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.
Metro was built for what they thought the 1990's and 2000's would be. Since no one has a crystal ball, they were not 100% spot on. But you should know better. I should not have to explain this.
It's not weak, they can't handle it. Overcrowded platforms, over reliance on cars that were used 30 years ago b/c the process to get new ones has been slow.
It's not weak, they can't handle it. Overcrowded platforms, over reliance on cars that were used 30 years ago b/c the process to get new ones has been slow.
That was never my point. Read what I wrote again.
Its not that I "can't handle it" its that you "can't read".
Its not that I "can't handle it" its that you "can't read".
Quote:
Metro was not built for the 1970's. It was built for the 1990's and 2000's.
So we've had actual deaths on the Metro, fires, and aging infrastructure and you're sitting here saying a metro system that was built in the early 70s was actually not meant for that time period, but rather 40 years from that time. Right. To say they weren't 100% spot on would be an understatement, I don't think people in the 1960s envisioned DC as being an economic powerhouse and over reliant on public transit.
So we've had actual deaths on the Metro, fires, and aging infrastructure and you're sitting here saying a metro system that was built in the early 70s was actually not meant for that time period, but rather 40 years from that time. Right. To say they weren't 100% spot on would be an understatement, I don't think people in the 1960s envisioned DC as being an economic powerhouse and over reliant on public transit.
I don't get your point.
London's Circle Line was built in 1860. Of course they didn't know what London would look like in 2016. It still works remarkably well.
You're really just making an excuse for Metro, but I don't know how/why this thread turned into another Metro thread.
So we've had actual deaths on the Metro, fires, and aging infrastructure and you're sitting here saying a metro system that was built in the early 70s was actually not meant for that time period, but rather 40 years from that time. Right. To say they weren't 100% spot on would be an understatement, I don't think people in the 1960s envisioned DC as being an economic powerhouse and over reliant on public transit.
You seem to forget that Metro has been poorly funded and maintained since it was built. They also allowed the development of a lazy and incompetent work culture which has been tolerated for years. So of course this has lead to many problems that could of been easily avoided.
I think you should really do more research and have a stronger grasp of a topic before you start arguing with people.
London's Circle Line was built in 1860. Of course they didn't know what London would look like in 2016. It still works remarkably well.
You're really just making an excuse for Metro, but I don't know how/why this thread turned into another Metro thread.
Metro was brought up b/c it has similarities to the street car in that it wasn't built for the time period rather 30 years from now. MAYBE that's the case w/the street car since we have a better grasp of how big the population is going to be, or projected to be in the next decade or so as well as the economic power house that is the city now. But no way can you say a metro system that was built in the middle to late 60s was meant for 2016. That's absolutely absurd especially considering DC wasn't nearly as strong economically 40 years ago, and Metro itself was only designed to shuttle people in and out. I don't think they expected a million riders in a single day on an Inauguration Day but I digress.
We'll agree to disagree y'all. I think the right way to go about things like this is to project the future, but Metro wasn't designed that way. The streetcar hopefully is.
Metro was brought up b/c it has similarities to the street car in that it wasn't built for the time period rather 30 years from now. MAYBE that's the case w/the street car since we have a better grasp of how big the population is going to be, or projected to be in the next decade or so as well as the economic power house that is the city now. But no way can you say a metro system that was built in the middle to late 60s was meant for 2016. That's absolutely absurd especially considering DC wasn't nearly as strong economically 40 years ago, and Metro itself was only designed to shuttle people in and out. I don't think they expected a million riders in a single day on an Inauguration Day but I digress.
We'll agree to disagree y'all. I think the right way to go about things like this is to project the future, but Metro wasn't designed that way. The streetcar hopefully is.
No one said Metro was designed for 2016. So not sure where you got that.
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.