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.
You get what you pay for. Surface level light rail is inferior to subway. Period.
If grade separated, light rail can be as good as a subway. Rapid transit might have a higher top speed, but with frequent stops average speed won't be much different. Capacity is lower, but in many cases it's not an issue.
Just look at KidPhilly's map and tell me that a city like Philadelphia wouldn't benefit from having more heavy rail expansion. It's not just NYC that has a strong need for heavy rail transit.
Yes they are, in fact. This is especially true for the Market-Frankford Line during certain hours of the day. It doesn't get as tightly packed as the MTA's 1 train, but it does get down to only standing room.
Except for the fact that you're more limited as far as where you can actually run it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BajanYankee
Are trains overflowing in Philly?
Philly uses smaller cars, like they use in Chicago if I am not mistaken, and they are definitely overcrowded and so to the limited number of lines and the area they cover, it can be a long hike just to get to the nearest train.
Philly is a city that should have a subway system more on par with what you will find in Brooklyn.
I hope one day they are able to tackle the corruption and issues they are having with their transit and expand and renovate their subway system.
Oh, but they still build subways. One opened up recently close the Ikea. I really like subway as far as fast food is concerned. The sub of the day only costs 2 euros here .
Yes they are, in fact. This is especially true for the Market-Frankford Line during certain hours of the day. It doesn't get as tightly packed as the MTA's 1 train, but it does get down to only standing room.
"Standing room only" is normal during rush hour. That doesn't mean that the capacity of the system is completely maxed out.
I took NOLA101's point to mean that NYC is the only city where additional capacity is absolutely needed. The Lexington Avenue Line alone carries almost as many daily riders as the DC Metro and the Chicago El combined.
Quote:
With only two minutes between trains, the line is operating at its capacity, meaning that during the height of the rush period, no more trains can be added.
Quote:
Even at full capacity — 27 trains per hour — during the morning rush, the two Lexington Avenue express lines, the Nos. 4 and 5, frequently are too full to accommodate all the passengers, who must wait for the next train.
"Standing room only" is normal during rush hour. That doesn't mean that the capacity of the system is completely maxed out.
I took NOLA101's point to mean that NYC is the only city where additional capacity is absolutely needed. The Lexington Avenue Line alone carries almost as many daily riders as the DC Metro and the Chicago El combined.
The MTA definition of an overcrowded rush hour subway train is when standing passengers have less than three square feet of space. Non rush hour has a lower definition, couldn't find it, but it refers to the % of passengers that are standing.
Basically DC's metro is a hybrid commuter rail-subway system serving an area of 6-7 million people, and even with all its advantages, it has lower per capita ridership than almost any European city. And the DC Metro is considered a smashing success in the U.S. context!
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.