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 November 5th, 2008, 07:45 PM   #321
serdar samanlı
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vienna
Posts: 792
Likes (Received): 21

Is RER metro or suburban rail?
serdar samanlı no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 5th, 2008, 08:22 PM   #322
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by serdar samanlı View Post
Is RER metro or suburban rail?
It is full sized heavy rail that comes from the suburbs through the centre of the city, so I wouldn't call it metro as such.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2008, 12:40 AM   #323
[email protected]
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Paris
Posts: 660
Likes (Received): 62

Quote:
Originally Posted by paF4uko View Post
I really hope they keep those clean...
Unfortunately it will be as dirty as the older ones in several years, as always . Are they going to change the outside or is it only an inside-renovation?

RER lines C, D and E are definately not metro since they have termini in the country and have only one train every half hour on some branchs; but lines A and B have very high frequencies : in Paris you can see both the train that leaves and the train that enters the station during rush hours. So it is very near from a metro service.

Last edited by [email protected]; November 6th, 2008 at 12:48 AM.
M@rtoc no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2008, 12:22 PM   #324
serdar samanlı
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Vienna
Posts: 792
Likes (Received): 21

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
It is full sized heavy rail that comes from the suburbs through the centre of the city, so I wouldn't call it metro as such.
But it is not suburban rail either. Paris suburb network is Transilien
serdar samanlı no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2008, 08:32 PM   #325
_Night City Dream_
Registered User
 
_Night City Dream_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 19,163
Likes (Received): 101788

Then how do you make difference between such notions as suburban rail network and that presented by RER?
__________________
Big Cities is one of the major inventions by human beings

My Baku / Мой Баку / 我的巴库

_Night City Dream_ está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old November 6th, 2008, 10:26 PM   #326
[email protected]
Registered User
 
m@rco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Grenoble, FRA
Posts: 1,319
Likes (Received): 148

Have you checked the 1st post of this thread ? May be there is a beginning of the answer you are expecting...
m@rco no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 02:16 AM   #327
lightrail
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 205
Likes (Received): 16

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
It is full sized heavy rail that comes from the suburbs through the centre of the city, so I wouldn't call it metro as such.
How is that different from the London Underground - Metropolitan Line?
lightrail no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 03:38 AM   #328
jarbury
Resident Planner
 
jarbury's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Auckland
Posts: 3,795
Likes (Received): 24

Oh gosh not this debate again! The RER is definitely a metro/heavy rail..... in the same grey area as the far northwest reaches of the Metropolitan line also are. Rail systems don't fit neatly into little boxes of "light rail", "metro", "heavy rail" and so on. There are many systems that are a mixture of types.
__________________
All opinions are my own and not my employer's (or anyone else's).
jarbury no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 03:47 AM   #329
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): 8816

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarbury View Post
Oh gosh not this debate again! The RER is definitely a metro/heavy rail..... in the same grey area as the far northwest reaches of the Metropolitan line also are. Rail systems don't fit neatly into little boxes of "light rail", "metro", "heavy rail" and so on. There are many systems that are a mixture of types.
I'm going to make a box and label it "SPECIALMETROURBANRAILTRAINS" and dump every system in there just to melt the brains of OCD people who insist that everything must be in a box.


Mind you, I quite like boxes, you can make a fort out of them.
Svartmetall no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 09:59 AM   #330
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by lightrail View Post
How is that different from the London Underground - Metropolitan Line?
I would hardly call the London Metropolitan line full sized heavy rail. Sure their trains are larger than tube stock, but they are still no full sized heavy rail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jarbury View Post
Oh gosh not this debate again! The RER is definitely a metro/heavy rail..... in the same grey area as the far northwest reaches of the Metropolitan line also are. Rail systems don't fit neatly into little boxes of "light rail", "metro", "heavy rail" and so on. There are many systems that are a mixture of types.
Quite true indeed. That is why when I answered the question I made the point it was full sized heavy rail. It is not a true metro it is not true suburban, it is somewhere in between.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 10:02 AM   #331
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by serdar samanlı View Post
But it is not suburban rail either. Paris suburb network is Transilien
That is a issue of branding, not function. Ineed the trains on the Transilien and RER are pretty much the same size and if I am not mistaken in some cases the exact same model, design etc.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 10:33 AM   #332
Cosmin
Euro Mod
 
Cosmin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 17,285
Likes (Received): 5961

RER or Réseau Express Régional (Regional Express Network) is a kind of mixture between heavy rail and metro. You can view it as something similar to express trains of the NY subway within Paris proper and suburban trains outside Paris proper. I like to think of the RER as being... RER.

I even refer to other systems as being RER-like.
Cosmin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 06:11 PM   #333
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,562

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
I would hardly call the London Metropolitan line full sized heavy rail. Sure their trains are larger than tube stock, but they are still no full sized heavy rail.
Then there's no full-sized heavy rail in the UK. The A stock that currently runs on the Metropolitan line is the largest train, in both height and width, that runs in the UK.

C and D stock, on the other SSLs, are a little bit smaller than the standard train in the UK, but A stock is bigger than even the special wide trains that run regional services on the large gauged GWML and Chiltern Main Line.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 07:18 PM   #334
Minato ku
Moderator
 
Minato ku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 16,749

Nogent sur Marne viaduc

image hosted on flickr

Picture by Ackteon
__________________
すみません !
J’aime Paris et je veux des tours !
Minato ku no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 07:40 PM   #335
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
Then there's no full-sized heavy rail in the UK. The A stock that currently runs on the Metropolitan line is the largest train, in both height and width, that runs in the UK.

C and D stock, on the other SSLs, are a little bit smaller than the standard train in the UK, but A stock is bigger than even the special wide trains that run regional services on the large gauged GWML and Chiltern Main Line.
They still are not anything like an RER train and if the metropolitan lines trains are the largest in the UK then no wonder their are capacity problems all over the place. Indeed the closest thing to RER in the London would be Thameslink or the planned Crossrail service.

Actually thinking about the whole debate, RER is really just the extension of suburban lines that previously terminated at stations on the edge of the city through the city. Hence the RER is part of the suburban network but with different branding and in the case of some lines a different operator compared to non RER services.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 08:59 PM   #336
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,562

Thameslink goes 100km each way out of London, and is planned to go far more - RER definitely doesn't get that far out of Paris - it gets about the distances that the ends of the tube reach.

RER was about linking suburban lines together? The Central line does that, just with tube trains - north of Stratford and east of White City all used to be NR lines that were either 4-tracked and more stations added or taken over suburban lines. The District line linked with the SW lines via Shepherd Bush to Richmond, Ealing and Hounslow East (plus a SW line from Putney to Wimbledon) with the LTS line out of Fenchurch Street (which was 4-tracked and more stations added). Southend-Windsor (via Ealing) trains used to run! It was a metro line that took over several mainline routes, working in an RER type way.

The Met line took all sorts of trains from suburban routes from Paddington, St Pancras and Kings Cross to Farringdon when it first opened - working just like RER E. Later it became just GW suburban trains going to Liverpool Street and further round.

They don't fit in a nice neat pocket - the London Underground is a Metro and RER Hybrid, with some suburban rail in the form of the Met Main line terminating at Baker Street in the off-peak (with some trains from all three routes terminating and going through in the peaks).

Crossrail is to a Londoner's eye just a mainline sized tube tunnel (which sound impressive, despite the fact that the Met line can carry mainline sized trains very easily), that just happens to share tracks with mainline trains in the west (the Met also does this north of Harrow, the District line does this on the Richmond branch, and occasionally the Wimbledon branch), and go out a bit further than normal (Maidenhead is no further out than Aylesbury, where the Met used to serve).

Crowding issues come from seating arrangements (too many seats in the wrong places), frequency (not enough trains per hour) and length (trains not long enough), not width (all it would do is increase comfort) and definitely not height (double deckers would mean that the train takes longer and wouldn't be as frequent, due to long boarding times and safety rules about station crowding - we've tried them and they don't work with the short-dwell time model of the UK rail network). The trains I've been on in Europe all felt about the same size as A stock, and other trains aren't that much narrower, and the height doesn't really matter too much, as A stock has a load of dead space up above.

To say that the Met is like an RER is correct - not entirely correct, but more correct than saying it isn't. Of course, you can't pigeon hole it. It is at once a suburban rail line, an RER and a metro. Likewise the District line and Crossrail are at once RERs and metros.
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2008, 11:10 PM   #337
ajw373
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,249
Likes (Received): 48

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
Thameslink goes 100km each way out of London, and is planned to go far more - RER definitely doesn't get that far out of Paris - it gets about the distances that the ends of the tube reach.
What does this distance of the line have to do with anything? What makes the RER the RER is what it does in the central zone. That is providing a high capacity, high frequency path for suburban trains to go through the city so the passengers don't have to change to the metro. The only line in London at present that does that is Thameslink, and in the future cross rail.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
RER was about linking suburban lines together? The Central line does that, just with tube trains - north of Stratford and east of White City all used to be NR lines that were either 4-tracked and more stations added or taken over suburban lines. The District line linked with the SW lines via Shepherd Bush to Richmond, Ealing and Hounslow East (plus a SW line from Putney to Wimbledon) with the LTS line out of Fenchurch Street (which was 4-tracked and more stations added). Southend-Windsor (via Ealing) trains used to run! It was a metro line that took over several mainline routes, working in an RER type way.
They are hardly the same. Besides all these lines have a Paris metro equivilent for better comparision.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
They don't fit in a nice neat pocket - the London Underground is a Metro and RER Hybrid, with some suburban rail in the form of the Met Main line terminating at Baker Street in the off-peak (with some trains from all three routes terminating and going through in the peaks).
Yeah they don't fit, but frankly there is nothing RER like in the London underground system. Mainline yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
Crossrail is to a Londoner's eye just a mainline sized tube tunnel (which sound impressive, despite the fact that the Met line can carry mainline sized trains very easily), ...
And what exactly do you think the RER tunnels under Paris are? And as I have said the Met line is no comparision, the Thamslink yes, but where does the Met line go? Yep around one corner of the city, not through or across it like the RER.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sotonsi View Post
To say that the Met is like an RER is correct - not entirely correct, but more correct than saying it isn't. Of course, you can't pigeon hole it. It is at once a suburban rail line, an RER and a metro. Likewise the District line and Crossrail are at once RERs and metros.
The Met line is not an RER. It doesn't cross the city and was not built to relieve over crowding and cut-down the need to interchange on the underground network. Indeed the Met was the first underground so the MO is totaly different. I could almost agree with the district line though, but only if it were running some decent sized trains like Paris does on it.

As I keep saying RER in London the best comparision is Thameslink or Crossrail or any other system that links London's major rail terminals. How about a Victoria to Liverpool Street line? Now before you say anything about RER line E ending in a terminus, just remember the grand plan is to make that a through route too.
ajw373 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2008, 12:13 AM   #338
Stuu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 159
Likes (Received): 41

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
They are hardly the same. Besides all these lines have a Paris metro equivilent for better comparision.
Sorry to develop this argument and take this thread further off topic, but why are they hardly the same? The major extensions to the Central Line and Northern Lines after WWII were taking over suburban lines so that commuters don't have to change onto the metro to reach their destination, exactly as the RER is

To the best of my knowledge no lines of the Paris Metro have done anything similar, and the Underground goes far further into the suburbs than the Paris Metro. See http://www.fakeisthenewreal.org/subway/ for a same scale comparison

And also about big trains, you would be right talking about total train length, but a Metropolitan line A Stock train is a massive 40mm wider than the MS61 trains on Ligne A of the RER (couldn't find width for other RER trains). They are 0.5 metres lower though, which makes all the difference I guess

The RER lines do obviously have significantly higher capacity than any of the London Underground lines, but at the same time most Underground lines have higher capacities and travel at higher average speeds than the Paris Metro, hence the more urgent need for extra capacity in Paris. So as Sotonsi says, the Underground fits very much between the Metro and the RER

Now back to the RER!
Stuu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2008, 02:54 AM   #339
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,562

Quote:
Originally Posted by ajw373 View Post
What does this distance of the line have to do with anything? What makes the RER the RER is what it does in the central zone. That is providing a high capacity, high frequency path for suburban trains to go through the city so the passengers don't have to change to the metro. The only line in London at present that does that is Thameslink, and in the future cross rail.
You think Thameslink offers a high frequency, high capacity route? You ever ridden it through the centre? It takes longer than the Northern line to do London Bridge-Kings Cross (and doesn't do that in peaks). At the moment it runs at a peak of 12tph, with 8-car trains. It's slow, low frequency. Stations occur in the central section in the City of London proper at distances of 200m between them - many tube lines have greater spacing than that. It doesn't fit your definition. I'm going to say that it's not an RER, but and RER with regional services as well.

the Met line is a better example, though of course only one sided. It has, at peak times, about 17tph of 8-car trains. It does stop often, however it was designed from the start so that suburban passengers wouldn't have to change to buses (no metro in those days). of course, that only works if you work on the line, as it does in Paris.
Quote:
And what exactly do you think the RER tunnels under Paris are?
exactly that - I'm not saying it's not RER, just that a Londoner can easily consider it an overblown tube line that happens to go a bit far out west.
Quote:
And as I have said the Met line is no comparision, the Thamslink yes, but where does the Met line go? Yep around one corner of the city, not through or across it like the RER.
other than the fact that there were plans to take it further, like RER, E and the other fact that the Met goes to Barking, just that the Hammersmith-Barking trains are branded as a different line. If you won't take the Met as it ends at Aldgate, how about the District? It goes right across the City, acting as suburban rail on the edges and metro in the centre. Ditto the Central line.
Quote:
The Met line is not an RER. It doesn't cross the city
nor does RER E - you say there's plans, there were plans for the Met.
Quote:
and was not built to relieve over crowding
yes it was - those buses (horse drawn) on the New Road were awful.
Quote:
and cut-down the need to interchange on the underground network.
because we didn't have one at the time - just because we built our RER first! However it was to stop the need to change to buses.
Quote:
Indeed the Met was the first underground so the MO is totaly different.
why - it works today like an RER that doesn't get across the City (though plans are possible for Barking). OK, it also functions like a Metro in the inner areas, but I never said it didn't.
Quote:
I could almost agree with the district line though, but only if it were running some decent sized trains like Paris does on it.
District line trains are practically UK mainline sized.
Quote:
As I keep saying RER in London the best comparision is Thameslink or Crossrail or any other system that links London's major rail terminals.
another system to link London's major rail terminals? Like the one that links Paddington, Euston, Kings Cross, St Pancras and Liverpool Street? With links to the GWML, GCML, GN, Midland and GE (sadly no link at Euston due to infighting) - it's called the Met, though those connections have been removed, as serving the stations were good enough for the GE and GW, and the GN and Midland built their own tracks alongside. As the original, GW ones, were so busy.
Quote:
How about a Victoria to Liverpool Street line?
it's called the Circle - you can go either way! . Crossrail removes the case for it as it was an alternative to a two line approach - it was an option. From the GEML into a tunnel going Liverpool Street, Farringdon, Tottenham Court Road, Piccadilly Circus, Victoria, Clapham Junction and then onto the SWML.
Quote:
Now before you say anything about RER line E ending in a terminus, just remember the grand plan is to make that a through route too.
there were plans up till last year to have the Met-that-is-still-called-Met reach Barking, swapping it with the rebranded-former-Met-of-the-H&C line. Canary Wharf as an extension of the Met came up a few years ago. But if the requirement is both sides, then the Central and District both fit the bill on that.

I'm not saying the Met, nor the District, is RER, I'm saying that there are bucket-loads of similarities there. I'm also saying that Crossrail and Thameslink aren't RER, but have similarities. Thameslink has regional, as well as suburban services, and Crossrail is basically a tube line east of Paddington that just happens to run bigger trains.

I agree with Stuu that the Tube is halfway between the Metro and RER - I also agree we should return to the RER. I think this came from a post saying that ignorantly said that the Met line's trains aren't heavy rail (3+2 face to face seating in/against direction of travel, rather than sideways, plus the size being bigger than other trains in the UK).
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 8th, 2008, 04:04 AM   #340
edubejar
Registered User
 
edubejar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 1,375
Likes (Received): 30

The London Tube and the Paris Metro function a bit differently in the sense that the London Tube reaches out much farther than the Paris Metro. In Paris, the RER was put in place to provide service to the suburban communities not reached by the Paris Metro. A big reason why the Paris Metro stops very short of the London Tube is because the City of Paris is much smaller in area than the many boroughs making up Greater London, which is often simply called London.

Paris on the other hand, has a clearly defined boundary (City of Paris) where the Metro was encouraged by some to stop (some go out a bit beyond), despite the fact there were already many adjacent municipalities surrounding the City of Paris. It wasn't until more than half a century later that the RER system was introduced, some parts running on existing regional rail lines, to "make-up" for the small coverage of the Paris Metro with respect to its ever-growing suburban communities which grew out and together more and more every decade, particularly in the Industrial Age, then again in the 60s, 70s and 80s with mass-immigration (as London experienced herself). To make-up even more for the lack of coverage, the system was designed to pass through Paris, not only providing service into Paris, but also through Paris (suburb to suburb), thus increasing for the RER connections with Metro lines. This, however, was in addition to the Suburban Trains (Transilien) which only arrive and depart from Intercity Train Stations but also provide suburban service. As such, the Transilien are true suburban trains, like those found in other cities, while the RER is a hybrid that is part Metro, part Suburban/Commuter train. It's not completely one or the other...it's a combination of both. Therefore it cannot be compared to other networks in the world in an apples-to-apples approach because it's quite unique, even if other cities come close to it (e.g. Madrid's Cercanías), but even then...
edubejar no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
paris, paris transport, rer

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 09:27 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