Paris suburban rail

[anti-pacer]

How does Paris compare to London in terms of suburban rail?

Is it as extensive, what's the rolling stock like, are loadings heavy, is it frequent, and is it as safe?

 

[Polarbear]

How does Paris compare to London in terms of suburban rail?

Is it as extensive, what's the rolling stock like, are loadings heavy, is it frequent, and is it as safe?

It's certainly extensive and loadings can be very heavy at peak times.

Essentially, you have the metro & tramways that cover the inner Paris area, with SNCF "Transillien" services and the RER network for longer distance services, as well as TER SNCF services that run out as far as Le Mans.

I'm sure someone else will be able to provide a bit more detail about ticketing, but it's certainly easy enough to get a ticket that covers most of the Paris suburban network.

Frequency - very good in the central areas as a general rule. RER line A has one of the most frequent services at peak times (with loadings to go with it).

Older rolling stock is somewhat basic in comparison to the UK, but new trains are being rolled out which appear to be better. As mentioned earlier, loadings can be very heavy & the stock is geared towards handling large volumes of people, rather than comfort.

Safety - this can be a little subjective but as long as you follow the usual rules & exercise caution in unfamiliar surroundings, you shouldn't have any problems. Having said that, ticketless travel is a big problem in & around Paris, which brings with it a degree of anti-social behaviour.

Also, there are some suburbs in the greater Paris area that are probably best avoided by tourists. RER lines B & D run through some of these areas so again, just exercise caution.

 

[class387]

I made a thread about this planning for my visit just over a year ago:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=128049

Paris is very interesting in terms of variety and is probably one of the only European city that rivals London in terms of stock sampled. It is generally safe, though some areas, especially in the north, are not pleasant and best avoided. One thing that shocked me was how much the trains were vandalised, though.

A lot has changed since my visit. The MS61s, one of the best EMUs anywhere in Europe are gone and I was there for its last days. A great shame, as they were great trains with the most amazing motor sounds. The BB17000s and CC72100s (the latter was used on IC trains) are also now only in small numbers.

Out of the trains still running here are three favourites:

1. Z50000s - New suburban trains that are my favourite in all of Europe. Can be found across the network.

2. Z6400s - 1970s units used on services out of St Lazare that makes great motor noises. Soon to be replaced by Z50000s

3. Z5300s - 1960s units that have amazingly survived, some in original condition, on local services in the Southeast​. Soon to be replaced by new double deckers.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

2. Z6400s - 1970s units used on services out of St Lazare that makes great motor noises. Soon to be replaced by Z50000s

3. Z5300s - 1960s units that have amazingly survived, some in original condition, on local services in the Southeast​. Soon to be replaced by new double deckers.

About half a dozen Z6400 have already been withdrawn.

The few remaining Z5300 are centered on the Melun area; they have a few months left.

 

[317666]

About half a dozen Z6400 have already been withdrawn.

The few remaining Z5300 are centered on the Melun area; they have a few months left.

Thanks for the heads-up - those two types are also among my favourites in Paris so I'll definitely pay them some attention next week!

To add to the comment above about frequency, I find that it varies wildly. The Métro lines are generally very frequent, but some of the RER lines not so much - especially some of the outer branches which only receive a half-hourly or even hourly service.

Safety, again I would agree is subjective, it depends how easily intimidated you are. I've never had any problems on the more notorious parts of the RER B or Transilien J, but generally keep myself to myself - no travelling with a massive rucksack or waving a big expensive camera about etc. I should probably point out that this has always been on busy trains during the day, on an empty train at night things might be somewhat different...

Overall I have to say that the Paris network is one of my favourites from an enthusiast's point of view, there's a lot of variety and the Métro in particular has a lot of character.

 

[sk688]

Went to Paris for a short break last year , and ended up using Line 6 and RER A to get to the Eiffel Tower

RER A has double deck trains , which are air-conditioned , but have 315 style 3+2 low backed seats on both decks , and can get very busy

When I went the entire centre section from La Defense to Nation was closed , so took Line 6 .

Would avoid Line 6 . Screechy , horrible , poorly maintained trainsets , although it did feel like it was in a time warp , rather like the Bakerloo Line . Had to cover my ears due to the wheel ( flanges I think ) between Nation and Bel Air , although the line is rather scenic between Bir Hakkeim and Trocadero

The stations did not feel as safe . There was a slightly threatening atmosphere , due to the dingy , wide empty corridors that we went through ( although some stations were nice , like la Defense ) , and there were far fewer staff around patrolling and on the platforms . Don't know if this is the same at peak times

Fare evasion seems to be high . When at Torcy station , I was buying tickets , when a train arrives . Half the people vault over the barriers , RATP staff just sit in their office .

 

[Gordon]

Two general points not made in other responses (as far as I can see):

1)
The biggest difference is that the French 'invented' the 'RER' concept that London's Crossrail is modelled on, but London is way behind.

The principal of the RER is that a suburban train comes in on its traditional route, but then burrows underground just before reaching the original surface terminus station, so serving an underground section of a major terminus then running through the city centre, then serving the underground section of another major terminus station before resurfacing to follow the original suburban route again.

Example:
In London the equivalent, and something we should have done years ago to match the same style as Paris, would be to create an underground section at London Victoria, and another at Euston. Trains from Brighton etc (and all over the Southern 'central division') would come straight up their normal direct routes towards Victoria but then dive under, run to Oxford Circus, then on to 'Euston RER' underground before surfacing and joining the fast straight lines out of Euston towards Watford, Milton Keynes etc.

In this way no-one has to change trains in order to get from a place, say, 50 - 100 km south of the city to one of the stations bang in the city centre. Trains on these lines run at a fast pace because they are on main lines.

The problem with what has been done so far in London is that 'cross-city' routes are peripheral, using essentially joined up bits of various orbital sections, so trains don't get from A to B as briskly.

2)
The Paris metro is quite different to the London Underground. It was built as essentially an underground tramway network. The tunnels in many places follow the streets but running beneath them. The idea was to 'declutter' the surface roads but still keep an electric transit system.


.

 

[317666]

2)
The Paris metro is quite different to the London Underground. It was built as essentially an underground tramway network. The tunnels in many places follow the streets but running beneath them. The idea was to 'declutter' the surface roads but still keep an electric transit system.

Which also explains why the stations on the Métro are often very close together, making it altogether pretty slow in the city centre.

 

[U-Bahnfreund]

The biggest difference is that the French 'invented' the 'RER' concept that London's Crossrail is modelled on, but London is way behind.

I don’t want to be nitpicky about this, but although the French did invent the RER brand and had more of a concept behind it, the idea of connecting major terminal stations by underground rail lines and then run suburban services through it, already existed prior to the Paris RER: Berlin’s Stadtbahn, which is overground and also handles main-line traffic, connected the Schlesischer Bahnhof (today Ostbahnhof) and Grunewald termini in 1882, while the proper underground S-Bahn route from Stettiner Bahnhof (today Nordbahnhof) to Anhalter Bahnhof, fully opened in 1939, picked up the local services of Stettiner Bahnhof, Anhalter Bahnhof and Potsdamer Bahnhof termini. Another route that was supposed to link the Görlitzer Bahnhof terminus with this route was planned, but never built. Today, Berlin has no major termini anymore.

 

[MarcVD]

Yes and you can add to that the north-south link in Brussels with its 6 tracks between Brussels North and Brussels Midi, carrying more than 1200 trains per day, not only suburban but also long distance.

Sent from my SM-T819 using Tapatalk

 

[plcd1]

How does Paris compare to London in terms of suburban rail?

Is it as extensive, what's the rolling stock like, are loadings heavy, is it frequent, and is it as safe?

Been a fair few years since I've been but I used to stay with friends to the NW of Paris. This meant I used the suburban lines out of Gare du Nord and also RER C. I've also used the other RER lines and one or two other suburban lines plus lots of the Metro and tram routes.

Generally there are no issues in the daytime as Paris is very busy like London. I agree with earlier comments about the need to be streetwise and a tad careful about precisely where you travel. Some outer areas are a tad notorious. I have travelled on the RER at night and was a tad unnerved. I certainly encountered trains with carriages sealed off and people concentrated into 2 cars only. I think this was to reduce vandalism and "steaming" type attacks. Some of the large RER stations can be pretty forboding when shops are closed and few people are around. I would not be waving cameras around in those places at night. All that said I've never suffered any sort of hassle from other people on any of the systems. The only "issue" has been ticket gates having fun with the Mobilis ticket I used.

I certainly used some of the older stock on the Nord lines but I believe they've all gone now and been replaced with shiny new EMUs. For me it's the sheer scale of things like the RER that are very different to London and the Metro is idiosyncratic but then so is the Tube in London.

 

[Taunton]

Would avoid Line 6 . Screechy , horrible , poorly maintained trainsets , although it did feel like it was in a time warp , rather like the Bakerloo Line . Had to cover my ears due to the wheel ( flanges I think ) between Nation and Bel Air , although the line is rather scenic between Bir Hakkeim and Trocadero

Unlikely, as Line 6 is one of the rubber tyred lines.

 

[sk688]

Unlikely, as Line 6 is one of the rubber tyred lines.

Might not have got what caused the sound , but it was one of those horrible high pitched screechy sounds , that I would usually associate with flanging

It was only between Nation and Bel Air , in the direction of Etoile . Not on the way back

 

[Polarbear]

Might not have got what caused the sound , but it was one of those horrible high pitched screechy sounds , that I would usually associate with flanging

It was only between Nation and Bel Air , in the direction of Etoile . Not on the way back

Although line 6 is one of the pneumatic lines, it could be that on the section you experienced the noise, it was using the steel wheel for some reason? All of the pneumatic stock also have steel wheels as well for depot/junction manoeuvres.

 

[edwin_m]

Although line 6 is one of the pneumatic lines, it could be that on the section you experienced the noise, it was using the steel wheel for some reason? All of the pneumatic stock also have steel wheels as well for depot/junction manoeuvres.

I remember reading that it drops onto the steel wheel if a tyre bursts. I think both steel and both rubber wheels are on the same axle, so unless the steel one is the same diameter as the surviving rubber one (allowing for compression of the latter), it will probably be slipping all the time. Come to think of it I don't know how they go round curves on the rubber tyres without a differential.

Always struck me as a really bad system, having to carry round two sets of running gear and lateral guide wheels as well. I suspect that though they wouldn't admit it they probably now regret ever installing it.

 

[Taunton]

It works quite well, several other systems (French-engineered of course) have adopted it. Initially it offered much better performance than the classic old Metro stock, but modern trains have caught up.

The steel wheels are clear of the rails all the time, apart from punctures (which I have never heard of happening). Interestingly there is no protection from punctures to the horizontal guide tyres. At points the train drops a bit to be guided by the deep flanges, but the steel wheel treads still do not touch. The rails remain bright throughout because they are shunted by skids for track circuit purposes.

Line 6 has significant outdoor sections and has tyres with tread, to maintain performance in the rain. The other lines have smooth tyres.

 

[Gordon]

Always struck me as a really bad system, having to carry round two sets of running gear and lateral guide wheels as well. I suspect that though they wouldn't admit it they probably now regret ever installing it.

Not sure its a matter of regret so much as that technology has moved on.

At the time of its conception and installation it did IMHO provide a quieter, slightly smoother ride. I certainly remember as a youngster in the 1960s riding the lines and we felt impressed.

However since then technology on bogies and suspension has moved on, so nowadays you can get a quite riding bogie without rubber tyres.



.

 

[edwin_m]

Not sure its a matter of regret so much as that technology has moved on.

At the time of its conception and installation it did IMHO provide a quieter, slightly smoother ride. I certainly remember as a youngster in the 1960s riding the lines and we felt impressed.

However since then technology on bogies and suspension has moved on, so nowadays you can get a quite riding bogie without rubber tyres.

Agreed - certainly the latest steel-wheel stock on the Metro seems some of the most comfortable and quiet on any of the lines.

Another claimed advantage is greater acceleration and braking rates, but they are so high that there is a significant risk of passengers falling over (there are warning signs in the coaches) so I'm not sure it's actually a benefit.

 

[Taunton]

The Paris Metro has very short distances between stations. It is common to be able to see the next station in either direction from a platform. So acceleration is more important than high speed. That is what the rubber tyres give.

I've had some spectacular last-train-at-night runs on rubber tyred Line 4, great acceleration and braking, and 5 second station stops (yes, the 'bruiteur' going off just a few seconds after stopping).

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The Paris Metro has very short distances between stations. It is common to be able to see the next station in either direction from a platform. So acceleration is more important than high speed. That is what the rubber tyres give.

I've had some spectacular last-train-at-night runs on rubber tyred Line 4, great acceleration and braking, and 5 second station stops (yes, the 'bruiteur' going off just a few seconds after stopping).

Bit like the last southbound Bakerloo then - doors open and close in micro seconds and a spirited use of the power controller / brake.

 

[Joe Paxton]

...
2)
The Paris metro is quite different to the London Underground. It was built as essentially an underground tramway network. The tunnels in many places follow the streets but running beneath them. The idea was to 'declutter' the surface roads but still keep an electric transit system.

I've never come across the Paris Metro explained quite like that before - I like it, it makes sense.

 

[edwin_m]

According to Wikipedia trams in Paris lasted to 1938, so I don't think you could describe the Metro as a tramway replacement.

However it does have much more severe curvature than the London Underground, the maximum body width is quite narrow (I believe this was deliberate to make sure heavy trains couldn't use it), and the new steel wheel trains I referred to above are quite like high-floor trams.

One other difference with London is that I believe most of it was built by cut and cover, although I think the RER lines and line 14 that were built from the 1970s onwards were bored.

 

[Gordon]

According to Wikipedia trams in Paris lasted to 1938, so I don't think you could describe the Metro as a tramway replacement.

One other difference with London is that I believe most of it was built by cut and cover, although I think the RER lines and line 14 that were built from the 1970s onwards were bored.

as a 'tramway replacement' was meant in the sense that taking it underground 'decluttered' the streets in the same way as the trend for putting street trams underground started in Germany circa 50 years ago.

The very reason the RER was developed was because the Paris Metro was largely sub surface and slow, not deep level and comparitively fast like the tube sections of LU



.

 

[Taunton]

Paris Metro was indeed built initially with tramway-sized vehicles and technology, coupled in trains, motor cars at the head pulling trailer cars. A major electrical fire in the early days between two motor units at the ends of such a train led to the development of early multiple unit operation. Even nowadays the cars feel somewhat small and simplistic in construction compared to say the London Underground.

The curves and gradients are more like a tramway, and the trains run on the right, like French road traffic, instead of on the left as French railways do.

 

[JohnR]

Surely the Metropolitan railway was originally designed to take trains from the stations west of Paddington under the streets to the City?

 

[urpert]

The Paris Metro has very short distances between stations. It is common to be able to see the next station in either direction from a platform. So acceleration is more important than high speed. That is what the rubber tyres give.

I've had some spectacular last-train-at-night runs on rubber tyred Line 4, great acceleration and braking, and 5 second station stops (yes, the 'bruiteur' going off just a few seconds after stopping).

On the trains with older stock (the ones which still have the "loquet" to open the doors), the sense of urgency is enhanced by the driver releasing the doors while the train is still moving. I have a possibly faulty recollection of the same thing happening with the 67 stock on the Victoria line many years ago.

 

[Taunton]

On the trains with older stock (the ones which still have the "loquet" to open the doors), the sense of urgency is enhanced by the driver releasing the doors while the train is still moving. I have a possibly faulty recollection of the same thing happening with the 67 stock on the Victoria line many years ago.

On the "Classic" old Paris Metro stock, which lasted from the 1920s to the early 1980s, the doors were hand push to slide open. There was an air cylinder which looked mounted as an afterthought which pushed the doors closed for departure, but was then released. It was operated again by the conductor, who worked from the front cab alongside the driver, approaching the next station to keep the doors closed until released when (almost) stopped. This meant that on hot days bold standing passengers could slide the doors open between stations for some more air. I wonder if anyone ever fell out. Given the aroma inside those old trains, a mixture of body sweat, gauloises (smoking still permitted), garlic, etc, it was necessary!

 

[duesselmartin]

On the "Classic" old Paris Metro stock, which lasted from the 1920s to the early 1980s, the doors were hand push to slide open. There was an air cylinder which looked mounted as an afterthought which pushed the doors closed for departure, but was then released. It was operated again by the conductor, who worked from the front cab alongside the driver, approaching the next station to keep the doors closed until released when (almost) stopped. This meant that on hot days bold standing passengers could slide the doors open between stations for some more air. I wonder if anyone ever fell out. Given the aroma inside those old trains, a mixture of body sweat, gauloises (smoking still permitted), garlic, etc, it was necessary!

of course France smells of garlic, as we all know from 'allo 'allo

 

[ChiefPlanner]

On the "Classic" old Paris Metro stock, which lasted from the 1920s to the early 1980s, the doors were hand push to slide open. There was an air cylinder which looked mounted as an afterthought which pushed the doors closed for departure, but was then released. It was operated again by the conductor, who worked from the front cab alongside the driver, approaching the next station to keep the doors closed until released when (almost) stopped. This meant that on hot days bold standing passengers could slide the doors open between stations for some more air. I wonder if anyone ever fell out. Given the aroma inside those old trains, a mixture of body sweat, gauloises (smoking still permitted), garlic, etc, it was necessary!

With brutal hard seating as I vaguely recall ...."basic" units to say the least.

 

[Billy A]

The Paris Metro has very short distances between stations. It is common to be able to see the next station in either direction from a platform. .

Yes, last time I was in Paris I always tried to get a front (well, side facing but at the front) seat on the automated Line 1 so I could get a "driver's" view of the way ahead. On straight sections I could usually see the next station lighting up the gloom a few hundred metres ahead.

Having closely spaced stations is a great thing if you're above ground and looking for one!