Nowadays, the order of the day seems to be high or at least higher speed trains, but in the past, some 'high speed' trains have roamed across US rails, such as the case presented in the adjoining movie, and without electronic air brake systems or positive train control. Maximum recorded speed : 124 Mph, with almost no bumps.
watch?v=Cph7KwNMon8
I was going to give them a free pass for sanding the flues in that first clip ...
... but 1:00 - 1:17 -- LOOK at those furnace puffs, almost has to be; was that a normal thing to observe on Milwaukee As decelerating for slow curves? Couldn't have been fun, or good for the locomotive...
How cool would it have been to be there and see that!
Interestingly, welded rail has made high speed operation more difficult. The joints in the rails provided just enough of an impact or jiggle to keep truck hunting from getting started. Now, we have to keep wheel profiles "just so" and apply all sorts of damping. In the end, it still cheaper "now" then "then". No army of track guys out there keeping things "tweaked just right".
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
As soon as 999 hit 100 we were edging to high speed rail and it became a common speed for PRR GG1's and many lines out west, too. Congestion brought the speeds down along with trying to maintain track within reasonable economic bounds. The complacency set in along with indifference and the stock market looked at trucking companies and airlines.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
The original Hiawatha (5 cars) of 1935 with the A's was re-equipped with a longer trainset (9 cars) using the F-7 Baltic 4-6-4s. even with the top speed up to 125 mph, it took 6 initially, but usually 6.5 hours to cover the 410 miles CHI-STP, with six intermediate stops, an average of 63 mph. the 1954 diesel Hi cut the timing to 6:15. Amtrak's Empire Builder makes the run (8 miles longer) in 8:16 by contrast.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Wow Mario, where do you come up with theis stuff! You're amazing! OK, those two Hiawatha shots weren't exactly "hi-speed", but I get your point. 100 mile-per-hour running was nothing for those engines, to say nothing of quite a few of their contemporarys. The "good old days" weren't always good, but they did have their times, didn't they?
oltmannd How cool would it have been to be there and see that! Interestingly, welded rail has made high speed operation more difficult. The joints in the rails provided just enough of an impact or jiggle to keep truck hunting from getting started. Now, we have to keep wheel profiles "just so" and apply all sorts of damping. In the end, it still cheaper "now" then "then". No army of track guys out there keeping things "tweaked just right".
We here in Europe, in high speed or in the so called 'higher speed' (speeds up to 220/230 kmhr) lines only use welded rail. Maybe the difference here is that we do what is called a 'preventive' grinding of tracks in order to smoothen up railheads. Also rail weldings are subjected to grinding in order to remove excess material. That, together with some very sophisticated pneumatic suspensions results in a ride as smooth as silk
henry6 As soon as 999 hit 100 we were edging to high speed rail and it became a common speed for PRR GG1's and many lines out west, too. Congestion brought the speeds down along with trying to maintain track within reasonable economic bounds. The complacency set in along with indifference and the stock market looked at trucking companies and airlines.
I've got an official guide from December '57 and the fastest train between NY-WAS took 3 hours 35. That doesn't seems to be a '100 mph' schedule. Maybe 80/90. Yet there are other RRs (IC between Effingham and Centralia, 39 minutes, circa 80 mph average speed) that most certainlny would reach the century mark
schlimm The original Hiawatha (5 cars) of 1935 with the A's was re-equipped with a longer trainset (9 cars) using the F-7 Baltic 4-6-4s. even with the top speed up to 125 mph, it took 6 initially, but usually 6.5 hours to cover the 410 miles CHI-STP, with six intermediate stops, an average of 63 mph. the 1954 diesel Hi cut the timing to 6:15. Amtrak's Empire Builder makes the run (8 miles longer) in 8:16 by contrast.
There is one question that keeps being on my mind. Did MILW scaled back to 90 when dieselised its crack trains ?
Firelock76 Wow Mario, where do you come up with theis stuff! You're amazing! OK, those two Hiawatha shots weren't exactly "hi-speed", but I get your point. 100 mile-per-hour running was nothing for those engines, to say nothing of quite a few of their contemporarys. The "good old days" weren't always good, but they did have their times, didn't they?
I even got another one, but this one seems to be a publicity movie
watch?v=oQupCrYLLbk
Overmod I was going to give them a free pass for sanding the flues in that first clip ... ... but 1:00 - 1:17 -- LOOK at those furnace puffs, almost has to be; was that a normal thing to observe on Milwaukee As decelerating for slow curves? Couldn't have been fun, or good for the locomotive...
Maybe the enginner was accelerating quite in a 'hard manner', it can be since the train seems to be leaving town
No...I don't think there ever has been a 100mph schedule in the US. But the capability for trains to reach that speed and more has been here since before 1900. We've never capitalized on it because it took too much capital with little perceived return on investment...then door to door private auto and the jet plane took away all concern for railroads. But look at an intercity schedule for bus or train and you will see that the elapsed time speed to be between 35 and 45 mph while actual attained speeds on the superhighway has to be 80 or on tracks at at least 75. Even Acela attainable speeds are much greater than lapsed time speeds. This is why I often don't think we understand HSR nor really need it in many places.
henry6No...I don't think there ever has been a 100mph schedule in the US.
I distinctly remember one of the Steffee speed surveys in Trains mentioning the 'first' 100-mph schedule (IIRC about 102 mph, Metroliners of course).
Sure weren't many, though!
OvermodI distinctly remember one of the Steffee speed surveys in Trains mentioning the 'first' 100-mph schedule (IIRC about 102 mph, Metroliners of course).
(What is Wilmington to Baltimore-- 68-point-something miles? Maybe a Metroliner had an optimistic 43-minute start-to-start schedule and Steffee decided to assume a 2-minute stop.)
Off the top of my head, the highest scheduled start to stop speed for a Metroliner was ~95 MPH. A 100+ MPH start to stop schedule would require sustained running above 120 MPH.
timz OvermodI distinctly remember one of the Steffee speed surveys in Trains mentioning the 'first' 100-mph schedule (IIRC about 102 mph, Metroliners of course).Steffee only mentioned start-to-stop schedules, didn't he? No US train has ever been scheduled 100+ mph start to stop. (What is Wilmington to Baltimore-- 68-point-something miles? Maybe a Metroliner had an optimistic 43-minute start-to-start schedule and Steffee decided to assume a 2-minute stop.)
There were a few 41 minute times in the public timetables in the early/mid 1980s after the concrete ties were in place, the speeds were back up to 125 mph and the AEM7s held the Metroliner assignments.
Mario_v henry6 As soon as 999 hit 100 we were edging to high speed rail and it became a common speed for PRR GG1's and many lines out west, too. Congestion brought the speeds down along with trying to maintain track within reasonable economic bounds. The complacency set in along with indifference and the stock market looked at trucking companies and airlines. I've got an official guide from December '57 and the fastest train between NY-WAS took 3 hours 35. That doesn't seems to be a '100 mph' schedule. Maybe 80/90. Yet there are other RRs (IC between Effingham and Centralia, 39 minutes, circa 80 mph average speed) that most certainlny would reach the century mark
Timetable speeds on the PRR NEC for GG1 hauled trains were 80 mph. Wink wink nudge nudge. I clocked a few trains I rode in the low to mid 90s during the Amtrak era in the mid 70s.
Timetable speed for GG1s increased to 100 mph (for some of them, anyway) in Oct 1967-- reverted to 80 after... a year or two? Then when they were rebuilding Metroliner MUs circa 1978 the replacement GG1-powered trains were allowed 100 mph.
GG1's were hitting 125 in the 30's. Maybe not in the timetables but in the cabs...
GG1s were hitting 125 in TESTING in the Thirties.
Original hard limit of 80 mph IIRC, raised to 100 with improvements. After Amtrak, of course, there was the short-lived 110 mph "Metroliner" program, since the 'real' Mets were acting much like the baseball Mets so often did...
... and some of the results from the high-speed testing, particularly those associated with braking and what came after, would convince you that no serious running at that speed, let alone 10-15 mph faster, would have been seen in service.
There is that story from the museum docent about 156 mph, but ... one question is how an engineer could possibly have known it, considering his speedometer didn't read anywhere close to that, and was electrical and not mechanical so little if any 'carryover' as may be possible in an eddy-current-driven automobile speedo.
Yes, it would have been possible to build a 'modified' G to go 120mph, assuming the trackwork to sustain that kind of running with a 242-ton locomotive. Minimum cost for each, in the late 1970s, would have been somewhere north of 4.5M, and that was not including new one-piece wheels to eliminate the tire issues. Replacement fabricated frames with those trendy chevron springs, etc. Would have been fun, but toasters were (1) cheaper, (2) lighter, (3) shorter, (4) better suspended, and (5) faster. Sometimes there is no justice. But I think the answer has sustained the test of time remarkably well...
Overmod There is that story from the museum docent about 156 mph, but ... one question is how an engineer could possibly have known it, considering his speedometer didn't read anywhere close to that, and was electrical and not mechanical so little if any 'carryover' as may be possible in an eddy-current-driven automobile speedo.
I wonder if the docent was confusing the GG1 speeds with speeds achieved in testing the "hot-rodded" Silverliners - seem to recall that they touched 156 MPH circa 1966.
- Erik
erikem Overmod There is that story from the museum docent about 156 mph, but ... one question is how an engineer could possibly have known it, considering his speedometer didn't read anywhere close to that, and was electrical and not mechanical so little if any 'carryover' as may be possible in an eddy-current-driven automobile speedo. I wonder if the docent was confusing the GG1 speeds with speeds achieved in testing the "hot-rodded" Silverliners - seem to recall that they touched 156 MPH circa 1966. - Erik
I'd like to think so ... but the audio file I had indicates pretty clearly that it was GG1s he thought he was talking about. ISTR this was somebody at Steamtown, but I can't find a current link to that file that I can include here. I will have to see if I still have a copy on disk.
I must confess that I really, really wanted it to be true...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.