I watched recently a video of some Acela trains at high speed in New England. Are both locomotives powering the train when it is running at high speed, i.e. delivering power to the wheels?
Acelas are a bit over-powered since the power cars are rated at 6000 continuous HP each but they were designed with longer trains in mind. They are both providing power to the wheels when the train is running.
IIRC, they were intended to be push-pull sets, but this was rejected due to crash standards. I could be wrong.
BuslistNever intended as push pull sets. They were to be TGV copies ( although very different) which have power cars on each end (note when intergral to the train they are called power cars and not locomotives).
What is the difference between a locomotive and a power car?.
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.
Buslist is using the correct term. Many French TGVs and the German ICE I's have power units at both ends which also have a control cab. Later German ICEs have distributed power throughout the train (EMUs of in German, Triebwagen) and the control cabs at each end are in passenger coaches.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
No one has addressed my question. What is the difference between a locomotive and a power unit?
The Acela has power units or locomotives at both ends of the train. So too does the Heartland Flyer. The Acela units or locomotives appear to be better integrated with the train, where as the two locomotives are the Heartland Flyer are clearly locomotives.
The terms are very close. I think the differences are that a power car isn't usually uncoupled from its train in daily service (and is semi-permanently coupled), while a locomotive is more flexible, and has standard couplings.
NorthWest The terms are very close. I think the differences are that a power car isn't usually uncoupled from its train in daily service (and is semi-permanently coupled), while a locomotive is more flexible, and has standard couplings.
Sounds reasonable! Thanks for your perspective.
The difference between a locomotive and a power car is that the power car has major passenger seating, major, not just incidental. The diffrence between a power car and a railcar/doodlebug/self-propelled-car/etc. i that the power car is intended primarily to be part of a multi-car train, while the railcar (RDC and SPV for examples) is intended for solo operation or with just one or two trailers.
All this applies regardless of whether deisel-electric. diesel-mechanical, or electric.
Some trains in Europe have a power car at each end. They each provide power to its half of the train's traction motors which are located on some or all axels of the passenger cars. One advantage proffered is that much smaller traction motors greatly reduce non sprung weight on axels. That makes for much better ride, less weight on drivers, less wear and tear on track, quicker acceleration and slowing. Sort of a hybrid EMU. They may have major passenger seating but each power car provides some electrical and control. IMO the acceleration factor will be very important for the NEC especially NYP - BOS.
Tilting may be more difficult or easier on curves ? Rode one Swiss that you could ride behind engineer and see out front as whole compartment was separated by glass from pass compartment. Have no idea if AC or DC traction.
blue streak 1Some trains in Europe have a power car at each end. They each provide power to its half of the train's traction motors which are located on some or all axels of the passenger cars.
Not necessarily. As I said before, the first HSR trains in Germany, the ICE 1s, had power cars at each end (no passengers) and the traction motors only on the power cars. For various reasons of improvement, the later ICE 2s and ICE 3s are with powered axles throughout and control cars on each end, which also carry a substantial number of passengers.
timz blue streak 1Some trains in Europe have a power car at each end. They each provide power to its half of the train's traction motors which are located on some or all axels of the passenger cars.One pantograph on the power car, which has the transformer to lower the voltage... and rectifies the AC? Then sends how many amps of how-many-volt DC to the passenger car next to it?
The traction motors are distributed to adjacent coaches, but I believe it's all AC propulsion.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
for those who didn't read the end of my post the point is if the "locomotive" is integral to the train set it is generally called a power car. I know of only one case where power is distributed to motors in passenger cars and that is the Eurostars ( power to the first truck adjacent to the power car ) but there may be others. Generally there is no passenger space in the power car. There is often passenger space in an EMU type train like the ICE3s etc.
I believe ICE 3s on DB have underfloor motors throughout the eight cars.
whether or not it is permanently coupled to the train, if there is no regular passenger seating, it is a locomotive, not a power car. That is North American Practice. Like the early Zephyrs and UP streamliners that had their locos permantely coupled to articiulated trains. But if there is regular revenue passenger seating, then and only then is it a power car. Europe may label things differrently.
daveklepper whether or not it is permanently coupled to the train, if there is no regular passenger seating, it is a locomotive, not a power car. That is North American Practice. Like the early Zephyrs and UP streamliners that had their locos permantely coupled to articiulated trains. But if there is regular revenue passenger seating, then and only then is it a power car. Europe may label things differrently.
Gee I guess we need to tell Amtrak that they have mislabeled their Acela equipment. We're not talking about the '30s but the current international HSR nomenclature (a business I worked in for quite a while).
Buslist daveklepper whether or not it is permanently coupled to the train, if there is no regular passenger seating, it is a locomotive, not a power car. That is North American Practice. Like the early Zephyrs and UP streamliners that had their locos permantely coupled to articiulated trains. But if there is regular revenue passenger seating, then and only then is it a power car. Europe may label things differrently. Gee I guess we need to tell Amtrak that they have mislabeled their Acela equipment. We're not talking about the '30s but the current international HSR nomenclature (a business I worked in for quite a while).
Here is a quote from the Amtrak Mechanical Departmment's description of the Acela train set.
"Acela Trainset Typical Configuration
Equipment Characteristics
The typical configuration of the trainset is 1-6-1. One power car, six passenger cars, and another power car coupled in the following order: leading power car, one end coach car, one coach car, one café car, two coach cars, one first class car, trailing power car."
Sorry for for the bolding but please know something about the topic before you post, like do some research, Google is a wonderful thing!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.