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 April 21st, 2010, 12:50 AM   #4021
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
Isn't overground quite different from suburban rail ? From what I have seen, Overground is a low capacity system, while suburban rails have higher capacity (maybe I am wrong).

Also the catchment of both of them is different. Suburban caters to mostly longer distance passengers coming from areas beyond London or its outer areas to the central London, while Overground caters to same people as Underground (i.e., mainly intra-London trips).

I think if the different suburban services are linked together and they form continuous mesh instead of fragmented systems, it will have a huge impact on London. Having an RER like system will allow people to travel from one end of London area to another seamlessly. And the biggest beneficiary of this will be the Underground. A lot of people will use suburban as an express service for intra-city trips, so no need of expansion, etc in LU.

Biggest challenge which I can see (apart from political will) is linking all the services with each other in central London and providing non-stop through-fare through central London, which may require intense tunneling in central London. It will be cost effective in long run since most of the tracks are on surface and already exist.

After that we can have 2 hierarchies of local rail transport in London - Upper level consisting of suburban and lower level consisting of LU, LO and DLR.

Regarding running of inter-city trains and suburban trains on same lines, there can be some rationalizing of resources if multiple tracks are available. At places where there is only 1 pair of tracks, a new pair can be added. It would be much cheaper than extending an Underground line.
No, the distinction isn't that clear... Admittedly LOROL operates mostly orbital routes, but Watford Junction to Euston is radial commuter rail, for example.

Some commuter routes operated by SWT, Southern, Southeastern, First Greatwestern etc have lower frequencies and similar length trains or shorter compared to LOROL... There really isn't much of a distinction.
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old April 21st, 2010, 03:02 AM   #4022
iampuking
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 2,414
Likes (Received): 43

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
Thanks. That pretty much explains it. I was assuming similar length of cars in both cities. Here the platforms are 185 m long, so that explains higher capacity of trains.
Compared to Asian metros the legnth of LU trains seems very small, but LU trains are actually relatively long compared to many other Europen capitals (Berlin, Paris, Copenhagen, Madrid)...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
Isn't overground quite different from suburban rail ? From what I have seen, Overground is a low capacity system, while suburban rails have higher capacity (maybe I am wrong).
Sorry to nitpick, but as a good example of the nature of London's rail network. London Overground is half medium capacity and half lower capacity. From 2012 (AFAIK).

London Overground

Low capacity

60m trains at 3tph (Euston - Watford Junction)
60m trains at 3tph (Willesden Junction - Clapham Junction)
48m trains at 3tph (Gospel Oak - Barking)

Medium capacity

80m trains at 4tph (Richmond - Highbury & Islington)
80m trains at 16tph (Dalston - Surrey Quays)
80m trains at 16tph (Canonbury - Highbury & Islington)
80m trains at 4tph (Canonbury - Stratford)
80m trains at 4tph (Surrey Quays - New Cross)
80m trains at 4tph (Surrey Quays - Clapham Junction)
80m trains at 8tph (Surrey Quays - Sydenham)
80m trains at 4tph (Sydenham - West Croydon)
80m trains at 4tph (Sydenham - Crystal Palace)

The DLR also is partially high capacity and partially medium capacity. I'd say the Bank Lewisham route is high capacity and the rest is medium.
iampuking no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2010, 09:40 AM   #4023
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
Well, we can't draw hard and fast lines between various systems sometimes but not always. You should take a look at various systems around the world and their purpose is different. For example, in Germany, purpose of U-bahn is different from S-bahn. In California, purpose of BART is different from Muni metro. In Paris, purpose of RER is different from Paris metro.

There is definitely a reason why we have different types of railway systems instead of having one standard system. BTW, Shanghai is criticized for developing a single large metro system instead of having a 2-level system (metro and suburban rail).
You asked about London, I gave you an answer specific to London. The fact remains that the various systems in London came about due to a mixture of history, politics, ownership and geography and each system has unique qualities and indeed each has overlapping roles. Trying to pigeon hole them into neat catagories or compare to other cities is pointless. No doubt if London had a clean sheet and started again it could do a lot better, but in reality that point is moot as it isn't going to happen.

The key to London at present and in the future is futher seamless integration of the various systems through common ticketing and building new interconnecting links and stations. Things like the new East London Line, Crossrail etc will help immensly.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2010, 04:28 PM   #4024
Abhishek901
Registered User
 
Abhishek901's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,773
Likes (Received): 1204

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
Compared to Asian metros the legnth of LU trains seems very small, but LU trains are actually relatively long compared to many other Europen capitals (Berlin, Paris, Copenhagen, Madrid)...
And the stations have good average gaps too (1.6 km average gap) which makes it much faster than other European systems and allows for longer lines
Abhishek901 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 21st, 2010, 04:57 PM   #4025
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Are you an Arsenal season ticket holder than Tubeman? What are you going to do for teh rest of the season?
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2010, 11:20 PM   #4026
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Are you an Arsenal season ticket holder than Tubeman? What are you going to do for teh rest of the season?
...Wait for next season to start...

I'm missing Man Shitty this weekend anyway, will be away in Cornwall... Have a horrible feeling that Adebayor is going to get a hat-trick so just as well really
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2010, 11:54 PM   #4027
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tubeman View Post
...Wait for next season to start...

I'm missing Man Shitty this weekend anyway, will be away in Cornwall... Have a horrible feeling that Adebayor is going to get a hat-trick so just as well really
I understand yeah.. I'm a Fulham fan. Tonight went quite well and I'll be there next week for the second leg against Hamburg... if we can get to the final it'll be absolutely amazing!

The PL's become very boring for us though!
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2010, 11:56 AM   #4028
Tubeman
Jubilation
 
Tubeman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London SE15
Posts: 18,973
Likes (Received): 3272

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
I understand yeah.. I'm a Fulham fan. Tonight went quite well and I'll be there next week for the second leg against Hamburg... if we can get to the final it'll be absolutely amazing!

The PL's become very boring for us though!
Kudos to Fulham though... You've been solid for a couple of seasons now rather than flirting with relegation every year.

Anyway, more questions about non-football stuff please
Tubeman no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2010, 12:14 PM   #4029
Jang0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by iampuking View Post
The DLR also is partially high capacity and partially medium capacity. I'd say the Bank Lewisham route is high capacity and the rest is medium.
I dunno really. Obviously it depends on what your definition of "medium" and "high" is, but I wouldn't say that the Bank to Lewisham route is high.

I'd say that our top-end tubes are on the low-end of high. The Jubilee does an incredible job at shifting large numbers of people. Victoria likewise. So, if we were to say that "high" is anything from 25,000 people per hour upwards (This would include RER A at 65,000).

So, in comparison, the Bank-Lewisham DLR is fairly medium really. It's cars are short and there's only 6 of them (ignoring articulation). The frequency is not a true 90sec or 2 mins service.

The rest of the DLR runs at 5-10min frequency with 4 cars. That's top-end low in my book. But again, it depends how you define.
Jang0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2010, 12:47 PM   #4030
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jang0 View Post
I dunno really. Obviously it depends on what your definition of "medium" and "high" is, but I wouldn't say that the Bank to Lewisham route is high.

I'd say that our top-end tubes are on the low-end of high. The Jubilee does an incredible job at shifting large numbers of people. Victoria likewise. So, if we were to say that "high" is anything from 25,000 people per hour upwards (This would include RER A at 65,000).

So, in comparison, the Bank-Lewisham DLR is fairly medium really. It's cars are short and there's only 6 of them (ignoring articulation). The frequency is not a true 90sec or 2 mins service.

The rest of the DLR runs at 5-10min frequency with 4 cars. That's top-end low in my book. But again, it depends how you define.
Capacity on the DLR is higher than you might think due to the open layout. 274 passengers per car, running at 3 cars that about 825 people per train.
It won't quite reach 25,000 per hour but that's still pretty good for what it is. Your definition of high capacity is a bit ridiculous really as 95% of all metro services around the world wouldn't reach it. Not a single line in the Americas runs at such high capacities I think, and only the busiest lines of the very biggest cities in Europe/Asia do.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2010, 09:36 PM   #4031
Abhishek901
Registered User
 
Abhishek901's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,773
Likes (Received): 1204

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
It won't quite reach 25,000 per hour but that's still pretty good for what it is. Your definition of high capacity is a bit ridiculous really as 95% of all metro services around the world wouldn't reach it. Not a single line in the Americas runs at such high capacities I think, and only the busiest lines of the very biggest cities in Europe/Asia do.
I guess he is right in his definition of high capacity. You must not compare with North America or Europe (don't know much about S. America). The capacities he mentioned are quite regular in metros in Asian cities.

In Delhi metro, most of the lines have a capacity of 65000+, one line even has a capacity approaching 90,000. The line with least capacity has a capacity above 45,000. New lines of Shanghai metro too have similar capacities and I guess Beijing too. I think in RER A, the capacity (or the actual usage) is close to 100,000, though not sure about it.

25,000 doesn't seems to be a high capacity now. It should be called medium capacity. I think Bogota's BRT has a capacity of 30,000 (though it is on the higher extreme among BRTs).
Abhishek901 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2010, 12:36 PM   #4032
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
I guess he is right in his definition of high capacity. You must not compare with North America or Europe (don't know much about S. America). The capacities he mentioned are quite regular in metros in Asian cities.

In Delhi metro, most of the lines have a capacity of 65000+, one line even has a capacity approaching 90,000. The line with least capacity has a capacity above 45,000. New lines of Shanghai metro too have similar capacities and I guess Beijing too. I think in RER A, the capacity (or the actual usage) is close to 100,000, though not sure about it.

25,000 doesn't seems to be a high capacity now. It should be called medium capacity. I think Bogota's BRT has a capacity of 30,000 (though it is on the higher extreme among BRTs).
Are we talking in single or double directions here?

I was assuming single. You say the Delhi metro has 65,000 capacity. Wikipedia says then run at frequencies between 3 and 4,5 minutes. That means (assuming 3 minutes in a single direction) each train would have a capacity of 3250 passengers! However, the rolling stock page of the Delhi Metro wiki says the trains can only carry 1,500 max. So that makes no sense.

If we are supposed to count both directions then double all those London figures as well, ie DLR capacity on the busiest lines around 32,000.
The Victoria line: 1,450 passengers per train x 60 trains an hour = 87,000 passengers per hour in both directions.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2010, 12:38 PM   #4033
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
I guess he is right in his definition of high capacity. You must not compare with North America or Europe (don't know much about S. America). The capacities he mentioned are quite regular in metros in Asian cities.

In Delhi metro, most of the lines have a capacity of 65000+, one line even has a capacity approaching 90,000. The line with least capacity has a capacity above 45,000. New lines of Shanghai metro too have similar capacities and I guess Beijing too. I think in RER A, the capacity (or the actual usage) is close to 100,000, though not sure about it.

25,000 doesn't seems to be a high capacity now. It should be called medium capacity. I think Bogota's BRT has a capacity of 30,000 (though it is on the higher extreme among BRTs).
Are we talking in single or double directions here?

You say the Delhi metro has 65,000 capacity. Wikipedia says then run at frequencies between 3 and 4,5 minutes. That means (assuming 3 minutes) each train would have a capacity of 3250 passengers! However, the rolling stock page of the Delhi Metro wiki says the trains can only carry 1,500 max. So that makes no sense.

If we are supposed to count both directions then double all those London figures as well, ie DLR capacity on the busiest lines around 32,000.
The Victoria line: 1,450 passengers per train x 60 trains an hour = 87,000 passengers per hour in both directions.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2010, 12:46 PM   #4034
Jang0
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 131
Likes (Received): 0

I was talking single.
Jang0 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2010, 04:10 PM   #4035
Abhishek901
Registered User
 
Abhishek901's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,773
Likes (Received): 1204

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Are we talking in single or double directions here?

I was assuming single. You say the Delhi metro has 65,000 capacity. Wikipedia says then run at frequencies between 3 and 4,5 minutes. That means (assuming 3 minutes in a single direction) each train would have a capacity of 3250 passengers! However, the rolling stock page of the Delhi Metro wiki says the trains can only carry 1,500 max. So that makes no sense.

If we are supposed to count both directions then double all those London figures as well, ie DLR capacity on the busiest lines around 32,000.
The Victoria line: 1,450 passengers per train x 60 trains an hour = 87,000 passengers per hour in both directions.
I guess you don't have a fair idea about technical terms associated with metro but it's okay, even I got used to them quite recently . Let me explain you with a simple example.

If I have a jar with a holding capacity of 5 liters but I have filled it only half, then what is the capacity of my jar - 2.5 L or 5 L ? Of course it is 5 L. I can anytime pour more water in it.

Similarly Delhi metro lines are operating at a fourth of their capacity because the system is still new and expanding (first line opened in 2002). System will attract huge crowd only when it will reach all parts of the city. (It is 110 km now and will be 400+ km by 2020, which means it is quite under-used now as most parts of the city are not connected yet).

And BTW, capacity is always mentioned in one direction as a standard practice and that's what I did. I have doubt on the capacity of trains you mentioned because as of now all trains are running in 4-car configuration, while the major lines are designed for 8-car trains and minor lines are designed for 6-car trains. So how can you assign a specific capacity to them ? Here are actual details:

An 8-car train of Delhi metro can comfortably carry 2200+ passengers (train length is ~ 185 m and width is 3.2 m, both of which are quite high compared to most of the metros). Yellow line of Delhi metro can handle trains at a frequency of 90 sec (40 TPH) and other lines can handle trains at 120 sec (30 TPH). So the capacity of yellow line is 88,000+ (in one direction) and other 8-car lines have a capacity of 66,000+. Similarly, 6-car lines have a capacity of 45,000+.

I followed Shanghai metro thread also and got to know that they had designed their lines for 6-car trains but now have decided for 8-cars for their new lines. So I guess Shanghai metro also reaches close to Delhi metro in terms of capacity. I don't have much idea about the capacities of other metros in operation in the world but in India, all the metro lines which are under construction or planning in any city of India have a capacity well above 40,000.

It would be interesting to know the figures for Singapore and HK metro. They too are quite new and modern. What are the capacities of lines in Paris metro ?
Abhishek901 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2010, 09:38 PM   #4036
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
I guess you don't have a fair idea about technical terms associated with metro but it's okay, even I got used to them quite recently . Let me explain you with a simple example.

If I have a jar with a holding capacity of 5 liters but I have filled it only half, then what is the capacity of my jar - 2.5 L or 5 L ? Of course it is 5 L. I can anytime pour more water in it.

Similarly Delhi metro lines are operating at a fourth of their capacity because the system is still new and expanding (first line opened in 2002). System will attract huge crowd only when it will reach all parts of the city. (It is 110 km now and will be 400+ km by 2020, which means it is quite under-used now as most parts of the city are not connected yet).

And BTW, capacity is always mentioned in one direction as a standard practice and that's what I did. I have doubt on the capacity of trains you mentioned because as of now all trains are running in 4-car configuration, while the major lines are designed for 8-car trains and minor lines are designed for 6-car trains. So how can you assign a specific capacity to them ? Here are actual details:

An 8-car train of Delhi metro can comfortably carry 2200+ passengers (train length is ~ 185 m and width is 3.2 m, both of which are quite high compared to most of the metros). Yellow line of Delhi metro can handle trains at a frequency of 90 sec (40 TPH) and other lines can handle trains at 120 sec (30 TPH). So the capacity of yellow line is 88,000+ (in one direction) and other 8-car lines have a capacity of 66,000+. Similarly, 6-car lines have a capacity of 45,000+.

I followed Shanghai metro thread also and got to know that they had designed their lines for 6-car trains but now have decided for 8-cars for their new lines. So I guess Shanghai metro also reaches close to Delhi metro in terms of capacity. I don't have much idea about the capacities of other metros in operation in the world but in India, all the metro lines which are under construction or planning in any city of India have a capacity well above 40,000.

It would be interesting to know the figures for Singapore and HK metro. They too are quite new and modern. What are the capacities of lines in Paris metro ?
I understand the terms full well; the system has a high provisional capacity. But if they wanted to actually run at that capacity it wouldn't be possible as there aren't enough trains.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 24th, 2010, 10:05 PM   #4037
Abhishek901
Registered User
 
Abhishek901's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,773
Likes (Received): 1204

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
I understand the terms full well; the system has a high provisional capacity. But if they wanted to actually run at that capacity it wouldn't be possible as there aren't enough trains.
Which city are you talking about in this case ?

And BTW, for meeting demand, trains can be ordered anytime. Is it difficult to buy trains ? As I explained with the jar example, you do not need to expand the jar for getting 5 L. You only need to pour 5 L into it, which is much easier than expanding the jar (or stations in case of metro).
Abhishek901 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2010, 11:43 AM   #4038
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
Which city are you talking about in this case ?

And BTW, for meeting demand, trains can be ordered anytime. Is it difficult to buy trains ? As I explained with the jar example, you do not need to expand the jar for getting 5 L. You only need to pour 5 L into it, which is much easier than expanding the jar (or stations in case of metro).
It's not always that easy to find "water" in these cases to turn theoretical capacity into actually running trains.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2010, 01:24 PM   #4039
Abhishek901
Registered User
 
Abhishek901's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 11,773
Likes (Received): 1204

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
It's not always that easy to find "water" in these cases to turn theoretical capacity into actually running trains.
I couldn't get it. Why it would be difficult to purchase more trains ? Difficult task is to expand the design capacity of the system but how is it difficult to operate the system at full existing capacity ?
Abhishek901 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 25th, 2010, 06:18 PM   #4040
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,636
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek901 View Post
I couldn't get it. Why it would be difficult to purchase more trains ? Difficult task is to expand the design capacity of the system but how is it difficult to operate the system at full existing capacity ?
Ehh, it's a question of funding...
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
london, railways, tube

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 06:36 AM.


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