Acela Speeds

Discussion related to Amtrak also known as the National Railroad Passenger Corp.

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, gprimr1, Amtrak67 of America, Tadman

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby ApproachMedium » Mon Oct 23, 2017 12:31 am

gokeefe wrote:
Matt Johnson wrote:Seems an odd thing to invest in given the longstanding practice of testing at the existing Pueblo, CO facility. I think Pueblo has a max of 165 mph, which may be part of the reason, but Alstom must be expecting this to be more than the one-off Acela order was, with Hornell being more than Barre, VT #2.


Interesting issue. Looks as if part of the problem is that TTCI is configured as a loop and doesn't have sufficiently long sections of tangent track. Although it would be nice to invest this money in the Empire Corridor a test track really should be isolated in order to minimize damage to existing service in the event of a malfunction that damages the rails or trackbed.



The NS line is not the empire corridor. so them doing it there is a line with no passenger service.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5601
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby Arlington » Mon Oct 23, 2017 10:08 am

ApproachMedium wrote:The NS line is not the empire corridor. so them doing it there is a line with no passenger service.

Yes, in the great Conrail divvy-up, CSX got the New York Central (Empire Corridor) and NS got the Erie (in/through Hornell). The Erie actually has some nice "valley floor" running, straight and flat near & through Hornell, so it must be one of these that Alstom is looking to upgrade (and presumably electrify)
"Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants."--Charles Marohn
Arlington
 
Posts: 3267
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:51 am
Location: Medford MA (was Arlington MA and Arlington VA)

Previous

Return to Amtrak

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: east point, MattW, NeedhamLine and 14 guests