Btw @miklcct, do you have data sets where you run into this problem? I'm not personally against this type of a change even if you aren't facing the issue of now but this information could still be useful when we make the decision on if we should change these limits. Also, what does "running speed" mean? Is it the maximum speed or some average that takes into account slowing down, acceleration and opening/closing doors? Metro stops aren't typically that far apart so those do affect the average a bit.

Btw @miklcct, do you have data sets where you run into this problem? I'm not personally against this type of a change even if you aren't facing the issue of now but this information could still be useful when we make the decision on if we should change these limits. Also, what does "running speed" mean? Is it the maximum speed or some average that takes into account slowing down, acceleration and opening/closing doors? Metro stops aren't typically that far apart so those do affect the average a bit.

This problem hasn't been encountered in GB yet (as the maximum train speed is 225 km/h) but it may be of interest in some other countries with faster high speed trains.

The 160 km/h on metro trains refer to the maximum line and train speed. However, with skip-stopping metro services, the current limit in OTP can be exceeded on those lines. The Guangzhou Metro line 18 has a 25.8 km non-stop section between Panyu and the city, so the limit is exceeded with 160 km/h running for such a long distance. It is called a high-speed metro because it is built to higher-speed rail standard, but it is regulated and operated as a metro service inside the metro network.

The GTFS validator uses the following values:

Route type Description Threshold, km/h
0 Light rail 100
1 Subway 150
2 Rail 500
3 Bus 150
4 Ferry 80
5 Cable tram 30
6 Aerial lift 50
7 Funicular 50
11 Trolleybus 150
12 Monorail 150

• Unknown 200

Should we do the same in OTP as well?

Lets just use the GTFS validator values.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 60.00000% with 4 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 71.03%. Comparing base (c6b53d1) to head (b8b5960).
Report is 14 commits behind head on dev-2.x.

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             dev-2.x    #6606      +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage      71.04%   71.03%   -0.01%     
- Complexity     18297    18299       +2     
=============================================
  Files           2005     2005              
  Lines          75850    75855       +5     
  Branches        7779     7780       +1     
=============================================
+ Hits           53884    53887       +3     
- Misses         19221    19224       +3     
+ Partials        2745     2744       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

I've removed the skip changelog label that I added previously since this probably should belong in the changelog so it's easier for someone to figure out if this causes issues for someone.