|To-do list for Train:|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Train article.|
|WikiProject Trains / in UK / in Scotland||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
|Train has been listed as a level-4 vital article in Technology. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|WikiProject Transport||(Rated C-class, Top-importance)|
|Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital / Core|
|The content of Local trains was merged into Train. That page now redirects here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page.|
- 1 question
- 2 Famous Train Routes
- 3 Fictional Trains
- 4 Motive Power
- 5 Merge
- 6 when were they invented?
- 7 Towards GA Status
- 8 edit links mixed up
- 9 hand pump trains
- 10 Gallery section
- 11 If you do keep the gallery section.
- 12 UNTRUE!!
- 13 U.S. Under-represented in Images
- 14 Bogies!
- 15 Russian refs
- 16 Garden trains
- 17 train project
- 18 Where Are Trains Manufactured?
- 19 Runaway trains
Moved here from the article:
- NOTE: Does anyone know enough to write a section about the train system as it historically operated during its heyday in the U.S.?? (Before the dismantling trend started... when every town seemed to be linked by rail, before the National Highway Defense Act of 1956 provided a means to replace nearly all mass transit with motorized highway alternatives....) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk • contribs)
Does anyone know when the train was INVENTED? -K
The train was not "invented" as such, it was more a progression of existing technology. Ordinary wagon that were pulled along the ground by horses were put on/between guide rails in order to provided steering when many were coupled together. I imagine this first happened in a mine, where spoil/ore was being removed by horses pulling wagons within the confines of a tunnel. ALECTRIC451 11:39, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Famous Train Routes
Please can we move this list to another page and link to it. It has some relevance to this article, but there are enough to warrant a separate page and some text to link to it.ALECTRIC451 23:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Please can we move this list to another page and link to it. It has some relevance to this article, but there are enough to warrant a separate page and some text to link to it.--ALECTRIC451 23:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- How about merging the info here with what's already on Rail transport in fiction, then just moving the two See also links from this section into the main article's See also section? Slambo (Speak) 11:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Is it me or is there a large gap between the title "Motive Power" and the beginning of that section. I have looked at it, but my lack of editing knowledge fails me and i can't change it. Mrjingjing
Came across a random page Local trains which seemed unnecessary, and probably duplicates info here. Didn't want to simply tag it for deletion if it's someone's project. I'll leave it to you guys to sort out. Gwinva 13:16, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
- Seems to me to be a pointless stub easily mergeable.--Lisa666 10:47, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
when were they invented?
When were they invented? By whom? 188.8.131.52 21:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
- They weren't "invented". It was more of an evolution of technology such as wagons, steam engines and guided rails. The origins can be traced to the mining industry and the need to move wagons of ore/coal/minerals out of the mine to the surface. Canterberry 09:37, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
Towards GA Status
This article has been rated as a 'vital article' in the 2006 CD selection. (See banner at top of page.)
As such, the article should really be pushed towards Good Article (GA) status, at the very least.
EdJogg 14:29, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi EdJogg! I see at least one reason not to call it a GA: Either it is not edited to fit W3C standards, or there is a real stupid link bug. See discussion section Talk:Train#edit_links_mixed_up. -- Greets JoernMa 00:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
I tried to fix some weird layout problem but I didn't find out the real problem.
Somehow, all the edit-links occur in one row in the middle of (and overlaying) one section. See on the right hand side what I mean.
What can cause this article to appear that screwed? -- Greets, JoernMa 23:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Edit: This bug happens with the following browsers:
- Firefox 184.108.40.206 (Linux/KDE, Windows2k and WindowsXP)
- Konqueror 3.5.6 (Linux/KDE)
- Opera 8.54 (Linux/KDE, Windows2k and WindowsXP)
It does not appear in:
- Internet Explorer 6.0 (Windows2k and WindowsXP)
-- JoernMa 00:48, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
- Hmmmm. Do you see this on any other page? Regardless, your best bet is to ask at the 'Village Pump', since there will be experts available to help you.
- EdJogg 12:58, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- This is a known issue with the stylesheet when there are a lot of images that overlap section boundaries; it's not unique to this article or, as far as I can recall, to any particular browser/OS combination. I don't see it mentioned in a quick scan through the FAQ, but I know I've seen it discussed before. There's probably something in bugtraq about it too. Slambo (Speak) 14:50, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
- If you investigate this known issue you will discover that there isn't yet a proper solution. I discovered there was an option available under My Preferences->Gadgets->User interface gadgets: editing. Select "Moves edit links next to the section headers" and the problem will go away, although it takes a bit of getting used to!
- EdJogg (talk) 12:51, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
hand pump trains
Does anyone know what those little manual hand pump 'machines' are called? I've seen them in lots of movies, they are wooden and have two hanles on each side where two people "pump" it to make it move on a railway.--220.127.116.11 (talk) 06:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
If you do keep the gallery section.
Certainly replace the Class 153 image with a class far more suitable and modern, e.g. a Class 390. There are only 70 units of Class 153 operating in the whole of the UK anyway. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 09:05, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
- Which is exactly what it says in the section 'Types of train', straight after the introduction...
- EdJogg (talk) 01:07, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
I absolutely agree that this article is mistitled, and its description of a train is quite untrue. There are several different kinds of train besides a railroad train, which should be the correct title of this article. I have noticed that "railroad train" does not even redirect here. The fact that this article is about railroad trains must be stated directly at the top of the article, preferably in its title.
Other kinds of trains that I can name is nust a few minutes include these:
A. A series of wheeled cargo containers that we call "trailers" in North America, and which are pulled by one truck. These form trains that move on highways. In some states and provinces, the maximum number of trailers allowed in one of these trains is three, and in most of the others, the maximum number is two.
B. A series of tracked cargo vehicles that are made to travel on snow and ice is called a train. These are seen in Antarctica, northern Canada, and in Alaska - and perhaps in Greenland and in Siberia. The most notable long-distance trail for these trains runs from the ocean at the seaport of McMurdo Sound to the Amundsen-Scott Station at the South Pole. The Amundsen-Scott Station was supplied for many decades by airlift, but sometime during the decade of 2000 - 2009, the trail was constructed (requiring the filling in of thousands of crevasses in the icecap) so that these trains could haul in cargo a lot more economically - cargo such as the large amounts of diesel fuel (for generating electricity, for heating, and for melting ice for fresh water), food, and construction. For the past several years, the Amundsen-Scott station has been in the process of being completely rebuilt (to a much more modern & scientific design) during the "summerimes" because the old one (with its geodesic dome) was becoming buried by decades-worth of ice and snow; generally getting worn out; becoming inadequate in its amount of floor space; and worst of all, its foundations were failing. The new station is designed to be jacked up twice in its lifetime, and it has been designed in an aerodynamic shape to force gales underneath it to blow away as much snow as possible. Even so, the usable lifetime of the the new Amundsen-Scott Station is expected to be about 40 years.
C. Any significant Army, Marine Corps, or Air Force unit requires a "supply train" to keep it in action. Much larger than the number of men in the fighting force needed in the "sharp point of spear" in this situation is the number of men and women needed in its supply train that brings up to the front the ammunition, food and drink, fuel, fresh water, extra clothing and footwear, lubricants, toilet paper, medical supplies, spare vehicles and weapons (incl. aircraft), spare parts for repairs, repair shops, tents, portable housing, field kitchens, replacement soldiers, mail, repair & maintenance shops, field hospitals, telecommunications gear, and everything else that you can think of that these military units need.
D. Any significant naval fleet or task force that projects power to the far sides of the oceans requires a large "supply train" of ships to keep it in action. Much larger than the number of sailors and airmen in the fighting force needed in the "sharp point of spear" in this situation is the number of men and women needed in its supply train that brings up to the fleet the fuel, ammunition, food and drink, spare aircraft and spare parts, lubricants, mail, toilet paper, telecommunications gear, medical supplies, spare clothing, spare sailors and airment, paint, hospital ships with doctors and dentists, and everything else that you can think of that these naval units need.
During the War in the Pacific of 1942 - 45, the supply train that was needed to to keep the U.S. Third Fleet and the Fast Carrier Task Force in action in the Western Pacific Ocean grew so large and so important that its commander was promoted to the rank of commodore (United States), which is higher than a naval captain, but lower than a rear admiral (United States). (Commodores only exist in the U.S. Navy during wartime.) Of course, Admiral Chester Nimitz, the Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Fleet, had a Vice Admiral (United States) working under him who was in charge of logistics, and Nimitz's logistics staff at Pearl Harbor (moved forward to Guam in early 1945) consisted of hundreds of officers and enlisted men, and those directed millions of sailors and Marines who carried out the actual logistics work.
The commodore who was in charge of the fleet's supply train at ses had under his command scores of cargo ships, scores of oilers (oil tankers), dozens of ammuniton ships, dozens of repair ships, several transports for spare sailors and Marines, scores of destroyers and destroyer escorts for anti-submarine warfare and air defense, several hospital ships, and his own group of six to twelve escort carriers for both fighter plane cover and to be available to deliver spare warplanes, pilots, and enlisted aircrewmen up to the fighting carriers of the Fast Carrier Task Force.
In any case, that supply train of ships for the U.S. Navy in the Western Pacific fighting the Japanese grew to be larger than the entire navies of nearly all of the other combatants, and also larger and more powerful than the entire navies of all but a handful of countries have ever been (disregarding the nuclear armament that some of these have): Let me name some of these: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Denmark, France, Greece, Holland, Italy, The Netherlands, New Zealand, Russia, Spain, Sweden, and Turkey. I deliberately left out these others because of their large WW I and WW II navies: Canada, Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom.
- I had prepared a multi-sentence reply, then noticed train (disambiguation) exists. This is already mentioned in the article hatnote, and hence answers the majority of your comments.
- EdJogg (talk) 13:07, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
U.S. Under-represented in Images
I believe that there should be more representations of United States railroad operations in the images in this article. Currently, the only one is of a BNSF freight. —Preceding unsigned comment added by YamahaFreak (talk • contribs) 02:50 26-Jun-2009
- Neither are there pictures of trains from South America, Africa, Australia, the Middle East or China.
- The pictures chosen should be the best for illustrating the text in question. The range of countries represented here is actually rather good. Since the US is more than well-represented when considering railway-related articles as a whole, I'm not sure that adding more than one extra US photo is justified here, and certainly not just because its a US photo!
- EdJogg (talk) 11:49, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
- (Cue scenes of young (British) school children going "Uerrrr"! and giggling helplessly...)
I know I just did a minor edit in the 'Bogies' section, but does it really belong in the article? We are dealing with trains here, not rolling stock, and it looks out-of-order and out-of-place.
- No, the above is a silly statement. A railroad train always consists of rolling stock, and you cannot have a train without rolling stock. On the subject of rolling stock, this includes box cars, flat cars, locomotives, passenger cars, hopper cars, tank cars, cabooses, and any other kind of railroad car that you can think of. Nearly all of these have bogies upon which their wheels and axles are mounted. Some locomotives might not have bogies.22.214.171.124 (talk) 23:25, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
There are about 103 refs on the Russian wiki, but the sites that they link to are in (oh my...) Russian! Should I find English ones, or are those acceptable for transfer
- Foreign-language references should only be used in exceptional cases, for example, describing 'foreign' topics where no English equivalent exists. Good luck searching for English references! -- EdJogg (talk) 12:00, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps that garden trains can be mentioned. See http://www.avforums.com/forums/general-chat/486644-where-can-you-buy-kids-ride-train-garden.html , http://www.maxitrak.co.uk/ , http://www.rideonrailways.co.uk/products/index.html 126.96.36.199 (talk) 08:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
- For a page on this topic, one could turn to Live Steam. NorthCoastReader (talk) 04:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Go to wikapidia then tipe Trains in then press enter
Where Are Trains Manufactured?
Someone might add a paragraph explaining where engines and cars are manufactured (talk) 17:16, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Should a subarticle or a section in the main article be added for runaway trains? It does happen on occasion, and a wikipedia article explaining the hows and whys would be useful in situations like the Lac-Mégantic derailment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Legacy (talk • contribs) 03:46, 11 July 2013 (UTC)