• The Talgo XXI

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

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

  by DutchRailnut
 
is the Talgo XXI in service yet ?? last I heard was it was still testing.
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=58489
and altough the Manufacturer wanted the USA railroads to try this, I believe non other than prototype have been built.
http://www.talgoamerica.com/talgo_xxi.asp

  by railfanofewu
 
I do not know if it is in service, but it would be a good addition for Amtrak Cascades to try. We have a success with the TALGO TPU up here. As soon as track improvents are complete, we will have faster trains.

  by DutchRailnut
 
Not unless a cabsignal system is provided, the Talgo equipment is restricted to 79 mph max. and why would Amtrak buy a train that even in Europe can not be made to work succcesfully???

  by railfanofewu
 
I would like to see them install cab-signalling. I do not know much about Signal improvements currently underway on the BNSF line, but you are right, they should be able to use it successfully if that is why they bought it. I would like to see Track and Signal Improvements all the way to Vancouver B.C. so they can run more trains to the Vancouver Olympics. We have 6 years to get it done, we should not waste them.

  by DutchRailnut
 
proving cab signal is nice but cost is enormous, not only pasenger trains and track need to be provided but every other locomotive AS WEEL. AT ABOUT $75K per locomotive. plus now after implementation only cab signal/atc equipped locomtives can lead, severly restricing the owner of the line.

  by Champlain Division
 
>> it would be a good addition for Amtrak Cascades to try. <<

You mean we could actually get a chance to get rid of those gawd awful "cadillac fin" cars?!!!!

  by railfanofewu
 
DutchRailnut wrote:proving cab signal is nice but cost is enormous, not only pasenger trains and track need to be provided but every other locomotive AS WEEL. AT ABOUT $75K per locomotive. plus now after implementation only cab signal/atc equipped locomtives can lead, severly restricing the owner of the line.
Wouldn't Frieghts benefit from Positive Train Control? I mean it would free up capacity for them. Also, on some stretches, they could add an extra track, and make up speed.

  by Irish Chieftain
 
Wouldn't Freights benefit from Positive Train Control?
They would and do, where it is in operation—but truly, it's only good for fast freight (80 mph plus), and freight trains of today do not operate above the 75 mph mark.

However, the biggest matter is (and always has been since 1950), who's gonna pay for it. Back in 1950, the ICC said that the RR companies had to bear all the burden for installation and maintenance; and here in 2004, the FRA and STB are saying the same thing.

  by railfanofewu
 
Irish Chieftain wrote:
Wouldn't Freights benefit from Positive Train Control?
They would and do, where it is in operation—but truly, it's only good for fast freight (80 mph plus), and freight trains of today do not operate above the 75 mph mark.

However, the biggest matter is (and always has been since 1950), who's gonna pay for it. Back in 1950, the ICC said that the RR companies had to bear all the burden for installation and maintenance; and here in 2004, the FRA and STB are saying the same thing.
I do not know what kind of Signal Improvements that are going on in the Central Puget Sound area, but on the Seattle-Everett segment, they are going to be adding two new tracks, and Sound Transit and WSDOT are paying for it. On the Seattle-Tacoma segment, more sidings, crossovers, and probably another track in some segments.

As for paying for it, perhaps some kind of Federal, State, and RR match would be the best.

  by hsr_fan
 
Are the Cascades trains legally obligated to stay under 80 mph once they cross into Canada?

  by wigwagfan
 
railfanofewu wrote:I do not know if it is in service, but it would be a good addition for Amtrak Cascades to try. We have a success with the TALGO TPU up here. As soon as track improvents are complete, we will have faster trains.
I'd love to see ODOT buy a pair of TPU sets, with six coaches, one bistro, one table and one baggage/service car each - and use it between Portland-Boise on the UP main.

There is considerable interest from the on-line communities, UP is not entirely opposed to passenger service on the line (as long as the passenger trains do not carry any type of freight other than passenger baggage), and the tilt technology would prove itself in the western part of the Gorge as well as in the mountains between La Grande and Ontario. A seven car set would be less expensive than the sets used on the Cascades (they have more regular coaches as well as two business class coaches each), yet would still have over 200 seats per train (the equivalent of over four Greyhound busses); the run can be made in about 12 hours with conventional Superliner equipment which is a good fit for Talgo equipment, and most of the stations are still in place from the days of the Pioneer (the "AmShack" in Hinkle, however, needs to be replaced. It looked pretty pathetic the last time I saw it.)

With a reduced number of cars, the TPU itself could even have less powerful prime movers, reducing both the power unit costs and fuel consumption, but still be able to maintain 79 MPH speeds. The UP line is cab signalled and has (or had) positive train control, so there is the possibility of faster speeds if UP and ODOT could cooperate on some improvements.

From a passenger perspective, each Talgo "car" is shorter and wider than a bus, the seats are larger, and the overhead storage (as well as luggage racks at each end of the car) are much better. The TV screens and radio jacks could be eliminated for a little cost savings, but if kept would be a nice perk over the bus. Plus the bistro/cafe and dining car services. If two trains were operated, the ridership could certainly be stolen away from Greyhound - and Horizon Air is awfully expensive to fly from Portland to either Pendleton or Boise.

Of course, this is just a pipe dream. ODOT is starved for cash, and UP ain't gonna run a passenger train if it doesn't have to. Another alternative would be for the exact same trainset, owned by WSDOT, to run on the "north bank road" from Portland to Spokane on a schedule approximately 12 hours opposite that of the Empire Builder run, or Seattle to Spokane - again, opposite the Empire Builder.

  by texman
 
Isnt the Talgo XXI being considerd for use on Ohios high speed rail plans and the Midwest HSR?

  by railfanofewu
 
wigwagfan wrote: I'd love to see ODOT buy a pair of TPU sets, with six coaches, one bistro, one table and one baggage/service car each - and use it between Portland-Boise on the UP main.
Sounds good, and they can add cars if demand requires it, even though they are articulated. I think they can be stretched, although it would require substitution by Horizon and Superliner coaches, but that happens when they come due for repainting and overhaul, anyway.
There is considerable interest from the on-line communities, UP is not entirely opposed to passenger service on the line (as long as the passenger trains do not carry any type of freight other than passenger baggage), and the tilt technology would prove itself in the western part of the Gorge as well as in the mountains between La Grande and Ontario. A seven car set would be less expensive than the sets used on the Cascades (they have more regular coaches as well as two business class coaches each), yet would still have over 200 seats per train (the equivalent of over four Greyhound busses); the run can be made in about 12 hours with conventional Superliner equipment which is a good fit for Talgo equipment


Since Talgo equipment can stay at top speed whent hey go into curves, because of the tilt-train technology, first developed in the United States(Talgo was originally designed by ACF 50+ years ago), I think it would do the run in less than 12. I think Union Pacific, Great Northern, and Northern Pacific should have tried this technology out in the '50s on their Seattle-Portland Pool Trains and Great Northern should have tried it out on the Internation between Seattle and Vancouver B.C.
With a reduced number of cars, the TPU itself could even have less powerful prime movers, reducing both the power unit costs and fuel consumption, but still be able to maintain 79 MPH speeds.
I wonder what kind of smaller prime mover could be used in a shortened TALGO set. I would see if GE could use the GEVO engine in something like an F59 Cab. Unfortunately, the Shark-Fins would have to stay.
The UP line is cab signalled and has (or had) positive train control, so there is the possibility of faster speeds if UP and ODOT could cooperate on some improvements.
If they already had the improvements in place, it could help save on costs.

From a passenger perspective, each Talgo "car" is shorter and wider than a bus, the seats are larger, and the overhead storage (as well as luggage racks at each end of the car) are much better. If two trains were operated, the ridership could certainly be stolen away from Greyhound - and Horizon Air is awfully expensive to fly from Portland to either Pendleton or Boise.
Good selling points for passengers. It would work. The day I rode Amtrak Cascades from Portland to Seattle, I had taken Greyhound from Seattle to Portland. The driver allowed stretch breaks at every stop, including three seemingly long stops at Tacoma, Olympia, and Centralia. Amtrak Cascades stopped in just about every place the bus did, but only an average of 3 minutes, they did not even open all the doors. Greyhound cut stops at Fort Lewis and Castle Rock last year. Fort Lewis because of security, and Castle Rock because it seemed to be a time-waster. Castle Rock does not have Amtrak Service, I do not even know if it is on the BNSF main. I think Greyhound would not be able to compete with this service if offered in Eastern Washington.
Another alternative would be for the exact same trainset, owned by WSDOT, to run on the "north bank road" from Portland to Spokane on a schedule approximately 12 hours opposite that of the Empire Builder run, or Seattle to Spokane - again, opposite the Empire Builder.
I have been thinking of an Amtrak Cascadses service in Eastern Washington for awhile, mainly as a bridge builder between East and West that could even help out during bad weather on the passes. I rarely hear of the North Bank Route or the Cascade Tunnel being closed on account of snow. Washington needs to be brought back together. especially with the continued turmoil in Olympia as a result of the Gubenatorial Election in November(all I will say about the Turmoil in Olympia on these boards.) The BNSF Stampede Pass Route hits the major population centers of Eastern Washington, Ellensberg(county seat of Kittitas County, and home to Central Washington University), Yakima(County seat of Yakima County), Pasco, Rtizeville(a stop in that area would be a good idea), and Spokane. Just before Spokane is Cheney, home to Eastern Washington University.