QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz In the Trains Magazine news wire for Friday 7-31, there was an article about how a British Rail Eurostar train hit 208 mph in a test run. The article goes on to mention that the French TGV has reached 300 mph, and that Japanese Shinkansen has hit 345 mph in speed tests! 345! And here we are in the great and mighty and rich USA getting excited that we may have trains going 110 mph soon. And on our "pride & joy" northeast corridor we hit an breathtaking 150mph, when the trains are not pulling down the catenary that was installed 100 years ago!! I seriously doubt that Japan, France, or England have much more cash available for such projects than the USA. They just have the determination and foresight.
Dave H. Painted side goes up. My website : wnbranch.com
Originally posted by zardoz In the Trains Magazine news wire for Friday 7-31, there was an article about how a British Rail Eurostar train hit 208 mph in a test run. The article goes on to mention that the French TGV has reached 300 mph, and that Japanese Shinkansen has hit 345 mph in speed tests! 345! Eem,, I think the problem is that the news wire may have confuse miles per hour with kilometers per hour,because Europe and Japan use the Metric system where a kilometre is only 5/8ths of a mile, so sure it seems fast. Generally a lurker by natureBe AlertThe world needs more lerts.It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference. Reply Hugh Jampton Member sinceSeptember 2003 From: Southern Region now, UK 820 posts Posted by Hugh Jampton on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:12 PM Originally posted by zardoz In the Trains Magazine news wire for Friday 7-31, there was an article about how a British Rail Eurostar train hit 208 mph in a test run. The article goes on to mention that the French TGV has reached 300 mph, and that Japanese Shinkansen has hit 345 mph in speed tests! 345! Eem,, I think the problem is that the news wire may have confuse miles per hour with kilometers per hour,because Europe and Japan use the Metric system where a kilometre is only 5/8ths of a mile, so sure it seems fast. Generally a lurker by natureBe AlertThe world needs more lerts.It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference. Reply zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:41 PM I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Reply zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:41 PM I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:52 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:52 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:57 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Next stop Eschede. All passengers for Eschede please move to coaches Four and Five. Through passengers please move to coaches three and forward. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:57 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Next stop Eschede. All passengers for Eschede please move to coaches Four and Five. Through passengers please move to coaches three and forward. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, January 7, 2004 12:21 PM FYI-- The Al Perlman-run NYC proved in 1966 that ordinary track could handle high-speed rail service, a la the M-497 jet-powered RDC-3 series of tests. The track chosen for the test was the New York Central main line that runs between Butler, Indiana, and Air Line Junction (west of Toledo), Ohio—the longest multiple track railroad line in the U.S.—68.49 miles. At that time, the line consisted almost entirely of standard, 39-foot sections of 26-year-old bolted 127-lb/yard Dudley Modified rail (with one short four-mile portion of continuously welded rail). The tracks between Bryan Ohio and Butler Indiana were typical of the rr tracks of that day. The M-497 set the U.S. rail speed record of 183.85 mph, which remains unbroken. Actually, Don Wetzel, the engineer, had the train up to 196+ mph but was under orders to bring it through the timing point somewhere around 180 mph, so the record could have been even higher than it turned out to be. When I read that the tracks aren't up to high-speed service, I'm always surprised. What's not up to snuff is the signalling which only allows 79 mph on main lines. The tracks can take it, the signals can't. Check out the high-speed tests in southern Illinois last summer for more on this. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, January 7, 2004 12:21 PM FYI-- The Al Perlman-run NYC proved in 1966 that ordinary track could handle high-speed rail service, a la the M-497 jet-powered RDC-3 series of tests. The track chosen for the test was the New York Central main line that runs between Butler, Indiana, and Air Line Junction (west of Toledo), Ohio—the longest multiple track railroad line in the U.S.—68.49 miles. At that time, the line consisted almost entirely of standard, 39-foot sections of 26-year-old bolted 127-lb/yard Dudley Modified rail (with one short four-mile portion of continuously welded rail). The tracks between Bryan Ohio and Butler Indiana were typical of the rr tracks of that day. The M-497 set the U.S. rail speed record of 183.85 mph, which remains unbroken. Actually, Don Wetzel, the engineer, had the train up to 196+ mph but was under orders to bring it through the timing point somewhere around 180 mph, so the record could have been even higher than it turned out to be. When I read that the tracks aren't up to high-speed service, I'm always surprised. What's not up to snuff is the signalling which only allows 79 mph on main lines. The tracks can take it, the signals can't. Check out the high-speed tests in southern Illinois last summer for more on this. Reply Edit 123 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 zardoz In the Trains Magazine news wire for Friday 7-31, there was an article about how a British Rail Eurostar train hit 208 mph in a test run. The article goes on to mention that the French TGV has reached 300 mph, and that Japanese Shinkansen has hit 345 mph in speed tests! 345! Eem,, I think the problem is that the news wire may have confuse miles per hour with kilometers per hour,because Europe and Japan use the Metric system where a kilometre is only 5/8ths of a mile, so sure it seems fast. Generally a lurker by natureBe AlertThe world needs more lerts.It's the 3rd rail that makes the difference. Reply zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:41 PM I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Reply zardoz Member sinceJanuary 2003 From: Kenosha, WI 6,567 posts Posted by zardoz on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:41 PM I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:52 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:52 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:57 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Next stop Eschede. All passengers for Eschede please move to coaches Four and Five. Through passengers please move to coaches three and forward. Reply dharmon Member sinceAugust 2003 From: Bottom Left Corner, USA 3,420 posts Posted by dharmon on Tuesday, January 6, 2004 12:57 PM QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there. Next stop Eschede. All passengers for Eschede please move to coaches Four and Five. Through passengers please move to coaches three and forward. Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, January 7, 2004 12:21 PM FYI-- The Al Perlman-run NYC proved in 1966 that ordinary track could handle high-speed rail service, a la the M-497 jet-powered RDC-3 series of tests. The track chosen for the test was the New York Central main line that runs between Butler, Indiana, and Air Line Junction (west of Toledo), Ohio—the longest multiple track railroad line in the U.S.—68.49 miles. At that time, the line consisted almost entirely of standard, 39-foot sections of 26-year-old bolted 127-lb/yard Dudley Modified rail (with one short four-mile portion of continuously welded rail). The tracks between Bryan Ohio and Butler Indiana were typical of the rr tracks of that day. The M-497 set the U.S. rail speed record of 183.85 mph, which remains unbroken. Actually, Don Wetzel, the engineer, had the train up to 196+ mph but was under orders to bring it through the timing point somewhere around 180 mph, so the record could have been even higher than it turned out to be. When I read that the tracks aren't up to high-speed service, I'm always surprised. What's not up to snuff is the signalling which only allows 79 mph on main lines. The tracks can take it, the signals can't. Check out the high-speed tests in southern Illinois last summer for more on this. Reply Edit Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, January 7, 2004 12:21 PM FYI-- The Al Perlman-run NYC proved in 1966 that ordinary track could handle high-speed rail service, a la the M-497 jet-powered RDC-3 series of tests. The track chosen for the test was the New York Central main line that runs between Butler, Indiana, and Air Line Junction (west of Toledo), Ohio—the longest multiple track railroad line in the U.S.—68.49 miles. At that time, the line consisted almost entirely of standard, 39-foot sections of 26-year-old bolted 127-lb/yard Dudley Modified rail (with one short four-mile portion of continuously welded rail). The tracks between Bryan Ohio and Butler Indiana were typical of the rr tracks of that day. The M-497 set the U.S. rail speed record of 183.85 mph, which remains unbroken. Actually, Don Wetzel, the engineer, had the train up to 196+ mph but was under orders to bring it through the timing point somewhere around 180 mph, so the record could have been even higher than it turned out to be. When I read that the tracks aren't up to high-speed service, I'm always surprised. What's not up to snuff is the signalling which only allows 79 mph on main lines. The tracks can take it, the signals can't. Check out the high-speed tests in southern Illinois last summer for more on this. Reply Edit 123 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 zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here??
QUOTE: Originally posted by dharmon QUOTE: Originally posted by zardoz I just read the link that dblstack placed in his post. I quote from the article here: "Officials said it appeared that the fifth car of the 12-car train hit the bridge. The back end of the car was broken off and the fourth car veered off the rails and rolled onto its side, while three other cars jackknifed farther up the line. The lead locomotive remained on the tracks, and the driver apparently was unaware of the disaster. It came to a stop only after the station master at Eschede activated an emergency brake." Is it just me, or does anyone else notice something odd about the chain of events listed here?? Ummm......I guess it kinda seems odd that the sudden loss of air pressure didn't trigger a mild reaction of .... say brakes, maybe they need to put Ed's mirror on it so they can periodically check and see if the rest of the consist is still there.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.