# DISCUSS: Best Subway



## nick_taylor

redstone - I think you'll be suprised to know that the network runs at around 97% - thats pretty damn special



hkskyline - MTR's network is nice, but lacks the immense size other networks, have which are also larger, denser and more connected. Also Singapore offers a nicer all-round package to be honest. 





Brice said:


> There's no fully automated lines in London, Moscow and Madrid.
> 
> Paris has 2 lines. NY 1
> 
> Paris and London have already a contact less system to open turnsti;es. NY, Madrid and Moscow don't eaven know what this system is.


Actually thats wrong, London was the first city in the world to put in place an a full-scale automatic railway line: the Victoria Line of 1968 (37 years old now). It uses an ATO (Automatic Train Operation) system which has been implemented over the decades on other London Underground lines (eg Northern, Jubilee, etc...) and railway networks across the globe. 

The New York Subway though has been lagging behind other world cities and has only just brought in this year the OPTO (One Person Train Operation) system on the BMT Canarsie Line. The Victoria Line though is just about to enter the next phase of automation with entire new rolling stock, I am unsure whether this will mean that the entire line becomes entirely fully-automatic - ie no human presence whatsoever.

That said London also has the DLR which is fully automatic semi-light/heavy rail network similar to the Vancouver SkyTrain with 34 stations (6 stations U/C, 5 stations Approved + 5 stations Proposed).

Also contactless cards, Platform Screen Door's and Electronic Display Boards are things New York seems to be lagging behind in unfortunately.



That said - London for me - the complete package of excellent + diverse station design, history, innovation, modern amenities, inconicity, size, future projects and efficiency.


----------



## nick_taylor




----------



## Zaki

^^why do all the stations look so old. I am sure with so many stations and lines london has to have atleast a few thats modern looking.


----------



## hkskyline

London's newest stations are along the Jubilee Line extension, which includes the Canary Wharf station designed by Norman Foster.

Westminster



















Canary Wharf




























While extensiveness is a valid criterion to judge a subway system, a very dense system doesn't necessarily mean the system is well-used. To me, whether or not people use the system will ultimately be the deciding factor. For such a small system, the MTR is able to have almost the same patronage as the London Underground. That's not bad at all.

I relate this concept to the highway lane dilemma. When a highway is built, the first lanes will score enormous economic benefits, but for each additional lane that is added, the amount of benefit decreases - the law of diminishing returns. For Hong Kong, since the city is so centralized, having massive rail redundancies like the Underground or the Paris Metro is simply not necessary because the population is centralized. Hence diminishing returns (marginal benefit drops) kick in very quickly.

Next, I'd look at facilities, such as the use of smart cards, air conditioning, ease of transfers, and clarity of signage. Hong Kong's Octopus card is the world's first public transport smart card, launched in the 1990s. Following the HK example, many cities use smart cards today, including the Oyster card in London.


----------



## nick_taylor

Thats because they are - some are 142 years old, dating back to 1863 such as Baker Street - the oldest underground/metro/subway stations in the world:













Others are more modern, such as Canary Wharf which opened in 1999.













Most stations now have Electronic Display Boards, some have Platform Screen Doors and more are constantly being renovated to include escalators and lifts to make the network more accessible to less-able users. These modern influences are infused with the historical stations of so many architectural styles that there isn't a comparable network on the planet with such station diversity. Without history, the network would be pretty much sterile and soulless which is the unfortunate result of many new stations and networks. The attention to detail at some of these old stations is absolutely astronomical.


----------



## cbrooks

i have lived in many cities and visited many cities.

My vote is for

NEW YORK :cheer:

despite that
- it is super dirty when compared to other subways like Hong Kong
- it makes a lot of noise and torque when running
- it does not have escallators in many of its stations
- it may not be the safest train ride

BUT

- it offers simple fair. once you pay, you dont need to worry how much it will costs to ride no matter how far.
- it is the most reliable (compare NY to London which has frequent downs)
- it runs 24 hours a day kay:
- it gives the best value of money. one can buy weekly, monthly tickets and can ride as much as one can. Tokyo is the most expensive (1 station ride costs Yen113)
- it gives many choices which train to take to speed up the whole trip
- it covers a great deal of New York area, unlike Singapore/Hong Kong which doesnt even cover many part of the city and many stations stops are too far apart once outside the CBD area.
- it is quite simple to use (compare New York to London which is so unnecessarily complicated) I can go anywhere in New York with maps in my head; however for London, due to complications, even train users of many years still doesnt know all the complicated transfers and have to rely on a map.
- it is quite comfortable to ride since it provides A/C and heater. try riding London underground during hot summer, it feels like entering a sauna. :nuts:
- it is quite comfortable to ride since it is not sardine packed like Tokyo and 
the absence of those grabbing hands :gaah:
- it provides many interesting cultural and musical entertainment for free


----------



## nick_taylor

Actually the London Underground is not only more reliable (ie in terms of running and actually being on-schedule) than the New York subway, but your 5x less likely to die (ie derailments, crashes, etc...) on the London Undeground than on the NYC Subway. I believe its even taken less time to fix the bomb damage in London than the recent fire started by some hobos on the NYC Subway.

Also you'd have to be kidding me to believe that the London Underground is unnecessarily complicated! There are some 468 stations on the New York Subway to the 275 on the London Underground (yet the LU has the longer network, ie average speeds between stations is higher), yet your telling me that those all those numbers are easier to name that less landmark names? Also why would regular users of the network need to require the use of a map to navigate their journey which they most likely conducted several hundred times before?

It also never gets too hot that its a sauna. It does get hot, but not on many days and there has to be the economical balance between modernisation of the network and supplying a/c. That said the network uses draught limitation devices to keep the network cool and a/c units themselves have not reached the level where they can be placed effectively into a tube train, they also consume a lot of energy and in turn cause a heating of the tunnels which is even worse.


----------



## Mojito

I've only seen and travelled nine systems in Europe, so I choose one of them, because I cannot judge others. And then I choose London. Why?



nick-taylor said:


> (...)
> 
> That said - London for me - the complete package of excellent + diverse station design, history, innovation, modern amenities, inconicity, size, future projects and efficiency.


I couldn't say it better, so I fully agree with this! London is iconic. In my opinion more than any other system in the world.


----------



## Zaki

London's new stations look amazing. I dont understand why UK people are always showing pictures of old garbage when they have such nice modern things too. Some peope think old means very detailed etc. but new modern stations are as detailed if not more with thought put into every aspect of the station. They make the subway from a cold dark underground place to an amazing lively beautiful place.


----------



## coth

nick-taylor said:


> That said - London for me - the complete package of excellent + diverse station design...


:laugh:


----------



## HelloMoto163

what is with berlins subway??

subway

subway2

train 

station 

station potsdamer platz 

station2


----------



## prahsharp

In the field of engineering, I truly think that the Tashkent (capital of Uzbekistan, central asia) underground is the best. Constructed after an earthquake wich destroyed almost the whole city, its quake proof (with rubber sleepers), and those crazy soviets made the whole thing that strong, and with heavy concrete doors, it can serve as a shelter in the event of a nuclear war!
The architecture is similar to the moscow underground, with heavy decorating, and each station has it's own theme, like one about space and joeri gagarin.
However, due the nuclear thing, it's strictly forbidden to take pictures inside, and in each station are 2 agents who will confiscate any used camera's ....
http://metroworld.ruz.net/others/tash_cruise.htm


----------



## nick_taylor

zaki said:


> London's new stations look amazing. I dont understand why UK people are always showing pictures of old garbage when they have such nice modern things too. Some peope think old means very detailed etc. but new modern stations are as detailed if not more with thought put into every aspect of the station. They make the subway from a cold dark underground place to an amazing lively beautiful place.


I've yet to see a modern station that replicates the detail of the older stations. Its the same with most architecture - you don't see skyscrapers detailed like they were in the 30's, nor do you see modern buildings with the detail of buildings 200+ years old. Its the same for stations. I should note also that metal and stone/concrete is used not to create a warm environment. If you want that you use different materials which aren't cold looking, eg bricks which is what some of the older stations are made out of.

Also I wouldn't call the London Underground's historical stations 'garbage', as I assume you haven't looked at Toronto's network recently? Using metal and stones are used in 





coth said:


> :laugh:


Don't know what your laughing about Coth - There are stations on the London Underground network built in styles 72 years before the first Moscow Metro line opened! Still having trouble finding those metro figures though eh?


----------



## coth

LOL!!! Nick - are you claiming London Underground as most beautiful in the world?

Я то всё нашёл - а ты?


----------



## coth

Nick, i'll show you what is beauty!
Here is one example from Saint Petersburg.
http://metrowalks.ru/spb/station-1-17


----------



## nick_taylor

Where did I say that? I said:

_excellent + diverse station design_

Where did I mention that its the most beautiful in the world? Have a problem quoting me on that do you? No source? What a suprise!


Ohhhh Russian! Find anything regarding metro's then?


----------



## coth

Nick - subcontext meaning is not cancelled

Please in Russian.


----------



## Zaki

nick-taylor said:


> I've yet to see a modern station that replicates the detail of the older stations. Its the same with most architecture - you don't see skyscrapers detailed like they were in the 30's, nor do you see modern buildings with the detail of buildings 200+ years old. Its the same for stations. I should note also that metal and stone/concrete is used not to create a warm environment. If you want that you use different materials which aren't cold looking, eg bricks which is what some of the older stations are made out of.
> 
> Also I wouldn't call the London Underground's historical stations 'garbage', as I assume you haven't looked at Toronto's network recently? Using metal and stones are used in


I am talking about a different kind. The detail your talking about is reffering to the art of the building, its looks. The detail i am talking about is the detail to lighting, geometry to make the space seem bigger then it is, environment, etc. The detail i am talking about is what makes being in the subway a great experience, not what makes it look great, though i prefer modern art rather than the old european style. 

Also about Toronto, most of the stations are quite modern and look very nice. There are a few downtown that look like crap but still it doesnt represent the network as a whole. But anyways i never claimed Toronto's network is better than londons, infact i havent even mentioned Toronto, when i think of great looking subways i think of Tokyo, Seoul, Singapore, etc. These are modern and beautiful.


----------



## Bitxofo

Tokyo has got the best subway in the wholw world!!
:yes:


----------



## TO_Joe

Zaki said:


> everytime i see a major cities subway system map it makes me wonder why Toronto's is so garbage.



I think Toronto's suck so badly (in terms of coverage of the city -- it's actually reasonably efficient and pleasant once you are riding in it) is that it was never designed as a SYSTEM.

From my understanding, the first line built in the 50s, Yonge Street, was designed to relieve surface traffic on Yonge Street. A subway was a cool thing to have, and there was lots of cheap labour -- from Europe and in particular the Italians who emigrated to Canada in droves. A cross town line (Bloor-Danforth) and then an adjacent downtown line forming a loop with Yonge Street less than 1 mile parallel to it (University Avenue) line was formed in the 60s as incremental expansion. 

But the mentality started to change in the 60s -- it was the car era. I remember seeing a Toronto master plan chart from 1966 that filled the city with expressways -- the Spadina Expressway (Allen Road), of course, the Eglinton expressway, the cross-town expressway (on the railroad tracks along Davenport), etc. -- it was like something out of the madness of Robert Moses of the New York highway fame.

Reality sunk in, particularly after the bitter Spadina Expressway fight (which was rich powerful WASPs disapproving of an expressway so close to their leafy Forest Hill neighbourhood and exerted power over the car-crazy suburban developers and middle classes). Jane Jacobs stared down the mighty Robert Moses -- so the urban redevelopment (read paving it over) political climate changed big time.

But they still weren't serious about building an actual transit system to complement city expansion. Toronto's expansion over the past 30 years was based on the car, with buses thrown so the poor carless people can get to their jobs and back.

The last time that Toronto got close to pro-transit was during the leftish NDP provincial government of the 90s who was willing to throw in funds for the Eglinton line, Sheppard line, etc. But the province was basically bankrupt (because of the Ontario Hydro nuclear reactor loan guarantees that spiralled so out of control and due to an economic recession). So much for that idea. And the government that succeeded the NDP was a very right-wing Conservative government whose powerbase was in the suburbs, exurbs and the rural areas anyway -- build roads, not cars, and so we end up with this abandoned tunnel in the middle of Eglinton and a stupid Sheppard subway line to basically takes you to Ikea (lug your non-sensical vaguely Swedish-named furniture onto the subway entrance 500 m away).

We still largely have this non-system mentality in 2005, and it surely doesn't help that we don't have a lot of capital dollars. Even when we have capital dollars to build subways or other transit infrastructure, we somehow manage to use it in the most inefficient way possible -- how can the Spadina streetcar line (they try to glorify it by calling it a light rail, when in fact it operates more like a 1920s street car line than the slick state-of-the-art light rails complete with multiple loading doors, articulation, no climbing walking on floor profile, etc. of today) cost $1.6 Billion (late 80s dollars, I might add).

And then we end up building low density North America anywhere suburbia 50 miles away -- in Milton, in Newmarket, in Whitby (even Mississsauga is now considered more "urban") -- that makes high density rapid transit pretty uneconomical.

Unfortunately, I think we are stuck with what we got, and we will tinker with it like extend the line from Downsview (with all its expected condo developments) to York University, and a few tweaks here and there -- that is all I can really forsee in the next 20 years. 

I think because of the existing infrastructure, the car mentality, the infrastructure funding mechanisms, the poor management track record of large capital projects, I think we will be lucky if we can just catch up to Montreal, never mind thinking that our subway map can resemble anything like New York or London (I don't want to embarass Toronto further by comparing it with the Japanese ones).


----------



## jesarm

For me the best underground in the world for high technology, extensive,architecture, efficient and trains sinceresly are Tokyo, Madrid and Seoul


----------



## coth

architecture? efficient? extensive? Tokyo? Madrid? Seoul? :crazy:


----------



## Ten

Bangkok metro....


----------



## Hollandski_KGB

Moscow is just the best subway system in the world for me.
Every 60 sec a train, best looking stations and perfect service.


----------



## aleko

Lo que pueden hacer los paises con plata ...


----------



## FOLK

Hay cosas tambien buenas en Colombia...a mejorado tambien..


----------



## FOLK

Moscu????


----------



## kenlau13

hk mtr subway


----------



## kenlau13

.........


----------



## Falubaz

para mi es metro de madrid


----------



## XCRunner

We have the L in Chicago. Lots of nostalgia and higher ridership than any other city in US save NYC. Really, though, it's got nothin' on the systems of other cities. I wish it were better, but oh well...


----------



## fluffyhorse

I really like the Moscow subway. It has character that the modern systems can't duplicate.


----------



## beta29

What´s with Berlin subway? It´s not the biggest but has character! Check out this pics:


----------



## seattlehawk

I would vote for the underground train systems in Tokyo, Hong Kong and Singapore for their efficiency and modernity. Yet, there is also something unique about the character and history of London "Tube" system that I have always enjoyed. It is one of those aspects that give you the feel of being in London, something that modern and newer systems would lack.


----------



## Jules

NYC Subway.


----------



## JV_325i

Wow. Those pictures of Copenhagen, Moscow, and Athens subways look incredible. I live in Chicago and that is the only "subway" I have ever been on, but it is only subway for maybe 10% of its length at the most. At any rate, I like the EL, but it pales in comparison to other systems around the world; a consequence of the trasportation lifestyle of the United States (save NYC). Too many people drive and most of the modern infrastructure built in cities reflects this. However, my sister is a huge world traveler and goes to various mega-cities at least twice a month and she says that Tokyo and London are the best in the world by far.


----------



## Skyscrapercitizen

1 London, has it all...

2 NYC, 24 hour subways and great identity, but a bit dirty sometimes. I love the express trains.

3 Hong Kong, only profit making subwaysystem worldwide I think...


----------



## JoSin

^^^^^Haha^^^


----------



## Manila-X

My choice 

1) London
2) Hong Kong
3) Singapore


----------



## Metropolitan

Well, I complain a lot about my subway but I have to defend the most dense network in the world in here. The one of *Paris, France*.

Hold on a sec...


----------



## Manila-X

Imagine how boring these maps can be if all the metro lines are represented with one color!


----------



## Mosaic

^^^^hehe, like noodle in a cup.^^^.I won't even look at it.


----------



## hkskyline

The London Transport Museum has a whole section devoted to the evolution of their Underground map through the ages. It's quite amazing!


----------



## picassoborseli

- Madrid










This is an old map, about 5 years ago!
Please post the current map including metrosur!


----------



## Metropolitan

Justme said:


> i.e. The Frankfurt and Munich maps also show the S-bahn, which is a suburban railway similar to the RER in principle. and the Sydney map is of a commuter/suburban system not a metro or subway system.


RER is not similar to the S-Bahn for the simple reason that all RER lines run in specific tracks in dedicated tunnels. On the other side, all S-Bahn lines are crossing the city on the same tracks (which are even shared with national rail lines in some cases). Your idea on things are very confused obviously.

Granted that at the gates of Paris proper, lines C, D and E shares tracks with the suburban rails network, but that's only true on very marginal portions and they never share stations with those. I know you hate Paris but you have to accept some facts once in a while. 

By the way, there are strong chances the RER E will be extended to reach La Défense. It will take a while to build the tunnel, but, that's still good news.


----------



## Falubaz

Metropolitan said:


> ...By the way, there are strong chances the RER E will be extended to reach La Défense. It will take a while to build the tunnel, but, that's still good news.


will the RER E go on 'Reseau St. Lazare' through Pont cardinet, Clichy-Levallois, Asniers sur Seine, Becon.., and Courbevoie to La Defense?? or from St. Lazare direkt to the RER A tunel via Ch.G.Etoile??


----------



## Justme

Metropolitan said:


> RER is not similar to the S-Bahn for the simple reason that all RER lines run in specific tracks in dedicated tunnels. On the other side, all S-Bahn lines are crossing the city on the same tracks (which are even shared with national rail lines in some cases). Your idea on things are very confused obviously.
> 
> Granted that at the gates of Paris proper, lines C, D and E shares tracks with the suburban rails network, but that's only true on very marginal portions and they never share stations with those. *I know you hate Paris * but you have to accept some facts once in a while.
> 
> By the way, there are strong chances the RER E will be extended to reach La Défense. It will take a while to build the tunnel, but, that's still good news.


I won't bother debating your endless rhetoric over the RER as it is nothing more than a waste of time. But your comment that I highlighted in bold shows clearly where your distorted view of the world around you comes from.

I have never once posted anything negative about Paris on SSC. I challenge you to find one single negative post about the city, it's architecture, the people or it's transport infrastructure. Despite my constant praising of Paris, your mind still translates that into, as you put it, a *hate* of the city.

How mind boggling bizarre.

You must be so obsessed with your RER that you are blinded to the reality of the world.

"Yes Marge, I would like a sausage"


----------



## Metropolitan

Falubaz said:


> will the RER E go on 'Reseau St. Lazare' through Pont cardinet, Clichy-Levallois, Asniers sur Seine, Becon.., and Courbevoie to La Defense?? or from St. Lazare direkt to the RER A tunel via Ch.G.Etoile??


Neither of both. It will be a brand new tunnel. That's actually the only possible solution because of the congestion of traffic.

Probably direct from St-Lazare to La Défense, but maybe with a stop somewhere. The specific road of the tunnel isn't known yet, however, what is important is that the project is already financed. Indeed, the EPAD, the local authority managing La Défense business district, has told it will finance it.


----------



## elkram

Peyre said:


> London had the first automated line. Victoria line


L'express Expo / the Expo Express opened to the public 28 April 1967, the year before the Victoria line came on stream -- its last day of service was sometime October 1972 -- although fully automated, fair organizers thought it best to staff the automatic trains with 'drivers' in the front 'cabs' so as to not freak out guests (passengers) waiting on the platforms -- it was the first fully automatic train in the world.

http://davesrailpix.com/odds/qu/htm/mwf01.htm

Cheers,
Chris


----------



## Alargule

Justme said:


> I won't bother debating your endless rhetoric over the RER as it is nothing more than a waste of time. But your comment that I highlighted in bold shows clearly where your distorted view of the world around you comes from.
> 
> I have never once posted anything negative about Paris on SSC. I challenge you to find one single negative post about the city, it's architecture, the people or it's transport infrastructure. Despite my constant praising of Paris, your mind still translates that into, as you put it, a *hate* of the city.
> 
> How mind boggling bizarre.
> 
> You must be so obsessed with your RER that you are blinded to the reality of the world.
> 
> "Yes Marge, I would like a sausage"



He (or she?) probably meant it ironically. I'm rather sure even, given the "" ending that sentence. 
Your interpretation is what's generally referred to as a _self fulfilling prophecy._


----------



## EtherealMist

Boston:


----------



## ricz

Hong Kong no doubt, efficient, opened long hours everyday, 24hours on bank holidays; clean, modern, spacious, fast, never any delays; even cleaner or more convenient than the one in tokyo..
The worst has to be the London one, dirty, old, inefficient, delays all the time, rude staff, steaming hot, high rates of accidents but it has the history n sometimes fun to ride if its not a long journey.


----------



## d7b

^is London's really that bad? haha
Well, after getting spoiled by HK's MTR and Japan's subway system - i feel Toronto's TTC really needs some renovations, improve the efficiency and delays, but it's doubtful given the poor financial performance

ditto for NYC, as much as i like the city.. it's too dirty!


----------



## alsen

No doubt...Tokyo's is the best.superb clean and always on time.Sendai subway also one of da best but it's too expensive....imo
http://osamuabe.ld.infoseek.co.jp/subway/maincity/sendai/car2.jpg


----------



## ricz

well London's one if even worse than NY..by far..lol
n u'll be lucky if u dun get some tramps beggin u for money or sit on a seat where there is no chewing gum lol


----------



## dom

I've used all of these metro systems for at least a week a piece.


London 
Pros: Its size, ease of use, historical innovation and character. The map, graphics etc are all world class.

Cons: Obscenely expensive (a 9 day NYC Metrocard when I went was the same price as a 1 day Zone 1-6+D travelcard!) and frequent signal failures. The district and circle lines. Poor coverage south of the thames. No air con.


New York
Pros: For being 24h, very cheap and fast. 

Cons: Felt very dangerous back in 2001 when I was on holiday, loads of rats and leaking air conditioners. 

Tokyo

Pros: Its size, price, ease of use, safety, technological innovation (felica cards), scale, and efficiency. The Yamanote line (which is imo the finest urban train line in the world imo).

Cons: Shinjuku station is possibly the most confusing place in the world for a foreigner! Should run later.


Paris

Pros: Efficient, great coverage of the city and station density. It has character too. Reliable.

Cons: Can't think of too many apart from that it felt rather edgy at night.


Moscow

Pros: The most beautiful by far. Very fast, efficient and very cheap.

Cons: Not many. The rail stock is rather old and rattles a bit (!) but for a relatively poorer country the Moscow Metro is an astounding achievement and certainly holds its own with any of the big 5.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

All of the other subway lines (Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai etc) aren't on the same scale to compare with the 'big 5.' Hong Kong and Singapore were quite impressive but didn't have the historical cachet of London or Paris, the size of Tokyo or the 24 hourness of New York. They felt rather devoid of charm and character... like faceless robots. But very efficient and clean.

A winner? I couldn't say. All of the main 5 are great systems. I'm tempted to say Moscow as its such an architectural achievement, but London is home to me and it has so much charm, New York is so cheap and runs all day, Tokyo is so advanced and the Paris subway has such great coverage of the city.


----------



## coth

I would not say that stock is old in Moscow. There are just two lines left that working only on Ezh and Em series. One line using new 81-74x series. One more lines is currently upgrading. Other lnes using 81-717/81-714 series. Not really old. In production from 1977 till present days.


----------



## me rrufsh bolet

Well, we have to determine how we are judging "best subways" cause new york is more complex and covers a lot of ground, while many subways are new and barely amount to half of NY's size...Also, NY's subways are older


----------



## EtherealMist

Is NYC's subway the only that stays open 24 hours?


----------



## ricz

Having been to a lot of cities' subway, I still have to say in terms of quality of the service(most helpful staff, best tickets system, value price), comfortness (air-conditioned, ultra modern, spotlessly clean, open, big and new interior of trains, refurbished and renew very often), efficiency(never any delays, trains every 1min in rush hour) and convenience(accessible in most metropolitan area, connected with all the other rail networks, shops around the station, exhibition held in some station, news being shown on screens), though it might as as monsterous as NY or London or as historical as those ones, the Hong Kong MTR definately deserves a nomination.


----------



## Justme

Metsfan1520 said:


> new yorks high point is its express service. at express stops you can transfer between local and express trains. this greatly speeds up the commute as you can skip stops. for example, if you live near a local stop but need to travel a long distance, you get on a local train and take it to the next express stop. there transfer to an express train. Its so easy & convenient. it also allows for the system to remain open 24 hrs.


Yes, Express trains are good. Many other networks though like London, Berlin, Frankfurt etc which don't have express services on their metro's have the equivalent by using the suburban trains. Many lines have parallel commuter services, or cross over stations that offer the equivalent of express services.


----------



## Occit

For Me: 

1) Santiago
2) Moscow
3) Seoul
4) Porto
5) Maracaibo


----------



## gladisimo

WANCH said:


> True but one thing nice about Tokyo's subway system is they have a smart card system (SUICA)


We were among the first ones to have it... now its not so special anymore =/


----------



## japanese001

*Japanese subway*

4 metro lines and 2 routes under construction are already iron ring-type linear motor car systems.
http://www.tokyometro.jp/


----------



## Metsfan1520

Dee Hinnov said:


> New York:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moscow:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New York:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Moscow:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> New York's last major finished construction project was the 6th Avenue Subway line, completed in 1940(!). Moscow's construction did only just begin by then, and major construction works have been going on until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The only advantage NY's system has over Moscow's, is that it is rather dense. But that's about the only advantage I can think of: frequencies are being lowered by the MTA, services cut back (notorious is the G line), the Lexington line has been overcrowded for years but the alleviating Second Avenue Subway line has been nothing but a pipe dream for the last 80 (!) years.
> 
> Yeah...NY is _definitely_ better than Moscow. If you believe in your own lies, that is...










before







after








2nd avenue subway
















East side access









There you have it. New york is indeed building new projects. the second avenue groundbreaking is on april 12, 2007. east side access is under construction and the 7 extension will begin soon. the mta has already purchased 660 new r160 subway cars. stations have been refurbished. ur pictures asre innacurate and misleading. new york eliminated graffiti from its subway cars 10-15 years ago. next time do your research.


----------



## Metsfan1520




----------



## Skyman

The best Subway I've ever seen was Moscow subway, it's very beautiful inside but I cannot say so about the trains


----------



## KVentz

Skyman said:


> The best Subway I've ever seen was Moscow subway, it's very beautiful inside but I cannot say so about the trains


Which trains did you see? There are 4 main types of them…
E/Ezh/Em:

















81-714/717:

















Yauza:

















Rusich:


----------



## poshbakerloo

Moscow Metro looks the best!!!
London Underground is the best!!!
New York Subway is also the best!!!


----------



## picassoborseli

Maybe the best in the world...

MADRID


(Photos are made by BLANCO)
Some new stations:




















































































































































































Enjoy them!


----------



## Ekumenopolis

My top 5:
1- Tokyo
2- NYC
3- Seoul
4- Madrid
5- Paris


----------



## hkskyline

Moscow and Stockholm both have some very nice station designs that are way beyond the functional norm.


----------



## gladisimo

These stations are huge and very extravagant...

I'm guessing Canal St. is Chinatown? The tiles say 'Chinatown' in Chinese


----------



## hkskyline

Canal Street Chinatown is among the worst subway stations I've ever had to use. It was raining downstairs at the fare gates one time I passed through. Some of the stations in the Upper West side heading up to GWB were quite beat up as well, although a few stations around Ground Zero have noticeably been cleaned up. The tiles looked fresh and new.


----------



## gladisimo

I'll take that as a "yes", then


----------



## SkyLerm

I'd say my city's Metro, probably the true landmark of Madrid kay:


----------



## Jakob

*Istanbul Metro*


----------



## eddie88

most iconic underground map in the world NO DOUBT ABOUT IT! (sorry about the size)


----------



## iahcgnoht

1. moscow
2. tokyo
3. new york
4. paris
5. london


----------



## Zaki

1. Tokyo
2. Moscow
3. Seoul
4. Madrid
5. New York


----------



## modestproposal

Zaki said:


> everytime i see a major cities subway system map it makes me wonder why Toronto's is so garbage.


New York and Tokyo are 4-6 times the size of Toronto. They're in a different league...how could you expect a similar subway system.


----------



## _BPS_

modestproposal said:


> New York and Tokyo are 4-6 times the size of Toronto. They're in a different league...how could you expect a similar subway system.


I fail to see the correlation between the size of a city and the quality of a subway.


----------



## Manila-X

gladisimo said:


> We were among the first ones to have it... now its not so special anymore =/


Oh yeah HK innovated it. Other than that there are only a few cities that have a successful smart card system.

Ok Singapore has EZ-Link, London has Oyster and Tokyo has Suica, any other cities?


----------



## Metropolitan

WANCH said:


> Oh yeah HK innovated it. Other than that there are only a few cities that have a successful smart card system.
> 
> Ok Singapore has EZ-Link, London has Oyster and Tokyo has Suica, any other cities?


Paris has navigo pass since 2001.


----------



## hkskyline

Population *and* urban expanse should be considered. New York, Tokyo, London, and Seoul are heavily populated *and* spread-out cities, hence they need a vast expanse of subways to get people around. Likewise, Hong Kong is a dense but concentrated city, so need for vast geographic coverage is weak. Toronto isn't a very big city population-wise, but it is very spread out, so it may not make economic sense to build too many subway lines. However, is this strategy viable in the long-run? Would intensification give better economic reasons to expand the subway network, or will a band-aid solution such as HOV lanes and buses do for now if there is no money for larger investments?


----------



## Pavlemadrid

Madrid is the third biggest Subway in the world with 317 km, later of New York & London....
In addition it was inaugurated in 1919.... before Tokyo & Moscow....
It has 316 stations.....
They are doing new extensions.....

Stations:
http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Estaciones_del_Metro_de_Madrid

I don't know other subway of a grand city....hno:









Now there aren't the Light rail transit:









My Neighborhood:


----------



## prelude91

The two best subways I have seen are NYC and London, I have not been to Asia so I am not too familiar with their systems.


----------



## Pavlemadrid

prelude91 said:


> The two best subways I have seen are NYC and London, I have not been to Asia so I am not too familiar with their systems.


Madrid? It's the third.... was you in Madrid city?


----------



## LeCom

Moscow, hands down, even though there are a few very serious contenders, mostly in large european cities. Those that listed New York, however, must be kidding.


----------



## prelude91

Pavlemadrid said:


> Madrid? It's the third.... was you in Madrid city?


I have not been to Madrid (will be going there in March '08 though :banana: ), so I cant speak for it, I have heard its great though.


----------



## Zaki

modestproposal said:


> New York and Tokyo are 4-6 times the size of Toronto. They're in a different league...how could you expect a similar subway system.


Toronto's metro population is around 6 million so around 3 times larger actually.

But thats not all. Madrid is similar in size to Toronto both by population and city size yet Madrid's subway is more than 3 times larger than Toronto's. The size of Toronto's subway is comparable to small cities in Europe housing only 500k - 1 million people which is pathetic. And also Toronto is spread out on its edges but the inner city is quite dense and have huge ridership numbers. Some bus lines have to run buses in groups of 3 every 2 minutes and they are still over flowing. Clearly the demand is there.


----------



## gladisimo

^^ I fail to see why people are listing how many kms of rail and how many stations they have. Just having a lot of stations and endless stretches of rail hardly accounts for how good a rail system is. 

Thanks to hkskyline for pointing that out before me, I just wanted to reiterate


----------



## Rachmaninov

^^ Exactly. Look at the difference between Tokyo and London.


----------



## KVentz

WANCH said:


> Oh yeah HK innovated it. Other than that there are only a few cities that have a successful smart card system.


When HK innovated smart card system?


----------



## hkskyline

KVentz said:


> When HK innovated smart card system?


Hong Kong's Octopus card was launched in 1997.


----------



## KVentz

hkskyline said:


> Hong Kong's Octopus card was launched in 1997.


Oh, thanks.
Moscow metro started using smart cards in 1998...


----------



## Pavlemadrid

prelude91 said:


> I have not been to Madrid (will be going there in March '08 though :banana: ), so I cant speak for it, I have heard its great though.


Ok! Madrid is a very nice city!!!  

The 3 line has the more modern trains in the city.... 

Sorry, but I don't speak english....:lol: 

If you want to ask something me of Madrid I will try to answer you  
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=495340
There are some of the monuments more famous of madrid....


----------



## rigoso

Subway Santiago de Chile..enjoy


----------



## Occit

*design: Santiago
efficiency: Seoul
cleaning: Caracas
capacity: Mexico DF
architecture: Santiago
history: London
character: NYC*

For me, the best of bests is *SANTIAGO DE CHILE* :yes:


----------



## luisdaniel

Santiago de Chile ... a little bit more

Una estaciòn de la linea 1











Estaciòn Plaza de Armas - Lìnea 5











Estaciòn Baquedano - Linea 1











Estaciòn Universidad de Chile - Linea 1










































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































agradecimientos a [email protected] [email protected] que reclamen los créditos de las fotos.


----------



## iampuking

London for me.

Pre-1900 sub-surface stations (Circle, East London, District, Hammersmith & City and Metropolitan lines, i.e. the Sub Surface Network, there are however pre-1900 overground 'tube line' stations, these are as a result of existing railway takeovers or line swapping)


















































































Many pre-1900 suburban stations have these 'country cottage' type of entrances, some of which are left over from existing railway take-overs, they look 'cottagey' perhaps because when they were built many of them were in the countryside!




























The platforms usually have an 'upside down picket fence' type of roof as their distinguishing feature




























Two of the few surviving C&SLR (City and South London Railway, now the Northern line's Bank branch)
entrances, these were built in 1890 and after, and was the first deep level railway in the world, however, the Tower Subway and Thames Tunnel could both be thought of as railways, the Tower Subway was cable hauled, and the Thames Tunnel wasn't originally intended to be a railway tunnel, being converted in the 1860s. The Thames Tunnel was also just a section of the East London Railway (now East London line) whereas the C&SLR was entirely in deep bore tunnels. The C&SLR tunnels are not original, as they were widened in the 1920s. The C&SLR was also one of the first railways in the world to use electric traction. C&SLR stations had plain white tiling on the platforms with a brown band legnthways, none of this tiling remains.



















Original narrow island platforms, only two stations are still like this on the network










Waterloo station on the Waterloo & City line (originally London and South Western Railway) it was opened in 1898, noticeable in being a cut-and-cover station on a 'tube' line, the rest of the line is deep level. This isn't the original decor.










Central London Railway stations, built around 1900. The platforms, like the C&SLR, had plain white tiling. It is now the Central line.



















Charles Yerks station (Bakerloo, Piccadilly and Northern (Charing Cross branch) lines) Designed by Leslie Green. Most of these were made between 1900-1910. The entrances have distinctive 'ox-blood' tiling for the entrances, and the platforms have unique tile patterns which differ for every station, many of which were unfortunately replaced in the 80s-90s... See below.









































































1910-1920s stations on the Bakerloo's extention to Queen's Park and the Northern line's extension from Golder's Green to Edgware designed by Stanley A Heaps.



















This is a continuation of the Leslie Green stations and is therefore based on them










Charles Holden art deco stations 1920s-1940s, there are Charles Holden stations on most lines. Some of his stations are reconstructions of existing Central London stations for the equipping of escalators, as all deep level stations were built before escalators were even invented and required lifts and a spiral staircase for emergencies. The rest of his work was reconstructions of suburban overground stations, and brand new suburban stations to encourage development.






















































































































Art deco escalator lamps, they were first on the Tube in the late twenties, most of them were unfortunately ripped out along with the wooden escalators after the King's Cross Fire in 1987, but a handful remain










Contemporary version, the originals were brown










This station (Gants Hill) was modelled on the Moscow Metro after Holden visited it in the 40s










1950-1960s stations, these are both reconstructions



















1960s-1970s stations (Victoria line) Each station has a unique motif in the wall recesses behind the benches. Some of them are a bit naff and literal, for example, Brixton has a tonne of bricks as it's motif... Other than that the platforms are practically identical, except for updates over the years: Oxford Circus and Victoria both had their tiles replaced with something just as bland and Oxford Circus and Green Park both no longer have their original motifs... See all the motifs here.





































1970s-1980s stations (Piccadilly line between Hounslow West and Heathrow Airport, and Jubilee line between Baker Street and Green Park)




























1980s-1990s stations (most of them are not original designs, most of them are in Central London, unfortunately)














































21st century stations (Mostly Jubilee line between Westminster and Stratford but some old stations that have been modernised in 21st century style)




































































































Last but not least, the trains, the interior decor is usually based on the line's colour, though there are some exceptions because of the Disability Discrimination Act...

Bakerloo line 1972 Stock = 7 short cars



















Central line 1992 Stock = 8 short cars



















Circle/Hammersmith & City/District (Edgware Road - Wimbledon) C Stock = 6 short cars



















District line D Stock = 6 long cars



















Metropolitan line A Stock, Metropolitan = 8 short cars



















Jubilee line 1996 Stock = 7 long cars



















Northern line 1995 Stock = 6 long cars (externally identical to 1996 Stock)










Piccadilly line 1973 Stock = 6 long cars



















Victoria line 1967 Stock = 8 short cars (externally identical to the 1972 Stock)










Waterloo & City line 1992 Stock = 4 short cars (externally identical to the 1992 Stock)










Victoria line 2009 Stock, expected to enter service in 2009! It'll be 8 slightly longer cars. These trains will be slightly (only slightly) larger than existing Tube stock as the Victoria line has slightly larger tunnels, they were built larger as the sixties planners thought that this would reduce air resistance.










This picture is from an accurate mock-up










Sub-Surface line Stock (Circle, District, Hammersmith and City and Metropolitan lines) Circle, District Hammersmith & City lines will become 7 short cars (The Circle and Hammersmith and City are 6 short cars, the District 6 long cars, so it'll be the same for the District) Metropolitan will remaine as 8 short cars. These trains will feature air-conditioning and inter-connecting gangways, like Paris Metro line 1. As the Sub-surface lines were built for steam trains, there are sections for the hot air to be expelled. They are expected to enter service in 2010 on the Metropolitan, replacing the much-loved A Stock.










And finally, something I thought was interesting...

Difference in size between the Sub-Surface Stock and the Tube Stock, it's the Piccadilly line 1973 Stock and Metropolitan line A Stock side by side on the Uxbridge branch.


----------



## hkskyline

The Underground is quite well kept considering its age. A lot of the stations in Zone 1 have been cleaned up. New York should learn from these efforts.


----------



## Manila-X

hkskyline said:


> The Underground is quite well kept considering its age. A lot of the stations in Zone 1 have been cleaned up. New York should learn from these efforts.


Agree with that. but NY should first start in rennovating its subway stations. They should keep the old design but at least make them cleaner and more stylish.


----------



## hkskyline

WANCH said:


> Agree with that. but NY should first start in rennovating its subway stations. They should keep the old design but at least make them cleaner and more stylish.


Some of the stations in Lower Manhattan have been cleaned up. They probably power-washed the tiles and they look quite good. London, on the other hand, has done more to renovate their Underground stations, with new wall panels, signs, and such.

Some of the stations on the A line up to the George Washington Bridge area are quite run-down, and very dirty.


----------



## sushibricks

i definitely say 

1. Seoul or/and Tokyo (they look really similar and are very clean and tidy)
apparently, seoul metro safety is ranked #1 and capacity #2 in the world and length #4. I said seoul metro,not korean metro. That means it doesnt include that daegu thing or wtvr. those seoul subways are damn nice. you wont know what i mean unless you actually ride it, not just view it. they're building so much lines right now ahaha....

3. Moscow
without a doubt, their architecture is impressive

4. Stockholm

5. London


----------



## iampuking

Deleted


----------



## Daryae_Abi

If the prices weren't so high, London public transit would be best in the world!


----------



## picassoborseli

Daryae_Abi said:


> If the prices weren't so high, London public transit would be best in the world!


And if the trains weren't that ugly! :nuts:


----------



## Daryae_Abi

picassoborseli said:


> And if the trains weren't that ugly! :nuts:


The design is good, it's the color that's ugly. 
They should paint them blue.


----------



## iampuking

picassoborseli said:


> And if the trains weren't that ugly! :nuts:


I like it personally, simple, distinctive but not too OTT. Plus the doors have to be a different colour from the body because of the Disability Discrimination Act... I'll take that over the boring functionality of Asian systems or the oh-so-original bare metal American subway cars.

And in the future can you actually say *what* you think is so ugly? This is a discussion forum, not somewhere where people just say something and then piss off.


----------



## picassoborseli

iampuking said:


> I like it personally, simple, distinctive but not too OTT. Plus the doors have to be a different colour from the body because of the Disability Discrimination Act... I'll take that over the boring functionality of Asian systems or the oh-so-original bare metal American subway cars.
> 
> And in the future can you actually say *what* you think is so ugly? This is a discussion forum, not somewhere where people just say something and then piss off.



Come on! It was just a joke...
London Underground is just genious and i like it very much.
What I was metioning that FOR ME it could be the best metro system in the world if the trains were nicer. I just don't like the design of the trains and the interior is awfull! It is just my personal opinion, respect that, I'm not trying to piss off!


----------



## iampuking

picassoborseli said:


> Come on! It was just a joke...
> London Underground is just genious and i like it very much.
> What I was metioning that FOR ME it could be the best metro system in the world if the trains were nicer. I just don't like the design of the trains and the interior is awfull! It is just my personal opinion, respect that, I'm not trying to piss off!


I'm not angry, it is just my manner. I don't see what the point of a discussion forum if someone does not want to have a discussion. The very fact that you've claimed said something that is so subjective without even saying why is something that annoys me, it's unlike what Daryae_Abi said when he said that the Tube is expensive, that is a fact since it is among the highest, if not the highest priced underground network in the world.

The seating cover (moquette) is busy because it shows dirt and stains less, but I think even if it is a bit strange, it is another thing that makes the Tube unique. And by the way, the tube trains are rounded at the top to fit inside of the tunnels, and the fronts are flat to push air, it is 'ventilation' as the Tube has no air conditioning whatsoever. Another point is that the interior theme of the train is based on the lines colour, so the central line's 1992 Stock is red on the Tube map, so red inside the train, it's very tourist friendly and I think it gives each line it's own identity, but there is still a unified design (corporate livery, design etc.) The very fact that the interior of the train is the trains line colour makes it easier to find an interior that appeals to you, but each to their own...

And I would be to see pictures of what your idea of an attractive train interior looks like.

This also gives an idea of how much space there is inside the train, if you ask me it's quite an achievement that the trains are as fast as they are (as fast as a normal subway train) whilst in an incredibly tight space.


----------



## Occit

*LONDON NO! --> IS DIRTY! uke:

SANTIAGO YES!! --> IS PERFECT!!

...and, I'm not Chilean...so. :|*


----------



## Daryae_Abi

Occit said:


> *LONDON NO! --> IS DIRTY! uke:
> 
> SANTIAGO YES!! --> IS PERFECT!!
> 
> ...and, I'm not Chilean...so. :|*


I don't know about Santiago (never been there), but London underground is not dirty at all. Especially when you know it was built more than 100 years ago!


----------



## picassoborseli

iampuking said:


> I'm not angry, it is just my manner. I don't see what the point of a discussion forum if someone does not want to have a discussion. The very fact that you've claimed said something that is so subjective without even saying why is something that annoys me, it's unlike what Daryae_Abi said when he said that the Tube is expensive, that is a fact since it is among the highest, if not the highest priced underground network in the world.
> 
> The seating cover (moquette) is busy because it shows dirt and stains less, but I think even if it is a bit strange, it is another thing that makes the Tube unique. And by the way, the tube trains are rounded at the top to fit inside of the tunnels, and the fronts are flat to push air, it is 'ventilation' as the Tube has no air conditioning whatsoever. Another point is that the interior theme of the train is based on the lines colour, so the central line's 1992 Stock is red on the Tube map, so red inside the train, it's very tourist friendly and I think it gives each line it's own identity, but there is still a unified design (corporate livery, design etc.) The very fact that the interior of the train is the trains line colour makes it easier to find an interior that appeals to you, but each to their own...
> 
> And I would be to see pictures of what your idea of an attractive train interior looks like.
> 
> This also gives an idea of how much space there is inside the train, if you ask me it's quite an achievement that the trains are as fast as they are (as fast as a normal subway train) whilst in an incredibly tight space.


Ofcourse I know that the trains are like that because, otherwise they won't fit in the tunnels. But then I still don't like the design. That rounding makes them weird.

Here an example of metrotrains I like:

METRO BILBAO


----------



## iampuking

We'll have to agree to disagree. Those trains look like moving science labs if you ask me.

Sharp edges and functionality is clearly your taste, so it's not surprising you find cushioned seats, colourful interiors and curvey walls unpleasant!

And by the way there is no such words as "metrotrain" we're not Germans here.


----------



## GNU

I like the character of the London Underground but imo its not the best in the world.
Its absolutely stunning from a historical point of view and architecture wise, but the trains are too old and the tracks arent well kept imo.
The gap between the train and the platform is sometimes awfully high.
I think the system needs more investment for its size.
The Victoria or Bakerloo line trains for example are outdated and need replacing.
Also the tracks are often very bumpy to a point that it can get scary especially on the part between Angel? and Highbury.
Also the carriages are pretty small. Of course that is because the tunnels are so old but its still a problem during rush hour when your squeezed in with many other people.
And then there are the expensive fares.
I imagine that they would make millions and millions, so they should pump more money into the infrastructure.
Another drawback is also that the underground shuts down so early in the evening.

As far as the overall transport systems are concerned Tokyo is said to have the best network in the world followed by Berlin.
However I dont know which underground system is supposed to be the best.
Maybe Tokyo aswell?


----------



## Occit

Daryae_Abi said:


> I don't know about Santiago (never been there), but London underground is not dirty at all. Especially when you know it was built more than 100 years ago!


*Being the oldest metro in the world, it is not an argument to consider it the best.*


----------



## iampuking

Checker said:


> The gap between the train and the platform is sometimes awfully high.


Isn't that part of the character? "Mind the Gap" which is sometimes seen as a "phrase for London" wouldn't exist if it there weren't giant gaps. It would be sad if there wasn't a stern English voice barking at passengers to mind a gap over a foot wide, it's so Londonish if you ask me.



Checker said:


> I think the system needs more investment for its size.


I think you'll find £10 billion is being invested in it.



Checker said:


> The Victoria or Bakerloo line trains for example are outdated and need replacing.


The Victoria line is getting brand new stock to be introduced from 2009. The Bakerloo not until 2016 at the earliest. I don't see what's wrong with the Bakerloo line's stock personally, the seats are more comfy than some of the newer stocks.



Checker said:


> Also the tracks are often very bumpy to a point that it can get scary especially on the part between Angel? and Highbury.


As part of the investment programme the tracks are being replaced to main line standards with flat bottomed rails and concrete sleepers.



Checker said:


> Also the carriages are pretty small. Of course that is because the tunnels are so old but its still a problem during rush hour when your squeezed in with many other people.


They are, but unless you're freakishly tall or standing right near the edge of the door then you won't have much of a problem. If the train looks that crowded you can always wait for the next one.



Checker said:


> And then there are the expensive fares.


Because of the investment programme...



Checker said:


> I imagine that they would make millions and millions, so they should pump more money into the infrastructure.


Ten billion... :goodnight 



Checker said:


> Another drawback is also that the underground shuts down so early in the evening.


Compared to most systems. It doesn't.



Checker said:


> However I dont know which underground system is supposed to be the best.
> Maybe Tokyo aswell?


Depends what you're judging it on. If it was charm and uniqueness I have no doubt it would be London's.

And by the way, the investment programme started in 2003, if you want to see a good line, use the Central line, smooth track, modern stock and extremely fast acceleration and braking, it sends most tourists flying which is rather amusing  Give it 15 years and most lines will be like that, such a big system can't be totally modernised at the flick of a switch. And considering the state it was in 15 years ago, i'm not complaining!


----------



## GNU

iampuking said:


> Isn't that part of the character? "Mind the Gap" which is sometimes seen as a "phrase for London" wouldn't exist if it there weren't giant gaps. It would be sad if there wasn't a stern English voice barking at passengers to mind a gap over a foot wide, it's so Londonish if you ask me.


The phrase "Mind the Gap" isnt there for fun but because the gap is so big at some stations.
And thats not good imo.
At some curved stations like Bank? the gap is so big that you can easily fall into it with one leg. thats dangerous and also very uncomfortable to elderly people or those in a wheelchair.
I dont understand why they cant make it smoother.




> I think you'll find £10 billion is being invested in it.


thats the money that Tansport for London (TFL) is going to invest in the next 5 years for its redevelopment project.
It isnt the annually/standard investment figure.
And TFL isnt only about the tube but also about London rail and the London busses.
So not all of the money is being invested into the tube.




> The Victoria line is getting brand new stock to be introduced from 2009. The Bakerloo not until 2016 at the earliest. I don't see what's wrong with the Bakerloo line's stock personally, the seats are more comfy than some of the newer stocks.


Well the Bakerloo line trains are quite old, although being younger than the Victoria line trains.
Its good to see that new trains are being introduced on both lines.
I have seen the new Victoria line trains in the Transport museum and they look good.




> They are, but unless you're freakishly tall or standing right near the edge of the door then you won't have much of a problem. If the train looks that crowded you can always wait for the next one.


Waiting for the next one is quite difficult during rush hour.
they are usually all packed then.
Btw: Im around 1,90 and its enough space for me.
But it kind of feels small when youve got so little space between your head and the roof of the carriage.




> Compared to most systems. It doesn't.


Well, in Berlin for example the tube runs 24h on Friday, Saturday and Sunday whereas it closes down in London.
I think they should also let them run 24 h on the weekend.
It makes sense and is very comfortable to the average traveller.




> And by the way, the investment programme started in 2003, if you want to see a good line, use the Central line, smooth track, modern stock and extremely fast acceleration and braking, it sends most tourists flying which is rather amusing  Give it 15 years and most lines will be like that, such a big system can't be totally modernised at the flick of a switch. And considering the state it was in 15 years ago, i'm not complaining!


The central line is fine.
I ike the trains just like I like the northern line trains.
Its very fast indeed but I have to dissagree about the smoothness.
Its also very bumpy although not as bumpy as on the Victoria line.


----------



## iampuking

We can't get rid of gaps with massive holes on the deep level tubes as the equipment is right beneath the floor, so there is no space for anything between the floor and the wheels, therefore there is a very large gap. However, they usually have a stripey line between the tracks and the gap, and of course they have the pits between the rails (for bodies to fall into), see here:










There are four different "Mind the Gap" announcements:

Soft Cow:






Shouty Man:






Polite Man:






The health & safety nazis are in full force, "Mind the Gap" announcements keep popping up at stations without a curve, why? They mays well put it at every single station on the network. The Tube are so scared of getting sued by some compensation bastards, it really makes me annoyed. Why can't people live and learn? The train operators aren't sadistic enough to start moving a train when someone is jammed between the train and the platform.


----------



## Justme

Thanks for the sound bites, although I couldn't get Shouty Man to work. 

My favourite has always been the Authoritive Man. This accent is so unique to England, almost 1950's BBC news reader accent. Absolutely brilliant.


----------



## iampuking

Soft Cow didn't work, I don't hate Soft Cow because she's a woman, but because her voice has no authority, I said in another thread that a great female voice would be Thatcher's!






And here is shouty man


----------



## GNU

Authoritive Man is best.


----------



## Marsupilami

as I haven`t been to tall the cities mentioned above, and if i had to choose only based in the pictures, maps, and comments, this is my list:

Madrid
London
Santiago de Chile
Tokio
Moscow


----------



## iahcgnoht

My favorite is hong kong they look really nice


----------



## CORLEONE

Before going abroad I always thought that Madrid underground was gonna be nothing compare to the big capitals in Europe and outside, after being in Paris, London, Brussels, Rotterdam, Berlin, etc... I can say that Madrid is much better system. Much better conserved than Paris or London, much cleaner than Brussels and Rotterdam, Much easyer than Berlin (I like this one the most of the ones I said).

My top:

1) Madrid
2) Moscow
3) Berlin
4) Hong Kong
5) Paris


----------



## kix111

hmmm shanghai subway? anyone?

grr..sorry dunno how to post youtube video..you can view shanghai subway here: http://youtube.com/watch?v=ewKhr7M83_4

and also see this super cool advertisement in subway that you can interact with the ad lol!: http://youtube.com/watch?v=lhMIrrZnzoU


----------



## hkskyline

kix111 said:


> hmmm shanghai subway? anyone?]


Lines 1 and 2 are quite horrible. It's hard to believe how old and deteriorated they look even though they haven't been around for too long, but the new lines are sleek and modern.


----------



## gladisimo

:cheers:


----------



## kix111

ahh thank you for posting my videos lol


----------



## XiaoBai

hkskyline said:


> Lines 1 and 2 are quite horrible. It's hard to believe how old and deteriorated they look even though they haven't been around for too long, but the new lines are sleek and modern.


Huh? Lines one and two are as "sleek and modern" as any of the other lines. Their biggest drawback is the long and tedious transfer between them at People's Square.


----------



## Manila-X

A photo I took on the MTR


----------



## kix111

XiaoBai said:


> Huh? Lines one and two are as "sleek and modern" as any of the other lines. Their biggest drawback is the long and tedious transfer between them at People's Square.


line 1,2,3,4,6 are basically the same, its just to much untidy/rude/dirty/country people at people's square ><

i hate them they have so bad manners and they destroy the whole shanghai's reputation.


----------



## hkskyline

XiaoBai said:


> Huh? Lines one and two are as "sleek and modern" as any of the other lines. Their biggest drawback is the long and tedious transfer between them at People's Square.


The stations are fairly dirty and dark. Maintenance is not too well done so they look very old considering their relatively young age. The ceiling tiles and wall tiles are full of grime and the construction wasn't too high quality.


----------



## XiaoBai

Ah, you meant the stations. They aren't the most asthetically pleasing, but I wouldn't go as far as calling them run down (well at least most of them).


----------



## kix111

i always ride line 2..i find it alright.

but line 1 is just aweful with those people..


----------



## Pincio

*MOSCOW* is the *number 1*, surely!!!
1000 time better than Paris or Madrid.
This subway seems a museum


----------



## kix111

wow that looks like 1980s 0.o


----------



## iampuking

The stations are nice, but apart from that, Moscow doesn't have much going for it IMO.


----------



## iampuking

You mean the frequency at rush hour?


----------



## CORLEONE

Aokromes said:


> I know no, but has i said, by only few kms (<5), Moskow one is bigger.
> 
> http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=14909745&postcount=337
> 
> (y no me añadas los kilometros de tranvia que entonces Moscu os pulveriza)


First, We don´t have tram in Madrid we have light subway.

Second, Madrid made 85 km the last 4 years and is planned to make around 95 km.

Madrid underground is bigger. The info you gave is old: Madrid has 309,554 km and we have almost 3 million people less living in here so the subway is less congested

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_de_Madrid


----------



## Aokromes

CORLEONE said:


> First, We don´t have tram in Madrid we have light subway.
> 
> Second, Madrid made 85 km the last 4 years and is planned to make around 95 km.
> 
> Madrid underground is bigger.
> 
> http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ampliaciones_del_Metro_de_Madrid


http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_de_Madrid#Metro_Ligero 

Y ya digo, a fecha de hoy el de Moscu es un poco mayor, a finales de año sera mayor el de Madrid, pero ahora es el de Moscu.


----------



## CORLEONE

Well, the point is that the underground will be bigger even having less people, so I think that is a significant data.


----------



## KVentz

coth said:


> Well, from what i have heard - Madrid has no money to expand the present system, while Moscow's budget is largest city budget in Europe.


55.7 Km of metro lines and 43 stations were built in Madrid in 2003—2007. Plus 28.2 Km and 36 stations of light rail. They spent €3'615'000'000 on this. Moscow can only dream about this figures.


----------



## coth

CORLEONE said:


> First, We don´t have tram in Madrid we have light subway.
> 
> Second, Madrid made 85 km the last 4 years and is planned to make around 95 km.
> 
> Madrid underground is bigger. The info you gave is old: Madrid has 309,554 km and we have almost 3 million people less living in here so the subway is less congested
> 
> http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_de_Madrid


you include rapid trams



iampuking said:


> You mean the frequency at rush hour?


yes. an average of 90 seconds on most of lines. 2 - 3 minutes during rest of the day. an interval goes up only after midnight to 10 minutes.



KVentz said:


> 55.7 Km of metro lines and 43 stations were built in Madrid in 2003—2007. Plus 28.2 Km and 36 stations of light rail. They spent €3'615'000'000 on this. Moscow can only dream about this figures.


3,6bln euro from 2003 to 2007 is hardly over $4,5bln. moscow plans to spend over $6bln from 2007 to 2010. over $1,3bln alone this year. plus few cents from federals.


----------



## CORLEONE

Coth this rapid trams that we call light metro act like subway in almos 3/4 of the distance because they go underground in the same metro rails, the point is that when they get to the end of the line they get out for few kilometres, was made like that because the composition of the stone on that side of the city is much harder than the rest. It is underground as well.

http://www.metroligero-oeste.es/


----------



## iampuking

coth said:


> yes. an average of 90 seconds on most of lines. 2 - 3 minutes during rest of the day. an interval goes up only after midnight to 10 minutes.


Bleh. Happens in Paris:






And London:






Just cause it isn't timetabled doesn't mean it doesn't happen.. :lol: 

How does Moscow achieve 40tph? Slam the doors shut when only a few passengers have boarded?


----------



## KVentz

coth said:


> 3,6bln euro from 2003 to 2007 is hardly over $4,5bln. moscow plans to spend over $6bln from 2007 to 2010. over $1,3bln alone this year. plus few cents from federals.


Oh yes. But Madrid built 43 metro stations and 36 LRT stations. Moscow going to build 15 ± 2 ones. And I don't believe federals will spend even few cents…


----------



## coth

@CORLEONE
Trams that going under ground != Metro. It's technically different. It was discussed here already. Check Porto Metro rapid tram thread.

@iampuking
Happens? Or exists on regular basis along the whole line?
Maximum what can London Underground technically achieve is 36tph. And it's only on two lines. All other lines will hardly allow more than 30 trains per hour.
Moscow Metro does not have 40tph right now. It was in 1970's. Right now it's 37-39tph on most of lines. Just 2 lines offer service less than 35tph. Only one is due to technical limitations and another line with just 3 stations because it's not necessary to have over 20tph there. High frequency is ongoing for at least 4-6 hours per day. Timetable fulfillment in 99,96% with commercial speed in 42kmph.


----------



## iampuking

coth said:


> @iampuking
> Happens? Or exists on regular basis along the whole line?


Happens when trains bunch up... You can see one train leave and then the next one behind it in the tunnel.



coth said:


> Maximum what can London Underground technically achieve is 36tph. And it's only on two lines. All other lines will hardly allow more than 30 trains per hour. Moscow Metro does not have 40tph right now. It was in 1970's. Right now it's 37-39tph on most of lines. Just 2 lines offer service less than 35tph. Only one is due to technical limitations and another line with just 3 stations because it's not necessary to have over 20tph there. High frequency is ongoing for at least 4-6 hours per day. Timetable fulfillment in 99,96% with commercial speed in 42kmph.


I know this... But i'm asking this: What does Moscow do that allows them a high frequency?


----------



## coth

better organization. well situated reverse sidings and yards, small number of railroad switches etc.


----------



## iampuking

Better organisation? A bit vague isn't it? One could say Tokyo is well organised yet it doesn't have lower than 2 minute frequencies.


----------



## Aokromes

If i don't remember bad, the metro of Riga have 75s frequencies.


----------



## Petr

^^
Since when Riga has metro?


----------



## coth

I think he was talking about Kiev Metro


----------



## gladisimo

Is the Paris one at a terminus? Trains often bottleneck at a terminus. 

Even if not, what happens in those videos is not that rare.


----------



## iampuking

gladisimo said:


> Is the Paris one at a terminus? Trains often bottleneck at a terminus.
> 
> Even if not, what happens in those videos is not that rare.


I think so, it's La Defense on Line 1, London one is Oxford Circus on the Central line and is not a terminus.


----------



## masterpaul

Athens Metro System...

Its metro stations are beautifull, and impressive. They are really modern. Amazing Most of them are like museums.


----------



## CORLEONE

masterpaul said:


> Athens Metro System...
> 
> Its metro stations are beautifull, and impressive. They are really modern. Amazing Most of them are like museums.


Is really nice underground but it has 77 km. It is clearly beautiful but is too small compared with such a big city as Athens. Anyway Athens is going in the right direction.


----------



## X Bomby

hno:


----------



## Mahratta

I can't really say since I have only been on the one in Delhi, Toronto, Montreal, new York and London.

I would say from this

Modernity and ambience:

1) Delhi Metro
2) London
3) Montreal
4) Toronto / NYC tie

Practicality

1) New York City
2) Delhi
3) London
4)Toronto / Montreal (both are inaccessible from many parts of the city)


----------



## iampuking

London... Modern? :lol:


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> London... Modern? :lol:


London doesnt get it for modernity

But for the second part of the category - the ambience


----------



## iampuking

What do you mean by ambience?


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> What do you mean by ambience?


I mean that when you go to London metro (and Im sure about this in Paris too) you get that ambience since it was the world's first underground - if you think about the history its almost overawing


----------



## iampuking

Okay.


----------



## X Bomby

London has one of oldest and shabbiest subways in the world; Trains are always late and most trains are unfashionable (except jubilee and central line)

cheers :cheers:


----------



## iampuking

What an earth do you mean by "unfashionable"?


----------



## Justme

X Bomby said:


> London has one of oldest and shabbiest subways in the world; Trains are always late and most trains are unfashionable (except jubilee and central line)
> 
> cheers :cheers:


The London Underground is old. That is true. It was afterall the first underground urban network in the world, and it took a good deal of the rest of the world to catch up. But there is nothing wrong with being the first in the world. What urban developments did your city innovate in that is now used everywhere around the world? For a city like London, the list is long. This age also adds to it’s amazing character, but it also does have the disadvantages that comes with it.

As for shabby. This is completely not true. Most of the London Underground is of very high standard these days. There was a time a few years ago where many stations did become quite run down, but a series of renovations have improved most of them. What is left that is shabby is very small compared to the whole network (which incidentally is the largest in the world in route length). Trains are not always late, and how would you know? Do you follow a timetable on London’s Underground. I doubt it. And as for unfashionable? I hardly doubt the Delhi Metro is more fashionable around the world. No one outside of India has even heard of it.


----------



## CORLEONE

the Nigel Effect said:


> I mean that when you go to London metro (and Im sure about this in Paris too) you get that ambience since it was the world's first underground - if you think about the history its almost overawing


I never got that mistic feeling... I think that this opinion has no strength and is not enought to give London the medal of the best subway. I think that ambient is not a main thing here.


----------



## Manila-X

the Nigel Effect said:


> I can't really say since I have only been on the one in Delhi, Toronto, Montreal, new York and London.
> 
> I would say from this
> 
> Modernity and ambience:
> 
> 1) Delhi Metro
> 2) London
> 3) Montreal
> 4) Toronto / NYC tie
> 
> Practicality
> 
> 1) New York City
> 2) Delhi
> 3) London
> 4)Toronto / Montreal (both are inaccessible from many parts of the city)


I agree with NY's position on practicality but Tokyo and HK can be contenders in this list.


----------



## CORLEONE

^^ I´m sorry but Madrid has to be in that list.


----------



## _00_deathscar

CORLEONE said:


> ^^ I´m sorry but Madrid has to be in that list.


If you read his post, he's merely rating from his experience - he hasn't visited the Madrid metro.


----------



## CORLEONE

:doh: :doh: Upss sorry...


----------



## hkskyline

Yes, do keep in mind that if the list looks weird, it's most likely due to the person's experiences. We can never get a constant set of experiences in a forum like this to do a more scientific poll.


----------



## CORLEONE

I imagine cause the list is to start laughting. Anyway is go to choose from his experience.


----------



## KVentz

Moscow subway has launched English version of its site.


----------



## Mahratta

Justme said:


> The London Underground is old. That is true. It was afterall the first underground urban network in the world, and it took a good deal of the rest of the world to catch up. But there is nothing wrong with being the first in the world. What urban developments did your city innovate in that is now used everywhere around the world? For a city like London, the list is long. This age also adds to it’s amazing character, but it also does have the disadvantages that comes with it.
> 
> As for shabby. This is completely not true. Most of the London Underground is of very high standard these days. There was a time a few years ago where many stations did become quite run down, but a series of renovations have improved most of them. What is left that is shabby is very small compared to the whole network (which incidentally is the largest in the world in route length). Trains are not always late, and how would you know? Do you follow a timetable on London’s Underground. I doubt it. And as for unfashionable? I hardly doubt the Delhi Metro is more fashionable around the world. No one outside of India has even heard of it.


Actually I found the Delhi metro more fashionable then those of London and North American ones, since it is far newer and more astetically pleasing.

Do you know anything about the Delhi metro or are you talking out of your ass?


----------



## Mahratta

WANCH said:


> I agree with NY's position on practicality but Tokyo and HK can be contenders in this list.


I am saying from my experiences.

I havent been lucky enough to visit HK or Tokyo


----------



## Mahratta

CORLEONE said:


> I never got that mistic feeling... I think that this opinion has no strength and is not enought to give London the medal of the best subway. I think that ambient is not a main thing here.


Sorry that I didnt put Madrid on the list, but perhaps if you actually read the post....:nuts:


----------



## iampuking

the Nigel Effect said:


> Actually I found the Delhi metro more fashionable then those of London and North American ones, since it is far newer and more astetically pleasing.
> 
> Do you know anything about the Delhi metro or are you talking out of your ass?


Eh, your idea of fashionable is clearly different from his, stop being so narrow-minded for christ sakes.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> Eh, your idea of fashionable is clearly different from his, stop being so narrow-minded for christ sakes.


My god...

How am I being narrow-minded?

Its fucking opinion! 

Its your problem if you idiots feel like:

1) Criticizing because I didnt include your own city, like a petty bitch
2) Ignoring that I said "FROM MY EXPERIENCE" and continueing to spew shit

or do you just read what you want to? He said that 'most people hadnt heard of this metro' and, from the tone, knew little about it as he passed it off as not good

Same with you, have you been to Delhi and London metro to compare? Or are you just spreading idiocy?

So perhaps you should post your opinion, instead of picking things out of context without properly reading them to jump on like a stupid idiot. And its much worse if they dont even make sense.


----------



## iampuking

the Nigel Effect said:


> My god...
> 
> How am I being narrow-minded?
> 
> Its fucking opinion!
> 
> Its your problem if you idiots feel like:
> 
> 1) Criticizing because I didnt include your own city, like a petty bitch
> 2) Ignoring that I said "FROM MY EXPERIENCE" and continueing to spew shit
> 
> or do you just read what you want to? He said that 'most people hadnt heard of this metro' and, from the tone, knew little about it as he passed it off as not good


An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.



the Nigel Effect said:


> Same with you, have you been to Delhi and London metro to compare? Or are you just spreading idiocy?


No I haven't. But i'd be interested to see you point out where I have specifically mentioned the Delhi Metro.



the Nigel Effect said:


> So perhaps you should post your opinion, instead of picking things out of context without properly reading them to jump on like a stupid idiot. And its much worse if they dont even make sense.


Maybe you could read a few pages back and you'll see my opinion


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.


Excellent...why don't we all use quotes meaningless in this context! I'm next...

"All the world's a stage, and all the people merely players."

Good! Now perhaps you can quote Macchiavelli...or how about Althusser? Or maybe Aryabhata? Since we are putting in quotes that do not pertain to the subject at hand, why don't we put in completely unrelated philosophical trains of thought as well?



> No I haven't. But i'd be interested to see you point out where I have specifically mentioned the Delhi Metro.


Seeing as how that "your idea of fashionable is different from his" line of yours was pertaining to my discussion with another forumer about the Delhi metro...come on, first you don't make sense, and now you make arguments that I simply need to scroll up and quote to disprove


----------



## go_leafs_go02

I've been on two subways in the world.

Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and London's Underground "Tube".

I was in London almost a month ago now, and I still just can't get over the system. I had the privilege to spend a day touring London using the Tube, and it was almost the highlight of my whole time there.

Yes, I'm going into transportation planning and engineering for school, so I do have an interest there. But I loved the system. So much charm, so much variation, and so simple. I look at the NYC map and try to figure it out through Wikipedia, and I am completely lost.

I only wish I had seen more of it. Such a wonderful, efficient, and unique system filled with blasts to the past right left and centre, but also modern marvels in places too.

Toronto's is neat too, for my first subway system, but London by far takes the cake.


----------



## bonivison

Line 5 in Beijing
open in 9.20.2007


----------



## Mahratta

bonivison said:


> Line 5 in Beijing
> open in 9.20.2007


Looking good!!


----------



## iampuking

the Nigel Effect said:


> Excellent...why don't we all use quotes meaningless in this context! I'm next...
> 
> "All the world's a stage, and all the people merely players."
> 
> Good! Now perhaps you can quote Macchiavelli...or how about Althusser? Or maybe Aryabhata?


Go ahead, I don't think anyone will care.



the Nigel Effect said:


> Since we are putting in quotes that do not pertain to the subject at hand


I beg to differ. 



the Nigel Effect said:


> Seeing as how that "your idea of fashionable is different from his" line of yours was pertaining to my discussion with another forumer about the Delhi metro...come on, first you don't make sense, and now you make arguments that I simply need to scroll up and quote to disprove


The opinion I was talking about was the one on the Delhi Metro. Which I have little opinion of as i've never been on it. From impressions it seems like your run-of-the-mill "modern" system in developing country, a bit like a Chinese Metro which i've never really been interested in... Basically, it seems to have nothing unique nor special about it. If you want to look at it from a capitalist perspective then it's great!


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> The opinion I was talking about was the one on the Delhi Metro. Which I have little opinion of as i've never been on it. From impressions it seems like your run-of-the-mill "modern" system in developing country, a bit like a Chinese Metro which i've never really been interested in... Basically, it seems to have nothing unique nor special about it. If you want to look at it from a capitalist perspective then it's great!


...You have no opinion on it, yet you criticize others opinions...

And if you want to look it from a cynical bullshit point of view, go ahead!


----------



## iampuking

the Nigel Effect said:


> ...You have no opinion on it, yet you criticize others opinions...
> 
> And if you want to look it from a cynical bullshit point of view, go ahead!


No, I criticize the way you sanctimoniously and self-righteously yelled your opinions as if people care.


----------



## oliver999

the Nigel Effect said:


> Actually I found the Delhi metro more fashionable then those of London and North American ones, since it is far newer and more astetically pleasing.
> 
> Do you know anything about the Delhi metro or are you talking out of your ass?


some Delhi metro photos will be pleased.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> No, I criticize the way you sanctimoniously and self-righteously yelled your opinions as if people care.


Strange, since this is a thread which states 'best subway.'

Seeing as how this is from experience, I am assuming that this is opinion-based.

So really, if you don't care, then don't comment and make a fool of yourself. If you really don't care, then why make such a big fuss?


----------



## Mahratta

oliver999 said:


> some Delhi metro photos will be pleased.


No problem

Looks-wise, I thought it was better than the other subways I have been on, simply due to the modern look and feel of the stations and coaches










Central park station









Kashmir Gate station



























Metro Mall


----------



## Justme

the Nigel Effect said:


> Actually I found the Delhi metro more fashionable then those of London and North American ones, since it is far newer and more aesthetically pleasing.
> 
> Do you know anything about the Delhi metro or are you talking out of your ass?


What exactly is "fashionable" about the Delhi Metro? It is a new metro, but it hardly is noted around the world as being architecturally special in any way. But then, as you pointed out so blatantly, we all have our own opinions.

And if imitation is a good representative of what's "fashionable", then London's Underground certainly has an edge on Delhi's. Globally, the world metro systems have copied more from the London Underground than any other network. From the famous tube map design, which is now the basis of most networks around the world, to even the symbol, adapted by more networks than any other.

Which brings me to your point about speaking from one's anus. If you are so sure that the new stations on the fashionable Delhi metro are so much better than the London Underground, then by all means, demonstrate your case by displaying photos of what you consider to be the top three most "fashionable" stations. And someone else may then show their top three stations modern stations from London's Underground. 

I suspect already that you will have strong competition from London here, as a number of the newer stations, especially those on the Jubilee line are quite spectacular and architecturally impressive.



the Nigel Effect said:


> 1) Criticizing because I didn't include your own city, like a petty bitch
> 2) Ignoring that I said "FROM MY EXPERIENCE" and continuing to spew shit
> 
> or do you just read what you want to? He said that 'most people hadn't heard of this metro' and, from the tone, knew little about it as he passed it off as not good


Let's remember that this thread is to discuss the "best" subway network in the world. You have to understand that the fact remains the Delhi Metro is not generally considered as such. It is hardly known around the world, and for a city the size of Delhi, woefully small and inadequate. This isn't a thread about showing your metro, it's a thread about discussing the best in the world. I think it is pretty understandable that many may consider a small metro of 56km and only 50 stations for a city of nearly 14million people and as many as 20million in the metropolitan area. Regardless of how "fashionable" it maybe.

I also find it hard to call something fashionable in a global discussion, if it is not actually fashionable globally. If people around the world spoke of the Delhi metro as being one of the most beautiful on the planet, then maybe you would have a case. The fact remains is that it is pretty much unknown outside of your country. 



the Nigel Effect said:


> So perhaps you should post your opinion, instead of picking things out of context without properly reading them to jump on like a stupid idiot. And its much worse if they don't even make sense.


Now let's see here. You entered Delhi Metro as a candidate as the best metro system on the planet. You should then expect a debate to start. Thinking otherwise does not demonstrate any basic grasp of social bantering.

You also stated that London had a shabby system, which many actually disagree with as in the last few years there have been great improvements.

If you can't take a debate, why join?


----------



## Mahratta

Justme said:


> You also stated that London had a shabby system, which many actually disagree with as in the last few years there have been great improvements.


When did I state this?

or are you confusing me for X Bomby?

By the way, I visited the London metro last (when I used to live in London), in 2000.

And since I specifically pointed out that this was from my experiences, not from what I had seen in pictures, I would ask you to refrain from chastising me for thinking the new Delhi metro stations and trains are better than the new London metro ones - since I have not seen the London Metro recently first hand, and am only judging what I have seen first hand.


----------



## Gaeus

If you are talking about reliability and convenience, DC Metro is the best IMO.


----------



## _00_deathscar

Gaeus said:


> If you are talking about reliability and convenience, DC Metro is the best IMO.


Have you travelled much?


----------



## anm

Gaeus said:


> If you are talking about reliability and convenience, DC Metro is the best IMO.


in the USA - yes, wordlwide - nothing special

for instance, metro system in Kiev is about the same size as Washington DC, as reliable and convenient as Washington DC, but nobody will ever mention it here as a top candidate for best metro system


----------



## X Bomby

I suppose some people here don't travel a lot; I still claim London tube is an old out of date network; miles/kms of a network means nothing; It's not a symbol of a good transportation;

In Europe my list would be:

-Vienna
-Berlin
-Barcelona
-Madrid
-Lyon

Imagine u go for a walk with your baby in a stroller; where are lift in London?
I think u get in trouble. 

In summer the tube is suffocating, plus u can be deaf with the noise in the trains. Do u call that "the best subway"? lol

I don't mention when trains are delayed or canceled...

London network is a nasty trick indeed


----------



## iampuking

X Bomby said:


> Imagine u go for a walk with your baby in a stroller; where are lift in London?
> I think u get in trouble.


You'd also get in trouble in Paris, New York, Moscow and much of Tokyo  



X Bomby said:


> plus u can be deaf with the noise in the trains.


No, you can't.


----------



## Mahratta

^^ :blahblah:


----------



## X Bomby

iampuking said:


> You'd also get in trouble in Paris, New York, Moscow and much of Tokyo



Right, but i didn't talked about Paris, New york and Moscow ( I know all these network); I don't know Tokyo but i hope to go there some day.

Paris, new york and Moscow are far better than "The Tube"; I agree access for stroller or disable people are not easy; but for Paris and Nyc stations are not deep so you can have an help even if it's not easy.

Ok, One good point for London: Map is easy to use and informations on platforms are simple


----------



## iampuking

X Bomby said:


> Right, but i didn't talked about Paris, New york and Moscow


Well if you're going to slag off London for something that many other systems are guilty of, then I think I have a right to point out the ridiculousness of such claims.



the Nigel Effect said:


> ^^ :blahblah:


That's what I thought when you said the Delhi Metro was fashionable :lol:


----------



## _00_deathscar

iampuking said:


> That's what I thought when you said the Delhi Metro was fashionable :lol:


He didn't say it was fashionable - he said it was fashionable compared to the London and North American ones.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> That's what I thought when you said the Delhi Metro was fashionable :lol:


Excuse me, but are you delusional?


----------



## iampuking

That's what I thought when you said the Delhi Metro was fashionable *compared to the London and North American ones.*


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> That's what I thought when you said the Delhi Metro was fashionable *compared to the London and North American ones.*


Oh, so you *are* delusional then...

Compared to *the* London...?


----------



## iampuking

If being delusional means having taste then yeah I am.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> If being delusional means having taste then yeah I am.


I love how you criticise opinion, and then, on top of that, propagate your own as the correct one. Nice touch.


----------



## iampuking

I love it how you take silly banter seriously.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> I love it how you take silly banter seriously.


Sorry, thats just how I roll. 

Lets get this thread back on topic now...I have nothing else to contribute.


----------



## hkskyline

*The World's Best Subway Stations*
http://images.businessweek.com/ss/06/11/1120_metro_stations/index_01.htm

*Magic in the Metro
How cities all over the world make important public works of art out of their underground mass-transit systems*

With 8 million people passing through each day, Moscow's metro system is the busiest in the world. It's also one of most of the beautiful.

Built during Stalin's rule, the stations are known as "the people's palaces" for their elegant design and lavish use of marble, mosaics, sculptures, and even chandeliers. The intricate mosaics lining Kievskaya station, the stained-glass panels at the Novoslobodskaya stop, and the gold-trimmed white porcelain caverns at Prospekt Mira are more museum than metro.

Most subway systems are dank and grimy—not places you'd want to linger. But a growing number of cities are taking a page from Moscow and investing in design and art for their underground transit.

Doing so not only makes an architectural and aesthetic statement but also helps attract more passengers. "Evocative metro stations are just as important to the whole experience of public transport as good-quality carriages," says John Smith, an architect and professor at London's Royal College of Art (RCA). 

That's why a number of cities, especially in Europe, are turning their once-dreary public transport systems into stunning works of art. London, home to the world's first underground, tapped the services of world-famous architect Sir Norman Foster, who designed the modern station at Canary Wharf.

With its high, vaulted ceilings and glass exterior surrounding the platform, the station feels clean, sleek, and futuristic. Foster used a similar approach when designing stations for Bilbao's metro in 1995. The stations are unique for their striking, glass-enclosed entrances, which locals have dubbed "Fosteritos" in honor of the architect.

Other metro systems house historical treasures or precious works of art. Indeed, the Athens subway is a museum in its own right. At the Syntagma station, for instance, visitors can check out ancient objects unearthed when the station was built. And passengers to Lisbon's Olaias station enjoy contemporary works of Portuguese artists, many using the country's colorful ceramic tiles.
World's Longest Art Gallery

Art also is a selling point for visitors to Stockholm's subway, or tunnelbana, whose 108 kilometers (65 miles) of tunnels have been dubbed the "world's longest art gallery." Seventy of the 101 stations are decorated with colorful and constantly changing art exhibits.

Credit Stockholm's savvy city council, which recognized way back in 1955 the potential for the subways to be about more than just transport. The city called on painters, sculptors, architects, and engineers to join forces in making metro stations attractive and stimulating environments: "underground cathedrals" with a "fanfare of color and rhythm," according to the city

Building beautiful metro stations isn't just a chance for cities to show off. It also provides valuable exposure for up-and-coming local artists and architects, giving them a chance to bring their work to the masses. "Artists have a captive audience," says Edward Barber, director of programs at the London College of Fashion, who has been involved in the city's Platform for Art initiative. 

Launched three years ago, the London program is designed to showcase and celebrate the city's rich and vibrant art scene. One current exhibition is a collection of student work from the RCA's printmaking department; the works range from a handmade woodcut of a fossil to a digitally created image of London's contemporary cityscape.

It's not just up-and-comers toiling underground, either. A growing number of big-name architects also are helping improve the subterranean world.

Italy's Renzo Piano designed part of the new metro in Genoa, while American Peter Eisenmann has recently been commissioned to plan the refurbishment of the railway station at Pompeii. It's not hard to understand the attraction. Public transport works, says Smith of the RCA, offer "a combination of prestige and civic pride." Not to mention the chance to improve the daily lives of millions.

Kamenev is an intern in BusinessWeek's London bureau.


----------



## iampuking

Canary Wharf station does not have "art" in it, it's just good architecture.

IMO, "art" is like an art installation, like a painting or sculpture, not something that was there from day one and designed into the actual station.

Art:










Architecture:


----------



## hkskyline

^ That first one is Gloucester Road on the District/Circle platform, right? I recognize it being very familiar.


----------



## iampuking

Yep, Gloucester Road, looking westwards on the Eastbound platform...


----------



## Justme

Interesting. Found this from an Australian news agency today:
*London's public transport voted best*
source: http://www.news.com.au/travel/story/0,23483,22535135-27977,00.html

WORLD travellers have voted London's public transport system the best, for the second year tunning.

London also topped the poll, by holiday review site TripAdvisor, for having the safest public transport, best subway and the best taxis, the BBC online reported.

But travellers also said London's transport system was the most expensive.

The UK capital was considered to have the fourth cleanest transport system, with Washington DC first, Tokyo second and Paris third. 

New York had the second best transport system, as well as being the second most expensive city for public transport.

Los Angeles came out as having the worst public transport system. 

"It's proof that even when it comes to riding a bus or a subway, you get what you pay for," TripAdvisor spokeswoman Michele Perry said.


----------



## iampuking

The Tube is my favourite, but i'm not naive enough to think it's the most reliable, most efficient or most comfortable system... I do think the people polled must be mad...


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> The Tube is my favourite,


Did we ever have any doubt about that?


----------



## OMH

Munich is the best i know,but there are probably better ones,but Munich has a very efficient and modern subway!


----------



## iampuking

MaitreyaSequeira said:


> Did we ever have any doubt about that?


Probably not... My work here is done.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> Probably not... My work here is done.


So is mine, apparently


----------



## iampuking

The reason London did so well is probably because it's well visited, Moscow probably beats London hands down but not many tourists visit Moscow compared to London...

I don't understand why it would beat Paris though...


----------



## _00_deathscar

iampuking said:


> The reason London did so well is probably because it's well visited, Moscow probably beats London hands down but not many tourists visit Moscow compared to London...
> 
> I don't understand why it would beat Paris though...


Cos the Paris system is crap.

I'm honestly surprised at HK's "low" ranking...and not a mention of Tokyo?


----------



## iampuking

Hong Kong and Tokyo don't get anywhere near the amount of tourists as London, that's probably why.

And why do you think the Paris system is crap?


----------



## _00_deathscar

It's relatively efficient, though not exactly the epitome of efficiency. It's also dirty, and the subway is notorious for its petty crimes (a friend of mine got robbed in front of me actually; but she managed to *rob* the *robber* back...yea work that one out!).

Crap is too harsh perhaps, but its most definitely not the world's 3rd (or whatever it was ranked) best system in the world. Fair point about tourists, although Hong Kong gets upwards of 25 million (not sure about Tokyo), not exactly a small amount, and when you consider that New York only gets 7 million international visitors a year (i.e., less than Hong Kong minus Mainland arrivals), you have to question exactly how the survey was conducted, and hence it's reliability. That's the problem with surveys anyway...(if you've seen the Yes Minister clip, you'll know what I mean)

Tourist arrivals also don't explain Washington's high ranking...


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> Hong Kong and Tokyo don't get anywhere near the amount of tourists as London, that's probably why.
> 
> And why do you think the Paris system is crap?


Im pretty sure Hong Kong gets a similar amount of tourists...


----------



## iampuking

Talking of Western tourists, it doesn't get the amount Paris or London does. And it was a Western poll... Sorry if I wasn't clear.


----------



## _00_deathscar

Where did the poll actually come from?

Think Hong Kong probably gets upwards of 5m "Western" tourists a year.


----------



## Mahratta

iampuking said:


> Talking of Western tourists, it doesn't get the amount Paris or London does. And it was a Western poll... Sorry if I wasn't clear.


What's the difference? London is in the west, so it gets more European and North American tourists...HK is in the east, so it gets more Indian and Japanese tourists (note how Im not counting mainland Chinese tourists)

I'm quite sure than HK gets more 'Western' tourists than London gets 'Eastern'

Tourists are tourists.


----------



## Minato ku

MaitreyaSequeira said:


> I'm quite sure than HK gets more 'Western' tourists than London gets 'Eastern'
> Tourists are tourists.


I pretty sure that it is the opposite, the same for Paris.


----------



## _00_deathscar

MaitreyaSequeira said:


> What's the difference? London is in the west, so it gets more European and North American tourists...HK is in the east, so it gets more Indian and Japanese tourists (note how Im not counting mainland Chinese tourists)
> 
> I'm quite sure than HK gets more 'Western' tourists than London gets 'Eastern'
> 
> Tourists are tourists.


Because it depends on where this survey was conducted.

Hong Kong and Tokyo's rankings suggest not many people who have visited either city (I haven't visited Tokyo for what its worth) had much to do with the final outcome...


----------



## Monkey

iampuking said:


> The reason London did so well is probably because it's well visited, Moscow probably beats London hands down but not many tourists visit Moscow compared to London...
> 
> I don't understand why it would beat Paris though...


Moscow's system doesn't beat London's hands down nor any of the other large systems. Moscow has some very grand stations and trains are very frequent but they are also old and uncomfortable and the escalator wells are very dimly lit.


----------



## Monkey

MaitreyaSequeira said:


> What's the difference? London is in the west, so it gets more European and North American tourists...HK is in the east, so it gets more Indian and Japanese tourists (note how Im not counting mainland Chinese tourists)
> 
> I'm quite sure than HK gets more 'Western' tourists than London gets 'Eastern'
> 
> Tourists are tourists.


Nonsense. London gets a lot more eastern tourists than Hong Kong gets western. Indeed, if you discount mainland Chinese, then I wouldn't be surprised if London gets more "eastern" tourists than Hong Kong. And of course London gets more in total.


----------



## iampuking

Monkey said:


> Moscow's system doesn't beat London's hands down nor any of the other large systems. Moscow has some very grand stations and trains are very frequent but they are also old and uncomfortable and the escalator wells are very dimly lit.


Old trains are usually MORE comfortable in my experience, ever sat on the Central line's seats? Sit on the Metropolitans afterwards for a perfect example 

And escalators being dimly lit is hardly much of a negative when the system is more frequent, faster and more reliable than ours.

But of course knowing your record you'd never listen to such ridiculous ideas! :|


----------



## gladisimo

No, I'm sure London gets more visitors than Hong Kong does. It's, if nothing else, that much huger. And people go on business trips all the time. 

Dunno about actual tourists, though.

Maybe someone has some numbers.

And wasn't this supposed to be a best subway thread?


----------



## gladisimo

On the poll's note, you have to realize its made by some site/company called Trip Advisor, hardly an unbiased authority. 

And notice the poll is about "public transport" in general.


----------



## iampuking

People don't seem to get it do they. IT'S A WESTERN WEBSITE. A WESTERN TOURIST WEBSITE. The amount of WESTERN tourists visiting London or Paris is far greater than the amount visiting Tokyo, Moscow or Hong Kong. If they had visited those cities then no doubt they would have come out on top.


----------



## coth

Monkey said:


> Moscow's system doesn't beat London's hands down nor any of the other large systems. Moscow has some very grand stations and trains are very frequent but they are also old and uncomfortable and the escalator wells are very dimly lit.


No. It's London's system is overbrighted. We have almost no old trains. There are just few E-type trains left that are not in serial production since early 1970's. May be they are a bit less comfortable, but comfort is not the main parameter of Metro system. Moscow metro is faster, much more reliable, much more frequent and much more safer.


----------



## Monkey

iampuking said:


> Old trains are usually MORE comfortable in my experience, ever sat on the Central line's seats? Sit on the Metropolitans afterwards for a perfect example
> 
> And escalators being dimly lit is hardly much of a negative when the system is more frequent, faster and more reliable than ours.
> 
> But of course knowing your record you'd never listen to such ridiculous ideas! :|


Oh for goodness sake. Go to Moscow and see for yourself. The trains are old and uncomfortable and the escalator wells are too dim. I have been all over the world and never seen such dimly lit escalator wells. They are gloomy and depressing.


----------



## coth

London's system doesn't looks much lighter isn't?


----------



## Monkey

The huge difference being that Moscow's system really does look dim and dingy just like the photos I posted. 

And didn't you say in your previous post that London's system is "overbrighted"? It seems as if you can't make up your mind! :laugh:

I think you know you the truth and are just sensitive what you know to be justified criticism.


----------



## coth

The true is what you say is nonsense. Photos posted above was made on cheap film camera in early 90's with flash.

several shots of different stations taken professionally by russos










































few my shots of two more stations taken long time ago with old bad camera


----------



## Monkey

Coth stop posting flattering photos. Anyone who has been to Moscow knows that what I'm saying is true. As for you, well didn't you tell us once that you'd never been outside of Russia and Ukraine? Well I've been to 50 countries on every habited continent and I have been on dozens of metro/subway networks. Moscow's and St Petersburg's were the only ones anywhere in the world that struck me as being particularly dark and gloomy.


----------



## iampuking

London's escalators are brighter, but Moscow's has a nice atmosphere.


----------



## iampuking

coth said:


> No. It's London's system is overbrighted. We have almost no old trains. There are just few E-type trains left that are not in serial production since early 1970's. May be they are a bit less comfortable, but comfort is not the main parameter of Metro system. Moscow metro is faster, much more reliable, much more frequent and much more safer.


It's faster because the stations are too far apart, which isn't very good for accessibility, it's probably more reliable and probably more frequent, but safer?!?! :nuts: I hope you aren't implying that my commute is dangerous.


----------



## coth

Monkey said:


> Coth stop posting flattering photos. Anyone who has been to Moscow knows that what I'm saying is true. As for you, well didn't you tell us once that you'd never been outside of Russia and Ukraine? Well I've been to 50 countries on every habited continent and I have been on dozens of metro/subway networks. Moscow's and St Petersburg's were the only ones anywhere in the world that struck me as being particularly dark and gloomy.


so you have nothing more to say?


----------



## coth

iampuking said:


> It's faster because the stations are too far apart, which isn't very good for accessibility, it's probably more reliable and probably more frequent, but safer?!?! :nuts: I hope you aren't implying that my commute is dangerous.


First of all Moscow metro was one of first systems that implemented anti-fire system in trains and total video control. Plus it has a police office on every station, which is backed by much better Russian federal security forces.

Stations are not too far apart. Average distance between stations is 1,5-2km, so station are within walking distance range (700m). Of course not all Moscow is covered yet by metro, since London's is twice older, but with a budget just a bit smaller of Tokyo, Moscow will expand metro system significantly in next 10 years.

Not even talking about the fact that there was just one small crash within service time since 1935. Once a broken train with several people inside derailed with no injuries.


----------



## gladisimo

^^ You don't wanna cross the KGB!


----------



## coth

It's not really place for political flood.


----------



## KVentz

Monkey said:


> the escalator wells are very dimly lit.


Some of them WERE. The lighting on every old stations is changing or already changed to the new one, more bright, according to the new lighting standarts. The oldest escalators are replacing by the new ones completely. Just compare:










and










This is the same escalator well on Mayakovskaya station before and after reconstruction. So, if somebody saw dim escalator well formerly it doesn't matter it is dimmed now too.


----------



## iampuking

coth said:


> First of all Moscow metro was one of first systems that implemented anti-fire system in trains and total video control. Plus it has a police office on every station, which is backed by much better Russian federal security forces.


What do you mean by "anti-fire system" and "video control" what is the purpose of police at every station? You'd have to be a mug to think that police can stop a suicide bomber! And to be honest, i'd hardly trust safety records from the Soviet times, they were hardly what you'd call "honest"


----------



## iampuking

KVentz said:


> Some of them WERE. The lighting on every old stations is changing or already changed to the new one, more bright, according to the new lighting standarts. The oldest escalators are replacing by the new ones completely. Just compare:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> and
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is the same escalator well on Mayakovskaya station before and after reconstruction. So, if somebody saw dim escalator well formerly it doesn't matter it is dimmed now too.


I prefered the old one personally.

And didn't Mayakovskaya get a second escalator and a new entrance built recently? Are you sure that isn't the new escalator shaft you're posting or has it actually been refurbished? Because to me, the ceiling design in those pictures differ.


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> What do you mean by "anti-fire system"


Just calc from Russian term. He mean fire-control system. Automatic fire-warning an fire-control system in every carriage.



> and "video control"


Four video cameras in every carriage (two ones on each side and two ones in the interphones) are translating video in a cabin, in a situation center. All video is recording.



> what is the purpose of police at every station?


What is the purpose of the police itself?


----------



## coth

iampuking said:


> What do you mean by "anti-fire system" and "video control" what is the purpose of police at every station? You'd have to be a mug to think that police can stop a suicide bomber! And to be honest, i'd hardly trust safety records from the Soviet times, they were hardly what you'd call "honest"


anti fire system is anti fire system. i don't know how to translate it in other way. video control is video control. every station + trains on some lines are equipped with tones of cameras that translating live video to security center.

purpose of police is the same as of street police - order 



iampuking said:


> I prefered the old one personally.
> 
> And didn't Mayakovskaya get a second escalator and a new entrance built recently? Are you sure that isn't the new escalator shaft you're posting or has it actually been refurbished? Because to me, the ceiling design in those pictures differ.


old entrance was rebuilt as well. but still it's pretty obvious that first photo is significantly underexposed. 

but i agree. i don't like very bright white light. i was heavily criticize a new trubnaya station that has a row of white lamps installed over platforms, just like every london underground station.
http://highriserussia.com/gallery/d/10998-1/IMG_3194.jpg


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> And didn't Mayakovskaya get a second escalator and a new entrance built recently?


Yes, it did. For the first, the new escalator was built, then the old was closed for reconstruction.



> Are you sure that isn't the new escalator shaft you're posting or has it actually been refurbished?


Yes, I am sure.

This is old reconstructed shaft (the day before it was reopened):









This is the new one (again the day before it was opened):









Look at the walls - they are different.



> Because to me, the ceiling design in those pictures differ.


Yes, the ceiling inside the tube itself differ because it was reconstructed too - they added drainage cover (can't find the correct term) like on all modern stations.


----------



## iampuking

To me, having police in every stations just seems way over the top. There's not a policeman in every station here yet people aren't tearing each other's throats out.



coth said:


> old entrance was rebuilt as well. but still it's pretty obvious that first photo is significantly underexposed.
> 
> but i agree. i don't like very bright white light. i was heavily criticize a new trubnaya station that has a row of white lamps installed over platforms, just like every london underground station.
> http://highriserussia.com/gallery/d/...1/IMG_3194.jpg


That's pleasent, even when I was complimenting Moscow you feel the need to make a sly jab anyway :|

If you look at the photos on page 19 you'll see that not every station has light bright enough to outshine the sun. It's just the stations with the dire 80-90s refurbs... And the bright light is to aid the partially sighted, overbright stations is probably the price we pay...


----------



## iampuking

Thanks for the explanation KVentz


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> To me, having police in every stations just seems way over the top.


For London undeground - yes. But not for Moscow metro - too large station complexes and too many people are inside. Moscow metro has less stations and much more passengers, so the small police station (usually about two rooms) is not way over the top. Like a medicine point (hope I said correctly) on almost (I'm not sure for that) every station too.


----------



## iampuking

Even at stations out in the suburbs? I can understand the police presence at the busier stations perhaps.


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> if you look at the designs of the deep level tube stations built in the 20s-30s and even the 60s they look almost identical in terms of structure,


Because this was the only way to built deep station: the three tubes design (the pylon-type stations). Two tubes for the trains and one between them for the central vestibule. The first column-type deep station was the award-wining Mayakovskaya:










But there is the same three-tube design motives in the base:












> the only difference is that Moscow has a full legnth central vestibule


Not all stations in Moscow had full length central hall. 'Lubyanka' didn't have it because of very hard geology conditions. The central vestibule there was built only in 1970s, with the cross to 'Kuzneckiy most' station (Lilac line, 7).


----------



## iampuking

KVentz said:


> Because this was the only way to built deep station: the three tubes design (the pylon-type stations). Two tubes for the trains and one between them for the central vestibule. The first column-type deep station was the award-wining Mayakovskaya:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But there is the same three-tube design motives in the base:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not all stations in Moscow had full length central hall. 'Lubyanka' didn't have it because of very hard geology conditions. The central vestibule there was built only in 1970s, with the cross to 'Kuzneckiy most' station (Lilac line, 7).


I know all of this. But you said "I think the designs were original" and I was proving to you that they were not.


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> But you said "I think the designs were original" and I was proving to you that they were not.


Each design and construction is unique, because it depends on deep, geology and other conditions, but most deep stations have the same pylon type, same three-tubes principle, because a round tube can hold outer pressure best of all.


----------



## iampuking

So you're telling me, that despite bringing in consultants from London, New York and Paris, Moscow somehow managed to do it all by it's self without learning lessons or being influenced by any other system? I'm sorry but I don't believe it.

And thanks for that handy information, there was me thinking a triangular tunnel would be a triumph in engineering efficiency! :|


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> So you're telling me, that despite bringing in consultants from London, New York and Paris, Moscow somehow managed to do it all by it's self without learning lessons or being influenced by any other system?


No, I'm not telling you this. I never told they "do it all by it's self without learning lessons or being influenced by any other system". I told each old station has each own project made by soviet engineers consulted by foreign consultants. Were those stations the copies of London ones? No. Are they similar to London stations? Yes. Yes, because the only way to build deep stations was to build a pylon-type station with two or three parallel large tunnels and passages between them.


----------



## iampuking

Well, in the future, choose your words more carefully if you don't want people to be misleaded. You said "the designs were *original*"

The original deep level Moscow stations were:

"1.	belonging or pertaining to the origin or beginning of something, or to a thing at its beginning: The book still has its original binding."

Nope.

"2.	new; fresh; inventive; novel: an original way of advertising."

Nope.

"3.	arising or proceeding independently of anything else: an original view of history."

Nope.

"4.	capable of or given to thinking or acting in an independent, creative, or individual manner: an original thinker."

Nope.

"5.	created, undertaken, or presented for the first time: to give the original performance of a string quartet."

Nope.

Thank you and have a pleasent day


----------



## KVentz

iampuking said:


> Well, in the future, choose your words more carefully if you don't want people to be misleaded. You said "the designs were *original*"


Sorry for bad English.


----------



## iampuking

It's all right...


----------



## FreeToLove

What about Tehran Metro?


----------



## iampuking

It was shown a few pages back, I doubt it'll ever be considered the best cause of it's size...


----------



## Xplosive

Hello buddies ,
first of all I have to say that I´m really impressed by this forum and your replies to this topic. I´m reading here since 2 days and this and the Tubeman´s thread are my overall-favorites... It is so interesting to see such systems growing and these great architectures.
Since yesterday evening I read every single page of this thread and I´ve seen the different "stages", f.e. the guy who notoriusly defended the New York City Subway and the very interesting discussion about the Delhi Subway (my parents come from India and even they never heard from it ).

I would call myself a train-enthusiastic since I´ve visited London for the first time. All I can remember is the "Authoritive" anncouncer (  ) saying his phrase and the brand-new Canary Wharf station, which really pulled over me. 
I´m from Frankfurt, Germany so my home-system is the U-Bahn Frankfurt (I could bite me in the ass for living here :bash:  ) and I only "mentionable" visited the New York City Subway this summer, the Paris Metro (at a time where I´ve not spoken a single word Frence :lol: ) and the London Underground 2x. So I cannot make a ranking out of them because even if I learned a lot about these systems I can´t prove their "all-day-functionality" but I can explain my feelings from an evenhanded point of view. 

The London Underground is an icon for me. It was the first big subway I ever visited and it changed my point of view to trains forever. The big point you were discussing about is the "flair" that it´s the oldest system and I can say that even for non-enthusiastics that there is this charme. The announcements, the ass-kicking opening from the doors, the speed they approach in the station, the escalators and the foolproof system to find the right train (different platforms for _every_ direction and line) is just gorgeous. Negative points I can mention are the sassy prices and the endless appearing ways to get to the platforms. 

I had huge expectations on the New York City Subway compared to the Tube and for the fact that NY is the inofficial capital of the world. First of all i have to say that the city is just mind-boggling and I would have money... 
So I got with the Amtrak to Penn Station and we bought a 7day-Metrocard. With our full-packed suitcases we wanted to reach the platform and there we met our first problem. We slided the card nearly ten times and the first comment I got from an American Lady was that "I´m too slow buddy" . We went underground and I was nearly shocked as I saw the tracks. It _really_ looked shabby and as the first train arrived, I thought it was a bull on tracks because of the front and the incredible noise. If I got in there was the first positive experience; the a/c-system which cooled the train down like an icebox. We wanted to get off at 66th street and I didn´t believe my eyes when I heared the inaudible announcements made by the driver(?). I really didn´t unterstand a single word so we had to arrange at the station sings. 
(Before we went there I had looked for a plan but I just found this one http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/NYC_subway_map.png and believe me, you f*ckin don´t understand anything compared to London´s.) 
As the days went by, we arranged preety good with the subway and I was impressed when I saw the brand-new trains with crystal-clear announcements  The sentence "Stand clear of the cloooosing doors pleease" is for me nearly as iconic as "Mind the gap" . We also recognized that there are express-trains (already, I think enough discussed here  ) but we just had no idea to mark them off (I even don´t know today if that diamond with the line number is the sign) so we werent able to use them. I also was a little disappointed when I saw that the tph-rate was really low and often we had to wait up to 10 mins (after midnight we almost waited half-an-hour). The stations are indeed very shabby (you have to say it like that) because except for the mosaics they look all the same and are dirty and there live rats and some stations in the Bronx look like abandoned areas.
A great and exciting exception is Grand Central; one of the most beautiful stations I ever visited (but the subway platforms look even there the same  )
I know that these are all results of the age and I don´t critizice that but I feel sorry that the MTA hasn´t recognized that a transit-system can be a major sight for tourists like TfL already did. I also know that this is part of the age-problem, but that is on ofe the only points that really sucked:
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:NYCSub_JMZ_Marcy_Av_exterior.jpg
That just sucks and the breeze is intolerable. 
It seems that I dislike the NYCS but as a resumé, for me, it is a mass-transit-system with the target to get commuters to their work and back and that´s the charme which makes it a real "subway". After the first shock, I enjoyed riding it and would be pleased to do so every day .

I would also love to ride the Moscow Subway many of you mentioned, because the stations just look lovely but I really think that the blue trains doesn´t fit. I nearly think it´s ugly to have such pretentious stations and train-liverys like that. 
I never heard of the Kopenhagen- or the Istanbul- or the Athens- (f.e.) systems, but it really ignited a flame in me and I´m sure I will visit all these systems and make my personal ranking like you did 

Sorry for this big text :lol: I just want to show you that many of you have a big advantage to live in Moscow or London and that you can be proud of your system and that there are a lot of beautiful transit-systems out there.

At last I present you our "wannabe-subway" Frankfurt, which isn´t really a subway... but anyway I´ll show you some pictures I made recently (I´m a real noobish photographer  ):








Ptb stock at Centralstation (Hauptbahnhof)

















U4 and U2 stock at Hauptwache

And the, in my opinion, most beautiful stations:








Schweizer Platz (Place of Switzerland  )
and
























Bockenheimer Warte

If you are interested in more pics, the German Wikipedia-article has some very nice ones: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-Bahn_Frankfurt

I hope I haven't bored you too much 

Have a great day,
Xplo

_(PS: I´m sorry for my English; I know it´s not good and I have to improve it but I´m sure it will get better  )_


----------



## japanese001

*world subway map*

*Europe*

London 1863 Map
Glasgow 1896 Map 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne 1980 Map
Paris 1900 Map
Lyon 1978 Map
Marseille 1977 Map
Lille 1983 Map
Toulouse 1993 Map
Rouen 1994 Map
Rennes 2002 Map
Berlin 1902 Map
Hamburg 1912 Map 
Munich 1971 Map
Frankfurt-am-Main 1968 Map
Stuttgart 1966 Map
Nuremberg 1972 Map
Cologne(Koeln) 1978 Map
Bonn 1991 Map
Rhein-Ruhr 1977 Map
Hannover 1975 Map
Bielefeld 1990 Map
Madrid 1919 Map
Balcelona 1924 Map
Valencia 1988 Map
Bilbao 1995 Map
Palma de Mallorca 2007 Map
Lisbon 1959 Map
Porto 2002 Map
Rome 1955 Map 
Milan 1964 Map
Naples (Napoli) 1993 Map
Genova(Genoa) 1990 Map
Catania 1999 Map
Torino 2006 Map
Lausanne 1991 Map
Amsterdam 1977 Map
Rotterdam 1968 Map
Brussels 1976 Map
Antwerpen 1975 Map
Charleroi 1990 Map
Wien(Vienna) 1976 Map
Athens 1904 Map
Warsaw(Warszawa) 1995 Map
Prague 1974 Map
Budapest 1896 Map
Bucharest 1979 Map
Sofia 1998 Map
Copenhagen 2002 Map
Stockholm 1950 Map
Oslo 1966 Map
Helsinki 1982 Map
Cairo 1987 Map

*North America,South America*

New York 1904 Map Link 
Newark 1908 Map PATH CitySubway 
Washington D.C. 1976 Map Link 
Boston 1897 Map Link 
Philadelphia 1907 Map Link PATCO 
Baltimore 1983 Map Link 
Pittsburgh 1985 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Chicago 1892 Map Link 
Cleveland 1955 Map Link 
Buffalo 1985 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Saint Louis 1993 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Atlanta 1979 Map Link 
San Francisco 1972 Map Link 
Los Angeles 1993 Map Link 
Montreal 1966 Map Link
Miami 1984 Map 
Toronto 1954 Map Link 
Edmonton 1978 Map Link
Vancouver 1986 Map
Mexico City 1969 Map Link 
Guadalajara 1989 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Monterrey 1994 Map RelatedHP LightMetroSubway 
San Juan 2004 Map HP 
Caracas 1983 Map RelatedHP 
Rio de Janeiro 1979 Map Link 
Sao Paolo 1974 Map Link 
Brasilia 1999 Map Link 
Porto Alegre 1985 Map Link 
Recife 1985 Map
Belo Horizonte 1986 Maｐ
Buenos Aires 1913 Map Link 
Santiago 1975 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Valparaiso 2005 Map Link1 Link2 
Medellin 1995 Map
Lima 2003 Map

*Asia*

Tokyo 1927 map Link1　Link2 
Osaka 1933 Map Link 
Nagoya 1957 Map Link 
Sapporo 1971 Map Link 
Yokohama 1972 Map Link 
Koube 1977 Map Link 
Fukuoka 1981 Map Link 
Kyoto 1981 Map Link 
Sendai 1987 Map Link 
Hiroshima 1994 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Saitama 2001 Map Link 2001
Tukuba　2005 Map Link 2005
Seoul 1974 Map Link1 Link2 
Pusan 1985 Map Link 
Daegu 1997 Map Link 
Inchon 1999 Map Link 
Gwangju 2004 Map Link 
Daejeon 2006 Map Link 
Pyongyang 1973 Map Personal HP 
Beijing 1969 Map Link 
Tianjin 1980 Map Link 
Shanghai 1993 Map Link 
Guangzhou 1997 Map Link 
Hong Kong 1979 Map Link 
Shenzhen 2004 Map Link 
Nanjing 2005 Map Link 
Taipei 1997 Map Link 
Bangkok 2004 Map Link Personal HP
Kuala Lumpur 1999 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Singapore 1987 Map Link 
Kolkata 1984 Map Link 
Delhi 2002 Map Link 
Tehran 2000 Map Link 
Ankara 1996 Map Link1 Link2 
Istanbul 1875 Map Link 
Izmir 2000 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Bursa 2002 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Haifa 1959 Map Link to Citymap 

*Russia,CIS*

Yerevan 1981 Map Link 
Baku 1967 Map Link 
Minsk 1984 Map Link 
Tbilisi 1966 Map Link 
Moscow 1935 Map Link 
Sankt Peterburg 1955 Map Link 
Nizhnii Novgorod 1985 Map Link 
Novosibirsk 1985 Map Link 
Samara 1987 Map Link1 Link2 
Yekaterinburg 1991 Map Link 
Volgograd 1984 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Kazan 2005 Map Link 
Kiev 1960 Map Link 
Kharkov 1975 Map Link 
Dnepropetrovsk 1995 Map Link 
Kryvyy Rih 1986 Map Link LightMetroSubway 
Tashkent 1977 Map Link


----------



## coth

You have missed pretty much


----------



## iampuking

You have missed a lot*


----------



## Justme

Xplosive said:


> Hello buddies ,
> first of all I have to say that I´m really impressed by this forum and your replies to this topic. I´m reading here since 2 days and this and the Tubeman´s thread are my overall-favorites... It is so interesting to see such systems growing and these great architectures.
> Since yesterday evening I read every single page of this thread and I´ve seen the different "stages", f.e. the guy who notoriusly defended the New York City Subway and the very interesting discussion about the Delhi Subway (my parents come from India and even they never heard from it ).
> 
> I would call myself a train-enthusiastic since I´ve visited London for the first time. All I can remember is the "Authoritive" anncouncer (  ) saying his phrase and the brand-new Canary Wharf station, which really pulled over me.
> I´m from Frankfurt, Germany so my home-system is the U-Bahn Frankfurt (I could bite me in the ass for living here :bash:  ) and I only "mentionable" visited the New York City Subway this summer, the Paris Metro (at a time where I´ve not spoken a single word Frence :lol: ) and the London Underground 2x. So I cannot make a ranking out of them because even if I learned a lot about these systems I can´t prove their "all-day-functionality" but I can explain my feelings from an evenhanded point of view.
> 
> The London Underground is an icon for me. It was the first big subway I ever visited and it changed my point of view to trains forever. The big point you were discussing about is the "flair" that it´s the oldest system and I can say that even for non-enthusiastics that there is this charme. The announcements, the ass-kicking opening from the doors, the speed they approach in the station, the escalators and the foolproof system to find the right train (different platforms for _every_ direction and line) is just gorgeous. Negative points I can mention are the sassy prices and the endless appearing ways to get to the platforms.
> 
> I had huge expectations on the New York City Subway compared to the Tube and for the fact that NY is the inofficial capital of the world. First of all i have to say that the city is just mind-boggling and I would have money...
> So I got with the Amtrak to Penn Station and we bought a 7day-Metrocard. With our full-packed suitcases we wanted to reach the platform and there we met our first problem. We slided the card nearly ten times and the first comment I got from an American Lady was that "I´m too slow buddy" . We went underground and I was nearly shocked as I saw the tracks. It _really_ looked shabby and as the first train arrived, I thought it was a bull on tracks because of the front and the incredible noise. If I got in there was the first positive experience; the a/c-system which cooled the train down like an icebox. We wanted to get off at 66th street and I didn´t believe my eyes when I heared the inaudible announcements made by the driver(?). I really didn´t unterstand a single word so we had to arrange at the station sings.
> (Before we went there I had looked for a plan but I just found this one http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/NYC_subway_map.png and believe me, you f*ckin don´t understand anything compared to London´s.)
> As the days went by, we arranged preety good with the subway and I was impressed when I saw the brand-new trains with crystal-clear announcements  The sentence "Stand clear of the cloooosing doors pleease" is for me nearly as iconic as "Mind the gap" . We also recognized that there are express-trains (already, I think enough discussed here  ) but we just had no idea to mark them off (I even don´t know today if that diamond with the line number is the sign) so we werent able to use them. I also was a little disappointed when I saw that the tph-rate was really low and often we had to wait up to 10 mins (after midnight we almost waited half-an-hour). The stations are indeed very shabby (you have to say it like that) because except for the mosaics they look all the same and are dirty and there live rats and some stations in the Bronx look like abandoned areas.
> A great and exciting exception is Grand Central; one of the most beautiful stations I ever visited (but the subway platforms look even there the same  )
> I know that these are all results of the age and I don´t critizice that but I feel sorry that the MTA hasn´t recognized that a transit-system can be a major sight for tourists like TfL already did. I also know that this is part of the age-problem, but that is on ofe the only points that really sucked:
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:NYCSub_JMZ_Marcy_Av_exterior.jpg
> That just sucks and the breeze is intolerable.
> It seems that I dislike the NYCS but as a resumé, for me, it is a mass-transit-system with the target to get commuters to their work and back and that´s the charme which makes it a real "subway". After the first shock, I enjoyed riding it and would be pleased to do so every day .
> 
> I would also love to ride the Moscow Subway many of you mentioned, because the stations just look lovely but I really think that the blue trains doesn´t fit. I nearly think it´s ugly to have such pretentious stations and train-liverys like that.
> I never heard of the Kopenhagen- or the Istanbul- or the Athens- (f.e.) systems, but it really ignited a flame in me and I´m sure I will visit all these systems and make my personal ranking like you did
> 
> Sorry for this big text :lol: I just want to show you that many of you have a big advantage to live in Moscow or London and that you can be proud of your system and that there are a lot of beautiful transit-systems out there.
> 
> At last I present you our "wannabe-subway" Frankfurt, which isn´t really a subway... but anyway I´ll show you some pictures I made recently (I´m a real noobish photographer  ):
> 
> If you are interested in more pics, the German Wikipedia-article has some very nice ones: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/U-Bahn_Frankfurt
> 
> I hope I haven't bored you too much
> 
> Have a great day,
> Xplo
> 
> _(PS: I´m sorry for my English; I know it´s not good and I have to improve it but I´m sure it will get better  )_


Don't worry, your English is great, and I enjoyed your post. Welcome to the forum!

Very interesting comments, and I agree with most of what you say about London's system. Next time you travel there, get an Oyster card. It will cut your costs down enormously - no Londoner buys paper tickets anymore, and you can take your Oyster card back home and use it next time you're in London.

I use Frankfurt's "U-bahn" every day, and have to admit it is a bit lame. Only parts are really a metro, the rest are more or less glorified trams. But it does have nice wide platforms and quick easy access (due to being cut and cover for most of it) One thing I do notice very different from London's, is the lack of staff. I can't remember when I last saw staff at a station (with exception to the two big ones in the city center - and even they're probably working for the S-bahn). Where as London's underground has loads of staff at each station.

(By the way, I would guess Schweizer Platz would correctly translate into English as "Swiss Square", or maybe today thay would say "Swiss Plaza")


----------



## Justme

coth said:


> You have missed pretty much


Jesus, give the guy a break. It must have taken him ages to compile that list.

@japanese001, thanks for the hard work! Some of us appreciate it here :cheers:


----------



## iampuking

Yes it was an interesting post, but I can't see what is so special about the opening of the doors, announcements or the speed the trains approach the station!

Welcome to SSC and all that.


----------



## Svartmetall

My favourite will go to the London Underground out of all those which I have been on. It is simply amazing. People have said enough about the tube for me not to have to go into detail about it. 

I would vote for the U-bahn in Berlin as being ONE of the best as for a city of it's size it has an amazing rail network. The Kleinprofil trains are a little old but as a forumer said on the Infrastructure pages they are ordering new trains in 2011 (IK series). Also - there are sections of the Berlin S-bahn which easily run to metro frequencies on dedicated tracks with a third rail power source, so when you put both networks together it becomes a very dense rail network indeed. But this network only gets my second place award.

Finally, my third place award goes to Paris. The metro is relatively clean, efficient and is a novelty for some lines running on rubber wheels. Despite what a number of other people say, I quite like the feel of the rubber wheeled trains compared to steel. I found them to overall be quieter than steel wheel, especially going around corners.


----------



## iampuking

I love the sound the newer Parisian rubber-tyred stock makes...


----------



## Alexriga

Lol, calling London the best. It was one of the worst metro I've ever seen. It was expensive, claustrophobic. Stations are very boring, I would call it copy-paste design (like commieblock). Endless tiny tubes, gateways etc. Also small platforms, endless signaling problems. I've never so such problems anywhere else except London. We have problems blah blah blah and stands in the tunnel. Trains were not too frequent. Of course it is effective enough and has big network, also medal for pioneering subway. But it is not the best, even not close to. Asian metros are cleaner, safer etc. And London metro is expensive. Too expensive for such crap sevice.


----------



## iampuking

Alexriga said:


> It was expensive


Yes, if you don't buy an Oyster card. It's deliberately expensive to discourage the use of paper tickets. IMO Oyster cards are still too expensive but hey it's not so bad.



Alexriga said:


> claustrophobic


Part of the character :lol:



Alexriga said:


> Stations are very boring


I beg to differ, it has more architectural variety then most other metros. See here.



Alexriga said:


> I would call it copy-paste design (like commieblock).


What?



Alexriga said:


> Endless tiny tubes


What do you expect? 



Alexriga said:


> gateways etc.


Gateways? Do you dislike ticket gates or something?



Alexriga said:


> Also small platforms


Define "small", legnth-wise or width-wise? Width-wise, the platforms are just as wide as in Paris or New York, and legnth wise, the trains are actually longer than most Parisian trains, however they're shorter than New York's.



Alexriga said:


> endless signaling problems. I've never so such problems anywhere else except London.


That is true, but the investment programmes means that by 2020 all lines will have automatic train operation with more frequent, faster and more reliable service.



Alexriga said:


> But it is not the best, even not close to. Asian metros are cleaner, safer etc. And London metro is expensive. Too expensive for such crap sevice.


Asian metros all look the same. Yet you accuse London of having "copy-paste" design, which by the way doesn't actually make sense.

You're contradicting yourself a bit, aren't you?


----------



## iampuking

World's Most Frequent Metro Systems...


----------



## jlshyang

I have not taken many metros around the world but i was really impressed with the London Underground. It's got a very extensive network and it's really easy to travel around in London in the tube. I have to agree that it's expensive. I'm seriously considering the Oyster card if i have to go down to London more often.


----------



## Minato ku

iampuking said:


> World's Most Frequent Metro Systems...


According this Moscow and Paris are the most frequent metro system.


----------



## coth

iampuking said:


> World's Most Frequent Metro Systems...


Minimum planned interval goes down to 89 seconds in Moscow.


----------



## iampuking

Minato ku said:


> According this Moscow and Paris are the most frequent metro system.


Yep, scroll down the page to see how rubbish LU is :lol:


----------



## anm

Monkey said:


> Coth stop posting flattering photos. Anyone who has been to Moscow knows that what I'm saying is true. As for you, well didn't you tell us once that you'd never been outside of Russia and Ukraine? Well I've been to 50 countries on every habited continent and I have been on dozens of metro/subway networks. Moscow's and St Petersburg's were the only ones anywhere in the world that struck me as being particularly dark and gloomy.


Monkey, have you been to Washington DC subway? It is by far much darker than Moscow. Yet considered by many an aesthetically pleasing system.


----------



## iampuking

Darkness 'works' in some places but looks gloomy in others, perhaps that's what he means.


----------



## somataki

Athens metro:


----------



## iampuking

Is Athens' Metro deep level or shallow?


----------



## RadioFan

*Pyongyang Metro... North Korea*

Pyongyang's metro was inaugurated in 1973... their stations and railcars were influenced by Russia's.



Here is the map of Pyongyang Metro designed by a Japanese person.












Some pics of a station...







































And Youtube clip explaining the Pyongyang Metro in English...


----------



## iampuking

LOL, the music... I feel really happy now.


----------



## Brad

iampuking said:


> You said "the designs were *original*"
> 
> The original deep level Moscow stations were:
> 
> "1 or beginning of something,
> Nope.
> 
> "5.	created, undertaken, or presented for the first time
> Nope.


Yes 
Mayakovskya metro station in Moscow was the first deep alignment station of columnar type in the world. 
Other deep stations were pylon type.

That's why this station was awared with Grand-Prix at New York World's Fair in 1939.










compare with a pylon type station


----------



## iampuking

God, you lot just can't let this one go.

He said that the first deep level designs were "original" he did not specify whether or not they were a column or a pylon station. And since he was so arrogant about it, I decided I wasn't going to shut up.


----------



## Skybean

Hong Kong's MTR for frequency, coverage, safety and cleanliness.

It is perfect in my mind.



Platform screen doors are present in almost all stations. (most other systems might only have this for several stations)
The Octopus Card smart cards are ubiquitous and have been in use with the system for over ten years. They are not exclusively for transit payment either; with many retails stores accepting Octopus payment. 
Cleanliness. It is nearly spotless. No graffiti, rats or even garbage.
Wide and roomy train cars.
Frequency on many lines of 2 minutes
Very efficient crowd management due to good station design. There are often redundant escalators running at high speed.
Ease of use. Flashing indicators in train to show which stations you are at and which one you are approaching. Tri-lingual station announcements.


----------



## Manila-X

The graffiti part in the MTR I agree


----------



## iampuking

Skybean said:


> There are often redundant escalators running at high speed.


What do you mean? The escalators run faster than on other systems?


----------



## coth

What is usual speed of long metro escalators around the world?


----------



## hkskyline

iampuking said:


> What do you mean? The escalators run faster than on other systems?


Yes, I've noticed MTR's escalators run at significantly higher speeds than their counterparts elsewhere, and for good reason - the huge passenger volumes demand a more effective and fast solution to move crowds between floors.


----------



## CORLEONE

It is dificult to measure which is the best underground. I think that we should create a poll and refreseh it every 6 months in order to add the new maps and changes from all diferent undergrounds. So we could have an stadistical averadge every period and see how people change their opinion or which underground gets most of the points permanently.


----------



## hkskyline

Quite an incredible project coming in China. Perhaps a future best?

*City in central China plans to spend US$40 billion on subway system *
AP - Tuesday, March 4

BEIJING - A city in central China plans to spend US$40 billion to extend its subway line, as part of China's relentless drive to build more infrastructure, the official Xinhua News Agency said Monday.

Wuhan, capital of Hubei province, plans to spend 300 billion yuan (US$40 billion) to expand its subway system, Xinhua said. It will be extended from seven to 12 lines with 309 stations by 2015.

A spokesman from the Wuhan city government publicity office confirmed the plans, but said it still has to be approved by the government.

The cost is equal to what China's capital Beijing is spending to remake its infrastructure to prepare for the Olympics that start in August.

Wuhan is a transportation hub for central China.

Once the expansion is finished, 66 percent of the city's 8.7 million people will be able to find a subway station within 600 meters (yards) of their home, Xinhua said.


----------



## Manila-X

That would be interesting with the case Wuhan


----------



## hkskyline

Although I'm not surprised since Beijing and Shanghai are already in the midst of their subway construction boom while interior cities have been a bit slow catching up with their peers on the East Coast.


----------



## iampuking

Quality over quantity.

Chinese metros will look "modern" but this was "modern" in the 1960s:


----------



## Minato ku

I agree, this was modern in the "1970"s


----------



## iampuking

LOL! Much better example.


----------



## hkskyline

Luckily those 60s and 70s styles are long gone from today's designs.


----------



## Manila-X

NY's subway station has a really nice tile design despite being older than these stations.


----------



## hkskyline

WANCH said:


> NY's subway station has a really nice tile design despite being older than these stations.


If they could only clean some of these stations so the patterns on those tiles can be far more visible.

I remember seeing a few very clean stations near the WTC. Perhaps they were power-washed as part of the Ground Zero cleanup, but there are plenty of stations that are downright scary.


----------



## Manila-X

Cleaning them would be the best option. Not just that but rennovating it as well


----------



## hkskyline

WANCH said:


> Cleaning them would be the best option. Not just that but rennovating it as well


I doubt there is money to renovate all the stations. Besides, a lot of them were built in small spaces and not much can be done about them besides a fresh coat of paint, a power-wash, or a wrapping around the ugly steel beams. They were designed back in the day when expectations were different. Not much else we can do about that.


----------



## iampuking

WANCH said:


> NY's subway station has a really nice tile design despite being older than these stations.


Yes, that's because good taste in architecture dissapeared after the Second World War and is only returning this century.


----------



## hkskyline

_Interesting read : _

*Connex doesn't like its passengers, and it shows, constantly *
23 January 2008
The Age

Our transport companies could learn a lot from the Japanese. 

OF ALL the wonders of the Tokyo subway and train network, by far the greatest are the ticket machines. The Shinkansen, or bullet train, the labyrinth that is the Tokyo subway system and the punctuality of the trains are all amazing feats of human ingenuity, design and organisation. Next to the ticket machines, though, they pale by comparison. 

The machines I have in mind aren't technically ticket machines at all, since they don't even dispense tickets. Rather, they enable travellers to add value to their tickets. They're called "fare-adjustment" machines and they're located just inside the barrier gates of almost every station. You enter your ticket into the machine and it tells you how much credit you need to add to go through the station exit barriers. 

The genius of the fare adjustment machine doesn't lie in the technology itself. No doubt manufacturers of ticket machines could knock one together in an afternoon. 

Rather, the genius of the fare-adjustment machine is the culture of which it is a product. The lowly fare adjustment machine is a concrete expression of a culture that is determined to serve customers and help them to do the right thing. 

The fare-adjustment machine doesn't make any presumptions about why you didn't purchase the correct ticket in the first place. You could be trying to cheat the system or you could be a clueless tourist who's struggling with the sensory overload of Tokyo and innocently bought the wrong ticket. 

The fare-adjustment machines don't care and the message they send is that as far as the transport authorities are concerned, a commuters' intentions are none of their business. The authorities simply want you to do the right thing, and have set up a system that is flexible enough to help you do so. 

The difference between this service-oriented culture and Melbourne's public transport is striking. In Melbourne, the prevailing attitude of public transport operators is one of barely concealed contempt. Commuters seem to be regarded as enemies who are presumed guilty until proven innocent. The public transport operators are beset by a fearful siege mentality: one that presumes that customers are sneaks, frauds and cheats, and constitutionally incapable of doing the right thing even if they tried. 

Of course, that's not to say that all commuters are angels. Many are serial fare evaders either because they have never accepted the privatisation of the public transport system and are unwilling to support the private operators or because they simply don't want to pay. Figures published on the Connex website estimate that fare evasion costs the public transport system $30 million to $50 million each year. 

Melbourne's public transport operators appear to have very little interest in changing this situation. The contempt they have for commuters has conferred a kind of anti-hero status on fare evaders. Even people, such as me, who dutifully buy tickets cheer when hearing of the exploits of serial fare evaders who proudly claim not to have bought a ticket in months. 

Changing this situation requires a change to the culture of how commuters are treated. In this regard, Melbourne could learn a thing or two from the Tokyo public transport authorities. This doesn't mean installing fare-adjustment machines at every train station. The costs of doing so would be prohibitive. It would require the installation of exit barriers and considerable redesign of almost every station. 

Rather, Melbourne's public transport authorities could learn from the service culture that the fare-adjustment machine embodies. 

One simple suggestion is to change how inspectors deal with suspected fare evaders. Rather than fining those without a ticket, ticket inspectors should be given the authority and the means to sell fare evaders a ticket. This would recognise that people have many reasons for not having a ticket. They might be serial fare evaders, or they might not have had the right money. 

If potential fare evaders do not have the money to buy a ticket, then fair enough, book them. They're fair game. It's clear that they never intended to buy a ticket. If they can buy a ticket, but didn't have the right change for the machine, as is often the case, then they would have an opportunity to do the right thing without further questioning. 

While those with the siege mentality probably have a long list of why this can't be done, it's unlikely that any barrier is insurmountable. After all, Melbourne's public transport system had something like this for years. They were called "conductors" and many people miss them. 

Over the long term, this simple change could produce savings on the administrative costs of cracking down on fare evaders. More importantly though, this small step would show that Melbourne's public transport operators are interested in serving, rather than punishing, their customers. Who knows? It might be the start of winning back the hearts and minds of Melbourne's jaded public transport users. 

Christopher Scanlon is a lecturer in the media studies program at La Trobe University and a co-editor of Arena Magazine.


----------



## Manila-X

iampuking said:


> Yes, that's because good taste in architecture dissapeared after the Second World War and is only returning this century.


And its gonna look better


----------



## hkskyline

iampuking said:


> Yes, that's because good taste in architecture dissapeared after the Second World War and is only returning this century.


I think the days for extravagant architecture, Moscow style, are over. Even Beijing's new Olympic line and London's Jubilee line are nowhere as exquisitly designed and decorated as those Moscow ones, and they're already quite over the top in today's standard already.


----------



## iampuking

I wasn't referring to Moscow stations, I was referring to architectural trends... Victorian architecture (when much of LU was built) is much nicer than pre-war parts. The extension of the Jubilee line is good architecture coming back to the Tube.


----------



## hkskyline

Yes, I liked the modern style in the Jubilee Line extension, and the extra stuff they did for Canary Wharf. I believe Stratford is also a very neat station, although I didn't have a chance to visit it to see for myself.


----------



## Fab 5

X Bomby said:


> U aslo can add Torino (italy) and Copenhaguen (Denmark); They both use technology developped by Matra .


What do you mean?


----------



## Iggui

the mexico city subway is great in that it is very cheap to ride (if i recall it was about US$0.20) is very extensive and gets you all over the city. however, from an aesthetic standpoint, it leaves a lot to be desired. it looks "cheap", so i guess you get what you pay for. there are a handful of stations which are bright, spacious, and have decorative features (basically, the ones shown earlier), but for the most part, it's a very "functional" and barebones operation. the cieling is very low, the flourescent lighting is unappealing, and it wasn't the cleanest or best maintained subway i've been on (but much cleaner than most US subways). you could never escape the fact that you were in a "3rd world" country while riding it. and there were food vendors everywhere, both inside the stations and at the entrances, so there was also a fair amount of litter in the stations and cars. i also found it interesting that they have "women only" metro cars during rush hour, but there might be other metro systems that do this too.

despite my aesthetic misgivings, it's a very good, functional metro system. it provides cheap mass transit for the people and that's what it's really about.


----------



## iampuking

Japan and India have "women only" carriages too I believe.


----------



## iampuking

anm said:


> Which point am I missing? I have not come up with this thread title.
> 
> I perfectly reallise that no system may be perfect at any given time, so what? Each has flaws? That does say anything. Let me explain what you do not understand (or pretend to not understand). There are flaws and there are flaws. Here is anecdote to illustrate.
> 
> 
> ************************
> A woman walks along street, a drunk guy follows her.
> 
> Hey, he says, you have crooked legs!
> 
> She does not respond but walks faster.
> 
> Hey, have you heard me, you have crooked legs!
> 
> Leave me alone, drunk hooligan, she says.
> 
> So what? I will sober tomorrow BUT YOU HAVE CROOKED LEGS!
> ************************
> 
> Moscow will be sober tomorrow. What about NYC?


What if she is drunk as well, and walks crooked, giving the appearance of crooken legs?

Are you saying that even when one's drunk they still see the NYC Subway system as crap? 



anm said:


> IMO if there is one US system that has been done fundamentally right and belongs to this thread - it is Washington DC. And by the way - you say that every system has flaws. Which flaws does this system have in your opinion? I used it quite a few times and have found any particular flaws.


Boring samey stations. Ugly trains. Slow escalators, with dim escalator tunnels. Transverse seating layout. Too few, and too small, doors on trains. Ugly floor design in stations. Infrequent service. Trains are often shorter than they should be.

I've never been on it, and neither have I been on Moscow's, but if I did use either system i'd probably come up with more flaws.


----------



## Major Deegan

So, not to divert from the topic of the discussion, could you reiterate what you said previously and clarify how you see London's tube being superior to the Moscow metro? In your own words, what makes an underground "authentic"?


----------



## iampuking

Major Deegan said:


> So, not to divert from the topic of the discussion, could you reiterate what you said previously and clarify how you see London's tube being superior to the Moscow metro?


Where did I say that?



Major Deegan said:


> In your own words, what makes an underground "authentic"?


Read the page prior to that one. Someone said that a video posted was authentic.

Anyway, the 'Mind the Gap' announcement is authentic, as LU was the first one to use it.


----------



## anm

iampuking said:


> What if she is drunk as well, and walks crooked, giving the appearance of crooken legs?
> 
> Are you saying that even when one's drunk they still see the NYC Subway system as crap?


You understood well what I said, and you have nothing to answer that is of any substance. I see no point continuing the exchange here.



> Boring samey stations. Ugly trains. Slow escalators, with dim escalator tunnels. Transverse seating layout. Too few, and too small, doors on trains. Ugly floor design in stations. Infrequent service. Trains are often shorter than they should be.
> 
> I've never been on it, and neither have I been on Moscow's, but if I did use either system i'd probably come up with more flaws.


Things that you say about Moscow and Washington DC metros tell more about you than about these systems. Particularly to people like me, who have been on both.


----------



## iampuking

anm said:


> You understood well what I said, and you have nothing to answer that is of any substance. I see no point continuing the exchange here.


Yes, I understood it with difficulty. It wasn't at all clear.



anm said:


> Things that you say about Moscow and Washington DC metros tell more about you than about these systems. Particularly to people like me, who have been on both.


I'm thinking of possible criticisms that could be aimed at Moscow's or Washington DC's systems, not my own personal opinions.

I happen to like the crowds on the Moscow Metro, or the strange barrel vaulted stations of Washington's. Which goes back to my original point - some people could see these as flaws but I happen to see them as things that make the system more interesting overall.

If you want, I could come up with a load of possible flaws of the London Underground to prove my objectivity?


----------



## anm

iampuking said:


> Yes, I understood it with difficulty. It wasn't at all clear.


With difficulty, but I hope you 've made it. You seem to like finding "flaws" with everything, so let it be. 

There are fundamental flaws, flaws by birth, flaws of design. Flaws that cannot be fixed in near or even long-term without astronomical investment comparable to building a whole new system from scratch. 

And then, there are temporary imperfections of otherwise completely soundly designed and admirably functioning systems that have already reached levels of performance that most other systems can only dream of ever matching.



> I'm thinking of possible criticisms that could be aimed at Moscow's or Washington DC's systems, not my own personal opinions.
> 
> I happen to like the crowds on the Moscow Metro, or the strange barrel vaulted stations of Washington's. Which goes back to my original point - some people could see these as flaws but I happen to see them as things that make the system more interesting overall.
> 
> If you want, I could come up with a load of possible flaws of the London Underground to prove my objectivity?


Please spare me from this. Absolutely not. I do not need artificial proofs of anybody's objectivity (I can make that judgement without them), neither am I interested in "proving" that I am always "objective" or always right.

Regarding Moscow and DC, I do not comprehend why you are so eager to bestow on me your criticisms of the things you have never experienced on your own. What can you do other than a) repeat something somebody else already said or b) twist and misrepresent somebody else said?

Ask yourself, before gracing the crowd with your precious opinions presented as facts - 1) why would anybody be interested listening to you? why do you think what you are saying is worth other's people time? 2) what is your goal here? are you trying to learn something? to contribute to a meaningful exchange of information? or is it something else? - you decide.


----------



## coth

Brice said:


> Paris and London have already a contact less system to open turnsti;es. NY, Madrid and Moscow don't eaven know what this system is.


just for a note - moscow metro was the first metro system in europe, implemented usage of smart cards on september 1 1998.


----------



## poshbakerloo

^^^^ when i was last in Moscow, not so long ago, the ticket gates were lethal! they would slam shut on your legs!


----------



## poshbakerloo

anm said:


> NYC subway - smell of urine, 50C and humid in a heat wave, trash on the floor and down between rails, rats, deafening noise... charming indeed.


but u gotta love it for that:lol:


----------



## coth

poshbakerloo said:


> ^^^^ when i was last in Moscow, not so long ago, the ticket gates were lethal! they would slam shut on your legs!


soviet. they are not so forceful as it might be seeing on a first look. they are not being installed since 10 years already or so.

modern turnstiles


----------



## anm

poshbakerloo said:


> ^^^^ when i was last in Moscow, not so long ago, the ticket gates were lethal! they would slam shut on your legs!


if you try to walk in without paying... I heard in some contries they cut off hands of thieves... this is a mild Russian version... gentle reminder


----------



## jarbury

Out of London, Paris, Barcelona & Rome (the subway systems I've been on) I actually found Barcelona had possibly the best subway. The rolling stock was fantastically modern and spacious, the frequencies were great, the tickets were really cheap (less than half the price of the London Underground for a trip) and I really appreciated knowing to the second when the next train was coming.


----------



## iampuking

anm said:


> With difficulty, but I hope you 've made it. You seem to like finding "flaws" with everything, so let it be.
> 
> There are fundamental flaws, flaws by birth, flaws of design. Flaws that cannot be fixed in near or even long-term without astronomical investment comparable to building a whole new system from scratch.
> 
> And then, there are temporary imperfections of otherwise completely soundly designed and admirably functioning systems that have already reached levels of performance that most other systems can only dream of ever matching.


How exactly are NYC Subway stations being dirty or noisy trains intrinsic flaws? Have you forgotten to take into account the many good points of the NYC Subway, express tracks and long platforms being two such examples?



anm said:


> Please spare me from this. Absolutely not. I do not need artificial proofs of anybody's objectivity (I can make that judgement without them), neither am I interested in "proving" that I am always "objective" or always right.
> 
> Regarding Moscow and DC, I do not comprehend why you are so eager to bestow on me your criticisms of the things you have never experienced on your own. What can you do other than a) repeat something somebody else already said or b) twist and misrepresent somebody else said?


It's called making an educated assumption. Let me use an example: metros are high capacity/frequency systems, to have high capacity/frequency they need to have short dwell times at stations, to have short dwell times they need to have large circulation areas by the doors, with plenty of doors. The Washington DC Metro has neither.



anm said:


> Ask yourself, before gracing the crowd with your precious opinions presented as facts - 1) why would anybody be interested listening to you? why do you think what you are saying is worth other's people time? 2) what is your goal here? are you trying to learn something? to contribute to a meaningful exchange of information? or is it something else? - you decide.


What is your goal? Considering you've been rambling far more than I have. Ever heard of the expression - "the economy of words"?


----------



## Rodrigo21

Metro de Santiago






























































































































































































































































































(Pictures from Flickr)



What do you think about this chilean subway?


----------



## iampuking

Thread about much of the new infastructure for London's rail network, with lots of it Tube/DLR related...


----------



## [email protected]

The metro on the first Santiago pic looks very similar to the parisian MP 89 (lines 1 & 14).


----------



## [email protected]

And to answer your question Rodrigo, Santiago subway looks very modern and clean. kay:


----------



## coth

More announcements:
The thread about Moscow Metro Developments - under construction, planned and recently opened stations.
The thread about Moscow Metro Trains.
The thread about Moscow Railways Developments.


----------



## snow is red

Rodrigo21 said:


> Metro de Santiago
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Pictures from Flickr)
> 
> 
> 
> What do you think about this chilean subway?


Classy looking


----------



## [email protected]

Subways I've used so far (56):

Amsterdam, Antwerp, Athens, Bangkok, Barcelona, Beijing, Berlin, Boston, Bremen, Brussels, Budapest, Cairo, Chicago, Cologne, Copenhagen, Dortmund, Dusseldorf, Frankfurt, Guangzhou, Hamburg, Helsinki, Hong Kong, Istanbul, Kobe, Kuala Lumpur, Kyoto, Lisbon, London, Los Angeles, Madrid, Mexico City, Milan, Munich, Nagoya, New York, Nuremberg, Osaka, Paris, Philadelphia, Porto, Prague, Rome, Rotterdam, San Francisco, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Singapore, Stuttgart, Sydney, Tokyo, Toronto, Vienna, Washington, Yokohama


Best: Hong Kong & Singapore

Worst: Rome & Philadelphia


----------



## PortoNuts

Madrid hands down. :cheers2:


----------



## Justme

AmirBaki said:


> Tokyo for sure for me... clean, efficient *and ON TIME which is a big plus, never seen that in any other major city.* I read somewhere that the engineer actually apologizes if hes more than 15 seconds late or something...
> 
> Although as nihonkitty said its not as nice as its 'commuter' rail, its still very extensive and covers most of the city, and the commuter rail (basically just ground level subway trains, so still part of the subway system right?) covers the rest of the city and its suburbs


Since when is being on time an issue with a metro system? A proper metro system has a frequent enough service that people never actually check time tables. Most people for instant don't realize the London tube actually has a time table, and this is common for most full networks. They are turn up and hop on services.

Actually, I liked the Tokyo system as well, but what I found was a let down, at least when I was last there 3 years or so ago, was that the network was divided into at least two seperate companies, and I found that even though I had a ticket, it wasn't valid when I changed lines because the other line was run by a different firm. This wasn't very efficient.


----------



## ukiyo

No one really buys tickets (except tourists who don't know the system I guess). You use a suica card (you simply sweep the card over the scanner), which can be used by basically every company in Japan now. The only time I used tickets is for Shinkansen.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suica

It works on buses, taxis, subway, commuter rail and even in restaurants and vending machines. The company doesn't matter . The suica is now even usable in basically every city in the entire country too (before it was only Tokyo). Hong Kong and Singapore also use the same system and Hong Kong was actually the first to use it even though it was developed by Sony.

Nowadays Japanese cell phones have this built into them, so your cell phone is basically a train card + wallet.


----------



## iampuking

^^ The lack of integration isn't just to do with the tickets, never been there but it seems as though the interchanges aren't particularly convenient.

Also, the stations are often cramped and rather bland and unattractive. Tokyo only wins on punctuality, IMO. Even then there are more frequent trains in Moscow and Paris.


----------



## manrush

Is it a coincidence that the four busiest metro systems happen to have large rolling stock?


----------



## ukiyo

iampuking said:


> ^^ The lack of integration isn't just to do with the tickets, never been there but it seems as though the interchanges aren't particularly convenient.
> 
> Also, the stations are often cramped and rather bland and unattractive. Tokyo only wins on punctuality, IMO. Even then there are more frequent trains in Moscow and Paris.


 The only inconvenience I can think of is with the commuter rail outside of the central wards. The subway (which this thread is about) on the other hand is not inconvenient at all, it is new and you don't really need to change anywhere (unless you're a tourist and going all over the place ). The commuter rail (above ground) was planned and designed decades ago (and in many cases the early 1900s).

This is why I never give my opinion on systems I have never been on...it's better to give a judgement if you've actually used it. Every person in this thread who has been to Tokyo and other systems has ranked it high, but maybe it's a conspiracy


----------



## _00_deathscar

NihonKitty said:


> I will rank them (in my own opinion) according to this: Cleanliness, how extensive, Trains and convenience.
> 
> *Note yes I ranked HK and Tokyo both as 1.
> 
> 1. Hong Kong (it also uses the same system developed by Sony as Japan [RFID chips]).


The Hong Kong one isn't very extensive - thought it is expanding. It's lack of extensiveness is brought about by physical factors though.

But yes, it rates very highly on the other scales - in particular cleanliness and convenience.


----------



## ajaaronjoe

London Underground is kinda interesting though as it is world's oldest underground railway systems, and it also has different architecture in each station.


----------



## Balkanada

PortoNuts said:


> Madrid hands down. :cheers2:


I'll second that :cheers:


----------



## Xusein

I think I posted in this thread a long time ago, but IMO, Washington DC has the best metro in North America aesthetically speaking.


----------



## SeñorGuillermo

Mexico City Metro




DanBusMetro said:


> HOLA A TODOS!!!
> AQUI ESTAN ALGUNA IMAGENES DE LA LLEGADA DE LOS NUEVOS TRENES FM-07 QUE CIRCULARAN EN LINEA "A" ESPERO PORDER VERLOS PRONTO Y SUBIRME EN ELLOS LO ESPERO CON ANSIA JEJE
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BUENO ESPERO LES GUSTEN.....
> Fuente: http://www.adefesio.com/search/label/Metro


----------



## SeñorGuillermo

*Mexico City Metro Modernizes and Expands.*



hook89 said:


> Estas son las ultimas imagenes que subieron a la pagina de proyecto metro sobre las estaciones subterráneas, son de finales de agosto. De las elevadas son de septiembre.
> 
> Estación Eje Central
> 
> De las fotos que hay en el sitio, estas son de las que muestran mas el "corazón" de la obra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Estación Mexicaltzingo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Estación Calle 11





siDEmaIN-ALEX said:


> Tuve la oportunidad de visitar los talleres de la estación Tláhuac, les traigo sólo unas fotos.
> Estación Tlahuac
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talleres
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tramo elevado
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poco a poco iré poniendo más fotos, esto es solo la probadita, complementando las fotos de las estaciones profundas





Alex Urban said:


> Aqui les traigo un pequeño avance de lo que es de la Estación }Periférico Ote. a Tlatenco
> 
> Periférico Ote:
> 
> Ya estan colocando los soportes del cajon mas altos, que son los próximos al inicio de la estación:
> 
> Como ya habían informado anteriormente 18 m sobre el nivel del piso
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aquí las columnas casi pegadas al puente vehicular del Periférico a ver cuanto le calculan de separación:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perspectiva general:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Estación San Lorenzo:
> 
> Sin gran avance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olivos:
> 
> Misma situación
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestación Olivos - Nopalera
> 
> Ya ahn colocado una cerca, o será los soportes para las instalaciones de comunicaciones y servicios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nopalera:
> 
> Sin avance significativo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestación Nopalera - Zapotitlán
> 
> Esta curvita se ve muy bien y pensar que tuvieron que llevarse n casas debajo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> Zapotitlán:
> 
> Aquí si se nota un avance puesto que ya están colocados los cabezales de la estación que tendrá un diseño estructural similar a las del tamo de Pueblo Culhuacán a Tomatlán que son construidas por ICA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> y su interestacion con Tlatenco igual que el tramo norte de Av. Tláhuac





skymex20 said:


> Lo que estan haciendo en la interestacion Olivos - Nopalera, se me figura que es la cerca que les van a poner según vi en renders, pero mejor te dejo un render para veas a lo que me refiero. Arriba de las trabes metalicas estan las tavlas de cocnreto, y arriva de estan se ve que hay algo mas y eso es lo que creo que estan poniendo ahí:


Mexico City Metro is expanding and modernizing one more time.


----------



## SeñorGuillermo

*Future Stations*




hook89 said:


> Estas son las ultimas imagenes que subieron a la pagina de proyecto metro sobre las estaciones subterráneas, son de finales de agosto. De las elevadas son de septiembre.
> 
> Estación Eje Central
> 
> De las fotos que hay en el sitio, estas son de las que muestran mas el "corazón" de la obra.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Estación Mexicaltzingo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Estación Calle 11





siDEmaIN-ALEX said:


> Tuve la oportunidad de visitar los talleres de la estación Tláhuac, les traigo sólo unas fotos.
> Estación Tlahuac
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Talleres
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Tramo elevado
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Poco a poco iré poniendo más fotos, esto es solo la probadita, complementando las fotos de las estaciones profundas





Alex Urban said:


> Aqui les traigo un pequeño avance de lo que es de la Estación }Periférico Ote. a Tlatenco
> 
> Periférico Ote:
> 
> Ya estan colocando los soportes del cajon mas altos, que son los próximos al inicio de la estación:
> 
> Como ya habían informado anteriormente 18 m sobre el nivel del piso
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Aquí las columnas casi pegadas al puente vehicular del Periférico a ver cuanto le calculan de separación:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perspectiva general:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Estación San Lorenzo:
> 
> Sin gran avance
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Olivos:
> 
> Misma situación
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestación Olivos - Nopalera
> 
> Ya ahn colocado una cerca, o será los soportes para las instalaciones de comunicaciones y servicios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Nopalera:
> 
> Sin avance significativo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Interestación Nopalera - Zapotitlán
> 
> Esta curvita se ve muy bien y pensar que tuvieron que llevarse n casas debajo
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ]
> 
> Zapotitlán:
> 
> Aquí si se nota un avance puesto que ya están colocados los cabezales de la estación que tendrá un diseño estructural similar a las del tamo de Pueblo Culhuacán a Tomatlán que son construidas por ICA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> y su interestacion con Tlatenco igual que el tramo norte de Av. Tláhuac





skymex20 said:


> Bueno, aqui les dejo unas fotos que acaban de poner en el facebook de Linea Dorada en donde ya se alcanza a ver grandes avances de la obra de la Linea 12, son fotos tomadas durante este mes, asi que esas imagenes han de ser como de hace 2 semanas:
> 
> 
> *OLIVOS*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ERMITA*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *20 DE NOVIEMBRE*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *EJE CENTRAL*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *NOPALERA*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *PARQUE DE LOS VENADOS*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *PERIFERICO ORIENTE*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ZAPOTITLAN*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *ZAPATA*


----------



## Justme

god that was boring.


----------



## ajaaronjoe

Justme said:


> god that was boring.


hundred and ten percent agree :lol:


----------



## Berlinerin

Berlin subway is the best. Stations are not as gorgeous as ,say, in Moscow but clean (unlike in Paris) and still look good.


----------



## Justme

Berlinerin said:


> Berlin subway is the best. Stations are not as gorgeous as ,say, in Moscow but clean (unlike in Paris) and still look good.


Despite having a real love and respect for Berlin. I simply can't agree with you there. Each time I go back to Berlin, their public transport has deteriorated. It's the little things sometimes, but when so many little things go wrong it all adds up. Berlin has terrible signage. And by terrible, I mean it's so bad, some station have virtually no signs or network maps. This makes it difficult to know everything from which platform to go on, to where to change.

And so many stations are terribly ugly. There are some nice ones, especially those that have been recently built or renovated, but it seems so more ugly ones. Service frequencies also seems to have dropped. The trams may as well just shut down I found them so infrequent.

And then of course is the new U5 (U55) U-whatever. 3 stations existing, and the final connection is globally recognized as the slowest infrastructure construction project on the planet. 

I think Berlin has great prospects in the future, and it certainly was one of the best networks in the world. But a lack of funds in the last few years has really taken a bit hit in the system.


----------



## ukiyo

Justme said:


> Actually, I liked the Tokyo system as well, but what I found was a let down, at least when I was last there 3 years or so ago, was that the network was divided into at least two seperate companies, and I found that even though I had a ticket, it wasn't valid when I changed lines because the other line was run by a different firm. This wasn't very efficient.


BTW just to let you know, that not only are all the cards usable on any system in Tokyo...now the 2 "subway" companies will be merging, so it will be just one company in Tokyo giving much better coverage and less transfers etc. 
You can read more about it here: http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/ed20101205a1.html

Even if the plan doesn't go through they are still doing this which solves most of the problems:


> On Nov. 17 the president of Tokyo Metro announced the possibility of decreasing the fare for passengers transferring between the systems and of remodeling stations to *make transfers between the two more convenient. *


----------



## leo_mp

I saw that of modern Mexico, a little rough but this well! Prosperity to Latin America!


----------



## iampuking

What is with all the construction pics? No-one cares. People want to see the finished article, and even then those pics should be in tens not flipping millions.


----------



## Yellow Fever

Vancouver's Canada Line 

Canada Line is a rapid transit line in the Metro Vancouver region of British Columbia, Canada. Opened in August 2009, it is the third line in TransLink's SkyTrain metro network, servicing Vancouver, Richmond, and the Vancouver International Airport. 

The Canada Line comprises 19.2 kilometres (11.8 mi) of track; the main line goes from Vancouver to Richmond, while a 4 km spur line from Bridgeport Station connects to the airport. It opened fifteen weeks ahead of the original schedule, well in advance of the 2010 Winter Olympics in February.

The Canada Line was anticipated to see 100,000 boardings per day in 2013, and 142,000 boardings per day by 2021, but it has exceeded these targets. Ridership has grown steadily since opening day, with average ridership of 83,000/day in September 2009; 93,000/day in December 2009; and 105,000/day in March 2010. During the 2010 Winter Olympics, the line's ridership increased a further 118 per cent to an average of 228,190 per day over the 17-day event.


----------



## coth

Tunnels looks way too clean, unsafe - no cables for emergency communication, power, signaling etc?


----------



## Remolino

On our island the only Subway is in the San Juan metropolitan area. It mostly transits on the surface.


> The Tren Urbano (Urban Train), a 10.7-mile, $2 billion heavy-rail system


 It went over budget. They have been talking about extending it but with what money. Some say the Subway is a White Elephant. 

Map -









Photos


















One of the station walls -









Another station -









Another Station Plaza -









Up to 1957 a steam engine (photo below) was the mode of travel around the island. You would catch a train from San Juan and travel all the way to the West end of PR. and then South to Cabo Rojo and from there East to the Southern City of Ponce. When they decided to build highways they made sure to get rid of the trains. Trucks and autos took over.

Very large map of the rail-line that existed in 1924- http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7d/Railroad_map_of_PR_1924.jpg 










Following are old photos of the electric tramways they had in todays San Juan metropolitan area around the early 1900's. Last tram ran in 1947 which is the last photo. 

Tram Page - http://www.tramz.com/pr/sjs.html


----------



## Skybean

*Hong Kong MTR
*


----------



## mvictory

How come every big city in the world seems to have a decent underground yet it seems so hard to get one line built in Melbourne?


----------



## SO143

^ they cost too much money to build, run and maintain. Melbourne is a drivable city just like LA


----------



## gladisimo

Some of HK's stock is 30 years old, not exactly new (well maybe relative to Melbourne's).


----------



## RaySthlm

*Bangkok Subway*


----------



## SO143

*London*


----------



## kaiser_conce

I know many metro systems in the world (London, Buenos Aires, Budapest, Madrid, Santiago, Berlin, Munchen, Paris, Rome), and i have to say than for me the best ones are Santiago (Chile) metro system, and Madrid one.





*Some pictures of Metro de Santiago - Chile system
*



[


Enhander said:


> Some more of our metro system.
> 
> MetroStgo by flickr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> All by FLICKR.









mariosantiaguino said:


> Some pics from *L5*
> 
> 
> 
> *Barrancas*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Laguna Sur*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Las Parcelas*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Monte Tabor*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Del Sol*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Santiago Bueras*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Plaza de Maipú*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Other photos*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From www.metrosantiago.cl
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Landscaping and urban improvements


----------



## Vasthrash

^^
yes, isn't extensive but is very clean and efficient


----------



## kaiser_conce

Vasthrash said:


> ^^
> yes, isn't extensive but is very clean and efficient


106 km until now (year 2011)

140 km year 2015


----------



## Vasthrash

named in previous pages have the triple or more extensión


----------



## Yellow Fever

really nice and clean metro in Chile!


----------



## Isek

Yellow Fever said:


> really nice and clean metro in Chile!


But does this qualify for being the best metro system in the world? I do not think so. We should take into account several 

1) Size and coverage in relation to the city size
2) Frequency of services (Peak, Day, Night)
3) Speed of travel
4) Integration to other systems like suburban rail, tram or buses
5) Trainsets and stations
6) Acceptance by the population
7) Maintenance and beauty 
8) History and landmarks


----------



## alexandru.mircea

Paris - old, tiny, smelly, badly mentained, yet so efficient! And _that_ charm...


----------



## KOTIKKEAN

alexandru.mircea said:


> Paris - old, tiny, smelly, badly mentained, yet so efficient! And _that_ charm...


I absolutely agree with you about Paris metro and want to add i was shocked when saw graffiti in the tunnels. There was no clean space at all :|
As for me i think subway systems of Madrid and Barcelona are really nice. It's clean, convinient and efficient.


----------



## alexandru.mircea

In fact, in Barcelona the surface transport works _so well_ that when I was there I only needed the metro just once (when I went to visit the Park Guell). Their urban planning is amazing. Therefore I don't even remember how the metro looked like. )


----------



## hseugut

Paris. The oldest and biggest in Europe.


----------



## coth

London, Moscow and Madrid metro networks are larger than Paris.


----------



## soloveich

isaidso said:


> Portland is about the same size as Vancouver.



what about population density?


----------



## isaidso

soloveich said:


> what about population density?


I have no idea. Vancouver's core is very dense, but beyond that not so much. There are over 20 cities in the US larger than Vancouver, so it's quite impressive that they're as high as 8th on that list. Boston, for example is about twice the size of Vancouver. Vancouver, is by far, the smallest city in the top 10.


----------



## Los Earth

isaidso said:


> I have no idea. Vancouver's core is very dense, but beyond that not so much. There are over 20 cities in the US larger than Vancouver, so it's quite impressive that they're as high as 8th on that list. Boston, for example is about twice the size of Vancouver. Vancouver, is by far, the smallest city in the top 10.


Have any of you been in Vancouver metro?


----------



## isaidso

No, why?


----------



## Yellow Fever

soloveich said:


> Seattle has monorail and portland is just too small.


Seattle's monorail system is very small and it serves more as a tourists attraction than the real people mover. The whole monorail track is just over a mile long and has only two cars and two stations. It runs from downtown to the Seattle Centre and its top speed can reach up to 45 mph.

Portland does has two very efficent transit systems that serve the greater Portland area. They are the MAX Light Rail and the Streetcars networks.


----------



## Los Earth

isaidso said:


> No, why?


So that we could see how well the Vancouver metro was laid out.


----------



## Yellow Fever

Los Earth said:


> Have any of you been in Vancouver metro?




SkyTrain is an urban rapid transit system in Metro Vancouver, which is considered to be a medium capacity or light metro rapid transit system. SkyTrain's 68.7 km (42.7 mi) of track makes it one of the longest automated rapid transit systems in the world. It uses fully-automated trains on grade-separated tracks, running mostly on elevated guideways, which helps SkyTrain to hold consistently high (over 95%) on-time reliability, making it one of the most reliable rapid transit systems in North America. It also uses the longest mass transit-only bridge, the Skybridge, to cross the Fraser River.

The system has a total of 47 stations on three lines. The Expo Line and Millennium Line are operated by British Columbia Rapid Transit Company under contract from TransLink (originally BC Transit), a regional government transportation agency. The Canada Line is operated on the same principles by the private concessionaire ProTrans BC under contract to TransLink, and is an integrated part of the regional transport system.










http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vancouver_SkyTrain_Map.svg


----------



## (E.G.O.S.)®

^^

I really like the Skytrain system, it's fast, clean and safe. Unfortunately, it only covers a small portion of Metro Vancouver, but nevertheless, it's good. The stations have nothing in special, but they are functional.


----------



## Ji-Ja-Jot

skytrax said:


> So far best Metro system I used were Shanghai


Me, too. Modern, clean, on schedule and safe. My friend forgot his digicam at the peoples square station, whe took the train back and it was still there on the same spot. At home in Germany someone would have immidiately stolen it.

Worest system I used was Berlin. Dirty, old, smell of pee everywhere, agressive people.


----------



## Los Earth

I'd love to visit the Vancouver metro, especially a metro in Canada


----------



## soloveich

Yellow Fever said:


> Seattle's monorail system is very small and it serves more as a tourists attraction than the real people mover. The whole monorail track is just over a mile long and has only two cars and two stations. It runs from downtown to the Seattle Centre and its top speed can reach up to 45 mph.
> 
> Portland does has two very efficent transit systems that serve the greater Portland area. They are the MAX Light Rail and the Streetcars networks.


What about the line to SEATAC? And I've heard they are planning one more to Everet I think. Though yeah. It is small


----------



## Yellow Fever

soloveich said:


> What about the line to SEATAC?


That line is LRT, not using the monorail system. It is the initial phase of Sound Transit's Link Light Rail system. Service operates seven days a week, from 5 am to 1 am Monday through Saturday and from 6 am to midnight on Sundays. Trains are composed of two cars, each with a capacity of 200 passengers—74 seated and 126 standing. Opened on July 18, 2009, Central Link initially operated between downtown Seattle and Tukwila, on a 13.9-mile (22.4 km) route. Service was extended by 1.7 miles (2.7 km) from Tukwila to SeaTac Airport on December 19, 2009.


----------



## soloveich

I see. A friend of mine told me that it's monorail :lol:
I guess we could call it a light metro.


----------



## Los Earth

isaidso said:


> Portland is about the same size as Vancouver.


If you mean by population Vancouver is bigger by 60,000 people.


----------



## vfG

French Subways

Lyon Subway is not so bad, 

4 lines 700.000 passengers per day.

Line D : The first automated subway of the world 
Line C : maximum incline of 17%
Use of contactless cards
Line A and B will soon be automated




























Lille Subway :

2 lines, 95 millions of passengers per year

Line 1 : The first automated light rail of the world
Line 2 : 31,7 km, one of the longest automated rail of the world



















Lille subway has no access doors !









But it has security doors !









Rennes and Toulouse subways are also automated and modern !

Rennes :





































Toulouse :


----------



## coth

this is not "spam us with big shots of you metro" thread and it's not about any system




vfG said:


> French Subways
> 
> Lyon Subway is not so bad,


Yet definitely not in Top 20.



vfG said:


> Line D : The first automated subway of the world


it's not



vfG said:


> Line C : maximum incline of 17%
> Use of contactless cards
> Line A and B will soon be automated


big deal


----------



## vfG

First : Sorry for the big shots !

Second : Sorry but for a city of it size, Lyon has a good subway : 
more than 700.000 passengers per day (without the 4 tramway lines !)

Lyon has 2,1 million inhabitants in the metro area, the subway covers a small area but the density is over 10.000 ppl per km² in the central area...
in comparison with many great american cities it is so much better !!!


Toronto 948,100
Washington, D.C. 919,300
Chicago 638,000
Boston 478,000
Vancouver 426,500
San Francisco 343,200
Philadelphia 314,800


----------



## hseugut

Paris, the most iconic !


----------



## Cal_Escapee

I'm in no way claiming it for "Best", but *San Francisco* has a more extensive rail transit (some portions being subway) system than most people realize:










Incidentally, we just got word of federal funding for the "planned extension" of BART in San Jose as far as the "Berryessa" station.


----------



## Cal_Escapee

vfG said:


> First : Sorry for the big shots !
> 
> Second : Sorry but for a city of it size, Lyon has a good subway :
> more than 700.000 passengers per day (without the 4 tramway lines !)
> 
> Lyon has 2,1 million inhabitants in the metro area, the subway covers a small area but the density is over 10.000 ppl per km² in the central area...
> in comparison with many great american cities it is so much better !!!
> 
> 
> Toronto 948,100
> Washington, D.C. 919,300
> Chicago 638,000
> Boston 478,000
> Vancouver 426,500
> San Francisco 343,200
> Philadelphia 314,800


Not sure where you got those numbers but I challenge them in respect of San Francisco, anyway. SF has 2 underground rail systems--BART and Muni Metro. And since you are counting ridership in the metro area, BART's metro ridership needs to be counted. That means adding Muni's 151,300 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muni_Metro ) to BART's 367,500 ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_Area_Rapid_Transit ) for a total of 518,800 riders daily. Otherwise, the Lyon system looks similar to both Muni Metro (the cars) and BART (the stations).


----------



## The City is Ours

Subway from Rotterdam, Holland.


----------



## fuckencio

is not the best but i think that the subway of my city (santiago, chile) is cute c: i know that someone posted pictures before but i want to do something with more information























































we pay the ticket with this 











we have this called "bibliometro" is a service that is present in the more important station. is like a library




















this is a service called bicimetro the idea is like a Bicycle nursery. u take your bicycle and when u arrive to the station u can save your bicycle there (is only present in the more important stations)


----------



## Himmelwärts

^^
those stations are beautiful :cheers:

i didnt expect that in santiago!! :applause:


----------



## fuckencio

thanks c: actually according to "metro rail" we have the best subway in all america


----------



## Manila-X

Are there any subway trains worldwide that are *carpeted*?

I was in SF a few weeks back and rode the BART to Milbrae. The train I rode was carpeted.


----------



## Abinash89

Delhi metro..


----------



## kaiser_conce

Santiago, Chile metro , by mariosantiaguino







Mariosantiaguino said:


> ^^
> 
> 
> 
> *Some photos*
> 
> 
> 
> Un poco del
> 
> *Metro de Santiago *
> 
> 
> Chico Trujillo 2 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> 130 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> PLAZA DE MAIPÚ 6 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> PLAZA DE MAIPÚ 5 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> STGO. BUERAS 5 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> PLAZA DE MAIPÚ1 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Monte Tabor 5 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> Las Parcelas 2 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> Las Parceas 1 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> Laguna Sur 4 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> Barrancas 3 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> Ruta de la India 3 por Metro de Santiago - Sitio Oficial, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> I make myself a pact, not to shut doors on the past.... por objetoslicitables, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> La estación de metro se refleja en el metro por Fitmoos, en Flickr
> 
> 
> R113 | Metro de Santiago | Universidad de Chile (L1) por Empezar de Cero / Ariel Cruz, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> Viaducto Maipu por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Viaducto Maipu por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Viaducto Linea 5 Maipu por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Metro Estación La Granja por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Intermodal El Sol Metro por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Metro por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> Metro Tobalaba por BUTAKA PRODUCCIONES, en Flickr
> 
> 
> 
> 
> :wave:
> 
> ​
> 
> :wave:


----------



## fuckencio

esas palmeras :cripes: ^^

pd: gracias por cooperar.


----------



## italiano_pellicano

muy bonito el de chile creo el mejor de latino america a mi gusto que conosco muchos , chile es un pais muy moderno no parece ni latino america


----------



## italiano_pellicano

Maxximus said:


> *NAPLES (NAPOLI) - ITALY*
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Dante*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Museo*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Materdei*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Salvator Rosa*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Quattro Giornate*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Vanvitelli*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 1 - Rione Alto*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 6 - Augusto*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Line 6 - Mostra*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Montesanto Subway Station*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *UNDER CONSTRUCTION*


wow wow wow wow : Dadi:: Dadi:


----------



## Riq-10

Moscow

http://www.baltictravelcompany.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/4022279833_631326cb65_b.jpg

http://www.civil.uwaterloo.ca/beg/JohnStraubePhoto/TransSib/Moscow_web/201_Moscow_subway1.JPG


----------



## .franco

London
Moscow 
Madrid


----------



## Xtreminal

1. Berlin 
2. London 
3. Moscow


----------



## koolio

Yellow Fever said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Vancouver_SkyTrain_Map.svg


I used the Skytrain last week and personally I was extremely impressed. Their stations and trains are very clean and nice looking. The "zone" system takes a little time to get used to but is very intuitive and wallet friendly. We went from Waterfront (the central terminus in the downtown core) all the way to the airport (via a change at Bridgeport) for only $2.50 per person. In Toronto, you can't even get from one bus stop to the next for that amount. I don't know how the other lines are but Canada Line was quite awesome. 

I've now used the Metro system in NYC, Toronto and Vancouver and I am sad to say that I feel Toronto's system is the most lacklustre. It doesn't have the extensive coverage like the NYC system nor does it have the cleanliness and user friendliness of the Vancouver system. It kind of occupies the unhappy medium between the two.


----------



## bayviews

koolio said:


> I used the Skytrain last week and personally I was extremely impressed. Their stations and trains are very clean and nice looking. The "zone" system takes a little time to get used to but is very intuitive and wallet friendly. We went from Waterfront (the central terminus in the downtown core) all the way to the airport (via a change at Bridgeport) for only $2.50 per person. In Toronto, you can't even get from one bus stop to the next for that amount. I don't know how the other lines are but Canada Line was quite awesome.
> 
> I've now used the Metro system in NYC, Toronto and Vancouver and I am sad to say that I feel Toronto's system is the most lacklustre. It doesn't have the extensive coverage like the NYC system nor does it have the cleanliness and user friendliness of the Vancouver system. It kind of occupies the unhappy medium between the two.


Sad to say, you'd hardly know now that Toronto used to be North America's model city!


----------



## ProdayuSlona

Kimiwind1184 said:


> Seoul subway is amazing. One of the best I've been to.


^^ 
What he said. What hit me most was how wide the cars were, there is so much space!!!!


----------



## Yellow Fever

Beijing



Beijing Subway by Max Xie, on Flickr


Beijing subway station at night 2 by Chad Catacchio, on Flickr


Subway station by TonyTsangHK, on Flickr


雍和宫站 (Yonghegong Lama temple Station) by sftrajan, on Flickr


Beijing Subway by TexasStarPics, on Flickr


Beijing Subway by oFF tHe bEat PaNDa, on Flickr


SJM-5DM2-(2012-04-04)-022 by stjohn88, on Flickr


----------



## kix111

^^IMO Beijing Line 1 & 2 are way too old, interchanging between lines is a pain and the exits are not well placed.


----------



## binhai

Best subway I've been on is Beijing. Pretty crowded but really efficient and it serves most of the city for 2 RMB. Slightly dirty but I like it.

Other metros I've been on:

Shanghai: Really good, super clean, modern, but not so fast and fare can get high (up to 9 RMB)
New York: Really dirty and loud, but it works
Tianjin: New, small, modern, but few use it yet
Boston: Horrible. Local gov't has had no interest in upgrading the system ever. Shitty trams that are slow and take forever to go anywhere. The system has gotten smaller over time and few of the promised extensions ever get built.


----------



## ProdayuSlona

Tokyo, Seoul, Moscow(mostly for the stations, but some of the new trains are great.) Singapore deserves an honorable mention too.


----------

