What happened to the Bombardier Jet Train?

3059 views
8 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January, 2014
  • 199 posts
What happened to the Bombardier Jet Train?
Posted by zkr123 on Sunday, January 12, 2014 11:13 AM

Why has the Bombardier Jet Train not been put into commercial use? They would be perfect for Amtrak's Cascade route pulling the Talgo's. 

  • Member since
    July, 2010
  • 12 posts
Posted by Rainhilltrial on Sunday, January 12, 2014 8:48 PM

It's an Acela power car with a jet-engine derivative gas turbine engine. Like all gas turbines, it has two effective fuel efficiency settings ... shut-down or wide-open full bore.

  • Member since
    May, 2013
  • 3,041 posts
Posted by NorthWest on Sunday, January 12, 2014 10:04 PM

The main problem, IIRC, is where to run it. The only railroad in the US willing to let trains run as fast as the JetTrain needs to in order to be practical is Amtrak, on the NEC.

  • Member since
    June, 2002
  • 13,909 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:41 AM

With this type of technology, Turbos were practical with low fuel prices.  They are inefficient when run at part load.  The genset concept can restore some efficiency, but that adds complications.

  • Member since
    November, 2003
  • From: Rhode Island
  • 2,289 posts
Posted by carnej1 on Wednesday, January 15, 2014 11:39 AM

IIRC correctly ,Bombardier pinned much of it's hopes for production orders for the Jet Train on proposed Florida and Texas high speed rail projects that failed to be built.

 The thought being that the high fuel consumption would be less of an economic deficit when compared to the cost of building and maintaining catenary..

"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock

  • Member since
    October, 2007
  • From: Conyers, GA
  • 38 posts
Posted by Champlain Division on Sunday, January 14, 2018 5:51 PM

What I'd like to know at this late date is what happened to the JetTrain prototype?  The last I heard is that it was languishing in storage at TTI in Colorado Springs.

  • Member since
    January, 2002
  • 3,374 posts
Posted by M636C on Sunday, January 14, 2018 10:42 PM

Champlain Division

What I'd like to know at this late date is what happened to the JetTrain prototype?  The last I heard is that it was languishing in storage at TTI in Colorado Springs.

 
I believe that is correct.
 
A point to note not highlighted in this thread is that it doesn't have a turbine.
 
The turbine was leased from the US Marine Corps from a stock held as spares for the Air Cushion Landing Craft which use four of these each for both lift and propulsion. The turbine lease was for the duration of the trials and it went back into USMC stores when the trials concluded.
 
If anyone wanted to run the power car, they could purchase, or lease a turbine as Bombardier did for the trials.
 
But it is basically an Acela power car without a transformer or pantograph. If an Acela power car was damaged, Amtrak could convert the Jetrain car to replace it but that hasn't happened either.
 
But it isn't a complete power unit that people are ignoring. Nobody wants to put up the money to run it, given the cost of buying or leasing a turbine.
 
Peter
  • Member since
    September, 2010
  • From: East Coast
  • 882 posts
Posted by D.Carleton on Tuesday, January 16, 2018 11:09 AM

Frankly, there's nothing the Jet Train could do that a Charger can't do more efficiently.

Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak

  • Member since
    December, 2007
  • From: Southeast Michigan
  • 2,983 posts
Posted by Norm48327 on Tuesday, January 16, 2018 12:01 PM

Turbine engines do not fare well at low altitude when it comes to fuel consumption.

The denser air at low altitude demands more fuel than it does in the rarified upper reaches of the flight levels. That should explain why long range flights strive to get as high as possible in the fupper flight levels. There is substantial fuel savings to be had at those altitudes.

There are hazards that high off the ground where a sudden decompression of the plane could be instanty fatal to passengers and crew but they are taken into consideration before the flight.

I enjoy flying private and like flying below 15.000 ft. Oxygen is  requieremt a that altitude but I did not find it a problem.

Norm


Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy