daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old March 11th, 2013, 08:11 AM   #1181
saiho
Registered User
 
saiho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 多伦多/多倫多
Posts: 1,357
Likes (Received): 1290

What Beijing should try to do is build some AGTs as feeders and circulators like Japan
saiho no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old March 11th, 2013, 09:30 AM   #1182
xeror
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 136
Likes (Received): 33

Why not building bike lanes and parking? This would be the most cost effective, time saving, environmentally friendly and healthy solution.
xeror no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2013, 05:09 PM   #1183
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,302
Likes (Received): 538

Quote:
Originally Posted by particlez View Post
^funny your 3 scenarios ignores the most efficient one:

actually laying new grade separated lines. the demand for mass transit outstrips the present lines' capacity, and there are gaps in service. don't cheapen out with at-grade service and allow cross-traffic t impede it.

the higher capacity of trams (vs. buses) is compromised when cross traffic is in the way of the tram. the presence of cross traffic is a reason why ultra high density, ultra congested hong kong's island line uses double decker vehicles. even then, its practicality is up for debate.

if someone is going < 1km, it makes more sense to walk, or take a flexible, short haul bus. the beijing cbd will eventually have a subterranean walkway system.
I am not saying it is impossible to do so, again not considering cost, but that the Beijing metro doesn't, and probably won't, fit the bill. In my scenario the time actually spent moving in a train was 3 minutes, with another 3 minutes for waiting for train and waiting for passengers to enter/leave train at intermediate station. 19 minutes were spent walking, 10 minutes to get to/from the station, and 9 minutes walking inside the stations.

In traffic the fastest (but not the most comfortable) long-distance alternative is metro. Short distance the time getting to/from the train platforms cost too much time. The Beijing system is probably one of the worst around for walking time, but it seems that for the most part newer lines are more effective than the old ones.

Trams/LTR (and busses/BRT) are better at having stations where people are, instead of forcing people to go to them. That is nothing intrinsic about LTR as such, except that the stations/stops are cheaper to make and maintain. Integrating metro and trams is possible. Here is an example from Oslo where tram and metro actually share track and signals part of the way, but they don't share platform as the tram is low floor and the metro is not.

(Letting the metro and LTR share a platform, higher on one end lower on the other, could be a way to integrate the two, doors could open on both sides of the metro car).

Likewise there is nothing to prevent trams or busses to be at street grade at the stop, and at separate grade at some or all junctions, or metro having platforms at street grade or quickly and easily accessible from street grade.

There are other alternatives like the Automated People Mover in Guangzhou, but to me it looks like a waste of money with little benefit and small prospects (I haven't tried it myself though).
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2013, 07:32 PM   #1184
hmmwv
Registered User
 
hmmwv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,391
Likes (Received): 420

Quote:
Originally Posted by xeror View Post
Why not building bike lanes and parking? This would be the most cost effective, time saving, environmentally friendly and healthy solution.
They already have bike lanes and parking.
__________________
The building under construction next to Shanghai Tower is Oriental Financial Center. The "plot" next to Jinmao is reserved green belt and no skyscraper will be built there.
hmmwv no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2013, 09:24 PM   #1185
xeror
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 136
Likes (Received): 33

true but the usable bike lanes are decreasing and they become less safe to use. Some of them are occupied by private cars. They should build separated lanes with underground road crossing to minimize the travelling time and safety problem.
xeror no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2013, 10:33 PM   #1186
particlez
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 106

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
Likewise there is nothing to prevent trams or busses to be at street grade at the stop, and at separate grade at some or all junctions, or metro having platforms at street grade or quickly and easily accessible from street grade.

There are other alternatives like the Automated People Mover in Guangzhou, but to me it looks like a waste of money with little benefit and small prospects (I haven't tried it myself though).
Today I have to be quick. I'll forgo standard grammar and resort to bullet points
  • Just like Vienna, another smaller city (Oslo) is not a good example. there are reasons why comparably large and congested London and Paris have at-grade trams that do not enter the central areas.
  • Central Beijing's rail infrastructure is at capacity level, the existing rails and stations are needed for metro trains, not some people mover
  • Central Beijing is congested. Driving is hell, crossing the street is hell, at grade trams would not be an exception
  • CBD people movers are less pressing than extending mass transit to actual commuters. People can walk another few minutes to the office, whereas there are still people who aren't yet served by mass transit
  • In addition to the example in Guangzhou, automated people movers exist in places like Miami and Detroit. Expensive, but obviously faster than an at-grade solution. By nature, they carry fewer passengers/distance and fewer passengers/cost.
  • subterranean tunnels are now planned for Beijing CBD. The geology, climate, and congestion warrant it. Plus any future pedestrian tunnel will be lined with very profitable shops selling overpriced crap. Examples exist in other lousy-climate cities like Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, etc.

I'm not even sure if you're being completely serious, or just arguing for its own sake. You originally wanted some idealist/nostalgic tram. Then you switched over and insisted on a mid-sized central European streetcar system. The overwhelming challenge of central Beijing is to transport its workers to and from work, not your issue with walking an additional 10 minutes.

If developers have their way, a circulator system (Detroit, Miami, Guangzhou, etc.) will eventually be built. But that is much less pressing than an expansion of the cross-city lines.
particlez no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2013, 11:51 PM   #1187
Bannor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 507
Likes (Received): 107

Interresting. So an APM is basically an underground monorail serving the same purpose as an LRT although saving space above ground with increased transfer options to the subway system.
I'd say its a very smart solution even if its expensive. We will probably see more of this in the future in downtown areas!

I regret not having taken a ride at that when I was in Guangzhou, as I was at both its end stations I remember :/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_JNQgjkCyo
Bannor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 10:32 AM   #1188
big-dog
Registered User
 
big-dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,080
Likes (Received): 6840

Beijing's metro's ridership can only grow higher.

Quote:
Beijing subway overtakes Moscow as busiest

Updated: 2013-03-13 11:08
( chinadaily.com.cn)


Beijing's subway lines have surpassed Moscow to become the world's busiest after a record 10.27 million passengers travelled on the city's rail transit network on Friday, Beijing Morning Post reported.

Russia's subway lines used to handle the most passengers in the world, with a daily transportation of 8 to 9 million people.

"We will see the number of 10 million often in the future," said Zhan Minghui, director of the capital’s rail transportation command center.

Four new subway lines went into operation on Dec 30, 2012 in Beijing, bringing the total track length to 442 kilometers and making it the country's longest subway network.

Among the total of 16 lines now running in the city, line 10 handles the most passengers. The subway transportation company plans to add 17 pairs of trains to this line and reduce departure intervals from the current 2.5 minutes to 2 minutes to facilitate traffic flow.
big-dog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 10:51 AM   #1189
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8795

As far as I know, Tokyo is still busiest (most used on average) along with Seoul and was always busier than the Moscow metro. Do you mean single highest amount of passengers on a given day (which is what the article implies)? In which case, it gives the Beijing metro system the honour of most people moved on a single day, not the most used system overall.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 10:57 AM   #1190
big-dog
Registered User
 
big-dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,080
Likes (Received): 6840

I believe it refers to the "busiest" on a SINGLE day. In terms of average amount it has to wait for the year-end to calculate.
big-dog no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 11:08 AM   #1191
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8795

Well, for it to be the worlds busiest it has to add 700,000,000 trips on top of the 2012 total, that's quite a lot to ask! Still, it should become the busiest in the world soon, it is one of the largest systems in the world as it stands at the moment, though to put things into perspective, it'll have to add the entire ridership of the Taipei metro on top of its current ridership to become the world's busiest system on average. I can see it overtaking the Seoul subway this year as there isn't much between the two and Beijing had a lot of lines and extensions opening this year.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 12:36 PM   #1192
chornedsnorkack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,974
Likes (Received): 388

Quote:
Originally Posted by particlez View Post
Today I have to be quick. I'll forgo standard grammar and resort to bullet points
  • Just like Vienna, another smaller city (Oslo) is not a good example. there are reasons why comparably large and congested London and Paris have at-grade trams that do not enter the central areas.
Except that Moscow IS comparably large.

And unlike London and Paris, Moscow DOES have significant at-grade tram and trolleybus networks entering central areas.

Could Moscow be a better example for Beijing?
chornedsnorkack no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 01:14 PM   #1193
VECTROTALENZIS
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
 
VECTROTALENZIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4,236
Likes (Received): 4435

Why trams? Just take the subway to the nearest station and walk from there even if it's 1 km. It's good everyday exercize.
__________________

Falubaz liked this post
VECTROTALENZIS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 01:15 PM   #1194
VECTROTALENZIS
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
 
VECTROTALENZIS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Sweden
Posts: 4,236
Likes (Received): 4435

Here is the list of the busiest metro systems in the world:

Metro systems by annual passenger rides

Real cool that Beijing is on third and that Shanghai and Guangzhou is on the fifth and sixth respectively. It's just a question of time when these will overtake Moscow.

Shenzhen is also increasing fast I think it should be in the top 10 given the cities size and development, but then again it's also a question of time until that happens.

Inland cities such as Chongqing, Chengdu, and Wuhan have only resently got proper metro networks and are still in the infant stage. Wait 10 years and they will propably be in the 1.5 - 2 billion range. And that's what I hope.

Last edited by VECTROTALENZIS; March 13th, 2013 at 01:22 PM.
VECTROTALENZIS no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 02:18 PM   #1195
_Night City Dream_
Registered User
 
_Night City Dream_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 19,114
Likes (Received): 101505

I doubt about Tokyo bieng the first. They probably count JR city lines, too.
__________________
Big Cities is one of the major inventions by human beings

My Baku / Мой Баку / 我的巴库

_Night City Dream_ no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 02:48 PM   #1196
Northridge
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Oslo
Posts: 640
Likes (Received): 72

Quote:
Originally Posted by Svartmetall View Post
As far as I know, Tokyo is still busiest (most used on average) along with Seoul and was always busier than the Moscow metro. Do you mean single highest amount of passengers on a given day (which is what the article implies)? In which case, it gives the Beijing metro system the honour of most people moved on a single day, not the most used system overall.
These numbers aren't really worth anything.
But you're right, Tokyo is by far the busiest, since they don't even add the numbers from all the JR lines.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metro_s...assenger_rides
Northridge no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 03:55 PM   #1197
:jax:
Registered User
 
:jax:'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Södertälje
Posts: 1,302
Likes (Received): 538

Quote:
Originally Posted by particlez View Post
Today I have to be quick. I'll forgo standard grammar and resort to bullet points
  • Just like Vienna, another smaller city (Oslo) is not a good example. there are reasons why comparably large and congested London and Paris have at-grade trams that do not enter the central areas.
  • Central Beijing's rail infrastructure is at capacity level, the existing rails and stations are needed for metro trains, not some people mover
  • Central Beijing is congested. Driving is hell, crossing the street is hell, at grade trams would not be an exception
  • CBD people movers are less pressing than extending mass transit to actual commuters. People can walk another few minutes to the office, whereas there are still people who aren't yet served by mass transit
  • In addition to the example in Guangzhou, automated people movers exist in places like Miami and Detroit. Expensive, but obviously faster than an at-grade solution. By nature, they carry fewer passengers/distance and fewer passengers/cost.
  • subterranean tunnels are now planned for Beijing CBD. The geology, climate, and congestion warrant it. Plus any future pedestrian tunnel will be lined with very profitable shops selling overpriced crap. Examples exist in other lousy-climate cities like Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, etc.

I'm not even sure if you're being completely serious, or just arguing for its own sake. You originally wanted some idealist/nostalgic tram. Then you switched over and insisted on a mid-sized central European streetcar system. The overwhelming challenge of central Beijing is to transport its workers to and from work, not your issue with walking an additional 10 minutes.

If developers have their way, a circulator system (Detroit, Miami, Guangzhou, etc.) will eventually be built. But that is much less pressing than an expansion of the cross-city lines.
I think we should end this. There have been some nice points coming up from time to time, but there have also been a number of re-runs, and also a number of mis-understandings. I know that I nowhere never have argued for "some idealist/nostalgic tram", not here, not in any other forum. There might be a use for it, but not to solve transport problems. I might have been drawn deeper into the discussion than I've liked because of your categorical position that trams have no role to play in a large dense city. I disagree with that, but I am not saying they have to be a part of a transport solution either.

I think the best approach for all modes of transportation is to be pragmatic. A car-free Beijing wouldn't work, and a car-only Beijing definitely wouldn't work. And no, bicycles isn't the panacea to Beijing traffic woes either. Neither is metro.

We all agree (?) that the metro has been needed, especially for long distance trips, and we need more of it. But metro also have shortcomings that are not solved with more metro. The distance between metro stations is generally large, and will remain so (line 7 will have somewhat shorter distance). Unless you have express tracks more stops means slower travel. Metro is expensive, also in China, though a city stuck in traffic is more extensive. By design choice the platforms are far from the entrances, so short trips, especially ones involving transfers, are not very effective or convenient if you don't like walking, or you can't. Beijing is going to get older.

Most of these problems are better solved with busses. The Beijing busses are not that comfortable, or well-suited for the elderly, but the major problem is that they spend much of the day stuck in traffic. Upgrade to a true BRT, and better/more efficient busses, will alleviate that.

Still millions prefer using cars, even though it is more expensive and sometimes slower than the alternatives, and few are actually bring anything but themselves (and maybe a driver), and finding parking is a nightmare, not to speak of the other drivers. Are they stupid? No, but apart from the status of having a car, cars are more comfortable. You have a little bubble of your own, your own reserved seat, and you get from door to door, or at least parking lot to parking lot. Some drivers will drive no matter what, but to win over the rest the alternative will have to be as convenient and comfortable as well. As Beijing becomes richer this will be more important.

Commuters like modern tram systems when they work well, better than busses. This may be due to rail transport offering a smoother trip, busses are flexible but have to react more to traffic. If we could design bus systems that have the likeability of trams, but with the flexibility of busses we should have a win.

Trams are good at being trams for good and bad. They can carry more people, they are easier to drive (potentially automatedly in the future). With right of way and priority (they will have the green light) they can move more people than busses can, with grade separation and efficient loading and unloading of passengers at stops they can move even more. But it comes at a cost. Cars and other traffic will have to yield, not only at crossings, but yield lanes as well and other traffic solutions will be to their disadvantage. The tram would be the king of the road.

The example from Oslo was to show that a tram system can be integrated with a metro system even to the extent of sharing track. The benefit of that is slight, but the benefit of an integration where the tram stop is next to the metro stop is significant. With the Beijing system it could have been done this way for one or two connecting stations.

Merchandize-financed pedestrian tunnels I am all for, by the way. Like you said it is a weather-free climate-controlled way of profiting from transport, with long tradition in Beijing and other cities. And frankly street-level CBD is for the most part pretty awful anyway (though faster than the pedestrian tunnels that tend to be quite congested). Walking has a low throughput because it is a slow mode of transport, almost as slow as driving on Ring 3.
:jax: no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 05:36 PM   #1198
particlez
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 106

Quote:
Originally Posted by chornedsnorkack View Post
Except that Moscow IS comparably large.

And unlike London and Paris, Moscow DOES have significant at-grade tram and trolleybus networks entering central areas.

Could Moscow be a better example for Beijing?
'cept the Moscow tram network is separated from most intersecting traffic. done the right way, but a tram still has less capacity than heavy rail, and the grade separation makes it expensive. it's a reason why the tram network has been stagnant, yet the subway has been expanded.

at any rate, the Moscow tram doesn't go through the busiest districts of Moscow.
__________________

Falubaz liked this post
particlez no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 05:59 PM   #1199
Svartmetall
Ordo Ab Chao
 
Svartmetall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Past: Northampton, UK (19 years), Auckland NZ (7 years), Now: Stockholm, Sweden
Posts: 14,074
Likes (Received): 8795

Quote:
Originally Posted by _Night City Dream_ View Post
I doubt about Tokyo bieng the first. They probably count JR city lines, too.
No, they don't, they are separate companies and therefore easy to distinguish between as everyone has to pass through fare gates to transfer between systems. There are over 40,000,000 journeys on the rail system of Tokyo per day if you count private lines, JR, Yokohama Municipal Subway, and the whole Tokyo subway (Tokyo Metro and TOEI subway).

Last edited by Svartmetall; March 13th, 2013 at 06:10 PM.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2013, 07:57 PM   #1200
particlez
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 106

Quote:
Originally Posted by :jax: View Post
I might have been drawn deeper into the discussion than I've liked because of your categorical position that trams have no role to play in a large dense city. I disagree with that, but I am not saying they have to be a part of a transport solution either....

...The distance between metro stations is generally large, and will remain so (line 7 will have somewhat shorter distance). Unless you have express tracks more stops means slower travel. Metro is expensive, also in China, though a city stuck in traffic is more extensive. By design choice the platforms are far from the entrances, so short trips, especially ones involving transfers, are not very effective or convenient if you don't like walking, or you can't. Beijing is going to get older.

...Walking has a low throughput because it is a slow mode of transport, almost as slow as driving on Ring 3.
Trams have a role. Just not in the busiest, most congested areas of the busiest, biggest cities. Again, with your logic, you might as well rail against Paris, London, et al. for keeping their trams AWAY from the city center.

We all agree that the current Beijing transit coverage is inadequate. Barring an economic collapse or a creepy shift toward libertarian austerity, new mass transit lines and stations will eventually fill in the gaps of the Beijing metro. This will provide coverage to as-yet unserved suburbs and fill in the gaps within the central city. The current incomplete coverage is part of living in a developing place. Annoying, but the situation will change.

You talk about practicality, yet you want resources devoted toward a local CBD people mover before/instead of mass transit to as-yet unserved/underserved areas (including the gaps within the CBD)? All to save a few minutes of walking time within the CBD? Yeah well, suck it up. Your extra ten minutes of walking pales in comparison to the hordes of white collar wage slaves--without mass transit access and forced to wallow through slug-like bus traffic on already saturated surface streets.

Local CBD circulators are fine, but they should be low on the list of priorities. In large, ultra high density areas, they absolutely have to be separated from any intersecting traffic, thus their high cost. The Guangzhou metro’s Zhujiang line is very similar to what you’d want. It works very well, and whisks passengers around the new CBD. Yet it was rightly criticized for having the highest cost/distance, and carrying the fewest passengers/distance of the entire system. There’s nothing wrong with the Zhujiang people mover. But CBD people movers are inherently pricey (all those stations don’t come cheap), and they only move people for very short distances. People movers are fine, but the alternative is... walking. It’s a costly, relatively low utility investment.
particlez no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
beijing, metro

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium