Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Just had an interesting conversation by phone with a colleague / correspondent of mine.
So they want to cut the wifi board trains?
Well that is going to seriously shove a rusty nail into the footsole of a certain TOC's "bright spark" idea to further reduce the role of the guard on their trains.
Is lighting and toilets commercially beneficial ?
seats are certainly optional.
maybe reducing windows is next ?
railways heading back to 1829’s level of service.
I would argue its at a minimum its an emergency informative service. Trains breakdown, the driver tells you nought, your sealed into a box carriage and twitter is the only route of communication with a toc.
This is a drawback of a nationalised railway - private operators go for value added services like this to attract customers (I'm not really sure it does), I would question how much it saves now most InterCity operators have it installed anyway.
I do wonder though if services like that, the cost could be negotiated to be mostly funded by one of the mobile networks or through advertising?
Does on train WiFi connect to multiple networks to always provide the best signal?
My experience with Northern WiFi (Sprinter and CAF) is that it is reliable with an adequate speed and often has better reception than my phone. Particularly in cuttings, perhaps because the antenna is 1.5m higher than the passenger so receives a slightly stronger signal.
Or is it that the mobile antenna kit used on train WiFi is of higher specification than the tiny antenna squeezed into a modern mobile phone.
Plus using WiFi is much kinder to phone battery life than the mobile network.
Does on train WiFi connect to multiple networks to always provide the best signal?
My experience with Northern WiFi (Sprinter and CAF) is that it is reliable with an adequate speed and often has better reception than my phone. Particularly in cuttings, perhaps because the antenna is 1.5m higher than the passenger so receives a slightly stronger signal.
Or is it that the mobile antenna kit used on train WiFi is of higher specification than the tiny antenna squeezed into a modern mobile phone.
Plus using WiFi is much kinder to phone battery life than the mobile network.
The external antenna(s) is most likely explanation, the coaches themselves will restricut the signal. The 390 and 222s I recall needed booster for people to even make phone calls (other classes may have had the same issue)
However I can see on the long distance routes it does offer an advantage over flying as you can use your travelling time to work. However on the IC journeys, I don't do work that needs constant connection to the internet. I can't use cloud based applications for example on the Eurostar.
I used to think like this however I once took an Avanti service from Glasgow to London with the intention of getting a few hours work done. The WiFi speed wasn't fast enough for me to be able to get a connection for anything more than checking email so I gave up somewhere between Motherwell and Carlisle and spent the rest of journey wishing I had flown home.
I’m not sure this is still the case now. I travelled Lancaster-Carlisle this year, and Leeds-Glasgow last year and on both journeys the only place I wasn’t able to watch a Youtube video on my phone was on the S&C.
(reply posted from a Penistone Line cutting with 3g)
I used to think like this however I once took an Avanti service from Glasgow to London with the intention of getting a few hours work done. The WiFi speed wasn't fast enough for me to be able to get a connection for anything more than checking email so I gave up somewhere between Motherwell and Carlisle and spent the rest of journey wishing I had flown home.
You can’t plug a train into a cable, so if the train can receive a signal for its Wi-Fi, then your phone will probably have service too. 99% of the time 4/5G is faster.
For most trains. Some trains have coating on the windows which heavily restricts mobile signal, the Class 222s for instance so the wifi works but your phone won’t!
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Those people should sign up for Airtime Rewards today. The cost of my phone bill has been a round figure of 0 for several years thanks to it. I got in in the early days when the rewards you could send to your phone account was unlimited. They restricted it to £100 a month but that should be more than enough for pretty much anyone if you are on a good value sim only plan.
For most trains. Some trains have coating on the windows which heavily restricts mobile signal, the Class 222s for instance so the wifi works but your phone won’t!
When the phone in your pocket can be used as a hotspot for faster data, the old on-train wi-fi becomes redundant. Can the industry afford the cost of replacement for the reducing amount of people with a need for connection?
It seems petty to switch off what infrastructure is there, however if a contract for provision has expired, understandable. As has been mentioned, get one of the networks to sponsor/provide like they do at stadiums.
Any traveller who can't get work done because they can't get wi-fi on board hasn't prepared properly.
This is a drawback of a nationalised railway - private operators go for value added services like this to attract customers (I'm not really sure it does), I would question how much it saves now most InterCity operators have it installed anyway.
In other words the private operators make an internal business case for providing wifi.
And what seems to have happened now is that the "nationalised railway" is requiring them to do so again, rather than the earlier government position that all trains in England and Wales should have free wifi whether it makes commercial sense or not.
It’s a complete non-story, train Wi-Fi is poor and increasingly redundant as mobile data coverage has improved massively, as have mobile data plans and their affordability. The numbers using it must be dwindling and it’s an unnecessary expense to install, maintain and transport the weight around in every carriage on the network. This is exactly the type of efficiency that should be being made, in order to preserve the actual train service itself.
Did anyone whine when pay-phones were removed from trains?
The 221 is a different class run by a different TOC so might be comparing apples with oranges there.
Three years of commuting on 222s, mobile signal was heavily reduced by some sort of coating on the windows. One advantage of the HSTs on that line is they didn’t have the same issue.
But by the time they were removed mobiles were widespread, so it was a bit of a non-problem, like the issue of WiFi being withdrawn. People will get used to it, adapt and catch up with their personal phone arrangements where it really is an issue. It’s just progress and as usual there’s a vocal minority that have a genuine issue (but which there is probably a solution for that issue), a section of society that likes to get outraged about anything and journalists that need to justify their existence.
That's still £360/year which is unaffordable for some people.
Personally I don't have unlimited data: I pay £10-ish a month and that gives me enough data to cover internet browsing and occasional videos when I'm out and about. It wouldn't be financially worth it to pay an extra £20/month when most of the time I'm at home and so don't need mobile data.
On the other hand, the few times a year that I'm on a long train journey are exactly the times that I'm likely to be working on the move and so would need a lot of mobile data. So a decent on-train wifi would be really useful (Sadly though, I find usually the on-train wifi either isn't good enough or is too much of a pain to go through the wholly unnecessary setup registration).
They put equipment in to improve it fairly soon after they were built. They have effectively got a repeater inside the train. The 390s also have. It impacted the higher frequencies more than the lower ones, so back when they were introduced Orange (remember them) struggled more than 02 / Voda. I am sure photos exist with the "improved mobile coverage sticker".
People did select GNER at the time to keep the signal even if it meant an extra change.
But by the time they were removed mobiles were widespread, so it was a bit of a non-problem, like the issue of WiFi being withdrawn. People will get used to it, adapt and catch up with their personal phone arrangements where it really is an issue. It’s just progress and as usual there’s a vocal minority that have a genuine issue (but which there is probably a solution for that issue), a section of society that likes to get outraged about anything and journalists that need to justify their existence.
But not having a mobile phone in 2023 is a niche pursuit, a bit like having your home lit by gas lamps. Nobody is going to put payphones on trains for the infinitesimal number of people who might actually use them.
On train Wi-Fi isn’t quite in that category yet, but it’s getting there with cheap and plentiful mobile data.
Story in The Times, see UK train passengers face loss of free wi-fi. Kite fying? Passengers face losing access to wi-fi on trains after ministers told rail companies to cut costs.
Although it doesn't always work that well, I often use it on Thameslink when my O2 tethering refuses to work for significant parts of the journey around Gatwick and London (full 4G signal, no action).
I think the issue for me is that this is going to save next to nothing in the context of £11bn subsidy for 2022 but make life more annoying. Symptom of this country right now, rather than try to make the Wifi work better, we'll just get rid of it to save peanuts.
That’s the case for many of the changes the government are insisting on, including the timetable being much less usable for many. It’s just penny pinching for the sake of it, with no regard for the overall picture.
The Wi-Fi issue I don’t think is a particularly big deal simply because it’s generally so awful.
Just had an interesting conversation by phone with a colleague / correspondent of mine.
So they want to cut the wifi board trains?
Well that is going to seriously shove a rusty nail into the footsole of a certain TOC's "bright spark" idea to further reduce the role of the guard on their trains.
Not sure most WiFi services could be considered WiFi - more of a glorified dial-up given the connection speeds!
Regardless, it'll be a loss to lose the WiFi on trains as that would lose an incentive for a modal shift. Certain (short-sighted, less enterprising) bus companies have already withdrawn their WiFi services during COVID and haven't brought them back, doing so on trains would leave a larger ripple effect.
Maybe no for you, but to me £30 is a lot of money. I pay £8 per month for my mobile plan, I can't afford any higher and many people also can't. Any other spend comes out of the family food budget. Doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to enjoy WiFi onboard, which I also get for free at supermarkets, coffee shops and many other places. As I said, it's a value proposition. Something that makes customers more likely to travel/visit more often.
The choice is never train ticket or data (or paid WiFi). I would imagine the vast majority of people plan their travel costs, and regular travel/commuting is part of their weekly/monthly expenditure.
The only issues I have with WiFi onboard are on very busy trains where you don't always get a connection, but once connected I've always been able to browse or watch at my heart's content (WMR/Avanti services).
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Wifi is "low on my list of priorities" but since we won't see any improvements prioritised in return (only more cuts) why should I accept it being given up ?
Exactly, the response wasn't tha WiFi wasn't needed/wanted. Just that other answers had a higher priority.
Surely it's obvious that lower fares, punctual and reliable services and hopefully trains with working toilets scores higher than WiFi which is more of a luxury. Doesn't mean we should get rid
They're simple installs not moving at up to 125 mph.
They're also not free, they have a cost to the business. Someone's tins of beans are more expensive because you don't want to pay for data.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
