Persistent railway myths, misunderstandings etc.

RPM · 13 Nov 2018

The "wrong kind of snow" was a phrase uttered by a BR manager. (It wasn't, it was presenter/journalist Jim Naughtie paraphrasing BR manager Terry Worral, in rather a snide way.

Anyone in HV clothing on a station is a member of railway staff. (No, they could be anyone from a builder to one of those people who changes the advertising hoardings).

Train companies make huge profits. (Generally TOC profits are modest, say 2 to 4% of turnover. Several TOCs are currently loss making and are receiving parent company support).

Railhead leaf contamination is a wet pulpy substance. (It is a hard, resilient black substance containing components from both the leaf and oxidation products from the steel rail).

Train drivers control the heating & air conditioning on trains, from their cab. (Not on the ones I drive anyway. It is an automatic system controlled by thermostats. The controls are in each coach, not in the driver's cab, and drivers are discouraged from tampering with them anyway).

RailUK Forums

xotGD · 13 Nov 2018

Here's a misconception I've heard several times recently: That the refurbished 185s are new trains.

DelW · 13 Nov 2018

Pigeon said:
I doubt that would have got as far as going into service. With the vacuum system, the train sits behind a column of vacuum that decreases in length as the train goes along, so you can (and they did) "precharge" it by evacuating the pipe ahead of the train as slowly as leakage will allow, which means you need less powerful pumping plant (but running it for longer at a time) for the same result. With compressed air it's the other way round, so you'd have to have a big powerful compressor that could supply air as fast as the train's movement created volume for it. This in turn would make it really obvious just how inefficient a method of power transmission it is - the vacuum version was bad enough - and I can't see it then being put to serious use if they didn't have free coal.

I take your point about being able to pre-evacuate with vacuum but not do the equivalent with air, that hadn't occurred to me. I suspect that even with modern materials, opening and closing the flap valve for the passage of a train would have been a major source of problems and air loss.

Pigeon said:
They really don't want people to know about it. I've quite often seen the capsules for it lying around; I suppose they think people won't know what they are. I've occasionally been able to make out where the hatch at the end of the tube is. I've never seen them actually use it. They must wait until there's no-one about, which only happens when they're shut, which makes it kind of pointless having it in the first place.

I've sometimes seen cashiers loading the capsule when they close down a check-out, but the 'works' normally seem to be out of customer sight.

Meerkat · 13 Nov 2018

Sainsbury’s use the vacuum pipes for bundles of notes and definitely do it during the day.
Might possibly be only the till supervisors that use them though

_toommm_ · 13 Nov 2018

xotGD said:
Here's a misconception I've heard several times recently: That the refurbished 185s are new trains.

They may aswell be - look and feel much nicer than the IEPs of late.

HH · 13 Nov 2018

A popular one that raised its head again today, GTR is not a Franchise.

Ken H · 13 Nov 2018

DelW said:
If the atmospheric system had worked (with a better material for the flap valve), I wonder if it would subsequently have been re-engineered to use compressed air instead of vacuum? With vacuum the maximum force has a theoretical limit of one bar pressure x area of the piston (less in practice), but with compressed air, that one bar could be any value that the valves and pipes could be engineered to withstand.

[O/T completely] I was in the transport museum in Munich recently, and it has a demonstration of the overhead pneumatic tube system that used to be used for coin handling in big shops many years ago. Sadly it wasn't working, but it brought back memories. I think some supermarkets may still use such a system, but it's not visible to customers in the same way[/OT]

They use a pneumatic system to send blood samples to the path lab at Airedale Hospital from the patient areas.

tbtc · 13 Nov 2018

BigCj34 said:
I thought those who advocated railways would be free huggers due their environmental credentials. A railway that is bad for the environment would be highly ironic, and very definitely pointless.

dcbwhaley said:
All transport systems are bad for the environment. The environment would be best served by everyone staying at home and working by telephone or its modern equivalent. (I am not advocating that by the way)

If you think that a DMU does a couple of miles to the gallon, there are a lot of services where it'd be more environmentally friendly (in terms of exhaust fumes, pollution) if all the passengers drove modern cars.

See also the argument on here that "people who don't agree with my plan of spending a hundred million pounds putting some rural village back on the railway map must hate railways" (rather than the reality that we just think there are other things that the money could/should be spent on - nothing against your plan but it's not a priority - but still we get posts along the lines of "I'm surprised that there are so many anti-train people on what is meant to be a forum for enthusiasts" any time a Crayonista scheme is criticised).

RPM said:
The "wrong kind of snow" was a phrase uttered by a BR manager. (It wasn't, it was presenter/journalist Jim Naughtie paraphrasing BR manager Terry Worral, in rather a snide way

I didn't know that.

It's one of those phrases that's often a stick to beat the railway with but does have a lot of truth to it, i.e. there are very different types of snow - you'd prepare for overnight frost differently to how you'd prepare for fluffy light snow and you'd prepare for fluffy light snow differently to how you'd prepare for slush. When it comes to safety, these things matter.

xotGD said:
Here's a misconception I've heard several times recently: That the refurbished 185s are new trains.

We really need more than one word for "new" - if I said my friend was buying a new house, you wouldn't necessarily expect it to be a newbuild, just as calling someone a "new boyfriend" is no comment upon their age! But when it comes to trains, people get quite sniffy about use of the word "new" (to mean "additional"/ "extra"/ "over and above the existing fleet"). My favourite example being the poster who told me it was wrong to describe the 350/4s for TPE as being "new" since the design was based upon the 450s that had been built many years earlier.

IceAgeComing · 13 Nov 2018

That generally its cheaper to fly domestically rather than take the train. Utter nonsense usually based on comparing Ryanair prices with those of a full price return which isn't exactly fair...

HaggisBotherer · 13 Nov 2018

tbtc said:
If you think that a DMU does a couple of miles to the gallon, there are a lot of services where it'd be more environmentally friendly (in terms of exhaust fumes, pollution) if all the passengers drove modern cars.

See also the argument on here that "people who don't agree with my plan of spending a hundred million pounds putting some rural village back on the railway map must hate railways" (rather than the reality that we just think there are other things that the money could/should be spent on - nothing against your plan but it's not a priority - but still we get posts along the lines of "I'm surprised that there are so many anti-train people on what is meant to be a forum for enthusiasts" any time a Crayonista scheme is criticised).

You are someone very much after my own heart, tbtc.

I was going to add the common railway forum myth that, by default, you are some sort of Judas to hold the view that, far from every inch of rural railway ever built being ripe for reopening, the cold, hard economic reality is that some should never have been built in the first place. (It was called it the Railway Mania for a reason)

I'd never heard the term Crayonista before. Brilliant, it has gone immediately to the top of my favourite words list...

HaggisBotherer · 13 Nov 2018

IceAgeComing said:
That generally its cheaper to fly domestically rather than take the train. Utter nonsense usually based on comparing Ryanair prices with those of a full price return which isn't exactly fair...

Especially once you factor in airport parking, the cost of taking a reasonable sized bag, paying to choose your seat, etc... in my experience domestic air travel usually works out more expensive, especially if booking in advance. Plus all that dicking around at the departure airport adds to the time factor.

IceAgeComing · 13 Nov 2018

Even if you go public transport there and back its both much more of a faff and also probably more expensive. I looked up Ryanair prices for my trip home and by the time you added in a carry-on case (since Ryanair doesn't even give you that now) and the Stansted Express and the bus/tram and train from Edinburgh Airport to Stirling it worked out as being more expensive in the end for a much more difficult journey: compared to getting a Thameslink from London Bridge right to St Pancras and a change at Waverley. I did have the advantage of an incredibly cheap train back down which helps but even if it worked out twenty quid more expensive I'm willing to spend that to get a more relaxing and easier journey.

If you're especially pedantic and factor in the fact that you can't bring your own refreshments on the plane as easily and smaller things like that then that cost gap only increases - plus the fact that the compensation available if you are delayed is better on the railway because of things like delay repay. I don't think that Ryanair is going to give you a partial refund just because your flight landed half an hour late...

DarloRich · 13 Nov 2018

tbtc said:
See also the argument on here that "people who don't agree with my plan of spending a hundred million pounds putting some rural village back on the railway map must hate railways" (rather than the reality that we just think there are other things that the money could/should be spent on - nothing against your plan but it's not a priority - but still we get posts along the lines of "I'm surprised that there are so many anti-train people on what is meant to be a forum for enthusiasts" any time a Crayonista scheme is criticised).

I was just going to post this!

142Pilot · 13 Nov 2018

That the Swiss or German railways compare to the UK's.

Or using fartzkplan, or SBahn or other jumbled nonsense gives your bone plan some gravitas.

Journeyman · 13 Nov 2018

xotGD said:
Here's a misconception I've heard several times recently: That the refurbished 185s are new trains.

That's quite common. The SWT Class 455 refurb was very extensive, and most non-gricers were convinced they were new.

dcbwhaley · 13 Nov 2018

Highlandspring said:
You’re aware that this was the subject of a major research project from 2005 to 2007 and the data showed that seatbelts are not appropriate on trains and would increase passenger injury? If you have a SPARK log in you can read the reports, or if not here’s the abstract:

Thank you for that. It is unarguable but surprising. Especially Seat belts also prevent passengers being thrown clear of structural damage which was a common, and now discredited, argument against the use of seatbelts in cars.

Journeyman · 13 Nov 2018

IceAgeComing said:
That generally its cheaper to fly domestically rather than take the train. Utter nonsense usually based on comparing Ryanair prices with those of a full price return which isn't exactly fair...

Usually the absolute cheapest Ryanair flights as well, which are often almost impossible to get hold of as there's only one or two seats at that price on each flight, and failing to take into account the costs of travel to/from airports at the other end.

I live near Edinburgh and travel to London a few times a year. I'll usually compare various rail/air options, and most of the time there's not much in it. That said, my choice of mode depends often on what I'm carrying - if I'm taking a large backpack on a camping trip, airline luggage restrictions make flying very tricky, and I'll take the train for convenience, even if it costs a lot more.

Andrew S · 13 Nov 2018

Maybe not a very widely held belief, or myth, but I've come across a small number of people who are convinced that, prior to HS1 and Eurostar arriving, St Pancras station was completely closed and disused for at least a decade.

Journeyman · 13 Nov 2018

Andrew S said:
Maybe not a very widely held belief, or myth, but I've come across a small number of people who are convinced that, prior to HS1 and Eurostar arriving, St Pancras station was completely closed and disused for at least a decade.

Well, that was true of much of the main building, I suppose.

Andrew S · 13 Nov 2018

I guess so regarding the hotel, yes.

Teflon Lettuce · 13 Nov 2018

Andrew S said:
Maybe not a very widely held belief, or myth, but I've come across a small number of people who are convinced that, prior to HS1 and Eurostar arriving, St Pancras station was completely closed and disused for at least a decade.

TBF it was a dismal dank fume-laden hole before it was rebuilt and it certainly felt like the railway authorities neglected the buildings.. though if truth be known in the 70's and early 80's that was probably true of 90% of the network.

BigCj34 · 13 Nov 2018

Journeyman said:
Usually the absolute cheapest Ryanair flights as well, which are often almost impossible to get hold of as there's only one or two seats at that price on each flight, and failing to take into account the costs of travel to/from airports at the other end.

I live near Edinburgh and travel to London a few times a year. I'll usually compare various rail/air options, and most of the time there's not much in it. That said, my choice of mode depends often on what I'm carrying - if I'm taking a large backpack on a camping trip, airline luggage restrictions make flying very tricky, and I'll take the train for convenience, even if it costs a lot more.

With a railcard, I have never encountered a situation where flying has worked out cheaper than the train. That comparison changes if paying without any discounts however. Plus if I see another article about it being cheaper to go from Birmingham to Newcastle via Moscow (Novosibirsk) International Airport, I will scream. If you want to do the cheapest option take the coach, rather than a loaded comparison, that compares advance flight purchases against walk-on fares.

EDIT: flying being cheaper than trains, not flying!

IceAgeComing · 13 Nov 2018

and I mean if you want to go through the faff of organising a Russian visa and paying all the stuff to get that and then spend 12+ hours making a trip that takes three on the train then feel free; but most people have lives.

Teflon Lettuce · 13 Nov 2018

IceAgeComing said:
and I mean if you want to go through the faff of organising a Russian visa and paying all the stuff to get that and then spend 12+ hours making a trip that takes three on the train then feel free; but most people have lives.

I don't know... sounds like a fun day out... :lol:

still I'm sure there's some airplane fan that would enjoy that in the same way as rail enthusiasts going on the Settle- Carlisle

Andrew S · 13 Nov 2018

Teflon Lettuce said:
TBF it was a dismal dank fume-laden hole before it was rebuilt and it certainly felt like the railway authorities neglected the buildings.. though if truth be known in the 70's and early 80's that was probably true of 90% of the network.

Oh yes, I agree it was grim, although the wood panelling in the ticket office was rather beautiful.

I can understand why the supposed closure myth was convincing, as it had few services then, and is alongside two other large main line termini, and BR had hinted at closing it.

I once wandered through an unlocked door and explored the disused hotel for around four hours on my own one Sunday afternoon. Hard to believe now!

yorksrob · 13 Nov 2018

tbtc said:
If you think that a DMU does a couple of miles to the gallon, there are a lot of services where it'd be more environmentally friendly (in terms of exhaust fumes, pollution) if all the passengers drove modern cars.

See also the argument on here that "people who don't agree with my plan of spending a hundred million pounds putting some rural village back on the railway map must hate railways" (rather than the reality that we just think there are other things that the money could/should be spent on - nothing against your plan but it's not a priority - but still we get posts along the lines of "I'm surprised that there are so many anti-train people on what is meant to be a forum for enthusiasts" any time a Crayonista scheme is criticised).

I didn't know that.

It's one of those phrases that's often a stick to beat the railway with but does have a lot of truth to it, i.e. there are very different types of snow - you'd prepare for overnight frost differently to how you'd prepare for fluffy light snow and you'd prepare for fluffy light snow differently to how you'd prepare for slush. When it comes to safety, these things matter.

We really need more than one word for "new" - if I said my friend was buying a new house, you wouldn't necessarily expect it to be a newbuild, just as calling someone a "new boyfriend" is no comment upon their age! But when it comes to trains, people get quite sniffy about use of the word "new" (to mean "additional"/ "extra"/ "over and above the existing fleet"). My favourite example being the poster who told me it was wrong to describe the 350/4s for TPE as being "new" since the design was based upon the 450s that had been built many years earlier.

The thumpers - 1950's technology do a couple of miles to the gallon in good condition. I would hope that fuel efficiency on a modern DMU would have improved since that time.

Teflon Lettuce · 13 Nov 2018

yorksrob said:
The thumpers - 1950's technology do a couple of miles to the gallon in good condition. I would hope that fuel efficiency on a modern DMU would have improved since that time.

well if the bus industry is anything to go by er.... no... due to all the legislation on emissions and extra weight due to more stringent safety requirements a modern DD returns 4-5 mpg compared to a typical late 50's/ early 60's figure of between 8-10 mpg

yorksrob · 13 Nov 2018

Teflon Lettuce said:
well if the bus industry is anything to go by er.... no... due to all the legislation on emissions and extra weight due to more stringent safety requirements a modern DD returns 4-5 mpg compared to a typical late 50's/ early 60's figure of between 8-10 mpg

That's quite poor, considering cars are also subject to more stringent safety and emissions standards, yet are becoming more efficient over time.

Dr_Paul · 13 Nov 2018

Andrew S said:
Maybe not a very widely held belief, or myth, but I've come across a small number of people who are convinced that, prior to HS1 and Eurostar arriving, St Pancras station was completely closed and disused for at least a decade.

It certainly felt like it was pretty much disused when I visited the place many years ago. Not quite as bad as Broad Street -- at least all the roof was there -- but it was dark and gloomy with a decided lack of anything happening.

Meerkat · 13 Nov 2018

Oh you could tell something happened at the old St Pancras.......from the absolutely appalling air quality!!

Not that the EMT bit of new St Pancras is much better for air quality....

Persistent railway myths, misunderstandings etc.

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member