Transport Tycoon Forums

Uh, how can you compare your Intercity trains to our highspeed trains ? It's something different.
Note that the entire UK is 242,000 km², while France is 643,000 km², so train journeys may be way shorter in UK than here. I only went once from London to York, and versa.

Pilot wrote:

Arch9enius wrote:Still, it's quite a collection. Does any other TOC have a bigger one?

Yes, Northern have 11 types of ex-BR units (142, 144, 150, 153, 155, 158, 319, 321, 322 and 323), versus GWRs 6 types (143, 150, 153, 158, 165 and 166).

You forgot the 156 and 333......

acs121 wrote:Uh, how can you compare your Intercity trains to our highspeed trains ? It's something different.
Note that the entire UK is 242,000 km², while France is 643,000 km², so train journeys may be way shorter in UK than here. I only went once from London to York, and versa.

That's the point. You don't need trains as fast as on the continent to "make it work" in the British Isles. 250 km/h (155 mph) is already a dream, the difference to 300 km/h (180 mph) is insubtstantial for UK distances.

If anything, the UK needs waay more trains. And if you haven't noticed, a Metro takes more passenger in an hour than an HSR at full train ("congested track") capacity.

acs121 wrote:Uh, how can you compare your Intercity trains to our highspeed trains ? It's something different.
Note that the entire UK is 242,000 km², while France is 643,000 km², so train journeys may be way shorter in UK than here. I only went once from London to York, and versa.

It's a pretty valid comparison to make.. if you're travelling between major french cities/towns by rail then the tgv is realistically your only option, and if you're travelling between major cities/towns in the UK by rail then an intercity service is the only option.

I think Geneva to Paris is probably a bad example (not being on an lgv) but it was the route I travelled on, and they're both large & important cities, ones that I'd imagine would be connected by train more than once every 2 hours. Eg. London to York (a pretty small city) you'd have a choice of 3 or 4 trains an hour.

acs121 wrote:Uh, how can you compare your Intercity trains to our highspeed trains ? It's something different.

If you actually look at some definitions of High Speed, existing/conventional lines capable of 125mph running (the speed the majority of our Intercity trains run at) is right at the Low end of what is considered to be High Speed.

Furthermore, many of our 125mph trains were actually designed to go quicker, the Pendolino's and IC225 were both designed for 140mph, however, running at these speeds was cancelled due to the lack of in-cab signalling. The IC225s have also reached, during test runs, 162mph, so they are no slouches, whilst our HSTs, diesel trains designed for just 125mph have hit 148mph, a record for diesel trains that is yet to be officially broken.

Construction of HS2 has already begun, in it's early phases (for example, work was done at Euston in preparation not so long back). When built, there is a likelihood that the Top Speed on it will be 250mph, and that will only cut an hour off the journey time from Manchester to London (currently 2hrs 8mins, post HS2 estimate 1hr 8mins). I would argue however, that HS2 is more about Capacity than speed itself.

---

Badger wrote:You forgot the 156 and 333......

I did forget the 156, however, I was under the impression that the 333s were post-BR era?

Pilot wrote:

Badger wrote:You forgot the 156 and 333......

I did forget the 156, however, I was under the impression that the 333s were post-BR era?

Yes and no. BR Class 333 were built from 1999 - 2000, and started service in 2000.
British Rail privatisation was between 1994 & 1997. So the 333s did come in after that, however British Rail itself as a company didn't terminate until 2001. So technically... not? They were certainly never used by British Rail, at least.

Pilot wrote:

acs121 wrote:Uh, how can you compare your Intercity trains to our highspeed trains ? It's something different.

If you actually look at some definitions of High Speed, existing/conventional lines capable of 125mph running (the speed the majority of our Intercity trains run at) is right at the Low end of what is considered to be High Speed.

Furthermore, many of our 125mph trains were actually designed to go quicker, the Pendolino's and IC225 were both designed for 140mph, however, running at these speeds was cancelled due to the lack of in-cab signalling. The IC225s have also reached, during test runs, 162mph, so they are no slouches, whilst our HSTs, diesel trains designed for just 125mph have hit 148mph, a record for diesel trains that is yet to be officially broken.

Construction of HS2 has already begun, in it's early phases (for example, work was done at Euston in preparation not so long back). When built, there is a likelihood that the Top Speed on it will be 250mph, and that will only cut an hour off the journey time from Manchester to London (currently 2hrs 8mins, post HS2 estimate 1hr 8mins). I would argue however, that HS2 is more about Capacity than speed itself.

Did i even say they were slouches ? No.
You simply can't compare the HST services to the TGV, ICE, etc : trains run on classic line, speed isn't over 200km/h, used for regional service, and more of those reasons.

Note that on the LGV Est in France, most trains go at the (maybe fabulous) speed of 192mph.

Chris wrote:

acs121 wrote:Uh, how can you compare your Intercity trains to our highspeed trains ? It's something different.
Note that the entire UK is 242,000 km², while France is 643,000 km², so train journeys may be way shorter in UK than here. I only went once from London to York, and versa.

It's a pretty valid comparison to make.. if you're travelling between major french cities/towns by rail then the tgv is realistically your only option, and if you're travelling between major cities/towns in the UK by rail then an intercity service is the only option.

I think Geneva to Paris is probably a bad example (not being on an lgv) but it was the route I travelled on, and they're both large & important cities, ones that I'd imagine would be connected by train more than once every 2 hours. Eg. London to York (a pretty small city) you'd have a choice of 3 or 4 trains an hour.

Paris to Geneva is on a LGV from Paris to Sathonay-Rilieux (north of Lyon), no further.
And for the London to York, those are inner-country relations, Paris to Geneva is international.
Plus, us tycooners know it, you shouldn't put too much trains on a line which no people take.

Also, in France, you have Intercity trains using 'Corail' cars. Those go from Paris to Lyon, Paris to Toulouse, and also go between big cities without passing by Paris, like Nantes to Bordeaux.

acs121 wrote:speed isn't over 200km/h.

You may wish to use Google before you say such a thing, otherwise, you look a little silly. 125mph is 201.168km/h (Google)

acs121 wrote:Did i even say they were slouches ? No.

You were however, stating that our trains weren't high speed. These have done 168mph on conventional lines, that, by definition, is High Speed - as is 125mph on conventional lines. Wiki for HS Rail.

acs121 wrote:Note that on the LGV Est in France, most trains go at the (maybe fabulous) speed of 192mph.

Good for your trains on the LGV Est, that only appear to run 8 carriage trains every 2 hours (I picked Strasbourg as an example on there). By comparison, we're running a 9-11 carriage 125mph train every 20 minutes between London and Manchester, so yes, your trains may be faster, but they're blooming useless to someone wanting to travel.

201km/h, is, roughly 200km/h. I know what 125mph is, don't tell me i'm stupid.

Oh, and for the argument of 8 carriage trains every 2 hours...that's absolutely false.
Click here, and you will see that trains have an interval of about 20 minutes too. Note that this station is on the LGV Est.

acs121 wrote:Oh, and for the argument of 8 carriage trains every 2 hours...that's absolutely false... Note that this station is on the LGV Est.

Well...

Pilot wrote:Good for your trains on the LGV Est, that only appear to run 8 carriage trains every 2 hours (I picked Strasbourg as an example on there).

https://uk.voyages-sncf.com/en/#/propos ... y/direct:1
This shows a train between 6 and 7, 2 between 7 and 8 then one at half 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 15:20, 16, 17 18, 19, 19:20 and 20:30. 15 trains throughout the day. That's 1 every 1 hr 30. Not exactly astounding frequency.

Still, we're not at the 2 hours that pretended Pilot.
Also, don't think the LGV Est was made only to go from Paris to Strasbourg. It was also made to go from Paris to Luxembourg, Paris to Remiremont...
For the HS2 line, it will be the same thing, not all trains taking the HS2 will be bound to Manchester.

As i said too, if there are 11-carriage trains every 20 minutes, that is because there is a need for it. We don't want to have a 20 minute interval with empty trains.

Quit arguing. Some of us are trying to get drunk and eat cake like good Christmaslings.

Edit: Pilot, claiming that because we ran a train at 168mph a few times is a moot point. They run at 125mph. Otherwise you are comparing 168mph with 300mph because the french once did that with a TGV. In a dick swinging contest we definitely lose.

Ameecher wrote:like good Christmaslings

Christmas is over for me, back to work in the morning (probably why I'm a little grumpy) Enjoy your time off though

Ameecher wrote:Edit: Pilot, claiming that because we ran a train at 168mph a few times is a moot point. They run at 125mph. Otherwise you are comparing 168mph with 300mph because the french once did that with a TGV. In a dick swinging contest we definitely lose.

Indeed, which is why I did ensure I said it was during a test run. Of course, we can always wonder what could have been if they had been allowed to do 140mph - would probably make paths harder to come by!

My point however was, that we do have High Speed trains, they just run on conventional lines, which is why the definition is slightly skewed.

Anyway, I agree with Ameecher, let's quit arguing, enjoy what remains of the Holiday period, and get this back on topic

Redirect Left wrote:I believe Euston will host something on 25th December for the homeless, i'm not sure who funded it and how much involvement Network Rail had, assumably some though, as its their property.

It was organised by Network Rail in conjunction with St. Mungo's. Lots of NR volunteers too.

JamieLei wrote:

Redirect Left wrote:I believe Euston will host something on 25th December for the homeless, i'm not sure who funded it and how much involvement Network Rail had, assumably some though, as its their property.

It was organised by Network Rail in conjunction with St. Mungo's. Lots of NR volunteers too.

Ah. That's probably the only reason it happened then, and they wouldn't be open to others trying to use their spare space for it. I imagine there are a huge heap of sizeable stations left unused aside from some maintenance or freight trains passing platforms. That otherwise could have the foyers used as public spaces for homeless or for example the elderly who'd otherwise spend the day alone.
That's a shame, probably wouldn't be able to try a movement to do it across the country and lots of stations on XMas Day in the coming years.

OK, I had a Train Journey recently, so I'll tell you:
R 7372, 2 January 2018
From Galați to Brăila (the train went further to Făurei, and the car was linked to an other train and went to Constanța)
My mom was amazed when she saw that the train had a single car. Well, that car had 2 floors, the first one having 1st class service. The people with a ticket could sit wherever they wanted (we are talking about a Regio train). The train had plugs and A/C. I heard people on TV complaining that the trains are overcrowded or don't have A/C even on IRs (we don't have ICs because of the speeds), but this one was OK, like any other train journey I made. I remember that dad told me that when he was at faculty he was using every week the train to go home and to return to faculty, and there was no pretention for A/C... Anyway, the faculty students received from the government gratuitousness for train rides, maybe to forget the government's sins... The train was comfortable . I enjoyed the ride. My geography teacher was in train also. I didn't know any other people in the train. The fire extinguisher was out of the warranty for a few days.

It looks very nice! I wish that our regional trains were as comfortable as those!

Just gone to Huddersfield on the 0844 Wakefield Westgate to Huddersfield. A lacklustre 142.

Minor surprise at Kirkgate, greeted by a First Great Western liveried 180 instead of the usual Grand Central livery.

Tried a 345 last weekend, along with an 800. Impressed with the 345, not so with an 800...... Inside it's virtually the same as a 395...

A couple of journey's from yesterday, where I headed to Derby for a meeting.

0742 Manchester Piccadilly to Sheffield, via Stockport and the Hope Valley, on 158865 and 158777
0849 Sheffield to Derby on 222020
1116 Derby to Sheffield on 220023, despite all the delays in/around Derby due to issues further south, this appeared to be the only train that was actually on time, although we were still 8 minutes late at Sheffield, mainly due to awaiting a platform at Sheffield because of the other delayed trains.
1214 Sheffield to Manchester Piccadilly via the Hope Valley, Marple and Belle Vue on 150117 - decided to take a slower, scenic train back, although the weather was pretty naff so didn't see much. I'd also been hoping for a Pacer, but that didn't turn up either.