Metro systems of the world are diverse, but nevertheless some metro systems are obviously (or not so obviously) related with each other. Some use the same or similar trains, or the station design is similar, or both -- or something else is related.

The following List includes suggestions from this thread until 11 Jan 2009:

Former Soviet family
Members: Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kiev and many more
Characteristics: the same type of trains is used, and stations are often lavishly decorated and made of marble or other natural stone. Many cities began with a triangular three-line network layout with three transfer stations.

Warsaw Pact family
Members: Budapest, Bucarest, Prague, Sofia
Characteristics: the same type of trains as in the Soviet family is used (or newer developments), stations unadorned.

Michelin/Alstom family
Members: Lausanne (M2 - Switzerland), Lyon (line A, B and D - France), Marseille (France), Mexico City (Mexico), Montréal (Canada), Paris (line 1, 4, 6, 11 and 14 - France), Santiago de Chile (line 1,2 and 5 - Chile)
Derivatives: VAL family
Characteristics: rubber-tyred metro developed by Michelin in the 1930s

VAL family
Members: Toulouse, Lille, Paris Airport shuttles (Orlyval and CDGVal) Rennes (France), Turin (Italy), Uijeongbu (South Korea), Taipei (Taiwan), Chicago (O'Hare Hare airport - USA)
Characteristics: Sleek little automated, rubber-tyred metros. Platforms are short and have platform screen doors.

Ansaldo/Breda family
Members: Brescia, Milan's Line 5, Copenhagen.
Characteristics: Similar trains.

Vancouver/KL family
Members: Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur
Characteristics: Automated trains using LIM technology.

US Bombardier ART family
Members: Vancouver (Expo and Millennium Lines), Kuala Lumpur, Toronto, New York City, Detroit People Mover, Beijing (Airport Line), Yongin (South Korea), Miami Metro Mover.
Characteristics: Spacious trains with carpets.

US Rohr Industries family
Members: Washington, San Franisco BART
Characteristics: Spacious trains with carpets.

US Budd family
Members: Baltimore, Miami.
Characteristics: Same trains.

US Boeing LRT family
Members: Boston, San Francisco (MUNI).
Characteristics: Same trains.

Istanbul-Caracas family
Members: Istanbul, Caracas.
Characteristics: Using similar trains.

German/Austrian family
Members: Berlin, Munich, Nuremberg, Vienna.
Characteristics: Using similar trains.

Spanish family
Members: Barcelona (Spain), Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic).
Characteristics: Using similar trains.

Siemens LRT family
Members: Frankfurt, San Diego, Portland, Edmonton, Calgary.
Characteristics: Older LRT train types are the same.
Derivatives: Rhine-Ruhr LRT family.

Rhine-Ruhr LRT family
Members: Bochum, Bonn, Cologne, Dortmund, Düsseldorf, Essen, Mülheim.
Characteristics: Using very similar LRT trains (Typ B).

Hamburg Derivatives family
Derivatives: Hamburg, Athens, Amsterdam, Dublin.
Characteristics: Hamburg's Metro operator was consultant to other cities, and some older train types look similar.

Cinese family
Members: Hong Kong, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, ...
Characteristics: Unadorned, clean and solid station design, often using coloured plates. Western-style trains. Hong Kong acted as consultant for most Chinese metro cities.

Japanese/Korean family
Derivatives: Tokyo, Kyoto, Kobe, Seoul, ...
Characteristics: Unadorned, clean and solid station design, often using coloured plates. Majority are run by Japan Railways Group, other trains mostly derived from those.

Australian Commuter Trains family
Derivatives: Sydney, Brisbane, Perth, Adelaide.
Characteristics: Similar system and train design.



Relationships can be manifold. I may be over-simplifying things here and have left out much. But I'm sure you guys can add a lot of information about the families above or add a lot of other families. If you like...

Maybe this could even lead to kind of a genealogical tree of metros...

For the U.S. family, you are correct to relate BART and Washington, DC. However, only those two belong in the group; Atlanta (MARTA) does not belong.

BART and Washington, DC, trains were initially both made by Rohr Industries.

You could group Chicago, NYC, and LA subway trains because they are all boxy, stainless steel-clad cars.

Russian (or former Soviet-Union) family
Member cities: Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kiev and many more
Characteristics: the same type of trains is used, and stations are often lavishly decorated and made of marble or other natural stone.

I think the russian-type has 2 sub-types: One is the soviet,as you sad,lavishly decorated and such,and the other,from former Warsaw-pact countries,which are just plain ugly,"commie"-style. Usually long platforms,the same trains everywhere.

East Asian family
Derivatives: Tokyo, Kyoto, Kobe, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, ...
Characteristics: Unadorned, clean and solid station design, often using coloured plates. Japanese cities often have similar trains.

It seems to me Chinese metros are quite different from the Japanese and Korean systems... The trains have western look because of being designed by Europeans. In Korea and Japan they use their own design of them.

Russian (or former Soviet-Union) family
Member cities: Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kiev and many more
Characteristics: the same type of trains is used, and stations are often lavishly decorated and made of marble or other natural stone.

I think decoration style is not a reliable way to identify this family. Stations are different and somethimes have no decorations at all. Main characteristic of this family is a technical compatibility.
Also, trains are not always the same here, but they are compatible.

VAL family
Member cities: Toulouse, Lille, Rennes (France)
Derivatives: Paris (line 14), Turin (Italy), Copenhagen.
Characteristics: Sleek little automated, rubber-tyred metros. Platforms are short and have platform screen doors.
Copenhagen's train sets don't have rubber tyres. I think it's more similar to eg. Vancouver's Skytrain than the French VALs actually.

Would "S-bahn metros" qualify as a family? Ie. actual metros that are called S-bahn and are therefore perceived as being commuter systems?
Examples: Berlin S-bahn, Hamburg S-bahn, Copenhagen S-tog.



Also, I'd put "Chinese metros" as a separate category, including Hong Kong's MTR. The MTR Corporation has been consulted when designing several of the metro systems in mainland China, and the systems are thus very much alike.

Turin metro is a VAL exactly like Lille Toulouse or Rennes.

You can include the classic trainsets of Vienna, Munich and Nuremberg, as well.

You could group Chicago, NYC, and LA subway trains because they are all boxy, stainless steel-clad cars.

Or, perhaps, Boston's could be added... albeit that they are boxy and stainless-steel-clad with further colored plating to indicate which line you're on (yellow, green, blue, or red).

VAL family
Member cities: Toulouse, Lille, Rennes (France)
Derivatives: Paris (line 14), Turin (Italy), Copenhagen.
Characteristics: Sleek little automated, rubber-tyred metros. Platforms are short and have platform screen doors.

Hum... The Paris line 14 is not a derivative from the VAL family. But they do share a common philosphy. They are both rubber-tyred (based on Michelin's technology) and automated. But that's all. The 14 is a regular sized parisian metro line (train length is 90m and will be at some point the future increased to 120m).

So let me correct you:
Michelin (a type of rubber-Tyred metro developped by Michelin during the 1930s)
Member cities: Lausanne (M2 - Switzerland), Lyon (line A, B and D - France), Marseille (France), Mexico City (Mexico), Montréal (Canada), Paris (line 1, 4, 6, 11 and 14 - France), Santiago de Chile (line 1,2 and 5 - Chile)
Derivatives: VAL family

VAL family
Member cities: Toulouse, Lille, Paris Airport shuttles (Orlyval and CDGVal) Rennes (France), Turin (Italy), Uijeongbu (South Korea), Taipei (Taiwan), Chicago (O'Hare Hare airport - USA)
Derivatives: NeoVal family (but for the moment it's more a concept than anything else)

It will be more accurate like this

Metro systems of the world are diverse, but nevertheless some metro systems are obviously (or not so obviously) related with each other. Some use the same or similar trains, or the station design is similar, or both -- or something else is related.

What comes to my mind (please correct me if I'm wrong or fill in the gaps):

Russian (or former Soviet-Union) family
Member cities: Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kiev and many more
Characteristics: the same type of trains is used, and stations are often lavishly decorated and made of marble or other natural stone.

VAL family
Member cities: Toulouse, Lille, Rennes (France)
Derivatives: Paris (line 14), Turin (Italy), Copenhagen.
Characteristics: Sleek little automated, rubber-tyred metros. Platforms are short and have platform screen doors.

Vancouver/KL family
Member cities: Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur
Characteristics: Automated trains using LIM technology.

US family
Derivatives: Washington, San Franisco BART, Atlanta and many more
Characteristics: Not sure, they just seem similar to me.

Rhine-Ruhr LRT family
Member cities: Bochum, Bonn, Cologne, Dortmund, Düsseldorf, Essen, Mülheim.
Characteristics: Using similar LRT trains.

Hamburg derivatives family
Derivatives: Hamburg, Athens, Amsterdam, Dublin.
Characteristics: Hamburg's Metro operator once gave consultancy to these cities, and some older train types look similar.

East Asian family
Derivatives: Tokyo, Kyoto, Kobe, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, ...
Characteristics: Unadorned, clean and solid station design, often using coloured plates. Japanese cities often have similar trains.


Relationships can be manifold. I may be over-simplifying things here and have left out much. But I'm sure you guys can add a lot of information about the families above or add a lot of other families. If you like...

Maybe this could even lead to kind of a genealogical tree of metros...

You missed a few here:

Toronton/NYC/Vancouver/KL family
Member cities: Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur, Toronto, New York City
Characteristics: Automated trains using LIM technology.

Toronto has the Scarborough RT which was the pilot project for the ICTS.

New York also has a line that goes to JFK I believe.

Detroit also has it's small MetroMover

You missed a few here:

Toronton/NYC/Vancouver/KL family
Member cities: Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur, Toronto, New York City
Characteristics: Automated trains using LIM technology.

Toronto has the Scarborough RT which was the pilot project for the ICTS.

New York also has a line that goes to JFK I believe.

Currently know as the Bombardier ART brand of rapid transit systems.

You could also add the Detroit People Mover, the Beijing Airport Line and also the system being built in Yongin, South Korea.

In Vancouver, only the Expo and Millennium Lines use Bombardier ART technology. The Canada Line that is under construction does not. The Canada Line does however use the SELTRAC Automatic train control system by Thales (formerly sold by Alcatel, sold by Standard Elecktrik Lorenz of Germany before that). SELTRAC is used in many more systems than Bombardier ART technology is used. The two technologies do not necessarily go hand in hand, but you do find them paired together in many instances. The Yongin installation does not use SELTRAC but Bombardier CityFLO 650 train control technology instead. This is the first Bombardier ART installation to NOT use SELTRAC.

The Istambul Metro is very similiar in design to the Metro de Caracas:



Caracas/Istambul:
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/9060/metro1py5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/5851/trenhermnaometrosdecaraoa9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Both trains (MP-89 and NS-93) are too similar,both are Rubber-Tyred, the development company is Alstom.

PARIS . MP-89
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Syf15SSWteM&hl=es&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Syf15SSWteM&hl=es&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

SANTIAGO . NS-93
<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QS-TbC2BcHY&hl=es&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QS-TbC2BcHY&hl=es&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Cheers :)

Some old stations of Athens' line 1 (green line) were built before the war by a German company from Berlin; the old signs have been carefully kept after the restoration and the company name (which I forget), followed by the word "Berlin" is visible. Especially the Omonoia station looks very similar to some contemporary (1930's) stations in Berlin

We could add rack metro like line C in Lyon.

Nice thread! Micro, can you please update your starting post to ensure some structure?

What comes to my mind ist the

Rathgeber-Family,
Munich and Nuernberg (A-Wagen)

and the


Berlin - Korea Connection

Would "S-bahn metros" qualify as a family? Ie. actual metros that are called S-bahn and are therefore perceived as being commuter systems?
Examples: Berlin S-bahn, Hamburg S-bahn, Copenhagen S-tog.
Between Berlin's and Hamburg's there is some similarity, but for Copenhagen it's only the name that sounds similar I guess. Spain's Cercanias and Paris's RER also come to mind, and many other cities also have that kind of commuter trains but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are all related.

Definitely related are the S-Bahn systems in Frankfurt, Stuttgart and Munich as they are using exactly the same type of trains.

Berlin - Korea Connection
As far as I know, Pyongyang just purchased some old trains from Berlin, I don't know if that counts as a full relationship...

Nice thread! Micro, can you please update your starting post to ensure some structure?
I'm a little overwhelmed by the loads of information you guys came up with. At the moment I don't have enough time and patience to sum up all those things, unfortunately. Maybe next week. But if anyone is in the mood to do it earlier, just post it and if desired I can then copy it into the first post (credits included, of course).

But it's interesting to read, keep your ideas coming!

You could group Chicago, NYC, and LA subway trains because they are all boxy, stainless steel-clad cars.
I don't know if "boxy and steel-clad" qualifies as a relationship. Do they have the same manufacturer or something else in common?

I don't know if "boxy and steel-clad" qualifies as a relationship. Do they have the same manufacturer or something else in common?The latest trains in Chicago and NYC are manufactured by Bombardier. All existing Toronto subway cars also fit this "family" description as do the cars of a metro in Turkey.

I would describe it as "boxy, steel-clad, modular trainsets of various sizes" with two subgroups - underground and elevated.

The description of the Bombardier ART system can also be divided into two subgroups...ART used as a main line service (Vancouver, Kuala Lumpur, Yongin) and ART used as a sub-line or specialized service (Toronto, New York-JFK, Beijing, Detroit).

I would also separate the HK line from the "Asian" grouping...HK trains have more in common with Singapore than with Japanese cities.

You could also consider the Australian commuter-trains-as metro familh.

Cheers, m

The latest trains in Chicago and NYC are manufactured by Bombardier. All existing Toronto subway cars also fit this "family" description as do the cars of a metro in Turkey.


To my knowledge NYC subways recently recieved trainsets from Kawasaki.
I also remember seeing alot of Kinki Sharyo trainsets as well.

Also, I'd put "Chinese metros" as a separate category, including Hong Kong's MTR. The MTR Corporation has been consulted when designing several of the metro systems in mainland China, and the systems are thus very much alike.

^^

Are we going to study metro lines or metro types (train...) ?

Because that can change things a lot.

For exemple most of the parisian system was built like an underground tram system with a station every 500m. Thats not the configuration of most of metro system in the world. As a matter of fact the New York metro is much more like Paris RER system than Paris metro.

The appearance of mpst metros seems to be more to do with age than anything else. Copenhagen's system, for example, look more East Asian than anything European. But that's probably because it's ratehr new, like most systems in East Asia.

East Asian family
Derivatives: Tokyo, Kyoto, Kobe, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Guangzhou, ...
Characteristics: Unadorned, clean and solid station design, often using coloured plates. Japanese cities often have similar trains.


Japanese cities have the similar trains because majority are run by Japan Railways Group.

The new Chinese MRT looks alike Hong Kong because the HK's MTRC, who operates MTR in Hong Kong, is the main consultant for the Chinese cities during the design, construction and operation phases.

Japanese cities have the similar trains because majority are run by Japan Railways Group.

The typical car design in the big cities (Tokyo, Osaka, Nagoya) is 18 or 20 m cars, with 3 or 4 doors per side, all longitudinal seating. The fact that all the trains are based on this design has less to do with JR (while JR is big, there are plenty of publicly- and privately-owned railways which have nothing to do with JR) and more to do with the fact that there was a need to standardize railways to allow for through-servicing between different operators.

Barcelona new 9000 series trains (made by ALSTOM) have been bought for Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic) metro too:
;)
http://i42.tinypic.com/2ngu91y.jpg
^^Barcelona.^^
:)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3254/3128894752_04953ab351_b.jpg
^^Santo Domingo.^^
:wink2:

Also Barcelona new 5000 series trains (made by CAF) have been bought for Rome, Algiers, etc.
http://i43.tinypic.com/11qo2fn.jpg
;)

In addition to station design and type of rolling stock, most of soviet-style metros has the same so called 3-line layout. Three lines meet in center, forming a triangular of transfer stations:

http://urbanrail.net/eu/pra/praha-map.gif

http://urbanrail.net/eu/kie/kyiv-map.gif

http://urbanrail.net/eu/kha/kharkiv-map.gif

Minsk:
http://bymetro.narod.ru/scheme/1992-1.jpg

http://urbanrail.net/eu/sof/sofia-map.gif

http://urbanrail.net/as/tbil/tbilisi-map.gif

http://urbanrail.net/as/tosh/toshkent-map.gif

http://urbanrail.net/as/yeka/yekaterinburg-map.gif

When a city grows, the basic 3-line structure may also expand. St. Petersburg is a good example.

1979:
http://podzemka.spb.ru/img/maps/1979kal.jpg

2009:
http://www.metro.spb.ru/data/img/sxema%20c%205%20liniey_%20v11.jpg

VAL family
Member cities: Toulouse, Lille, Rennes (France)
Derivatives: Paris (line 14), Turin (Italy), Copenhagen.
Characteristics: Sleek little automated, rubber-tyred metros. Platforms are short and have platform screen doors.

Paris' Line 14 is not a VAL, and Copenaghen line run on steel wheels. Brescia and Milano's Line 5 use the same technology of Copenaghen, from AnsaldoBreda. Turin uses a VAL.

In addition to station design and type of rolling stock, most of soviet-style metros has the same so called 3-line layout. Three lines meet in center, forming a triangular of transfer stations:

Budapest too, no?

http://urbanrail.net/eu/bud/budapest-map.gif

In addition to station design and type of rolling stock, most of soviet-style metros has the same so called 3-line layout. Three lines meet in center, forming a triangular of transfer stations

When a city grows, the basic 3-line structure may also expand.
This is incredible! Thank you for coming up with this aspect!

@staff
Budapest looks not triangular to me...

2009:
http://www.metro.spb.ru/data/img/sxema%20c%205%20liniey_%20v11.jpg

Has Line 5 opened yet? Wikipedia says it's due December 2008...

In addition to station design and type of rolling stock, most of soviet-style metros has the same so called 3-line layout. Three lines meet in center, forming a triangular of transfer stations:

One could almost class Munich as a Soviet style metro with branches at the end of the lines as there are three groups of lines:

U1 and U2
U3 and U6
U4 and U5

Between them they form a triangle of interchanges in the centre.

http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/muc/muc-map.gif
Taken from: http://www.urbanrail.net/eu/muc/muenchen.htm

Would Montreal's metro be part of this VAL system? It has rubber tires, but it doesn't have platform-screen doors.

No, VAL is a light metro, whereas metro in Montreal is a heavy one, and is the same as in Paris, Lyon and Marseille.

As a matter of fact I allready propose a correction for the VAL/Heavy rubbered-tyred metro (see at the beginning). It will be nice if someone read it for a change.

@staff
Budapest looks not triangular to me...
Oh, I was more thinking about the three lines that "meet in the centre". I suppose Budapest doesn't belong in the "Sovjet family" anyway-- especially since its metro dates back long before the Sovjet era..

Not a metro, but the trolleybuses of Córdoba (Argentina) could fit in the 3 routes scheme. The network is operated with soviet equipment from the late ´80s.

Baltimore and Miami shared an order for subway cards from Budd:

http://images.nycsubway.org/i37000/img_37605.jpg

http://images.nycsubway.org/i13000/img_13369.jpg

During the 1970s, San Francisco cooperated with Boston in ordering the notorious Boeing Vertols although there were significant differences in the vehicles delivered to the two cities:

http://images.nycsubway.org/i72000/img_72102.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/BoeingUSSRLV.jpg/800px-BoeingUSSRLV.jpg

Norfolk daisy-chained onto Charlotte's order for light rail vehicles from Siemens:

http://images.nycsubway.org/i82000/img_82695.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/greg_vassilakos/norfolk_lrt/norfolk_s70.jpg

Light rail lines around the United States can be divided into families based on vehicle and platform configuration. The permutations include high-floor vehicles with high platforms (Los Angeles and St. Louis), high-floor vehicles with low platforms (Sacramento, Baltimore, and Salt Lake City), and low-floor vehicles with low-floor aligned platforms (Houston, Charlotte, Seattle, San Jose, and Norfolk). There also are cities that don't seem to have settled on a single configuration (Boston, Philadelphia, San Francisco, Portland, and San Diego). Some of the cities that share a common vehicle and platform configuration could probably share equipment. Then there is the case of Los Angeles, which has the same vehicle and platform configuration for all three of its light rail lines but has a different signaling system for each!

The streetcar lines in Portland and Seattle (Tacoma Link Streetcar and South Lake Union Streetcar) and the line that might get built in the Anacostia neighborhood of Washington, DC all use the same Skoda-Inekon streetcar design:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/82/PortlandStreetcar5.jpg/800px-PortlandStreetcar5.jpg

In the United States, transit agencies usually go on their own when ordering equipment. Even within the same city it is common for different transit lines to use different equipment.

Another interesting subject is the differences between metro lines that exist in the same city. Boston has three metro lines. Each uses different equipment. The Red Line and the Orange Line have different clearances. The Blue line requires both overhead wire and third rail power supply.

Philadelphia also has three metro lines that each use different equipment. The Broad Street Subway and the Market-Frankford Elevated have different clearances. The Market-Frankford Elevated also uses an oddball track gauge. The PATCO line might be able to share equipment with the Broad Street Subway; however, this doesn't happen because they have different signaling systems and are operated by different agencies.

In New York City, the former IRT lines of the subway have different clearances than the former IND and BMT lines. The PATH system has clearances that are similar to the IRT lines. A further variant was recently added with JFK Airtrain, which is fully automated and uses Bombardier's linear induction motor system to propel the vehicles.

Budapest looks not triangular to me...

Budapest is an interesting story :) First line, so called Millennial Underground Railway Line or M1 was opened in 1896 - long before any Soviets in Hungary. Construction of modern subway started in 1970's and the same trianglular scheme was put over this historical line. Take a look at masterplan of Budapest Metro:

http://www.euro-life.ru/images/016a.gif

Line 4 (M4) is the part of initial project and is u/c now. All modern lines correspond to soviet standarts and ttey are incompatible with M1.

M5 is a future project, expanding a triangular structure similar to SPb.

Has Line 5 opened yet? Wikipedia says it's due December 2008...

Yes, new stations were opened, but Spasskaya station isn't ready yet. So the section Sadovaya - Komendantsky still is a part of Line 4. For the month or so the scheme will look like this:

http://www.metro.spb.ru/data/img/poslepuskov.jpg

I say more :) Even Moscow Metro initially provided the triangular structure!

1938:
http://metro.ru/map/1938/metro.ru-1938map-big1.gif

2008:
http://metro.ru/map/2008/metro.ru-2008.03map.gif

Buenos Aires subway "A" line. A living fossil for the metro family. The oldest rolling stock in daily service in the world. This is a La Bruggeoise original car dating back to 1913, rebodied in the ´20s when the route was shortened and went purely underground since then.

http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/9749/subte72buehs1.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
http://img209.imageshack.us/img209/subte72buehs1.jpg/1/w450.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img209/subte72buehs1.jpg/1/)

Pic by Cerami ?

Yes, new stations were opened, but Spasskaya station isn't ready yet. So the section Sadovaya - Komendantsky still is a part of Line 4. For the month or so the scheme will look like this:

Do you know where I can view images of them? Why is there no thread on the St Petersburg Metro in this forum?

Few shots can be found here
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=587108

Munich and Nuernberg (A-Wagen)



I am adding Vienna (type U), Berlin (D-Wagen) and Stockholm (type ??)!

I have done my homework now and updated the list in the first post (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=771958). Please review.

I've put the list on metrobits.org: Families of Metros (http://mic-ro.com/metro/families.html) with a backlink to this thread.

US Bombardier ART family
Members: Vancouver (Expo and Millennium Lines), Kuala Lumpur, Toronto, New York City, Detroit People Mover, Beijing (Airport Line), Yongin (South Korea), Miami Metro Mover.
Characteristics: Spacious trains with carpets.
...
genealogical tree of metros
Genealogical? :sly: Neither Toronto nor Détroit ever got an ART de Bombardier, as --along with Vancouver's initial fleet--
they were from Ontario's UTDC ... oh! plus judging by the mouldy-smelling rugging to BART's fleets back in the day,
I'd say carpeting would be pushing it ;) :
http://www.monorails.org/webpix/Detroit.jpg (http://www.monorails.org/tmspages/WhatIs.html),http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/16/TTC_UTDC_ICTS_Mark_I_3012.jpg/250px-TTC_UTDC_ICTS_Mark_I_3012.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarborough_RT),http://www.canada.com/technology/3084277.bin?size=300x200 (http://www.canada.com/technology/topic.html?t=Person&q=Bruce+Springsteen)
^^ Detroit's "People Mover" (http://www.monorails.org/tmspages/WhatIs.html)......^^ Toronto's "SRT" (soon to be abolished) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scarborough_RT)............^^ Vancouver's "SkyTrain" (http://www.canada.com/technology/topic.html?t=Person&q=Bruce+Springsteen)





All existing Toronto subway cars also fit this "family" description as do the cars of a metro in Turkey.
As per your inclusion of Toronto's H4s through H6s, we'd better throw in both Lagos:
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/images/icons/icon1.gif
Trains from Canada (http://media.blubrry.com/world/p/www.podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/media.theworld.org/audio/092820117.mp3)


or


Trains from Canada http://www.theworld.org/wp-content/uploads/toronto-subway300.jpg (http://www.theworld.org/2011/09/canada-nigeria-subway-train/)
and Montreal:
http://i741.photobucket.com/albums/xx52/brunolapointe/expo.jpg
^^ clickable... (http://media.photobucket.com/image/expo%20express/brunolapointe/expo.jpg?t=1268097881)




Would Montreal's metro be part of this VAL system? It has rubber tires, but it doesn't have platform-screen doors.
The closest Montreal came to VAL was the cornfield photo above :D i.e., the world's first fully automatic units.




We could add rack metro like line C in Lyon.
Peg to which system? (pun intended :D)

I think for the US families of metros, Atlanta, DC, BART, Miami, and Baltimore are all strongly related in their initial planning, source of funding, and motive for creation. Doesn't matter if some used trains by Rohr and others by Budd.

Here's my reasoning:

1. Mostly built by the federal government in a period between the late 60s and early 80s by the UMTA/FTA. Marked the first big investment in urban transit at the federal level, and were also a bit of a learning experience.

2. Have similar architecture/aesthetics, brutalist/modern. . Stations are all full-sized with mezzanine levels and fare barriers. Platforms have brown tiles(DC's are hexagons :)) like the floor of an old Burger King or McDonalds. Trains have the same kind of seating as an old McDonald's too, sans the pictures of Grimace and Mayor McCheese.

3. Were planned in the "dark ages", all started with a strong suburban focus with park n' rides and long distances. On the other hand, no expense was spared in routing them straight into the city, down the middle of the freeways or with expensive tunnels if necessary, so they all have much higher ridership than the average "successful" light rail system. Twice as many people take MARTA as they do the MAX in Portland, yet one is considered a model and the other a failure...heh.