The tube ain’t that bad

I was in Rome this weekend and stayed close the main railway station (Rome Termini). From there I could use the Rome Metro to go about town. As I was using it, I started thinking how it compared to the London Underground, or Tube, and quickly realised that the Tube is rather good.
For starters, it’s big; you can go almost anywhere in London using the Tube. In Rome, I wanted to go to the older part of town and to my dismay discovered that there is no Metro that covers that section; rather, you had to catch a bus. Needless to say with the rather chaotic Italian directions and Rome city layout, that was quite difficult.
The second thing which caught my attention about the Rome Metro was the graffiti on the trains. Whilst you notice it a bit on the Tube (and typically it gets removed quite quickly), the Rome Metro is plastered with graffiti. In some instances, so much so that you can hardly see the actual train.

DSC00014.JPG

It was also interesting to see that in Rome, you buy a ticket valid for 75 mins (at

Related posts:

  1. The rush that is London
  2. Hot times on the tube
  3. Further More…
  4. Tube stuff
  5. Art appreciation

9 Comments so far

  1. Chavez (unregistered) on November 30th, 2004 @ 3:36 pm

    Enjoyed your post on the trains!

    I believe the Washington DC or NYC trains are something of a hybrid between the London and Greek trains in that:

    In DC, you can buy a pass to be used anytime (today, tomorrow, next month). In NYC, I believe you have 24 hours to use your pass. However, in both cases, the length of distance you can travel depends on the amount your pass is holding.

    The DC trains do not feature graffiti while the NYC trains have a little, but not like the photo in your post.

    If I remember correctly, neither the DC nor the NYC train stations pipe in music as the trains drown everything out.

    The DC trains feature advertisements here and there

  2. Sean Hogan (unregistered) on November 30th, 2004 @ 4:39 pm

    A good piece and good photograpghs, but I have to say something here. The tube is terrible, sorry to be blunt. Given its scale and the level of woeful under investment its amazing there hasn’t been another Moorgate disaster! Have a look at cities such as Paris for a fairer comparison where the lines do ’seem’ to work, though the lack of CCTV is a worry. The tube has many, many faults one of which is its haphazard planning a legacy of its private origins where owners would not share stations. Then you have the woeful lack of service south of the river. However, the thought of what life would be like without it doesn’t even bear thinking about. ;-)

  3. Riaan (unregistered) on November 30th, 2004 @ 5:32 pm

    Hey Sean
    Yep you’re right…hence I made the post it ain’t that bad! Let’s not talk about delays, suspensions and all that! :)
    Riaan

  4. simon (unregistered) on December 1st, 2004 @ 9:48 am

    well, having lived in rome for 4 years i have to disagree, the tubes are great, they work, they’re on time.

    The thing is that Rome city centre is a tiny tiny place. You can walk from termini to the colloseo in about ten minutes and from there it’s another 15 minutes to trastevere. the metro will also take you to places close enough that you can have a quick walk too.

    london may have more stops but sometimes it also takes longer on the tube than it does to walk. Also, rome is such a beautiful place, why would you want to be underground.

    oh, and i always kind of liked the grafitti trains.

  5. Riaan (unregistered) on December 1st, 2004 @ 7:12 pm

    Simon
    Yes you’re right; walking around the city centre was great. As I wrote in my post about it here:
    http://www.720510.com/mt/archives/2004/12/ciao_ciao.html

  6. M (unregistered) on December 1st, 2004 @ 9:19 pm

    You can get anywhere in London - you ever been south of the Thames? That is called London too….. no tubes here, even in zones 3 or 4….. Would enjoy your comment on this one

  7. him (unregistered) on December 3rd, 2004 @ 4:07 am

    Having just seen the opening of the Bangkok tube I was amazed to hear that certin tour reps were recommending that it was “too dangerous” for tourists, from the UK, to use.

    I’m from the Uk and lived in london. The Bangkok tube is incredibly clean and safe - but thats the thai-view of England - everything there is perfect, including the tube.

    While the london tube has a lot of faults, I think it’s one of the things that really gives the city it’s character, something I’ve not seen in other cities, except possible NY.

  8. Beth Ballingall (unregistered) on December 3rd, 2004 @ 6:42 am

    I’m always disgusted by how grimy I feel after a day using the tube. Myself, I’m a much bigger fan of the bus. In terms of city comparisons, I’m a big fan of the U-bahn in Berlin. It’s just nicer, and not so far underground. It doesn’t take ten minutes to get to the train upon entering the station.

  9. Stephen (unregistered) on January 23rd, 2006 @ 5:04 pm

    Just a comment from Toronto - our subway sucks horribly.. but they sure do pipe in music as well. There are some ‘troubled’ stations and since teens love to hang out there and cause trouble they pipe in Classical music during the before and after school times.

    I’m just not sure if they feel it will have a calming effect or if they want them to just leave…


Terms of use | Privacy Policy | Content: Creative Commons | Site and Design © 2008 | Metroblogging ® and Metblogs ® are registered trademarks of Bode Media, Inc.