From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Fri Jun 13 13:39:47 2008
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:39:47 -0000
Subject: Great train gaffe?
Message-ID: <g2ttb3+2a5c@...>

Dear All, long time no post, but I read this entertaining discussion 
on a non-HP message board recently. I think its an error that has not 
been picked up before. Loved the anecdote about the little boy!

Carolyn

<a train spotter comments:>
>From the classic gaff in the Kenneth More version of the 39 steps to 
Harry Potter, with a zillion gaffs in between, none of them can get 
the trains right 

<an HP reader responds:>
You mean the Hogwarts Express DOESN'T go from Platform 9 and three 
quarters!!!!!!!!!!!!

<a train spotter:>
Yes of course it does - that's literary licence. The existance of 
platform 9 3/4 is part of the wizarding world in the book.

But it won't go anywhere if the engine is facing the buffer stops; it 
has to be at the other end........

<HP reader:>
Um.......but isn't the Hogwarts Express magic? 

<a train spotter:>
The Hogwarts express is pointing the wrong way........and it doesn't 
magically disappear through the buffer stops, because people (and 
large black dogs) run to the end of the platform waving people off 
(OK the black dog probably doesn't wave).

<someone else helpfully contributes this graphic link!>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Train_wreck_at_Montparnasse_1895.jp
g

<a train spotter continues:>
the Hogwarts Express should really go from somewhere between 
platforms 1-8 (I think) as I'm fairly sure that going from Platform 9 
3/4 it would end up in the East of England - somewhere between 
Cambridge & N Lincolnshire.

<a worried HP reader adds:>
theres a plaque on nearby wall now thats says 'platform 3/4' with a 
luggage trolley seemingly disappearing into the wall below it

I once watched a small boy, red cap and blazer, hurling himself at 
this wall, in an attempt to do likewise. (Couldn't intervene or 
encourage, as I was already on my train.) 




From catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun 14 04:17:12 2008
From: catlady at catlady_de_los_angeles.yahoo.invalid (Catlady (Rita Prince Winston))
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 04:17:12 -0000
Subject: Great train gaffe?
In-Reply-To: <g2ttb3+2a5c@...>
Message-ID: <g2vgo8+6sb0@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2"
<carolynwhite2 at ...> quoted:
>
> <a train spotter:>
> But it won't go anywhere if the engine is facing the buffer stops; 
> it has to be at the other end........
> 
> <HP reader:>
> Um.......but isn't the Hogwarts Express magic? 
> 
> <a train spotter:>
> The Hogwarts express is pointing the wrong way........and it doesn't 
> magically disappear through the buffer stops, because people (and 
> large black dogs) run to the end of the platform waving people off 
> (OK the black dog probably doesn't wave).

But trains can travel with the engine at the back. It's called 'push'
(even if that does contradict the words 'traction' and 'train'). I
found a wikipedia article on push-pull:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push-pull_train>
"This configuration means that the locomotive never needs to be
uncoupled from the train, and ensures fast turnaround times at a
railway station terminus."




From Oryomai at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun 14 04:45:23 2008
From: Oryomai at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Oryomai at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 00:45:23 -0400
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Great train gaffe?
In-Reply-To: <g2vgo8+6sb0@...>
Message-ID: <8CA9BF09782B31F-C1C-3ABE@...>

Not that this has anything to do with the subject, but if *I* were near the sign for Platform 1 3/4, I'd throw myself at it.? Multiple time I'm sure.

I think picking on the way the train is moving is more about having nothing to talk about than actually knowing about trains *g*

Oryomai
Who saw the new M Night movie and doesn't want anyone else to waste 8 American dollars....


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From macloudt at macloudt.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun 14 12:01:32 2008
From: macloudt at macloudt.yahoo.invalid (Mary Ann Jennings)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:01:32 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Great train gaffe?
Message-ID: <610165.65556.qm@...>

Catlady wrote:

>>>But trains can travel with the engine at the back. It's called 'push'
(even if that does contradict the words 'traction' and 'train'). I
found a wikipedia article on push-pull:
<http://en.wikipedia .org/wiki/ Push-pull_ train>
"This configuration means that the locomotive never needs to be
uncoupled from the train, and ensures fast turnaround times at a
railway station terminus."<<<

My trainspotter husband informs me that push-pull trains were used on small branch lines in the UK where there were no turntables or reversing loops.  Long-range trains with multiple coaches never had the push-pull configuration because push-pull trains couldn't reach high speeds as derailment was a constant danger for tender engines travelling in reverse.  It's not just steam engines; diesel engines (and I can name a-plenty!) working fast, long-range trains also never ran in reverse in such a manner.  It was the introduction of HSTs (High Speed Trains) in the 1970s that eliminated the need for engines to run 'round trains in the UK as these trains have engines at both ends.

Mary Ann, who doesn't make fun of her husband's diesel train obsession because she has several closets full of knitting yarn.  Tit for tat, and all that.



From carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid  Sat Jun 14 17:10:58 2008
From: carolynwhite2 at carolynwhite2.yahoo.invalid (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2008 17:10:58 -0000
Subject: Great train gaffe?
In-Reply-To: <610165.65556.qm@...>
Message-ID: <g30u32+rh42@...>

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Mary Ann Jennings 
<macloudt at ...> wrote:
>
> Catlady wrote:
> 
> "This configuration means that the locomotive never needs to be
> uncoupled from the train, and ensures fast turnaround times at a
> railway station terminus."<<<
> 
> My trainspotter husband informs me that push-pull trains were used 
on small branch lines in the UK where there were no turntables or 
reversing loops.  Long-range trains with multiple coaches never had 
the push-pull configuration because push-pull trains couldn't reach 
high speeds as derailment was a constant danger for tender engines 
travelling in reverse.  It's not just steam engines; diesel engines 
(and I can name a-plenty!) working fast, long-range trains also never 
ran in reverse in such a manner.  It was the introduction of HSTs 
(High Speed Trains) in the 1970s that eliminated the need for engines 
to run 'round trains in the UK as these trains have engines at both 
ends.

Carolyn:
Oh, I totally love these debates!

Mary Ann, welcome, I don't think I have seen your posts before. Ok, 
Yankies she's right. Our dear beloved JKR clearly gave no thought to 
this matter (not for the first time). In PS, Harry clearly trudges 
his way down the platform for his first journey on the Hogwart's 
Express. He finds an empty carriage and there is absolutely no 
mention that the carriage is just behind the engine that is about to 
pull the train out of the station. In fact, the reverse is implied. 
Here is the great HP, forced to find a seat at the 'back' of the 
train because he knows no one.. (sob, sob).

If any of you have visited London-town and travelled from any of our 
major train terminals you will understand the easy mistake that JKR 
made. As Mary Ann says, there are boring old engines both ends of the 
train on modern trains which sort the problem. However, the Hogwarts 
Express is clearly a different beastie... and it did need to be on 
the opposite end of the platform from where the students enter.. ha 
ha!

> 
> Mary Ann, who doesn't make fun of her husband's diesel train 
obsession because she has several closets full of knitting yarn.  Tit 
for tat, and all that.
>

Hey, I really like this domestic trade off!

Carolyn 
x




From ewetoo at ewe2_au.yahoo.invalid  Sun Jun 15 07:17:43 2008
From: ewetoo at ewe2_au.yahoo.invalid (ewe2)
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 17:17:43 +1000
Subject: [the_old_crowd] Re: Great train gaffe?
In-Reply-To: <g30u32+rh42@...>
References: <610165.65556.qm@...>
	 <g30u32+rh42@...>
Message-ID: <91d14f320806150017t7bed6a6dpc3baa6c13ffc9254@...>

On 6/15/08, carolynwhite2 <carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Mary Ann Jennings
> <macloudt at ...> wrote:

[snip]

As a child my train obsession made me quite knowledgeable about such
questions, we have similar arrangements here. Even then the British
rail landscape was hopelessly romanticized in the books i read and I
suspect JKR may be operating from the same imaginative place. Romantic
trains can do anything, you know.

Of course I've grown up since then and now have an aeroplane obsession.

-- 
Emacs vs. Vi flamewars are a pointless waste of time. Vi is the best