as it turns out viewers really enjoyed
my recent tram battle video
which made me think how do i one-up that
the answer was obvious
trade the two most iconic tram systems
in the english world
for the two most iconic metro systems in
the world
and have the new york city subway and
the london underground duke it out
so as with the latest video i want to
provide a disclaimer at the beginning of
this one
first while this video is mostly
lighthearted i do think there is value
in comparing systems this way
it can be a great way of figuring out
what existing systems do well and where
they need to improve
while also learning about more systems
now for the nitty gritty
since this is the tube in the subway i
won't be counting the dlr
or overground or crosstrail for london
nor the air trainer
path for new york which i think is fair
and reasonable
i devised new categories for comparison
as well and i will continue to refine
these for each video so i think we get
the best
and most interesting comparisons i also
want to mention that in making these
videos
i don't pre-plan the results i go
through the categories and i try to
honestly assess which systems win
as i'm writing my script so without
further ado let's get into it
[Music]
the first round is rolling stock i'm
just going to come out and say it
london wins this one to be fair this
category is probably influenced a little
too much by personal aesthetic
preferences but this is rm transit
not impartial transit i've never loved
the tin can on wheels look of the new
york subway stock
and the let's modernize this rolling
stock by slapping some glossy black
panels on the front trend has not saved
it for me
the trains look cold and soulless to me
on the outside and the inside while
slightly more spirited and unique on
newer train models doesn't do all that
much for me either
i will say that new york gets some
points for its info screens on trains
which are quite good
it also should lose some points for its
over-reliance on ad-hoc jumbled messages
from train crews
rather than the calm and discernible
announcements you hear on the tube
so what do i love so much about the tube
stock then well there are lots of things
but perhaps the first is the iconic
design language
no other city does it quite like london
and the way trains have been modernized
through the years while staying true to
the fundamental curve design language is
a great achievement
of course i also love the tasteful mix
of colors which are applied in one of
the most sophisticated ways i've seen
for a metro train
the interiors are also better in my eyes
as well from the padded seats with
varying maquettes
to the frequently separated longitudinal
seating to the use of color it's also
better on the interiors with colored
grab bars being a fundamental feature
that being said having to crane your
neck on the tube shaped trains
is not a plus there is one negative
point about the tube rolling stock at
the moment
well like new york with its larger bmt
ind stock
and its smaller irt stock london has two
styles of rolling stock
the larger subsurface stock and the
smaller deep level stock
london's smaller deep level rolling
stock has never had air conditioning and
while there are claims that the new tube
from london will implement it
i'm not holding my breath this one
strikes home because i hate extreme heat
and doubly so in enclosed spaces
then there's the way the systems are
modernizing while new york's vision of
modernizing appears to be trading
blue for black for train faces and
adding a stripe on the cold metal body
london has been doing far more of course
there's also the big one
london's new trains are properly walked
through while new york might be widely
rolling out walk through trains in the
not so distant future
maybe london also experiments more with
different seating arrangements and its
new trains than new york does
and london's newest rolling stock the
new tube for london on the deep level
lions will be built with considerations
for fully automated operation
which is truly a cut above anything new
york is currently doing
it's clear from the rolling stock that
the tube has a more progressive design
culture and is more willing to innovate
on design and so it just isn't much of a
the next round will be on operations and
network
this round is the big one who's got the
better network
at the end of the day trains are nice
but if your network isn't good then who
cares
i'd rather ride the piccadilly line than
the dubai metro any day
there are a ton of small aspects to the
networks that we need to get into
so let's get started first the number of
stations
london has 270 new york has around 420
and with more than 150 more stations
clearly new york wins here
it's worth noting that new york probably
has a higher number of redundant
stations and services than london as
well
though i would like to note that things
change when you look at accessible
stations
while a higher number of new york subway
stations are accessible to some extent
london has a higher proportion of its
stations fully accessible
when london does accessibility it
usually does a fairly good job
whereas new york has mastered half
measures and low quality accessible
elements
while london does have the issue of
curved platforms and inconsistent
platform heights and more gaps than new
york mining the gap is less of a concern
than the horrendous inaccessibility of
many new york subway stations
which generally tend to be in an overall
worst state of repair than tube stations
in addition london stations tend to get
better frequencies which is a big bonus
as well
of course some underground stations even
feature platform screen doors
which is a cut above almost any transit
system in the americas and the tube also
has far more modern and modernized
stations
than the subway which nets it even more
points in fact there really is no
comparison
while new york does have some nice
mosaics its stations simply do not reach
the same level as london's
of course though new york has an ace up
its sleeve extensive express services
are a huge part of the system
new york is of course quite unique in
that express services are a core part of
the system
implemented with quad track trunks and
lots of triple track too
this of course means that new york does
suffer from quite the legibility problem
with its wayfinding and mapping
solutions
areas where london has been a leader in
the past but nonetheless it means
incredible service offerings are
possible on the subway
and that getting across the city can be
a shockingly quick affair
to be fair something a few appreciate is
that the tube does have express services
for a portion of the metropolitan line
and combined sections of the district
and piccadilly lines and jubilee and
metropolitan lines act in much the same
way
but overall triple and quad track is far
more uncommon than in the big apple this
round goes to new york
for turning the traditional metro on its
head and building a true subterranean
railway
a subway if you will the next round
details the level of integration with
other transit
of course as a big proponent of
toronto's transit integration
one of the things i think is most
important is the way transit systems are
integrated
so here's how i think new york and
london fare the first thing that comes
to mind with this category is the fare
card system
in this case virtually all services in
london use the oyster fare card and are
contact less enabled
meaning direct payment from debit or
credit is possible
new york has a similarly ubiquitous but
outdated option
in the metrocard which is being replaced
slowly by omni
a modern fare card system similar to
oyster but so far
only implemented for contactless
payments in terms of transit fare
integration things are not amazing in
either city
there is a single unified fare for
multiple modes with the good fare card
system in london
but a lot of trips are simply
unnecessarily discouraged by double
fares
new york gives some transfer discounts
and allowances but it's also far from
ideal
for physical integration the systems run
the gamut some stations have incredibly
good cross-platform transfers on both
systems and some stations have
incredibly long walks
some are integrated very well with local
transit and some are not
there is not a consistent focus on
integration with either system
that being said york has a few big
weaknesses for one
cross the hudson into new jersey and
head to other areas of the metropolitan
area and you're dealing with totally
different transit systems
want to go to the airport get ready to
ride an air train with an expensive
add-on fare
by comparison most urban transport
services in london are run by or at
least affiliated with tfl
which lowers the barrier to
understanding and using the system
considerably
you also don't need to worry about
paying more to get to heathrow which is
served directly by the tube
something which isn't true of the subway
and any of new york's major
airports for this category london eeks
out a slight win
but just barely both of these systems
have a lot of work to do
to be better systems rather than just a
raise of transport services
with a lot of work to be done to improve
the fare systems in particular
as i've said before a growing and
developing transit network is among the
most important things for a major city
here is where some of the most important
and frankly stark differences in the
system start to shine through
while neither system has grown nearly
enough in the past few decades with the
development of both slowing down
substantially in the latter half of the
20th century
that being said the underground in
particular has seen a few notable
expansions
including the jubilee line extension or
jle which added a number of iconic
stations with platform screen doors
in contrast the mid-1900s was notably a
time
when substantial sections of the new
york city subway were actually removed
and the most substantial expansion in
decades has been the construction of the
three-stop second avenue subway line
while sections of the tube were shut
down they were much more peripheral in
my eyes than the sections closed on the
subway
as mentioned before with regard to
stations london generally has a solid
upper hand
with even new stations in new york being
of quite questionable workmanship
of course one of the reasons andy byford
a former employee of the london
underground left toronto for new york
was to help fix the massive state of
good repair and maintenance backlog that
has plagued the subway for years
not only is this an issue of repair work
being put off but unlike london who is
currently upgrading a substantial part
of the underground to cbtc
as part of the four lanes modernization
program new york is just starting to
wade into the work of converting large
portions of the subway
to computerized signaling and clearly
has a lot of work to do
this category when considering improved
modernization programs with regard to
fair collection
accessibility and rolling stock goes to
london handily
and that's without even considering the
major development of the dlr
the overground crossrail and more
of course every transit network has some
unique elements and coming off the last
episode i thought it would make sense to
add a final round for
special sauce unique elements of the
system that don't fall into other
categories of course
new york has a huge one daily 24-hour
service
almost the entire new york subway
network operates 24 hours a day
which is still quite a unique feature
for a metro system and has likely done a
lot to help lead to the major state of
good repair backlog
of course since the subway operates more
like a mainline railway
services in the overnight periods do run
differently
that being said until just recently the
overnight services were closed to
passengers for apparent cleaning reasons
a heavily criticized move that calls
into question the commitment to
maintaining
service in new york the tube also
recently started to have
24-hour services but they're really of a
different scale than new york's
they only run on select lines and on
weekends though i do think this is a
sensible approach for cities interested
in dabbling with 24-hour services
as mentioned earlier london does benefit
from a number of elements which are
fairly unique
london's wayfinding is generally
excellent and has inspired almost all
subsequent metro wayfinding systems
london also has a number of more modern
operating practices such as one person
train operation
both systems are iconic for their art
and visual identity
and while i imagined initially that
london would win on cultural impact
i don't think that can be said both
systems have iconic designs
incredible station art and priceless
impacts on the streetscape
new york even has a sandwich shop named
after its system amazing stuff
with all that in mind the system's tie
for the special sauce round
both systems have a lot of very special
elements which make it impossible for me
to declare a winner here
so when the dust settles we see that
london has taken the win 3.5 to 1.5
both systems are fantastic and iconic
but london has benefited from decades of
much more
funding and prioritization and a wider
adoption of international best practices
leading to it besting new york before
you go i recommend checking out the
london reconnections article comparing
the systems which i'll link directly
below
if you have an idea for the next transit
battle video please leave a comment down
below and as always i'll see you in the
next one
[Music]
you