Travel Mapping
Railway Data Discussion => In-progress Railway Systems & Work => Topic started by: si404 on August 16, 2023, 01:22:20 pm
-
List of potential systems: (a whole-Europe one would get too big!)
(Black=not yet drafted (not in RB), Orange=in RB (preview), Lime = ready for review, Green=active).
National Rail (GB)
- gbnaw - National Rail: Transport for Wales
- gbncc - National Rail: c2c
- gbnch - National Rail: Chiltern Railways
- gbncs - National Rail: Caledonian Sleeper
- gbnemi - National Rail: East Midlands Railway Intercity
- gbnemc - National Rail: East Midlands Railway Connect
- gbnemr - National Rail: East Midlands Railway Regional
- gbngc - National Rail: Grand Central
- gbngn - National Rail: Great Northern
- gbngr - National Rail: LNER
- gbngw - National Rail: GWR
- gbngx - National Rail: Gatwick Express
- gbnht - National Rail: Hull Trains
- gbnhx - National Rail: Heathrow Express
- gbnil - National Rail: Island Line
- gbnld - National Rail: Lumo
- gbnle - National Rail: Greater Anglia
- gbnln - National Rail: London Northwestern Railway
- gbnlo - London Overground
- gbnme - Merseyrail
- gbnnr - National Rail: Northern
- gbnse - National Rail: Southeastern
- gbnseh - National Rail: Southeastern Highspeed
- gbnsn - National Rail: Southern
- gbnsr - National Rail: ScotRail (possible breakout of Inter7City subbrand?)
- gbnsw - National Rail: South Western Railway
- gbnsx - National Rail: Stansted Express
- gbntl - National Rail: Thameslink
- gbntp - National Rail: TransPennine Express
- gbnvt - National Rail: Avanti West Coast
- gbnwm - National Rail: West Midlands Railway
- gbnxc - National Rail: CrossCountry
- gbnxr - TfL Elizabeth line
Irish and other mainline Train Operating Companies
- eures - Eurostar
- euret - Le Shuttle (fine with this becoming part of a 'car-transporting trains' system)
- irlent - Enterprise
- irlie - Iarnród Éireann (split into sub-brands?)
- Iarnród Éireann InterCity
- Iarnród Éireann Commuter
- Iarnród Éireann DART
- irlnir - NI Railways
Metros
- gbndlr - Docklands Light Railway
- gbngs - Glasgow Subway
- gbnlu - London Underground
- gbnswm - South Wales Metro (under construction - currently part of TfW Rail)
- gbntwm - Tyne & Wear Metro
Trams
- gbnbt - Blackpool Tram
- gbnet - Edinburgh Tram
- gbnlt - London Trams (nee Croydon Tramlink)
- gbnman - Manchester Metrolink
- gbnnet - Nottingham Express Transit
- gbnss - Sheffield Supertram
- gbnwmm - West Midlands Metro
- irlluas - Dublin Luas
People Movers
- eurapm - Europe Airport People Movers (landside) grabbag: consists of Birmingham Air-Rail Link, Luton DART, Gatwick Airport Shuttle Transport, and Heathrow Pod
- eurapma - Europe Airport People Movers (airside) grabbag: consists of Heathrow Terminal 5 Transit and Stansted Airport Track Transit System
- eurat - Europe Aerial Trams grabbag
- eurf - Europe Funiculars - complete for the UK & I (some might be in eurhr instead)
Heritage / Tourist (lump all into one for now)
- eurhr - Europe Heritage and Tourist Railways
-
gbncc - c2c
gbnnr - Northern
gbnse - Southeastern
gbnsn - Southern
Are those system names really as we want?
https://tmrail.teresco.org/user/?u=michih
What's c2c? What's southern? Sure, the column to the left indicates GBR but still. I think that we could improve the system names.
btw, I know that all systems are not yet ready for preview, and thus likely not yet considered being "completely reworked" but I've seen on Github that the gbnlu system was already reworked. I just want to drop here, that there are still some concurrencies I'd not expect. E.g. this (https://tmrail.teresco.org/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=michih&r=eng.thalnkcam&lat=51.529832&lon=-0.112664&zoom=16). I only traveled the underground tracks but I've credited for a 0.51mi Thameslink section albeit the systems are physically separated.
In total, I actually traveled 3 system in England but are credited for 13 systems. Two systems are metros which are (mostly) physically separated.
-
What's c2c? What's southern?
Train operating companies (already explained this particularity of the UK rail system) - they can be seen on tube maps (https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf) and here's a big list of them (https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/travel-information/find-a-train-company/).
In total, I actually traveled 3 system in England but are credited for 13 systems. Two systems are metros which are (mostly) physically separated.
But they aren't physically separated on bits that you've travelled. There's even places where the 2 metro systems you used are using the same set of tracks as other systems, not just using tracks next to other systems (and more than just the bits you travelled on). I think the word 'metro' has confused you here.
The other 10 systems (in alphabetical order), and why you have been given travels on them:
- Avanti West Coast - on the WCML heading out of London the later (5th and 6th) tracks built for the Bakerloo/Watford DC Line aren't always concurrent, but have long stretches where it's a 6-track alignment where they form two of the tracks.
- c2c - 4 track alignment with District (and H&C) lines from Bow to Upminster
- Caledonian Sleeper - WCML+Bakerloo (see above)
- Chiltern Railways - 6 track alignment with the Metropolitan and Jubilee lines from about Finchley Road to where the Uxbridge line turns off (where it then becomes a 4 track alignment, with the Met using all 4 tracks (and all 6 platforms at Harrow-on-the-Hill). Plus sharing tracks with West Midlands Trains.
- CrossCountry - sharing the same tracks with West Midlands Trains
- DLR - 4 track alignment with the Jubilee line
- Grand Central - shares tracks with the Yellow Line of the T&W Metro from Sunderland until the junction to the south.
- London Northwestern Railway - WCML+Bakerloo (see above)
- London Overground - sharing the same tracks as the Bakerloo line between Queens Park and Harrow & Wealdstone
- Northern - shares tracks with the Yellow Line of the T&W Metro between Pelaw and the junction south of Sunderland, runs in a 4-track alignment with Yellow and Green lines from Gateshead Stadium to Pelaw.
- Thameslink - 4-track railway (built by the Metropolitan line)
-
Thanks for the detailed answer!
What's c2c? What's southern?
Train operating companies (already explained this particularity of the UK rail system) - they can be seen on tube maps (https://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-rail-and-tube-services-map.pdf) and here's a big list of them (https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/travel-information/find-a-train-company/).
I understand the origin of the names. I just wonder:
Are those system names really as we want?
I was thiking about Great Britain Southern or British Southern or something like that. Like Great Britain Motorways, Australia Motorways, Cyprus Motorways, Ireland Motorway, Jamaica Motorways,...
Thameslink - 4-track railway (built by the Metropolitan line)
That's (https://tmrail.teresco.org/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=michih&r=eng.thalnkcam&lat=51.529832&lon=-0.112664&zoom=16) the only concurrency I really checked. Just because it was the first one. It starts at a DIV and it ends at a DIV with no visible wp in-between. Just looking at OSM with standard tile, it looks like there are different tubes just sharing nothing. The distance in-between is varying. I don't know, it could even be possible that one tube is 10 meter deep and the other one 100 meter (exaggerating!), i.e. far away from each other.
That means, I'm credited for a SERVICE I never used just because it's track is close to another track which is used by a SERVICE I really used.
Sure, it's also possible that there is just one tube between the DIV wps. If so, does a casual traveler realize that? As a passenger in the tunnel? Is that what we want?
-
I assume the concern here is that this is not how people looking to track rail travels will want to track it. By service or by (set of parallel) track.
-
I assume the concern here is that this is not how people looking to track rail travels will want to track it. By service or by (set of parallel) track.
The concern is the mismatch. We provide the ability for mapping by service but we are actually mapping tracks. The infrastructure used. Thus, users are credited for services they've never used.
I don't say that it is wrong. I think it's odd. We should have a common understanding how we want to present our project before going public. If not, there might be some discussion the more people try to map their travels. I don't worry about those who already map highway travels. We won't lose them. I just expect that potentially new users might be confused.
It's all fine when we say `the rule is xxxxxxxxx. Period.`
That's why I want to think it through before going public.
-
My understanding of the rail community is that they mostly care about trackage, not specific services. So if I rake Amtrak through Orlando, it makes sense that I clinch the SunRail commuter service on the same tracks.
-
My understanding of the rail community is that they mostly care about trackage, not specific services. So if I rake Amtrak through Orlando, it makes sense that I clinch the SunRail commuter service on the same tracks.
But if you ride the DC Metro Blue Line out to Franconia-Springfield you don't clinch the adjacent VRE/Amtrak mileage since while parallel and in the same ROW it's not the same tracks (has to be physically separate, even, since one is FRA-regulated and the other isn't).
This is what we've been moving to implement and I generally agree with it: concurrency should be mapped and detected if it's the same tracks, even if it's two different systems. But if it's different tracks, no concurrency.
This is consistent with how we handle things for roads too, where if they physically share the same pavement they're marked concurrent even if they're different classes, but if they're only parallel (e.g. state route follows the frontage roads of an interstate), they're not.
And as far as "but we're mapping services, not tracks", I see no problem, this too is consistent: a given numbered route may follow multiple distinct named roads, but it doesn't matter because we map the route and not the roads. No one thinks that you shouldn't get credit for I-94 mileage by clinching I-80 because we're mapping I-80 and I-94, not the Borman Expressway. Nor does anyone think I-94 should be cut up into multiple routes to avoid needlessly running it concurrent with other interstates.
Likewise, fair game to get credit for Metro-North by clinching Amtrak even though we're mapping those services and not The Northeast Corridor. Whether it's a train service or a road route, what is mapped matches its extent, and if it shares space with another you get credit for both.
-
- Thameslink - 4-track railway (built by the Metropolitan line)
It's an interesting history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widened_Lines), but it seems that the two pairs of tracks have always been operated separately.
-
My understanding of the rail community is that they mostly care about trackage, not specific services.
Me too.
This is consistent with how we handle things for roads too, where if they physically share the same pavement they're marked concurrent even if they're different classes, but if they're only parallel (e.g. state route follows the frontage roads of an interstate), they're not.
That's the case here (https://tmrail.teresco.org/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=michih&r=eng.thalnkcam&lat=51.529832&lon=-0.112664&zoom=16).
-
This is consistent with how we handle things for roads too, where if they physically share the same pavement they're marked concurrent even if they're different classes, but if they're only parallel (e.g. state route follows the frontage roads of an interstate), they're not.
That's the case here (https://tmrail.teresco.org/hb/showroute.php?units=miles&u=michih&r=eng.thalnkcam&lat=51.529832&lon=-0.112664&zoom=16).
I don't believe that that is the case there. However I've treated it as if it was, because having undone changes you've made that split up single stations with 4 parallel and adjacent platforms (the middle two sharing an island) into two 2 points less than 20m apart (not just broken the concurrency, but totally segregated them on the graph), I've reached my limit in dealing with your craziness on this.
-
changes you've made that split up single stations with 4 parallel and adjacent platforms (the middle two sharing an island) into two 2 points less than 20m apart
I only changed some systems* I've traveled but I didn't touch wps of other systems even when they've been very close. I don't know what you are referring here but if the wps are from different systems, it was not on purpose that they are just 20m apart.
*I opened all wpt files (here, of the system only, not from the whole region as usual) and replaced all wp label and/or coords via the find+replace feature of the text editor.
-
In this situation I'd keep the coords at both stations the same to preserve the graph connections, but center the shaping point in between over the Underground tracks for the Underground Lines and over the Thameslink tracks for the Thameslink lines - thus preventing a concurrency.
If there weren't already a shaping point in between, I'd add one to one of the two to break the concurrency (which is SOP for the analogous situation with roads).
-
In this situation I'd keep the coords at both stations the same to preserve the graph connections, but center the shaping point in between over the Underground tracks for the Underground Lines and over the Thameslink tracks for the Thameslink lines - thus preventing a concurrency.
That's what I did