Boston's MBTA!!
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority does it all.
600 miles of 80 mph Commuter Rail (80 locomotives, over 300 cars) reaching out 50 miles in 2 States --- 4 Subway Systems reaching out 8 to 10 miles --- A Light Rail line, some running in streets and some running on old Rail LInes --- A group of PCC streetcars --- Diesel Buses on some routes, Trolley Buses on others routes (new Trolley Buses on order). Whatever works in a given area.
Parking in Boston runs $35 and traffic is a nightmare, public transit has to work.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Here's a vote for Philadelphia.
From Hoovers.com "The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, known as SEPTA, provides passenger transportation services in the Philadelphia area. The agency's operations include buses, subways and elevated trains, trackless trolleys, and light rail and commuter rail lines. SEPTA serves some 280 stations, mainly in five Pennsylvania counties (Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Montgomery, and Philadelphia) and in the neighboring states of Delaware and New Jersey. Its service territory spans some 2,200 sq. mi. The Pennsylvania legislature established SEPTA in 1964, and over the years the agency has acquired the assets of several for-profit transportation companies that operated in the region."
From Septa.org; "SEPTA is one of only two truly multi-modal transit properties in the United States (Boston is the other) with bus, subway, high speed rail, trackless trolley, Regional Rail and Paratransit vehicles.
Number of Routes
76
42
9
2
13
Number of Vehicles(as of FY2007)
1,371
185
343
349
418
2,664
Number of Stations/Bus Terminals
36
53
52
22
153
If it is variety you want, no city beats San Francisco:
1. diesel buses. 2. trolleybuses 3. Cable cars. 4. Vintage streetcars on street trackage 5. Modern light rail on private right of way, street trackage, tunnels, subway with high platform stations. 6. High-speed heavy rail rapid transit in subway, elevated, and surface (BART). 7. Diesel commuter rail. 8. Ferry boats
However, when it comes to on-time performance, general spiffiness of property, proper use of rail for all its capabilities, nobody beats Toronto. It was the only North American City that kept streetcars as streetcars during the dark period of public transit 1965-1978. To settle an argument in advance, no other city kept electric streetcars as streetcars:
Boston Subway could not be converted for buses and buses could handle subway traffic
Philadelphia Same as above for City Division, much private right-of-way (PRW) on Red Arrow
New Orleans Tourist attraction
San Francisco Twin Peaks and Sunset Tunnels
Newark Subway
Shaker Heights PRW
Pittsburgh PRW, Mt. Washington Tunnel capacity
Although some malign it, NYC has a great system, in my view. To be sure, service on some lines is spotty at times (G and L lines, anyone?), but getting around at rush hour you rarely have to wait for more than a couple of minutes. Further, the 2-4-5-6 lines have nice, modern cars...and the 1-3-7 line cars aren't too shabby, either.
Perhaps the biggest weakness is that there is no high speed rail link to the airports, but the same can be said of many N.A. cities. Nevertheless, one can get from Grand Central to LGA or JFK in an hour during rush hour via subway/bus for $2 and subway/airtrain for $7, respectively, which is at least on par timewise vs. a rush hour cab -- if you can get one -- at $30/$45.
Agree with Amtrak77 that Metra in Chicago is fantastic, but the CTA is a disaster that I again have to tolerate on a daily basis. The CTA is significantly worse than it was 4 yrs ago when I previously lived in Chicago.
I'll go with Toronto on this one. Where else can a rush-hour commuter grab a bus that comes right into his cul-de-sac, takes him direct to a GO station, and then (in winter especially) gives him the option of walking to work underground?
It's all so very well co-ordinated. This is just a hunch, not based on actual residence but talking with people who have worked for GO or on the streetcars, but Toronto seems to be blessed with not only financial but civic and social assistance for the idea of mass transit.
New York definitely has the mostest but not necessarily the bestest. Outside of the subway system and some commuter, what is there? Do the buses synchronize with any other mode of transit?
I've been to Boston and Philly, too, and could probably do quite all right without a car in the central part of either town, but I think most of the public's thinking (if we throw in commuters from the suburbs) is oriented toward private car, not public transit.
IMHO that's what makes Toronto stand out. It works well for everyone. Not to mention that magnificent streetcar system! - a. s.
passengerfan wrote: And the TTC with fast modern subways, diesel buses, Electric buses, streetcars, and light rail?
passengerfan, what are the Electric buses? Toronto removed its traditional trackless trolleys quite a while ago, I think they've been gone over 10 years. Are you talking about hybrid or battery powered buses?
daveklepper wrote: However, when it comes to on-time performance, general spiffiness of property, proper use of rail for all its capabilities, nobody beats Toronto. It was the only North American City that kept streetcars as streetcars during the dark period of public transit 1965-1978. To settle an argument in advance, no other city kept electric streetcars as streetcars:Boston Subway could not be converted for buses and buses could handle subway trafficPhiladelphia Same as above for City Division, much private right-of-way (PRW) on Red ArrowNew Orleans Tourist attractionSan Francisco Twin Peaks and Sunset TunnelsNewark SubwayShaker Heights PRWPittsburgh PRW, Mt. Washington Tunnel capacity
daveklepper, Philadelphia also kept streetcars, even during the dark times. we have the 5 "subway-surface" lines, but 1965-1978 we also had 7 pure streetcar lines. We started to whittle them away in 1975, eliminating 1 of them because we lost 50 PCC's in a depot fire in 1975, but the other 6 remained until the mid '80's, not being completely eliminated till around 1992. One of them had been reinstated in 2005.
and Philadelphia's still the city with the largest fleet of light rail vehicles in the United States. 2nd If you look at North America, because, guess what, Toronto's got more.
passengerfan and daveklepper, I do agree that Toronto's got the best variety, cleanliness, performance, frequency of service and hours of service, and a bunch of other bests.
One complaint that comes to my mind though is the Scarborough line. The original proposal was that it would use Canadian Light Rail Vehicles, perhaps modified a little bit from the street running models. I don't feel there was any good reason to have finally built it with the linear induction motor vehicles. In addition to making it very difficult to convert it to through running with anything else, Toronto winters aren't very kind to the electrical equipment in the tracks that linear induction motors use. However from what I understand they have put forth the extra effort that keeps it running even in winter, I just don't think it's efficient to have put oneself into the position of needing to go to that effort.
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
ok, so far I got this
NYC tranist - Car not needed to move around much within the city
Philly - Car may be needed but trains are more betterToronto - Nice systemChicago - Car will be needed to reach hard areas but not so much toward the cityLA - Metrolink is no up to speed!!! 100% Car needed!! along with tazer, mace, rollerstakes, bicycle, patience to sit in traffic (trust me I know)*If you have not go outta downtown LA by 2:30pm then forget it!!
I don't understand why there is no branch-line of the number 7 to La Guardia Airport. After all, the 7 does run quite close to LGA, and it offers express-service to midtown Manhattan.
IMHO, the sky-train to JFK-airport is a white elephant. It would have made more sense to build a subway-line or a branch-line of the LIRR to JFK.
martin.knoepfel wrote: I don't understand why there is no branch-line of the number 7 to La Guardia Airport. After all, the 7 does run quite close to LGA, and it offers express-service to midtown Manhattan.IMHO, the sky-train to JFK-airport is a white elephant. It would have made more sense to build a subway-line or a branch-line of the LIRR to JFK.
Right on both counts. And if Robert Moses had been willing to condemn another few feet of ROW, there would be LIRR service into Kennedy today. Instead, the dreaded "Van Wyck."
al-in-chgo wrote: martin.knoepfel wrote: I don't understand why there is no branch-line of the number 7 to La Guardia Airport. After all, the 7 does run quite close to LGA, and it offers express-service to midtown Manhattan.IMHO, the sky-train to JFK-airport is a white elephant. It would have made more sense to build a subway-line or a branch-line of the LIRR to JFK. Right on both counts. And if Robert Moses had been willing to condemn another few feet of ROW, there would be LIRR service into Kennedy today. Instead, the dreaded "Van Wyck."
And, why doesn't PATH run another half mile or so to the Newark Liberty Airport Monorail station? As it stands now, passengers arriving at EWR must use NJ Transit to Penn Station (Mid-Town) or ride NJT in a vestibule (not really enough time to actually drag the bags and find a seat before it's time to detrain) to Newark and change to PATH...
paulsafety wrote: al-in-chgo wrote: martin.knoepfel wrote: I don't understand why there is no branch-line of the number 7 to La Guardia Airport. After all, the 7 does run quite close to LGA, and it offers express-service to midtown Manhattan.IMHO, the sky-train to JFK-airport is a white elephant. It would have made more sense to build a subway-line or a branch-line of the LIRR to JFK. Right on both counts. And if Robert Moses had been willing to condemn another few feet of ROW, there would be LIRR service into Kennedy today. Instead, the dreaded "Van Wyck." And, why doesn't PATH run another half mile or so to the Newark Liberty Airport Monorail station? As it stands now, passengers arriving at EWR must use NJ Transit to Penn Station (Mid-Town) or ride NJT in a vestibule (not really enough time to actually drag the bags and find a seat before it's time to detrain) to Newark and change to PATH...
Rest easy. PATH will definitely be extended to the NE Corridor Newark Airport Station or to the Airport itself. I have this on the authority of the former manager. They are studying the extension right now.
As a native New Yorker, I would rate NY high except for the prejudicial anti-trolley and anti-light-rail attitude, whcih began with LaGuardia and seems to continue to this day, refusing to even consider this mode even when it is the obvious solution to a problem.
The Nortons Point line in Brooklyn is the classic case. All PRW, direct connection to an elevated subway station at Stillwell Avenue Terminal, fast operation, replaced by a meandering slow bus on a street.
Sorry< Philadelphia by your own admission did not keep streetcars as streetcars. The only lines left IN CONTINUAL OPERATION were those running into the subway plus Red Arrow with its majority of miles on private-right-of-way. I do give Philadlephia credit NOW, for having REVIVED a genuine streetcar line, the 15, and if they do more, I'll let Philadelphia share with Toronto and San Francisco, which has also revived streetcar operation, the F line.
But note that San Francisco has all modes of operation that Philadlephia does except currently its commuter trains are diesel and not electric. But it has ferry boats and cable cars in addition!
daveklepper wrote: Rest easy. PATH will definitely be extended to the NE Corridor Newark Airport Station or to the Airport itself. I have this on the authority of the former manager. They are studying the extension right now.As a native New Yorker, I would rate NY high except for the prejudicial anti-trolley and anti-light-rail attitude, whcih began with LaGuardia and seems to continue to this day, refusing to even consider this mode even when it is the obvious solution to a problem.The Nortons Point line in Brooklyn is the classic case. All PRW, direct connection to an elevated subway station at Stillwell Avenue Terminal, fast operation, replaced by a meandering slow bus on a street.Sorry< Philadelphia by your own admission did not keep streetcars as streetcars. The only lines left IN CONTINUAL OPERATION were those running into the subway plus Red Arrow with its majority of miles on private-right-of-way. I do give Philadlephia credit NOW, for having REVIVED a genuine streetcar line, the 15, and if they do more, I'll let Philadelphia share with Toronto and San Francisco, which has also revived streetcar operation, the F line.But note that San Francisco has all modes of operation that Philadlephia does except currently its commuter trains are diesel and not electric. But it has ferry boats and cable cars in addition!
You're certainly right that S.F. has the diversity, but from what I've been told it doesn't run as well as it used to. For efficiency in point-to-point transit, I'll still go with Toronto. Bearing in mind it's a much bigger city and metro area.
Amtrak77 wrote: LA - Metrolink is no up to speed!!! 100% Car needed!! along with tazer, mace, rollerstakes, bicycle, patience to sit in traffic (trust me I know)*If you have not go outta downtown LA by 2:30pm then forget it!!
The Orange County Transit Authority is funding a big increase in Metrolink service. By 2010 they will have 1/2 hour service both ways from Mission Viejo to Fullerton and from 5 AM to 10 PM. (I may have these times off by an hour or so.) They are using a voter-approved 0.5% increase in the sales tax for this (Measure M).
Why to Fullerton and not LA, you ask? Because LA couldn't come up with the money to do the sensible thing and Measure M funds can only be used in Orange County. So Metrolink is building some parking tracks west of Fullerton. We really need a TRULY regional transit authority.
SoCal rail advocates are pushing for 1/2 hour service on weekdays from Oceanside (in North San Diego County) to Chatsworth (northwest San Fernando Valley. If that happens I see a big increase in ridership. However that frequency of service is very hard to provide south of Mission Viejo due to some really difficult single-track stretches.
Jack
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.