That is not a controversial thought, try again.
No debating!That is not a controversial thought, try again.
Ahem...I think this thread needed to include a definition of "controversial".
.. a straightforward statement of what you think about something railway-related, that is probably not widely shared by others.
Instead of under 5s travelling for free, charge them ( or rather their parents) twice the adult fare to reflect the annoyance their running around and screaming causes to other passengers.
Agree with every one of these apart from the "station swap" thing. +1 for the 153s and the WCML renaming especially!
- I don’t care about “metals”. It doesn’t bother me in the slightest whether my local line in Yorkshire was built by the North British or the Great Western, I’m not fussed whether a modern route stays wholly on tracks that were once LNER or strays onto ex-LMS territory. Rails look shiny silver or rusty bronze to me; I don’t picture them in the variety of reds and blues and greens of a 1920s Track Atlas.
- If you are the kind of person who moans about “noisy” underfloor engines on modern DMUs then you look a bit silly when you eulogise about how wonderful “thrash” is and how much you enjoyed sitting in the front coach of a train with a loud diesel locomotive pulling it. Sorry!
- We’ve got enough stations. If your plan is to re-open some long abandoned ones then you should do so at the price of closing an equivalent number of ones currently open. It’d put some jeopardy into the “My Idea For…” threads.
- 1980/1990s BR were much better at design and aesthetics than they were at actually running trains. Their liveries and patterns were ahead of their time and many still work well today. Simple clear branding, easy to understand colour schemes. But at the same time as having such marvellous Advertising Agency stuff, they were inflicting Pacers on passengers. Fur coat and no knickers.
- 153s should all have a Quiet Coach.
- (with the obvious exception of London services) Virtually any journey over two hundred miles and most journeys over one hundred miles will have such insignificant numbers of daily passengers to be irrelevant. Such through services exist more as happy coincidences rather than any significant number of passengers. For example, it makes sense for Plymouth/ Exeter to have through trains to Bristol and Birmingham. It makes sense for Bournemouth/ Southampton to have through trains to Oxford and Birmingham. But the numbers of people travelling from the south coast to places north of Birmingham are so small that it doesn’t really matter whether one route has a direct service to Liverpool/ Manchester/ Edinburgh (via Leeds) or Newcastle (via Doncaster). Same with arguments about whether the service from Manchester along the Welsh coast should go to Llandudno or Holyhead (with the other Welsh town getting a service from Birmingham/ Cardiff instead) or whether Scarborough or Middlesbrough are more deserving of a through service to Manchester Airport or Liverpool. Most of these through services exist just because it balances out the service patterns on XC/TPE etc (where most passengers are concentrated on the middle of the journey) rather than any huge demand to get from coast to coast. Some people will benefit but not enough for it to be worth trying to give everywhere a direct service to everywhere else or for it to be unforgivable to remove a direct service between two places hundreds of miles apart. See also Norwich – Liverpool, Brighton to Cheltenham etc (and proposals for Nottingham – Carlisle and the like). I'm not arguing against long distance services, I'm just saying that people on here get far too fixated with the tiny number of people going from end to end and it wouldn't be the end of the world if termini were swapped around for whatever reason.
- The future for branch lines should be more like Falmouth (frequent shuttle service to the main line, catering for local passengers who use the line daily, giving connections to longer distance services) and less like Newquay (irregular service on the branch, relatively useless for locals, but a few Birmingham/ London services providing a direct service for longer distance passengers).
- Once the longer trains are introduced (and the conflicts caused by Northern’s well documented problems resolved), the new TPE timetable from Leeds to Manchester will be a big success, giving more services between the cities, providing faster journeys from some intermediate stations to Leeds/ Manchester (e.g. Marsden to Manchester, Batley to Leeds) and providing direct services from some intermediate stations to Leeds/ Manchester (e.g. Marsden to Leeds, Batley to Manchester). But introducing it with three coach 185s at the same time that Northern are struggling was always going to be a baptism of fire.
- We should rename the West Coast Main Line. I know that this is what it was called hundreds of years ago but the name just sounds silly, given the geography of the route.
Compared to development of self-driving cars, it would be a trivial engineering task to automate the job of driving trains. In less than a decade, the job of train driver will not exist.
We could probably also save a packet there by the lower build costs generally, and being able to run the line down the hard shoulder of the M6.
The notion that many safety critical tasks can be successfully automated is a hubristic fantasy, which will lead to a lot of people being injured and killed in order to maintain the profits of the companies selling the technology, and will also see many people who do vital jobs being sacked in order to appease other people who enjoy that kind of thing
A normal service should operate 365 days of the year, 366 in leap years.A normal Saturday service should operate on Boxing Day