I admit I haven't read his column for some years but I don't remember him being particularly interested in having a Swiss-style interconnecting network and I'm sure I remember him obsessing about direct services as a typical Brit enthusiast would. I certainly didn't realise it was possible to have tight connections across a whole network before I branched out onto the continent. Without continental knowledge he is bound to have formed typically British attitudes on how things should be, as I used to.
He usually wants whatever is best for the passenger (unless of course it is unreasonable). So whilst i cant recall him mentioning a fully interconnecting network, I really cant see him being against it. He realises though, a lot of this is not plausible with the fragmented privatised railway we have, and his views on whether he agress with privatisation or not, is something he very rarely makes obvious in his writings. He leaves that to Wolmar!
I sense he, like me, is more interested in how everything in a transport network fits together, such as timetabling and fares, rather than the actual vehicles themselves. Given that it is widely publicised how good European trains are in this respect, it seems odd that he isn't at least curious. Of course it is his choice to study what he wants. As I said, I used to read everything he wrote, for both buses and trains, especially buses, and thought it made total sense. So it was very disappointing to me when I realised so much of it was blinkered.
Blinkered? What because his specialist subject does not extend to European Railways? Thats hardly fair.
He has a good idea of the good points and the bad points of the UK rail system. He doesnt need to know about European Railways to do this. He may/ may not suggest something that is in use elsewhere in Europe. What he knows on European railways makes no difference with this.
He may not think of something that is happening in Hungary or Poland or Turkey, which he may have known about if he had been there, but this hardly makes what he says bad, or blinkered.
His stuff still often makes sense. What he says is often well thought through, and Europe doesnt need to play a part in it.
You say he is blinkered because he doesnt know much about European railways. Where does this end? Surely you could call someone blinkered for not knowing about Indian Railways? Aussie Railways? Argentinian Railways? Are we saying that someone claiming to know about fares and timetables in any country must be blinkered if they dont know about railways all around the world? Afterall, its unfair just to limit it to European railways.
As for how good European Railways are in the timetabling front. Have you seen the comment made by some American Railway journalist on the most underrated and overrated rail systems? I hope so, otherwise could we perhaps call you blinkered???
If so, you would know that in his view, the most underrated rail system is that of the UK. Mainly because of our very good regular frequent trains, which people conveniently dont see. Which was the most underrated? The French. Why? Because get away from the TGV, and they are totally the opposite, yet people seem to just base the French system on the fast TGVs.
Now im not trying to claim that the UK system is the best in the world. But it goes to show, that actually, we are not languishing behind other European countries.
