HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 11:23 AM
nito nito is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alon View Post
I've been trying to get ridership statistics for London-area commuter rail. Where did you find them? And do they include all commuter rail ridership in the metro area, or just boardings in Greater London proper?
The Office of Rail Regulation produces a variety of statistics and reports; one report (http://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/display...2-e4981745d08b) provides a 2011-12 figure of 993.8mn for train operating companies operating in and around London (but excluding long distance and other regional operators).

Without a further breakdown, it would be hard to ascertain a weekday number, but probably in the region of 3mn+. The interesting story behind the figures is the increase in ridership despite the mixed economic outlook and year-on-year above inflation fare rises.

Following on from muppet's post, total ridership for 2011-12 as per Transport for London's 2012 Annual Report (http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloa...ort-2012.pdf):
Buses: 2,344mn
Underground: 1,171mn
Overground: 102mn
DLR: 86mn
Tramlink: 28.5mn
__________________
London Transport Thread updated: 2023_07_12 | London Stadium & Arena Thread updated: 2022_03_09
London General Update Thread updated: 2019_04_03 | High Speed 2 updated: 2021_09_24
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 2:33 PM
Minato Ku's Avatar
Minato Ku Minato Ku is offline
Tokyo and Paris fan
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Paris, Montrouge
Posts: 4,168
Paris
Annual rail ridership in 2011
  • Metro: 1,524 million
  • SNCF RER and suburban train: 698 million
  • RATP RER: 469 million
  • Tram: 114 million

http://www.stif.info/IMG/pdf/RA_2011_BD-2.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 2:57 PM
Nexis4Jersey's Avatar
Nexis4Jersey Nexis4Jersey is offline
Greetings from New Jersey
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 3,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Source?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subway-..._Lines_(SEPTA)

120,000 now
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 3:52 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
APTA's most recent ridership report says 95,000 on the average weekday for all SEPTA light rail (which would include the Norristown high speed line in addition to the streetcars).

I clicked through to Nexis' wiki link. I see where it says 120,450 (supposedly not including the Norristown line), however when I click on the citation and go to the actual SEPTA source document for that, the number 120,450 does not appear anywhere in the document. It's 76 pages long and mostly text, so I admit I haven't read all of it, but running a search for that number does not produce any results.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 3:55 PM
Nexis4Jersey's Avatar
Nexis4Jersey Nexis4Jersey is offline
Greetings from New Jersey
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 3,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
APTA's most recent ridership report says 95,000 on the average weekday for all SEPTA light rail (which would include the Norristown high speed line in addition to the streetcars).

I clicked through to Nexus' wiki link. I see where it says 120,450, however when I click on the citation and go to the actual SEPTA source document for that, the number 120,450 does not appear anywhere in the document. It's 76 pages long and mostly text, so I admit I haven't read all of it, but running a search for that number does not produce any results.
Still the highest in the US , its a shame the system isn't shown off more as opposed to Portland which gets all the credit for Modern streetcars or streetcars in general which Philly has almost 10x the ridership and size.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 4:17 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
Still the highest in the US
According to APTA, Philadelphia is 6th in total light rail ridership.

1. Boston: 232,000
2. LA: 200,000
3. SF: 175,000
4. Portland: 130,000
5. San Diego: 96,000
6. Philly: 95,000

Including the NJ RiverLine would be enough to push Philadelphia up to 5th, but definitely not first.

Maybe you could invent some metric that Philadelphia is first for. It could conceivably be first for ridership on streetcars operating in mixed-traffic with cars (although SF is going to be a serious contender as well). But you'd have to subtract all ridership on the Market subway portion, plus the Norristown Line, and probably some other segments, so the number would be much much lower. And of course, Toronto would then blow anything in the US out of the water. It would be a pretty silly distinction.

By the way, the reason Portland gets attention for its streetcar is because it's new. Other cities that hope to build new streetcars can learn much much more from a new one than from any vintage pre-1950 streetcar network.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 4:50 PM
Nexis4Jersey's Avatar
Nexis4Jersey Nexis4Jersey is offline
Greetings from New Jersey
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: North Jersey
Posts: 3,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
According to APTA, Philadelphia is 6th in total light rail ridership.

1. Boston: 232,000
2. LA: 200,000
3. SF: 175,000
4. Portland: 130,000
5. San Diego: 96,000
6. Philly: 95,000

Including the NJ RiverLine would be enough to push Philadelphia up to 5th, but definitely not first.

Maybe you could invent some metric that Philadelphia is first for. It could conceivably be first for ridership on streetcars operating in mixed-traffic with cars. But you'd have to subtract all ridership on the Market subway portion, plus the Norristown Line, and probably some other segments, so the number would be much much lower. And of course, Toronto would then blow anything in the US out of the water. It would be a pretty silly distinction.

By the way, the reason Portland gets attention for its streetcar is because it's new. Other cities that hope to build new streetcars can learn much much more from a new one than from any vintage pre-1950 streetcar network.
I consider Philly and Toronto to be in a separate category from Light Rail....and I thought they were in a separate category. Toronto's Streetcar system is similar to Philly's , so hence why I compared the two systems. I don't really view both systems as primarily Light Rail , there's only 1 or 2 lines that really fall under Light Rail. Its true that both systems do purpose LRT routes but for now most of both systems is Streetcars. I think you can learn more from the past in terms of system design and usage patterns then from the present. Portland is a two faced tale of one being a nice Modern system and the other having numerous problems depending on who you ask. So I honestly don't like the fact that it is poster child for all New Streetcar systems in the US....but then again Philly is not a perfect system either but its a system that works and can be learned from. Same with Toronto , both systems work and service a variety of densities and system design varies as well. Thats just my opinion though....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 4:55 PM
afiggatt afiggatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus View Post
APTA's most recent ridership report says 95,000 on the average weekday for all SEPTA light rail (which would include the Norristown high speed line in addition to the streetcars).

I clicked through to Nexis' wiki link. I see where it says 120,450 (supposedly not including the Norristown line), however when I click on the citation and go to the actual SEPTA source document for that, the number 120,450 does not appear anywhere in the document. It's 76 pages long and mostly text, so I admit I haven't read all of it, but running a search for that number does not produce any results.
The Philadelphia trolley system is listed in the 4th quarter 2011 APTA report as averaging 110.1 thousand weekday passengers in 2011. SEPTA ridership is down in 2012 for both the subway and trolley/light rail categories. The 120,450 figure is likely an older number.

The Boston Green Line has been the busiest light rail system in the US for many years, AFAIK.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 6:54 PM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey View Post
I consider Philly and Toronto to be in a separate category from Light Rail
Philadelphia's trolleys run in a dedicated subway through downtown. A subway. To suggest that on-street light rail in other cities doesn't count because it has its own lane apart from cars, but then ignore Philadelphia's subway, is absurd.

If you want to count only streetcars that run in mixed traffic, you have to subtract *all* ridership in Philadelphia that begins or ends in the subway, as well as all that begins or ends anywhere off-street (including the Norristown line). It would be interesting to see those numbers, but you haven't presented them. You've claimed Philadelphia's full light rail ridership and then exaggerated it even further.

This is why we never trust your numbers.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads

Last edited by Cirrus; Feb 6, 2013 at 10:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 10:52 PM
Alon Alon is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 219
Philadelphia, Boston, and San Francisco have subway-surface systems: fast and frequent in the center, on-street and slower outside. Frankfurt and Cologne are the same. Tel Aviv is building its subway line on the same principle, but without the branching of the other cities; instead, there are turnback and yard access facilities at both portals of the central subway segment, to allow higher frequency in the subway than can be accommodated on-street.

Los Angeles, Portland, Calgary, etc. have the opposite concept: their light rail lines run in fast dedicated ROWs with long interstations outside the center but slow down in the center.

Toronto has a legacy streetcar system that's slow everywhere. It has high ridership because even a legacy streetcar has better ride quality than the most modern bus.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 11:50 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alon View Post
Philadelphia, Boston, and San Francisco have subway-surface systems: fast and frequent in the center, on-street and slower outside. Frankfurt and Cologne are the same.
Pittsburgh also has a surface light rail system that goes underneath the downtown area.

Quote:
Los Angeles, Portland, Calgary, etc. have the opposite concept: their light rail lines run in fast dedicated ROWs with long interstations outside the center but slow down in the center.
Buffalo's light rail line is similarly situated: it runs on the surface downtown but goes underground in the neighborhoods.

Nexis: you are free to 'consider' light rail in whatever way you prefer, and cherry-pick old figures because they are higher than the newest available, but I am not alone in rejecting your personal approach to these matters.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Feb 6, 2013, 11:50 PM
tayser's Avatar
tayser tayser is offline
Vires acquirit eundo
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 3,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alon View Post
Toronto has a legacy streetcar system that's slow everywhere. It has high ridership because even a legacy streetcar has better ride quality than the most modern bus.

"Legacy" streetcar system?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you all over-classify everything to the extreme.

It also highlights the absurdity of words "subway" and "underground" to refer to what they essentially are: high frequency rapid transit regardless of whether a train's weight is "light" or "heavy".

The frenchies got it right when they stole the name for Paris' Metro from the Metropolitan Line of the London underground - it doesn't give the impression that a line is light, heavy, underground, on the surface or elevated, the name just refers to what the service is: high frequency and high capacity rail lines.

There's some justification for clearly delineating between lower frequency services and higher because they generally perform two functions (one transports people over greater differences, but even then, frequencies can be very high, hence the "Some justification").

But no, go on, these North American city rail pissing contests get quite funny after a while!

[end rant]
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 12:07 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by tayser View Post
It also highlights the absurdity of words "subway" and "underground" to refer to what they essentially are: high frequency rapid transit regardless of whether a train's weight is "light" or "heavy".
The difference in capacity between light rail and heavy rail are really why we rightly distinguish between the two.

Consider: underneath downtown San Francisco, there are two transit tunnel systems--the Muni Metro tunnels at ground level minus one, and BART tunnels at minus two. They run at similar frequencies during rush hours, but a crush-loaded 10-car BART metro train can carry 2,000 passengers while a crush-loaded 2-car Muni LRV can carry only about 335 passeners. Muni cannot run longer trains because they cannot negotiate the surface streets; because BART has a third rail, it is entirely separated from all other modes and can run long consists. Both systems regularly see crush loading at rush hours, but only one of those systems can carry many hundreds of thousands of riders each day. In light of this, the distinction between light and heavy rail is not meaningless, nor is it merely a regional pissing match.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 1:49 AM
TheBigGeo08 TheBigGeo08 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 36
To all those naysayers, Philly's light rail and trolley system demolishes Portland's and yet Portland is used as a model.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 2:22 AM
BIMBAM's Avatar
BIMBAM BIMBAM is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 545
I split my time between two Canadian cities, Montreal and Vancouver.

MONTREAL

I have numbers for average weekday ridership, but not numbers that take weekends into account, for what that's worth. These are 2011 numbers from the American Public Transit Association

Commuter Rail is: 70,900/day
Metro: 1,111,700/day
Bus: 1,403,700/day

VANCOUVER

Weekday average =

Commuter rail: 11,100/day
Skytrain: 406,300/day
Buses: 774,500/day

Don't put too much comparitive stock into the bus numbers, the Vancouver numbers are for Translink which runs transit most places in metro Vancouver (some exceptions), whereas the bus numbers in Montreal are just for the STM which runs things on the island of Montreal (population 1.9 million), and suburbs like Laval and Longeuil have their own bus systems (total metro is 4 million). The Metro extends under rivers into Laval and Longeuil so their systems feed it at those ends.

One other bit of trivia, Vancouver is home to the continents' busiest bus route. The 99B line comes every 2 minutes and carrys 55,000 passengers average on weekdays. Freaking brutal, constantly passing people up at peak times, same for any and all parallel routes, even on other streets. We need a subways to replace it badly.

Last edited by BIMBAM; Feb 7, 2013 at 2:59 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 2:29 AM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheBigGeo08 View Post
To all those naysayers, Philly's light rail and trolley system demolishes Portland's
Statistics disagree.

Portland: 130,000 daily light rail riders.
Philly: 95,000 daily light rail riders.

Now if you want to say that Philly's overall transit system is better, then yes. Clearly when you combine the subway lines and regional rail lines, Philly has a lot that Portland doesn't. But at the light rail level alone it is objectively wrong to say Philadelphia "demolishes" Portland.
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 2:46 AM
TheBigGeo08 TheBigGeo08 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 36
The 95,000 is only for trolleys and suburban lines. Add SEPTA's subway lines (340,000); PATCO (36,000); River Line and Atlantic City Line (16,000); Regional Rail(120,000):

Philly's total is around 610,000. Compare that to Portland's 140,000 (w/streetcar and commuter rail)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 5:32 AM
Cirrus's Avatar
Cirrus Cirrus is offline
cities|transit|croissants
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 18,344
Isn't that what I just said?
__________________
writing | twitter | flickr | instagram | ssp photo threads
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 6:19 AM
mrnyc mrnyc is offline
cle/west village/shaolin
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 11,589
cleveland reporting in.
well not really rta had no Q3 weekday info,
these are older ballpark numbers just for fun:

heavy rail: 26,500
light rail: 12,400
healthline brt: 14,367
^no, not rail but anyway


according to this jan 2013 blurb, ridership took quite a jump up from 2011-12:

RTA ridership overall rose from 46.2 million in 2011 to 48.2 million rides last year. Ridership on the system's Red Line rapid transit trains, which runs from East Cleveland to Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, recorded the biggest jump in ridership at 9.3 percent, or about 500,000 more rides.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index...dership_b.html


Quote:
Originally Posted by BIMBAM View Post

One other bit of trivia, Vancouver is home to the continents' busiest bus route. The 99B line comes every 2 minutes and carrys 55,000 passengers average on weekdays. Freaking brutal, constantly passing people up at peak times, same for any and all parallel routes, even on other streets. We need a subways to replace it badly.

mmm, not so fast there:

nyc mta
M15Lcl/SBS
weekday 2007-2011
57,582 56,490 53,073 51,461 55,528

^of course, this is the manhattan 2nd ave bus, so when the 2nd ave subway is finished...dont hold your breadth lol...but eventually those numbers will drop off quite a bit as sections of that subway open.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Feb 7, 2013, 6:51 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is online now
Volatile Pacivist
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 9,003
Quote:
Originally Posted by BIMBAM View Post
One other bit of trivia, Vancouver is home to the continents' busiest bus route. The 99B line comes every 2 minutes and carrys 55,000 passengers average on weekdays. Freaking brutal, constantly passing people up at peak times, same for any and all parallel routes, even on other streets. We need a subways to replace it badly.
So... any idea when they're going to build a Skytrain to UBC? Greater Vancouver has already proven it isn't shy about extending the system considering its rapid transit network is already as long as the Montreal Metro or Toronto Subway.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:28 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.