Morton wrote:
Just come back from Paris for a couple of days and had my first
metro experience. A few comments:

1. The Metro trains are better than London Underground. All I saw
were wider (holding more people) and much cleaner. Some trains had
a rather quaint flick-switch opener to activate the door opening
rather than all automatically opening.

There are no small-sized tube trains in Paris, but I would guess that
the trains are no wider than, say, D-stock. I find the old latches
somehow more satisfying to use than the mere push-buttons on more modern
stock. The latest stock on line 14, and I think line 1 too, has
all-door opening.

2. Signs on the Metro are much inferior to the Underground. I've
been in London for 4 years now so perhaps am used to the
Underground but I felt the Metro's signage was really confusing and
incomplete.

I'm used to both systems, and don't have a problem with the Métro signs.
The main difference is the use of (to give a Piccadilly line example)
"Uxbridge/Heathrow" and "Cockfosters" instead of "westbound" and
"eastbound". In what way did you feel the signage was incomplete?

3. Further to that, the Metro map was shown in different formats
opposed to the famous Harry Beck Tube map. Different maps confused
the hell out of me.

Yes, IIRC there are three basic designs: a Beck-like diagram that is a
reasonable compromise between geometry and geography, a quite different
diagram that seems to have been designed for printing on small pages
such as diaries, and a geographic one with the lines superimposed on a
simplified street map, which is the version displayed at stations.

4. I did like the cross-city trains (RER) in Paris. Double-decker
trains were impressive. I do hope that cross-rail does this.

It's not planned. Since Crossrail will run on existing lines outside
Central London, the loading gauge is to small for a true double-decker.

5. Surprisingly the Underground is cleaner and brighter than the
Metro. While Paris is spotless compared to London, I thought the
Metro was drab, uninspiring and could do with a good clean.

It varies quite a lot between stations. But the relative lack of signal
failures, persons under trains, stations closed by defective safety
equipment, etc. is worth a bit of grime.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)