Acela is a fixed consist also, technically an EMU. In Germany they sometimes combine two separate ICE (HSR EMUs) consists and run it as one, possibly splitting at some point.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
OvermodCan I have a detailed reference on this? Particularly about the 35 mph curve business?
Can I have a detailed reference on this? Particularly about the 35 mph curve business?
The Acela is a success because it is all-reservation, uses demand pricing, and has a backup in Norhteast Regional to handle the overflow. In a sense, the Broadway Limited and 20th Century, once streamlined and rarely run with extra sections until train-offs made extra equipment available, were practically fixed consist, with overflow business going to the General and Commidor Vanderbilt, for example. The Comet hung around for a long time. After it was bumped from Boston - Providence fast local service, it ran Boston - Waterbury via Hartford, where I rode it in 1950 or 1951, with my MIT classmate Gerry Dyar (who later served "under my command" at the Psywar Center at Fort Bragg.). Similarly, when the fixed consist Flying Yankee was bumped from Boston - Portland - Bangor, it served as the Cheshire, Boston - Bellows Falls - White River Junction (or Wells River?), and as the Minuteman, Boston -Troy.
In a sense, the New York subway system has gone to fixed consists, with five-car unitized trains, full-width cabs only at the two ends. This applies to both A (old IRT) and B (IND-BMT) divisions. Most of the time they run as ten-car trains, late nights as 5-car. Not universal (yet?) for all lines, and the 7, Flushing, has single cars to allow 11-car trains (and also 6-car?)
Has Amtrak ever run two Acelas in service together? I know it is technically possible.
What do fixed consists have to do with monorails?
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
Most monorails have operated with fixed consists.
aegrotatioI was unable to edit my post to update it, but it was about another monorail that balanced itself on a single rail on the ground and also used the overhead catenary to keep the balance. It eventually crashed when the motorman decided to take a curve at less than the required speed which was actually 55 MPH, not 35 MPH as I had originally posted. It was built by August Belmont based on what he saw at the Jamestown Exhibition. Here is a link: https://archive.org/stream/tramwaysactvict00britgoog#page/n66/mode/2up
It was built by August Belmont based on what he saw at the Jamestown Exhibition.
Here is a link: https://archive.org/stream/tramwaysactvict00britgoog#page/n66/mode/2up
This is the same reference (More Unusual Railways), and the same railroad. I believe Belmont's interest was through the IRT and not personally... but I am no expert.
I think I disagree over the high speed thing -- but it does hinge on where the defective construction was. The overhead system guiding the 'ears' had to be 'pre-superelevated' to a particular speed for the banking to work correctly, with the assumption being that the flanges on the earwheels (I couldn't resist coining the term!) would never 'derail' as long as the car was running.
With the car running slowly, the balancing between left and right ears was thrown off, with more stress being placed on the inside members of the portal frames. This very well might have caused one or more of the portal frames to shift, but this imho would not have caused the earwheels on that side to lose contact with the rails -- it appeared to me, perhaps incorrectly, that the running rail itself had subsided and shifted laterally, causing at least some of the 'inside' earwheels to flip off their guiderail. At that point of course the car just went over with nothing to hold it up...
The take-home point is that this system was NOT gyroscopically stabilized, and in fact any developed gyro torque from the wheels would be counteracted by the superelevation of the overhead structure, rather than lead to any increased stability, in this system.
It does have to be said that this, like the Kearney/Boynton Bicycle Railway, does have a certain amount of merit... if strongly built. I believe this is actually mentioned near the end of the Times article. We might remember in judging the terminal fate of this system that the BMT experienced a similar one after the Malbone affair...
CSSHEGEWISCH Most monorails have operated with fixed consists.
But it's not a requirement, anymore than saying light rail has to run on the surface. Monorails can have cars that can couple and uncouple. Why do you think most have fixed consists?
Have we yet discussed Brennan's monorail?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Einschienerp.jpg
http://www.catskillarchive.com/rrextra/ODGYRO.Html
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.