What the Heck is an LRT?
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 01. 2022
- This video is sponsored by Rocketman. Check out the Rocketman app for free for both Android and iOS here: rocketmanapp.onelink.me/QIMY/...
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.epidemicsound.com/referra...
Nexa from Fontfabric.com
Map Data © OpenStreetMap contributors: www.openstreetmap.org/copyright
=PATREON & CZcams 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 CZcams! Every dollar goes towards helping my channel grow & reach more people.
Patreon: / rmtransit
CZcams Memberships: / @rmtransit
=COMMUNITY DISCORD SERVER=
Discord Server: / discord
=MY SOCIAL MEDIA=
Twitter: / rm_transit
Instagram: / rm_transit
Website: reecemartin.ca
GitHub: github.com/reecemartin
=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!
What other transit modes need better definitions?
What counts as Transit needs better definition in some places.
What about people movers? A vague definition for a bunch of different things
stadtbahns! you mentioned them but they are abused as well.
BRT, imho, even with the ITDP's BRT Standard, especially in the border between BRT and Rapid buses with Queue Jumper lanes, etc.
@@urbanfile3861 that’s a good point, I did a video on them too!
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.
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.
Volgograd is light metro
@@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.
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.
@@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.
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.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. It's really weird how they suck at naming the lines here and changing the colors way too often, for purely political reasons.
It is never going to get old!
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".
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.
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.
Actually, it stands for Licorish Rotary Transport.
Basically, a helicopter made of that candy.
A form of transit I’d never oppose
How delicious! A bon bon for us transit interested types.
@@robertcartwright4374 it's the bon bahn
@@1224chrisngBut banned in Singapore.
HELIKOPTER HELIKOPTER
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'.
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.
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.
@@pwhnckexstflajizdryvombqug9042 Kudos for trying!
Fun fact: Manila LRT 2 called an LRT since it is managed by Light Rail Transit Authority despite it is a heavy rail metro.
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.
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.
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.
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!
@@danielb2286 - It is called a light urban/rural rail system built to light specifications.
@@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.
we should dismantle TEC, STIB and DE LIJN and recreate the SNCV with tram-trains in my opinion
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)
ironically, the LRT track use standard-gauge, which in fact wider than KRL and MRT narrow cape-gauge.
@@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.
@@arsyapermana1as far as I know LRT use R30 light rails
Also, KRL/Commuter Line is mixed with long distance train
Foolish me! For years, I just called everything on rails by another name: "train"
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!
I absolutely think coming up with standardized terminology is critical for just the reason you say
The term subway is confusing because people don't know whether you're talking about an underground rail service or a sandwich shop.
A "subway" in India refers to an underground pedestrian crossing, typically located at busy junctions.
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.
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]
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.
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.
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.
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.
@@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.
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.
The real LRT was the one in our hearts....
... the friends we made along the way
@@arnor811 Yeah I got the rest of the quote wrong...
@@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".
Sometimes I think LRT only exists in peoples hearts haha
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)
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.
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
The Italian term for "Light Rail" would be Metrotranvia, which literally traslates to "Metrotramway", which I guess doesn't really provide clarity.
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.
The D2 subway cannot come fast enough…the 15-45 min headways on DART can be crippling.
@@danielb2286 it's insane. They need that subway
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.
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.
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)
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!
I Poland we have: SKM trains. Fast City Railway=just city and extra stops / ex: ŁKA Łódzka Aglomeration Railway=city+near city
Light metro= plans for underground trams like plans for Kraków or for me Fast Poznań Trams
Yeah, a lot of different terms
The BART System is both a metro & suburban rail. The Muni Metro System is both a metro and a streetcar system.
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.
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.
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.
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
Easily, but light metro IS LRT, just with tunnels
@@Mike-ukr system mentioned above is fully elevated tho
It’s possible but tram style trains often can take tighter corners which can restrict such a conversion
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.
@@kornkernel2232 gauge varies a lot around the world
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.
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.
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.
@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.
True
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?
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
If it's on the street with road traffic, it's a streetcar.
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.
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.
I like the more international definition
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.
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.
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.
Finally. The video I was waiting for.
Many thanks.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Gosh, I've been waiting for this video for long!
Haha, it was needed!
I needed this !
Was waiting for this video!!!
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.
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 ?
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.
In philadelphia it is called regional rail, but the major hub station is called Suburban Station
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
Local buses in SEA are mostly called as “Stage buses" as they always stop at every bus stops
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
"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...
Well hypothetically streetcars are still more efficient
@@RMTransit I just watched your "Are streetcars better than buses?" video and you do have a point...
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?
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?
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.
In Singapore, LRT is an automated people mover serving residential towns like Punggol, Sengkang, Choa Chu Kang and Bukit Panjang.
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.
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! :)
@@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
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.
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.
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)
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.
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 :)
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
Can't wait to hear your spin on the Wuppertal Schwebebahn
My classification system is simpler:
Intercity train (high speed and normal 160km/hr): high cruising speed, relative slow acceleration, service between cities only, less doors
Regional train: lower cruising speed, relative high acceleration, covers villages between cities as well as the cities, less doors
Metro: Service within a city, third rail, grade separated below or above ground, more doors, high acceleration, low maximum speed, longer sets than tram, more standing places than trains mentioned above, no step entry and exit (level boarding), walk between stops half an hour on average.
Tram (or streetcar): Service within a city, no grade separation most of the time, more doors, high acceleration, low maximum speed, more stops than metro, more standing places than intercity and regional trains, walk between stops 5 minutes on average.
Light Rail Train: like metro, but sometimes without third rail, grade separation is a must else it's a tram with a very long service line, but service defines the name and that is when two cities or more expand to a big metropolitan region and the LRT covers the whole metropolitan area.
Different buses too:
Intercity / coach bus: high floor, one door, luggage compartments, higher maximum speed, lower acceleration, no standing places (only seats)
City transit bus: complete low floor, three or more doors (when articulated), many standing places, high acceleration, low maximum speed
Regional transit bus: partly low floor, partly high floor (in the back), less standing places than city bus, less doors than city transit bus, but at least two doors for non-articulated bus.
Depending on the population density: mini, midi, standard (2-axle), extended standard (2-3 axle), articulated (3 axle), extended articulated (4 axle), bi-articulated bus. And sometimes double decker.
BRT is no step entry and exit (means need platforms)
Payment method inside or outside the vehicle can be done with everything, so not a qualifier for any system.
Another qualifier is if passengers must use a stop button to make the driver stop at a stop.
Another one: does the operator drive on sight or on rail signalling?
How would you classify the Stadtbahn Köln (50/50 grade separated and only operates within the city) and the S-Bahn Hamburg (especially the S3 line)?
I don't know enough about both.
Both seem to go beyond the city borders, so I would call them light rail. Also because they have right of way, which is almost as good as grade separation.
And the low floor parts I would call tram. Because access is slower compared to high floor-platform no step designs.
Unless there are more cities that will establish such systems I won't find a separate category necessary.
@@rudivandoornegat2371 I can tell you something about them. The S-Bahn can reach 180 meters in length with 9 cars. Whatever they are, it's not "light". The S3 line travels 75km and connects to Stade, a town outside the state of Hamburg. There are a lot of commuters in that line.
The Stadtbahn Köln is what the french call pre-metro, because it does have tunnels but it also goes on the surface, with separation in some parts and in others not. They are high and low floor hybrids.
These both systems are just a couple that I personally use and they already fall outside your scheme. It's rather difficult to attribute names and categories to so many unique pieces of transport infrastructure across the world
Your fleece looks awesome
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.
Light rail doesn't imply light trains. The light refers to capacity, rather than weight.
@@nictheperson6709 Does it? Or does it refer to the actual rail profile of the tracks?
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.
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.
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.
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.
The Klang Valley in Malaysia has 3 LRT Lines, 2 MRT Lines, 1 BRT Line, 3 Commuter Lines and 1 Monorail Line
In America it means a train with the frequency of a bus who’s construction takes over a decade and necessitates shitting down 5 metro stations for months to construct
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.
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?
IIRC, "Light rail" and "heavy metro" are based on the type of track. "Heavy metro" uses the same tracks as regular trains. "Light rail" systems use a special type of rail that is incompatible with normal trains.
I wouldn't say that's necessarily true. Street running track will be a different profile to sit flush with the road, but when on their own ROW the track is often the same as heavy rail or metro track in shape.
Awesome Guangzhou BRT
My brain just melted, but I enjoyed the video ~
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.
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.
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.
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. (-:
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.
Here's my terminology (from a US perspective), let me know what you think. Many of the systems I mention operate a variety of lines and service patterns that can cause them to classify as different modes, but I'm speaking for a general classification of the system as a whole.
Intercity Rail: Heavy rail trains that travel between cities at a higher average speed. Typically stop in city centers only. Amtrak Acela (and other NEC services), Cascades, Capitol Corridor, Surfliner, and Brightline (private) to name a few.
Regional Rail: Heavy rail trains that don't travel as fast as intercity trains and make more frequent stops. They often follow the same route as intercity trains but include suburban stops. LIRR, Metro-North, SEPTA and MBTA NEC services, FrontRunner, and ACE (Altamont Commuter Express). Caltrain's express service can be considered regional rail. You can still take these to the next city over but it will take a little longer than intercity rail. There are often rural areas in between stops.
Commuter Rail/Suburban Rail: Heavy rail trains that operate within a single metropolitan area. Some extend slightly into rural areas. Caltrain, Metrolink, Denver RTD A/B/G lines, and Metra. DMU operated services (TEXRail, SMART, UP Express) also fall in this category. Stations are at least a mile apart and often have low platforms.
Metro/Subway: Somewhat lighter vehicles that often have tighter turning radii than heavy rail mainline trains. Usually 3 or more doors per car and high-level boarding on the entire route. Stations typically closer together than commuter rail. NYC Subway, CTA, DC Metro, LA Metro Red/Purple lines. Almost always grade separated for their entire route (exception: CTA).
Light Rail: Lightweight 1-2 car trains that involve some low-platform boarding along their route. LA Metro Light Rail, Seattle Link, UTA, and DART to name a few. Note how I did not specify "low-floor vehicles" as that would exclude San Francisco MUNI and a few East Coast systems like SEPTA and MBTA. These mostly operate on separate right-of way but sometimes run in mixed traffic, especially on older systems converted from streetcars. Grade crossings are frequent compared to metros.
Trolley/Streetcar: Lightweight 1-2 car trains that operate entirely at street level. They have shorter routes than light rail trains and spend most of their time running in mixed traffic. OKC Streetcar, Detroit Qline, Cincinnati Bell Connector, and Portland Streetcar. Most use low-floor vehicles but a few use vintage high-floor vehicles like El Paso, MATA, Dallas M-Line, and New Orleans.
I would LOVE for you to assess the Wellington rail network based on these various metrics. It will be difficult 😆
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.
A tram. It’s a tram.
I just call everything a metro since Miami's metro service is called the metrorail.
we will soon have a subway-tram in València as Line 10 of our metro system
In short, it is anything and everything, and it is the solution to all the world’s problems.
Indeed it is!
The Salt Lake City BRT is pretty unique as it acts exactly like LRT but with busses and I think you'd find interesting
Isn't that common in a lot of places though?
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
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)
Indeed, I concur with the other comment. The mostly unique thing in North America is that you basically ONLY have trains at rush hour
@@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?
Me trying to categorize the Seattle Link system around 8:50
“What the hell is a stat-bahn?”
okkkk loving the new intro!
Great video! Can you please discuss Transit city in Jersey City, NJ?
Hong Kong and Auckland can't enter the conversation because both places are small in land mass and especially in Auckland: Have a small transport network.
Here’s a spanner in the works ,before I became unwell I was a train dispatcher for southwest trains /SWR at Clapham junction ,my contract was SWT metro they regarded the suburban services as metro and the trains wore red ,blue was outer suburban and white was intercity type services ,then SWR took over and it changed again ,blimey mate ,as for LRT it was the name once for TfL London regional transport 😂😂,all the best we have a similar system in London as an app like rocket man it’s useful bus times shows tube ,rail and DLR plus Croydon tram and even the cable car near the dome 👍🏻😊
I was wondering your thoughts on high floor BRT as seen in Mexico City. Their platforms are very tall and have 4 doors per side.
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?
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.
@@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)
In Montréal, we say "train de banlieue" for exo's train network. So, suburban rail.
As would most places in Europe as well as Australia