Ulrich... Bread lines, government housing, and pollution aren't unique to Russia..
Bread lines, government housing, and pollution aren't unique to Russia..
Stalin would like your comment.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
York1 MidlandMike How is picking only the dense countries that have electrified rail a perfect example. It is a biased example. You are ignoring the examples of the Trans-Siberian and Morocco mentioned multiple times. Population density is not a defining factor; ton-miles and efficiency and ability to finance are the limiting factors. You are mixing the two. You point up Russia and Morocco. Russia is a good example of a railroad system built by a dictatorial government. Morocco's railroad is state-owned. Then you mention Japan and Europe. As pointed out, both of those are small, densely populated areas. Europe's private trains for the most part operate on state owned tracks. Japan's trains are private, but carry almost no freight. All of these situations would not translate well to the U.S. or Canada. If you want us to have a system like Russia or Europe, then elect people to Congress who will take over the rail system, spend trillions of dollars to electrify it, and then sit back and enjoy watching your tax dollars at work. Several times you've mentioned Russia's system. It was mostly built by the communist governments. While they electrified the system, they also had people standing in bread lines and living in government housing that would be condemned in any other country. They didn't worry about pollution or dirty power systems.
MidlandMike How is picking only the dense countries that have electrified rail a perfect example. It is a biased example. You are ignoring the examples of the Trans-Siberian and Morocco mentioned multiple times. Population density is not a defining factor; ton-miles and efficiency and ability to finance are the limiting factors.
You are mixing the two.
You point up Russia and Morocco. Russia is a good example of a railroad system built by a dictatorial government. Morocco's railroad is state-owned.
Then you mention Japan and Europe. As pointed out, both of those are small, densely populated areas. Europe's private trains for the most part operate on state owned tracks. Japan's trains are private, but carry almost no freight.
All of these situations would not translate well to the U.S. or Canada.
If you want us to have a system like Russia or Europe, then elect people to Congress who will take over the rail system, spend trillions of dollars to electrify it, and then sit back and enjoy watching your tax dollars at work.
Several times you've mentioned Russia's system. It was mostly built by the communist governments. While they electrified the system, they also had people standing in bread lines and living in government housing that would be condemned in any other country. They didn't worry about pollution or dirty power systems.
MidlandMike Backshop Perfect example--Germany has 84 million people in a country a little more than half the size of Texas. Japan has 124 million people in a country the size of Montana. With a population density like that, you can do it. Germany's is greater than every state except for Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Jersey. Guess what? Two of the three have decent electrified networks. How is picking only the dense countries that have electrified rail a perfect example. It is a biased example. You are ignoring the examples of the Trans-Siberian and Morocco mentioned multiple times. Population density is not a defining factor; ton-miles and efficiency and ability to finance are the limiting factors.
Backshop Perfect example--Germany has 84 million people in a country a little more than half the size of Texas. Japan has 124 million people in a country the size of Montana. With a population density like that, you can do it. Germany's is greater than every state except for Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Jersey. Guess what? Two of the three have decent electrified networks.
Perfect example--Germany has 84 million people in a country a little more than half the size of Texas. Japan has 124 million people in a country the size of Montana. With a population density like that, you can do it. Germany's is greater than every state except for Massachusetts, Rhode Island and New Jersey. Guess what? Two of the three have decent electrified networks.
How is picking only the dense countries that have electrified rail a perfect example. It is a biased example. You are ignoring the examples of the Trans-Siberian and Morocco mentioned multiple times. Population density is not a defining factor; ton-miles and efficiency and ability to finance are the limiting factors.
Trans-Siberian was a Russian State project; Morocco is also a state project. It is amazing what can be accomplished when return on investment is looked at as other than on a financial profit/loss statement.
Remember MILW and GN both had long distance electrified zones and scrapped them in the 1970's or thereabouts.
MidlandMikeHow is picking only the dense countries that have electrified rail a perfect example. It is a biased example. You are ignoring the examples of the Trans-Siberian and Morocco mentioned multiple times. Population density is not a defining factor; ton-miles and efficiency and ability to finance are the limiting factors.
York1 John
Russia is vastly larger with a populaton of 140 million and declining. Their rail network is electrified for the most part (87%) including the Trans Siberian line. In Russia 90% of intercity freight moves by rail..
MidlandMike1. Apparently you missed the part of my post that talked about the Trans-Siberian railroad and the Morocco HSR. Do those countries have the density of Europe. 2. Does this mean that you agree that private companies are incapable of electrification?
2. Does this mean that you agree that private companies are incapable of electrification?
1. Government sponsored, supported and financed.
2. If there is a sufficient profit, private companies will be there. No profit expected, no private involvement.
York1 MidlandMike Are Europe and Japan governments authoritarian? Even a third world country like Morocco has electrified high speed rail. Does the fact that they are all government owned, infer that private railroads are incapable of electrificatioon? 1. Europe and Japan are both high populations - small areas. Most of our country is not in that situation. 2. Private companies won't spend money with no possibility of profits in return.
MidlandMike Are Europe and Japan governments authoritarian? Even a third world country like Morocco has electrified high speed rail. Does the fact that they are all government owned, infer that private railroads are incapable of electrificatioon?
1. Europe and Japan are both high populations - small areas. Most of our country is not in that situation.
2. Private companies won't spend money with no possibility of profits in return.
1. Apparently you missed the part of my post that talked about the Trans-Siberian railroad and the Morocco HSR. Do those countries have the density of Europe.
MidlandMikeAre Europe and Japan governments authoritarian? Even a third world country like Morocco has electrified high speed rail. Does the fact that they are all government owned, infer that private railroads are incapable of electrificatioon?
Backshop MidlandMike The Trans-Siberian is more than twice as long as LA-CHI and is electrified. It was also built and operated by an authoritarian government. See a pattern here?
MidlandMike The Trans-Siberian is more than twice as long as LA-CHI and is electrified.
The Trans-Siberian is more than twice as long as LA-CHI and is electrified.
It was also built and operated by an authoritarian government. See a pattern here?
Are Europe and Japan governments authoritarian? Even a third world country like Morocco has electrified high speed rail. Does the fact that they are all government owned, infer that private railroads are incapable of electrificatioon?
In my opinion, there are no 'showstopping' objections to the technical achievement of punctate, progressive electrification. The concerns are allocating the capital and establishing suitable 'championing', developing effective-scale construction and maintenance support, and managing the public and political objections to electrification 'at all the neighbors' expense'.
Something I have seen architects and planners address is how to make OHLE less ugly or intrusive. Some of the work done in connection with 'three-wire' streetcar and light-rail development specifically concerned itself with how to make that kind of overhead wire look better -- acceptably better, not just something to be promoted via the usual methods.
Like California :D
Backshop charlie hebdo It's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines. It's really not such a big deal. Most other industrialized nations seem to have overcome the difficulties mentioned here. I suspect most here have never spent much time in areas that have such services. As to noise, definitely quieter. Most are government run, which means that money is less of a problem. Their runs are also much shorter than ours. LA-CHI is huge compared to anything in Europe.
charlie hebdo It's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines. It's really not such a big deal. Most other industrialized nations seem to have overcome the difficulties mentioned here. I suspect most here have never spent much time in areas that have such services. As to noise, definitely quieter.
It's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines. It's really not such a big deal. Most other industrialized nations seem to have overcome the difficulties mentioned here. I suspect most here have never spent much time in areas that have such services. As to noise, definitely quieter.
Most are government run, which means that money is less of a problem. Their runs are also much shorter than ours. LA-CHI is huge compared to anything in Europe.
charlie hebdoThere is lots of international service in Europe. If engine changes are needed st s border, they are done efficiently.
Engine changes, no matter how efficient, are DELAY. The bigger problem is actually having engines at the proper location at the proper time to facilitate a change.
Backshop rdamon LA-CHI sure, but this may be more like LA-Barstow That's a separate thread about California banning older diesels. This thread is about long distance, widespread electrification on many major trunk lines.
rdamon LA-CHI sure, but this may be more like LA-Barstow
LA-CHI sure, but this may be more like LA-Barstow
That's a separate thread about California banning older diesels. This thread is about long distance, widespread electrification on many major trunk lines.
I disagree. Last time I drove that route it was not a local trip.
If that is the catalyst to start the transcon, then continuing to Belen and to KC and eventually Chicago would be incremental.
There is lots of international service in Europe. If engine changes are needed st s border, they are done efficiently.
charlie hebdo Backshop charlie hebdo It's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines. It's really not such a big deal. Most other industrialized nations seem to have overcome the difficulties mentioned here. I suspect most here have never spent much time in areas that have such services. As to noise, definitely quieter. Most are government run, which means that money is less of a problem. Their runs are also much shorter than ours. LA-CHI is huge compared to anything in Europe. I suggest that the network of lines in Europe or Japan is very dense. Majority of lines in Germany and France, Italy, Benelux are electrified. The infreastructure is state owned; operators are privatized. We should do the same for efficiency
I suggest that the network of lines in Europe or Japan is very dense. Majority of lines in Germany and France, Italy, Benelux are electrified. The infreastructure is state owned; operators are privatized. We should do the same for efficiency
Europe's rail 'system' is far from a system with each country marching to their own 'drummer' as to manner of operation and with each country having its own form of elctrification that effectively prevents anything like 'run through' trains across Europe in any direction. Were the European model implemented in the US, each state would have its own rail 'system' and crossing from state to state would be a major undertaking.
To my limited knowledge is the Thalys service is one of the few cross country services and the equipment has been built to handle the four different forms of electrification the service operates over.
[quote user="BaltACD
[/quote]
Also, I think you will find that on a number of lightly used branch lines steam lingered on considerably longer before being replaced by diesel railcars.
tree68 charlie hebdo It's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines. I think it's less a matter of being opposed to the concept than it is understanding the realities of the costs of building such a network from scratch. Never mind the lesser distances - the European lines have been electrified for years.
charlie hebdo It's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines.
I think it's less a matter of being opposed to the concept than it is understanding the realities of the costs of building such a network from scratch. Never mind the lesser distances - the European lines have been electrified for years.
Also remember, much of Europe had to rebuild their railways from the damages of WW II. Faced with the costs of rebuilding from near scratch and having governmental financing - they chose electric for their own reasons.
charlie hebdoIt's amazing how oppositional folks are on here to electrification of major trunk lines.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
azrailExcept for the fact that a lot of people don't want to live next to a web of buzzing wires and ugly poles ruining their views. And I thought that electric waves caused cancer-as the same environazis said before.
Except for the fact that a lot of people don't want to live next to a web of buzzing wires and ugly poles ruining their views. And I thought that electric waves caused cancer-as the same envirkazis said before.
Overmod This was actually the scam set up with an early run of the Milwaukee Road electrification - the basis for the claim that their regenerative braking from a descending train would supply enough energy to lift another upgrade. They started with a long, heavy train at the top of one of the grades, and the train 'lifted' with the regenerated power was much smaller.
This was actually the scam set up with an early run of the Milwaukee Road electrification - the basis for the claim that their regenerative braking from a descending train would supply enough energy to lift another upgrade.
They started with a long, heavy train at the top of one of the grades, and the train 'lifted' with the regenerated power was much smaller.
I don't recall reading anything about a demostration where an ascending train was pulled up by a descending train. OTOH, the first freight train hauled electrically over Pipestone pass eastbound, so it ended up at a much lower elevation than it started. At the end of the trip, an announcement was made that the Montana Power Company owed the Milwaukee a few dollars for the net regenerated energy.
Regeneration was credited with a 17% savings in power consumption, but within a year or so, operating experience showed that the reduction in brake show wear and reduced accidents had a much larger payback than the savings in electric energy.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.