If they were to rate architecture and general impressiveness of
appearance - then Moscow Metro would probably win. But as a transport
service it certainly lags behind.

"Alex" wrote in message
...
If they were to rate architecture and general impressiveness of
appearance - then Moscow Metro would probably win. But as a transport
service it certainly lags behind.

Pyongyang is also pretty good in architecture and general impressiveness.
But it's a shame the only pictures we ever see are from just two stations,
so it might be hard to say.

In message
,
Alex writes
If they were to rate architecture and general impressiveness of
appearance - then Moscow Metro would probably win. But as a transport
service it certainly lags behind.
I found the Moscow Metro a curious setup, the trains seemed old but all
had rheostatic braking, and I didn't like the juice rail right under the
platform instead of furthest away. Paris has stations too close together
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like
Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.
New York, (where every car is both a power car and driving car) can be
confusing and has a habit of missing stations unless you're very
careful, I've had to walk back the full length of Central Park before
now. Outside of London I would vote BART as the best of the lot
especially as the trains do 75mph in the tunnels, more than double all
the rest. But for good coverage and a reasonably reliable service I
would vote for London.
--
Clive

On Tue, 28 Apr 2009 16:42:41 +0100
Clive wrote:
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like

I find that rubber tyred stock has a nasty bouncy characteristic when
going fast.

Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.

Sounds like the central line. The current crop of ATO systems seem pretty
braindead.

B2003

Clive wrote on 28 April 2009 16:42:41 ...
In message
,
Alex writes
If they were to rate architecture and general impressiveness of
appearance - then Moscow Metro would probably win. But as a transport
service it certainly lags behind.

I found the Moscow Metro a curious setup, the trains seemed old but all
had rheostatic braking, and I didn't like the juice rail right under the
platform instead of furthest away. Paris has stations too close together
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like
Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.

In my experience the acceleration/deceleration of the rubber-tyred
trains is no worse than the Central Line, and your description of
arriving at Les Halles (it's Line 4 by the way) sounds just like the
Victoria Line.

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

"Richard J." wrote in message
m...
Clive wrote on 28 April 2009 16:42:41 ...
In message
, Alex
writes
If they were to rate architecture and general impressiveness of
appearance - then Moscow Metro would probably win. But as a transport
service it certainly lags behind.

I found the Moscow Metro a curious setup, the trains seemed old but all
had rheostatic braking, and I didn't like the juice rail right under the
platform instead of furthest away. Paris has stations too close together
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like
Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.

In my experience the acceleration/deceleration of the rubber-tyred trains
is no worse than the Central Line, and your description of arriving at Les
Halles (it's Line 4 by the way) sounds just like the Victoria Line.

--
A bit OT, I think, but how often are often are Paris Metro drivers required
to manually operate their trains? I think that the whole system is on ATO.
Line 14 certainly is.

wrote on 29 April 2009 12:26:51 ...
"Richard J." wrote in message
m...
Clive wrote on 28 April 2009 16:42:41 ...

[snip] ........ Paris has stations too close together
and their rubber tyre stock can throw you off balance when braking, like
Ligne 1 at Les Halles, the train brakes, enters the station then
accelerates then brakes suddenly to a halt.

In my experience the acceleration/deceleration of the rubber-tyred trains
is no worse than the Central Line, and your description of arriving at Les
Halles (it's Line 4 by the way) sounds just like the Victoria Line.

A bit OT, I think, but how often are often are Paris Metro drivers required
to manually operate their trains?

Whenever the (timetabled) service interval is more than 4 minutes. They
can optionally drive manually if the intervals are between 2 and 4
minutes, but my impression is that few do so.

I think that the whole system is on ATO.

More or less. Lines 1-9, 11-13 were converted to ATO (using existing
trains) between 1967 and 1979. Trains on lines 10, 3bis and 7bis are
driven manually.

Line 14 certainly is.

Line 14 is computer-controlled ATO, monitored remotely. There are no
drivers or other on-board staff at all.

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

"Richard J." wrote in message
om...

Whenever the (timetabled) service interval is more than 4 minutes. They
can optionally drive manually if the intervals are between 2 and 4
minutes, but my impression is that few do so.

But there is no set time when they are required to manually operate their
trains to stay in practice, as is reportedly the case in Vienna?

More or less. Lines 1-9, 11-13 were converted to ATO (using existing
trains) between 1967 and 1979. Trains on lines 10, 3bis and 7bis are
driven manually.

Not all lines use rubber-tyred wheels either.

Line 14 is computer-controlled ATO, monitored remotely. There are no
drivers or other on-board staff at all.

Oh yes, I know. I've been on it a couple of times -- good speed between
Châtelet and Gare de Lyon.

What is the average speed on the Paris Metro anyway? It can't be very high.

In message ,
writes

What is the average speed on the Paris Metro anyway? It can't be very high.

Considerably lower than London (although "average" is a poorly defined
term in this context).

Line 14's average of 40 km/h was claimed to be twice the speed of the
rest of the Paris metro. I believe LU has an average of 33 km/h over the
whole system - although this includes non-stop runs over quite long
lengths of the Met and Piccadilly.
--
Paul Terry

wrote on 29 April 2009 19:01:49 ...
"Richard J." wrote in message
om...

Whenever the (timetabled) service interval is more than 4 minutes. They
can optionally drive manually if the intervals are between 2 and 4
minutes, but my impression is that few do so.

But there is no set time when they are required to manually operate their
trains to stay in practice, as is reportedly the case in Vienna?

As I said earlier, it's when the trains are timetabled to run more than
4 minutes apart, which in practice means in the evenings, and perhaps at
other times in summer when the service is less frequent. [Info from
Brian Hardy's Paris Metro Handbook, 3rd edition]

--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)