|
How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name.
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 21:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
kingturnip posted:Given how much stuff is right next to the railway most of the way, the easiest (cheapest?) option would be to expand Brimsdown or Ponders End stations to 4 tracks. Those stations aren't far off halfway between Broxbourne (which already has 4 tracks) and Tottenham Hale, where every train stops anyway. So suburban services could stop and wait there while a fast train goes through. Everything from Brimsdown to Coppermill Junction (south of Tottenham Hale) has plenty of space on the eastern side for another pair of tracks. In places you can see where the old bridges are still in place. There's even a couple short sections of ancient track left in the undergrowth. If you look at Tottenham Hale's platform 1, you can see it used to be double sided as well. And if you're going to just quad one station, why not make it Tottenham Hale for improved interchange, rather than somewhere smaller? You've already got Broxbourne and Harlow Town further north for the same purpose.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 21:18
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name. I pronounce it with a capital O.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 22:09
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name. Like all true Londoners, I refer to the lines by their colours.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 22:18
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name. Most people refer to small-o overground trains as just "trains", whereas both Overground and Underground are just called the Tube. (Also am I the only one to get the Wombles theme stuck in their head when reading the word "Overground"? Weird that "Underground" doesn't trigger it, possibly due to longer exposure)
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 00:26
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:As to the different ticketing regime and its workability - if the Met (and the Overground) can work out to Watford and the Central Line out to Epping, there's no particular reason the Overground can't work out to Sidcup, for example. That is my main question. Why not go the whole way and make the entire network country wide operate on the same ticketing scheme. everyone just pays per segment between stations. Works well in Japan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
See thread title for the short answer.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 09:55
|
|
|
The Japanese system isn't nicely integrated either. The paying per segment means that you actually have to touch out and back in with your Oyster-equivalent if you're changing between two tube lines run by different companies. Also, would it be fair to say that London buses were successfully privatised? Service levels, frequencies etc. set by a central body and really have improved (especially night services), simple and integrated fare structure, unified branding and relatively reasonable prices. Or am I missing anything? sweek0 fucked around with this message at 11:44 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 11:40
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:The Japanese system isn't nicely integrated either. The paying per segment means that you actually have to touch out and back in with your Oyster-equivalent if you're changing between two tube lines run by different companies. That's only because London Buses were privatised in name (and where the profits go) only. Any franchise holder is required to run the exact routes and frequencies TfL tell them to and at the price they're told, in return for a pretty fat subsidy, and the improvements you're talking about only came about with the establishment of TfL and Ken Livingtsone's personal crusade to sort the buses out, even if it did have the unfortunate side-effect of introducing bendy buses. The privatisation has bought nothing to the table but considerably less efficiency in procurement and maintenance, and of course basically free money for Arriva, Stagecoach et. al.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 11:52
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:How do you guys distinguish between the Overground and the overground railways in everyday speech? I find it a very annoying name. will probably call crossrail 1 & 2 just "crossrail". if i live long enough to see that open. people who call the big-O Overground "tube" though - they're monsters. does anyone else wish that Thamelink was under TfL and on the tube map?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 12:40
|
|
|
Cerv posted:does anyone else wish that Thamelink was under TfL and on the tube map? TfL don't as NR would probably try and make them chip in for the upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 12:42
|
|
|
It's been on the tube map in the past. It's going to be too big and complicated as a network for it to be shown again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 12:53
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:It's been on the tube map in the past. It's going to be too big and complicated as a network for it to be shown again. 15 years ago they removed it. Completely forgot about that. Looking back, the colour scheme's terrible. http://www.clarksbury.com/cdl/maps/tube98.jpg I still think you could make the current situation fit ok. This is just missing the south-west loop (ignore the handful of errors and crazy circular format). http://www.flickr.com/photos/anniemole/8425646797/
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 13:16
|
|
|
Cerv posted:15 years ago they removed it. Completely forgot about that. North Woolwich station RIP 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 13:24
|
|
|
Somewhat disappointed that there's no spot for Pacer equivalents, since that's what I end up on most of the time. Other than that I knew electric was good, but daaaang, same mpg as a bicycle? I know there's going to be other environmental costs associated with putting together a whole electric train line plus stock over knocking ~20kg of aluminium into a shape, but that's still really, really good. Looking forward to NW electrification even more now. Unrelated: a 747 is more fuel efficient than most cars, 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 13:30
|
|
|
I don't get that graph. Why is the "Eco-Boat" the least fuel-efficient thing on there? Edit: Editagain: No, biodiesel. So...the 'eco boat' was really inefficient with its biodiesel? Edit 3: It's "per passenger". Mystery solved. Noreaus fucked around with this message at 13:43 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 13:38
|
|
|
Noreaus posted:I don't get that graph. Why is the "Eco-Boat" the least fuel-efficient thing on there? Except why are the full 747 and electric car less fuel-efficient than the empty (well minimum crew presumably) equivalents? e: And what the living gently caress is a jet-ski doing all the way up at the top of that graph? They're about as fuel-efficient as a small motorbike (which they often share an engine with) and are pretty much one-person vehicles. e2: No, wait, your first assumption was right, more efficient is at the bottom. goddamnedtwisto fucked around with this message at 15:47 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
Can anyone post the link to the long article about railway privitisation, I think it was in the Guardian. But it explicitly discussed the details of what happened, along with the consultants promising technology that didn't exist yet (moving monitoring sensors or something?) and the gutting of the British Rail engineering corp? I would appreciate it as I lost all my bookmarks recently and it was handy to have.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Sri.Theo posted:Can anyone post the link to the long article about railway privitisation, I think it was in the Guardian. But it explicitly discussed the details of what happened, along with the consultants promising technology that didn't exist yet (moving monitoring sensors or something?) and the gutting of the British Rail engineering corp? Very end of the OP
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Wheres our level crossings post?  You've got time enough to swan around in the sun with a big bass drum strapped to your chest, but no time for level crossings? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2013 17:16
|
|
|
What's so fascinating about level crossings anyway?
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 15:29
|
|
|
We don't know, because Bozza keeps failing to tell us.  Although at this point he probably feels we're beginning to drift into Duke Nukem Forever territory, where no level crossing factoid could possibly be interesting enough to satisfy 14 months of hyped curiosity. It's okay, we all know it's going to be amazing.  Realtalk, we're all humongous nerds here who read encyclopaedias for fun, and you know it. You can't fail Bozza.  Except by continuing to fail to tell us anything about level crossings
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
sweek0 posted:The Japanese system isn't nicely integrated either. The paying per segment means that you actually have to touch out and back in with your Oyster-equivalent if you're changing between two tube lines run by different companies. The Japanese tube system is quite heavily privatized in places, although they did it in a weird way I think. Their companies seem to work together much better than ours though with trains through running on private and public railways. The buses privatisation is more like a concession system which is typically much more successful than the quai privatisation system used for the national rail lines. The Overground uses a similar model and has also done very well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 10:45
|
|
|
Noreaus posted:I don't get that graph. Why is the "Eco-Boat" the least fuel-efficient thing on there? I think the point is that the "Eco boat" was more a publicity stunt than everything else. You can also only use the graph to compare different options for a journey of the same length, while a 747 may be more efficient than a car for a long journey they don't really serve the same market. My big takeaway is that 1) For passangers boats are less efficient than plains (he explains that this is because of high energy use on the boats during travel, but perhaps you should subtract what those people would use normally during that time) 2) Trains are really really efficient, and it is far more important to provide a good train service that will get people out of planes/cars than to use the most energy efficient trains.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 10:56
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:I think the point is that the "Eco boat" was more a publicity stunt than everything else. Cruise liners are spectacularly inefficient in every possible way because any system that is not "make this thing move" lowers the efficiency, and almost everything on a cruise liner (from air conditioning to onboard surf machines) falls into the latter categort. I'm willing to bet that a liner with provisions like the between-wars transatlantic liners and modern engine technology would kick the arse of almost everything on that list.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 11:09
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:I think the point is that the "Eco boat" was more a publicity stunt than everything else. If this were a comparison of fuel usage per ton-mile of freight I'd think you see cargo ships way up there alongside rail transport. But for passenger boats, you usually don't bother to go for efficiency when you make them. Though if you look closely there's a "SeaBus" entry which does quite well - that's the passenger ferry system for Vancouver whose ships are like this:  Strict ferries like this or the NYC Staten Island Ferry tend to be quite efficent because you pile on 400 people (in the Vancouver case) with little more than some chairs to sit in and a bathroom or two; or gor the NYC Staten Island ferry you're loading on 1000-6000 people per ship (and they decide which size ships are available for each crossing in order to maintain proper fuel consumption, you don't want to send out the huge 6000-passenger class ones for the 3 am crossing that'll have 500 aboard)   Of course neither of these would be really suitable for long haul travel. Edit: remember with cruise ships: This ship holds the same number of people (about 6000) as the first NYC SI ferry I linked:  It is 362 meters long, 47 meters wide at the waterline, and goes 9.3 meters under the waterline. The Barberi-class ferry vessels instead carry 6000 people within 94.5 meters long, 21.3 meters wide and 4 meters under the waterline. Nintendo Kid fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Jul 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 16:18
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:The Japanese tube system is quite heavily privatized in places, although they did it in a weird way I think. Their companies seem to work together much better than ours though with trains through running on private and public railways. The payment card system (SUICA/IOCA/PASMO etc etc - there are a good 10 systems) is a complete clusterfuck - a JR SUICA (*not* a Rinkai SUICA) will work with pretty much everyone, but you can - I've done this - get on the train with a PASMO in Kawasaki, transfer to the bullet train, and then be hosed in Kyoto because you can't touch out as the card isn't recgonised. This is particularly irritating because it's a political decision, not a technical one - I've read all the inter-op documents and wrote a bunch of the code to deal with passing payments / info on banned cards between the different systems. I swear I've made this post - or something like it - before. Pretty much everything you read about how great Japan's railways is total BS anyway, as the number of people that talk about it who've spent any real time travelling during rush hour is low. The Tokaido line, main route from the south through Yokohama, and into Tokyo is even less punctual in the rush hour than any of the routes into London, and the Odakyu line has a problem with "the wrong sort of rain" that would make BR proud (The vast majority of my experience there going Shonandai -> Shin-Yurigaoka -> Kurokawa, which usually took 30 minutes longer than the time table claimed each way) ookiimarukochan fucked around with this message at 18:05 on Jul 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 18:00
|
|
|
Interesting fact I know about Japanese railways: There high speed network is the only line on standard gauge, the rest uses metre. This was done on purpose because it stops freight and local traffic from interfering with the bullet train. Japan, like a lot of countries, come to Britain when they want to know about mixed traffic operations.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Bozza posted:There high speed network is the only line on standard gauge, the rest uses metre. Part of the joy of the different railway systems is the stations of course - JR Machida / Odakyu Machida are a few dozens of meters apart, but Odakyu Sagamihara station and JR Sagamihara are a 30 minute car journey apart (finding this out when I was drunk, late at night, and still spoke almost no Japanese was great fun btw) ookiimarukochan fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Jul 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 23:02
|
|
|
The question about Japan was more directed at the fare situation, where my reading says in england the cost for a segment changes on how you purchase it , but in Japan X to Y on a given leg and service is known. My experience in Japan is limited to JR and the various metros though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
Bozza posted:There high speed network is the only line on standard gauge, the rest uses metre. This was done on purpose because it stops freight and local traffic from interfering with the bullet train. This isn't strictly true..... There are quite a few Japanese private lines that use standard gauge. Off the top of my head I know that the Tokyo Metro Ginza line runs on standard gauge (Mainly because the guy who founded it saw the London Underground a few years earlier and decided that Tokyo must have exactly the same thing. As well as the Keisei Electric Railway which converted to Standard Gauge around the 50's. That said, the train companies in Japan have all sorts of fingers in a number of pies. Tobu railway (the rail company I used to ride when I lived there) not only has a chain of supermarkets, a theme park, health spas, department stores and housing but they also funded the Tokyo Skytree (With the help of some other companies like NHK.) This is a similar story for most of the Private Japanese railway firms too. They're usually part of a greater conglomerate with the railway as the businesses backbone. Its a bit like Tesco running the East Coast Mainline. Or First Group deciding to open a chain of supermarkets, and then building a massive tower in the centre of London. -EDIT- That said, regarding the Japanese fares. If there was one thing I would love to have brought over its the Japanese Fare Structure. Paying for the distance you travel rather than what someone says you should pay makes far more sense. Venmoch fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Jul 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
Bozza posted:There high speed network is the only line on standard gauge, the rest uses metre. Venmoch posted:That said, regarding the Japanese fares. If there was one thing I would love to have brought over its the Japanese Fare Structure. Paying for the distance you travel rather than what someone says you should pay makes far more sense. I think paying by distance in the UK would either make commuter rail unprofitable or intercity even more overpriced, unless there were variable fees for time / distance like cabs at night.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 01:47
|
|
|
Venmoch posted:This isn't strictly true..... Actually British rail companies used to do this too. The most famous example of course is the Metropolitan Railway, which bought up swathes of land along its route and built entire towns (Nesaden, Wembley, Willesden) for the new commuters to live in. The Southern Railway used to own loads of hotels along the South Coast as well as pubs, clubs, and ferries, and the LNWR owned shitloads of coal and iron mines. They only abandoned them after nationalisation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 08:24
|
|
|
Venmoch posted:Paying for the distance you travel rather than what someone says you should pay makes far more sense.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 09:25
|
|
|
goddamnedtwisto posted:Actually British rail companies used to do this too. The most famous example of course is the Metropolitan Railway, which bought up swathes of land along its route and built entire towns (Nesaden, Wembley, Willesden) for the new commuters to live in. The Southern Railway used to own loads of hotels along the South Coast as well as pubs, clubs, and ferries, and the LNWR owned shitloads of coal and iron mines. They only abandoned them after nationalisation. Well if you count that, almost all the private railroads in the US, once they started expanding outside of the already settled areas, built and ran thousands and thousands of towns and coordinated stores and hotels along their routes. Atlanta, Georgia was originally built by a railroad as a company town for instance, before the railroads were built to it there was no one there!
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 18:59
|
|
|
All the rail companies owned hotels and similar at their major stations. Most if not all also owned ferries. I've seen photos of railway-company-liveried barges, and of course they owned delivery carts and lorries. The LMS (and possibly others) even had its own airline for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 21:43
|
|
|
 sadly missed
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 22:02
|
|
|
And also
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2013 22:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 21:53 |
|
|
What a gorgeously futuristic piece of poo poo. Like something right out of a *punk novel.  Install Gentoo posted:Well if you count that, almost all the private railroads in the US, once they started expanding outside of the already settled areas, built and ran thousands and thousands of towns and coordinated stores and hotels along their routes. Atlanta, Georgia was originally built by a railroad as a company town for instance, before the railroads were built to it there was no one there! gently caress capitalism, forget communism, clearly the ultimate form of government is Trains. Renaissance Robot fucked around with this message at 21:31 on Jul 18, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 18, 2013 21:28
|
|