Attention Charlie Hebdo!
243129So where did you get your info that I was forced to retire? Are you going to run from the question as is your M.O.?
How about this one too?
"Where do I say "poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies"???
C'mon charlie and substantiate your allegations.
JOHN PRIVARA Re: Why not if the same end result is the same. For the same reason people will buy 1st class, business class, and Escalades.
Re: Why not if the same end result is the same.
For the same reason people will buy 1st class, business class, and Escalades.
If the same amenities were available in a business class or parlor car in an Amfleet consist which attained the same running time as the Acela would you accept that?
Backshop My point is, will people pay the same premium for a "business class" car tacked onto the end of a Regional train as they will for an Acela?
Why not if the same end result is the same.
If the topic is REALLY new tilt-trains vs "conventional" trains on the NEC, I really can NOT see Amtrak buying "conventional" NEC equipment regardless of how practical it is (in fact, the MORE practical something is the WORSE this might be for any government agency now, not just Amtrak).
The government (and society in general) is WAY beyond "practical solutions". Does anybody really think the F35 is "practical"? Do we actually spend government loot for "practical" reasons? Amtrak isn't just buying a train, like most people buy a car. It's buying "a concept" with which it can SELL the BS of buying a "new and improve concept" later. Amtrak is the guy who buys the 7-series BMW. He not JUST buying the car: he's buying the "concept of the 7-series that happens to function like a car". With that "concept" he gets to sell more BS.
Anybody who works in a modern BS driven corporate world surely understands this. People don't "level-set the table-steaks in a going-forward space while orchestrating their core-competencies" and NOT understand why having a 7-series (or the Acela OR an F35) is REQUIRED!
Surely, Amtrak - as a modern BS driven government entity (one without functional accounting system, no less) - can NOT buy 1950's - 1970's conventional-speed equipment, after telling CONgress (and the Kardashian obsessed public) that the NEC is Amtrak's "profitable" and future HSR system. I mean, really...
"Practical" in the US went out the window after WW2 when the defense industry realized how much fun free loot from the government was. After THAT, it was free loot - justified with ever increasing amounts of BS - for everybody: freeways, airports, waterways, 4 years of debt funded college parties majoring in "bidness", and Amtrak Acela's (sure, small time compared to an F35, but still.. it's the GAME that's being played here NOT just the train cars).
The Acela is BLING, in a Kardashian society. Nobody should be arguing about Acela's vs (what) Budd 52 seaters pulled by suped-up GG1's? Come-on here: THAT is LAME!!!
The discussion should be about which train BLING Amtrak will be getting.
charlie hebdoAnd Heathrow airport is a real mess inside. Worth the fare to avoid it.
I'd want to go just to ride the pods.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
charlie hebdo Sadly, I'm not joking.
Sadly, I'm not joking.
So where did you get your info that I was forced to retire? Are you going to run from the question as is your M.O.?
Backshop Here's a little story about luxury and what people will pay for. British Airways has a couple of Airbus A319's set up with low density, all business class planes that they fly between London and JFK in New York. They charge a premium, even over their regular flight Business Class cabins. The service isn't really faster (I'll get to that soon) but it is "exclusive". Why do people pay more? In a word-convenience. It flies out of London City Airport, not Heathrow. It is closer to "the City" (look it up). Why is it slower? Because the runway is too short at LCY to allow full fuel tanks. Therefore, it has to stop at Shannon, Ireland to top off its tanks. My point is, will people pay the same premium for a "business class" car tacked onto the end of a Regional train as they will for an Acela?
Here's a little story about luxury and what people will pay for. British Airways has a couple of Airbus A319's set up with low density, all business class planes that they fly between London and JFK in New York. They charge a premium, even over their regular flight Business Class cabins. The service isn't really faster (I'll get to that soon) but it is "exclusive". Why do people pay more? In a word-convenience. It flies out of London City Airport, not Heathrow. It is closer to "the City" (look it up). Why is it slower? Because the runway is too short at LCY to allow full fuel tanks. Therefore, it has to stop at Shannon, Ireland to top off its tanks. My point is, will people pay the same premium for a "business class" car tacked onto the end of a Regional train as they will for an Acela?
And Heathrow airport is a real mess inside. Worth the fare to avoid it.
charlie hebdo 243129 charlie hebdo Joe does on here with his two, perseverative (not just repetitive) themes : 1. poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies; 2. Acela, Avelia Liberty ET Al. are bad. Where do I say "poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies"??? I consider being perseverative an attribute and a compliment. Do you have a fiber deficiency charlie? Metamucil is touted to improve attitude and comprehension. As usual, you fail to understand words. Perseveration and perseverative are also a clinical terms, neither compliments or insults, just descriptive of doing or saying the same thing over and over. Since you keep bringing up maladies, perhaps you should turn to your physician. There are some meds out there that have been shown to retard the degeneration seen in DAT, if taken early enough.
243129 charlie hebdo Joe does on here with his two, perseverative (not just repetitive) themes : 1. poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies; 2. Acela, Avelia Liberty ET Al. are bad. Where do I say "poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies"??? I consider being perseverative an attribute and a compliment. Do you have a fiber deficiency charlie? Metamucil is touted to improve attitude and comprehension.
charlie hebdo Joe does on here with his two, perseverative (not just repetitive) themes : 1. poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies; 2. Acela, Avelia Liberty ET Al. are bad.
Where do I say "poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies"???
I consider being perseverative an attribute and a compliment.
Do you have a fiber deficiency charlie? Metamucil is touted to improve attitude and comprehension.
As usual, you fail to understand words. Perseveration and perseverative are also a clinical terms, neither compliments or insults, just descriptive of doing or saying the same thing over and over.
Since you keep bringing up maladies, perhaps you should turn to your physician. There are some meds out there that have been shown to retard the degeneration seen in DAT, if taken early enough.
That was weak Charlie you must try harder
As usual, you fail to understand words. Perseveration and perseverative are also clinical terms, neither compliments or insults, just descriptive of doing or saying the same thing over and over.
Re: Would the vast outlay of taxpayer dollars for this project for minimal gain in running time be worth it?
"Worth it" compared to what? What other option is there? Not spend it, or spend it on something else?
Beside, this isn't being paid for WITH "taxpayer dollars". The ONLY thing "taxpayer dollars" do is pay interest on the national debt. For the last 100 years or so, all government spending (and most private spending for that matter) is debt; the "taxpayer dollars" just pay the interest on the debt. "Taxpayer dollars", like money in general, is just a fake concept. Money is created from nothing. You, me, an airline, the government, can walk into a bank today, take out a loan (for any amount) and the money is CREATED (from nothing). The bank doesn't keep a big pile of money in the basement ready to loan out. It's all fake.
Re: "All that money for little gain?" Not sure what that is relative too?
Is "all that money" related to:
* The Acela 2's? Are they that much more expensive?
-or-
* Building a new NEC HSR system? It seems to me that a new NEC HSR system will never be built with the existing American political system (not the political parties, the entire system. As that's not going to change, so) that just leave tilting-trains.
charlie hebdoJoe does on here with his two, perseverative (not just repetitive) themes : 1. poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies; 2. Acela, Avelia Liberty ET Al. are bad.
charlie hebdoEven with a supporter, Joe snarls like Trump at anyone who he perceives (key detail, folks) disagrees or even mildly offers a correction. He must (in his mind) always be right.
You remind me of the kid who got slapped around at recess because he was such a dweeb.
So charlie where did you get your info that I was forced to retire?
243129 Overmod Joe, you need to stop shooting at people who support you. He has a 'funny' way of showing it. Snarky assertions do not denote agreement. Overmod but did you not clearly establish there that the 'luxury' of any branded Acela service could be as easily achieved with slower-peak-speed equipment -- in fact, with loose-car equipment? I have established that fact early on in this thread.
Overmod Joe, you need to stop shooting at people who support you.
He has a 'funny' way of showing it. Snarky assertions do not denote agreement.
Overmod but did you not clearly establish there that the 'luxury' of any branded Acela service could be as easily achieved with slower-peak-speed equipment -- in fact, with loose-car equipment?
I have established that fact early on in this thread.
Even with a supporter, Joe snarls like Trump at anyone who he perceives (key detail, folks) disagrees or even mildly offers a correction. He must (in his mind) always be right.
OvermodJoe, you need to stop shooting at people who support you.
charlie hebdo ... perseverative ...
My Lord, that's wicked!
Let's see who else gets it.
Joe is living in the distant past, those golden years. He got old and was forced to retire. He seems to have problems with unit trains of all types for some reason, even though they are widely and successfully used all over for many years. The public prefers them. But Joe feels a compulsory need to attack any and all who see things differently. Thankfully not all of us seniors act like the old man shouting at kids to get off the lawn as Joe does on here with his two, perseverative (not just repetitive) themes : 1. poor vetting, training and supervision as universal remedies; 2. Acela, Avelia Liberty ET Al. are bad.
243129Nope no Thesaurus I used overmod's descriptive portrayal of backshop's SPECIOUS reasoning.
Joe, you need to stop shooting at people who support you. All the points he make explicitly (another fun GMAT vocabulary word!) support your original argument, as well as some of the things you've said since. I'm too lazy to go back to the original letter again ... but did you not clearly establish there that the 'luxury' of any branded Acela service could be as easily achieved with slower-peak-speed equipment -- in fact, with loose-car equipment? That's backshop's third point. Has he not established that paying extra for 'more speed' than the road requires is a waste if cheaper equipment does the job as well as needed for less money? Does to me. Do I hear him saying the answer for automobiles is more and more radically expanded road capability really soon so more of that 'vanity cushion' speed could be utilized before modern cars start to wear out? I don't think so.
But luxury as something we could want to pay extra for? I thoroughly agree. And so should you... oh wait, I see you do.
blue streak 1About MAX speed. Could it be that Amtrak would ultimately want to operate at these faster speeds during the life time of Acela-2s ? Probably if the rebuilding of Trenton - Newark is complete. That of course would need the easing of the 2 curves between TRE and NWK ?
Bearing in mind that I wholeheartedly support the purchase of these trains since the Government has chosen to buy them, for reasons other than the idea they'll provide time savings at all proportional to their marginal cost for added speed --
Take this simple quiz:
1) What is the anticipated service life of an Avelia Liberty trainset?
2) What is the cost, and more important the full project time including EIS and 'consultant' delays, in making the necessary changes completely within that service life?
3) What is the actual saving in time (and corresponding schedule timing) from each increment of the improvement as it becomes effective? (Customers only care about peak speed if they're tech lovers like me; what they care about is being on time in minimum time for a fair price -- the luxury amenities can be the same regardless of speed, unless someone wants to argue the onboard sandwiches being 10 minutes fresher when served is meaningful...)
The issue with the NECIP all along has been that many billions are required to reduce the timesignificantly even at 125mph peak speed... because there is a #4, which applies here as much if not more as to the original Acelas: what percentage of a given trip time is covered at a speed above 125mph, and adding up the cumulative mileage run at higher speed, what is the marginal gain for 220 over 125mph capability?
blue streak 1 About MAX speed. Could it be that Amtrak would ultimately want to operate at these faster speeds during the life time of Acela-2s ? Probably if the rebuilding of Trenton - Newark is complete. That of course would need the easing of the 2 curves between TRE and NWK ?
About MAX speed. Could it be that Amtrak would ultimately want to operate at these faster speeds during the life time of Acela-2s ? Probably if the rebuilding of Trenton - Newark is complete. That of course would need the easing of the 2 curves between TRE and NWK ?
Would the vast outlay of taxpayer dollars for this project for minimal gain in running time be worth it?
charlie hebdoJoe shows us he used a Thesaurus. But his poor educational base reveals itself again, like Trump's does every day. The analogy to which you object was pretty decent, IMO. Not perfect, but close. So in your infinite wisdom, can you itemize the specific points where Backshop went astray as a favor to us ignorant louts?
Nope no Thesaurus I used overmod's descriptive portrayal of backshop's SPECIOUS reasoning.
Here is my "poor educational base": Elementary school, high school, graduating in 1961 and hiring to the NY.NH.&H.RR 1963 in engine service. So given my "poor educational base" where in this thread does it "reveal itself"?
As for you portraying yourself as an ignorant lout, I take no exception to that.
Backshop1. All American cars will go well over any posted speed limit.
BackshopA barebones model will get you there at the same speed as the more luxurious model.
Backshop3. Companies offer more luxurious models because some consumers will pay for the upgrades.
BackshopCharlie, I was wondering about his increased vocabulary myself, until I saw that Overmod used the word in his reply above.
My criticism of the analogy was addressed at the 'Model T' connotations, not at what backshop was saying (which I don't object to).
Joe's original point was (and basically still is) that Amtrak actually needed much less ultimate speed capability than the nominal Avelia Liberty provided, and the proper backshop analogy would reference the general speed capacity and not just that modern automobiles are capable of much higher speeds than their drivers require, let alone what roads either safely or legally permit.
This is significant, in my opinion, because the original analogy ran as follows:
Every American who owns a car owns one that is capable of well over any speed at which it will ever be driven. The most basic car will get you to the destination at the same speed and almost the same comfort as the luxury model but as long as the consumer is willing to pay for the frills, you offer it.
whereas the actual argument is different. Every American certainly doesn't own a car that is capable of 220mph, and I suspect most drivers would complain if required to pay the added cost for their car to safely do so. That is part of the argument that Joe was making; another significant part of the argument, as established by backstop, is that conventional cars (at no more than nominal increased cost) can often reach 125mph with relative safety.
The 'specious' part is to equate the desire for the lower-cost (and I'm still working up numbers to establish the 'how much') option with a Model T, which even with Frontenac assistance is really 'going like sixty' at 60mph. A better analogy for 'antiques' would be older cars capable of 125 continuous mph -- bearing in mind that the 'step' between about 120mph and 125mph is as steep for many older automobiles as it proves for steam locomotives -- and I invite you to consider which of these carry the intended hopelessly-outdated cachet that was intended.
To be fair here, the 'revised' points are slightly different in emphasis:
1. All American cars will go well over any posted speed limit. 2.A barebones model will get you there at the same speed as the more luxurious model. 3. Companies offer more luxurious models because some consumers will pay for the upgrades.
2.A barebones model will get you there at the same speed as the more luxurious model.
3. Companies offer more luxurious models because some consumers will pay for the upgrades.
TNote that this is completely different from the original argument. Point number 2 should not concern 'luxury' at this point, but speed: for example, specifying the old WS6 option for suspension, or ordering a Trackhawk, or for a more 'barebones' model perhaps harking back to the original Plymouth Roadrunner with its delete options and el cheapo horn. These can produce the 'corresponding' speed increase represented by a 220mph-capable train, at a cost the customer may or may not think represents a practical use of his available capital.
We've already established beyond reasonable shred of a doubt that the same 'luxury' could be provided for equivalent or lower cost in a 125-mph capable shell and consist configuration than in a lightweight and carefully engineered 220mph-capable one. Which is again inherent in backshop's analogy to cars, up to a very reasonable point: the fastest-accelerating car in America recently was a Porsche Panamera ... with rear seat heaters standard.
Charlie, I was wondering about his increased vocabulary myself, until I saw that Overmod used the word in his reply above.
243129 Backshop Every American who owns a car owns one that is capable of well over any speed at which it will ever be driven. The most basic car will get you to the destination at the same speed and almost the same comfort as the luxury model but as long as the consumer is willing to pay for the frills, you offer it. "Specious". Look that up in your Funk and Wagnalls.
Backshop Every American who owns a car owns one that is capable of well over any speed at which it will ever be driven. The most basic car will get you to the destination at the same speed and almost the same comfort as the luxury model but as long as the consumer is willing to pay for the frills, you offer it.
"Specious". Look that up in your Funk and Wagnalls.
Joe shows us he used a Thesaurus. But his poor educational base reveals itself again, like Trump's does every day.
The analogy to which you object was pretty decent, IMO. Not perfect, but close. So in your infinite wisdom, can you itemize the specific points where Backshop went astray as a favor to us ignorant louts?
1. All American cars will go well over any posted speed limit.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.