Quentin
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe Oltmannd, RE: Amtrak and Buearacracy. That is just the opponents of Amtrak's point though. They contend that every project that Amtrak ever does will be miered in such problems, therefore we should just do away with it--i.e. it is impossible to get government out of a government-run railroad. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by conrailman To: Gabe: Amtrak needs 30 Billion for Northeast Corridor to get it into A- Shape again, and 350 New Cars for the Corridor.
Originally posted by gabe [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 1:30 PM true, it is paid for by the gas tax, but not all of it. There is still alot of it that comes from the general fund. Brad Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 4:53 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd Why the new cars? What's wrong with Amfleet? What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? Why the new cars? Because a service like Boston - Wash should be run with 15 minute interval. If not more. What's wrong with Amfleet? Apart from being late 70ties technology - nothing much. What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? I heard that LD trains long for new equipment. Reply Edit mustanggt Member sinceOctober 2002 From: Massachusetts 664 posts Posted by mustanggt on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 4:56 PM QUOTE: He also commented on the Accella disaster. His basic premise was it wasn't Amtrak's fault but bureaucratic problems caused the current mess Actually I think it's Bombardier's fault. But anyways, Speaking of the big dig, it's too bad they did'nt link North station and south station. The NEC could have extended further up the coast, possibly to Portland, Maine. C280 rollin' Reply conrailman Member sinceDecember 2001 From: NS Main Line at MP12 Blairsville,Pa 830 posts Posted by conrailman on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 5:00 PM Its in Amtrak 5 year plan to Replace all the Amfleet Cars with 350 New Ones and about 30 Billion Its in Trains Maz Somewhere I forget the Year it was in Trains, But that what Amtrak needs for the Corridor 30 Billion. I will look for the issue it was in. Let you know later. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 5:43 PM As far as the big Dig is concerned, I have this feeling that on the the day its opened the traffic will still be jammed.....maybe moved a few miles to where they didn't rebuild the freeway.... I am of the opinion if you took all the money in the world and build new freeways, they would still be a traffic jam on them..... Its time to turn to other alternatives than building or rebuilding new freeways...... Reply Edit morseman Member sinceJuly 2004 From: Ontario - Canada 463 posts Posted by morseman on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 6:33 PM Further to the BIG DIG Money spent on Boston's Big Dig could have covered the cost of building a high speed rail line from washington to Jacksonvile, Fla. Reply conrailman Member sinceDecember 2001 From: NS Main Line at MP12 Blairsville,Pa 830 posts Posted by conrailman on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 7:24 PM I found it in Trains Maz October of 2004 issue about the Amfleets Cars being replace in 2007 AND OTHER STUFF about amtrak 5 year plan on Pg 14 and 15.[:)] Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:09 PM The original 5 year plan, updates, and the Amtrak's proposal for organizational changes are all on their web site. The 2006 appropriations request includes Amtrak's proposals for organizational changes. It is a 52 page document and presents a plan to get to an organization that includes a good portion of the things that the Bush Administration has been looking for. In many respect I see it as a put up or shut up document. I am sure that neither Congress or the Administration will see it that way, the wording is very diplomatic, but Amtrak has been pretty clear as to what it will take to implement the changes. For example, the NEC needs $2 billion to be put in good operating condition. There is a pretty strong implication that it doesn't make any difference if Amtrak, NECtrak, 13 Original Coloniestrak or billgatestrak is given the NEC, it is still going to take $2 billion for fix up. Amtrak acknowledged that the other corridor operations (the short haul stuff), ought to be an important focus of the reauthorization bill and suggested an 80-20 federal-state funding scheme to promote the development of these services. Amtrak agreed that the states should be the key deciders of which corridors should be developed and they should select operators for lines on a competitive basis. It is suggested that Amtrak should be allowed to be a bidder. The plan does note that if outside operators are to be found it may be necessary to change the federal laws governing bargaining with rail unions, the requirement for participation in the Railroad Retirement Program, and other lawful requirements that apply to railroad companies. These are all perceived to be a cause of costs incurred by railroads that other types of business do not have to deal with. Amtrak also offered to establish a precise method for determing the cost recovery of long distances trains so that congress could establish legal minimums for train continuation. When I say this is a put up or shut up document this is what I mean. The first thing being said is that this is the kind of federal investment that is going to be necessary if there is to be any rail passenger service in the US. The second is directed to the people who argue that competition solves everything. Here is an outline of the first necessay steps to make the business attractive. Get that done and then good luck. The forgoing is a little off the topic, but if one wants factual information about what Amtrak is trying to do and how the government money will be used, these documents have to be read. I didn't see the C-Span interview, but I suspect that Gunn may have been trying to make the point that the Acela problems are not exclusively the fault of Amtrak. My reading of the histroy was that rather than setting the necessary specs and authorizing the constructions of the trains, Congress, DOT planners and the FRA kept coming back with an "Oh by the way, you need to add this or upgrade that." Appearantly there was no individual in charge of the project either willing or able to keep all such requests to making it to the builder. Bombardier filed the lawsuit against Amtrak with the allegation that these change requests screwed up the works and cost them hundreds of millions of dollars. It would be a pure guess on my part, but had he been in charge Gunn may have suggested that the money put up for Acela trains may have been better spent on upgrades to the NEC. With that, the somewhat slower convential trains may have been able to achieve the running times at or close to what was to be done with the Acelas. Maybe after that, the modern style high speed train can be developed, possibly without the need for tilt and with less power. One prototype test until all the bugs are gone and then you launch the production model. The Big Dig. A few have bought up with the old saw or the highway lobby propaganda that highway projects are paid for by user fees. Sorry, but you are wrong. Federal Highway System projects are paid for by a tax on gasoline, which is paid by gasoline buyers even if they do not use Federal Highways. If you are going argue that the Big Dig is being paid for by the users, you better get me some pictures of the toll gates. By the way, many states, including Florida get much less back in federal money for highways than comes from gasoline sales in that states. How does that become a user fee for the residents of Florida? Take a trip to Boston? I was glad to hear that Mineta was very impressed by the "profitable" operation of Japan's bullet trains. They may have an operating profit, but I am willing to bet a lunch that the Japanese Government's investment in the building of that system would make our investment in Amtrak look like chump change. "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply jeaton Member sinceSeptember 2002 From: Rockton, IL 4,821 posts Posted by jeaton on Wednesday, April 27, 2005 10:52 PM Gabe Here is a link to a New York Times on the history of the Acela trains. Don Phillips was one of the covering reporters, so the paper got it right and may give you more insight to the comment made by Gunn. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/24/national/24acela.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5094&en=33b9ffeaa0c275cf&hp&ex=1114315200&partner=homepage Jay "We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, April 28, 2005 1:40 PM Yes CNN said today that Bombardier "over" estimated the usage on the brakes. [:(][:(] Originally posted by mustanggt [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:05 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd Why the new cars? What's wrong with Amfleet? What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? Why the new cars? Because a service like Boston - Wash should be run with 15 minute interval. If not more. What's wrong with Amfleet? Apart from being late 70ties technology - nothing much. What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? I heard that LD trains long for new equipment. What "technology" of Amfleet is obsolete? I would suggest that there really is nothing new since the 70s on the car side. What do you base the 15 minute interval demand on? I remember reading a case, not too long ago in trains, that the frequency should be no more than hourly and the trains longer with several classes of accomodations - not more frequent. Where did you hear that the LD trains need more coaches? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:30 PM i could see more coaches and sleepers for the trains to florida, and all the west coast trains. If Amtrak could do it right, it would be good for them to have extra cars to put on the trains as demand requires. In the west, Keep extra Superliners in Seattle, Portland, Oakland, LA, Denver, DALLAS, Minneapolis, New Orleans. I know that it would cost a lot of money, but it would be worth it. At times when there is huge demand, which would be the summer, and holidays, you would be able to meet the demand instead of saying sold out. In the mean time, the extra cars would make it so that they could keep the maintence up all year and keep the cars in good shape. Also, for sleepers, I would make one care that was all double deluxe bedrooms so that they are like master suites. You could then put a double bed in there as well as the bunk beds. If you made the cars right, you could put that car at the end of the train, so that way they would have a huge window to look out of the back. Make it like a cruise. I would also build more Pacific Parlour cars for the rest of the system, as those are a huge success. Now of course this would all take a lot of money, but if Amtrak was given the resources to do this, it would work. Brad Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:37 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Yes CNN said today that Bombardier "over" estimated the usage on the brakes. [:(][:(] Originally posted by mustanggt [ There is a lot of really curious information out there. Best I can figure out, the problem isn't the brake "wore out", since the wear surfaces of brakes are designed to be replaced more often than one a million miles. The failure is cracks of the rotor - which at this point in their life are likely due to fatigue. Fatigue occurs with repetitive stress. Stress can occur mechanically, from braking force, or thermally. I really can't imagine they blew the stress calculation from the braking force, but thermal stress is something else. It could be a product of too much power braking, too little time released between, full speed, full application or even insufficient cooling in the rotor design or air flow around the rotor. I'll put my money on cooling deficiencies, if I were betting. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:18 PM There is no doubt in my mind that Amtrak is short on sleepers, and could use some new diners on the east coast.... However, I don't think Amtrak is short on coaches...... Reply Edit jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Friday, April 29, 2005 5:38 AM Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s... Jamie Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, April 29, 2005 8:33 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s... Is the Adirondak selling out between NY and Albany or from Albany to Montreal? The times I've ridden it, it's been pretty sparsely filled north of Albany, but that was years ago. Do they drop/add cars at Albany? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jockellis Member sinceMay 2002 From: Just outside Atlanta 422 posts Posted by jockellis on Friday, April 29, 2005 11:06 AM G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City. The military heads a list of agencies wanting better and bigger roads. They have the ear of Congress. Congressmen love to have new roads in their districts because it is a very visible sign of the hard work they do in Washington for their constituents. In other words, it helps them get re-elected. Remember LBJ's War on Poverty? A lot of it went for an interstate-type highway north from Atlanta to Dahlonega, GA 400 which some drivers think is the Indy 500 and drive appropriately. This was not built with a penny of federal DOT money but anti-poverty money. As as for federal programs actually working, this is a poster project. It took Bill Elliott's hometown Dawsonville and gold mining Dahlonega out of Appalachian poverty and onto the road to wealth as landowners sold their farms for suburban subdivisions. And the wealth was spread around. But back to highways, a lot more money that what the DOT amasses in gas taxes goes into the roads. If Congressmen could point with pride to new federally-financed railroads in their territories, we would be getting more trains because they could be getting more votes. In reality, our representatives can get more votes railing against the railroads than they can supporting them. Railroads have from the very beginning been high profile targets and will always because they are seen as cold and heartless big business and worse than that, they keep you waiting at grade crossings for a few minutes. Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Friday, April 29, 2005 11:10 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by jockellis G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City. What is the big idea of trying to sell my bridge out from under me? Gabe Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:17 PM Maybe he means better suspension & maybe leaning into curves. I would suspect that the NEC ould easily support trains with 15 minute headways with the signal system now in place. Heck between commuter & A/trak trains I would think even 15 minutes would be a long period. I know that the tunnel between NJ & Penn Station NY can handle a ttrain every 3 minutes. That would mean the signal system is geared for that time frame. [:D][:p] Originally posted by oltmannd Originally posted by uzurpator Originally posted by oltmannd Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:23 PM I think then Americans would have to cease driving cars. I am sure you are aware that you/I & everybody who buys gasoline is paying I think 80% of any hwy project thru a gasoline tax. The state pays the remaining 20% & that comes thru taxes that are paid into state coffers. [:D][:)][:o)] Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd Why the new cars? What's wrong with Amfleet? What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet?
QUOTE: He also commented on the Accella disaster. His basic premise was it wasn't Amtrak's fault but bureaucratic problems caused the current mess
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
Originally posted by mustanggt [ Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:05 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd Why the new cars? What's wrong with Amfleet? What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? Why the new cars? Because a service like Boston - Wash should be run with 15 minute interval. If not more. What's wrong with Amfleet? Apart from being late 70ties technology - nothing much. What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? I heard that LD trains long for new equipment. What "technology" of Amfleet is obsolete? I would suggest that there really is nothing new since the 70s on the car side. What do you base the 15 minute interval demand on? I remember reading a case, not too long ago in trains, that the frequency should be no more than hourly and the trains longer with several classes of accomodations - not more frequent. Where did you hear that the LD trains need more coaches? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:30 PM i could see more coaches and sleepers for the trains to florida, and all the west coast trains. If Amtrak could do it right, it would be good for them to have extra cars to put on the trains as demand requires. In the west, Keep extra Superliners in Seattle, Portland, Oakland, LA, Denver, DALLAS, Minneapolis, New Orleans. I know that it would cost a lot of money, but it would be worth it. At times when there is huge demand, which would be the summer, and holidays, you would be able to meet the demand instead of saying sold out. In the mean time, the extra cars would make it so that they could keep the maintence up all year and keep the cars in good shape. Also, for sleepers, I would make one care that was all double deluxe bedrooms so that they are like master suites. You could then put a double bed in there as well as the bunk beds. If you made the cars right, you could put that car at the end of the train, so that way they would have a huge window to look out of the back. Make it like a cruise. I would also build more Pacific Parlour cars for the rest of the system, as those are a huge success. Now of course this would all take a lot of money, but if Amtrak was given the resources to do this, it would work. Brad Reply Edit oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Thursday, April 28, 2005 2:37 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Yes CNN said today that Bombardier "over" estimated the usage on the brakes. [:(][:(] Originally posted by mustanggt [ There is a lot of really curious information out there. Best I can figure out, the problem isn't the brake "wore out", since the wear surfaces of brakes are designed to be replaced more often than one a million miles. The failure is cracks of the rotor - which at this point in their life are likely due to fatigue. Fatigue occurs with repetitive stress. Stress can occur mechanically, from braking force, or thermally. I really can't imagine they blew the stress calculation from the braking force, but thermal stress is something else. It could be a product of too much power braking, too little time released between, full speed, full application or even insufficient cooling in the rotor design or air flow around the rotor. I'll put my money on cooling deficiencies, if I were betting. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:18 PM There is no doubt in my mind that Amtrak is short on sleepers, and could use some new diners on the east coast.... However, I don't think Amtrak is short on coaches...... Reply Edit jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Friday, April 29, 2005 5:38 AM Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s... Jamie Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, April 29, 2005 8:33 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s... Is the Adirondak selling out between NY and Albany or from Albany to Montreal? The times I've ridden it, it's been pretty sparsely filled north of Albany, but that was years ago. Do they drop/add cars at Albany? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jockellis Member sinceMay 2002 From: Just outside Atlanta 422 posts Posted by jockellis on Friday, April 29, 2005 11:06 AM G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City. The military heads a list of agencies wanting better and bigger roads. They have the ear of Congress. Congressmen love to have new roads in their districts because it is a very visible sign of the hard work they do in Washington for their constituents. In other words, it helps them get re-elected. Remember LBJ's War on Poverty? A lot of it went for an interstate-type highway north from Atlanta to Dahlonega, GA 400 which some drivers think is the Indy 500 and drive appropriately. This was not built with a penny of federal DOT money but anti-poverty money. As as for federal programs actually working, this is a poster project. It took Bill Elliott's hometown Dawsonville and gold mining Dahlonega out of Appalachian poverty and onto the road to wealth as landowners sold their farms for suburban subdivisions. And the wealth was spread around. But back to highways, a lot more money that what the DOT amasses in gas taxes goes into the roads. If Congressmen could point with pride to new federally-financed railroads in their territories, we would be getting more trains because they could be getting more votes. In reality, our representatives can get more votes railing against the railroads than they can supporting them. Railroads have from the very beginning been high profile targets and will always because they are seen as cold and heartless big business and worse than that, they keep you waiting at grade crossings for a few minutes. Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Friday, April 29, 2005 11:10 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by jockellis G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City. What is the big idea of trying to sell my bridge out from under me? Gabe Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:17 PM Maybe he means better suspension & maybe leaning into curves. I would suspect that the NEC ould easily support trains with 15 minute headways with the signal system now in place. Heck between commuter & A/trak trains I would think even 15 minutes would be a long period. I know that the tunnel between NJ & Penn Station NY can handle a ttrain every 3 minutes. That would mean the signal system is geared for that time frame. [:D][:p] Originally posted by oltmannd Originally posted by uzurpator Originally posted by oltmannd Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:23 PM I think then Americans would have to cease driving cars. I am sure you are aware that you/I & everybody who buys gasoline is paying I think 80% of any hwy project thru a gasoline tax. The state pays the remaining 20% & that comes thru taxes that are paid into state coffers. [:D][:)][:o)] Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by uzurpator QUOTE: Originally posted by oltmannd Why the new cars? What's wrong with Amfleet? What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? Why the new cars? Because a service like Boston - Wash should be run with 15 minute interval. If not more. What's wrong with Amfleet? Apart from being late 70ties technology - nothing much. What would they do with all the displaced Amfleet? I heard that LD trains long for new equipment.
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed Yes CNN said today that Bombardier "over" estimated the usage on the brakes. [:(][:(] Originally posted by mustanggt [ There is a lot of really curious information out there. Best I can figure out, the problem isn't the brake "wore out", since the wear surfaces of brakes are designed to be replaced more often than one a million miles. The failure is cracks of the rotor - which at this point in their life are likely due to fatigue. Fatigue occurs with repetitive stress. Stress can occur mechanically, from braking force, or thermally. I really can't imagine they blew the stress calculation from the braking force, but thermal stress is something else. It could be a product of too much power braking, too little time released between, full speed, full application or even insufficient cooling in the rotor design or air flow around the rotor. I'll put my money on cooling deficiencies, if I were betting. -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 28, 2005 6:18 PM There is no doubt in my mind that Amtrak is short on sleepers, and could use some new diners on the east coast.... However, I don't think Amtrak is short on coaches...... Reply Edit jchnhtfd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: US 1,537 posts Posted by jchnhtfd on Friday, April 29, 2005 5:38 AM Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s... Jamie Reply oltmannd Member sinceJanuary 2001 From: Atlanta 11,971 posts Posted by oltmannd on Friday, April 29, 2005 8:33 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s... Is the Adirondak selling out between NY and Albany or from Albany to Montreal? The times I've ridden it, it's been pretty sparsely filled north of Albany, but that was years ago. Do they drop/add cars at Albany? -Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/) Reply jockellis Member sinceMay 2002 From: Just outside Atlanta 422 posts Posted by jockellis on Friday, April 29, 2005 11:06 AM G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City. The military heads a list of agencies wanting better and bigger roads. They have the ear of Congress. Congressmen love to have new roads in their districts because it is a very visible sign of the hard work they do in Washington for their constituents. In other words, it helps them get re-elected. Remember LBJ's War on Poverty? A lot of it went for an interstate-type highway north from Atlanta to Dahlonega, GA 400 which some drivers think is the Indy 500 and drive appropriately. This was not built with a penny of federal DOT money but anti-poverty money. As as for federal programs actually working, this is a poster project. It took Bill Elliott's hometown Dawsonville and gold mining Dahlonega out of Appalachian poverty and onto the road to wealth as landowners sold their farms for suburban subdivisions. And the wealth was spread around. But back to highways, a lot more money that what the DOT amasses in gas taxes goes into the roads. If Congressmen could point with pride to new federally-financed railroads in their territories, we would be getting more trains because they could be getting more votes. In reality, our representatives can get more votes railing against the railroads than they can supporting them. Railroads have from the very beginning been high profile targets and will always because they are seen as cold and heartless big business and worse than that, they keep you waiting at grade crossings for a few minutes. Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers Reply gabe Member sinceMarch 2004 From: Indianapolis, Indiana 2,434 posts Posted by gabe on Friday, April 29, 2005 11:10 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by jockellis G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City. What is the big idea of trying to sell my bridge out from under me? Gabe Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:17 PM Maybe he means better suspension & maybe leaning into curves. I would suspect that the NEC ould easily support trains with 15 minute headways with the signal system now in place. Heck between commuter & A/trak trains I would think even 15 minutes would be a long period. I know that the tunnel between NJ & Penn Station NY can handle a ttrain every 3 minutes. That would mean the signal system is geared for that time frame. [:D][:p] Originally posted by oltmannd Originally posted by uzurpator Originally posted by oltmannd Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:23 PM I think then Americans would have to cease driving cars. I am sure you are aware that you/I & everybody who buys gasoline is paying I think 80% of any hwy project thru a gasoline tax. The state pays the remaining 20% & that comes thru taxes that are paid into state coffers. [:D][:)][:o)] Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by mustanggt [
QUOTE: Originally posted by jchnhtfd Amtrak longer distance trains are short on coaches -- it is not unusual, for instance, for the Adirondack to and from Montreal to sell out (for lack of equipment) long before the departure date, and it's not alone... The brake rotor thing? It will be interesting to read the final analysis reports. I'd agree with Don, though -- more likely cooling problems than anything else. And I would add to that that there is nothing wrong with the fundamental design (500,000 miles isn't bad, guys -- try that with your automobile!) except... and it's a big except... an Acela is a LOT heavier than the trains (TGV) from which it was derived, and has to use the brakes more often due to speed restrictions and the like. There were some somewhat similar problems (not brakes, but others related to heavier loadings than anticipated) in the very first AEM7s...
Jock Ellis Cumming, GA US of A Georgia Association of Railroad Passengers
QUOTE: Originally posted by jockellis G'day, Y'all, Anyone who believes ONLY gasoline tax money is used to build highways might want to buy my bridge in New York City.
Originally posted by oltmannd Originally posted by uzurpator Originally posted by oltmannd Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:23 PM I think then Americans would have to cease driving cars. I am sure you are aware that you/I & everybody who buys gasoline is paying I think 80% of any hwy project thru a gasoline tax. The state pays the remaining 20% & that comes thru taxes that are paid into state coffers. [:D][:)][:o)] Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by uzurpator Originally posted by oltmannd Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:23 PM I think then Americans would have to cease driving cars. I am sure you are aware that you/I & everybody who buys gasoline is paying I think 80% of any hwy project thru a gasoline tax. The state pays the remaining 20% & that comes thru taxes that are paid into state coffers. [:D][:)][:o)] Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by oltmannd Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Friday, April 29, 2005 12:23 PM I think then Americans would have to cease driving cars. I am sure you are aware that you/I & everybody who buys gasoline is paying I think 80% of any hwy project thru a gasoline tax. The state pays the remaining 20% & that comes thru taxes that are paid into state coffers. [:D][:)][:o)] Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by donclark Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply 12 Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.