AlexNL
Established Member
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 1,684
The livery of the unit on test isn't final yet. A second unit was outshopped not too long ago and this had the blue band continue on the power cars.
That's real. Tests are going on and the train has reached speeds up to 165mph.
Current Acela is fixed at 7, no? Which is crazy short in itself. Most of the key stations can take 10-12 without problem.It will be interesting to see how Amtrak gets on with fixed-formation articulated sets, instead of their traditional approach to mechanical issues of "cutting out cars" and having the rest continue.
Regarding the locos being a different profile to the coaches, again that's something just alien to European eyes. It's not just the bodywork, the livery application doesn't align either. I recall the Chicago rapid transit, by the 1970s, had three separate batches of cars, all compatible and able to multiple together, but with completely different body styles, which looked ridiculous trained together. Eventually a design house (I think it was Sundberg-Ferar) got a job to achieve something of it, and came up with quite a clever livery and striping application to make it look less obvious. Then the next batch of cars were delivered, with quite a different livery ...
The "Avelia Liberty" concept is capable of achieving speeds up to 220mph (354 km/h), but only with tilt disabled. Perhaps Alstom are hoping to be able to use the Avelia Liberty to get a foot in the door for future rolling stock, such as for the California HSR project?I doubt we will see this new product sold anywhere else in the world
Why would Alstom want to market this train in California? California doesn’t need tilting trains, so it’s much simpler for Alstom to market the AGV; in fact, the California HSR technical documents use the AGV as one of four example trains for purposes of figuring out schedules and infrastructure requirements.
...
The problem with the foot-in-the-door theory is that it compels Alstom to build a top-notch train, which may not be possible given the specs. If there’s a groundswell of HSR construction in the next 20 years, and Alstom is remembered for building a high-maintenance lemon, it’s unlikely to get orders for a while. The risk here is greater than the reward.
Could that be a bit like North British in the 1960s in Britain with their fine, reliable diesels, because the components were all tried and proven from Germany ... .The good thing about the Avelia is that is made from tried and proven components. May not be as sexy as am AGV, but it will work.
Still can't get over the body profile of the power cars and the passenger rakes being so noticeably different. How hard would it have been to at least have a cosmetic bulging towards the rear of the power car bodywork to match?
Providence RI not that much better either.How does the loading gauge / cross-section of these units compare to the UK or French equivalent. I presume it's bigger than the UK.
Having done the Acela a few times it is a shame how slowly it has to travel over some extremely antiquated infrastructure. The station at New London, CT is quite comically provincial.
I agree, especially that it's something that Amtrak has already done on a few of its power cars, especially on the roof.
Or maybe the product Amtrack wanted was this model and Amtrack were happy with that?Mismatched power and pax cars seem not to be a concern of the manufacturer, the one who has to sell these things.
It’s not a fully off-the-shelf product.Or maybe the product Amtrack wanted was this model and Amtrack were happy with that?
To be fair, Amtrak has had to do this on a fraction of the budget the TGV program had available. Their concentration on the profitable North East Corridor routes to prop up the business appears to be working well. Hopefully more income from these projects will help them invest into making other areas of the business profitable too.French trains were doing that speed in 1980. Only 40 years to catch up USA
Will these be doubled and split as per TGVs allowing for more peak capacity into and out of NYC, Philly, Washington and Boston?
Totally agree, I absolutely love the colour scheme too, even down to the mismatch between the cars, honestly it's funky and different I can't bash it. Shared bogies is cool to see as well.I am loving the overall train design, a great departure to what we often get here in the States. If this train is successful for Amtrak, this could help accelerate the high speed train movement in the U.S. in light of the recently opened diesel high speed service in Florida (private operator).
Off the core route, there would be nowhere worthwhile to split these. The only other wired route is to Harrisburg (Keystone seems to be the best place for the old Acelas, given how many regionals go beyond DC)
Presumably 20 years of hammering up and down the NEC, in the depths of extreme winter and heat of summer, with quite high humidity in the summer too, is quite hard work vs 20 years of operating on LGVs in France?
In order to procure the world’s best off-the-shelf train for the least amount of money, Amtrak decided to buy an existing design from a European or Japanese manufacturer, who have decades of experience building and operating high-speed trains. The winner of this competition was a consortium of Bombadier and Alstom (the French TGV builder).
Then, in 1999 with Acela planning fully underway, the FRA pulled the rug out by issuing regulations for high-speed rail service requiring trains to withstand 800,000 pounds force without deformation. The 800,000 figure is an arbitrary number dating back to the 1920s; this mandate has since been increased to 1 million pounds.
The buffering requirement confounded Bombadier. Train weight is of crucial importance as it affects the amount of track wear, noise, and energy costs. To meet the buffering regulation, the train would have to be significantly bulked-up. The result was a highspeed train nearly twice as heavy as its European counterparts. As such, the Acela has been described variously as a tank-on-wheels and a bank-vault-on-wheels. Indeed, an overweight train like Acela would be banned from the European high speed rail network.
Because the extra weight put so much strain on the train body (which was never designed to handle suchloads) trainsets suffered excessive wheel wear, cracks in the yaw damper and brake rotors, and other problems which can probably never be completely fixed. Whereas the original contract called for trains to run 400,000 miles between equipment failures, the Acela can barely manage 20,000 miles.
The original Acela trains are very heavy because of FRA crashworthiness requirements, and unreliable because of problems caused by their weight.
The original Acela trains are very heavy because of FRA crashworthiness requirements, and unreliable because of problems caused by their weight.