Railroad Forums 

  • Acela Disposition Discussion

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

Moderators: GirlOnTheTrain, mtuandrew, Tadman

 #1535463  by ApproachMedium
 
the new train sets will be able to couple two sets together to make one, or remove 2 power cars and couple between sets, or remove at the articulated joints and expand with more cars. There are a lot of options here, from every day ones to future expansion ones. The current sets cannot be connected together and operated as a normal train. The new sets will be able to be plugged right in to each other without any mechanical dept help or man on the ground which will be a huge advantage for broke down trains or late equipment, combining it to keep stuff moving and on time.
 #1535488  by Tadman
 
We're going around in six month circles here, rehashing the same ideas and constraints. How about we lock this up until news is posted?
 #1535491  by eolesen
 
We don’t have any Turbotrains or Turboliners, and those were evolutionary and unique.

Acela? Aside from being the first new generation higher speed trainsets in North America, I’m not sure I’ll miss them if they’re not sent to a museum.
 #1535548  by WhartonAndNorthern
 
mtuandrew wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 10:10 am Understand this is not a question relating to future usage, but, did Amtrak ever consider using the Acela-1 equipment as single-ended sets of four or five cars?
They could not do that. The FRA collision standards essentially required a locomotive at each end. That may have been because a Tier II-rated cab car was harder to design than a locomotive, not 100% sure of the details. But without a rear engine or cab car, there would be no easy way to turn the train at Washington (not sure about Boston). I know at Washington, Amtrak uses dual cab locomotives and detaches the locomotives and runs them around the train.
 #1535579  by gokeefe
 
Tadman wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 9:37 am We're going around in six month circles here, rehashing the same ideas and constraints. How about we lock this up until news is posted?
Second the motion. There just isn't anything worth discussing further until we see an update. You either scrap 'em or you don't and if you don't we all know right now there are few (probably none) options whatsoever that make any sense.
 #1535623  by John_Perkowski
 
Tadman wrote: Mon Mar 02, 2020 9:37 am We're going around in six month circles here, rehashing the same ideas and constraints. How about we lock this up until news is posted?
ADMIN NOTE:
Mr Dunville is right. If you have something new and original to contribute (a news release from Amtrak, a scrapping contract or a donation agreement), feel free to contact a moderator to reopen this.

Until then, it's time to let the topic rest. Locked.
 #1572966  by Alphaboi
 
photobug56 wrote:Is the existing fleet so worn out that it cannot be used in another electrified corridor after repairs, renovation and updates?
Aren't they leased? Besides what intercity corridors outside NEC and Keystone are electrified?

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

 #1572993  by ExCon90
 
I believe that turbines are efficient only when operating at maximum capacity and every US railroad that has tried them has found that they don't get enough chances to go flat out to benefit from that -- on Amtrak they'd spend too much time dwelling at station stops and waiting for signals to clear.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 21