Jump to content

Talk:Lauterbrunnen–Mürren Mountain Railway: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Gradient: some fast evidence
Line 37: Line 37:
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 13:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 13:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


== Inclination ==
== Gradient ==


Inclination for cohesion driven railways are always given in promilles, expediently and consistently! And it is also concensus among Swiss Railway articles. -- [[User:ZH8000|ZH8000]] ([[User talk:ZH8000|talk]]) 21:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Inclination for cohesion driven railways are always given in promilles, expediently and consistently! And it is also concensus among Swiss Railway articles. -- [[User:ZH8000|ZH8000]] ([[User talk:ZH8000|talk]]) 21:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
:{{replyto|ZH8000}} It might be common practice in Switzerland, but this is not the Swiss Wikipedia this is the :en Wikipedia. I was unfamiliar with he ‘per thousand’ symbol (and I have been around a while) and had to google it (once I figured out how to enter it). In English usage it is considered obsolete and archaic, so it should not be used in the :en Wikipedia as few people understand it; no keyboard supports it and very few character sets include it. If you must insist, then obtain a consensus (as [[WP:BRD]] requires). Expressing the gradient as ‘5%’ is almost universally understood. [[Special:Contributions/148.252.129.216|148.252.129.216]] ([[User talk:148.252.129.216|talk]]) 18:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
:{{replyto|ZH8000}} It might be common practice in Switzerland, but this is not the Swiss Wikipedia this is the :en Wikipedia. I was unfamiliar with he ‘per thousand’ symbol (and I have been around a while) and had to google it (once I figured out how to enter it). In English usage it is considered obsolete and archaic, so it should not be used in the :en Wikipedia as few people understand it; no keyboard supports it and very few character sets include it. If you must insist, then obtain a consensus (as [[WP:BRD]] requires). Expressing the gradient as ‘5%’ is almost universally understood. [[Special:Contributions/148.252.129.216|148.252.129.216]] ([[User talk:148.252.129.216|talk]]) 18:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

::Can you read a simple diagram? [[WP:BRD]] is the other way around; actually, you have to provide evidence for your bold change. Therefore I filed you for [[3rr]].
::You are obviously not an engineer, i.e. an "amateur" (lit. somebody who loves the subject) at best. Of course, engineering has its own nomenclature and signs, since centuries, obviously, necessarily and inevitably. Not to admit this commonplace truth is just plain ignorance.
::But well, just a few very fast examples:
:*[[‰]] ... quote: "Tunnel and railway gradients (in some countries in Europe)"
:*[[List of spiral tunnels and tunnels on a curved alignment]]
:*[http://w1.siemens.ch/mobility/global/en/interurban-mobility/rail-solutions/locomotives/vectron/technology/product-expertise/tractive-effort/references/Pages/references.aspx?ismobile=true Siemens], a producer of trains ... "For example, it was possible to start and accelerate the 5,500-ton train from a standstill on a gradient of over 12 ‰."
:*[https://www.iroads.co.il/sites/default/files/imce/railway_tracks_design_guidelines_2013_part_1_-_eng.pdf e.g. Israelian Railways] ... all ''i<sub>x</sub>'' are expresed in ‰.
:: etc, etc, and so forth.
::-- [[User:ZH8000|ZH8000]] ([[User talk:ZH8000|talk]]) 02:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:50, 9 February 2018

WikiProject iconTrains Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSwitzerland Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Switzerland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Switzerland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cog Railway?

According to Tramways and Light Railways of Switzerland and Austria (see citation in article) the upper section of this railway is an electric tramway with no indication that it is a cog railway. And the 5% maximum gradient quoted both in the original article and that book is well within the limits of adhesion for an ordinary electric railway. So I have removed the reference to cog railway. -- Chris j wood 13:58, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Yes, the upper section is indeed an adhesion narrow gauge railway, no cog. Gestumblindi 22:18, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The funicular will close

The funicular was effectively used to transport the trains from Lauterbrunnen to the line, how, I have no idea. In fact, this line is strange exactly because it has no connection with the world other than the funicular.

The funicular will close next year to be changed with a "cable passenger telepheric". During he transition (between 1 May and 9 December) passengers must use the Stechelberg-Mürren telepheric, and the Grütschalp-Mürren line will have a less frequent service (because, as said, after Grütschalp you can't go anywhere without the funicular, except by foot).

Aerial tram?

Why change "cable car system" to "aerial tram"? Here they're known as cable cars! Thrapper 22:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cable car is ambiguous - please see Cable car which is a disambiguation page. Lots of transportation systems relying on cables are called "cable cars", so the more specific term Aerial tramway is appropriate here, especially since the funicular it replaces could also be called a cable car - and you don't want to write "a cable car replaced by a cable car" when the replacing transportation system is something very different... 00:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Debatable point. Personally I had no clue what an aerial tramway was until I clicked on the link - it doesn't help if noone understands what it is. The system being replaced could be called a funicular, or a cable train, but I would never call it a cable car. As far as I'm concerned a "tramway" runs on rails, and doesn't hang from a cable. Calling it "aerial" implies (to me) that the rails are suspended in the air and the tram runs on top of those rails. Maybe this is a regional issue, but this particular system is in Europe. Thrapper 23:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article name

In 2013, this article was moved from Bergbahn Lauterbrunnen-Mürren to Lauterbrunnen–Mürren mountain railway. However, I think that Bergbahn Lauterbrunnen-Mürren is a proper name and as such shouldn't be translated into English for the article name - like Matterhorn Gotthard Bahn (not "Matterhorn Gotthard railway") or Chemins de fer du Jura (not "Jura railways"). However, there doesn't seem to be a consistent approach? There's also Brienz–Rothorn railway, or Rigi Railways... Gestumblindi (talk) 23:27, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lauterbrunnen–Mürren Mountain Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:15, 18 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gradient

Inclination for cohesion driven railways are always given in promilles, expediently and consistently! And it is also concensus among Swiss Railway articles. -- ZH8000 (talk) 21:52, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ZH8000: It might be common practice in Switzerland, but this is not the Swiss Wikipedia this is the :en Wikipedia. I was unfamiliar with he ‘per thousand’ symbol (and I have been around a while) and had to google it (once I figured out how to enter it). In English usage it is considered obsolete and archaic, so it should not be used in the :en Wikipedia as few people understand it; no keyboard supports it and very few character sets include it. If you must insist, then obtain a consensus (as WP:BRD requires). Expressing the gradient as ‘5%’ is almost universally understood. 148.252.129.216 (talk) 18:01, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can you read a simple diagram? WP:BRD is the other way around; actually, you have to provide evidence for your bold change. Therefore I filed you for 3rr.
You are obviously not an engineer, i.e. an "amateur" (lit. somebody who loves the subject) at best. Of course, engineering has its own nomenclature and signs, since centuries, obviously, necessarily and inevitably. Not to admit this commonplace truth is just plain ignorance.
But well, just a few very fast examples:
etc, etc, and so forth.
-- ZH8000 (talk) 02:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]