Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
william wrote:WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
IMO, the livery is overly busy, but I guess that par for the course these days to stand out.
On the positive side using tried and true rail tech (TGV) should yield better reliable trainsets from Alstom than the overweight present Acela trains from BBD.
KLDC10 wrote:I wonder why they didn't just stick with that?
af773atmsp wrote:Do you know how many billions that would take? Freight trains beat up on track. A track good for 100mph costs many times what a track good for 60mph does. It needs more constant maintenance, also. Acelas are electric so it's a moot point anyways, since only the NEC has catenary.Yes I know most track Amtrak uses is owned by freight companies, but Amtrak can still get the funds to upgrade those tracks too.
WIederling wrote:What is "professional" in a more or less flashy color scheme?
( America seems to be rather hung up on appearances in lieu of performance
Trains have a tendency to look dirty independent of the colors chosen.
the most dirt resilient layout ( beyond matte black ) I remember are the DB "Silberlinge"
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/N-Wagen#/ ... ndezug.jpg
( Even if you got dirty just from walking near by they still resembled the
original appearance :: rotating brush pattern polished stainless steel.)
KLDC10 wrote:not to mention dirty in a matter of days - white is a poor choice here.
VSMUT wrote:The Germans seem to manage pretty well regardless:
WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
WarRI1 wrote:WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
A rather dull color scheme to me.
WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
johns624 wrote:af773atmsp wrote:Do you know how many billions that would take? Freight trains beat up on track. A track good for 100mph costs many times what a track good for 60mph does. It needs more constant maintenance, also. Acelas are electric so it's a moot point anyways, since only the NEC has catenary.Yes I know most track Amtrak uses is owned by freight companies, but Amtrak can still get the funds to upgrade those tracks too.
KLDC10 wrote:The front of that train is filthy. Zooming in, it doesn't look like the rest of it is much better.
af773atmsp wrote:johns624 wrote:af773atmsp wrote:Do you know how many billions that would take? Freight trains beat up on track. A track good for 100mph costs many times what a track good for 60mph does. It needs more constant maintenance, also. Acelas are electric so it's a moot point anyways, since only the NEC has catenary.Yes I know most track Amtrak uses is owned by freight companies, but Amtrak can still get the funds to upgrade those tracks too.
If we're talking upgrading all the trackage that Amtrak uses then yes it would be a high cost for little benefit. However corridor routes (LA-San Diego, Seattle-Portland, MSP-Chicago, Dallas-Houston, etc.) would greatly benefit from upgrading track to 110 mph speeds (or at the very least have a higher average speed on the entire route). Doesn't need to be electric as there are already 110 mile per hour trains operating between St. Louis and Chicago.
william wrote:WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
Simpler livery is better. The mostly silver or aluminum livery (strike a bell in the airline world) is classy. And we are talking about Amtrak here, it needs all the class it can get.
It started with the Amfleet Metroliners and with the present Acelas, Amtrak owns the markshare and has relegated the famed DCA-LGA air shuttles to history. Amtrak does not need a livery that looks a LCC.
william wrote:Can anyone else the images I posted? Is there a limit on pics or something?
stlgph wrote:af773atmsp wrote:johns624 wrote:Do you know how many billions that would take? Freight trains beat up on track. A track good for 100mph costs many times what a track good for 60mph does. It needs more constant maintenance, also. Acelas are electric so it's a moot point anyways, since only the NEC has catenary.
If we're talking upgrading all the trackage that Amtrak uses then yes it would be a high cost for little benefit. However corridor routes (LA-San Diego, Seattle-Portland, MSP-Chicago, Dallas-Houston, etc.) would greatly benefit from upgrading track to 110 mph speeds (or at the very least have a higher average speed on the entire route). Doesn't need to be electric as there are already 110 mile per hour trains operating between St. Louis and Chicago.
It's not a matter of just upgrading the track. The Northeast Corridor is loaded with too many curves and too many local commuter lines all sharing the same space. For high speed service, all the curves would have to go back and be re-banked, and anything which is not high speed equipment would tip over.
stlgph wrote:For high speed service, all the curves would have to go back and be re-banked, and anything which is not high speed equipment would tip over.
tommy1808 wrote:stlgph wrote:For high speed service, all the curves would have to go back and be re-banked, and anything which is not high speed equipment would tip over.
Tilting trains gives you some wiggle room for that. And they won´t tip over in any case, at least here trains have to be able to stop on any stretch of track without tipping over.
bhill wrote:Well, at least it LOOKS fast......
william wrote:WIederling wrote:william wrote:Words cannot describe this.....................
What's your beef ? ..
Let's try this posting pics thing again.
Simpler livery is better. The mostly silver or aluminum livery (strike a bell in the airline world) is classy. And we are talking about Amtrak here, it needs all the class it can get.
It started with the Amfleet Metroliners and with the present Acelas, Amtrak owns the markshare and has relegated the famed DCA-LGA air shuttles to history. Amtrak does not need a livery that looks a LCC.
tommy1808 wrote:stlgph wrote:For high speed service, all the curves would have to go back and be re-banked, and anything which is not high speed equipment would tip over.
Tilting trains gives you some wiggle room for that. And they won´t tip over in any case, at least here trains have to be able to stop on any stretch of track without tipping over.
best regards
Thomas
af773atmsp wrote:stlgph wrote:af773atmsp wrote:
If we're talking upgrading all the trackage that Amtrak uses then yes it would be a high cost for little benefit. However corridor routes (LA-San Diego, Seattle-Portland, MSP-Chicago, Dallas-Houston, etc.) would greatly benefit from upgrading track to 110 mph speeds (or at the very least have a higher average speed on the entire route). Doesn't need to be electric as there are already 110 mile per hour trains operating between St. Louis and Chicago.
It's not a matter of just upgrading the track. The Northeast Corridor is loaded with too many curves and too many local commuter lines all sharing the same space. For high speed service, all the curves would have to go back and be re-banked, and anything which is not high speed equipment would tip over.
I should have specified upgrading tracks outside the Northeast Corridor. Not to high speed standards, but higher speed (110 mph maximum).
af773atmsp wrote:Its good to see new rolling stock for the Acela, but it seems Amtrak focuses a lot on new locomotives and rolling stock and less on track infrastructure, which is the real determinant of maximum allowable speed. Yes infrastructure upgrades are more challenging from a cost and political standpoint, but in the long run it'll make trains have higher average speeds.
Yes I know most track Amtrak uses is owned by freight companies, but Amtrak can still get the funds to upgrade those tracks too.
VSMUT wrote:KLDC10 wrote:not to mention dirty in a matter of days - white is a poor choice here.
The Germans seem to manage pretty well regardless:
Gemuser wrote:Those ICE trains are grey, not white and look dirty when freshly painted. Which is a good idea actually.
Gemuser
VSMUT wrote:Gemuser wrote:Those ICE trains are grey, not white and look dirty when freshly painted. Which is a good idea actually.
Gemuser
They are white, not grey. I ride on them several times a week.
VSMUT wrote:Gemuser wrote:Those ICE trains are grey, not white and look dirty when freshly painted. Which is a good idea actually.
Gemuser
They are white, not grey. I ride on them several times a week.
Gemuser wrote:The ones I rode 3 days ago were gray, not white. I saw some white ones last year but not this year.
Gemuser
KLDC10 wrote:I'll have the opportunity to ride on one myself next month for the very first time. I'm very much looking forward to the experience, though I'm not sure exactly which ICE Variant it will be.
readytotaxi wrote:Curious, what sort of catering is there onboard? Anything like in UK/Europe ?
VSMUT wrote:KLDC10 wrote:I'll have the opportunity to ride on one myself next month for the very first time. I'm very much looking forward to the experience, though I'm not sure exactly which ICE Variant it will be.
Where are you travelling to/from, and what is the number of your train?
KLDC10 wrote:VSMUT wrote:KLDC10 wrote:I'll have the opportunity to ride on one myself next month for the very first time. I'm very much looking forward to the experience, though I'm not sure exactly which ICE Variant it will be.
Where are you travelling to/from, and what is the number of your train?
Stuttgart HBF to Frankfurt Flughafen. ICE 618. It leaves at a ridiculous time in the morning, but it is what it is.
KLDC10 wrote:Stuttgart HBF to Frankfurt Flughafen. ICE 618. It leaves at a ridiculous time in the morning, but it is what it is.
VSMUT wrote:KLDC10 wrote:VSMUT wrote:
Where are you travelling to/from, and what is the number of your train?
Stuttgart HBF to Frankfurt Flughafen. ICE 618. It leaves at a ridiculous time in the morning, but it is what it is.
It should be an ICE 3 The restaurant and bar will be closed
WIederling wrote:KLDC10 wrote:Stuttgart HBF to Frankfurt Flughafen. ICE 618. It leaves at a ridiculous time in the morning, but it is what it is.
It is a "night train" going from Munich ( departure 00:01 ) to Essen ( arrival 8:01 )
( and the reason why it takes forever to cover those 671 km is "sleeping to your job"
used to take the København - Flensburg - Hamburg .... Köln - Aachen regular night train on occasion.
Go to sleep near your home, wake up were you are set to work the next morning.
( to fit the sleep window these trains get parked here and there over the night. They are rather slow.)
But rather useful. Just like "Kurswagen".
VSMUT wrote:KLDC10 wrote:VSMUT wrote:
Where are you travelling to/from, and what is the number of your train?
Stuttgart HBF to Frankfurt Flughafen. ICE 618. It leaves at a ridiculous time in the morning, but it is what it is.
It should be an ICE 3 The restaurant and bar will be closed
WIederling wrote:KLDC10 wrote:Stuttgart HBF to Frankfurt Flughafen. ICE 618. It leaves at a ridiculous time in the morning, but it is what it is.
It is a "night train" going from Munich ( departure 00:01 ) to Essen ( arrival 8:01 )
( and the reason why it takes forever to cover those 671 km is "sleeping to your job"
used to take the København - Flensburg - Hamburg .... Köln - Aachen regular night train on occasion.
Go to sleep near your home, wake up were you are set to work the next morning.
( to fit the sleep window these trains get parked here and there over the night. They are rather slow.)
But rather useful. Just like "Kurswagen".
KLDC10 wrote:I'd prefer a proper night train to be honest - one which takes the whole night and on which one can sleep.