On 16/11/2015 01:38, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 15 Nov 2015 22:33:16 +0000, Dr J R Stockton
wrote:

In uk.transport.london message
om, Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:16:38, e27002 aurora posted:

On Sat, 14 Nov 2015 09:03:03 +0000, Chris J Dixon
wrote:

Basil Jet wrote:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxScXvX1Dv4

I'm a little surprised that they claim it uses less power than a
conventional lift. If you have to raise a given mass through a
given vertical distance, shouldn't the answer be the same?


It is a funicular railway, no?


According to the beginning of
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funicular#Inclined_lift, a funicular must
have two cars - but other parts of the article ignore that.

"Funicular" relates to the haulage method (a rope) so once again
Wonkypaedia seems to have bolted a few bits on to a definition unlike
e.g. Wiktionary which simply states "Of, pertaining to, resembling, or
powered by a rope or cable" in agreement with various dictionary
websites. It would seem to be a false assumption that a funicular
railway is inevitably one that uses two vehicles rather than one and a
counterbalance as used on the currently out of use Broadstairs Cliff
Railway :-
http://www.theheritagetrail.co.uk/cl...roadstairs.htm
(NB 5' 3" gauge).
and the definitely-defunct Margate Cliff Railway
http://www.hows.org.uk/personal/rail/mar.htm

The only other two single-vehicle railways in the World listed in :-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...cular_railways
were both in the USA. Using two vehicles is probably optimal for
nearly all systems thus providing the seed for Wonky's incorrect
description.


Technically the counterbalance could be the second vehicle in the
description, it doesn't have to be passenger carrying.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read, substitute trains for rail.