Why is this subforum here?

[DerekC]

Can I ask admin/moderators why the LU subforum is tucked away in other transport modes (buses etc) when LU is a very considerable and pretty "heavy" railway. I think it would get a lot more threads and attention if it was in the main railway section.

 

[rebmcr]

Seconded, and I used the 'Report Post' button ( ) to let the mods know!

 

[birchesgreen]

I third it, although a regional network there is a lot of interest in LU from outside London and the SE

 

[MrB]

You raise a very good point, more attention and discussion on such an interesting area of our railways should be encouraged in my opinion!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I fourth it.


( Personally I disagree with the very system of sub forums... )

 

[WatcherZero]

Doesn't limit the Bus forum which is far more active than LU threads.

 

[Dent]

I am not sure about it limiting use, but it is a illogical to be placed where it is.

Given that there is a category for UK railways, "Other Railways" would logically mean "Railways other than those in the UK", which LU is not. With the category titles as they are, this subforum really belongs under "UK Railway Forums".

 

[WatcherZero]

You would then have to have every Metro/light rail forum in there then.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's light rail not heavy rail, and it belongs in here, alongside the Subway, the Metro and the various trams. Just my £0.02.

 

[nerd]

As I rarely post on this sub-forum, I can scarcely claim the same standing as those who do;

- but in my perspective, this is the right place for it.

Because the London Underground is prior to any systematic Urban Transport design categorisation, it is difficult to fit into any of the boxes that subsequently became recognised; Light Rail, Heavy Raill; S-bahn; U-bahn; Metro; Pre-metro.

So, although the Tube does run some services that correspond to S-bahn heavy rail commuter networks elsewhere, I would judge it as predominantly a Metro system - or U-bahn. Its nearest, and only, strcit equivalent in the UK would be the Glasgow Subway. Specifically in that both run specialised limited-gauge stock. Had the Liverpool Overhead Railway (of sad memory) survived; that would be here too.

The Tyne & Wear Metro and DLR do otherwise have much in common; and I see those as properly discussed with 'Other Public Transport'.

Wheras I would regard the London Overground and Thameslink services as standard Heavy Rail commuter services; which may run through the centre in a tunnel, and so properly to be discussed in the general rail forums. As with the North Clyde Line, Argyll Line and Merseyrail.

 

[Met Driver]

As much as it might jar with some, London Underground is a heavy rail system. Definitely a metro, but not light rail.

The infrastructure, rolling stock and operating practices do not conform to light rail characteristics. Mainline TOCs run passenger trains over LUL infrastructure, Class 66s were used on BTR jobs for a decade up until this year, and Class 20s were used to deliver S Stock to Neasden - not to mention heritage operations using mainline steam, diesel, coaching stock over the years (and not just on the Met).

Rolling stock, while obviously rated for lower maximum speeds, has nothing in common with light rail vehicles. 1973 and D Stock use the same braking system and traction control/auxiliary supply methods as mainline 3rd rail EMUs of a similar age. Conventional stock prior to the C69s was similarly comparable to the slammers on the Southern in terms of braking and traction control. Continuing the trend, S Stock and 378s share a number of components - presumably so do other members of the Bombardier EMU family.

The only thing which detracts from LUL's status as a heavy railway, albeit tenuously, is the loading gauge of the tube lines.

 

[WatcherZero]

The S Stock/2009 stock is part of Bombardiers Movia family which they place in between Light and Heavy rail. The simplicity in design and low maintenance cost of Light Rail engineering with high capacity (length and close together doors).

Same vehicles operate the Toronto subway, three metro in China, Delhi Metro, Bucharest Metro, Singapore underground, Bangkok Monorail, and have been ordered for the Stockholm underground.

 

[rebmcr]

Light Rail interworking with National Rail has been stuck behind the red tape for years. London Underground has been doing it for decades already — it's definitely Heavy Rail.

 

[Mutant Lemming]

It does carry more people than the rest of the UK rail network put together.

 

[Dent]

Whether LU can be considered "heavy rail" is irrelevant. The section is titled simply "UK Railway Forums", not specifically "UK Heavy Railway". LU is a network of railways, and London is in the UK, so by what logic does it "belong" in the category of "Other [than UK] Rail"?

 

[Greenback]

Thanks to everyone for the feedback. We'll be discussing this matter at our next meeting.