Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
NJ Transit doesn't service the Newark Airport, officially known as Newark Liberty International Airport. NJ Transit does services the Newark Airport Airtrain stop. There is true legality behind that. Hence why the station is called Newark Airport Railroad Station. It can get you as close as public transportation can get you to the airport area, before you take airport specific transfers to the terminal. AirTrain, again not public transportation I work for one of these agencies, services only 2 of the 3 terminals. When Terminal B is redone, AirTrain will only service 1 of the three terminals… which is Terminal C by United. If you fly jetBlue, American, Air Canada or some United flights, you actually can’t utilize the AirTrain transfer to the airport. Fun fact. That will continue to Terminal B in the 2030s.
I would say Boston is similar here... but you can quite literally walk to the terminal in like 10 minutes from the station. I'd say Boston is more like DCA. Chicago is in it's own league for rail transportation to the airport.
The RER is ROUGHLY equivalent to the PATH, and is public transportation that serves the CDG and ROY airports directly.
OyCrumblr is 100% right here.
Thank you! I don't understand why this is such a point of contention, and it's weird to think of something this basic and existing in the real, physical world as somehow a matter of opinion. I reckon my tone's probably not helping things, so I'll try to be less of an ass about it.
I think one thing I’ve noticed is that Boston and Chicago have very different periods of relevancy- almost inverse
so Boston was more important probably until about 1920 and then as soon as the great depression hits in the late 20s Boston sort of begins this long decline it doesn’t pick up again until about 1980. Whereas Chicago its golden era is during the great migration, and such when Boston’s economy was relatively stagnant.
During Chicago’s heyday was with modern American life was sort of established in terms of the American middle-class automobiles the rise the TV that all happened when Chicago was going up so it has a really lasting impact during that time Boston was in the backwaters.
But in 1980 is when there was a soft culture explosion in the US, that’s when things like celebrity paparazzi, and things like that became a bit more at the forefront of American culture and society and that’s right about the time the Boston started to pick up the pieces with Larry Bird in the Celtics and new edition/NKOTB and then you see in the 90s the number of movies and shows that in Boston really starts to begin to pick up and then it explodes in the 2000s and 2010s. The thing about this era is that it’s global and it’s connected via the Internet so there’s a huge impact there.
since 1980 it’s been Boston on the resurgence and Chicago really in a state of prolong stagnation, and either result not only of the scale of New York, and the global influence in reach, but that long stagnating period Chicago has been in relative to nyc and Boston, are more global cities in terms of its population, and appeal. Whereas I think Chicago is more valued and talked about nationally due to that Golden Era and FoxNews.
And for the record, and I stated this several times - I’ve voted right in between them, because even though logically, I know, it’s closer to Boston…. I try to account for all the softer cultural things like Chicagos AA appeal and land area/Sears tower, but to say New York is just too much of a logical Leap, and or fallacy for me.
I think one thing I’ve noticed is that Boston and Chicago have very different periods of relevancy- almost inverse
so Boston was more important probably until about 1920 and then as soon as the great depression hits in the late 20s Boston sort of begins this long decline it doesn’t pick up again until about 1980. Whereas Chicago its golden era is during the great migration, and such when Boston’s economy was relatively stagnant.
During Chicago’s heyday was with modern American life was sort of established in terms of the American middle-class automobiles the rise the TV that all happened when Chicago was going up so it has a really lasting impact during that time Boston was in the backwaters.
But in 1980 is when there was a soft culture explosion in the US, that’s when things like celebrity paparazzi, and things like that became a bit more at the forefront of American culture and society and that’s right about the time the Boston started to pick up the pieces with Larry Bird in the Celtics and new edition/NKOTB and then you see in the 90s the number of movies and shows that in Boston really starts to begin to pick up and then it explodes in the 2000s and 2010s. The thing about this era is that it’s global and it’s connected via the Internet so there’s a huge impact there.
since 1980 it’s been Boston on the resurgence and Chicago really in a state of prolong stagnation, and either result not only of the scale of New York, and the global influence in reach, but that long stagnating period Chicago has been in relative to nyc and Boston, are more global cities in terms of its population, and appeal. Whereas I think Chicago is more valued and talked about nationally due to that Golden Era and FoxNews.
And for the record, and I stated this several times - I’ve voted right in between them, because even though logically, I know, it’s closer to Boston…. I try to account for all the softer cultural things like Chicagos AA appeal and land area/Sears tower, but to say New York is just too much of a logical Leap, and or fallacy for me.
+On movies, another Boston area themed horror movie comes out Friday and its aimed at GenZ with Addison Rae (???) as the star in the film. Hollywood makes bank on Boston in films and is trying to keep this trend going.
So the problem is it's literally not part of an agency or service with a specific name and which you didn't capitalize to explicitly reference it before, but decide to do it now? This is an odd argument.
Did you know that NYC doesn't officially call its subway systemMetro? Chicago doesn't officially call the LMetro either.
What NJTransit service to EWR are you trying to reference here? No NJT train goes into or next to *any* of EWR's terminals. I had already pointed that out to you earlier, but it didn't seem to catch.
You don't need to transfer into Metro to get to central Paris. The RER is a rapid transit service and it will take you to multiple parts of central Paris directly as a single seat ride--the RER B goes to both Gare du Nord and Châtelet–Les Halles. How much more central are you going to get than the I-er arrondissement? And then after that it clears through the entire center of Paris. I do not believe you have used mass transit to and from CDG. I do not believe you have used mass transit to EWR either.
RER is a commuter rail run by the French national railway. Not a metro system.
Thus CDG dies not have a metro stop. And to get on the metro you must transfer to it.
Air Train from JFK is not the NYC subway. To get on the subway you must transfer at Jamacia.
Nothing I said was incorrect
Being a sanctimonious jerk dies not make you correct
There is no metro connection to Charles DeGaule
If your considering the 25 minutes (19 from Terminal E) a poor connection to Boston based on the mode, then you must do the same for Paris.
RER is a commuter rail run by the French national railway. Not a metro system.
Thus CDG dies not have a metro stop. And to get on the metro you must transfer to it.
Air Train from JFK is not the NYC subway. To get on the subway you must transfer at Jamacia.
Nothing I said was incorrect
Being a sanctimonious jerk dies not make you correct
There is no metro connection to Charles DeGaule
If your considering the 25 minutes (19 from Terminal E) a poor connection to Boston based on the mode, then you must do the same for Paris.
It is definitely a rapid transit systemand hence metro system even if it does not have the word Metro in its official name. It operates much like Washington Metro does in that it goes far out into the suburbs where stops are placed far apart, and then in the core has lower stop spacing and where it through-runs into the suburbs on the other side and these suburbs are often more densely populated than Boston proper. On some lines it utilizes branching and then interlines in the urban core to get higher frequencies, but each of those branch lines also have high frequency services all day rather than just peak times. RER B stations at CDG, despite being on one of the branches at those stations, have 8 services per hour each direction, so service every 7.5 minutes running on fully grade-separated paths cutting through the city center on electrified track. The Red Line in Boston runs something like every 9 minutes on weekdays and every 11 minutes on weekends. There is no Métro station at CDG, but there is a metro system that services CDG--it just doesn't have the name Métro.
I do not think you have any experience with using mass transit at CDG. Why do you continue with this when you obviously do not know what you're talking about?
I do think it's important to understand how the RER functions, because how it functions and how it came about as essentially extensions and enhancements of existing then commuter rail infrastructure is what several US cities, including all three mentioned in this topic, can fairly rapidly create a rapid transit system for a fairly low cost per rider acquisition. It's a massive leap in transit access as it turns commuter rail infrastructure into express metro systems. The RER was conceived in this manner and being an "métropolitain express", or express metro in English, was literally what it was envisaged to and now successfully do.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 11-15-2023 at 02:05 PM..
It is definitely a rapid transit systemand hence metro system even if it does not have the word Metro in its official name. It operates much like Washington Metro does in that it goes far out into the suburbs where stops are placed far apart, and then in the core has lower stop spacing and where it through-runs into the suburbs on the other side and these suburbs are often more densely populated than Boston proper. On some lines it utilizes branching and then interlines in the urban core to get higher frequencies, but each of those branch lines also have high frequency services all day rather than just peak times. RER B stations at CDG, despite being on one of the branches at those stations, have 8 services per hour each direction, so service every 7.5 minutes running on fully grade-separated paths cutting through the city center on electrified track. The Red Line in Boston runs something like every 9 minutes on weekdays and every 11 minutes on weekends. There is no Métro station at CDG, but there is a metro system that services CDG--it just doesn't have the name Métro.
I do not think you have any experience with using mass transit at CDG. Why do you continue with this when you obviously do not know what you're talking about?
I do think it's important to understand how the RER functions, because how it functions and how it came about as essentially extensions and enhancements of existing then commuter rail infrastructure is what several US cities, including all three mentioned in this topic, can fairly rapidly create a rapid transit system for a fairly low cost per rider acquisition. It's a massive leap in transit access as it turns commuter rail infrastructure into express metro systems. The RER was conceived in this manner and being an "métropolitain express", or express metro in English, was literally what it was envisaged to and now successfully do.
It’s a high frequency main line railway. Not a Metro. LIRR from Jamaica east is very high frequency ~once every 8 minutes) but again, isn’t the subway.
If you not being very technical but judging on the quality of the service only then you’re shortchanging JFK. Frankly considering the geographic layout of the NYC metro, connecting to Jamaica probably is the best connection JFK can have since the vast majority of JFK passengers would be from Long Island/Queens/Brooklyn not Manhattan. And for most of those people Jamaica is a better than Penn Station.
The Metro North Railway isn’t a metro despite the word metro in the name either
Not that this really matters, cause in the L is so much closer to the T than the MTA I’m not sure what the point of this debate is
It’s a high frequency main line railway. Not a Metro. LIRR from Jamaica east is very high frequency ~once every 8 minutes) but again, isn’t the subway.
If you not being very technical but judging on the quality of the service only then you’re shortchanging JFK. Frankly considering the geographic layout of the NYC metro, connecting to Jamaica probably is the best connection JFK can have since the vast majority of JFK passengers would be from Long Island/Queens/Brooklyn not Manhattan. And for most of those people Jamaica is a better than Penn Station.
The Metro North Railway isn’t a metro despite the word metro in the name either
Not that this really matters, cause in the L is so much closer to the T than the MTA I’m not sure what the point of this debate is
Whoa, bud, it is not a main line railway--it's a system where large parts of it were *converted* from main line railways. What you're looking for instead is Transilien which is the Paris area's commuter rail system which runs on a cobbling of different railway systems owned by different entities. Transilien is much better than most US commuter rail systems in the US and services a lot of riders (it services about as many riders in a week as MBTA Commuter Rail does in a year), but it does not run with the regular all-day high frequency at low fare costs nor does it through-run the city center in the way that rapid transit systems (metro systems) like RER has.
I am not shortchanging JFK. That's the most frequent airport I use and I unfortunately end up going to and from there often.
Last edited by OyCrumbler; 11-15-2023 at 03:09 PM..
Whoa, bud, it is not a main line railway--it's a system where large parts of it were *converted* from main line railways. What you're looking for instead is Transilien which is the Paris area's commuter rail system which runs on a cobbling of different railway systems owned by different entities. Transilien is much better than most US commuter rail systems in the US and services a lot of riders (it services about as many riders in a week as MBTA Commuter Rail does in a year), but it does not run with the regular all-day high frequency at low fare costs nor does it through-run the city center in the way that rapid transit systems (metro systems) like RER has.
I am not shortchanging JFK. That's the most frequent airport I use and I unfortunately end up going to and from there often.
RER can run on Transilien track (same loading gauge, same voltage, same track gauge). It can not run on metro track (different loading gauge, different voltage)
It’s a mainline train. They run double decker trains for gods sake.
+On movies, another Boston area themed horror movie comes out Friday and its aimed at GenZ with Addison Rae (???) as the star in the film. Hollywood makes bank on Boston in films and is trying to keep this trend going.
Yea there was a Netflix special last year too but set I. Christmas. Another one was some mystery movie sort of like clue that wa sin Bosotn last year.
And the. You have a plethora of other movies and tv shows set in MA with an ode to Boston- Boston Strangler (new), Patriots Day, Trial 4: the Sean Ellis Story, The TV mini series the New Edition Story (and subsuquent Bobby Brown Story and subsequent @617Mike Biv miniseries), American Manhunt, The Social Network
The brand and visibility of the city…it’s incredibly identifiable and in Hollywood. A quick google search reveals tons of movies and shows I didn’t know were in Boston or haven’t seen.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
