9 is Rouen, I believe.

I have never been in the station itself, but when I was in the city last November, having parked the car by the river, I was surprised to see a class 66 locomotive in the "old" EWS^▸ (English Welsh & Scottish Railway Ltd, now known as DB Schenker Rail (UK^▸ (United Kingdom))) livery running along the shore of the Seine on the line that's between the Quai de Paris and the river. It's the second such occurrence - happened near Beziers Cap D'Agde airport many years ago too.

Did you know that Tornio has a Wiltshire connection? It's twinned with Devizes. It's clearly done a bit better, rail-connection wise than It's Wiltshire twin.

I have found this section fascinating.  I visited some of the places you have visited, although not by train,  on a birding trip back in 1988. I admit I didn't even know that Tornio was on the rail network.

Looking forward to the next installment.

They are Rooks, Marlburian. One used the extensive metal structure forming part of the OHL^▸ (Over-Head Line) equipment at Goring as a nest site over the main lines as a nest site last year!

Presumably - 60% was thought to be  by private car. Buses, cycles (mostly) and quite a substantial proportion of walking is on roads.

However - using II's table - private car accounts for 86% of all passenger miles, rail, 8.64%, all "road", 90.8% - air just 0.54%.

I am not sure though that it is enough to be a major political factor.  Any pro-rail feeling that the current government has not funded rail adequately is probably outweighed by widely-held (but mistaken?) belief that too much money was being/had been spent on HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) and Crossrail. I would not be surprised if someone did some polling on this issue before HS2 was severely pruned.

At Goring & Streatley, it was the combination of an active local pressure group (MIGG - I think that stood for "Mobility in Goring Gap", but happy to be corrected by anyone who knows better) and the opportunity provided by the announcement that the footbridge at the station would be replaced and the prolonged delay in NR^» (Network Rail - home page) actually getting around to starting work.

I think Cholsey's problem is that you have an underpass, not a footbridge, so lifts as part of a footbridge renewal is not an opportunity that will arise.

Strikes me we ought to be planning for the extra capacity for this now, you know, like the French did 50 years ago. Perhaps what we need is a high-speed network to separate out the long-distance traffic and free up existing capacity for freight and local trains.

Oh, wait.........

For those who do not subscribe to Paul Whitewick's excellent You Tube channel, here's his take on the HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s)) fiasco (and some of the opposition to it, both "environmental" and economic).-

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fS_KrQExIE

It's a technical question regarding the process for applying to divert or stop up a public right of way.

Confusingly there are two ways of doing so, either under the Highways Act or the Town & Country Planning Acts. For some reason the planning permission specified the latter, but Network Rail appears to have applied under the former.

The proposed amendment will rectify this, albeit that I would have thought that the council would want to make the prior condition the making of the Highway Act order, rather than the application.

I expect most passengers don't care if differences between the fenestration result in differences in the external appearance of first and standard class coaches or parts of them. Wouldn't it be nice if they put our needs above any desire for uniform window spacing that almost noone will notice and even fewer care about?

There's already quite a variation in the external appearance of various types of coaches comprising a typical modern fixed formation passenger train

Actually 37-40 year old stock, but your point is well made.

I had previously thought about posting that perhaps this should be promoted as a heritage diesel experience........

Might this change soon in the light of recent posts about tendering for new stock for the GW^▸ (Great Western) network?

Out of personal interest - how does it account for season tickets?

I noted with interest that the 2020-21 figure (1st lockdown year) for Goring & Streatley to Guildford was only 127, whereas the previous two years it was 1974 and 1264. In those years I would have been doing about 200 journeys on that route on annual season tickets. Can I see the effect of lockdown on my commuting habits reflected in these figures?

Many years ago, I was sat with what my wife calls "one of my commuting friends" on the North Downs line as we both commuted to Guildford, he being another professional person working in the property sector. In our carriage, but some way from us, was someone was talking loudly on his mobile phone. We both worked out from what he said who he worked for - no doubt had we been closer we would have worked out the project he was discussing.

9 - St John's Newfoundland

Personal opinion – I think that all these proposals are starting from the wrong place.

Most rail passengers want to take a return journey – out and back form the same place to the same destination. They might want to reserve a seat, but probably would rate flexibility above this. If you are on a business trip, you are probably going to a meeting, and who wants to spend half the meeting worrying about whether you will miss your train? (as in my experience, many do), and if it’s a leisure trip most would welcome the flexibility of a choice of trains. Who wants to have the hassle of wondering if there’s a train 70 minutes after one nominated on a ticket?

So – make the core fare the off-peak return. I can see the merit in an additional charge for peak time travel. If you want to reserve a seat, then an option to pay for this. If you don’t make that train then you lose your payment, but if it’s because the train is cancelled or short-formed, or missed due to a late running connection, then there’s an automatic right to get a refund. No rules about not breaking your journey, short stopping (if the TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) is dumb enough to charge more for an intermediate station, the customer can buy the cheaper fare for the longer journey without penalty) and no “only valid via X” rules. Any revised permitted routing guide to have maximum reasonable flexibility. The ticket is valid for 30 days from date of first travel, to allow weekend/overnight/holiday travel.

The starting point in setting the fare under this regime should be the cheapest current off-peak return between the starting point and destination. If you do want one way only, it’s half that fare. Nothing else, save that TOCs can make special offers, but these (apart from price) to be on these terms, unless “rover tickets” giving unlimited travel in a specified area.

So – one basic fare for a return off-peak. A peak time supplement, a supplement for reserving a seat and half the fare for a one-way journey and that’s it. Apart from this, it’s valid for 30 days from first travel, and journeys can be broken at the passenger’s absolute discretion, and they can choose a route to suit them. It would still mean there would have to be the extensive lists of what is a reasonable route, but there ought to be some clear rules, such as doubling back if a stopping service is cancelled or if the stop is missed by the TOC is permitted without penalty.

Split ticketing to remain possible, to give TOCs (or whoever really sets fares) an incentive to change fares to remove such anomalies.

Is that all pie in the sky/unrealistic/fundamentally flawed/misses one or more practical problem? 

Add St Pancras to Amsterdam Central, but it will be suspended for a while after June for the reconstruction of Amsterdam Central