Will Amtrak order their own versions Brightline sets? Particularly where turboliners ran.
They'll have SC-44s but without the extra sloping nose, however they'll be running with the Talgos and Midwest Bilevels rather than Brightline cars. These would be a good design for Amfleet III, though.
I would add the sloping nose. They would look the part of a high speed trainset. Making them Acela's for the non-electrified high speed corridors.
Let's get the Brightline Florida trains running first and then we'll go from there.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
I tend to think not. As all the Charger as operated by FEC is a modernised and Americanised version of the HST125/XPT If Amtrak wanted what is effectively a HST125/XPT they would have gone to Budd to get in touch with BREL and Comeng (A Budd licencee) back in the 80's who for the Australianised HST used stainless steel trailer cars built along Budd principles. So Budd would have seen the trailer car designs.
gregruddI tend to think not. As all the Charger as operated by FEC is a modernised and Americanised version of the HST125/XPT If Amtrak wanted what is effectively a HST125/XPT they would have gone to Budd to get in touch with BREL and Comeng (A Budd licencee) back in the 80's who for the Australianised HST used stainless steel trailer cars built along Budd principles. So Budd would have seen the trailer car designs.
I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say. Namely the design engineers and FEC very much studied the HST125/XPT and used that as an inspiration, the simmilarites are closer than you think. If you think that the Charger/Brightline concept was a "clean sheet" that is unique to North America then you need to look a world operations at bit more.
gregrudd I tend to think not. As all the Charger as operated by FEC is a modernised and Americanised version of the HST125/XPT If Amtrak wanted what is effectively a HST125/XPT they would have gone to Budd to get in touch with BREL and Comeng (A Budd licencee) back in the 80's who for the Australianised HST used stainless steel trailer cars built along Budd principles. So Budd would have seen the trailer car designs.
But that was back in the 80's we didn't have the state sponsored higher speed corridors at the time. But now the states are committed to the vaporware bi levels it would take a cancellation of that contract (which might yet happen) to get the states interested.
Back around the same time as the LRC was being built there were EMD-powered proposals that were similar that we've discussed in the diesels not built thread.
gregrudd I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say. Namely the design engineers and FEC very much studied the HST125/XPT and used that as an inspiration, the simmilarites are closer than you think. If you think that the Charger/Brightline concept was a "clean sheet" that is unique to North America then you need to look a world operations at bit more.
D.Carleton gregrudd I think you missed the point of what I was trying to say. Namely the design engineers and FEC very much studied the HST125/XPT and used that as an inspiration, the simmilarites are closer than you think. If you think that the Charger/Brightline concept was a "clean sheet" that is unique to North America then you need to look a world operations at bit more. Then I shall ask what "inspiration" we took away from the HST125/XPT? Overall concept or mechanical?
Then I shall ask what "inspiration" we took away from the HST125/XPT? Overall concept or mechanical?
Interesting question as many Amtrak consists in some corridors are "Top and Tailed" as they would say, just like the HST 125s. All that is missing is the Quasi fixed consists but included is the enhanced flexibility demonstrated when both locomotives are operated on the front because the track geometry/inspection car needs to be on the rear.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.