My grandfather travelled every day, by train, from his home in Brighton
to his ministry in London. According to family lore, while his fellow
commuters were frivolously completing crosswords, Dids - as he was
affectionately known - acquired his seven extramural degrees from
London University. One thing is for certain, my grandfather's passion
for self-education knew no bounds. The son of a Fulham tram conductor,
he clawed his way up the greasy pole through a combination of dogged
hard work and an eidetic memory which meant he could scan a page text
and instantly commit it to memory. In his dotage he wrote a book
entitled The Divine Indwelling, which was an attempt to synthesise all
religions, with both science and existentialism. After I'd read a few
pages of the typescript my father asked me what I thought: "Dids
suffered for his education," I replied, "and now it's our turn."

I digress, of more interest than his philosophy was Dids's commute. He
claimed that in the interwar period, the Brighton Belle often had so
many coaches that as the engine coasted into Victoria the guard's van
was only just leaving the south coast. I didn't stop believing this
until I was about 35, and managed, through my own synthesis of science
and existentialism, to grasp the elementary laws of physics which had
hitherto evaded me. Nevertheless, Dids's imaginary train does point up
certain distinguishing characteristics of the rail journey as opposed
to any other. With its near-abolition of gradient, its smooth
acceleration and braking, and - most importantly - its capacious
interior, the modern train links disparate locations with an elongated
territory entirely its own.

This is why, when people say, "Ooh, I love travelling by train," what
they really mean is: "I like being on trains" - not that there is some
distinguishing characteristic of the train's means of covering distance
which particularly appeals to them. The truth is that hardly anyone
loves travelling by train - they infinitely prefer sitting in their
cars; which explains why soi-disant civilisation is rapidly
accelerating towards complete collapse and the reintroduction of the
handcart. The people who love being on trains are enchanted by this
tubular realm. They like the way they can get up, go to the toilet,
visit the buffet - in short, treat the fact that they are hurtling
through space with complete insouciance.

Sadly, modern trains lack the scenic cars, club cars, restaurant cars -
indeed any of the myriad cars which made the trains of yore so
exciting. From Queen Victoria's state train through to Churchill's
"secret" train HQ of the Second World War - the great age of the train
elevated form over function. This was, after all, an era when airship
gondolas were tricked out like the palm courts of Riviera hotels, and
flying boats featured tiled bathrooms. That the German surrender was
signed in a train carriage in 1918 (and that the very same carriage was
brought back from retirement as a restaurant, so that the French could
be humiliatingly forced to capitulate in it in 1939), is further
confirmation of how the train was once regarded as a place in its own
right.

I say "was once" with some sadness, for even though train lovers
continue to have a touching faith in train world, it's difficult to
imagine any contemporary armistice - no matter how transitory - being
concluded on a Virgin Pendolino. What is it with Richard Branson anyway
- what does he want? A Briton can now live out their entire life
consuming only Virgin products, drinking Virgin Vodka and Cola,
copulating wearing Virgin Condoms, supping on Virgin Quorn (I made that
one up), listening to Virgin Records, surfing on Virgin Net and
travelling on Virgin Airways. Is there no particle of our social fabric
not besmirched by this beardie weirdo? No Virgin Land?

Now comes the Pendolino - Branson's cheapskate version of the Train à
Grande Vitesse or the Bullet Train. Dumb idea Ricky, what with
rail-track construction and maintenance in this country being such a
debatable land. Worse still is the appearance of the thing; in
anticipation of travelling at over 150 mph, the designers have tricked
out its coaches like aircraft cabins - this is the train as hideously
extruded fuselage. In India trains are vibrant mobile cities, full of
hawkers, riven by caste and class, pullulating with life. In Russia
trains are wide and gloomy - with a samovar in every coach. Hell, even
in the USA the Amtrak tin boxes offer authentically crap hotdogs and
flaccid Budweisers. If trains are places in their own right then the
Pendolino is a jet permanently grounded at Stansted. Confronted with
this monstrosity, my poor grandfather wouldn't have been able to
reconcile anything at all - let alone get a degree in it.

WIll Self is another dickhead who thinks he is Gods gift to newspapers.


Virgin as a group may get some things wrong, but not all.

"Grumpy Old Man"  wrote in message 
news:1123436831.443440.291210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> WIll Self is another dickhead who thinks he is Gods gift to newspapers.
>
>
> Virgin as a group may get some things wrong, but not all.


I gave up reading half way through the first paragraph as I
CBA to wait to find what point he was going to make

tim


> 

tim (moved to sweden) wrote:

> "Grumpy Old Man"  wrote in message 
> news:1123436831.443440.291210@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>WIll Self is another dickhead who thinks he is Gods gift to newspapers.
>>
>>
>>Virgin as a group may get some things wrong, but not all.
> 
> I gave up reading half way through the first paragraph as I
> CBA to wait to find what point he was going to make
> 
> tim
> 
> 
> 

For all you know, it might have been making an offer you could not
resist. How about printing it off and reading it in comfort?

Henry Law

Henry Law wrote:


> How about printing it off and reading it in comfort?
>
> Henry Law



And waste more paper on a self-righteous newspaper columnist. Heaven
forbid.

As another posted pointed out that he got bored cos Mr Self was just
rambling and no plot.

> WIll Self is another dickhead who thinks he is Gods gift to newspapers.


Met him in a hotel bar once, he seemed mildly irritated I didn'thave a
clue who he was.

Basically he says that trains should be more like the Blue Train, they
should have character and be designed as the end rather than the means
to an end. As a rich ponce that doesn't work a 40 hour week he doesn't
realise that most people consider trains to be functionary, and they
just want to go where they need to go as time is short.

"Grumpy Old Man"  wrote in message
news:1123444581.075688.281430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

>
> Henry Law wrote:
>
> > How about printing it off and reading it in comfort?
> >
> > Henry Law
>
>
> And waste more paper on a self-righteous newspaper columnist. Heaven
> forbid.
>
> As another posted pointed out that he got bored cos Mr Self was just
> rambling and no plot.
>

I don't think it takes much effort to grasp that the point that Self was
making was that modern rolling stock leaves a lot to be desired. Branson
joined in the railway game because he thinks that only airlines know how to
run a transport system and that the railways would be much improved by
implanting airline practices onto the railway. One of the most blatant
blunders was his belief that rail passengers wanted to travel in trains
which internally were akin to an aircraft interior. Experience would seem to
indicate that he could not be more wrong.

MJW

On 7 Aug 2005 09:24:43 -0700, jon.porter1@lycosmax.co.uk wrote:


>flying boats featured tiled bathrooms. That the German surrender was
>signed in a train carriage in 1918 (and that the very same carriage was
>brought back from retirement as a restaurant, so that the French could
>be humiliatingly forced to capitulate in it in 1939),


Any pedants or historians going to mention that it was 1940...?
-- 
Arthur Figgis                Surrey, UK

Travelling on a modern train may not be perfect but its still more
relaxing than driving a car 95% of the time in this country (that other
5% only really being on those gloriously empty roads you see on car
adverts)

In article <dd5s7q$68f$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk>,
   M.J.Whitson  wrote:

> I don't think it takes much effort to grasp that the point that Self was
> making was that modern rolling stock leaves a lot to be desired. Branson
> joined in the railway game because he thinks that only airlines know how
> to run a transport system and that the railways would be much improved
> by implanting airline practices onto the railway. One of the most
> blatant blunders was his belief that rail passengers wanted to travel in
> trains which internally were akin to an aircraft interior. Experience
> would seem to indicate that he could not be more wrong.


This is exactly why nobody travels on them - because of the overcrowding.
:-))

-- 
David Wild using RISC OS on broadband

Grumpy Old Man wrote:

> Henry Law wrote:
>
> > How about printing it off and reading it in comfort?
> >
> > Henry Law
>
>
> And waste more paper on a self-righteous newspaper columnist. Heaven
> forbid.
>
> As another posted pointed out that he got bored cos Mr Self was just
> rambling and no plot.


There was a common thread, trams, Brighton Belle and 390s. Actually Mr.
Self does travel and write rather a lot on trains, and is generally
complimentary. He may not be everyone's cup of tea, but I find most of
his writing amusing.

"Paul Weaver"  wrote in news:1123446289.205409.242840
@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com:


>> WIll Self is another dickhead who thinks he is Gods gift to newspapers.


> As a rich ponce that doesn't work a 40 hour week he doesn't realise  


> Met him in a hotel bar once, he seemed mildly irritated I didn'thave a
> clue who he was.


Maybe he was was mildly irritated by your enquiries about his wealth and 
the length of his working week?

Rick.

"M.J.Whitson"  wrote in message
news:dd5s7q$68f$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...

>
> "Grumpy Old Man"  wrote in message
> news:1123444581.075688.281430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Henry Law wrote:
> >
> > > How about printing it off and reading it in comfort?
> > >
> > > Henry Law
> >
> >
> > And waste more paper on a self-righteous newspaper columnist. Heaven
> > forbid.
> >
> > As another posted pointed out that he got bored cos Mr Self was just
> > rambling and no plot.
> >
> I don't think it takes much effort to grasp that the point that Self was
> making was that modern rolling stock leaves a lot to be desired. Branson
> joined in the railway game because he thinks that only airlines know how
to
> run a transport system and that the railways would be much improved by
> implanting airline practices onto the railway. One of the most blatant
> blunders was his belief that rail passengers wanted to travel in trains
> which internally were akin to an aircraft interior. Experience would seem
to
> indicate that he could not be more wrong.


Your experience - if ridership numbers are correct the average passengers
are happy with increased frequency, ability to plug in their laptops and
shorter journey times. Maybe many of the regular travellers have no interest
with the view from the window and would still travel the same way if the
trains had solid walls?

Mr Branson may not have been as wrong as you suggest?

TM

"Paul Weaver"  wrote in message 
news:1123446289.205409.242840@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>> WIll Self is another dickhead who thinks he is Gods gift to newspapers.
>
> Met him in a hotel bar once, he seemed mildly irritated I didn'thave a
> clue who he was.
>


How did you know it was him, and indeed that we are talking about the same 
guy now?

the_invisible_man_@hotmail.com wrote:

> Travelling on a modern train may not be perfect but its still more
> relaxing than driving a car 95% of the time in this country (that other
> 5% only really being on those gloriously empty roads you see on car
> adverts)


They only film them during school holidays.

Paul Weaver wrote:

> Basically he says that trains should be more like the Blue Train, they
> should have character and be designed as the end rather than the means
> to an end. As a rich ponce that doesn't work a 40 hour week he doesn't
> realise that most people consider trains to be functionary, and they
> just want to go where they need to go as time is short.


40 hour week? Must be great to work part time.

On Sun, 7 Aug 2005 21:57:15 +0100, M.J.Whitson wrote:

> One of the most blatant blunders was his belief that rail passengers
> wanted to travel in trains which internally were akin to an aircraft
> interior. Experience would seem to indicate that he could not be more
> wrong.


FWIW, I was sitting on a 158 at Crewe the other day as a Voyager pulled 
in. From behind me I heard a woman getting quite excited. "Look, look! 
There's one of those Virgin trains. I went on one to Southampton. 
they're really good. Absolute comfort, so fast, and the inside is sheer 
luxury. They even have plugs for people to use their laptops and you can 
listen to music on the journey." 

Clearly Mr Branson has at least one *very* satisfied customer.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683786.html
(150 222 at Cuddington, 28 Jun 2004)

> 40 hour week? Must be great to work part time.


My average week is arround 48 hours, depending on overtime, but 40
hours is the standard "9-5" 5 day week that many seem to follow.

Introduced to him (a friend of mine was a collegue of the guy he was
with), but true, he could be another "Will Self" that writes for
newspapers.

> Travelling on a modern train may not be perfect but its still more
> relaxing than driving a car


In your opinion. In mine I disagree, hence I drove in to London on
Saturday night. The trip in from Twyford (having driven to the station
and paid to park) would have been more convienient than parking at work
and central-Line in (would have osterley/piccadilly line but the line
was down), but we didn't fancy coming home at 23:xx on a train full of
drunk crowds.

M.J.Whitson wrote:


> Branson
> joined in the railway game because he thinks that only airlines know how to
> run a transport system and that the railways would be much improved by
> implanting airline practices onto the railway.



Rubbish.


Branson is a businessman, not an airline expert.


Branson joined the game to make a profit nothing else.


He made his first millions through Virgin Records, then moved into
airlines as well as other stuff as a means to make more money. He
himself said the only reason he started Virgin Cola was why should he
sell other brands of cola in vast quantity on Virgin aircraft and in
Virgin cinemas when he could profit more from his own branding.


--
Nick

On 7 Aug 2005 17:21:20 -0700, "Paul Weaver" 
wrote:


>My average week is arround 48 hours, depending on overtime, but 40
>hours is the standard "9-5" 5 day week that many seem to follow.


The "standard 9-5" week is 35 hours - an hour for lunch.  I see no
problem with people working that, certainly where not paid for
overtime.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Williams"  wrote in message 
news:42f6fb8d.1682990@news.tesco.net...

> On 7 Aug 2005 17:21:20 -0700, "Paul Weaver" 
> wrote:
>
>>My average week is arround 48 hours, depending on overtime, but 40
>>hours is the standard "9-5" 5 day week that many seem to follow.
>
> The "standard 9-5" week is 35 hours - an hour for lunch.  I see no
> problem with people working that, certainly where not paid for
> overtime.
>


Don't you mean 37.5? That's the case everywhere I have worked.

>> >
>> I don't think it takes much effort to grasp that the point that Self was
>> making was that modern rolling stock leaves a lot to be desired. Branson
>> joined in the railway game because he thinks that only airlines know how
> to
>> run a transport system and that the railways would be much improved by
>> implanting airline practices onto the railway. One of the most blatant
>> blunders was his belief that rail passengers wanted to travel in trains
>> which internally were akin to an aircraft interior. Experience would seem
> to
>> indicate that he could not be more wrong.
>
> Your experience - if ridership numbers are correct the average passengers
> are happy with increased frequency, ability to plug in their laptops and
> shorter journey times. Maybe many of the regular travellers have no 
> interest
> with the view from the window and would still travel the same way if the
> trains had solid walls?
>
> Mr Branson may not have been as wrong as you suggest?
>
> TM
>


The spees and frequency of the service are great but the Pendelinos are the 
worst long distance trains ever built. If you offered the same speed and 
frequency in a refusrbished Mk 3 type environment I bet passengers would 
prefer that.

Tim

> 

i suspect they film them during term time, as certainly round here
(Fife) the roads are *much* busier during the school holidays, with
camper vans, caravans and the like.  The commuter routes (Forth Road
Bridge) is not being used, but the A9 is also packed compared to early
May.

"M.J.Whitson"  wrote in message 
news:dd5s7q$68f$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...

>
> "Grumpy Old Man"  wrote in message
> news:1123444581.075688.281430@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Henry Law wrote:
>>
>> > How about printing it off and reading it in comfort?
>> >
>> > Henry Law
>>
>>
>> And waste more paper on a self-righteous newspaper columnist. Heaven
>> forbid.
>>
>> As another posted pointed out that he got bored cos Mr Self was just
>> rambling and no plot.
>>
> I don't think it takes much effort to grasp that the point that Self was
> making was that modern rolling stock leaves a lot to be desired. Branson
> joined in the railway game because he thinks that only airlines know how 
> to
> run a transport system and that the railways would be much improved by
> implanting airline practices onto the railway. One of the most blatant
> blunders was his belief that rail passengers wanted to travel in trains
> which internally were akin to an aircraft interior. Experience would seem 
> to
> indicate that he could not be more wrong.
>
> MJW
>
>

Could Will Self be Henry Law? I think we should be told... To be fair, one 
point that he made, which many on here have made before, is that recent 
railway stock design seems to be trying to copy the airlines.
Brian

"BH Williams"  wrote:


>Could Will Self be Henry Law? I think we should be told... To be
>fair, one point that he made, which many on here have made before, is
>that recent railway stock design seems to be trying to copy the
>airlines.  Brian


Not a new idea...look at the Amtrak "Amfleet" coaches[1]; not only do
they have miniscule windows (forget trying to see anything from an
aisle seat), they are even tube shaped! Why...?

And it's said that the nose shape of the original Japanese "Bullet
trains" was based on the nose of an airliner rather than being
designed for aerodynamics.

Adam

[1] http://www.trainweb.org/amtrakonline/abrAmfleet-Is_and_an_HHP-8atWashingtonDC.jpg

<snip>
gondolas were tricked out like the palm courts of Riviera hotels, and

<snip>
<snip>
anticipation of travelling at over 150 mph, the designers have tricked
out its coaches like aircraft cabins - this is the train as hideously

<snip>

BEEP!

Repitition of "tricked out"

Am I the only one who found that annoying?

"Paul Weaver"  wrote in message
news:1123460924.791609.145510@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...

> > Travelling on a modern train may not be perfect but its still more
> > relaxing than driving a car
>
> In your opinion. In mine I disagree, hence I drove in to London on
> Saturday night. The trip in from Twyford (having driven to the station
> and paid to park) would have been more convienient than parking at work
> and central-Line in (would have osterley/piccadilly line but the line
> was down), but we didn't fancy coming home at 23:xx on a train full of
> drunk crowds.



You preferred a road full of drunken motorists?


Paul

> You preferred a road full of drunken motorists?


Pretty quiet road, certianly no motor vehicles being dangerous, only
stress induced incident was one with a light-less bike on the A4 I've
mentioned elsewhere in usenet.

I assume the fact that peopel crawl along the M4 at 50-60 every night
is because they are over the limit, but I witnessed no out-of-control
vehicles. I drive back from (or too) London most nights and it's the
same old story, occasionally a very slow vehicle in lane 1,
occasionally a 85mph+ in lane 3, but most of the time I cruise in lane
1 at ~65-70 and rarely pass anyone else.

What is it with some people?? If anyone dares to criticise their
beloved railway they're off the deep end on auto pilot.

Life is a constant compromise - and for most of us a choice between
work and leisure and how best to mix the two.

Those in work commute - downstairs or down the country - but they
commute. In their leisure time they travel - to shop - or to play, but
in the main they don't stay at home. Most of it outside the
metropolitan areas where driving is a royal pain during the working day
is done by private transport, because outside of the working week in
domestic, retail, and leisure life the train hardly enters the equation
for most once the weekday drudge is over.

So why in that scenario should anyone be happy to have just one
homogenised provided down to a price and not up to a spec rail product
to choose from? or in fact be tied to one mode of transport.

I was a forty year rail commuter  - to school and work - but Fatty
Prescott (Lab - pro public transport) put a stop to that and now I
drive. I am exceedingly unhappy about it but two and a half hours
versus three quarters and my choice of radio, refreshment or route
don't endear me to TPX and Northern. I would still need my car for the
first and last six miles anyway thanks to theirs and Network
Rails/GMPTE's congenital incapacity to provide a park and ride at Guide
Bridge on the old five acre signing on point next to the M60 - since it
opened in 2000.

Personally I think Branson should have been strangled at birth for what
he has done to West Coast and Cross Country. I am also exceedingly glad
I never worked for the gimlet eyed James Sherwood - but when you look
at GNER and the Orient Express and Virgin Trains and ask which
management you would prefer operating your trains - only the perverse
would answer Branson.

If you are happy to be treated first like an idiot when you try to buy
a ticket - then like a battery hen - crammed in a nasty little seat and
fed shite from a plastic box, then go by Virgin and be happy. As for me
- I like the speed to Euston from Manchester but other than the alcohol
I don't partake of what passes for food on that route. I have also late
at night got from Manchester to Euston in 2hrs 15 by MkIII in comfort
with real food on board - so whats all this billions got to do with it?


For the other routes - Cross Country or to Scotland - the service level
and timings are useless for most of my needs - look at the latest
southbound dperature times - so its the M6 and M74 or M6 and M5 -
cruise control and stops at my favourite off motorway haunts for good
food and good crack at my choice of travel time.

Will Self may be wordy - so am I - but in my world - he ain't far wrong!

>
> Personally I think Branson should have been strangled at birth for what
> he has done to West Coast and Cross Country. I am also exceedingly glad
> I never worked for the gimlet eyed James Sherwood - but when you look
> at GNER and the Orient Express and Virgin Trains and ask which
> management you would prefer operating your trains - only the perverse
> would answer Branson.


Indeed was on holiday in Yorkshire and looked on enviously at those 
passengers who can travel by GNER to/from London

>
> If you are happy to be treated first like an idiot when you try to buy
> a ticket - then like a battery hen - crammed in a nasty little seat and
> fed shite from a plastic box, then go by Virgin and be happy. As for me
> - I like the speed to Euston from Manchester but other than the alcohol
> I don't partake of what passes for food on that route. I have also late
> at night got from Manchester to Euston in 2hrs 15 by MkIII in comfort
> with real food on board - so whats all this billions got to do with it?
>


Exactly. Yes passenger numbers are up but if the passengers had a choice for 
their trains between GNER or Virgin then I know who'd be the winner. Thank 
God Virgin didn't win the East Coast Franchise!


my needs - look at the latest

> southbound dperature times - so its the M6 and M74 or M6 and M5 -
> cruise control and stops at my favourite off motorway haunts for good
> food and good crack at my choice of travel time.
>
> Will Self may be wordy - so am I - but in my world - he ain't far wrong!


Indeed.

Paul Weaver wrote:

> Basically he says that trains should be more like the Blue Train, they
> should have character and be designed as the end rather than the means
> to an end. As a rich ponce that doesn't work a 40 hour week he doesn't
> realise that most people consider trains to be functionary, and they
> just want to go where they need to go as time is short.
> 


What Self says is perfectly clear. It seems to me he would have been
happy with trains like the ordinary commuter trains they had on the
South Coast services immediately pre-Con-ex, and not too different from
GNER as presently running. Hardly Blue Trains.

Henry Law

One or two people on here got the wrong end of the stick when I said
that despite its faults, train travel was still more pleasurable than
driving 95% of the time in this country.

I didn't say it was more convenient, or easier (the two areas where
cars often score higher than trains), just that it was more
pleasurable.  For most of the time, driving is a real chore, and less
relaxing than travelling by train.

In message , at 
10:52:43 on Mon, 8 Aug 2005, the_invisible_man_@hotmail.com remarked:

>For most of the time, driving is a real chore, and less
>relaxing than travelling by train.


That depends a lot on the car. I think you'll find the driving 
experience (and I don't mean acceleration, but the comfort factor) of a 
car costing 40k is much better than one costing 12k.
-- 
Roland Perry

Tony Miles wrote:


> Your experience - if ridership numbers are correct the average passengers
> are happy with increased frequency, ability to plug in their laptops and
> shorter journey times. Maybe many of the regular travellers have no interest
> with the view from the window and would still travel the same way if the
> trains had solid walls?
> 
> Mr Branson may not have been as wrong as you suggest?


On the face of it, yes, but other factors may be at work here. The massive 
publicity may have tempted people who would otherwise have flown or driven to 
give rail a try. Possibly these people would have been discouraged from using 
Virgin in the past by Branson's persistent rubbishing of his inheritance from BR.

Alan

> I didn't say it was more convenient, or easier (the two areas where
> cars often score higher than trains), just that it was more
> pleasurable.


Not in the case of late-evening transport (i.e. when I'm travelling
home from work), dealing with loud smelly drunks, dirty trains with
god-knows-what on the floors, and of course the 15 minute wait on a
freezing platform (the shelter, if it's open, isn't worth the assult to
the nostrils) even when the train is on time...

Not in the morning either when you're crammed in like sardines with
sombody's elbow in your face. I'd rather sit in comfort and privacy in
my £600 car in a traffic jam for 2 hours than spend 20 minutes on
public transport at the times I'd need to use it.

Long distance trains aren't too bad from a "usage" factor, but then the
cost, and more important lack of transport at the other end, tip the
ballance.

"Arthur Figgis"  wrote in message
news:0ctcf11gh3dg40sr3ef3779ie5ng8rm0u1@4ax.com...

> On 7 Aug 2005 09:24:43 -0700, jon.porter1@lycosmax.co.uk wrote:
>
> >flying boats featured tiled bathrooms. That the German surrender was
> >signed in a train carriage in 1918 (and that the very same carriage was
> >brought back from retirement as a restaurant, so that the French could
> >be humiliatingly forced to capitulate in it in 1939),
>
> Any pedants or historians going to mention that it was 1940...?


Interestingly, I saw the original article - but not this post until tonight.
The thing that immediately struck me was the factual errors, viz:

1940 not 1939, as you point out.

Reference to the Brighton Belle "often having so many coaches"... as to
[whatever]. Surely it only ever had 5 coaches...

"...engine coasting into Victoria..." - not on the Brighton Belle EMU.

"anticipation of travelling over 150 mph". Pendolino never claimed this, and
it wasn't Branson's fault it didn't run at over 125 mph.

Good August journalism.

Regards

Jonathan

"Jonathan Morton"  wrote

>
> Reference to the Brighton Belle "often having so many coaches"... as to
> [whatever]. Surely it only ever had 5 coaches...
>
> "...engine coasting into Victoria..." - not on the Brighton Belle EMU.
>

Usually ran as 2 5-car sets, i.e. a 10-car train (not coaches - Pullmans
were always cars). The steam predecessor of the Brighton Belle was named the
Southern Belle.

As to the length of the train, he was probably mixing up a reference to the
length of the platforms at Victoria. In that era many platforms on the
Brighton side could hold two 8-coach trains, which could arrive and depart
independently. Passengers who arrived at the rear of a train which
terminated at the far end of the platfrom would often complain that they
'had to walk half way from Brighton'.

Peter

"Jonathan Morton"  wrote in 
message news:dddk9m$iou$1@nwrdmz02.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

> "Arthur Figgis"  wrote in message
> news:0ctcf11gh3dg40sr3ef3779ie5ng8rm0u1@4ax.com...
>> On 7 Aug 2005 09:24:43 -0700, jon.porter1@lycosmax.co.uk wrote:
>>
>> >flying boats featured tiled bathrooms. That the German surrender was
>> >signed in a train carriage in 1918 (and that the very same carriage was
>> >brought back from retirement as a restaurant, so that the French could
>> >be humiliatingly forced to capitulate in it in 1939),
>>
>> Any pedants or historians going to mention that it was 1940...?
>
> Interestingly, I saw the original article - but not this post until 
> tonight.
> The thing that immediately struck me was the factual errors, viz:
>
> 1940 not 1939, as you point out.
>
> Reference to the Brighton Belle "often having so many coaches"... as to
> [whatever]. Surely it only ever had 5 coaches...
>
> "...engine coasting into Victoria..." - not on the Brighton Belle EMU.
>
> "anticipation of travelling over 150 mph". Pendolino never claimed this, 
> and
> it wasn't Branson's fault it didn't run at over 125 mph.
>
> Good August journalism.
>
> Regards
>
> Jonathan
>
>

Brighton Belle 5 cars Sun
10 cars during the week.

"Peter Masson"  wrote in message 
news:dddl5n$rpg$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...

>
> "Jonathan Morton"  wrote
>>
>> Reference to the Brighton Belle "often having so many coaches"... as to
>> [whatever]. Surely it only ever had 5 coaches...
>>
>> "...engine coasting into Victoria..." - not on the Brighton Belle EMU.
>>
> Usually ran as 2 5-car sets, i.e. a 10-car train (not coaches - Pullmans
> were always cars). The steam predecessor of the Brighton Belle was named 
> the
> Southern Belle.
>
> As to the length of the train, he was probably mixing up a reference to 
> the
> length of the platforms at Victoria. In that era many platforms on the
> Brighton side could hold two 8-coach trains, which could arrive and depart
> independently. Passengers who arrived at the rear of a train which
> terminated at the far end of the platfrom would often complain that they
> 'had to walk half way from Brighton'.
>
> Peter
>

Platforms 11-12 prior to Feb 1980 Signalling Instruction CD20

"4sub"  wrote in message
news:dddlq7$47l$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...

>
> "Peter Masson"  wrote in message
> news:dddl5n$rpg$1@nwrdmz01.dmz.ncs.ea.ibs-infra.bt.com...
> >
> >
> > As to the length of the train, he was probably mixing up a reference to
> > the
> > length of the platforms at Victoria. In that era many platforms on the
> > Brighton side could hold two 8-coach trains, which could arrive and
depart
> > independently. Passengers who arrived at the rear of a train which
> > terminated at the far end of the platfrom would often complain that they
> > 'had to walk half way from Brighton'.
> >
> Platforms 11-12 prior to Feb 1980 Signalling Instruction CD20
>

It had originally, following the Edwardian era rebuilding, applied to all
platforms on the Brighton side.

Peter

"Geoffrey Mortimer"  wrote in message
news:3lorfhF13jh7nU1@individual.net...

>
> <snip>
> gondolas were tricked out like the palm courts of Riviera hotels, and
>
> <snip>
> <snip>
> anticipation of travelling at over 150 mph, the designers have tricked
> out its coaches like aircraft cabins - this is the train as hideously
>
> <snip>
>
> BEEP!
>
> Repitition of "tricked out"
>
> Am I the only one who found that annoying?


No. I also noticed this - and wondered whether he meant "decked out". And if
not, what "tricked out" was supposed to mean.

Regards

Jonathan

The big problem with Virgin Trains is the overcrowding; from the point
of view of Voyagers they didn't order enough units. A single Voyager
unit appears to be fine for the Reading to Birmingham locals but
inadequate for many of the busier longer-distance service units from
Bournemouth. To avoid overcrowding, when travelling from Southampton to
Birmingham recently I got the through train as far as Reading and then
changed to the much more comfortable "local".

Nick