Talk:List of urban rail systems by length

message: How was this list defined as to qualify and define the length? (and I am sure it should be spelt lenth not lenght)
I would think that by almost any definition Sydney's Cityrail would have enough kilometres to beat some of the entries on this list
Why should they be "Independent from national railways"? (criteria 4)
Many national railways operate frequent urban rail systems that well matches other criteria.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leinsd (talk • contribs) 14:59, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition 

message: All matters of semantics. The term subway is often used to denote an entire Metro system, such as NY or Washington, where the system is sometimes in subway, sometimes elevated and sometimes on the surface... but never are there grade crossings. Same for the London underground. This is the principal charateristic of a Metro. Thus, metros may operate above, below or on the ground. The Paris metro, for example, has a long elevated section on Line 2.
In in the broad sense of the term, Sydney does not have a subway, but its Cityrail commuter rail system operates in subway configuration in the downtown area.....
Sources for the length of the rail systems in Berlin: for Berlin U-Bahn and Tram see this PDF file at bvg.de, for Berlin S-Bahn see link.  --FlorianB 8 July 2005 15:02 (UTC)
This is, was, and will be, a List of ONLY Subway or Elebvate Metropolitan Railway Systems.
to the definition of a Subway you can read here:
http://www.urbanrail.net/about.htm
What is a metro? A subway? An underground? 
*1) An urban electric mass rail transport system, i.e. it is primarily used to move within the city
*2) Totally independent from other traffic, rail or street traffic
*3) High frequency service (maximum interval approx. 10 minutes during normal daytime service)
Obviously a metro does not have to be underground (this is why I prefer this term to 'subway' or 'underground' or 'U-Bahn' as all these terms imply a tunnel), it can also be elevated or at grade. A metro does not necessarily use heavy rail technology, therefore the Docklands Light Railway or the Lille VAL are full metro services, with the only difference that their capacity is smaller according to the needs of the city/area they serve. It's also irrelevant whether the metro runs on steel wheels or rubber tyres, is monorail or conventional double rail, uses third rail power supply or overhead wire, is fully automated or has a driver, has standard, narrow or broad gauge.
There are many mixed forms nowadays and probably there will be even more in the future. In Europe (especially Germany and the Benelux) light rail systems (Stadtbahn, Premetro) have been bridging the gap between metros and trams for some decades now and provide, in most cases, a perfect service in their city. For the time being I can only cover these mixed systems (which I'd like to refer to as metroTrams) in Europe only, although also in America and Asia more and more networks of this kind are being built.'''
 
Sydney don't have a Subway.
About Berlin...same answer the S-Bahn and the Tramways AREN'T Subway Systems.
BTW Paris with Subway+RER+Tramways have 200 km more than Berlin!
But you can open, and i will be happy to help you, a page where there are a list of all the city with the total km/miles of ALL the Urban Railways of any typologies that run above and underground.
have a nice day.
:Ok, the introduction is better now, although I find it still way to confusing what is included on the list and what is not. But still, Berlin S-Bahn is exactly what you stated, you just need to read the first paragraph of its article! It is an integrated system together with the U-Bahn. So I will add it again. The only difference is that U-Bahn is mostly underground and S-Bahn is mostly elevated (and partly underground). --FlorianB 17:03, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlin data 

message: Where would you put the Poma 2000 of Laon ? 208.46.78.226 00:18, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Laon

message: read: Mumbai#Transport should it be included as it is? It is just a normal commuter railway which the article says it should be excluded.---Pedro 10:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Bombay

message: I made the correction to Istanbul's data.  New length excludes suburban rail system (72 km total acc. to Urbanrail) Urbanrail's data wasn't updated and doesn't include the newly opened lines. For the map, http://www.istanbul-ulasim.com.tr/harita/IstanbulHarita.pdf
: Sorry, i must reverted your edit. See on the end of the article, what is not included. Suburban rail lines is exact that (like RER in Paris or German S-Bahns). --Jklamo 21:57, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Corrections to Istanbul's Data 

message: Portland, Oregon's MAX line should be on this list.
Oh, also, the person screaming about the S-Bahn in Berlin is only partially correct.  Take a look at a map -- there is a big S-Bahn line running straight through the city (a line which also takes the RB and ICE trains).  I assure you that that line is FAR more critical to the city's transportation network than the U2 past Schoenhauser Allee.  Oh, and the Ringbahn.  That thing is critical too, and is entirely within the city.  Zweifel 07:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portland, OR 

message: I think a few of you should look at this line, it has a central street running zone incorporated with roads, traffic and lights, etc. Yet it also runs through suburbs on the extremities of the track.
I'm no expert on trains and railed transport, but this is definately an urban rail system in my eyes.
it currently has a main line from Altrincham to Bury and a second line from Piccadilly (centre of the Altrincham-Bury line) down to Eccles. The main use of this rapid transit system is essentially commuting to and from work in the city centre, however, the lazy ones also use this for getting around the commercial area of Manchester going between shops.
Link to their main site, happy updating!   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.162.192 (talk) 17:20, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Manchester, United Kingdom

message: In my Humble opinion I think the S-Bahn of Berlin should not be added or the RER should be, I will let others decide that.  But if the S-Bahn and U-Bahn of Berlin are counted then the S-Bahn and U-Bahn of Vienna should also be included.
---Lumber Jack- 14:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Vienna combines S-Bahn & U-Bahn

message: While this is a useful article it has absolutely no references and I've been unable to find any from a quick look on google. Also it would be useful if we included dates in the opening paragraph i.e. this is a list of the longest urban rail systems as of 27th October 2007, so that editors will know that they should include any extensions made after that date. Valenciano 09:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  References 

message: Shouldn't the S-train services of Copenhagen be included, seeing as both Berlin and Paris have their S-train netowork in the list? The T-bane in Oslo is more comparable to the Copenhagen S-trains than the Copenhagen Metro; in addition, the S-trains often have a higher service frequency than the T-bane (every ten minutes on the main lines which have rush hour services, plus every five minutes on the ring line).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.75.167.214 (talk) 17:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That would be fair enough. Although I think all S-Bahn and S-trains should be removed from this list. --Kildor (talk) 17:55, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see your objections toward S-bahnen, but as long as we have hybrid systems they composes a problem: many of them form a metro component while being suburban feeder lines, falling short of regional service (like the Nordic capitals), thus restricting the "true" metro systems only to large cities (because of their large urban areas). The Copenhagen Metro is actually one of the most urban of all urban rails, but even this one has some km. out in the suburbs (bordering at one end and continuing out on the two branches).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.75.167.214 (talk) 20:26, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: This has recently been discussed at Talk:List of rapid transit systems. The S-train/S-Bahn/RER systems serve a larger area and connect with other cities (i.e. Potsdam and Frederikssund). They have separate tracks but run in large parts parallell to national rail lines. These are better described as commuter rail and are often referred to as such (the lead of the Wikipedia Copenhagen S-Train article is "The S-train network is the commuter train network of Metropolitan Copenhagen, Denmark."). These systems are not included in other lists of metro/rapid transit systems (MetroBits, UrbanRail.net, UITP/ERRAC). And if we include them here, then we will have problem with many other commuter rail systems being added (which already happend; it does not make sense to see Vienna ahead of London in this list...). --Kildor (talk) 21:51, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough--it's intention, rolling stock, stations and company makeup are certainly "heavy rail", whereas service frequency and track corridors are rapid-transit (12 times/hrs on the "inner lines" (double service), separate (elevated) tracks), compared to Oslo which has 15-min service at the branches, servicing the suburbs and used to have two separat power systems and at-grade crossings.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.75.167.214 (talk) 22:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What is your point? That the Copenhagen commuter rail system is better than the Oslo metro system? I certainly agree. But it does not matter when it comes to inclusion for this list. Including commuter lines makes comparison with other cities completely meaningless (even though I am not sure that a comparison of metro systems only is meaningful either). It is impossible to have a set of criteria for inclusion that will make this list completely fair. And when there is no distinct and clear definition to use, we will need to look for sources (otherwise, this will be own research...). And the Copenhagen S-train network is not included in any lists of metro systems I have seen. But Oslo T-bane is. --Kildor (talk) 23:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

text: BTW, it would be interesting to know the length of the S-tog system. If you know it, please add it to the S-train infobox. --Kildor (talk) 23:48, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copenhagen S-train 

message: The length of Tokyo is too short, and Tokyo has many urban rail lines operated by East Japan Railway Company and many other private railway companies. Trains run every 10 minites or more frequently in those lines, and total length of them is more than 1,000 km in Tokyo metropolitan area. They have similar function as 'S-Bahn' in Germany or 'RER' in Paris.  
Current length of Tokyo includes subway only, but in many other cities, lines of 'S-Bahn' kind are included.  
As already raised in many other opinions, it looks quite strange that suburban lines such as S-Bahn' or 'RER are included in some cities (Berlin, Vienna,,,) and not in others (Tokyo, London, Paris, Seoul,,,).
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Leinsd (talk • contribs) 15:12, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tokyo

message: I'm sorry, this article is awful now with people just adding up as much as possible for their own cities just to let them end up on number one. Why doesn't London have the DLR added, and Paris doesn't have the RER, or New York hasn't got the PATH added? All of of these systems are equally if not more of a metro system than the S-Bahn, for example.
The definition that is used to introduce the list seems to be completely random and well, made up, without any references or backup. Especially the no National Rail bit is something I've never heard before.
I would like a simple list of just the metro systems, excluding suburban rail.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.33.100.13 (talk) 11:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree. Take a look at the List of rapid transit systems. It is perhaps what you are looking for. But this article should be rewritten, and renamed to List of metro systems by length. --Kildor (talk) 12:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is a complete mess 

message: The Monorail list in this article has "Charleroi, Belgium 25.0 km" as the longest system in the world, but I cannot find any references to this system on Wikipedia. The Osaka Monorail listed as #2 is the longest monorail in the world according to the Guiness Book of Records. Maybe an expert can clarify the situation - as it is difficult to verify any of the entries without reference sources or citations. --DAJF (talk) 05:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Charleroi system is not a monorail, but a pre-metro or light rail system. See Charleroi Pre-metro. The section is labelled "Monorail, pre-metro & people mover", so it does not say anything about the longest monorail in the world. --Kildor (talk) 08:12, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, thanks for the clarification. Now, what is a "pre-metro"? I am not familiar with the term, and it does not appear to be explained on this page or on the Charleroi Pre-metro page. --DAJF (talk) 09:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It is not a well defined term. But it can be used to describe a light rail system with high standard, aimed to be "upgraded" to full metro. The system typically have metro standard to a large extent, but has some elements of light rail, such as intersections with road traffic, pedestrian crossings or some parts with in-street routes. See also Premetro. --Kildor (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Belgian Monorail?

message: I don't think we should in include the Berlin Strassenbahn tram network because no other city has its tram network included in its total legnth. Howeverm I do not mind if the Berlin tram network is included as long as other light rail networks such as London's tramlink, Brussel's premetro, Manchester's metrolink, Sheffield's supertram, San Fransisco's muni and similair are included as well.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spacevezon (talk • contribs) 18:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Berlin Tram Network Should Not Be Included 

message: This page is all rubbish. Why do some cities (i.e. Barcelona) have tram networks added when others do not?
Why does Milan have a regional rail system included in its total legnth?
And more similair points.
79.66.64.56 (talk) 17:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rubbish 

message: I removed Barcelona and Madrid from the list. This is for the following reasons:
A) Barcelona had a tram network on it. There was no citations or refrences about the legnth of this network (or wikipedia article).
B) Milan had an international rail network (which serves Switzerland and Italy)
C)Barcelona had many unvertified metro networks counted, of which to little information was avaliable (I tried google, wikipedia and the libary).
Could someone please add these two cities back once they can vertify the information and only add systems which meet the metro criteria. Spacevezon (talk) 13:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  MILAN/BARCELONA 

message: If RER included for Paris and Tokyo, why Moscow Elektrichka is not included?--Dojarca (talk) 13:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commuter train 

message: Substituted at 22:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment