Comments on: Why trundle at 186 when you can whizz along at 300? http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/ Commentary on the measurement muddle in the UK Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:50:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.5 by: Phil Hall http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6938 Sat, 01 Dec 2007 08:46:28 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6938 I wonder whether the UK promotion of 186 mph (and they really are making a lot of fuss about it) is in part due to government and Civil Service (i.e political) influence. In February 2006 when UKMA published "Metric Signs Ahead" there was a hostile reaction from DfT, who were so anxious to quash any public sympathy for changing to metric on road signs and speed limits that they published their ludicrously exaggerated cost estimates. In the wake of that they are now keen to defend the mile and mph in transport. Waving the figure of 300 km/h under the public nose would definitely not go down well with them! I wonder whether the UK promotion of 186 mph (and they really are making a lot of fuss about it) is in part due to government and Civil Service (i.e political) influence.
In February 2006 when UKMA published “Metric Signs Ahead” there was a hostile reaction from DfT, who were so anxious to quash any public sympathy for changing to metric on road signs and speed limits that they published their ludicrously exaggerated cost estimates.
In the wake of that they are now keen to defend the mile and mph in transport. Waving the figure of 300 km/h under the public nose would definitely not go down well with them!

]]> by: Han Maenen http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6891 Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:23:36 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6891 However, the Imperialists might claim that the standard rail gauge of 4' 8-1/2'' is being used on that project and even throughout Europe! Too bad for them, that gauge converts to the very neat metric number of 1435 mm, meaning that is is totally compatible with the metric system, and thus can be regarded as a metric standard. A classic Pyrrhus victory for Imperialism! I once read that when rail came to The Netherlands in the 19th century a Dutch railway engineer was opposed to this gage, and wanted it metric. I would emphasise with his oppostion to Imperial encroachments, but I could say to him now that this gauge is metric after all. A happy coincidence indeed! However, the Imperialists might claim that the standard rail gauge of 4′ 8-1/2′’ is being used on that project and even throughout Europe! Too bad for them, that gauge converts to the very neat metric number of 1435 mm, meaning that is is totally compatible with the metric system, and thus can be regarded as a metric standard. A classic Pyrrhus victory for Imperialism! I once read that when rail came to The Netherlands in the 19th century a Dutch railway engineer was opposed to this gage, and wanted it metric. I would emphasise with his oppostion to Imperial encroachments, but I could say to him now that this gauge is metric after all. A happy coincidence indeed!

]]> by: Alex Bailey http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6635 Wed, 21 Nov 2007 11:58:35 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6635 Since it is generally the case that industry uses metric and merely converts to imperial measures in their public interface one might have been surprised that the railways haven't already fully converted to metric - however given the past militancy of rail workers, particularly back in the old BR days, we probably shouldn't be that surprised. However, this is no excuse for Eurostar to use imperial measures on a section of rail which is otherwise 100% metric. One thought I did have, perhaps the phone number 300 300 wasn't available! Since it is generally the case that industry uses metric and merely converts to imperial measures in their public interface one might have been surprised that the railways haven’t already fully converted to metric - however given the past militancy of rail workers, particularly back in the old BR days, we probably shouldn’t be that surprised.

However, this is no excuse for Eurostar to use imperial measures on a section of rail which is otherwise 100% metric.

One thought I did have, perhaps the phone number 300 300 wasn’t available!

]]> by: David http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6458 Fri, 16 Nov 2007 18:15:53 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6458 Why do Eurostar use in their advertising the slow-looking 186 mph when the actual speed of the trains is 300 km/h (average speed)? The 300 figure is much higher, or maybe they think that British people would not understand such a large number. I would prefer to see the speed given as 300 km/h, not only is the number bigger, but it also shows a more intelligent approach to advertising, as well as being more consistent with the destinations of Eurostar, i.e. both France and Belgium use metric including km/h for speeds, rather than the old Roman-type measures of miles. In the Belgian and French versions of the Eurostar website there is no mention of the "186mph", and I see no reason for it on the UK site or in their advertising. I think a better approach is to state the time it takes to get to the destinations rather than an approximate average speed, as they do on the French and Belgian sites. Why do Eurostar use in their advertising the slow-looking 186 mph when the actual speed of the trains is 300 km/h (average speed)? The 300 figure is much higher, or maybe they think that British people would not understand such a large number.
I would prefer to see the speed given as 300 km/h, not only is the number bigger, but it also shows a more intelligent approach to advertising, as well as being more consistent with the destinations of Eurostar, i.e. both France and Belgium use metric including km/h for speeds, rather than the old Roman-type measures of miles.
In the Belgian and French versions of the Eurostar website there is no mention of the “186mph”, and I see no reason for it on the UK site or in their advertising.
I think a better approach is to state the time it takes to get to the destinations rather than an approximate average speed, as they do on the French and Belgian sites.

]]> by: Martin Ward http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6447 Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:20:13 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6447 In describing their trains as "186mph", Eurostar have done themselves a disservice ("Hello to 186mph" http://www.eurostar.com ). Many news providers have converted this figure back to km/h for their readers and in the process have lost the original 300 km/h value. Readers might conclude that Eurostar trains are not quite up to the task of reaching speeds of 300 km/h and more. Here are a some of the news articles from around the world that have reported the speed as 299 km/h ! http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL1484614120071114 http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/11/15/worldupdates/2007-11-15T000620Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-305038-1&sec=worldupdates http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=4018206 http://www.worldtravelguide.net/news/2901/news/Eurostar's-inaugural-train-runs.html http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Eurostar-sets-ParisLondon-speed-record/2007/09/05/1188783280143.html In describing their trains as “186mph”, Eurostar have done themselves a disservice (”Hello to 186mph” http://www.eurostar.com ).

Many news providers have converted this figure back to km/h for their readers and in the process have lost the original 300 km/h value. Readers might conclude that Eurostar trains are not quite up to the task of reaching speeds of 300 km/h and more.

Here are a some of the news articles from around the world that have reported the speed as 299 km/h !

http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL1484614120071114
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/11/15/worldupdates/2007-11-15T000620Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-305038-1&sec=worldupdates
http://www.thestar.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=4018206
http://www.worldtravelguide.net/news/2901/news/Eurostar’s-inaugural-train-runs.html
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Eurostar-sets-ParisLondon-speed-record/2007/09/05/1188783280143.html

]]> by: Keith Hodgkin http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6433 Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:19:30 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6433 The daftness of using 186 mph became only too evident on the Reuters website when the figure was given with a conversion in brackets of 299 kph. Leaving aside the erroneous abbreviation for km/h, this is an example of why giving conversions all the time can become confusing as different rounding methods end up being used. In any case, for a non-technical publication such as a business news website, I wonder if such precision is absolutely necessary? See:http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL1484614120071115 The daftness of using 186 mph became only too evident on the Reuters website when the figure was given with a conversion in brackets of 299 kph. Leaving aside the erroneous abbreviation for km/h, this is an example of why giving conversions all the time can become confusing as different rounding methods end up being used. In any case, for a non-technical publication such as a business news website, I wonder if such precision is absolutely necessary?

See:http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL1484614120071115

]]> by: Martin Vlietstra http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6359 Wed, 14 Nov 2007 12:31:31 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6359 It would appear that Eurostar is using the figure 186 mph in their advertisements and that the press is following suit. The Eurostar English-language website starts off with the words “Hello to 186 mph”. The French language website emphasises a time of 2h15 (after all the TGV has been clocked at 574 km/h and the TGV travels up to 320 km/h in commercial use – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV and http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV). In contrast, travellers to Waterloo station (and probably elsewhere) can see advertisements for Ryanair flights to Dublin for €10. This raises the question – “Why should one company who are advertising in the UK use the Euro on their advertisements, while another company who is probably targeting the same market hesitate to use km/h?” It would appear that Eurostar is using the figure 186 mph in their advertisements and that the press is following suit. The Eurostar English-language website starts off with the words “Hello to 186 mph”. The French language website emphasises a time of 2h15 (after all the TGV has been clocked at 574 km/h and the TGV travels up to 320 km/h in commercial use – see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV and http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/TGV).

In contrast, travellers to Waterloo station (and probably elsewhere) can see advertisements for Ryanair flights to Dublin for €10. This raises the question – “Why should one company who are advertising in the UK use the Euro on their advertisements, while another company who is probably targeting the same market hesitate to use km/h?”

]]> by: Crooked Miles http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6357 Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:46:40 +0000 http://www.metricviews.org.uk/2007/11/14/186-300/#comment-6357 British Rail (RIP) once launched a class of trains called the 225 (built to travel at 225 km/h) as the next generation on from the 125s (which run at 125 mph of course). So not only is "186" ridiculous but unnecessary, given this precedent. British Rail (RIP) once launched a class of trains called the 225 (built to travel at 225 km/h) as the next generation on from the 125s (which run at 125 mph of course). So not only is “186″ ridiculous but unnecessary, given this precedent.

]]>