Slashdot Mirror
First UK On-Train WiFi Service Launches Monday
dave writes "UK train company GNER starts trials of the UK's first on-train wireless Internet access service. Currently only available on limited services and in First Class; if the trial is successful the service will be rolled out across the entire fleet in both Standard and First Class."
let's hope this service doesn't get too popular - for health reasons. WiFi is fine, but packing 200 passengers into a small train carriage and allowing each to use a WiFi transmitter is just stupid.
seriously, how hard would it have been to stick an ethernet port in each seat? my guess is that they went with WiFi only because it was cheaper (less rework to the train)
lame.
At least they TELL you it's something strange like lightning hitting the tracks. In reality the conductor probobly fell asleep while he was driving the train.
"It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
This is what bothers me about our trains:
Potters Bar (2002)
Hatfield (2000)
Ladbroke Grove (1999)
Selby (2001)
There have been others...
And they are talking about WiFi? Disgusting.
This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
I am genuinely mystified by the common practise of citing recnet rail crashes as, so far as I can tell, evidence of systemic failure in the railway system. The rail crashes and loss of life are naturally terrible events and wherever possible strenuous efforts should be made to eliminate the causes of them BUT BUT BUT - on average six people die every day on British roads.
It's a bad YEAR when six die on the rails. Even if it has deteriorated somewhat in recent years (and should therefore be given urgent attention), it's in a different league from the risks associated with road travel.
Yet you wait in vain to hear calls for public enquiries into the deadly state of the road transport system. Why is that? I'm not making a political point here, I'm genuinely amazed that these two situations exist: a dangerous transport system alongside one that is very much better with the latter attracting the 'we must make it safer' publicity.
It just doesn't make sense to me.
Sounds like a desperate attempt to upsell seats in first class to me. I doubt if it's going to work because you're either willing to pay thru the nose for a special seat or you're not, how does better internet access make a difference? I already can and do get an adequate bluetooth/GPRS connection anyway, even in economy class.
Also the UK train system does not have a particularly good record for efficiency, they really struggle with the retailing computers in the snack-bar so why do I not have a good feeling about their ability to operate a satellite link. Personally I would put "not crashing" at the top of my train wish-list instead of wi-fi.
"Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
This is a very good point. It is also worth adding that if you are on a motorway and are involved in an accident with other cars the risk of death is very low because all the energy is travelling in the same direction regardless of speed. On the other hand, if a lorry is involved the risk of death goes through the roof. That freight should be on the rails... We need to shift back to rail rather than abandon it.
I have to stop before I get into a political rant about fuel tax etc. and lack of investment on rail...
I love stacking my barbecues in the shed at the end of summer - you can't beat a bit of grill on grill action.
Selby's a bit of a red herring here, but the inquiries into Ladbroke Grove, Hatfield and Potters Bar each concluded that systemic factors contributed to the accidents - poor maintenance of signals, poor maintence of points, poor maintenance and condition checking of rails, generally poor safety culture.
BBC URIs for the reports:
Hatfield
Potters Bar
Ladbroke Grove
I worked for Railtrack a few years back on a condition survey project, and we found at least one set of points which the contractor had signed off for five years when it was clear from a cursory inspection that the heaters had burned out five years back. If it was found that lots of road deaths were due to unsafe cars passing their MOTs there *would* be a massive outcry against the dodgy garages issuing such certificates.
I wish to God somebody would mod that up. I agree 100%. Lorries are a fucking nuisance and a menace to all other road users. There are enough laws about how lorries should be driven (eg keeping to their own lane, keeping below 60mph) but lorry drivers *never* obey those laws.
Also they tend to rely on their size to intimidate. In theory nobody is supposed to pull any sort of maneuver without looking first to make sure it won't force another road user to change speed or direction. But lorry drivers just don't give a damn. You'd better keep your wits about you when you're driving behind one of those things.
Taking long distance freight off the roads and putting it back onto rail where it belongs would be a major vote winner I reckon.
Comparing the UK's train system to the American system and saying that it's great by comparison is like saying that McDonald's food is great when compared to poo.
The American system is total crap, but that doesn't mean the UK system is great. I've never used the UK system, but your description doesn't sound so good. In France, if a train is more than a couple of minutes late, they actually get on the PA and say "we're sorry for the delay, please don't hate us". Ten minutes late is nutty. I've only been more than ten minutes late on a French train twice. Once it was because there was an accident on the tracks, I think involving somebody shuffling off this mortal coil. Your (rough guess) figure of 9 out of 10 trains being on time means 10% are late, which seems really high.
And then, of course, there's the TGV. Paris to Marseille in three hours. Whee.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
The train companies are not entirely to blame for those accidents.
If you want someone to blame, pick the Conservative government of the time that sold off the railway network to the highest bidder at a massively undervalued price.
So began the culture of profits before safety that dogged Railtrack. Enormous profits earned from buying the network at such a low price and then selling shares should have been sunk back into improving the railways. Of course, as expected, they gave it all away to shareholders and executives as dividends.
They cut maintenance, farmed out lucrative service contracts that put the emphasis on "keep it working, dont bother improving" and not spending any money on safety systems that could have prevented the accidents you listed above (things like ATC and other systems) because they were "too expensive".
Railtrack and the Tory government are the reason people have died in preventable crashes. I'm not saying the rail operators (Midland Mainline, GNER, Virgin etc) are blameless. but it's not all their fault by a long shot.
The idea that the railways were "privatised" in any real sense is a myth. They're just run by government cronies, rather than directly by the government, so the government no longer take the blame for their poor decisions even while they still get to set the policies.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.