derek-thomas/squad-v1.1-t5-question-generation huggingface dataset:
In the UK, the London, Brighton and South Coast Railway pioneered overhead electrification of its suburban lines in London, London Bridge to Victoria being opened to traffic on 1 December 1909. Victoria to Crystal Palace via Balham and West Norwood opened in May 1911. Peckham Rye to West Norwood opened in June 1912. Further extensions were not made owing to the First World War. Two lines opened in 1925 under the Southern Railway serving Coulsdon North and Sutton railway station. The lines were electrified at 6.7 kV 25 Hz. It was announced in 1926 that all lines were to be converted to DC third rail and the last overhead electric service ran in September 1929.

Question: When was overhead wires system being used for the first time in UK? Question: What line used the overhead wire system first Victoria to Crystal Palace or Peckham Rye to West Noorwood? Question: What was the cause of lines not being extended? Question: What voltage was used in the two lines opened in 1925 of Southern Railway?
Three-phase AC railway electrification was used in Italy, Switzerland and the United States in the early twentieth century. Italy was the major user, for lines in the mountainous regions of northern Italy from 1901 until 1976. The first lines were the Burgdorf-Thun line in Switzerland (1899), and the lines of the Ferrovia Alta Valtellina from Colico to Chiavenna and Tirano in Italy, which were electrified in 1901 and 1902. Other lines where the three-phase system were used were the Simplon Tunnel in Switzerland from 1906 to 1930, and the Cascade Tunnel of the Great Northern Railway in the United States from 1909 to 1927.

Question: What countries  used three-phase AC system in the the beginning of 20th century? Question: What country was a bigger user compare to the three of them? Question: Where did Italy start using the AC system? Question: How long did the AC system last in northern Italy? Question: How long did three-phase system operate in Cascade Tunnel?
The first attempts to use standard-frequency single-phase AC were made in Hungary as far back as 1923, by the Hungarian Kálmán Kandó on the line between Budapest-Nyugati and Alag, using 16 kV at 50 Hz. The locomotives carried a four-pole rotating phase converter feeding a single traction motor of the polyphase induction type at 600 to 1,100 V. The number of poles on the 2,500 hp motor could be changed using slip rings to run at one of four synchronous speeds. The tests were a success so, from 1932 until the 1960s, trains on the Budapest-Hegyeshalom line (towards Vienna) regularly used the same system. A few decades after the Second World War, the 16 kV was changed to the Russian and later French 25 kV system.

Question: What country has first tried to use single-phase AC? Question: What frequency did the line of Hungarian rail system used in 1923? Question: What type of the converter was used in hungarian locomotives of that time? Question: How could the locomotives run on four speed levels? Question: What system was adopted in Hungary after WWII?
To prevent the risk of out-of-phase supplies mixing, sections of line fed from different feeder stations must be kept strictly isolated. This is achieved by Neutral Sections (also known as Phase Breaks), usually provided at feeder stations and midway between them although, typically, only half are in use at any time, the others being provided to allow a feeder station to be shut down and power provided from adjacent feeder stations. Neutral Sections usually consist of an earthed section of wire which is separated from the live wires on either side by insulating material, typically ceramic beads, designed so that the pantograph will smoothly run from one section to the other. The earthed section prevents an arc being drawn from one live section to the other, as the voltage difference may be higher than the normal system voltage if the live sections are on different phases and the protective circuit breakers may not be able to safely interrupt the considerable current that would flow. To prevent the risk of an arc being drawn across from one section of wire to earth, when passing through the neutral section, the train must be coasting and the circuit breakers must be open. In many cases, this is done manually by the drivers. To help them, a warning board is provided just before both the neutral section and an advance warning some distance before. A further board is then provided after the neutral section to tell drivers to re-close the circuit breaker, although drivers must not do this until the rear pantograph has passed this board. In the UK, a system known as Automatic Power Control (APC) automatically opens and closes the circuit breaker, this being achieved by using sets of permanent magnets alongside the track communicating with a detector on the train. The only action needed by the driver is to shut off power and coast and therefore warning boards are still provided at and on the approach to neutral sections.

Question: What was the main requirement for electric feeder stations? Question: What invention prevented lines from getting mixed? Question: What was the part of wire in Phase Break sections an arc being drawn from one wire to another? Question: How were the drivers warned to start coasting the train? Question: What should the driver do in order to open and close the circuit breaker?
Modern electrification systems take AC energy from a power grid which is delivered to a locomotive and converted to a DC voltage to be used by traction motors. These motors may either be DC motors which directly use the DC or they may be 3-phase AC motors which require further conversion of the DC to 3-phase AC (using power electronics). Thus both systems are faced with the same task: converting and transporting high-voltage AC from the power grid to low-voltage DC in the locomotive. Where should this conversion take place and at what voltage and current (AC or DC) should the power flow to the locomotive? And how does all this relate to energy-efficiency? Both the transmission and conversion of electric energy involve losses: ohmic losses in wires and power electronics, magnetic field losses in transformers and smoothing reactors (inductors). Power conversion for a DC system takes place mainly in a railway substation where large, heavy, and more efficient hardware can be used as compared to an AC system where conversion takes place aboard the locomotive where space is limited and losses are significantly higher. Also, the energy used to blow air to cool transformers, power electronics (including rectifiers), and other conversion hardware must be accounted for.

Question: What nowdays electrification systems can use? Question: What is the main action AC and DC systems have to deal with? Question: What type of losses happen during conversion and transmission in wires and electronics? Question: What kind of losses take place in transformers and inductors during conversion/transmission process?
In the Soviet Union, in the 1970s, a comparison was made between systems electrified at 3 kV DC and 25 kV AC (50 Hz). The results showed that percentage losses in the overhead wires (catenary and contact wires) was over 3 times greater for 3 kV DC than for 25 kV AC. But when the conversion losses were all taken into account and added to overhead wire losses (including cooling blower energy) the 25 kV AC lost a somewhat higher percent of energy than for 3 kV DC. Thus in spite of the much higher losses in the catenary, the 3 kV DC was a little more energy efficient than AC in providing energy from the USSR power grid to the terminals of the traction motors (all DC at that time). While both systems use energy in converting higher voltage AC from the USSR's power grid to lower voltage DC, the conversions for the DC system all took place (at higher efficiency) in the railway substation, while most of the conversion for the AC system took place inside the locomotive (at lower efficiency). Consider also that it takes energy to constantly move this mobile conversion hardware over the rails while the stationary hardware in the railway substation doesn't incur this energy cost. For more details see: Wiki: Soviet Union DC vs. AC.

Question: What two systems were compare in the Soviet Union in 1970? Question: Which system had higher losses in overhead wires? Question: Which system was used in Soviet Union after all calculations? Question: What came with lesser lesser cost mobile conversion hardware or stationary hardware?
Newly electrified lines often show a "sparks effect", whereby electrification in passenger rail systems leads to significant jumps in patronage / revenue. The reasons may include electric trains being seen as more modern and attractive to ride, faster and smoother service, and the fact that electrification often goes hand in hand with a general infrastructure and rolling stock overhaul / replacement, which leads to better service quality (in a way that theoretically could also be achieved by doing similar upgrades yet without electrification). Whatever the causes of the sparks effect, it is well established for numerous routes that have electrified over decades.

Question: What can be seen in the newly electrified lines? Question: What can electrification of modern trains effect? Question: How can better service quality be achieved?
Network effects are a large factor with electrification. When converting lines to electric, the connections with other lines must be considered. Some electrifications have subsequently been removed because of the through traffic to non-electrified lines. If through traffic is to have any benefit, time consuming engine switches must occur to make such connections or expensive dual mode engines must be used. This is mostly an issue for long distance trips, but many lines come to be dominated by through traffic from long-haul freight trains (usually running coal, ore, or containers to or from ports). In theory, these trains could enjoy dramatic savings through electrification, but it can be too costly to extend electrification to isolated areas, and unless an entire network is electrified, companies often find that they need to continue use of diesel trains even if sections are electrified. The increasing demand for container traffic which is more efficient when utilizing the double-stack car also has network effect issues with existing electrifications due to insufficient clearance of overhead electrical lines for these trains, but electrification can be built or modified to have sufficient clearance, at additional cost.

Question: What is a major factor whn it comes to electrification? Question: What was the reason some electrifications were removed after a while? Question: Where can the issue of through traffic benefits occur? Question: What can be a drawback of electrification of long distance freight trains? Question: What does the increasing demand for container traffic make companies use more often?
Additionally, there are issues of connections between different electrical services, particularly connecting intercity lines with sections electrified for commuter traffic, but also between commuter lines built to different standards. This can cause electrification of certain connections to be very expensive simply because of the implications on the sections it is connecting. Many lines have come to be overlaid with multiple electrification standards for different trains to avoid having to replace the existing rolling stock on those lines. Obviously, this requires that the economics of a particular connection must be more compelling and this has prevented complete electrification of many lines. In a few cases, there are diesel trains running along completely electrified routes and this can be due to incompatibility of electrification standards along the route.

Question: What is the other issue that comes to sight when using electrification system? Question: Why the commuter lines built to different standards can cause be complicated? Question: What is the solution many lines came up with in order to avoid replacing present rolling stock? Question: Why are disel trains  still used on electrified routes?
Central station electricity can often be generated with higher efficiency than a mobile engine/generator. While the efficiency of power plant generation and diesel locomotive generation are roughly the same in the nominal regime, diesel motors decrease in efficiency in non-nominal regimes at low power  while if an electric power plant needs to generate less power it will shut down its least efficient generators, thereby increasing efficiency. The electric train can save energy (as compared to diesel) by regenerative braking and by not needing to consume energy by idling as diesel locomotives do when stopped or coasting. However, electric rolling stock may run cooling blowers when stopped or coasting, thus consuming energy.

Question: Which of two can be more efficiently electricified? Question: How can electric power plant become more power efficient? Question: How can electric train be more energy efficient? Question: Which type of train continues to use energy while coasting or being stopped? Question: What causes electric trains to waste energy?
Energy sources unsuitable for mobile power plants, such as nuclear power, renewable hydroelectricity, or wind power can be used. According to widely accepted global energy reserve statistics, the reserves of liquid fuel are much less than gas and coal (at 42, 167 and 416 years respectively). Most countries with large rail networks do not have significant oil reserves and those that did, like the United States and Britain, have exhausted much of their reserves and have suffered declining oil output for decades. Therefore, there is also a strong economic incentive to substitute other fuels for oil. Rail electrification is often considered an important route towards consumption pattern reform. However, there are no reliable, peer-reviewed studies available to assist in rational public debate on this critical issue, although there are untranslated Soviet studies from the 1980s.

Question: Can renewable source of electricity be used in mobile power plants? Question: What type of natural resources is more scarce? Question: What is the recent incentive in  order to overcome oil scarcity? Question: What research can be used in the future if translated?
In the former Soviet Union, electric traction eventually became somewhat more energy-efficient than diesel. Partly due to inefficient generation of electricity in the USSR (only 20.8% thermal efficiency in 1950 vs. 36.2% in 1975), in 1950 diesel traction was about twice as energy efficient as electric traction (in terms of net tonne-km of freight per kg of fuel). But as efficiency of electricity generation (and thus of electric traction) improved, by about 1965 electric railways became more efficient than diesel. After the mid 1970s electrics used about 25% less fuel per ton-km. However diesels were mainly used on single track lines with a fair amount of traffic  so that the lower fuel consumption of electrics may be in part due to better operating conditions on electrified lines (such as double tracking) rather than inherent energy efficiency. Nevertheless, the cost of diesel fuel was about 1.5 times more (per unit of heat energy content) than that of the fuel used in electric power plants (that generated electricity), thus making electric railways even more energy-cost effective.

Question: What type of trains became more energy-efficient in the former Soviet Union? Question: What year could be marked as year when electric railways more efficient than diesel ones? Question: How much fuel did electric train used less than diesel in the middle of 1970 in USSR? Question: What could be a factor of lower energy consumption for electric trains? Question: How much more expensive was diesel compare to electricity per unit?
Besides increased efficiency of power plants, there was an increase in efficiency (between 1950 and 1973) of the railway utilization of this electricity with energy-intensity dropping from 218 to 124 kwh/10,000 gross tonne-km (of both passenger and freight trains) or a 43% drop. Since energy-intensity is the inverse of energy-efficiency it drops as efficiency goes up. But most of this 43% decrease in energy-intensity also benefited diesel traction. The conversion of wheel bearings from plain to roller, increase of train weight, converting single track lines to double track (or partially double track), and the elimination of obsolete 2-axle freight cars increased the energy-efficiency of all types of traction: electric, diesel, and steam. However, there remained a 12–15% reduction of energy-intensity that only benefited electric traction (and not diesel). This was due to improvements in locomotives, more widespread use of regenerative braking (which in 1989 recycled 2.65% of the electric energy used for traction,) remote control of substations, better handling of the locomotive by the locomotive crew, and improvements in automation. Thus the overall efficiency of electric traction as compared to diesel more than doubled between 1950 and the mid-1970s in the Soviet Union. But after 1974 (thru 1980) there was no improvement in energy-intensity (wh/tonne-km) in part due to increasing speeds of passenger and freight trains.

Question: What caused the energy efficiency to go up? Question: Elimination of what helped the efficiency of diesel traction to go up? Question: What type of locomotives got improved during 1950-1973 in Soviet Union? Question: How much of energy was saved and re-used due to regenerative braking in 1989? Question: Was there an energy efficiency improvement in the period 1974 through 1980?
The Spanish language is the second most spoken language in the United States. There are 45 million Hispanophones who speak Spanish as a first or second language in the United States, as well as six million Spanish language students. Together, this makes the United States of America the second largest Hispanophone country in the world after Mexico, and with the United States having more Spanish-speakers than Colombia and Spain (but fewer first language speakers). Spanish is the Romance language and the Indo-European language with the largest number of native speakers in the world. Roughly half of all American Spanish-speakers also speak English "very well," based on their self-assessment in the U.S. Census.

Question: What other language is often spoken in the United states? Question: How many people speak Spanish as a first or second language in the United States? Question: How many Spanish speaking students are there in the United States? Question: What type of language id Spanish? Question: How many Hispanics speak English too?
The Spanish language has been present in what is now the United States since the 16th and 17th centuries, with the arrival of Spanish colonization in North America that would later become the states of Florida, Texas, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, and California. The Spanish explorers explored areas of 42 future U.S. states leaving behind a varying range of Hispanic legacy in the North American continent. Additionally, western regions of the Louisiana Territory were under Spanish rule between 1763 to 1800, after the French and Indian War, further extending the Spanish influence throughout modern-day United States of America.

Question: How old is the Spanish language in the United States? Question: Did the Spanish conquer land in the United States? Question: Where in the United States did the Spanish explore? Question: Were there states ruled by the Spanish? Question: Do the Spanish have a legacy in America from their forefathers?
Spanish was the language spoken by the first permanent European settlers in North America. Spanish arrived in the territory of the modern United States with Ponce de León in 1513. In 1565, the Spaniards, by way of Juan Ponce de León, founded St. Augustine, Florida, and as of the early 1800s, it became the oldest continuously occupied European settlement in the continental United States. The oldest city in all of the U.S. territory, as of 1898, is San Juan, capital of Puerto Rico, where Juan Ponce De León was its first governor

Question: Did Europeans speak Spanish in America? Question: When did the Spanish arrive to America? Question: How was St. Augustine founded? Question: Where is the oldest settlement in America? Question: What is the oldest city of the United States territory?
In 1821, after Mexico's War of Independence from Spain, Texas was part of the United Mexican States as the state of Coahuila y Tejas. A large influx of Americans soon followed, originally with the approval of Mexico's president. In 1836, the now largely "American" Texans, fought a war of independence from the central government of Mexico and established the Republic of Texas. In 1846, the Republic dissolved when Texas entered the United States of America as a state. Per the 1850 U.S. census, fewer than 16,000 Texans were of Mexican descent, and nearly all were Spanish-speaking people (both Mexicans and non-Spanish European settlers who include German Texan) who were outnumbered (six-to-one) by English-speaking settlers (both Americans and other immigrant Europeans).[citation needed]

Question: Was Texas a part of Mexico? Question: When did the Americans come to Texas? Question: Was there a war between the Mexicans and the Texans? Question: When did Texas become a state? Question: Was Texas a primarily a Spanish speaking state?
After the Mexican War of Independence from Spain also, California, Nevada, Arizona, Utah, western Colorado and southwestern Wyoming became part of the Mexican territory of Alta California and most of New Mexico, western Texas, southern Colorado, southwestern Kansas, and Oklahoma panhandle were part of the territory of Santa Fe de Nuevo México. The geographical isolation and unique political history of this territory led to New Mexican Spanish differing notably from both Spanish spoken in other parts of the United States of America and Spanish spoken in the present-day United Mexican States.

Question: When did other states become part of Mexico? Question: What states made up of Alta California Question: What states were part of Santa Fe de Nuevo Question: Why is  there still Bilingual  spoken in these states?
Through the force of sheer numbers, the English-speaking American settlers entering the Southwest established their language, culture, and law as dominant, to the extent it fully displaced Spanish in the public sphere; this is why the United States never developed bilingualism as Canada did. For example, the California constitutional convention of 1849 had eight Californio participants; the resulting state constitution was produced in English and Spanish, and it contained a clause requiring all published laws and regulations to be published in both languages. The constitutional convention of 1872 had no Spanish-speaking participants; the convention's English-speaking participants felt that the state's remaining minority of Spanish-speakers should simply learn English; and the convention ultimately voted 46-39 to revise the earlier clause so that all official proceedings would henceforth be published only in English.

Question: Why isn't the southwest Spanish speaking? Question: Is Canada bilingual? Question: Was California a bilingual state? Question: Why didn't California officially become  bilingual? Question: Was there a court ruling?