search the site
 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 July 19th, 2009, 11:27 AM   #41
sweek
Registered User
 
sweek's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London NW1
Posts: 1,637
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slagathor View Post
No that's nonsense. First of all, you don't count all of Randstadrail, you count the Erasmus line. Randstadrail involves lightrail services as well, currently between The Hague and Zoetermeer but there's an additional line Zoetermeer-Rotterdam on the cards. That would be lightrail (trams, essentially) and therefore it wouldn't count.
Sorry but just the Erasmus-line is too much to count as well... it runs from one city to another through some very low-density areas, especially between Schiebroek and Pijnacker for example.

It also runs at frequencies of every half an hour during the off-peak, every 15 minutes peak...

Now if you go by the three definitions of urbanrail.net

1) An urban electric mass rail transport system, i.e. it is primarily used to move within the city
2) Totally independent from other traffic, rail or street traffic
3) High frequency service (maximum interval approx. 10 minutes during normal daytime service)

It doesn't meet either 1 or 3, nor 2 actually since it does share with the Zoetermeer Stadslijn towards The Hague.

Last edited by sweek; July 19th, 2009 at 11:34 AM.
sweek no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old July 19th, 2009, 11:37 AM   #42
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Slagathor View Post

For me, the Rotterdam subway system consists of the Erasmus line (especially when the Centraal Station link is finished) + the Caland line excluding the sneltram bit.
I didn't forget you, Slagathor. I went to Rotterdam yesterday and there in the subway itself they mention only two lines on the maps. Erasmusline from Centraal station to Spijkenisse and the Calandline. That's a total of 37 km.

Quote:
By what criteria? It is entirely separate from the regular railway network and serviced exclusively by subway cars that run on the current subway lines. How is it a railway line??
A metro is a urban railroad, not a suburban. Randstadrail is a railroad that connects The Hague and Rotterdam with stops in between. So it's not a metro. It's not even connected (yet)with the Rotterdam metro.

Quote:
Sorry but this I really don't get. It's like you're searching very hard for arguments to make your opinion stand. A bunch of trees turns a subway line into a suburban railway? I think rather the nature of the line (it should be shared with regular trains) and the material (trains instead of subway cars) would place a certain iron track in that category.
You didn't read well. I said very clairly that I considere the Spijkenisse line as a full metro.

Quote:
What on Earth is your definition of a subway? It's like our two opinions are from two different planets
I'm not talking about subway, but metro. (I find the name subway confusing) For me a metro is a Urban railway. I can be underground but can be on grade or on viaducts... Connections between cities can never be metro. Even if they look very much like a metro, the simple fact that the largest part of the line is outside the city makes it a suburban line.

In other words: Randstadrail is not used for transportation in Rotterdam but brings the passengers in en out of the city....

I know that you Rotterdammers very much want to prove that you have this gigantic subway and maybe that's what's making you guys blind for the facts? It's not me who he trying to manipulate the facts. Just accept the truth guys!

Quote:
Originally Posted by xlchris View Post
Anyway, the Brussel metro isn't bigger. You know that, I know that, everybody knows that.
Now, only Rotterdam people want to prove by all means that there Metro is bigger. It's not. Not only everybody knows that, It's very simple to check for yourself.

Quote:
My advice, start looking around on the internet instead of looking at the numbers I posted here (also from the internet).
The numbers are very clear and cannot be debated. The Rotterdam metro is 37 kilometers long and has 37 stations. The Brussels metro is 38 kilometers long and has 59 stations. Brussels also has the premetro wich is 13kilometers long and has 15 stations.

Quote:
Try to find out if there is any site matching your ideas. Please tell us when you found something like that.
Difficult to convince you. You are so chauvinistic about your city that every reasonable arguement flows of you like water on a duck. You have to accept that randstadrail and sneltram are not metrolines by any standard.

I see that Sweek also tried to explain the difference between metro and suburban rail. I cannot do anything more. It's not really important. Wat baten kaars en bril als de uil niet zienen wil.

This is what I consider to be the Rotterdam metro. Nothing more, and it's 37 kilometers long! (No sneltram or suburban randstadrails on this map!)


Last edited by hix; July 19th, 2009 at 12:08 PM.
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 12:09 PM   #43
xlchris
Not much
 
xlchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Haarlem
Posts: 11,087
Likes (Received): 201

Quote:
Originally Posted by hix View Post
Now, only Rotterdam people want to prove by all means that there Metro is bigger.
I'm not from Rotterdam
__________________
"
xlchris no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 12:12 PM   #44
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by xlchris View Post
I'm not from Rotterdam
I'm sorry. My mistake.
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 12:55 PM   #45
xlchris
Not much
 
xlchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Haarlem
Posts: 11,087
Likes (Received): 201











__________________
"
xlchris no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 02:24 PM   #46
Slagathor
Gay love is love too
 
Slagathor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: The Hague
Posts: 8,330
Likes (Received): 5778

Quote:
Originally Posted by hix View Post
I didn't forget you, Slagathor. I went to Rotterdam yesterday and there in the subway itself they mention only two lines on the maps. Erasmusline from Centraal station to Spijkenisse and the Calandline. That's a total of 37 km.
I agree with that. I would never count the sneltram, for instance.

Randstadrail Erasmus line, however, I think is different. As I explained before.

Quote:
A metro is a urban railroad, not a suburban. Randstadrail is a railroad that connects The Hague and Rotterdam with stops in between. So it's not a metro. It's not even connected (yet)with the Rotterdam metro.
Bear in mind we're dealing with the Randstad area here. The Netherlands doesn't have any true metropolises, so by your standards you could argue there isn't a proper metro in the entire country. Instead, there's just a bunch of railways of varying degrees connecting stuff up. With all due respect, I think that's a little extreme.

Turn your definition around, for a moment, if you will. You think RandstadRail ceases to be a metro when it leaves the Rotterdam urban area (keep in mind the same cars will soon run from Spijkenissen to The Hague in 1 go). What if someone said: "Rotterdam doesn't have a metro, it is serviced by a lightrail system that spans across the Randstad Zuidvleugel." <-- that claim fits your definition perfectly. Doesn't it?

Quote:
You didn't read well. I said very clairly that I considere the Spijkenisse line as a full metro.
My bad.

Quote:
I'm not talking about subway, but metro. (I find the name subway confusing) For me a metro is a Urban railway. I can be underground but can be on grade or on viaducts... Connections between cities can never be metro. Even if they look very much like a metro, the simple fact that the largest part of the line is outside the city makes it a suburban line.

In other words: Randstadrail is not used for transportation in Rotterdam but brings the passengers in en out of the city....
So you would label certain parts of the network as metro, but not others? That's alright for the sneltram bit, we're dealing with an entirely different lay-out there. But the Erasmus line to The Hague? When the Centraal Station link is finished, subway cars will run from Spijkenisse to The Hague. One and the same car. Imagine, now, that you're on board this thing. When you pass Blijdorp heading North - should the announcer go "Welcome aboard the lightrail service to The Hague" to make it clear that this is no longer a metro? I mean, the concept of a metro ceasing to be a metro because it leaves an urban area just seems a little silly when it's still running on dedicated tracks! Metros run into suburbs and satellite towns all over the world, that doesn't mean they're not metros anymore.

Quote:
I know that you Rotterdammers very much want to prove that you have this gigantic subway and maybe that's what's making you guys blind for the facts? It's not me who he trying to manipulate the facts. Just accept the truth guys!
Hold on, a few remarks here:
1) I'm not a Rotterdammer, and
2) I've never claimed the city has the largest metro network in the Benelux. Like I said before, I'm very unfamiliar with the Brussels network but if it's bigger, then so be it. I love Brussels. It's already the biggest city proper in the Benelux (that I know of), so it would make sense if it also has the largest metro network.

On that note: do you have a link to some detailed information on the Brussels metro? Is there a thread in the Belgian forum maybe? I'd like to know more about it.

Quote:
Now, only Rotterdam people want to prove by all means that there Metro is bigger. It's not. Not only everybody knows that, It's very simple to check for yourself.
Like I said, I don't really care about the size of the thing. I just have a different take on the definition. I don't think the Erasmus line stops being a metro just because it leaves the urban area. But then that's me. Sweek posted definitions from urbanrail.net before, and clearly those people disagree with me as well so I might have to accept I uphold a minority stance here

Quote:
The numbers are very clear and cannot be debated. The Rotterdam metro is 37 kilometers long and has 37 stations. The Brussels metro is 38 kilometers long and has 59 stations. Brussels also has the premetro wich is 13kilometers long and has 15 stations.

Difficult to convince you. You are so chauvinistic about your city that every reasonable arguement flows of you like water on a duck. You have to accept that randstadrail and sneltram are not metrolines by any standard.

I see that Sweek also tried to explain the difference between metro and suburban rail. I cannot do anything more. It's not really important. Wat baten kaars en bril als de uil niet zienen wil.

This is what I consider to be the Rotterdam metro. Nothing more, and it's 37 kilometers long! (No sneltram or suburban randstadrails on this map!)
Slagathor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 02:31 PM   #47
Capzilla
robkaper.nl
 
Capzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,852

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Now if you go by the three definitions of urbanrail.net

1) An urban electric mass rail transport system, i.e. it is primarily used to move within the city
2) Totally independent from other traffic, rail or street traffic
3) High frequency service (maximum interval approx. 10 minutes during normal daytime service)
If we don't readily accept numbers from third party websites we should also question definitions from a third party web site. While I agree with them in general, there are definitely situations where you cannot strictly apply those rules.

1) Not every city has the sheer size of London or Paris. It is inevitable parts of metro systems spread to suburbs, outskirts or even neighbouring cities. This is especially true in Holland with its many smaller populated city centres as opposed to a strongly centralised urban setup.

2) I agree that a true metro should have no level-crossings. Sharing track with other services doesn't have to be a problem, that prohibition seems outdated with the number of hybrid systems being developed.

3) A frequent service during main operating hours is very pleasant for any kind of method of transportation, but doesn't really qualify what type of transportation it is. If you run a metro once an hour, that sucks, but it doesn't make it a bus or tram.

As for Rotterdam:

- obviously one should not count the shared parts in Spijkenisse double
- the sneltram parts of the Calandlijn should count at least partially. While indeed it doesn't qualify as metro in the strictest sense, it is definitely an integral part of the network, sharing track on a large section. It is easier a substandard metro with crossings than a fast tram capable of riding metro tracks.
- Randstadrail should not count until completion and opening of the Statentunnel, at which time the service will indeed be a train every minutes. Until then it is a separate system, afterwards it should also count at least partially. Again the level-crossings (having been converted from the railway network) disqualify it as proper metro, but it will be indistinguishable from one downtown.
- The same for de Hoekse Lijn. It's completely separate now, but will be indistuinguishably merged in 2011.

Completely excluding those lines and sections is one extreme, the Rotterdam definition is the other: if it runs through Beurs metro station, it's metro. The difference with Brussels premetro is that all trains on the substandard sections of Rotterdam actually can and do/will also run the downtown stretch.

That would still make Brussels network bigger for now. Rotterdam would catch up in 2011 though, with the completion of the two new hybrids. But it does depend on how pedantic or practical you want to be, there's no definite answer here guys.
__________________
Rob Kaper
Capzilla no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 02:40 PM   #48
hoogbouw010
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Den Haag
Posts: 4,373



The Calandline between stations De Tochten and Nesselande is a proper metro track and should be added to this map. After station De Tochten it changes from sneltram to metro (third rail). This adds another 1,5 kilometers to the total track, making 37+1,5=38,5.


Source: www.retmetro.nl
__________________
hoogbouw010.nl / amazingurban.com
hoogbouw010 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 02:48 PM   #49
cjav
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Rotterdam, New Haven
Posts: 725
Likes (Received): 117

Am I the only one that gets a chuckle from this entire debate. especially the last post..
cjav no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 04:46 PM   #50
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

It doesn't matter really, Rotterdam still has a very nice metro/randstadrail/sneltram/tram network. Something to be very proud of.
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 05:52 PM   #51
xlchris
Not much
 
xlchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Haarlem
Posts: 11,087
Likes (Received): 201

^I get it. When everybody admits that the Rotterdam metro network isn't that much bigger than the Brussels metro network than it doesn't matter. But when it is bigger, then it does Anyway, it still is bigger since it's 38,5km and not 37km.
__________________
"
xlchris no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 06:41 PM   #52
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by xlchris View Post
Anyway, it still is bigger since it's 38,5km and not 37km.
Yes, it seems that it's 500 meters bigger! But seriously why are you trying so desperately to prove that it's the biggest? Why is that so important for you?

As I said, I drove to Rotterdam saterday to check the metro out. My findings: The station are very sobre. The trains, the new ones aswell are very spartan.
The trains run at a 15 minute interval on a saterday afternoon. The stations are not very busy, except station Beurs.
The metro is to my opinion very usefull for the inhabitants of the suburbs. For transport in the centre the trams are a very good alternative.

Some photo's:


























Last edited by hix; July 19th, 2009 at 07:31 PM.
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 07:16 PM   #53
xlchris
Not much
 
xlchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Haarlem
Posts: 11,087
Likes (Received): 201

Thanks for the pics Didn't know they already installed the tv's.
__________________
"
xlchris no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 19th, 2009, 07:44 PM   #54
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

Station Rijnhaven has the best view I have ever seen from a metrostation!
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2009, 01:58 PM   #55
Cymen
Just another user
 
Cymen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,918
Likes (Received): 40

Quote:
Originally Posted by sweek View Post
Sorry but just the Erasmus-line is too much to count as well... it runs from one city to another through some very low-density areas, especially between Schiebroek and Pijnacker for example.

It also runs at frequencies of every half an hour during the off-peak, every 15 minutes peak...

Now if you go by the three definitions of urbanrail.net

1) An urban electric mass rail transport system, i.e. it is primarily used to move within the city
2) Totally independent from other traffic, rail or street traffic
3) High frequency service (maximum interval approx. 10 minutes during normal daytime service)

It doesn't meet either 1 or 3, nor 2 actually since it does share with the Zoetermeer Stadslijn towards The Hague.
IMO Zoetermeer Stadslijn is also a metro, because it pretty much meets those definitions.

The Amstelveen-line in Amsterdam is not a metro because it causes accidents with cars but also the distance between the stops is to short.

Another definition could be, according to city planners:
Metro = stop every ~700 to ~1200 metres
Sneltram = stop every ~400 to 700 metres
Tram = stop every 200 to 400 metres
(don't shoot me on the numbers!)

I know the Erasmuslijn also has stops every 1500 metres possibly making it an S-Bahn. But an express metro is also a metro and you don't have to be strict on definitions. Rotterdam - The Haque is dense enough to call it a metropolitan.
__________________
"Amsterdam is the world's smallest metropolis" - Mick Jagger

I'm not a slave to a god that doesn't give a shit!
Cymen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2009, 02:26 PM   #56
xlchris
Not much
 
xlchris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Haarlem
Posts: 11,087
Likes (Received): 201

Picture
Quote:
Originally Posted by hoogbouw010 View Post
__________________
"
xlchris no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2009, 06:20 PM   #57
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

I found this on the RET website http://http://www.ret.nl/over-ret/or...spx?sc_lang=en


Quote:
RandstadRail RandstadRail is a light rail connection between Rotterdam, Den Haag and Zoetermeer. Lightrail is a hybrid of tram, train and metro and the vehicles can run on both train and metro lines as well on the tram network. Since the vehicles are light, they accelerate much faster than their heavier counterparts and the stops at the stations are shorter. Travelling times with light rail are also shorter than those of other types of rail transport.
For me, the situation is clear: it's not a metro. Randstadrail is a great way of transportation. I wish we could have something simular to connect Brussels with nearby cities such as Leuven and Mechelen.
I think the discussion is pointless. There are no strict definitions to say what's a metro and what not. But for me there is one that is absolutely strict. A metro must be used for transportation within a city, not between cities...
For the same reason that BART in San Francisco is not a metro Randstadrail is not.
But I understand that the patriotic Dutchmen desperately want to have the biggest metro of the Benelux. So... I rest my case.

Last edited by hix; July 20th, 2009 at 06:30 PM.
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2009, 06:40 PM   #58
Encore
Encore
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Gent
Posts: 240
Likes (Received): 1

What a stupid discussion, but I guess that's what a forum is all about . For me both Rotterdam or Brussels metro systems aren't that spectacular at all if you compare it with other city's, but I do have to say that I have the best subway 'feeling' in Brussels.
Encore no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2009, 09:58 PM   #59
Alargule
Gidroow Neget Mola
 
Alargule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 8,068
Likes (Received): 1921

Quote:
Originally Posted by hix View Post
But for me there is one that is absolutely strict. A metro must be used for transportation within a city, not between cities...
Then we've got a real problem defining the Dutch systems. The Rotterdam one connects to places like Poortugaal, Capelle a/d IJssel, Schiedam and Spijkenisse, neither of which form part of the city of Rotterdam proper. Hoek van Holland, however, does form part of the city of Rotterdam (that's where the "Hoekselijn" runs to, which should be connected to the Calandlijn in the future).
And though to a lesser extent, the Amsterdam systems also runs through municipalities like Diemen, Duivendrecht and - though it's technically a metro-sneltram hybrid (the Dutch just love hybrid solutions) - through Amstelveen as well.

According to your definition, those systems can't be called proper metros. Should we leave those parts out in the grand total sum?

The way I see it, every attempt to define strict and safe guidelines by which we can discern the 'proper' metro systems from the 'hybrid' or even 'false' ones is an attempt in vain, since the whole concept of a metro system itself is nowadays defined by all the exceptions to the rule.
The dense Parisian system differs a lot from the widespread London one, but are both colloquially called metro systems. The New York Subway has special express tracks and highly intertwined routes; most of the Japanese systems share their tracks with regional trains, and in a city/metropolis like Tokyo it has become all but impossible to define the boundaries of the city (so why not call metro-like railway lines like the Yamanote line a metro line anyway)?
Alargule no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2009, 11:24 PM   #60
hix
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 3,775
Likes (Received): 3

There is no problem with metro to go outside the city. Aslong as it stays mainly in the city proper. In Amsterdam only the Amstelveen sneltram line is not metro. There's no doubt about that.
Generaly you cannot compare London, New York, Tokyo, Paris systems with small cities like Rotterdam or Brussels.

For me, it's almost always very clear. I know a metro when I see one. I also know a lightrail system, a sneltram system, a RER system when I see it. There's never a confusion. Even in Berlin, where the S-Bahn (one of the best in the world) is clearly not a metro. And still, it's more metro than the Randstadrail. In San Francisco the muni metro is just a premetro system and Bart is a regional railsystem. Only the locals want to prove desperately that it's a real metro, because it makes their city more cosmopolitan...

I agree that different systems can be confusing. Is the metro of Porto a metro? No, it's not, it's a fast tram system. Is the S-tog in Copenhagen a metro? No, it's a suburban railroad. Can you have a system that is a metro aswell as a suburban railroad. Not in my opinion.

Like I said, I understand why the Dutch, and especialy the Rotterdammers want so desperately prove that this line is a metro. It makes their city more "metropolitan" , more New York as it were, and less a poldervillage. (Not that you could think that, Rotterdam is a super city with the best modern architecture in the Benelux and central Europe)

And it's so easy, converting a railroad in to a metro, is so much more easy than to build a real metro, digging tunnels in the city..... (Ask around in Amsterdam) But really if you take a light rail train from Den Haag to Pijnakker Zuid, a train that runs every 30 minutes, are you really using the Rotterdam metro? I dont think so...

Last edited by hix; July 20th, 2009 at 11:30 PM.
hix no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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 11:38 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu