From: stephen@sprunk.org

On 14-Aug-14 03:37, rcp27g@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 August 2014 19:54:50 UTC+2, Stephen Sprunk  wrote:
>> On 12-Aug-14 21:40, John Levine wrote:
>>> That's not totally foolish.  The new trains will run 4 tph, more
>>> like transit, while the existing trains run on a typical
>>> commuter schedule.
>>
>> Nit: commuter rail is a subset of transit.  Perhaps you meant
>> light and/or heavy rail?
>
> The OP's statement was "a typical comuter schedule", that is a
> schedule that is entirely, or predominantly tidal in nature (in in
> the morning, out in the evening), as opposed to a transit-like
> schedule, one that is high frequency, stop at all stations, in both
> directions all day.

I'm not aware of any transit system that doesn't have significantly
heavier service during peak hours; that's what peak hours means!

Some commuter rail systems don't have much/any service outside of peak
hours due to lack of demand and/or funding, but many do.

> Terms "heavy rail" and "light rail" are not particularly meaningful
> anyway as they are marketing, not technical terms.

They are FRA/FTA regulatory terms, not marketing or technical terms.

"Light rail" is for heavy non-FRA trains on a non-exclusive ROW, and
"heavy rail" is for light non-FRA trains on an exclusive ROW.

S

--
Stephen Sprunk         "God does not play dice."  --Albert Einstein
CCIE #3723         "God is an inveterate gambler, and He throws the
K5SSS        dice at every possible opportunity." --Stephen Hawking

--- SoupGate/W32 v1.03
 * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)