Template talk:LGV Interconnexion Est

Fancy arrows
"Fancy arrows" are pretty and great, but I don't believe they should take priority over keeping a diagram accurate. That includes: For the moment I'm done a temporary undo; please feel free to re-add the beautification in a way that does not sacrifice factual quality. —Sladen (talk) 01:51, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Motorway bridges
 * LGV Est double flying junction configuration
 * Offset CDG runway alignment
 * Differentiation between what is a different line and what is an old unused/lesser used route (old PSE route) and Vemars single-track spur.


 * Let me remind you that:
 * The template rmr is part of official WP:RDT use (see here and here for some nice examples)
 * Pink icons are used for either abandoned lines or lines other than the one in the diagram (like the LGV Nord) - no difference is made between the traffic on the tracks
 * Having the runways in different alignments just looks bad - either the runway crosses the track or it doesn't
 * I don't see the difference between the different LGV Est junctions
 * Therefore my edits, apart from the removing of the N2, N3 & N4 (for which I admit my mistake), do not remove factual accuracy but improve it by conforming to current WP:RDT rules.
 * Chris DHDR 16:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
 * PS:The track from the Coubert triangle towards Paris is in fact part of this line, even if it is used by almost all PSE trains - this will need to be changed.


 * Agreed, there are indeed some lovely examples on the WP:RDT page. (I wonder who the author(s) were..?)
 * There is a flying junction: LGV Est Eastwards—Interconnexion Southwards; because of the huge size of these triangles, this leaves/joins south of the canal and motorway crossing.
 * I'll cede your point about the runways. The runways at CDG are highly offset.  Depending on how one measures, the north runway only crosses the LGV line by 130 m (or 200 m), or possibly doesn't cross it at all (−500 m).  Phrased another way 97% of the runway tarmac is on one side of the LGV line and 3% on the other—which is why I chose to try and build upon that.  If the offsetting is removed, please also rename the runways to include both approaches.
 * Not entirely sure what to do about the diagram at the south end; the junctions were remodelled to give line-speed to the through PSE path—I'll defer to you and any references you can find about what technically "belongs" to each of the LGVs now.
 * —Sladen (talk) 18:49, 5 November 2008 (UTC)