Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Best Place to Build a Subway

queue.acm.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–15 of 15 posts

Re: The Best Place to Build a Subway

#11

Post by sdunwoody »

Markoff wrote: post #9

> You can't easily build infrastructure where it's crowded, and you can't afford to build infrastructure where it's not crowded. Isn't "easily" and affordable" pretty much the same thing? Surely you can build subway pretty much anywhere, it will just cost you where it's crowded. He is basically saying you can't afford to build infrastructure anywhere - no matter if crowded or not crowded, which is quite dumb.

I think by saying "you can't afford to build infrastructure where it's not crowded", he actually means that it's not affordable because the ridership will be too low, so it's not really viable in that sense.

Re: The Best Place to Build a Subway

#13

Post by w-m »

simula67 wrote: post #2

I wonder what the authors thoughts are on the Moscow Metro. Schematic map: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Moscow_m... Seems like a bunch of concentric circles with lines going away from the center. I have never been to Moscow, but it seems like an interesting success story of planning infrastructure projects properly.

Looking at this plan reminded me of how these plans never convey a sense of scale, and how you have to learn that when exploring the city. The Paris Metro has a similarly looking density of lines and stations: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2b/Carte_M%...

In Paris it takes you 3-5 minutes to walk between mostly any of the stations of one line. Coming to Moscow I was somewhat surprised to find that the stations can be 30-45 minutes walking distance apart.

That all makes sense of course, given the population density structure of the cities and the mix of inner-city and suburban trains. But it's kind of hard to take that from these kinds of plans if you don't already know the city, and every station is evenly spaced apart on paper.

Re: The Best Place to Build a Subway

#14

Post by Markoff »

sdunwoody wrote: post #11
Markoff wrote: post #9

> You can't easily build infrastructure where it's crowded, and you can't afford to build infrastructure where it's not crowded. Isn't "easily" and affordable" pretty much the same thing? Surely you can build subway pretty much anywhere, it will just cost you where it's crowded. He is basically saying you can't afford to build infrastructure anywhere - no matter if crowded or not crowded, which is quite dumb.

I think by saying "you can't afford to build infrastructure where it's not crowded", he actually means that it's not affordable because the ridership will be too low, so it's not really viable in that sense.

I understand what he wanted to say, but it is same in the end - where it's crowded it is expensive to built and cheaper to operate, where it is not crowded it's vice versa, but in the end you end up with both being not affordable by his quote, so there is no difference between them really, they are both not financially efficient.

Re: The Best Place to Build a Subway

#15

Post by bobthepanda »

supernova87a wrote: post #3

I observe that being able to build great infrastructure is when you have the good fortune of having financial, political, and social forces that incentivize it. That doesn't occur a lot these days. It also takes foresight to build up a reserve of these, because projects are so easily cancelled. One surprising thing I learned about the Japanese (Tokyo) metro system and its complexity, and yet punctuality and adherence…

I mean it can get overly ridiculous. Stress over schedule adherence was considered a major factor in a Japanese train crash that killed 100+, and injured 500+: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amagasaki_derailment
Post reply on HN