Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday October 18 2017, @02:55AM   Printer-friendly
from the cost-vs-convenience dept.

With Uber and other ridesharing services becoming a common transit option for some D.C. residents, we wanted to get a sense of when someone might substitute an Uber trip for a Metrorail trip. To do this, we plotted data on travel time and cost, creating a visualization that shows whether Uber or Metro is faster, and at what cost, for 114 different trips between Metro stations. By adding in the time it takes to wait for a Metro train or Uber, walk to the Metro, or sit on a delayed train, we can see how a person's decision might change depending on their circumstances.

The trips we analyzed include trips between the city and the suburbs as well as trips within the city.

[...] We found that for longer trips between the center of the city and the suburbs, Metro tends to be both more cost-effective and quicker than Uber. But for trips within the city that require a Metro transfer, Uber is often quicker than Metro, especially when Metro wait times are long, like on weekends, or when there are delays. While Uber's regular service tends to be much more expensive than Metro, Uber Pool makes some Uber trips nearly as affordable as Metro.

Did they factor in the need for a pack train, 3 days' provisions, and sherpas to get up and down the stairs in the Metro?


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18 2017, @04:04AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 18 2017, @04:04AM (#583797)

    You just don't see any problems like this at all on Japanese subways or trains. Americans simply have no idea at all how to run an efficient train service.

    Tokyo's mass transit is very good, but it is wrong to think it is problem-free. It's also a bit unfair to compare a system supporting the most populous city in the world with, well, any other city. Tokyo can afford to have routes like the yamanote line that basically have a train going both directions at every station all the time because the ridership is there.

    Some problems come from the fact that there is no unified system: several different rail companies run the various lines basically independently. For example, at least 4 companies have local mass transit connections at Shinjuku, but nowhere in the station will you find a single map that shows them all (with the sole exception of Toei Subway and Tokyo Metro which share a map). Each company has its own fare structure, although at least they all use the same payment card system.

    I also find many of the stations themselves in Tokyo are difficult to use, mostly due to poor signage. Seoul is much better in this regard, which has the best station maps and signage I have ever seen anywhere.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +3  
       Interesting=2, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   3