Hello,

It's a translation-related query (English to Polish)
I've got two terms, "passanger kilometers" and "freight kilometers".
Now, an equivalent term exists in Polish for passanger kilometers, but the 
nearest to "freight km" is something like "tonne-kilometers", sometimes also 
"bruttotonne-kilometers". I need to know if the "freight" per km is also 
given in tonnes or is it something completely different? I've seen figures, 
but they're always a percentage (increase or decrease in relation to the 
previous year, etc)

Regards,

marek

marek wrote:

> Hello,
>
> It's a translation-related query (English to Polish)
> I've got two terms, "passanger kilometers" and "freight kilometers".
> Now, an equivalent term exists in Polish for passanger kilometers, but the
> nearest to "freight km" is something like "tonne-kilometers", sometimes also
> "bruttotonne-kilometers". I need to know if the "freight" per km is also
> given in tonnes or is it something completely different? I've seen figures,
> but they're always a percentage (increase or decrease in relation to the
> previous year, etc)
>
> Regards,
>
> marek


In the UK freight movement is measured in two different ways.
1.  Tonnes lifted.
2.  Tonnes/Kms moved.

So far as I am concerned the only meaningful measure is number 2,
tonnes/kms.  Take the following example:-

A 20 tonnes container is moved from London to Birmingham, for arguments
sake a distance of 200kms.  The road movement is door to door but the
equivalent rail journey has a one km road leg at each end.

By road this generates 20 tonnes lifted or 20 x 200 = 4000 tonnes/kms.

By rail this generates 20 tonnes lifted or 20 x 200 = 4000 tonnes/kms
PLUS 20 tonnes lifted by road at each end = 40 tonnes or 20 x 1 = 20
tonnes/kms at each end = 40 tonnes/kms.

Thus if you measure only by tonnes lifted, the favourite measure of the
road haulage industry, most rail journeys, no matter how long, also
generate twice the number of tonnes for the road element!  On that
basis, the more that rail carries the larger the percentage swing to
road.
There are lies, damned lies and statistics!  Never believe them:-)

George

In message , 
furnessvale  writes

>
>
>marek wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> It's a translation-related query (English to Polish)
>> I've got two terms, "passanger kilometers" and "freight kilometers".
>> Now, an equivalent term exists in Polish for passanger kilometers, but the
>> nearest to "freight km" is something like "tonne-kilometers", sometimes also
>> "bruttotonne-kilometers". I need to know if the "freight" per km is also
>> given in tonnes or is it something completely different? I've seen figures,
>> but they're always a percentage (increase or decrease in relation to the
>> previous year, etc)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> marek
>
>In the UK freight movement is measured in two different ways.
>1.  Tonnes lifted.
>2.  Tonnes/Kms moved.
>
>So far as I am concerned the only meaningful measure is number 2,
>tonnes/kms.  Take the following example:-
>
>A 20 tonnes container is moved from London to Birmingham, for arguments
>sake a distance of 200kms.  The road movement is door to door but the
>equivalent rail journey has a one km road leg at each end.
>
>By road this generates 20 tonnes lifted or 20 x 200 = 4000 tonnes/kms.
>
>By rail this generates 20 tonnes lifted or 20 x 200 = 4000 tonnes/kms
>PLUS 20 tonnes lifted by road at each end = 40 tonnes or 20 x 1 = 20
>tonnes/kms at each end = 40 tonnes/kms.
>
>Thus if you measure only by tonnes lifted, the favourite measure of the
>road haulage industry, most rail journeys, no matter how long, also
>generate twice the number of tonnes for the road element!  On that
>basis, the more that rail carries the larger the percentage swing to
>road.
>There are lies, damned lies and statistics!  Never believe them:-)


They can't be tonnes/kilometres because that's division when you want 
multiplication. As in 'foot-pounds'.

Mike
-- 
M.J.Powell

M. J. Powell wrote:

>
> They can't be tonnes/kilometres because that's division when you want
> multiplication. As in 'foot-pounds'.
>
> Mike
> --
> M.J.Powell


Thank you for correcting my punctuation but I think people understand
the message.  I note that the SRA get round the problem by not using
any punctuation in National Rail Trends.
George

furnessvale wrote:

> M. J. Powell wrote:
> >
> > They can't be tonnes/kilometres because that's division when you want
> > multiplication. As in 'foot-pounds'.
> >
> > Mike
> > --
> > M.J.Powell
>
> Thank you for correcting my punctuation but I think people understand
> the message.  I note that the SRA get round the problem by not using
> any punctuation in National Rail Trends.
> George


The units are gross tonne kilometres (sometimes abbreviated to GTK, or
gross t km) if you're including the weight of the wagons, or net tonne
kilometres (sometimes NTK, or net t km) for just the weight of the load
- and no punctuation is necessary (or desirable).

Mike

In article ,
furnessvale  wrote:

>
>
>M. J. Powell wrote:
>>
>> They can't be tonnes/kilometres because that's division when you want
>> multiplication. As in 'foot-pounds'.
>
>Thank you for correcting my punctuation but I think people understand
>the message.  I note that the SRA get round the problem by not using
>any punctuation in National Rail Trends.


IIRC that's the modern way of writing it, e.g. 1 Newton metre instead
of 1 foot-pound.  Not sure if it's part of the SI standard or just
common usage.

Incidentally I see one Google advertiser will happily offer you a
"Newton Meter", I always though those were called "scales" !

Nick
-- 
http://www.leverton.org/                      ... So express yourself