Railroad Forums
Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman
MudLake wrote:The configuration of Acela Express was loosely modeled from the TGV (using conventional trucks and adding tilting). How is that a rejection of a tried and true technology?The only things that were taken from the TGV were the aynchronous motors. The rest was Bombardier's design.
geoking66 wrote:I was referring more to the general layout of the train with a dedicated power car on each end. It works quite well for the TGV so why is there a rejection of this concept in Acela in favor of an EMU arrangement? Also, I was under the impression that Alstom played a bigger design role than just contributing the asynchronous motors but I freely admit that I very well could be wrong.MudLake wrote:The configuration of Acela Express was loosely modeled from the TGV (using conventional trucks and adding tilting). How is that a rejection of a tried and true technology?The only things that were taken from the TGV were the aynchronous motors. The rest was Bombardier's design.
MudLake wrote:Also, I was under the impression that Alstom played a bigger design role than just contributing the asynchronous motors but I freely admit that I very well could be wrong.I believe you are correct:
Gilbert B Norman wrote:Mr. King, we should note that the EMU is a "been there done that' with the premium service equipment. the Metroliner MU cars were obviously a commercial success in that they engendered 492 "look alike' Amfleets. But alas, they were mechanical nightmares, and were withdrawn from premium service by 1980. Today, some "soldier on" as de-motored cab units in bi-directional equipment assignments.They were withdrawn from Metroliner service by 1980 or thereabouts, but a few of them did make it to 1987 in New York - Harrisburg service. Here's one in December of 1986. I always thought they were cool looking trains, and I wish I had gotten to ride aboard one. One of these days I'll have to take a ride in one of the cab car conversions on a Keystone train!
hsr_fan wrote:There is no EMU TGV out there. Perhaps you meant the next generation TGV, if there is one in development?well, EMU's dont' require that passengers occupy the ends of the train, however EMU gives better acceleration rates due to many more powered axles. it also may become more important as train power requirements become so large as to make the a single or double power car much heavier than the passenger cars and start to produce excessive track wear and possibly impacts general train handling
Tier II safety requirements dictate that no passengers can occupy the lead or trailing unit of the train, so that kind of eliminates EMU's from consideration.
metrarider wrote:there's absolutely nothing precluding an EMU acela with non occupied (end cars) but distributed power,
however it's probably not that important in the lower speed, fewer stops realm that the acela currently operates inLower speed?
hsr_fan wrote:not really, many train sets, both EMU and conventional power car power, have 'empty' driving cars that provide space for baggage or packages or other stuff, but not passengers. Sure looking out the front or rear window is cool thoughmetrarider wrote:there's absolutely nothing precluding an EMU acela with non occupied (end cars) but distributed power,
It would be a waste on an EMU, however, to have an unoccupied crash buffer car on each end. One thing I liked about the ICE 3 was being able to look through the windshield when I took first class and rode aboard the lead car!
hsr_fan wrote:Sorry but a short stretch of 150mph running doesn't put Acela in the same league as the latest ICE/TGV/Shinkansen where EMU's are currently or planned to be used. plus shorter trainsets mean it's less of a factor than the longer sets common elsewhere in the worldhowever it's probably not that important in the lower speed, fewer stops realm that the acela currently operates inLower speed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mw1IqwPgGoI
metrarider wrote:Sorry but a short stretch of 150mph running doesn't put Acela in the same league as the latest ICE/TGV/Shinkansen where EMU's are currently or planned to be used. plus shorter trainsets mean it's less of a factor than the longer sets common elsewhere in the worldTrue, there are only about 32 miles of 150 mph track currently. However, having just taken the Acela from New York to Washington and back, I can tell you that there is a lot of sustained 110, 125 and even 135 mph running. Many of the Shinkansens in Japan max out at 150 or 160 mph. Only the Series 500 reaches 186 mph.
hsr_fan wrote:the north part is quite curvy, and slow(er) as a result. South of York it's a reasonable railroad. Although they WCML might be a better comparison ni many ways with the NEC than the ECML. Although both have far more capacity than the NECmetrarider wrote:Sorry but a short stretch of 150mph running doesn't put Acela in the same league as the latest ICE/TGV/Shinkansen where EMU's are currently or planned to be used. plus shorter trainsets mean it's less of a factor than the longer sets common elsewhere in the worldTrue, there are only about 32 miles of 150 mph track currently. However, having just taken the Acela from New York to Washington and back, I can tell you that there is a lot of sustained 110, 125 and even 135 mph running. Many of the Shinkansens in Japan max out at 150 or 160 mph. Only the Series 500 reaches 186 mph.
I was over in England in June, and I took a GNER IC225 train from York to Edinburgh. That line is probably more comparable to the NEC - an old but upgraded right of way, 125 mph speeds.
metrarider wrote:The WCML is probably the NEC of the UK (that was a lot of abbreviations in one sentence). It's got everything from high-speed rail using Pendolinos (which I've ridden, much better than Acela in my opinion), commuter rail all over the place, and freight. The only major difference is the amount of service. Acelas are hourly whilst Pendolinos are every 10-20 minutes. I don't get how more traffic is handled on the WCML, in the section between Euston and Rugby, it's only four tracks in most places.hsr_fan wrote:the north part is quite curvy, and slow(er) as a result. South of York it's a reasonable railroad. Although they WCML might be a better comparison ni many ways with the NEC than the ECML. Although both have far more capacity than the NECmetrarider wrote:Sorry but a short stretch of 150mph running doesn't put Acela in the same league as the latest ICE/TGV/Shinkansen where EMU's are currently or planned to be used. plus shorter trainsets mean it's less of a factor than the longer sets common elsewhere in the worldTrue, there are only about 32 miles of 150 mph track currently. However, having just taken the Acela from New York to Washington and back, I can tell you that there is a lot of sustained 110, 125 and even 135 mph running. Many of the Shinkansens in Japan max out at 150 or 160 mph. Only the Series 500 reaches 186 mph.
I was over in England in June, and I took a GNER IC225 train from York to Edinburgh. That line is probably more comparable to the NEC - an old but upgraded right of way, 125 mph speeds.
btw - the IC225 has a 'dummy' engine / cab car on one end, and a traditional power car on the other just to bring it into context of the thread - although it's not an EMU
geoking66 wrote:It's got everything from high-speed rail using Pendolinos (which I've ridden, much better than Acela in my opinion),How so? Just curious...
hsr_fan wrote:For one, the frequency is much better, around every 15 minutes there's one from Euston, much more reliable than Acela (despite the Grayrigg derailment, but that wasn't Virgin's fault so I wouldn't blame them), and the Standard Class pricing is relatively inexpensive, sometimes as low as £13.50 ($27.11).geoking66 wrote:It's got everything from high-speed rail using Pendolinos (which I've ridden, much better than Acela in my opinion),How so? Just curious...
I was hoping to ride aboard a Pendolino in June, but it just didn't fit into my schedule.
Edit: It does look nice!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B_eyfj-dxQ&NR=1
