Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

8132Re: McLanes vs. Train Lanes

Expand Messages
  • emccaughrin
    Feb 27 9:19 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford"
      <mailbox@c...> wrote:
      >
      >
      > Sorry, I fail to see why a 9-foot gauge is ridiculous.

      Because it isn't necessary. There's no point in reinventing the
      wheel when the Japanese will happily sell you DMU's that can provide
      high-speed performance (i.e. good enough to eliminate competing jet
      aircraft service) in some of the most twisty, mountainous, icy
      terrain imaginable -- on conventional guage.

      >
      > In any case, the short-length Talgo-style coaches I would propose
      > can probably get the axle loadings down to near the current truck
      > loadings anyway

      Which Talgo model are you referring to? The smallest I've ever seen
      from them is in the neighborhood of 13t. At the very least, such a
      train being proposed would not be allowed to have a "crush" load of
      passengers.

      > assuming we get aircraft manufacturers to bring
      > their knowledge of light weight and extreme reliability to the
      > problem.

      Historically, aircraft manufacturers have done an awful job at
      building reliable rail vehicles.
    • Show all 24 messages in this topic