Although I understand the idea of pinning the performance of each line to one person and holding that person accountable instead of a bureaucratic system, isn’t integration of a vast series of subway lines a better idea than giving each one autonomy? As another commenter said, it’s not like we have much of a choice in which line we choose. In the situations where people do have a choice, such as choosing the 123 over the BC or the 4 over the BD, the conclusion we can draw is that the system shortchanges the CBD, not that the 1234 are somehow better run.

Instead of making all the lines different, I be much more supportive of bringing the PATH system into the MTA and further interconnecting and expanding the existing system efficiently. That would be much more transformational and exciting.

Do you have ANY idea of the organizational make-up of NYCT, and how responsibility is actually distributed? There are divisions for Rapid Transit, Track, Signals, Stations, Electricity, Structures, Capital, all of which are involved in making the entire system work, imperfectly, as we all know. If you think that somehow additional new people are going to be hifed to try to organize and rationalize those operations on behalf of the riding public.
David Gunn was able to make enormouse headway 20+ years ago, but he was fully backed by the State and Local Goverments, and was given the Capital funding and Operating budget to do the job.

To address your first part, it’s hard to fault the MTA for wanting to spread management around. It’s ludicrous that one person is in charge of maintenance and upkeep at 468 stations. I’m just wondering if a line-by-line reorganization is really the way to go.