Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Wireless Networking Hardware IT

WiMax Hits 100 mph on Rails to Brighton 250

Posted by samzenpus
from the network-every-where dept.
judgecorp writes "T-Mobile has put a Wi-Fi service on the London to Brighton Express commuter service. It uses WiMax (ok, pre-WiMax) for the uplink, and is cheap enough to put on any other long-distance rail service. One interesting thing is that they didn't need to wait for next year's "mobile" WiMax version: the system can handover between base stations at 100mph, using today's pre-WiMax (802.16d) products. The only drawback - in June the free trial ends, and we'll have to pay T-Mobile's high Wi-Fi charges."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

WiMax Hits 100 mph on Rails to Brighton

Comments Filter:
  • a wish (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The only drawback - in June the free trial ends, and we'll have to pay T-Mobile's high Wi-Fi charges.

    May this not end up as bad as cellphone service.
  • Trains (Score:4, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:05AM (#12231752)
    High charges? On the British rail network?

    NEVER!!!
    • Re:Trains (Score:5, Funny)

      by gowen (141411) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:21AM (#12231790) Homepage Journal
      There is no British Rail network. It got broken up and sold off 15 years ago.

      And, of course, since private enterprise is always much more efficient than public ownership, that's why today the railways are now safe, clean, cheap and reliable.
      • Re:Trains (Score:2, Funny)

        by Juice2504 (744291)
        Now if I only had some mod points, thats the funniest thing I've read in a long time.
      • Re:Trains (Score:3, Insightful)

        by 91degrees (207121)
        There is no British Rail network, but there is still a British rail network. Check the capitalisation. The first implies a network for "British Rail". The second implies a rail network that is British.
      • Re:Trains (Score:5, Informative)

        by l-ascorbic (200822) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:35AM (#12231841)
        You'll notice the gp wrote "British rail network" not "British Rail network". Of course there's a British rail network. It runs on track owned by Network Rail, with services operated by the TOCs. It may have many owners, but there's still a network. You can still use one ticket to travel between any two stations in the country.
        • Re:Trains (Score:5, Informative)

          by Shisha (145964) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @07:35AM (#12232039) Homepage
          No you can't. Take London -> Birmingham as an example. You can buy cheap Chiltern tickets for trains that take ages and go via Oxford and Leam. Or you can buy more expensice Virgin tickets for trains that go via Coventry.
          • Re:Trains (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Uart (29577)
            London -> Edinburgh and vice-versa, however always works that way.

            Talking about that route, the GNER trains that run it are and have been equipped with wireless internet (that you pay for) for a while now.
          • erm... you could always buy tickets with the route as 'any permitted' then you can travel on any train company that serves that destination.

            Just most companies also have their own fares that are cheaper but restrict you to their service.
        • Really. Try making a journey between Birmingham New Street and Birmingham Moor Street ;)
      • Re:Trains (Score:5, Insightful)

        by BenjyD (316700) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:43AM (#12231870)
        My sarcasm detector is off the scale...

        The government subsidy to the railways has just about trebled since privatisation, IIRC. Private enterprise efficiency my arse.

        If you're ever bored on a British train, find a ticket inspector who looks old enough to have been working since before privatisation and ask them if they prefer working for the privatised company.
        • Re:Trains (Score:3, Insightful)

          by rcs1000 (462363) *
          I hate to say it, but companies are not run for the benefit of employees. (Except, of course, for workers co-operatives.)

          It's funny; everyone slags off the railways privatisation. But (coincidentally, I'm sure) their privatisation marked a reversal of the trend of downward rail passenger miles that had started in 1945. Rail passenger miles are up 30% from the bottom. If the new railways are so awful, why are more people using them?
          • It's generally best not to have employees whose first words to many customers are how crap the company is. I'm just going on the five or so inspectors I've talked to about it all, really.

            I imagine rail miles are going up because travelling miles in general are going up and because of the increasing cost of road travel (petrol's ~90p/litre, isn't it?). I don't have any figures to back that up.
          • by rpjs (126615) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @08:15AM (#12232231)
            Take commuting into central London. Even with the outrageously high rail fares, it's still cheaper for most people to commute by train than car when you factor in the high-price of parking in central London, and not to mention the Congestion Charge.

    • T-Mobile is the mobile spin-off from Deutsche Telekom. They are active in many countries, and overcharge in all of them!!!!
  • If the service is this easy to implement it should only be a matter of time before railway equipment manufacturers like Alsthom offer trains with wifi preinstalled. That should break T-mobiles extortionate charges.
    • by pklong (323451) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:22AM (#12231793) Homepage Journal
      Bah ha ha ha. That would involve someone other than Branson buying new trains (not that it's improved service. Bransons 15 minutes off the journey doesn't help you when your journey is an hour late. Like on Saturday, and the seats are uncomfortable as well.).

      Besides the rust holes on the roof improve the WiMax signal reception.

      I've recently figured out why the South East is sticking to the ancient third rail system in use, despite the low maximum speed possible using it. It's so when we finally become a fully fledged third world country people will be able to ride on the roof of trains, just like you see in travel documentaries.
      • "I've recently figured out why the South East is sticking to the ancient third rail system in use, despite the low maximum speed possible using it."

        I can't remember the source, but I read that the low maximum speed is due to adjacent lines being too close. If the trains went even as fast as high speed British trains on those tracks, regardless of power supply, the force of the air displacement on trains passing each other would be too great. Fixing this would obviously be a much bigger job than changing th
        • I can believe that. I was on a Thameslink train once (heading out of Luton, overhead power but it switched to third rail somewhere along the way, didn't even notice!) and another train passed in the other direction. I was in that semi hypnotic state you can get into on a train (when its not full of screaming kids or drunk football hooligans*). Believe me the thing shuddered so violently I was quickly brought back to reality.

          * Why do we have to put up with this.
      • 3rd rail....

        Why don't they just use ADSL over power line technology instead of fixed radio base stations? The power source is DC and around 750 volt if I recall correctly, shouldn't be difficult to get a stable carrier signal over that.
      • That would only work until the next bridge, a lot of the bridges on the london-brighton line have less than a foot of clearance... better learn to duck fast.

        There is a financial incentive to get new trains, just not _good_ new trains. Which is why the Southern/Thameslink area has a large number of the ultra cheap cattletruck 5 across electrostar trains, the ones that are almost worse than the 60s slam doors. The incentive is this: electric doors don't open once the driver hits the button. So instead of
        • Driver only operation is a pet hate of mine. They sack all of the staff then half of all the travellers don't bother buying a ticket. Worse still kids run riot. It's really safe after dark...

          Then whenever (frequently) the trains get covered in graffiti the company complains like crazy about the tens of thousands of pounds it costs to take the train out of service and clean it up.
        • At least Southern's "cattletruck 5 across electrostar trains" do have some areas of 4 across seating. In Southeastern Trains land our cattletruck 5 across electrostar trains are 5 across throughout, except for first class of course.

          And then there's the new class 376 "suburban Electrostars" which can't be described as cattletrucks as cattletrucks are a damn sight more comfortable!
          • we shouldn't complain. it won't be long before they give up all pretence at providing a service, and just take all the seats, lights and other nonessentials out, and double the fares.

            but you'll still be able to pay for wifi.
    • If the service is this easy to implement it should only be a matter of time before railway equipment manufacturers like Alsthom offer trains with wifi preinstalled. That should break T-mobiles extortionate charges.

      Where are they going to get the network service from, them? One of the wireless operators, right?

    • only if those pre-installed ap's will be connected to the internet and left open.
  • 100 mph? (Score:4, Funny)

    by The New Andy (873493) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:08AM (#12231759) Homepage Journal
    Call me once they get it working on those German trains that Einstein used to ride to work - the ones travelling near the speed of light.

    In a battle between WiMax and Doppler shift, I'm putting my money on Doppler.

  • Great (Score:5, Interesting)

    by gowen (141411) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:08AM (#12231761) Homepage Journal
    If my experience of the London-Brighton line is anything to go by, the money would be much better spent :
    i) installing more seats or adding extra carriages
    ii) actually cleaning the inside of the trains from time to time.

    It's no use getting a WiFi connection if you have to stand up the whole bloody way.
    • If you have to stand up the whole bloody way, there's a good risk of people seeing your lovely wifi laptop and stealing it or your bag once you get off. It's no use getting a WiFi connection if you can't use it, just to be safe.
    • Re:Great (Score:3, Insightful)

      by PhilHibbs (4537)
      So how do you propose persuading T-Mobile to spend their money on improving the train service instead of offering communications services?

      It's like the people who complained about The Gimp being "skinnable" when there is still some Photoshop functionality missing. Programmers who specialise in UI design aren't going to drop it and learn all about image composition techniques. We don't have a centralised command economy in the UK, or in the open source community.
      • WTF? You mean the people who gave the made the Gimp skinnable were _specialists_ in UI design? I'd sure hate to see what amateurs would have done.
    • Re:Great (Score:3, Informative)

      They are currently in the process of replacing all the trains on the london to brighton line with nice new ones, which are a lot better.
      It is a very busy line however, at peak times people are bound to have to stand no matter how many seats there are.
      • Re:Great (Score:3, Insightful)

        by iworm (132527)
        That's the attitude that let's the UK's shoddy train system continue the way it is - the British belief that it's unreasonable to design something that meets an entirely predictable and regular peak.

    • Having been doing that line for last 2 years, and working with others who've been doing it much longer, I can tell you that your experience is very accurate. Even when you know in detail which services are the best and worst, you cannot be sure enough of getting a seat to bring your laptop, even when travelling 45mins+delays each way.

      So this service is worthless for maybe 60-70% of commuters straight off. And how many of that last 30% have laptops? 1 in 10? Now how many are going to spring for WiMax car
  • by Sirch (82595) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:12AM (#12231769) Homepage
    "The Brighton Express is an apt place for a pioneering Wi-Fi service, given Brighton's role as a high-tech media-savvy remote suburb of London"

    Since when has Brighton been a "high-tech media-savvy remote suburb of London"? As far as I'm aware, the only thing Brighton's particularly renowned (infamous) for is its status as the UK's San Francisco...
    • I'm working at Amex House in Brighton.

      I wouldn't use "high-tech media-savvy" to describe anything I have seen in this town.

      I do enjoy free wi-fi at the Thistle Hotel where I am living :-)
      • The Thistle Hotel is well and good but you must experience the best wi-fi spots out at sea :D
      • That's because you haven't gone to the right bits yet.

        Amex is by the nastiest parts of Brighton.

        I've lived in Brighton for 8 years. The last two about 300 metres away from your building. It's not very nice around here. I'm moving back to the Hove end asap. The only nice bit of Kemptown is the seafront.
        • It's not all that bad down that way. I went to school near there (Brighton College, Eastern road) and pupils did used to get beaten up occasionally on the way to the sports ground, but generally it wasn't too bad. Just don't get lost and end up in Whitehawk.
      • Re:How queer... (Score:2, Informative)

        by singleantler (212067)

        All the people I've met who worked at Amex hated it, so I can see why it would give you a bad impression, especially as that area of Brighton isn't particularly nice either.

        We've become known for "high-tech media savvy" because of the large number of new media companies down here, bolstered by efforts like the free wi-fi network on the beach [piertopier.net] (between the two piers, well, the pier and the remains of the other pier.) And in various pubs [looseconnection.com], the active new media community [brightonnewmedia.org] (including companies, freelancers [brightonfarm.com], and

    • Re:How queer... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by 91degrees (207121)
      Since when has Brighton been a "high-tech media-savvy remote suburb of London"?

      Since the mid 90's. It has a considerable prescence of internet providers and web based companies, as well as the European HQ of American Express.

      As for "a remote suburb of London" - No idea where that came from. Probably ignorant Londoners who are unable to comprehend that something interesting might happen outside of London.
    • And Southampton is the UK's Fresno..
    • Re:How queer... (Score:3, Insightful)

      Since approximately the beginning of the 19th century.
    • Re:How queer... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Golygydd Max (821422)
      One thing that we born and raised Brightonians do hate hearing is that Brighton is some suburb of London or, even worse, London-by-the-sea. It has a culture all of its own. A Wi-Fi service sounds good in principle but as I, and 100s of others, frequently stand on the London-Brighton trains, I think there's limited opportunity to do any work.
    • Re:How queer... (Score:3, Informative)

      by peterpi (585134)
      This Brightonian is currently working here [semantico.com], and used to work here [climaxgroup.com].

      It's closer to central London in terms of journey time than many places inside Greater London.

  • 100mph? (Score:4, Funny)

    by gallondr00nk (868673) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:15AM (#12231777)
    Never mind the wi-fi, I'm impressed by the fact that a UK train reached 100mph in the first place.
    • Re:100mph? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by TheRaven64 (641858) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:27AM (#12231808) Journal
      Intercity trains can go at 125mph. Be aware, however, that this is roughly analogous to the GFLOPS numbers quoted by CPU manufacturers, i.e. down hill, with a training wind and no passengers. The existence of weather (any weather) seems to have a significant adverse affect on their ability to move.
      • .. one cool thing about the newer trains in finland is that while on one you can see current speed from a display.
      • Re:100mph? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Alioth (221270)
        Actually, the HST (InterCity 125) can do 140mph on the level with a full load of passengers, it's been done - they are still the world's fastest diesel train. In normal use they are limited to 125mph.
    • Re:100mph? (Score:3, Funny)

      by Tx (96709)
      UK trains have no problem going fast, it's avoiding other trains [telegraph.co.uk] that's a problem.
      • Insightful? Give me a break. The vast majority of rail incidents (Great Heck, Ufton Nervet) are caused by careless drivers who end up parked on the line. Since the Paddington rail crash, full ATP (automatic train protection) was installed on the Great Western route, and TPWS (inferior but still effective) has been installed on the remainder on the network.
    • Re:100mph? (Score:3, Informative)

      by pklong (323451)
      I'm impressed it reaced 100kph. I'm even more impressed they managed to get the driver to give up his sandwich shelf.

      Now seriously Branson has had his trains touching on 140mph for a while now. The Eurostar runs at 186 mph this side of the channel. The record is 208 mph in the UK on a Eurostar test run.

      The Intercity 125 is an exceptional train as important as trains like the Flying Scotsman. It is the reason so little of the UK is electrified. Still very much in use today it can reach 125mph, quite execep
      • Re:100mph? (Score:2, Informative)

        by alanthenerd (639252)
        The intercity trains are diesel-electic i.e. a diesel engine powering a big generator powering an electric motor. So in actual fact the diesel engine doesn't go very fast.
        I seem to remember that back when the intercity trains were being tested before introduction they had one up to 180mph but they were only ever allowed to go up to 125mph because of track conditions and other safety fears.
      • Re:100mph? (Score:2, Informative)

        by gowen (141411)
        Now seriously Branson has had his trains touching on 140mph for a while now
        Pendolinos are great. I commuted Crewe/Stoke to Manchester for a while and (shock, horror) Branson's Virgin service was quiet, convenient and hardly ever late.

        Really.
    • Re:100mph? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by gowen (141411) <gwowen@gmail.com> on Thursday April 14, 2005 @07:30AM (#12232011) Homepage Journal
      Never mind the wi-fi, I'm impressed by the fact that a UK train reached 100mph in the first place.
      We had 100MPH trains [wikipedia.org] back when American Railroads major passengers were migrant workers fleeing the Great Depression.
    • What's more impressive is I thought UK trains don't operate in imperial units anymore.
  • by gozu (541069) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:15AM (#12231779) Journal
    Am I the only one getting tired of all these uninteresting stories about WiFi being available here or there?

    Yes, you can bridge hundreds of wireless routers and have humongous hot spots, yes you can get WiFi on moving spaces, yes you can go to the desert and have a connection over large distances and maybe beat this week's world record.

    We know that.We really do. WiFi is great, it's this awesome magic thing that allows you to download the interweb out of thin air. Now knock it the hell off.

    Thanks you.

    • Um, this isn't about standard WiFi. It's about WiMax, which is a new technology. It's not just showing that a large WiFi network can be created with hundreds of access points, it's showing how well a new technology works. Standard WiFi probably can't roam between AP's at 100 mph, let alone communicate. (It can hardly do it at normal driving speeds!)

  • by MrNonchalant (767683) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:15AM (#12231780)
    When will T-Mobile, SBC, Telarama, et al all realize their wifi business model sucks? I mean seriously, 5 bucks an hour, 20 bucks a month? For scattered coffee shops and book stores that I maybe frequent once a week? None of them has anything near enough coverage to make a subscription worth my while and their hourly rates are way too high. Maybe for a certain sector of the populace, those earning six figures and those who spend a lot of time in coffee shops, this is acceptable, but to middle america (where the real money is) it stinks. Maybe if they all pulled their resources and allowed me to log into any of their collective hot spots for a reasonable (~$15) monthly fee I'd consider it.
    • WiFi is much cheaper to roll out than, for example, UMTS or GPRS data. However they don't want to undermine their cellular data business model.
    • Yeah, but that would *gasp* mean working together with a competitor.
    • by MoralHazard (447833) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:46AM (#12231887)
      For another perspective...

      I think T-Mobile's rates are just fine, thank you. And it's probably not just because I have a job.

      Seriously, one person (or even many people) with the opinion that the pricing is too high for too little doesn't mean that a business model sucks! Last I heard, T-Mobile's hotspot subscriptions were doing pretty damn well. One of the reasons why the hourly rate is so high is to encourage people who use it more than rarely to subscribe, which helps even out the revenue stream and usage patterns. This is just like cellphone billing--plan minutes are loads cheaper per minute than overtime minutes because they want to impose a cost on you for being unpredictable.

      As long as they have enough people who pay the freight, bitching or not, nobody else can say that the price is too high to be a "good business model".

      Then again, I come from NYC. When I went to LA for the NBA all-star game last year, I remember driving down Figueroa St., about 1/2 block from the Staples Center, and seeing signs for $20 parking spots 1 hour before gametime. I literally said to myself "$20? What a deal! How can these not be taken this late before the game!" Turns out it was because LA people consider $20 for parking to be a ripoff. In NYC, that's kind of a steal.
      • Well, subscribing to one isn't too bad, but the fact of the matter is in a couple days you'll be somewhere else and you'll have to get onto a competitor's network if you want access.

        My point is that if you have to drive around looking for a hotspot that your month long password works with, you might as well just look for something that is free via nodedb or something.
        There are a ton of free APs out there. Sure, they might not be as obvious as a starbucks, but if you're not downtown, finding a starbucks can
        • I use a LOT of free hotspots--tiny, 2-person startup company, no real office at the moment, so we work out of coffee shops and bars a lot.

          Commercial hotspots have one thing that free nodes can't beat: quality of service. In terms of distance to the AP and interference from intervening objects, you'll usually get a much better signal from the commercial AP. This is exacerbated in a built-up city like NYC, because the buildings severely cut down on wireless propagation between blocks--normally, you'll onl
    • Middle America is not where the real money is. The real money is in the 2% or so of the population who have the lion's share of the wealth. Middle America's job is to help the people at the top get richer. It's the 19th Century all over again.
  • High Wi-fi Charges (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shashark (836922) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:19AM (#12231785)
    "and we'll have to pay T-Mobile's high Wi-Fi charges"

    There goes another brilliant service down the drain.

    High User Access Charges: The reason why services like these remain hugely unpopular.

    Irony though is, service providers spend a fraction of what they earn over these services. Yet the "its-a-premium-service-hence-we-milk-you" syndrome keeps them from bringing the charges down. When will the service providers understand that term premium is only notional. Mobile was a luxury only 10 years ago -- now a country like India as 100mn cell users -- why ? because its low-cost.

    Price is an entry barrier -- and high prices let less and less people use a service, and recommend it to other users. I just hope T-mobile understands that and keep the charges minimal, so that more users use it. And OEMs can provide more cheap solutions leveraging the service -- like wi-fi for train-staff communication.

  • by phil-trick (24853) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:41AM (#12231863) Journal
    Great, now I can stand on the platform at Three Bridges and get WiFi access for free for a few seco...
  • I've tried twice but I haven't got it working yet.
  • by An Ominous Cow Erred (28892) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @06:52AM (#12231902)
    I have it because it's my primary internet connection. I live one block from a hotspot and I get it from my house. $30/month for a T1 (that almost nobody else uses) is not that bad even though it's NAT'd.

    The account is good at thousands of hotspots world wide (including, I assume, this train one), so really it's a pretty good deal.

    I've been thinking of getting a Sidekick -- then the fee for a TMob Hotspot account would drop to $20. =P

    (Just to stress that I'm not astroturfing here -- I don't think I'd pay for this service if it weren't my primary internet connection at home... There's lots of free hotspots available at all sorts of businesses and public places... but if I traveled a lot more and were well-payed, I think I'd do it.)
  • Their rains are nicer (and faster) too. Still costs £8/hr unless you are in First Class (in which case it is "free"), but that isn't too bad if you are working - not so good for personal use though. They are one of the better train companies although £124 to travel from Leeds to London in peak hours isn't cheap!
  • Do Japanese trains offer Wifi? I bet Eurostar - hang, on I bet everyone else with High Speed trains offers WiFi. Is this some kind of subtle taunt?
    • * Do Japanese trains offer Wifi? I bet Eurostar - hang, on I bet everyone else with High Speed trains offers WiFi. Is this some kind of subtle taunt?*

      100mph isn't really high speed with trains anymore(more of a 'normal' speed with modern trains) - and no, they don't offer wifi at "everyone else".
  • Setting off on a Dirty Weekend with your WiMax hardware for company.....
  • Unreasonable charges (Score:3, Informative)

    by Alioth (221270) <no@spam> on Thursday April 14, 2005 @07:38AM (#12232047) Journal
    If the charges are anywhere near as bad as the WiFi hotspot at London City airport, no thanks. Expensive and restrictive. You can't just, say, buy 15 minutes to check your email, the minimum is 1 hour - usually for about GPB6 or so - and you can't just use 15 mins one day, then 15 the next. (By contrast, in an airport, those 'payphone style' internet kiosks are GBP4/hr and you can buy just 15 minutes for £1 if you want, and you don't get to use up your laptop's battery).

    Since I've already paid for GPRS access on my mobile phone, I'll just use my GPRS thanks. Although it's only 64kbit/s, for going on IRC, writing emails and Slashdotting it's more than adequate, and it works well on the train as well as in airports.
    • Since I've already paid for GPRS access on my mobile phone, I'll just use my GPRS thanks. Although it's only 64kbit/s, for going on IRC, writing emails and Slashdotting it's more than adequate, and it works well on the train as well as in airports.

      However, GPRS

      • tends to get interrupted when other things happen on the phone (i.e. receive call or text message on my Nokia 6310i),
      • is often not very reliable on either the UK's east or west coast main line (i.e. London to Leeds or London to Manchester)
      • is
  • As an American, it's the European *train services* that I would like to have in the States.
  • That's Incredible! (Score:3, Informative)

    by FlukeMeister (20692) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @08:05AM (#12232152) Homepage
    As a long-suffering commuter, this news is really astounding. The London-Brighton express can reach 100MPH!

    Of course, the speed of the train is pretty much irrelevant if you put the hotspot on the train, which is what GNER have been doing with their long-distance services for the last two years.

    But who am I to quibble?
  • by YuppieScum (1096) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @08:23AM (#12232282) Journal
    ...and I can tell you that the implementation is very, very poor.

    Not only do they not provide connectivity via a true AP, DHCP is still unable to dish out addresses - I've been getting 169.254.* since they turned it on...

    Oh, and it's only available in 3 of the 12 carriages of the train, and only on one train so far...
  • by tagishsimon (175038) on Thursday April 14, 2005 @03:09PM (#12237078) Homepage
    GNER [gner.co.uk] has had WiFI on (faster) trains running between Aberdeen / [wikipedia.org] Leeds [wikipedia.org] and London [wikipedia.org]. The single drawback is that the firm that set it up, Icomera [icomera.com] having just sold a system to a Swedish train company, Linx AB [gner.co.uk], appears to be routing through Sweden, meaning that your default google becomes google.se [google.se]. Oh. And the GNER website has a lovely little map which updates itself as you wind up & down the country, showing you where you are. In sum, it rocks.

It is contrary to reasoning to say that there is a vacuum or space in which there is absolutely nothing. -- Descartes

Working...