UK train passengers face loss of free wi-fi

[jon0844]

...until we see coffee shops and pubs etc. removing it I think the argument that anybody wanting to use wifi on a train is somehow living their life in the wrong way is somewhat weak.

Another thing is that many networks actively encourage Wi-Fi to allow VoWiFi (Voice over Wi-Fi) as it can be much cheaper to offload users onto Wi-Fi in places like shops or pubs than install an expensive DAS solution.

While it may mean a user having to connect to a hotspot rather than just using their phone as normal, it gets people online in an otherwise difficult place to cover.

The use of femto cells is probably quite low these days thanks to Wi-Fi. Meanwhile low frequency bandwidth can help with indoor (or in train) penetration but usually with relatively low potential speeds.

 

[Bartsimho]

But nobody needs wifi, like many people you're confusing "need" with "want". Let's be honest, from looking at other people's phone and laptop screens on the train, nearly all of them aren't doing anything worthwhile, they're just wasting time watching trashy American TV shows on Netflicks or playing childish games that involve prodding coloured blobs on a screen.

Personally I'd go the other way; not only would I remove wifi from trains, I'd introduce mobile signal blockers so people couldn't use their phones either. Just imagine how much more peaceful and pleasant journeys would be!

It isn't the 1950's anymore.

The railways need to adapt or die. Part of this adaptation is to move towards value added in a way it is interesting. The ability to connect to the internet while travelling is an advantage the railway has over other competing forms of transport so it should be able to lean into it not actively step away from it like you are suggesting.

People listening out loud is a problem but should be sorted by a member of on-board staff whether that be a guard or a supervisor.

People use it for leisure and business. I've specifically taken the Northern 195 home over the EMR 15x due to the WiFi capability of these newer units. It helps pass time or allow leisure travellers to plan their journey further when they are travelling and it can also allow business travellers respond to emails which can be tedious and taking the time to do it in an otherwise dead time is really useful.

I'd always be in favour of even better WiFi to allow better access to more services and if mobile ticketing is being used then WiFi should be mandatory on the unit as otherwise there are issues with presenting the ticket through no fault of the traveller (they have paid and selected the e-ticket option. Many of the e-tickets also aren't sent as PDF's but they when it is time to check on the train there is no WiFi available and the data coverage is either dropping out or really slow. This is also the case with Online issued railcards. It removes the excuse of there isn't a suitable connection and while it is on the passenger to ensure they can present a ticket many guards sympathise with it not loading due to poor connectivity and if the passenger is sincere about having the ticket).

 

[AdamWW]

I'd always be in favour of even better WiFi to allow better access to more services and if mobile ticketing is being used then WiFi should be mandatory on the unit as otherwise there are issues with presenting the ticket through no fault of the traveller (they have paid and selected the e-ticket option. Many of the e-tickets also aren't sent as PDF's but they when it is time to check on the train there is no WiFi available and the data coverage is either dropping out or really slow. This is also the case with Online issued railcards. It removes the excuse of there isn't a suitable connection and while it is on the passenger to ensure they can present a ticket many guards sympathise with it not loading due to poor connectivity and if the passenger is sincere about having the ticket).

Do you know who is selling m-tickets or the equivalent that need a live internet connection to be displayed?

I would certainly not want to rely on working wifi on a train to be able to show a valid ticket. On the services I generally use wifi is fairly reliable, but certainly nowhere near 100%.

 

[zwk500]

I'd always be in favour of even better WiFi to allow better access to more services and if mobile ticketing is being used

M-Tickets (captive to an app) should be got rid off, frankly. E-tickets are better for the customer in every way and plenty of industries use them absolutely fine.

This is also the case with Online issued railcards.

The railcard app should really have something like a QR code for when there are connectivity problems. Again, not a massively difficult thing to implement if some sensible thought is applied.

 

[AM9]

I was talking about the proposal to block all mobile signals so that the poster could pretend it's 1970.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 May 2023 ==



I probably would pay a few quid for the day if it worked reliably throughout the journey. I'm really not sure why everyone is getting so worked up about this, it's a useful thing to some people, the cost is likely next to nothing in the context of the amount of money the railway gets through and if you don't want to use it then don't use it!

If they get rid of it it's not the end of the world but feels very penny pinching at the expense of passenger experience.

Apologies, there weren't any specific indications in your words of humorous rebuke, but I thought that you were responding to the first paragraph of @CaptainHaddock 's post. Clearly the last paragraph was typical of some other comments in this thread.
As far as I am concerned, anybody with a genuine need to have access to the WWW whilst travelling might be disappointed that they would have to pay for it, but be very frustrated if the available bandwidth was continually gobbled up by relatively trivial demands of others for video, preventing them from doing whatever urgent task they needed to do. The availability of a reliable mobile network signal is not the railway's fault, and there's little that it can do about it, so whatever bandwidth that is accessible should at least be equitably managed. I suggest that much of the less important consumption is a consequence of the zero cost the railway offers.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 May 2023 ==

Do you know who is selling m-tickets or the equivalent that need a live internet connection to be displayed?

I would certainly not want to rely on working wifi on a train to be able to show a valid ticket. On the services I generally use wifi is fairly reliable, but certainly nowhere near 100%.

Has there been any recorded instances where a TOC has issued a penalty fare or even a byelaw breach when an M-ticked hasn't been presented because of no or poor internet access on a train?

 

[AdamWW]

Has there been any recorded instances where a TOC has issued a penalty fare or even a byelaw breach when an M-ticked hasn't been presented because of no or poor internet access on a train?

Does anyone know who is selling m-tickets that can't be displayed without internet access?

The only m-tickets I have used are TfW Multiflexes and these do not need internet access to display, and (now within some limits) can even be activated off-line.

 

[jon0844]

Most onboard Wi-Fi block many ports and services, so the service shouldn't be impacted by someone streaming video.

What you could also do is offer a free, speed limited and data limited, service for free and then offer a premium Wi-Fi with no/less limits.

But the problem then is that if you're taking money, you now have to provide a level of service that might be always possible. You need to have a billing system in place, the means to administer logins and also the customer service to deal with issues. In the end, it may not be worth the hassle.

A bit like the careful wording of providing free food/drink for first class ticket holders.

Ultimately, just block video streaming, file sharing sites and certain cloud based services. Some companies/networks now block VPNs too, which I think is a step too far (especially for business users) but I can perhaps see why if VPNs are being used to get around blocks.

 

[william.martin]

Too be fair you can't do alot on WMR WiFi as it blocks things like you tube and Spotify so in my opinion they may aswell get rid of it as I'm afraid even if you can get onto you tube (obviously on other networks) train WiFi is do crap you may aswell not even bother.

 

[AM9]

Most onboard Wi-Fi block many ports and services, so the service shouldn't be impacted by someone streaming video.

What you could also do is offer a free, speed limited and data limited, service for free and then offer a premium Wi-Fi with no/less limits.

But the problem then is that if you're taking money, you now have to provide a level of service that might be always possible. You need to have a billing system in place, the means to administer logins and also the customer service to deal with issues. In the end, it may not be worth the hassle.

A bit like the careful wording of providing free food/drink for first class ticket holders.

Ultimately, just block video streaming, file sharing sites and certain cloud based services. Some companies/networks now block VPNs too, which I think is a step too far (especially for business users) but I can perhaps see why if VPNs are being used to get around blocks.

If as you suggest a speed and data limited service without charge can be offered, then that would seem to remove most of the problems, even for those using VPN. It would certainly get rid of the bandwidth-hogging that takes place, particularly video/games streams.

 

[jon0844]

Not only can be offered, but IS offered. I am pretty sure all the train Wi-Fi services limit services. They may have missed some, or in some cases they may force a lower bitrate (just as they can force safe searching and other limits), but the Wi-Fi service is absolutely traffic managed.

I am not sure how many SIM slots Icomera have on their system (or whether you can expand them easily) but I believe it is quite modular.. so on busy routes, they may well aggregate multiple SIMs - as well as using different networks (as I've said before, most likely Vodafone AND EE). With larger antennas, and without the antennas being inside a train, a Wi-Fi service should be able to beat your phone for resilience.

For outright speed and no limits, your phone will likely win - but have more likelihood of losing signal periodically.

Therefore, on a long journey I'll usually go with the onboard Wi-Fi. It may have outages too, but will likely provide a more stable connection in the long run. If I need to download large files, I can easily switch to my phone as and when.

 

[AM9]

Not only can be offered, but IS offered. I am pretty sure all the train Wi-Fi services limit services. They may have missed some, or in some cases they may force a lower bitrate (just as they can force safe searching and other limits), but the Wi-Fi service is absolutely traffic managed.

I am not sure how many SIM slots Icomera have on their system (or whether you can expand them easily) but I believe it is quite modular.. so on busy routes, they may well aggregate multiple SIMs - as well as using different networks (as I've said before, most likely Vodafone AND EE). With larger antennas, and without the antennas being inside a train, a Wi-Fi service should be able to beat your phone for resilience.

For outright speed and no limits, your phone will likely win - but have more likelihood of losing signal periodically.

Therefore, on a long journey I'll usually go with the onboard Wi-Fi. It may have outages too, but will likely provide a more stable connection in the long run. If I need to download large files, I can easily switch to my phone as and when.

Ok, so is this traffic management dynamic in that it can lift and lower individual logins' data rates through bad spots (clearly not dead spots), forcing streamed loads to fall back on their own caching, or in the case of video/audio, dynamically modulate video streaming rates in line with the aggregated incoming data rate.

 

[jon0844]

I am not sure how dynamic it is, but if you think of how your home broadband or mobile connection is managed, it is likely to be similar to that. Some networks impose a hard cap on speed, and this is what GTR and others used to do where you got 50MB (yes, that little) at full speed and then a capped amount after. In reality, the difference wasn't that great.

I am sure the Icomera website (https://www.icomera.com) can help you find the answers to many questions, either on the site or asking them. There's a LOT of data (including downloadable spec sheets and technical data) on there from memory, although they are now under new ownership.

When it comes to video streaming, there are ways to limit the resolution and bitrate, and that might well be fixed. Again, without being on a train right now to check, I can't say. I don't stream YouTube, iPlayer, Netflix, Disney Plus or anything when on the train. I'm happy for data to send/receive emails, check forums and the like - all relatively low impact stuff.

I know GTR limited access to Drive, and I can't say I've tried a Teams chat or Zoom call. I am sure TOCs can make their own decisions on what to offer, based on the level of usage. An IC operator may want to offer more, and be willing to use more SIM cards to allow for a bigger overall 'pool' of data. Likewise, the operator will not only have the APs on the train to worry about maintaining, but also the type of modems they use.

Does the train support carrier aggregation? Can it aggregate with 5G on all bands? That's a HUGE difference. Someone with a Cat 3 or 4 LTE modem is likely going to never get above 50-70Mbps. With Cat 20 or above, they may get 300-400. With 5G and the latest Qualcomm modem, anything up to 1.6Gbps.

Now imagine a couple of SIM cards capable of pulling over a gig each, and sharing that. That's a game changer, and is purely down to some newer equipment installed.. not even needing new cabling to be routed inside the train or anything complicated.

 

[tomuk]

From a hardware point of view it certainly is minimal difference. On our stock (196/350/323/172) it equates to 1 Access Point and 1 router with multiple SIM cards. Yes the router is likely a specialised one rather than an off the shelf model, but it's needed for the staff requirements anyway. The cost difference in a standard and a high user AP is marginal.

Nobody will know the cost of the service/network contract, may not be hugely different between a low/high bandwidth and likely no data cap to factor in either.

So you don't know the costs of the data contract or the cost of the hardware either?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 May 2023 ==

I am not sure how dynamic it is, but if you think of how your home broadband or mobile connection is managed, it is likely to be similar to that. Some networks impose a hard cap on speed, and this is what GTR and others used to do where you got 50MB (yes, that little) at full speed and then a capped amount after. In reality, the difference wasn't that great.

I am sure the Icomera website (https://www.icomera.com) can help you find the answers to many questions, either on the site or asking them. There's a LOT of data (including downloadable spec sheets and technical data) on there from memory, although they are now under new ownership.

When it comes to video streaming, there are ways to limit the resolution and bitrate, and that might well be fixed. Again, without being on a train right now to check, I can't say. I don't stream YouTube, iPlayer, Netflix, Disney Plus or anything when on the train. I'm happy for data to send/receive emails, check forums and the like - all relatively low impact stuff.

I know GTR limited access to Drive, and I can't say I've tried a Teams chat or Zoom call. I am sure TOCs can make their own decisions on what to offer, based on the level of usage. An IC operator may want to offer more, and be willing to use more SIM cards to allow for a bigger overall 'pool' of data. Likewise, the operator will not only have the APs on the train to worry about maintaining, but also the type of modems they use.

Does the train support carrier aggregation? Can it aggregate with 5G on all bands? That's a HUGE difference. Someone with a Cat 3 or 4 LTE modem is likely going to never get above 50-70Mbps. With Cat 20 or above, they may get 300-400. With 5G and the latest Qualcomm modem, anything up to 1.6Gbps.

Now imagine a couple of SIM cards capable of pulling over a gig each, and sharing that. That's a game changer, and is purely down to some newer equipment installed.. not even needing new cabling to be routed inside the train or anything complicated.

Or why jot just dispense with all the complication and just improve mobile coverage along the lines. Maybe reform the planning rules so Network Rail masts can host public 5G cells not just railway GSM-R.

 

[AM9]

I am not sure how dynamic it is, but if you think of how your home broadband or mobile connection is managed, it is likely to be similar to that. Some networks impose a hard cap on speed, and this is what GTR and others used to do where you got 50MB (yes, that little) at full speed and then a capped amount after. In reality, the difference wasn't that great.

I am sure the Icomera website (https://www.icomera.com) can help you find the answers to many questions, either on the site or asking them. There's a LOT of data (including downloadable spec sheets and technical data) on there from memory, although they are now under new ownership.

When it comes to video streaming, there are ways to limit the resolution and bitrate, and that might well be fixed. Again, without being on a train right now to check, I can't say. I don't stream YouTube, iPlayer, Netflix, Disney Plus or anything when on the train. I'm happy for data to send/receive emails, check forums and the like - all relatively low impact stuff.

I know GTR limited access to Drive, and I can't say I've tried a Teams chat or Zoom call. I am sure TOCs can make their own decisions on what to offer, based on the level of usage. An IC operator may want to offer more, and be willing to use more SIM cards to allow for a bigger overall 'pool' of data. Likewise, the operator will not only have the APs on the train to worry about maintaining, but also the type of modems they use.

Does the train support carrier aggregation? Can it aggregate with 5G on all bands? That's a HUGE difference. Someone with a Cat 3 or 4 LTE modem is likely going to never get above 50-70Mbps. With Cat 20 or above, they may get 300-400. With 5G and the latest Qualcomm modem, anything up to 1.6Gbps.

Now imagine a couple of SIM cards capable of pulling over a gig each, and sharing that. That's a game changer, and is purely down to some newer equipment installed.. not even needing new cabling to be routed inside the train or anything complicated.

Thanks for that interesting info. I presume that video/gaming/live view connections are the major problem on trains, - UDP continues to consume available data whether packets are received complete or not but the hit on the path is the same. It also is continuous, and I doubt that even a well heeled 5G system can provide unbroken streaming.
Genuine data transactions (running under TCP) being fully packetised are inherently more durable, and there is more opportunity to average out the demand to fit what is available when compared to the incessant demand of UDP.
The genuine need for internet access whilst travelling is far more TCP oriented (travel webpages, maps, news (written) and file/document access (mostly PDF), whereas the more spurious usage is largely entertainment value only).

 

[CaptainHaddock]

It isn't the 1950's anymore.

The railways need to adapt or die. Part of this adaptation is to move towards value added in a way it is interesting. The ability to connect to the internet while travelling is an advantage the railway has over other competing forms of transport so it should be able to lean into it not actively step away from it like you are suggesting.

Whenever I read knee jerk reactions like this, I like to respond with a simple question.

Has spending every second of your waking hours on the internet made your life happier, healthier and more fulfilled? If we're honest, no rational person can answer "yes" to that question.

One of the great aspects of train travel is being able to switch off from the pace of modern life; to sit back in your seat, enjoy the views of gently-rolling countryside from your window and to feel at peace with the world. A desire for such a state of mind doesn't mean you're stuck in the past, more that you recognise that, whilst technology may occasionally be useful, more often than not it's a needless distraction.

 

[zwk500]

Whenever I read knee jerk reactions like this, I like to respond with a simple question.

Has spending every second of your waking hours on the internet made your life happier, healthier and more fulfilled? If we're honest, no rational person can answer "yes" to that question.

One of the great aspects of train travel is being able to switch off from the pace of modern life; to sit back in your seat, enjoy the views of gently-rolling countryside from your window and to feel at peace with the world. A desire for such a state of mind doesn't mean you're stuck in the past, more that you recognise that, whilst technology may occasionally be useful, more often than not it's a needless distraction.

If you want to get shut off from the world and enjoy a quieter pace of life for a bit, go for a walk in the country. I have train journeys when I want to look out of the window all the time, but I also have train journeys when I'd really rather finish off something I've been working on before getting home, or train journeys where it's grey and dull and the views are rubbish anyway so I'd rather listen to a podcast. Normally I'm fine for mobile data, but if the train offers a decent WiFi it's a nice to have.

I'd be perfectly happy for TOCs to charge for WiFi if they want to control bandwidth or make it revenue positive, but insisting there be no internet connectivity because one individual may prefer a quieter life doesn't strike me as particularly reasonable.

 

[AdamWW]

If you want to get shut off from the world and enjoy a quieter pace of life for a bit, go for a walk in the country. I have train journeys when I want to look out of the window all the time, but I also have train journeys when I'd really rather finish off something I've been working on before getting home, or train journeys where it's grey and dull and the views are rubbish anyway so I'd rather listen to a podcast. Normally I'm fine for mobile data, but if the train offers a decent WiFi it's a nice to have.

I'd be perfectly happy for TOCs to charge for WiFi if they want to control bandwidth or make it revenue positive, but insisting there be no internet connectivity because one individual may prefer a quieter life doesn't strike me as particularly reasonable.

Hear hear.

 

[Richardr]

Whenever I read knee jerk reactions like this, I like to respond with a simple question.

Has spending every second of your waking hours on the internet made your life happier, healthier and more fulfilled? If we're honest, no rational person can answer "yes" to that question.

Of course no one can answer "yes" to that question - rational or not - no one spends every second of their waking hours on the internet.

The question is whether the provision of Wi-Fi on trains is beneficial in that it increases usage of the railways or not.

 

[sbf kent]

So, please let me give you a real world example. I currently drive to work, it takes 40 minutes to avoid traffic I get to work by 07.30.I am moving home, so in the future I want to travel by train. Get the train at 07.30, work on the train and get to work at 08.30 - 60 minute journey time. I want to use free wi-fi on the train and will pay £4,500 per year for the journey. So, I get a better journey to work, the rail co gets £4,500 per annum, but I need to be able to work on the train and decent wi-fi, Will it make me happier, yes, will it reduce car travel, yes, will it bring additional revenue to the railway, yes all three..the ability to work effectively and travel together is vital to the future of the railway, if it does not accept this, total revenue will be reduced...and to be quite frank our railways need passengers at £4,500 per year, not £3.00 for a wi-fi connection.

 

[stuu]

One of the great aspects of train travel is being able to switch off from the pace of modern life; to sit back in your seat, enjoy the views of gently-rolling countryside from your window and to feel at peace with the world.

Clearly you have never commuted via Loughborough Junction

 

[ComUtoR]

Has spending every second of your waking hours on the internet made your life happier, healthier and more fulfilled? If we're honest, no rational person can answer "yes" to that question.

Leading a very connected life has made mine better in almost every way. I feel healthier and more fulfilled. Without a shadow of a doubt, I do not want to disconnect and I am grateful, almost every day, that we have the internet.

One of the great aspects of train travel is being able to switch off from the pace of modern life; to sit back in your seat, enjoy the views of gently-rolling countryside from your window and to feel at peace with the world

I couldn't think of anything more tedious. I'm a city boy at heart. When i look out a train window (other than out the front) I see miles and miles of concrete jungle. Not all pleasant. I'm also a Londoner. The views down the Thames are a wonder to behold. Watching the hustle and bustle of the city is incredibly fascinating.

I also love to 'people watch'. Watching a full commuter service into town and seeing the connected lives and people staring into their devices is just mind blowing. Roll back 20 odd years and you'll see misery.

. A desire for such a state of mind doesn't mean you're stuck in the past, more that you recognise that, whilst technology may occasionally be useful, more often than not it's a needless distraction.

Technology has changed the face of the planet. Sometimes you have to sit back and marvel at the sheer beauty of it.

 

[43066]

The railways need to adapt or die. Part of this adaptation is to move towards value added in a way it is interesting. The ability to connect to the internet while travelling is an advantage the railway has over other competing forms of transport so it should be able to lean into it not actively step away from it like you are suggesting.

The whole “adapt or die” thing is complete hyperbole. Trains are now very busy again, and that has nothing to do with some of them providing rubbish Wi-Fi! The point many of us are making is that modern data plans are better then Wi-Fi for most, so it’s simply a dying technology. As has been made clear above the on train Wi-Fi system we currently have itself relies on mobile data, and there’s no way anybody is going to invest in improving it, so it doesn’t make too much sense to lament its demise.

People listening out loud is a problem but should be sorted by a member of on-board staff whether that be a guard or a supervisor.

Sorted how? It isn’t as straight forward as that. Albeit really this problem has much more to do with declining standards of behaviour in society generally than it does with lack of Wi-Fi.

People use it for leisure and business. I've specifically taken the Northern 195 home over the EMR 15x due to the WiFi capability of these newer units. It helps pass time or allow leisure travellers to plan their journey further when they are travelling and it can also allow business travellers respond to emails which can be tedious and taking the time to do it in an otherwise dead time is really useful.

Perhaps those units are better than most. The trains I travel on regularly offer reliably awful connectivity. On the rare occasions it works at all, it’s so rubbish. As mentioned above with a 4/5g connection (very common nowadays) it slows my phone down to the point I actively switch Wi-Fi off when on a train.

I'd always be in favour of even better WiFi to allow better access to more services and if mobile ticketing is being used then WiFi should be mandatory on the unit as otherwise there are issues with presenting the ticket through no fault of the traveller (they have paid and selected the e-ticket option. Many of the e-tickets also aren't sent as PDF's but they when it is time to check on the train there is no WiFi available and the data coverage is either dropping out or really slow. This is also the case with Online issued railcards. It removes the excuse of there isn't a suitable connection and while it is on the passenger to ensure they can present a ticket many guards sympathise with it not loading due to poor connectivity and if the passenger is sincere about having the ticket).

I suspect the ticketing thing is complete red herring and, to the extent it is an issue at all, better dealt with via a decent data connection than a slow and unreliable Wi-Fi connection.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Leading a very connected life has made mine better in almost every way. I feel healthier and more fulfilled. Without a shadow of a doubt, I do not want to disconnect and I am grateful, almost every day, that we have the internet.



I couldn't think of anything more tedious. I'm a city boy at heart. When i look out a train window (other than out the front) I see miles and miles of concrete jungle. Not all pleasant. I'm also a Londoner. The views down the Thames are a wonder to behold. Watching the hustle and bustle of the city is incredibly fascinating.

I also love to 'people watch'. Watching a full commuter service into town and seeing the connected lives and people staring into their devices is just mind blowing. Roll back 20 odd years and you'll see misery.




Technology has changed the face of the planet. Sometimes you have to sit back and marvel at the sheer beauty of it.

Thanks for your alternative viewpoint; that's a genuinely interesting and rational response to my post which presents a powerful argument for the benefits of retaining internet access on trains.

However, those of us of a certain vintage might remember a classic British Rail advert from the 1980s.

Imagine an updated version with the tagline at the end;

"Travel by train
No WiFi
No mobile phones
Complete peace".

I'd buy into that. Wouldn't you?

 

[Darandio]

"Travel by train
No WiFi
No mobile phones
Complete peace".

I'd buy into that. Wouldn't you?

No. And being a certain vintage (just!) that can remember that advert and the era represented I can certainly say there wasn't complete peace on trains back then either.

 

[43066]

Thanks for your alternative viewpoint; that's a genuinely interesting and rational response to my post which presents a powerful argument for the benefits of retaining internet access on trains.

However, those of us of a certain vintage might remember a classic British Rail advert from the 1980s.

Imagine an updated version with the tagline at the end;

"Travel by train
No WiFi
No mobile phones
Complete peace".

I'd buy into that. Wouldn't you?

No. And being a certain vintage (just!) that can remember that advert and the era represented I can certainly say there wasn't complete peace on trains back then either.

I can also (just) remember that.

Shortly after the Jimmy Saville “age of the train” adverts, wasn’t it!? Perhaps the less said the better…

 

[SLC001]

It would be interesting to know how much WiFi adds to the cost of a ticket. There is a reasonable argument to say that you should only pay for what you need. Those who need WiFi should pay for it without being subsidised by those who do not need it.

 

[ar10642]

"Travel by train
No WiFi
No mobile phones
Complete peace".

I'd buy into that. Wouldn't you?

No, not at all. I recommend the Bluebell Railway if you want this kind of experience.

 

[jon0844]

It would be interesting to know how much WiFi adds to the cost of a ticket. There is a reasonable argument to say that you should only pay for what you need. Those who need WiFi should pay for it without being subsidised by those who do not need it.

Maybe a penny or two?

 

[Killingworth]

I recall an episode of Channel 5's The Hotel Inspector presented by Alex Polizzi when she was appalled that the hotel she was inspecting was giving away free wi-fi. One of the major improvements she recommended was charging. I don't think they did.

I can't recall the last time I stayed in a hotel that didn't provide free wifi, nor most of even the smallest restaurants. This thread seems to reflect opposite traits in society. Those who push back against new technology, some even wanting to ban all phones on trains, and those who are well ahead of trends with the best phones/laptops and internet access packages.

I'm in the middle. I like the standby option of railway wifi, but in most situations it's not of high enough quality to be worth paying for. Mobile reception is also poor in many older buildings so any free wifi is greatly appreciated.

 

[bussnapperwm]

Maybe I'm a bit of an outlier here but why do some people on trains feel they need to be connected to the internet every second of their journey? If you want to entertain yourself over the course of your journey, try looking out of the window; the view will be far more interesting than anything you can see on a mobile or laptop screen. If it's dark or you're travelling through a dull industrial area read a book or maybe listen to some music on your mp3 player. None of these activities require a wifi connection.

For me, it's so I can check rail connections, the progress of the train I'm on versus a potential connecting train, plus don't TOC ticket apps need Internet too?