Trivia:Country with most frequent intercity sevices

[thenorthern]

Looking at other countries I am surprised at how infrequent intercity trains are compared to Great Britain.

A good example of this is between London and Birmingham the two largest cities there are 8 trains per hour in each direction of which 3 are the fast Virgin Trains.

But that's not the only one between London and other cities there are Bristol 4, Manchester 3, Leeds 2, Sheffield 2 and Stoke-on-Trent 3. There is also 2 trains per hour between Birmingham and Nottingham, Newcastle and Reading.

Compared to other countries this is a very large amount with New York and Washington only having 1 train per hour, Berlin and Hamburg also having 1 train per hour, as well as Madrid and Barcelona having 1 train per hour.

It made me think though which country has the most frequent services the only one that seems to be higher than the United Kingdom is Japan where there seems to be regular intercity trains on a frequency that rivals some metro systems in this country.

What other countries have a higher level of frequency compared to the United Kingdom?

 

[gordonthemoron]

Rotterdam-Amsterdam appears to be 8 trains an hour. That does not include Thalys or NS International

 

[higthomas]

Bern-Zurich is 2 an hour (plus two more slower services)
Milan to Rome is three an hour.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Munich-Nuremburg is 3 ICEs an hour plus a fast regional train every other hour plus a slow regional train every other hour plus some other regional trains with connections. Mind it helps there are 4 routes

 

[anme]

London is more than twice of size of any other EU city - over 8 million people, and it also serves as a hub for much of the densely populated south east of England. The next largest city in the EU is Berlin with 3.4 million, and only five cities have over 2 million people. That may partially explain differences in train frequency.
Amsterdam and Rotterdam, with a mere 800,000 and 600,000 people respectively, are particularly well served with 8+ trains per hour (as pointed out by gordonthemoron above)! Frequencies in the Netherlands and Belgium tend to be high, often with four intercity trains per hour between major cities.
(Numbers from Wikipedia based on official figures, there are other ways to measure population)

 

[JamesCardiff]

If Turkey joins the EU then Istanbul would weigh in at almost double the size of London. An interesting journey between the two.

 

[higthomas]

London is more than twice of size of any other EU city - over 8 million people, and it also serves as a hub for much of the densely populated south east of England. The next largest city in the EU is Berlin with 3.4 million, and only five cities have over 2 million people. That may partially explain differences in train frequency.
Amsterdam and Rotterdam, with a mere 800,000 and 600,000 people respectively, are particularly well served with 8+ trains per hour (as pointed out by gordonthemoron above)! Frequencies in the Netherlands and Belgium tend to be high, often with four intercity trains per hour between major cities.
(Numbers from Wikipedia based on official figures, there are other ways to measure population)

Remember any journey has to travel between multiple cities though, and especially remember how small Manchester is, with not that much between it and London. A journey between the Northern Rhine conglomerate and Berlin for instance serves about as many people, with a slightly more even population spread.

 

[thenorthern]

I don't think Japan will be beaten.

I am always surprised at the United States how infrequent their services are, even between New York and Philadelphia its only a train every half hour which considering the size of those cities and how close they are this is very low.

 

[higthomas]

But for most Americans taking the train never crosses their mind it's just not a consideration.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But for most Americans taking the train never crosses their mind it's just not a consideration.

Indeed, I bet there are air services in the US with 20 minute headways.

Neil

 

[Ash Bridge]

If Turkey joins the EU then Istanbul would weigh in at almost double the size of London. An interesting journey between the two.

Are you sure? Wiki quotes London metro area as 3236 sq.m. & Population at 13,614,409. Istanbul metro area as 2109 sq. m. & population of 14,160,467.

 

[radamfi]

Are you sure? Wiki quotes London metro area as 3236 sq.m. & Population at 13,614,409. Istanbul metro area as 2109 sq. m. & population of 14,160,467.

That definition of 'London metro' is not widely used in the UK as it includes most of the neighbouring counties and is typically referred to as the 'London commuter belt'. Greater London (area administered by the mayor) is more like 8 million and the Greater London Built Up Area is just under 10 million, which is arguably the fairest definition as it only includes area where buildings are close enough together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London_Built-up_Area

 

[gordonthemoron]

moscow is pretty big too at 11.5 million

 

[thenorthern]

Russia is relatively frequent as well with half hourly between Moscow and St Petersburg which considering the size of Russia and that there are very few cities in-between them.

 

[higthomas]

That definition of 'London metro' is not widely used in the UK as it includes most of the neighbouring counties and is typically referred to as the 'London commuter belt'. Greater London (area administered by the mayor) is more like 8 million and the Greater London Built Up Area is just under 10 million, which is arguably the fairest definition as it only includes area where buildings are close enough together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London_Built-up_Area

Interesting that.
It puts my house inside "London," and lets just say that I do not live inside London, so I don't think you can say that the "Greater London Built Up Area" is the fairest definition, putting places such as Guildford inside London.

 

[duesselmartin]

I think its difficult comparing IC Services in different countries. A Dutch or Belgian Intercity is more comparable to a German Regional Express or a French TER.
One needs to look at similar sized countries.

 

[thenorthern]

Does anyone know how frequent the TGV is, I would expect it to be quite high.

Canada is even lower than the United States with only 5 trains per day between Montreal and Toronto even though the distance is comparable with London to Edinburgh.

In Israel between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem its hourly as far as I can see but Tel Aviv to Haifa is every 20 minuets.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Russia is relatively frequent as well with half hourly between Moscow and St Petersburg which considering the size of Russia and that there are very few cities in-between them.

the train frequencies between Moscow and Leningrad are weird, none for several hours and then 2/3 within a few minutes

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

London is more than twice of size of any other EU city - over 8 million people, and it also serves as a hub for much of the densely populated south east of England. The next largest city in the EU is Berlin with 3.4 million, and only five cities have over 2 million people. That may partially explain differences in train frequency.
Amsterdam and Rotterdam, with a mere 800,000 and 600,000 people respectively, are particularly well served with 8+ trains per hour (as pointed out by gordonthemoron above)! Frequencies in the Netherlands and Belgium tend to be high, often with four intercity trains per hour between major cities.
(Numbers from Wikipedia based on official figures, there are other ways to measure population)

As can also been seen on wikipedia. Paris has a population in excess of 12million metro area and 10million for urban area. You are comparing Greater London which is a county with some rural areas to a city district. Remember the City of London is technically the second smallest in England. It must have been obvisious London isn't twice as big as the next biggest EU city.

 

[goodnight033]

The Chinese Canton railway operates intercity CRH services 'can be as frequent as 5 mins interval'.

 

[mister-sparky]

As can also been seen on wikipedia. Paris has a population in excess of 12million metro area and 10million for urban area. You are comparing Greater London which is a county with some rural areas to a city district. Remember the City of London is technically the second smallest in England. It must have been obvisious London isn't twice as big as the next biggest EU city.

the "City of London" is just the name of a council district. That's like saying New York City is only Manhattan, it's ridiculous! "The City" hasn't been all of London for over 200 years.

 

[radamfi]

Interesting that.
It puts my house inside "London," and lets just say that I do not live inside London, so I don't think you can say that the "Greater London Built Up Area" is the fairest definition, putting places such as Guildford inside London.

You can draw arbitrary and political boundaries, like the GLA boundary, but it is a fact that you can get from Guildford to Harlow without a break in urbanisation.

Harlow and Guildford were added to the urban area in 2011:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_urban_areas_in_the_United_Kingdom

The more generous definitions of cities are important when comparing cities, as some other 'big' cities don't have endless sprawl to the extent that London does. Obviously Guildford is quite loosely joined up to the rest of the Greater London urban area, but that can't be said for many other areas that are outside the GLA boundary, such as Epsom, Watford, Sunbury, Ashford, Staines etc.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

the "City of London" is just the name of a council district. That's like saying New York City is only Manhattan, it's ridiculous! "The City" hasn't been all of London for over 200 years.

Must be more than double that time.

New York has 5 boroughs in the city.
Manhatten, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten and another which I forget.
New Jersey has large areas that are part of the metro area but aren't counted in any official way as part of New York.
Remember the City of London and Westminster are the only areas round there with city status.

You can use areas which are officially cities or urban areas. But I dislike places of importance being thrown under one banner.
Wolverhampton is not Birmingham for example.
The use of urban areas is to distort the fact that many have their own towns in the urban area which are seperate to a bigger city miles away. This is to get on the map.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Does anyone know how frequent the TGV is, I would expect it to be quite high.

Relatively infrequent. As an example, Paris to Bordeaux is about 1tph with the odd extra.

Neil

 

[pne]

New York has 5 boroughs in the city.
Manhatten, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten and another which I forget.

The Bronx.

 

[radamfi]

New York has 5 boroughs in the city.
Manhatten, Brooklyn, Queens, Staten and another which I forget.
New Jersey has large areas that are part of the metro area but aren't counted in any official way as part of New York.

New York is a good example of why the urban area is important. Most people would naturally assume that New York is much bigger than London, but the combined population of the 5 boroughs is only 8.4 million, similar to that of Greater London (inside GLA boundary) and about one million less than the Greater London Built Up Area as defined by the Office of National Statistics. But looking at the map it is obvious that the urbanisation continues solidly into New Jersey and also east into Long Island and also into Connecticut. The combined population of that area is over 18 million.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Do that many people travel from the far reaches of Long Island or Newark to work or shop in New York? I doubt it.
It might be one big metropolis, but in reality it is lots of seperate big towns all joined up around an extra busy central city.
The total of the entire population for the urban area shouldn't be used if the services people use everyday are alot closer to home.


Surely Guidford and Watford aren't just part of London neither are Birkenhead and Bolton parts of other cities.
They all have their own town centres and rail stations.

 

[radamfi]

Do that many people travel from the far reaches of Long Island or Newark to work or shop in New York? I doubt it.
It might be one big metropolis, but in reality it is lots of seperate big towns all joined up around an extra busy central city.
The total of the entire population for the urban area shouldn't be used if the services people use everyday are alot closer to home.


Surely Guidford and Watford aren't just part of London neither are Birkenhead and Bolton parts of other cities.
They all have their own town centres and rail stations.

You are always going to get your suburban centres regardless of whether or not the constituent town within the urban area has historically independent roots. Watford has its own centre, but so does Croydon, Kingston, Wimbledon, Ealing, Stratford etc.

Manchester only has about 500,000 people within its municipality boundaries. If there was no other population near it then it would not really be a significant place. It would be roughly on a par with Bristol or (Greater) Nottingham. But obviously most people consider it to be the second/third city and it has facilities and importance more or less in line with a city of 2+ million, rather than one of 0.5 million.

The size of the urban area is relevant when discussing inter-city train travel. Manchester to London wouldn't be every 20 minutes if Manchester didn't have a 2+ million urban population.