Comparing apples and pears
פריס, והיחס שבין המטרו ל RER - א - אזור המטרו בפריס עצמה
האזור הרצוף מייצג את העיר פריס עצמה, בה יש רשת מטרו צפופה, כאשר הבחירה היא לייצג את השלוחות שיוצאות אל מחוץ לרבעים ברצועות דקות כדי להראות את ההבדל בין אזור שבו יש 16 קווים לאזור בו הקווים צפופים פחות ונמצאים מחוץ לעיר עצמה. גוגל מראה לא רק את המטרו וה RER בצבעיהם אלא גם קווים פרבריים שמסתיימים בתחנות רכבת עיקריות על רשתות המטרו וה RER. כתייר שביקר בפריס יתכן שהתפספס איזה קטע פה ושם, אבל העיקרון הוא שרשת המטרו היא צפופה ונמצאת במרכז הגוש האורבאני הרחב יותר.
כך הצרפתים מגדירים זאת בדיאגרמות שלהם:
http://www.ias.u-psud.fr/kepler/images/plan_rer.jpg
http://www.businesstravel.fr/images/stories/plan-rer-sncf-paris-idf.jpg
Comparing apples and pears
.Knowing London Paris and Berlin well, I find it hard to understand what you are trying to say.
what your presentation fails to take account of are geography, denisty of population/use of land, communting patterns and economy.
Berlin is less dense than London- residential and commercial use. in practice what it meansare longer distances between 'places', so in order to get from A to B you need to 'commute' longer [by foot or by vehicluar means].
Of all the three, London is the most dense, and employment is centred within what is known as zone 1 +2, and that's where demand for public transport is the highest.
the same can be said of Paris, although demand is more evenly spread within Metropolitan Paris.
The tube in London and the Metro in Paris were built over 100 years ago, - both cities were much smaller, .and the resulting system served most of the habited area.
The berlin system of S Bahn was born out of military conisderation as much as commercial/economic considertions- in other words, there as part of a rail network serving not just civilian but military use.
So the story of the three system is of evolution- there is no comprehensive prior planning from the beginning to the 21st centuary[with the exception of Germany prior to WW1], .there are hundreds of plans for all three cities for new faciliies that have not been implemented.
Topography is important. you can not compare a place like Jerussalem or Hong Kong to Paris or London.
geography is a limited factor- - in matters of costs.
I suggest you look at Hong Kong and match the rail network [which is being expanded] to a geographical map, and you can see the issues for yourself.
regards
Yoram
