Talk:Metro systems by annual passenger rides

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Trains Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
See also: WikiProject Trains to do list
List This article has been rated as list-Class on the quality scale. (assessment comments)
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale within the Trains WikiProject.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rapid transit.

Contents

[edit] Singapore to be listed?

According to Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore), in 2005 average daily ridership was about 1.338 million. That works out for about 488.37 million (= 1.338 x 365) in a year. 488 million should make the Singapore MRT be listed in top 20. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Florian fang (talk • contribs) 16:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Generally speaking, statistics about daily ridership are made for average workdays. As a result, we can't obtain the annual ridership simply in multiplying it by 365. I've checked the source for Singapore MRT and it seems quite unclear on the topic. In doubt, I would be more inclined not to add Singapore MRT simply because I've never seen before a daily ridership consisting in the division of the annual ridership by 365. Metropolitan 00:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Toronto deleted

I deleted Toronto from the list and moved it to the hidden comments. As somebody noted the 444M figure is for the entire system, not just the subway. According to the APTA the subway ridership is 265M, plus I believe 13M for the Scarborough RT. Actually, their total ridership stats contradicts with the Toronto TTC's report. But I think it's safe to assume that the subway/RT ridership is much less than 444M. I've added Vienna's U-Bahn system back to the #20 spot; its page calls it "Vienna" rather than "Wien". DisgruntledWaterlooStudent 18:05, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually the figures are only for the subway system. [1] They just split the numbers up for different regions. I've re-added Toronto to the list. And I don't know what APTA is, but the official TTC site obviously knows more than them about their own subway.Sbw01f (talk) 17:20, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mumbai

The mumbai (bombay) suburban railway system carries 6.3 million passengers everyday! That should make it the top in terms of annual passenger rides

Its suburban railway. For Moscow and St.Petersburg for example, suburban rail is not counted at all--Nixer 22:11, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
It is time the editors decided whether they want the defination of metro system by some dictionary defination or practical defination. Many of the so called metros have upto 70% above ground services. This article is not doing its job of giving knowledge. I encourgae you to read about public transportation in Mumbai, which is among the best in the world (perhpas the most crowded as well). 75.111.197.176 06:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rail systems

Rail systems? What about national rail systems? Places like India, Japan, France would have thousands of stations. I don't think it's the best term to use. - Randwicked 03:47, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Source

What is the source for this? Marskell 18:29, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Osaka's figure

Original figure was 957million without source, and I wonder where it comes from. From the following two sources, I could only add up the figure to 880million and I amended it. If anyone have support to the other 100million passenger, feel free to reverse my changes.

Osaka subway statistics

Osaka monorail patronage

--Jeremy1897 05 May 2005

[edit] Objection to deletion

I object to the proposed deletion, for two reasons:

  1. In spite of the fact that this article was not created by me, I was trying to improve the citation in past few days (see history, 61.10.12.41 and 222.166.160.89 are from my computer). Please have patience while amateurs are putting effort.
  2. And secondly, information without verification is not entirely meaningless. Readers are warned of the lack of source, so they should be aware of it when reading or using it. This article at least gives readers general idea about which city's subway system got most passengers (and true figures would not be too far away), which should be important as far as a comprehensive encyclopedia is concerned.

To say the least, I could show to you whether the ranking is correct or not. But to verify whether the figures are correct or not, again, takes time. --Jeremy1897 07 May 2005

No reason to delete. Disagreements are not a reason for deletion. For the ones where the accuracy is doubted, simply put {fact} or add your own source and include the year. Many, if not all of these entities should have official websites, with press releases and ridership information. As I don't speak Russian, Japanese, Hindi, Korean, Spanish, French, Cantonese, this might be difficult for awhile, until we get help from some Wikipedian polyglots. I'm trying to add some sources myself; help would be appreciated. User:129.7.152.56 14 May 2005

[edit] Paris metro figure

According to the STIF, the authority managing developments of public transportation in Paris region, the annual passengers traffic of Paris metro network was of 1,335.7 million journeys in 2004. This figure is strictly for the Paris metro and does not include the RER network (which was approximately of 800 million journeys in 2004) or Transilien suburban trains (trains de banlieue). Here is the official source for that figure :

Metropolitan 03:15, 19 may 2004 (UTC).

[edit] Lastest revise by Metropolitan

At 21:38, 14 May 2006, someone added some 500 million patronage (from KCRC, a so-called "suburban rail") to HK's system as a whole, and Metropolitan reverted it at 14:41, 23 May 2006, for the figures imply strictly metro services and nothing else. I have to say it depends on how to see the definition, which i inclinded to include the 500 million.

According to wikipedia, "A rapid transit, underground, subway, elevated, or metro system is a railway system, usually in an urban area, with a high capacity and frequency of service, and grade separation from other traffic." Most of the train services of KCRC (East Rail+West Rail) are absolutely of high capacity and frequency and grade separated. Train headway during peak hrs is around 3 min, and is operated in a manner similar to urban metro. It might be argued that KCRC does not serve urban area. This might be true in some sense, because it runs along "new towns" that are less close to the city centre. But I assure you that the population density of those New towns are way higher than most of the urban centres in other cities. Also those areas and population are always considered to be part of Hong Kong as a whole (Like, we never have any statistics that say the urban population is xxx and suburban is xxx, we juz say there are 6.9million in HK). And at last, after the merger of KCRC and MTR in 2 years time (which is going-on at this moment), it is not possible to seperate patronage figures of MTR and KCRC anyway.

For the same reason I didn't revert the revise by someone to include mumbai's suburban rail. I think whether the rail is situated in "urban area", which in itself is a vague concept, is only indicative but not conclusive in determining whether it is a rapid transit according to the definition of Wiki.

--Jeremy1897 06:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, in such a case, you would have to include the RER annual passenger rides to the figure for Paris. Indeed, the RER is also a railway system, in an urban area, with a high capacity and frequency of service and most are grade separated (either underground, on viaduct, or dug at open air). RER lines are actually busier and have a higher train frequency in their central part than Paris metro lines. At rush hours, the train frequency on line A is of one train every 90 seconds, the lowest frequency during daytime is of a train every 5 minutes. The thing is that the 5 lines of the RER network have an annual passenger ride of 782.9 million people altogether. That would raise Paris figure to 2,118.6 million journeys a year.
For a confirmation of those figures, you should go visit RER wikipedia pages, you will find the annual passenger rides of each of the 5 RER lines on their dedicated pages : RER A, B, C, D and E. You can also find an insightful story about the Paris metro History in which is also explained how the RER has been created. Metropolitan 06:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
I get your point. Actually right after my last update i was thinking that that would include many suburban rail into calculation. What I did was simply following the definition that was available. But it seems following the rules would create a result that we do not desire. I suppose most people who click into this page are interested in knowing the patronage of cities' subway system. I am not saying that subway+suburban rail info is not useful, nor am i having bias towards results that favour my hometown Hong Kong. I have no complaint if there is a seperate page that publish subway+suburban list, but for the benefit of most users a useful subway list is vital, and such a list requires a definition differs from the one originally in Wiki. Agree? If there is no objection why don't we discuss a definition here?

--Jeremy1897 13:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The RER system in Paris is not the suburban trains network. Paris Suburban trains are organized in 5 different networks consisting in 31 lines altogether. The RER is a different network which is a kind of hybdrid between being an express metro service in the center and a suburban service in the suburbs, all this being served at a high frequency. If I've talked about the RER, it's simply because you've mentionned high capacity and high frequency, and that's exactly what the RER is about. Now I don't mind adding the high frequency urban rail services into the list, but I think it should be written as a second list. The first one could be strictly about metro services, the second one could also add other high frequency urban rails. This way, everyone is happy. What do you think ? I'll make a try and you'll tell me afterwards. :) Metropolitan 17:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay i heard of that in middle school. Actually KCRC is sth of that kind, except that the length is much shorter (around 30km) and they are strictly within the territory of HK. I support that we make a primary list of metro. But what amounts to metro? How about say, the underground network by which the city centre is principally served? But for the secondary list, i have doubt. The list for some cities, say Tokyo, is never complete (http://photoimg.enjoyjapan.naver.com/view/47/43/enjoyjapan_12/41000/40967.jpg). Perhaps we juz add any additional available info for reference only? --Jeremy1897 15:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My recent edit

I have deleted the "rapid transit" section because it was a copy of the metro section, but with Mumbai added, for which the commuter rail was compared with metro of other cities.--Nixer 18:57, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

No it isn't. It contains figures for non-metro rapid transit users in other cities (Paris, London, etc). As such, I've reverted your edits. --Dtcdthingy 00:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Why then the digits are exactly the same with digits for metro? Look for example on Moscow and St.Petersburg.Nixer 11:56, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
Just an info: commuter trains ridership for Moscow last av. year is in exceed of 550 million. How many of those rides are inside the Moscow City limits or how many passengers change to/from the "normal" Metro I don't know.—Sascha. 12:31, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tokyo/Moscow metro comparison

For Tokyo the numbers for different operators are added. So if a passenger transfers from a line belonging to one operator to a line belonging to another operator he counted twice. This is wrong, dont you think so?--Nixer 19:05, 2 June 2006 (UTC)


to Dtcdthingy — you have removed the note:

The figure is derived from ridership of two operators in Tokyo <…>
thus passengers, transferred from one system to another are counted twice.  
(added 08:39, 4 June 2006; removes 00:19, 6 June 2006)

without discussing this removal or stating your opinion on the Talk page (that is — here:) Do you disagree with it? Maybe those two systems in Tokyo are thoroughly separated and passengers just never transfer from one to the other? Any other reasons for that not being mentioned? —Sascha. 10:29, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Passengers transferring from one line to another on any system may be counted twice, so I don't think it's particularly notable. We don't know how any of these figures were worked out. --Dtcdthingy 15:48, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
That's exactly the point — they are not in Moscow (I mean,passengers not counted twice in Moscow Metro). On the other hand, from a look at the map of the Tokyo Metro it is clear that it's two systems are highly integrated and possible transfer points are multiple. That's why it seems to be only fair to mention that those two figures (for TM and MM) could have been arrived at differently. —Sascha. 09:47, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Toronto

I've just edited the name of Toronto Metro to Toronto Subway, as that is the name it's known as. Torontonians don't use the term "Metro" to refer to the Subway; until 1998, the term "Metro" was used to refer to what is now the City of Toronto (as in "Metropolitan Toronto"). -Kain 11:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tokyo figures — source?

Anyone knows where the data for Tokyo are coming from? I've looked up the news article given as a source, but there are no such figures there. There are daily figures, but those could well be for working days only as well mean average for the whole year. Clarification anyone? --Sascha. 14:41, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

That was me who updated those figures. The source contains daily mean average numbers. Obviously, if we multiply that by 365, we'll get the annual figures. As discussed above, it counts those who change from Tokyo Metro to Toei twice. (They also pay twice.) I also found two official statements: from Toei and from Tokyo Metro. Yury Petrachenko 18:48, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
That's what I mean — nowhere in the article is said that those figures are in fact mean average on a year basis. It could as easily be an average figure for the work days. It may be ok for PR but for an encyclopedia entry is a little to vague. Well, I mean Japan is a major country, there must be some more direct statistics somewhere? Of course it may happen to be in Japanese --Sascha. 21:34, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
I don't read Japanese (yet:) but I think the sources above are pretty clear. They say, "The average daily number of passengers reached 2.09 million in fiscal 2005" (for Toei), "Each day our trains carry 5.76 million passengers" (for Metro). These are from official websites above and are supported by a bunch of other sources. If these were working days only, there would have been other figures, for weekends. I can ask about this on the Japan portal though. Yury Petrachenko 22:09, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
That'd be great if you could, cause sure is sure. As it is it doesn't seem sure to me. "Each day" can mean different things to different people.--Sascha. 22:29, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

New figures for Tokyo are there again: "more than 2.5 billion". Has anyone any idea where these are coming from?--Sascha. 22:06, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I've calculated them from average daily rides given in the source (i.e. "On an average day, the Tokyo subway system transports 7.25 million passengers.", see under the photo).--Dojarca 22:36, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, same as above — a lot of people would argue (me including) that say Sunday is not an average day and that an average day is a working day and therefore overall figure for the year is incorrect that way. But for the lack of better, more direct statistics...--Sascha. 22:58, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
I've found two reliable sources that say the average daily number of passengers is 5.8-5.9 million[2][3]. Sbw01f (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Berlin S Bahn

Why the S Bahn of Berlin is included if Paris RER is not include Please someone can remove the S Bahn of Berlin figure Minato ku 07:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I agree with that. If no on will oppose it, i will remove S Banhs tomorrow. --Jklamo 21:10, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Budapest's BKV

The page on Budapest's BKV lists an annual ridership of 1.4 billion. This figure, if correct, places it well into the top 5, but right now it's not listed at all. I glanced through BKV's 2005 annual report but could not find confirmation of the figure. Should it be added -- unsourced though it is -- to the list? 218.225.111.205 03:50, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

That is presumable number for whole transport system. Sourced figure for Budapest Metro only is welcomed. --Jklamo 21:11, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
In 2005 Annual Report [4] is number 1.3 billion for whole system, and that metro share is 22%. That mean 286 million. --Jklamo 21:20, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merge?

I cam across this article which basically has the same info as the other article. Simply south 00:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I went ahead and redirected the other article here and removed the merge tag. —CComMack (t–c) 00:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


[edit] New York City Subway 1.850 billion

According the source [5] this figure is the all MTA system and the PATH but MTA it is not only subway, it is also suburban trains and buses. so 1.850 billion is wrong. It should be only MTA subway and PATH Minato ku 22:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

The source specifically says that it is counting only riders of "heavy rail" on "MTA New York City Transit". This is the same as the New York Subway. Buses would not be included in "heavy rail", and the suburban trains are run by the Metro North and Long Island Railroad divisions of MTA, which are separate from the NYC Transit division.

But according the official site New York subway [6] Ridership in 2006 is 1.499 billion passengers. Minato ku 06:47, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

I think it's an issue of the counting convention being used. You can see for yourself at the APTA site that MTA buses and suburban trains are counted separately under the Bus and Commuter Rail reports. I think the issue may be that the APTA counts "unlinked" passenger trips, which means that a trip with a transfer between lines (even without leaving the system) is counted as 2 trips. I'd guess that the lower number at the MTA site counts a trip with a transfer as only 1 trip. Of course, this also brings up the issue that the NY subway site includes differing counts for many other agencies (especially St. Petersburg). And also, who knows what definitions the various other sources are using?

[edit] Toronto Subway

Toronto Subway was added to the list, quoting a source with daily ridership statistics from 2006-2007. The daily ridership is defined as number of trips made on an average weekday. It sums up to about 1,21 million trips per weekday for all the four subway lines. It is obvious that the number for Toronto in this article has been calculated by taking 1,21 millions * 365 days (=442 millions). That would be a too high estimate for the annual ridership, since travelling on weekends is far less than on weekdays. With that in mind, it is not likely that the Toronto Subway has more passenger rides than the Vienna U-Bahn (427 millions). --Kildor (talk) 07:08, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

First of all you have no proof for your claims of how they calculated the number, don't make assumptions. They could have just taken the yearly total and divided it by 365. Can you prove they didn't? Second, how do you know the other ones don't calculate their numbers the same way? Look at Tokyo for example. Saying "it's not likely that.." does not give you justified reason to remove it from the list. Sbw01f (talk) 13:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Of course, I cannot prove anything. But if they calculated the daily ridership by dividing the annual ridership with 365, I am pretty sure they would have written "average day" instead of "average weekday". An example from the Stockholm Metro: The daily ridership (typical weekday) is 1,071 millions. The annual ridership is 297 millions. The ratio is 278, which is far from 365. I don't know what the annual ridership of Toronto Subway is, and neither do you, as it seems. But we should not quote a source for a fact which does not appear in the quoted report. Looking at SkyscraperCity Forum, I have found a post with annual ridership statistics from metro systems worldwide. In their list, Toronto is 32nd with 253 millions. Unfortunately, there is no source, but I would say that this is a good indication on that Vienna has a higher ridership than Toronto. In either way, I believe you will need to find a better source to justify your claim to put Toronto on this list ahead of Vienna. --Kildor (talk) 19:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC)