The new R211 trainsets[1] have digital displays that show this information as well -- they show the upcoming station ahead of time, along with which exit is relative to which car in the train.
On a recent week long with lots of subway use trip to NYC, it was wild to me that this sort of extremely basic information was incredibly hard to impossible to find. At best, there was a single screen, but positioned in such a way to be invisible to at least half the carriage (on the side in one of the ends); at worst there was only the driver saying stations names over an intercom system that garbled everything. Same at stations, where with a few exceptions, it seemed the only information was on track-facing screens in very limited numbers. There was vastly more space dedicated to ads, including screens with ads, than to signage. Why? Why not replace 3 of the 100 ad signs with some information about the train, or a map? Being more used to Paris and London metros, it was quite hard to navigate and took lots of effort fishing for information which should be well presented.
It seems that usability is one of the last concerns of US transit planners. And NYC Subway is supposed to be one of the good ones!
> At best, there was a single screen, but positioned in such a way to be invisible to at least half the carriage (on the side in one of the ends); at worst there was only the driver saying stations names over an intercom system that garbled everything.
That’s the old (but not very old) trainsets. The new ones have a digital display above every door. Be happy you weren’t on the very old ones; those don’t have displays at all, besides a paper map.
The answer to this isn’t about usability, but about the fact that the NYC subway runs old trainsets and isn’t given very much money (relative to its economic impact on the city) to upgrade them. But that’s slowly changing.
Even the oldest trainsets in Paris and London (as old as from the 50s) have at least a static map of the line; none in NYC out of those I was one had even that.
Similarly, all stations have digital signage indicating when the next train is coming and where it's going, starting from the ~70s.
My point about usability was that NYC Subway was pretty hard to use as a tourist. Station entrances had random variations of end destinations or broad directions (e.g. either the name of the lasts stops, or the location of the last stop like Coney Island, or the general direction of Uptown or Brooklyn). Understanding where express services are stopping was hard, because the one screen per station with that detail was inaccessible due to the amounts of people on waiting. And the noise.. NYC Subway needs lots of investment, but that investment needs to be spent better too.I passed through some works a few time, and the ratio of workers on their phone vs workers looking like they're working was 30:1 each time. The Grand Paris Express president talked about the mismanagement and absurd contracts MTA have, and he has said that if they had the same requirements GPE (100+ km of brand new fully automated metros) would never have been built.
> Even the oldest trainsets in Paris and London (as old as from the 50s) have at least a static map of the line; none in NYC out of those I was one had even that.
You might have missed it. I absolutely guarantee you that every single car in the NYC subway has at least one system map and multiple line maps. On the older cars, the (paper) system map tends to be at the front of the car, and the (paper) line maps are generally in the middle of the car.
I don't particularly disagree about destination-designated services being confusing. However, that's the norm for subway systems AFAICT; Paris's metro directions were equally confusing for me as a visitor.
(You're also right about the noise although, again, I think Paris is a relative outlier among large metros in terms of low noise levels. To my understanding, this is a result of using rubber tires on some lines, continuously-welded rail on others, smaller trainsets overall, and - yes - better maintenance.)
> You might have missed it. I absolutely guarantee you that every single car in the NYC subway has at least one system map and multiple line maps. On the older cars, the (paper) system map tends to be at the front of the car, and the (paper) line maps are generally in the middle of the car.
One per car is absurdly insufficient. Especially considering the amount of space dedicated to ads.
> I don't particularly disagree about destination-designated services being confusing. However, that's the norm for subway systems AFAICT; Paris's metro directions were equally confusing for me as a visitor.
Nope, Paris metro only uses the last stop for signs. You don't have some signs saying La Plaine, others St Denis, third ones Mairie de St Denis when they're talking about the Mairie de St Denis stop in the La Plaine neighbourhood of St Denis (random example). This is the same way that transit apps orient you (tell you to catch line X from stop A, direction ABC; having some stop entrances say some places on the way to ABC, that's confusing)
Not on the elevated lines (with the exception of some stretches that are being replaced now), to my knowledge. The elevated lines are some of the loudest in the city.
(Ironically, the biggest reduction in noise along the J/Z line in recent years has been due to lead abatement: the temporary sheds they're using to cover the superstructure while they remove the lead paint makes the surrounding streets noticeably quieter.)
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R211_(New_York_City_Subway_car...