Trainguy34
Member
I remember on pancake day a couple of years ago, trains were going to London St Pancake according to the platform info screens.Even worse.
I remember on pancake day a couple of years ago, trains were going to London St Pancake according to the platform info screens.Even worse.
If there are so many people happy to continually use alternative names for the place perhaps it needs renaming officially. Possibilities: Kings Cross West, Euston East, Somers Town, (British) Library.I remember on pancake day a couple of years ago, trains were going to London St Pancake according to the platform info screens.
Anyone who misspells 'gauge' as 'guage' should never be allowed on a train ever again.
The problem that many people have is confusing the spellings of 'gauge' and 'guard'....or is it 'guage' and 'gaurd' ?
No different to the last student accommodation I had then!Anyone advocating the return of Pacers to the UK rail network should be made to live on one for a year first!
And it would have to be one with all the classic Pacer faults as well, ie toilets out of order, windows that only open in winter and heaters that only work in summer!
It's not the spelling that's the problem so much as the illogical pronunciation. What other word pronounces AU as AY?I can never work out the correct spelling of gauge. It takes at least fifteen looks at the diary !
I doubt if he'll see one, let alone ride one, since he will doubtless have his private jet.Another flight of cancellations from York tonight.
Sunak is apparently visiting India today. Perhaps he can take a leaf out of India's book and get the bloody trains running !
What about the streamliners built for Southern Pacific or New York Central?The Americans never built a decent looking steam locomotive. They either look like children's toys (4-4-0 The General-style tender locos with fruity cow catchers, spark arrestors, big brass lamp lashed to the chimney) or things cobbled together Mad Max-style from spare parts from the oil industry. A series of black barrels crudely riveted together, teetering along on two dozen comically small driving wheels, black smoke billowing from yet another barrel on the top. Exponentially worse if in some sort of Shay or Mallet configuration with cams and driveshafts all over the place.
Noteworthy for delivering gargantuan power at the rail head, but not designed efficiently at all. I have no idea how anybody can get excited about them.
What about the streamliners built for Southern Pacific or New York Central?
Personally I would put more emphasis on the "efficient design" part - there's no art to American steam locomotives, since they could always build bigger. While there is definitely an animal pleasure in the very large and very powerful, the best locomotives, like the best art, were born from limitations.The Americans never built a decent looking steam locomotive. They either look like children's toys (4-4-0 The General-style tender locos with fruity cow catchers, spark arrestors, big brass lamp lashed to the chimney) or things cobbled together Mad Max-style from spare parts from the oil industry. A series of black barrels crudely riveted together, teetering along on two dozen comically small driving wheels, black smoke billowing from yet another barrel on the top. Exponentially worse if in some sort of Shay or Mallet configuration with cams and driveshafts all over the place.
Noteworthy for delivering gargantuan power at the rail head, but not designed efficiently at all. I have no idea how anybody can get excited about them.
I read that book and didn't think much of it - academics tend to have an obsession with linking anything they can get their hands on back to unsavoury ideologies on flimsy evidence.I read an interesting book a while back that linked the obsession with streamlining everything in the 1930s, including household objects such as steam irons or toasters, back to the eugenics movement. Say no more!
I like this, it made me chuckle and, ultimately I have to agree. Though I can't help but marvel at/cower from the sheer weight and power the Americans were ultimately able to achieve with steam power on Stephenson gauge (Noting another post above, I always have to think hard as to which way round the a and u go there) track.The Americans never built a decent looking steam locomotive. They either look like children's toys (4-4-0 The General-style tender locos with fruity cow catchers, spark arrestors, big brass lamp lashed to the chimney) or things cobbled together Mad Max-style from spare parts from the oil industry. A series of black barrels crudely riveted together, teetering along on two dozen comically small driving wheels, black smoke billowing from yet another barrel on the top. Exponentially worse if in some sort of Shay or Mallet configuration with cams and driveshafts all over the place.
Noteworthy for delivering gargantuan power at the rail head, but not designed efficiently at all. I have no idea how anybody can get excited about them.
And the GWR should run the Resding/Bristol to Brum servicesBirmingham - Manchester should go over to LNWR using spare class 350/2s when available.
If Liverpool can manage without direct trains to Bristol or Reading, so can Manchester.
Bigger, louder and brasher is so often the American answer to everything, especially politicians.Personally I would put more emphasis on the "efficient design" part - there's no art to American steam locomotives, since they could always build bigger. While there is definitely an animal pleasure in the very large and very powerful, the best locomotives, like the best art, were born from limitations.
Mind you, Americans will get furious with you if you dare suggest their trains weren't perfect - I got jumped on a couple of days ago for saying that at no point in time could the US have been said to have the world's best passenger rail.
There should be some direct trains to the south (that isn't London) from at least somewhere in the North West.Birmingham - Manchester should go over to LNWR using spare class 350/2s when available.
If Liverpool can manage without direct trains to Bristol or Reading, so can Manchester.
Just no. One of the advantages of rail over other modes is flexibility.Also moving to 100% reservations required on long distance regional services eg London to Glasgow etc.
I generally agree that this is how regional and long distance rail travel should be, but I agree with xotGD that 100% reservations undermines the turn up and go appeal of rail travel. It's largely that flexibility that attracts me to take the train.Here is something controversial.
What about returning it to a single operator nationwide eg British Rail. With fares that are simple and cheap regardless of when you travel?
Also moving to 100% reservations required on long distance regional services eg London to Glasgow etc. No more risk of having to stand and you can book the exact seat you want online in advance.
A return to checked luggage as an option on long distance trains no more concerns of where to put it or its safety during the trip.
How about a proper buffet car and a lounge car on long distance trains! You know proper cooked meals on a train to Manchester or Glasgow etc.
This is how it should be comfortable on all regional and long distance trains. Its not all about the fastest journey but the enjoyment of relaxing on the train perhaps having a meal in the buffer car or a drink in the lounge while travelling in a relaxed state as the hours go by.
I read that book and didn't think much of it - academics tend to have an obsession with linking anything they can get their hands on back to unsavoury ideologies on flimsy evidence.
Why stop there, that's nowhere near Draconian enough? All passengers on long distance services should be strapped into their seats with locked seatbelts that are not released until the train is nearing their destination. Refreshments, if required, would be brought to their seat and if they need the toilet they would have to press a button for traincrew to bring them a bucket.Also moving to 100% reservations required on long distance regional services eg London to Glasgow etc. No more risk of having to stand and you can book the exact seat you want online in advance.
.
Personally I would put more emphasis on the "efficient design" part - there's no art to American steam locomotives, since they could always build bigger. While there is definitely an animal pleasure in the very large and very powerful, the best locomotives, like the best art, were born from limitations.
Mind you, Americans will get furious with you if you dare suggest their trains weren't perfect - I got jumped on a couple of days ago for saying that at no point in time could the US have been said to have the world's best passenger rail.
I read that book and didn't think much of it - academics tend to have an obsession with linking anything they can get their hands on back to unsavoury ideologies on flimsy evidence.
Given that so many Americans assume the US is a massively improved version of Europe (and only a few actually visit) it hardly comes as a surprise that they could be deluded about rail services.My God, when did they imagine that they did have the worlds best passenger service ?
There is a segment of the American population who either believes that the US way is the best way, or they concede that the developed world functions better, but it couldn't possibly work over there, because: reasons.Given that so many Americans assume the US is a massively improved version of Europe (and only a few actually visit) it hardly comes as a surprise that they could be deluded about rail services.
So making them walk from Victoria to Piccadilly will improve connections?Force EMR's Liverpool to Norwich service through Denton, Ashton and Victoria, instead of the Castlefield Corridor.
A lot of the time people miss connections at Picc, due to their poor punctuality on Liv-Norwich services.
Well the thread has no "firm foundation in logic"...So making them walk from Victoria to Piccadilly will improve connections?