Will a TGV train function properly on the Northeast Corridor rail line and vise versa?
alloboard "...Will a TGV train function properly on the Northeast Corridor rail line and vise versa?"
"...Will a TGV train function properly on the Northeast Corridor rail line and vise versa?"
Not only will it.. An I.C.E. train demonstrator has run in AMTRAK service on the NEC! See link @ http://www.railfaneurope.net/ice/ice_usa.html
FTA:"...From July to October, this ICE was shown to the public at Baltimore, Washington DC, Maryland, Pittsburgh, Albany, Maryland, Niagara Falls, Toronto, Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Sacramento, Oakland, San José, San Francisco, Los Angeles, San Diego, Orlando, Raleigh, Providence, Boston, Springfield and St Louis..."
And in Regular Service! FTA:"...From October 4 to December 15, the train was in regular service as a Metroliner between New York and Washington DC, at a speed of up to 220 km/h..."
See the above linked site for the Technical Modificatons that were made to enable its operation in the USA. Site also has a couple of pictures, as well.
I see, but will an Amtrak Acela work on Frances TG System? What about platform clearances? What if the TGV cars have different floor heights.
Just because the ICE ran OK on the NEC, does not automatically mean that a TGV will also do the same. At the time of the ICE test opertion, the operation in Germany was 12,000V 16-2/3 Hz AC. The transformer for !6-2/3 Hz should work OK, with little loss in efficiency, at 25 Hz AC, and the voltage drop from 12,000 to 11,000 volts should have only a minor effect on the top speed, which could not be used on the NEX because of track conditions anyway.
The TGV operateds off of 50Hz 25,000 Hz. It would work on the portions of the NEC, east of New Haven to Boston, that are now at 60Hz 25,000Hz. It could not run on the portions that are stilll at 25Hz, now 12,000V.
USA passenger equipment is generally too large for European clearances.
What about floor height clearances.
TGVs are designed to operate under 1500V DC and 25kV/50Hz AC, with some also capable of 15kV/16.7 Hz AC, and a small number off 3000V DC.
Then the ones also capable of 15000V 16-2/3 HZ could probably manage the present 12000V 25Hz, again with some reduced performance and could thus run the corridor. The others could not but would be restricted to the 25000V 60 Hz portion.
Doesn't the TGV and most of European trains run on meter gauge track? Wasn't there a tilting passenger train test ran in the N.E. US? I'd guess riding on the tilting train might be unsettling to some people.
Modeling the "Fargo Area Rapid Transit" in O scale 3 rail.
Boyd Doesn't the TGV and most of European trains run on meter gauge track? Wasn't there a tilting passenger train test ran in the N.E. US? I'd guess riding on the tilting train might be unsettling to some people.
I can recall the following foreign equipment on US rails: D&RGW and SP each purchased three diesel-torque converter locomotives from Krauss Maffei of Munich in 1961. SP purchased an additional 15 of a modified design in 1964. Amtrak also tested a French (X995) and Swedish (X996) electric locomotive in the NEC prior to the purchase of the AEM7's. South Shore has 44 MU coaches from Sumitomo of Japan. The shells were built in Japan while most of the interior fittings were installed in the United States.
BoydDoesn't the TGV and most of European trains run on meter gauge track?
"Metric" is not the same as "meter". The LGV are built to 1435mm (or thereabouts) [NOT 1524mm as I first said here; you can tell metric isn't my 'native system'] which is the metric 'equivalent' of standard gauge. About the smallest-gauge tilting trains I know of are the ones in Queensland (perhaps not coincidentally called "Tilt Trains") which have successfully run over 125mph on 3'6" track (or its 1067mm 'equivalent'). While some people, notably the Brazilians with both steam (GELSA) and diesel, have done amazing things on meter gauge, there's a really big drop between 'Cape' and metre gauge with respect to true high-speed stability (and the ability to apply 'negative cant deficiency' to a carbody at high speed).
Wasn't there a tilting passenger train test ran in the N.E. US?
Quite a few, including something that should be mentioned but has not been, the Canadian LRC.
For some reason it is almost impossible to find the appropriate technical reports from the testing on the Web (they are counterparts to the report on high-speed suspension I mentioned in the SEPTA broken-Silverliner-V-truck thread). I cannot post an effective link to them, as they are in a special library connected with NTIS (the United States 'National Technical Information Service) called NTRL, which requires (free) registration. I'm "permanently logged in" and so can't display the appropriate page in a link I can check when pasted into a post, but here is the basic information page, from which you can register:
http://www.ntis.gov/products/ntrl/
You will need to confirm registration via the e-mail address you provide.
Once you are signed in, go to the Search tab and then enter "high cant deficiency" as the term. This will give you a number of highly interesting reports, including those for the X2000 and ICE trains as well as the earlier Amcoach and LRC tests, which you can download as PDFs.
Other search terms will likely provide further valuable content, for example on class 9 track design.
I'd guess riding on the tilting train might be unsettling to some people.
There is a fundamental concern with any tilting train: the 'correction' for centrifugal force applies to only some regions inside the carbody for any given degree of tilt. Most engineering (since the British APT-E, which was really the pioneering examination of the technology applied to true high speed) has calculated this to give maximum 'correction' to the seated passengers, and so (depending on the geometry of the tilt mechanism) standing passengers are likely to experience some very strange (and possibly counterintuitive) inner-ear 'alerts'. There is a very famous example of an early BR test of one of the APT consists where a large 'press' contingent was present. These were well-plied with alcohol in the then-typical approach to put 'em in a mood to write grateful and appreciative stories, but the attempt very sadly backfired when the subsequent test was run up to maximum demonstration speed on a typically curvy section of permanent way. With their sense of balance already severely decremented, and observing the rather dramatic difference between the view out the windows (which was a fascinating thing even when sober!) and what was supposedly being felt inside, a great many of the pressmen had a poor day of it, and their coverage reflected that rather than a great British technical achievement. We are all (except the Italians who bought the technology for Pendolino) a bit the worse off for that.
The most unsettling thing, once you get used to the view out the window, comes when one of the tilt mechanisms fails at speed and you get the view between cars. This was not, to me, nearly as unsettling as the view you'd sometimes get between cars in the NYC subway A train in the early '70s, when part of the train would lean one way and an adjacent part the other, the visual reference being to see the difference in the angle of doorways between cars (which were open in those more halcyon days) as the absolute tilt of a car.
CSSHEGEWISCH I can recall the following foreign equipment on US rails: D&RGW and SP each purchased three diesel-torque converter locomotives from Krauss Maffei of Munich in 1961. SP purchased an additional 15 of a modified design in 1964. Amtrak also tested a French (X995) and Swedish (X996) electric locomotive in the NEC prior to the purchase of the AEM7's. South Shore has 44 MU coaches from Sumitomo of Japan. The shells were built in Japan while most of the interior fittings were installed in the United States.
The Krauss-Maffei M400 C'C' diesel hydraulic locomotives, with their cover photo, and interior story. A nice photo spread of a Southern Pacific painted unit being tested on the Alpine grade of the Semmering Pass line.
The first six units delivered in the USA were in 1961, to both Denver and Rio Grande RR [ decorated in yellow and silver] and the 3 to Southern Pacific[ in red and gray]. Eventually D&RGW, sold their units to SP. Interestingly, the D&RGW loand out a couple of their units, 1 went west to be part of multi-unit testing on SP and one went East to be tested on the D&H and NYC.
See link for the K-M story and history @ http://sp9010.ncry.org/cabunits.htm
samfp1943See link for the K-M story and history @ http://sp9010.ncry.org/cabunits.htm
Everyone, including me, has been looking at the topic sentence of this post, which doesn't adequately describe what the original poster appears to have been asking.
It might be argued that there was substantial 'foreign' content in other areas, such as the post-Frangeco Rohr Turboliners, or the transmissions in the Alco-haulic DH-643s. But the initial question he asked has an important answer that, as far as I can see, hasn't been described yet.
The French sent a locomotive over for testing as part of the high-speed competition that led to the 'toasters'.
http://www.amtrakhistoricalsociety.org/x996.html
One of the cardinal reasons for its relative failure was the suspension design and tuning. It was very well understood that the contemporary TGV designs were all even more radical in secondary stiffness than X996 was, so even with a waiver from FRA collision standards there would be little point in testing a TGV trainset on even the most "improved" Northeast Corridor track.
Does anyone have access to the actual current Amtrak B&F plan, or know to what extent the design technologies for the 220mph proposed trainsets have been specified? I suspect there is some more recent document that reflects the fusion of the 2014 PRCIP with the 2012 'update' to the Vision for the Northeast Corridor report (that had the sexy CGI trainset pictures with what appeared to be drop-equalizer trucks(!) in it...). Whether this would be covered by a waiver from the Buy American regulations remains to be seen.
I spcecificaly meant that If the TGV operated on the NEC would there be an issue with boarding and floor and platform loading height and level.
M636C Boyd Doesn't the TGV and most of European trains run on meter gauge track? Wasn't there a tilting passenger train test ran in the N.E. US? I'd guess riding on the tilting train might be unsettling to some people. Apart from railways in Russia, former Soviet countries and Finland, which are five feet gauge, the great majority of European railways are standard gauge. There are a few metre gauge lines in Spain, France and Switzerland. A Swedish train, type X2000, was tested on the Northeast Corridor but a US built tilting train, the United Aircraft Turbotrain ran for Amtrak in its early days during the 1970s, also in the Northeast. The Acela trains built by Bombardier are tilting trains. I've ridden in a Swedish X2000. The tilting isn't noticeable from the seats but standing at the bar feels a little odd in curves. M636C
Much of the trackage in Spain and Portugal is broad gauge as well:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_gauge
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
[quote user="alloboard"]I specifically meant that 'if the TGV operated on the NEC would there be an issue with boarding and floor and platform loading height and level.'
I'm going to refer you to this site for starters, where you can likely find all the necessary dimensions and clearance information for your chosen 'flavor' of TGV. Then compare this with NEC clearances, particularly platform gap.
Paul Druce pointed out that even the duplex TGV fits inside the Amtrak height restriction (approx. 14'2" vs 14'8") and the 'control dimension' appears to be Plate C in the B&P tunnels, as seen in this set of references, so the issues you mention ... within the ADA-imposed context that all doors have to be 'handicap-enabled' for the trainset to be "legal" ... would be the 'controlling' ones. I still suspect that suspension issues would be critical, particularly if the ride height has to be adjusted to suit a TGV for NEC service.
There are a handful of Australian built SD50s running in Utah and one Oz built GE in Minnesota.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
D.Carleton There are a handful of Australian built SD50s running in Utah and one Oz built GE in Minnesota.
Those SD50s were built here, and brought back when their time in the Pilbara was done.
Buslist D.Carleton There are a handful of Australian built SD50s running in Utah and one Oz built GE in Minnesota.
I stand corrected!9
About 24 years ago three or four Danish-built IE-3 diesel three-unit, four-truck, mu's (diesel-mechanical, two outer trucks powered, two diesels) were tested in Amtrak Chicago- Milwaukee Hiawatha service before being delivered to Israel. They are built to European loading gauge and for low-platform set-up loading.
daveklepperAbout 24 years ago three or four Danish-built IE-3 diesel three-unit, four-truck, mu's (diesel-mechanical, two outer trucks powered, two diesels) were tested in Amtrak Chicago- Milwaukee Hiawatha service before being delivered to Israel. They are built to European loading gauge and for low-platform set-up loading.
Unless I'm very mistaken, you're describing the infamous Giant Sandworms of Dune, the Flying Lampreys, the ADtranz IC-3 Flexliners. Those things ran a demonstration tour in 1996-7, with some humorous results (if you thought the SPV-2000 had wacky problems, how about a computer that locks the bathroom door?). One notable story was that the computer derated and shut down the engines on a hot day going over Donner Pass and the Danish equivalent of a riding maintainer, asked what was wrong, said "I do not know. We do not have hills in Denmark." (It had no problem going back over the next morning, when it was cooler out.) Here is a version in Canadian service:
There was a rather good redesign of these, with stainless carbodies and water-cooled engines, developed in the late '90s, but when ADtranz was spun off to Bombardier it was not 'proceeded with'.
As an amusing aside, wasn't there a fire in one of these things in Israel, caused by a U-joint adjacent to a conveniently-placed fuel tank?
"The LGV are built to 1524mm (or thereabouts) which is the metric 'equivalent' of standard gauge."
Standard gauge is 1435 mm; 1524 mm (about 5 feet) is the gauge used in Finland.
Bob Nelson
[quote user="Overmod"]
[/quote above]
YES
but they are stiill being used, problem resolved
daveklepperYES but they are stiill being used, problem resolved
Specifically what did they do to 'fix' the situation?
I presume it was a combination of different maintenance procedure combined with some strategic redesign of the equipment configuration -- did they change anything about the design of the universal? Armor the tank or insulate it better?
Additional foreign equipment that ran on US rails includes the FAUR Quarter Horse which demonstrated for sales in the US and wound up on the Washington Terminal.
Also, in the late 1960s the Flying Scotsman 4-6-2 made a US tour. I saw it in 30th Street Station in Philly. (wasn't there an earlier tour by an English steam lovomotive in the US?)
Not to forget the French Turbos Amtrak ran, I am not talking about the Rohr copies which were produced later but lasted much longer.
There was an English built industrial switcher used in Ohio. I cannot remember the specifics other than the photographer was amazed that the cab was paneled with polished hardwood.
If we look north we can include the Hunslett switchers in the Vancouver Area, The English Electric locomotives on the CN Montreal commuter network, and the Werkspoor TEE locomotives on the ONR Northlander.
Others I missed?
In Canada, the original Toronto subway cars were built by Glascow Carriage Works. 10 foot-wide cars, Toronto streetcar gauge. Have been replaced.
DS4-4-1000 Additional foreign equipment that ran on US rails includes the FAUR Quarter Horse which demonstrated for sales in the US and wound up on the Washington Terminal. Also, in the late 1960s the Flying Scotsman 4-6-2 made a US tour. I saw it in 30th Street Station in Philly. (wasn't there an earlier tour by an English steam lovomotive in the US?) Not to forget the French Turbos Amtrak ran, I am not talking about the Rohr copies which were produced later but lasted much longer. There was an English built industrial switcher used in Ohio. I cannot remember the specifics other than the photographer was amazed that the cab was paneled with polished hardwood. If we look north we can include the Hunslett switchers in the Vancouver Area, The English Electric locomotives on the CN Montreal commuter network, and the Werkspoor TEE locomotives on the ONR Northlander. Others I missed?
The story was that they were sent in payment for a grain shipment from America to Russia. On arrival in Texas, The US Customs had them impounded, variously, I've heard they were not compliant with American standards ( crashworthyness, EPA, etc. ) Do not know 'rea'l story on that. They were never released to run in US, and sat in Houston Port area ever since?
I am wondering if they are still there or as some mentioned, scrapped there? Found some photo links and to TRAINS Forum Threads @
http://www.pbase.com/lynnh/russian_tem7a_engines
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/211583.aspx?page=2#2322414
http://cs.trains.com/trn/f/741/t/94901.aspx
The photos of the 11 TEM7A's are on the site Rail Pictures, and as I think about them; They were brought over during a time when Barter was being used for goods between the USA and Russia, as there was some problem with the currencies at that time....It was also within that same time frame, there was a story that the Pepsi-Cola Co. They had wound up with some Russian Submarines, as payment was bartered for them as well... IIRC, I think that Pepsi had them scrapped, to gain their value? [My guess is that Cocoa Cola was releived?]
The photos of the 11 TEM7A's are on the site Rail Pictures, and as I think about them; They were brought over during a time when Barter was being used for goods between the USA and Russia, as there was some problem with the currencies at that time....It was also within that same time frame, there was a story that the Pepsi-Cola Co. They had wound up with some Russian Submarines, as payment was bartered for them as well... IIRC, I think that Pepsi had them scrapped, to gain their value? [My guess is that Cocoa Cola was relieved?]
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.