Media has analyzed Amtrak latest RFI for new Acela equipment. Have noted that Amtrak is looking for 160 MPH ( 170 test speed ) operational speeds. IMHO this is a good reality check for the following reasons.
1. Present ROW even with the many improvements will only be capable of 160 except for maybe the Elizabeth - Trenton section ?
2. it probably will be year 2050 before the another HSR route can be built.
3. The 160 MPH equipment can be built much cheaper and would probably be worn out before the 220 MPH route could be built.+ there may be major changes in technology especially what may come out of Europe.
4. A non stop NYP - WASH ( 225 miles ) would take 1:05 vs 1:25. For each en route stop that is added expect a loss of 4 min for 160 MPH and 5 minutes ( more acceleration and slowing distance ) for 220 mph. ?
5. That will assume a standard 5 stop Acela of 1:25 vs 1:45 en route times.
6. Since there can only be a finite amount of funds for HSR spend less for rolling stock and more for upgrading infrastructure to 160 capable.
7. NYP - BOS is a different item .
8. Width of new Acela -2s needs to be narrower to allow tilting to be in operation west of NH allowing higher speed on the MNRR.
9. much higher speed east of NH can only come with additional over passes, high clearances over waterways, and some straightening.
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/transportation/20131208_Hitting_the_brakes.html
Rail is air-competitive D.C.-NYC now, and 160 mph is surely sufficient to keep it that way. Where is the profit, or sense, in gilding the lily -- especially when road-ready is pushed out so far and at such great cost?
I presume that when Amtrak talks about 220 mph, they are talking about their proposed new HSR line parallel to the NEC. They will have to upgrade the cat south of NY just to get to 160 mph there.
The bigger picture is basically an acknowledgement by Amtrak that California HSR is a no go.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
D.Carleton The bigger picture is basically an acknowledgement by Amtrak that California HSR is a no go.
Why?
Whether the California project is go or no go, or California opts for 160 MPH instead of 220 MPH HSR, what does that have to do with the Amtrak decisions on replacing Acela trainsets?
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
Paul Milenkovic D.Carleton The bigger picture is basically an acknowledgement by Amtrak that California HSR is a no go. Why? Whether the California project is go or no go, or California opts for 160 MPH instead of 220 MPH HSR, what does that have to do with the Amtrak decisions on replacing Acela trainsets?
California and Amtrak "shook hands" over attempting to work together on equipment specs to keep costs down. A 220 mph trainset would work at 160 mph - just needs less propulsion oomph.
I'm all for squeezing the most existing NEC before we go off plowing green fields. The driver will be capacity, not running times. If you can get more speed while you're doing it, great!
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Hence the need to seriously look at the French TGV Euroduplex, since the capacity for the same length train is so much greater. Euroduplex has a capacity to transport 1,020 passengers at a safe average speed of 320kmph. Its unique design provides the train with higher return per seat..
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm Hence the need to seriously look at the French TGV Euroduplex, since the capacity for the same length train is so much greater. Euroduplex has a capacity to transport 1,020 passengers at a safe average speed of 320kmph. Its unique design provides the train with higher return per seat..
I vote "yea"! ( I do get a vote, don't I?)
oltmannd schlimm Hence the need to seriously look at the French TGV Euroduplex, since the capacity for the same length train is so much greater. Euroduplex has a capacity to transport 1,020 passengers at a safe average speed of 320kmph. Its unique design provides the train with higher return per seat.. I vote "yea"! ( I do get a vote, don't I?)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.