QUOTE: Originally posted by Townsend From what many of you have said is it appears electrification is a non starter. I get the point with double stack, that would be very difficult but not impossible to fit under wire. As to the cost (this is were i make sort of mistage ony a foreigner would make) wouldn't the government shoulder some of the cost to guarantee a morket for publicly owned hydro electric dams and other power plants if there are any. As to having a standard method of electrification, would the Association of American Railroads come up with a standard American electrification system for it's class 1 members.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator QUOTE: Originally posted by mhurley87f The point of my original respnse was, "What's the benefit of running 1 mile/2 mile long trains through, say Clapham Junction, Willesden Junction, Stratford, Leeeds West?? Any***up and the Fat Controller's blood would be on the moon !! The point is, that setting any arbitrary limit for train length (or forcing any arbitrary train length) is stupid since then trains lose much of their flexibility. Ling freights pretty much mean that in the night, when psgr traffic is light, much more capacity could be utilised. This way railroads could recapture some traffic they lost to trucks and ships. The advantage of railroads is quantity, limiting it is at least moronic.
QUOTE: Originally posted by mhurley87f The point of my original respnse was, "What's the benefit of running 1 mile/2 mile long trains through, say Clapham Junction, Willesden Junction, Stratford, Leeeds West?? Any***up and the Fat Controller's blood would be on the moon !!
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper You can run heavy ore trains under 1500V DC catenary, if you have the wire diameter and substation capacity to do it. And probably fi you are using only one locomotive, it better have two pantographs contacting the wire. I suspect it was substation capacity that prevented electric locomotives on the ore trains. One ore train probably would draw about ten times the amperage that one typical passenger train draws.
QUOTE: Originally posted by mhurley87f Let's start again, the UK's signalling thinking is based on a signal spacing that allows a safe braking distance from the permitted track speed, and that means in 3 aspect signal areas, a half mile signalling block will give around a mile advand ewarning of a red, and likewise in a 4 aspect area, around the same briaking distance. It's the distance between signals that limits the trains, not the maximium length the can be protected by a single track circuit. The point of my original respnse was, "What's the benefit of running 1 mile/2 mile long trains through, say Clapham Junction, Willesden Junction, Stratford, Leeeds West?? Any***up and the Fat Controller's blood would be on the moon !! Regards,
QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator QUOTE: Originally posted by mhurley87f In what way is it moronic to limit freight train length to track circuit signal block lenths? What (train length) works best west of the Chicago - New Orleans axis in the US would be truly moronic in Europe. Have you ever seen how busy and complicated track layouts can be over this side?? Yes. I have seen. Frankly - I see that every day. And you got things backwards. In what way it was wise to limit train length to ~700 metres by track circuits? Ore trains can get up to 6000 tonnes within this limit, and that is pretty good. But intermodals, or auto trains linger about 1500 tonnes - which is pretty pathetic.
QUOTE: Originally posted by mhurley87f In what way is it moronic to limit freight train length to track circuit signal block lenths? What (train length) works best west of the Chicago - New Orleans axis in the US would be truly moronic in Europe. Have you ever seen how busy and complicated track layouts can be over this side??
QUOTE: Originally posted by 440cuin I know lots of examples of deisel freight that was electrified when Denmark electrified their main line from Sweden to Germany. The fisrt generation of electrics locos in the 80's have 7000hp but weigh 80 tons and can't even get a loaded "moronic" 750meter long freight started, (I dont realy think short trains are moronic realy) so then they double headed the trains. 14000 hp just to move 2000 ton trains. One 3000 hp GM deisel had no problem exept for emisions in the long tunnel. Most freight trains today are electric now, but most freight and mail now moves by truck.
QUOTE: Many passenger trains are deisel multipal unit trains so the electric locos are expensive surplus. They don't need them for passenger trains and they can't pull the freights, they also cannot run through into Germany or Sweden. They may soon be getting old and haven't realy had the careir that was intended for them;-(
QUOTE: My point though is that I am in favour of electrification, but it has to be done right and the risks are high, the costs are high so politics enter it all if the government pays for some of it. A railroad should also only electrify if it realy needs it, not just because it is perceived as better. Right now the North American freight railroads have too many other things to spend their efforts on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd As someone noted, however, many low-traffic branches, which were once electrified, have been turned over to diesels. They're cheaper to run (I'll get to fuel costs in a minute). Some portions of the western railroads (GN and Milwaukee) were electrified in the steam era; the problem again was tunnels. Once diesels took over, those electrifications were discontinued.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Townsend A lot of people on this forum seem to be commenting on the high price of oil.However i have never read anything on electrification. When i lived in South Africa S. A. R. had an iron ore line several hundred miles long that was electrified at 50kv AC so the substations could be masive distances apart and the locomotives could handle a voltage drop of nearly 50% (i think). Has electrification like that been considered for service in the USA in the western states.
QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator 440cuin the problem with europe is not motive power. Just as Dave noted - just as much freight is moved with electrics, as is with diesels. The problem is in the moronic limitation of 750 metres for a single train (2300 ft) as mandated by UIC. And the ore trains move with diesels because holland has 1500VDC wires, and those do not cope with power requirements of heavy ore trains. BTW those aren't the heaviest trains in Europe.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.