What the Heck is an LRT?

This video is sponsored by Rocketman. Check out the Rocketman app for free for both Android and iOS here: rocketmanapp.o...
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!
FTC Disclosure: This video is sponsored by Rocketman. All content presented is my own. There may be affiliate links, meaning I receive a small commission from purchases - feel free to use your own links! These are my 100% honest opinions.
=ATTRIBUTION=
Epidemic Sound (Affiliate Link): www.epidemicso...
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreet...
=PATREON & KZbin MEMBERSHIPS=
If you'd like to help me make more videos & get exclusive behind the scenes access and early video releases, consider supporting my Patreon or right here on KZbin! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
KZbin Memberships: / @rmtransit
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: reecemartin.ca
GitHub: github.com/ree...
=ABOUT ME=
Hi, my name's Reece. I'm a passionate Creator, Transportation Planner, and Software Developer, interested in rapid transportation all around my home base of Toronto, Canada, as well as the whole world!

[@RMTransit]

What other transit modes need better definitions?

[@tsguy-h3q]

What counts as Transit needs better definition in some places.

[@urbanfile3861]

What about people movers? A vague definition for a bunch of different things

[@billythorne]

stadtbahns! you mentioned them but they are abused as well.

[@alexjenkins1079]

BRT, imho, even with the ITDP's BRT Standard, especially in the border between BRT and Rapid buses with Queue Jumper lanes, etc.

[@RMTransit]

@@urbanfile3861 that’s a good point, I did a video on them too!

[@vovacat1797]

I am pretty sure that rail transit is a continuum. You have street car trams, light rail, light metro, actual (subway/underground) metro, regional trains and then long range intercity trains... And I am pretty sure you can find everything in between, if you look for it. Like, the city of Volgograd has a tram line that has 6 stations of actual soviet-style underground metro. And it's just a tram for the rest of the line, though it is more grade-separated than the rest of the trams in the city. And I love the trams in Volgograd. Even though they are old, you can actully comfortably go places with them.

[@chrismckellar9350]

There are two rail systems being light and heavy rail. Light rail system whether it is street, street/dedicated right of way or dedicated right of way (above or below ground) only is built to light rail specifications using light rail designed vehicles and heavy rail which predominantly above or below ground dedicated right of right is built to heavy rail specifications using heavy rail designed vehicles/rolling stock.

[@Mike-ukr]

Volgograd is light metro

[@vovacat1797]

@@Mike-ukr Oh well, maybe. But when you're standing on a soviet-style underground station, a freaking Tatra T3 tram is the last thing you're expecting to appear out of the tunnel. Granted, now the line is mostly not T3's anymore, but for the longest time it was just them, and some are still running on it, and the rest of Volgograd's tram system is mostly just T3's. I am utterly surprised by how amazingly resilient these little 50-year-old machines are. And in Volgograd they are kept in a rather well condition, as opposed to some other tram systems in Russia. And I must admit, I absolutely love them.

[@TheEpicAppleEater01]

Then there is Karlsruhe, Germany which has "S-Bahn" trains on the streets of the city that also drive out into the suburbs on heavy rail track. It's a commuter train that looks like a tram.

[@chrismckellar9350]

@@TheEpicAppleEater01 - They are called train-trams like the Alstom Regio-Citadis that are built to heavy rail specifications allowing operation on light rail and heavy rail tracks.

[@ruejr]

Oh yes the Manila LRT. The not-LRT LRT line actually has higher capacity trains than the line called MRT. But what do you expect from the city that plans to name its central station as the woefully long Unified Grand Central Station.

[@ianhomerpura8937]

HAHAHAHAHAHA. It's really weird how they suck at naming the lines here and changing the colors way too often, for purely political reasons.

[@RMTransit]

It is never going to get old!

[@robertcartwright4374]

Perhaps one day, somewhere, we will rejoice in an Amalgamated Unified Grand Central Station? In my town we suffer from bland, unspecific naming; there's a sports arena called "B.C. Place", and a planned central business district called "Surrey City Centre".

[@kornkernel2232]

Ah yes, because at that time DOTC doesn't seem to understand it either. What's I'm sad about is this instill misinformation to the populace, and now people refer to any metro systen being LRT and MRT being interchange so often, it's bad for us. Transit planners don't help either. I read somewhere in the forums that misnamed LRT Line 2 was originally referred to MRT Line 2 in its early stages during the planning, and it is funded by JICA, which is Japanese who knows rail. But because it landed to LRTA, a transit agency originally formed to oversee systems like the LRT Line 1 during the 80`s, now will operate heavy metro. It is called LRT because it is operated by LRTA, stupid isn't it? If the reason is true. About the new tacky name of the station "Unified Grand Central Station". Yes I agree and I always cringe hard hearing and reading that. It is just a normal interchange with 3 lines, 4 if you include the Line 9 which is the Subway and technically should be called MRT Line 9, but the government don't call it. The station name is nothing but propaganda tackiness. It's not even that big or an architectural marvel to consider calling it "grand" and the name doesn't tell its locale, for foreign and non-locals, that station name don't make any sense. They should just called it North Avenue, because it is located at the intersection of North Avenue. Practical, easy, simple. I hate even more that people even defending its name, some even degraded into political or questioning your nationalism. I wish there will be more public shaming against that name, not to discredit the other good works of DOTR and the station function, which is crucial interchange. But they should stop with any tackiness with the transport system.

[@chrismckellar9350]

There are two rail systems being light and heavy rail. Light rail system whether it is street, street/dedicated right of way or dedicated right of way (above or below ground) only is built to light rail specifications using light rail designed vehicles and heavy rail which predominantly above or below ground dedicated right of right is built to heavy rail specifications using heavy rail designed vehicles/rolling stock.

[@lillywho]

Actually, it stands for Licorish Rotary Transport. Basically, a helicopter made of that candy.

[@RMTransit]

A form of transit I’d never oppose

[@robertcartwright4374]

How delicious! A bon bon for us transit interested types.

[@1224chrisng]

@@robertcartwright4374 it's the bon bahn

[@robertcartwright4374]

@@1224chrisngBut banned in Singapore.

[@warbler4954]

HELIKOPTER HELIKOPTER

[@jack2453]

It shouldn't matter. The ingenuity to think outside standard models is the reason we have RERs like Paris and Sydney, German Tram-trains and a continuum of light rail schemes from trams to pre-metros to Stadtbahns to light metros. It is however annoying when polititions label any suburban rail upgrade a 'metro' and any new bus line a 'BRT'.

[@mark123655]

There is definitely a political (or brand new thing) element to naming.. In Sydney in the 00s we got Metro Buses which were high frequency articulated buses painted red. These have now mostly disappeared, with route numbers reverting to three digits and buses to standard colouring although we do have the new double deck BLine to the Northern Beaches with bright Yellow buses, and some remaining T-Ways. The new Sydney Metro I think is far more apt as being described as a suburban system in reach (or Sydney Trains 2.0). The forthcoming Brisbane Metro, is really just a BRT using bi-articulated buses and more of an expansion and upgrade to it's existing Busway network. In Malaysia Kuala Lumpur, you have about every definition under the sun, with the main difference between the LRT and MRT lines being age and length of the train.

[@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042]

There is so many exceptions to any definition you create, that it might as well be that there are no definitions at all. I have tried making a sort of sliding scale that can categorise public transport, but the problem is none of it actually fits onto a scale, it ends up being like a public transport tree with branches on one end and roots on the other, and the centre section isn't a single truck but a bunch of complicated lines. Any sliding scale you try and create is going to end up looking like a Tokyo rail map - which isn't helpful. The benefit of having so many exceptions to the rule is that no matter what you think a transport route should look like, chances are there is a system somewhere in the world that is a close match - so rather than saying "BRT" "LRT" or "Metro", you can just say, "we should build this transport line like X line in X city." I live in Australia and although the Adelaide rail system and the Sydney rail system would both be categorised under practically the same standards, I don't think it does justice to how different the systems actually are and how different they are like to travel on. And the differences to are too subtle to even properly describe so I doubt anyone could make a useful categorisation. Generalising and categorising things have rules: 1. It needs to make it easier to understand and describe. 2. It can't be so general that it ignores relevant nuance. And given that "relevant nuance" is the name of the game when it comes to the differences between, and the importance of different transport options, I think just as a general rule, there are no definitions or categories that can ever actually help, they can only serve to make it worse.

[@robertcartwright4374]

@@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042 Kudos for trying!

[@nee__8132]

Here in Belgium, we had something we called vicinal tramway, they were a system of narrow-gauge tramways or local railways and covered the whole country, including the countryside. They carried considerable quantities of freight, especially agricultural produce as well as, of course, passengers. They gradually switched to buses and dismantled the tram tracks later on.

[@danielb2286]

In the US we called them “interurbans” which linked outlying towns to major cities…but they were all dismantled in favor of cars/trucks too. It’s criminal so many places here had better public transport around the time penicillin was being discovered than they do today!

[@chrismckellar9350]

@@danielb2286 - It is called a light urban/rural rail system built to light specifications.

[@ashleyhamman]

@@danielb2286 The interurbans really seem like a glimpse into a future that we didn't get. While this video and channel focus on passenger rail, the fact that inteurbans were able to service both freight and passenger on primarily electrified network both in cities and to rural areas sounds like a pipe dream of transit fans today.

[@Thomas-gs8ug]

we should dismantle TEC, STIB and DE LIJN and recreate the SNCV with tram-trains in my opinion

[@wwbaker3]

Doesn't help that "Metro" as a term is generally thrown around to classify/brand a transit system. Example being King County Metro, which is primarily a bus network that serves Seattle, Bellevue and other cities in King County - it has nothing to do with capacity or mode of transport. When people in Seattle say, "ride the metro" it doesn't refer to anything other than the busses.

[@ajwasthere]

Metro is just a really awful name. To a normal person metro transportation it basically like saying metropolitan transportation it’s just terrible and a better name should be used.

[@5plus9equals7]

I don't think anyone here in Seattle calls it "metro". We just say we're taking the bus. I always thought metro = city

[@dani-zm9mx]

in indonesia theres three type of urban rail transport 1. KRL/CL: commuter train (rail on the ground and sometimes overground) 2. LRT: smaller version of metro/MRT (rail on overground) 3. MRT: same with metro in other countries, bigger version of LRT (rail on overground and underground)

[@arsyapermana1]

ironically, the LRT track use standard-gauge, which in fact wider than KRL and MRT narrow cape-gauge.

[@asantaraliner]

@@arsyapermana1 Maybe because using the name "Metro Ringan" is not great and the term "Mini Metro" is a problem since there is a bus called "Metro Mini". The term Light Metro is difficult since different countries speaks different languages.

[@widodoakrom3938]

​@@arsyapermana1as far as I know LRT use R30 light rails

[@muhrizqiardi]

Also, KRL/Commuter Line is mixed with long distance train

[@dominicarceo9637]

Fun fact: Manila LRT 2 called an LRT since it is managed by Light Rail Transit Authority despite it is a heavy rail metro.

[@burdizdawurd1516Official]

My degree in English tells me that creating terms we can all agree upon globally won't be easy. That's not because we all speak different languages, but because our cultural and social understands of transportation differ. If I said the MBTA and GO are both heavy rail commuter railroads, that's something we can all agree upon be they're on the same continent. But the NYMTA subway lines and TFL Underground lines are all differently built because of geography and history. Even the BMT and IND are different in ways! That's why I like the analysis about shared bogies. We can distinguish different modes of transit by how they look. Ask questions like how high is the boarding level? How long is the route? How many routes? What do stations look like? What are the service patterns and schedules? Type of coupler can also say something about a service too. If I put up some pictures of a vehicle, it's route, and the stations, that's what we need to form definitions. Unfortunately there aren't clear, exclusive categories. As for bogies, you forget that high speed trainsets also have shared bogies in some cases (R.I.P Talgo VI) which means you need to specify more factors to distinguish trams from big zoom zooms.

[@AaronSmith-sx4ez]

Terminology is important because often proposed expansions/new lines will be politically labeled with implied meaning (subway, light rail, metro, etc) that not everybody can agree on. Voters might want a proper metro system but get conned with a slow street car because they didn't understand definitions. This happens with many American cities...like Milwaukee which recently wasted federal transit money on a slow street car/glorified bus "The Hop" that should have been spend on a proper metro. To me the best term for proper metro is "rapid transit". You should be able to load/unload in a hurry and the line should be COMPLETELY grade separated. Suburban rail is a tough definition. In DC, that is kind of a hybrid metro/suburban rail network. The outer stations tend to have large parking lots/garages and less frequent service while the inner stations tend to have more frequent service, station density, and less car dependent. IMO a good suburban rail definition would be if more than 50% of station passengers came from a car. Metro is a confusing term, because many American cities use it to describe their bus network, while subway is obviously one of the most confusing terms out there. I think this was an important video for the transit community to raise awareness of the issue!

[@RMTransit]

I absolutely think coming up with standardized terminology is critical for just the reason you say

[@IBeforeAExceptAfterK]

The term subway is confusing because people don't know whether you're talking about an underground rail service or a sandwich shop.

[@NiharThakkar]

A "subway" in India refers to an underground pedestrian crossing, typically located at busy junctions.

[@jamesrobinson1022]

Detroit with the Q-Line. Of course they messed up their transit decades ago with their biggest miss was turning down a subway proposal in 1919 by one vote and ending its streetcar/ trolley bus service in 1956. The people mover was supposed to be bigger than what it is.

[@appa609]

Rapid transit is a stupid meaningless term. A car on a highway is rapid transit. An airplane is rapider transit Subway is pretty good. Too bad it's confused for the sandwich shop. Underground Rail is slightly too long. Metro is fucking terrible. The Chinese term is descriptive and short. 地铁 is literally Ground Iron, short for (under)ground iron(road) [rail]

[@offichannelnurnberg5894]

3:23 It's actually literally "Regionalbahn". It's so simple, -bahn is more like a suffix than a word in German. If it's high above street level, it's a "Hochbahn", if it runs in the City it's a "Stadtbahn", if it's suspended it's a "Schwebebahn", if it runs on one track it is an "Einschienenbahn" if you encounter ghosts on the ride it's a "Geisterbahn" And if it's meant for cars it is the "Autobahn". Gernans really depend on -bahns but they tend to mix up the terms, calling trams S-Bahn and Stadtbahns either Tram or U-Bahn.

[@momo1435]

Kobe in Japan revealed today that they are considering building an LRT, as in modern urban tram, in the center of the city between JR Sannomiya Station, the harbor area and JR Kobe Station. This is in line with the use of the term LRT in Japan, which is used when a new tram service is created. It's for a new services, like the Utsunomiya LRT which is currently under construction. If it's a similar line as an extension of a existing tram network it just remains a tram.

[@dda40x]

I keep going back and forth on whether one should make a distinction between RER and S-Bahn, or consider RER the french translation of S-Bahn. There's an awful lot of overlap and shared concepts between the two things, and most differences seem to be historic accidents (e.g. that Berlin has some local-only lines with the Ringbahn, or that Berlin uses smaller rolling stock that's incompatible with the national network because they were trying to save money in the 1920s and 1930s), but there's no denying that there are differences. Though the newer S-Bahn systems (the ones that deserve the name anyway) do look more similar to the french RER.

[@lordsleepyhead]

The Berlin S-Bahn is a bit of a strange one in Germany, because it uses metro-style trains that operate with a thrid rail and runs high frequency with the stops relatively close together, whereas in other German cities the S-Bahns use trains that more resemble DB Regio style trains with overhead wires that run on track shared with regional and intercity trains.

[@gentuxable]

I would say RER is the french translation of S-Bahn because the S-Bahn in the canton of Vaud is called "RER Vaud". Many lines were simply "Regio" before.

[@unlapras9365]

@@lordsleepyhead German S-Bahns are mostly similar to Paris's RER. Berlin is particular because it's actually a suburban metro running on separated tracks. RER A in Paris can also be considered a suburban metro though, as it runs on dedicated tracks all the way except for one branch.

[@Thomas-gs8ug]

In Belgium, we have RER around our biggest cities on which mostly "S-trains" ride. These are light trains that are meant to stop often in the suburbs. we also use S-trains on our main lines where they would stop at every stops while our IC trains will skip them and only connect the main towns and cities. Even before that we had the SNCV which was a kind of old school tram-train that connected every villages together en to their administrative centers. Sadly they have been dismantled for buses that are often completely trash.

[@Nikky705]

Foolish me! For years, I just called everything on rails by another name: "train"

[@henny6772]

btw the regiobahn at 3:15 is actually just a company that runs a s-bahn line in the rhine ruhr area of germany. the rhine ruhr s-bahn network is pretty interesting in general because since this area has a lot of city’s with more than 100.000 inhabitants it serves as a polycentric s-bahn and has some regional train character to it especially with some of the rolling stock but they are still more frequent and have more stops. whats also cool in rhine ruhr is if you want to commute from düsseldorf to cologne for example you can choose between s-bahn, regional and intercity trains . s-bahn for the districts and suburbs between them, regional just for suburbs and multi transfer stations and intercity as an express. would love to see some videos about german s-bahn networks, they all have different purposes and some are just regional train networks called s-bahn because they are better to commercialize,and more videos about german transport systems in general. love your content man salute

[@kiroolioneaver8532]

One of the funniest/most memorable moments from the Sheppard LRT debate in Toronto City Council circa 2011/12 was when then councillor Raymond Cho (born in Korea and in favour of the LRT) told Doug Ford (then a Toronto city councillor) in a self-deprecating joke: "Why (do) you keep calling (LRT) 'streetcar'? You (have an) English language problem like me?" (Funnily enough, Doug would be the campaign manager for Raymond Cho's successful election to provincial politics and would later appoint him to the cabinet when he became premier lol)

[@adm1nspotter]

The Sound Transit Link (Seattle area) that you showed in the video is referred to locally as "light rail". It's got above-ground elevated parts, parts that run in tunnels underground, and it's got parts that run along roads. Seems like the new extensions they're working on (that I've seen anyway) are all above-ground elevated. I wish they would have gone all underground, but I'm sure that's crazy expensive and probably slow to dig compared with building concrete piers and connecting them with concrete spans. They've got huge plans for regional connectivity, which I'm excited about, but of course some of the expansions aren't planned to open until the 2030s.

[@robbanto98]

Streetcar is just the american word for tram. Its the same. You should make a video about Central European cities like Vienna, Prague, and Budapest, how they use extensively tram lines to feed and connect metro lines. (or the 4/6 lines in Budapest having almost the capacity of a metro line)

[@StrassenbahnBen]

As a transit planner I'll give you an A+. This is one of your top notch videos. It is very accurate! You're spot on!

[@robk7266]

The Metrolink in St Louis is pretty much a rapid transit, but is called light rail. Similar situation with the Lynx in Charlotte. And then there is DART. It feels like a metro in most parts, light rail in some sections, and suburban rail in others.

[@danielb2286]

The D2 subway cannot come fast enough…the 15-45 min headways on DART can be crippling.

[@robk7266]

@@danielb2286 it's insane. They need that subway

[@eryngo.urbanism]

I think I've watched this video three or four times and I still have a hard time talking about train systems with other urbanist folks because nobody seems to agree on what these definitions mean. This is really an important conversation that people often overlook. It's such a fundamental building block in just being able to discuss the possibilities of building rail transit.

[@kisaragi-hiu]

I think some of these rail categories can be defined with just their speed and frequencies: HSR = high speed (something like 200km/h) light rail / tram / streetcar / LRT = slow trains (slow enough that they can easily stop before obstacles) metro = high frequency Basically very fast → HSR, very slow → tram, high frequency → metro.

[@MrNicholasAaron]

This is useful. Would be nice to have a chart with modes in the left column and things like speed, frequency, capacity, length, grade separation, drivers, along the top and filled in with the qualities of each mode, even if you have to say "sometimes" or "mostly" where things are squidgy.

[@anonomia5535]

This classification doesn't cover regional rail and non-high speed intercity rail services, as found around the world. And, commonly (at least in Europe), suburban and regional rail also operates based on advanced signalling, just as high speed rail, and not on sight, like trams. Many regional rail services can run at speeds of 160 km/h.

[@anonomia5535]

@Zaydan Naufal Is this a reply to my comment, because I never said something about that? With speeds of 160 km/h, I'd say it is an international intercity rail service, indeed not high-speed rail.

[@widodoakrom3938]

True

[@abhishekjain2444]

We need a separate video on light metro and heavy metro, especially in my city and many others in the country are playing around with these. What I see from your videos is that a huge percent of the Eastern world is just untouched, I'd love to see videos on India then more on Japan, Thailand, Malyasia, Vietnam (lot to cover there, quite interesting country). My city comes under the MMR, meanwhile having it's own municipal corporation separate than Mumbai. The politicians plan on getting "LRT" or even use the terms light metros, what exactly are those!? Same with Delhi metro, the regional city body's are introducing their own transits. Also as you said in previous video, will they be considered the same metro system or distinctive systems, would love your views on it! Other than that love your videos, Amazing quality, keep making more n more! Another huge question, from what you told, would Mumbai Suburban Rail, or the local term, "local trains" be terned metro?

[@Shamai36]

I Poland we have: SKM trains. Fast City Railway=just city and extra stops / ex: ŁKA Łódzka Aglomeration Railway=city+near city

[@Shamai36]

Light metro= plans for underground trams like plans for Kraków or for me Fast Poznań Trams

[@RMTransit]

Yeah, a lot of different terms

[@hesterclapp9717]

If it goes in a city, it's a metro If it goes underground, it's a subway or tube train If it does both, call it what you want, they're both correct

[@wizardsuth]

If it's on the street with road traffic, it's a streetcar.

[@jfungsf882]

The BART System is both a metro & suburban rail. The Muni Metro System is both a metro and a streetcar system.

[@matthewjohnbornholt648]

The real LRT was the one in our hearts....

[@arnor811]

... the friends we made along the way

[@matthewjohnbornholt648]

@@arnor811 Yeah I got the rest of the quote wrong...

[@arnor811]

@@matthewjohnbornholt648 haha, I saw it as an alternative, as in "the real meaning of Christmas was in our hearts" and "the real treasure was the friends we made along the way".

[@RMTransit]

Sometimes I think LRT only exists in peoples hearts haha

[@maciejjablonski9982]

And in case of the distinction between streetcars and trams made in this video, I think that this doesn’t work at least in Poland. In cities where we have such systems, they combine in different proportions sections separated from cars with sections shared with cars and we simply call those systems trams.

[@FrostyShadowYT]

It's like that basically in the entire Europe, which is why no matter where you go in Europe you'll hear the name tram, streetcar is a strictly American term.

[@analama3077]

Great video as always. I totally agree with your point on "commuter rail." Here in Helsinki, we have a quite S-Bahn like suburban rail system with frequent services. Suburban sections with dedicated tracks are served every 5-10 mins. And even so, the system is referred to as Commuter Rail (in English) in the passenger info materials. And that's a pity, the high quality system really would deserve a more appropiate branding.

[@TuomasLeone]

Agreed, suburban rail or regional rail is better at describing the actual service offered here. Although "regional rail" may want to be avoided as that's how VR translates is "taajamajuna" service. I think maybe just "local rail" would be the best here.

[@varotjutaviriya1808]

In Bangkok We have a confusing naming of our metro system which is BTS Skytrain and MRT, actually situation is similar with Tokyo's Metro and Toei's subway which different company has different name. But when is was first built, BTS run aboveground on the viaduct and MRT had a single 100% underground line, situation remains like this for a decade, so people start colloquially to call any metro aboveground a "Skytrain" and any metro underground "Underground train". In 2016-2020 MRT open a new line and extension that runs mostly above ground, but peoples are so used to calling any metro running above ground a BTS or Skytrain that leads many people to call the new section a "Skytrain" or "BTS" even though it is not operate by BTS company.

[@quoniam426]

In Europe, Light Metro can cover many things such as underground trams or small metros such as VALs. It is also because metros tend to get bigger by the time they develop. New big cities metro systems are bigger than those built in the 1900s in some countries. Paris metro could be put into the Light Metro category, mostly because trains are under 2.80 m wide. Grand Paris Express is considered a heavy metro. RERs tend to have been designed as fast regional metro systems.

[@NicholasBhagasinsan]

Is it possible to replace LRT trains with faster metro or light metro trains in the future? Cause in Jakarta they're building an LRT with only a top speed of 60km/hour and i just don't think it's fast enough especially since it's a suburban line. Even our commuter rail is faster

[@Mike-ukr]

Easily, but light metro IS LRT, just with tunnels

[@anindrapratama]

@@Mike-ukr system mentioned above is fully elevated tho

[@RMTransit]

It’s possible but tram style trains often can take tighter corners which can restrict such a conversion

[@kornkernel2232]

Maybe not Metro due to loading gauge, full metro are wider than typical LRT or light metro. But that depends on the designed load and if there is tight corners within that line that may restrict a light metro. Though the new Jakarta LRT really looks like a light metro already, at least design wise of the rolling stock. It's not like in Manila that it was originally use high-floor trams that coupled together to make longer trainsets, and operate like light metro. Only from Generation 2 to 4 where it is more proper LRT or starting to be closer to light metro. Manila is far more convoluted.

[@Mike-ukr]

@@kornkernel2232 gauge varies a lot around the world

[@herlescraft]

you have no idea how much the NA use of the "regional rail" term bothered me, in Italy by region we means the entire place like Tuscany, Sardinia or Lazio, large (provinces?) with more in common of US states (short of the size) than the suburban area, that means that a regional rail in Italy is more akin to the bottom line intercity service in the US... and the existence of service literally called "intercity" doesn't help as that is more akin to an American express intercity, with it stopping mainly at large cities with faster speeds and more deluxe services.

[@RMTransit]

I like the more international definition

[@dijikstra8]

Yeah that's the same in Sweden. Regional trains serve a larger region than just a single city and its surroundings, hell we even have a regional train that goes between Stockholm and Gothenburg, though much more slowly than the intercity trains, obviously because it makes a lot of stops in smaller towns along the way. I'd say that's the defining characteristic of a regional train, the stop pattern, regional trains stop in small cities or towns, but not in small suburbs (but perhaps suburban hub stations) like suburban trains do.

[@KumarNikhils]

My view, light and heavy metro should be defined as per their max carrying capacity per car/coach. While metro, suburban rail, regional rail should be defined as geographic region it is serving.

[@tunatezer8902]

"Tram" and "streetcar" are two different thing? I thought they were the same thing, with "tram" being British English and "streetcar" being American English. -That being said, streetcars are dumb. What good is a railed system if it's going to mix with car traffic? It's just a glorified bus.- Trams are actually worth it though. Edit: I just watched your "Are streetcars better than buses?" video and you do have a point...

[@RMTransit]

Well hypothetically streetcars are still more efficient

[@tunatezer8902]

@@RMTransit I just watched your "Are streetcars better than buses?" video and you do have a point...

[@rebeccawinter472]

This is a good starter video Reece. It would be great to do a whole video on transit mode terminology. I think this could be expanded on given how varied the landscape has become and, as you say, words matter - and they can be used to argue for or against good projects. Suggested structure: First, Introduce a mode (and the names it goes by) and describe who it serves, what its purpose is & what its unique features are (e.g. frequency of service; speed; grade separation; stop spacing; electrification; etc…). Second, show video of some examples, both the “prototypical” version of a given mode as well as video highlighting the diversity of what it can look like in 2024. Third, talk about why it matters - which you do a good job here in this video and you can largely probably take a lot of inspiration from this. 😊 You can summarize the differences in a table if you want, to help folks keep things straight. The different modes I can think of, with as much granularity that I can think of are from longest/largest capacity to least capacity: - International Rail (Long-Distance / Overnight) - Intercity Rail - Regional Rail (Suburban / Commuter) - Urban Heavy Rail (Metro / Subway) - Light Metro (Intermediate Rail / Regional Light Metro?) - Tram Trains (some Light Rail) - basically fully (or almost fully) grade separated lighter rail - Tramways (Trolley / Streetcar / Interurbans if longer distance / some Light Rail) - lighter rail vehicles running on dedicated rights of way with some grade separation but sometimes crossing traffic - Automated People Movers (incl Monorails & Airport transit) - good for short distances; unsure where to slot in vis-a-vis capacity - Funicular- sort of a special category but super useful when used right - Trams (Trolley / Streetcar) - BRT - with its various tiers (Gold/Silver..), which is thankfully at least well established - Ferry (Fast Ferry / Boat) - Trolley Bus (arguable if it deserves separate mention, as unsure if capacity affected) - Buses - Gadgetbahn? - special note about the trackless trams, monorail & hyperloops of the world? *Have added alternative names in parentheses and question marks where unsure where what should go where.

[@RMTransit]

I think I actually kind of did this recently! kzbin.info/www/bejne/ama9haaCqsSahtk Thanks for the suggestion and I will store it for consideration in an extended future version!

[@rebeccawinter472]

@@RMTransit great minds 🧠 🧠

[@Demosthenas]

We actually call it an LRT in Edmonton. We have a high platform type thats part of the original system thay goes north/south with a spur line to the northwest. This year we are opening a brand new line with a low floor tram system. That goes SE to Central then eventually to the west. 11 stops are completed on the SE line slated to open this summer. Fun fact Edmonton was one of the first to use LRTs in Canada.

[@francesconicoletti2547]

As an example of why linguistic clarity is good, using your definitions I can say, in Sydney we are building new suburban rail using metro technology. Once that is clear it is now possible to ask the question, Why ?

[@cookie.lover007]

Gosh, I've been waiting for this video for long!

[@RMTransit]

Haha, it was needed!

[@chrispayne7204]

Very good video Reece! Video Idea: Highways & Congestion, recently, I heard that National Highways (UK Highways service) intends on opening the hard shoulder as a fourth lane on the smart motorways. There are various problems with this, aside from safety risks, increasing lanes does not solve congestion problems, research shows it increases traffic. LA as an example. There is a lot of build it and they will come (convinient segway into how this also applies to rail ;)) Thanks for reading.

[@tonywalters7298]

Any sort of transportation infrastructure should be looked at on a network-wide scale. Adding capacity in one area does not help things if people are heading into a bottleneck in another area. Of course, I think there are plenty of cites that would benefit from investments in better transit, but i think a common issue in North America is that transit is seen as a form of social class distinction (i.e. transit exists to serve those who cannot afford a car/cannot drive for whatever reason) rather than as a utility for all to use. Car infrastructure takes up a lot of space, and that comes at a premium in built up areas, and for that reason alone, investment in transit makes sense from a land use perspective.

[@cityjetproductions]

Shared bogies is a bit of a weird distinction to make, as there are light rail systems (Hong Kong, Buffalo, Stuttgart) that don't have them, and a lot of light metros (and full metros like Moscow and Sofia) that do have them.

[@RMTransit]

Just a heuristic, I’d argue it works much more often that it doesn’t! Jakobs bogies are not common on metros! But quite on light rail!

[@carllivingston169]

I live in New Jersey, and grown up in the NYC and Philly metro areas my whole life. I've always considered NJ Transit, LIRR, Metro North & SEPTA as commuter rail. While some NJT & MN branches only run limited service outside of peak commuter times, they all run both directions during the entire day. Something I found shocking when learning that MARC only runs peak direction trains. Would you consider these more regional rail?

[@cheese5194]

OMG why have I only seen your channel today?! I’m a transport/train nerd and seeing your channel excited me! I’ve been to Japan multiple times now just for their transport systems. Subscribed! Would like yo play Cities Skylines and apply some of that transport knowledge in the game?

[@rickmcginnis]

Toronto is notorious for this definition-fudging. The St. Clair right of way project (overbudget and over schedule, with no project management for at least part of its construction) was constantly referred to as an LRT even though it was really just the restoration of a dedicated transit lane for trams that had been removed in the 1920s. The TTC and the city used the term, and then the media started parroting it, even though it resembled no LRT line in use anywhere.

[@justanotherdankmemer]

In philadelphia it is called regional rail, but the major hub station is called Suburban Station

[@MJ-ch2gg]

S-Bahn and RER are often confused because of their similar role. For me the biggest difference is in the size and capacity of the systems. S-Bahn is suitable for urban areas not exceeding 5 million inhabitants, such as large German cities, while RER is more suitable for agglomerations of 10 million inhabitants or more, such as Paris (or London with crossrail). This is why S-Bahn tends to share infrastructures more than RER systems and has a lower capacity.

[@catenaris]

And I'm curious, where would you draw the line? :) I'm from france and I live in germany, so I know what you mean by that. I think I get what you mean and if you look at cities like Copenhagen and so on outside of Germany and France, it's generally smaller cities that have such S-Bahn systems. But where lies the difference? I would say the speed (and ease to embark/disembark that comes with it), but there's a little problem: look at line C in Paris. It's named RER, but it's absolutely not the same quality as the other lines. Both slow and inefficient to embark and disembark! (I like the line, but still, let's be honest 😄) But still, it runs in a tunnel... At the opposite, let's say the corridor of lines S3/S5/S7/S9 in Berlin has super high frequencies and I think the speeds are quite ok, although not as high as on line A; perhaps as high as line B? Yet, it's entirely overground, but at grade and offers quite a great service I guess. You meant size and capacity are the difference between the 2, right? But wouldn't you call the east-west line of Berlin super-high capacity? I mean, it's clearly not line A, but it's way better than line C and E. The size of the Paris lines are bigger, that's right, but not necessarily all are better and more suited to a bigger city! :)

[@MJ-ch2gg]

@@catenaris I understand that the reality is not as perfect as the theoretical definitions. The aim is rather to give general definitions. And the S-Bahn of Berlin is one of the biggest exceptions because of the history of the city in particular. The same goes for the RER C which is much more of a network than a normal RER line. But there is a clear distinction between these lines and those of S-Bahn networks in smaller German or Swiss cities. And even if Berlin is a special case, the total ridership barely reaches the ridership of RER A alone. Despite all its problmes, the ridership of RER C is also 500,000 travelers per day. I am not sure that S3, S5, S7, S9 combined exceeds it. It is also true that lines of RER can sometimes not be adapted to their urban area. But the ones most often taken as an example to illustrate the concept are also those which have the most success and are best designed like the line A. Hope it's clearer now

[@wizardsuth]

It seems the terms people use for various rail-based transportation depend on several factors, including: - whether the rails are completely separate from roads, cross them at level crossings, run alongside them, or are mixed with road traffic - whether the trains run at ground level, underground, above ground, or a mix of these - whether trains can run in both directions or need loops and/or roundhouses to reverse - the range of the system (downtown only, within the city itself, its the city's broader city area, between local cities, or between widely separated places) - the number, size, and capacity of the train cars, and the number of doors on each - the frequency of trains (a few per day, mainly rush hour, or all day) - whether the number of trains running in certain directions (e.g. into or out of the downtown) varies with the time of day - the trains' power supply (overhead catenary/pantograph, third rail, diesel, etc.) No wonder it's confusing.

[@sylvainmichaud2262]

Finally. The video I was waiting for. Many thanks.

[@ironbark88]

I like to think of just three transit systems based on rail design. HRS - a heavy rail system that mixes passenger and freight services, relatively low frequency urban and Inter urban trains with powered and unpowered rolling stock. Often a legacy rail line. URS - an urban rail system that runs a relatively high frequency, city wide, passenger only service in a dedicated corridor. This is the system that is most commonly being developed using diverse new rail technologies and where legacy systems are being redeveloped with new technologies. It is a diverse system due to the different technologies and histories of development. Generally powered rolling stock are used and the newer systems are driverless. May be elevated, surface or underground or a combination. A "Metro", a SkyTrain, a Subway etc is a sub type of an URS. LRS -a light rail system is one that mostly runs in a shared corridor with street traffic.

[@ironbark88]

I'm old enough to remember when Sydney's Central railway station (built in 1906) had two sections. Platforms 1 to 12 was called the "steam trains" and 13 to 23 the "electric trains." There was also a ramp up to the entrance from street level for the trams. None of this fancy Metro or light rail and interchange stuff.

[@josephpadula2283]

Sounds like people forgot the Interurban systems , closest thing to light rail. Before WWII the Galveston Tx to Houston did 70 mph on a 26 mile dead strsight track . On both ends it made frequent trolley type stops in both Houston and Galveston. In the 1915 hurricane one car was lost on the causeway bridge with passengers.

[@AridChannelOfficialSG]

I have no idea why LTA still calls out APMs LRTs. One constantly breaks down and has a full day rail-replacement bus service to complement it, while the other two go in loops

[@namenamename390]

I don't mind the term "suburban rail" or "suburbs" for that matter. A suburb doesn't need to be a car centric hellscape, look at the old streetcar suburbs in Toronto. Those are nice suburbs where you can actually walk somewhere, say a railway station.

[@MACROPARTICLE]

What I admire about light trains is that they carry heavy loads relative to their size, making them more efficient. Their low mass and small wheel diameters give them low inertia, therefore high acceleration, ideal for frequent stops. Unfortunately, these small wheel diameters restrict their top speed, as well as increasing rolling resistance and making the ride more bumpy. The way I see it, from an efficiency perspective, all frequently-stopping systems should use light trains.

[@nictheperson6709]

Light rail doesn't imply light trains. The light refers to capacity, rather than weight.

[@user-gu2dx2ys8w]

@@nictheperson6709 Does it? Or does it refer to the actual rail profile of the tracks?

[@chrismckellar9350]

The standard terminology should be used - a. There are two rail systems being light and heavy rail. Light rail system whether it is street, street/dedicated right of way or dedicated right of way (above or below ground) only is built to light rail specifications using light rail designed vehicles and heavy rail which predominantly above or below ground dedicated right of right is built to heavy rail specifications using heavy rail designed vehicles/rolling stock. b. Urban rail whether it is light and/or heavy rail is passenger rail vehicles that travel from a central city to suburban 'towns' and 'cities' within that local government city boundary, as above and/or below ground. This also applies to urban bus systems/networks c. Regional rail are heavy passenger rail services that link multiple cities with major towns and other smaller communities on route. This also applies regional bus systems/network. d. Mass/rapid urban rail whether it is light and/or heavy rail is passenger trains that travel from a central city to suburban 'towns' and 'cities' within that local government city boundary, as above and/or below ground us dedicated right of way using high frequency scheduling. This also applies to mass urban bus systems/networks.

[@YaoboyProd2K15]

In Singapore, LRT is an automated people mover serving residential towns like Punggol, Sengkang, Choa Chu Kang and Bukit Panjang.

[@broman178]

The UK for the most part seems to avoid frequently using the term of "Light Rail" and its definitely a term not commonly used by the general public (except maybe by some people interested in transit distinctions/terms). Because while the term Light Rail may be sometimes used for most modern tramways (e.g. Manchester Metrolink or Croydon Tramlink) or metro systems like the Tyne and Wear Metro or DLR (Docklands Light Railway), most systems here which would otherwise fit the distinction of Light Rail in North America are usually called a tram network if they have some street running sections even if those sections are short (although I think when the Manchester Metrolink first opened, there was initially some debate as to whether they should be called trams or LRV's but they eventually settled into exclusively calling them trams because the vehicles are very much trams) while if they are entirely grade separated but still have lower capacity than heavy rail metro, then they are still called a metro network (or Light Metro). So its either just called a tram or metro in the UK by the general public and in my opinion, Light Rail is essentially just a cross/bridge between the two types but the vehicle used is either a tram if its designed for street running or a metro if its designed for grade separated routes.

[@sideshowbob]

From an engineering / design perspective (I'm a civil engineer who has worked on "commuter rail" in the northeast US for decades), designations can be based on design criteria: Commuter Rail & Metro/Subway/El = "Heavy Rail" as they use the same weight rail - 132 or 140 lb/ft. "Light Rail" uses lighter rail as the cars are lighter. There are differences in geometry - Commuter Rail typically needs larger curve radii (18 degrees max) as the vehicles are longer & have longer trucks. Metro/Subway can have the same sharp curves as light rail since the vehicles are shorter & have shorter trucks. Commuter rail & light rail does not need to be grade separated from roadways but Metro/Subway does. Commuter rail can be diesel but Metro/Subway is almost always electric as they run in tunnels, & there are a few rare diesel light rail systems (NJ Transit River Line). Electrified Commuter Rail can be overhead catenary or 3rd rail (altho that is rarer - Long Is RR & 2 of Metro North lines are), Metro/Subway is usually 3rd rail. Commuter Rail can be a mix of high, med, & low platforms, Metro/Subway all hi level, Light Rail also a mix but usually low. Metro/Subway covers dense urban areas, Commuter Rail goes out to the suburbs & serves nearby smaller cities. Altho newer Metro's (BART, DC Metro, MARTA) are much longer distance, more like commuter rail. CT, western MA, & RI are collaborating to set up a network of "commuter rail" lines to connect the small cities between NYC & Boston, so they could be considered "regional rail". There's no difference engineering wise between Regional Rail & Commuter Rail. When it comes to car layouts, commuter/regional rail emphasizes rows of seats, very little standing room, while Metro/Subway/Light Rail will have a combo, with many sideways seats. I would also say "Light Rail" is used pretty commonly in the USA rather than "Streetcar" or "Tram" for any systems that satisfy most of the "light rail" criteria. Just to add to the jumble of confusion.

[@tonywalters7298]

Commuter rail vs regional rail seems to be more of a distinction with service patterns rather than network characteristics. i would say that commuter rail that exists to serve the needs of 8-5 office commuters is an accurate term.

[@IamTheHolypumpkin]

The English word I use to refer to a Stadtbahn is premetro. Because especially Germany build a lot of Standtbahns in the 60 and 70, and they all where intended to be an intermediate state before building a fully grade seperated metro. But it shouldn't be forgotten, that the reason all those Stadtbahns where build and planned wasn't to provide better transit to people, but to get rid of the streetcars and trams which where seen to be in the way of the car.

[@nuffaildaniaelle977]

Local buses in SEA are mostly called as “Stage buses" as they always stop at every bus stops

[@RoRZoro]

Was waiting for this video!!!

[@carel_dfx]

Madrid metro features a lot of stations at the downtown and it's complemented with a Cercanias (S-bahn style train), but going farther, it starts to behave as a S-bahn rather than metro (take a look to the TFM, which connects Arganda with Madrid with a suburban rail services, but is considered as Metro)

[@hesterclapp9717]

I think the line between intercity and regional is blurry and difficult to describe. For example, I would say that the train from Norwich to London (in the UK) is Intercity and the train from Norwich to Liverpool is regional, despite it going a much longer distance, and I can't really explain why. Edit: Also, I would say the train from London to Cambridge is commuter because "suburban" trains would only go as far as London does and "regional" trains would be less frequent with lower capacities and much longer routes.

[@maciejjablonski9982]

And as I can see references in other comments to my country - Poland - I would say that at least in case of my city (Gdańsk), SKM is more like a hybrid between overground metro and a regional train. As SKM in my region connects several cities that form metropolitan area (Gdańsk, Sopot, Gdynia, Rumia, Reda, Wejherowo) with three other cities: Pruszcz Gdański and Tczew (more or less 30 min ride south from Gdańsk) and Słupsk (more or less 1 hour west from the mentioned metropolitan area). And I am not sure how to be strict with classification of SKM, if the frequency is taken under consideration: 1 train each 6-7 min in peak hours, 1 train each 15 min after peak hours and 1 train each 30 min during night hours with technical brakes between 1 and 4:30 am.

[@catenaris]

I come from France and I've been to Poland and Germany a couple times: Wouldn't you call the SKMs in Poland simply S-Bahns? I mean, they even use the abreviations with S1, S2... for the lines, just like in Germany or Belgium. They serve the city center as well as the neighbouring ones, included or not so much included into the said city (I know what you mean with Tczew! I mean exactly that.) And besides that, they are completely overground I think (except in Warsaw) and as you said 7-8 minutes is a good frequency, just like an S-Bahn could have actually. (at best, obviously, often it's way less just as you said, for skm just like for s-bahn). There are obviously less frequent metros than that, but usually, metros are rather under the 5 minutes frequency and have substantial sections underground. What would be your criterias that make you call the SKMs partly regional rail and _partly metros_? I'm curious :)

[@2712animefreak]

I dislike your argument at 8:00. Firstly, I don't think that the specific execution of the vehicles should be a part of this classification, but more the intended throughput or something similar. Secondly, a lot of tram networks in Europe use vehicles without shared bogeys. The vehicles are consists of two or three individual cars with two bogeys each, some of the cars are powered, and some are just trailer cars. (occasional system also makes use of "slave" cars, that are powered but lack a cockpit. These vehicles are usually older and operate mixed with newer vehicles that you would call LRT on the same service. On another note, personally, rather than "LRT", the term I'd discard is "streetcar". Because, to me, it is perfectly normal that a tram line is in shared traffic for most of the route. And I would ascribe "LRT" to a system that uses tram-like vehicles, but is mostly or wholly kept off streets. The Eglington Crosstown line would for me be a Stadtbahn, because its mix of tunnel and street operation reminds me of several such systems in Germany that are usually called Stadtbahn, e.g. in Cologne.

[@RMTransit]

It’s only a heuristic, not a hard and fast rule

[@studentjohn35]

Can't wait to hear your spin on the Wuppertal Schwebebahn

[@ianprince1698]

I would refer to public transport ie' trains trams and busses not forgetting taxis. In England we refer to the London transport service as the Underground, A subway is an underground footpath normally under a road

[@Maj275]

Funny thing: The german Regio Bahn isnt really a private rail company as its sems, like Rheinbahn (local bus and tram operator) they are owned by the City of Düsseldorf. :D

[@LouisPeplerify]

I needed this !

[@adrianarbon2742]

8:20 well actually the MNL "LRT" line 2 was under by the Light Rail Transit Authority(LRTA) that started around the '80s with the opening of LRT-1 that being said many terms were used in that line like "LRTA-Line 2" "MegaTren" or "MRT 2". Yeah, it's an MRT type of train but of course, there are Manileños who became a habit and prefer calling it "LRT-2" Just Sayin.

[@phoenixbwp]

Ugg! Interurban came from the central portion of the USA, Chicago mainly from the original street car lines that ran out to Elgin, Milwaukee and South Bend, and were allowed to run onto the Loop via the L... Philly had something similar out to Norristown but to a terminus at 69th and Market Street, where other streetcar lines went into suburban neighborhoods. Denver's rail attempt is called Light Rail until the newer commuter rail was built... In rail parlance, the weight of the multiple unit will give you the style, except LRT can be both a Street Car/Tram or run in a dedicated right of way. NYC original elevated trains were steam hauled coaches until the IRT came into being, but the BRT used coaches styled after steam coaches, until electrical multiple units gain more technological advancements (Better traction motors and breaking systems). Now, what would you consider the PATH train? A subway or a Metro? and what about the PATCO trains from Philadelphia to Lindonwold NJ, a metro or LRT?

[@cauchy911]

In China, the name of LRT is very clear as it's first introduced in Shanghai as the Ming Zhu line has all their stations and tracks above the ground in the contrast of other subway lines.

[@reinerjung1613]

A key feature of BRTs are that they have their own roads/lanes separated from traffic. They are usually improved so that the road surface can handle the higher load. In contrast simple bus lanes do not have this feature.

[@DwainRichardson]

You’ve got some salient points in this video, Reece. I agree that some politicians and contractors simply toss terms about without knowing what mode is what. This can lead to much unnecessary confusion. Every politician and contractor should watch this video. (-:

[@genoobtlp4424]

Commuter rail isn’t exclusively a US practice, heck, Liechtenstein only has train stations served by commuter rail, and I know quite a few lines that are commuter rail, the only difference is that they usually are a reinforcement line paralleling normal lines but taking a different alignment or switching the line being paralelled, though in the case of Liechtenstein and a few rare lines, they relieve a bus line during rush hour by providing a rush hour express service to otherwise abandoned stations

[@herlescraft]

I feel like the difference is in what else happens in the mean time, let me explain: if one stations has only trains in the morning and in the evening it's more likely to be defined as a commuter service while if a station has more services during rush hour but keeps on having trains in the mean time it's probably going to be defined as a regional service (with added capacity during rush hour)

[@RMTransit]

Indeed, I concur with the other comment. The mostly unique thing in North America is that you basically ONLY have trains at rush hour

[@genoobtlp4424]

@@RMTransit ok, fair argument that commuter rail means basically only commuter lines and not additional rush hour reinforcement limes, still leaves Liechtenstein and a few other lines that are normally served by bus, but there’s a commuter line as rush hour express, otherwise the station isn’t being served by rail, would that qualify as commuter rail?

[@klausjackklaus]

The Salt Lake City BRT is pretty unique as it acts exactly like LRT but with busses and I think you'd find interesting

[@bruhbutwhytho]

Isn't that common in a lot of places though?

[@YishaiBarr]

Inter city vs Regional vs Suburban is too vague of a definition. In my country, the largest travel distances, "intercity" are what would otherwise be named regional or suburban trains in other countries and are used daily by many people for that exact purpose due to the short distances between metropolitan areas. Also, "regional rail" in Australia is actually used for very long intercity rail, like XPT and Xplorer while "intercity" is used for longer distance suburban rail to places like Wollongong-Sydney and Blue Mountains-Sydney, while "suburban" is within the Sydney metropolitan area. As for LRT, Metro or suburban rail, the terms aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Sydney just separates its mainland suburban rail from the dedicated metro which generally speaking, serve the exact same purpose, unlike in France or the US where equivalents compensate for where the metros don't go to, but otherwise, the cities themselves have expansive metros. DLR is both LRT and metro. A light metro. Tram, streetcars and stadtbahns are AU/GB terms vs N. American terms vs German terms, tram trains are trams that can share mainland railways with big trains, I share the frustration with politicians and people throwing branding terms where they don't apply. My country has "high speed rail" at 160 km/h. And I don't care about the relatively high speed for a short distance, that's not what it is. False BRTs are known as BRT creeps. Because they are branded as BRTs when they're just a bus lane for regular services.

[@sm6allegro]

RE: London Underground, the quad tracks and suburban-style operation only applies to the Metropolitan line, which would better be described as the exception that confirms the rule. If you want an example of a metro with different service patterns and quad tracks that would be the NYC subway. Other quad-track sections on the Tube are actually former quad-track sections of the Met and the District where one pair of tracks was taken over by a deep-level line.

[@anonomia5535]

Agree with everything said in the video, but I guess the main reason people call the Marmaray suburban rail, is the fact it is operated by the TCDD (Turkish Railways). If Via Rail suddenly operates a system in Toronto, I guess you might also not immediately call it a metro?

[@RaymondHng]

Unlike other languages, English has no international organization that regulates use of the English language. There's no international standard terminology for even food in English. What we call Half and Half in the USA, the UK calls single cream. What is called whipping cream in the USA is called double cream in the UK.

[@RaymondHng]

@@amyl.9477 In France, it's Académie française and Délégation générale à la langue française et aux langues de France In Belgium, Académie royale de langue et de littérature françaises de Belgique (Royal Academy of French Language and Literature of Belgium) In Quebec, Office québécois de la langue française (Québec Office of the French Language)

[@romanschafer2101]

In my opinion, a line that is partly shared by intercity trains and even freight trains and operated by the national railway company, like the Marmaray, cannot be called a metro. It is a suburban train line, similar to a German S-Bahn. The difference to the metro is not in the capacity or the train headways (the Munich S-Bahn, for example, has headways of two minutes on the central trunk line and trains over 200 meters long if three units are coupled together), but in the area of operation and the organization. A suburban railway is usually connected with a country's railway network and extends beyond the urban core while a metro is "just" urban mass transit.

[@lukeueda-sarson6732]

This is my way of thinking too.

[@mark123655]

It's a fuzzy definition. The core of most large cities (NY, London etc) is definitely Metro - typified by high frequency, close station spacing, underground platforms, short journeys and an above ground density of mostly 3+ story buildings. But even in those cities the outer edge of the network is far more 'suburban'. This probably then covers a lot of European cities as they are generally fairly dense for a wide area. So the bulk of the network is more metro/subway like so that's what you call it. You don't really have this in American or Australian cities where you've historically had a very small urban core and then suburban sprawl of 1-2 story dwellings, so thus the suburban network with above ground running outside the core is more common, even if it is metro like in the core and over the last 30-50 years you have seen densification close to rail lines. I think you've got to look at transport definitions hand in hand with city planning and how various cities densities have evolved.

[@fauzirahman3285]

I like to think that there's also some overlap between commuter rail, suburban rail and regional rail. Perhaps the transport operators who operated commuter rail feels that there's some demand for services outside of commuting hours, so decide to run a lower frequency service outside of peak hours to fill the gap and earn a revenue from it (as otherwise the stations and the trains are just sitting there anyway). And with flexible hours being more a thing these days, 9-5 services just doesn't cut it. They would extend operating hours to those who would start earlier (5-2) or later (10-8). Also in Australia's example, there are regional rail that also work as suburban rail where there's stopping patterns within a city before going out to regional areas, so much so that at peak they just run these services to the boundary of the city and not leave the city (e.g. Wyndham Vale services running as short services of the Geelong Line operated by V/Line). Also I think I've said this before in another video but in South-East Asia there are just too many different examples of what transport can be that is also called an LRT.

[@jameslowe5851]

The metrolink in Manchester, UK is a system which either has elements of all different rail types or plans to include them. Some parts feature street running whilst other parts are completely grade separated. The city centre however is completely street running through pedestrian areas. It connects to many of Manchester's satellite towns such as Rochdale, Oldham and Altrincham operating as suburban rail for these lines. There are plans to make it into a greater suburban rail system taking some national rail lines and also regional going as far as Warrington. There's also plans for the 2030s to 2040s to build a metro style tunnel through the city centre . All of these different classifications all being interoperable with each other.

[@mohdsyazwannuddin1975]

In Kuala Lumpur, the term Komuter is basically just a regional line, operated by the same company that operated intercity railway. It is notorious for their lateness and never adhered the ETA.

[@thegreypenguin5097]

In short, it is anything and everything, and it is the solution to all the world’s problems.

[@RMTransit]

Indeed it is!

[@gazzamuso]

I would LOVE for you to assess the Wellington rail network based on these various metrics. It will be difficult 😆

[@robinhenry1824]

I think I can explain why we in Australia are more likely to say 'suburban rail' as opposed to 'regional rail'. I think is actually due to postcodes/zipcodes/suburb definitions. To explain: city administrative zones are much bigger in North America than Australia. By contrast, with the notable exception of Brisbane, or local government areas are very small, and we have many more, small suburbs with their own zip codes. For example, the City of Burnaby neighbours Vancouver if I remember correctly. If that were an Australian city, between Vancouver and Burnaby would be probably five or six suburbs with their own postcodes/zipcode running in that same distance. If I live in greater Sydney, it is very unlikely that you would address a letter to me to Sydney - rather the particular suburb where I live. Melbourne is a city of 5-6 million, but almost no-one lives in the postal area of Melbourne. Thus we quite clearly think of ourselves as living in suburbs, rather than regions. And as you correctly point out, regional trains in Australia will mostly likely be travelling for several hours into the countryside.

[@LinusTrainTips]

doesn't really matter but the picture you are using at 3:13 is also a S-Bahn Train ^^

[@rca8309]

My personal definition is that it's not BRT or LRT if it doesn't have a fully dedicated right-of-way and transit priority signaling. To qualify for "RT" status you need to eliminate (or at least minimize) conflicts and delays from street traffic.

[@РоманБекиров-с4м]

Oh, lawd sweet gebbus. It's a tram!

[@calebv9307]

okkkk loving the new intro!

[@prakhartheg]

Your fleece looks awesome

[@arii1987]

The Klang Valley in Malaysia has 3 LRT Lines, 2 MRT Lines, 1 BRT Line, 3 Commuter Lines and 1 Monorail Line

[@Brick-Life]

Awesome Guangzhou BRT

[@RegisBodnar]

I've never really thought of it this way before, but I really do call Pittsburgh's T "Light Rail" to kinda obfuscate what it is! Few people want to hear "It's like a Subway downtown, mostly a tram for the rest of it, except for a section of the Red Line where it's a streetcar." But I'll absolutely tell people that, if they ask what I mean!

[@pauldevey8628]

I would call the system after the service pattern they meet and not the tech or implementation.

[@RMTransit]

That makes sense to an extent, but capacity and performance affect ride experience too

[@pauldevey8628]

@@RMTransit Attributes that can modify or influence classificaiton?

[@HexAyed]

I think alot of times, we forget the some names are used, because they best suite that host country, like Britain's former Inter-city, CrossCountry, NSE and Regional Railways etc, then the PTEs etc. Like alot of trams. The only system that I think of as a "Tramway" is Blackpool, everything else is a LRV/LRS Network

[@HexAyed]

And on the note for Tram vs Streetcar. Streetcar is an extremely American term. If you went to Croydon, Manchester or Nottingham and said Streetcar, most people would either be confused, or think of San Fran

[@AdaDenali]

Me trying to categorize the Seattle Link system around 8:50 “What the hell is a stat-bahn?”

[@TheCriminalViolin]

Now here's the fun fact about this kind of thing, Reece - NO ONE WILL EVER AGREE on ANY of this. That's the problem at it's root in reality. This is just about a universal rule of life - another prime example is all these long time "experts" who define generations of people who to this day cannot even begin to agree on what the parameters and definitions of a generation and each generation are, should be, or is. This is a problem that therefore is almost inevitably never going to be solved. As you likely know and recall, I am very passionate on transit, and that includes my definitions of each form of rail. - For me, LRT is EXCLUSIVELY trams/trolleys/streetcars (which ever one of the three you wish to call it... also, case in point yet again haha) and it exclusively runs in small loops through/around the main urban core of a city. That's it. That's TRUE Light Rail. Nothing else. - Then comes commuter rail - to me Commuter Rail is the next longest lines, and uses somewhat higher capacity, slightly heavier rail vehicles, and serves as a metro area service, connecting various suburbs and their main city. This would include cities which are next door and grown into multiple other fair size cities, rather than one city and it's suburbs. It's the distance that defines Commuter for me, not time tables and thus frequencies. - After that comes Regional Rail, which likely would connect one main metro area via it's main city, and one or two major suburban town cores, and one or two mid-distance towns or cities, think in example if Vancouver had a train line that stopped in Coquitlam and then ended in downtown Abbotsford. Or say a train line that went from Vancouver Washington to Tacoma with two stops in-between, one in Kelso, one in Chehalis. Or Oregon, Portland to Salem, with a stop say in Wilsonville. That'd be Regional. - Next up is Intercity services - These are routes that exclusively stop once in the core of major cities, say if there was a ICE train that went from Portland to Vancouver but stopped in Seattle. Or went from Toronto to Quebec City, but stopped in Ottawa and Montreal along the route. That's true Intercity services. And honestly, I'm much more old school and classical when it comes to this stuff, so to me, all but what I listed as light rail is therefore exclusively using heavy rail. And again, it does go to show my point - no one will ever agree on clear definitions and what they should be. As for what I'd refer to as a Metro System and a Subway System is dependent on how their routes are built. If it's exclusively underground, it's a Subway, no matter the frequencies or type of rail vehicles utilized. Otherwise if it maintains a exclusive right of way for itself on it's own separate grade the entire way, then it's a Metro, again, no matter it's frequencies or the type of rail vehicle used. Of course, the only other qualifying criteria that has to be met for this is that they are exclusively serving one main metro area or city. They cannot go beyond the main metro core. That's it, that's the only criteria that needs to be met to define a rail network/route as a Metro or Subway.

[@suhandatanker]

I'm not sure if this is true or not, but the reason why malaysia used LRT systems instead of an MRT is because the TBM technology of the time (late 90s) aren't able to dig into Kuala Lumpur's terrain without causing risks such as sinkholes, it was only until 2016 the first MRT Line was opened thanks to the variable density TBMs, which we are the first country to ever use, they have made a documentary about it. Budget and Political Situations of the time was also another factor.