This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Would 91.106.6.150 and A1octopus please care to explain why they have deleted virtually all the good work that has been done (by at least three others) on this page over the past year, specifically to list known examples of parliamentary train in the 21st century. 213.86.33.33 16:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not convinced the Gainsborough service counts - might it be explained by alternative flows or differeing traffic patterns on Saturdays? I know the ticket numbers are a bit erratic due to Lea Road getting most of the group allocation. 81.110.104.91 ( talk) 11:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add the Ealing Broadway to south London ghost service in 2009? - it was a weekly coach replacement, and the Evening Standard took the subject up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.115.158 ( talk) 00:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
This article seems to be about two different things. I thought about editing it to make them more separate within the same article, but what do others think about making two distinct articles? -- Northernhenge ( talk) 15:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Although Gladstone was a government minister at the Board of Trade in 1844, this was during the Conservative administration of Sir Robert Peel. Gladstone did not become PM until 1868, and was not even considered a Liberal until the 1850s. In fact he had essentially started his career on the extreme right. Whoever thought that Gladstone was a Liberal PM in 1844 was a long way wide of the mark, although right to highlight his effective administration at the BoT.
Please clarify in article why Walsall to Wolverhampton is listed as an example. http://traintimes.org.uk/walsall/wolverhampton/09:15/today/changes=0 shows one direct train an hour. John a s ( talk) 08:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I'd suggest that the section " Parliamentary train#Examples of extant "parliamentary" trains" either be drastically trimmed to leave 2 or 3 entries, or retitled "List of extant parliamentary trains", with a comment that it is non-exhaustive (or maybe it is exhaustive - it's maassive). Pol098 ( talk) 13:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Is that really such a good example for a parliamentary service? True, it runs only once a day Monday to Friday in one direction only, but it's definitely not the remnant of a more frequent service. It also isn't needed to keep a bit of line open - if actually necessary, Kensal Rise to Willesden Junction Low Level was and still is covered by NLL trains running at the start and finish of service, and before this service was introduced, the direct connection between GOBLIN and NLL, bypassing the platforms at Gospel Oak, didn't have any passenger service for a very long time. In fact this is more or less simply a peak time extra. For some reason or other (possibly capacity reasons), it doesn't terminate at Gospel Oak to return to Barking, so for connectivity to the NLL it had to run one station further to Hampstead Heath. Because you can't sensibly reverse a train there either - not without holding up the rest of the NLL - it then continued to the bay platform at Willesden Junction Low Level. At first, it ran empty from Hampstead Heath, but eventually the whole route was included in the passenger timetable, because terminating at Hampstead Heath still took too much time. JanTH ( talk) 10:08, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
The article doesn't cover what these costs actually are, so er what are these costs? Seems weird that the costs of running a single train now and then is still less than the costs to close the line. It would be nice if the article explained what the costs are and why it's cheaper to run the ghost trains rather than closing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.162.140 ( talk) 16:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
I doubt this can be described as a "Parliamentary Train". It's only twice a day Mon-Sat, but at convenient times, and it's reasonably well-used. Fares undercut the more frequent routes via Leeds or Doncaster. So the operator isn't acting as if the aim is to close it down, and the line would probably still be needed for mineral freight. Grahamsands ( talk) 16:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Should the text acknowledge cases where the "parliamentary" substitute bus has been absorbed into regular bus service (but still receives some railway subsidy, and there is still some evidence in National Rail timetables on national rail website)? Example is Peterborough - Wisbech - Dereham (which used to be shown on national rail map and is in national rail planner). This is now a First express bus with onwards service to Norwich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.72.50.120 ( talk) 10:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
The word "bustitution" might confuse readers: it is a pun? Does it refer to substitution or another word ending in -ution? Maybe use another word or phrase as header of that paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.122.211 ( talk) 14:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Newhaven Marine has now started formal closure process, which will mean the parly service will also go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7d:b378:ac00:59d2:c96:6941:40ec ( talk) 00:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Is the summer Sunday Dalesrail service classed as a parliamentary train as it is the only regular passenger train that uses the line between Clitheroe and Hellifield
This really shouldn't be listed as a parliamentary service. It's the Isle of Man boat train. The ferry arrives at 1215 and departs at 1415. 2A02:C7D:2E1B:EC00:1C6A:C144:FC5C:1AB5 ( talk) 13:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
The Metropolitan line services that operates between Watford East Junction & Watford North Junction (Watford North curve) [1] is this just for route knowledge or do they have to run the services
References
Should this service be on the list there is only two services in each direction on the line and no other passenger services use the line. Its the only service that calls at Ince and Elton ( talk • contribs) 23:16, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Would 91.106.6.150 and A1octopus please care to explain why they have deleted virtually all the good work that has been done (by at least three others) on this page over the past year, specifically to list known examples of parliamentary train in the 21st century. 213.86.33.33 16:38, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm not convinced the Gainsborough service counts - might it be explained by alternative flows or differeing traffic patterns on Saturdays? I know the ticket numbers are a bit erratic due to Lea Road getting most of the group allocation. 81.110.104.91 ( talk) 11:41, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Can someone add the Ealing Broadway to south London ghost service in 2009? - it was a weekly coach replacement, and the Evening Standard took the subject up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.115.158 ( talk) 00:34, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
This article seems to be about two different things. I thought about editing it to make them more separate within the same article, but what do others think about making two distinct articles? -- Northernhenge ( talk) 15:17, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
Although Gladstone was a government minister at the Board of Trade in 1844, this was during the Conservative administration of Sir Robert Peel. Gladstone did not become PM until 1868, and was not even considered a Liberal until the 1850s. In fact he had essentially started his career on the extreme right. Whoever thought that Gladstone was a Liberal PM in 1844 was a long way wide of the mark, although right to highlight his effective administration at the BoT.
Please clarify in article why Walsall to Wolverhampton is listed as an example. http://traintimes.org.uk/walsall/wolverhampton/09:15/today/changes=0 shows one direct train an hour. John a s ( talk) 08:06, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I'd suggest that the section " Parliamentary train#Examples of extant "parliamentary" trains" either be drastically trimmed to leave 2 or 3 entries, or retitled "List of extant parliamentary trains", with a comment that it is non-exhaustive (or maybe it is exhaustive - it's maassive). Pol098 ( talk) 13:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
Is that really such a good example for a parliamentary service? True, it runs only once a day Monday to Friday in one direction only, but it's definitely not the remnant of a more frequent service. It also isn't needed to keep a bit of line open - if actually necessary, Kensal Rise to Willesden Junction Low Level was and still is covered by NLL trains running at the start and finish of service, and before this service was introduced, the direct connection between GOBLIN and NLL, bypassing the platforms at Gospel Oak, didn't have any passenger service for a very long time. In fact this is more or less simply a peak time extra. For some reason or other (possibly capacity reasons), it doesn't terminate at Gospel Oak to return to Barking, so for connectivity to the NLL it had to run one station further to Hampstead Heath. Because you can't sensibly reverse a train there either - not without holding up the rest of the NLL - it then continued to the bay platform at Willesden Junction Low Level. At first, it ran empty from Hampstead Heath, but eventually the whole route was included in the passenger timetable, because terminating at Hampstead Heath still took too much time. JanTH ( talk) 10:08, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
The article doesn't cover what these costs actually are, so er what are these costs? Seems weird that the costs of running a single train now and then is still less than the costs to close the line. It would be nice if the article explained what the costs are and why it's cheaper to run the ghost trains rather than closing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.31.162.140 ( talk) 16:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
I doubt this can be described as a "Parliamentary Train". It's only twice a day Mon-Sat, but at convenient times, and it's reasonably well-used. Fares undercut the more frequent routes via Leeds or Doncaster. So the operator isn't acting as if the aim is to close it down, and the line would probably still be needed for mineral freight. Grahamsands ( talk) 16:37, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
Should the text acknowledge cases where the "parliamentary" substitute bus has been absorbed into regular bus service (but still receives some railway subsidy, and there is still some evidence in National Rail timetables on national rail website)? Example is Peterborough - Wisbech - Dereham (which used to be shown on national rail map and is in national rail planner). This is now a First express bus with onwards service to Norwich. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.72.50.120 ( talk) 10:57, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
The word "bustitution" might confuse readers: it is a pun? Does it refer to substitution or another word ending in -ution? Maybe use another word or phrase as header of that paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.122.211 ( talk) 14:28, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Newhaven Marine has now started formal closure process, which will mean the parly service will also go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a02:c7d:b378:ac00:59d2:c96:6941:40ec ( talk) 00:34, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Is the summer Sunday Dalesrail service classed as a parliamentary train as it is the only regular passenger train that uses the line between Clitheroe and Hellifield
This really shouldn't be listed as a parliamentary service. It's the Isle of Man boat train. The ferry arrives at 1215 and departs at 1415. 2A02:C7D:2E1B:EC00:1C6A:C144:FC5C:1AB5 ( talk) 13:00, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
The Metropolitan line services that operates between Watford East Junction & Watford North Junction (Watford North curve) [1] is this just for route knowledge or do they have to run the services
References
Should this service be on the list there is only two services in each direction on the line and no other passenger services use the line. Its the only service that calls at Ince and Elton ( talk • contribs) 23:16, 28 December 2021 (UTC)