Craig North Carolina
I have always found the DC Metro to meet those criteria. They are fast, frequent, clean and every employee with whom I have had contact was friendly and helpful.
CATS Lynx light rail in Charlotte also meets those criteria, but so far has only one line.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Having just spent a month in London and commuting to work on the Northern line from Morden to Elephant and Castle every day I can make the following observations. The trains do not run all that fast, they are smaller than what we are used to in Toronto, the aisles are narrower and they are very crowded but the dwell time is longer so no matter how crowded the car is, you have time to get out at your stop. the main thing is, the trains are clean! No take out food, no one is drinking coffee! Upholstered seats with armrests! Everyone is readng a newspaper, most of which are free or close to it. Wherever the train run ends, there are people to pick up the newspapers left behind by the passengers and that is all that they pick up. No banana peels, no chicken bones. People seem to have an ideal vision of the TTC, but living here as I do, you have to put up with the rolling dumpsters that the transit vehicles have become, especially at the end of the work day. South of the Thames there does not look to be a lot of tube service if you look at the classic London Undergound map, but it is covered by the various commuter lines, not to mention the buses which have an amazing number of routes. The London system is truly the" standard of the world," just like a former American railroad I could name!
You did not mention that South of London also has the Croydon Light Rail system and the east has Docklands. With your coming from Toronto, this surprised me. What you say about Toronto in comparison is true, but still Toronto remains one of the very best North American systems, just to put things in perspective.
That's true, I did not mention the DLR or the Croyden Tramlink, but they weren't the focus of my entry. I guess Toronto has a good system but compared to London, it's not even close. Here we have the Scarborough Rapid Transit which should never have been built and is currently falling apart and the Sheppard Avenue "subway to nowhere." Coming eventually is the "Transit City" scheme which originally was going to be five light rail lines and would be completed by 2015. The province pulled four billion dollars from the funding for reasons they did not explain, so now it will be four shorter lines and won't be completed until 2020, if then. The TTC has a habit of "cheaping out" on anything they build these days. Why do it right when you can do it half-assed? I'm still waiting for them to rebuild the streetcar tracks on Roncesvalles Avenue where I live. They were torn out over a year ago to rebuild the sewer systems and so forth, so what the hell are they waiting for? Not the way it's done in London, or New York for that matter.
On the London Underground system there are two sizes (not lengths) of trains. The Northern Line which has been mentioned is part of what is known colloquially as The Tube. The Northern Line has a couple of distinctions, more probably, in that it features the longest section which is totally underground i.e. around 17 miles. It also has the deepest part of the whole system i.e. 250ft. below ground at Hampstead, which is on a hill.
The other (non-tube) lines are sub-surface and are the oldest on the system. Consequently their cars are much the same as the standard gauge in Britain.
Alan, Oliver & North Fork Railroad
https://www.buckfast.org.uk/
If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there. Lewis Carroll English author & recreational mathematician (1832 - 1898)
Your experiences with London aren't unique to Europe. I've had positive experiences with the London, Paris, Brussels, and Rome subway systems.
Mark
Both Tokyo and Osaka, Japan have superb mass transit systems. For example, Tokyo has an extensive underground subway system that seems to go nearly everywhere. Some of the system dates back to the times of WWII, but much of it is very new and modern. Trains are clean, fast and frequent, about every six to ten minutes in daytime. The other way to get around is commuter railroad operated by JR as well as many private lines. A typical Tokyo JR commuter train consists of ten cars, and the train can carry as many as 1,000 people during rush hour. Clearly, during rush hour there is little room and train cars are packed, but during the day one can almost always find a seat.
The trains are virtually guaranteed to run on time. In fact, if you are giving instructions to someone who is unfamiliar with the system and he wants to know what train to get on, you simply tell him to go to such and such station, track such and such. Don't take the train at 2:42, don't take the train at 2:46, take the train at 2:44. Get off at the fourth stop and I will meet you outside the station. It works every time.
The stations are well signed in Japanese and English characters.
There is also an extensive bus network, but not speaking Japanese I could never master the details of the bus system.
For inter-city travel, the extensive Shinkansen (New Line) system has the airlines beat in nearly all cases. The trains are fast, beating the airlines when it comes to times for downtown to downtown travel times on all but the longest routes. The rides are smooth and the trains are always spotlessly clean. Every time I visit Japan, there is a newly improved model of Shinkansen train that is faster, with more comfort. They are a pleasure to ride.
If we in America had such a system, our transit problems would be solved.
I certainly think that the subways in Washington DC and Toronto compare favorably with the London Underground. I even think that Chicago's CTA is better run than it was in the 1950's and 1960's. As for London's Underground which I've ridden a number of times came up short on my last visit to London in 2006. The Circle Line was having a bad day dealing with 90 degree heat and packed trains that were having trouble holding their schedule. I have heard that the Circle Line will be replaced soon. The Bakerloo Line was a much better operation than the Circle.
Having been a long term rider of the CTA in Chicago, the Underground was a similar superior experience in terms of train frequency, cleanliness, and helpful friendliness of personnel for the week's time I was there. The variety of station types were interesting from a preservation angle, located in deep cuts, to elevated, to underground. The Underground museum was particularly enjoyable, with their early preserved steam and Victorian carriages, etc. I rode the Underground exclusively everywhere during my stay in London..the litter free stations and carriages were a nice change of pace...mind the gap!
Nothing is more fairly distributed than common sense: no one thinks he needs more of it than he already has.
Aricat mentions the Circle Line and the Bakerloo Line. The Circle Line is part of the sub surface lines I mentioned in a previous post: the Bakerloo being deep level.
I can't see the Circle Line being phased out somehow as it is an integral part of the system and shares its metals with the Hammersmith & City, Metropolitan and the District Lines. It has the advantage for cross city travelers in that it has stations located at most of the Main Line London terminals. It takes about an hour to do the circuit - both directions. The deep level 'tubes' are at a fairly constant temperature whatever the time of year. It is a good place to be in cold weather up above.
The track gauge and power rail specs are the same for both, and on my last visit there were still places where both the tube stock, as it is called, and the surface stock, even though much is still underground, just not as deep, did share tracks and with compromise height platforms. I think there is less of this today, perhaps even none except for shop moves. All standard gauge, of course. Some of the tube lines have a fourth rail between the running rails for ground return separate from the running rails, but the equpment can also operate without them on the tracks that have only the third rail for power, with running rail ground return.
Looking at the London Underground map, it looks like the Circle line is the heart of the system in that it serves most of the railway stations. Other lines come into and go out of or cross the Circle line. but it looks to me like it's the original system. I understand that the "circle" is now called a "lasso" as the service starts/stops at Edgeware road, travels around the line, continues on the Hammersmith and City line and ends at the Hammersmith station, but this may not be a permanent change.
We have also enjoyed using the London Underground. Our main complaint was the very long walks between platforms at various junction points and the lack of elevators or escalators in many stations. It is not very user friendly if you are using the system with any luggage.
Gosh - so many compliments. A few points though on London.
1. Morden to East Finchley via Bank is still the longest transit tunnel in London, but not in the world, as the Moscow Metro has a longer one. There are also longer rail tunnels, for example the Channel Tunnel.
2. The two train sizes are related back to history. Broadly the sub-surface lines (Metropolitan, District, Hammersmith and City and Circle) are Victorian Railways burrowing into the city, with tunnels suitable for main line stock of c 1870 vintage. Tunnels are just below street level. Tube lines are same track guage, but the trains are much less high with a characteristic round profile. In central London these tunnels are much deeper, though all except the Victoria line do come to the surface out in the suburbs. In all cases the suburban surface lines are in fact connections to older Victoran era lines built by other companies.
3. Train length does vary between sub-surface and tube lines, but not with much consistency. The longest trains are on the Metropolitan Line (8 cars) the shortest on the Hammersmith and City, Circle and one part of the District Line. Here length is governed by short platforms at Bayswater, Notting Hill Gate and Paddington (Circle and District lines) which can only take take six cars. Circle, District and H&C stock interwork. Tube trains are universally 7 carriages except the Central Line which is 8.
4. While appearing to be the centre of everything the Circle line isn't. Historically it is a connection between two separate railways(the Metropolitan and the Metrolpolitan District). There are flat junctions at Aldgate (2), Baker St, Paddington, High St Kensington and Gloucester Road which seriously hamper operatioanl efficiency and frequencies - thus the best interval on the Cricle is about every 8 mins, when other tube lines often get a train every two minutes.
5. It's nice to have a system praised, and it is good, but daily commuting can be a trial. Rush hour trains can be very full indeed, something the average holidaymaker does not see as they are not out at 8am and are back at their hotel at 5.30pm. Getting on at Victoria at 8:30am is an exercise in seeing how many people can squeeze into the smallest space.
6. Cost is also significant especially before 09:30 when tickets get cheaper. Single cash fares are among the highest in the world, though the electronic Oyster cards provide a very significant saving.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.