MISC | How many cities have you travelled "underground"?

[VelesHomais]

JFK, WOW!

I would love a short impression on each system from your perspective, like Vertigo just did

[JFK]

Impressions as requested by Pan_Stanislav:

Boston: My first system, oldest system in North America, good coverage of the downtown, has lost a lot of charcter, especially on the Orange line with the replacement of the El.

New York: The system I work for so its hard to be objective, but I do agree with Vertigo that it could be cleaner. The extensive express/local service makes it unique as does the 24/7 service, and it has both the largest number of cars and stations in the world.

Montreal: Typical French export system, entirely underground.

Toronto: Well run system, wide-long cars, good tranfer facilities to buses and streetcars.

Vancouver: Mainly elevated automated system, short underground section downtown.

Philadelphia: Small system for city size, Broad Street line similar to New York IND lines

Baltimore: One line system typical of American systems built in the 70's and 80's.

Washington D.C.: Impressive station architecture, suburban sections more like a commuter rail/S-bahn system.

Atlanta: Like Baltimore and Miami.

Miami: Entire system above ground.

Cleveland: More like a commuter rail/S-bahn line, very low ridership.

Chicago: Interesting El loop downtown, system misses a lot of the most developed sections of the city.

San Francisco: More like a commuter rail/S-bahn line. Only one line in downtown .

Los Angeles: Only one line with small branch. Does not follow the main flow of traffic down Wilshire Blvd.

Mexico City: Large rubber tired system like Santiago and Montreal, built by the French.

Santiago: Like Montreal and Mexico City.

Rio: Only one line system.

Buenos Aires: Feels like a European system -- could be Madrid or Barcelona. Oldest equipment in use in the world on line A.

Sydney: More like a commuter rail/S-bahn system. Interesting double deck trains.

Melbourne: Also like a commuter rail/S-Bahn system with a downtown loop.

Singapore: Well run system with a lot of above ground sections -- interesting use of platform doors.

Kuala Lumpur: One line very similar to Vancouver, the other line entirely above ground -- more like a light rail line.

Hong Kong: Small system for size of the city, heavily used, interest "Dragon train" set up with full-width passageways between cars. (We could really use this in NYC)

Bangkok: Skytrain system entirely elevated -- only three car trains.

Beijing: Small system for city size.

Seoul: Heavily used system, well run, just completed an amazingly fast expansion.

Inchon: Like a branch of the Seoul system.

Tokyo: Impressive system, probably the best run system in the world. The gold standard for operating a large Metro.

Yokohama: One line, typical Japanese system, all seem very similar to Tokyo.

Nagoya: Typical well run Japanese system.

Kyoto: Only two lines.

Osaka: Large well run system, much like Tokyo. Good coverage of the city.

Kobe: Typical Japanese system.

Hiroshima: Small rubber tire cars, mainly elevated.

Moscow: Impressive system, incredible architecture especially on the older lines, busiest sytem in the world, able to handle the crowds, very short headways. The first "soviet system" -- many others very similar.

St. Petersburg: Typical soviet system, deep stations, also incredibly busy with interesting architecture, especially on the older sections.

Kiev: Soviet system, deep stations, interesting bridge crossings for lines across the river.

Cairo: Heavily used system, older line much like a very busy commuter rail/S-bahn line.

Helsinki: One line system, bright orange trains.

Stockholm: Interesting system, large size for city.

Copenhagen: Automatic system much like Vancouver or Kuala Lumpur.

Oslo: More like a commuter rail/S-bahn system/light rail system.

London: The oldest system and largest in route miles. Interesting difference between tube sections and subsurface sections. Interesting architecture.

Madrid: Like New York and Berlin it needs two fleets of trains to cover the narrow and wide lines it operates. Stations like Paris. Overhead power supply. Impressive expansion in recent year.

Barcelona: Good coverage of the city, well run.

Paris: Impressive system, probably the best coverage of the city in the world. Interesting split between rubber tired and steel wheel sections.

Brussels: Modern European system.

Rotterdam: Much like Brussels and Amsterdam.

Amsterdam: Hybrid system with Metro and light rail characteristics.

Hamburg: Much like Berlin, interesting El sections

Berlin: Large interesting system, architecture very interesting on the older sections. Yellow train color is different.

Frankfurt: Small system, much like an undergound light rail system.

Munich: Good coverage of city, impressive expansion, well run.

Vienna: Well run system.

Rome: Small system for city size, lots of graffitti.

Milan: Trains similar to Rome, much larger system. Older stations architecture not holding up well.

Warsaw: Close to the surface, uses Russian trains, only one line.

Prague: Typical three line soviet system.

Budapest: Two lines are like other soviet systems, oldest line like Boston's Green line.

Bucharest: Although built during the Communist era not like other "soviet systems" found in Central Eastern Europe.

Sofia: Small soviet system, barely enters the city center.

Athens: Only rode the old line - much like a commuter train/S-bahn.

I think I prefer the systems build before World War II, much more character!

[Jo]

Originally Posted by JFK

Bangkok: Skytrain system entirely elevated -- only three car trains.

There is a subway also. It opened a year ago, maybe you went there before that. I think skytrain length varies, never thought about it.

[szehoong]

Mine:




KUALA LUMPUR - Extensive but need lotsa work on integration of lines (most interchanges are currently upgrading). Metro lines are mostly elevated with a mish-mesh of many different train systems. Train fanatics would love to see the variety of trains KL had to offer




SINGAPORE - A very well built line with great efficiency. Love their new NEL trains




HONG KONG - Very similar to Singapore's but platform looks a bit dated and small. Otherwise very well-maintained




VANCOUVER - Very similar to KL's Putraline as it is also built by Bombardier. Being driverless is a big plus




SYDNEY - I love those double-decker trains and they are huge. I just think that they should upgrade all the trains to those of the Tanggara or the new Milliennium ones because those non-air-conditioned ones are really worn-out.




BANGKOK - They have a system similar to Singapore and Hong Kong but they are not as extensive. Otherwise a very well-built system

[nikko]

Actually...the Double deckers in Sydney are very inefficient are are going to eventually be replaced.

I agree though, getting a non-airconditioned train is hell...although the Tangaras aren't airconditioned either

[InitialD18]

I only listed the system which I used more extensively than a few days of usage ... systems such as Seoul and Amsterdam I only spend a very short times in these cities so Dont' want to say much ...

London: A system which I rode quite extensively from zone one all the way to zone six ... even tried their lightrail
at croydon
The best classic system for its age ... way better than nyc or paris i thought ... one of the world's greatest metro and one of the many symbol of London ... my favorite station isn't the jubilee line ones but the heathrow ones ...

Tokyo: the best for its large size ... its clean, efficient, timeless, a great circle line, my favorite part its how each station relates to its neighborhood ... great urban design
however its really expensive

Hong Kong: the system which I have rode the most extensively ... rode all four rail systems ... the two heavy rail MTR and KCRC(80+ stations) systems are possibly the most efficient and cleanest system in the world ... whats special about the system here is it constantly changes through its advertisement(some has called hk's rail-station a Museum of visual design) ... and how it tries to improve constantly ... theres always some sort of improvement programme going on ...

Singapore: A system which I liked the details very much it doesn't have the layering of hong kong system but its usage of materials and lay out ... similary to its airport ... its very lasting ... i wished to have ridden it more ...

New York: a very shocking system for its classic yet dark underground ambience ... a system very hard to hate but also very hard to love ... definitely the most memorable system on NA and also the most extensive on NA ...
its hard to forget its style and ambience but its really quite scary and dirty ...
honestly a lot of works need to be done to this system ... for a system which i love and hate ...

Barcelona: to be honest ... everything about the city suprised me ... i expected a european medium size city mediocre system with minimal coverage but instead i found an above average system with great coverage ...

Vancouver: a system which sets itself apart from the others in NA ... a very clean, advanced efficient system ... its current coverage has much to be desired ... coverage to richmond, ubc, airport and more of downtown is definitely needed ... the good news is ... its going to happen

there are many other systems which i like but generally in asian metropolis ... as maybe they are newer with higher population hence more activities and cleaner ...

[VelesHomais]

Thanks a lot JFK, interesting observations

[Relay]

I have traveled underground in
Stockholm
Berlin
London
Paris
Barcelona
Bucharest

[volguus zildrohar]

Philadelphia (including PATCO and all commuter rail and suburban light rail)
New York City (including PATH and LIRR)
Boston
Washington D.C.
Baltimore
Atlanta

JFK, Philly's Broad Street Subway was built at the same time as the IND lines of NYC and to the same specs. When the SOAC cars were making their nationwide tour in the 70's, they traveled on the Broad Street Subway as it's the only of the city's two heavy-rail subways that could handle cars of those specs - identitcal to IND/BMT specs.

[ncon]

ME:
AUSTRALIA:
BRISBANE
SYDNEY
GOLD COAST
MELBOURNE
PERTH

NEW ZEALAND:
AUCKLAND
WELLINGTON
NELSON

TAIWAN:
TAIPEI

U.S.A:
LOS ANGELES
SAN FRANCISCO
LAS VEGAS

CHINA:
HONG KONG
SHANGHAI
BEIJING
SHENZHEN
XIAMEN
GUANGZHOU

JAPAN:
TOKYO

INDONESIA:
BALI
JAKARTA
SURABAYA

SINGAPORE:
SINGAPORE

MALAYSIA:
KUALA LUMPUR

THAILAND:
BANGKOK

[Küsel]

You have all very impressive lists!! Wow!!!

[JohnnyMass]

me:

LISBON
OPORTO
MADRID
BARCELONA
PARIS
LONDON
AMSTERDAM
NEW YORK
BOSTON
SAN FRANCISCO
MONTREAL

within 2 months:
PHILADELPHIA
WASHINGTON DC

[Dharm]

USA
Atlanta
Boston
Chicago
Cleveland
Los Angeles
Miami (no underground but it is a Metro)
Philadelphia (PATCO and SEPTA)
New York (PATH and Subway)
San Francisco
Washington

CANADA
Toronto (both the subway and the Scarborugh ALRT)

Western Europe
Amsterdam
Brussels
London
Milan

Asia
Tokyo (later this month)

[invincible]

Originally Posted by encon

ME:
AUSTRALIA:
BRISBANE
SYDNEY
GOLD COAST
MELBOURNE
PERTH

The Gold Coast line is an intercity line from Brisbane and doesn't go underground.
Brisbane and Perth don't really have underground sections but Perth has a short extension of a line that is currently under construction that will go underground.
In any case, they're all suburban networks with underground sections, except for Sydney's airport line which is fully underground.

NEW ZEALAND:
AUCKLAND
WELLINGTON
NELSON

Auckland is in the same situation as Perth. A short extension of a line (one station?) was built underground. Auckland has more important things in terms of its rail network, like electrification.

Wellington has no underground lines except for possibly some tunnels. I don't really know the extent of the rail network because I never took a train when I lived there as a child - I was in an area served by the very good trolleybus network. There is a very long section of tunnel in one part of the busway though.

Nelson is just a large town, I don't even the passenger service (which you take for a scenic tour, not to get from A to B) reaches there.


As for me, if Sydney and Melbourne count, then those will be the only two in my list. I might have been on the Hong Kong one when I was very young.

[Relay]

Why have nobody mention the Blue line to the north in the Subway system in Stockholm? Every station in the blue line is like a magic kingdom looks like real caves instead of subway stations.
I hope any of you exploring that

here is a nice site there you can read more about the lines and stations in Stockholm and of course alot of photos
http://www.kynerd.nu/Tunnelbanan/Tunnelbanan.html

here is some pictures from beautiful stations in Stockholm subway.

here is the subway map so you can follow the lines and the stations


Kungsträdgården



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hötorget

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rådhuset


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fridhemsplan

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tekniska Högskolan

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Universitetet



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fridhemsplan

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Västra Skogen









----------------------------------------------------------------------
Huvudsta




----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sundbyberg




----------------------------------------------------------------------
Duvbo


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rissne


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rinkeby


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Tensta


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Akalla


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Solna Centrum



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Näckrosen



----------------------------------------------------------------------
T Centralen

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mörby centrum

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

[CharlieP]

Originally Posted by Gareth

Liverpool (it's a metro by definition as small as it is)

Liverpool is not a metro by Kuesel's definition - "no trams or suburban trains"!

[CharlieP]

My list:

London
Lille
Paris
Singapore
Hong Kong

I've also been on suburban trains that run underground in:

Liverpool
Sydney
Melbourne

..and on trams that run underground in Dusseldorf.


Hmm, thought it was more.

[B@dGuYoM]

Paris

[murdomac]

I have travelled on the undeground in London, Paris, New YorK and Toronto all of which are well known of course.

I visited Moscow in 1979 and found the undeground there to be quite fascinating. It was as busy as London but almost surreal in its crisp 1930's Stalinist imagery with just a hint of decadent Art Nouveau. Is it still the same?

In 1998 I was the victim of a pick pocketing/muuging attempt while trying to alight from the underground in Barcelona.
It was quite scary as I had my wife and three small children with me. Nobody paid any attention to us inspite of the commotion we caused when cornered by the two would be thieves.

As a Scotsman I have to reccommend that real underground enthusiasts visit Glasgow.

The underground there consists of one circular line only which is narrow with seats along the sides only. I don't know of any smaller real underground trains which do actually carry people around their city.

It is known locally as the Clockwork Orange! (Yes that is its colour)

[superchan7]

Those Glasgow trains are tiny!