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)