"Sam Wilson" <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:t63742$r92$1@dont-email.me...
> Battersea Power Station station
> is a perfectly valid locution, then, unlike Elizabeth Line line, unless
> one
> is referring to some line that the Elizabeth line follows or is bounded by
> or somesuch. :-)

Going back further in history:

- Junction Road junction
- Box signal box

Though these feature the same word multiple times, it is not consecutive.

Was the station at Micheldever Station ever called Micheldever Station
station? I realise that the place called Micheldever Station is named after
the station, presumably to distinguish it from the nearby and pre-railway
place called Micheldever. As a matter of interest, why was the station built
in a location which presumably had no houses before the station, instead of
building it further south so it was close to Micheldever, and (by a short
pony-and-trap journey) Sutton Scotney for those people who wanted the line
to London rather than the single-track Didcot-Newbury-Southampton line.

On 18/05/2022 18:09, NY wrote:
> "Sam Wilson" <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:t63742$r92$1@dont-email.me...
>> Battersea Power Station station
>> is a perfectly valid locution, then, unlike Elizabeth Line line,
>> unless one
>> is referring to some line that the Elizabeth line follows or is
>> bounded by
>> or somesuch.  :-)
>
> Going back further in history:
>
> - Junction Road junction
> - Box signal box
>
> Though these feature the same word multiple times, it is not consecutive.
>
>
> Was the station at Micheldever Station ever called Micheldever Station
> station? I realise that the place called Micheldever Station is named
> after the station, presumably to distinguish it from the nearby and
> pre-railway place called Micheldever. As a matter of interest, why was
> the station built in a location which presumably had no houses before
> the station, instead of building it further south so it was close to
> Micheldever, and (by a short pony-and-trap journey) Sutton Scotney for
> those people who wanted the line to London rather than the single-track
> Didcot-Newbury-Southampton line.

According to Wikipedia, it was originally called "Andover Road" until
Andover got its own station. It's handily situated for access to there.

On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:

> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with all
> TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink, Liz
> Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.

Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
with off-vehicle card readers.

--
Arthur Figgis

On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:

> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>
>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>
> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
> with off-vehicle card readers.

But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?

Robin

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>
>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>
>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>>
>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>
> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>
> Robin
>
>

The latter.

Arthur Figgis <afiggis@example.invalid> wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>
>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with all
>> TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink, Liz
>> Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>
> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
> with off-vehicle card readers.

However, English national bus passes aren't valid on them.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>>
>>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>>>
>>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>
>> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>>
>> Robin
>>
>>
>
> The latter.

Though, unlike many push-pull sets, they are push and pull simultaneously!
Of course you could argue that they are the same layout as a 4REP…

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t62cdg$shn$1@dont-email.me...
>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 17/05/2022 22:20, Recliner wrote:
>>>> NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> "Recliner" <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>> news:t60tn7$i4n$1@dont-email.me...
>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> No surprise here.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.mylondon.news/lifestyle/travel/crossrail-new-elizabeth-line-central-23971729
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a bit of a strong headline for closing on one Saturday.
>>>>>
>>>>> The decision not to run rail-replacement buses sounds sensible given
>>>>> that
>>>>> there are other routes... until you read that "the District line is
>>>>> part-suspended and the Hammersmith & City line is entirely closed,
>>>>> adding to
>>>>> the disruption" on 11 June, day that the Liz Line is closed.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Central line would be the main substitute for Central Liz, plus
>>>> there's
>>>> lots of normal bus routes in that area.
>>>>
>>> What is the colloquial for the Elizabeth Line -- the Lizzie, the Lizard?
>>>
>>> Is there any consensus on this?
>>>
>>
>> Not yet, and perhaps there never will be? Personally, I prefer the single
>> syllable Liz, to go with the Met, Picc and Vic. But I suppose it'll be the
>
> It is interesting that current signage refers to "ELIZABETH LINE" whereas
> all the other lines are referred to as "VICTORIA", "METROPOLITAN" etc (no
> "LINE") on signs. Presumably that word "LINE" is added to avoid confusion
> with the name of the current queen. I wonder if it will one day be removed,
> when Charles or William is king. I wonder if Charles or William will get
> lines named after them if a new line is built during their reign. Maybe
> Elizabeth is a special case because she had reigned for over 60 years when
> Crossrail was renamed Elizabeth (Line). It will be a long time before we
> have another monarch who reigns so long, unless a monarch dies so young that
> his/her successor reigns from as young an age as Elizabeth.
>
>

It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
within that mode.

Whether or not that should be the case, will clearly be subject of plenty
of debate in the future.

Personally l'm inclined to think it should be 'Crossrail', with 'Elizabeth'
being a line within that mode (thus allowing Crossrail2 to be added in
future).

I also think that the DLR should be divided into 'lines' for the various
parts of the service pattern.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>>>
>>>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>>>>
>>>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>>>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>>>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>>
>>> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>>>
>>> Robin
>>>
>>>
>>
>> The latter.
>
> Though, unlike many push-pull sets, they are push and pull simultaneously!
> Of course you could argue that they are the same layout as a 4REP…
>
> Sam
>

The Jacobite was a push pull set last time I saw it. One summer pre
lockdown it was hot and there was a fire risk. The steam loco on the front
was working on minimal power with a diesel giving a push from behind.

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>>>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>>>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>>>>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>>>>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>>>
>>>> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>>>>
>>>> Robin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> The latter.
>>
>> Though, unlike many push-pull sets, they are push and pull simultaneously!
>> Of course you could argue that they are the same layout as a 4REP…
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> The Jacobite was a push pull set last time I saw it. One summer pre
> lockdown it was hot and there was a fire risk. The steam loco on the front
> was working on minimal power with a diesel giving a push from behind.

It was the same with the GBXIV on its way north to Inverness. NR instructed
that because of the high fire risk, the diesel must be pushing at the back,
to relieve most of the load on Scots Guardsman.
https://youtu.be/YoxxJDwulGM

Fortunately, there was some light overnight rain in the area, so that
requirement was lifted on the way south from Inverness the next morning, so
we got to enjoy the sounds and steam clouds of an unbanked, hard working
Royal Scot.
https://youtu.be/jOvrkFu4-gk

Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>
>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>
>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping purposes.
>>
>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>
> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>
>

Both and/or neither, IMO.

I've also argued in the past that the top-n-tail class 31/37 sets which
have operated with various TOCs over the years, better meet the definition
of "DMU" than an HST does *grin*.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

"Tweed" <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:t63dl6$ggm$1@dont-email.me...
> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>>
>>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping
>>>> purposes.
>>>
>>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>
>> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>>
>> Robin
>>
>>
>
> The latter.

I would certainly regard it as the latter, because its motors are in the
power cars and not under the floors of the passenger carriages between one
power car and the other.

I've never understood why HSTs are deemed to be pushed/pulled by "power
cars" and not "diesel-electric locomotives". At one time I thought that the
distinction was that HSTs' motors were under the carriage floors, until I
learned that this is not the case.

Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
> within that mode.

So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
Elizabeth Line line?

Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
GEML.

Theo

Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>> within that mode.
>
> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
> Elizabeth Line line?
>
> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
> GEML.

Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.

As the construction project has continued to be called Crossrail, I wonder
if that will remain the name for the central tunnels?

On 18/05/2022 18:49, Arthur Figgis wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>
>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR,
>> Tramlink, Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and
>> mapping purposes.
>
> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
> with off-vehicle card readers.
>
>

I would go with trains as a tram network is a railroad.

On 18/05/2022 23:52, Recliner wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>>> within that mode.
>>
>> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
>> Elizabeth Line line?
>>
>> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
>> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
>> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
>> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
>> GEML.
>
> Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.

I've wondered about that, and assumed that the M in GWML[1] means "not a
branch" rather than identifying the fast lines from the reliefs.

[1] or should I write "GWML line"?

> As the construction project has continued to be called Crossrail, I wonder
> if that will remain the name for the central tunnels?

Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 23:52, Recliner wrote:
>> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>>>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>>>> within that mode.
>>>
>>> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
>>> Elizabeth Line line?
>>>
>>> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
>>> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
>>> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
>>> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
>>> GEML.
>>
>> Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.
>
> I've wondered about that, and assumed that the M in GWML[1] means "not a
> branch" rather than identifying the fast lines from the reliefs.

On the GWR, there are no 'Fast' lines, just Mains and Reliefs.

>
> [1] or should I write "GWML line"?

Why not just GWR?

On 19/05/2022 00:50, Recliner wrote:
> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>> On 18/05/2022 23:52, Recliner wrote:
>>> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>>>>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>>>>> within that mode.
>>>>
>>>> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
>>>> Elizabeth Line line?
>>>>
>>>> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
>>>> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
>>>> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
>>>> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
>>>> GEML.
>>>
>>> Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.
>>
>> I've wondered about that, and assumed that the M in GWML[1] means "not a
>> branch" rather than identifying the fast lines from the reliefs.
>
> On the GWR, there are no 'Fast' lines, just Mains and Reliefs.

True. I was looking for a synonym for main (non-relief) track pair
which couldn't be misinterpreted as meaning main (non-branch) route.

>> [1] or should I write "GWML line"?
>
> Why not just GWR?

I was just copying the term used above, and avoided GWR as that might
refer to the TOC, franchise area, Big Four company, etc.

Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On 19/05/2022 00:50, Recliner wrote:
>> Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>> On 18/05/2022 23:52, Recliner wrote:
>>>> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>>>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>>>>>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>>>>>> within that mode.
>>>>>
>>>>> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
>>>>> Elizabeth Line line?
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
>>>>> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
>>>>> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
>>>>> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
>>>>> GEML.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.
>>>
>>> I've wondered about that, and assumed that the M in GWML[1] means "not a
>>> branch" rather than identifying the fast lines from the reliefs.
>>
>> On the GWR, there are no 'Fast' lines, just Mains and Reliefs.
>
> True. I was looking for a synonym for main (non-relief) track pair
> which couldn't be misinterpreted as meaning main (non-branch) route.

But Crossrail uses the Relief, not the Main lines.

>
>>> [1] or should I write "GWML line"?
>>
>> Why not just GWR?
>
> I was just copying the term used above, and avoided GWR as that might
> refer to the TOC, franchise area, Big Four company, etc.

It's usually clear from the context.

On Thu, 19 May 2022 00:15:09 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
<hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 18/05/2022 18:49, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>
>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR,
>>> Tramlink, Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and
>>> mapping purposes.
>>
>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>
>>
>
>I would go with trains as a tram network is a railroad.

<guffaw> You're streets ahead of us...

In message <t63jrd$214$1@dont-email.me>, at 20:10:21 on Wed, 18 May
2022, Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> remarked:

>> It is interesting that current signage refers to "ELIZABETH LINE" whereas
>> all the other lines are referred to as "VICTORIA", "METROPOLITAN" etc (no
>> "LINE") on signs.
....
>
>It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>within that mode.
>
>Whether or not that should be the case, will clearly be subject of plenty
>of debate in the future.

More strictly (but doesn't sounds so good) "ElizabethRail"? (As in
MerseyRail, ScotRail, West Midlands Rail...)

>Personally l'm inclined to think it should be 'Crossrail', with 'Elizabeth'
>being a line within that mode (thus allowing Crossrail2 to be added in
>future).
>
>I also think that the DLR should be divided into 'lines' for the various
>parts of the service pattern.

I think the Overground should, too.
--
Roland Perry

NY <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
> "Tweed" <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:t63dl6$ggm$1@dont-email.me...
>> Bob <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>> On 2022-05-18 17:49:41 +0000, Arthur Figgis said:
>>>
>>>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR, Tramlink,
>>>>> Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and mapping
>>>>> purposes.
>>>>
>>>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>>>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>>>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>>
>>> But is an HST a DEMU or a push-pull locomotive set?
>>>
>>
>> The latter.
>
>
> I would certainly regard it as the latter, because its motors are in the
> power cars and not under the floors of the passenger carriages between one
> power car and the other.
>
> I've never understood why HSTs are deemed to be pushed/pulled by "power
> cars" and not "diesel-electric locomotives". At one time I thought that the
> distinction was that HSTs' motors were under the carriage floors, until I
> learned that this is not the case.
>

HST power cars contain the luggage van area, so technically they're MLVs?
They originally contained the guard's area too, so perhaps they're DBMLV?
[1]

HST power cars don't have a 'straight air brake' (ie, ability to control
the locomotive brakes separately from the train brake) which AFAIK every
other locomotive type does; they have only train brake and parking brake
controls.

[1] this leads to another difference between HSTs and LHCS; there's no
brake vehicle carriage in the train (ie a carriage with a parking brake
which can hold the train with locomotives detached), as that feature is
provided by the power cars, perhaps because they were not original
considered to be locomotives! (On other fixed-formation sets, the DVT
vehicle has a parking brake)

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>>> within that mode.
>>
>> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
>> Elizabeth Line line?
>>
>> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
>> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
>> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
>> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
>> GEML.
>
> Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.
>
>

They usually use the relief lines on the Great Western Main Line, but they
can, and do, use the main lines when the reliefs are unavailable, for
example due to disruption, failure or planned engineering work.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 18:49, Arthur Figgis wrote:
>> On 18/05/2022 13:07, NY wrote:
>>
>>> I'd say they ought to have top-level divisions of rail and bus, with
>>> all TfL-operated rail services (Underground, Overground, DLR,
>>> Tramlink, Liz Line) grouped together for ticketing, branding and
>>> mapping purposes.
>>
>> Though there is the angels-on-pinheads question of whether trams are
>> basic trains or fancy buses. The trams operate more or less as buses
>> with off-vehicle card readers.
>>
>>
>
> I would go with trains as a tram network is a railroad.
>

I'm currently travelling around Europe and have used a number of town
tramway systems; IMO from a passenger POV they align more closely with
buses than trams (often same operator, integrated ticketing, shared stops;
but also from the POV of "transport onwards from the station through the
streets"). UK mileage may vary, however, with many systems being converted
from, or using former, railway alignments, and operation and ticketing
often being separate from the local bus operator.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
> On 18/05/2022 23:52, Recliner wrote:
>> Theo <theom+news@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
>>> Anna Noyd-Dryver <anna@noyd-dryver.com> wrote:
>>>> It's because Elizabeth Line is the *mode*, equivalent with Underground,
>>>> Overground, DLR; whereas Central, Victoria, Piccadilly etc are *lines*
>>>> within that mode.
>>>
>>> So if we can talk about the Underground Central line, can we talk about the
>>> Elizabeth Line line?
>>>
>>> Which is not entirely facetious as presumably there needs be to some way to
>>> refer to the route in the central London tunnels, as opposed to the parts
>>> which are the GWML or the GEML. And so maybe an Elizabeth Line service from
>>> Reading to Shenfield makes use of the GWML, the Elizabeth Line line and the
>>> GEML.
>>
>> Actually, Crossrail uses the GWRL, not the GWML.
>
> I've wondered about that, and assumed that the M in GWML[1] means "not a
> branch" rather than identifying the fast lines from the reliefs.
>
>

For a long time I've been amused how smug the ELR [1] for the GWML is.
"MLN", ie main line. *The* main line. No geographical qualifier. Let the
ECML, WCML etc qualify their ELRs, we're just *the* main line!

[1] Engineers Line Reference, a unique 3-character code for every length of
line in the country. Often geographically based, or railway-history based.

Anna Noyd-Dryver