Riders Group Issues Yearly “State of the Subways Report Card”

Best: 6 with ‘MetroCard Rating’ of $1.65; Worst: N with 80¢ Rating

Overall Positive Picture: Subway Cars Cleaner, Less Crowded, Fewer Breakdowns, Better Announcements

 
The NYPIRG Straphangers Campaign today issued its seventh annual “State of the Subways” Report Card, rating the 6 as the best of 21 subway lines with a “MetroCard Rating” of $1.65 and the N as the worst with a rating of 80 cents.

The 43-page report is based on an extensive review of official data on subway service, much of which has not been released before on a line-by-line basis. It includes detailed one-page profiles of 22 lines and a Straphangers Campaign “MetroCard Rating” for 21 of the lines.

The profiles report six measures of service, based on recent data from MTA New York City Transit, largely covering the last half of 2003. The measures for each line are: the amount of scheduled service and the regularity of train arrivals; mechanical failures of subway cars; chance of getting a seat at the most congested point; cleanliness of subway car floors and seats; and adequacy of announcements.

The MetroCard Ratings are a shorthand tool to compare lines and are based on a formula developed in consultation with independent transportation experts. A line could receive a rating of $2.00 if it scored, on average, in the top 5% on the six measures of service.

“Overall, our report card paints a positive picture of the subways, with less crowding, fewer breakdowns, cleaner cars and better announcements,” said Gene Russianoff, staff attorney for the Straphangers Campaign.

Russianoff noted that the report was being issued at a critical time for the city’s subways, which may soon be hit with fare increases, service cuts and a downturn in rebuilding efforts unless leaders in Albany and City Hall provide new transit funding.

Among the key findings of the report

1. The best subway line in the city is the 6, with a “MetroCard Rating” of $1.65. The 6 ranked high because it is tied for first in frequency of scheduled service and it performs above average on four other measures: arriving with regularity, car breakdowns, cleanliness and announcements. The line did not get a higher rating because it performed below average on chance of getting a seat during rush hours. Russianoff noted that this was the first time the 6 line has ranked first in the Straphangers Campaign Report Card since the group began rating lines in 1996. He said the top performance of the 6 is due in part to the new technology subway cars, which began replacing the line’s aging fleet in recent years. The 6 runs between Pelham Bay Park in the Bronx and the Brooklyn Bridge subway station in lower Manhattan.

2. The worst subway line is the N*, with a MetroCard Rating of 80 cents. The N* line has a low level of scheduled service and it performs below average on four other measures: arriving with regularity, car breakdowns, seat availability and announcements. The N* line did not receive a lower rating because its cars are much cleaner than the system average. The N* was the next-to-worst performing line last year in the 2003 Straphangers Campaign Report Card, which rated service for the last six months of 2002. The N* line operates between Astoria, Queens and Gravesend, Brooklyn.

(*During the period covered by this report — the last six months of 2003 — the N served downtown Manhattan, traveling through the Montague Street tunnel from downtown Brooklyn. Starting in late February 2004, the routing changed on the N and the line now bypasses downtown Manhattan, travelling over the Manhattan Bridge. Lines whose current routing changed in February 2004 are noted with asterisks.)

3. Overall, subway cars are less crowded, cleaner, and provide better announcements than in 2002; they also break down less often. The regularity of service remained the same. (These findings are detailed below.)

4. System-wide, the subways are less crowded since our last report. The chance of getting a seat during rush hour at a line’s most crowded point increased from 41% in 2002 to 44% in 2003 (this data is the most recent available).

• Crowding decreased on 12 subway lines (4, 6, 7, B*, C, E, F, J/Z, M, Q*, R and W*), grew worse on four (2, A, L, and N*), remained unchanged on two (5 and D*) and could not be compared on four (1/9, 3, G, and V). (Routing on the 1/9 and 3 differed in 2002 and 2003. No comparable crowding data is available for the G; data on crowding was released for the V in 2003 but not in 2002.)


• The most improved line for crowding was the M. The line went up from a 47% chance of getting a seat during rush hour at the line’s most crowded point to a 66%, comparing data from the most recent available time periods.


• The most deteriorated line for crowding was the 2. The line went down from a 41% chance of getting a seat during rush hour at the line’s most crowded point to a 35%, comparing data from the most recent available time periods.

5. System-wide, subway cars with clean seats and floors increased from 78% to 83%, comparing the last six months of 2002 to 2003. The improvement is more dramatic compared to our first report, which covered the last six months of 1996. At that time, we found only 70% of cars with clean seats and floors.

• Car cleanliness improved on 14 subway lines (4, 5, 7, A, C, D*, E, F, G, J/Z, L, M, N* and Q*) and grew worse on five (2, B*, R, V and W*), remained unchanged on one (6) and could not be compared for two (1/9 and 3).


• The most improved line for car cleanliness was the J/Z. The line went up from 60% cars with clean seats and floors to 86% between the last six months of 2002 to 2003.


• The most deteriorated line for car cleanliness was the R. It went down from 82% clean cars to 70% between the last six months of 2002 to 2003.

6. System-wide, subway cars with accurate and understandable announcements increased from 87% to 88%, comparing the last six months of 2002 to 2003.

• Despite the overall improvement, accurate and understandable car announcements improved on only six subway lines (2, 4, 5, L, R, and V), grew worse on 13 (6, 7, A, B*, C, D*, E, F, G, J/Z, M, N* and Q*), remained unchanged on one (W*) and could not be compared for two (1/9 and 3). Most of the declines were moderate.


• The most improved line for car announcements was the 4. The line went up from 83% cars with accurate and understandable announcements to 95% between the last six months of 2002 to 2003.


• The most deteriorated line for car announcements was the J/Z. The line went down from 89% cars with accurate and understandable announcements to 76% between the last six months of 2002 to 2003.

7. System-wide, the regularity of service — how often trains arrive without bunching or gaps in service — remains unchanged at 88%.

• Regularity improved on five subway lines (4, 5, C, G and N*), grew worse on six (6, 7, E, Q*, R and V), nine remained unchanged (2, A, B*, D*, F, J/Z, L, M, and W*) and could not be compared for two (1/9 and 3). Most of the declines were moderate.


• The most improved line for regularity was the 4. The line went up from 81% of trains arriving without bunching or gaps in service to 89% between the last six months of 2002 and 2003.


• The most deteriorated line for regularity was the V. The line went down from 90% of trains arriving without bunching or gaps in service to 86% between the last six months of 2002 to 2003.

8. MTA New York City Transit basic data indicate an ongoing trend of fewer breakdowns as new technology cars come on line. (A direct comparison for the subway car breakdown rate with past years is not possible, due to a change in methodology.)

Russianoff noted that the 2002 fleet-wide 12-month breakdown rate was every 114,619 miles. In 2003, the breakdown rate is every 139,960 miles. Russianoff added that the Report Card also could not make comparisons to past performance on frequency of service. (For the differences in how these measures were calculated in 2002 and 2003, see report’s methodology section.)

9. There are great disparities in how subway lines perform:

• Breakdowns: The D* had the best record on delays caused by car mechanical failures: once every 448,404 miles. The G line had the worst, experiencing breakdown delays more than eight times as often: once every 53,331 miles.


• Cleanliness: The E was the cleanest line, with only 4% of its cars having moderate or heavy dirt, while 30% of cars on the dirtiest line — R — had moderate or heavy dirt, a much worse performance.


• Chance of getting a seat: We rate a rider’s chance of getting a seat at the most congested point on the line. We found the best chance is on the B* line, where riders had a 72% chance of getting a seat during rush hour. The L ranked worst and was much more overcrowded, with riders having only a 29% chance of getting a seat.


• Amount of scheduled service: The 6 and 7 lines had the most scheduled service, with two to three minute intervals between trains during rush hours. The B* and M rank worst, with nine to ten minute intervals between trains during this period.


• Regularity of service: The G line had the greatest regularity of service, arriving within two to four minutes of their scheduled interval 94% of the time. The most irregular line is the 5, which performed with regularity only 80% of the time.


• In-car announcements: The 5 line had the highest rate of adequate announcements made in its subway cars, 100% of the time. The J/Z was the worst, at 76%.

The Straphangers Campaign’s work to rate the quality of subway and bus service is funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, which is a leader in supporting the assessment of government services. Click here to see the full report.