A recent illustration of the Wisconsin Talgo shows a non-electric articulated power car similar to the Talgo XXII. That would correspond with previous information of a 14-car all-coach train with 420 seats. Maybe.
The following was from an AP article published by the Janesville Gazette Wednesday, March 3.
"Talgo said it would begin manufacturing Wisconsin's two trains by November and finish by next July.
"(Talgo Chief Executive) Perez acknowledged that was an aggreessive deadline, but he said most of the preliminary work, including identifying suppliers in the United States, is complete."
"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
blue streak 1...My concern is that at the present in the US there is not a locomotive that has a low center of gravity. Maybe in Europe?How hard would it be to dust off the EMD AMT-125 plans and adapt it for the 710-series engine - maybe raise the cab in a coupola for better crossing collision survivability? If a switch engine can be built with a low profile, why couldn't a passenger locomotive? A number of previous plans like the Bombardier LRC and FM Speed Merchant mounted the diesel in a well between the trucks. European designs, if available, would need to be adapted for the US market given what others have posted previously.The biggest change may be in a European-derived truck and motor mounting, perhaps body-mounted to reduce unsprung weight.I feel that the class 1s will be reluctant to have present locos run through their curves at the higher speeds. Engineers will get used to the higher speeds.Yah, I wonder about getting used to the unsettling speed through curves too; but it's done every day. I wouldn't be a high-rise window washer either.I wonder if other locations will have speed boards like BNSF has on the Portland - Vancouver route ex T-70; P-60; F-50? Isn't that up to the railroad? And wouldn't PTC with a speed profile display make that obsolete or relegated to the timetable? One big cost consideration for the Talgos is platform length. I do not know the lengths of the platforms CHI - MKE but you may know if those platforms can handle a full length Talgo?I have no firm information; but it seems that the current stops have sufficiently long platforms. A 14-unit Talgo is equivalent to 7 conventional coaches. Other questions come into play: how many doors will be opened, and how will passengers needing assistance be handled? Both questions are factors in station dwell time. The requirements of ADA and the possible difference between Talgos and Superliners will need consideration. I assume that Washington state has solved any problems? What about Oregon?
...My concern is that at the present in the US there is not a locomotive that has a low center of gravity. Maybe in Europe?
How hard would it be to dust off the EMD AMT-125 plans and adapt it for the 710-series engine - maybe raise the cab in a coupola for better crossing collision survivability? If a switch engine can be built with a low profile, why couldn't a passenger locomotive? A number of previous plans like the Bombardier LRC and FM Speed Merchant mounted the diesel in a well between the trucks. European designs, if available, would need to be adapted for the US market given what others have posted previously.
The biggest change may be in a European-derived truck and motor mounting, perhaps body-mounted to reduce unsprung weight.
I feel that the class 1s will be reluctant to have present locos run through their curves at the higher speeds. Engineers will get used to the higher speeds.
Yah, I wonder about getting used to the unsettling speed through curves too; but it's done every day. I wouldn't be a high-rise window washer either.
I wonder if other locations will have speed boards like BNSF has on the Portland - Vancouver route ex T-70; P-60; F-50?
Isn't that up to the railroad? And wouldn't PTC with a speed profile display make that obsolete or relegated to the timetable?
One big cost consideration for the Talgos is platform length. I do not know the lengths of the platforms CHI - MKE but you may know if those platforms can handle a full length Talgo?
I have no firm information; but it seems that the current stops have sufficiently long platforms. A 14-unit Talgo is equivalent to 7 conventional coaches. Other questions come into play: how many doors will be opened, and how will passengers needing assistance be handled? Both questions are factors in station dwell time.
The requirements of ADA and the possible difference between Talgos and Superliners will need consideration. I assume that Washington state has solved any problems? What about Oregon?
First, I am pretty far removed from Washington and Oregon. It seems that the ADA is handled with a bridge plate (based on one trip in 2004); and platforms have been raised to 8" above top of rail to facilitate boarding.
Jeaton; thanks for the updates. Nov seems like a doable date for construction start. Just hope some more orders come along to speed up construction. One question will be how much testing will be required for the finished product? Another question is how many if any parts will be interchangeable with present US Talgos and othe AMTRAK equipment?.
Reports on the press conference indicate that production will begin in November this year. Earlier reports indicated that the two train sets purchased by Oregon are scheduled to be delivered in 2012. Seems reasonable that the Wisconsin sets will be delivered sometime in 2011.
The comparable cars I rode in Spain had a step that extended when the car doors were opened. No doubt there can be a design to meet ADA requirements, especially since the floors are much lower than the typical Amtrak car.
HarveyK400 4. What happens if only 4 train sets get built? Right now it looks like six; but Michigan desperately needs tilting equipment if they can scrape together the money. 110 mph only may be possible between Porter and Kalamazoo, but Talgos at least would make 79 mph on the rest of the line instead of being limited by curvature. With PTC, 90 mph may be allowed.
4. What happens if only 4 train sets get built?
Right now it looks like six; but Michigan desperately needs tilting equipment if they can scrape together the money. 110 mph only may be possible between Porter and Kalamazoo, but Talgos at least would make 79 mph on the rest of the line instead of being limited by curvature. With PTC, 90 mph may be allowed.
Harvey: As usual you hit many nails on the head. The ability to use as much of the present track as possible but increase the train speeds with a tilt train has much merit. My concern is that at the present in the US there is not a locomotive that has a low center of gravity. Maybe in Europe? I feel that the class 1s will be reluctant to have present locos run through their curves at the higher speeds. Engineers will get used to the higher speeds.
HarveyK400 6. If more get built for Wisconsin will WI get credit for returned single level cars to AMTRAK? Credit? Single level cars'd be scrapped beyond those temporarily kept in reserve. If anything, I would think leases would end or payments reduced
6. If more get built for Wisconsin will WI get credit for returned single level cars to AMTRAK?
Credit? Single level cars'd be scrapped beyond those temporarily kept in reserve. If anything, I would think leases would end or payments reduced
My thought was that Wisconsin had to pay something for the rehab of the cars used CHI - MKE. If the Talgos replace these cars and they go back into the national AMTRAK car pool would there be some credit to Wisconsin?
One big cost consideration for the Talgos is platform length. I do not know the lengths of the platforms CHI - MKE but you may know if those platforms can handle a full length Talgo? The requirements of ADA and the possible difference between Talgos and Superliners will need consideration. I assume that Washington state has solved any problems? What about Oregon?
I'm pretty much in agreement with jeaton.
blue streak 1Now for the real questions. 1. Does Oregon and Wisconsin already have the money in hand to let a construction contract?Wisconsin would seem to have the money to commit to the first two. Washington and Wisconsin may be a little more iffy for the next two each respectively. 2. How soon can the required modifications to the Tower facility be made once a construction contract is let?I won't hazard a guess; but I'd say it would be within any mandated stimulus time frame. 3. How long will it take to get the first train set out of the plant.?Another interesting question; but any progress is welcome after all these years - almost certainly within two years. 4. What happens if only 4 train sets get built?Right now it looks like six; but Michigan desperately needs tilting equipment if they can scrape together the money. 110 mph only may be possible between Porter and Kalamazoo, but Talgos at least would make 79 mph on the rest of the line instead of being limited by curvature. With PTC, 90 mph may be allowed. Elsewhere, Illinois could use Talgos between Chicago and Saint Louis; Missouri could use them between Saint Louis and Kansas City; and they would make Chicago-St Louis-Tulsa-Oklahoma City possible. Talgos also would be essential for routes out of Atlanta, between Chicago and Nashville and Memphis, in the Texas Triangle, the Chicago-Twin Cities and Minnesota services, in Florida, and definitely to Las Vegas. For the last, the problem is more the capacity through Cajon Pass. Talgos might work on the Coast Line between Los Angeles and San Francisco; but I don't know if 6 hours can be taken out of the schedule between San Jose and Portland, raising the average speed to 56 mph for 767 miles. In the latter case, freight traffic and line capacity may be bigger issues than buying trains. There are probably other potential applications as well. Any ideas? The potential market is quite large. 5. Will this mess up AMTRAK's fleet plan by building a third type rolling stock?Without rereading the fleet plan, it seemed that bilevel cars were meant to replace the California (Surfliners-Capitols-San Joaquins) & long distance Superliner cars with a 2% annual allowance for growth. This would seem to exclude bilevels for new services in the Midwest or elsewhere. Now some single level cars are used in the Midwest; but not nearly enough for all the proposed new starts; so there is an apparent gap in the Amtrak plan here as well if one assumes Amtrak will be the exclusive purchasing agent. Apparently then, non-long distance and non-NEC services are on their own with some reserve Amtrak capacity for filling in and backing up. There will be no Talgo "third" Amtrak type, actually fourth behind the new Acela type, single level & bilevel cars. In that vacuum, Wisconsin has struck first to get the Talgo assembly plant. Talgos would enhance performance on many potential new non-NEC state-supported routes. Talgos very well may be the go-to choice for the states and not for Amtrak; so in that sense, it is not a fourth type for Amtrak. 6. If more get built for Wisconsin will WI get credit for returned single level cars to AMTRAK? Credit? Single level cars'd be scrapped beyond those temporarily kept in reserve. If anything, I would think leases would end or payments reduced.
Now for the real questions.
1. Does Oregon and Wisconsin already have the money in hand to let a construction contract?
Wisconsin would seem to have the money to commit to the first two. Washington and Wisconsin may be a little more iffy for the next two each respectively.
2. How soon can the required modifications to the Tower facility be made once a construction contract is let?
I won't hazard a guess; but I'd say it would be within any mandated stimulus time frame.
3. How long will it take to get the first train set out of the plant.?
Another interesting question; but any progress is welcome after all these years - almost certainly within two years.
Elsewhere, Illinois could use Talgos between Chicago and Saint Louis; Missouri could use them between Saint Louis and Kansas City; and they would make Chicago-St Louis-Tulsa-Oklahoma City possible. Talgos also would be essential for routes out of Atlanta, between Chicago and Nashville and Memphis, in the Texas Triangle, the Chicago-Twin Cities and Minnesota services, in Florida, and definitely to Las Vegas. For the last, the problem is more the capacity through Cajon Pass.
Talgos might work on the Coast Line between Los Angeles and San Francisco; but I don't know if 6 hours can be taken out of the schedule between San Jose and Portland, raising the average speed to 56 mph for 767 miles. In the latter case, freight traffic and line capacity may be bigger issues than buying trains.
There are probably other potential applications as well. Any ideas? The potential market is quite large.
5. Will this mess up AMTRAK's fleet plan by building a third type rolling stock?
Without rereading the fleet plan, it seemed that bilevel cars were meant to replace the California (Surfliners-Capitols-San Joaquins) & long distance Superliner cars with a 2% annual allowance for growth. This would seem to exclude bilevels for new services in the Midwest or elsewhere. Now some single level cars are used in the Midwest; but not nearly enough for all the proposed new starts; so there is an apparent gap in the Amtrak plan here as well if one assumes Amtrak will be the exclusive purchasing agent. Apparently then, non-long distance and non-NEC services are on their own with some reserve Amtrak capacity for filling in and backing up. There will be no Talgo "third" Amtrak type, actually fourth behind the new Acela type, single level & bilevel cars.
In that vacuum, Wisconsin has struck first to get the Talgo assembly plant. Talgos would enhance performance on many potential new non-NEC state-supported routes. Talgos very well may be the go-to choice for the states and not for Amtrak; so in that sense, it is not a fourth type for Amtrak.
Credit? Single level cars'd be scrapped beyond those temporarily kept in reserve. If anything, I would think leases would end or payments reduced.
"I don't think it is in anyway guaranteed that Amtrak will go Talgo in a big way. My impression of the current Wisconsin Governor is he isn't all that intelligent. He was looking at this as a jobs program more then a HSR program, IMO."
If the Wisconsin governor isn't all that intelligent, I am going to start to vote for the least intellegent guys on the ballot. By getting the state to put up $43 million, he got a foreign car builder to agree to produce rail cars in Wisconsin meaning some new jobs for people who can vote. Along with that, and having a solid set of comprehensive plans prepared and presented to the US Department of Transportation, the state was able to land a federal appropriation of more than 10% of the total $8 billion put up for "High Speed Passenger Rail".
He gets the jobs and an enhancement of a popular rail service. There is something wrong with that?
1. Yes
2. Reports I saw on the candidate sites in Janesville would indicate that every place Talgo looked at could be up and running fairly quick. Maybe 6 months?
3. Ties to q. 2
4. Talgo closes the operation.
5. With Amtrak looking to states to provide significant funding for intercity operations, they really haven't left themselves any say on the subject.
6. The old cars belong to Amtrak and are provided on their dime. However, given that Wisconsin and Illinois provide funds to covering the deficit on the Hiawatha Service, it is possible that there will be a reduction in the state funds required to support the service.
I would guess that as soon as delivery dates our developed, an announcement will be made.
blue streak 1Will this mess up AMTRAK's fleet plan by building a third type rolling stock?
Nope, I think Amtrak is still free to persue it's equipment needs as it wishes. I have my doubts Amtrak will go Talgo in a big way but we'll see.
Paul MilenkovicThe other thing about Talgo is that if Amtrak goes into Talgo in a big way, and the Wisconsin Governer must believe in it by making the "preemptive purchase" of a pair of train sets along with the push to get the Talgo US assembly plant located in Wisconsin, than at least one has standardized on Talgo and can set up to maintenance bays for it. But if Talgo is a kind of orphan with those Cascades train sets and a couple train sets in Wisconsin, not quite so good.
I don't think it is in anyway guaranteed that Amtrak will go Talgo in a big way. My impression of the current Wisconsin Governor is he isn't all that intelligent. He was looking at this as a jobs program more then a HSR program, IMO.
Today's Trains Newswire and other sources report that Talgo has selected the former Tower Automotive facility in Milwuakee as the location for the manufacture/assembly of Wisconsin's order for two train sets for the Hiawatha Service.
In addition to those two set, the State of Oregon has anounced plans to purchase 2 additional train sets for the Cascade Service. Wisconsin has an option to purchase two additional sets which will be used when service is expanded to Madison.
The plant is ideally located on WSOR tracks just a few miles north of the CP's Milwaukee-Minneapolis mainline. If this also becomes the service location for the cars when they go in service it will be an easy trip (westward) from the Milwaukee train station to the plant location.
If they take the advice of WASHDOT, learn from the mistakes and improve upon WASHDOT's policies and procedures, and only when absolutely warranted, then they will do just fine. They also need to listen to the Talgo techs; I do not believe there were any more valuable people on the property in Seattle, relative to those trains than the folks from Spain.
The new equipment should have modifications and improvements over the originals since time allows for such things.
Will be interesting to see what goes on after delivery and what the public response is.
From what I know about Wisconsin's Department of Transportation and its current head, I think it is very likely that there have already been some discussions with Washington State's DOT. Like most, the State of Wisconsin is in a tough money situation, and I don't believe that the present state administration would have made the move to purchase the cars without a very thorough study of all aspects of the service, including maintenance.
Paul Milenkovic "The Cascades Talgos were drawbar equipped, making it difficult, though not impossible, to add or remove cars. Individual cars were serviced in the consist, and such operations as wheel truing were also done within the consist. This required a revision in thinking by the American railroaders that handled the equipment, but Talgo's service technicians led the way and the adjustments were relatively easy to make and are now made without a second thought" One of the long-time knocks on any kind of articulated or semi-permanently coupled equipment is this matter of switching out cars, for any reason.
"The Cascades Talgos were drawbar equipped, making it difficult, though not impossible, to add or remove cars. Individual cars were serviced in the consist, and such operations as wheel truing were also done within the consist. This required a revision in thinking by the American railroaders that handled the equipment, but Talgo's service technicians led the way and the adjustments were relatively easy to make and are now made without a second thought"
One of the long-time knocks on any kind of articulated or semi-permanently coupled equipment is this matter of switching out cars, for any reason.
I too was a serious doubter when I got to Seattle, but after seeing the Talgo trainsets in action, and the speed with which servicing could be accomplished, I became a believer in these trains.
Switching the cars is an argument for all fixed consist doubters, but the real question is whether the support facilities have been properly set up to maintain the equipmen without having to do much in the way of switching. If the proper facilities are or have been put in place, the Talgo equipment is as maintenance friendly and in many ways more so than conventional equipment.
Whether Wisconsin or any other entity meets with success using fixed consist equipment begings and ends with planning for maintenance and use. If the proper planning is done, the setting is created where the equipment can perform its best and thereby get the most bang for the buck.
As to the orphan factor, much knowledge has been gained through the use of the Talgos in Washington State, and if the Wisconsin Talgos come to pass the knowledge base will spread. Las Vegas trains were originally set to have Talgos some years ago and I have not heard anything to dispute the idea that use of those types of trains has been declared dead, if and when Vegas service gets off the ground.
HarveyK400 Don't believe my observations on time taken for boarding. At the minimum, count the passengers and mark the time it takes for boarding and alighting, noting the type of car and whether tickets were just checked or taken at the door before you offer your opinion. Railway Man says dwell time is half as much for commuters; but we're dealing with a mixed market where most are commuters or day-trippers. The time needed to board or alight is exacerbated by luggage beyond a briefcase or laptop carried by commuters.
Don't believe my observations on time taken for boarding. At the minimum, count the passengers and mark the time it takes for boarding and alighting, noting the type of car and whether tickets were just checked or taken at the door before you offer your opinion.
Railway Man says dwell time is half as much for commuters; but we're dealing with a mixed market where most are commuters or day-trippers. The time needed to board or alight is exacerbated by luggage beyond a briefcase or laptop carried by commuters.
I am not disputing your observations as to loading time. All I have said is that the time required to lift tickets at the door is not the factor that causes the total time spent at the stop. While my opinion is not based on a thorough study of the subject, I have observed the process perhaps several hundred times over the decades that I have been riding trains.
Given that the Talgo cars are easier to step aboard and that the doors can be built for remote operation, perhaps lifting tickets at a limited number of open doors would be the factor controling the time spent at the stop. If that's the case, perhaps Amtrak will employ a method to collect tickets on board for passengers boarding at intermediate points. It's not rocket science.
When the plans for Talgo were first made known by WisDOT to our local advocacy group, and this goes back a few years, the recent announcement by the Wisconsin Governer did not come from "thin air" apart from long-term DOT planning, I had asked about the drawbacks of articulated trains.
I was told that the Hiawatha, for all practical purposes, was "semi-permanently" coupled because it cost too much to switch cars in an out of the consist, and all of the coach yard space in Chicago has been given over to office building parks.
On the other hand, Train-X, TurboTrain, and Talgo all had/have "dolly wheels" or similar arrangements for uncoupling the single-axle articulated connections to do shop work on the cars. Look, even an OTR semi-trailer truck is semi-permanently coupled in that fashion, every semi trailer I know has dolly wheels, and truck drivers couple and uncouple their semi trailers all the time. I would agree that you can't "switch" Talgo equipment, and removing a bad-order Talgo coach from a consist out on the road is a serious problem, but my understanding is that they uncouple these things in the shop all the time.
As to doing wheel maintenance on articulated trains, I saw somewhere how in France they have special shops that can swallow entire TGV trains and do wheel work on them in place.
With the TurboTrain, however, I got the impression from Jason Shron's recent book that they had to do wheel maintenance on those puppies all the time, in part because the TurboTrain used friction tread brakes on these tiny "streetcar" wheels the thing had. That book told of how in Canada, the Turbo maintenance facility was simply some station tracks set aside in Toronto, and how they were doing the constant and chronic wheel maintenance by propping the car ends on dolly wheels and by swapping out the articulated single-axle trucks as a unit.
I am a bit of a "guided-axle fan" in the way Jason Shron is a "Turbo train fan", and I think the Talgo is cool and everything, but the part of "vastly improve service" seems a bit overstated. Yes, the Talgo has fewer boarding steps (but still has some steps), so boarding should be a tad faster, and the Talgo has passive tilt, so the travel times should be a tad quicker, and Talgo is considerably lighter in weight, so trains should accelerate quicker and use less fuel, although if they are keeping the arrangement of WaDOT of a 140 ton F59 at one end and a 130 ton ballasted NPCC at the other end, and add to that the aero drag of the height mismatch, the fuel savings of Talgo of what they have now may not be that dramatic.
The other thing about Talgo is that if Amtrak goes into Talgo in a big way, and the Wisconsin Governer must believe in it by making the "preemptive purchase" of a pair of train sets along with the push to get the Talgo US assembly plant located in Wisconsin, than at least one has standardized on Talgo and can set up to maintenance bays for it. But if Talgo is a kind of orphan with those Cascades train sets and a couple train sets in Wisconsin, not quite so good.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
RFID's are apparently the fashion these days. Isn't that how the I-Pass/Speedpass auto toll collection works?
Do you suppose that a train ticket could be an RFID tag? That you could even request that passengers wear it, either as a clip-on "name tag" or as a kind of "necklace" thing that I use for my employee ID and my USB drive.
Do you suppose conductors can just go through the train and scan the passengers to make sure the fares are paid? Could commuters or regular riders have a kind of RFID that they would just be billed for their rides, just as with Speedpass on the roads?
jeatonI am going to submit here that the ticket collection process has little to no impact on the time spent at an intermediate stop. Amfleet and Horizon coaches are simply not designed for rapid and safe entrance or exit. Unless the conductor is extraordinarily slow, taking the ticket and checking an ID will take less time than it takes most individuals to climb the steps into the car. I suspect that the reason that Amtrak does not have open doors unattended by a crewman is for safety and rider assistance. Beside the delay caused by a passenger having a difficult time without assistance with heavy luggage, having an unattended door would mean that a crewman would have to move a car length to close the door before the train could depart. The Talgo cars will mitigate some of the loading problems. The floor of the car is so low that no more than one step up is required to enter the car. Compared to existing cars, doors are half the distance apart making it at least easier for a crewman to open two doors at a stop, more if the need was apparent. Procedures for insuring that all tickets are collected could easily be established, without the need for gated access to the intermediate stations' platforms.
I am going to submit here that the ticket collection process has little to no impact on the time spent at an intermediate stop. Amfleet and Horizon coaches are simply not designed for rapid and safe entrance or exit. Unless the conductor is extraordinarily slow, taking the ticket and checking an ID will take less time than it takes most individuals to climb the steps into the car.
I suspect that the reason that Amtrak does not have open doors unattended by a crewman is for safety and rider assistance. Beside the delay caused by a passenger having a difficult time without assistance with heavy luggage, having an unattended door would mean that a crewman would have to move a car length to close the door before the train could depart.
The Talgo cars will mitigate some of the loading problems. The floor of the car is so low that no more than one step up is required to enter the car. Compared to existing cars, doors are half the distance apart making it at least easier for a crewman to open two doors at a stop, more if the need was apparent. Procedures for insuring that all tickets are collected could easily be established, without the need for gated access to the intermediate stations' platforms.
Since steps are fewer for the Talgo, they are slightly faster boarding than Horizon or Amfleet cars. In addition, all doors can be opened remotely for low platforms; and I have suggested that only alternate cars need doors for a 20% increase in seating capacity. Seven doors are 3.5 times 2.
A procedure for ensuring all tickets are collected and no one rides beyond the transportation purchased was used here sometimes and almost universally in Europe - it's called on-board collection. Only because of the over-reaction to security I offered the suggestion for controlled platform access.
As for those needing assistance, whether for luggage or a disability, computerized seat assignment can cluster such passengers in the units (4 of 14; 29%) adjacent the staffed doors.
CSSHEGEWISCHNote that Amtrak's Horizon and Amfleet coaches are all equipped with traps over the steps in the customary railroad style to handle both ground-level and high-level platforms, which all but eliminates remote operation of doors. Metra's gallery coaches are set up for ground-level platforms only, which allows remote operation of doors. Other differences include the width of the doors, gallery coaches have double-width doors while Amtrak's coaches do not.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
schlimm Railway Man For operational modeling & planning, we automatically double the platform dwell time for an Amfleet type car vs. a commuter-type car, for the equivalent number of passengers. RWM Very interesting. Why? Are the steps higher on the Amfleet car? Nobody needs to help much with boarding on commuter cars.
Railway Man For operational modeling & planning, we automatically double the platform dwell time for an Amfleet type car vs. a commuter-type car, for the equivalent number of passengers. RWM
For operational modeling & planning, we automatically double the platform dwell time for an Amfleet type car vs. a commuter-type car, for the equivalent number of passengers.
RWM
Very interesting. Why? Are the steps higher on the Amfleet car? Nobody needs to help much with boarding on commuter cars.
Note that Amtrak's Horizon and Amfleet coaches are all equipped with traps over the steps in the customary railroad style to handle both ground-level and high-level platforms, which all but eliminates remote operation of doors. Metra's gallery coaches are set up for ground-level platforms only, which allows remote operation of doors. Other differences include the width of the doors, gallery coaches have double-width doors while Amtrak's coaches do not.
The current Talgo equipment does, as was mentioned earlier have doors at each end of each car, thus making the equivalent of a double door for one train service person to handle. Additionally, I believe the doors had commuter style buttons which would allow the Conductor to open all doors in the train from a central point, if so desired. Since a group of four doors can be opened by two trainmen, on-platform ticket collection does actually improve the boarding process. Scheduling dwell for this or any other boarding process is the obligation of the planners for the service, snd if you have thoughtful and intelligent folks to work with at your government agency, as WASHDOT's folks were, then you get well though out ticket collection processes and dwells to support that, which do not adversely impact the schedule.
The Cascades Talgos were drawbar equipped, making it difficult, though not impossible, to add or remove cars. Individual cars were serviced in the consist, and such operations as wheel truing were also done within the consist. This required a revision in thinking by the American railroaders that handled the equipment, but Talgo's service technicians led the way and the adjustments were relatively easy to make and are now made without a second thought.
One thing that also aided Talgo longevity was the fact that the people in the Seattle area and beyond were very proud of these trains, and most took good care not to abuse them or ruin them. The surfaces inside plus the care with which the public used them, added to their serviceability as much as the routine and heavy maintenance did.
The one thing that the Talgo brings to the table is the anti-centrifugal force system which, as proven during higher speed tests between Vancouver and Portland, allowed significantly higher speeds on curves than conventional equipment. The deceleration, speed through the curve and then the effort to accelerate out of the curve gave those of us closely watching the tests the impression that a good deal of time could be saved by simply raising speeds in territory where it was possible. Of course, BNSF cooperated by allowing the tests and adding superelevation where possible, and then permitting the speed increases as the FRA approved them.
Leave it suffice to say that the Talgos in Wisconsin, if used after the WASHDOT/Amtrak model, should vastly improve service where it may exist and provide an excellent level of availabilty and speed for the money spent.
Railway Man For operational modeling & planning, we automatically double the platform dwell time for an Amfleet type car vs. a commuter-type car, for the equivalent number of passengers.RWM
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
oltmanndSpeeding up boarding is "cheap speed" compared to trying to save a couple minutes with class 6 track.
Absolutely and it would seem to be cheap and easy to implement
oltmannd Speeding up boarding is "cheap speed" compared to trying to save a couple minutes with class 6 track.
I totally agree; and have advocated such measures for a looong time.
schlimmjeatonI don't think that the number of doors opened or limited platform length is going to be any problem for the Milwaukee-Chicago service. I am sure that by far the largest passenger counts are at the terminals of the service. That sounds right but if you check 2008 Hiawatha service, it shows total ridership of 750,000. The two intermediate stops are Glenview, IL - 66,000 and Sturtevant, WI - 74,000. A fair number of people board or get off at those two stops - almost 20% or 27 people per train. The same situation occurs on the three Amtrak trains through Champaign, IL 152,000 or 70 people per train. I don't know how long in duration those stops are (not shown in timetable) but I bet it's more than a couple minutes.
jeatonI don't think that the number of doors opened or limited platform length is going to be any problem for the Milwaukee-Chicago service. I am sure that by far the largest passenger counts are at the terminals of the service.
That sounds right but if you check 2008 Hiawatha service, it shows total ridership of 750,000. The two intermediate stops are Glenview, IL - 66,000 and Sturtevant, WI - 74,000. A fair number of people board or get off at those two stops - almost 20% or 27 people per train. The same situation occurs on the three Amtrak trains through Champaign, IL 152,000 or 70 people per train. I don't know how long in duration those stops are (not shown in timetable) but I bet it's more than a couple minutes.
Thanks for the numbers. However, I'd like to straighten out a couple points.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.