Metric Railway

[Up_Tilt_390]

My understanding is that from 2018 when the roll out of ERTMS signalling starts to be integrated onto our railway network, all speed boards, speed-o-meters, and mileposts will all be converted from miles per to hour to kilometres per hour, in the case of mileposts they'll be changed to kilometre posts, only in this there will be more of them and they'll be moved (eg. a 1-milepost will be moved 600 metres down the track and become a kilometre post).

Personally, I am all for this move towards metrication of the network, because if I'm not mistaken we was suppose to have done this back in the 1960s or somewhere around that time period, and only because of a new European signalling system we're doing so now, and if it was our own signalling system I don't think we would be converting the system of measurements. Also, I believe rail engineers use metric measurements, correct me if I'm wrong, so it's right we be consistent with railway distances.

But what do you all think, should be going metric now? Should we have gone metric back in the 1960s, or should we stick with the imperial measurements on our network? If you believe the last one, then I suggest not using the "if it isn't broke don't fix it" argument, because if the imperial system wasn't somewhat broken, the much more simple metric system wouldn't exist. Thanks...

 

[Ironside]

I don't know if has to be done by 2018 but if it needs doing we may as well get on with it. As a passenger I don't know that it will directly make a difference to me but if it makes the engineering easier or equipment simpler so be it.

 

[Trog]

Should stick with Imperial for railway distance as that is what all the records are in and what the staff know.

Also unless the EU has brought in a law that over rides existing English laws such as the acts of Parliament that underpinned the building of the railway. I believe it would be illegal to remove the imperial mileposts as their provision and maintenance are usually a condition for the building of the lines.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

Should stick with Imperial for railway distance as that is what all the records are in and what the staff know.

Also unless the EU has brought in a law that over rides existing English laws such as the acts of Parliament that underpinned the building of the railway. I believe it would be illegal to remove the imperial mileposts as their provision and maintenance are usually a condition for the building of the lines.

The first part is a good argument, but I never actually knew about the second part, I just assumed the mileposts would be replaced cause the speed boards and speed-o-meters would. I guess that's why you should never assume...

 

[Trog]

The railway has happily worked for years using both systems depending on what worked best or was easiest. I worked for years surveying track in metric vertically and imperial horizontally with out any problem. Changing all the records would cost millions for no real benefit. So if the EU insist the S&T change to metric, there is no reason the P-Way should not stick with Imperial. But please can we all use a common zero point.

 

[Domh245]

Wasn't this discussed recently only to discover that it isn't imperial as such, but 'metrified' imperial? For example, 1 mile was 1600m, rather than the 1609m that it actually is.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

No need to move the mileposts, just add new metric points where needed.
That's how the Cambrian ERTMS was done (which has speeds set in km/h).
All recent electrifications are in metric (mast numbers etc) starting with the ECML I think.
So the process has already started.
Roadside markers on motorways are already signed in metric (every 100m).
It's more an industry standardisation thing than an EU directive, and reduces the cost of instrumentation and installation.

 

[crehld]

Also unless the EU has brought in a law that over rides existing English laws such as the acts of Parliament that underpinned the building of the railway. I believe it would be illegal to remove the imperial mileposts as their provision and maintenance are usually a condition for the building of the lines.

Let us dispell this Euro-myth! Relatively few EU 'laws' override legislation from the UK parliament.

All EU legislative measures on weights a d measures (that I'm aware of) are directives and therefore do not have direct applicability and need to be translated into UK law through an act of parliament. Furthermore such directives will require the agreement of British (and other EU member state) ministers in the Council of the European Union. This permits the British parliament a great deal of flexibility, and enables it to continue permitting imperial measurements for as long as it may desire. The European Commission has clarified this position many times.

It is also worth mentioning that the first substantive steps towards metrification (is that a word?) started appearing in UK legislation with the 1963 Weights and Measures Act, which was adopted by parliament ten years before we even became an EU (or then EEC) member state.

 

[Trog]

Wasn't this discussed recently only to discover that it isn't imperial as such, but 'metrified' imperial? For example, 1 mile was 1600m, rather than the 1609m that it actually is.

There are some places I know of where the distance between mileposts has been marked out in metric, and a few new mileposts have indeed been installed at 1600m from the last real milepost. However you soon get a longer mile where things correct back to a real milepost. Often if you poke about in the bushes near a metric milepost you can still find the original or its post still in situ.

 

[Altfish]

I can't believe that the railways still deal with Imperial Units, children at school have been taught solely metric for the last 40-years. If I talk in feet and inches to my grandson it is like speaking in Clingon to him.

Has anyone ever tried to just add up (never mind multiply, etc.) in imperial on an Excel spreadsheet.

 

[Railsigns]

My understanding is that from 2018 when the roll out of ERTMS signalling starts to be integrated onto our railway network, all speed boards, speed-o-meters, and mileposts will all be converted from miles per to hour to kilometres per hour, in the case of mileposts they'll be changed to kilometre posts, only in this there will be more of them and they'll be moved (eg. a 1-milepost will be moved 600 metres down the track and become a kilometre post).

There will be fewer kilometre posts than mileposts, not more. Mileposts are spaced at quarter mile intervals (402 metres), whereas kilometre posts are spaced 500 metres apart.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

Does it really matter ?

We're still going to be stuck with the chinless wonders who can't use a tape measure supposing their lives depended on it, it doesn't matter if it says feet and inches, metres, or cheese butties, whatever they write down will be wrong and will needs to be redone by a responsible adult.

 

[notadriver]

I think there could be issues. Road vehicle drivers are used to dealing with mph and km/h on a relatively small part of the speed scale (in the UK it would be up to 113 kph - 70 mph). It doesn't really matter if there is a small amount of speeding in a road vehicle. For trains getting speeds confused could ultimately mean licence removal or worse.

 

[cin88]

I can't believe that the railways still deal with Imperial Units, children at school have been taught solely metric for the last 40-years. If I talk in feet and inches to my grandson it is like speaking in Clingon to him.

Has anyone ever tried to just add up (never mind multiply, etc.) in imperial on an Excel spreadsheet.

Some of us were taught both, I left school six years ago with a good knowledge of how to use both systems. Imperial still has it's uses in my opinion.

 

[Altfish]

Some of us were taught both, I left school six years ago with a good knowledge of how to use both systems. Imperial still has it's uses in my opinion.

So was I !!
The only use is in a pub.

 

[Domh245]

I think there could be issues. Road vehicle drivers are used to dealing with mph and km/h on a relatively small part of the speed scale (in the UK it would be up to 113 kph - 70 mph). It doesn't really matter if there is a small amount of speeding in a road vehicle. For trains getting speeds confused could ultimately mean licence removal or worse.

I would have thought that it would only be the lines with ERTMS fitted that would be converted to metric, seeing as that is a metric system with lots of bells and whistles which should prevent drivers speeding. It wouldn't make sense to convert otherwise because you'd have to either do it all overnight, or stage it so that units have got speedos reading in mph and kph, and then convert signs over, but ensuring there is some kind of differentiating feature between the kph boards and the mph boards, perhaps using a square board instead of round?

 

[cin88]

So was I !!
The only use is in a pub.

Sadly for me I have to know how to convert to metric from imperial because my parents can't seem to get a grasp of/refuse to learn metric.

Working on heritage locos also throws up a challenge as nothing is ever uniform as far as measurement standards go. Bolts are a mix of Whitworth/BSF, AF and metric and it's a real hassle having to get tools for all standards.

 

[Railsigns]

and then convert signs over, but ensuring there is some kind of differentiating feature between the kph boards and the mph boards, perhaps using a square board instead of round?

That was settled about twenty years ago, when the Channel Tunnel opened. MPH signs have a white background. KMH signs have a black background.

 

[QueensCurve]

It is also worth mentioning that the first substantive steps towards metrification (is that a word?) started appearing in UK legislation with the 1963 Weights and Measures Act, which was adopted by parliament ten years before we even became an EU (or then EEC) member state.

I think the word is metrication.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can't believe that the railways still deal with Imperial Units, children at school have been taught solely metric for the last 40-years. If I talk in feet and inches to my grandson it is like speaking in Clingon to him.

Has anyone ever tried to just add up (never mind multiply, etc.) in imperial on an Excel spreadsheet.

It is essentially the same as the roads. Engineers will measure and calculate in metric, but the signs will stay imperial. The two can happily coexist.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I would have thought that it would only be the lines with ERTMS fitted that would be converted to metric, seeing as that is a metric system with lots of bells and whistles which should prevent drivers speeding. It wouldn't make sense to convert otherwise because you'd have to either do it all overnight, or stage it so that units have got speedos reading in mph and kph, and then convert signs over, but ensuring there is some kind of differentiating feature between the kph boards and the mph boards, perhaps using a square board instead of round?

What is the situation with ERTMS on the Cambrian?

 

[Altfish]

Sadly for me I have to know how to convert to metric from imperial because my parents can't seem to get a grasp of/refuse to learn metric.

Working on heritage locos also throws up a challenge as nothing is ever uniform as far as measurement standards go. Bolts are a mix of Whitworth/BSF, AF and metric and it's a real hassle having to get tools for all standards.

I still know 0.3048 as the conversion from feet to metres

 

[Ploughman]

Or 0.914 for yards / metres

 

[Bevan Price]

Yes - metric is simpler. But the cost of replacing every milepost & speed restriction sign would be very high - and money that could be better spent on improving the network.
Just be glad that (almost) nobody still uses rods, poles, perches, firkins, leagues, etc.

 

[Magicake]

Just to clear up from a civil engineering perspective we use a horrible mish mash of the two. Designs for anything new come in metric but position along the track is typically imperial. A few times in my career I have found myself searching for a position such as 5miles 3chains and 7 metres when trying to find a particular point in a design.

 

[alxndr]

That'll be fun with everyone having to relearn where everything is yet again... :roll: It's bad enough with everything getting messed around with the resignalling.

In metric would places be referred to in kilometers and meters, or rounded to kilometers and hundreds of meters, seeing as a hundred meters is the closest sensible grouping to a chain.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

In metric would places be referred to in kilometers and meters, or rounded to kilometers and hundreds of meters, seeing as a hundred meters is the closest sensible grouping to a chain.

Everything would be rounded up to metric rather than exact conversion. For example, 25mph amounts to 40km/h, but 20mph is 32km/h, and would have to be rounded to 30. Here's a few examples of what would change...

20mph - 30km/h
30mph - 50km/h
40mph - 60km/h
50mph - 80km/h
60mph - 100km/h
70mph - 110km/h
80mph - 130km/h

There are a few gaps, but for the most part it would account to that and likely round up to ten. As for the secondary measurements, it would likely just be metres. For example, Bletchley is 46 miles and 50 chains from London Euston, so that would change to 75 kilometres and 5 metres (1005 metres was what I got converting from 50 chains, but 1000 metres makes a kilometre, so it'll have to add on to the 74 kilometres).

 

[Llanigraham]

I would have thought that it would only be the lines with ERTMS fitted that would be converted to metric, seeing as that is a metric system with lots of bells and whistles which should prevent drivers speeding. It wouldn't make sense to convert otherwise because you'd have to either do it all overnight, or stage it so that units have got speedos reading in mph and kph, and then convert signs over, but ensuring there is some kind of differentiating feature between the kph boards and the mph boards, perhaps using a square board instead of round?

From experience of being in the driving cab of an ERTMS unit on the Cambrian (officially!!) it is impossible to "overspeed". The "system" just will not allow it!

And the speedos on the dash are in KPH.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What is the situation with ERTMS on the Cambrian?

The Cambrian is metricated!

 

[notadriver]

With ERTMS you can obviously see the braking curve. At the present time there other speed supervising systems such as TASS and TVM where you can't see the curve.

Aren't the Cambrian trains operating on both ERTMS and conventionally signalled lines?

 

[Trog]

In metric would places be referred to in kilometers and meters, or rounded to kilometers and hundreds of meters, seeing as a hundred meters is the closest sensible grouping to a chain.

We are talking the railway here, they could change all the mileposts to km posts tomorrow, and in twenty years time people would still be saying "North end of Bletchley platform, that's the 46 3/4 milepost mate."

 

[Llanigraham]

With ERTMS you can obviously see the braking curve. At the present time there other speed supervising systems such as TASS and TVM where you can't see the curve.

Aren't the Cambrian trains operating on both ERTMS and conventionally signalled lines?

They are. They come off ERTMS at Sutton Bridge Junct onto "normal" track and then can go all ways, north, east and south.

 

[Up_Tilt_390]

We are talking the railway here, they could change all the mileposts to km posts tomorrow, and in twenty years time people would still be saying "North end of Bletchley platform, that's the 46 3/4 milepost mate."

That's a bit far-fetched in my opinion. Old staff might be saying it's the 46 3/4 milepost, but in twenty years time there will be mostly new staff who will be trained in using metric measurements if the scenario of changing it tomorrow was to occur. Metrication can become standard in as little as ten years, but because of people's stubborn unwillingness to learn what has proven itself to be the superior system it's been much slower for Britain.