Which of course becomes a suburban railway, and not a metro at all.
The total journey requires getting to the station as well.
The are figures for general acceptability for walking to transport.
IIRC to a railway station, down from 1.5 km to 800 m; to a tram around 400
m; to a bus down to 200 m.
Except in Perth, station designers have never been able to design an
effective bus-train interchange.
130 km/h does nothing for urban transport, but is useful for interurban
(intercity for NSW readers).
On Tuesday, June 11, 2019 at 5:10:23 PM UTC+10, Prescott wrote:
> PS Station spacing is where it needs to be in each specific and unique
> city and according to the overall transport plan for that city, not
> according to some textbook formula. There is no such thing as a "real
> metro" except in textbooks. You adapt the most relevant technology to the
> needs of the specific city.
> 130 km/h you need to raise average speed on segments longer than a few km.
> You don't want to put a low upper limit on your ability to raise average
> speed. If your service only has shorter segments and will not require
> longer segments in the future then, yes, you can have rolling stock with a
> lower maximum speed.
> Tony P