Nexus Metro & Merseyrail: What is the difference?

thecraftybee · 18 Feb 2020

I'm very interested in urban planning and that has meant needing to become more knowledgeable about trains and the railways, which led me to this site. I've been following a number of threads with interest, although it's difficult to understand some of the conversations as they can get quite jargon heavy and I personally have no interest in knowing the difference between a 150-something and and 160-something, although I do admire the passion and expertise you all have.

I have a question I hope someone can help me out with.

I've seen a number of references to Tyne & Wear's railways as a Metro, but that naming convention doesn't seem to apply to Merseyrail. Looking at wikipedia, they seem to be a similar length with a similar number of stations and passengers. They both have underground stations. The main difference I see is that the Merseyrail lines branch more compared to Nexus, and Nexus seem to have 5 trains per hour compared to 4 in Liverpool. I've been on both, although awhile back and Merseyrail trains seemed roomier to me, but not significantly different. Are Nexus trains faster? Would Merseyrail need more tph to be considered a Metro?

Anyway, I'd love to know the difference, so I'd appreciation if anyone who could enlighten me.

RailUK Forums

STEVIEBOY1 · 18 Feb 2020

I am not sure, but I suspect the name/word, "Metro" was a marketing ploy used when the system was modernised (I think in the late 1970s or 1980s-Not quite sure when), to it's format as we have today. Both systems incorporate much of what was there before, with a number of alterations, (Building some new lines/connections/stations etc.) Many overseas rapid transport systems are called metro, that being a throw back to the first one which was the Metropolitan line in London.

yorkie · 18 Feb 2020

thecraftybee said:
I've seen a number of references to Tyne & Wear's railways as a Metro..

.. probably because it's called T&W Metro.

thecraftybee said:
but that naming conventiondoesn't seem to apply to Merseyrail.

The name of a system doesn't necessarily indicate whether it is a "metro" system or not.

Furthermore, the term "metro" is subjective with no universally accepted meaning.

The Merseyrail network is effectively a metro in every respect; the main reason it probably doesn't have the name "Metro" in the name is because it is part of the National Rail network, and the name "Metro" may be considered to suggest being a separate system.

That said, the name 'Metro' has been used in branding by some National Rail franchises in the past e.g. "Silverlink Metro", "Thameslink CityMetro".

In effect, a "Metro" can be whatever you want it to be, within a broad range of definitions!

thecraftybee said:
Looking at wikipedia, they seem to be a similar length with a similar number of stations and passengers. They both have underground stations. The main difference I see is that the Merseyrail lines branch more compared to Nexus, and Nexus seem to have 5 trains per hour compared to 4 in Liverpool. I've been on both, although awhile back and Merseyrail trains seemed roomier to me, but not significantly different. Are Nexus trains faster? Would Merseyrail need more tph to be considered a Metro?

There is no universally accepted minimum trains per hour to be deemed a "Metro"; the Metropolitan Line itself isn't particularly frequent at Chesham.

thecraftybee said:
Anyway, I'd love to know the difference, so I'd appreciation if anyone who could enlighten me.

I'm not sure if you are asking for a list of differences (and similarities) between Nexus T&W Metro and Merseyrail or if you asking for differences between different definitions of the term "Metro" more generally?

edwin_m · 18 Feb 2020

Metro was built as a self-contained light rail network where trains weren't to the same technical standards as the main line railway. In fact this was never totally true as some freight trains still used the Metro lines in the early years, and it became less true after 2000 when Metro trains started running on the main line to Sunderland albeit with some special electrification and signaling features. The new trains now on order are more heavy-rail like and in fact very similar to those being delivered to Merseyrail.

Merseyrail is still officially part of the main line network although it has exclusive use of most of its routes. At one point it was suggested that infrastructure would be transferred from Network Rail to a new authority, but that didn't happen in the end.

So in practice the two are very similar from a passenger perspective. The difference is in ownership, with Metro not being part of Network Rail, and in some technical details such as different systems of electrification.

Vespa · 18 Feb 2020

Merseyrail has more in common with London Underground compared to Tyne & Wear.

Merseyrail is a self contained third rail system with underground stations.

ainsworth74 · 18 Feb 2020

Metro very much, in my view, is a brand identity thing rather than a technical definition. Some systems that have 'Metro' in their name will have similarities but they will also have similarities to other systems which don't have 'Metro' in their title. Take the Docklands Light Railway and compare it to the Tyne & Wear Metro for instance. Both provide services across a reasonable area, both have some underground sections, both use light rail vehicles as opposed to heavy rail vehicles. Yet on is a 'Metro' and the other a 'Light Railway'. You could just as easily call them the Docklands Metro and the Tyne & Wear Light Railway and it wouldn't be inaccurate.

Then there's the West Yorkshire Metro which is (or I suppose from a rail perspective increasingly was) the brand name given to the collection of routes serving West Yorkshire (mostly centred on Leeds). Many of which were diesel operated at comparatively low frequencies (i.e. two trains per hour or less). Yet they were branded as a 'Metro'!

There probably is a technical definition or a broadly agreed set of criteria to judge something as being a 'Metro' but the names given to various systems is certainly not determination in the way that you might be thinking.

thecraftybee · 18 Feb 2020

yorkie said:
I'm not sure if you are asking for a list of differences (and similarities) between Nexus T&W Metro and Merseyrail or if you asking for differences between different definitions of the term "Metro" more generally?

I’m asking because I’ve seen a number of sites or YT videos that discuss “Metros” around Europe and they tend to list the U.K. as having only 3 Metro systems with those being the London Underground, Glasgow Subway and Newcastle Metro. To my uninitiated eyes Merseyrail seems pretty similar to the Nexus Metro so I was wondering if there was a certain property it was missing for it to be classed as a Metro.

After reading the answers here it seems the term is fairly nebulous and more about branding than about the physical systems.

LNW-GW Joint · 18 Feb 2020

The South Wales Metro is heading in the same direction as Nexus/T&W Metro, ie with mainly local ownership and operation outside the national system.
Valley Lines NR infrastructure (not all of it) is being transferred to the local body, and the system will also have tram-like properties in places.

Ticketing on Nexus is entirely separate from the National Rail system, while on Merseyrail it is still at least nominally part of the national system (through tickets etc).
Merseyrail (actually Merseytravel, the PTE) did try to transfer its infrastructure to local control but gave up when they realised how much it would cost.
(this was just before some major NR upgrades, notably replacing all the "fit and forget" slab track in the tunnels).

Rikki Lamb · 18 Feb 2020

ainsworth74 said:
Metro very much, in my view, is a brand identity thing rather than a technical definition. Some systems that have 'Metro' in their name will have similarities but they will also have similarities to other systems which don't have 'Metro' in their title. Take the Docklands Light Railway and compare it to the Tyne & Wear Metro for instance. Both provide services across a reasonable area, both have some underground sections, both use light rail vehicles as opposed to heavy rail vehicles. Yet on is a 'Metro' and the other a 'Light Railway'. You could just as easily call them the Docklands Metro and the Tyne & Wear Light Railway and it wouldn't be inaccurate.

Then there's the West Yorkshire Metro which is (or I suppose from a rail perspective increasingly was) the brand name given to the collection of routes serving West Yorkshire (mostly centred on Leeds). Many of which were diesel operated at comparatively low frequencies (i.e. two trains per hour or less). Yet they were branded as a 'Metro'!

There probably is a technical definition or a broadly agreed set of criteria to judge something as being a 'Metro' but the names given to various systems is certainly not determination in the way that you might be thinking.

No, not quite, Metro was the brand name for WYPTE and is now the brand for WYCA.

The sub brands were MetroTrain for the WYPTE subsidised services and MetroBus. There were some River Bus canal services too and WYPTE bus stops could be found along a couple of local canals as Barge stops.

Interestingly, at the 1974 reorganisation, SELNEC pte planned to take the name Metro but WYPTE beat them to it

ainsworth74 · 18 Feb 2020

thecraftybee said:
I’m asking because I’ve seen a number of sites or YT videos that discuss “Metros” around Europe and they tend to list the U.K. as having only 3 Metro systems with those being the London Underground, Glasgow Subway and Newcastle Metro. To my uninitiated eyes Merseyrail seems pretty similar to the Nexus Metro so I was wondering if there was a certain property it was missing for it to be classed as a Metro.

I would argue that the main thing that links those three systems is that they use light rail vehicles. But then I would argue that the DLR is just as much a metro system as those three are (and also uses light rail vehicles)! It certainly covers a far larger area than the Glasgow Subway!! YouTube is good but it isn't always authoritative

LNW-GW Joint said:
Ticketing on Nexus is entirely separate from the National Rail system, while on Merseyrail it is still at least nominally part of the national system (through tickets etc).

Tyne & Wear Metro has through tickets from National Rail stations. They're not always obvious, easy to find or purchase but they certainly exist. For instance this fare from Middlesbrough to Zone A: http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=MBR&dest=H638&tkt=SDR or how about this one from Manchester Airport to Newcastle Airport: http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=MIA&dest=APN&tkt=SDS both of those are available via TPE's website at least. Admittedly in my experience such tickets don't work the barriers at Tyne & Wear Metro stations but I've never had a single member of staff even give it a second glance despite being on the 'wrong' type of ticket stock (they used yellow and white rather than orange tickets).

ainsworth74 · 18 Feb 2020

Rikki Lamb said:
No, not quite, Metro was the brand name for WYPTE and is now the brand for WYCA.

The sub brands were MetroTrain for the WYPTE subsidised services and MetroBus.

Okay so I may have not quite got the precise details right on the history of that brand but I note that the rail services still included the title 'Metro' despite being completely different to the other systems that we're talking about which have 'Metro' in their name or a 'Metro' assoication

TheSeeker · 18 Feb 2020

I've always considered a Metro, like the one in Brussels to be defined by not having a timetable. You just wait a few minutes for the next train to come along.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

They are quite similar in what they do, but Nexus Metro is a light rail system not running on Network Rail metals (mostly, other than the extension to Sunderland) - on the German model an U-Bahn - and Merseyrail is a heavy rail system running on Network Rail metals, so on the German model an S-Bahn. (I know some people don't like the use of this categorisation but it is quite useful in this regard).

I think political views shifted on the structure under which such a thing should work between the building of the two, so I'm pretty sure that had Merseyrail been built a bit later it would have looked much more like Metro.

I would say the DLR and Metro are very similar things (both U-Bahnen), they are different in that Metro uses OHLE and DLR third rail (the latter the same system as most German U-bahnen) but I don't think this is a significant difference; again looking at the German model there are third rail S-Bahnen (Berlin, Hamburg) and OHLE ones (most others).

Metrolink, to throw it in, would be a Stadtbahn (which also gets the "big U"), being a hybrid tram/light rail train type thing having properties of both - indeed in its early days GMPTE refused to use the word "tram" to describe it, until it realised it had lost the battle for that.

Dr Hoo · 18 Feb 2020

Recognising that it is on neither Tyneside nor Merseyside it has always struck me that Pontefract Baghill set the “Metro” bar fairly low under WYPTE. Two pacer calls each way per day at one time (now three calls, with slightly better trains coming) and no direct services to the main West Yorkshire cities. But still proudly Metro branded.

A completely debased currency.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

Dr Hoo said:
Recognising that it is on neither Tyneside nor Merseyside it has always struck me that Pontefract Baghill set the “Metro” bar fairly low under WYPTE. Two pacer calls each way per day at one time (now three calls, with slightly better trains coming) and no direct services to the main West Yorkshire cities. But still proudly Metro branded.

A completely debased currency.

I wouldn't call Metro (the PTE) a metro (lower case), though. The former is more like the MTA (in a New York Sense) i.e. Metro is short for "Metropolitan Transport Authority" (I know it's not quite), the latter refers to a style of railway i.e. the New York Metro (but not, say, the Long Island Railroad, though this is very similar, a bit like the AKN lines around Hamburg which are built to look like the U-Bahn but are low frequency diesel routes).

That said, like the term S-Bahn (which gets used for rural lines using some of the concepts these days, e.g. Breisgau-S-Bahn and the Swiss ones) it can be a bit blurred as "metro" concepts get applied to other lines - e.g. the "North Wales Metro" which was at one point discussed, which didn't involve electric light rail trains but more referred to an enhancement to local services and more clockface timetabling.

swt_passenger · 18 Feb 2020

Vespa said:
Merseyrail has more in common with London Underground compared to Tyne & Wear.

Merseyrail is a self contained third rail system with underground stations.

I’d say Merseyrail is more like the DC areas of London Overground, than the underground. It’s operationally more segregated than the various LO routes, but still uses regular Network Rail signalling standards.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

swt_passenger said:
I’d say Merseyrail is more like the DC areas of London Overground, than the underground. It’s operationally more segregated than the various LO routes, but still uses regular Network Rail signalling standards.

It is similar to both LO and the Metropolitan Line, I'd say. The fact that Merseyrail and most of LO[1] are part of NR and the Metropolitan Line isn't is to me just a historical accident.

It is not even remotely similar (other than being heavy rail) to the deep Tube.

[1] Some of the East London Line isn't, and accordingly doesn't have double-arrow signs on the station totems.

swt_passenger · 18 Feb 2020

I also think in terms of naming the use of the word Metro for quite different purposes in some areas, (comparing TWPTE and WYPTE), might have had something to do with them being fairly recently formed Metropolitan counties.

urbophile · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
It is similar to both LO and the Metropolitan Line, I'd say. The fact that Merseyrail and most of LO[1] are part of NR and the Metropolitan Line isn't is to me just a historical accident.

It is not even remotely similar (other than being heavy rail) to the deep Tube.

[1] Some of the East London Line isn't, and accordingly doesn't have double-arrow signs on the station totems.

It's only historical accident that means the Metropolitan Line is part of LU rather than LO or even in the case of Amersham and Chesham an outer-suburban Network Rail route. If you were classifying rail systems according to objective criteria you'd put T&W, Merseyrail, the Met, all in the same category. They all are (more or less) segregated systems with little through running apart from the Sunderland branch and the northern part of the Met. London Overground is much more complicated and hence, despite the level of service, is much less like a discrete Metro.

LNW-GW Joint · 18 Feb 2020

Sydney also refuses to use the term "tram" for its "Light Rail" system.
Its first line was a converted heavy rail line round the old docks, with a short central section of street running.
This line feels very much like Nottingham Tram or Midlands Metro, with similar tram vehicles.
The second line recently opened towards the south-eastern suburbs is entirely street running - in fact the whole system is on the surface bar a couple of short railway tunnels.

Meanwhile the "Sydney Metro", now under construction, is going to be much like our Crossrail with adapted heavy rail sections in the suburbs and a central deep level tube through the centre and the harbour, all to a main line spec.
The whole network (all modes) is part of the standard city ticketing system (Opel, much like Oyster in London).
Except for the privately funded airport stations, which carry a premium fare.

BigCj34 · 18 Feb 2020

So essentially it's three cities that have their own self contained railways. If you wanted to say cities (or really connurbations) with inner city and suburban rail services that net is widened, moreso if you include trams.

What is confusing is Crossrail, the Elizabeth Line is branded like the other LU lines (by having line apended to its name) while not being classed as the Tube, but built to NR specifications but not classed as that either.

It's got more in common with Thameslink but the TfL won't show a rival operator and the London Rail services map isn't the prettiest.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

Crossrail is a really odd one - I don't totally understand why it's a thing in its own right and not part of either LU or LO. But then again Thameslink isn't, but then Thameslink isn't controlled by TfL.

Thameslink does appear on the London Connections maps.

ainsworth74 · 18 Feb 2020

Unless I've missed a trick it's pure TfL politicking. The reality is that they want to add it to their own train set without faffing with all the things that come with being a part of the National Rail network. But they can't quite get away with that so we have this rather bizarre halfway house.

yorkie · 18 Feb 2020

Let's not forget London Underground is heavy rail, not light rail.

The Metropolitan Railway - from where the term "Metro" originated - was (and, to some extent still is) a proper mainline railway with fast and slow services.

thecraftybee said:
I’m asking because I’ve seen a number of sites or YT videos that discuss “Metros” around Europe and they tend to list the U.K. as having only 3 Metro systems with those being the London Underground, Glasgow Subway and Newcastle Metro. To my uninitiated eyes Merseyrail seems pretty similar to the Nexus Metro so I was wondering if there was a certain property it was missing for it to be classed as a Metro...

I'd be curious to learn of their criteria; I strongly suspect that if you apply their criteria correctly you would find that the number should be different.

I fail to see how on earth the DLR is not considered to be a "Metro system"; what part of their criteria could possibly exclude it? I assume the reason for not counting Merseyrail or London Overground is that they are part of the wider National Rail "system", but it's far from clear.

The fact they use the term "system" adds even more room for ambiguity and interpretation.

And under what criteria would the Manchester Metrolink not be considered to be a Metro?

I think the people who make these lists up are just making it up as they go along and this is just more evidence that no authoritative definition exists, no authoritative list exists, the concept is more a case of a loose connection of attributes which systems may or may not conform to, to varying degrees, to be more or less 'Metro'-like.

It's not a clearly definable thing; if anyone wants to argue that T&W Metro and London Underground are "Metros" but DLR, Metrolink and Merseyrail are not, then I'd like to have an argument* with them about their logic.

(* The full argument, not the 5-minute one

)

47271 · 18 Feb 2020

I'm a very frequent user of both systems, and Tyne & Wear mainly out to Sunderland, where we mix it on the main line for a grim rattly and cold half hour.

Unless you want to be very picky, there's very little difference in the history or the heritage, other than Merseyrail was maintained as a BR run system from the late 70s, and T&W was handed over in its entirety to the PTE with a focus on new purpose built infrastructure through and from Newcastle and Gateshead.

The key difference to the passenger now is that Merseyrail uses properly constructed heavy rail 40 year old clapped out trains, but is pretty much okay. Nexus uses light rail rickety 40 year old clapped out tram trains, none of which appear to have functioning heating this winter (has anyone experienced a heated Metro since October, let me know?), and is way off from okay.

As per other posts above, both networks' stock will be brought in line to main line standards before long, at which point there will be less to choose between them.

BigCj34 · 18 Feb 2020

yorkie said:
Let's not forget London Underground is heavy rail, not light rail.

The Metropolitan Railway - from where the term "Metro" originated - was (and, to some extent still is) a proper mainline railway with fast and slow services.

I'd be curious to learn of their criteria; I strongly suspect that if you apply their criteria correctly you would find that the number should be different.

I fail to see how on earth the DLR is not considered to be a "Metro system"; what part of their criteria could possibly exclude it? I assume the reason for not counting Merseyrail or London Overground is that they are part of the wider National Rail "system", but it's far from clear.

The fact they use the term "system" adds even more room for ambiguity and interpretation.

And under what criteria would the Manchester Metrolink not be considered to be a Metro?

I think the people who make these lists up are just making it up as they go along and this is just more evidence that no authoritative definition exists, no authoritative list exists, the concept is more a case of a loose connection of attributes which systems may or may not conform to, to varying degrees, to be more or less 'Metro'-like.

It's not a clearly definable thing; if anyone wants to argue that T&W Metro and London Underground are "Metros" but DLR, Metrolink and Merseyrail are not, then I'd like to have an argument* with them about their logic.

(* The full argument, not the 5-minute one )

I guess the logic is a self-contained heavy/light rail? Although the LO is a self-contained network in London but uses NR infrastructure so it's not a closed system. The DLR is a closed system, so there is no reason why that's not a metro. People poke fun at Glasgow's subway for being a loop but of course its suburban railway is extensive, but Charing Cross (Glasgow) is as much as a National Rail station as Birmingham New Street.

The dictionary definition suggests an underground railway network, but considering many LU/TW metro lines for instance are surface level that meaning is obsolete. I think any frequent stopping guided mass transit system that runs through a conurbation fits the definition, something the likes of London, Glasgow, Tyne and Wear, Merseyside and Greater Manchester do have, and what other cities are working towards. That's a geographic and physical definition, though Metro branding is all over the place. Glasgow and Strathclyde could easily be classed as having a Metro system, while West Yorkshire is too spread out and infrequent to be considered a Metro for instance.

bramling · 18 Feb 2020

ainsworth74 said:
I would argue that the main thing that links those three systems is that they use light rail vehicles. But then I would argue that the DLR is just as much a metro system as those three are (and also uses light rail vehicles)! It certainly covers a far larger area than the Glasgow Subway!! YouTube is good but it isn't always authoritative

Tyne & Wear Metro has through tickets from National Rail stations. They're not always obvious, easy to find or purchase but they certainly exist. For instance this fare from Middlesbrough to Zone A: http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=MBR&dest=H638&tkt=SDR or how about this one from Manchester Airport to Newcastle Airport: http://www.brfares.com/#faredetail?orig=MIA&dest=APN&tkt=SDS both of those are available via TPE's website at least. Admittedly in my experience such tickets don't work the barriers at Tyne & Wear Metro stations but I've never had a single member of staff even give it a second glance despite being on the 'wrong' type of ticket stock (they used yellow and white rather than orange tickets).

London Underground is very much heavy rail, and Tyne & Wear is essentially a heavy rail system even if the current rolling stock isn’t.

Remember we do have the odd section of “light railway” used by heavy rail trains. Bere Alstom to Gunnislake being the one which springs to mind!

bluenoxid · 18 Feb 2020

A conversation about West Yorkshire Metro cannot be complete without the attached.

To throw more into the mix. What would you call Rapid Transit/ Mass Transit?

Scott M · 18 Feb 2020

T+W Metro:
• Tramcar trains
• Don't meet the same safety standards as heavy rail - no AWS, TPWS etc
• Unlike heavy rail, uses KMPH instead of MPH
• Max speed 50MPH (80 KMPH)
• Self-maintained

Merseyrail:
• Heavy rail stock
• Same safety standards as heavy rail (AWS, TPWS etc)
• Uses MPH
• Max speed 75MPH
• Network Rail maintained

DanBlanchflowe · 18 Feb 2020

yorkie said:
.. probably because it's called T&W Metro.

The name of a system doesn't necessarily indicate whether it is a "metro" system or not.

Furthermore, the term "metro" is subjective with no universally accepted meaning.

The Merseyrail network is effectively a metro in every respect; the main reason it probably doesn't have the name "Metro" in the name is because it is part of the National Rail network, and the name "Metro" may be considered to suggest being a separate system.

That said, the name 'Metro' has been used in branding by some National Rail franchises in the past e.g. "Silverlink Metro", "Thameslink CityMetro".

In effect, a "Metro" can be whatever you want it to be, within a broad range of definitions!

There is no universally accepted minimum trains per hour to be deemed a "Metro"; the Metropolitan Line itself isn't particularly frequent at Chesham.

I'm not sure if you are asking for a list of differences (and similarities) between Nexus T&W Metro and Merseyrail or if you asking for differences between different definitions of the term "Metro" more generally?

The term "Metro" comes from the fact that the 1972 Local Government Act created metropolitan counties. Densely populated areas of Midland & Northern England.
The 5 metropoliton boroughs of Tyne and Wear were one of these counties.
The County were unique in persuading central government to pass the Tyne and Wear Metropolitan Railway Act 1977. Its achievement was therefore called Tyne and Wear Metro, "the Metro" which was completed 1980-1982.

Nexus Metro & Merseyrail: What is the difference?

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Forum Staff

Veteran Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Forum Staff

Forum Staff

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Forum Staff

Forum Staff

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Attachments

Member

Member