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.
MTA (the Maryland one) overall is a joke, though, with god awful public transit inside Baltimore.
I commuted on the Baltimore Metro Subway every work day for six years. You could set your watch by the trains, and I mean that literally. Baltimore has an anemic, piecemeal system whose lines (what few there are) don't connect well together. And don't get me started on the sad joke we call the Light Rail. But the Metro line provided a reliable, comfortable service.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheProf
Being born in 1995, you're a young pup (compared to me, at least). You just missed the horrifying El crash near 30th Street station causing 4 fatalities and 162 injuries.
I lived in University City (West Philadelphia) and commuted to Center City when that happened. My Subway-Surface car was diverted to 40th Street station, where I joined the huge crowd that was just standing around doing nothing but watching jam-packed buses pass by, one after another. Finally I walked down to Spruce Street and, after quite a bit of waiting, managed to squeeze aboard a No. 42 bus to take me into Center City. A real mess of a day, though obviously my experience was nothing compared to the unfortunate people who were on the derailed train that day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheProf
Huh? How is MTA 'relying on past glory?' Yes, it is super old, often dirty, needs much updating, etc, etc. But it is by far the most extensive, most used, and most impactful system in America -- one of the best in the world. And with extensive 3 and 4-track express services, it is also one of the fastest. Nothing in the Western Hemisphere even comes close to NYC's MTA.
Yes, the New York subway is extensive, heavily used, and impactful. But best in the world? Not a chance. I've only been on three subway systems outside of North America, they being Paris, Seoul, and Busan. Each one of them was orders of magnitude better than that run-down, ugly, decrepit, stinky pit that brings shame to what people call The Greatest City In The World.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBornMassMade
The orange line trains look absol it let horrific last time knvistrd. Just so much damn rust. It was all peeling off the paint and what not. And the leaks, the homeless people and the fact that Reddit can name a frequent stabbed on the red line and we all I think the level of crime in the MBTA has gotten worse and is underestimated. It’s not uncommon to see fight, chases or be threatened in the MBTA. Over half of MBTA riders say they feel somewhat unsafe or just flat out unsafe on the MBTA. It certainly feels more dangerous than the city itself.
Last time I was in Boston was in 2018, and I made good use of the MBTA rail lines while I was there. I didn't experience anything like what you'd described. Did it really go so far downhill in such a short time?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Easy
Service-wise LA is a disaster. It's gotten somewhat better but the metro board is strongly opposed to enforcing any rules or laws that aren't causing immediate injury, so stations and trains are overrun with drug addicts openly smoking meth, shooting heroin, and behaving badly. There have been two murders in the last few weeks and all crime is way up.
Been longer since I rode the Los Angeles subway, probably sometime around 2005 or so. Again, nothing like what you've described. Why have things fallen so far in such a relatively short time?
I commuted on the Baltimore Metro Subway every work day for six years. You could set your watch by the trains, and I mean that literally. Baltimore has an anemic, piecemeal system whose lines (what few there are) don't connect well together. And don't get me started on the sad joke we call the Light Rail. But the Metro line provided a reliable, comfortable service.
I lived in University City (West Philadelphia) and commuted to Center City when that happened. My Subway-Surface car was diverted to 40th Street station, where I joined the huge crowd that was just standing around doing nothing but watching jam-packed buses pass by, one after another. Finally I walked down to Spruce Street and, after quite a bit of waiting, managed to squeeze aboard a No. 42 bus to take me into Center City. A real mess of a day, though obviously my experience was nothing compared to the unfortunate people who were on the derailed train that day.
Yes, the New York subway is extensive, heavily used, and impactful. But best in the world? Not a chance. I've only been on three subway systems outside of North America, they being Paris, Seoul, and Busan. Each one of them was orders of magnitude better than that run-down, ugly, decrepit, stinky pit that brings shame to what people call The Greatest City In The World.
Last time I was in Boston was in 2018, and I made good use of the MBTA rail lines while I was there. I didn't experience anything like what you'd described. Did it really go so far downhill in such a short time?
Been longer since I rode the Los Angeles subway, probably sometime around 2005 or so. Again, nothing like what you've described. Why have things fallen so far in such a relatively short time?
Regarding the MBTA. Its in rough shape. However, BBMM has a tendency to be very dramatic about the MBTA (Sorry BBM lol). I take the MBTA a lot and of my trips in 2022 about 80% have been no complaint/really good and 20% have sucked ... which were all on the Red Line surprisingly.
Its in rough shape and they need to focus on maintenance. I think all lines should close for 30 days or so to get their maintenance up to par. The Orange and Red Lines are very neglected.
Last edited by masssachoicetts; 08-30-2022 at 07:12 AM..
I don't think any American city would say they're satisfied with their public transit system. There's so much room for improvement across the board. There have been so many missed opportunities and political bungles, too, that do our transit systems no favors reputationally.
Public transit agencies were already facing chronic underfunding and maintenance backlogs earlier in the 2000s; the double-whammy of increased ride-sharing and then COVID/remote work trends really puts a lot of agencies in a longer-term funding and ridership bind. Very often, meaningful modernization and expansion projects take multiple times longer and are prohibitively more expensive than is considered reasonable, making them relatively rare in the American context. There has to be another way.
Traffic will continue to return to big cities and get worse over time, so I do think we'll again see a push towards PT usage as we were seeing in the early 2010s. I only hope that a major rise in federal/state political support and investments will follow.
I don't think any American city would say they're satisfied with their public transit system. There's so much room for improvement across the board. There have been so many missed opportunities and political bungles, too, that do our transit systems no favors reputationally.
Public transit agencies were already facing chronic underfunding and maintenance backlogs earlier in the 2000s; the double-whammy of increased ride-sharing and then COVID/remote work trends really puts a lot of agencies in a longer-term funding and ridership bind. Very often, meaningful modernization and expansion projects take multiple times longer and are prohibitively more expensive than is considered reasonable, making them relatively rare in the American context. There has to be another way.
Traffic will continue to return to big cities and get worse over time, so I do think we'll again see a push towards PT usage as we were seeing in the early 2010s. I only hope that a major rise in federal/state political support and investments will follow.
Yeah agreed. I've taken NYC, Boston, Chicago and Philly over the past year. Chicago was decent, but everything else has sucked. Its really not a city issue. Its a lapse in federal/state funding to make these systems to where they need to be.
I can't really rely on NJ Transit anymore. The cancelling of trains at NY Penn, leaving passengers stranded overnight is like exponentially increasing lately. I know it's not their fault, but we have a huge ROW issue too. NJT is one of the most unreliable services (Yes, BBMM... worse than MBTA C.R.....) and it literally is not their fault. We have to address a variety of issues.
I commuted on the Baltimore Metro Subway every work day for six years. You could set your watch by the trains, and I mean that literally. Baltimore has an anemic, piecemeal system whose lines (what few there are) don't connect well together. And don't get me started on the sad joke we call the Light Rail. But the Metro line provided a reliable, comfortable service.
Baltimore's problem is that, more than any other large Northeast/Mid-Atlantic metropolis, it engaged in what I call flavor-of-the-month transit expansion based on where the Feds were throwing money at the time.
The city was supposed to have a metro system along the lines of Washington's; that median in the segment of canceled I-70 west of downtown was supposed to hold a heavy-rail rapid transit line, and today's proposed Red Line, which Gov. Larry Hogan killed again to the consternation of Baltimoreans, is a scaled-down version of that. But after completing its first metro line, the Feds stopped throwing money at heavy rail, so Baltimore got the Central Light Rail Line instead.
Now BRT is all the rage, and Hogan's/Maryland DOT's rejiggering of Baltimore's bus network was an attempt to introduce BRT-lite to the city. I hope whoever succeeds Hogan is more amenable to giving Baltimore the transit it deserves rather than catering to suburban Washingtonians all the time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by masssachoicetts
Yeah agreed. I've taken NYC, Boston, Chicago and Philly over the past year. Chicago was decent, but everything else has sucked. Its really not a city issue. Its a lapse in federal/state funding to make these systems to where they need to be.
I can't really rely on NJ Transit anymore. The cancelling of trains at NY Penn, leaving passengers stranded overnight is like exponentially increasing lately. I know it's not their fault, but we have a huge ROW issue too. NJT is one of the most unreliable services (Yes, BBMM... worse than MBTA C.R.....) and it literally is not their fault. We have to address a variety of issues.
However, PATCO still has my heart.
1) Boston's current Orange and Blue Line fleets were placed in service in 1980, when I was still living in Boston. Both Boston and Philadelphia have a history of running trains into the ground — the Blue Line fleet replaced two separate fleets, one acquired in 1950 when the line was extended to Orient Heights (Wonderland came four years later) and the other dating to the East Boston Tunnel's conversion to heavy rail in 1923. Now, that fleet lasted 57 years, and it never had the kinds of problems either the current Orange Line fleet or Philadelphia's North Broad subway cars were having by the time they were retired at age 55 in 1982, so it seems clear that maintenance standards have slipped badly at the MBTA while they've improved at SEPTA, that 1993 MFL crash notwithstanding. And as I pointed out upthread, it seems that maintenance rises and falls on all of the major legacy systems: there was a time in the 1990s when people spoke of the CTA the way they do the MBTA now.
PATCO's advantage is the same one PATH in New York has: it's operated by an agency that gets lots of revenue from elsewhere that it uses to keep the rail transit line (PATCO)/network (PATH) in good shape. Both of them also have "Port Authority" in their names, but only one of them (the one in the New York area) actually runs ports. The Delaware River Port Authority, however, operates four toll bridges across the Delaware River, including the two busiest Delaware River crossings in the Philadelphia region*, and toll revenues from those four bridges keep PATCO in tip-top shape. Plus, PATCO's just one line — the prototype for all the Second Subway Era systems that followed in its wake, opened in 1969.
*Actually, they rank #2 and #3 behind the Delaware Memorial Bridge twin span between Salem, NJ and suburban Wilmington, Del. That bridge is operated by a different bi-state agency, the Delaware River and Bay Authority, a New Jersey-Delaware interstate compact.
I commuted on the Baltimore Metro Subway every work day for six years. You could set your watch by the trains, and I mean that literally. Baltimore has an anemic, piecemeal system whose lines (what few there are) don't connect well together. And don't get me started on the sad joke we call the Light Rail. But the Metro line provided a reliable, comfortable service.
Medium-sized, less-dense major metro areas like Baltimore, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis, will naturally have smaller rail networks than Philly, DC, or SF. That's just the historical nature of mass transit funding in the USA, even going back to legacy systems of the late 19th/early 20th century, when either heavy local bond issues needed a public vote or wealthy private investors -- usually railroads, then, entered the picture. Given Baltimore's size & status as a medium-sized major metro area, it ranks pretty high in my book compared to the rest of similar American cities. I would not expect B'more to have a BART or a DC Metro because B'more is not in those cities' size or density class.
I do wish Baltimore Metro and the LRT were better connected -- and not having to walk the block around or through Lexington Market (when it's open). Also, the Howard Street street trackage is awful -- it's slow and has hurt more than helped B'More development on that street. Trains should be placed into a subway on that route. Gov. Hogan did, indeed, seriously kneecap Baltimore/MTA by killing the Red Line which had been green-lighted after a decade's painstaking effort by city planners, which is a shame. Balto rail transit would be much more comprehensive -- indeed one of the best mid-sized city systems -- had the Red Line been built... Alas, in America, medium cities always must live on the edge of rail transit funding -- usually having to piecemeal-build their systems over the course of decades -- that is if they are even fortunate enough to have a rail system (or just 1 line, in Buffalo's case) at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man
Yes, the New York subway is extensive, heavily used, and impactful. But best in the world? Not a chance. I've only been on three subway systems outside of North America, they being Paris, Seoul, and Busan. Each one of them was orders of magnitude better than that run-down, ugly, decrepit, stinky pit that brings shame to what people call The Greatest City In The World.
I said NYC/MTA is "one of the best" not THE best in the world. I also freely acknowledged that New York's subway system is generally run down and dirty -- in a number of stations; however, MTA's trains appear well kept, for the most part, esp for such a huge network. But my focus was on coverage and efficiency, and in those categories, MTA is tough to beat ... anywhere. Paris and London have huge and comprehensive rapid transit systems -- no doubt, but they don't have any speedy express service as does NYC, which is unmatched anywhere I'm aware of -- maybe the Tokyo system has such service -- that network is so massive and confusing, I've never really figured it out.
I commuted on the Baltimore Metro Subway every work day for six years. You could set your watch by the trains, and I mean that literally. Baltimore has an anemic, piecemeal system whose lines (what few there are) don't connect well together. And don't get me started on the sad joke we call the Light Rail. But the Metro line provided a reliable, comfortable service.
I lived in University City (West Philadelphia) and commuted to Center City when that happened. My Subway-Surface car was diverted to 40th Street station, where I joined the huge crowd that was just standing around doing nothing but watching jam-packed buses pass by, one after another. Finally I walked down to Spruce Street and, after quite a bit of waiting, managed to squeeze aboard a No. 42 bus to take me into Center City. A real mess of a day, though obviously my experience was nothing compared to the unfortunate people who were on the derailed train that day.
Yes, the New York subway is extensive, heavily used, and impactful. But best in the world? Not a chance. I've only been on three subway systems outside of North America, they being Paris, Seoul, and Busan. Each one of them was orders of magnitude better than that run-down, ugly, decrepit, stinky pit that brings shame to what people call The Greatest City In The World.
Last time I was in Boston was in 2018, and I made good use of the MBTA rail lines while I was there. I didn't experience anything like what you'd described. Did it really go so far downhill in such a short time?
Been longer since I rode the Los Angeles subway, probably sometime around 2005 or so. Again, nothing like what you've described. Why have things fallen so far in such a relatively short time?
I will guess you hadn't been to Montreal. Where I remember their subway system was pretty clean, reliable, and is a rare system outside of Paris, France to even use rubber tired railcars. Which made the sound of the trains while they traversed through the tunnels quieter, vs. with metal rails. Montreal's public transit bus routes on a side note were pretty reliable, too.
Hadn't been to Boston, but I worry the MBTA stories I've read online makes me worry they have slipped a lot. Where it'll probably take a while to fix all the track issues with their subway, a la what Washington, DC went through.
Medium-sized, less-dense major metro areas like Baltimore, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and St. Louis, will naturally have smaller rail networks than Philly, DC, or SF. That's just the historical nature of mass transit funding in the USA, even going back to legacy systems of the late 19th/early 20th century, when either heavy local bond issues needed a public vote or wealthy private investors -- usually railroads, then, entered the picture. Given Baltimore's size & status as a medium-sized major metro area, it ranks pretty high in my book compared to the rest of similar American cities. I would not expect B'more to have a BART or a DC Metro because B'more is not in those cities' size or density class.
Actually, of the four "First Subway Era" legacy systems — Boston (1897), New York (1904), Philadelphia (1907) and Chicago ("Initial System of Subways" 1940) — Philadelphia's was the only one built entirely with private money; the City Councils gave the recently formed Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company a franchise to build an east-west elevated railroad line across the city, with the stipulation that the line run underground between the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers. Boston's and Chicago's tunnels were entirely public undertakings (Chicago's, funded with PWA/WPA money), while New York's was built by a public-private partnership.
The elevated railroads in New York and Chicago were entirely privately financed. The company that operated Boston's rapid transit was a private company chartered by the Commonwealth, which made it a ward of the state in 1917.
Quote:
I do wish Baltimore Metro and the LRT were better connected -- and not having to walk the block around or through Lexington Market (when it's open). Also, the Howard Street street trackage is awful -- it's slow and has hurt more than helped B'More development on that street. Trains should be placed into a subway on that route. Gov. Hogan did, indeed, seriously kneecap Baltimore/MTA by killing the Red Line which had been green-lighted after a decade's painstaking effort by city planners, which is a shame. Balto rail transit would be much more comprehensive -- indeed one of the best mid-sized city systems -- had the Red Line been built... Alas, in America, medium cities always must live on the edge of rail transit funding -- usually having to piecemeal-build their systems over the course of decades -- that is if they are even fortunate enough to have a rail system (or just 1 line, in Buffalo's case) at all.
Actually, I'd argue that both San Diego and St. Louis stand as examples of the opposite: their transit agencies have somehow managed to have both the vision and the funding to build and expand a light metro system over time based on a comprehensive, unified vision and plan.
No large city got a rapid-transit network full-blown in a short period of time, though Boston and the San Francisco Bay Area come awfully close. New York's subway system was largely built out over the course of three decades. Fifteen years separate the opening of Philadelphia's first rapid transit line and its extension northeastward, and another six passed before the second one opened. World War II intervened between the opening of the first segment of Chicago's "Initial System of Subways" and the second one, and most of the subways proposed under its plan never got built. Washington was pretty methodical about expanding its network, true, but a network that size (103 miles, third in size behind New York and Chicago) still couldn't be built quickly; its last segment didn't open until the early 2000s.
Quote:
I said NYC/MTA is "one of the best" not THE best in the world. I also freely acknowledged that New York's subway system is generally run down and dirty -- in a number of stations; however, MTA's trains appear well kept, for the most part, esp for such a huge network. But my focus was on coverage and efficiency, and in those categories, MTA is tough to beat ... anywhere. Paris and London have huge and comprehensive rapid transit systems -- no doubt, but they don't have any speedy express service as does NYC, which is unmatched anywhere I'm aware of -- maybe the Tokyo system has such service -- that network is so massive and confusing, I've never really figured it out.
There are sections of the London Underground where multiple lines share tracks, but only one line stops at all the stations while the other has limited stops (see this map). There are also places where two lines run parallel to each other but only one has local stops (like the Dorchester and South Shore branches of Boston's Red Line). I presume that the latter have four-track rights-of-way but am not sure about the former. However, given the frequency at which London Underground trains run, I suspect that they must.
I do know that the four-track North Side (Howard Street) Elevated (Red and Purple lines, plus the Brown Line between Belmont and Armitage) in Chicago and Philadelphia's Broad Street Subway are the only two four-track rapid transit lines in North America not located in New York.
I haven't ridden SEPTA since 2019. I like that you can still use transpasses(if they still sell those) anywhere on regional rail on weekends. The BSL was clutch with the express and spur, as well as the NHSL. RR frequency is garbage but usable. But you absolutely can NOT shut down bus service when there's a few inches of snow. That's inexcusable. Hills aren't an excuse. Here in the Twin Cities they do a terrible job of snow removal yet buses aren't shut down; same with Fort Wayne.
The MTA in NYC isn't one of the best in the world. LOL stop with that nonsense. Back in the 90s and maybe the 2000s yes; not today. Quantity doesn't equal quality, which is 3rd rate. Dirty, unreliable system with no law enforcement. Metro North/LIRR I'm not gonna count but it's WAY too expensive.
WMATA is currently trash with its frequencies and fare system.
If CTA can get its act together when it comes to crime/homelessness/riff raff it could be the best system in the country. That includes the buses. Wish there was a system like SEPTA where you can use your CTA pass on Metra.
Heard good things about Seattle. LA I hear has invested but homelessness/riff raff are a major problem.
Actually, of the four "First Subway Era" legacy systems — Boston (1897), New York (1904), Philadelphia (1907) and Chicago ("Initial System of Subways" 1940) — Philadelphia's was the only one built entirely with private money; the City Councils gave the recently formed Philadelphia Rapid Transit Company a franchise to build an east-west elevated railroad line across the city, with the stipulation that the line run underground between the Delaware and Schuylkill rivers. Boston's and Chicago's tunnels were entirely public undertakings (Chicago's, funded with PWA/WPA money), while New York's was built by a public-private partnership.
The elevated railroads in New York and Chicago were entirely privately financed. The company that operated Boston's rapid transit was a private company chartered by the Commonwealth, which made it a ward of the state in 1917.
All true; good points.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarketStEl
Actually, I'd argue that both San Diego and St. Louis stand as examples of the opposite: their transit agencies have somehow managed to have both the vision and the funding to build and expand a light metro system over time based on a comprehensive, unified vision and plan.
No large city got a rapid-transit network full-blown in a short period of time, though Boston and the San Francisco Bay Area come awfully close. New York's subway system was largely built out over the course of three decades. Fifteen years separate the opening of Philadelphia's first rapid transit line and its extension northeastward, and another six passed before the second one opened. World War II intervened between the opening of the first segment of Chicago's "Initial System of Subways" and the second one, and most of the subways proposed under its plan never got built. Washington was pretty methodical about expanding its network, true, but a network that size (103 miles, third in size behind New York and Chicago) still couldn't be built quickly; its last segment didn't open until the early 2000s.
You've got to throw in Chicago's core L as a system built instantaneously. The South Side Rapid Transit Railroad, (today's still-operating Green Line to Cottage Grove) was ostensively built in 1892 with the entrepreneurial goal of transporting hundreds of thousands of visitors to the Chicago World's (Columbian) Fair of 1893, but by New Year's day 1900, most of the core trunk lines of today's CTA rail network, including the downtown Loop, had been completed -- sure, there've been several extensions, relocations, and 2 short connector subways through downtown around WWII, but the extensive core system was finished inside 8 years. Sure 4 different private companies (the South Side RT, the Lake Street, the Metropolitan West Side Elevated, and the Northwestern L) built the system, but it was obviously a coordinated development as the truncated cars (around a max 47-feet in length) navigated all elevated structures' tight turning radii, shared the (Union) Loop as well as 3-rail traction and were otherwise fully compatible to eventual through routing.
The building of the DC Metro was methodical, all right; as near to an instantly-built network as one city could get, starting with the 4-mile segment of Red Line (Dupont Circle to Rhode Is. Ave), and completed to its planned 101 total route miles by 2001 (or thereabouts)... 101 miles of heavy rail rapid transit in 25 years is "instant" in my book. And of course, Metro has blown past their initial projection with a 3-mile Blue Line extension to Largo Town Center, and the still expanding 15+ mile extension deep into Loudon County, VA (via Dulles Int. Airport).
Yes, St. Louis' Metro Link is about as "instant" as a smaller-to-mid-major metro area can ask for -- unless, of course, a city goes all-in tax-wise as Denver to build their massive FasTracks LRT, electric commuter rail network.
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.
