I get a 403 Forbidden error trying to read Dwell from Australia the last week or so. Are they blocking everyone outside the US perhaps?

Prior to this starting, I used to get some other temporary error for each subpage I loaded within a session. Geofenced caching issue maybe?

Many of the tube lines run above ground once outside the center. And I thought the Overground had gone and had been incorporated into the tube network fully when they renamed all the lines.

> An underground train network is the pinnacle of public transport—right now, in New York and Chicago... people are being whisked through a network of tunnels, deep below the bustling city

Chicago is almost entirely above ground. Very little of the network is below the city.

Out of 224.1 miles of track, only 11.4 are underground (5%).[1] Only two out of the eight lines run that 11.4 miles and the majority of their time is spent on elevated tracks above street level.

That said, a ring around the city would be great. The hub and spoke layout dramatically limits Chicagoans ability to get around.

[1]: https://www.transitchicago.com/facts/

This is a great success story, but I was really hoping the article would address the question in the title, that is, how can this be replicated in other cities?

They mention repurposing existing underused lines, which certainly many cities have, but how did they manage to actually get the project off the ground?

> in New York and Chicago, Paris and Berlin, Tokyo and Beijing, people are being whisked through a network of tunnels, deep below the bustling city.

Paris’ RER is a mostly aboveground suburban rail network, it’s only underground when it reaches the city center. And it’s far from unique, that’s a common feature of commuter rail.

And while the metro is mostly underground, about 20km (out of 245) is aboveground.

In Stockholm we were a bit late to the party and dug our tunnels bigger, our teeny wheeny network has about 50% above ground stations and most new development is underground since it's easier to DnD (drill and dynamite) through a neighborhood than getting people to move.

Sadly we combine the worst of two worlds, in the summer the train takes on heat though radiation, but since track is tunneled they can't run AC which would heat up the tunnels (we haven't developed on/off switches in Sweden yet).

We only have 65 miles of track compared to Londons 225 but ours is uniquely cool by being bedrock excavation instead of dig & cover.

I think in the US we can only do things that others don't. For example, all the best transit systems cost money but in the US transit activists advocate for every system to be free. In this way, we can innovate and solve problems in novel ways that others have already solved.

I think a big part of why the Overground is lively and revered is because it’s where more of the “real” London is (i.e. the full-time residents, of all classes, whose lives are very much anchored to where they live). The center in contrast is a hollowed out cultural wasteland. I’ve long felt that you can’t have the effects that make cities special without that physical compression at the center, that forces people and ideas to meet which otherwise would not have. So I abandoned London in that regard. But I’d be very happy for the Overground to prove me wrong!

Interesting! I didn't know about the London Overground, only visited London once (nearly 20 years ago).

I like our trains here in Sydney for similar reasons. The lines are almost all aboveground, you get to see plenty of neighbourhoods and plenty of sunshine out the windows (you also get the full panoramic scenery when going over the harbour bridge). And they're double decker and have lots of seating, so there's not nearly as much shoulder jostling as on typical metro trains (although there is frequent squeezing past peoples' knees to get out of a window seat).

Ironically, there is a brand new "metro" line here in Sydney (and they're building more metro lines), and many people prefer it - even though it has less seating, is often crowded, and is more underground - because it's faster and more reliable. Opposite of the situation in London. I guess the grass is always greener!

The quality of the travel experience on the tube highly depends on how old that specific line is.

The northern line, which is arguably one of the most useful lines for many people, is just not pleasant at all. The air is stale and full of soot particles, and you wait in a small cramped station perfect for claustrophobia. The trains are narrow and not air-conditioned. The central, victoria and piccadilly lines aren't much better.

The elizabeth or jubilee lines, newest of the bunch, offer comfort that is much more in line with the overground (wide and tall air-conditioned trains, large and well-ventilated stations).

Myself, I just avoid taking the tube and cycle instead. It's usually faster anyway.

As a rider I prefer overground. but as a resident I hate them. I see people living next to the tracks, it’s horrible. I’ve been next to the tracks in hotels, it’s horrible.

Tokyo has been working to move several lines underground. not quite the same because they weren’t elevated. but, once the buried the trains they turned the old track areas into parks, walking paths, biking paths, indie stores, etc. it’s great!

I don't know about "every city", but Paris has both regular metros that are above ground (sometimes way above), and "tramways" that are trains running in the streets.