Talk:Indian Railways/Archive 1

Rail Transport in China vs India
In reference to the sentence talking about how China invests $200 billion in railways according to a report by JP Morgan Stanley, it would be helpful to see a reference to that report. Otherwise the might as well be deleted since there are no references to prove it.

(The line is under the current problems section in the article)

Unprofessional writing
There are a cpl of statements, for instance "The credit goes to Mr Lalu Prasad Yadav for turn around...". Such statements can't be used in professional writing, as it is a personal opinion. The turn around in IR, could have been coz of
 * Efforts of previous R Ministers, or efforts of some/all of Board Members, entirely Mr Lalu's efforts/ideas. We don't really know.

It is a fact that in Mr Lalu's term, IR made huge profit and turn-arounds. But Media habitually hypes up facts to fiction. Unless we come across authentic sources that confirms that the reason's behind the turn over were mostly/entirely Mr Lalu's ideas/initiative, we can't make that statement.

In any case, such sentences could be reworded to something like: "It is generally acknowledged that the present turnaround.......blah blah blah...... has happened because of the initiatives of the current Rail Ministry". —The preceding unsigned comment was added by FatCow (talk • contribs) 05:21, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Cleanup
I'd rather have the cleanup-tag back. The page still needs lots of work - freight operations, signalling, finance/budget etc. - and might also need to be split into many pages. Binand 14:33, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Accident rate
Indian rail suffers about 300 accidents per year.

Safety statistics published by Loss Prevention Association India Ltd show for the Year 2000 1282 deaths were attributed to railroad accidents; 0.5% of the 255,883 deaths attributed to natural and un-natural accidents. A further 16,638 died from other rail road accidents (6.5% of accidental deaths).These rail related deaths compare with only 72 from air crash and 80,118 due to road traffic accidents (31.3% of accidental deaths).

To understand the statistics though, they should be at least compared over several years - were the proportions the same a decade ago? - was there some one-off event in 2000 that raised the numbers?

It would also be useful to compare say transport miles - there are 4.5 times the number of deaths in road traffic accidents but are 4.5 times the number of miles travelled in India by road compared with the number of miles travelled by rail?

How does the accident rate compare with other rail networks?

Chandigarh Tribune interview with MR IIMS Rana (Chairman of the Railway Board from March 31 2002) published September 28 2002 quotes Mr Rana on accidents as follows:
 * "Over the years and decades, the safety performance of the Railways has been gradually improving. In the year 1960-61, there were 2131 accidents and in 2001-02, there were 415 accidents. This is despite the fact that there has been a five time increase in passenger and freight traffic. Let us compare with international standards.


 * "There is a universal index of million accidents per million train kilometres. This was 5.5 in 1960s and it has come down to 0.65 in 2000-01 and .55 (provisional figure) this year. If you look at the accident frequency per one million train kilometres (East Japan Railway annual report 2002), Japanese Railways has .65 and in Germany 0.91. That means we are almost the lowest in the world and this, mind you, is despite the fact that we don&#8217;t have too many technological inputs."

On the subject of infrasturcture the interview reports:


 * "Q: What is the overall situation on the renewal of direly needed tracks. What about replacement and rehabilitation of old bridges?


 * "About Rs 3516.50 crore has been allocated for track renewal for 2002-03. The money allocated for rehabilitation of old bridges in this financial year is Rs 209.30 crore compared to Rs 111.53 crore in 2001-02. The budgetary allocation for rolling stock for this year is Rs 919.19 crore. Of the 1,19,984 railway bridges in India, 51,340 (44 per cent) are 100 years old. Till April 1 this year, 527 bridges were identified as distressed (which show signs of deterioration). Another 347 bridges are to be rehabilitated during 2002-03. Till July end, 61 such bridges had been rehabilitated. One thing that must be understood is that if some part of the railway infrastructure is weak, we introduce speed restrictions."

An article on September 9 crash of the Howrah-New Delhi Rajdhani Express by the World Socialist Web site discusses whether sabotage or poor infrastructure maintenance are causes of the accident and notes that the Indian Rail officials were quick to blame saboteurs perhaps in an effort to deflect criticisim of poor maintenance.

The article cites statistics on bridges: India has 51,340 rail bridges that are more than 100 years old and another 89,076 that are more than 60 years old. Of those, 526 are classified as badly in need of repair or &#8220;distressed&#8221;. In 2001 the Mangalore-Chennai Mail train crashed in Kerala due to bridge failure; 59 people killed and 200 injured. The article suggested that the 2002 Howrah-New Delhi Rajdhani Express was probably due to bridge failure.

The article refers to a 1998 review committee led by retired Supreme Court judge H.L. Khanna which pointed out that the two factors responsible for most rail accidents over the past decade were the poor state of bridges and the lack of track maintenance. Perhaps this Wkipedia article could reference the Khanna committee recommendations. --AYArktos 23:59, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

According to the Chandigarh Tribune 24 June 2003 the Khanna committee reommendations were not implemented. --AYArktos 00:05, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Numbers in the article
At one place the article says: "The total length of track used by Indian Railways is about 108,706 km". At another place, it says: "About 16,000 km of the total 63,028 km route length is electrified". Elsewhere, it is: "World's 5th largest rail network, with route length of 63,518 km (2002)". I can't find an authoritative figure on this - even a google search restricted to .gov.in doesn't return anything. All the numbers in the article needs to be checked. It says IR carries "300 million tons of freight" every year - I just read through LPY's budget speech for 2004-05, which has "the Railways have moved 557.39 million tonnes of originating revenue earning traffic, against the target of 550 million tonnes". - Binand 00:15, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * That bureaucratese "originating revenue earning traffic" is probably just to keep from pissing the passengers off by calling them "freight". Gene Nygaard 00:33, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * If I recall correctly, there is 100,000+ km of *track* covering some 63,000+ km of *route*. If the line from station A to station B has double track (or more), then the distance is counted multiple times for "track" but only once for "route". Budget for gauge-conversion etc use the former, while estimation of journey time etc use the latter. And yes, all the figures need to be checked and updated. Most of them are outdated by a year or more. -- Brhaspati (talkcontribs) 01:11, 2005 Apr 5 (UTC)


 * All these numbers in the articles needs the source. Unsubstantial numbers need to be removed. Or atleast put it on a different article. Just way too much insignifica. - RC 17:26, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

The Indian Railways site uses frames and so I can't give you the page reference. If you use the navigation bar on the left hand side of the page. Go to "About Indian Railways" then "Evolution" then click "next page" on bottom right hand side you get the track statistics and also the stats for rolling stock etc.--AYArktos 01:20, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * The link you are mentioning is http://www.indianrailways.gov.in/railway/evolution/rail-network.htm - RC 17:26, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

inuse
Nichalp, is the article still inuse? Just wondering if you forgot to remove the notice. :-) -- 11:50, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

Yup, I forgot. I had paused work. = Nichalp ( Talk )= 12:26, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)

OK. I'll do some copyediting tomorrow. -- Sundar 12:40, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * You can copyedit upto ==organisation==, I'll be working on the lower sections. = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 19:02, Jun 14, 2005 (UTC)


 * I got caught up with work. Will look at it tomorrow. -- Sundar 15:01, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

I'll be editing Current problems onwards; so feel free to cpedit upto that section. = Nichalp ( Talk )=

saving stuff
Removed: (may be added later):

A partial list of the railway stations is found in List of railways stations in India.
 * Railway Museums

The National Rail Museum and the rail museum at Mysore are the most prominent rail museums, and display historic railway locomotives. Regional Rail Museums are being established in Howrah and Chennai. Heritage rooms exist in various terminals like the Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus (restricted access to public).

http://www.glynstrains.com/india2.html http://www.indianrail.gov.in/abir.html http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:w0LDqmUJxZQJ:www.unctad.org/en/docs/rmt1999ch6_en.pdf+Indian+Railways+1.2+billion&hl=en http://www.indianrailways.8m.net/ http://exim.indiamart.com/budget-2005-06/rail-budget2005-06/rail-budget-05-06-highlights.html http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/11212 http://danger-ahead.railfan.net/features/india_safety/india_safety.html http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/jul/03inter.htm http://sify.com/news/fullstory.php?id=13499563

SNO?
In the three tables of additional information, what is "SNO"? If it's merely a row number, I would suggest that such numbering is not necessary for tabular data. If it is an acronym for something, please define it. Thanks. slambo 17:15, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * Serial number = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 17:18, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
 * It will be removed, I've to add one more table on zone numbering. = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 17:22, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Bholu
Guys, can we find a picture of Bholu the IR mascot as in ?.
 * I think we can upload it under logo or something like that. The last image is the most common one. = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 17:42, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Rail transport in India vs. Indian Railways
I'd like to point the contributors of this article to an unwritten convention that "Rail transport in X" discusses gauge, size, history, rail transport lines (both passenger and freight), and that "A Rail company of X" discusses it as a company (marketshare, policy, evolution, etc.). I know this is tricky to separate, especially when there is only one company. Compare Rail transport by country and List of railway companies. Just that it is known. Phlebas 20:55, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)


 * Very tricky to separate. While sections like rolling stock can be moved there what about =ticketing=, =accom. classes= & =heirachy=. Do they belong here or there? Any suggestions? = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 11:33, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * Also I guess that certain sections would overlap. = Nichalp  ( Talk )= 17:48, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

I've split up the article. = Nichalp ( Talk )= 19:12, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)


 * I would prefer keeping them as one article, with appropriate redirects, for what it is worth. -- ALoan (Talk) 21:22, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree. It should be a single article. In India there is only one state run railway company. Splitting the article is artificial and makes no sense. Until the time government opens up the railways for private sector these articles should be merged.--DuKot 03:41, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Indeed, for what it's worth. Some articles that are split in this manner duplicate content, and don't look balanced. But on the other hand, as a wikipedian I'd like to adhere to "standards" that are already in vogue by majority, be it a skewed standard since state owned rail transport companies are a minority. --Phlebas 16:46, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Permission granted
http://www.irfca.org/ has given us permission to the text on their site. Photgraphs are copyrighted though, and permission has to be obtained from the induvidual uploaders.

Fri, 17 Jun 2005 22:01:04 IST Nicholas, a few comments in reply, below.

> * Wikipedia is a purely non-commercial and an ad-free site. It is funded by donations and contributions are purely voluntary.

Yes, I know. But you stated that the GNU licence would allow potential commercial use (by others, I presume, not by Wikipedia itself), and that was what concerned me.

> * We do not upload copyrighted images. If a violation is detected, > it is immediately deleted.

Thanks, that's good to know. There are many copyrighted images on our site that you will be able to use -- just check with me, and in most cases I'll be able to tell you very quickly whether or not it's OK. It's just that I can't give you blanket permission because not all of our copyright owners agree to reproduction of their works, but many are quite happy for their images to be used by others.

> * Also, as far as images are concerned: The Indian copyright Act 1957 > (http://www.naukri.com/lls/copyright/section5.htm#25) states that all > works published sixty years ago (ie prior to 01-01-1945 as of today) > are free from copyrights.

We only have some of those -- you're free to use them if you find any, of course. Not all our pictures were originally published in India, so this law may not always apply. There is also the issue of 'orphan' pictures, those that are old, from the 1930s and so on, which have no known attribution or copyright information, or the publisher who made them available is no longer in existence and their legal heirs cannot be traced. We have generally (cautiously) decided to use some of these with attributions. You're free to use these too, depending on your policy in such cases.

Another thing to keep in mind: Most publications available to the general public from the Government of India (such as brochures, advertisements, etc.) are considered to be in the public domain in India. There are generally no restrictions on reproducing the material from them.

> I also notice that you have linked to wikipedia.

Ah, we've already got you, then. Sorry -- sometimes I'm not entirely on top of all the links added by the folks who help on the site.

Let me repeat what I think is the basic rule of thumb for the content on our site. Almost any page that you see that has general information presented without any particular authors being identified is fair game for you -- use it, re-use it, modify it. For anything that mentions the names of specific persons as the authors, please check with me. Good luck with your venture. I'll check the Wikipedia page now and then to see how you're progressing.

Also, if you need any clarifications or explanations of anything that is not clear on our site, feel free to ask. And by the way, if you find anything on our site that's not well presented, inaccurate, etc., just drop me a note.

Thanks, and regards,

Satish

= Nichalp ( Talk )= 09:12, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)

Revert reason
I just reverted a minor edit to the table. An anon user linked the two unlinked instances of Mumbai even though the first is linked. Only the first instance of the word needs to be linked. slambo 20:45, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

revenue of IR
revenue of IR should be given in INR instead of USD to take the purchasing power parity. Otherwise somebody may compare the revenue of IR and pepsico


 * It is given in the section ==revenues== isn't it? =Nichalp   «Talk»=  12:35, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations!!
Congratulations to all those editors who ensured that this article has become a FA!! Way to go!! --Gurubrahma 09:52, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Typo?
What are "rake accidents"? A typo? Some Indian English or railroading jargon term with which I'm unfamiliar, and which should be explained? Gene Nygaard 15:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Its a rail term used in India. A rake is known as "consist" in the US. I've removed the word, it was a vestige of an earlier version, before the article was split. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  15:23, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

English/Indian place names
Great article. A relatively minor thing I am concerned about is the chopping and changing between English English and Indian English versions of the various place names. Is there a convention on this? I just think that a lot of people will be confused by the use of Bombay and Mumbai or Calcutta and Kolkata to refer to the same place. And thoughts? - 81.109.184.63 15:16, 16 October 2005 (UTC)


 * First instance of the term use: . After that use Mumbai.  =Nichalp   «Talk»=  15:20, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Cost to transport
I think one of the things we can / should mention is the low fare charged to move a person thousands of kilometres, on the different classes. And a comparison with the cost of rail travel in other countries. what say?
 * Low fare to move persons? Well, 'subsidised fare' captures the topic. If the railways were not a public sector unit, I dont think the fares would be so low. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  17:33, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Scope
If this article is about the company Indian Railways, should the description of Delhi Metro be included? deeptrivia (talk) 02:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)


 * There's only a line on the Delhi Metro. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  06:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Broken thumbnail
Does anyone else see a solid blue square instead of the expected schematic diagram? The 250px thumbnail looks broken, though sizes at 247px and 251px seem to work. Should I change the size slightly or can we flush the thumbnail cache? Geoffrey 02:46, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Need to verify records
We need to check if some records still hold in the light of Qingzang railway. -- Sundar \talk \contribs 05:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The Compartment description
The details of the compartment is wrongly mentioned...

An AC 2 Tier coach consists of 8 compartments with 6 berths thus totalling 48 Berths An AC 3 Tier coach consists of 8 compartments with 8 berths thus totalling 64 Berths


 * It's too specific to be added here. I'm removing. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  12:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Firstly I am a fan of Indian Railways (may not in formal terms).

I think we need a section/page on Types of coaches used in passenger trains, what I added was a starting point and expected more informed people like you to take it up instead of bringing it down.

Also I added few unfilled sections like 'Modernization' and few subsections like 'Passenger safety', 'Station cleanliness', 'Coach cleanliness'.

I would request you to fill such sections (may be start a new page) and put this info on Wikipedia for others to read.

I wish Wikipedia to become one stop source for most the info thus we IR page should have info on upcoming projects (e.g. new freight corridor) /special trains (Garib Rath, tourist trains etc) shortfalls /pitfalls, info calculation rules of FINE imposition (why not as this is faced by several railway passengers) etc etc.

I sincerely believe that in future sites like this will be used by respective authorities (here IR authorities) as well to understand end user in better ways and serve them better and frankly design of IR coaches desires a lot of improvement/customization, platform/coach cleanliness is again a big concern area. So pls help in putting more information. Vjdchauhan 05:50, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * This article is about the company. =Nichalp   «Talk»=  16:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Should be more appropriate at Rail transport in India --Plane Mad 17:17, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Classes of Indian Train