Jump to content

Talk:Chiltern Main Line

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 90.196.10.20 (talk) at 23:28, 16 July 2010 (→Not Intercity: intercity and InterCity are NOT the same). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Last paragraph

Surely the last paragraph is somewhat subjective? -- 80.41.215.203 16:26, 21 Apr 2005

I have clatrified 'rubbish trains'; I presume that is what this comment was about. The last para now reads:
The line from Northolt Junction to Paddington alone has not been improved, and only one Chiltern train a day from Princes Risborough, and back, uses it, and only during the week. Freight trains carrying refuse from London use the line, however, and it has been used as a diversion when work is taking place on the line to Marylebone, or when the normal line into Paddington is closed.
which seems perfectly NPOV to me. What I don't understand is the last phrase and what exactly is thw 'normal line into Paddington'?. -- Chris j wood 20:09, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Split article?

Should this article be split up into several new articles? The suggested new article names are below. Our Phellap 23:07, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford-Banbury spur?

The section on 'future' suggests that Oxford-Banbury could be transferred to Chiltern as a consequence of a new Oxford-Risborough line; given that XC use the line as a key part of the Reading-Birmingham route, would it not be unnecessarily confusing to move this to Chiltern? 62.239.159.6 (talk) 13:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Line Speeds and History

I just added a bunch of info on line speeds and reformatted the History section to remove the "wall of text" effect. I'd appreciate any feedback available. -User:TheOneKEA (20080530 18:33) —Preceding comment was added at 22:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, the speed info is good. Too good perhaps. Maybe just a more simple bullet point list would be ok (see the B'ham to Worcester via Kidderminster line page). Btline (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BTW measuring speeds with GPS shows that W&S travel around 100mph between bicester and risborough ... perhaps they've successfully obtained derogations to observe some of the higher speed limits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.3.230.236 (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not Intercity

This line is not an Intercity line. Yes, it links two cities, but it is the slower, secondary route between them. It is a regional secondary route and a commuter route. I have changed this. I have also changed the commuter to mention B'ham commuters as well as London. Btline (talk) 20:10, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you're wrong. It is an intercity line, not an InterCity line. The line links Greater London (which is a de facto city) with the City of Birmingham, and thus qualifies as an intercity route. Howerver, it never regularly carried trains that were branded under the old BR InterCity brand; AFAICR it carried trains branded under the BR CrossCountry/Regional Railways brand. Line speeds, the presence of commuter traffic, and its (possible) classification as a secondary route by Network Rail doesn't really enter into the equation IMO. -User:TheOneKEA (20080618 18:35 GMT) —Preceding comment was added at 22:37, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

InterCity and Intercity are the same thing, albeit spelt differently. This line is NOT the Intercity/InterCity route between the two cities. The WCML is. There are no such services. It is a secondary line, which is regional (demonstrated by its stopping patterns). Many lines link two cities, but they are not Intercity lines unless they have intercity/express services. Think about Leeds to Lancaster, Manchester to Cardiff via Ludlow (as opposed to the XC route), Bristol / Exeter to London Waterloo (as opposed to London Paddington), Carlisle to Glasgow via Dumfries. None of these are Intercity lines, even though thet link two cities.

Therefore, the Chiltern route is not an Intercity line.

The fact that it is a commuter route is irrelevant. The WCML is also a commuter route as well as an InterCity route. My commuter remark was just about the fact that the page did ot mention B'ham commuters. Btline (talk) 19:24, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Sorry, but I completely disagree with you. I spelled out quite clearly (IMO) the difference between 'no caps' intercity (which is any train service between two cities), and 'InterCaps' InterCity (which is a very specific brand that existed before BR Privatisation and only existed on a specific set of clearly described BR routes). And IMO stopping patterns don't matter to one jot when describing whether or not a train service is an intercity train service, which the Chiltern Line clearly is!

If I appear to be splitting hairs, I'm doing so because I feel the need to try to explain my position on the very real difference between an InterCity route (which the Chiltern Main Line is _NOT_) and intercity (which it is). All of the routes you mention above are most certainly NOT InterCity routes, because they never regularly carried BR InterCity services. They, however, are all intercity routes, because they link two or more cities.

However, I will accept that the route is a secondary route, and that the WCML is the primary route. That, however, IMO has little to no bearing on whether or not the Chiltern Main Line is an intercity route. -User:TheOneKEA (20080619 19:43) —Preceding comment was added at 23:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, although I still disagree and think that the Chiltern Line is not an Intercity route, perhaps a compromise of "secondary intercity" or similar could be found. Btline (talk) 16:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that WSMR trains use the route strengthens the case to call it an Intercity/intercity route. These are long distance locomotive worked trains. 7severn7 (talk) 20:32, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Current usage in the technical press for referring to lines that run between cities, but are not "inter-city" in the generally understood British sense of that term, is to call them "inter-urban" and I have amended the article accordingly. Alarics (talk) 10:17, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, the word 'intercity' existed long before the BR concept of InterCity- for something linking two cities. The word 'inter-urban' doesn't mean the same thing; any reasonably sized settlement could be described as urban, so a rural railway such as the Aylesbury-Princes Risborough could be called inter-urban, though of course not InterCity. Whilst the Chiltern Main line connects many urban areas (making it inter-urban), it also links two (major) cities making it intercity, just not the InterCity that British Rail ran. There is a difference. 90.196.10.20 (talk) 23:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Slower but more direct'?

"Although the West Coast Main Line is the faster and original main line between the two cities, the Chiltern Main Line remains popular due to its more direct route between its two termini" - this makes no sense. The route is clearly not more direct as it takes at least 30 minutes longer on average with far more stops. Surely the reason the Chiltern line is popular is because it's frequently cheaper than the West Coast services? Smurfmeister (talk) 13:22, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, but without a reliable source confirming that Chiltern prices are less than Virgin, it cannot be stated. However, I do think it is more direct, the reason it takes longer is a) all the stops and b) the West Coast trains can travel much faster than Chiltern. OllieFury (talk) 16:43, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll just add some facts for the benefit of readers: FACT 1 the Chiltern route is about 2 miles shorter than the WCML. FACT 2 Chiltern is cheaper on all buy on the day ticket types and the same on Advances. Btline (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MOC Ruling Question

Does the recent purchase of Arriva by DB overcome the MOC ruling preventing WSMR trains from calling at Birmingham New Street? 7severn7 (talk) 20:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't, this clause will apparently be removed when the West Coast franchise is up for renewal in 2012 (whether Virgin Trains get renewed or another operator takes over) --Geezertronic (talk) 08:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid this article is still badly overlinked. I've reinstated the {{Overlinked}} template and removed some of the duplicates (eg. 'High Wycombe' and 'West Coast Main Line') but there are still many remaining. 'Aynho Junction' was Wikilinked no less than nine times. —MegaPedant 16:18, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed much of the overlinking and deleted the {{Overlinked}} template. —MegaPedant 16:31, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why should it be popular because it's slower? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.103.145 (talk) 19:50, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Compared to the Euston-Rugby-Birmingham New Street route, the Marylebone-Banbury-Birmingham Snow Hill route is indeed slower (by some 30 min or more), but has three advantages that I see: - first off, it's cheaper; second, the trains are less crowded; third, they tend to be more punctual. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:27, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The reference to "popular" was unclear, unsourced and subjective, and has been removed. Alarics (talk) 10:20, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chiltern_Main_Line&oldid=373889550"