DMUinCT oltmannd I don't remember any LD coach seats that weren't "spinable". The Amfleet cars generally have the release pedal pinned, so "Joe Traveller" doesn't spin his seat. Generally, you push on the pedal, pull the seat away from the wall, spin it, then shove it back against the wall. That's a lot of work to spin all the seats on an Acela. I guess there is too much customer dissatisfaction from riding backward to have the seats 50/50. I know my wife hates riding backward... Not a lot of seats to turn, and some seats face tables and need not be turned. Remember, the Acela has only "First Class" and "Business Class", no Coach. Each seat has space, full recline, foot rests, 115 volt power plug, headphone jacks, and fold up tray tables, with 3 across seating in "First Class" and 4 across in "Business Class". Like an airliner, they also have overhead cargo bins and emergency floor lighting. Not only that, but the center car is a Food Service Car with full tables. The total capacity of an Acela is only about the same as a Jumbo Jet (Boeing 767,777).
oltmannd I don't remember any LD coach seats that weren't "spinable". The Amfleet cars generally have the release pedal pinned, so "Joe Traveller" doesn't spin his seat. Generally, you push on the pedal, pull the seat away from the wall, spin it, then shove it back against the wall. That's a lot of work to spin all the seats on an Acela. I guess there is too much customer dissatisfaction from riding backward to have the seats 50/50. I know my wife hates riding backward...
I don't remember any LD coach seats that weren't "spinable". The Amfleet cars generally have the release pedal pinned, so "Joe Traveller" doesn't spin his seat. Generally, you push on the pedal, pull the seat away from the wall, spin it, then shove it back against the wall.
That's a lot of work to spin all the seats on an Acela. I guess there is too much customer dissatisfaction from riding backward to have the seats 50/50. I know my wife hates riding backward...
Not a lot of seats to turn, and some seats face tables and need not be turned. Remember, the Acela has only "First Class" and "Business Class", no Coach. Each seat has space, full recline, foot rests, 115 volt power plug, headphone jacks, and fold up tray tables, with 3 across seating in "First Class" and 4 across in "Business Class". Like an airliner, they also have overhead cargo bins and emergency floor lighting. Not only that, but the center car is a Food Service Car with full tables. The total capacity of an Acela is only about the same as a Jumbo Jet (Boeing 767,777).
Acela seats about 300, right? First class is 2 + 1, but there are some facing pairs, so 140 seats to turn, perhaps? At 4 per minute, that's 35 minutes, so a cleaning crew of 3 or 4 ought to be able to turn an Acela set in an hour. Is that how it works?
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
oltmannd don't remember any LD coach seats that weren't "spinable". The Amfleet cars generally have the release pedal pinned, so "Joe Traveller" doesn't spin his seat. Generally, you push on the pedal, pull the seat away from the wall, spin it, then shove it back against the wall.
All of the pre-Amtrak LD coach seats that I rode in were reversible, whether they were the "walkover" (simply walk down the aisle, pushing on the backs of the seats to move them to the other side; did you ever spend a night on one of these cars?), or turn the whole seat on a center axis. Some roads had seats that were not pinned in any way, and the seats needed only pressure on the outer ends to turn them (Sou), the seats of others had a lever that had to be pressed down (N&W), and others, yet (IC), had seats that had to be pulled away from the side of the car before the seats could be turned. Perhaps "press and pull out" is more secure, but it seems to me that this adds more labor than is necessary.
I have not yet decided if the second most comfortable night I ever spent riding coach was in two facing seats on a Frisco car (lie down across one seat with my feet resting on the opposite seat), or in a Santa Fe high level coach (legrests made a great difference in comfort). My most comfortable coach night of all was in, believe it or not, a coach with walkover seats. I lay down, at full length, on the seat at the end of the seating section; it was next to the restroom wall, and was wide enough for me to stretch out. Of course, there were only two such seats in the car.
Johnny
(I thought this was the turbo thread, and all I see are spinning seats...)
Oh yes, NEC express trains! My mention of airliners using turbos was meant to illustrate that the United States has a long history of being able to innovate when necessary. For example, Boeing built hydrofoils for Hawaii as well as subway cars for Boston. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company's express NEC train of the 1950's was featured in a display at Back Bay Station.
I just Googled history of NEC express for info on Bombardier trains, and saw a nifty name I about which I had forgotten...
"American Flyer."
"Make no little plans; they have no magic to stir men's blood." Daniel Burnham
The T (Boston MBTA) hated those awful Boeing trolleys. They constantly modified them and threw up their hands. There aren't even any of them preserved from the T. You can't teach an old dog (jet helicopter maker) new tricks (good trolley maker). Those were the products of a raft of "make-work" contracts for defense contractors that would have gone out of business otherwise.
Ever hear of New York Shipbuilding? Probably not. They didn't get enough "make-work" to stay in business.
To Blue Streak 1
Here are some.
Russia-6000 kW LNG-fueled freight locomotive. One operating, 6 on order
Egypt-Bombrdier (ANF) 600 passenger, 10 car trains, max speed 160 km/hr. Two power cars/train, each with one 1200 kW traction turbine and two 400kw APU's, all burning diesel fuel.
Iran-RTG Trains delivered to Iran in the 70's during the Shah's reign. Used to connect Teheran to Mashad, cutting travel to this holy city time in half. Max speed 200 km/hr, track permitting Maintenance was neglected following the revolution and the trains were out of service for some time but I understand they have been re-engined and are back in service now. Having lost my French contact, can't readily confirm this
Pictures of all 3 available if you are interested
aegrotatio The T (Boston MBTA) hated those awful Boeing trolleys. They constantly modified them and threw up their hands. There aren't even any of them preserved from the T. You can't teach an old dog (jet helicopter maker) new tricks (good trolley maker). Those were the products of a raft of "make-work" contracts for defense contractors that would have gone out of business otherwise.Ever hear of New York Shipbuilding? Probably not. They didn't get enough "make-work" to stay in business.
Last ship completed USS Truxtun CGN-35, nuclear-powered guided missle cruiser.
Maglev (I thought this was the turbo thread, and all I see are spinning seats...) Oh yes, NEC express trains! My mention of airliners using turbos was meant to illustrate that the United States has a long history of being able to innovate when necessary. For example, Boeing built hydrofoils for Hawaii as well as subway cars for Boston. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company's express NEC train of the 1950's was featured in a display at Back Bay Station. I just Googled history of NEC express for info on Bombardier trains, and saw a nifty name I about which I had forgotten... "American Flyer."
One Hundred yeas ago "American Flyer" (Chicago) Electric Trains were the number 2 builder of toy trains in the United States. Bought by A.C. Gilbert of New Haven CT during the Great Depression, they continued in production into the 1960s. They then were bought by the #1 company, Lionel Trains, and again put into production. The Lionel 2008, 200 page catatalog, had 14 pages of "American Flyer" (Registered Trade Mark of Lionel LLC) trains including a model of the 1947 Ameican Freedom Train.
Must have been a shock to Bombardier when they found American Flyer Trains were already in production.
Don U. TCA 73-5735
Jerry Pier To Blue Streak 1 Here are some. Russia-6000 kW LNG-fueled freight locomotive. One operating, 6 on order Egypt-Bombrdier (ANF) 600 passenger, 10 car trains, max speed 160 km/hr. Two power cars/train, each with one 1200 kW traction turbine and two 400kw APU's, all burning diesel fuel. Iran-RTG Trains delivered to Iran in the 70's during the Shah's reign. Used to connect Teheran to Mashad, cutting travel to this holy city time in half. Max speed 200 km/hr, track permitting Maintenance was neglected following the revolution and the trains were out of service for some time but I understand they have been re-engined and are back in service now. Having lost my French contact, can't readily confirm this Pictures of all 3 available if you are interested
I'd be interested to see more about the Russian turbo freight locomotive...
"I Often Dream of Trains"-From the Album of the Same Name by Robyn Hitchcock
I know Boeing's foray into transit was less than successful, but I think the hydrofoils are still in use in Hong Kong thirty years later... I was really amazed when I saw that poster of a Goodyear train from the same era when that company was removing interurban tracks in Los Angeles. It seems that they knew Boston would always need trains, so they tried to innovate.
Maglevhydrofoils are still in use in Hong Kong thirty years later...
Again this is a constant speed use at max power. Not able in the present RR enviroment.
And the second gener
aegrotatio The T (Boston MBTA) hated those awful Boeing trolleys. They constantly modified them and threw up their hands. There aren't even any of them preserved from the T. You can't teach an old dog (jet helicopter maker) new tricks (good trolley maker). Those were the products of a raft of "make-work" contracts for defense contractors that would have gone out of business otherwise. Ever hear of New York Shipbuilding? Probably not. They didn't get enough "make-work" to stay in business.
I quite agree. And the second generation of "bicenennial" cars on the CTA L, which were built by Boeing/Vertol, had (or perhaps I should say have) more maintenance trouble that the originals built by Budd.
Still OT, butI wonder who designed the cars for Amtak's Chgo - Milwaukee run (the Hiawathas) and where they were built.
RUSSIAN LNG GAS TURBINE POWER
(I have a good pic from the Gazette but haven't figured how to insert it. Jerry Pier)
[1] Railway Gazette International
Well, it must be metioned that combustion turbines are a geat way to generate electricity. I toured the power plants on Maui once. The old Kahului steam plant burned thick oil. In Maalaea, we saw workers removing a piston big as a 55-gallon drum from an EMD diesel. And then we saw the combustion turbine--you could stand next to it and feel it. I think there are two of them there now, with a full heat recovery co-generation. Occasionally they clip 'em to an Air New Zealand 747 for maintenance in Auckland...
Jerry,
Thanks for the info on the equipment curve performance tests.
The New Haven and Amtrak cab signals allowed 75 mph before the NEC change. I assume this was a practical limit due to frequent curvature. Furthermore, I understand New Haven and Amtrak? had waivers allowing 5 inches of cant deficiency. Doing some reverse-engineering, that works out to predominately 2-degree curves with 3 inches of cant (super-elevation).
I would add that the probable reason for allowing the LRC to be tested at 9 inches cant deficiency was due to the lower center of gravity of the Bombardier locomotive compared with the EMD F59. This leads me to wonder if the electrical gear above the floor of the Acela locomotives result in a higher than necessary center of gravity; and whether it's the locomotive lean as much as the tilt of the cars that is a factor in the New York - Boston restriction. The cant deficiency works out to 94 mph.
8 inches cant deficiency allows 90 mph; and 7 inches allows 85 mph. A minute is saved roughly every 6 miles with a nominal 90 mph limit; and a guesstimate is that as much as 30 minutes might be saved New York - Boston. A minute is saved every 9 miles at 85 mph; and 20 minutes might be saved.
You spoke of European systems allowing up to 6 inches cant deficiency. An SNCF representative explained in 1974 that 140 kph (86 mph) was only allowed for all-reserved trains such as the Mistral and Lyonnaise with seated passengers instead of the normal 120 kph (74 mph) limit where there may be standees. From this SNCF went to the TGV-Est running initially at 270 kph.
The point about the impact of active-tilt failure on schedule reliability is significant, although a 6-car Acela would meet 95%. Unfortunately, tilt isn't the only thing that can go wrong.
Well put about passengers steering, Al.
al-in-chgoI guess this is close enough to be on-topic: Does the Acela actually "tilt" when it goes around curves? Like the Pendolino or like the Swedish prototype, for lack of the exact specs Acela's "grandfather"? I know the curves impose their own speed limitation but any tilting would tend to speed up the schedule at least a little, wouldn't it? And reduce the passengers' attempts to steer the train with the muscles of their diaphragm?
I guess this is close enough to be on-topic: Does the Acela actually "tilt" when it goes around curves? Like the Pendolino or like the Swedish prototype, for lack of the exact specs Acela's "grandfather"?
I know the curves impose their own speed limitation but any tilting would tend to speed up the schedule at least a little, wouldn't it? And reduce the passengers' attempts to steer the train with the muscles of their diaphragm?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.