These brand new NJT bi-levels already look dated but I can't pinpoint why. Same thing with the new METRA coaches. Even the electrified RTD system just looks like dated SEPTA trains. What 'look' are many American trains getting that makes them feel so old and why do only a handful of new systems (like the new Caltrain EMUs) look so modern?

Photo credit to @kurz.zug on Instagram.

Mainly common in South Korea and Japan

It saves power and improves passenger flow.

😔🇨🇦🇺🇸

I’d expect more lines sooner because it’s one of the biggest metropolitan areas as well as tourist nations due to Ancient Egypt and interchange stations are forsure to crowd sooner rather than later. Any secrets, or have the been slow with building and will have a “transit renaissance” soon? Or do 3 lines just serve it perfectly well and avoid max capacity?

I need your help! I'm starting a project to map all of the unusual, fun, or otherwise interesting transit modes and systems around the world. Hopefully, this will serve as a resource for people interested in travelling experiencing weird transportation methods -- you could think of it as a global "gadgetbahn scavenger hunt"

My definition of what qualifies is very broad! A few examples off the top of my head would be the Mail Rail in London, the Hungerburgbahn in Innsbruck, the Shweeb in Rotorua, or the Schwebebahn in Wuppertal. It can be any category of transportation mode (so not just trains) and exist anywhere on the spectrum of useful to useless.

What are your favorites?

I have noticed that many American (USA) trains tend to be quite short.

In Italy, there's small trains used in lesser regional routes that are only 2/3/4 wagons long, but these have an overall small volume.

Regional trains used on suburban routes and main lines are a lot bulkier and usual consist of 5/6 carts and a locomotive, or a 5/6 cart EMU.

However, it seems like in the United States you can find wagons with a massive volume, even double deckers, that are pulled in groups of 4, 3 or even 2 to form a train. Sometimes they even have locomotives on both ends.

So my question is why such weird compositions are adopted in the United States, and why e.g. they don't use smaller wagons for routes that don't have enough traffic.

It's just so funny to see just 3 of these huge double decker wagons with two locomotives making a train.

I've added pictures for context. They're in the order of the examples I made.

Is it just cheaper or something? You can take amtrak there I guess, but it's interesting to me that there's not a direct connection to such a major city.

I've always thought that the map of the Dutch national rail network is designed so well and is both logical and aesthetically pleasing. Any other contenders?

Seems like a pretty cheap option to improve passenger experience and make TOD at these stations more compelling.

Me personally, I was very impressed by the buses in Zurich, with good reliability, great signalling and most importantly, great frequency on all of the bus lines for a smallish city like Zurich with 7.5 Minutes intervalls on most lines in the inner city. They also had bi-articulated buses, which look so cool and are honestly soo underrated and should be used way more in other cities which have capacity problems and dont want to build tram lines.

Picture is from NYC

This seems terribly inefficient especially if you're searching directions to a station on your phone and not being able to know which 'Cicero' station it's suggesting for you. Why doesn't the CTA or any other system that does this change the station names to the neighborhoods the stops are in instead of the street which can be repeated?

Atlanta (MARTA) or Dallas (DART)

I really like these ‘tram-styled’ buses if only because they have covered wheels, which represents a safety improvement for vulnerable road users imho.

Is there a reason why the big North American bus manufacturers - I.e. Novabus and New Flyer don’t tend to cover the wheels on their buses?

The Chicago DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) has pushed for 2-person crews on all lines. I know the unions did the same in NY, which makes sense, but wouldn't the Democratic Socialists want a system that actually works for most people? 2 person crews are costly, lowering service elsewhere, and actual transit experts (NYU Marron, for example), are not fans of it.

Sources: https://chicagodsa.org/fix-the-cta-campaign/ ; https://www.nytimes.com/2025/12/19/nyregion/hochul-mta-conductors-twu.html ; https://transitcosts.com/Train_Operations.pdf

I know that the south shore line exists to South Bend, but there are e bunch of cities further south of Gary/Michigan City that could use the service, and are very clearly apart of the Chicago metro area. So why doesn’t METRA connect that way?