In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>> Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>> say you know it when you see it. If it has street running it's
>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>
>Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>conventional heavy rail.

But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy rail,
and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.

I think that to be "light rail" the rolling stock has to have at least
the word "tram" in it somewhere

>Something like the Berlin S-Bahn is far more akin to the LU subsurface
>lines in most of its technical and operational approaches, than it is
>to "mainline" DB services, but most conventional thinking is that
>S-Bahn is not "metro".

In England a metro is probably a train run by an operator which has
"metro" (or a synonym) in its name, including in any event the
Underground and sub-surface trains operated by TfL.

Arguably the tunnelled and subsurface sections of Thameslink and EL are
'metro', but best left with their given names with a rider that they
operate a 'metro-like service' in Zone 1.
--
Roland Perry

On 13.12.2023 08:22, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>>  Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>>> say you know it when you see it.  If it has street running it's
>>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>>
>> Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>> Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>> conventional heavy rail.
>
> But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy rail,
> and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.

Right, but are they "metro" or not? What differentiates a metro from any
run-of-the-mill ordinary railway line?

> I think that to be "light rail" the rolling stock has to have at least
> the word "tram" in it somewhere

You might think that, but many, many instances exist of lines and
systems that self-describe as light rail where this is not the case. The
new trains about to be introduced on the DLR, for example, are built on
a design platform for conventional metro trains, and do not have
anything tram-derived in their design heritage.

>> Something like the Berlin S-Bahn is far more akin to the LU subsurface
>> lines in most of its technical and operational approaches, than it is
>> to "mainline" DB services, but most conventional thinking is that
>> S-Bahn is not "metro".
>
> In England a metro is probably a train run by an operator which has
> "metro" (or a synonym) in its name, including in any event the
> Underground and sub-surface trains operated by TfL.

By that reasoning, the trams between Birmingham and Wolverhampton
definitely are a metro, but Merseyrail definiely is not a metro, as the
former is called "West Midlands Metro" but the latter has no such name
elements. I'm not sure that passes a duck test.

> Arguably the tunnelled and subsurface sections of Thameslink and EL are
> 'metro', but best left with their given names with a rider that they
> operate a 'metro-like service' in Zone 1.

But what does a "metro like service" mean, if there isn't a clear
definition of what a metro is. Does NET operate a "metro like service"
because it operates a service similar to the "West Midlands Metro"?

Robin

Am 12.12.2023 um 18:32 schrieb Bob:
> On 12.12.2023 16:45, John Levine wrote:
>> According to Bob  <bob@domain.com>:
>>> You are of course free to have your own personal idea of where the
>>> distinction ought to lie between the two, but that doesn't account for
>>> how other people chose to use the respective terms. There are examples
>>> of systems that describe themselves as light rail that very much do not
>>> conform to this distinction, indeed there are systems in the US and
>>> Canada that describe themselves as  "light rail" that use standard UIC
>>> rolling stock such as Stadler FLIRT, GTW and Coradia LINT units.
>>
>> In the U.S. it's more a political than a technical term. Heavy rail
>> means it can share tracks with freight trains and has to be sturdy
>> enough to survive crashing into one.
>
> But that is a technical distinction. Heavy rail that iner-operates with
> freight in the US has to meet FRA technical standards, while passenger
> railways that do not, have different, less stringent standards they are
> held to. The FRA has recently modified its passenger equipment standards
> to make them more compatible with international standards, in particular
> moving away from crashworthiness being measured in pure buckling
> strength limits to being measured in terms of energy dissipation.
>
> This causes a problem as a definition for "light rail" outside of that
> regulatory environment, as, by that definition, basically the entire
> railway network of Europe, would be "light rail", which is somewhat
> absurd. Therefore it leads to the situation where something that is
> defined as light rail in one context (a UIC spec passenger train) is
> defined as heavy rail in a different context, for exactly the same
> railway vehicles, operating in exactly the same way.

This shows that 'light rail' per se is not a meaingful class of objects
ourside a given regulatory framework. I sepculate that the most
meaningful definition of 'Light rail' is 'a railway that is exempted
from some parts of the national regulatory framework on grounds that it
does not interact with heavy freight trains'.

>> Light rail has its own separate
>> tracks or in one case in New Jersey, a special agreement with light
>> rail during the day and freight at night.
>>
>> Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>> say you know it when you see it.  If it has street running it's
>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>
> Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
> Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
> conventional heavy rail.  Something like the Berlin S-Bahn is far more
> akin to the LU subsurface lines in most of its technical and operational
> approaches, than it is to "mainline" DB services, but most conventional
> thinking is that S-Bahn is not "metro".

I would actually separate the continuum of rail-like services
differently (placing an 'S-Bahn' into the same bucket as a Metro but
into a different bucket from LU):

1) Tram-like typically has some on-street running, typically has stops
every few hundred meters and therefore line speeds of 30 mph (faster on
outer branches), typically has low platforms that are not line-specific,
typically has a service pattern of 6 tph or more.

2) 'U-Bahn'-like typically has no on-street running (but Frankfurt
does), typically has stops every 1-2km and therefore line speeds below
60 mph, typically has line-specific platforms and typically has a
service pattern of 10 tph or more.

3) 'S-Bahn' like never has on-street running, typically has stops every
2-5km and line speeds around 80 mph, typically has high platforms that
are not line specific in the central core, typically has a service
pattern of 2-4 tph on each line, usually shares track with regional
railways on outer branches.

4) 'Regional Railways' is similar to 'S-Bahn' but has no central core,
and is advertised as individual trains rather than 'line-based'.

The 'Underground-specific' operation pattern is that it is line-based
with high frequencies and very few junctions: problems on one line are
extremely unlikely to spread to different lines.

Rolf

In message <ulbo4o$2qon$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:57:12 on Wed, 13 Dec
2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>On 13.12.2023 08:22, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
>>2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>>>  Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>>>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>>>> say you know it when you see it.  If it has street running it's
>>>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>>>
>>> Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>>>Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>>>conventional heavy rail.

>> But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy
>>rail, and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.
>
>Right, but are they "metro" or not? What differentiates a metro from
>any run-of-the-mill ordinary railway line?

I've already explained my view on that.

>> I think that to be "light rail" the rolling stock has to have at
>>least the word "tram" in it somewhere
>
>You might think that, but many, many instances exist of lines and
>systems that self-describe as light rail where this is not the case.
>The new trains about to be introduced on the DLR, for example, are
>built on a design platform for conventional metro trains, and do not
>have anything tram-derived in their design heritage.

DLR might be one such instance, can you quote three or four more of the
"many" you refer to?

>>> Something like the Berlin S-Bahn is far more akin to the LU
>>>subsurface lines in most of its technical and operational
>>>approaches, than it is to "mainline" DB services, but most
>>>conventional thinking is that S-Bahn is not "metro".

>> In England a metro is probably a train run by an operator which has
>>"metro" (or a synonym) in its name, including in any event the
>>Underground and sub-surface trains operated by TfL.
>
>By that reasoning, the trams between Birmingham and Wolverhampton
>definitely are a metro, but Merseyrail definiely is not a metro, as the
>former is called "West Midlands Metro" but the latter has no such name
>elements. I'm not sure that passes a duck test.

Merseyrail might be an example of a synonym, though.

>> Arguably the tunnelled and subsurface sections of Thameslink and EL
>>are 'metro', but best left with their given names with a rider that
>>they operate a 'metro-like service' in Zone 1.
>
>But what does a "metro like service" mean, if there isn't a clear
>definition of what a metro is. Does NET operate a "metro like service"

Not it's a fucking TRAM.

>because it operates a service similar to the "West Midlands Metro"?
>
>Robin

--
Roland Perry

On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 15:45:52 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
<johnl@taugh.com> wrote:

>According to Bob <bob@domain.com>:
>>You are of course free to have your own personal idea of where the
>>distinction ought to lie between the two, but that doesn't account for
>>how other people chose to use the respective terms. There are examples
>>of systems that describe themselves as light rail that very much do not
>>conform to this distinction, indeed there are systems in the US and
>>Canada that describe themselves as "light rail" that use standard UIC
>>rolling stock such as Stadler FLIRT, GTW and Coradia LINT units.
>
Gareth Dennis has discussed 'what's a metro' frequently.

https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22

In message <gnvini5q3e4k5nu42gm3og46ef28qi1nft@4ax.com>, at 09:53:27 on
Wed, 13 Dec 2023, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 15:45:52 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
><johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>>According to Bob <bob@domain.com>:
>>>You are of course free to have your own personal idea of where the
>>>distinction ought to lie between the two, but that doesn't account for
>>>how other people chose to use the respective terms. There are examples
>>>of systems that describe themselves as light rail that very much do not
>>>conform to this distinction, indeed there are systems in the US and
>>>Canada that describe themselves as "light rail" that use standard UIC
>>>rolling stock such as Stadler FLIRT, GTW and Coradia LINT units.
>>
>Gareth Dennis has discussed 'what's a metro' frequently.
>
>https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up
>-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22

"The webpage at
https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-
to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily down or it may have moved
permanently to a new web address."

If this is the Cambridge City metro, that was always a pipe dream of the
former Mayor. A kind of guided-bus through tunnels under the City.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry wrote:

> Ken remarked:
>
>> https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up
>> -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>
> "The webpage at
> https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-
> to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily down or it may have moved
> permanently to a new web address."

Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point where
it wrapped? Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party
redirector ...

<https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>

On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 09:53:27 +0000
Ken <ken@birchanger.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 15:45:52 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
><johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>>According to Bob <bob@domain.com>:
>>>You are of course free to have your own personal idea of where the
>>>distinction ought to lie between the two, but that doesn't account for
>>>how other people chose to use the respective terms. There are examples
>>>of systems that describe themselves as light rail that very much do not
>>>conform to this distinction, indeed there are systems in the US and
>>>Canada that describe themselves as "light rail" that use standard UIC
>>>rolling stock such as Stadler FLIRT, GTW and Coradia LINT units.
>>
>Gareth Dennis has discussed 'what's a metro' frequently.
>
>https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-
>cfbc6d9d0a22

In the UK "metro" seems to mean little more than Some Train Service that
operates to/from/within a city with service intervals probably < 10 mins.

In message <kttfahFj6esU1@mid.individual.net>, at 10:28:32 on Wed, 13
Dec 2023, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry wrote:
>
>> Ken remarked:
>>
>>>
>>>https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-
>>>up -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22

>> "The webpage at https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-
>>metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily
>>down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."
>
>Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point where
>it wrapped?

No, I just clicked the link

>Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party redirector ...
>
><https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>

That gives the same error message.
--
Roland Perry

On 13/12/2023 15:44, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <kttfahFj6esU1@mid.individual.net>, at 10:28:32 on Wed, 13
> Dec 2023, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> Ken remarked:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-
>>>> up  -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>
>>>  "The webpage at  https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-
> >>metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily
>>> down or it may have moved  permanently to a new web address."
>>
>> Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point
>> where it wrapped?
>
> No, I just clicked the link
>
>> Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party redirector ...
>>
>> <https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>
>
> That gives the same error message.

Works here.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 15:44:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
wrote:

>In message <kttfahFj6esU1@mid.individual.net>, at 10:28:32 on Wed, 13
>Dec 2023, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>>Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> Ken remarked:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-
>>>>up -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>
>>> "The webpage at https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-
> >>metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily
>>>down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."
>>
>>Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point where
>>it wrapped?
>
>No, I just clicked the link
>
>>Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party redirector ...
>>
>><https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>
>
>That gives the same error message.

The irony! Perry complains about people posting broken links!

It still works for me if I copy and paste and remove the brackets. On
utr we're well aware that Agent doesn't make a good job of links that
exceed the line length. Even Roland knows. Thank you Andy for
providing the shorter version.

Yes, the article is about Cambridge but Gareth takes the opportunity
to discuss what is and what isn't a metro. This isn't just opinion;
it's a sort of industry collective view.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <kttfahFj6esU1@mid.individual.net>, at 10:28:32 on Wed, 13
> Dec 2023, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>>> Ken remarked:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-
>>>> up -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>
>>> "The webpage at https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-
>>> metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily
>>> down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."
>>
>> Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point where
>> it wrapped?
>
> No, I just clicked the link
>
>> Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party redirector ...
>>
>> <https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>
>
> That gives the same error message.

The first one worked fine for me until it started getting wrapping and
extra spaces included in it (currently “>>>> “ and “…up[2spaces]-to-be…”.
The second one works fine.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <trmjni5vo8fgvhafdnrqk07pfqsrptatjc@4ax.com>, at 16:34:17 on
Wed, 13 Dec 2023, Ken <ken@birchanger.com> remarked:
>On Wed, 13 Dec 2023 15:44:12 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>In message <kttfahFj6esU1@mid.individual.net>, at 10:28:32 on Wed, 13
>>Dec 2023, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>>>Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ken remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-
>>>>>up -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>>
>>>> "The webpage at https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-
>> >>metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily
>>>>down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."
>>>
>>>Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point where
>>>it wrapped?
>>
>>No, I just clicked the link
>>
>>>Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party redirector ...
>>>
>>><https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>
>>
>>That gives the same error message.
>
>The irony! Perry complains about people posting broken links!

Is that an admission it's broken?

And the links I post which people claim are broken, usually aren't, it's
their client that's broken.

>It still works for me if I copy and paste and remove the brackets. On
>utr we're well aware that Agent doesn't make a good job of links that
>exceed the line length. Even Roland knows. Thank you Andy for
>providing the shorter version.
>
>Yes, the article is about Cambridge but Gareth takes the opportunity
>to discuss what is and what isn't a metro. This isn't just opinion;
>it's a sort of industry collective view.

Anyway, now I'm back home I'm using a third[1] set of connectivity, and
a different browser (Opera), and still get the same error message.

[1] First was Premier Inn wifi, second a phone hotspot on O2.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ulcno0$u5nd$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:56:32 on Wed, 13 Dec
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <kttfahFj6esU1@mid.individual.net>, at 10:28:32 on Wed, 13
>> Dec 2023, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry wrote:
>>>
>>>> Ken remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-
>>>>> up -to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>>
>>>> "The webpage at https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-
>>>> metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22 might be temporarily
>>>> down or it may have moved permanently to a new web address."
>>>
>>> Works for me, maybe you copied some stray characters at the point where
>>> it wrapped?
>>
>> No, I just clicked the link
>>
>>> Anyway, it can be shortened without needing a 3rd party redirector ...
>>>
>>> <https://medium.com/swlh/cam-metro-cfbc6d9d0a22>
>>
>> That gives the same error message.
>
>The first one worked fine for me until it started getting wrapping and
>extra spaces included in it (currently “>>>> “ and
>“…up[2spaces]-to-be…”.

>The second one works fine.

The second one redirects to the same long url, which is why I get THE
EXACT SAME ERROR MESSAGE, not an error message regarding the shortened
url. It's a bit of a mystery.
--
Roland Perry

On 12/12/2023 09:25, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 18:15:17 +0100
> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>On 11.12.2023 12:53, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>>> My understanding was that the min distinction between 'Underground' and
>>> 'Metro' is that 'Metro' is heavy Rail while 'Underground' is light rail.
>>
>>The problem is there isn't a consistent distinction between heavy and
>>light rail. The term has been used for a variety of purposes over the
>>years, often inconsistently, for an inconsistent collection of railway
>>schemes, both proposed and realised. In the London context, the DLR was
>>proposed as "light rail" specifically in contrast with the earlier Fleet
>>line proposal to extend what became the Jubilee line east to serve the
>>Docklands area, with the implication that the Tube is not "light rail".
>
> My interpretation of light rail is somewhat flimsily built vehicles with a
> shorter lifespan than normal trains that can negotiate tight curves and
> carry more passengers than a bus but less than a heavy rail train.

The vehicles on the Glasgow Subway and the Tyne and Wear Metro are both
about 43 years old and commonly described as "light rail". Is that a shorter
lifespan?

Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
> On 12/12/2023 09:25, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 18:15:17 +0100
>> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 11.12.2023 12:53, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>>>> My understanding was that the min distinction between 'Underground' and
>>>> 'Metro' is that 'Metro' is heavy Rail while 'Underground' is light rail.
>>>
>>> The problem is there isn't a consistent distinction between heavy and
>>> light rail. The term has been used for a variety of purposes over the
>>> years, often inconsistently, for an inconsistent collection of railway
>>> schemes, both proposed and realised. In the London context, the DLR was
>>> proposed as "light rail" specifically in contrast with the earlier Fleet
>>> line proposal to extend what became the Jubilee line east to serve the
>>> Docklands area, with the implication that the Tube is not "light rail".
>>
>> My interpretation of light rail is somewhat flimsily built vehicles with a
>> shorter lifespan than normal trains that can negotiate tight curves and
>> carry more passengers than a bus but less than a heavy rail train.
>
> The vehicles on the Glasgow Subway and the Tyne and Wear Metro are both
> about 43 years old and commonly described as "light rail". Is that a shorter
> lifespan?
>
The Glasgow Subway trains aren’t much different to London tube trains other
than the track gauge,

On 13.12.2023 10:37, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <ulbo4o$2qon$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:57:12 on Wed, 13 Dec
> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>> On 13.12.2023 08:22, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
>>> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>>>>  Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>>>>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>>>>> say you know it when you see it.  If it has street running it's
>>>>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>>>>
>>>> Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>>>> Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>>>> conventional heavy rail.
>
>>>  But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy
>>> rail,  and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.
>>
>> Right, but are they "metro" or not? What differentiates a metro from
>> any run-of-the-mill ordinary railway line?
>
> I've already explained my view on that.
>
>>> I think that to be "light rail" the rolling stock has to have at
>>> least  the word "tram" in it somewhere
>>
>> You might think that, but many, many instances exist of lines and
>> systems that self-describe as light rail where this is not the case.
>> The new trains about to be introduced on the DLR, for example, are
>> built on a design platform for conventional metro trains, and do not
>> have anything tram-derived in their design heritage.
>
> DLR might be one such instance, can you quote three or four more of the
> "many" you refer to?

Alstom Coradia LINT and Stadler FLIRT on Trillium line of the "O-Bahn
light rail" in Ottawa

Stadler GTW on NJT River Line

Alstom Metro seires 9000 on the Guadalajara light rail system

P2020 stock on LA C line (formerly Green line)

>>>> Something like the Berlin S-Bahn is far more akin to the LU
>>>> subsurface  lines in most of its technical and operational
>>>> approaches, than it is  to "mainline" DB services, but most
>>>> conventional thinking is that  S-Bahn is not "metro".
>
>>>  In England a metro is probably a train run by an operator which has
>>> "metro" (or a synonym) in its name, including in any event the
>>> Underground and sub-surface trains operated by TfL.
>>
>> By that reasoning, the trams between Birmingham and Wolverhampton
>> definitely are a metro, but Merseyrail definiely is not a metro, as
>> the former is called "West Midlands Metro" but the latter has no such
>> name elements. I'm not sure that passes a duck test.
>
> Merseyrail might be an example of a synonym, though.

How does the name of a river mean "metro"? Is the Hochrheinbahn a metro?
It is also named after a river.

>>> Arguably the tunnelled and subsurface sections of Thameslink and EL
>>> are  'metro', but best left with their given names with a rider that
>>> they  operate a 'metro-like service' in Zone 1.
>>
>> But what does a "metro like service" mean, if there isn't a clear
>> definition of what a metro is. Does NET operate a "metro like service"
>
> Not it's a fucking TRAM.

So a system like West Midlands Metro, that has "metro" in its name is a
"fucking TRAM", not a metro. Got it. Being called a "metro" doesn't make
a service a metro. Being named after a river does make a service a
metro. Completely consistent and logical there.

Robin

According to Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>:
>In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
>2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>> Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>>> say you know it when you see it. If it has street running it's
>>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>>
>>Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>>Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>>conventional heavy rail.
>
>But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy rail,
>and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.

To cross theads a little bit, what's the line between
Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham? It has Metropolitan Line LU trains
and Chiltern NR trains running on the same tracks and stopping at the
same stations.

--
Regards,
John Levine, johnl@taugh.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Please consider the environment before reading this e-mail. https://jl.ly

In uk.transport.london Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> The second one redirects to the same long url, which is why I get THE
> EXACT SAME ERROR MESSAGE, not an error message regarding the shortened
> url. It's a bit of a mystery.

Worked for me. Looking at a checker site:
https://www.site24x7.com/link-checker.html
it says the page and links worked apart from one to the Android app.

but, interestingly, another site like that:
https://httpstatus.io/

got told 403 Forbidden, and indicates it's on Cloudflare. Maybe there's
something about your system that doesn't like Cloudflare? Do you have any
IP blocks or anything?

If the redirect worked, it suggests the site replied to it successfully, so
the web server is working but something interfered with the page fetch. Do
you have any kind of virus checker or proxy on your machine that might
intercept page fetches?

Theo

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 12/12/2023 09:25, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com wrote:
>>> On Mon, 11 Dec 2023 18:15:17 +0100
>>> Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 11.12.2023 12:53, Rolf Mantel wrote:
>>>>> My understanding was that the min distinction between 'Underground' and
>>>>> 'Metro' is that 'Metro' is heavy Rail while 'Underground' is light rail.
>>>>
>>>> The problem is there isn't a consistent distinction between heavy and
>>>> light rail. The term has been used for a variety of purposes over the
>>>> years, often inconsistently, for an inconsistent collection of railway
>>>> schemes, both proposed and realised. In the London context, the DLR was
>>>> proposed as "light rail" specifically in contrast with the earlier Fleet
>>>> line proposal to extend what became the Jubilee line east to serve the
>>>> Docklands area, with the implication that the Tube is not "light rail".
>>>
>>> My interpretation of light rail is somewhat flimsily built vehicles with a
>>> shorter lifespan than normal trains that can negotiate tight curves and
>>> carry more passengers than a bus but less than a heavy rail train.
>>
>> The vehicles on the Glasgow Subway and the Tyne and Wear Metro are both
>> about 43 years old and commonly described as "light rail". Is that a shorter
>> lifespan?
>>
> The Glasgow Subway trains aren’t much different to London tube trains other
> than the track gauge,

That and the structure gauge.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Bob <bob@domain.com> wrote:
> On 13.12.2023 10:37, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ulbo4o$2qon$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:57:12 on Wed, 13 Dec
>> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>> On 13.12.2023 08:22, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
>>>> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>>>>>  Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>>>>>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>>>>>> say you know it when you see it.  If it has street running it's
>>>>>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>>>>>
>>>>> Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>>>>> Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>>>>> conventional heavy rail.
>>
>>>>  But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy
>>>> rail,  and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.
>>>
>>> Right, but are they "metro" or not? What differentiates a metro from
>>> any run-of-the-mill ordinary railway line?
>>
>> I've already explained my view on that.
>>
>>>> I think that to be "light rail" the rolling stock has to have at
>>>> least  the word "tram" in it somewhere
>>>
>>> You might think that, but many, many instances exist of lines and
>>> systems that self-describe as light rail where this is not the case.
>>> The new trains about to be introduced on the DLR, for example, are
>>> built on a design platform for conventional metro trains, and do not
>>> have anything tram-derived in their design heritage.
>>
>> DLR might be one such instance, can you quote three or four more of the
>> "many" you refer to?
>
> Alstom Coradia LINT and Stadler FLIRT on Trillium line of the "O-Bahn
> light rail" in Ottawa
> [snip]

So completely unlike the Stadler FLIRTs that run on the heavy rail main
lines in East Anglia then. :-)

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
> According to Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk>:
>> In message <ula5fq$3o5cc$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:32:42 on Tue, 12 Dec
>> 2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:
>>>> Now you'll ask what the difference between light rail and
>>>> subway/metro/underground, and I will wave my hands like crazy and
>>>> say you know it when you see it. If it has street running it's
>>>> light rail, if not it's probably a subway.
>>>
>>> Until you come to things like Thameslink, London Overground or the
>>> Elizabeth line, that straddle the boundary between metro and
>>> conventional heavy rail.
>>
>> But all run, in places, on the same tracks as conventional heavy rail,
>> and use the same classes of EMU as heavy rail.
>
> To cross theads a little bit, what's the line between
> Harrow-on-the-Hill and Amersham? It has Metropolitan Line LU trains
> and Chiltern NR trains running on the same tracks and stopping at the
> same stations.
>

Both are heavy rail. The short Chiltern trains run Fast, and only make
three intermediate stops. Some Met trains similarly run fast, but there are
also stopping services which make an additional five stops.

Ken <ken@birchanger.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Dec 2023 15:45:52 -0000 (UTC), John Levine
> <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:
>
>> According to Bob <bob@domain.com>:
>>> You are of course free to have your own personal idea of where the
>>> distinction ought to lie between the two, but that doesn't account for
>>> how other people chose to use the respective terms. There are examples
>>> of systems that describe themselves as light rail that very much do not
>>> conform to this distinction, indeed there are systems in the US and
>>> Canada that describe themselves as "light rail" that use standard UIC
>>> rolling stock such as Stadler FLIRT, GTW and Coradia LINT units.
>>
> Gareth Dennis has discussed 'what's a metro' frequently.
>
> https://medium.com/swlh/is-cambridgeshires-new-metro-all-it-s-cracked-up-to-be-cfbc6d9d0a22
>

Including a very convenient flowchart:

<https://x.com/railnatter/status/1647864495354662912>

Key definitions include whether the line carries below 10,000 people per
hour per direction, between 10k and 20k pphpd or over 20k; steel or rubber
tyres; dedicated tracks or not, street running or not.

The available outputs from the flowchart are car, bus, dangleway,
gadgetbahn, tram, heavy tram, light metro, metro, light suburban rail,
suburban rail, heavy suburban rail.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Theo wrote:

> but, interestingly, another site like that:
> https://httpstatus.io/
>
> got told 403 Forbidden, and indicates it's on Cloudflare. Maybe there's
> something about your system that doesn't like Cloudflare? Do you have any
> IP blocks or anything?
>
> If the redirect worked, it suggests the site replied to it successfully, so
> the web server is working but something interfered with the page fetch.

Checking with firefox dev tools I don't see any full page redirects
happening, ghostery does block a couple of scripts from cloudflare
insight and google analytics.

Clearing site cookies and pausing ghostery then refreshing the page
makes it overlay a half screen banner asking to create a free or paid
account, a cookie policy pop-up and a sign-in using google popup, but
doesn't cause it to break for me, the small area of screen still visible
behind the clutter still scrolls and shows the full content.

In message <uld0k1$vjeg$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:28:00 on Wed, 13 Dec
2023, Bob <bob@domain.com> remarked:

>>> But what does a "metro like service" mean, if there isn't a clear
>>>definition of what a metro is. Does NET operate a "metro like service"

>> Not it's a fucking TRAM.
>
>So a system like West Midlands Metro, that has "metro" in its name is a
>"fucking TRAM", not a metro. Got it.

I think you are in danger of completely losing the plot (unless you are
deliberately trying to wind us up).

NET is 100% a tram, in Nottingham. Not the West Midlands.

>Being called a "metro" doesn't make a service a metro. Being named
>after a river does make a service a metro.

Again, what I said was: "metro" (or a synonym) in its name.

$geographic+$descriptor is a candidate for such a synonym.

$geographic need not be a river; $descripter could be "rail".

Thus tfl-rail might qualify as a metro.

"tfl" is not a river.

Apply that logic to 'Mersey' 'Rail'.

--
Roland Perry