Can a single 153 be called a train?

Status
Not open for further replies.

AndrewE

On Moderation
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
3,710
It's only just occurred to me, but my dictionary says a train is "a number of things in a string... as... railway carriages or wagons."
Maybe that's why a trip from Crewe to Derby doesn't seem like a train ride any more!
Perhaps part of the fun is being part of the train!
A
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

HMS Ark Royal

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2015
Messages
2,811
Location
Hull
It's only just occurred to me, but my dictionary says a train is "a number of things in a string... as... railway carriages or wagons."
Maybe that's why a trip from Crewe to Derby doesn't seem like a train ride any more!
Perhaps part of the fun is being part of the train!
A

Yes, yes it can...

The same as a locomotive hauling a single truck or tank is hauling a train
 

Jona26

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2013
Messages
271
Location
West Sussex
A train was originally a 'train of carriages'. Should a 153 technically be described as a railcar or something similar?
 
Last edited:

AndrewE

On Moderation
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
3,710
Maybe, but if ORR calls a 153 a train in their reports, thats what I go by

If you rely on our Civil Service's use of English as the way you understand the world then you will have a very lopsided view!
"Yes Minister!"
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
A train wa originally a 'train of carriages'. Should a 153 technically be described as a railcar or something similar?
Absolutely.
A
 

HMS Ark Royal

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2015
Messages
2,811
Location
Hull
There is a piece of string, and there is a string of things. A "train" implies the latter.
Just a late-night musing.

I am not sure what you have consumed, Andrew, but you might need to put it down

The whole thread is invalid as a simple search of the forum would tell you that we all call a 153 a train
 

RichmondCommu

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
6,912
Location
Richmond, London
I disagree...

Single car units have formed trains before and continue to do so.

Your argument is, therefore, invalid

I concur. The GWR did it with steam rail motors (there's one preserved at Didcot) and later on the GWR designed and built diesel rail cars (also known as Flying Bananas). From memory more were built to the same design after WW2.
 

HMS Ark Royal

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2015
Messages
2,811
Location
Hull
I concur. The GWR did it with steam rail motors (there's one preserved at Didcot) and later on the GWR designed and built diesel rail cars (also known as Flying Bananas). From memory more were built to the same design after WW2.

Thank you, Richmond... I suspect the OP has not seen any trip reports where we call 153s trains
 

Lou92

Member
Joined
8 Feb 2014
Messages
40
Location
Carlisle
It's only just occurred to me, but my dictionary says a train is "a number of things in a string... as... railway carriages or wagons."!

Operationally speaking, a train is just something that is used to work diagrams - the railway does not care about dictionary definitions. :p
 

Railsigns

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2010
Messages
1,764
According to the Rule Book, the term train includes a "light locomotive, self-propelled rail vehicle or road-rail vehicle in rail mode".
 

HMS Ark Royal

Established Member
Joined
2 Sep 2015
Messages
2,811
Location
Hull
According to the Rule Book, the term train includes a "light locomotive, self-propelled rail vehicle or road-rail vehicle in rail mode".

Well that clears that up! Mods to lock thread then? :D :D :D

I did not know that train covered a light movement
 

KeithP

Member
Joined
26 Apr 2007
Messages
83
Operationally speaking, a train is just something that is used to work diagrams - the railway does not care about dictionary definitions. :p

Which is probably how they get away with using the word diagrams. :D
 
Last edited:

AndrewE

On Moderation
Joined
9 Nov 2015
Messages
3,710
According to the Rule Book, the term train includes a "light locomotive, self-propelled rail vehicle or road-rail vehicle in rail mode".

That clinches it. A specialised railway useage, but not the normal use of the word.
I must re-read my old rule-book. In my day a Diagram used to be one day's set of workings for a set (or sub-set) of stock, which actually did include single motor parcels vans, bubble cars etc. (besides "each" loco.)
 

507021

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2015
Messages
4,427
Location
Liverpool
I think a Class 153 can definitely be called a train, but I personally think the 153s are railcars rather than units, but that's just my personal opinion.
 

Railsigns

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2010
Messages
1,764
The Rule Book definition of train has to be all-inclusive, otherwise the rules and regulations would be littered with multiple references to "train or light engine or single-car unit or permanent way machine, etc..." Once a "train" is occupying the running line, its composition becomes largely irrelevant - the signalling system can't tell one type from the other and, by and large, the same operating rules are applicable to all.
 

Harbornite

Established Member
Joined
7 May 2016
Messages
3,634
I used to associate a train with being multiple vehicles, so a light engine or railcar on its own wouldn't count. Having just read those definitions, I've changed my mind. At least we can all agree that 153s aren't multiple units when working on their own!
 

edwin_m

Veteran Member
Joined
21 Apr 2013
Messages
21,158
Location
Nottingham
I used to associate a train with being multiple vehicles, so a light engine or railcar on its own wouldn't count. Having just read those definitions, I've changed my mind. At least we can all agree that 153s aren't multiple units when working on their own!

Ah, but they are capable of working in multiple. That makes them multiple units in my book, and indeed in the spotter book too.

A 153 on its own is a single multiple unit!
 

Johncleesefan

Member
Joined
4 Sep 2013
Messages
726
Yes a single 153 is definitely a train and a multiple unit even when working solo. Why overcomplicate something that is simple. (I do however say I'm driving me bus when working the single shuttles) :)
 

Condor7

Member
Joined
13 Jul 2012
Messages
989
Location
Penrith
I actually think Andrew is technically correct.
Of course it is not going to change (nor should it) but just because a rule book calls it something or because it is in common usage does not mean it is correct.

For instance throughout the world we talk about the sunrise in the morning, and nothing will ever change that, but of course it is not technically correct as it is in fact the earth setting.
 

LowLevel

Established Member
Joined
26 Oct 2013
Messages
5,149
The rule book definition is correct in terms of railways because at least as a railwayman, in terms of railways that's all I'm bothered about.

It isn't incorrect in that the railway has it's own distinct terminology in order to ensure safe and consistent operations, some of which like other industries may appear odd to outsiders.

On the other hand I'll quite happily agree that a 153 in and of itself doesn't really satisfy the dictionary definition of a train, but as it is an operational vehicle operating on a railway for the purpose of the railways it most definitely is a train.

I've had dopes before come up to me with the 'Ahh, but a 153 can't be a train' thing and I've usually made an excuse to leave as from a railwayman's perspective it's a daft debate to have.
 

jopsuk

Veteran Member
Joined
13 May 2008
Messages
12,591
a single carriage train is called a train because it would be madness and confusing in day to day operation to call it anything else.
 

Mutant Lemming

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2011
Messages
3,194
Location
London
It is the opposite for a tram. A single tram is called a tram and when operating in multiple it is still called a tram.
 

pdq

Member
Joined
7 Oct 2010
Messages
592
On a quiz show recently there was a question along the lines of 'what type of vehicle is the Flying Scotsman?' The contestant didn't know the answer (and guessed aeroplane) so the answer was given as 'train'. My wife and I shouted at the television that it's a locomotive not a train. But were we right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top