FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

General discussion of passenger rail proposals and systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: gprimr1, mtuandrew

FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby dgvrengineer » Wed Nov 21, 2018 2:44 pm

From Progressive Railroading:

https://tinyurl.com/yantxp6u

Fair Use: " The rule defines a new category of high-speed rail operations, which FRA officials say will make it possible for high-speed trains to use existing infrastructure, saving the cost of building new rail lines.
The new Tier III passenger trains can operate over the shared track at conventional speeds and as fast as 220 mph in areas with exclusive rights of way and without grade crossings, FRA officials said in a press release. Passenger-train manufacturers around the world have used "innovative" design and testing techniques for several years. Yet under the FRA's previous passenger equipment regulations, U.S. rail companies have had limited procurement options or have needed to petition the FRA for waivers to use the newer technologies, FRA officials said."

Sounds like new crash protection standards included in the rule.
dgvrengineer
 
Posts: 122
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 10:22 am

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby bdawe » Thu Nov 22, 2018 12:50 pm

Also important to these announcements would be the new tier-1 alternate compliance rules, which broadly legalize "Euronorm" trains for conventional rail service.

Hopefully we can see rapid uptake of the new regulations in Amtrak & Commuter procurement
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby CLamb » Fri Nov 23, 2018 12:37 am

Can someone provide a link to the new rules? I got lost trying to find it on the FRA website.
CLamb
 
Posts: 209
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 11:29 pm
Location: Scotch Plains, NJ

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby bdawe » Fri Nov 23, 2018 1:35 am

B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby frequentflyer » Tue Nov 27, 2018 9:50 am

So I guess Amtrak can order Stadler FLIRT trains now and run them along side of freights.

Now we see why Amtrak held off announcing its Amfleet I replacement.
frequentflyer
 
Posts: 235
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2011 9:28 am

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby electricron » Tue Nov 27, 2018 8:26 pm

Allowing HSR Tier III trains to share tracks with existing speed Tier I trains on Class 4 tracks or lower would allow CHSR trains to share tracks with Caltrain trains between SJ and SF. It would also allow Texas Central HSR trains to run on TRE tracks to Fort Worth at existing TRE speeds, assuming somebody electrifies the TRE corridor.
electricron
 
Posts: 4345
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby bdawe » Wed Nov 28, 2018 12:26 am

Assuming Texas Central sticks with Japanese rolling stock, probably. they're going to be wavered
B. Dawe's map of routes and urban populations https://brendandawe.carto.com/viz/80b9d ... /embed_map NOW updated with 2016 Canadian Populations
User avatar
bdawe
 
Posts: 611
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2015 1:06 pm
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby ziggyzack1234 » Fri Nov 30, 2018 4:06 pm

The problem with Dallas/Ft. Worth is that that territory has double stacks running on it, making any electrification a literal tall order. There is also the fact that the N700, while in the single level height range, is a good 6 inches wider than the average American train. If they wanted extra-length pantographs that could probably be done, but they would need to narrow the body of the train itself to about the width of an Amfleet (at its widest point) to be within any of the AAR clearance plates. The high vs. low platform problem may also arise here.


If these issues could be solved then electrifying TRE could be a good interim solution should TCR want to go to Ft. Worth.
ziggyzack1234
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:54 pm

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby MattW » Sat Dec 01, 2018 1:26 pm

http://testplant.blogspot.com/2013/09/e ... ouble.html
Now, I don't know if you could keep a line cleared for double stacks and run 220mph with those tall pantographs, but it can be, and has been done.
MattW
 
Posts: 545
Joined: Thu May 13, 2010 8:00 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA (ATL)

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby Nasadowsk » Sat Dec 01, 2018 5:40 pm

You wouldn't run freight on a 220mph line anyway, but, for 'last mile' access, you sure could mix the two on a "low" speed line. Common in Europe.

Probably the biggest issue would be noise / drag at high speed from a larger pan, but the Japanese sure have a lot of experience with pantograph design, so I'm sure they can figure out a way to make it work.
Nasadowsk
 
Posts: 3900
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:45 pm

Re: FRA Issues Rule for New Catagory High Speed Trains

Postby ziggyzack1234 » Sun Dec 02, 2018 12:12 pm

Yes, last mile is exactly what I am talking about here. Think about the Mini-Shinkansen concept already in use in Japan, where conventional lines are outfitted for the Shinkansen to use at conventional speeds, in our case likely 80mph.
ziggyzack1234
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2017 4:54 pm


Return to General Discussion - Passenger Rail

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests