Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
First an apology: There are two post before where I hit submit by accident. Being still moderated I can't delete or edit them. [quote user="243129"]t is the infrastructure that does not permit the speed on the NEC to be clear.[/quote] No question, here you are right. [quote user="243129"]The Acela is a waste that is why there is no reason to purchase Gen 2 trainsets.[/quote] I think that is not that easy. I take the relation New York to Washington DC as reference. An Acela Express takes 2:58 hours, a Regional 3:25 hours. So the Regional, limited to 125 mph, takes 27 minutes more with just three more station stop. So Acela's higher top speed allows an about 20 min better running time. Are these 20 minutes worth the money? At least they brought the NEC a 71% share of the combined rail/air traffic on the New York to Washington DC route. With 20 minutes more travel time business travels might change back to air travel. Amtrak decided to go with an Acela Express replacement. What they bought might enlarge the gap. The FRA's increase of lateral acceleration to 0.15g allows higher curve speed on the same curvature. The higher tilt adds to this. The track structure must be able to bear the higher forces but no new alignement is necessary to incremental speed increases. That the Acela Express has shortcomings was caused largely caused by FRA doubling the buff load after the purchase during the design process. An ICE-1 train with two power cars and 14 intermediate cars weighs 880 tons, an Acela Express of the same configuration would weigh 1100 tons. Car length are the same. The European railroad switched to trainsets for high speed from the beginning. The dynamic effects of high speeds lower the allowed axle loads considerably, in Germany from 24.8 tons to about 21.5 tons at 175 mph. At higher speeds even less. A multi-system 125 mph locomotive like the Siemens Vectron with 5,000 kW continous power has axle loads of 24 tons, the ACS-64 with the same power 27 tons. As the additional power couldn't be put into the locomotive it was spread over two power cars. The same applies to Amtrak. You can't put the additional weight for larger traction motors, heavier trucks, heavier transformer, heavier power electronics for 150 mph into a single locomotive without violating the lower axle loads. So you limited to a trainset with two power cars or EMUs. If the Avelia Liberty specifics are necessary? I don't know. I see them as way to pressurize Congress for faster improvement  of the NEC. Regards, Volker
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag