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

Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 142 posts

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#121

Post by rsynnott »

Eddy_Viscosity2 wrote: post #91
genghisjahn wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public transit people don't value their time? I wonder about the people stuck on I-76 as I pass over them on the regional rail here in Philly. Sure I deal with a late train now and then. But those people deal with center city traffic every day twice a day.

Many city buses just use the same roads as cars so if the cars are stuck in traffic so are the transit passengers. Some cities do have bus-only lanes, and others have full on subway systems which is great but most do not.

> Some cities do have bus-only lanes, and others have full on subway systems which is great but most do not.

So, er, maybe a first step is installing more bus lanes? They really can make a tremendous difference, and they can transport far more people in a given amount of space than cars can. For instance, look at the picture on this article: https://www.independent.ie/regionals/dublin/dublin-news/priv...

That’s transport for 360 people in the four visible buses, plus 400 in the tram. And, er, four in the taxi, I suppose.

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#122

Post by bmicraft »

janalsncm wrote: post #38

My question is, who is constructing these rail systems in each of the countries? My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore. For political reasons that would be untenable in the US. Therefore we have to pay full price to build a thing we’re not good at building and don’t have the ramped up supply chains to support. If there’s only…

Most European cities don't have any Chinese involvement.

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#123

Post by rsynnott »

mike_hearn wrote: post #72
dado3212 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is this unique to America? Why doesn’t this apply to the UK?

It does apply to the UK. Very little new public transit gets built, what's there is permanently overloaded. Whenever I visit I regularly end up on trains where you have to stand for the entire 1hr journey. Many lines are full and can't be easily upgraded short of massive signalling reworks (moving block etc). Reliability is poor because there's no slack in the system. Root cause is more people + little/no new capacit…

It’s all relative, of course. I live in Dublin, a city not exactly known for its amazing public transport (we are currently on attempt number three to build a proper metro - we’re currently at the planning approval stage, so it’s probably doomed). At some point a colleague from San Francisco who’d been living here a while mentioned how good the public transport was (and this was a few years back; it was worse back then than now). I was quite confused, until I visited San Francisco.

And then on the other hand, every time I’m in Germany I’m amazed at how good the public transport is. But I’m fully aware that complaining about the trains is basically a national sport in Germany.

Like, you’re complaining about the trains being full, but at least the trains _exist_.

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#124

Post by rsynnott »

giantg2 wrote: post #26

The heart of the problem is that cars became popular for the majority of the people due to freedom and convenience, causing most of the infrastructure to focus on them. The existing public transit saw worse service and problems such as crime or cleanliness. New projects become more difficult and costly to build, and were hijacked for political causes. Willingness to fund even the existing projects fell. Nobody wants…

Also, it likely worked better before cars became popular. In Dublin, at peak, in 1928, we had 23 tram lines. By 1949 they were all gone. Today we have two to four, depending on how you count them (some branching is involved), but they were only built 20 years ago.

What happened to the old ones? They were largely replaced with buses. Some of Dublin’s bus lines _still_ follow the path of tramlines from a century ago. And the thing is, _at the time_, this kind of worked. Not many people had cars in 1928. There was no significant traffic, and the buses operated about as fast as the trams, and were cheaper to maintain (and the trams from a century ago weren’t the 400 person capacity monsters you get now; they were similar capacity to buses). A few decades later, when traffic picked up and suddenly the buses weren’t so fine, the tram infra was all gone, and it was far too late to go back.

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#125

Post by rsynnott »

normalaccess wrote: post #95

America is HUGE... And all of the big cities seem unable to herd their own cats. People often forget that the USA is really 50 small countries wearing a trench coat. Just look the maps linked below. The EU has all its people piled up close where as the US has HUGE tracts of low population areas. That's why you'll never see a high speed coast to coast rail system here. logistically it's just not possible (at least not…

I mean, the EU is 27 small countries barely even bothering to wear the trenchcoat. It is not like the EU has some sort of integrated transport policy, except in the vaguest terms; every country does its own, and they’re often quite different. In many countries it even varies quite a lot between cities.

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#126

Post by rsynnott »

onecommentman wrote: post #80
mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's begging the question isn't it? In places with quality transit, even the creme de la creme are riding it.

Not the *real crème de la crème”, unless it is a photo op. Not regularly, and they have access to limos whenever the occasion calls for it. Their staff handles the logistics and staff quite often use automobiles. But an occasional trip to Lincoln Center, sure. Even shopping on 5th Avenue, though the packages will be delivered later by an auto or van or whatever vehicles those sorts of people use.

I mean, it depends who you’re talking about, but there are plenty of cities where the upper-middle-class use the public transport.

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#127

Post by rsynnott »

janalsncm wrote: post #38

My question is, who is constructing these rail systems in each of the countries? My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore. For political reasons that would be untenable in the US. Therefore we have to pay full price to build a thing we’re not good at building and don’t have the ramped up supply chains to support. If there’s only…

> My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore.

From Kyiv to Singapore, sure, but not far west of Kyiv. I’m not aware of _any_ Chinese transport project in Western Europe?

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#128

Post by rsynnott »

onecommentman wrote: post #81
Ekaros wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is really talking about connecting tiny places really faraway from each other. But cities in 1-6 hours drive of each other and sensible locations inside them clearly make very much sense to connect with public transit.

Unless almost everyone who wants to travel already owns a car which they and their family can quickly, safely and directly drive (with reasonable luggage) to the very doorstep of any given 1-6 hour destination. Which is the case in the US. Will be even more the case if cheap Chinese electric cars ever hit the shores. Makes very much less sense then.

San Francisco to LA is about a seven hour drive. It’s about 90 minutes flight, plus getting to the airport and getting through security in the airport and all the general airport-induced slowness. Given a top-quality conventional high-speed line (300km/h) it would be two hours (so in practice faster than the flight).

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#129

Post by fragmede »

rsynnott wrote: post #127
janalsncm wrote: post #38

My question is, who is constructing these rail systems in each of the countries? My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore. For political reasons that would be untenable in the US. Therefore we have to pay full price to build a thing we’re not good at building and don’t have the ramped up supply chains to support. If there’s only…

> My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore. From Kyiv to Singapore, sure, but not far west of Kyiv. I’m not aware of _any_ Chinese transport project in Western Europe?

The MTR Corporation out of Hong Kong runs trains for Stockholm, Sweden.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR_Corporation?wprov=sfti1#Sw...

Re: Why is it so hard for the U.S. to build quality transit?

#130

Post by rsynnott »

fragmede wrote: post #129
rsynnott wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My understanding was that Chinese companies had built a lot of the biggest subway systems in various cities from Kiev to Singapore. From Kyiv to Singapore, sure, but not far west of Kyiv. I’m not aware of _any_ Chinese transport project in Western Europe?

The MTR Corporation out of Hong Kong runs trains for Stockholm, Sweden. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MTR_Corporation?wprov=sfti1#Sw...

I mean, that’s a public multinational which runs a rail system. You were originally talking about _building_ them.
Post reply on HN