Should Your Metro Line Get Express Tracks?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 гру 2022
- Watch this video ad-free on Nebula: nebula.tv/videos/rmtransit-sh...
All it takes is one trip to New York for the average person to wonder: Should their city have an express metro system? Here's why additional express tracks may not be the best idea.
As always, leave a comment down below if you have ideas for our future videos. Like, subscribe, and hit the bell icon so you won't miss my next video!
=PATREON=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): share.epidemicsound.com/nptgfg
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
(Not officially affiliated with the channel)
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: reecemartin.ca
Substack: reecemartin.substack.com
=ABOUT ME=
Ever wondered why your city's transit just doesn't seem quite up to snuff? RMTransit is here to answer that, and help you open your eyes to all of the different public transportation systems around the world!
Reece (the RM in RMTransit) is an urbanist and public transport critic residing in Toronto, Canada, with the goal of helping the world become more connected through metros, trams, buses, high-speed trains, and all other transport modes.
While it's not a great advantage for capacity, one thing you gain with triple track is the ability to use the spare track during track maintenance or to switch around a broken down train. This helps with NYC's 24/7 operation.
None of the metro systems I've used had trouble with train reliability in a way that substantially impacted service, certainly not to the degree that it's worth putting down a whole nother track. Frequent crossovers and actually using reliable rolling stock should be more than enough to cover any situation that wouldn't also cripple a system with express tracks.
Yea whenever NYC needs to do maintenance on a yard they put all the trains onto the express tracks
@@wewillrockyou1986 Even if there aren’t any reliability problems, NYC also uses them for just storage purposes in bad weather situations
Yeah, I’m just not confident that the best solution to the problem is a third track. At least along third track because lots of systems have loads of pockets.
@@wewillrockyou1986 l think he was referring to track maintenance, not train reliability
As someone who lived in NYC for many years, I can say that express trains are most certainly a benefit. If you have a city with high density and is geographically large, like NYC, local trains can be painfully slow. Express trains just simply take you into and through Manhattan much faster; especially Midtown, the Financial District and all areas south of 96th street. Also, for accuracy purposes, the triple tracks go into the Outer Boroughs, meaning Brooklyn, Bronx, and Queens. (Staten Island's trains do not connect with Manhattan.) The suburbs do not have NYC subway service. They are served by various regional rail such as NJ Transit, Metro North, Long Island Railroad and Path. Skip-stop services is annoying and if you are not familiar with the lines involved, there is a chance you will skip your stop and be required to take the correct train back...it happens.
I agree. I would also add about adding express tracks where there are no equivalent parallel regional commuter rail corridors serving specific destinations available but utilizing existing system to double as a regional commuter system.
Pet peeve of mine when the outer boroughs are referred to as the "suburbs"
I also suggest looking at NJ Transit’s Northeast Corridor timetable, where it runs on 4 tracks (Amtrak owned territory)… in the AM Peak, a local train departs Trenton for NYC then about 5-10 min later an Express train departs Trenton but will switch from the outer track to the inner track and speed past the local train that stopped at a station and then arrive at Penn Station before the local train
A lot of other US commuter agencies also do this, although their express trains tend to run local in outer suburbs (as NJT does on non-NEC trackage). Metra runs an express about 5-10 minutes behind a local on most corridors, and 2 expresses for every local on the BNSF line. It works great for promoting more patronage from the ends of the network.
The Chuo and Chuo-Sobu lines are great examples of the capacity benefit in Tokyo. The “local” Sobu and the “express” Chuo stop at almost the same stations on their way to the city on weekdays, so the benefit is mostly that the Sobu provides some much needed capacity closer to Shinjuku.
On weekends and holidays however, the Chuo turns into a more proper express service and skips more than half the Sobu stations on its way to Shinjuku. I assume because overcrowding isn’t that much of a concern and people appreciate the faster service
The Chuo Line does skip both Higashi-Nakano and Okubo, along with most of the stops within the Yamanote loop, at all times - it simply doesn't have any platforms at these stations. Most express trains around the world run local in the city center but express in the suburbs, but the Chuo Rapid is the other way around!
Even on weekdays (except in the morning rush), it also has Special Rapid (特快) trains four times an hour, which skip several of the suburban stops.
Also, the Chuo rapid line also has its own express and local services. As an example, the Chuo rapid local will stop at Musashi Sakae but the Chuo rapid express won't.
@@wasmic5z I think this goes in line with the philosophy of concentrating most passengers at big stations like Shinjuku and letting them transfer there.
@@wasmic5z Express in the city and local in the suburbs is actually very common in areas where you either have alternative transit inside the city limits, or a large concentration of travel going downtown. Most US cities, for instance, have metro systems in the inner city, and a lot of suburbanites who work downtown, so commuter agencies run express trains to give passengers in the suburbs a quicker commute downtown, where they can transfer to other modes of transit to complete their journey.
I think the Sobu rapid line and Chuo-sobu line combination is a much better example on providing express services.
In practice, the Chuo-sobu service is mostly empty from Mitaka to Shinjuku since the commuters just takes the chuo "rapid" line instead of the Chuo-sobu service as the rapid service only skips 2 stations and only the "rapid" services goes to Tokyo station. This completely defeats the purpose of separating the express service and the local service.
Now even public transport advocates says: Just one more track bro! :)
I think induced demand also apply to public transit: if you build more public transport, more people will ride public transport. The difference with car infrastructure is that one more train track can handle much more people than one more highway lane.
@@hanifalhusaini5455 Absolutely, induced demand works here as well. But we want rail, because it needs less space, more green, and easier to subsidize the poorer more, and the wealthy less.
It helps that the justification here is mostly to separate two different services kind of like having separate lanes for public transportation, cars, bikes and pedestrians for a street, not to feet to the existing demand.
So, if one is applying this video to one’s Cities Skylines city, learn from the Central Line and the Elizabeth Line; put in a train line to serve major stops, and serve both local and major stops with your metro, rather than struggling to do quad tracks. Alternately, you can run parallel metro tunnels, which also gives you flexibility to diverge the express line to better serve important areas the main line may miss. I love it! This video frees me from the itch to use quad tracks when the game doesn’t allow it properly.
If you use metro overhaul mod, you can do proper quad-track corridors and stations
@@somethingsomething7712 MOM is amazing and I love it. And you can do metrotrain systems where "full scale" trains run on metro tracks
I stopped using MOM after repeatedly having an issue where metros would not spawn from the depot. Is this a case of RTFM on my part?
I’m thinking of getting into cities skylines. What are your opinions on the metro expansion dlc? Is it worth it?
Quad track is Gods track.
Nothing is more frustrating than going local all the way during rush hour because you travel against rush hour traffic. Wistfully staring as the express trains pass, knowing that you can never get one.
The one place NYC style express tracks do make sense is in similarly massive sprawling cities with high density throughout and where you're starting with the express track in mind rather than adding them later- as was the case it seems in NYC. So I'm surprised that these sorts of express tracks aren't more common in China - especially Beijing and Shanghai - where similarly to NYC, the subways are long and traverse distances comparable to what in German speaking cities, for example, you'd traverse with an S-Bahn, which acts as an express in some of those places.
Agree. NYC express tracks do make sense and dot see any issues with it. I couldn’t imagine it I had to make every stop. I took the subway for nearly 18 years and while not perfect if very reliable
You could also plan to finish 2 tracks while completing the other 2 to speed things up a bit. You could potentially space this out by quite a bit with an actual pause in construction while the capacity fills up, but with all the connective infrastructure in place so the new construction doesn't disrupt service like it would with a retrofit.
@@shraka I think this might be viable for cut and cover in relatively sparse areas without too much infrastructure, but when tunnel space is at a premium, I doubt it can work in most situations.
@@unknownPLfan ... Err, that seems like it contradicts what you said above. And no, if anything the more populace it is the better off you are staging it like this. The faster you can get partial service the better. You've gotta bore each tunnel individually anyway, so it'd be much faster to task your 4 tunneling machines to work on two tracks, or cheaper to just use 2 machines. You could cut the middle parts of the express lines after the main line was already running.
Other than the oldest lines, most Chinese metro systems have very wide stop spacing compared to European or US systems. Unlike in say Chicago where a 5-minute walk gets you to the next station, you could easily be walking 20 to get to the next stop in a Chinese metro. With that kind of spacing, as the video said you lose a lot of the benefit of express services, as going express at that point means basically creating a regional rail line.
RER A is clearly an express line, it parallels line 1 over its entire length but has only 7 stops compared to 25 for the line 1. Line 14 was not really designed as an express corridor of line 1 but rather as a relief line of RER A, even if line 14 is slower and has more stops, it provides extra capacity on the super busy section Gare De Lyon - Châtelet - St Lazare/Auber. The northern extension of line 14 was however designed as an express service of line 13.
I mean, it’s still express from the reference point of line 1! There’s a reason it was known as “MÉTro Est-Ouest Rapide”
Line 1 was too busy, so the RER A was built. The RER A was in turn too busy so line 14 was built. And the RER E... but only in 2024 for St-Lazare - La Défense and Nanterre !
Line 14 will also act as an express service for line 7 from the southeast to Central Paris.
@@RMTransit Line 14 is faster than line 7 between Châtelet and Pyramides, same for line 1 between Châtelet and Gare de Lyon, running faster between 2 stations on the same line does not make line 14 an express service of lines 1 and 7. METEOR and EOLE (Est Ouest Liaison Express) were designed at the same time during the 90s to relieve RER line A. Est Ouest precisely refers to line A and not to line 1, EOLE does not even have a connection to line 1!
You missed that an express track, or a third/fourth track allows for 24hrs service, where a 2 track system has to be shut down every night for maintenance.
Hi RM Transit, this video has been great. Myself being a New Yorker and riding the Subway for years. I have seen lots of areas on the MTA where it makes sense to have a quad track and it being used for express service versus having quad track and not being used for express service but for train storage.
The Queens Blvd line that has quad track carries a lot of Queens residence from the middle of nowhere to Midtown Manhattan and even lower Manhattan.
Now there are some areas that have quad or triple track that is not used for anything through the subway system. Unfortunately this being due to the various companies that owned certain parts of the system and made a mess of what the subway is today.
Quite interesting video!, i always think that the NYC subway quad track layout is the real thing for express trains, but sometimes as i see in your video the best solution is building a new line that runs parallel to another most congested line in a portion of that one, like here in Santiago on the construction of the line 7
Great video, Reese! I personally needed this discussion exactly. I have gotten so used to quad tracking being the next logical step to improve existing well-designed lines, but the Elizabeth Line started to sell me on separate express lines. Needed this video to clarify the final breakdown of pros and cons between the two strategies!
Also I'm very excited to hear more about the idea you tease at the end.
The Tung Chung line of HK MTR was supposed to have quad tracks to isolate the airport express from the local service, but decidedly continued with dual tracks (budget reasons) with quads at some stations for the express service and to bypass the stations. Even tho it was cheaper, it has effects throughout the whole line like longer headways due to letting the express service have priority and such. The Philippine NSCR is doing the same thing. Although we have to wait for the construction to finish to see if it'll have the same effects.
Moreover, that is also causing problems with Tung Chung line's extension to Tamar Park, Admirality, and is instead being considered a "North Island" line. Ideally, I'd prefer Tung Chung like and TKO line to be merged together via the proposed North Island line route.
Love that yonge line idea. I lived at Yonge and Sheppard for while and it was so crazy to me that to go downtown during rush hour it made more sense to take the train a stop or two north then come back down south... Not to mention if there was ever an issue on the line getting all those people on shuttle buses
If I were a resident of the DC metro area and had to depend on its Metro east-west services, I would be constantly wondering why they never built express tracks on its central east-west subway.
I heard talk of building a brand new tunnel for the Blue Line that would stop at Georgetown and run east towards Union Station, but there is little chance an entire build like that happens in our lifetimes. But with the Silver Line fully finished, there should at least be consideration for a skip-stop along the shared section with the Orange Line in Virginia given that the travel time downtown is around 1 hour.
Even if Paris metro 14 could be an alternative to line 1, the real express alternative is RER A, from la Défense on the west side to Vincennes on the east, it sticks closely to line 1.
Yes, however I prefer the example of Line 14 for this video since I would say, it’s more focussed on the express element
This is one of the reasons why I like the transport system of Düsseldorf. That bigger City (600K Citizens) here in Germany, I live close by.
When I need to travel fast in and out of the City, I frequently use the S-Bahn. And when I need to commute even faster I may take a Regional Express Service.
But, when I am in Düsseldorf, and I need to travel a short distance, but still fast, I can take every 3min the Stadtbahn (Subway).
And when I need to travel a short distance, to reach my final destination, i usually use the Tram, the Bus or my Bike.
It's not a perfect system, as you are in need to transfer quite often. But with that transport system, you can always use the method of public transport that gets you where you need to go, the fastest.
The express train can do wonders if it’s executed correctly. For example, ABCD runs express from 59-125th, which is basically a regional rail with subway frequencies.
I'm so glad you made the episode about the Oslo metro. That video popped up in my feed probably because, you guessed it, I'm Norwegian. Without that video I might've never heard of your glorious channel! I haven't been a subscriber for long, but I really enjoy your positive energy and knowledge!
Seoul is dealing with the issue of not having express service on most of its lines, as its once core city centric metro has sparwled out into commutter rail levels and not really have a dedicated communer service.
the city is trying to fix that with the GTX opening within the next decade, a semi-high speed system that runs under the city between major hubs.
I would like to see an analysis of how the single bore method Barcelona is using for line 9 could be used to get quad track more easily. The current plan is a single tunnel with enough space for 4 tracks (2 over 2) but instead of building four tracks, they're building stations within the bore to lower costs. I wonder how hard it would be in the future to rebuild the stations outside the bore and having an express local pattern
My guess would be it'd be more efficient to build it with 2 tracks but allow for 2 more to be added from day 1, rather than ripping up the stations and rebuilding them in 20-30 years time.
Every time I ride the Yonge line in Toronto, all I think about is how there should be an express track connecting Finch to Shepherd, Eglinton, Bloor, and Union.
So many commuters riding in from Finch every morning going straight downtown, the existing line is slow with multiple stops along the route, and has been above capacity for what feels like two decades. And York region is only growing.
London basically has express trains as you've said, some done in the New York style with 1 line running alongside another bypassing most stops (Piccadilly line runs express in West London for the local district line, metropolitan line runs express for the local jubilee line in north West London and also runs express for itself), but it also has separated express lines like the Victoria line effectively acting as an express line for the Piccadilly and northern lines, or other parts of the jubilee line which act as an express line for the Bakerloo line, and of course the Elizabeth line acting as an express line for the central line.
Obviously there are other local National Rail lines that at least somewhat offer services that are tantamount to Express services i.e. being able to get from Harrow & Wealdstone from Euston in 11 minutes, or even the admittedly infrequent trains to Sudbury from Marylebone.
Your content lately has been incredible keep it up
The (A) train, the Jamaica-179th street (E) train are examples of true subway express service in NYC. The (A) skips many stations along its corridors and soon at efficient speed and the (E) covers its distance at 50mph. Those two lines are examples of what good express services can be but remove some, if not ALL interlining and they will show their usefulness.
Why not do both? Build a whole new line that has both an express track and a local track that intersects with the old line but doesn't run parallel. Get that S tier public transport infrastructure.
Hi Reece, I’ve noticed that you’ve been increasing your upload frequency, much appreciated!!
I do this every year for the holidays!
In nyc, all 5 boroughs are officially part of the city, suburbs are more so stuff like jeresy city, westchester county and nassau county
He can be misinformed sometimes
To be fair, the definition of suburb vary from person to person.
In geographic and descriptive terms, Staten Island, the Rockaways, most of Queens, are all very suburban. A suburb is a kind of development not a distinct form of government different from "the city", and suburbs are very often parts of cities (municipalities). In NYS every place has some form of municipal government. In the tri-state area what people consider a "suburb" colloquially varies. Depends on who you ask. A to of people would consider Jersey city or Hoboken to be "the city".
@@kms1.62 the outer boroughs literally can't be the suburbs of the city because they comprise the city.
Westchester is a suburb. Yonkers even. Hoboken, sure.
@@Gregq96 sorry to hear you are confused
Thanks for recognizing the Purple Train as the express service of the Central line. 🙂
The skytrain line between waterfront and King George desperately needs this.
Especially pre Langley Extension 😬
Check out the NYC MTA E & F lines also how they interact with the M & R lines at different sections & times of the day they all act as a combination of all types.
This video and the comments have given me 2 ideas for future videos: 1). A video about the concept of corridors. You talk about them ALL the time, but I'm not sure if you've ever explained what you mean by the word? 2) A video about budget cuts and future proofing. How to build in such a way that is initially cheap, until the concept is proven, but provides easy expansion for the future. For example, how could you efficiently build a 2 track corridor with provision for 4 tracks in the future instead of just cutting the budget back and building a 2 track corridor/line and later realising you didn't protect enough land to build more tracks, making it horribly expensive to upgrade.
Loving these bonus videos, Reece!
Thanks! 🎉 happy holidays!
IMHO most metro lines built today should have 4 tracks by default. It's not much more expensive than 2 tracks, and it will massively improve service as it can now serve long distance as well as short distance passengers with ease. People shouldn't have to spend an hour on the subway just to go 20 miles - express service can cut that time dramatically. Some metro line can still have 2 tracks, but major lines (especially those that travel long distances) should have 4.
Space... That factors in a lot along with the cost to do such work on such a proposal.
Granted, I'm speaking from a Baltimorean where getting the funding to build a measly east-west line have been a b*tch to get.
@@MarloSoBalJr You can build the northbound tracks above the southbound tracks. With cut-and-cover construction, it's not that much more work.
Express tracks are perhaps the greatest innovation of the NYC subway. When used effectively, they improve capacity and create a pseudo-regional rail which with unified fares creates a cheap option for getting around the city fast.
It’s also worth it to consider that metro services spur development, and express stops create miniature “hubs” which distance out commuters and reduce crowding overall.
I'm not sure how much this logic applies to commuter rail. For example, I live near a stop on the Keio line in Tokyo. The Keio line offers a local, express, semi limited express and limited express. And catching the express saves about 20-30 minutes one way from where I live to the terminal at Shinjuku. Although this isn't technically a metro system, it does offer a similar service so I think the logic still applies. This express service works by stopping only at transit hubs and/or business districts. If your station isn't served by an express train, you simply take a local train to the express station and change trains. The nice thing is that this means that the local service is usually empty, which provides a way for families and the elderly to use transit without being burdened with a full train.
If Toronto extends line 1 north to Richmond Hill, it will need some form of express running since nobody south of Shepherd will be able to get on a rush hour train going south! But adding passing trackage along the existing line/tunnel would be a major rebuild.
This is the very reason the Ontario Line should be extended much further north, because much of that demand is actually coming from east of Line 1, as well as from Markham. The Ontario Line should be extended at least up to Victoria Park and Steeles (up Don Mills through Finch, where Seneca College has a very large campus; then over Hwy 404 and through the hydro corridor to Victoria Park; and then up to Steeles.
This is a much better solution to capacity problems on Line 1 and provides greater coverage. A station at Victoria Park and Steeles also gives close GO bus access to Hwy 404 and would benefit many communities north all the way up to East Gwillimbury.
Well, that’s sort of what I propose in the video
@@pauly5418 Ah, but that's the east. Everyone knows we're poor and don't matter.
Thanks for this video on Express Service. I really think this would benefit the Yonge line.
Absolutely. You need to build in as much redundancy as possible. You want people to be able to depend upon your service. If there are too many problems that could have been easily solved with extra tracks but instead end up thinking the system is unreliable because of problems then you will lose them as customers
Not one mention of the SEPTA Broad Street Line in Philadelphia which has 4 tracks with express service from Olney to Walnut-Locust St… and on game days, express trains on the express tracks extend further past Walnut-Locust to the stadiums
Just make sure the light on the front of the train isn’t yellow, or you are on the spur that ends in Chinatown
And the market Frankfort has skip stop service (A/B service)
The el went local only during the pandemic, but still provides express style service where it runs along the subway surface trolleys with the trolleys serving local stops.
LA needs express tracks since it’s spread out and sometimes cars beat the trains when traffic is normal or little (especially during holidays).
There’s very few trips where cars don’t beat trains in LA (even with traffic) unless the start and end are literally at one of the subway (not light rail) stations.
Another nice example for express trains is the Tōbu Tōjō Line in Tokyo, going from Ikebukoro outwards. It has over six (!) types of service - Wikipedia has an OK-ish overview. Find a nicer map via google picture search.
Roughly, there is a local train that stops everywhere, and the express train that only stops at a few larger stations. But, and that is what I like especially, is the train that skips a whole lot of stations and THEN stops at every station. Ideal for picking up commuters and bringing them to the center quickly.
Sounds like how express buses work in my country i.e. running local in 2 suburbs before travelling express to downtown, though during peak hours a single service may be split into 2, 1 for each suburb before going express to downtown. Thus commuters who board in the more outlying suburb can travel express to downtown without having to travel local thru the inner suburb 1st
The city I live, Philadelphia, has a 4-track express subway setup (called B1 to B4 now, prior known as the Broad Street Subway) as it was built when developers thought the city will continue growing at the rates it was int he 1st half of the 20th Century. It's great to use the express if it's going where you are. We have another subway line called the L (formerly Market-Frankford Elevated Line) which is only 2-track and used to do skip-stop service with an A/B/Local pattern where some stations would be bypassed at rush-hour.
People care about travel time - and from that perspective - the new Ontario line - will be in effect the express service for those approaching Yonge from the east. The issue with it, is that it really should be extended as far as Sheppard to maximize the benefit. Also permit - any bus based express services that could be built into the 404 - where there is space for dedicated lanes.
The whole point of center express tracks is to provide customers a faster trip for farther stations, not just to run point-to-point on them. Also, single center express tracks do NOT increase capacity on the line, unlike conventional double express tracks. The capacity is how many trains can run safely apart from each other and all turn around at the terminus. As for the express track, say all trains within that capacity are local, take some of those and have them run express. Because in the other direction, they must run local. Also, as mentioned in the beginning, express tracks are supposed to provide faster trips to farther stations. They can only stop at express stations and must bypass all local stations regardless of their ridership. This means that if there’s a local station with higher ridership than the express stations, they would have lower train frequencies and may cause problems during rush hour. On the Flushing Line, for example, 74th St-Broadway is a local station with much higher ridership than the express stations due to it being a transfer station and Mets-Willets Pt is an express station with much lower ridership than the local stations. However, the terminus, Flushing-Main St has very high ridership so there’s express service anyway despite the contrasting ridership and station types above, since the advantages mostly outweigh the disadvantages.
Thank you from Roger Sexton for an extremely well presented and well reasoned video. One point regarding the Elizabeth Line. When I visited the line for the first time on November 9th I was amazed to discover that some of the trains running west of Paddington miss out some less important stations such as Acton Main Line and Iver. THIS IMPORTANT FACT IS NOT SHOWN ON MAPS of the Elizabeth Line. I only found out from the on board announcements! This is frankly disgraceful. Where 'metro' type trains run express or skip stop, that must be made clear on maps both off and on the train. It must also be made clear on station platform indicators.
My City Mumbai has Suburban Trains (EMUs), also there are Loco based long-distance trains, also new metro lines are being built.
Suburban lines (3 corridors + few branch lines) are often 4track, where two tracks are slow trains, stopping at all stations, while other two tracks are fast tracks (shared with outstation trains) and they stop at specific stations where the passengers alight to get into slow trains for stops which are skipped by fast trains.
it would have been more efficient if the fast trains were in inner pair of tracks while slow trains were on the outer pair but that causes problems during turnaround
so setup is , one slow down, two slow up, three fast one down, four fast up.
this does mean that passengers have to cross over platforms to go from slow to fast and viceversa
"elevated in the suburbs"
Inner Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx is the suburbs now?
Most of it was suburban when the lines were built. Not car dependent suburbs(hadn't been invented yet) but very distinctly suburban. Most of Manhattan was suburban too at the time. It wasn't really until GCT and the commercialization of midtown that people began to see anything other than the financial district as part of the urban core of the city. Nowadays much of the Brooklyn/Queens east river areas can be considered "downtown" neighborhoods. But back then the only areas that weren't really suburban were the city hall area in downtown Brooklyn and the court square area in Long Island City
@@mmhoss sure, some of it was even exurban when it was built, places where rich people had weekend homes. It's not an accurate description any more though.
They certainly were when the lines were built!
@@RMTransit but it's 2022 and they've been part of NYC for >100 years
@@RMTransit when the lines were built, many of even the buried lines ran out past even the suburbs. Building into much of the outer and even inner boroughs were almost speculative development in the early 1900s. The development followed the train, not the other way around. Hell, Brooklyn only became officially part of NYC in 1898, it wasn't even really economically integrated with Manhattan when the subway came.
when I used to live in croydon south of London there were two routes one from victoria station and one from London Bridge station both had fast and slow lines down for about 20miles both had disused platforms on the fast line this was on the southern railway I Think that the Brighton line was 4 tracks most of the way to Brighton this service also serves in part Clapham junction which is/was the busiest junction in England if not the world
I would love them to do a subway under Geary and 19th Ave in San Francisco, double deck like they have the market street subway, but with more muni stops so that BART can be the express train
This is probably dumb, but your recent video on Barcelona gave me an idea… With all that extra space in a massive single bore tunnel, would it be possible to add in one or two express tracks? You probably would need to build the stations outside the diameter of the tunnel though.
You might need an even bigger tunnel. I think it's a good idea though.
Another thing of the express set up on a subway is that when you have track work on the Express track you can put them on the local track pass the construction site then switch over to the express track after the construction site or go local all the way to the last express track. Time to time this happens in New York City.
Another example where this also happens is in Germany S-Bahn Rhein Ruhr S8 Mönchengladbach Neuss Düsseldorf Wuppertal Steinbeck Hagen Hbf where there is an Express service available for the route the RE4 Wupper Express for the entire Mönchengladbach Neuss Düsseldorf Wuppertal Steinbeck Wuppertal Hbf Hagen Hauptbahnhof Rhein Ruhr Osten route. However you can use the same ticket on the slower S-Bahn & RE4 Wupper Express due to Verkehrsverbund Rhein Ruhr VRR with DB Regio NRW running the route.
Ah yes when I get back to my hometown of Tulsa, OK after a trip to NYC I do often wonder if we should have -express- trains here
I also like Boston's potential for amazing express service! Since every time a subway line heads away from the city it is followed closely by a commuter rail branch if connected with 1 tunnel (North-South rail link, each subway line would have express commuter rail service.
For example, with the north-south rail link, taking an express trip from Braintree to Porter could theoretically be done express by taking any Old Colony train through the central corridor up to Porter Square commuter rail station.)
Or taking an express orange line trip from Forest Hills to Oak Grove could be done by taking any Northeast Corridor line train through the center of the city north to Oak Grove commuter rail station!
The possibilities are endless!
I really wish we could get an express line between the regional centres of population in Singapore - from Woodlands in the north, to somewhere near Jurong in the west, to the city centre, and back out to Tampines in the east. It's probably not financially feasible, but still.
When the MRT averages around 40 km/h and the expressway network 60, it's very hard to convince people not to drive. At least, not without angering drivers.
It would be viable if the externalities of road use were properly factored in.
In South Korea, capital city Seoul has some express train services. Line 9 is the most famous line that has express service. Line 9 has express trains so much! You can take express train within 10 minutes even on weekends. From Gimpo Airport(Local airport for domestic and short distance international airlines) to Gangnam CBD only takes 30 minutes! If you drive to this route, you'll spend more than a hour.
Korail line 1 has express lines but does not operate express service in downtown areas. Line 1 express service only operates in suburban area.
London has express services also operating on the Metropolitan Line
5:00 - The Western Sydney Metro is doing the same thing. It gives a faster ride to Parramatta whilst serving new stations on a new route.
Yes on some lines the metropolitan line non stop to Wembley Park is great Hammersmith to Acton Town on the picc really useful services
That is pretty unusual for London, but, in an alternate universe, the politicians who were reorganising the railways in the 1930s would have made the Metropolitan Railway part of LNER rather than London Transport, and today it would be part of the Overground (or possibly Chiltern Railway) rather than the Underground. Two of the former Metropolitan Railway Lines - Northern City Line and East London Line, have subsequently been turned in to train lines.
@@katrinabrycethis is true on photo shop they done an S8 unit in overground livery it looked cool ,merry Christmas and thank you 🎅🏼
Yep they are!
The other area where express services bring big benefits is if the metro line is relatively long and sprawling, as journey times with all-stations trains get very long. (e.g. Outer London Central/District/Piccadilly lines). A fairly low cost solution is to add extra tracks on the open-air sections where traffic density and required frequency are lower, and have everything stop in the busy central section where everyone wants to go. In London this is apparent on the Metropolitan line and the District/Piccadilly parallel section. Rather than a passing loop, a passing section of 2-3 stations can be more effective. This exists at Northfields but is not exploited. The Piccadilly trains to Heathrow could be speeded up by several minutes by overtaking there, missing the lightly used outer suburban stops and fitting in the gaps between trains on the Uxbridge/Rayners Lane branch. However the Heathrow Express and then Heathrow Connect/Elizabeth Line have been used to provide a high-capacity (though high cost) alternative.
I keep on thinking that the MTA New York City Subway should not only have quad-track service underground, but overground and elevated as well. It is a pity that the NYC subways in the suburb areas, especially those which are overground and elevated, are often triple track with only one express track, meanwhile they should all need two express tracks so express service operate in both directions - one northbound express and one southbound express. This idea would be superior than skip-stop service.
I just like express lines because trains passing at speed are neuron activating.
can you make a video on Atlantas Marta. you made one on bart and now dc, so I feel like doing on Marta could fit in perfectly with them. again great vid
I made you one, but Marta is a lot less notable in my opinion
@@RMTransit true marta isn’t even half as big as wmata or bart. do you know when the marta video will drop?
4:30 Don't forget express-running regional rail like RER A/B and the Elizabeth line!
I mentioned in the video!
portland needs an express train. It takes 90 minutes to get to the airport from beaverton, uber is less than 30 minutes. there are too many stops in portland so commuting in and out of of portland from hillsboro takes over an hours. but in NYC an express train from the bronx to lower manhattan is under 30 minutes and you could never do that in a car so the subway is way faster.
"Should your metro..." Let me stop you right there brother, I am damned to live in a city without a Metro😭
Munichs new S-Bahn tunnel is the only excample I can think of, where you actively retrofit express tracks.
I just got back from Tokyo to my hometown of Montreal and I was wondering about how great it would be to have expresses like in Tokyo here. I was thinking how great it would be to have express métros from Montmorency to Berri-UQAM and Côte-Vertu (terminus to major hub to terminus).
I work in Saint-Laurent and live in the eastern part of the island. It would save me so much time just getting on an express train from Berri to Côte Vertu in a heartbeat
I’m not sure having express services on the orange line in Montreal would really save that much time. A lot of the stations are already 1km or more apart from each other, allowing trains to travel relatively fast between stations. I think building a brand new express line parallel to the eastern portion of the orange line, similar to what Reece proposes for Toronto in this video, could make a lot of sense though. I would maybe have it diverge to serve the Mile End, which is quite dense despite only being served by slow buses.
🤔In Shenzhen, we have express trains operating on Line 14 every hour.
But there are no express tracks on the line.
Since the express cannot bypass the local trains, the spacing needs to be large enough and the speed is limited.
That means a longer waiting time at local stations and a lower capacity.
And we can save few minutes taking the express.
So what is the purpose of the express🤔
I guess technically it could increase capacity on a longer line if the line was quad tracked to the half way point! From there express trains would serve all of the stations from the halfway point while the local trains would serve all the other stations and terminate at the halfway point! However the setup may also make more sense if the line branches off into two branches from the half way point! :)
Stage 1-2 (& part of stage 3) of Singapore MRT's Thomson-E Coast Line (TEL) behaves like an express version of the older North South Line too by taking a more direct route from Woodlands suburb to the downtown Orchard Rd shopping st, instead of detouring via the suburbs of Yishun & Sembawang. Stages 4 & 5 of TEL meanwhile run parallel to the eastern half of East West & Downtown Lines but sadly won't have express service. Many stations en-route are in less densely populated areas, so stopping there ends up wasting the time of more commuters on-board (same issue with the western half of Downtown Line & much of the Circle Line, @ least until Keppel Golf Club & Pasir Panjang container terminal are replaced with housing in 20 yrs time). Looking ahead, there's also an opportunity to raise capacity in the country's west by extending the North South Line from Jurong E to downtown along Ulu Pandan Canal & then along the permanent way vacated by neighbouring Malaysia's KTM railways (which did extend all the way into Singapore's downtown until 2011), to run parallel to the East West Line
I think Line 1 should have express tracks added. The line should loop around and have a stop @ Bay Station. By passing BY, you can reduce congestion. This line should follow under Bay to Union St.
Adding express tracks is very difficult!
@@RMTransit Please check out the new four stations portion of M4 in Milano. I think the Ontario Line will look similar.
Dammit Reece, the outer-boroughs aren't the suburbs. They are still NYC!
The subways stay within city limits
In Toronto, the 1 line is very long and certainly needs express trains to half the time to downtown.
Our cities are too small for express metro, but our train system has express tracks or passing tracks for intercity trains. There could/should be more express tracks for intercity trains though. Our national train grid is too congested for double tracks only. On some busy double tracks there is no more capacity to squeeze in more trains during rush hour. Even on the quadruple tracks there is no more space left for new international trains. The existing European Night Jets arrive just after morning rush hour when the freight trains have their time slots.
I feel like expresss trains have a place on long-run trains. Case in point I used to ride CalTrain from SF > Mtn View and catching the bullet was way nicer than sitting on a slow local... Heck even on BART if there was a way to run an express train to/from the airports it could be a gamexhanger.
The Metro Regional Connector in Los Angeles will open soon. The new Metro A line will be the longest line and it is going to be a tough decision.
With regard to more platforms at Toronto's Union Station...
Currently there is only one (curved) platform for streetcars, at Union Station. The loading area was large enough two traditional sized vehicles, but the Flexity vehicles are twice as long.
The replacement plan is to widen the tunnel, and have two sets of platforms, each with multiple colinear platforms. It is 400 metres from Front to Queens Quay, and, once a passenger walks to the south end of these platforms they might as well have gone to the surface and walked to Queens Quay.
I thought they should have budgeted to place the streetcar platforms under the Line 1 platforms, and eliminate that long walk. Your parallel express line could have its platforms on the same level. You didn't say, but can I assume you planned for all its stations would use Spanish loading, where trains had platforms on both sides, so they can use all doors?
I anticipate this will be a weakness on the Eglinton Crosstown, because those vehicles don't have so many doors. I think every interchange station on the crosstown should have been designed so passengers could enter and exit from all the doors.
@rmtransit, a video about the rapid Expansion of Open-Loop Contactless Travel Payments should cool!
I don't understand how the three track system works. During rush hour, you have more trains going in one direction than in the other. What do you do with those trains once they arrive at their destination? There seems to me to be no way to get them back to where they are needed. If you have each rush hour train make just one trip, then wait for when they are needed going the other way, you need many trains, and a lot of space in the city center to store them during the day.
Maybe the express trains return as local trains.
Reese look how the 6Ave Line express tracks and tunnels were built
Building a new metro line? I would say quad track express for sure. Like Los Angeles SHOULD HAVE done.
Retrofitting an existing metro to add an express? I can see the practical problems with trying to retrofit an existing line.
Aside: The northern part of the MBTA Orange Line has a 3rd track that was supposedly intended for express service, but I have never heard of it actually being used that way, or indeed being used for anything other than running test trains.
In Melbourne, we really need all the inner core quadrupled, with local all stops services 7 days a week, as many of our lines are long.
Normal express running on our line cuts out around 10 minutes on a 55 minute journey, and that would be a major patronage incentive for most lines east of the City, as well as for the (already busy) Werribee and Sunbury lines in the west.
What we need is a real metro. We've got a regional rail service that does a bad job doubling as a metro service. The line arrangement isn't very good ('all roads lead to rome' leads to congestion and bad headways - the loop is at capacity at the moment), and we have an embarrassingly low number of underground track, but another real problem is the actual trains are this awkward compromise between the two design directions. We could probably also cut down on the number of stops out in the suburbs and instead set up parallel trams to shuttle people to the less frequent stations, but our suburbs are also designed very inefficiently.
Would it make sense to have an express line on Lakeshore West to Union from West Harbour and back? Maybe only stopping once in Burlington, Oakville, and Mississauga and skipping the Toronto stations between union?
How have you been getting so many videos out lately?
Please make an explained video on the local transit in Mumbai. The Mumbai Suburban local trains are the backbone of the city's transit and although they are not very modern, they do connect a lot of places and the network is expanding. The Mumbai Metro which has 3 lines currently operational and a total of 14 lines either under construction or planned is actually intended to cater for shorter stop distances with an average of 1 station every kilometre. But no video on suburban transit in Mumbai can be complete without considering the extensive suburban rail network which already exists and which is expanding as well in addition to being modernised. The suburban trains have an average stop distance of a kilometre downtown and distances increase as one moves into the suburbs. It's a very intricate and interesting system which moves people roughly equal to the entire population of Belgium, every single day. And yes , there are multiple express services in the network using a combination of methods.
Toronto definitely needs them
I think when people want express trains, they are really wanting "a train that only stops at my home station and destination, whenever I want to ride it".
It might be noted that Amtrak/NJ Transit has four tracks from NY to Washington.
We just got express tracks on main line of the Long Island Railroad, sure it’s not bad, we need to move trains across Long Island more frequently and efficiently. Though my friend John @Pinepowerli says that’s a ploy to bring more freight traffic down that way.
Yeah, that claim about freight traffic is bullshit.
Sure, that can be a (positive) externality, but it's been made clear time and again that the third track is meant for _passenger_ service, particularly since the older two-track layout with so much peak service made it impossible to have reverse-peak service in any real capacity.
I remember in another video you talked about using bypass lanes at metro stations to get the benefit of express service without a massive cost increase. Do you still think that's a viable option?
I mean, it’s not even a matter of thinking it’s viable or not. It just exists, all over the world. There are capacity limits, though.
0:11 me when I catch my bus transfer at Finch
The Elizabeth line in London is not really a metro line and runs on main line tracks outside London. It also has 25kv AC electric power and the rolling stock is much larger than the tube lines.
imo the silver line should have had stations with passing tracks to enable a dulles airport express, but there wasnt space :(
Which NYC subway with 3 tracks goes to the suburbs of the city?
The NYC subway does not run anywhere outside of the city. Saying “the suburbs” at 0:58 is wrong, i think you meant just outside Manhattan, or the outer boroughs. Cheers
What about a hybrid alternative where train stations have 3 tracks: 2 outer platform tracks and one central one for passing trains? That way you get the cost of a double track system with the ability for trains to pass each other?
When do you sleep?
At night? 😂
When he's dead.
Many Manhattan's IND and BMT "express" trains are local in the outer reaches and express in Manhattan or visa-versa to improve on the issues had on the IRT where the local was meant to simply gather local passengers and dump them at express stations causing crowding on platforms and trains. So for example the F is Local in Manhattan and most times in Brooklyn, but express in queens. The D train is local in Brooklyn and the Bronx but Express in Manhattan. It is about distributing passengers to high volume stations depending on their destination and picking them up at low volume stations depending on their origin, it didnt have much to do with speed. This is the historic definition of what an Express Train does, gather volume from a few small stations then expressly run to one or two major destinations. It allows even distribution of passengers closer to the high volume express destination. Manhattan's platforms are also configured to accommodate this by limiting cross platform transfers to express trains in certain stations. So it is in fact a great advantage for capacity since in places where express trains operate express they are often fully packed when they let out along side the local.
Good point but the D train is actually express in Northern Brooklyn and Manhattan and local in South Brooklyn and the Bronx.
@@EpicThe112 re: D correct, my point being moreover that trains are Express around business cores or high volume stations gather passengers as Locals at low volume stations which is what the D does including DT BK and at the time fast growing N BK. Other's do so in reverse or were planned to do so.