Guest fountainhall Posted February 15, 2011 Posted February 15, 2011 For those who travel a bit, here's a short quiz about subway station names. It's not easy unless you've been to those cities (at least I reckon it's not!) but it might provide a bit of light relief. Question: in which cities will you find the following subway stations - Austerlitz Bryn Mawr Buenos Aires Concord Danube Europe Franklin D Roosevelt Moscow Nation San Francisco Stalingrad Theydon Bois Clue 1: They are in 6 cities in what are generally described as 3 continents - but some might argue just 2! Try without cheating first. By all means post how many stations you got right, but please do not post the cities as you'll deny others the chance to 'have a go'. I'll post the answers in a couple of days. Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 17, 2011 Posted February 17, 2011 No takers! Well, even though I travel a lot, I reckon I'd only have placed 5 correctly. Oddly, it is the Paris metro which has station names you'd expect to be in other cities. Paris - Austerlitz, Danube, Europe, Franklin D Roosevelt, Nation and Stalingrad Chicago – Bryn Mawr London – Theydon Bois Madrid – Buenos Aires and San Francisco St Petersburg – Moscow San Francisco – Concord Quote
KhorTose Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 Without checking I recognize Paris. Also, I( recognize Concord California and San Breuno (both part of BART). I think you should add that some of these stations are in the same city. AFTER EDIT Oh you were posting at the same time. Concord California is not part of San Francisco. It is on the Bay Area Rapid transit System, but it is 50 miles from SF and a separate city. I was thinking you meant San Francisco airport so I am wrong about that one. So you are into industry, as that is the only thing near that stop in Madrid. Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 I think you should add that some of these stations are in the same city . . . So you are into industry, as that is the only thing near that stop in Madrid. I did say the stations were in 6 cities - so some were bound to be found in the same city. On the other hand, I perhaps used subway in too loose a context. I always think of BART as basically a subway since, like almost many similar systems, part of it runs under the city. I have been on the Madrid subway but only in the centre. I chose the stations only in an attempt to make things a little more tricky Quote
Guest Posted February 18, 2011 Posted February 18, 2011 The original post seemed clear. Despite having used the underground system in 3 of the cities, Austerlitz was the only one I recognised. So I didn't post. Some of the others sounded familiar. Quote
Guest gwm4sian Posted February 21, 2011 Posted February 21, 2011 Just to be pedantic, Theydon Bois is not in the city of London, it is in Essex Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Just to be pedantic, Theydon Bois is not in the city of London, it is in Essex Difficult to argue with that. But Essex does not have any underground system (to my knowledge) and it's not a city, whereas Theydon Bois is certainly a station on the London underground Central Line. Quote
Guest gwm4sian Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 But Essex does not have any underground system (to my knowledge) and it's not a city, So does that make your original post Question: in which cities will you find the following subway stations - invalid? Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 So does that make your original post invalid? Of course not! It is listed as a London Tube station and printed as such on all the underground maps. What else would you call it? A London underground station that is outside the boundary of the city of London? That would be pretty ridiculous in my view - and, yes, somewhat pedantic! Quote
KhorTose Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 Of course not! It is listed as a London Tube station and printed as such on all the underground maps. What else would you call it? A London underground station that is outside the boundary of the city of London? That would be pretty ridiculous in my view - and, yes, somewhat pedantic! I think he has a point. Besides downtown San Francisco, BART runs to twenty-One different and distinct cities, and all of it rail is above ground, except for the immediate San Francisco area and under the bay. Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 On a technicality you may be correct. But it's a pretty fine distinction. Most major cities in the world have underground systems. A huge number of stations are effectively outside the borders of the cities' limits, but they are still listed on the cities subway or rapid transit maps. If you think that's not the correct way of looking at it, that's fine by me. But the people you should be complaining to, I suggest, are the relevant city's subway/rapid transit systems. I don't think the BART authorities are going to put the Concord station on a separate system - no more than London Underground will change the listing of Theydon Bois. Concord is 50 miles from SF and a separate city. On a technicality, google says Concord is 23 miles from the centre of San Francisco. And the Theydon Bois village website says this: Quote
Guest Posted February 22, 2011 Posted February 22, 2011 The entire London Underground system is known as Underground, even the over ground portions. The German U-bahn systems operate similar terminology. Also, as everyone knows, a proper Subway doesn't have trains running in it, it's merely a pedestrian crossing. At least that's how it is in British English. Quote
KhorTose Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Also, as everyone knows, a proper Subway doesn't have trains running in it, it's merely a pedestrian crossing. At least that's how it is in British English. Please explain? Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 We seem to be getting into a situation where we are splitting hairs. If so, there's no point pursuing this thread, in my view. To end it, let me satisfy those who have objected (nicely!) by saying my description on the first post was unclear - and let's end the thread. I believe z909 means that a subway in the UK basically means an underpass - a passageway for pedestrians under a road or a rail line. The London underground/subway system is of course called the 'Tube' locally. Quote
Guest Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 We seem to be getting into a situation where we are splitting hairs. Well (I think) it's all meant to be taken as a bit of fun. I've used underground lines in over 20 cities, but only perhaps one city out of 4? in my own country (UK). So I'm not going to remember stations in Spain, France or even a London "outlier". Much more fun to split hairs over the definition of subway. Being British, I immediately translated Subway to Underground and presumed you referred to the entire network, including the above ground parts. So that wasn't a problem for me. I've been to the city with the ORIGINAL Underground system (London, of course!!) & 2 which claim to have the second line....... Which are they? (I risk getting slaughtered on this, so please be nice.....) Quote
KhorTose Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 I've been to the city with the ORIGINAL Underground system (London, of course!!) & 2 which claim to have the second line....... Which are they? (I risk getting slaughtered on this, so please be nice.....) I think we are always nice, even when we disagree. I've been to Boston frequently and they claim to have the second oldest subway. I do not know of the other site, but will guess the City of Paris? Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 2 which claim to have the second line....... Which are they? (I risk getting slaughtered on this, so please be nice.....) I have hatchet at the ready If I am correct, then I have been on one - Budapest. Yes? Last year I was in Buenos Aires where the A line still has the original cars (see photo). But I doubt if that claims to be the 2nd oldest. How about Glasgow? I was based there for a few years and its trains are tiny, but it has been running a very long time. Quote
Guest Posted February 24, 2011 Posted February 24, 2011 Budapest is one. Here is the other. My link Quote
Guest fountainhall Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 I've been there twice and had no idea it had an underground - only a tram system! Quote
Guest gwm4sian Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Budapest is one. Here is the other. My link Dangerous to use Wikpedia to support claims - there's always another article, such as this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metro_systems which makes a clear distinction as to what is and what isn't a subway system, and places the oldest thre systems as London (1893) Budapest (1896) and Glasgow (1896) completely ignoring the Tunel Quote
Guest Posted February 25, 2011 Posted February 25, 2011 Dangerous to use Wikpedia to support claims - there's always another article, such as this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metro_systems which makes a clear distinction as to what is and what isn't a subway system I said I had been to 2 cities which "claimed to have the second oldest line". That is true. When I used the system in Istanbul, the sign on the wall carried the claim. I provided the Wiki link merely as information. Quote
