Talk:Nottingham Express Transit

message: Given what happened to Merseytram, is phase 2 really still going ahead?  Morwen - Talk 00:58, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Very likely, it appears.  But we'll have to wait and see until it's finished! :)  Sladen 03:07, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Still happening?

message: Only 50mph? I'll have to borrow a satnav and hop on board again at some point but I'd swear they go much quicker than that, particularly when on the more regular railway-line type track. I have no evidence for this than my own experience but it feels compelling; I ride most days on a commuter train that manages 60-70mph peak, and the tram felt at least as much of a rapid thrill ride at peak speed (possibly due to the low floor?); also, the speed restriction signs visible beside the track in many places (particularly on roadways and pedestrianised areas, but also besides plain track) go as high as "80" - though of course, this may be in kilometres per hour, but that seems unusual for a UK rail service... and is also at odds with some of the posted limits (I doubt the local drivers would be too happy with a street tram regularly limited to speeds around "25", i.e. 15mph on public highways where the private vehicle restriction is twice that)
They do make a most awesome whining noise, also, that became almost ultrasonic at full pelt!
-Mark P
:I've only had the pleasure of riding on them on one occasion, so bear that in mind. However, I'm sure that the limits are in km - which is not unusual for modern systems (even the 1980s Tyne and Wear Metro is all metric). 
:Lower floors do give a greater feeling of speed than when you are further off the ground - if you look out the window of a plane as it comes into land you will notice how until you are very near the ground you appear to be going much slower than any road traffic you can see, then all of a sudden you realise that you are going at a couple of hundred mph! Also, compare the speed that you feel in a go-kart compared to a road car. I don't know why this is (possibly paralax?) - but now you've got me thinking about it I'll ask at the Wikipedia:Reference desk!
:Regarding the differing speed limits, I've never driven in Nottingham but I'd be suprised if traffic ever got up to anything like 30mph. You've also got to remember there is a big difference between a compartively small vehicle with rubber tyres on tarmac and a very long (33 metres) and heavy (37.3 metric tonnes when empty) vehicle running on steel wheels on steel rails.
:Road speed limits and rail speed limits are also very different - road limits should be (and, before speed camera madness, generally were) the 85th percentile speed (the speed 85% of drivers do not exceed) rounded to the nearest multiple of 10mph. Thus the road speed limit plus approximately 5-10% should be the maximum safe speed in good conditions in the area covered by the speed limit. Built up areas are generally just given a blanket speed limit of 30mph - but given constraints of visibilty, traffic, other road users, road design, corners, junctions, pedestrians, obstructions, parked cars, weather, etc, etc, the 85th percentile speed is normally very much lower. 
:In contrast with a rail speed limit you know exactly what the design of the route is, what the space is like, what the gradients are, what the visibility is, what junctions are like, etc. The rail speed limit is also not a rough approximation of the safest maximum speed, it is a speed that will not be exceeded and if distance between stops allows it is the speed at which the trams will travel. On an 80km/h stretch of tram line the trams will travel at between about 75-80km/h. On an equivalent stretch of 50mph road, safe drivers in free-flowing traffic in good conditions will be travelling between about 40 and 60 mph depending on various things. Drivers who do not know the road will be driving much slower than someone who drives it every day - on the tram network all drivers have extensive route knowledge. Sorry for the very long reply, but basically you are comparing apples and oranges! Thryduulf 00:44, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Speed?

message: I've removed the following:
:and extensive works will be needed to ensure that the power supply for the trams does not interfere with the railway signaling system.
from the main article regarding the construction works around the central railway station.  It doesn't appear to make sense, although if somebody can substantiate this I'm happy for them to add it back.  The railway and tram lines will be on a completely different level, one above the other and not connected.  Sladen 03:12, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Signalling Comment

message: There seems to be a lot of weasel words and opinion in this piece; any chance there could be some more references given to whether it truly exceeded expectations (what were they?) and how that compared to other tram systems? I'm removing the bit saying "Nottingham is an excellent showcase for integrated transport" because that's not only bias, but both uncited and overstated. (One single tram line does not 'integrated transport' make, generally.) Kylotan 08:31, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel words etc

message: According to the Gauntlet track article, there is some interlaced track near Forest tramstop (one of only two places in the UK, the other being on London Tramlink at Mitcham). Is this true?
194.80.106.135 12:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, this is true: there are 3 "platforms" at forest, which mainly hold a spare tram during Goose Fair, and to nesseciate this, there is a small amount of interlaced track with the mainline at each side, so that it could be accessed from both ends, and both mainlines. Bluegoblin7 17:06, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interlaced track? 

message: The use of :Template:Transdev UK bus divisions appears to automatically place this article in :Category:Current bus operators in England, which isn't really appropriate. Does anyone know if there is a way to disable this from happening? I didn't want to remove the template, which does have some relevance, so wondered if any more experienced editor than me knew of a workaround. Quackdave (talk) 18:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Problem solved! Bluegoblin7 had added a note regarding this on the template page, but failed to remove the category when they did it. I have taken it off now though. After doing this, I went through all the articles and checked they have the category anyway, which they all did. Slight mishap, but not the biggest category cock-up I have ever seen! -- Arriva436 (talk) 20:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template and categorisation 

message: Much of this seems to be speculation without refs. Due for removal? SovalValtos (talk) 21:27, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I say go for it!, It's been unsourced for long enough. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 21:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Future Lines 

message: There seems to be too much about the commercial side of things, and not enough about what exists and how it is used. Comments please.SovalValtos (talk) 16:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede/Lead out of balance? 

message: There's confusion in the article about the line numbers. The Hucknall to Toton Lane route is referred to as Line 1 and the Phoenix Park to Clifton route is referred to as Line 2 in one part. In another the Hucknall/Phoenix Park to Station Street route is referred to as Line 1, while Nottingham Station to Clifton is referred to as Line 2 and Nottingham Station to Toton Lane is referred to as Line 3. So will there be three lines or two? 188.29.165.70 (talk) 23:49, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lines 1, 2, 3? 

message: Article should mention Mango smartcards in place of tickets. John a s (talk) 22:11, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mango 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Nottingham Express Transit. 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:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120805170119/http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/netphase2/index.aspx?articleid=16948 to http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/netphase2/index.aspx?articleid=16948
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:16, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:30, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: In response to 10mmsocket, I think the incidents should be included as they are very similar to the incidents on 18 July 2017 and 31 October 2018 (the latter is even at the exact same point as the 5 March 2023 incident) which are included.
Are there any baselines for whether an incident should be included? I.e., does it take derailment? Or injury? I’d be grateful to know for the future 🙂 80.7.161.36 (talk) 11:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: * I partly agree with 80.7.161.36, the overhead power line failure was a major incident with the network affected most of the day so should be included, the car hitting the tram I am not sure wether it should be included.  palmipedTalk 11:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

text: *:I'm quite fond of the ten-year test: will it matter in ten years? Or, if we were writing a history of the NET in 2033, would we include every incident that resulted in a one-hour suspension of service or a tram hitting a car? Fatalities probably pass the ten-year test, and I would say anything that resulted in a full-blown RAIB report (as opposed to just a digest) probably would, and anything that resulted in a change of procedures. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accidents and incidents