These are all meaningful, but the meaning is changed and the context in which they could be used would be changed. "Would" is more often used to discuss expectations (that one feels certain about) in projected courses of action, rather than hopes or expectations in the current situation. You wouldn't use "would" there except in limited circumstances, when you are very confident in your predictions. I think a lot of this falls out of the use of "should" to describe model behavior or what is 'right' (like def. 3 here). Incidentally, I think (without proof) that that is why we don't use "should" to describe expectations that go awry, like the train being late: we certainly don't think that our hopes or expectations ought to be denied!
with "should" is a prediction; with "would" the speaker is certain enough to, for instance, discount the possibility of it not having been received. ("They would have it by now, so that can't be the reason they haven't responded...")
"should" states a probable expectation, while "would" is more like a certainty in a hypothetical plan ("We would get there by six, which would give us time to change before dinner...")
is tough. "We wouldn't have to wait much longer" is an acceptable utterance with an appropriate context: if I'm making a case for my plan (staying in line) over your plan (leaving the line). The implied full thought is "we wouldn't have to wait much longer [if we agreed to stay]." Here we are discussing the expected-to-be-certain details of possible plans, rather than stating our hopes about the future.
would work if you'd said "there were no reports of delays, the train would be on time [and that is why I am worried that your sister hasn't arrived yet]". This is related to sentence 1; I am stating a prediction about which I feel certain enough that I discount the train being late as a possible reason that your sister is delayed, and start worrying that something else could have happened to her.
Meaning is completely changed--we don't use "should" to emphasize things that happen contrary to expectation. Sometimes "The train would be late!" (with emphasis) is used expressing frustration that the train is late. The resulting statement is whining. A more full example: "The train would be late on the day I have an interview! This always happens to me!"
So: the distinction as I see it is pretty much what your edited addition says. "Should" suggests a more tentative attitude than "would," which may be from genuine uncertainty, or from an attempt to be more polite or more emotionally removed.
Both "should" and "would" are used to discuss an event about which the speaker is not completely certain or confident. But "would" seems to have the implication of talking about the details of a hypothetical world, future course of action, proposed plan, etc. "Should" is used to make less confident predictions about the future.
BE + going to - Lindsay is going to fly to New York next week.
Forms with BE + going to possibly originated in such utterances as:
1. We are going to meet Andrea at the cinema,
uttered when we were literally going, i.e. on the way, to the meeting. At the moment of speaking there was present evidence of the future meeting. This use has become extended to embrace any action for which there is present evidence – things do not have to be literally moving. Consider now these two utterances:
2. Look at those black clouds. It's going to rain.
3. Luke is going to see Bob Dylan in concert next year
In [2] the present evidence is clear – the black clouds. In [3], the present evidence may be the tickets for the concert that the speaker has seen on Luke’s desk, or it may simply be the knowledge in the speaker's mind that s/he has somehow acquired.
Modal (will) - Lindsay will fly to New York next week.
Will is a modal and, like the other modals, has two core meanings. The two core meanings for most modal are:
(a) the 'extrinsic' meaning, referring to the probability of the event/state
(b) the 'intrinsic' meaning, reflecting such concepts as: ability, necessity,
obligation, necessity, permission, possibility, volition, etc.
The extrinsic meaning of will is exemplified in:
4. Emma left three hours ago, so she will be in Manchester by now.
5. There will be hotels on the moon within the next 50 years.
6. The afternoon will be bright and sunny, though there may be rain in the north.
In all three examples, the speaker suggests 100% probability, i.e. absolute certainty. (MAY would imply possibility, MUST logical certainty, to take examples of two other modals). Note that while certainty in [5] and [6] is about the future, in [4] it is about the present. It is the absolute certainty, in the minds of speaker/writer and listener/reader, that can give the impression that forms using ‘the will future’ are some way of presenting ‘the future as fact’. Some writers therefore call this form ‘the Future Simple’. Weather forecasters, writers of business/scientific reports, deliverers of presentations, etc, frequently use will, and learners who encounter English more through reading native writers than hearing native speakers informally may assume that it is a 'neutral' or 'formal' future. In fact the particular native writer or speaker is simply opting to stress certainty rather than arrangement, plan or present evidence.
The intrinsic meaning of will is exemplified in:
7. I'll carry your bag for you.
8. Will you drive me to the airport, please?
9. Jed will leave his mobile switched on in meetings. It's so annoying when it rings.
These examples show what we might loosely call volition, the willingness or determination of the subject of the modal to carry out the action. Note that [9] is not about the future, and in [7] and [8] the futurity is incidental. It is context rather than words which gives the meaning.
Best Answer
There is a huge difference between the two sentences:
means that something has occurred which may or may not have been John's fault
means he is not at home, but enough time has passed that it would have been achievable
means he did not get into trouble but he would have been better off if he did (it is an awkward sentence in that respect)
Drawing a conclusion involves determining an outcome using facts. It is a form of prediction and forecasting. Guessing usually means trying to determine an outcome without any facts ie a wild guess