Hey, there! Log in / Register
Why Bostonians - and the MBTA - rock
By DarkSun on Fri, 10/24/2008 - 1:21pm
Yesterday during my commute home, I was stuck on a Red Line train for about 20 minutes due to a switching problem in the Alewife area. But this is what struck me about the experience: the car was filled with tired commuters heading home, yet everyone was understanding and not a single person complained. In fact, people were still very courteous to each other afterward when getting off the train. No one became upset, everyone simply used the delay time to do something else. And the train crew handled the situation professionally and courteously: they apologized numerous times for the delay and provided frequent, periodic updates to us riders on the status of the switching problem.
Now, in which other city would something like this happen? In any other city, the crew would have ignored the riders and the riders would have been really ticked off... not so in the great city of Boston! :)
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Figured you out
I believe what you are describing is Stockholm Syndrome, the psychological state where a hostage begins to show signs of loyalty and complacence with their captor. You seem to have a worst case than those you describe who have simply accepted the high likelihood of "switching problems" which lead to commuting delays.
Once you come to accept these things will occur (especially with a frequency you can almost come to count on), then that will become the norm and the days when you get home without significant (extra) delay are the ones where you are happier for it. It's a defense mechanism for not just flipping out and shooting up the train.
Stockholm
hahahahahahahaha! Aww, poor DarkSun.
What else can you do during a train delay? Bitching is useless as it does not bring you closer to your goal. You either accept the delay peacefully, or begin a violent revolt (bailing from train, etc)
DS asserts these situations elsewhere would result differently. But I would assert that these things _don't happen_ elsewhere. They probably have better systems for handling disabled trains, and more efficient systems altogether. That can be hypothesized simply from the age of the system. Compare traffic maps and patterns to a west-coast city and I'm sure they (typically) cream Boston.
When I get on the T every day, I just say to myself "this sucks, it will suck, and there's nothing I can do about it other than get on my bike, so embrace the suck!" Which is essentially Stockholm Syndrome.
Yesterday going outbound on a GreenC train there was a disabled train going from Gov'tC --> Boylston. I forget if it was before or after Park. There was a guy standing around and couldn't stop moving and complaining. He looked like he wasn't a regular. Everyone else was placid in response to his verbiage. I just thought to myself "Bro, Park Street is the largest subway station this side of Brooklyn, and this is the T we're talking about. Get used to it!"
ROFL
While I appreciate the sentiment, I must point out that I do not, in fact, have Stockholm Syndrome. I am fortunate enough to have a variety of commuting and work options. I usually (not always, but usually) choose to commute on the T.
I do not assert that a 'violent revolt' would happen elsewhere. But it is likely that elsewhere people would groan and complain about it, just like that guy liveinvt referred to did. And it is also likely that elsewhere the train crew - busy as they were with a steady stream of incoming communications from control - would not focus on keeping the riders in the loop.
Delay? SIGH
I actually enjoy when the driver/etc announce that there's a delay, and you can hear the train make a semi-collective "SIGH" or "Come on!" from those demure middle-aged commuters who would otherwise be lip-zipped while combing through the other interesting events that happen downtown.
Maybe I'm a sadist.
You didn't assert there'd be a violent revolt, true, but I didn't quite say that. My writing can be unclear at times so sorry for any confusion.
OH and I forgot to say that during the logjam on the GreenC, the operator was apologizing every few minutes.
The key here
is that the crew was telling you what was going on. I'm surprised, frankly, since the usual procedure is to at most tell you "we're standing by" (though sometimes they say something about a "schedule adjustment", which is hard to believe, since when does the T care about schedules?). And that, more than anything else, angers people (like me).
We know shit happens sometimes; just be up front and honest when it does, and it makes everyone so much more rational and understanding.
Refreshing!
Somebody on these boards not only feels good about the T, but actually posted a front page article about it!
This is Universal Hub, right? ;-)
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
Rock? Perhaps.
Roll is an entirely different story alltogether.
I entered Park Street station at 8:35 last night and waited another 20 minutes for the train. The platform was so crowded that people were waiting on the stairs, and the train was packed solid. According to another passenger, it was at least 25 minutes between trains.
Because of the late hour, it continued to be solidly packed until Davis Square. Worse than rush hour packed.
Not. Acceptable.
Somehow, my trip from Long Beach to Pasadena at a similar hour on a Thursday Night two weeks ago went far better, despite the two large suitcases I was towing and some sketchy signage at Union Station in LA. Seems that Los Angeles can manage to send trains through the system every 12 minutes and have them be on-time, even with multiple grade-level crossings that the red-line does not have.
Every transit system everywhere
I have ridden in many places (maybe not as many as most) but I have yet to find a worst transit system than Boston.
The *one* hugely negative experience I've had outside of Boston was in NYC one weekend when they dropped local service because of some sort of emergency repair need that meant I had to either go back a few stops and catch an express on the express tracks or leave the system and take a cab. The worst part wasn't even the inconvenience, but the fact that it was so poorly announced to us why we had to get off and what our options were from where we were. That's it.
Boston public transit is just abysmal and just about the only thing I really dislike about the city.
Worst Ever
NYC transit system ... July, 1986!!
That incredible turnaround they pulled off in NYC, of course, just makes Boston suck worse.
A case could be made ...
That November, 1918 on the BRT was the worst ever, but as somebody who lived in NYC in the 1970s, I'd argue that that period was pretty much the nadir - not only were the cars covered in graffiti, you always had to worry about getting knifed by a crazy person with a machete or your train just falling off the elevated tracks on the way to Shea Stadium (if you were a Mets fan, which a lot more people were back then). By 1986, the subways were way better.
Not true
There are plenty of public transit systems that are worse than Boston's. In fact, the MBTA is just about the only thing I really like about the city...
Here's how I look at it, and this is all from firsthand experience. If you live in Boston, your transportation needs can be adequately met by the MBTA. If you live in Dallas or Denver, you need a car; DART or RTD isn't going to cover it. DART and RTD actually publish schedules for their rapid transit lines. With DART, for example, there are gaps as large as 40 minutes between trains on weekdays. And that's downtown... at stations that are farther out, you can wind up waiting 60 minutes - that's an hour between trains - since not all trains serve the entire rapid transit line. This is not exaggeration. Say what you will about the MBTA, but rapid transit here is a whole lot better than that. Many Dallasites and Denverites would kill for a public transit system as reliable as the MBTA.
The MBTA obviously isn't the best out there. It's an old system - part of the Green Line is the oldest subway in America. Its rapid transit network isn't nearly as comprehensive as the MTA's. Nor does it offer 24-hour service as the CTA, the MTA, and a few other transit agencies do. But it's a far cry from the worst.
I think T riders are used to
I think T riders are used to it by now that it's just a matter of routine.
Poor comparison
Having recently lived in Dallas; comparing DART to the MBTA is not a good comparison. Dallas' rail system was just built a few years ago and the public transportation mentality has completely different up until 15 years ago. It's still growing it's ridership because you do have options, whereas in Boston you largely don't.
I will say that Dallas is actually growing it's system in a smart way compared to Boston. I believe that in a few years, Dallas will have more miles of light rail than Boston and I'm sure it will be more reliable.
But how is it not a good comparison?
Both are public transit authorities in their respective areas of service. Dallas' rapid transit system - the currently operating portions, anyhow - was largely built in the mid-late 90's and while I admire DART for its efforts in building its rapid transit system, the quality of service leaves much to be desired. As it is currently, almost all Dallasites who can afford a car do not take DART. This is understandable when the standard wait time between rapid transit trains on weekdays varies between 20 and 30 minutes. If the Red Line here only ran trains every half-hour or so, I wouldn't take the T. I'd drive.
Track mileage doesn't mean much when a light rail line is run more like a commuter rail line than a rapid transit line.
Paper Schedules versus Rider Reality
Oh, gee, I'd better get my invisible glasses again so I can see those ghost trains that run between the visible trains and make the system on time.
In other words, the T only does better than this ON PAPER. They have plenty of bus runs ON PAPER. They don't even get close to the service they promise ON PAPER.
Not quite...
I know from firsthand experience that the T runs rapid transit trains a lot more frequently than every half-hour or so.
I won't get into the business of comparing the T's buses with DART's buses, but roughly speaking I'm quite sure the T bus network is better in terms of frequency of service and density/redundancy of coverage.
In theory
Reality is quite another story ... perhaps you should listen to all of us regular riders and stop with all of this tiresome, made for politics Mass Backward Denial Approach. It is completely ineffective to continually tell people that they haven't experienced what they have on a repeated basis, and are all not understanding how good they have it to have such a sucky system.
We know better. We live it on a regular basis. Published schedules are garbage with the T. In fact, I am beginning to doubt that you even ever ride the T at all given your continual denial and state of fantasy world living.
My kids got to a stop in plenty of time for a bus this afternoon, and ended up waiting 45 minutes for the next one because the bus they waited for was a "paper bus" - it existed on paper, but did not exist in reality. 45 minutes. This is what the T thinks of its customers. Just because you and a press release say otherwise does not make black into white, day into night, or fiction into truth.
I know the T isn't perfect...
...and yet, overall, as a former Dallasite, I understand how good we have it to have the MBTA here in Boston. I ride the T daily. I take it during rush hours to work and back during the week and I take it on the weekends to do shopping around town. I have experienced firsthand many of the shortcomings of the T. I've had to scramble to get home before the T stopped running for the night. I've had to wait in excess of 50 minutes with a makeshift umbrella in torrential downpours to catch a bus - because a bus that was supposed to show up was actually a 'paper bus'. I've been stuck in the central subway for extended periods of time during rush hours - all while being packed in like sardines. I've missed buses because they came and left over 10 minutes earlier than scheduled. I've rode in 'hot' cars that nearly gave me heatstroke. I've experienced a lot at the hands of the T.
And yet despite all this, I am still a fan of the T. You have to accept certain things when you take public transportation, after all.
No acceptance here
If I hear another Massbackward hack say this or anything like it ever again, I think I'm going to scream in a way that breaks windows for miles around.
We are the citizenry and the ridership. This "just be happy" garbage is patronizing, insulting, marginalizing, and anti-democratic. What is this, Moscow 1979 or something? It sounds like that Miss Massachusetts contestant vapidly talking about "having faith in our freedoms" rather than having any actual expectation of practicing them.
PUBLIC transportation. Citizen involvement, control, and ultimate approval is required in a democracy. Public funding means that the public must be kept happy and involved as much as possible. I am totally sick and tired of hearing how I should just pay up, shut up, and paint on a goddamned happy face because local governments and authorities can't possibly be expected to do better. Bullshit.
I travel frequently, and make a point of using public transit when I do. The T sucks, and it could do better even with the resources that it has. The T and the attitude of "happy face or else" or "we can't be expected to make it work" is part and parcel of why cities like Portland, OR have added 1/3 more people and are growing jobs right now, and MA is facing an increasing population drain. You want to live in Baltamore North or Detroit East, fine. I think we can do way better than that - but that means that apologists like you and the politicians and hacks who echo your patronizing attitude need cut the crap and face reality and act accordingly.
I understand your lack of acceptance...
so there's no need to get all worked up. I think you make some valid points.
But I also think part of the issue is that you seem to have unrealistically high expectations of a public transportation system that's over a century old. Of course cities who are just now building their public transportation networks and have tons (comparatively) of open land to build their networks on will have, well, more modern public transportation networks. But even these more modern networks are not always better in all respects: reference my previous posts on DART/RTD and Shady's comparison of the MBTA and the WMATA. So all in all I think we're doing quite well with the MBTA here in the greater Boston metro area.
part of the issue is ...
If we were riding around in original 100 year old equipment, you'd have a point but the equipment is not so old, and equipment breakdowns account for a small part of the large number late arriving pickups, delays, and tardy arrivals.
I rode from Logan to Forest Hills today. Half of the transfers, namely Blue to Orange, and Orange to bus were 30-40 minute waits. That's not what the schedule calls for.
I don't see drivers and starters showing concern about keeping a schedule yet people who rely on public transportation to get to work and to get home do have to keep a schedule.
In these day of expensive energy and global warming, public transportation is a choice we want citizens to make. Reliable and prompt public transportation is an incentive. Unreliable, delayed public transportation is a disincentive.
Let me say this. The German train system is just as old as ours. How is it that their trains run like Swiss clocks?
You know, Id be ok with a
You know, Id be ok with a system that only ran every 45 minutes (even if it really needed to run every 20 minutes) if someone at least had the guts to stand up and say "yes, that bus can only come every 45 minutes!" and they changed the schedules to reflect that. It seems to be a major problem in American society in general, getting it right on paper and then fumbling it on the ground. Its like Enron and the recent Wall Street crash, noone wanted to be the one who said it wasnt possible to make those returns so everyone just kept on lying or continued being naive about what would happen if it was never fixed. We all work with people like that, they promise the world, dont do it, but then submit a report that says they did it and then some.
The temporary solution is to stop LYING to us and give us schedules they can realisticly follow under current conditions. Then work on fixing the underlying problems and build up from there. I bet people would be a whole lot less pissed off if the schudule said there were going to be three buses an hour but for a month you managed to toss in a 4th rather then if you said there would be 4 buses and hour and for a few months you had to cut back to three...
The T's published schedules are fantasy
Before I stopped taking the T, I would take the Orange Line to and from work in Government Center. Despite a 4 minute published headway, the trains rarely run more frequently than every seven minutes at rush hour. The ride home was particularly unreliable because the wait would typically exceed 10 minutes. I normally got to Haymarket at 5:05 and rarely got a train before 5:15 (with "another service train directly behind" it). In August I began walking (from Mass Ave in the South End) to and from work. It takes me 30 to 35 minutes, which is about five to 10 minutes longer than it would take the train on a good day, but more reliable.
The T's been a lot better recently...
...especially after rush-hour service was increased at the beginning of September and 6-car trains started operating on the Blue Line.
I think you should give it up
I am beginning to suspect that you are secretly Smiling Dan Grabauskas himself. Actually, even Dan would probably tell you the T isn't really as great as you think it is.
I'm sorry, I'm not GM Grabauskas...
...I wish I made over a quarter million a year and had a company SUV!
And I suspect General Manager Grabauskas has better things to do in what free time he has than lurk around UHub trying to defend the MBTA. I think I read somewhere he works 12-hour days...
For many reasons..
Comparing DART and the MBTA is not a very good comparison for many reasons. I think it's like comparing the MBTA to the MTA or London's tube (i.e. you can't). You keep mentioning the space between trains, but Dallas has a much smaller ridership than Boston. They could schedule a lot more trains there, but they'd be next to empty.
Anyways... I'm glad you like the T so much. Really... I do. You're going to have an uphill battle trying to convince people in Boston that the T is great. Bringing up other transportation systems in the US, in most cases, isn't going to make the T look any better, IMO.
Then what can you compare it to?
With respect, Bill, using your logic we wouldn't be able to compare any public transit networks with each other.
And in fact, if you wish to use the above logic, that's perfectly fine. In this case, going by an absolute standard, I think the T is just fine. It's safe and it works. For trips outside of the core rapid transit network, taking a car or a cab is generally going to be quicker/more convenient than taking the T, but that's only to be expected.
I think the problem is that few people appreciate what they've got until they don't have it anymore. Not too long ago, for example, a Chicago resident and blogger came and visited Boston. He was so impressed with the MBTA that he argued that the CTA's administration should try to learn from their MBTA counterparts.
Okay ...
I read that blog and I was impressed at how he drew his conclusions from riding a very limited section of the system at mid-day. Not rush hour or "after hours", as if a city should ever consider anything before 10pm "after hours".
Especially since I had vastly better experiences in Chicago (despite the world's most dangerously psychotic bus drivers) at rush hour than I have had in any given week with the T.
I'm sorry, but you appear to be wrong...
"I rode it several times daily during many different times of the day, weekend and weekday, rush and non-rush."
I think time of travel, and
I think time of travel, and where your going makes a huge difference. From what Ive read in past posts it sounds like you live on the North Shore, maybe a little to the west (Im North Shore east) so life seems to suck for us more then if you happened to live in a community serviced by the Green Line Trolleys, or downtown ect. Every system has its good and bad and it really all depends on your view point. My best analysis is between DC and Boston as Ive used both systems, and used both systems in many different ways at many different times.
I was in DC and thought that they did a better job of reaching out with their transit lines so you could reach farther without leaving the central system. Advantage Metro
What I didnt like was the bus system as once you got off the Metro and onto the buses it was like a whole different world. While we have bus issues here I found the DC buses to be much worse and older. Advantage T
Boston has a much more centralized transit system so its actuallye easier to get around Boston proper then DC proper which seems more optimized for getting people IN and OUT. Advantage T
Clenliness... Not gonna bother even explaining. Advantage Metro, unless your someone who likes to eat in the subway system lol
Price. Advantage T
When it comes to failure there are two categories. Metro wins on everyday failure rates because its not often their system stops or they need to shut down whole stations like the MBTA does. The problem is the Metro is prone to system wide failures due to issues on one track due to their interconnected system. I was there for 4 months and the whole system shut down twice that I know of in that time (during rush hour no less, due to accidents in VA and MD, not even in the middle of the system.) So mixed bag on this one.
Ease of payent used to go to Metro hands down until Boston got its own electronic card. The Boston card doesnt cost any money to buy, unlike the DC card, and so far doesnt charge you more or less depending on when you use the syste. The DC card on the other hand allows you to use it to pay for some shuttle buses at some of the airports, for parking at Metro owned garages, and gives your a quantitative discount if you put on 20 dollars or more at a time (its a slight discount but a discount none the less, and the discount goes up as you put more on. I was also impressed with the system they have where your employer (if enrolled in the right program) can give you a Metro voucher which can then be added to your Metro card as if it were cash. Advantage still Metro because the T is still trying to launch the Charlie brand.
Thanks Shady
As someone who has also used both systems extensively, I think your post provides a very nice, objective, and detailed analysis of the respective merits of the Boston T and the Washington, D. C. Metro. Thanks!
Apples to oranges.
You can't compare the transportation systems in Boston to Dallas. You just can't. You might as well be comparing Boston to Fargo, ND. They are two completely systems that really have no comparison other than the fact that they are public transportation systems. You are dealing with variables that are incongruent.
I know that coming from Dallas to Boston is a step up regarding the public transportation availablility (specifically with rail), but Dallas is quickly catching up (as are many other communities)and it's not taking them 100 years to do so.
You may not be noticing
You may not be noticing hidden rage in some of the riders lol. Im sure there are others like me.
Ever see the Seinfeld episode where Elaine is on the NYC subway going to the lesbian wedding (remember when even that was edgy lol) and the train stops (lights go off ect) and Elaine has that running commentary in her head?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vyq9MMcLsv4
"What would you do if you were a hostage think about that!"
"Maybe Ill get out in five seconds... no Im still here, still here, when will they start moving... MOVE MOVE MOVE"