Richard E. "Rick" Shivik
HO D&H Champlain Division
Piedmont Division NMRA
Conyers,GA
HO D&H Champlain Division
Piedmont Division NMRA
Conyers,GA
Railroad Forums
Jet Train
- General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1
if you want high speed diesel , then i think a high reving diesel genset(s) is the way to go .
Moderator worldwide railfan , Rail travel & trip reports
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
It rises again in that this is the first time I have seen that footage on YouTube. And I have searched "JetTrain" frequently from time to time over the years and this is the first time it has popped up for me. (BTW, who said anything about wanting high speed diesel?)
Imeant the whole purpose of the jet train was to get a high speed diesel , ( or non electrified hsr ) , and a trubine is not the way to do it . hence the quiet death .
Moderator worldwide railfan , Rail travel & trip reports
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
David Benton wrote:if you want high speed diesel , then i think a high reving diesel genset(s) is the way to goWhy is that? Because of the MTU 4000s that some of the Class 43s in the UK were re-engined with...?
well , yes that is an excellent example , even the original paxmans could get up and go , with acceleration 2nd only to an electric . i just think there would be so much equipment avaliable in the genset market , it would make costs low .
Moderator worldwide railfan , Rail travel & trip reports
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
David Benton wrote:well , yes that is an excellent example , even the original paxmans could get up and go , with acceleration 2nd only to an electric . i just think there would be so much equipment avaliable in the genset market , it would make costs low .Are there any hydrogen-fuel cell locomotives yet? There is a one car train in Sweden that runs on biogas.
george matthews wrote:BNSF tested a hydrogen fuel cell locomotive in 2009. This was a switch engine, and no further word has been forthcoming about it. I've certainly never heard of a high-speed passenger type.David Benton wrote:well, yes that is an excellent example, even the original paxmans could get up and go, with acceleration 2nd only to an electric. i just think there would be so much equipment avaliable in the genset market, it would make costs low.Are there any hydrogen-fuel cell locomotives yet? There is a one car train in Sweden that runs on biogas.
i think fuel cells will die a quiet death too . Lithuim batteries in some form or the other seem to be the way to go .
Moderator worldwide railfan , Rail travel & trip reports
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
The only train trips I regret are the ones I didn't take.
I remember a similar concept in a made for TV movie about a fictional "Nations First Coast-To-Coast Jet Powered Monorail."
Richard E. "Rick" Shivik
HO D&H Champlain Division
Piedmont Division NMRA
Conyers,GA
HO D&H Champlain Division
Piedmont Division NMRA
Conyers,GA
Champlain Division wrote:I remember a similar concept in a made for TV movie about a fictional "Nations First Coast-To-Coast Jet Powered Monorail."What is the obsession some people have for monorails? 100 years of experience with monorails has shown that the bi-rail has overwhelming advantages over the mono.
Out in the open field, I agree with you. In urban setting, monorails make more sense.
The advantages are a smaller footprint, less 'sunshine obstruction', quieter and ease of constructing the tracks (pre-fab sections). Look at some of the designs that Seattle had for making their proposed monorail pylons almost invisible compared to an old El.
Where land acquisition isn't an issue, steel wheel on steel rail can't be beat.
The advantages are a smaller footprint, less 'sunshine obstruction', quieter and ease of constructing the tracks (pre-fab sections). Look at some of the designs that Seattle had for making their proposed monorail pylons almost invisible compared to an old El.
Where land acquisition isn't an issue, steel wheel on steel rail can't be beat.
djlong wrote:The advantages are a smaller footprint, less 'sunshine obstruction', quieter and ease of constructing the tracks (pre-fab sections). Look at some of the designs that Seattle had for making their proposed monorail pylons almost invisible compared to an old El.Monorail is a smaller footprint than light rail or commuter rail?
Kuala Lumpur's Monorail
Vancouver's Sky Train
While I'm not capable of measuring the dimensions of the vertical pillars between monorail and light metro rail trains, they look approximately the same to me. Additionally, I wanted to point out the size (length) of the trains and the vehicles.
DFW's TRE commuter rail
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUyTjc3W4T8
I'll agree traditional commuter rail viaducts have significantly larger pillars. But then again, that locomotive and double deck Bombardier railcars are significantly heavier.
And I suggest that physical science suggests the heavier the train weighs the larger and stronger the pillars and supports must be. Monorail trains aren't automatically lighter than light rail trains. The length of the trains is just one of many items that determines that. Others include length of the vehicle, width of the vehicle, height of the vehicle, materials used to make the vehicle, and crash worthiness of the vehicle....