Francisco Bart and buses (and CalTrain commuter rail)
Washington, D.C. Metro
Boston "T" rail
Stockholm metro
Oslo subway, streetcars, ferry and airport express train
Paris Metro and RER
Madrid Metro and buses
Vienna subway
Moscow subway
Toronto subway and buses
New York City subway and buses and LIRR
Chicago subway, buses and Metra commuter rail
Shanghai subway and buses
Nanjing subway and buses

[Shawn]

List the many mass transit and commuter systems that you have used.

MBTA (Boston)
MTA (New York)
RIPTA (Providence)
SEPTA (Philly)
METRO (DC)
MUNI / BART (Bay Area)
TTC (Toronto)
Whatever they call it up in Montreal
The Tube (London)
DART (Dublin)
DART (Dallas)
Metrorail (Miami)
LACMTA (Los Angeles)
CTA (Chicago)
Metro / JR East (Tokyo)
Metro / JR West (Osaka)
KMTB (Kyoto)
NMS (Nagoya)
SMS (Sapporo)
FCTB (Fukuoka)

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing

Most: Fukuoka
Least: Philly

2) the most (least) comfortable to ride

Most: Kyoto
Least: Chicago in general, Tokyo during extremely crowded morning commutes

3) best (worst) bargain for the money

Best: Tokyo hands down
Worst: Philly - really expensive for the options available

4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes

Most: Tokyo
Least: LA . . . so many densely populated places aren't serviced...

Lastly, observe the city/metro you were in... does the system provide enough coverage and frequency to not need private transportation?

MBTA (Boston): central core coverage is excellent, but you'll need a car outside of the core and a select group of inner-ring burbs, plus service isn't 24-hour
MTA (New York): provides enough coverage and frequency to not need a car
RIPTA (Providence): you'll need a car here no matter where you live in the city
SEPTA (Philly): I haven't spent enough time on this system to comment with authority
METRO (DC): see Boston, but the stations and rolling stock are far more attractive
MUNI / BART (Bay Area): see Boston, with slightly better suburban coverage and slightly worse core coverage
TTC (Toronto): see Boston, but better for both the core and burbs
Whatever they call it up in Montreal: see Boston
The Tube (London): provides enough coverage and frequency to not need a car
DART (Dublin): see Boston
DART (Dallas): from what I saw, this can be a nice option for commuting provided you live in the right spots, but you'll still need a car
Metrorail (Miami): you'll need a car here no matter where you live in the city
LACMTA (Los Angeles): I haven't spent enough time on this system to comment with authority
CTA (Chicago): I haven't spent enough time on this system to comment with authority, but my impression is that frequency rivals New York, while coverage leaves a little more to be desired...
Metro / JR East (Tokyo): best transit system on Earth in my opinion, although I have yet to experience Hong Kong, which everyone says gives Tokyo a run for its money
Metro / JR West (Osaka): better than anything in North America, including New York
KMTB (Kyoto): see DC
NMS (Nagoya): rivals New York, stations and rolling stock are far more attractive
SMS (Sapporo): see DC
FCTB (Fukuoka): see DC

[Reverberation]

I have limited Experience.

BART - Awesome, takes you everywhere important.
MARTA - Easy but doesn't help you if you live outside 285. Sketchy on the southside.

[Okstate]

^ I have limited experience also.

-----------------
Portland TriMet
Dallas DART
Denver RTD
-----------------

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing
Most- Denver
Least- Dallas

2) the most ( least) comfortable to ride
Most- Dallas ( Seats facing front of train opposed to facing opposite side of train..i.e. directly at someone else)
Least- Portland ( Some newer trains are coming soon...but currently dated and crickety along turns)

3) best (worst) bargain for the money
Best- Portland ( Fareless square downtown covers a significant portion of landmark amenities)
Least- ??

4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes

This is really a double edged sword to discuss. There are TWO reasons mass transit functions.
1.) Serve area in need of alternative transportation.
2.) SPUR economic development on area needing revitalizing through a resource via transit lines (increased commerce, activity, NEW & INCREASED TAX $$$ from new business coming into city hands.

In other words...what may appear illogical presently is designed to morph (for the better) through time, becoming a more logical route in the future.

Having said all that. Portland's current routing and surroundings seem to work the best and is light years ahead of any city its size in the U.S. with the lone exception of maybe San Diego.

[bvpcvm]

ok, i'll bite. here are the systems i've used:

paris metro
brussels metro
lyon metro
munich u-bahn
frankfurt s-bahn
koln u-bahn
wien u-bahn
prague metro
budapest metro
istanbul light metro
warsaw metro
helsinki metro
st petersburg metro
moscow metro
nizhniy novgorod metro
yekaterinburg metro
kiev metro
washington dc metro
vancouver skytrain
portland trimet
san francisco bart
los angeles metro

most aesthetically pleasing: toss up between moscow and d.c. - for completely different reasons.

least aesthetically pleasing: brussels or koln, maybe budapest (it's been a while)

most comfortable: bart
least comfortable: the trolleybus system in vladimir, russia, winter 1996, when the city couldn't afford snow tires and so the few busses that ran were so packed people practically clung to the outside. also, the commuter trains outside of moscow, in the winter, when the heat doesn't work.

best bargain: moscow, without a doubt. at least it used to be.
worst bargain: bart or d.c. metro -

most logical routes: most places, moscow in particular
illogical routes: nizhniy novgorod. the city is split by the Oka river, but the metro runs only on the suburban side, without going downtown. they're working on this, however.

no car needed:

i live in portland; in some places you don't need a car. but those places are limited.

when i lived in moscow you definitely didn't need a car, but that's changing as retail and office space moves out to the suburbs.

[deasine]

Worst Bargain - SkyTrain

Really? Is that Vancouver's SkyTrain? =O I'm just curious: why?

[tua21506]

well it looks like SEPTA is winning the least desirable in the whole world title...lol. I think i can agree with that unfortunately....
I have ridden..
SEPTA
MTA
PATCO
NJT
METRO
LYNX
Arubus
Metro (Tokyo)
JR East (Tokyo)
Tokyo ikegami line (I rode on a couple of the lines run by Tokyu can't remember the names though)
Also rode the monorail in Tokyo...i think thats run by another company...
If you want to count Disney worlds transit as one then that too..lol

as far as the poll is concerned
1
most - JR line

least - SEPTA :(

2
most - Tokyo ikegami line (I liked the padded seats...this is especially pleasing when you take last or first train back after drinking heavily lol)

least - Arubus...lol this is the transit system in Aruba..lol...I remember riding it the one time and the bus driver decided to take a shortcut across a dirt field lol..the bus already not having AC was just toped off by being tossed around going across this field lol

3
most - Anything in Tokyo
least - SEPTA

4
most - Tokyo
least - hmm not sure

[brickell]

Really? Is that Vancouver's SkyTrain? =O I'm just curious: why?

Sorry, meant the Airtrain to JFK in New York.
$5 just to get you anywhere useful.

[MolsonExport]

I will give a global measure. Just a thumbs up (TU), neither good nor bad (~), or thumbs down (TD) rating to the mass transit systems that I've used:

Canada:
Montreal (TU)
Toronto (~)
Vancouver (TU)
Calgary (TU)
Ottawa (TD)

USA:
Boston (TD)
New York City (~)
New Orleans (TD)
Los Angeles (~)
Minneapolis (TD)
Seattle (TD)

Australia:
Sydney (TU!!)
Perth (TU!!)

Europe:
London (TD)

Asia:
Seoul (TU)

[JDRCRASH]

It's actually pretty comfortable; i'm surprised people don't realize how smooth it is.

[urbanactivistTX]

Wow, my experience is super limited to this point, but will get better :(

List the many mass transit and commuter systems that you have used.

Major cities
-Houston METRO (home transit system)
-Dallas DART/Ft. Worth the "T"
-Chicago CTA
-London the Tube
-San Diego (MTS?)
-San Antonio VIA
-Austin Capitol Metro

Smaller cities
-Cambridge transit/ Ely-Cambridge-London Commuter Rail
-Little Rock CAT

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing
For pure appeal and uniformity, I have to go with London. Sadly the Tube is very complex and tough for novices to the city, but it definitely felt and looked powerful

for the least category, I have to go with Houston. The MetroRail route is just not nice to look at, unless you're in the medical ctr, or downtown. This can only improve with the surroundings, and better use of midtown's dead space. Bike racks on the buses are a BIG plus though, as they have increased transit options for thousands of Houstonians. CTA is a close second though, b/c some of those EL cars are fugly.

2) the most (least) comfortable to ride
Definitely Houston. buses are spacious, and the only times that a seat isn't available is around major sporting events. Can't say enough about the bike racks to promote mixed use mass transit, and the new hybrid buses are not only sleek and comfy, but are allowing METRO to save on fuel costs (which in turn is keeping the fares low).

3) best (worst) bargain for the money
CTA just b/c it provides the most consistent coverage without Tube prices

4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes
As an American, I don't feel qualified to comment on European transit in terms of logic just b/c I don't know the trends within their cities well enough. But for the US, I'd say that Dallas/Ft. Worth seemed pretty logical based on the connection from core-to-core, and coverage to the airport (although conserted). The "T" is also quite well-planned, but sparsely used.

Lastly, observe the city/metro you were in... does the system provide enough coverage and frequency to not need private transportation?
I would definitely cite London as the most comprehensive transport system that I've ridden, although the city is mighty confusing!! It would be very easy to get around without a car. Chicago is also a decent city to live in without a car, but you'll be on the bus a lot more. Within each city there is a decent, livable and walkable core, but the biggest hinderance to car independence (especially in the sunbelt) is the lack of 24hr transit coverage.

[miketoronto]

I have been on on the following systems.

NYC: NEW WORK CITY TRANSIT BUS
PHILADELPHIA: SEPTA
PITTSBURGH: PAT
BUFFALO: NFTA METRO
SYRACUSE: CENTRO
WINDSOR: TRANSIT WINDSOR
DETROIT: DDOT & SMART
CHICAGO: CTA
BOSTON: MBTA
CLEVELAND: RTA
MONTREAL: STM
OTTAWA: OC TRANSPO & STO
LONDON, ONTARIO: LONDON TRANSIT COMMISSION
HAMILTON, ONTARIO: HAMILTON STREET RAILWAY



I have to say that so far, the most confusing system I have ever been on was Syracuse's CENTRO bus system. They have the most confusing route numbering system ever. One route for example can have 3 different route numbers to it depending where the bus ends its run at.
And here is the most confusing part.
I got to the transit centre out near the suburban mall by intercity bus, and had to take the CENTRO bus to downtown. I knew from getting the information that I had to take a bus numbered just for example 16 SALINA.
However at the Transit Centre no 16 came by. Finally I asked a bus driver and he said his bus was going downtown.
Turns out that on trips going twords downtown, the bus displays the route number that the bus will continue one once it hits downtown. So all the 16 buses were displaying bus routes 252, 206, etc. So you have to know all the other bus routes to. It was the most confusing system ever.

[plinko]

List and private transportation question at bottom:

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing
MOST: Kuala Lumpur lite rail, DC Metro
LEAST: NYC subway

2) the most (least) comfortable to ride
MOST: Shanghai Maglev
LEAST: Tokyo Yamanote or Shanghai at rush hour

3) best (worst) bargain for the money
BEST: Hong Kong (octopus card)
WORST: hard to remember

4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes
LOGICAL: Berlin S-Bahn
ILLOGICAL: LA Metro

Lastly, observe the city/metro you were in... does the system provide enough coverage and frequency to not need private transportation?

Among those I've ridden (if I can remember them all):

Likely Require a Car in the City/Metro:
San Diego - lite rail
LA - Metro
Sacramento - RT
Phoenix - Metro (bus)
SLC - TRAX
Dallas - DART
Pittsburgh - whatever the train is called
St. Louis - lite rail
Caracas - subway

Still might want a car in the city/metro:
Berlin - S-Bahn / U-Bahn
Toronto - subway
Mexico City - Metro
Philly - SEPTA
Northern NJ - NJ Transit (lite + commuter rail)
Baltimore - lite rail
Washington DC - Metro
Chicago - CTA
SF - BART

No car required:
Tokyo - JR Rail (Narita) / Yamanote Line
Shanghai - subway / Pudong Airport Maglev
Beijing - subway
Guangzhou - subway
Hong Kong - pretty much any type available (MTR/KCR/bus/van)
Singapore - lite rail
Kuala Lumpur - lite rail / KL Sentral from KLIA
Paris - Metro
Copenhagen - whatever the train is called
NYC - subway
Boston - T
SF - MUNI

These are just my opinions of course...and I have never taken transit everyday so I'm likely wrong about many of them...

[rsbear]

Well I'm not exactly a world traveler, but here goes (no meaning to the order):

Boston - T (Green and Orange lines)
NYC - Air Train and MTA subways
San Diego - Trolly
Los Angeles - Blue, Green and Gold lines (light rail), Red line (subway), MTA buses and MetroLink
San Jose - VTA light rail
San Francisco - BART, MUNI rail
Oakland - Air Bus
Portland - MAX (all lines), Street Car, Tri-Met bus
Seattle - Monorail (not really transit, I guess, more of leftover novelty)
Vancouver - SkyTrain

1 - Aesthetically Pleasing
MOST - Vancouver SkyTrain (but it's been years, so NYC AirTrain might actually now be the most pleasing)
LEAST - Boston Green line T (though some NYC stations are pretty bad, too)

2 - Comfortable Ride
MOST - BART (wide seats with deep cushions)
LEAST - NYC subways (hard seats, rough ride on some lines)

3 - Relative Bargain
MOST - LA light rail and subway ($1.25 a ride!)
LEAST - NYC AirTrain ($5.00 for what, two miles?)

4 - Route Logic
MOST - San Francisco BART (given it's role as long-distance regional commuter rail)
LEAST - NYC subway

[Pistola916]

I've been on the following mass tran systems

SACRAMENTO- RT BUS & LIGHT RAIL
SAN FRANCISCO- BART & MUNI
SEATTLE- SOUND TRANSIT BUS
VANCOUVER- TRANSLINK BUS
NEW YORK- MTA SUBWAY
MEXICO CITY- MICRO BUS & EL METRO (SUBWAY)

[The Chemist]

I've been on:
London - Underground/DLR/Bus
Dublin - DART
Boston - Green/Red Line
Calgary - C-Train
Vancouver - Skytrain
Shanghai - Metro/Bus

1. Aesthetically Pleasing
MOST: London Underground - can't beat the colour scheme, and some of the stations are really amazing.
LEAST: Boston Green Line

2. Comfortable Ride
MOST: Calgary C-Train at off peak times
LEAST: Calgary C-Train at peak hours / Shanghai Metro at peak hours (especially line 1)

3. Relative Bargain
MOST: Calgary C-Train - $2.25 per ride anywhere in the city, $6 for a day pass
LEAST: London Underground - it takes you a lot of places, but man, it's pretty expensive

4. Route Logic
MOST: Shanghai Metro - many of the lines follow major road arteries and go exactly where you want them to go.
LEAST: No opinion

I will provide my opinions on the two systems I am most familiar with - Calgary's C-Train and Shanghai Metro.

Calgary: If you live near a C-Train station and work downtown or at the University, at one of the major hospitals, or a few other select locations, you could certainly get by without a car. However, if you live further away from a C-Train station, many bus routes have terrible frequencies off peak hours, or do not run at all. So you would need a car then.

Shanghai: Once you figure out the buses, and provided you don't need to be out past 10:30 or 11pm, it'd be very easy to get by without a car here. I do already. The metro is very extensive, and getting bigger by the year - but I do wish they'd improve frequency on some of the newer lines (15 minute frequency on a big city metro is pathetic) and extend the operating hours (Calgary's C-Train, in a city of only 1 million people, is open 2 hours later every night than the Shanghai Metro, which shuts down at only 10:30pm! :hell) The buses are tough to figure out if you don't read Chinese, but once you get the hang of them, they're cheap, they're quite convenient, and many routes are very frequent.

[vid]

To give you an example of how illogical things are in Thunder Bay, we have five route 3s, all going to different places, while routes 4, 5, and 6 are one route. In some places, just to move one kilometre north you have to spend 45 minutes going downtown and back. The routes are also numbered somewhat inconsistently, and we have a bus that goes about 10 miles from downtown down streets that are many kilometres long and have only a handful of residents. We have two routes where the majority of the passengers per run (of which there are 2) are just on the bus to see where its going, and why.

Our most frequent route is every 15 minutes even though the amount of people commuting between the two cores would almost justify an LRT line. Buses are every 15 minutes downtown, but there is one every 5 minutes at the college. They also have "surprise buses" -- buses that run but not on any schedule. They just appear at random. They seem to have a bit of a schedule to them but for the most part they're not dependable and occasionally don't go where you think they will, and almost never arrive at terminals when other buses do which means you have to stay at the terminal for 5 to 20 minutes depending on the time of day. Evening frequencies (20 or 40 minutes) begin at 5 in the south end and 6 in the north end, and during the period between 5 and 7, buses never arrive when you think they will.

The city also spent 700,000$ setting up a system that tells you where buses are and when they will arrive at your stop (example (http://www.nextbus.com/predictor/prediction.shtml?a=thunderbay&r=01&d=01northbound&s=simpdeas_n&ts=fortcent_n)) but it doesn't work right. Everyone finds the digital signs confusing, and some don't even work right.

Route numbering is inconsistent and doesn't follow a predictable pattern. Buses interline but the way they interline changes during the day (two routes only interline for 4 hours during the afternoon), and two routes change where they go after 10pm, but no one knows that they do because it serves an area that has no people at that time of day. We have one route that only runs during peak hours, but on the map it says it serves an industrial park during off peak hours. :shrug:

It's an adventure, let me tell you.

[urbanactivistTX]

I have limited Experience.

BART - Awesome, takes you everywhere important.
MARTA - Easy but doesn't help you if you live outside 285. Sketchy on the southside.

Hey Reverb, you've used METRO, right??

[WonderlandPark]

1) the most (least) aesthetically pleasing

Most pleasing: DC Metro, Kuala Lumpur is nice, least would be Dallas (many outdoor stations in the heat, pretty ugly trainsets)

2) the most (least) comfortable to ride

The new Munich U-Bahn trainsets are the nicest I have ever seen, least would be NYC at rush hour in the summer

3) best (worst) bargain for the money,

Best: Kuala Lumpur, NYC is also a bargain, worst BART


4) seemed to follow the most logical (illogical) routes

most: BART, MAX (portland), Hong Kong, LA Metro rail is illogical, (but busses are pretty logical), Kuala Lumpur needs to be more logical, its a poorly integrated system (between various private operators)

now this is a nice train (Munich, all photos mine)
http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Scenic/world/sl_munich_13.jpg

KL Monorail & LRT below
http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Scenic/world/sl_malaysia_08.jpg
http://www.pixelmap.com/images/Scenic/world/sl_malaysia_05.jpg

[staff]

1) Most aesthetically pleasing was Stockholm's subway.
Apart from a handful stations in the centre, I'd say the general design and layout of Stockholm T-bana stations is quite dull and generic. Depends on what you compare it to, of course.

I'll come up with a list later when I got time...