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 bostontrainguy » Fri Oct 20, 2017 7:37 am

ApproachMedium wrote:Forget trying to move the track centers!


Wasn't that part of the original plan though?
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby bostontrainguy » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:13 pm

Tidbit from Trains:

The changes are necessary, Alstom officials say, to accommodate workers who will be building 28 new Avelia Liberty high-speed trainsets for operation on the Northeast Corridor.

The newspaper says the company is also working with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Norfolk Southern to build a new track to accommodate testing the high-speed trainsets at up to 184 mph.


Can we get them to update a section of the Empire Route?
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby Arlington » Fri Oct 20, 2017 12:19 pm

^ Where, physically, is the Army+NS test track supposed to be?

Link?
"Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants."--Charles Marohn
Arlington
 
Posts: 3264
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:51 am
Location: Medford MA (was Arlington MA and Arlington VA)

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby bostontrainguy » Fri Oct 20, 2017 1:11 pm

Excerpt:

In addition to the three buildings going up in short order, Alstom and its team of engineers will have to build a test track for the trains capable of speeds of 184 miles per hour. In the past several months, the company has consulted with the Army Corps of Engineers so they can build a bridge to carry tracks across the Canisteo River. Engineers received a note this week, alleging the Army Corps. was close to an approval.

Complicating matters, Alstom also needs to seek permission from Norfolk Southern to build the test tracks on property adjacent to their rail bed.

Norfolk Southern was said to have been “very supportive”, but they have asked for additional engineering details from Alstom.

Link: http://www.eveningtribune.com/news/2017 ... n-approved

Just checking Google Earth, there doesn't seem to be much tangent ROW in the area for 184 mph running! Also there are a lot of grade crossings in the area.
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby electricron » Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:27 pm

I suppose they could man the grade crossings with staff to safely close the grade crossing during each test.
electricron
 
Posts: 3898
Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 8:35 pm

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby gokeefe » Fri Oct 20, 2017 6:46 pm

I am having trouble believing they really are going to test at full speed in this area.
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9813
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby ApproachMedium » Sat Oct 21, 2017 12:37 am

bostontrainguy wrote:
ApproachMedium wrote:Forget trying to move the track centers!


Wasn't that part of the original plan though?


I dont know who kept putting that in to the sitation, but the track centers were only changed at Midway, Adams, and Delco to accommodate the replacement switch panels.
No good deed goes unpunished.
User avatar
ApproachMedium
 
Posts: 5597
Joined: Wed May 31, 2006 9:44 pm
Location: From here to There

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby bostontrainguy » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:05 am

So the Alstom fact sheet list the top speed at 186 mph. Testing is usually done at 5 - 10 mph higher so we are talking maybe 196 mph here. Where? Seriously in the Hornell area? This is going to be interesting.

Seriously though . . . Amtrak should ask Alstom to build a test track along the Empire Route somewhere that can actually be used for future revenue service. An additional track (or a major upgrade of a section of the existing track) should be considered. Testing is often done overnight anyway.
bostontrainguy
 
Posts: 948
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 11:14 am

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby Arlington » Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:50 am

^ I was hoping they were thinking the long tangent stretch between Petersburg VA & Chesapeake (with Norfolk being a designated HSR market)
"Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants."--Charles Marohn
Arlington
 
Posts: 3264
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:51 am
Location: Medford MA (was Arlington MA and Arlington VA)

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby mtuandrew » Sat Oct 21, 2017 2:06 pm

Surprise, it’s stage 1 of NYP-BUF high speed rail via Hornell :P
User avatar
mtuandrew
 
Posts: 4080
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:59 am
Location: the Manassas Gap Independent Line

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby Matt Johnson » Sat Oct 21, 2017 3:42 pm

bostontrainguy wrote:Excerpt:

In addition to the three buildings going up in short order, Alstom and its team of engineers will have to build a test track for the trains capable of speeds of 184 miles per hour.


184 is an odd figure that I assume is just a result of an incorrect conversion of 300 kph, which is actually 186.416 mph. :)
User avatar
Matt Johnson
 
Posts: 3820
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:57 pm
Location: Hazlet, NJ

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby Arlington » Sat Oct 21, 2017 9:20 pm

Scrolling around Google maps, there look to be a number of tangent stretches on the Erie (now NS?) Near Hornell. Must be these.
"Trying to solve congestion by making roadways wider is like trying to solve obesity by buying bigger pants."--Charles Marohn
Arlington
 
Posts: 3264
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2004 7:51 am
Location: Medford MA (was Arlington MA and Arlington VA)

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby Matt Johnson » Sun Oct 22, 2017 10:52 am

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.
User avatar
Matt Johnson
 
Posts: 3820
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:57 pm
Location: Hazlet, NJ

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby gokeefe » Sun Oct 22, 2017 1:53 pm

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.
gokeefe
User avatar
gokeefe
 
Posts: 9813
Joined: Sat Feb 16, 2008 12:28 pm
Location: Winthrop, Maine

Re: Acela Speeds

Postby mtuandrew » Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:59 pm

Would be nice to have the test track between Rochester and Buffalo, but gokeefe has an excellent point about it needing to be isolated. On that note, does GE still have such a track at Erie, and what kind of speeds does it support?
User avatar
mtuandrew
 
Posts: 4080
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 2:59 am
Location: the Manassas Gap Independent Line

PreviousNext

Return to Amtrak

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: arthur d., johnpbarlow, Rockingham Racer and 6 guests