• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (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!

Is a single railcar a train?

Status
Not open for further replies.

tivoli

Member
Joined
23 Apr 2009
Messages
219
A train is defined as a series of connected rail vehicles, so is a single ralicar like a class 153 Super Sprinter, for example, operating on its own, really a train?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

pemma

Veteran Member
Joined
23 Jan 2009
Messages
31,474
Location
Knutsford
You remind me of the Top Gear where they had a go at creating rail vehicles out of road vehicles and Richard Hammond said you couldn't have a train with one carriage as that wouldn't be a train.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
A train is defined as a series of connected rail vehicles, so is a single ralicar like a class 153 Super Sprinter, for example, operating on its own, really a train?

As far as the operational railway is concerned, a train is defined as a self propelled, rail mounted vehicle... including road/rail vehicles in rail mode.
 

ash39

Established Member
Joined
8 Feb 2012
Messages
1,503
Is a Class 153 a DMU? If so, what does the multiple imply?
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
It implies it can work in multiple with units of a similar nature.
 
Last edited:

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,455
Location
UK
Is a Class 153 a DMU? If so, what does the multiple imply?


A single unit consisting of multiple coaches/carriages/cars

eg. 4-Car 465. (DMOS=TOS=TOSL=DMOS)

A train is 2 or more units

no doubt there is a specific rule book or RGS definition somewhere but that's my best guess what is meant by multiple unit. Hopefully someone will correct me and give an accurate response with the relevant linky.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Multiple units (MU) are self-propelled train carriages capable of coupling with other units of the same or similar type and still being controlled from one driving cab. Often these are passenger trainsets consisting of more than one carriage. Single self-propelling carriages (also called railcars, rail motor coaches or railbuses) are multiple units if capable of operating with other units.

Multiple units are classified by their power source and are of two main types: electric multiple unit (EMU) or diesel multiple unit (DMU). Diesel-powered units may be further classified by their transmission type: diesel-electric (DEMU), diesel-mechanical (DMMU) or diesel-hydraulic (DHMU).

Locomotives utilising multiple-unit train control are not multiple units.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_unit

Best I can find at the moment sorry about wikipedia usage :/
 

PHILIPE

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Nov 2011
Messages
13,472
Location
Caerphilly
There are no trains running between Cardiff Queen St and Cardiff Bay and also between Coventry and Nuneaton.
You will see 153s running over the tracks, however.
 

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,772
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
So what about the DLR? Its rolling stock consists of "units" that operate singly or in pairs or in threes. (Used to operate singly, anyway.) But a unit has two sections which look like separate car or coach or carriage bodies. Would a single unitl there be a train?

[Hint for a future post - the GWR autotrain.]
 

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,840
As GB correctly says, as far as the operational railway is concerned, a single 153 is considered to be a train, as is a light loco.
 

The Decapod

Member
Joined
16 Aug 2010
Messages
236
Location
Everywhere
So what about the DLR? Its rolling stock consists of "units" that operate singly or in pairs or in threes. (Used to operate singly, anyway.) But a unit has two sections which look like separate car or coach or carriage bodies. Would a single unitl there be a train?

The units, or sets, on the DLR are 2 or 3 section articulated ones. That means although there are 2 or 3 separate bodies, each inner flexible joint of a unit is supported by a single, shared bogie, so it can't be uncoupled in the normal way.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,925
Location
Nottingham
The units, or sets, on the DLR are 2 or 3 section articulated ones. That means although there are 2 or 3 separate bodies, each inner flexible joint of a unit is supported by a single, shared bogie, so it can't be uncoupled in the normal way.

All the DLR units have two sections articulated together on three bogies, not three sections. They mostly run coupled in threes (ie six sections) but I think in pairs on quieter routes. I haven't seen one on its own since the early days of DLR, but then again I'm usually there during the week.
 

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,772
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
This, then, is another uncertain case. If a unit is articulated, are the coach bodies it consists of separate coaches, or not? I would say that a DLR unit is two coaches, even though they cannot easily be separated from the single bogie on which their inner ends rest.

People might argue about that. But would anyone claim that a Gresley quad-art - four coach bodies on five bogies - was not a train? Probably not.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
Whilst a single railcar may not meet the strict, pedantic dictionary definition of a "train", it makes absolute sense that in the real world it is referred to as such
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,925
Location
Nottingham
This, then, is another uncertain case. If a unit is articulated, are the coach bodies it consists of separate coaches, or not? I would say that a DLR unit is two coaches, even though they cannot easily be separated from the single bogie on which their inner ends rest.

That's probably why the word "coach" isn't generally used for articulated units - "section" is a better word.
 

High Dyke

Established Member
Joined
1 Jan 2013
Messages
4,282
Location
Yellabelly Country
Whilst there are many cases where a single car is the norm for many services / routes the continued lack of investment in extra stock for some operators...and the continued left hand / right hand attitude to proper maintenance means that sadly a single unit is a train. Unless of course that single unit has broken down... Yet another defective East Midlands Trains 'Dogbox' in service today.
 

oldman

Member
Joined
26 Nov 2013
Messages
1,023
Whilst a single railcar may not meet the strict, pedantic dictionary definition of a "train", it makes absolute sense that in the real world it is referred to as such

But is there a strict pedantic dictionary definition? Looking at some online dictionaries I found:

Cambridge - a railway engine connected to carriages/cars for carrying people or to wheeled containers for carrying goods

Collins - a line of coaches or wagons coupled together and drawn by a railway locomotive

Oxford - A series of connected railway carriages or wagons moved by a locomotive or by integral motors

So only Oxford is almost right. If they replaced series with one or more, the problem would be solved.
 

bigdelboy

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
198
Surprised the class 139 PPM has not got a mention, it being possibly the biggest current tiddler, especially in relation to class 153. All said though really it does not add particularly to the arguments.
 

talltim

Established Member
Joined
17 Jan 2010
Messages
2,454
Whilst a single railcar may not meet the strict, pedantic dictionary definition of a "train", it makes absolute sense that in the real world it is referred to as such

What he said. If people call it a train, it is called a train
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,773
in DLR parlance, they refer to each articulated unit as a single "car"
 

Sunbird24

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2013
Messages
391
Location
La Mont Ravana
The use of train for a single car DMU vehicle comes under the same banner as train station. Both are relatively recent additions to our vocabulary introduced by people who do not fully understand the English language of yesteryear. This is the way language evolves.
Back in the earlier part of the last century the steam-powered coaches were not referred to as trains when there was only one unit but as a coach. Also, there was no such thing as a train station, it was always railway station, though going back even earlier the railway station was the main building and the trains used the train shed which referred to the lines in the covered platforms.
Until the 1950s engine shed, and later locomotive shed were used for all locomotives but when the masses of diesel locomotives started to appear they first used fuelling points and later diesel depots.
Who knows what other changes will come about in the next 50-100 years.
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
24,925
Location
Nottingham
The railway has always referred to a single railcar or light engine as a train so this isn't a recent thing. For example block instruments have a setting called "Train on line" and I would imagine station announcements and departure boards have always referred to "The next train to" even if it was a steam railmotor.
 

DXMachina

Member
Joined
24 Oct 2011
Messages
652
People might argue about that. But would anyone claim that a Gresley quad-art - four coach bodies on five bogies - was not a train? Probably not.

a QA is a carriage. Quad Art + N2, now thats a train.... the DLR case is harder since its self propelled

I prefer the old definitions, train for a 2+car DMU, EMU or locomotive + hauled stock of any sort, light engine for a locomotive alone, railcar or tramcar for anything else.

The word train existed for centuries before railways did. It means 'to be pulled' hence training in the sense of drawing people to knowledge. Arguably a power-twin DMU/EMU isnt a train but you can be too specific....
 

Sunbird24

Member
Joined
26 Oct 2013
Messages
391
Location
La Mont Ravana
The railway has always referred to a single railcar or light engine as a train so this isn't a recent thing. For example block instruments have a setting called "Train on line" and I would imagine station announcements and departure boards have always referred to "The next train to" even if it was a steam railmotor.
Station announcements and departure boards are also a relatively recent innovation in most cases for most stations. Announcements were nothing more than a shout from a worker on the platform or the station master on smaller stations and departure boards were literally a wooden board attached to a post or wall at the end of the platform on some stations, but not many. Manual systems in most cases, remember most of the technology in use today just did not exist prior to the 1960s or later.
While it is true that block instruments used the simple wording of "up train on line" or "down train on line"and bell signals referred to "trains", this was clarified in the codes which separated light engines and railmotors etc from the various passenger and goods trains. In this respect different companies used different codes and different terminology.
The word train evolved from an old latin word which meant to draw or pull.
To bring it all into perspective, try reading this:

It all sounds very complicated, so ponder this.

The instrument shows Line Blocked when the line is not blocked, but shows Train on Line when the line is blocked. If the Line is clear, it shows Line Blocked but if it shows Line Clear, there is a train coming. If it says Line Closed, the line isn't closed, because if it was closed the block instrument would be taken away. It will show Train on Line if the train is on the line, but will also show Train on Line if the train is off the line. So, if the block instrument shows Normal, things probably are very normal indeed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top