
Subways of the world, to scale - cubix
http://fakeisthenewreal.org/subway/
======
Empact
As for the effects of these differences in layouts, here's an interesting
analysis of SF Bart vs. DC Metro, which finds the DC network-style system far
more effective - 2.5x the ridership for the same track length
([http://www.ctchouston.org/intermodality/2006/05/06/tale-
of-t...](http://www.ctchouston.org/intermodality/2006/05/06/tale-of-two-
subways/))

I'm not sure what institutional reason leads Bart to continue expanding
outward, rather than running new tunnels in SF proper, but it doesn't seem to
be cost-effectiveness driving them to do it.

Interestingly, Seattle made a special institutional provision to ensure this
doesn't occur there - they have a system of "sub-area equity", whereby the tax
revenues for each of several regions must be spent within that region. So, for
example, political power in the suburbs or a desire to expand the agency's tax
base doesn't drive them to unfairly allocate transit where it's relatively
unneeded, and they can get their second central tunnel whenever the tax
revenues for the core call for it.

~~~
gojomo
Don't trust a Houstonian to interpret SF transit!

MUNI light rail, subways, and buses handle most shorter trips within SF -- so
Metrorail is more comparable to a mix of MUNI plus BART. (It's possible for
visitors to the bay area, or even residents of outlying suburbs, to almost
completely overlook MUNI trains. I know when I lived in Berkeley, and took
BART into SF, I had no appreciation of all the places MUNI went, even though
the downtown MUNI stations are stacked above the BART tubes so you see them
while riding the escalator up.)

BART was always a longer-trip system, by design.

~~~
Empact
Alright, so if I'm evaluating the benefits of adding an additional 20 miles of
track length to the system, should I added at the low-density edges or the
high-density core? How would you evaluate the benefits of the two options?
He's said that the core option would get several times more ridership.

And I'm sorry you bring up his city of residence. As a Texas-born New Yorker,
I'm particularly sensitive to this fallacious ad hominem. Or should I
discounting your arguments because you're presumably Californian and your
government isn't particularly high-functioning?

~~~
hugh3
San Francisco faces a lot of problems which DC doesn't when designing a subway
system. Apart from the fact that there's a honking great bay in the middle of
the metropolitan area, I'm not sure it's possible for BART to serve much more
of San Francisco proper than it already does.

Why? Well, if you go north of the BART line you're rapidly into the hills, so
either you have to take the trains up the grade (bad idea) or you have to
build your stations thirty storeys underground (also a bad idea). If you go
past the hills and up to the Marina, you're into reclaimed land so I don't
think it's possible to build a tunnel (civil engineers out there to comment?)

You could probably extend it out into the Richmond and Sunset districts, but
that part of town is served reasonably by buses anyway.

While I hate to defend BART almost as much as I hate to ride on BART, its main
purpose is really all about linking the cities of the East Bay with San
Francisco, and San Francisco with the airport. Comparing it to a proper metro
system in a city not subject to the weird geographical limitations imposed by
the hills and the Bay isn't really fair.

~~~
Someone
I'm not an engineer, but I live in the Netherlands, so I am qualified to tell
you that it is possible to build tunnels under reclaimed land. Just like with
tunnels under a waterway, you just have to take some precautions to prevent
the tunnel from flooding or floating.

------
limmeau
Including the S-Bahn of Berlin but not the RER of Paris or the S-Bahn of
Munich looks like an arbitrary decision. Yes, I know the shapes of the
pantographs differ, but that's not relevant to me at that scale.

~~~
2arrs2ells
Agreed that the decision about what above-ground rail to include seems very
arbitrary. The Tokyo map seems to only include the "subway" lines, for
example, while the JR rail lines serve the same function + even share stations
within the city limits.

~~~
dalore
55% of the London Underground is above ground:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground>

------
fhe
a design issue: as I scrolled down the page, at half way I was confused if the
city name was associated with the map on top of it or below it. of course I
could have scrolled back to find out which was which, but it seemed a poor
design if I had to do that.

------
yread
[2004]

Some are seriously dated. For example Valencia
<http://www.metrovalencia.es/planos.php?page=103>

~~~
pmjordan
Oddly enough, the Vienna map seems to include the new part of the U2 line to
the football stadium, which was opened shortly before the Euro 2008.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_U-
Bahn#3rd_expansion_pha...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_U-
Bahn#3rd_expansion_phase_.282001.E2.80.932010.29:_The_first_extensions_of_U1_and_U2)

------
sqrt17
It's not quite obvious what the point here is. Many of the cities listed (at
least Amsterdam, Munich and Paris) have lightrail lines which can be used
seamlessly from the subway. In the case of Amsterdam, the lightrail lines are
what you'd actually use to move within the city.

On the larger scale, you get Paris' RER lines or Hamburg's S-Bahn and, for
most European cities also a comprehensive train network that makes it possible
to commute from larger cities that are as far away as 100km (e.g., from
Maastricht, Den Haag or other Dutch cities to Amsterdam) - probably also for
the (relatively large) Cologne/Düsseldorf area, which comprises as many people
as Berlin, but has many local governments instead of one.

Not sure how to visualize this, though. (Ideally, you'd provide maps based on
(i) actual scale, (ii) commute time, and (iii) commute cost.

------
CWIZO
Interesting, I always thought London had the biggest underground network. As
far as I know Glasgow is missing.

Which city, do you think, has the best one? I've only been on the underground
in London, Glasgow and Munich. And to me, London seems the best, you really
don't need a car there (well at least in the centre).

~~~
buster
Actually, i was quite unimpressed by the London metro last time i visited.
London is quite famous for its underground but due to it's age it seems to be
extremely overcrowded. My experience on a weekend trip has been that the train
did only stop every two stations because of so many people and it was just
overcrowded.

On the other hand this made me realize how good the Berlin system actually is.

~~~
tome
London Underground trains always stop at every stop[1].

[1] actually not always, but with very rare exception.

{EDIT:

I'm getting downvoted so I think I misunderstood what you were saying.

On rereading again I now think you were saying "unusually due to overcrowding
the trains were missing out every other station". Previously, I thought you
meant "unusually due to overcrowding the trains stopped as frequently as every
other station [whereas usually they visit fewer stations than that]".

I was trying to point out that stopping often is usual Underground behavior,
thinking that you were assuming it wasn't.

}

~~~
buster
Well, out of two days i've visited London i had the pleasure to walk one
station (and because of the elevator being overrun by people, i took the
stairs.. the thing i've learned was that the London underground can be quite
deep in the ground, it felt like kilometers :P ).

~~~
omh
Taking the stairs is a mistake you only make once :)

There's a very strongly worded sign at Covent Garden station, telling people
that it really is faster to wait for a lift. But I often see tourists making
their way up the stairs.

~~~
buster
Haha, yes. I've seen such a sign ("Emergency stairs, don't use!") but well..
it was soo crowded and so many people took the stairs i thought it may be a
good idea (at first) :)

------
naz
The Vancouver Translink map is missing the new Canada Line.

------
mitjak
I'm surprised the pathetic Toronto TTC subway made its way to the list. For a
city of its size it could really enjoy a more intricate subway system. There
are buses and trams here indeed but they get stuck the traffic just like every
other vehicle during the rush hour.

~~~
run4yourlives
We get health care instead of transit.

That is in no means an opinion of what is better, just simply a statement as
to how underfunded our transit systems are and how much we spend on health
care overall, from a federal and provincial point of view.

~~~
mitjak
Not sure what you mean. A simple look at Vancouver reveals a modern, plastic
accepting, completely automated and growing network of under and above-ground
trains. Oh, and that isn't owned by the government. Could that be the issue?

~~~
run4yourlives
Point is that there are 3 extensions to that system I can name right now that
should be put in place though prior to it being considered adequate to the
region, never mind going beyond.

1\. Extension to UBC 2\. Evergreen Extension 3\. Surrey Extension

If you look a Toronto, they're desperate for a complete conversion - New York
style - to a subway/mass transit only system. There is so much they should be
doing, but aren't.

I don't need the transit to be owned by government, but both Federal and
Provincial levels should be regular contributors, like they are in every other
nation.

------
georgecmu
Well, technically, not all of these are strictly subways: there's plenty of
above-ground lines represented here.

Still, it's very interesting to see these to scale. I did not realize Parisian
subway system was so compact.

------
davidu
The most bizarre thing is that they don't all appear to be normalized to point
North at the top.

------
jleader
How come there's a "thank you" for a Los Angeles map, but I don't see it on
the site?

------
yourmomcalled
They forgot Glasgow. I'll add it here: o

;)

~~~
zalew
I'll add Warsaw: ____________

~~~
igravious
What would be super awesome would be a globally complete _and_ up-to-date
_and_ animated from inception. I dunno why that would make me so happy but it
would.

