The same thread just with a poll. Choose the city with the best transportation system in Europe. For infos about the cities use the other thread. Please post pics and make a reply. :)

Ehm sorry, where is Zurich? We don't even have one of the obviously best transportation systems, we are also the ones apart from the Japanese who have the highest percentage of commuters by train and the most pt-km/capita in the world...

I know that sounds now again patriotic, but it's true. Of all my friends not even 20% have a car (and I am not all a teenager) and even they commute mostly by pt.

But from the list London and Moscow by far.

Sorry from me too, but I can't add more than 15 cities in the list.
So, I've chosen the biggest.

Madrid


http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E2323798%3A8%3A89%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E2323798%3A8%3A58%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A53%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A53%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B84%3A5ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp7%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32328899%3A3%3A%3B%3Anu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp7%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32328899%3A3%3A%3B%3Anu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E2323798%3A8%3B272ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E2323798%3A8%3B789ot1lsi


http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B78%3B%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32329254%3C8746nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B78%3B%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B867%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9%3A47ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32329254%3C6%3C9%3Anu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9359ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B8%3B53ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B7%3B%3A%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B867%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9%3A49ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B7%3B%3B2ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9948ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B82%3A2ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A536ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B8979ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B83%3B6ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9767ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B83%3B7ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9469ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B8%3B58ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B965%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A5%3C7ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A253ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B926%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B897%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9%3B36ot1lsi




http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A534ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9947ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B7%3B%3A6ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B83%3B5ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B83%3B%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B83%3B%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B935%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B%3A7%3C3ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B8987ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32329254%3C9428nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B84%3A6ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437486323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23238345%3B9859ot1lsi

Sorry from me too, but I can't add more than 15 cities in the list.
So, I've chosen the biggest.

lisbon's bigger than many of these cities..

An annual travelcard in London which covers Buses, Trains, Trams and Tube costs £856 (1250 Euros) for zones 1 and 2 which cover all of central London and the inner suburbs. For that you can travel one of the most extensive networks in the world.

London Metro (Tube), Train and Tram map (http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/pdfdocs/lon_con.pdf)

http://www.glue.umd.edu/~bcswartz/london/London30-5.jpg

http://www.cfit.gov.uk/2annual/images/image05.jpg

http://www.thames-gateway.org.uk/images/transport/crossrail-train-front-b.jpg

http://rob.aktualne.cz/foto/london2/dlr.jpg

Buses, 6,500 buses on 700 routes. An all-day ticket for central London costs £3

http://www.milesfaster.plus.com/london-images/london-bus-2.jpg

London also has an extensive network of River Ferries and water taxis.

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/images/030522_tatetotate4.jpg

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/images/030522_tatetotate1.jpg

It has fast mainline train services to all other UK cities as well as Paris and Brussels via the Channel tunnel

http://www.hochgeschwindigkeitszuege.com/england/pendolino_britannico3_gr.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/GNER_White_Rose_train_at_King's_Cross_-_London_-_England_-_240404.jpg

http://www.greatescapes.co.uk/img/travel_options/eurostar.jpg

London is also Europe's biggest air hub with 5 airports from the busiest international airport at heathrow to Gatwick, 2nd busiest in the UK, Stansted, 4th busiest and home of the low cost airlines, Luton which also has low cost fligts and City airport right in the middle of the city centre.

All the main airports have dedicated fast train links into the city centre.

http://www.gakei.com/loo/rh1.jpg

Of course there are also the famous London Taxi cabs too!

http://autoers.didibaba.com/bbs_upload/london_taxi/london_taxi-01.jpg

None of the above. You forgot to include in your poll one of the best and diverse transport system in Europe - Lisbon's!!!

The city of Lisbon has an exceptional range of public transport, which includes trams (old and new), funiculars, a street elevator, river ferries (passenger and car), underground Metro, railways (suburban, national and international), buses (city and suburban) and aircraft. Virtually all of these modes of transport are undergoing major expansion at the present time, which makes them particularly interesting.

http://www.tramways.com/subways/lisbon/lm16max.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/oriente9.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i33000/img_33755.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i33000/img_33739.jpg

http://www.jorgecorreiasantos.interdinamica.net/artes/jcs/images/622004216441.jpg

http://www.jorgecorreiasantos.interdinamica.net/artes/jcs/images/6220041230322.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i33000/img_33903.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/03fertag.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i8000/img_8398.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/03alcdoc.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/03estbel.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/03estostn.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/cacilhen.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/bicacat2.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/03alfa.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/rossstn.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/ecmpostn.jpg

http://www.luso.u-net.com/fogue031.jpg

http://www.personal.u-net.com/~luso/newallan.jpg

http://www.personal.u-net.com/~luso/lisaptin.jpg

http://www.personal.u-net.com/~luso/flexcalv.jpg

http://www.personal.u-net.com/~luso/03turmid3.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i8000/img_8384.jpg

http://www.personal.u-net.com/~luso/28moniz3.jpg

http://www.personal.u-net.com/~luso/turtram5t.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org//i33000/img_33749.jpg

Someone here who could post my Berlin pics. I would send them to you via E-mail :)

I really liked barcelona's public transport, it didn't look too fancy, but it was pretty clean, modern, really easy and dropped off in good locations.
http://www.uwasa.fi/~atn/travel/spain/barcelon/metro.jpg
http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/es/metro/Barcelona/Barcelona_metro-2.jpg
I was also impressed with Lisbon's and Madrid's

Someone here who could post my Berlin pics. I would send them to you via E-mail :)


it will be a pleasure, i´m sending you my mail via PM so you can send me the pics. I was in Berlin not even a month ago, and i truly belive that this city has one of the best public transports of Europe. :)

lisbon has a good public transport and they are renewing it, berlin has a very big communication net, also paris and london.
but all of us can see metro de madrid is the more modern,more secure with more than 2500 tv cams,more adapted to invalid and ancien people, and the unic in the world that uses the best efficient and modern technology to build it, having duplicated the metro extension from 1995 to 1999 and in 2007 madrilenians will have 3 times more metro than in 1995.reaching the 300 km of extension.and if it is chosen olympic city to 2012 its said the government of madrid has projects to build another 90 km of metro an tramway in the new neighborhood and 60 of train (cercanias).
I think metro de madrid is eficient, is future, is cleanliness, security ,fast ,and cultural and alive, cause metro is not only stations, there are temporarly cultural expositions,restaurants,shops,music,concerts,department stores in big stations like principe pio, metro de madrid is more than travel, is future, a life under the life

Here some facts about Berlin transport system:
SUBWAY:

lines: 9
length: 152 km
stations: 170

COMMUTER NETWORK

lines: far over 20
length: 2777 km
stations: a lot

S-BAHN

lines: 15
length: 330 km
stations: about 170

TRAM

lines: 21
length: 370 km
stations: about 800

BUS

lines: 150(day),55(night)
length: about 2000 km
stations: about 6600

FERRY

lines: 6

I think that's one of the best.

A few pics of the Berlin transport system, provided by Berlincity:

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B83354%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B833735ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B834432ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp47%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B833736ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B833458ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp47%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B82%3B9%3B8ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B82%3C792ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/34375%3A4%3B23232%7Ffp47%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B82%3C88%3Aot1lsi

more pics to come soon!

Paris, London, Madrid

The chosen ones are not the biggest.

Metro in Kyiv is much more extensive than a lot of the options, as well as Metro of Kharkiv.

MAdrid at all!!
I've also tried Barcelona, Paris and Berlin. From those 3 the best for me is Berlin! Excellent S-Bahn+U-Bahn system!

Madrid

Subway
lines: 12
length: 226,9km
stations: 190

Commuter trains (cercanias)
lines:12
length: 584,7km
stations:173

EMT (buses in the city)
lines:190 (26 night)
length:1532 km
stations:a lot

Interurban buses (connect the metropolitan area with the city and viceversa)
lines:368
length: don't know but almost the double of length than EMT buses
stations:a lot

Some more pic of Berlin´s transports, also provided by Berlincity:

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A34633ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A34633ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A33563ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A2%3B5%3B8ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A33664ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A33767ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A33%3A58ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437684323232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E232383%3B%3A34%3B%3C5ot1lsi


And a few extra not-very-good shots i took some weeks ago:

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B3356%3Bot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32328%3B%3A%3A43334nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B34456ot1lsi


http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3B3%3B6%3B3%3C8ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp54%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3B3%3B6%3A%3B48ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A6675ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A7642ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32328%3B%3A9%3B5%3A77nu0mrj

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A874%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A8384ot1lsi


http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A9292ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A%3A%3A38ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A%3B455ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A8698ot1lsi


http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp63%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A%3A273ot1lsi
http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp4%3Enu%3D3249%3E%3B82%3E5%3B6%3EWSNRCG%3D32328%3B%3A9%3B9846nu0mrj


http://images.snapfish.com/3437687923232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A%3A%3A49ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/343768%3B523232%7Ffp58%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B27488ot1lsi


http://images.snapfish.com/343768%3B523232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B2748%3Aot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/343768%3B523232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B2%3B298ot1lsi


http://images.snapfish.com/3437698723232%7Ffp46%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B2%3A6%3B5ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437698723232%7Ffp45%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3B2%3A8%3B3ot1lsi

http://images.snapfish.com/3437698723232%7Ffp64%3Dot%3E233%3A%3D%3C73%3D6%3A7%3DXROQDF%3E23237%3C9%3A%3A8%3B%3B9ot1lsi

Very nice photos Skylandman!! Gracias!!

I voted for Moscow because it is, by far, the busiest subway system in the world in terms of passengers carried.
I understand that Madrid has amongst the best transit systems on the planet.

Bilbao (Basque Country, North of Spain), as European Planning Studies Journal says: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=209087

;)

WOW!!
:eek2:

Seems that no one knows Munich, here some facts:
SUBWAY:

lines: 8
length: 86 km
stations: 91

TRAM

lines: 10
length: 71 km
stations: 148

BUS:

lines: 61
length: 432 km
stations: 842

S-bahn:

lines: 10?
length: 442 km
stations: ?

So you see it´s one of the best in Europe and there are a lot of projects, for example the subway will reach 100 km soon!

Barcelona Metropolitan Area has got now 800 km. of rail transport:
-Metro
-Tramways
-Commuter trains
:wink2:
Updated 1/6/2005
;)

why is the poll closed ?

Its easy, Athens. The most moder transportation urban system in Europe. Who voted for London???????????????????????? I would never vote for London, u enter at londond metro and U dont know if u ll go out alive or ablebodied....Brrrrrrrrr

get a life you insensitive dick.

Who voted for London???????????????????????? I would never vote for London, u enter at londond metro and U dont know if u ll go out alive or ablebodied....Brrrrrrrrr


Stupid dickhead...you better shut up your mouth arsehole!!!

BTW, Athens is far from having Europe´s best transportation system, it may be modern but it´s way too small. It can´t compete with London, Paris, Berlin or Madrid to name just a few...

I thought Paris was good, but parts were grotty and smelled of wee. Berlins was clean and efficient but its map was confusing. Ive not used Madrid but i hear its meant to be very good. Londons is the biggest and is currently being virtually completely renewed. Its a tough one...

No.For the size of Athens,the combination of metro (which has stations-museums of modern and ancient art), tram, buses,trolleys and suburban railway, the network works excellent, its clean and of course its very safe, no bombs, no beggars.
And Prizemazda,its not my fault if your city pays for your dickhead-politicians choices.

Madrid is so good? I have known just now. :cheers:

Is there a map of a city with the size of Madrid, Moscow, Paris, London etc . where you can see everything in one. ? I mean, metro, buses, tram, S-Bahn/RER etc
Just wondering if that's possible...

no you dick but to make fun of peoples death is sick. Also do you think that Morroco or Bali or Casablanca or Djerba or Riyadh had anything todo with the Iraq war? You are an idiot of the highest degree. NOw go away and crawl back under that EU subsidised rock you cam from.

I never made fun of the people who died. But I dont consider,in my opinion, the London metro as good, at the time that it is not secure and safe,thats all.As for the rock I m coming from, dont forget that is is also called the craddle of the western culture , u little barbarian..

Its easy, Athens. The most moder transportation urban system in Europe. Who voted for London???????????????????????? I would never vote for London, u enter at londond metro and U dont know if u ll go out alive or ablebodied....Brrrrrrrrr

:no:

Oh I have never heard a Greek go on about words that are greek, this and that blah blah blah. Its a real shame that nothign good has come out of Greece since how many millenia ago, oh wait there is despina vandi.

You know absolutely nothing about London Underground or the attacks. Currently there is 1 policeman to every 500 people using public transport in London. The average Londoner is filmed over 200 times a day by security cameras. London is a pretty safe place to be. Surely safer than in a country which takes months to find a small group of terrorists. So shut your mouth newbie otherwise you won't last very long on this site at all.

Sure London is anice city, i was there a lot of times.But look. When u are number 1 target of the terrorists, 1 policemean to every 500 people its not enough to be safe.It is good for other cities which are not number 1 target,but for London its sure not enough.Your city have to do much more to become safe again in the future and believe me, its not a matter of the policemen or thre cameras. The problem is not there and u know what I mean. U give war, u take war.

Shut up. Iraq is the lastest in a long line of causes al-qaeda is using to promote its view of global jihad. You clearly know nothing about al-qaeda.

Keep going and Ill report you to a moderator.

You don't know how many police there are in London, they are everywhere. If we were attacked because of the Iraq war why was Greece at risk because of the olympics which had nothing to do with Iraq. You really are short-sighted.

What an idiot.... just using the attacks as an excuse to have a go.

Is there a map of a city with the size of Madrid, Moscow, Paris, London etc . where you can see everything in one. ? I mean, metro, buses, tram, S-Bahn/RER etc
Just wondering if that's possible...
Here is the one of MADRID with ALL RAIL TRANSPORTS (Metro, Light Metro, Commuter trains...) which SpastiK (from spanish forum) made. It
represents the situation in 2007, with all the ampliations that are now being built.

http://img260.imageshack.us/img260/9325/planospastik3br2iz.gif

More information at Madrid Metro Ampliation 2003-2007 thread:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=235045

Some numbers for Zürich:
Area of Zürcher Verkehrsverbund: 1840 km2, 1.31 mio people, 186 communities (it's NOT the whole area of the S-Bahn in Metro Zurich but only the Kanton - "Tarifverbund")

25 S-Bahn-lines
4 Night-S-Bahn lines
13 Tram-lines
7 Boat-lines
4 Cablecars
300 Buslines
transport 310'570 people/day on 3513 km

The datas are only from the white area on the map, as you can see it also reaches out to other metro cities as Lenzburg, Baden, Zug, Frauenfeld... an area of about 3000km2 and 1.8mio pop.
http://www.zvv.ch/liniennetz_2005/liniennetz.gif

london

London 2004-2005 Rail Map
*Not including riverboat services.

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a259/mkimemia/Image1.jpg

Best transportation system is difficult to find due to different criterias.

First to mention: Eastern and central european countriues had developed very densy public transport systems as collective transport beating individual one was part of the commie ideology. Their recent problem is efficience and vehicles condition. But especial central european countries deal well with.

Second to mention: German speaking countries have a long tradition of very good public transport, especially Switzerland.

Examples from my country: Prague, as I remember, has the largest percentage of people moving by public transport among EU capitals. Plzen, pop 162,000 (as well as larger cities of Ostrava and Brno) has an integrated system of trams and trolley-buses (rail in a process to be integrated closer). Buses work too, but only as a supplementar mean of transport. The percentage of people using electric-base (=no-polution) transport in the Czech republic belongs to world's top and IMO only Switzerland can rival here (with respect to DE, AT and PT). We are still world's largest producer of trolley-buses and one of three largest producers of trams.

PS: London or Paris systems may seem impressive, but considering their size, the system is rather infrequent.

PS: London or Paris systems may seem impressive, but considering their size, the system is rather infrequent.

What do you mean? If you mean train frequency then Paris has trains coming nearly as frequent as in ex-USSR on the metro.

PS: London or Paris systems may seem impressive, but considering their size, the system is rather infrequent.

I have to agree with your stance. Though I wouldn't call it infrequency but lack of coverage. London Underground for instance is anything but impressive. It is completely beyond me how London came second in this poll.
LU serves 268 stations in a city populated by nearly 8m people. In Berlin the U- and S-Bahn combined serve 306 stations in a city merely half the size of Greater London. And Berlins transportation systems are not even the best. I'm sure that there are cities with a better stations per capita ratio.

LU serves 268 stations in a city populated by nearly 8m people. In Berlin the U- and S-Bahn combined serve 306 stations in a city merely half the size of Greater London.
If you combine Berlin U-Bahn and S-Bahn, you need to do the same for London. Underground, DLR, Overground and regional rail lines (not yet integrated in Overground) combined make much more than 268.

Madrid s is the best .

iampuking:
I meant rather lack of coverage, like flierfy mentioned, than infrequence. In cities I mentioned above, you get hardly longer than 10 min. walk to get to closest rail-based station or stop. Anyway, "nearly as frequent as in ex-USSR" makes it even worse for Paris. Out of Moscow there is no city in ex-USSR comparable with Paris in it´s size.

flierfly:
...agree.

Peshu:
Yes, Madrid metro density of coverage is one of the biggest in the world.

I have to agree with your stance. Though I wouldn't call it infrequency but lack of coverage. London Underground for instance is anything but impressive. It is completely beyond me how London came second in this poll.
LU serves 268 stations in a city populated by nearly 8m people. In Berlin the U- and S-Bahn combined serve 306 stations in a city merely half the size of Greater London. And Berlins transportation systems are not even the best. I'm sure that there are cities with a better stations per capita ratio.

London compared to Berlin is not a good analogy. In Berlin - or most big cities in Europe - people live densely in the city centre. It's a densely populated city. London is far more sprawled and therefore dependent on it's suburban rail network which is far more expansive than any other European City (300+ inner suburban London stations) . London's suburban rail network is rivaled by nothing in Europe - only Tokyo. Again, it's not perfect because of the history of London's railways meaning people are taken to a railway terminus from the suburbs and they have to change on to LU. However the future is to adopt the French RER model and construction should start on a new Suburban/Metro line through West->East London ("Crossrail") soon.

Also worth mentioning that LU may only have 268 stations (408km), but London also has the DLR which has 40 stations and a light rail system in the South of the city (40 stations). Recently the London mayor has been given control of some other railways to create the 'London Overground' network. This has 55 stations and another 10+ under construction. This will create an orbital "S-Bahn" around London. We haven't even touched on the Bus network (Europe's largest).

Whilst London's transport is not perfect (for example, Berlin has 24-hour subways at the weekend), it is more than adequate for the moment and favours very comparably to many other EU cities in terms of shifting people around the Central area.

If you combine Berlin U-Bahn and S-Bahn, you need to do the same for London. Underground, DLR, Overground and regional rail lines (not yet integrated in Overground) combined make much more than 268.

I know that there is a bit more than LU. However, Thameslink is the only cross city rail link. Any other rail service terminate at one of London's termini which is far from being perfect. Furthermore are these rail services less frequent than LU.

London compared to Berlin is not a good analogy. In Berlin - or most big cities in Europe - people live densely in the city centre. It's a densely populated city. London is far more sprawled and therefore dependent on it's suburban rail network which is far more expansive than any other European City (300+ inner suburban London stations) . London's suburban rail network is rivaled by nothing in Europe - only Tokyo.
Surely no european city rivals the overcrowding (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7i-Tt5ZygU) in London's suburban trains.

Again, it's not perfect because of the history of London's railways meaning people are taken to a railway terminus from the suburbs and they have to change on to LU. However the future is to adopt the French RER model and construction should start on a new Suburban/Metro line through West->East London ("Crossrail") soon.

Also worth mentioning that LU may only have 268 stations (408km), but London also has the DLR which has 40 stations and a light rail system in the South of the city (40 stations).
Compared to Berlin London's tram network is rather tiny.

Recently the London mayor has been given control of some other railways to create the 'London Overground' network. This has 55 stations and another 10+ under construction. This will create an orbital "S-Bahn" around London. We haven't even touched on the Bus network (Europe's largest).
Crossrail and London Overground might be the future. But by now London's transportation networks are nowhere near the best.

Whilst London's transport is not perfect (for example, Berlin has 24-hour subways at the weekend), it is more than adequate for the moment and favours very comparably to many other EU cities in terms of shifting people around the Central area.
In the central area maybe. But London is more than that. Other cities outskirts are much better served than those of London. That's why I rank London much lower than most people do.

Surely no european city rivals the overcrowding (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7i-Tt5ZygU) in London's suburban trains.


Actually Moscow and Paris can compare. :(


London compared to Berlin is not a good analogy. In Berlin - or most big cities in Europe - people live densely in the city centre. It's a densely populated city. London is far more sprawled and therefore dependent on it's suburban rail network which is far more expansive than any other European City (300+ inner suburban London stations) . London's suburban rail network is rivaled by nothing in Europe - only Tokyo. Again.

Not rivaled in size but London suburban system is rivaled in use.
Paris RER + suburban lines are maybe less extensive but much more used.

The quality of a system is not only the kilometers of track or the number of station.

iampuking:
I meant rather lack of coverage, like flierfy mentioned, than infrequence. In cities I mentioned above, you get hardly longer than 10 min. walk to get to closest rail-based station or stop. Anyway, "nearly as frequent as in ex-USSR" makes it even worse for Paris. Out of Moscow there is no city in ex-USSR comparable with Paris in it´s size

What? Paris has the densest metro ssystem in the world, and one of the most frequent in terms of train frequencies, Moscow has high train frequency but is not anywhere near as dense. The rest, I don't have a clue what you're on about.

Surely no european city rivals the overcrowding (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7i-Tt5ZygU) in London's suburban trains.


I don't know. But I'm not sure showing a video of where a train has broken down substantiates that claim!


Compared to Berlin London's tram network is rather tiny.


Oh yes, London's tram route is very small in length. We have nothing like the Berlin tram system (well not any more). However the South London Tram system is for most of its journey a light rail system. It was never intended to be an on-street tram for its most part. Infact they originally wanted to build it as an underground line! (too expensive though).


Crossrail and London Overground might be the future. But by now London's transportation networks are nowhere near the best.


Nowhere is perfect. Though London scores highly on many attributes which constitute a 'best transportation' system IMO. You suggested coverage and number of stations let London down. I don't think you've actually visited London enough or understand all the transport modes in the city to come up with that conclusion. It's main flaw is lack of capacity due to relentless growth of London (nb. Berlin just hasn't matched London on growth, economy etc etc. It's a bad comparison by you) - this is why there is a planned future.


In the central area maybe. But London is more than that. Other cities outskirts are much better served than those of London. That's why I rank London much lower than most people do.

London is served with excellent links on its outskirts! Many suburban stations have high train frequencies matching those of LU. There are express tracks too. In fact people in inner London often travel for longer to their place of work than those on the outskirts. Again, I don't think you understand London that well do you?!

Come live in London, you will change your opinion on what you believe to be the bad aspects of London's transport. By which I mean, you'll understand its real flaws.

I know that there is a bit more than LU. However, Thameslink is the only cross city rail link. Any other rail service terminate at one of London's termini which is far from being perfect.

The termination at termini is a problem. It's a legacy of private companies that the Crossrail scheme will hopefully address.

Furthermore are these rail services less frequent than LU.

Some examples for you:

Off peak frequencies for some London suburban stations:

Clapham Junction 57 trains per hour to Central London. (No LU line has this)

East Croydon has 27 trains per hour to Central London. (Better than average LU line)

Wimbledon has 20 trains per hour to Central London (better than the Wimbledon LU station)

Stratford has 17 trains per hour to Central London (better than some LU branch lines)

This is off peak so on-peak there are more!!

Not rivaled in size but London suburban system is rivaled in use.
Paris RER + suburban lines are maybe less extensive but much more used.

The quality of a system is not only the kilometers of track or the number of station.

I absolutely agree. I don't think people who are saying the Paris and London systems are not impressive really know what they're talking about!

Some examples for you:

Off peak frequencies for some London suburban stations:

Clapham Junction 57 trains per hour to Central London. (No LU line has this)

East Croydon has 27 trains per hour to Central London. (Better than average LU line)

Wimbledon has 20 trains per hour to Central London (better than the Wimbledon LU station)

Stratford has 17 trains per hour to Central London (better than some LU branch lines)

This is off peak so on-peak there are more!!

These are four key stations in Londons rail network. They are in no way exemplary. Stations like Enfield Town which is served by 2 train-pairs per off-peak-hour are more common.

I absolutely agree. I don't think people who are saying the Paris and London systems are not impressive really know what they're talking about!

Don't confer the judgement on London to those of Paris. The transportation systems in the Île de France is on a different level than those of London. Contrary to London the French didn't dread to invest several billion euros on cross-city rail tunnels.

Don't confer the judgement on London to those of Paris. The transportation systems in the Île de France is on a different level than those of London. Contrary to London the French didn't dread to invest several billion euros on cross-city rail tunnels.

Well I mean the judgement of who, you? You've not really said anything that bears true in your accusation of lack of transport coverage in London. And now you say London dreads to spend money? On the contrary, if it had it, it would. But wait a minute, you agreed London and Paris are not great on coverage...

I think you're confused and lacking any real knowledge about London.

These are four key stations in Londons rail network. They are in no way exemplary. Stations like Enfield Town which is served by 2 train-pairs per off-peak-hour are more common.

Rubbish!! Enfield Town is not exemplary. It's the legacy of badly planned out private rail companies. Connecting to Enfield Town by local bus from other stations and LU stations is piss easy.

You first suggested coverage, not so much frequency, in London was bad. Not true! Then you changed your mind and suggested rail services did not match LU. I showed you stations that exceed LU. You suggested the outskirts of London are badly connected and then point out the stations I showed you are: 'Key Stations' - all well outside of central London!

Most rail stations in London, at a minimum off-peak, run 4 trains an hour. Most run more. Few, but in fairness a considerable fair few, run less.

Nothing is perfect - far from it, but you've clearly not spent a significant amount of time commuting as a Londoner. Sometimes it's ok just to say 'oh sorry, I didn't realise'. :)

If you like seeing many trains moving, here's a video from February 2007 I've found about Gare du Nord : 33 trains show their face to the camera in 56 seconds. The title says it's been accelerated 20 times, which make a good average of 106 trains appearing to an observer located there in an hour.

P7TrJ-NZwiI

However, that's only a small part of rail traffic through Gare du Nord. You would also have to add metro lines 4, 5 and 7, and also RER lines B, D and E. Now that I think about it, all this makes a lot of trains in the end!

London compared to Berlin is not a good analogy. In Berlin - or most big cities in Europe - people live densely in the city centre. It's a densely populated city. London is far more sprawled and therefore dependent on it's suburban rail network which is far more expansive than any other European City (300+ inner suburban London stations) .

Err...Berlin is a very spread out city. It is actually less densely populated than London.

I don't know. But I'm not sure showing a video of where a train has broken down substantiates that claim!
Not just a single train that has broken down but the whole attitude to deal with that problem.


Nowhere is perfect. Though London scores highly on many attributes which constitute a 'best transportation' system IMO.
I'm curious to know what these attributes are.

You suggested coverage and number of stations let London down. I don't think you've actually visited London enough or understand all the transport modes in the city to come up with that conclusion. It's main flaw is lack of capacity due to relentless growth of London (nb. Berlin just hasn't matched London on growth, economy etc etc. It's a bad comparison by you) - this is why there is a planned future.
I'd rather say it's the lack of investment that lets London down. But if you insist on growing cities take Zürich or München. Their economic growth rivals that of London. And they still have better transport links.

London is served with excellent links on its outskirts! Many suburban stations have high train frequencies matching those of LU.
If they had such high frequencies. Why does nationalrail.co.uk tell me something else? Northumberland Park, served by 1 train-pair per hour. And that one doesn't connect it even to central London but an obscure place like Stratford.

There are express tracks too. In fact people in inner London often travel for longer to their place of work than those on the outskirts. Again, I don't think you understand London that well do you?!
I understand it well enough that I can say there are other cities which are way better off with their transportation systems.

Come live in London, you will change your opinion on what you believe to be the bad aspects of London's transport. By which I mean, you'll understand its real flaws.
Well, I listen to Londoners. And they far more than other people complain about transportation in their city.

Err...Berlin is a very spread out city. It is actually less densely populated than London.

Really? I've always found Berlin to be a fairly dense city. People seem to live in apartments reaching 5/6/7 stories high. This is not the case in London. Most people live in the suburbs.

They're very different cities. I couldn't go to Berlin and say 'this is the centre of Berlin' - it's central area is often ambiguous and very much spread out. That's why I think it's not appropriate to compare the Berlin U/S-bahn with LU.

Not just a single train that has broken down but the whole attitude to deal with that problem.

I'm not sure what you mean... you were talking about overcrowding before. Does British culture cause broken down trains? Maybe, our trains break down often...


I'm curious to know what these attributes are.


Coverage. Frequency. Capacity. Technology. Ambience.

All of these things London does well at... it's just not consistent across the transport modes. That's a genuine problem.


I'd rather say it's the lack of investment that lets London down. But if you insist on growing cities take Zürich or München. Their economic growth rivals that of London. And they still have better transport links.


How do you define better transport links? Does Zurich or Munchen have an equivalent of Heathrow Airport? What place does not deserve better investment? Which city has met its transport needs? Is that ever even possible? London is undergoing massive investment btw.


If they had such high frequencies. Why does nationalrail.co.uk tell me something else? Northumberland Park, served by 1 train-pair per hour. And that one doesn't connect it even to central London but an obscure place like Stratford.


This is not a reflection of a typical London train station. It is the lack of forward thinking on the designers of Victorian railways. Anyone living near Northumberland park might prefer to use Bruce Grove station or take a bus from the Victoria Line.

I think you're scraping the barrel to argue a case you don't have. This is the actual picture of train frequencies in London's boundaries. Populated areas not served by LU, particularly in the south, have high frequency suburban trains http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/High-frequency-services-map.pdf - there are some significant gaps, yes, but numerous projects are underway to rectify this. No one is saying otherwise. From the outset you weren't even aware London had anything but LU it seems...


I understand it well enough that I can say there are other cities which are way better off with their transportation systems.


Your views on cities and their transportation systems are too black and white. When i ride the Paris metro I don't think 'This is like LU' - because it's not. It's more like the Hong Kong metro. Try to consider transportation in context and then tell me where London is failing to meet the needs of its people - beyond what the planners are not already working on.


Well, I listen to Londoners. And they far more than other people complain about transportation in their city.

I'm at the front of the complaining queue. I'm also at the front of the queue to correct people who clearly have not spent time in London and are not being very consistent in their critique of London's transport.

Rubbish!! Enfield Town is not exemplary. It's the legacy of badly planned out private rail companies. Connecting to Enfield Town by local bus from other stations and LU stations is piss easy.
Buses are time consuming. The rail link is a lot quicker.

You first suggested coverage, not so much frequency, in London was bad. Not true! Then you changed your mind and suggested rail services did not match LU.
I don't switch criteria. I said that London lacks coverage. And that is well true. The reason why I didn't count other rail services than LU is their infrequency. Lee Valley lines - badly served, Northern City line - served peak hours only and so on.

I showed you stations that exceed LU. You suggested the outskirts of London are badly connected and then point out the stations I showed you are: 'Key Stations' - all well outside of central London!
The majority of Londoners lives outside walking distance to these key stations. So you can't tell the tale of London rail services by these few well served stations. They are rather the exception but the rule.

Most rail stations in London, at a minimum off-peak, run 4 trains an hour. Most run more. Few, but in fairness a considerable fair few, run less.
I must be damn unlucky that always pick one of these few when I study Londons rail services.

Nothing is perfect - far from it, but you've clearly not spent a significant amount of time commuting as a Londoner. Sometimes it's ok just to say 'oh sorry, I didn't realise'. :)
I don't need to commute in London. All I need to do is to read timetables.

Buses are time consuming. The rail link is a lot quicker.

Not if you've only got 2 trains an hour it's not...


I don't switch criteria. I said that London lacks coverage. And that is well true. The reason why I didn't count other rail services than LU is their infrequency. Lee Valley lines - badly served, Northern City line - served peak hours only and so on.


Ermmm... but you didn't mention the DLR, The Overground, South West Trains, South Eastern Trains, Southern, Thameslink, C2C.



The majority of Londoners lives outside walking distance to these key stations. So you can't tell the tale of London rail services by these few well served stations. They are rather the exception but the rule.


So take Clapham Junction... 57 trains an hour to central London...

The stations on its lines include Putney, Earlsfield, Battersea, Raynes Park, Streatham Hill. All these stations have high frequencies services. Keeping in with "the rule".


I must be damn unlucky that always pick one of these few when I study Londons rail services.


I think so.


I don't need to commute in London. All I need to do is to read timetables.

Get some glasses perhaps? Failing that, remember Google is no substitute for reality.

I'm not sure what you mean... you were talking about overcrowding before. Does British culture cause broken down trains? Maybe, our trains break down often...
This rail company leaves people waiting who were left behind by an overcrowded train. I don't think that you see that in too many other countries.

Coverage. Frequency. Capacity. Technology. Ambience.
I think we already spoke about coverage and frequency.
Capacity - it has already be mentioned that London is rather short of that.
Ambience - The narrow tube platform are a bit scary. But that's a subjective appraisement. So I leave that out.
Technology - can't say anything about it.

How do you define better transport links? Does Zurich or Munchen have an equivalent of Heathrow Airport?
Equal in the way to be an airport or to make me laugh? ZH-Kloten and FJS might struggle with the latter.

What place does not deserve better investment? Which city has met its transport needs? Is that ever even possible? London is undergoing massive investment btw.
It might not be possible to satisfy every transport need. Nonetheless is it possible to come close to that. And I dare to say that there cities which come much closer to perfection than London.

This is not a reflection of a typical London train station. It is the lack of forward thinking on the designers of Victorian railways. Anyone living near Northumberland park might prefer to use Bruce Grove station or take a bus from the Victoria Line.
Victorian traffic planner tackled the problems of their times. They even laid tracks that connect Northumberland Park directly to Liverpool St. They cannot be blamed for the lack of funding that is that cause for the cut down of this service today.

I think you're scraping the barrel to argue a case you don't have. This is the actual picture of train frequencies in London's boundaries. Populated areas not served by LU, particularly in the south, have high frequency suburban trains http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/High-frequency-services-map.pdf - there are some significant gaps, yes, but numerous projects are underway to rectify this. No one is saying otherwise. From the outset you weren't even aware London had anything but LU it seems...
Good for London if something is done now. In comparable cities, however, projects like crossrail are in service for decades. London is still a long way behind. Which brings me back to my starting point. Londons transport is nowhere near the best in Europe.

Your views on cities and their transportation systems are too black and white. When i ride the Paris metro I don't think 'This is like LU' - because it's not. It's more like the Hong Kong metro. Try to consider transportation in context and then tell me where London is failing to meet the needs of its people - beyond what the planners are not already working on.
Tottenham Hotspur wants to increase their ground capacity significantly. Main obstruction are the piteous transport links. Support by the govt - none. One solution is to relocate which tells a lot about transportation in London.

I'm at the front of the complaining queue. I'm also at the front of the queue to correct people who clearly have not spent time in London and are not being very consistent in their critique of London's transport.
Who can you mean? My critics of Londons transport is fairly consistent.

Well I mean the judgement of who, you? You've not really said anything that bears true in your accusation of lack of transport coverage in London.
I admit that transport in London as a whole doesn't lack coverage of sufficient frequented rail service although some areas do. The weakness of rail transport in London, however, is the insufficient interaction between the lines. The majority of rail lines in London are radial lines. They run into the city centre and terminate there. Very few of these suburban lines connect to other suburban lines apart from their sister lines run into the same terminus.
This increases the number of changes for cross city journeys as those suburban lines are connected indirectly by LU.

Ermmm... but you didn't mention the DLR, The Overground, South West Trains, South Eastern Trains, Southern, Thameslink, C2C.
With the exception of DLR and Thameslink suburban rail lines provide a rather 19th century service. They collect their passengers at unsheltered stations in the suburbs and dump them collectively at a terminus in central London. This creates enormous numbers of passenger that run through Londons main stations which operate at or over capacity according to TfL.

Modern suburban rail services run on diameter lines through the city centre and connect there to almost any intersecting line of the metro system. This keeps the number of changes limited to one for almost any journey within the network. It creates redundancies in the network which keep the system running even if a single line breaks down.

The stations on its lines include Putney, Earlsfield, Battersea, Raynes Park, Streatham Hill. All these stations have high frequencies services. Keeping in with "the rule".
You tell me the number of stations that are served by at least 4 train-pairs per daytime-hour and I add them to the number of LU stations and those of DLR. A rough calculation with an estimate of 550 rail stations in Greater London tells me that London is still short of stations.

The narrow tube platform are a bit scary. But that's a subjective appraisement. So I leave that out.

Please point out to me which platforms, except for a select few, are remarkably narrow.

sarfonland, iampuking:

1. City Transportation Density:
In Prague (pop 1.18 mil.; Grater Prague) there are 57 metro stations recently. Grater London would have to have over 450 and Greater Paris almost 500 stations to reach the same density. There is an extension planned to reach up to 84 stations until 2019. That means to rival possible 650-750 stations in London/Paris. As in London/Paris there is a city rail system in Prague as well plus one of the densiest tram network in the world (141 km) consisting of 36 lines. I do not talk about buses as they are everywhere. London bus network being the largest in Europe is not extremly impressive either as only Paris and Moscow can be compared to London in size matters. I believe Paris bus network scale is closed to London's. Moscow has an all-city tram system plus trolley-buses. Perhaps Moscow bus + trolley-bus network is larger than London bus one?

2. London living-space sprawl:
??? Where did you find info about the fact, other big european cities are more centrist? I do not mean it oiffensive. Am just interested. I do not know most of european cities so much to make judgements, but I have not realised big differencies. Prague, as usual example :): The central "Prague 1" district population sank from 64k in late 80's down to barely 30k in 2007 (new offices, expansive prices)... and is still sinking...

British Isles have always been more individualist and less socialist than continental Europe and public transport is an example of that. Where there is densy S-bahn+tram+bus city transport system in german city, there are few buses and a some possible rail stops in british/irish city of the same size.

Madrid for me.
London - too expensive, trains not frequent for subway.
Moscow - overcrowded subway.

sarfonland, iampuking:

1. City Transportation Density:
In Prague (pop 1.18 mil.; Grater Prague) there are 57 metro stations recently. Grater London would have to have over 450 and Greater Paris almost 500 stations to reach the same density. There is an extension planned to reach up to 84 stations until 2019. That means to rival possible 650-750 stations in London/Paris. As in London/Paris there is a city rail system in Prague as well plus one of the densiest tram network in the world (141 km) consisting of 36 lines. I do not talk about buses as they are everywhere. London bus network being the largest in Europe is not extremly impressive either as only Paris and Moscow can be compared to London in size matters. I believe Paris bus network scale is closed to London's. Moscow has an all-city tram system plus trolley-buses. Perhaps Moscow bus + trolley-bus network is larger than London bus one?

2. London living-space sprawl:
??? Where did you find info about the fact, other big european cities are more centrist? I do not mean it oiffensive. Am just interested. I do not know most of european cities so much to make judgements, but I have not realised big differencies. Prague, as usual example :): The central "Prague 1" district population sank from 64k in late 80's down to barely 30k in 2007 (new offices, expansive prices)... and is still sinking...

British Isles have always been more individualist and less socialist than continental Europe and public transport is an example of that. Where there is densy S-bahn+tram+bus city transport system in german city, there are few buses and a some possible rail stops in british/irish city of the same size.

Why exactly are you addressing me, you haven't replied to my post :nuts:

Good for London if something is done now. In comparable cities, however, projects like crossrail are in service for decades. London is still a long way behind. Which brings me back to my starting point. Londons transport is nowhere near the best in Europe.

You're forgetting why the RER in Paris was made. The Paris Metro has short 5 car platforms on many of it's lines and stations too close together and therefore insufficient capacity to extend into the suburbs. LU has longer trains and further apart stations (1.5km on average and thus more comparable to the Moscow Metro which has 1.6km on average) doing the job that the RER would do in Paris, which goes back to your point about coverage, If LU serves as an RER system then it has better coverage, the Parisian RER only has 5 lines compared to LU's 11. Crossrail isn't even being built to take passengers off so called "overcrowded" rail routes, it's to relieve the Central line and as an express route between Heathrow, The City and Canary Wharf.

You're forgetting why the RER in Paris was made. The Paris Metro has short 5 car platforms on many of it's lines and stations too close together and therefore insufficient capacity to extend into the suburbs. LU has longer trains and further apart stations (1.5km on average and thus more comparable to the Moscow Metro which has 1.6km on average) doing the job that the RER would do in Paris, which goes back to your point about coverage, If LU serves as an RER system then it has better coverage, the Parisian RER only has 5 lines compared to LU's 11. Crossrail isn't even being built to take passengers off so called "overcrowded" rail routes, it's to relieve the Central line and as an express route between Heathrow, The City and Canary Wharf.

RER does, however, a much better job. Their five lines split into various branches on either end and covers the whole area around the core city whereas LU barely reaches the south half of London.
RER is also significantly quicker than LU. It takes just 31 min to get from Châtelet-Les Halles to CdG 1 whereas Piccadilly Line takes 51 min from Leicester Square to Heathrow 123.

RER does, however, a much better job. Their five lines split into various branches on either end and covers the whole area around the core city whereas LU barely reaches the south half of London.
RER is also significantly quicker than LU. It takes just 31 min to get from Châtelet-Les Halles to CdG 1 whereas Piccadilly Line takes 51 min from Leicester Square to Heathrow 123.

Of course it does a better job it's stations are 2.2km apart on average. What i'm disputing is you whining about London's rail network having little coverage, completely ignoring the fact that the Parisian RER has fewer, further apart stops than LU, meaning that it has worse coverage and thus Parisians may have to rely on getting a bus to the nearest RER station, which you also whined about. And London Underground's lines also split into branches. the development to the south of the Thames is a lot less because of geological conditions, and the fact that it is served by a well developed overground network that was electrified early on, compared with the undeveloped steam railways in the north. The frequencies aren't as good as LU, but Livingstone plans to take over the Southern franchise meaning higher frequencies, don't forget Overground...

Also, here is a Tube + Overground (http://www.tfl.gov.uk/gettingaround/1106.aspx) map showing routes with 4tph frequency or more, if anyone is interested. It's the second one down.

iampuking:
My answer was posted to London-deffenders generally :) and answered several posts in one. This is a thread about the "best transportation system in Europe". Crowded trains are not the best transportation I can imagine.
PS: I know there is smaller or bigger crowd in actually any big city in a peak time, but in a "best transportation system" shouldn't be a place where school boys have to wait for another train (video) anyway...

iampuking:
My answer was posted to London-deffenders generally :) and answered several posts in one. This is a thread about the "best transportation system in Europe". Crowded trains are not the best transportation I can imagine.
PS: I know there is smaller or bigger crowd in actually any big city in a peak time, but in a "best transportation system" shouldn't be a place where school boys have to wait for another train (video) anyway...

Wasn't the delay in the video because of broken down train?

iampuking: As far as I remember, it was just crowded, not delayed.

iampuking: As far as I remember, it was just crowded, not delayed.

Okay, so how does that prove your point?

Realy incomplete thread,,,, reduce transportation systems in europe to a few citys....

Lisbon? Porto? Valência? Bilbao? Lyon? Marseille?Manchester?Glasgow?Dublin?Hamburg?Bruxels? etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.....

London

Someone should make a new thread for this, is possible. The poll has been closed for some time now.

However, I like the discussion here.

I would like the London complainers - who have never been to London - to come and stay here. The reasons you cite for London having bad transport are neither unique or well founded and will be washed away upon your stay as a real Londoner.

London's real problems is having a 21st century city with 19th century infrastructure. Big improvements are underway to increase an already impressive system in terms of frequency, capacity and coverage. I struggle to find another city in Europe to compare London with on any level. Paris, London's closet European rival and about the only other mega city in Europe, has developed entirely differently so even a comparison with Paris' transport is inappropriate (look how small its subway is - but its patronage is far more impressive than London).

The poll to me looks perfectly fair and reasonable.

I would like the London complainers - who have never been to London - to come and stay here.
I do not complain about it. I do not need to as I do not use it daily. I just very doubt it is the best transportation system in Europe. Anyway, I can easily turn it and ask you to come to the cities I mentioned. Three types of electricity-based ( two of then on rail tracks) means of transport in 162,000 Plzen for example :)...

London's real problems is having a 21st century city with 19th century infrastructure.
Well, this fact actually throw London out of the pot of candidates itself...

Big improvements are underway to increase an already impressive system in terms of frequency, capacity and coverage.
I believe in London transport huge improvements - no irony. And I am full of respect. I can imagine ruling 10 milion city must be a madness to organize. But it does not make London "the best transportation system in Europe". It is only the scale, not the density and coverage (I am not sure with frequency, what makes London system impressive. Or maybe, it seems to be impressive compared to other british-isles cities like Dublin where there is hardly any public transport from a view point of many continental Europeans.

Realy incomplete thread,,,, reduce transportation systems in europe to a few citys....

Lisbon? Porto? Valência? Bilbao? Lyon? Marseille?Manchester?Glasgow?Dublin?Hamburg?Bruxels? etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.....
In fact, the poll should have less options.;)

Realy incomplete thread,,,, reduce transportation systems in europe to a few citys....

Lisbon? Porto? Valência? Bilbao? Lyon? Marseille?Manchester?Glasgow?Dublin?Hamburg?Bruxels? etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.....

It's impossible to compare big cities like London, Berlin, Paris, Madrid etc. with medium or small size cities like Bilbao (more or less 300.000 inhabitants). The system are different because the problems to resolve are different :)

It's impossible to compare big cities like London, Berlin, Paris, Madrid etc. with medium or small size cities like Bilbao (more or less 300.000 inhabitants). The system are different because the problems to resolve are different :)

But metro in Bilbao arrive till the metro area, which has a million of inhabitants

"Best transportation system in Europe" is not the same as "Best transportation system in europe big citys and other"....

try: better sistems in europe that serve more than 1 million people, or more than 2 millon...

Portvscalem: Definitelly true.

Forbes.
On The Road.
Europe's Most Congested Cities
Parmy Olson and Kelly Nolan 04.21.08, 7:45 PM ET.

Picture 19th-century London and you might imagine quaint, horse-drawn carriages creaking along cobbled streets at the snail's pace of seven miles per hour. Surprisingly enough, the average speed at which cars travel through London today is not that much faster.

London drivers clock an average speed of 11.8 miles per hour (19 kph). That's far slower than Berlin, at 15.0 mph (24.2 kph), and Warsaw, at 16.1 mph (26 kph), which came in second and third, respectively.

"I'm not surprised," says Justin Simon, 35, a driver of one of London's famous black cabs, when told that London tops the list of Europe's slowest cities. How does he describe maneuvering through Britain's capital city? "Horrendous."

The average speeds are the findings of the researchers at Keepmoving.co.uk, a Web site run by international traffic information technology company ITIS Holdings. Keepmoving compiled its survey by analyzing the speed of cars within a 16-square-mile area in the centers of what it calls Europe's 30 major cities, based on Global Positioning System data gathered between June and September 2007. There are many different ways of defining "congestion," but in this case, we've chosen speed.

The U.K. has a dismal six cities in the top 10, including the northern cities of Manchester, Edinburgh and Glasgow not far below London.

Behind The Numbers
What makes the traffic so bad? There are untold theories about fluid dynamics and the financial incentive not to over-utilize area highways.

But there's also the city’s growing population. The researchers at Keepmoving said they were shocked to learn that the average driving speed in London was 40% slower than in Paris, but said that disparity might have to do with the fact that the British capital has the largest population of the 30 cities surveyed, or 7.5 million people. Paris has 2.2 million people. Manchester, in fourth place, is just 450,000 people strong. Britain's National Statistics Office expects the U.K. population to rise to 65 million by 2016, from just over 60 million today.

Hamburg, Germany’s coastal city, ranks last, making it one of the fastest and least-congested cities in Europe, with an average driving speed of 52.3 miles per hour. Hamburg residents can thank an efficient transportation system, where buses and trains coordinate their timetables in order to provide a smooth commute, thereby coaxing people out of their cars. It's also got more incoming freeways than other European cities, which eases congestion.

"London's got a very old infrastructure, and you don't have freeways coming into the city center," said Alex Petrie, manager of Keepmoving. London's quaint, winding roads might be a turn-on for tourists and Anglophiles, but it's intensely irritating to local drivers. "If you have a multi-lane freeway going into a city, the speeds are going to be a lot higher. Hamburg is the fastest city because most of the vehicles we surveyed were on freeways."

Traffic Tune-Ups
Europe's cities are trying to tackle bad traffic in different ways--and with varying levels of success. London and Milan (ranked No. 23) both have a congestion charge system in place, as does Stockholm, which doesn't feature on our list. London charges drivers 8 pounds ($15.79) to travel within the official congestion charge zone between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., while Milan, which has one of the world's highest rates of car ownership and is one of Europe's most polluted cities, charges 10 euros ($15.96) to travel within its zone. London's congestion charge zone covers about eight square miles of the city center; Milan's covers three square miles.

But not everyone is sure that congestion charging will help the standstills. The issue has already become controversial in London, where mayoral elections are about to take place. One of the incumbents, Ken Livingstone, was responsible for having first introduced the scheme in London, to the ire of many local residents.

Opponents argue that the charge in London is too high and doesn't help the environment as much as organizers originally thought. But Malcolm Murray-Clarke, the director of congestion charging in London, says traffic in the capital has been reduced by 20% since the plan was introduced in February 2003.

"It has made difference," agrees Keepmoving's Petrie. "London is one of the cities that has most certainly required more serious action."

Yet while traffic may have eased for those who can afford to pay the charge, along with the taxis and buses that don't have to pay it at all, Petrie says there hasn't been a relative improvement in the buses and trains. "It is still hard to get around in the city center. So whether the effects of the congestion charge are really being felt by the average Londoner, I doubt it very much."

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/21/europe-commute-congestion-forbeslife-cx_po_0421congestion.html

The difference between Paris and London isn't about the size. Paris has actually a quite complete transportation network mixing efficiently both road and rail infrastructures.

Regarding road infrastructures, Paris benefits from straight and large avenues in the city center, and a large variety of expressways including 3 circle motorways (Périphérique, A86 and Francilienne), 7 radial motorways, and a good system of expressways and road tunnels in the center of Paris.

Regarding rail infrastructures, Paris benefits from a dense metro network in its core making any points of Central Paris at less than 5 minutes from a rail station. Meanwhile it has developped the RER which, thanks to its high frequency and fast interconnections to the major metro hubs, make the central city easily accessible to suburbanites.

However, that's far to mean the Paris system is perfect. Indeed, the city suffers from increasingly dense inner suburbs. Business districts are developping all over the areas located between the périphérique and the A86 motorways. As a result the three circle motorways are highly congested, and there's no rail alternatives to them. Indeed the RER lines join suburbs to the city center whereas metro lines join city center to city center.

To sum up, the Paris transportation system is good at the center and in the outer suburbs, but its weak point are the dense inner suburbs, especially when it's about linking an inner suburb to another inner suburb.

Amsterdam / GVB

Part of the GVB Map of all lines (boat/metro/bus/tram)
http://www.nikhef.nl/grid/meetings/jra1ah/gvb.png

Facts etc.
Travelling people every year - +/- 260 million
Travelling people every day - +/- 800.000

Lines;
Bus - 43
Night bus - 12
Tram - 16
Metro - 4
Boat - 6

Length;
Metro - 81,2 km
Tram - 213 km

Stops;
The tram, bus and metro use about 1900 stops and stations in Amsterdam

Numbers;
236 Double Trams
106 Double Metro's
268 Buses
11 Boats

Pictures;
Link (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.mauritsvink.net/site/GVB821.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.mauritsvink.net/site/&h=600&w=900&sz=193&hl=nl&start=3&sig2=SEhxpC-_Zq2s5MuDHIQL3w&um=1&tbnid=1vrSC-y71b089M:&tbnh=97&tbnw=146&ei=ie8VSLGOI5HQ6gPAlvmUAw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgvb%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dnl%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7GZAZ%26sa%3DN)
http://www.mauritsvink.net/site/GVB821.jpg

Link (http://www.overhoeks.nl/images/beeld/pont.jpg)
http://www.overhoeks.nl/images/beeld/pont.jpg

Links (http://www.watertof.nl/watertof/_images/site/toepassingen/bus.jpg)
http://www.watertof.nl/watertof/_images/site/toepassingen/bus.jpg

Links (http://p.chiparus.net/pic/4447/dsc_5695b.jpg)
http://p.chiparus.net/pic/4447/dsc_5695b.jpg

Link (http://www.lennartstreinenpagina.nl/Gastfoto%20Hans%2013.jpg)
http://www.lennartstreinenpagina.nl/Gastfoto%20Hans%2013.jpg

Forbes.
On The Road.
Europe's Most Congested Cities
Parmy Olson and Kelly Nolan 04.21.08, 7:45 PM ET.

But there's also the city’s growing population. The researchers at Keepmoving said they were shocked to learn that the average driving speed in London was 40% slower than in Paris, but said that disparity might have to do with the fact that the British capital has the largest population of the 30 cities surveyed, or 7.5 million people. Paris has 2.2 million people. Manchester, in fourth place, is just 450,000 people strong. Britain's National Statistics Office expects the U.K. population to rise to 65 million by 2016, from just over 60 million today.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/21/europe-commute-congestion-forbeslife-cx_po_0421congestion.html

:lol:

How they are wrong, most of the traffic in Paris come from the "suburbs".
That's weird to not include the suburbs in stats like this. :nuts:

It's said to see Milano and Roma stuck at zero.....

Transports in Milan-city are not as bad as people think... Actually, it's a problem to come from the outskirt to the centre and viceversa.

No compare with Paris, London, Madrid, of course and unfortunately.

Sorry from me too, but I can't add more than 15 cities in the list.
So, I've chosen the biggest.

So, then...where is Hamburg?

Lisbon should be in this pool --'
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2014/2415922128_460fd333de.jpg

what constitutes as 'best'?
Budapest has a modal split of 60%....

^^
The trams! Seriously, Lisbon isn't bad at all (although not the biggest one) and probably the one with the most charme.

Otherwise, certainly not Rome... :)

In terms of fares to quality it's probably Madrid and/or Barcelona (at least of the ones I know). Barcelona has a larger offer of different transport modes, so it's BCN.

Unfortunately, Zurich is not on the list, it's my favourite.

From the cities where I've actually been I'd choose Berlin. The U-Bahn and S-Bahn are great and the tram network in the eastern part is also nice.

Now if they'd only expand the tram network to the western part of the city, for example with a line on the Schlossstraße to Steglitz, or a line from Warschauer Str. to Hermannplatz... but all in all the system is already very good as it is today.

To London I've been once. I found the tube stations and trains very small and hot, a bit claustrophobic. And as we wanted to enter the underground at Covent Garden, we couldn't enter the station. It was completely full, the people were even waiting outside on the street...

And Amsterdam, where I live now, certainly not either. Metro, tram and bus can't keep to their schedule and run quasi randomly. Tram and bus don't have priority at traffic lights. Tram vehicles and infrastructure aren't maintained very well so that the ride is much less comfortable than technically possible.
The trams do run very frequent, though, have a good coverage of the city, and the windows are never covered by advertisements. So there are positive points too. :)

^^
The trams! Seriously, Lisbon isn't bad at all (although not the biggest one) and probably the one with the most charme.

Otherwise, certainly not Rome... :)

In terms of fares to quality it's probably Madrid and/or Barcelona (at least of the ones I know). Barcelona has a larger offer of different transport modes, so it's BCN.

Unfortunately, Zurich is not on the list, it's my favourite.

Hi!

I´d like to know what do you mean when you say that Barcelona has a larger offer of different transport modes...cause I can´t see any fact in your post....larger than....what? Thanks

I haven't been to Madrid, but judging on what has been built there, it seems to be one of the best. Capacity is still superior on the London and Paris systems, while Madrid's is the most modern.

Best? London is still the biggest and most multi faceted, but perhaps, not the best in terms of the demands placed upon it.

Best transport system would probably go to Zurich, Munich or Madrid.

The coolest though? London. They invented the metro/subway after all.

@ gerarsx: Ok, it may be confusing: I meant a larger variety types of transportation: Metro, Busses, Cercancías, FGC trains, boats, several funiculars, trams, tramvía blau, etc.
Madrid basically "only" has the Metro, Cercancías and busses, hasn't it?

Surely no european city rivals the overcrowding in London's suburban trains.

Actually Moscow and Paris can compare. :(
[…]

Not to forget St. Petersburg.

The same thread just with a poll. Choose the city with the best transportation system in Europe. For infos about the cities use the other thread. Please post pics and make a reply. :)

Moscow, Madrid, Paris, London.

It has to be a germanic city, because they offer an unmatched combination of streetcars, trams, subways and regional trains. I don't know many cities on the continent that provide such a high quality of service. Most S-Bahn systems win hands off against their european counterparts, it's just amazing how they go anywhere and serve any small village in the surroundings; Stadtbahn are just great... and so on!

Actually if we drew up a top20 ranking of the european systems, a dozen would probably be located in Germany, Switzerland or Austria. Berlin, Munich and Vienna would top that list, I have very little doubt about that.

Other european systems worth mentioning are Prague whose metro layout is simply very well thought, and associated with an extensive tram network (don't know for the regional trains though); and Madrid which managed to build up a solid system and ensures a good coverage for a city of its size.

It has to be a germanic city, because they offer an unmatched combination of streetcars, trams, subways and regional trains.
[…]

It isn't unmatched, the combination in Moscow or St. Petersburg is much better.

In Moscow for example they have:
Bus
Trolleybus
Tram (two separate networks)
Light-Metro
Metro
Monorail
Boats
Commuter trains
Regional trains

There ist no german city which can compete with this.

It isn't unmatched, the combination in Moscow or St. Petersburg is much better.

In Moscow for example they have:
Bus
Trolleybus
Tram (two separate networks)
Light-Metro
Metro
Monorail
Boats
Commuter trains
Regional trains
A great number of means of mass transportation in use is no indication of a sophisticated network. On the contrary. The more different types of transport technologies there are the more expenses for a broader maintenance equipment are needed.

I really can't see the necessity of a light-metro in Moscow when there are metros and tram. Trolleybuses are the crappiest system anyway, combining the disadvantages of buses and trams. And don't get me started on Monorail. Moscow was better off if they concentrated on metro, trams and buses.

Three or four means of mass transportation are enough. All they need to do is to complement one another to form one well-thought PT network.

A great number of means of mass transportation in use is no indication of a sophisticated network. On the contrary. The more different types of transport technologies there are the more expenses for a broader maintenance equipment are needed.

The network in Moscow is sophisticated, no question about that.


I really can't see the necessity of a light-metro in Moscow when there are metros and tram.

To close the gap between metro and tram.


Trolleybuses are the crappiest system anyway, combining the disadvantages of buses and trams. And don't get me started on Monorail. Moscow was better off if they concentrated on metro, trams and buses.

Three or four means of mass transportation are enough. All they need to do is to complement one another to form one well-thought PT network.

I think they know exactly what they do in Moscow, they have a great transportation system.
In which other european city you have for example a metro train every 75 s?

It isn't unmatched, the combination in Moscow or St. Petersburg is much better.

I've never been to Russia so I refrained from making any comments about russian systems. That's it.

I think they know exactly what they do in Moscow, they have a great transportation system.
In which other european city you have for example a metro train every 75 s?

Time tabled frequency in Moscow is at least 95secs. Paris is not far behind with 100secs.

DAMN?? where's stockholm? oslo? lisbon?

Time tabled frequency in Moscow is at least 95secs. Paris is not far behind with 100secs.

My "metro-book" says 75 s.
When I have been to Moscow I noticed that the frequency is better than in St. Petersburg and the frequency in St. Petersburg is 90 s.

90 is average from 39 tph. it can vary from 70 to 120 sec within a hour. depend on traffic.

It has to be a germanic city, because they offer an unmatched combination of streetcars, trams, subways and regional trains. I don't know many cities on the continent that provide such a high quality of service. Most S-Bahn systems win hands off against their european counterparts, it's just amazing how they go anywhere and serve any small village in the surroundings; Stadtbahn are just great... and so on!

Actually if we drew up a top20 ranking of the european systems, a dozen would probably be located in Germany, Switzerland or Austria. Berlin, Munich and Vienna would top that list, I have very little doubt about that.

Other european systems worth mentioning are Prague whose metro layout is simply very well thought, and associated with an extensive tram network (don't know for the regional trains though); and Madrid which managed to build up a solid system and ensures a good coverage for a city of its size.

I have to agree. German cities do PT brilliantly. Munich has amazing coverage considering it's really just a medium sized city, and Berlin is great to get around (especially on the elevated lines). The only downside about Berlin is that the U-Bahn doesn't go further into East Berlin, but we have history to thank for that.

ill ask again: whats our measure here? what is the "best system"

i think its modal split, because it filters out many differences

ill ask again: whats our measure here? what is the "best system"

i think its modal split, because it filters out many differences

for me would it be
1) Frequency
2) Coverage
3) Comfort
4) Costs

Oh all the Germanic systems are wonderful.

But no one seems to buy tickets to ride for them!

^^ Well, in fact almost everyone does buy a ticket, at least in Berlin.

BVG: Amount of fare evasion in Berlin about the lowest in Europe

Berlin (dpa) The Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG) registered a historically low fare evasion quote of 3,1 percent. "Compared to other European cities, this is very good: in Paris about 6 percent of all travellers ride without a ticket, ...(source (http://www.berliner-verkehr.de/presse/2007/01/bvg-schwarzfahrerquote-in-berlin-eine.html))

My experience in the Ruhr Area is about the same.

^^ Well, in fact almost everyone does buy a ticket, at least in Berlin.

BVG: Amount of fare evasion in Berlin about the lowest in Europe

Berlin (dpa) The Berliner Verkehrsbetriebe (BVG) registered a historically low fare evasion quote of 3,1 percent. "Compared to other European cities, this is very good: in Paris about 6 percent of all travellers ride without a ticket, ...(source (http://www.berliner-verkehr.de/presse/2007/01/bvg-schwarzfahrerquote-in-berlin-eine.html))

My experience in the Ruhr Area is about the same.
I've been to Berlin so many times and so many people don't buy tickets there... it really is high. Those statistics obviously only show the number of people they manage toi catch.
In Paris it must be high as well... stations are unmanned and even if they are manned, you often see kids forcing open the gates so they and their friends can get through without paying... without anyone doing a single thing about it.

6% it is since the introduction of smart card for youth (ImaginR) before it was a way higher (over 10%).

@ gerarsx: Ok, it may be confusing: I meant a larger variety types of transportation: Metro, Busses, Cercancías, FGC trains, boats, several funiculars, trams, tramvía blau, etc.
Madrid basically "only" has the Metro, Cercancías and busses, hasn't it?

OK! thanks

well, you have to include trams (metroLigero)and soon you´ll have to include a new system here in Madrid called Metrobus, that you can find in some cities of south america. bus with its own road.

I've been to Berlin so many times and so many people don't buy tickets there... it really is high. Those statistics obviously only show the number of people they manage toi catch.
How do you know? There are no barriers, so everybody with a season ticket (students, commuters, most kids) don't have to show their ticket.

I've been to Berlin so many times and so many people don't buy tickets there... it really is high. Those statistics obviously only show the number of people they manage toi catch.
Those numbers are reliable sources at least unlike your subjective appraisal.

Those numbers are reliable sources at least unlike your subjective appraisal.
How can you reliably measure fare-dodging when fare-dodging is all about not being caught? Those numbers say just as much about how good the Berlin Transport Police (and equivalents in other cities) are at catching faredodgers as the actual number of faredodgers.

Another example are bendy buses in London... I take them daily and every time there's a check so many people manage to escape without being caught by quickly touching their Oyster card against a reader before they can check them, or escape through one of the three sets of doors as the inspectors often only come in through one of them. So how reliable are the faredodger numbers for London then?

It's the same as reliable numbers on 'illegal immigrants' in a country... the nature of the problem means these people won't be registered and you can't have reliable numbers.

Anyway, I was just posting about my own experience in these cities and my talks with local residents. Not saying that I had a definite answer to this... no one has. Although it makes sense that having permanently staffed gates make faredodging harder than occasional ticket checks.

I know paris system metro very well and lisbon too, but the last one is very poor comparing with the first one..

I don't know how Prague is overlooked. I think the best. Also I believe the highest usage in Europe (57%).

I don't know how Prague is overlooked. I think the best. Also I believe the highest usage in Europe (57%).
The starter of this thread overlooked all the good systems. Only the big and widely known cities were included in the poll.

I don't know how Prague is overlooked. I think the best. Also I believe the highest usage in Europe (57%).

Stockholm, Oslo, Helsinki, Copenhagen were all overlooked and they each have pretty fantastic systems. Perhaps the poll starter doesn't like Scandinavia?

Madrid
-for its modern system
-for its dense and large network although population-wise it's much smaller than Paris,London and Moscow

.
.
.
Paris,London, Moscow
Berlin

I don't know how Prague is overlooked. I think the best. Also I believe the highest usage in Europe (57%).

We have about 60%.

I don't know how Prague is overlooked. I think the best. Also I believe the highest usage in Europe (57%).

percent of what?

So what has given Madrid the edge over London? Is it the HSR?

So what has given Madrid the edge over London? Is it the HSR?

Size of the metro system relative to population I'm guessing.

The starter of this thread overlooked all the good systems. Only the big and widely known cities were included in the poll.

Agree. He's probably a soccer fan! :cheers:

percent of what?

Percent of the city population using the metro, I think.

Percent of the city population using the metro, I think.

No, entire modal split.

No, entire modal split.

Are you being sarcastic, or what is that?!?!

Are you being sarcastic, or what is that?!?!
Why would he be sarcastic? Entire modal split means percentage using public transport vs percentage using cars.

These figures come from the EMTA barometers:

http://www.emta.com/article.php3?id_article=267

They would change from year to year but it is a good guide to which cities have attracted high public transport usage.

Why would he be sarcastic? Entire modal split means percentage using public transport vs percentage using cars.

These figures come from the EMTA barometers:

http://www.emta.com/article.php3?id_article=267

They would change from year to year but it is a good guide to which cities have attracted high public transport usage.

I only thought you may have been being sarcastic because I didn't know what "modal split" was and thought you may have been implying I was stating the obvious..

Anyway, isn't that pretty much the same thing as the percentage of the city population using public transport? I guess modal split takes into account people who are unemployed or do not need to travel far to work.

I only thought you may have been being sarcastic because I didn't know what "modal split" was and thought you may have been implying I was stating the obvious..

Anyway, isn't that pretty much the same thing as the percentage of the city population using public transport? I guess modal split takes into account people who are unemployed or do not need to travel far to work.
It was Svartmetall who was using the term "modal split" not me. Anyway we're all talking about the same thing - the percentage of people using public transport so that's cool! :)