Talk:Multiple-unit train control

Snippets
Snippets I removed from Multiple unit in an effort to condense all discussion of MU Train Control here:

''More commonly used in North America, the term can also refer to multiple locomotive operation. The driver's cab on a MU is usually truncated to a short room at each end of the train.'' Before his successful invention, differences in the speed and response of motors on different cars of the train caused binding on the couplings between the train cars, wheel slippage and excess wear on motors due to operating gear running at speeds faster or slower than the overall speed of the train, or even derailment, as well as an uncomfortable ride.

Skabat169 04:51, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Multiple working
Multiple working also exists - Multiple-unit train control deals with the technology, that page deals with the British system more specific. Any thoughts Wongm (talk) 00:00, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Suggest merge, also see below.

Merge
Suggesting merge of Diesel_locomotive see Talk:Diesel_locomotive

as well as Multiple working into one "uber article".

What the best title would be?FengRail (talk) 20:44, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

✅Merge: I agree that this article and Multiple working should be merged since they are both on similar topics. Slender (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Articles to be linked
There are a numerous related articles including Control Car Remote Control Locomotive, consist, Slug (railroad)

Error in linked table?
I think there is an error in the table at Railway Technical Web Pages. There is no numbered wire for "E" Governor Solenoid. Biscuittin (talk) 08:46, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Multiple-unit train control. 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://web.archive.org/web/20141007220720/http://www.railway-technical.com/newglos.shtml to http://www.railway-technical.com/newglos.shtml
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080201090339/http://www.railway-technical.com/us-musp.shtml to http://www.railway-technical.com/us-musp.shtml

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) 04:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Language…
… is more akin to a rail enthusiast magazine that an encyclopaedia. Expressions like ‘they can be easily spotted’ is anorak-speak. 2001:8003:229C:DE00:CCF8:47C5:5A7A:AC35 (talk) 09:20, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this is a problem on a great many articles relating to trains and rail transport. Focus on spotting features and minor details at the expense of achieving encyclopedic treatment of a subject (in the U.S. we call rabid railfans foamers). I am slowly working on addressing this issue across high level articles like this but it's a task I won't have done for years. I'm very proud of how I cleaned up and improved Train but that and Rail transport are the only high level rail transport articles I am happy with the state of. As you pointed out, we are an encyclopedia, not a railfan magazine. But who's going to edit train articles besides railfans? (and let's be real, I'm one too). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:03, 23 March 2022 (UTC)